quote:

---

The Hpal (np3,592) mitochondrial DNA marker is a selectively neutral mutation that is very common in sub-Saharan Africa and is almost absent in North African and European populations. It has been screened in a Meroitic sample from ancient Nubia through PCR amplification and posterior enzyme digestion, to evaluate the sub-Saharan genetic influences in this population. From 29 individuals analysed, only 15 yield positive amplifications, four of them (26.7%) displaying the sub-Saharan African marker. Hpa 1 (np3,592) marker is present in the sub-Saharan populations at a frequency of 68.7 on average. Thus, the frequency of genes from this area in the Merotic Nubian population can be estimated at around 39% (with a confidence interval from 22% to 55%). The frequency obtained fits in a south-north decreasing gradient of Hpa I (np3,592) along the African continent. Results suggest that morphological changes observed historically in the Nubian populations are more likely to be due to the existence of south-north gene flow through the Nile Valley than to in-situ evolution.

---

quote:

---

For mtDNA analysis, a total of 56 haplotypes were observed, all belonging to the major sub-Saharan African and Eurasian mitochondrial macrohapolgroups L0, L1, L2, L4, L5, L3A, M and N in frequencies of 12.1, 11.9, 22, 4.2, 6.2, 29.5, 2, and 12.2% respectively.

---

--Hassan, 2009
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
^ I thought this issue was discussed several times before where the Euronuts tried to claim non-Hpal (np3,592) lineages as 'Caucasian' even though these same lineages are common in Sudan as you say.
 

---

Posted by anguishofbeing (Member # 16736) on :
 
Will Smith doesn't look Nubian - Mary
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
Getting back to the topic, are there any studies on Hpal frequencies of modern Sudanese populations?? The Euronuts keep touting Hpal as evidence of lack thereof 'negroes' but those of us in the know, know otherwise.
 

---

Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
 
Modern sudan
Now this is paternal only.




Sample Nubians taken(Nile Valley)
Nubians (Agriculturists; n=39; Nilo-Saharan, Eastern Sudanic)
3/39 = 7.7% B-M60 - Nilotic
3/39 = 7.7% E1b1b-M215(xE1b1b1a-M7.8. North East Africa
5/39 = 12.8% E1b1b1a1-V12(xE1b1b1a1b-V32) North East Africa
1/39 = 2.6% E1b1b1a1b-V32 North East Africa
4/39 = 10.3% F-M89(xH1-M52, I-M170, J-12f2, K-M9) Western Asia
2/39 = 5.1% I-M170 - Near East
16/39 = 41.0% J-12f2(xJ2-M172) - Arabic
1/39 = 2.6% J2-M172 -Arabic
4/39 = 10.3% R1b1-P25 - Chadic


Nuba
Hill Nubians and others.(Central sudan)
(Nilo-Saharan, Eastern Sudanic)
46 % A3b2-M13 - Nilotic
14.2% B-M60 - Nilotic
14.2% E1b1b-M215(xE1b1b1a-M7.8. - North East Africa
25 % E1b1b1a1-V12(xE1b1b1a1b-V32) North East Africa


Beja (Pastoralists; n=42; Afro-Asiatic, Cushitic?)
2/42 = 4.8% A3b2-M13 - Nilotic
7/42 = 16.7% E1b1b-M215(xE1b1b1a-M7.8. - North East Africa
2/42 = 4.8% E1b1b1a1-V12(xE1b1b1a1b-V32) North East Africa
13/42 = 31.0% E1b1b1a1b-V32 -North East Africa
15/42 = 35.7% J-12f2(xJ2-M172) Arabic
1/42 = 2.4% J2-M172 -Arabic
2/42 = 4.8% R1b1-P25 - Chadic


Arabs/Gaalien (Agriculturists; n=50; Afro-Asiatic, Semitic)
3/50 = 6.0% A3b2-M13 - Nilotic
3/50 = 6.0% E1b1b1a1-V12(xE1b1b1a1b-V32) North East Africa
3/50 = 6.0% E1b1b1a1b-V32 North East Africa
3/50 = 6.0% E1b1b1a3-V22 North East Africa
5/50 = 10.0% F-M89(xH1-M52, I-M 170, J-12f2, K-M9)Western Asia
2/50 = 4.0% I-M170 Near East
18/50 = 36.0% J-12f2(xJ2-M172) Arabic
2/50 = 4.0% J2-M172 Arabic
3/50 = 6.0% K-M9(xL-M11, O-M175, P-M74) Southwestern Asia
1/50 = 2.0% R1-M173(xR1b1-P25) Chadic
7/50 = 14.0% R1b1-P25 - Chadic


Arabs/Meseria (Nomadic Pastoralists; n=28; Afro-Asiatic, Semitic)
1/28 = 3.6% E1b1b1a1-V12(xE1b1b1a1b-V32) North East Africa
3/28 = 10.7% E1b1b1a1b-V32 North East Africa
3/28 = 10.7% F-M89(xH1-M52, I-M170, J-12f2, K-M9) Western Asia
2/28 = 7.1% I-M170 - South West Asia
12/28 = 42.9% J-12f2(xJ2-M172) Arabic
7/28 = 25.0% R1b1-P25 - Chadic


Arabs/Arakien (Agriculturists; n=24; Afro-Asiatic, Semitic)
2/24 = 8.3% E1b1b1a1-V12(xE1b1b1a1b-V32) - North East Africa
1/24 = 4.2% E1b1b1a1b-V32 North East Africa
1/24 = 4.2% E1b1b1a3-V22 North East Africa
2/24 = 8.3% F-M89(xH1-M52, I-M170, J-12f2, K-M9) West Asia
16/24 = 66.7% J-12f2(xJ2-M172) Arabic
2/24 = 8.3% R1b1-P25 Chadic

Sudanese Arab total:
3/102 = 2.9% A3b2-M13 - Nilotic
6/102 = 5.9% E1b1b1a1-V12(xE1b1b1a1b-V32) - North East Africa
7/102 = 6.9% E1b1b1a1b-V32 - North East Africa
4/102 = 3.9% E1b1b1a3-V22 - North East Africa
10/102 = 9.8% F-M89(xH1-M52, I-M170, J-12f2, K-M9) West Asia
4/102 = 3.9% I-M170 South West Asia
46/102 = 45.1% J-12f2(xJ2-M172) Arabic
2/102 = 2.0% J2-M172 - Arabic
3/102 = 2.9% K-M9(xL-M11, O-M175, P-M74) - South west Asia
1/102 = 1.0% R1-M173(xR1b1-P25) - Chadic
16/102 = 15.7% R1b1-P25 - Chadic


Masalit (Agriculturists; n=32; Nilo-Saharan, Maban)
6/32 = 18.8% A3b2-M13 - Nilotic
1/32 = 3.1% B-M60 - Nilotic
1/32 = 3.1% E1b1b1a-M78(xE1b1b1a1-V12, E1b1b1a2-V13, E1b1b1a3-V22, E1b1b1a4-V65) - North East Africa
17/32 = 53.1% E1b1b1a1b-V32 - North East Africa
5/32 = 15.6% E1b1b1a3-V22 - North East Africa
2/32 = 6.3% J-12f2(xJ2-M172) Arabic


Fur (Agriculturists; n=32; Nilo-Saharan, Fur)
10/32 = 31.3% A3b2-M13 - Nilotic
1/32 = 3.1% B-M60 - Nilotic
13/32 = 40.6% E1b1b1a1b-V32 - North East Africa
6/32 = 18.8% E1b1b1a3-V22 - North East Africa
2/32 = 6.3% J-12f2(xJ2-M172) - Arabic


Copts (Agriculturists; n=33; Afro-Asiatic, Ancient Egyptian > Semitic)
5/33 = 15.2% B-M60 - Nilotic
2/33 = 6.1% E1b1b-M215(xE1b1b1a-M7.8. - North East Africa
5/33 = 15.2% E1b1b1a1-V12(xE1b1b1a1b-V32) North East Africa
13/33 = 39.4% J-12f2(xJ2-M172) Arabic
2/33 = 6.1% J2-M172 - Arabic
1/33 = 3.0% K-M9(xL-M11, O-M175, P-M74) - South West Asia
5/33 = 15.2% R1b1-P25 -- Chadic


Sudanese (Pastoralist/AgriPastoralist Nilotes (Dinka, Nuer, Shilluk) Nilo-Saharan, Eastern Sudanic)
A3B2 (28/53 = 52.8%), - Nilotic
B(16/53 = 30.2%), -Nilotic
E1b1b1a1 (V12+V22 +32)- 9/53 = 17.0%. - North East Africa


http://sudanforum.net/showthread.php?p=1474128


http://leherensuge.blogspot.com/2009/04/brief-review-of-recent-mtdna-h-info.html


____________________________________________________________________


quote:Originally posted by Doctoris Scientia:
Haplogroup J in itself is most likely African. J* peaks in territories near in or around Africa.

J2-M172 is African ...
J (Y-DNA), more than likely originated in East Africa also.

J1 moved into Yemen, While J2 spread from Egypt into the Levant

J1 were Nomads similar to the Beja and Tigre, While J2 were farmers in affiliation to Nile Valley populations.

Areas like Socotra (a few miles outside off of Somalia) still have the highest % of J*.

Both J1 and J2 have African origins...
J*(xJ1, J2) is the oldest form of J ever found, it was found in and near Africa.

70% J* in Socotra (Cerny)
7.7% J* in Oman (Di Giacomo)

According to the most recent studies, most of the "Eurasian" tagged haplogroups developed either in Africa or originated among populations who spanned between both "Southwest Asia" and Africa.
 

---

Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
 
Early sudan

Genetic Patterns of Y-chromosome and Mitochondrial DNA Variation, with Implications to the Peopling of the Sudan

http://etd2.uofk.edu/view_etd.php?etd_details=4312
 

---

Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
 
This deals with sudan and other places in africa.


Nilotic peoples

Regions with significant populations
Nile Valley, African Great Lakes, southwestern Ethiopia

Languages
Nilo-Saharan languages

Religion
traditional religion, Christianity



1st row: Milton Obote • Alek Wek


2nd row: Salva Kiir Mayardit • Daniel arap Moi



Cross country world champion and record holder Lornah Kiplagat, one of many prominent Nilotic distance runners.


Pokot women trekking through the Kenya outback.



Nilotic men in Kapoeta, South Sudan.




Dinka politician John Garang amongst Nilotic supporters in South Sudan.


Genetics

A Y-chromosome study by Wood et al. (2005) tested various populations in Africa for paternal lineages, including 26 Maasai and 9 Luo from Kenya and 9 Alur from the Democratic Republic of Congo. The signature Nilotic paternal marker Haplogroup A3b2 was observed in 27% of the Maasai, 22% of the Alur, and 11% of the Luo. Haplogroup B, another characteristically Nilotic paternal marker according to Gomes et al. (2010), was found in 22% of Wood et al.'s Luo samples and 8% of the studied Maasai. The E1b1b haplogroup was also observed in 50% of the Maasai, which is indicative of substantial gene flow into this population from Cushitic males. In addition, 67% of the Alur samples possessed the Sub-Saharan E2 haplogroup.

Another study by Hassan et al. (2008) analysed the Y-DNA of populations in the Sudan region, with various local Nilotic groups included for comparison. The researchers found the signature Nilotic A and B clades to be the most common paternal lineages amongst the Nilo-Saharan speakers, except those inhabiting western Sudan, where an appreciable North African influence was noted. Haplogroup A was observed amongst 62% of Dinka, 53.3% of Shilluk, 46.4% of Nuba, 33.3% of Nuer, 31.3% of Fur and 18.8% of Masalit. Haplogroup B was found in 50% of Nuer, 26.7% of Shilluk, 23% of Dinka, 14.3% of Nuba, 3.1% of Fur and 3.1% of Masalit. The E1b1b clade was also observed in 71.9% of the Masalit, 59.4% of the Fur, 39.3% of the Nuba, 20% of the Shilluk, 16.7% of the Nuer, and 15% of the Dinka. Hassan et al. attributed the atypically high frequencies of the haplogroup in the Masalit to either a recent population bottleneck that likely altered the community's original haplogroup diversity or to geographical proximity to E1b1b's place of origin in North Africa, where the researchers suggest that the clade "might have been brought to Sudan from[...] after the progressive desertification of the Sahara around 6,000–8,000 years ago". Henn et al. (2008) similarly observed Afro-Asiatic influence in the Nilotic Datog of northern Tanzania, 43% of whom carried the M293 sub-clade of E1b1b.


mtDNA

Unlike their paternal DNA 543, the maternal lineages of Nilotes in general show low-to-negligible amounts of Afro-Asiatic and other extraneous influences. An mtDNA study by Castri et al. (2008) examined the maternal ancestry of various Nilotic populations in Kenya, with Turkana, Samburu, Maasai and Luo individuals sampled. Almost all of the tested Nilotes belonged to various Sub-Saharan macro-haplogroup L sub-clades, including L0, L2, L3, L4 and L5. Low levels of maternal gene flow from North Africa and the Horn of Africa were also observed in a few groups, mainly via the presence of mtDNA haplogroup M and haplogroup I lineages in about 12.5% of the Maasai and 7% of the Samburu samples, respectively.


Autosomal DNA
The autosomal DNA of Nilotic peoples has been examined in a comprehensive study by Tishkoff et al. (2009) on the genetic affiliations of various populations in Africa. According to the researchers, Nilotes generally form their own Sub-Saharan genetic cluster. The authors also found that certain Nilotic populations in the eastern Great Lakes region, such as the Maasai, showed some additional Afro-Asiatic affinities due to repeated assimilation of Cushitic-speaking peoples over the past 5000 or so years.


Anthropology
Physically, Nilotes are noted for their typically very dark skin color and slender, tall bodies. They often possess exceptionally long limbs, particularly vis-a-vis the distal segments (forearms, calves). This characteristic is thought to be a climatic adaptation to allow their bodies to shed heat more efficiently.

Sudanese Nilotes are regarded as one of the tallest people in the world. Roberts and Bainbridge (1963) reported average values of 182.6 cm (71.9") for height and 58.8 kg (129.6 lbs) for weight in a sample of Sudanese Shilluk. Another sample of Sudanese Dinka had a stature/weight ratio of 181.9 cm/58.0 kg (71.6"/127.9 lbs), with an extremely ectomorphic somatotype of 1.6-3.5-6.2.

In terms of facial features, Hiernaux (1975) observed that the nasal profile most common amongst Nilotic populations is broad, with characteristically high index values ranging from 86.9 to 92.0. He also reported that lower nasal indices are often found amongst Nilotes who inhabit the more southerly Great Lakes region, such as the Maasai, a fact which he attributed to genetic differences.

Additionally, it has been remarked that the Nilotic groups presently inhabiting East Africa are sometimes also smaller in stature than those residing in the Sudan region. Campbell et al. (2006) recorded measurements of 172.0 cm/53.6 kg (67.7"/118.2 lbs) in a sample of agricultural Turkana in northern Kenya, and of 174.9 cm/53.0 kg (68.8"/116.8 lbs) in pastoral Turkana. Hiernaux similarly listed a height of 172.7 cm (68") for Maasai in southern Kenya, with an extreme trunk/leg length ratio of 47.7.


Many Nilotic groups also excel in long and middle distance running. It has been argued that this sporting prowess stems from their exceptional running economy, which in turn is a function of slim body morphology and slender legs, as well as a culture of running to school from a young age. A study by Pitsiladis et al. (2006) questioning 404 elite Kenyan distance runners found that 76% of the international-class respondents hailed from the Kalenjin ethnic group and that 79% spoke a Nilotic language.

Some
References


^ The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language (2004). "Nilotic". Fourth Edition. Houghton Mifflin Company. Retrieved 11 January 2013.


^ a b c Elizabeth T Wood, Daryn A Stover, Christopher Ehret et al., "Contrasting patterns of Y chromosome and mtDNA variation in Africa: evidence for sex-biased demographic processes", European Journal of Human Genetics (2005) 13, 867–876. (cf. Appendix A: Y Chromosome Haplotype Frequencies)


^ Gomes V, Sánchez-Diz P, Amorim A, Carracedo A, Gusmão L, Digging deeper into East African human Y chromosome lineages, Hum Genet. 2010 Mar;127(5):603-13. Epub 2010 Mar 6.

^ Cruciani et al., "Phylogeographic Analysis of Haplogroup E3b (E-M215) Y Chromosomes Reveals Multiple Migratory Events Within and Out Of Africa", Am J Hum Genet. 2004 May; 74(5): 1014–1022

^ Hassan, Hisham Y. et al. (2008), Y-Chromosome Variation Among Sudanese: Restricted Gene Flow, Concordance With Language, Geography, and History, American Journal of Physical Anthropology (2008), Volume: 137, Issue: 3, Pages: 316-323
 

---

Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
 
Has for the nuba it seems they are treated has one group,but within the group there are differences.

There are different cultures,that's why i read awhile ago they were not a ethnic group,but different groups within the region.

They seem more of a regional group,that's why they are treated has one.

Nuba peoples
Nuba is a collective term used here for the peoples who inhabit the Nuba Mountains of South Kordofan state, in Sudan. Although the term is used to describe them as if they composed a single group, the Nuba are multiple distinct peoples and speak different languages. Estimates of the Nuba population vary widely; the Sudanese government estimated that they numbered 1.07 million in 2003.

Languages
Most of the Nuba peoples speak one of the many languages in the geographic Kordofanian languages group of the Nuba Mountains. This language group is in the major Niger–Congo languages family. Several Nuba languages are in the Nilo-Saharan languages family.
Over one hundred languages are spoken in the area and are considered Nuba languages, although many of the Nuba also speak Sudanese Arabic, the official language of Sudan.

Note- there number is higher then what is said above.they maybe close to 2million or more.

The man at rescuenubia.com told me there maybe up to 5 million of them,because the sudanese government before south sudan split and further nuba full blown rebellion did not count enough of them.
Who knows.

Anyway they are working together and with the darfur rebels and eastern front and they doing a good job so far defending themselves from the arabized africans.

I wanted to see a separted dna profile for hill nubians,the Midob,the Birgid,and those of kenya etc..


# Nobiin (previously known by the geographic terms Mahas or Fadicca/Fiadicca).
# Midob (Meidob) in and around the Malha volcanic crater in North Darfur.
# Kenzi-Dongolawi, the largest Nubian language, with over a million speakers. May be closest to Birgid.

# Birgid – originally spoken north of Nyala around Menawashei until the 1970s. The last surviving aged speakers were interviewed by Thelwall at this time. Some equally aged speakers on Gezira Aba just north of Kosti on the Nile south of Khartoum were interviewed by Thelwall in 1980.

# Hill Nubian – a group of closely related dialects spoken in various villages in the northern Nuba Mountains – in particular Dilling, Debri, and Kadaru.
The Midob.there languages is not extinct.


The Birgid language is mostly exinct but the not culture the the people.many of them live in chad it seems.

That's why i would like to have each group break down,and know the dna info for each instead of the nuba being treated has a ethnic group,because they are not.
They seem to be more of a region group and force to be closer because of the arab raids and the ARABIZED blacks treat them has one but they are different ethnic groups in the nuba hills.


That's were the confusion for some come in.

The nuba are treated has one,but they are different ethnic groups.


The hill nubians,i would like to know their dna profile separately from the other nuba.

I WOULD like to know the dna profile of nubians in darfur but i have not seen any info so for.it would be basically the same has the hill nubians and the rest of nuba but i would at least like to see that info.


Check the info below Has for the nuba.


This info goes into more detail on why the nuba is not a ethnic group but just a regional group treat has one because that how the arabs see them and they were forced to work together.


I WISH MORE AFRICANS or blacks worldwide were more like them.


We NEED MORE UNITY,AND THEY ARE A GOOD EXAMPLE.
 

---

Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
 
Hill Nubian languages
Hill Nubian is a dialect continuum of Nubian languages spoken in the Nuba Hills of Sudan.


The ethnically and linguistically fragmented situation indicates that the Nuba Mountains have in all probability served as a retreat area. This may have happened at various times in history for basically two reasons. The first would be climatological: the desiccation of the Sahara has certainly time and again impelled people to migrate in search of more abundant water, either to remaining rivers and lakes, or just more generally southwards. In a more close-up perspective the driving forces are on the whole politico-economical. Looking at the map it is not difficult to find the areas of power concentrations from which people might have found it expedient to seek refuge. To the north, the Sahel empires have succeeded each other for centuries. The period of intensive slave-raids over a century ago was a severe threat and a bitter experience for the southern neighbours of Kordofan (i.e., El Obeid). South of the Nuba Mountains, the large and compact area occupied by Dinka and Nuer speakers also has the appearance of a relatively recent centre of expansion. Therefore, we should not overlook the possibility that some present-day inhabitants of the Nuba Mountains came there from the south.

2. The Evidence

The ten language groups established by the MacDiarmids (1931) can serve us well as a point of departure. They are lexicostatistically definable as having an internal cohesion of not less than 45%, based on a 100-word list. The groups and their internal distances (rounded off to multiples of five) are:


1. Heiban 45%
2. Narrow Talodi 65%
3. Tegem (=Lafofa) -
4. Rashad 55%
5. Katla 50%
6. Kadugli 60%
7. Nyimang 60%
8. Temein 60%
9. Daju 60%
10. Nubian 85%

Stevenson (1956-57) summarizes all significant research on Nuba Mountain language to that date, and is also based on his immense collection of manuscript data, largely unpublished, though summary extracts form the main basis for the relevant sections in Tucker and Bryan (1956, 1966). Those publications also contain detailed maps of distribution on which our Map 1 is based. Thelwall (1978, 1981a,b) and Schadeberg (1981a,b) provide subclassifications of most language groups, which will be summarized further on.


The first eight groups listed above are confined to the Nuba Mountains; Daju and Nubian are the only ones that have close connections outside. Our argumentation makes critical use of such information. However, the fact that Nyimang, Temein, Daju and Nubian have all been classified - together with Nilotic and several other language groups - as Eastern Sudanic has no consequence in our present context. Different branches of Eastern Sudanic are very distant from each other; they generally share less than 20% in lexicostatistic terms. Since there are no indications that the Nuba Mountains were the original home of Eastern Sudanic such distant genetic links are judged to be unconnected with the appearance of those four language groups in the Nuba Mountains.

The affiliation of Kadugli is presently open (see Schadebert 1981c). Again, nothing in our argumentation depends on remote possible links with Nilo-Saharan. On the other hand, the fact that groups (1) through (5) may be classified as Kordofanian, and that all Kordofanian languages are spoken exclusively within the Nuba Mountains is certainly relevant. Our hypotheses about the relative chronology of the influx of the various groups are based on these three types of clues about each language group: (i) internal diversity, (ii) immediate external genetic links, and (iii) geographical distribution. Naturally, other evidence such as loanwords and historical traditions should be taken into account as they become available.

3. Hill Nubian
Figure 1: Subclassification of Nubian



Nubian is a language group which presently spreads from Darfur to the Nile (see Map 2). The most prudent interpretation of our lexicostatistical data (Thelwall 1978, 1981a) leads to the subclassification shown in figure 1.

4. Daju
Figure 2: Subclassification of Daju



For the Daju also we have good linguistic evidence and scanty but cogent historical tradition. Languages of the Daju group are presently spoken in Wadai, Darfur, the Nuba Mountains and Bahr el Ghazal (see Map 2). The subclassification in Figure 2 emerges from the work of Thelwall (1978, 1981a,b).


5. Nyimang; Temein; Kadugli
Figure 3: Subclassification of Nyimang and Temein



Nyimang and Temein are two small language families, each consisting of two or three languages, all spoken exclusively in the Nuba Mountains. They have been classified as two (out of ten) branches of Eastern Sudanic. Genetic relationships within Eastern Sudanic are too distant - and too uncertain - as to permit any inferences about migration at the time depth with which we are here concerned. We can only note that both groups show an internal divergence of about 60% (see Figure 3). The data are taken from Thelwall (1981a).


Figure 4: Subclassification of Kadugli
Note that Stevenson's division into Eastern, Central and Western Kadugli is only in part borne out by this calculation; in particular, his Eastern division consisting of Keiga, Kamdang and Kanga/Kufa appears to be non-coherent.


Figure 5: The major branches of Kordofanian

The outside relations of Kordofanian are too distant to be relevant in the present context. The whole Kordofanian language family is located within the Nuba Mountains where it occupies the most central and most widespread geographical position (see Map 1). There appears to be a continuous history of branching, beginning with a (presently assumed) four-way split into Katla, Heiban, Talodi and Rashad. This primary split must have preceded the subsequent split of Talodi into Tegem and Narrow Talodi (25%). On the basis of this evidence it is clearly indicated that the development of Kordofanian occurred in the Nuba Mountains, and that Kordofanian has the longest linguistic history in this area.


1. Kordofanian

2. Nyimang; Temein; Kadugli
3. Daju I: Shatt, Liguri
4. Hill Nubian
5. Daju II: Lagawa


Map 1: Language distribution in the Nuba Mountains



Map 2: The distribution of the Nubian and Daju language groups



_______________________


History of the Nuba, part I
Introduction

The Nuba are a group of peoples who share a common geography in Sudan’s Southern Kordofan Province, known as Jibal al-Nuba or Nuba Mountains. The origins of most Nuba peoples are obscure, but there is no doubt that they are Africans. They arrived to the area from various directions and in the course of thousands of years. Today there are over fifty Nuba tribes, who speak as many different languages. Their combined number is estimated at 2.5 million people.


3. The Nuba on the Nile and the Nuba in the Mountains.
Of course it’s tempting to draw a line from the Nile south-eastward. Wouldn’t it be wonderful to provide the Nuba with an ancestry that goes well beyond the arrival of the Arab conquerors? Al right: the Nuba came to the Nile Kingdoms after the time of the Pharaohs, so we forget about Kush and the rule over Egypt… but three ancient Kingdoms that lasted from roughly 400 to 1600 BC wouldn’t be bad, would it?


Well, to begin with: for the majority of the Nuba tribes there is nothing to suggest a relationship with the Nuba on the Nile. No archaeological finds, no linguistic relationships. The only Nuba tribes that can be linked to the Nuba on the Nile, are those speaking one of the Nubian languages. In order to understand more about the relationship between the two groups, we need to look into linguistics classifications.


The basic idea behind linguistic classification is that people speaking the same language can drift apart, after which the language develops differently in the two groups. After so many hundreds of years this leads to the creation of two different languages. Linguists look at lexicological, grammatical and structural aspects of different languages to group them according to affiliation. With the help of standard word lists they can determine the level of proximity between two affiliated languages.


Researchers of the nineteenth century already acknowledged the linguistic affiliation between the Nuba on the Nile, several Nuba tribes in the Mountains and some scattered communities in Darfur.12 They all speak Nubian languages, classified with the Eastern Sudanic branch of the Nilo-Saharan language family. For a long time, the burning question was: did the Nuba in the Mountains come from the Nile, or did the Nuba on the Nile come from the west?


Despite the Arab conquest of Egypt and the ensuing Islamisation, the people along the Nile in Lower Nubia retained their original language, known as Nubian, or Nobiin for linguists. Closely related to Nobiin is Dongolawi, spoken up the river around Dongola in present day Sudan. Nobiin and Dongolawi probably drifted apart about 1100 years ago – give or take a century or two. Their languages, and specially Nobiin, are considered to be remnants of Old-Nubian, spoken in the Chrsitian Kingdoms of Nobatia, Dongola and Alwa.


Both Nobiin and Dongolawi are related to the so-called Hill Nubian languages of the Nuba Mountains and Darfur. The tribes that speak Hill-Nubian include those of Dilling, Kadaru and Ghulfan; Wali, Karko, Habila, Debri and some tribes more to the West like Tabag and Abu Jinuk.13 Looking at their geographical dispersion, you can imagine them coming from the northeast, some entering the Nuba Mountains from the side of Kadaru, some moving on westward around the Nyimang hills.


This combines well with events at the Nile in the 13th century AD. After centuries of stability, Bedouin tribes driven south by the Mameluks14 , started raiding Makuria. To the east the Beja were harassing Egypt and the Mameluks decided that if Makuria couldn’t keep the Beja in check, it was time to take matters in their own hands. The region was completely destabilised and we can imagine the people from Makuria fleeing south, until they found refuge in the Nuba Mountains. Makes sense, doesn’t it?


Well… to make a long story longer: linguistic evidence rules against it. Apart from Nobiin, Dongolawi and Hill-Nubian, there are two other Nubian language group: Birgid and Meidob, found further to the west scattered over Darfur (Meidob being extinct by now). Combining linguistic data from the different Nubian languages, J.H. Greenberg concluded that ‘to assume any split between Hill Nubian and Nile Nubian more recent than 2,500 years B.P. [before present] would be incorrect.’


Of course we can’t give up a beautiful ancestry that easily: C. Herzog noticed that some Hill-Nubian languages have Christian words for days of the week, and other loan words too: the Nuba in Kordofan came from the Nile after all! But R. Thelwall wasn’t impressed:


We are very confident that Nobiin (and later Dongolawi) came to the Nile from a centre of dispersion in Darfur-Kordofan which they occupied and controlled for perhaps 4000 years. We know that there were Nubian speakers on the Nile at least as early as the 500s CE and probably much earlier. The fact that the Hill Nubian languages have words for the days of the week dating back to Christian Nubian indicates that these languages were in contact at least during the Christian Nubian period which probably covers 500 CE - 1400 CE. This does not necessarily mean that the Hill Nubians did more than expand from central Kordofan into the NubaMountains during the period of Nubian political dominance from Aswan to Kosti (at least). But given the location of the Hill Nubian speakers (Dair, Dilling, Karko etc) along the NE edge of the Mountains it appears that they were "incomers" settling among the existing Nyima and Temein groups who were there before them.


2. The classification of Nuba languages
Maybe systematic archaeological research could shed more light on the origins of the Nuba people, but right now we will have to concentrate on linguistic findings. Linguistics is a complex field, not very sexy to be honest, but in many cases, it’s all we have. So we will first look at the classification of the different Nuba languages, and then move on to the question of who came to the Mountains at what time.

The Nuba Languages can be classified into members of two or perhaps three language families: Nilo-Saharan and Kordofanian.

A. The Kordofanian languages consist of four groups located in the southern and eastern areas of the Nuba Mountains: Heiban, Talodi, Rashad and Katla. Kordofanian languages are considered a branch of the Niger-Congo family, which encompasses all Bantu languages, and in general most of the languages spoken in Sub-Saharan Africa. The only thing is: Kordofanian doesn’t resemble any of the other Niger-Congo languages closely. It constitutes a group of its own and geographically also, Kordofanian is isolated. In other words: we don’t have a clue as to how these Kordofanian speaking Nuba ended up in the Nuba Mountain.

B. The Kadugli Group is located in the south east central fringe area near Kadugli. It was earlier classified as part of Kordofanian but is currently considered part of Nilo-Saharan. This is another large phylum: Dinka and Nuer are Nilo-Saharan languages, and so are many languages of Chad and Congo, as well as several languages spoken in Nigeria.


C. The rest of the Nuba languages are classified as part of a major sub-group of Nilo-Saharan called Eastern Sudanic. They consist of Hill Nubian, Daju, Timein and Nyimang. The tribes speaking Eastern Sudanic languages can be found in the north western areas of the Mountains.


3. Linguistic settlement

As we’ve just seen in the case of the Nubian speakers, shifts in related languages can tell us something about how long ago the speakers of those languages went their own way. Unfortunately this is not very exact, as Robin Thellwall explained to me:

[the] reconstructions are based minimally on linguistic distance and extrapolated onto a fairly speculative time frame (glotto-chronology). Such a time framework is only a provisional and relative model to be tested against other evidence (archaeology, oral traditions, blood types, climate history, agricultural and animal husbandry terminology etc). This has not happened for the NubaMountains.

However, for ‘The Linguistic Settlement of the Nuba in the Mountains’ Thelwall and Schadeberg20 analysed all the available data from the Nuba languages, and they came up with the following hypothesis regarding the relative chronology of the linguistic settlement of the Mountains:

1. Kordofanian language speakers came earlier than all the others

2. Nyimang; Temein and Kadugli language groups followed them

3. Daju speakers of Shatt and Liguri were next

4. Hill Nubian speakers – probably somewhere between 500 and 1400 AD

5. Daju speakers around Lagawa, who settled there relatively recently.

4. Kordofanian

Heiban, Katla, Rashad and Talodi are the current names for the different groups of Kordofanian languages that cover the eastern half of the Nuba Mountains and a large part of the centre. Within the language group, differentiation has progressed much further than in the other Nuba language groups. According to R. Thelwall ‘the family has a time depth of a minimum of 6000 years.’21 This means that you would have to go back at least 6000 years in time to find all Kordofanian speakers speaking the same language. Kordofanian is classified with the Niger-Congo languages, and the nearest Niger-Congo speaking people would be found over the border of Sudan in southern Chad, in Central African Republic and in the Congo. The relationship between Kordofanian and the rest of Niger-Congo is not clear. The current subdivision of Kordofanian is as follows:

5. Nyimang, Temein and Kadugli


These three language groups are unique, like the Kordofanian languages, in the fact that they are only spoken in the Nuba Mountains. Judging from the large internal linguistic diversity within each group, the Nyimang, Temein and Kadugli speaking tribes might well have been in the Mountains for more than 2000 years.30 They seem to have come to the Nuba Mountains in tough times, with a lot of people on the move, losing touch with one another. In the words of Thellwal and Schadeberg:


6. Hill Nubian

As discussed at length above, the Hill Nubian speaking tribes came to the Mountains from the North, probably before 1400 AD. The different languages are classified as follows:

Ghulfan and Kadaru are grouped together. Ghulfan is spoken in Ghulfan Kurgul and Ghulfan Morung; Kadaru in the hill communites of Kadaru, Kururu, Kafir, Kurtala, Dabatna and Kuldaji.
Dilling is spoken in the town and the surrounding villages

Dair, in the western and southern parts of Jebel Dair

Karko in the Karko Hills and Dulman; maybe also Abu Jinik and Tabaq.

Wali in the Wali Hills

Thelwall and Schadeberg can’t say more as to why or when exactly the Hill Nubians migrated south:

Whether this occurred due to pressure from Arab nomads as Arkell proposes, or whether an earlier date should be assumed is not clear. The relative closeness of the Hi1l Nubian dialects to each other does not suggest the presence of isolated Nubian communities in these hills for several millennia.
It was probably a gradual process. R. C. Stevenson writes:


Nubian speech was brought to the northern NubaMountains by tribal movements accelerated by the Arab influx during the past few centuries. In Rüppell’s time (mid 1820s) it was still spoken on the plains south of El Obeid.

7. The Daju speaking tribes

The Daju speaking tribes came to the Nuba Mountains from the west, from a Daju Kingdom that we know conveniently little about. The Kingdom was based, as early perhaps as 1200 AD, in Jebel Marrah, a rain-fed mountain range in an otherwise arid country. The Daju controlled the area between southern Jebel Marra and the western edges of the Nuba Mountains. They were displaced by the Tunjur at the end of the fourteenth century, and left no records besides a list of kings that ends with King Kasi Furogé. The Daju were scattered by the Tunjur and we find them back in some isolated pockets across a wide area of Chad and Sudan, in the regions of Kordofan, Darfur, and Wadai.
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
^ There's so much info you posted Firewall. Too much for me to address at one time, though I've been meaning to address your first post of the genetic data. I will say that the Nilo-Saharan language phylum tends to displays the most diversity in Sudan, especially in the Kordofan province of central Sudan which holds a number of long isolated cultural groups and languages. The Kordofan region itself is a sprachbund (group of languages of diverse origins that have developed some striking structural similarities over time) area holding some Nilo-Saharan, Niger-Congo, and a few isolates.
 

---

Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Firewall:
Modern sudan

---

quote:

---

• Nubians possess more tropically adapted leg limbs and a more linear body plan compared to Egyptians. This was expected since Nubians are situated further south and closer to Sub-Saharan Africa.
• Brachial index, crural index, bi-iliac breadth, and body surface area to body mass (BSA/BM) were analyzed by region to test whether Upper Egyptians and Nubians possess a more tropical body plan compared to populations from the northern region of Egypt. These were compared to indices from archaeologically derived skeletons from various parts of the world (data from Holliday 1995).

---

quote:

---

"Analysis of Predinastic skeletal material showed tropical African elements in the population of the earliest populations of the earliest Badarian culture" [...]

---

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.

---

quote:

---

The results indicate overall population continuity over the Predynastic and early Dynastic, and high levels of genetic heterogeneity, thereby suggesting that state formation occurred as a mainly indigenous process. Nevertheless, significant differences were found in morphology between both geographically-pooled and cemetery-specific temporal groups, indicating that some migration occurred along the Egyptian Nile Valley over the periods&time; studied.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Troll Patrol:

[*]Nubians possess more tropically adapted leg limbs and a more linear body plan compared to Egyptians. This was expected since Nubians are situated further south and closer to Sub-Saharan Africa.
[*]Brachial index, crural index, bi-iliac breadth, and body surface area to body mass (BSA/BM) were analyzed by region to test whether Upper Egyptians and Nubians possess a more tropical body plan compared to populations from the northern region of Egypt. These were compared to indices from archaeologically derived skeletons from various parts of the world (data from Holliday 1995).
[/list]

---

--Michelle Raxter
Egyptian Body Size: A Regional and Worldwide Comparison




Holliday et al 2013

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Explorer:
It has two main branches—a long and linear body build branch that includes the Egyptians, Sub-Saharan Africans (except for the Pygmies), and African-Americans and a second, less linear body form branch that includes the Inuit, Europeans, Euro-Americans, Puebloans, Nubians, and Pygmies. Note that the Nubians used in this study are thought by some to represent an immigrant population from Europe or Western Asia [see Holliday (1995)]. - Holliday et al. (2009)

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Troll Patrol:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Firewall:
Modern sudan

---

Huhmmmm, some Arabic tribes moved into Africa recently. Hence the o.p. posted Sample of Arab Nubians taken. You took out the Arab part, for some funny reason.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Troll Patrol:

[*]Nubians possess more tropically adapted leg limbs and a more linear body plan compared to Egyptians. This was expected since Nubians are situated further south and closer to Sub-Saharan Africa.
[*]Brachial index, crural index, bi-iliac breadth, and body surface area to body mass (BSA/BM) were analyzed by region to test whether Upper Egyptians and Nubians possess a more tropical body plan compared to populations from the northern region of Egypt. These were compared to indices from archaeologically derived skeletons from various parts of the world (data from Holliday 1995).
[/list]

---

--Michelle Raxter
Egyptian Body Size: A Regional and Worldwide Comparison




Holliday et al 2013

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Explorer:
It has two main branches—a long and linear body build branch that includes the Egyptians, Sub-Saharan Africans (except for the Pygmies), and African-Americans and a second, less linear body form branch that includes the Inuit, Europeans, Euro-Americans, Puebloans, Nubians, and Pygmies. Note that the Nubians used in this study are thought by some to represent an immigrant population from Europe or Western Asia [see Holliday (1995)]. - Holliday et al. (2009)

---

I don't know about the European element but these Holliday articles are not corresponding to Raxter
Holliday places Nubians with a less tropical body plan than Egyptians
and Kermans on the other hand, with a more tropical body plan than Egyptians.
Did he use the same Nubian data in 2013 that was in the 2009 article? I don't know

________________________________

- the Raxter quote also indicates:

"these were compared to indices from archaeologically derived skeletons from various parts of the world (data from Holliday 1995)."

---

quote:

---

"Analysis of Predinastic skeletal material showed tropical African elements in the population of the earliest populations of the earliest Badarian culture" [...]

---

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.

---

quote:

---

The results indicate overall population continuity over the Predynastic and early Dynastic, and high levels of genetic heterogeneity, thereby suggesting that state formation occurred as a mainly indigenous process. Nevertheless, significant differences were found in morphology between both geographically-pooled and cemetery-specific temporal groups, indicating that some migration occurred along the Egyptian Nile Valley over the periods&time; studied.

---

--Am J Phys Anthropol, 2007.
 

---

Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
 


Ps. Nubians are within the same line of the dendrogram. As the assumed populations with similar postcranial variable set..


Anyway, I can't see what this variable set implies, do you?

In older studies the author Holliday TW. clearly shows that Africans, historically, overall are tropical adapted. Whereas Arabs and Europeans aren't. Raxter also indirectly stated the same, by implying they became "quickly tropical" thou I think she had different intentions. LOL

quote:

---

Replacement predicts that the earliest modern Europeans will possess "tropical" body proportions (assuming Africa is the center of origin), while Regional Continuity permits only minor shifts in body shape, due to climatic change and/or improved cultural buffering. This study tests these predictions via analyses of osteometric data reflective of trunk height and breadth, limb proportions and relative body mass for samples of Early Upper Paleolithic (EUP), Late Upper Paleolithic (LUP) and Mesolithic (MES) humans and 13 recent African and European populations.

---

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).... "

---

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.

---

quote:

---

Migration within a larger time framework took place ca. 15,000--18,000 BP, when the first Asian populations crossed the Bering Strait, ultimately founding the modern Amerindian population. Despite having as much as 18,000 years of selection in environments as diverse as those found in the Old World, body mass and proportion clines in the Americas are less steep than those in the Old World (Newman, 1953; Roberts, 1978). In fact, as Hulse (1960) pointed out, Amerindians, even in the tropics, tend to possess some ''arctic'' adaptations. 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."

---

quote:

---

Late Upper Paleolithic and Mesolithic Europeans should not exhibit tropically-adapted limb proportions, since, even assuming replacement, their ancestors had experienced cold stress in glacial Europe for at least 12 millennia. [...] Additionally, brachial and crural indices do not appear to be a good measure of overall limb length, and thus, while the Late Upper Paleolithic and Mesolithic humans have significantly higher (i.e., tropically-adapted) brachial and crural indices than do recent Europeans, they also have shorter (i.e., cold-adapted) limbs. [...] The somewhat paradoxical retention of "tropical" indices in the context of more "cold-adapted" limb length is best explained as evidence for Replacement in the European Late Pleistocene, followed by gradual cold adaptation in glacial Europe.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Firewall:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Troll Patrol:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Firewall:
Modern sudan

---

Huhmmmm, some Arabic tribes moved into Africa recently. Hence the o.p. posted Sample of Arab Nubians taken. You took out the Arab part, for some funny reason.

---

I believe the sample was for the nubians of the nile valley that's why i took out the arab part,but you could be right and these could be the arab nubians,but one problem sudan does not have arab nubians in the census,only egypt has that.

Sudan have arabized nubians but most are called arabs first like Gaalien etc...,but these would be called arabized nubians,but on the census they are just called arabs and not arab nubians.

There are arabized hill nubians and darfur nubians but the only thing really arabized about then is that they speak arabic mostly first,but they still speak thier nubian language and thie rculture still still nubian,so i do not why they called arabized because thier culture is still mostly nubian,and they see themselves has nubian and in the census still are nubians.

So arabized could mean varied things it seem.


The sample was for the nile valley modern nubians of sudan.


The other interesting thing is that there are more nubians outside the nile valley in sudan then in the nile,like the darfur nubians and hill nubians.


I should have posted them instead,but some nubians of the nile valley of sudan do look like white arabs or turks so i guess when they i mean nubian these days it could be white or black,like hispanic,so i agree we have to be careful on who they are testing just like they do with late ancient egypt or modern egypt.

Of course most nubians are still black but you do have some that do not look black in egypt and sudan and i was shocked when i first saw them on tv a few years ago calling themselves nubians,but they do not call themselves black i heard recently.


So you do have nile nubians of egypt and sudan that are not really black,but nubians outside the nile in sudan,kenya,chad etc...are only black and i do not see any arab white looking types in those nubian groups.

I GUESS they had enough of the few whites coming into the nile, like those arab invaders overtime and thier the brainwashed black arabs so they went further south and south west years to better protect themselves and doing a good job at.


Here are links with out the arab part below dealing with the nile valley.
Check it out.

The info inside just says nubian,not arab nubian.

Brief review of recent mtDNA H info

http://leherensuge.blogspot.com/2009/04/brief-review-of-recent-mtdna-h-info.html

and
sudaneseonline.com

/sdb/2bb.cgi?seq=msg&board=430&msg=1364754551&rn=
http://www.sudaneseonline.com/cgi-bin/sdb/2bb.cgi?seq=msg&board=430&msg=1364754551&rn=88

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Troll Patrol:

[*]Nubians possess more tropically adapted leg limbs and a more linear body plan compared to Egyptians. This was expected since Nubians are situated further south and closer to Sub-Saharan Africa.
[*]Brachial index, crural index, bi-iliac breadth, and body surface area to body mass (BSA/BM) were analyzed by region to test whether Upper Egyptians and Nubians possess a more tropical body plan compared to populations from the northern region of Egypt. These were compared to indices from archaeologically derived skeletons from various parts of the world (data from Holliday 1995).
[/list]

---

--Michelle Raxter
Egyptian Body Size: A Regional and Worldwide Comparison




Holliday et al 2013

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Explorer:
It has two main branches—a long and linear body build branch that includes the Egyptians, Sub-Saharan Africans (except for the Pygmies), and African-Americans and a second, less linear body form branch that includes the Inuit, Europeans, Euro-Americans, Puebloans, Nubians, and Pygmies. Note that the Nubians used in this study are thought by some to represent an immigrant population from Europe or Western Asia [see Holliday (1995)]. - Holliday et al. (2009)

---

I don't know about the European element but these Holliday articles are not corresponding to Raxter
Holliday places Nubians with a less tropical body plan than Egyptians
and Kermans on the other hand, with a more tropical body plan than Egyptians.
Did he use the same Nubian data in 2013 that was in the 2009 article? I don't know

________________________________

- the Raxter quote also indicates:

"these were compared to indices from archaeologically derived skeletons from various parts of the world (data from Holliday 1995)."

---

quote:

---

Bivariate analyses distinguish Jebel Sahaba from European and circumpolar samples, but do not tend to segregate them from recent North or sub-Saharan African samples

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Troll Patrol:
Bivariate analyses distinguish Jebel Sahaba from European and circumpolar samples, but do not tend to segregate them from recent North or sub-Saharan African samples T. W. Holliday* 2013
Population Affinities of the Jebel Sahaba Skeletal Sample: Limb Proportion Evidence [/QB]

---

The dendogram is distingusihing Nubians from Jebel Sahabans.
Why I don't know.
I thought Jebel Sahabans were Nubians yet this chart indicates some sort of difference.
I think it must be that Jebel Sahabans are Upper Paleolithic whereas what is labeled here "Nubians" are later Merotic people with a different morphology

 

---

Posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova (Member # 15718) on :
 
Originally posted by Troll Patrol:
In older studies the author Holliday TW. clearly shows that Africans, historically, overall are tropical adapted. Whereas Arabs and Europeans aren't. Raxter also indirectly stated the same, by implying they became "quickly tropical" thou I think she had different intentions. LOL

^The new post cranial proxy data again casts doubt
on the recent claims of Raxter. It is using post
cranial proxies as a stand in for direct limb
measurements and this might not be as strong as
direct limb data, but the overall pattern confirms
previous studies, which did use direct limb measurement data.




RECAP for new readers:

Better nutrition does not necessariy mean intensive sedentary
agriculture. Better foraging and resources bases can boost nutrition as well.
In the Nile Valley, a substantial, mixed subsistence economy was long in
place. The ancient Egyptian Badarian, who in numerous studies cluster
with tropical Africans had a subbstantial population and resource base-
reflecting rich subsistence foraging and haversting, not merely sedentary
agriculture. Such mixed economies including harvesting of wild grains and
tubers is an early development in Africa and the Nile Valley scholars show,
without needing any outside settlers. QUOTE:

"Here we demonstrate that this transition is also associated with a modest
reduction and subsequent improvement in stature and body mass. This
trend could be broadly interpreted in the context of models of relationship
between body size and nutrition. In this case, the greater body size of early
hunter-gatherers may reflect the benefit of broadly based hunting and
gathering subsistence... Archaological evidence suggest that the Badarian
civilization had higher population density than did other contemporaneous
civilizations (Gabriel, 1987; Hassan 1988)."
--Pihnasi and Stock (2011) Human Bioarchaeology of the Transition to
Agriculture

“The adoption of this broad adaptive strategy provided the large food
supply needed by a growing population, but achieving maximum
production called for a good deal of planning and the management of
labour. This marks the beginning of an organized food-producing system:
agriculture.” “Dating from more than 15,000 years ago, the evidence from
the Nile valley is arguably the earliest comprehensive instance of an
organized food-producing system known anywhere on Earth.”
--Africa: A Biography of the Continent, by John Reader, 1998, pp.
120-173


The transition to better nutrition & agriculture is associated with
increases in sexual dimorphism, a pattern also occurring in the studies of
ancient Americans. Quote:
"The OK possesses the highest SDS of all temporal groups, including
individual Predynastic sites (Table 10; Figure 10). The greatest increase in
SDS is thus from the Predyn to OK." --Raxter 2011.


-----New World data - same pattern associated with better nutrition not
influxes of outsiders

"Finally body mass has long been recognized as a morphological trait
amongst humans that relates to ecogeographic patterns in association with
climate (Holliday, 1997, Rull 1994). However, Auerbach (2007) found
that the relationship between climatic factors and body mass amongst a
broad sample of New World groups was inconsistent and may have been
influenced by subsistence.. ..there is a similar trend amongst both males and
females: the agriculturalists are taller and more massive, on the average.
This is identical to patterns of diachronic change in stature documented
using different samples from the southeast... There is also a coincident
slight increase in sexual dimorphism among the agriculturalist samples,
accompanied by a slight increase in overall variance in stature, body mass
and bi-iliac breath.. In short, the long temporal perspective on the
development of agriculture in the Southeast may be characterized by
significant overall increases in body size for both males and females."
-- Pinhasi and Stock (2011). Human Bioarchaeology of the Transition to
Agriculture


A rich, indigenous foraging and harvesting strategy is old news in
boosting better nutrition in ancient Africa.

“The adoption of this broad adaptive strategy provided the large food
supply needed by a growing population, but achieving maximum
production called for a good deal of planning and the management of
labour. This marks the beginning of an organized food-producing system:
agriculture.” “Dating from more than 15,000 years ago, the evidence from
the Nile valley is arguably the earliest comprehensive instance of an
organized food-producing system known anywhere on Earth.” --Africa: A
Biography of the Continent, J. Reader, 1998, 120-173


Long native settlement- No mass influx of outsiders-

QUOTE: “Furthermore, the archaeology of northern Africa does not
support demic diffusion of farming from the Near East. The evidence
presented by Wetterstrom indicates that early African farmers in the
Fayum initially incorporated Near Eastern domesticates into an
INDIGENOUS foraging strategy, and only over time developed a
dependence on horticulture. This is inconsistent with in-migrating farming
settlers, who would have brought a more abrupt change in subsistence
strategy. "The same archaeological pattern occurs west of Egypt..”

--Ehret, Keita, Newman, Bellwood (2004). The Origins of Afroasiatic
Science 3 v306, n5702, p1680
------------------------------------------------------


---------------------------------------------------------------------

RECAP transfer from Reloaded posting:




--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Raxter 2011 unpublished dissertation posits close relations between Mediterraneans and
Middle Easterners based on body mass indices. But such
connections in any mass way are dubious, and changes in body mass-
are associated with a shift to agriculture. Adaptation to cooler,
more temperate Nile Valley climes over millennia would also play a
part in any body changes. In short, there is no need for any
mass movement of "Mediterraneans" or "Middle Easterners" to give
the Nile Valley natives diversity in body mass. They already had
it as adapting to temperate climes and taking on more agriculture.


per Raxter:
"Ancient Egyptians as a whole generally exhibit intermediate body breadths relative to higher and lower latitude populations, with Lower Egyptians possessing wider body breadths, as well as lower brachial and crural indices, compared to Upper Egyptians and Upper Nubians. This may suggest that Egyptians are closely related to circum-Mediterranean and/or Near Eastern groups, but quickly developed limb length proportions more suited to their present very hot environments. These results may also reflect the greater plasticity of limb length compared to body breadth.


^1-- Actually it doesn't automatically "suggest" AEs are
"closely related to circum-Mediterranean and/or
Near Eastern groups." [/b] Connections between regions
occurred in all eras but the body mass data also shows that
the peoples of the Nile Valley had built-in native
variation as expected for the many different climes of Africa.
Tropical people adapted in Europe. They also adapted in
the Nile Valley, as they did on East African mountains, as
they did in humid jungle and dry savannah.

And as noted below, bi-ilac ranges/breadth are also
correlated with several other things such as changes
in diet and lifestyle as other scholars show. For example
agriculturalists tend to have greater body breath
than exclusively foraging/hunting peoples. It does
not automatically follow that greather breadth ranges
mean "circum-Mediterranean" relations. Rather the shift
to more dynastic agriculture, from a more mixed pre-
dynastic economy can well accommodate changes in body breath
without the need for any mass influx of "Near Easterners."

Bi-iliac ranges are correlated with many things
including thermoregulation and locomotion. They are also
correlated with stature, and with a shift to agriculture.
Hence an "intermediate" bi-iliac range could be easily
due to any of the above, including a shift from the
mixed economy pre-dynastics, to the more agricultural
early dynastic/dynastic types.

QUOTES:

"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).."

"Generally narrower body breaths of the foragers contrast markedy
with the wider-bodied agriculturalists. Although bi-iliac breadth
has been argued to be stable over long periods of time (Auerbach,
2007), this shift in mean body breath may be indicative of changes
correlated with subsistence economy."

"Any use of the bi-iliac breath/stature body mass estimations
would inherently reflect changes in stature.."

"In this study, skeletal measures of body size were analysed to
evaluate the long-term impact of the transition to agriculture in the Nile
Valley.. Here we demonstrate that this transition is also associated
with a modest reduction and subsequent improvement in stature and
body mass. This trend could be broadly interpreted in the context
of models of relationship between body size and nutrition."
-- Pinhasi & Stock. 2011. Human Bioarchaeology of the Transition to Agriculture


And it should be noted that the pre-Dynastic
Badari, who cluster with tropical Africans were
ALREADY farming and stock-raising with some hunting/
foraging on the side. In other words, tropical
African variants were ALREADY engaging in the
agricultural practices that are correlated with greater
bi-iliac ranges. "Diffusion" from the Middle East
of plants such as wheat, is just that, diffusuion
that was adopted by the indigenous tropical variants
on their own terms. They could grow wheat or peas,
on their own ground, without needing any "wandering Caucasoids"
to be present. This is the precise point stated by Keita 2005,et al

QUOTE:
Furthermore, the archaeology of northern Africa does not
support demic diffusion of farming from the Near East.
The evidence presented by Wetterstrom indicates that early
African farmers in the Fayum initially incorporated Near
Eastern domesticates into an INDIGENOUS foraging strategy,
and only over time developed a dependence on horticulture.
This is inconsistent with in-migrating farming settlers,
who would have brought a more abrupt change in subsistence
strategy. "The same archaeological pattern occurs west of
Egypt, where domestic animals and, later, grains were
gradually adopted after 8000 yr B.P. into the established
pre-agricultural Capsian culture, present across the northern
Sahara since 10,000 yr B.P. From this continuity, it has been
argued that the pre-food-production Capsian peoples spoke
languages ancestral to the Berber and/or Chadic branches of
Afroasiatic, placing the proto-Afroasiatic period distinctly
before 10,000 yr B.P."
--Source: The Origins of Afroasiatic
Christopher Ehret, S. O. Y. Keita, Paul Newman;, and Peter Bellwood
Science 3 December 2004: Vol. 306. no. 5702, p. 1680
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PEr Raxter:
2--Stature regression equations derived from American Black populations may therefore not be appropriate to estimate the statures of ancient Egyptians.

^^In earlier studies (one of which Raxter herself did)
US Blacks as a tropial people were used as a stand-in
to estimate height of Ancient Egyptians. In those studies
Black AMericans were found to cluster closer to Ancient Egyotians
than EUropeans. That finding is not changed at all by Raxter's 2011 study.
In fact, the new study AGAIN confirms that tropical peoples have
similar limb proportions- hence Egyptians and Nubians cluster thereby.

Even if stature was over-estimated in earlier
studies as Raxter claims, the data STILL showed US
Blacks closer to AE proportions. Whether the use
of US blacks is "appropriate" to estimate the
statures of AEs makes little difference because
in limb to limb comparison, the AE's are closer
to the US blacks. Throw out the stature estimation
task and this central result STILL stands.


Even if stature estimation is excluded the
bottom line results are STILL the same- the AE's
cluster more closely with US Blacks.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Per Raxter:
3-- but quickly developed limb length proportions more suited to their present very hot environments.

^^A misleading claim by Raxter. Actually limb
length proportions do not "quickly" change, but
are heavily genetically embedded.


Limb proportions DON'T "quickly" change. They are
rather slow in fact. Hence tropical proportions
found in the Nile Valley are not the product of
"Mediterranean" or "Middle Eastern" migrants who
"quickly" changed to "tropical Africans." Limb
proportions don't work that way.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Per Raxter:
4-- The present results for bi-iliac breadth are also consistent with various genetic studies that have found modern Egyptians to have close affinities to Middle and Near Easterners (Manni et al., 2002; Arredi et al., 2004; Shepard and Herrera, 2006; Rowold et al., 2007) and Southern Europeans/Mediterranean groups (Capelli et al., 2006).
^^No surprise there. We all know MODERN Egyptians
are not identical to the ancients and are more
varied, a result that shows up in ancient samples as well.
Note below that Zakrewski found one widely used sampling
set was not at all typically Egyptian. And whether samples
were pooled or not pooled in other studies MADE LITTLE
DIFFERENCE. The AEs STILL cluster more with tropical
Africans than Europeans or "Middle Easterners."


Some tail end sampling sets are not typical of Ancient Egypt.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Per Raxter
5--Some of these authors suggested their results may have been associated with a diffusion from the Near East during the expansion of early food-producing societies
^^Sure some plant and animal domesticates filtered
into AE from the "Middle East." That was never at
issue. But most of the archaelogical evidence shows
no mass influx of "Caucasoids" or "circum-Mediterranean"
types to instruct the natives. QUOTE:

Ovacaprines appear in the western desert before the Nile valley proper (Wendorf and Schild 2001). However, it is significant that ancient Egyptian words for the major Near Eastern domesticates - Sheep, goat, barley, and wheat - are not loans from either Semitic, Sumerian, or Indo-European. This argues against a mass settler colonization (at replacement levels) of the Nile valley from the Near East at this time. This is in contrast with some words for domesticates in some early Semitic languages, which are likely Sumerian loan words (Diakonoff 1981).. This evidence indicates that northern Nile valley peoples apparently incorporated the Near Eastern domesticates into a Nilotic foraging subsistence tradition on their own terms (Wetterstrom 1993). There was apparently no “Neolithic revolution” brought by settler colonization, but a gradual process of neolithicization (Midant-Reynes 2000).
-- Keita and Boyce, Genetics, Egypt, And History: Interpreting Geographical Patterns Of Y Chromosome Variation,
History in Africa 32 (2005) 221-246
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


6--Ancient Egyptians "as a whole"
Sure. If you lump in the more varied New Kingdom types
and Hyskos/Roman era/Greek era types you will get more variation.
Everyone knows the tail end period of AE had more variation.
Even Zakrewski says that one tail-end series is not
"typically" Egyptian. That was never at issue. What is at issue
is the genesis and maintenance of the pre-Dynastic
and early Dynastic period. Later periods were to
have a more mixed pattern, The 12th Dynasty for example
had several pharaohs of Nubian origin (Yurco 1989), as
did the 18th, as did the 25th. Raxter is eager to highlight
the "close links" with "circum-Mediterranean" types it seems, but not the other way.



Whether stature estimation is involved makes little difference.
AEs STILL cluster more with Black Americans. ANd limb proportions
do not "quickly" change.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


7--RaXter's presentation doesnt make a dime's worth of difference
on the fact that based on limb proportions, AEs cluster more towards
Nubians and other tropical Africans than EUropeans or Middle Easterners.
Body breath indexes are accounted for via dietary/economic shifts and do
not necessarily point to any influx of "Middle Esterners" or "Mediterraneans"

Note how Raxter presents the data:



A-- It is admitted that the AEs have more tropical proportions.
B-- It is admitted that the Nubians have even more tropical proportions.
C-- But then the author quickly leaps to highlight body breath and talk about close links with
Europe and the Mid East.

--In fact though, there are EVEN CLOSER links in A and B above
than C,
between Egytians and other Africans via limb
proportions. Highlighting body breadth cannot obscure this reality.


And if body breadth is "intermediate"- half of the "close links" - then the second half
of the body breath equation is with tropical Africans. If intermediate body
breadths tell about Euro/Mid East Links, then THE OTHER HALF LIKEWISE SPEAKS
OF AFRICAN LINKS. But how come Raxter never uses a consistent approach on
this count - on the flip side?

Raxter's blanket claim of Egyotians as a whole
is flawed. Her main data point is Lower Egypt. But
even this varied over time. In the early period,
the limb length proportions of northern samples,
per Kemp cited above show more affinities with
the Africans rather than the Europeans. Also
flawed is Raxter's blanket notion of "quickly developing"
tropical limb lengths, for which she offers little
clear evidence. To the contrary, as other scholars show,
limb proportions are relatively stable, genetically
embedded, and do not quickly change.

If anything the weight of the overall Nile Valley
picture also points to another alternative- that
of tropical Africans with extreme proportions-
having such proportions modified over the millennia by
(a) cooler Mediterranean temperatures of Egypt,
and (b) a shift to a more agricultural lifestyle.

The Egyptians are more similar to the Nubians via limb proportions.
Both peoples are from warm climes as Raxter notes.
Hence the link with US blacks on limb proportions,
another tropical people from warm climes, and
who have the same typical linear body build, IS
NOT IN THE SLIGHTEST BIT AFFECTED. The limb proportion
data still stands. Body mass variation is accounted
for by (a) adaptation to cooler climates, and (b)
a shift to more agriculture. This does not at all
rule out small scale migration from the Levant/Maghreb.
We all know it occurred, as well as trade links,
prisoners taken in warfare from Palestine etc.
But mass influxes of "Mediterraneans" or "Middle Easterners"
are not at all needed to give the peoples of the
Nile Valley diversity or variation in body mass.


8 -- Adaption to environment is another way tropical peoples
may vary. Nasal shape for example can vary with the environment. Tropical
Africans moving into the Egypt and staying millennia would not
remain static without any changes caused by the environment.



Likewise in Europe, tropical African migrants gradually
got lighter skin colors, under cooler more temperate climates
or colder climates. There is no mass influx of cold-adapted
Neanderthals needed to explain such routine adaptation. Tropical
African variants adapted in temperate EUrope. ANd they adapted
in the temperate Nile Valley and/or the much fluctuating Saharan
climates in varying proportions. Tropical Africa it should also be noted
has numerous micro-climates- from cold thin altitude cloud
forest to sweltreing desert and junge. All these areas change
people if they are there long enough, without the need for any
outside migrants to explain why.


Earlier studies using direct limb data show
AEs clustering with Africans..


FINAL QUOTE:

"Generally narrower body breaths of the foragers contrast markedy
with the wider-bodied agriculturalists. Although bi-iliac breadth has
been argued to be stable over long periods of time (Auerbach, 2007),
this shift in mean body breath may be indicative of changes correlated
with subsistence economy."

"In this study, skeletal measures of body size were analysed to
evaluate the long-term impact of the transition to agriculture in the
Nile Valley.. Here we demonstrate that this transition is also
associated with a modest reduction and subsequent improvement
in stature and body mass. This trend could be broadly interpreted
in the context of models of relationship between body size and nutrition."

-- Pinhasi & Stock. 2011 The Bioarchaeology of the Transition to Agriculture
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova:
A-- It is admitted that the AEs have more tropical proportions.
B-- It is admitted that the Nubians have even more tropical proportions.

---

then why is this 2013 Holliday chart showing Nubians less tropically proportioned than Egyptians?
 

---

Posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova (Member # 15718) on :
 
Raxter and Holiday are not using the same datasets or methods.
Despite this, Holliday's final results still fit
the general patterns of previous studies.





The dendogram is distingusihing Nubians from Jebel Sahabans.
Why I don't know.
I thought Jebel Sahabans were Nubians yet this chart indicates some sort of difference.
I think it must be that Jebel Sahabans are Upper Paleolithic whereas what is labeled here "Nubians" are later Merotic people with a different morphology


Why do you believe Jebel Sahabans and Nubians are
the same?
 

---

Posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova (Member # 15718) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
^ I thought this issue was discussed several times before where the Euronuts tried to claim non-Hpal (np3,592) lineages as 'Caucasian' even though these same lineages are common in Sudan as you say.

---

Yeah, covered multiple times....


 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova:
Holliday's final results still fit
the general patterns of previous studies.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova:
A-- It is admitted that the AEs have more tropical proportions.
B-- It is admitted that the Nubians have even more tropical proportions.

---

The two statements do not agree. Holliday indciates Nubian were less tropically proprtioned than Egyptians.
The reason for it is a separate topic and earlier studies misrepresentation of Nubian DNA, Hpal site is irreleavnt to this physical morphology


 

---

Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lioness:
then why is this 2013 Holliday chart showing Nubians less tropically proportioned than Egyptians?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Troll Patrol:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Firewall:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Troll Patrol:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Firewall:
Modern sudan

---

Huhmmmm, some Arabic tribes moved into Africa recently. Hence the o.p. posted Sample of Arab Nubians taken. You took out the Arab part, for some funny reason.

---

I believe the sample was for the nubians of the nile valley that's why i took out the arab part,but you could be right and these could be the arab nubians,but one problem sudan does not have arab nubians in the census,only egypt has that.

Sudan have arabized nubians but most are called arabs first like Gaalien etc...,but these would be called arabized nubians,but on the census they are just called arabs and not arab nubians.

There are arabized hill nubians and darfur nubians but the only thing really arabized about them is that they speak arabic mostly first,but they still speak thier nubian language and thier culture still nubian.

I do not why they called arabized because thier culture is still mostly nubian or nubian,and they see themselves has nubian and in the census still are nubians.

So arabized could mean varied things it seems.


The sample was for the nile valley modern nubians of sudan.


The other interesting thing is that there are more nubians outside the nile valley in sudan then in the nile,like the darfur nubians and hill nubians.


I should have posted them instead,but some nubians of the nile valley of sudan do look like white arabs or turks so i guess when they mean nubian these days it could be white or black,like hispanic,so i agree we have to be careful on who they are testing just like they do with late ancient egypt or modern egypt.

Of course most nubians are still black but you do have some that do not look black in egypt and sudan and i was shocked when i first saw them on tv a few years ago calling themselves nubians,but they do not call themselves black i heard recently.


So you do have nile nubians of egypt and sudan that are not really black,but nubians outside the nile in sudan,kenya,chad etc...are only black and i do not see any arab white looking types in those nubian groups.

I GUESS they had enough of the few whites coming into the nile in nubia, like those arab invaders overtime and converted brainwashed black arabs so they went further south and south west over the years to better protect themselves and doing a good job at.


Here are links with out the arab part below dealing with the nile valley.
Check it out.

The info inside just says nubian,not arab nubian.

Brief review of recent mtDNA H info

http://leherensuge.blogspot.com/2009/04/brief-review-of-recent-mtdna-h-info.html

and
sudaneseonline.com

/sdb/2bb.cgi?seq=msg&board=430&msg=1364754551&rn=
http://www.sudaneseonline.com/cgi-bin/sdb/2bb.cgi?seq=msg&board=430&msg=1364754551&rn=88

---

Yeah, you're right that Nubian is just a cluster name.

One should keep in mind that "Nubians", Southern Egyptians are endogamous people (who don't easily marry out) and always have been.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Firewall:

Oh,so that's the christian period for those samples?
Swenet thanks for clearing that up.
I had a funny feeling that was the case.

Yeah,some nubians in certain parts of lower nubia and a few in upper nubia in the later middle ages had varied admixture from outside elements.
Of course not southern nubia.

This gets back to what i said and troll patrol had said,it depends on what period in history and location these samples are from.

The samples seem to be only from nile and not other regions of sudan and nearby countries were nubians are known to live in.

Chad has a nubian population that live there for awhile most likely since the late middles ages or before but they are not in these samples.
Nubian churches etc.. were found there too.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lyinass:
then why is this 2013 Holliday chart showing Nubians less tropically proportioned than Egyptians?

---

This is the same sample that in Hanihara et al 2003 clustered away from the Naqada Giza and Kerma subcluster, and instead with with French and other Europeans. Its Christian era and postulated to be mixed with Middle Eastern elements.

Hanihara 2003 et al

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Troll Patrol:

Yeah, you're right that Nubian is just a cluster name.

One should keep in mind that "Nubians", Southern Egyptians are endogamous people (who don't easily marry out) and always have been.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lyinass:
then why is this 2013 Holliday chart showing Nubians less tropically proportioned than Egyptians?

---

This is the same sample that in Hanihara et al 2003 clustered away from the Naqada Giza and Kerma subcluster, and instead with with French and other Europeans. Its Christian era and postulated to be mixed with Middle Eastern elements.

Hanihara 2003 et al

---

I've always suspected as much. This reminds me of the (late) Giza sample Zakrewski found to be non-Egyptian but was held up as Egyptian by Howells and how many scholars.

Lyinass: "I don't know. I don't know. I don't know."

Well now you know, twit!

quote:

---

Originally posted by Troll Patrol:

Yeah, you're right that Nubian is just a cluster name.

One should keep in mind that "Nubians", Southern Egyptians are endogamous people (who don't easily marry out) and always have been.

---

Yes with few exception. As I just pointed out there were Ottoman Imperial outposts in the Nubian region with soldiers raping women if not marrying them. This is why lighter-skinned mixed looking Kanuzi are not that rare. Although I should also point out that interestingly even these light types tend to marry amongst themselves. The vast majority of Kanuzi are still dark. Both Nubians and Upper Egyptian Sa'idi not only marry within their communities but actually practice cousin marriage. So studies of these people do tend to give more stable trends either morphometrically or genetically.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:


Lyinass: "I don't know. I don't know. I don't know."

---

 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lioness:
then why is this 2013 Holliday chart showing Nubians less tropically proportioned than Egyptians?

---

This is the same sample that in Hanihara et al 2003 clustered away from the Naqada Giza and Kerma subcluster, and instead with with French and other Europeans. Its Christian era and postulated to be mixed with Middle Eastern elements.

Hanihara 2003 et al

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Firewall:
quote-
Would this mean modern Nubians on average cluster with French and other Europeans?
______________

No.
Some modern nubians do have varied outside admixture,but most do not.

Egypt on average more so then sudan however.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lioness:
then why is this 2013 Holliday chart showing Nubians less tropically proportioned than Egyptians?

---

This is the same sample that in Hanihara et al 2003 clustered away from the Naqada Giza and Kerma subcluster, and instead with with French and other Europeans. Its Christian era and postulated to be mixed with Middle Eastern elements.

Hanihara 2003 et al

---

Does Holliday reference Hanihara et al 2003 for the article?
I don't know I have not read it.
Would this mean modern Nubians on average cluster with French and other Europeans?

---

My comments of ''Middle Eastern'' elements do not pertain to all of Christian Nubia. The 'Nubia' sample that keeps reappearing in Holiday's work is just a sample that happens to be admixed. The indigenousness of the native Christian era Nubians, however, is not up for discussion. In fact, Christian era Nubians have more affinity with Sub-Saharan Africans than earlier C and A-group Nubians. Here, below, some other Christian era Nubian sample that is likely to be more reflective of the local population, assumes a cranio-facial position all the way in the back, close to the Teita sample, while the other Nubian samples cluster more to the other side, towards the Naqada Egyptians, Masai and the Tindiga (i.e., Hadza).


 

---

Posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova (Member # 15718) on :
 
Originally posted by Djehuti:
This is the same sample that in Hanihara et al 2003 clustered away from the Naqada Giza and Kerma subcluster, and instead with with French and other Europeans. Its Christian era and postulated to be mixed with Middle Eastern elements.

Hanihara 2003 et al

I've always suspected as much. This reminds me of the (late) Giza sample Zakrewski found to be non-Egyptian but was held up as Egyptian by Howells and how many scholars.

^^Yes, Hanihara's Nubian sample is later, more mixed Meriotic era.
But also in the SAME Hanihara 2003 study, the Kerma
samples from Nubia region cluster with Egyptians.
So one way or another, you have "Nubian" samples
clustering with ancient Egyptians.
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:
My comments of ''Middle Eastern'' elements do not pertain to all of Christian Nubia. The 'Nubia' sample that keeps reappearing in Holiday's work is just a sample that happens to be admixed. The indigenousness of the native Christian era Nubians, however, is not up for discussion. In fact, Christian era Nubians have more affinity with Sub-Saharan Africans than earlier C and A-group Nubians.

---

You say some are admixted.
That means one can't say the Christian era Nubians being indigenous is not up for discussion.
According to what you are saying some Christian ear Nubians were indigenous and others were less than indigenous, so much so that their limb ratios approach Europeans.
is Holliday misreprenting Nubians by not making this distinction?

And is there other Christian ara Nubian data specifically on limb ratios that demonstrates some samples having limb ratios more tropical than AAs and AEs?
cranio-facial data is a different metric
one can only assume that corresponds to limb proportions
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 


^^^ I am still finding the pygmy position here hard to believe.
Many pictures I've seen of pygmies, the first thing you notice is how short their legs are, shorter proportionally than AAs.
This looks similar to a cold adpated limb to body ratio.
But that alone cannot indicate cold adaptation.
They don't have thick limbs like other short statured, short legged people do who come from cold environments-Bergman's rule.
Obviously they are tropical but not in the usual way.
I don't see any of this pertaining to Eurocentic vs. Afrocentric arguments. I just see the pygmies as a unique population with overlap to other Africans and other things that do not overlap but these things still completley indigenous to Africa.
Add to this some mix with Bantus and take on more of their charactersitics.
 

---

Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lyinass:
then why is this 2013 Holliday chart showing Nubians less tropically proportioned than Egyptians?

---

This is the same sample that in Hanihara et al 2003 clustered away from the Naqada Giza and Kerma subcluster, and instead with with French and other Europeans. Its Christian era and postulated to be mixed with Middle Eastern elements.

Hanihara 2003 et al

---

I've always suspected as much. This reminds me of the (late) Giza sample Zakrewski found to be non-Egyptian but was held up as Egyptian by Howells and how many scholars.

Lyinass: "I don't know. I don't know. I don't know."

Well now you know, twit!

quote:

---

Originally posted by Troll Patrol:

Yeah, you're right that Nubian is just a cluster name.

One should keep in mind that "Nubians", Southern Egyptians are endogamous people (who don't easily marry out) and always have been.

---

Yes with few exception. As I just pointed out there were Ottoman Imperial outposts in the Nubian region with soldiers raping women if not marrying them. This is why lighter-skinned mixed looking Kanuzi are not that rare. Although I should also point out that interestingly even these light types tend to marry amongst themselves. The vast majority of Kanuzi are still dark. Both Nubians and Upper Egyptian Sa'idi not only marry within their communities but actually practice cousin marriage. So studies of these people do tend to give more stable trends either morphometrically or genetically.

---

Yes, these exceptions are. It's true. But those are rare occasions. It's even hard for a Northern Egyptian to marry a Southern Egyptian, let alone a foreign person. Usually the son in law moves in to the house, where the couple has a separate cubic, this a basic principle.


I can't get a clear picture on some Bosnian or Yugoslavian descendants with Southern Egyptian/ Nubian admixture. Maybe you remember what that group is called.



 

---

Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:
My comments of ''Middle Eastern'' elements do not pertain to all of Christian Nubia. The 'Nubia' sample that keeps reappearing in Holiday's work is just a sample that happens to be admixed. The indigenousness of the native Christian era Nubians, however, is not up for discussion. In fact, Christian era Nubians have more affinity with Sub-Saharan Africans than earlier C and A-group Nubians.

---

You say some are admixted.
That means one can't say the Christian era Nubians being indigenous is not up for discussion.
According to what you are saying some Christian ear Nubians were indigenous and others were less than indigenous, so much so that their limb ratios approach Europeans.
is Holliday misreprenting Nubians by not making this distinction?

And is there other Christian ara Nubian data specifically on limb ratios that demonstrates some samples having limb ratios more tropical than AAs and AEs?
cranio-facial data is a different metric
one can only assume that corresponds to limb proportions

---

quote:

---

Scholars have identified a hiatus in the archaeological record of Lower Nubia that spans approximately 1000 years. This interval may represent a desertion of Lower Nubia by its inhabitants. Evidence of occupation did not reappear in the area until the Meroitic time period. However, the identity of the returning people has been the subject of speculation. In order to determine who the Meroites of Lower Nubia were, 20 cranial non-metric traits were observed on six Nubian groups, representing five time periods. Two groups date to time periods immediately before (Kerma) and immediately after (X-Group) the Meroitic period. Three additional Nubian groups (two Christian samples from different sites and Sesebi, a contemporary sample) were utilised as outgroups to elucidate a clearer picture of the relationship among the six samples. Mahalanobis D2 with a tetrachoric matrix was employed for calculating biological distances among the groups. Principal coordinates analysis produced two clusters of Nubians, where the Meroitics clustered with other Nubian groups. Specific distance scores indicate the Meroites were biologically similar to individuals from the time periods prior to and after their arrival in Lower Nubia. The Meroites therefore appear to be a Nubian group returning to Lower Nubia after its desertion. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:
Holiday has made at least two references to peculiarities in this Christian era sample. These peculiarities are well know in the literature and were observed well before Holiday started using this sample, and well before his limb data results confirmed what was written in those early reports.

Also, please don't try to lecture me about the differences between non-metric data and limb data, as it'll lead to nowhere. I actually have a history of looking into this stuff--you don't. Your insinuation that the entire Christian era population needs to be revisited on the account of one peculiar sample reeks of bias.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:


^^^ I am still finding the pygmy position here hard to believe.
Many pictures I've seen of pygmies, the first thing you notice is how short their legs are, shorter proportionally than AAs.
This looks similar to a cold adpated limb to body ratio.
But that alone cannot indicate cold adaptation.
They don't have thick limbs like other short statured, short legged people do who come from cold environments-Bergman's rule.
Obviously they are tropical but not in the usual way.
I don't see any of this pertaining to Eurocentic vs. Afrocentric arguments. I just see the pygmies as a unique population with overlap to other Africans and other things that do not overlap but these things still completley indigenous to Africa.
Add to this some mix with Bantus and take on more of their charactersitics.

---

 

---

Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Firewall:
quote-
Would this mean modern Nubians on average cluster with French and other Europeans?
______________

No.
Some modern nubians do have varied outside admixture,but most do not.

Egypt on average more so then sudan however.

---

quote:

---

The Magyarab are a people living along the Nile River in Egypt and Sudan. ... Rather, the name is a concatenation of "Magyar" (Hungarian) and "Ab" which in Nubian simply means "tribe"...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Troll Patrol:

I can't get a clear picture on some Bosnian or Yugoslavian descendants with Southern Egyptian/ Nubian admixture. Maybe you remember what that group is called.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lyinass,:

You say some are admixed.
That means one can't say the Christian era Nubians being indigenous is not up for discussion.
According to what you are saying some Christian ear Nubians were indigenous and others were less than indigenous, so much so that their limb ratios approach Europeans.
is Holliday misreprenting Nubians by not making this distinction?

And is there other Christian era Nubian data specifically on limb ratios that demonstrates some samples having limb ratios more tropical than AAs and AEs?
cranio-facial data is a different metric
one can only assume that corresponds to limb proportions

---

LOL So you are going to use the admixed sample--which is considered an OUTLIER among all the samples-- as representative of the general population overall?! This would be like using the Greco-Roman era samples of Alexandria as representative for all Egyptians or modern day cosmopolitan London people as representative of all British people.

I hope you can see your failed logic.
 

---

Posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova (Member # 15718) on :
 
^^lol


^ Indeed, in fact during the late 19th century, it was not uncommon for wealthy Europeans of eastern Europe to travel to Africa and "mingle" with Africans especially the nobility or royalty of those nations.

Hmm, interesting. Any refs?
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
[QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by the lyinass,:

---

 

---

Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
 
Deleted.
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2987219/

The emergence of Y-chromosome haplogroup J1e among Arabic-speaking populations2010

Jacques Chiaroni,1,* Roy J King,2 Natalie M Myres,3 Brenna M Henn,4

A recent Bayesian analysis of Semitic languages supports an origin in the Levant 5750 years ago and subsequent arrival in the Horn of Africa from Arabia 2800 years ago (11)

Moreover, the network analysis of J1e haplotypes (Figure 2b) shows that some of the populations with low diversity, such as Bedouins from Israel, Qatar, Sudan and UAE, are tightly clustered near high-frequency haplotypes suggesting founder effects with star burst expansion in the Arabian Desert.



______________________

ref. 11
Kitchen A, Ehret C, Assefa S, Mulligan CJ.

Bayesian phylogenetic analysis of Semitic languages identifies an early Bronze Age origin of Semitic in the Near East. Proc Biol Sci. 2009;276:2703–2710.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2839953/
 

---

Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
 

quote:

---

The overall expansion time estimated from 453 chromosomes is 10000 years. Moreover, the previously described J1 (DYS388=13) chromosomes, frequently found in the Caucasus and eastern Anatolian populations, were ancestral to J1e and displayed an expansion time of 9000 years

---

quote:

---

Although humidity levels fluctuated during the Holocene, the present climatic regime in Arabia was established ~5000 years ago.16

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:
mtDNA analysis in ancient Nubians supports the existence of gene flow between sub-Sahara and North Africa in the Nile valley

quote:

---

The Hpal (np3,592) mitochondrial DNA marker is a selectively neutral mutation that is very common in sub-Saharan Africa and is almost absent in North African and European populations. It has been screened in a Meroitic sample from ancient Nubia through PCR amplification and posterior enzyme digestion, to evaluate the sub-Saharan genetic influences in this population. From 29 individuals analysed, only 15 yield positive amplifications, four of them (26.7%) displaying the sub-Saharan African marker. Hpa 1 (np3,592) marker is present in the sub-Saharan populations at a frequency of 68.7 on average. Thus, the frequency of genes from this area in the Merotic Nubian population can be estimated at around 39% (with a confidence interval from 22% to 55%). The frequency obtained fits in a south-north decreasing gradient of Hpa I (np3,592) along the African continent. Results suggest that morphological changes observed historically in the Nubian populations are more likely to be due to the existence of south-north gene flow through the Nile Valley than to in-situ evolution.

---

I can't wrap my mind around why this paper is so undercited, aside from Cuckoo Mathilda and her confused puppets. Notice I'm not saying that this paper has been ignored by ES members, as its potential to be misconstrued has been nipped in the bud several times. But why isn't it pro-actively quoted as much as, say, DNA Tribes' Amarna analysis?

First of all, judging by the abstract, the authors aren't even saying that these Nubians had 61% non-African mtDNAs, and secondly, their title and abstract are suggesting that they were testing the contributions of Niger Congo speaking Africans in the ancient Nile Valley genepool (which doesn't make sense due to the fact that these lineages predate anything Niger-Congo, but oh well..):

Thus, the frequency of genes from this area in the Merotic Nubian population can be estimated at around 39%

^They clearly aren't counting Northeast African specific mtDNA Ls (which we now know, are prominent).

Thirdly, it is NORMAL for Sudanese to only have ~30% hpa I np 3592 associated uniparentals (L1 and L2):

quote:

---

For mtDNA analysis, a total of 56 haplotypes were observed, all belonging to the major sub-Saharan African and Eurasian mitochondrial macrohapolgroups L0, L1, L2, L4, L5, L3A, M and N in frequencies of 12.1, 11.9, 22, 4.2, 6.2, 29.5, 2, and 12.2% respectively.

---

--Hassan, 2009

---

For the record, certain aspects of this post are
inaccurate. The Hpal 3592 marker left the mtDNA
tree immediately upstream of L4'3, meaning, only
L3, L4, M and N lineages lack the Hpal 3592 marker.
There are exceptions but these exceptions don't
have common ancestry with the Hpal 3592 marker
upstream of L4'3.

This Meroitic sample has a Hpal 3592 signature
consistent with modern day Red Sea Coast indigènes
who have relatively high proportions (often >50%)
of M1, L3 and L4 when compared to their overall
mtDNA L pool, a condition in Africa shared
consistently by Nile Valley Egyptians, Siwa
Egyptians, Nubian speakers, Beja and Lowland East
Cushitic speakers.
 

---

Posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate (Member # 20039) on :
 
It's not surprising to find common DNA between African (sub-Saharan) people (Yoruba, Somali, Dinka, Wolof, etc) and Kushite/Ancient Egyptian people since they all share a common origin in North-Eastern Africa (after the OOA migrations of course). For example, the Niger-Congo languages as well as Nilo-Saharan languages have their common origin in Northeastern Africa around Sudan/Ethiopia (I don't have to repeat it but this common linguistic origin is also after the OOA migrations of course).

As another example we can note most Niger-Congo, Cushitic and Chadic speakers share the same Y-DNA haplogroup E-P2. The haplogroup E-P2 is the haplogroup of over 80% of African people (Sub-Saharan Africans/black Africans).

Obenga, basing his work on Anta Diop and Lilias Homburger before him, has determined the probable language of the common E-P2 ancestor which he calls African-Egyptian/Negro-Egyptian . This is not a mainstream linguistic view (such as Ehret posted below) but it comes to the reason that the common E-P2 ancestor, grandfather of most African people, spoke a language and this language was the common language of all his descendant people (current E-P2 carriers like E1b1a/E1b1b carriers which I recall form about over 80% of modern African people)

Ramses III=E1b1a, BMJ, JAMA and DNA Tribes data are other evidence of this as well as many line of inquiry from linguistic to genetics passing by Biological Anthropology. Which I will expose below.

Modern African people, like all people in the world, as well as Kushite and Ancient Egyptians are the products of demographic changes in the last 6000-8000 years (genetic drift, change in lifestyles, change in physiology, demographic expansion, admixtures, post-dynastic migrations, admixtures and conquests, within-Africa migrations and admixtures, etc).


1) Genetically: The current ancient DNA analysis of Ancient Egyptians mummy specimen have identified the haplogroup E1b1a for Ramses III and the screaming mummy. The most common haplogroup among Sub-Saharan Africans and African-Americans. Autosomal STR have them clustering with Great Lakes, Southern and West Africans. Not Eurasians. This is all from the JAMA , BMJ and DNA Tribes studies mentioned in this thread and forum. Ancient DNA in general has the best discriminative power to identify related and non-related populations.

2) Cultural Archaeology: Same here, Ancient Egyptian share many cultural characteristic with Ancient Egyptians. It has been demonstrated that Ancient Egypt was mostly the product of an indigenous African development. From their common origin in Eastern Africa, to the Green Sahara culture (Wavy-line pottery), to Nabta Playa, Tasian, Badarian, Naqada culture.


3) Biological Anthropology: Same here, Ancient Egyptians cluster with modern African populations not modern Eurasian populations. The change in physiology between them and their North-East African ancestors/predecessor is related to the change in lifestyles and diet and genetic drift. For example, the transition from hunter-gatherers, to pastoralism to agriculture lifestyles. Ancient Egyptians have been demonstrated to be continuous with their North-East African ancestors/predecessors in modern studies.


Let's consider the data from this study:
The questionable contribution of the Neolithic and the Bronze Age to European craniofacial form by Brace (2005)


Fig. 1. Neighbor-joining dendrogram for a series of prehistoric and recent
human populations (Craniofacial measures)

Clearly, we can see Niger-Congo speakers (Tanzania, Dahomey, Congo), Nubians, Somali, Naqada clustering on the same branch. Completely distinct from modern Eurasian populations like in Egypt, Middle East, Italy, France, or Germany.


Same for post-cranial analysis:


We can see African populations (including East, West Africans and African-Americans) clustering at the top and non-African populations clustering at the bottom.

This study has the same analysis:

From Cranial Discrete Traits in a Byzantine Population and Eastern Mediterranean Population Movements by F. X. RICAUT and M. WAELKENS (2008)

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).


This affinity between Ancient and modern Northeastern African populations and Niger-Congo speakers (which form the majority of African people) can also be seen genetically and linguistically. As modern East and West African people (and Ancient Egyptians of course) have a common origin in Eastern Africa after the Out of Africa migrations of Eurasian people ancestors .

Genetically:
Y-DNA:

And here for MtDNA (other L haplogroups were obviously not part of the OOA migrations so I didn't include them in the graph):

African populations are genetically close to each others in a similar way Eurasian populations are close to each others, mitigated by the amount of Eurasian back migration they possess. Bi-directional migrations must also be taken into account.

Before the OOA migrations the E and even E-P2 haplogroups didn't even exist as East and West Africans (the greater part of their ancestry) were still part of the same population in North-East Africa. Where they eventually developed the E and E-P2 haplogroups. Eventually spreading E-P2 across Africa along with its MtDNA haplogroups counterparts (like L2a, L3f, L3d, L3eijx, etc).

We can see something similar for autosomal DNA, we also see African populations clustering close to each others (like Europeans, Native Americans and East Asians too respectively) in term of genetic distance mitigated by the level of "recent" (post OOA) Eurasian back migrations into those populations.

For example, on this genetic distance tree from Tishkoff we can clearly see African population clustering on one side and non-African populations clustering on the other side. We can measure the genetic distance too since the genetic distance tree is on scale.


We can see a bigger and more clear image Here and in the study link below.
From The genetic structure and history of Africans and African Americans by Tishkoff (2009)

We can notice among other populations Maasai, Yoruba, Fulani, African-Americans clustering close to each others compared to with Eurasian populations. That is despite, for example, Fulani having some substantial level of Eurasian admixture. Of course population like Mozabite and Beja which are more "recently" admixed with back migrating Eurasians post OOA are kind of in-between (their genetic closeness with other African populations are mitigated by the amount of Eurasian admixtures in their populations).


Linguistically:
All modern African languages family, including Niger-Congo have their ancient origin in North-Eastern Africa:

From:Reconstructing Ancient Kinship in Africa by Christopher Ehret (From Early Human Kinship, Chap 12)

Ultimately, most African people, including Somali, Yoruba, and Ancient Egyptians, share a common origin in Northeastern Africa at a time period after the OOA migrations of non-Africans.


Other threads of interests:
http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=009018
http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=008815
http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=008903
http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=009022;p=11#000536
 

---

Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
 
You better take your spam elsewhere before I'll call
for your posts to be deleted. I have no time for
you, go take your revisionist fairy tales elsewhere.
 

---

Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
 
As for the undiluted facts that some can't stand:

only 15 yield positive amplifications, four of
them (26.7%) displaying the sub-Saharan African
[Hpal 3592] marker.
--Fox et al

Hpal 3592 levels in Africa:


Like I said:

This Meroitic sample has a Hpal 3592 signature
consistent with modern day Red Sea Coast indigènes
who have relatively high proportions (often >50%)
of M1, L3 and L4 when compared to their overall
mtDNA L pool, a condition in Africa shared
consistently by Nile Valley Egyptians, Siwa
Egyptians, Nubian speakers, Beja and Lowland East
Cushitic speakers.
--Swenet
 

---

Posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate (Member # 20039) on :
 
^^^Obvious splittism approach based on the dynastic/hamitic race myth employed by Swenet above. What a shame.

Like all African populations Ancient Egyptians and Kushites were their own people but they also share a common origin with other African populations whether you like it or not.

You can try to twist and turn the BMJ (Ramses III=E1b1a), JAMA and DNA Tribes aDNA results or any genetic/archaeological results as much as you want. It won't change that fact.
 

---

Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
 
I'm not moved by your teary eyes, boy. Go bitch,
moan and make emotional pleas elsewhere.



How CL Fox' Nubian aDNA sample compares to the
above frequencies of Hpal 3592:

only 15 yield positive amplifications, four of
them (26.7%) displaying the sub-Saharan African
[Hpal 3592] marker.
--Fox et al
 

---

Posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate (Member # 20039) on :
 
^^Empty insults now. Ridiculous.
 

---

Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
 
Sue me. Go cry elsewhere instead of polluting my
thread with your pseudo-science and denialism.
 

---

Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
 
^Goes for anyone by the way. If you approach my
post in a nagging manner that conveys that you're
offended by scientific observations and your way
of trying to deal with said emotional discomfort
is by posting spammy walls of opinions that you
wrote yourself wherein academic sources only
appear as non-sequiturs to what you're saying (if
they appear at all), and you repeatedly accuse me
of being a racist/proponent of the Hamitic myth,
EXPECT a dismissive reply.

I carry myself within the bounds of rules laid
out earlier for this forum by Ausar. Throughout
my 5 year stay here, I never pretended to be some
sort of Dalai Lama of decorum, contrary to some
others. You don't have to like it, but at least
with me you get consistency.

His earlier long winded opinion filled post was
copy-paste spam from some other thread where
he was repeatedly spamming it out of outrage
with the scientific data others were posting.
That's why he was meted out the response he got.

And if you catch me wilfully antagonizing
established facts and polluting the threads of
people who subscribe to those facts, merely
because I resent such facts, feel free to uphold
me to the same standards. In such a case I'd
deserve to be blown off.
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
^ Swenet, I totally concur with everything you say. Despite some here, you do display a reserve attitude in regards to FACTS and the presentation thereof. Of course at least one or more of those emotion-laden fools will now accuse me of being your lapdog/b|tch-boy whatever just for writing this but I really don't care anymore about others 'think' or rather feel but about FACTS same as you.

Of course Ahmanutcase the Ultimate is just one of the idiots I am addressing. Note how in another thread, his emotional instability goes into the very depths of insanity where he literally misreads everything I write as the opposite!

As such it no longer matter that he distorts YOUR posts as somehow supporting debunked Euronut theories of 'Hamitic race' or suggesting that Nile Valley Africans have no relation to other Africans at all when that is NOT what you stated.

Forget being a people-pleaser because most people are just too stupid or too crazy to please.
 

---

Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
 
^I'm glad you're noticing the systematic misplaced
indignation with scientific data that goes on here.
Sometimes I feel like I'm in the twilight zone when
I see what these propagandists get away with here.
One of the reasons why Egyptsearch has become a
laughing stock in the Anthro-blogosphere.
 

---

Posted by Truthcentric (Member # 3735) on :
 
I know I've said it before, but I think I can understand why people like Amun-Ra and other posters here on ES get rather squeamish about data implying that ancient Egypto-Nubians didn't perfectly resemble the platonic "sub-Saharan African" ideal in phenotype.

Let's face the facts, the vast majority of people who give more than one **** about the race of the ancient Egyptians do have a vested interest in racial politics. One of the reasons I myself got embroiled in this mess was that I saw white supremacists on the Internet claiming that Black Africans were inherently incapable of civilization and that the Egyptians could only have been "Mediterranean Caucasoid" people. This was never a debate of purely academic interest for any of the parties involved.

As for Amun-Ra et al, like most "Afrocentric" activists they probably want to challenge the pervasive perception that the so-called "True Negro" features like full lips, broad noses, very dark skin, and kinky hair are necessarily ugly or subhuman. That's a commendable agenda by itself, but insofar as the general public perceives ancient Egypt to represent the pinnacle of African civilization (if they recognize it as African at all), these activists feel a need to project this "True Negro" ideal on the Egyptians despite any evidence to the contrary. After all, if you believe Egypt is the quintessential African kingdom, wouldn't you want to make the Egyptians resemble so-called quintessential Africans?
 

---

Posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate (Member # 20039) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Truthcentric:
I know I've said it before, but I think I can understand why people like Amun-Ra and other posters here on ES get rather squeamish about data implying that ancient Egypto-Nubians didn't perfectly resemble the platonic "sub-Saharan African" ideal in phenotype.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Truthcentric:

As for Amun-Ra et al, like most "Afrocentric" activists they probably want to challenge the pervasive perception that the so-called "True Negro" features like full lips, broad noses, very dark skin, and kinky hair are necessarily ugly or subhuman. That's a commendable agenda by itself, but insofar as the general public perceives ancient Egypt to represent the pinnacle of African civilization (if they recognize it as African at all), these activists feel a need to project this "True Negro" ideal on the Egyptians despite any evidence to the contrary. After all, if you believe Egypt is the quintessential African kingdom, wouldn't you want to make the Egyptians resemble so-called quintessential Africans?

---

This is even more stupid and on the verge of racism. You only use my name in vain to reflect your racist opinion and prejudice against African people. I certainly never expressed anything even close to it. You're a stupid asshole.
 

---

Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
 


How CL Fox' Nubian aDNA sample compares to the
above frequencies of Hpal 3592:

only 15 yield positive amplifications, four of
them (26.7%) displaying the sub-Saharan African
[Hpal 3592] marker.
--CL Fox
 

---

Posted by tropicals redacted (Member # 21621) on :
 
@truthcentric

quote:

---

As for Amun-Ra et al, like most "Afrocentric" activists they probably want to challenge the pervasive perception that the so-called "True Negro" features like full lips, broad noses, very dark skin, and kinky hair are necessarily ugly or subhuman .

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by tropicals redacted:
@truthcentric

quote:

---

As for Amun-Ra et al, like most "Afrocentric" activists they probably want to challenge the pervasive perception that the so-called "True Negro" features like full lips, broad noses, very dark skin, and kinky hair are necessarily ugly or subhuman .

---

I think you've concluded this elsewhere, and I found it as disturbing then as I do now, particularly when taken with your sexualised depictions of black women. It feels like you think you're doing black people a favour.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Truthcentric:
[qb]
As for Amun-Ra et al, like most "Afrocentric" activists they probably want to challenge the pervasive perception that the so-called "True Negro" features like full lips, broad noses, very dark skin, and kinky hair are necessarily ugly or subhuman. That's a commendable agenda by itself, but insofar as the general public perceives ancient Egypt to represent the pinnacle of African civilization (if they recognize it as African at all), these activists feel a need to project this "True Negro" ideal on the Egyptians despite any evidence to the contrary. After all, if you believe Egypt is the quintessential African kingdom, wouldn't you want to make the Egyptians resemble so-called quintessential Africans?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova:
Dubious. Who says so-called most "Afrocentric" activists
in relation to Egypt, have much interest in whether
"true negro" features are considered ugly or "subhuman"?
Concern with "negro lookism" or such has more to do with
general critiques of racism, not so much ancient Egypt.

And who says would be "activists" of any significant number
are "projecting" so-called "true negro" features
on Egypt because they are concerned about how negro
features look to Europeans? Can you cite any of these
generally recognized "Afrocentric activists" who, according
to you, are "projecting" on Egypt due to the lookism issue?
If this is the case with "most" Afrocentric activists,
you should have no problem finding them.

You also seem to forget that there is no need to
make any "projections." "True negro" features are
part and parcel of the NATIVE Ancient Egyptian makeup,
over millennia. They were always part of the mix, alongside others,
and were never "foreign," and do not need to be "projected."
Who are these "most" activists, and why do "negro"
features need to be "projected"?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:
Not to get involved here, but the "True Negro" type as
used in the literature is not to be confused with
other negroid types in pre-Bantu South and Central
Africa and palaeolithic North Africa. "True Negro" as
conceptualized by the academics who coined it
and promoted it, was not "always in the Nile Valley".

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Truthcentric:
I admit I was speaking from anecdotal experience, but the very fact that various posters in this forum (yourself included) have been getting riled up when Swenet and beyoku remind you of longstanding population substructure in Africa suggests to me that, yes, most of you do have a vested interest in conflating ancient Egypto-Nubians with the sub-Saharan norm in one way or another. That's been the ultimate source of all the recent major conflicts here.

And it's not just obvious dunderheads like Amun-Ra or Akachi either. Even Charlie Bass and claus/tropicals redacted, both of whom I used to have a lot of respect for, seems to have a hard time wrapping their minds around it.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Truthcentric:

quote:

---

Originally posted by tropicals redacted:
@truthcentric

quote:

---

As for Amun-Ra et al, like most "Afrocentric" activists they probably want to challenge the pervasive perception that the so-called "True Negro" features like full lips, broad noses, very dark skin, and kinky hair are necessarily ugly or subhuman .

---

I think you've concluded this elsewhere, and I found it as disturbing then as I do now, particularly when taken with your sexualised depictions of black women. It feels like you think you're doing black people a favour.

---

It should be obvious that I myself am not saying that "True Negro" features are subhuman.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Truthcentric:
I admit I was speaking from anecdotal experience, but the very fact that various posters in this forum (yourself included) have been getting riled up when Swenet and beyoku remind you of longstanding population substructure in Africa suggests to me that, yes, most of you do have a vested interest in conflating ancient Egypto-Nubians with the sub-Saharan norm in one way or another. That's been the ultimate source of all the recent major conflicts here.

And it's not just obvious dunderheads like Amun-Ra or Akachi either. Even Charlie Bass and claus/tropicals redacted, both of whom I used to have a lot of respect for, seems to have a hard time wrapping their minds around it.

---

Still somewhat dubious. I never was "riled up" or
"denied" that there was population substructure
in the Nile Valley, or Africa itself. Of course
there would be population sub-structure in various
parts of Africa, and in fact I have sometimes referenced
Relethford, along with others, who demonstrate that
"sub-Saharan" Africa has the highest phenotypic
diversity. Whatever Amun-Ra is "denying" that's his
baby. And since Relethford in fact shows such diversity,
along with Keita, Hiernaux et al, broad "true negro"
features are no stranger to the Nile Valley at all.
They never were foreign to Egypt, or to Nubia. Your insinuation is that
they are foreign, which is false. You talk about
African diversity, but seem to be denying the fact
of that diversity when it comes to the Nile Valley.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Truthcentric:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:
Not to get involved here, but the "True Negro" type as
used in the literature is not to be confused with
other negroid types in pre-Bantu South and Central
Africa and palaeolithic North Africa. "True Negro" as
conceptualized by the academics who coined it
and promoted it, was not "always in the Nile Valley".

---

Excuse me, but I was pretty much using "True Negro" in the sense most people in our circle use it, namely as a catch-all for African people with the broad noses, full lips, and kinky hair that are conventionally called "Negroid" characteristics. Even if the original term was even narrower in application by bygone anthropologists, surely the sense I was using it is the sense you recognize in everyday discourse.

---

quote:

---

It should be obvious that I myself am not saying that "True Negro" features are subhuman. Rather, that claim is a widespread meme promoted by an infectious legacy of global white supremacy, and black people with those features are in the right to challenge it.

---

quote:

---

As for the "doing black people a favor" charge, what is challenging racism and Eurocentrism if not beneficial to the people harmed by it? Why is that a problem?

---

quote:

---

And newsflash: heterosexual men like drawing pictures of sexy ladies. Always have, always will. There are millions of male artists out there who draw mostly white ladies without getting any flack for it (besides maybe a generalized and racially neutral "objectification of women" complaint). Why is my stuff any worse?

---

quote:

---

(Actually I think I do know why you're attacking my character all of a sudden, but suffice to say it wasn't for anything which happened here on ES.)

---

quote:

---

most of you do have a vested interest in conflating ancient Egypto-Nubians with the sub-Saharan norm in one way or another.

---

quote:

---

And it's not just obvious dunderheads like Amun-Ra or Akachi either. Even Charlie Bass and claus/tropicals redacted , both of whom I used to have a lot of respect for, seems to have a hard time wrapping their minds around it.

---

quote:

---

“That still doesn't mean these features were universal across Africa, which you acknowledge yourself ”

---

Quite puzzling. So one minute I get it, the next I don't? Although the use of “acknowledge yourself” suggests when I did get it, I'd come round to it begrudgingly. However, I’ve NEVER said that the stereotypical, supposed broad West African phenotype, or “sub-Saharan norm” were modal in ancient Egypt. Never. You might remember that I quoted Keita’s “Somali-like” reference during that particularly embittered, protracted thread a few weeks back? Moreover, you’ll also know that I didn’t like the image you posted on the FB site, one of the reasons being that it didn’t fit my understanding of what they generally looked like. (But now you say I don't get it?)

My view has been that, in British and American sociological terms, most ancient Egyptians would be regarded as black/black Africans. I’ve said this all along. Even Cass, at least when posting under one of his recognisable names, eventually went with this. Twice.

If anyone disagrees with my interpretation, then say so.
 

---

Posted by tropicals redacted (Member # 21621) on :
 
Look truthcentric.

As a person, I actually like you. None of us are infallible, but I really hope you think about this. I'm not puritanical, but there are times when your comments and artwork make me feel uneasy.
 

---

Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
 
^I think you know very well in what sense TC says
you have trouble accepting substructure and the
difference between when he says you're in denial
vs when you're acknowledging certain facts. Citing
Cass here makes little difference; when you brought
it up he (too) made it clear to you that "sociological"
views are based on premises that are not rooted
in objective reality. Which is interesting given
that he arrived at that conclusion independently
(I certainly didn't talk to him about this issue)
using simple reasoning, as have others, including
lioness.

Sure, it's an academic generalization about a
hypothetical observation, but neither have biological
or genetic significance.
 

---

Posted by tropicals redacted (Member # 21621) on :
 
^I think you know very well that I've always approached this from a sociological angle, supported by references to geographic origin. So citing Cass's take on the sociological context is entirely relevant.

I recently put up the Stuart Tyson Smith quote, which articulates the view that races are culturally defined. I've always known this.

I leave it to you and others to argue about whether or not it has any biological or genetic significance.
 

---

Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
 
Sure, it's a sociological angle; one that would get
your underlying premise in trouble the 2nd you're
asked how your "sociological" observation gels with
the recent discovery that very recent European
hunter gatherers and other decidedly non-African
individuals inconvenient to your non-pigmentation
based use of "black", would easily pass your "street
experience" test as well. AE and Africans aren't
unique in this regard, which runs counter to your
premise.
 

---

Posted by tropicals redacted (Member # 21621) on :
 
^???
Not quite sure where you're taking this, but it's already tiresome.

Also, wanted to note your edit:

You wrote something like "Sure, it's an observation that can be made but doesn't have any biological or genetic significance"

and then changed it to something which appears watered down:

"Sure, it's an academic generalization about a
hypothetical observation, but neither have biological or genetic significance."
 

---

Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
 
More watered down? It's even more detrimental to
your case. It stresses that your "street experience"
fallacy is a generalizion, re: many people would
disagree with grouping certain elongated Africans
under "black". Meaning, your anecdote is also a
fallacy on grounds not acknowledged before the
edit was made.

Any more perceived damning citations from
me that you'd like to "expose" in a bid to obfuscate
the shortcomings of your claims, noted even by
lioness and Cass? Or maybe you want to bring in a
certain person on ES whose use of "black" you took
out of context and ask him right here and now if
he agrees with you that "black" can be continentally
circumscribed in any meaningful way?

However you want to do it
 

---

Posted by tropicals redacted (Member # 21621) on :
 
^

quote:

---

More watered down? It's even more detrimental to your case.

---

quote:

---

Or maybe you want to bring in a
certain person on ES whose use of "black" you took
out of context and ask him right here and now if
he agrees with you that "black" can be continentally circumscribed in any meaningful way?

---

quote:

---

No one disagrees that...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:

^I'm glad you're noticing the systematic misplaced
indignation with scientific data that goes on here.
Sometimes I feel like I'm in the twilight zone when
I see what these propagandists get away with here.
One of the reasons why Egyptsearch has become a
laughing stock in the Anthro-blogosphere.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by tropicals redacted:
^Disappointing.

You know what, I'm actually genuinely saddened.

To repeat, you've used the term "black" yourself to refer to the ancient Egyptians.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by tropicals redacted:
[]

quote:

---

---

.

I've told you this. That's why I hung out with you in private for best part of a year, two, three times a day, late evening into the early hours.

let go of this need to always be right. I'm being serious now. It's not an attractive personality trait, [/]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:
As for the undiluted facts that some can't stand:

only 15 yield positive amplifications, four of
them (26.7%) displaying the sub-Saharan African
[Hpal 3592] marker.
--Fox et al

Hpal 3592 levels in Africa:


Like I said:

This Meroitic sample has a Hpal 3592 signature
consistent with modern day Red Sea Coast indigènes
who have relatively high proportions (often >50%)
of M1, L3 and L4 when compared to their overall
mtDNA L pool, a condition in Africa shared
consistently by Nile Valley Egyptians, Siwa
Egyptians, Nubian speakers, Beja and Lowland East
Cushitic speakers.
--Swenet

---

quote:

---

If you
really respected my analysis so much, maybe you
should have listened when I told you that the term
"black" is problematic weeks before you all of
a sudden had a problem with me saying it and went
on a desperate search to find posts of mine where
I use the term, and tell me I'm doing a 180.

---

quote:

---

^Well, should your desperation to contradict my posts ever come back to you, you're more than welcome to point out that I used it in the substructure dismissing way you're using it,
where "black" is necessarily specific to the
western idea of who is black [I used it in the[/, and exclusive of,say, European hunter gatherers who were contemporary with predynastic Egyptians and who have the ancestral alleles for skin pigmentation.

---

quote:

---

Not to take away from whatever information program has but as usual the title is inaccurate at best and racist at worst since it implies that only the Kushites were black whereas ethnic Egyptians were not. This has been discussed multiple times in regards to the book of the same name as well as Nat Geo article which they published on February (Black History Month) of 2008.

While the show will no doubt give good insight into the rise of the 25th dynasty it will still obfuscate and distort the fact that the Egyptians themselves are equally black and African .

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:

Mere pigmentation in the Palaeolithic Nile Valley,
North Africa or anywhere in Africa for that
matter, per se has nothing to do with the people
and connotations you attempt to confound them
with, with your western derived use of 'black'
and it's connotations.

---

quote:

---

Our data suggest that in Brazil, at an individual level, color, as determined by physical evaluation, is a poor predictor of genomic African ancestry, estimated by molecular markers

---

The same can be said when dealing with some Africans. The fact that some modern Egyptians may have darker skin as you go south do not necessarily correspond with increasing levels of African ancestry as once thought. All one needs to do is look at Y-dna and even these Mtdna affinities in different Egyptian groups:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/enhanced/doi/10.1046/j.1529-8817.2003.00057.x/

There is no clear North South Gradient...........just as there is no clear north/south "SW Asian" gradient, which in Structure Analysis has a higher showing in the Horn of Africa than it does in Egypt. Thinking Skin tone corresponds with biology as far as "African" Ancestry is concerned is a simplistic as thinking the same is true for dark skin populations from Arabia to Indian to the south pacific. Holding on to these ideas is futile.
 

---

Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
 
^Indeed. Did you see that reconstructed Aterian girl
(Boushra) or even reconstructions of the Qafzeh and
Skhull individuals? You'd have to be very unlearned
(to put it nicely) to think you can sell the idea
that these tropically adapted people can be
simplistically assigned to a particular modern day
ancestry or defined in modern day terms on the
account of merely having pigmentation.


 

---

Posted by Truthcentric (Member # 3735) on :
 
In fairness to Claus/Tropicals Redacted, I've decided that I don't have a problem with calling ancient Egyptians "Black African", at least in a non-academic context. The term by itself doesn't necessarily have phylogenetic connotations, for it simply references dark skin together with deeply rooted ancestry in some African location. No one here is denying ancient Egyptians, Nubians, and other East Saharans were indigenous to the region they occupied even if they had a fraternal relationship with OOA or certain physical distinctions from modal sub-Saharans. By virtue of being significantly pigmented and native to northeastern Africa, I would say ancient Egyptians would indeed qualify as "Black African" in the commonly accepted, pre-phylogenetic way.

Note that this doesn't mean we cannot apply "Black" as a chromatic descriptor to any OOA groups. If you want to call early foragers in Europe "Black Europeans", I say go ahead. In fact I'm not even sure Claus/Redacted even did mean to say only African populations can be called Black.
 

---

Posted by tropicals redacted (Member # 21621) on :
 

quote:

---

In fact I'm not even sure Claus/Redacted even did mean to say only African populations can be called Black.

---

quote:

---

AE were heavily pigmented and they were African. No one is denying that. What he's doing is using pigmentation and equating it with "black" in a context where "black" is divorced from pigmentation and is a particular ancestry, e.g. Barack Obama is often referred to as "black", but Indians and many other populations an objective observer would group on the basis of pigmentation, aren't.

---

Are you really saying that I can't conceptualise, for example, Black Asians and Black Australians?

Look, you're being wilful. You're deliberately obfuscating and misrepresenting my position. But carry on, people can see it. Even though you admit that the AEs were African and "heavily pigmented" you still play at misdirection.

And all to save face.
 

---

Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
 
Bottom line, the VERY populations whom you attempt
to exclude from your "street experience" test because
you presume they would have been white back then,
would have passed it a couple of thousand years ago
in the TIME of the AE, re: ancestral pigmentation
alleles. Your "street experience" test is meaningless
fluff as it doesn't discriminate visually between
Africans and pigmented Asians on the one hand or
modern day SSA and preOOA Africans on the other
hand (the latter are more related to Europeans
than those those you consider "black", despite
both sharing heavy skin pigmentation). Kemp owned
you for presenting him that fallacy, as you're
being owned right now.


 

---

Posted by beyoku (Member # 14524) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
@beyoku That much is obvious to anybody. When you apply black out of context it doesn't mean anything. They are black skinned people in India, but in this context (Ancient Egypt) they are just not related to the peopling of Ancient Egypt.

..............

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by tropicals redacted:
[QUOTE]

Look, you're being wilful. You're deliberately obfuscating and misrepresenting my position. But carry on, people can see it.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by beyoku:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
@beyoku That much is obvious to anybody. When you apply black out of context it doesn't mean anything. They are black skinned people in India, but in this context (Ancient Egypt) they are just not related to the peopling of Ancient Egypt.

..............

---

The autosomal sub structuring of Africans predates E1b1a and even Pn2 and L3. All that stuff is moot. There is a genetic cline of populations stretching from South Africa to Europe. IN prehistoric times the skin tone of all these populations would have been dark.

---

I'm talking about structuring relevant to the OOA migrations. Between CT and non-CT haplogroups carriers and between L3 and non-L3 carriers.





The common E-P2 grandfather and L3 grandmothers (as well as other MtdNA L haplogroups) show that modern East, West Africans and indeed the majority of African populations shared a common ancestry well after the OOA migrations and before the more recent back migrations of Eurasians into Africa (from Y-DNA F and MtDNA M/N descendants haplogroups). When population share common haplogroups like the common E-P2 and L3 grandmothers cited above, this is reflected on their whole genome including autosomally. They didn't only receive the P2 mutation from their common grandfather but the whole genome. That's why for example, Ramses III's Great Lakes, Southern and West Africans regional affiliation reflect the same regions where E1b1a is more prevalent.
 

---

Posted by tropicals redacted (Member # 21621) on :
 
No, no, no.

quote:

---

Bottom line, the VERY populations whom you attempt to exclude from your "street experience" test because you presume they would have been white back then, would have passed it a couple of thousand years ago in the TIME of the AE, re: ancestral pigmentation alleles. Your "street experience" test is meaningless
fluff as it doesn't discriminate between Africans
and pigmented Asians on the one hand or modern
day SSA and preOOA Africans on the other hand (the
latter are more related to Europeans than those
those you consider "black", despite heavy skin
pigmentation). Kemp owned you for presenting him
that fallacy, as you're being owned right now.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by tropicals redacted:
The basic question, which you're playing around
with, is whether the ancient Egytians would be
considered black in Western sociological terms, or
street experience.

---

quote:

---

Nope, the basic question is whether you're omitting the fact that this doesn't mean what you want it to mean, considering the fact that 1) OOA populations would have passed that test for the majority of their duration of their stay outside of Africa, 2) AE with more ancestry from African preOOA individuals would have passed that test as well, and it would mean the exact opposite of what you're promoting it to mean.

---

quote:

---

Would ancient Egyptians be considered black/black Africans in a sociological context/street experience today? You've already said that they would.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:
@Truthcentric

AE were heavily pigmented and they were African.
No one is denying that. What he's doing is using
pigmentation and equating it with "black" in a
context where "black" is divorced from pigmentation
and is a particular ancestry, e.g. Barack Obama
is often referred to as "black", but Indians and
many other populations an objective observer
would group on the basis of pigmentation, aren't.

---

quote:

---

It stresses that your "street experience"
fallacy is a generalizion, re: many people would disagree with grouping certain elongated Africans under "black". . Meaning, your anecdote is also afallacy on grounds not acknowledged before the
edit was made.

---

From a FB conversation:

One of the members asked:
“I don’t intentionally provoke debates on the biological affinities of the ancient Egyptians any more, but I have had a couple of people on DeviantArt and tumblr asking why the Egyptian characters in my art and stories are black . Should I just ignore them, or is there a way to quickly address them without getting into another long and unproductive argument?”

Swenet replied:
“Ask them what they perceive the red to brown skinned murals to depict if not an Ethiopian-like population (of course, there is more to their population affinities, but since you’re talking to lay people, its reasonable to dumb it down to Ethiopian-like ). I’m actually curious about their answer to this question. I’ve heard seasoned Euronuts attempt to answer it with the True Negro approach, and by contrasting the Egyptian figures with supposed ‘real Africans’, but presumably, your artistic audience doesn’t have access to such data. Ask them and tell us what they said.”

Oh, the BS!!!!
 

---

Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
 
^More desperate digging but as for how
exactly it relates to the fact that my past use
of "black" is not limited to Africans or equatorial
Africans (i.e. the dominant western idea) and
INCLUDES all heavily pigmented people, including
European hunter gatherers 6kya, no one knows.

Lying troll, are you going to answer the pending
questions or is this trolling on your part a sign
of you waving a white flag?

@Truthcentric

From what I recall, the issue specifically came up
during the discussion of Hawass' insinuation that
the AE were black in pigmentation terms but not
necessarily in the western concept of what 'black'
means (IIRC Kemp also said something to that effect,
but his choice of words was "African"), and he
took offense at that.

Any concession on his part now in regards to the
existence of heavily pigmented Africans who are
not at all affiliated to the people who are
designated in the West as "black people", and
the high likelihood of finding such indigenous
African people in AE is exactly that: a grudging
concession. If that's how he feels nowadays, he
should admit that he was wrong and retract the
lies that he's still spouting as we speak.
 

---

Posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate (Member # 20039) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:
the
existence of heavily pigmented Africans who are
not at all affiliated to the people who are
designated by the West as "black people", and
the high likelihood of finding such indigenous
African people in AE

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
You can notice the need for Swenet to make those heavily pigmented Africans not affiliated to the modern black Africans like West Africans and even the need to make them closer to Eurasian and OOA migrants than to other black Africans.

---

Absolutely right. descendants of those Africans
would have been there. You've got a problem with
that? Teary eyes and emotional pleas aren't going
to make the elephant in the room go away. No doubt
in your head full of misfiring neurones, crying
and protesting objective reality is an acceptable
way of dealing with facts, but not in the real world.


 

---

Posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate (Member # 20039) on :
 
^^^You're just shaming yourself with that hamitic race myth stupidity. Debunked btw by the second part of my post above you choose to not reply to.
 

---

Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
 
Calling the existence of Africans with preOOA
ancestry "stupid" or "hamitic myth" and referring
to your own propaganda isn't going to make the
nightmare go away.
 

---

Posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate (Member # 20039) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:
Calling it stupid and referring to your own propaganda
isn't going to make it away.

---

quote:

---

^More desperate digging - but as for how
exactly it relates to the fact that my past use
of "black" is not limited to Africans or equatorial
Africans (i.e. the dominant western idea) and
INCLUDES all heavily pigmented people, including
European hunter gatherers 6kya, no one knows.

Lying troll, are you going to answer the pending
questions or is this trolling on your part a sign
of you waving a white flag?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by beyoku:
One of those beja samples by the way carries PN2 to the tune of 100%.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by tropicals redacted:
first you say that "many" people wouldn't regard
elongated Africans as black, and then when you're
caught doing exactly that, you then start diversionary
tactics.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
Calling my second part of my post propaganda won't make it go away either. The genetic results on Ancient Egyptian mummies speak for themselves.

---

What speaks for itself is that several somewhat
more isolated modern Egyptians have >5% E-M2,
which, going by this data, makes it at least
a 1/20 chance that Egyptian aDNA will report
E-V38--not at al contradictory to my views to
those with working neurones. As for your DNA
Tribes' analysis, even entertaining the idea that
your interpretation of it is sound, it would not
disprove that the aforementioned individuals
would be in AE.

Like I said, referring back to your own propaganda
and crying foul isn't going to make this nightmare
of the existence of Africans with preOOA ancestry
go away. Not today, not yesterday, not tomorrow.


 

---

Posted by tropicals redacted (Member # 21621) on :
 
^Adolescent backchat.

Swenet commenting on a lecture on Egypto-Nubians he linked to on his FB page:

"Still the same bs"

Then he remarked:

'"Nubians were indigenous black Africans" in the lecture concerning Egypt, as if to say the Egyptians weren't."'

And then:

"Looks like we're in for a long ride of misinterpretations."

Indeed.
 

---

Posted by beyoku (Member # 14524) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:

quote:

---

Originally posted by beyoku:
One of those beja samples by the way carries PN2 to the tune of 100%.

---

That's a lie of course typical of undercover racists on this site like Swenet, Beyoku, Djehuti and now apparently Truthcentric (or maybe he's just a confused idiot that one). He wrote that to fool us.

Here below we can see Beja have 42.85% of Eurasian Y-DNA (35.71+2.38+4.76=42.85).

http://ethiohelix.blogspot.ca/2013/02/sudan-ydna.html

Many aspects of those type of studies have been discussed in this thread (as well as other threads): http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=009054

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by beyoku:
One of those beja samples by the way carries PN2 to the tune of 100%. I dont know if any of those other populations are fixed for Pn2. Their mtdla L lineages are higher than many other populations in the horn of Africa too......go figure.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by tropicals redacted:
^Adolescent backchat.

Swenet commenting on a lecture on Egypto-Nubians he linked to on his FB page:

"Still the same bs"

Then he remarked:

'"Nubians were indigenous black Africans" in the lecture concerning Egypt, as if to say the Egyptians weren't."'

And then:

"Looks like we're in for a long ride of misinterpretations."

Indeed.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by xyyman:
Go figure???? Use the few brain cells you have remaining young man. Oh!....you are waiting for Henn or Pagani to tell you what it means.

quote:

---

Originally posted by beyoku:
One of those beja samples by the way carries PN2 to the tune of 100%. I dont know if any of those other populations are fixed for Pn2. Their mtdla L lineages are higher than many other populations in the horn of Africa too......go figure.

---

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:
How does my pigmentation-based use of the term
"black" contradict the fact that many people on
the face of the earth would disagree that Iman
Abdulmajid or Anwar Sadat are "black" in the
western sense?

---

quote:

---

"Dear [X] Thanks for the reply. I understand how busy you must be. I was seeking quick clarification of the conclusions of the Amarna anthropologists; whether, given the limb length findings, we could reasonably conclude that most Ancient Egyptians were Black African in appearance; and your view on the Sphinx."

---

quote:

---

"it is, in my opinion, a mistaken question. The people of Africa show the greatest variety in physical characteristics of any region in the world, a consequence of Africa being the evolutionary origin of humanity. To lump them all together to create a single type, labelled Black Africans (presumably in contrast to White Europeans and Brown Middle Easterners) is to invent a myth. With pygmies at one end of the spectrum and Masai at the other, and Berbers, Zulus and T'Kung Bushmen somewhere in between, the range of bodily variation within Africa must be greater than exists between several of the major non-African groups. The term 'Black Africans' works at the level of popular culture, but is not scientific.
Regards:
[X]"

---

quote:

---

It's just a way for him to muddy up the conversation and to delay the inevitable with irrelevant objections. They all do this. They start talking about population affinity of Nubians and use the term 'black' freely, then they start talking about Egyptians and all of a sudden the term itself is scientifically problematic. It's true, but if you're intellectually honest you won't use semantics as a strategic advantage to not have to answer what someone is asking you. He could just as easily have said: "While black is a problematic term, I don't agree with the notion that they were predominantly African in genetic make-up, either", and he'd at least have addressed the heart of the matter.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by beyoku:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:

quote:

---

Originally posted by beyoku:
One of those beja samples by the way carries PN2 to the tune of 100%.

---

That's a lie of course typical of undercover racists on this site like Swenet, Beyoku, Djehuti and now apparently Truthcentric (or maybe he's just a confused idiot that one). He wrote that to fool us.

Here below we can see Beja have 42.85% of Eurasian Y-DNA (35.71+2.38+4.76=42.85).

http://ethiohelix.blogspot.ca/2013/02/sudan-ydna.html

Many aspects of those type of studies have been discussed in this thread (as well as other threads): http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=009054

---

The samples you listed are from Hassan et al.
The image that was posted is from Hirbo et al. (Page 83)

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:
@Truthcentric
The reports of Iman complaining about people telling
her that she doesn't look black are public record.
So is the fact that Egyptians protested against
Anwar Sadat's role being portrayed by someone who
is "black". Take it up with the world, not with
me. I didn't create it. And you're free to agree
with him all you want. Why feel the need to
repeatedly inform me of it and rationalize your
decision?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by tropicals redacted:
Are you really saying that I can't conceptualise, for example, Black Asians and Black Australians?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by beyoku:

quote:

---

Originally posted by xyyman:
Go figure???? Use the few brain cells you have remaining young man. Oh!....you are waiting for Henn or Pagani to tell you what it means.

quote:

---

Originally posted by beyoku:
One of those beja samples by the way carries PN2 to the tune of 100%. I dont know if any of those other populations are fixed for Pn2. Their mtdla L lineages are higher than many other populations in the horn of Africa too......go figure.

---

---

I already know what it means: Their Y-dna profile does not translate into Autosomal African ancestry to the tune of 100%. This is to show Amun ra the clown that of all the Black populations in the entire group.........the one with the least amount of non OOA cluster at K=2 has the most PN2 in relation to all the groups. Hence the presence of E1b1a in ONE mummy does not clearly correspond to an autosomal profile. The Y-Chromosome does not carry autosomal information.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:
First of all, where do you get it that he's using
it in the exact same sense, and secondly, where
have I relied on black (the way I used it in the
past) to designate a particular African ancestry
and exclude other African ancestries, e.g. preOOA
populations? If this is not what he was doing (as
you say), then explain why he would object to
Kemp and Hawass saying that black or African in
Egypt is not the same as how people in the West
think of "black"?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by xyyman:

Exactly. But there is more to it than that. Sage, you want to help these youngsters out?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:

quote:

---

Originally posted by beyoku:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:

quote:

---

Originally posted by beyoku:
One of those beja samples by the way carries PN2 to the tune of 100%.

---

That's a lie of course typical of undercover racists on this site like Swenet, Beyoku, Djehuti and now apparently Truthcentric (or maybe he's just a confused idiot that one). He wrote that to fool us.

Here below we can see Beja have 42.85% of Eurasian Y-DNA (35.71+2.38+4.76=42.85).

http://ethiohelix.blogspot.ca/2013/02/sudan-ydna.html

Many aspects of those type of studies have been discussed in this thread (as well as other threads): http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=009054

---

The samples you listed are from Hassan et al.
The image that was posted is from Hirbo et al. (Page 83)

---

Don't be ridiculous, we can see in Appendix 1 in the Hirbo study (p191) that it didn't use the same samples for the Y-DNA, MtDNA and autosomal analysis. Another attempt to fool us. Failed.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:
Me, I'm just sitting back observing
the FB crew fallout from disagreeing
with its "founder" as his "friend" all
of a sudden becomes a troll, a liar,
etc., who humbly subordinates to the
emotional ego driven name calling attack.

---

This is just going to keep getting better and
better, is it not? Hypocrisy incarnate here.
Just a week ago he was complaining about what
he perceived to be people "following" him from
to other threads to instigate things. Look
at him now; never jumped in as a mod to tell a
proven liar to substantiate contested charges
and slander, but doesn't mind jumping in at
the first opportunity to deliberately
misrepresent what happened and aligning with
proven liars, just to hand out jabs.

You've been caught red-handed contradicting
what you yourself say you stand for, numerous
times. You have no consistency in behaviour,
whatsoever. What you say today might be the
exact opposite tomorrow. What you criticize
today you engage in and promote tomorrow.

You've deleted the name of that author. Even
though that email doesn't paint him in a bad
light, out of considerations for him I'm going
to say "fair enough". But you're not fooling
anyone. The rest of your post proves you're
only in this thread to get what little leverage
you can take out of it, whether to hand out
jabs, or edit posts under false pretences.

Which mod-action of yours hasn't been out of
self-interest? First thing you did in the mod
seat is to selectively clean up one of your old
threads from spam. Next thing you did is issue
mod warnings to people who were engaging in the
same behaviours you were engaging in in that thread.
Yesterday you were harassing someone in your mod
account who simply wanted to attract someone's
attention and send a PM. You're also using your
mod account to wilfully edit and delete your own
posts on several occasions. It just doesn't end
with you, does it?

It's only going to be a matter of time before
others who turn a blind eye now, will start seeing
funny things. A wolf in sheep's clothing can only
hide his true self for so long to those who are
(wilfully) oblivious.


 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by ausar:
I have selected Tukuler as the new moderator.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by xyyman:
Give it up already. The man is the chosen mod. And he doing alright. Trying to attract new memebers

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by beyoku:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:

quote:

---

Originally posted by beyoku:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:

quote:

---

Originally posted by beyoku:
One of those beja samples by the way carries PN2 to the tune of 100%.

---

That's a lie of course typical of undercover racists on this site like Swenet, Beyoku, Djehuti and now apparently Truthcentric (or maybe he's just a confused idiot that one). He wrote that to fool us.

Here below we can see Beja have 42.85% of Eurasian Y-DNA (35.71+2.38+4.76=42.85).

http://ethiohelix.blogspot.ca/2013/02/sudan-ydna.html

Many aspects of those type of studies have been discussed in this thread (as well as other threads): http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=009054

---

The samples you listed are from Hassan et al.
The image that was posted is from Hirbo et al. (Page 83)

---

Don't be ridiculous, we can see in Appendix 1 in the Hirbo study (p191) that it didn't use the same samples for the Y-DNA, MtDNA and autosomal analysis. Another attempt to fool us. Failed.

---

Ok then that means we both screwed up.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
manipulation to prove your hamitic myth like crap

---

The person who insists that Beja inherit ~60% of
their genome from a non-African source, then turns
around and says that others are proponents of the
Hamitic Myth.

Aint that a trip?
 

---

Posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate (Member # 20039) on :
 
^^That's stupid. Yes modern Beja are admixed with Eurasian but it is recently (for the most part), well after the foundation of Ancient Egypt.

The same way modern Egyptians are not like Ancient Egyptians due to RECENT foreign conquests and admixtures (Assyrians, Macedonians, Romans, Arabs, etc). Beja also have substantial RECENT Eurasian admixtures.

Recent in the context of this forum means WELL after the foundation of Ancient Egypt:


From http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn24988-humanitys-forgotten-return-to-africa-revealed-in-dna.html

3000 years ago is well after the foundation of Ancient Egypt and well after the Naqada, Badarian, Tasian and Green Saharan culture which were the foundation of Ancient Egyptian culture.

This is all explain in the Joseph K. Pickrell study:

quote:

---

Conclusions

Based on these analyses, we can propose a model for the spread of west Eurasian ancestry in southern and eastern Africa as follows. First, a large-scale movement of people from west Eurasia into Ethiopia around 3,000 y ago (perhaps from southern Arabia and associated with the D’mt kingdom and the arrival of Ethiosemitic languages ) resulted in the dispersal of west Eurasian ancestry throughout eastern Africa. This was then followed by a migration of an admixed population (perhaps pastoralists related to speakers of Khoe–Kwadi languages) from eastern Africa to southern Africa, with admixture occurring ∼1,500 y ago. Advances in genotyping DNA from archaeological samples may allow aspects of this model to be directly tested.

---

quote:

---

As a consequence the many invasions of ancient Egypt, the population has changed over the years. There were Hyksos (Heka Khasut) from Asia, who melted into the Delta Region around 1500 B.C.E., and then a series of invasions by the Assyrians, Persians and Greeks. With the arrival of large groups of Arabians in the seventh century C.E., the racial character of Egypt began to change.

The resultant mixtures of Africans, Arabs, Greeks and Persians were to be jointed with Turks, Russians, Albanians, British, and French to create a different population that there had been during the ancient times.

One cannot say that today's Egypt is the same as the Egypt of antiquity anymore than one can say that today's North America is the same as it was 5000 years ago.

---

quote:

---

With the passage of time, each wave of new immigrants has assimilated into the local mix of peoples , making modern Egypt a combination of Libyans, Nubians, Syrians, Persians, Macedonians, Romans, Arabs, Turks, Circassians, Greeks, Italians, and Armenians, along with the descendants of the people of ancient Egypt.

---

quote:

---

- Alexander the Great’s conquest of Egypt, in 332 BCE, precipitated a period of mass immigration .

---

quote:

---

The Late Period is often singled out as the time when mass immigration into Egypt altered the character of the country

---

quote:

---

The Muslim conquerors did not attempt a mass conversion of Christianity to Islam, if only because that would have reduced the taxes non-Muslims were compelled to pay, but a number of other factors were at work. Arab men could marry Christian women and their children would become Muslim. Large-scale Arab immigration into Egypt began during the eighth century.

---

from A History of Egypt: From Earliest Times to the Present by Jason Thompson (2009)
 

---

Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
 
The bizarre consequence of his claims is that Beja
have only ~10% more African ancestry than Mozabites.


 

---

Posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova (Member # 15718) on :
 
Djehuti says:
I really do the gist of what Truthcentric and Ahmanut are saying.
Basically it is the fact that Euronuts through the decades up to the present
day have been limiting and narrowing the definitions of 'negro', 'black
African', or what have you while expanding their definition of 'white' or
'Caucasian' so as to claim not only Egypt but all cultures of North AND
East Africa as well!

Indeed. And on ES, such stereotypical thinking
has long since been debunked, although Truthcentric's so-called
"sub-Saharan norms" remain a mystery he has yet to define.


I fail to see how Egyptsearch is the laughing stock of the
anthro-blogosphere when you have blogs like Dienekes' 'Racial Reality' or
Mathilda's Anthroplogy Blogspot. Hell even more 'mainstream' sites like
Anthroscape and Biodiversity are overrun with erroneous info by racial
propagandist who disseminate and perpetuate the lie of Caucasoid
domains in Africa! In the latter sites I read things about Pleistocene
Caucasoids of Sudan and Kenya to even Eurasian [read Caucasoid] origin
of Khoisan which is espoused here by the fake black woman lyinass!

Correct. I don't see any so-called "laughing stock" either. If anything they
fear, avoid, or are uneasy with the hard data and scholarship brought to
bear on ES that has debunked their distorted notions time and time again.
Of course they engage in desperate name-calling- (what else is to be
expected?) but that only reveals their bankruptucy. And when confronted, as
shown on numerous forums, ES members under a variety of names
(Morpheus, Slugger, MKGlouis, TTJones, Big Mike, etc etc etc) have used the data
here quite profitably, not merely to hammer facile Eurocentrics but to
establish a solid baseline that speaks to an accurate understanding of
Africa and the Nile Valley's diversity and history. The so-called
"anthro-blogsphere" with its assortment of trolls, racists, "HBDers",
distorters and "guardsmen"- (what was the name of that guy- the so-called
'Crimson Guard" who seems to be in love with Carleton Coons) is nothing
special. You are exactly right- it is overrun with a load of racist nuts and
other related types, and is no "role model" for anything. It is the so-called
"anthro-blogsphere" that is often not only laughable, but inaccurate a well.


So while Egyptsearch may not be the perfect place to get accurate and
scientific data on anthropology, I hardly see it as the horrible back-water
'ghetto' that many especially the Euronuts make it out to be.

Indeed, and their propaganda is laughable. No one ever claimed ES was
this bastion of perfection. The reputed "glory days" were filled with trolls
like "Hammer", "Akoben" etc as well as assorted racists and Eurocentrics,
along with the usual Afroloons and inaccurate “enthusiasts”. But over time
it has developed a solid, accurately cited, base of data that is
widely and easily available on the web, defeating detractors and
assorted moles that strive (and fail) to bury or obfuscate
good scholarship. Doesn't have to be perfect.
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:

@Djehuti, are you aware of the archaeological
industries in the Nile Valley and Libya in the UP
and MP? I think the people in the Nile Valley at that
time had common ancestry with OOA populations. I
think the makers of UP tools in the Levant were in
the same biological clade as the people who inhabited
Egypt and Libya at that time. I think the UP tool
makers of the Levant either represent a migration
from Egypt or that their MP predecessors migrated
to the Levant and blade-based industries were then
made in the Levant.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:

^And the part where I or Djehuti say that "black"
excludes, say, contemporary European hunter
gatherers? Or are you simply trolling?

The ancestors of Europeans and much of all of West
Eurasia are suspected of having had the ancestral
ancestral pigmentation alleles up until very
recently, yet the Stuart Smith citation is used
by some dogmatists with the tacit suggestion that
OOA populations wouldn't also pass the touted
"street experience" test *ahum* fallacy *ahum*
during most of their stay in Eurasia. Nope, I'm
not going to sit here and say that's truthful.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
I for one believe that predominant Sub-Saharan clades such as PN2 did expand into the Nile Valley region post OOA but that there were some remnant peoples if not individuals who carry the older clades. As such this would give the peoples of East Africa including the Nile Valley an intermediate positioning between OOA peoples and other Africans and thus still corroborating Tishkoff's findings.

---

quote:

---

For the record, I don't believe European hunter-gatherers were black and all of a sudden became 'white'. Obviously there was a process of *gradual lightening* that first began even before they entered Europe. Dr. Jablonski made this clear in her works on the evolution of human skin. During the late Pleistocene much of Central Asia and Anatolia which are already at higher latitudes were cloudy regions at that time receiving less sun-light. The hypothesis was that European hunter-gatherers were at least 'brown' in color if not lighter and of course we have Khoisan of southern Africa as an example of less than the typical black complexion of Sub-Saharans so obviously the selective pressures for lighter color were already active.

---

The original paper on that Mesolithic Spanish dude mentioned the finding of certain ancestral alleles for skin color (along with alleles associated with blue eyes), but I don't remember they being specific on exactly how dark he would have looked. We only have this reconstruction associated with press reports on the paper:

Would you describe this dude as black-skinned in your usual chromatic sense? I notice that there's a sharp contrast between the highlights on the face and the shaded areas around it, so I'm having a hard time picking out midtones.
 

---

Posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate (Member # 20039) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:

I for one believe that predominant Sub-Saharan clades such as PN2 did expand into the Nile Valley region post OOA but that there were some remnant peoples if not individuals who carry the older clades . As such this would give the peoples of East Africa including the Nile Valley an intermediate positioning between OOA peoples and other Africans

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Truthcentric:

For my part, I think this is pretty close to the truth. The skeletal and dental analyses showing a physical distinction between ancient Egypto-Nubians and West/Central Africans cannot be ignored, but neither can Amun-Ra's beloved autosomal DNA data which does suggest that ancient Egyptian genetic profiles would fit more snugly into the sub-Saharan range of genetic variation than that of any Out-of-Africa population. Once you reconcile this autosomal data with the skeletal data, the picture that emerges is that the ancient Egyptians and Nubians that everyone knows were most probably hybridized between the indigenous East Saharan substructure and later waves of sub-Saharan migrants.

As to the precise proportions of the mix, I don't think we on this forum have any direct way to gauge that right now from the genetic data. The DNA Tribes scores are not really admixture percentages, and it's doubtful that the small sample of STRs from the original JAMA and BMJ papers are even sufficient to provide admixture analysis. We'll need a larger sampling of genetic loci for that kind of stuff.

---

But really my actual point is overall WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE?? Whether more recent PN2 descendant or ancestral OOA, the point is these populations were *all* equally African. I mean really if one wants to nitpick all the nuances go ahead, but I noticed it is Euronut racialists who tend to do this while Afrocentrics like Ahmanut try to downplay it. As if such genetic differences take away from their African or even black identity.

quote:

---

The original paper on that Mesolithic Spanish dude mentioned the finding of certain ancestral alleles for skin color (along with alleles associated with blue eyes), but I don't remember they being specific on exactly how dark he would have looked. We only have this reconstruction associated with press reports on the paper:

Would you describe this dude as black-skinned in your usual chromatic sense? I notice that there's a sharp contrast between the highlights on the face and the shaded areas around it, so I'm having a hard time picking out midtones.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ama-nutcase The Ultimate:

The belief in this mythical clade which is not based on science. Can be compared to a "leap of faith", "Magical Thinking" among racist people on this site (Swenet, Djehuti, Beyoku and Truthcentric). The idea is to promote the splittism approach mentionned by zarahan, to disconnect Ancient Egypt from the rest of Africa pulling it toward Eurasia, and promote the debunked hamitic race myth based on racist pseudo-science from the 19th century.

---

The clade(s) I was referring to are the ones ancestral to all non-Africans, dummy. As for what you call "splittism" well this is a scientific FACT as it comes to genetic lineages. In fact YOU yourself were the one who presented the following image.



It's interesting how the diagram above hows a split between African DE and Eurasian DE even though both share a common YAP ancestry in Africa. And as I said, your diagram shows CF originating in Eurasia even though there is a para-clade F* among populations in Sudan having nothing to do with Arabs.

Also, what are we to make of older clades that predate BOTH ancestral OOA and ancestral PN2 such as hgs A and B??! Genetically both CF (ancestral OOA) AND YAP (ancestral PN2) are more divergent genetically from A and B carriers than from each other!!

So in other words you seem more comfortable with some splits but not others and accuse me of "splittism". LOL You are as much hypocritical as you are dense!
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amanutcase The Ultimate:

For the record, what I consider for historical purpose Africans is people who stayed back in Africa during the OOA migrations. People who are mostly not the product of the back migrations of non-African/Eurasian people more than 30-40 000 years after the OOA migrations. People from the African A, B and E Y-DNA haplogroups and African MtDNA L haplogroups. Of course nowadays every African people are admixed at various degrees with non-African people either directly or through African intermediaries.

---

Hey dummy, nobody is disagreeing with your definitions. Of course the ancient Egyptians and other Nile Valley folks are populations who never left the continent!

This is besides my point.

What do YOU make of older clades that predate BOTH ancestral OOA and ancestral PN2 such as hgs A and B??! **Genetically both CF (ancestral OOA) AND YAP (ancestral PN2) are more divergent genetically from A and B carriers than from each other!!**
 

---

Posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate (Member # 20039) on :
 


Yeah, I post this image a lot. It shows that Africans are from the African A, B and E haplogroups.

When you know most Africans are from the haplogroup E and E-P2 Y-DNA haplogroups by looking at haplogroup frequency tables...

It also shows that East and West Africans have a common ancestry in Africa (the orange part) **after** the OOA migrations (after the common CT and DE haplogroups they BOTH share with Eurasians). For example, over 80% of East and West Africans are from the E-P2 haplogroups. Same could be said about the African MtDNA L haplogroups.

This is all mentioned in more details in this thread:

Common Origin of black Africans, Ancient Egyptians and Kushites people
http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=009076
 

---

Posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate (Member # 20039) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:

What do YOU make of older clades that predate BOTH ancestral OOA and ancestral PN2 such as hgs A and B??!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amanutcase The Ultimate:
[qb]
For the record, what I consider for historical purpose Africans is people who stayed back in Africa during the OOA migrations. People who are mostly not the product of the back migrations of non-African/Eurasian people more than 30-40 000 years after the OOA migrations. People from the African A, B and E Y-DNA haplogroups and African MtDNA L haplogroups. Of course nowadays every African people are admixed at various degrees with non-African people either directly or through African intermediaries.

---

Hey dummy, nobody is disagreeing with your definitions.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:


How CL Fox' Nubian aDNA sample compares to the
above frequencies of Hpal 3592:

only 15 yield positive amplifications, four of
them (26.7%) displaying the sub-Saharan African
[Hpal 3592] marker.
--CL Fox

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Truthcentric:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
I for one believe that predominant Sub-Saharan clades such as PN2 did expand into the Nile Valley region post OOA but that there were some remnant peoples if not individuals who carry the older clades. As such this would give the peoples of East Africa including the Nile Valley an intermediate positioning between OOA peoples and other Africans and thus still corroborating Tishkoff's findings.

---

For my part, I think this is pretty close to the truth. The skeletal and dental analyses showing a physical distinction between ancient Egypto-Nubians and West/Central Africans cannot be ignored, but neither can Amun-Ra's beloved autosomal DNA data which does suggest that ancient Egyptian genetic profiles would fit more snugly into the sub-Saharan range of genetic variation than that of any Out-of-Africa population. Once you reconcile this autosomal data with the skeletal data, the picture that emerges is that the ancient Egyptians and Nubians that everyone knows were most probably hybridized between the indigenous East Saharan substructure and later waves of sub-Saharan migrants.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Firewall:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Truthcentric:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
I for one believe that predominant Sub-Saharan clades such as PN2 did expand into the Nile Valley region post OOA but that there were some remnant peoples if not individuals who carry the older clades. As such this would give the peoples of East Africa including the Nile Valley an intermediate positioning between OOA peoples and other Africans and thus still corroborating Tishkoff's findings.

---

For my part, I think this is pretty close to the truth. The skeletal and dental analyses showing a physical distinction between ancient Egypto-Nubians and West/Central Africans cannot be ignored, but neither can Amun-Ra's beloved autosomal DNA data which does suggest that ancient Egyptian genetic profiles would fit more snugly into the sub-Saharan range of genetic variation than that of any Out-of-Africa population. Once you reconcile this autosomal data with the skeletal data, the picture that emerges is that the ancient Egyptians and Nubians that everyone knows were most probably hybridized between the indigenous East Saharan substructure and later waves of sub-Saharan migrants.

---

From what i read so far on this forum when the term Egypto-Nubians is mention i think you mean lower A-group nubians and some later nubians of lower nubia in different time periods only.


Nubia was varied in looks as we know so far,and so was egypt and the rest of africa but A- group lower nubians were physically distinct from upper/southern nubia.


From a book i read awhile ago,egypt,nubia and axum from kenny mann,physically A- group nubians would have more in common with egyptians or look more like them,while nubians from upper/southern nubia like yam, and kushites would have more common or look more like those africans from darfur,the nuba hills,west and central africa.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Firewall:
From what i read so far on this forum when the term Egypto-Nubians is mention i think you mean lower A-group nubians and some later nubians of lower nubia in different time periods only.


Nubia was varied in looks as we know so far,and so was egypt and the rest of africa but A- group lower nubians were physically distinct from upper/southern nubia.


From a book i read awhile ago that Djehuti mention in a another thread, egypt,nubia and axum from kenny mann,physically A- group nubians would have more in common with egyptians or look more like them,while nubians from upper/southern nubia like yam, and kushites would have more common or look more like those africans from darfur,the nuba hills,west and central africa.

---

Such a cline would make intuitive sense, but the physical anthropological evidence doesn't all square well with it. Remember that Kerma is considered part of Upper Nubia, and yet the remains recovered from there have consistently shown such similarity to ancient Egyptians that often they're indistinguishable. For that matter, we have dental analyses on Mesolithic remains from way down in Khartoum showing a pattern like those of later Nubians and Egyptians. So, no, it doesn't look like even southern Nubians were more than subtly different from Egyptians.

As for the jet-dark portrayals of Nubians in Egyptian art, right now I'm inclined to think that was less a reflection of a real physical difference than a convention which helped the Egyptians distinguish themselves from other Nile Valley Africans. Since we're dealing with societies where most people went around half-naked and showed a lot of skin, assigning distinct skin colors to non-Egyptian Africans would have set them apart more than, say, subtle differences in loincloths.

This is how Nubians portrayed themselves in their own art, using the same color schemes as the Egyptians:




And this is how ancestral Eastern Saharans painted themselves thousands of years before:

 

---

Posted by Truthcentric (Member # 3735) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
But really my actual point is overall WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE?? Whether more recent PN2 descendant or ancestral OOA, the point is these populations were *all* equally African. I mean really if one wants to nitpick all the nuances go ahead, but I noticed it is Euronut racialists who tend to do this while Afrocentrics like Ahmanut try to downplay it. As if such genetic differences take away from their African or even black identity.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Truthcentric:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Firewall:
From what i read so far on this forum when the term Egypto-Nubians is mention i think you mean lower A-group nubians and some later nubians of lower nubia in different time periods only.


Nubia was varied in looks as we know so far,and so was egypt and the rest of africa but A- group lower nubians were physically distinct from upper/southern nubia.


From a book i read awhile ago that Djehuti mention in a another thread, egypt,nubia and axum from kenny mann,physically A- group nubians would have more in common with egyptians or look more like them,while nubians from upper/southern nubia like yam, and kushites would have more common or look more like those africans from darfur,the nuba hills,west and central africa.

---

Such a cline would make intuitive sense, but the physical anthropological evidence doesn't all square well with it. Remember that Kerma is considered part of Upper Nubia, and yet the remains recovered from there have consistently shown such similarity to ancient Egyptians that often they're indistinguishable. For that matter, we have dental analyses on Mesolithic remains from way down in Khartoum showing a pattern like those of later Nubians and Egyptians. So, no, it doesn't look like even southern Nubians were more than subtly different from Egyptians.

As for the jet-dark portrayals of Nubians in Egyptian art, right now I'm inclined to think that was less a reflection of a real physical difference than a convention which helped the Egyptians distinguish themselves from other Nile Valley Africans. Since we're dealing with societies where most people went around half-naked and showed a lot of skin, assigning distinct skin colors to non-Egyptian Africans would have set them apart more than, say, subtle differences in loincloths.

This is how Nubians portrayed themselves in their own art, using the same color schemes as the Egyptians:




And this is how ancestral Eastern Saharans painted themselves thousands of years before:

---

quote:

---

When we started excavating three years ago, we could not be sure we would find anything. All that was left of the largest tomb in the area was a crack in the ground. For weeks we were digging with no results. Our only discoveries were pieces of burnt bedrock with no traces of hieroglyphic inscriptions or decoration. Only fifteen feet down from the surface of the desert did we find the first inscription with the titles of a dignitary. This small fragment with original ancient carving gave us hope that there was something still left in the tomb. A week later we found the first image of the owner of the tomb, the Nubian Priest Karakhamun. The face of Karakhamun displays bold Nubian features, round head with cropped hair, round full cheeks, nose broad at the nostrils, and full protruding lips. A long neck and large elegant eyes with thin pointed cosmetic lines make his features resemble those of the Nubian pharaoh Shebitqo who ruled Egypt and Nubia at the end of the eighth and beginning of the seventh century B.C.

---

Later kushite art you see darker skin tones on average in the art and of one of reasons is that kushite art on average later became more nubianized or there was more native influences in the art again.


Another example in later kushite art the art was more realistic,queens were shown has fat etc..


I should have mention kerma was abit different then what you see further south,but of course heads shapes etc.. were similar to egypt except egyptians were lighter on average, medium nosed on average and those kushites of kerma were broad nosed and were darker on average.

Further south in upper nubia and southern nubia there are those in kush or in those regions that are broad nosed types,and broader heads on average like the king posted in the reply and darker on average.

Like a few others mention in this thread,egyptians and kushites had things that were similar but they varied or had distinctions too and there was a common type in each region.

There were varied looks in ta-seti just like egypt or kemet,but ta-seti would have common type and so would ancient egypt/kemet.

Let me put this way,the average kushite will not be described as Somali like,the average ancient egyptian is described that way so there were differences.


Egyptians lighter,kushites darker,egyptians more narrowed headed and on average medium nosed,closer to narrow on average,while kushites on average broad nosed and broad heads or round headed.


That's the distinction i am was talking about and want to make clear again.
You see these types in other parts of africa too.


Noba and kushites were indistinguishable of course and you could see the descendants of sudanese nile valley in other parts of sudan too in the nuba hills to darfur.


I posted some pics of these descendants in another thread and the average kushite and ancient noba would look more these these modern nubians.

Midob Nubians








and those you see in the nuba hills and those modern nubians you see in chad.


Here some modern nubians in nubia today.
Lori at Nubian Village visit (Timinar)


or
larger pic
http://www.flickr.com/photos/33176246@N04/6349161838/in/set-72157628106520848/


In pics i posted there a mixed of broad-head/round head types and those with more narrow heads and medium head types but all broad nosed and darker then then the average ancient egyptian.

Like zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova said earlier there was mix african types in both regions in ta-seti and ancient egypt,but there was a common head type, nose type,skin tone type etc..i mentioned above.

What i could tell so far and what i have read, the average kushite was broad-headed or round-head and broad nosed and darker on average then the egyptians.


Topic: NUBIAN TOMBS DISCOVERED
http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=15;t=006031#000006
 

---

Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
 

This art image seems to me not the real skin tone of this king,but i could be wrong,but it looks like it's just gold painting on the statue.

It reminds of those statues when king tut is painted all black,but of course that's not his real skin tone either.
 

---

Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
 
This was posted before about kushite art i found on this forum.

quote:

---

Originally posted by:
this is a good reading on the subject of what the scholars call a classic kushite fold


Egypt: Child of Africa
By Ivan Van Sertima of

if link does not work,copy and paste in address box

By Ivan Van Sertima quote-
but king taharka is man of many faces,whether in relief;as a sphinx(amon temple at kawa);as a colossi(gerbel barkhal);on temple shrines (kawa) or a fresco (quasm ibrim).those elements of his facial features which define him as a african man are unmistakable.and at last,there is tanwetamani(in relief and on fresco)who succeeded taharka

scholars treatment on the image of taharka requires comment.while his image occures on many extant statues,reliefs,stele,frescoes and shrines,the image of him which have received the greatest attention and praise are those which do not reflect the characteristic kushite bulbous nose,the prominent fold around the nose,the large lips,round head and short neck.some scholars,leclant for example,describe as unflattering those portraits of takarka which depicts him with prominent nose,thick lips and drooping eyes

for more reading clink link below-


http://books.google.com/books?id=Y7KmBTz2vUoC&pg=PA175&lpg=PA175&dq=kushite+nose+and+lips&source=web&ots=QsbQWC8k_r&sig=zQaLkUD1EqG-dGXzszDnUC6oXsY


Kushite King Senkamanisken

Napata (643-623 B.C.)

From Gebel Barkal, head from Temple B 500, body from B 904
Harvard University-MFA Boston Expedition, April 1916, field no. 16-4-32
Boston, Museum of Fine Arts, 23.731

With the retreat of the Kushite kings from Egypt, the art of the Napatan empire gains a new dimension. Its characteristic fashion of representing the human form and face were already visible in the works of the Twenty-fifth Dynasty. But they were toned down through direct contact with the tradition-bound art of Egypt, failing to come to full fruition.
Once freed, however, from the restrictions of the pharaonic legacy, a style develops in the Napatan dynasty that brings the more "African" components to the fore. Many colossal statue fragments from the original inventory of the great Amun Temple at Gebel Barkal were unearthed in a cache north of the first pylon. This statue of Senkamanisken was one of them. All of the stylistic tendencies of the preceding era come to light here, enhanced and expanded. The forcefully striding legs have become more massive, the feet larger. The arms end in balled fists that bespeak raw power; the musculature is strongly emphasized. The head rests heavy on the short neck, thickset in profile view. The southern facial type is characterized by the full lips, broad nose, the widely spaced, slightly bulging eyes, and the low brow. The double uraeus at the forehead is completely preserved—in the Napatan homeland the statues were spared the persecutions wrought by the succeeding dynasty in Egypt. The Kushite cap closely conforms to the round skull. Around the neck hangs the cord with three ram's heads. Surface areas left rough for gilding or silver plating include the jewelry bands on the upper arms, wrists, and ankles, the sandal straps, tripartite royal kilt, and the cap.

From the book Sudan: Ancient Kingdoms of the Nile, Dietrich Wildung, 1997, p. 218
Funerary Figurine of King Senkamanisken

This shabti, or funerary figurine, is typical of the nearly 1300 figurines found in Senkamanisken's pyramid at Nuri, the royal necropolis in the Kushite capital of Napata.


Housed in the Brooklyn Museum
add text.

The Kingdom of Kush: Handbook of the Napatan-Meroitic Civilization
By László Török

http://books.google.com/books?id=i54rPFeGKewC&pg=PA41&lpg=PA41&dq=kushite+nose+and+lips&source=web&ots=aW09Jwjx0K&sig=jQEMzSWH79OAzXjcjytITeQuCX4

---

quote:

---

As if such genetic differences take away from their African or even black identity.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by tropicals redacted:
@ Djehuti

quote:

---

As if such genetic differences take away from their African or even black identity.

---

Exactly.

---

Genetic differences (substructure) happens between any people including within the same ethnic group, members of the same (nuclear) family or surprisingly enough even between twins. I'm sorry but if you want to invent one group of mythical Africans who are closer to Eurasians than to other Africans, corresponding to the hamitic race myth from the 19th Century, it is racist and it does take away their African identity by making them closer to Eurasians than other Africans. It's also stupid and not based on any science (as both East and West Africans share a common Y-DNA CT (and DE) and MtdNA L3 haplogroups with OOA migrants.





Saying otherwise is based on leap of faith and magical thinking and is ridiculous. The hamitic race myth was debunked decades ago. But its also a complete lie and it's in the lies people tell themselves you know where people truly stand on this forum.
 

---

Posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate (Member # 20039) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:

I for one believe that predominant Sub-Saharan clades such as PN2 did expand into the Nile Valley region post OOA but that there were some remnant peoples if not individuals who carry the older clades . As such this would give the peoples of East Africa including the Nile Valley an intermediate positioning between OOA peoples and other Africans

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
The belief in this mythical clade which is not based on science.

---

Says who? You? Don't make me laugh. You have never
read a genetic article (or any anthro article for
that matter) in your life. This impression instantly
occurs to any reader of your posts who is not
similarly ignorant of African population history.
This is precisely why you and other crap mongers
thrive here; the folks who agree with you on ES
are equally ignorant of what they're talking about.

The Fulani and Cushitic (an eastern Afroasiatic subfamily)
AACs, which likely reflect Saharan African and East African ancestry, respectively, are
closest to the non-African AACs, consistent with an East African migration of modern
humans out of Africa or a back-migration of non-Africans into Saharan and Eastern
Africa.
--Tishkoff et al 2009
 

---

Posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate (Member # 20039) on :
 
Yes, and it also mentions the RECENT (post OOA, post Dynastic era) back-migration of non-Africans into Africa.

Also this Cushitic and Fulani AAC is closer to other Africans AACs than to European AAC, as we can see from this graph from the same study:



Personally, I could see Ancient Egyptians to be were the Fulani are (due to their geographic locations, the eventual cosmopolitan nature of the empire think Hyksos) based on current genetic results. That is mostly Africans with some low level of Eurasian admixtures.
 

---

Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
Yes, and it also mentions

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
Yes, and it also mentions

---

So you admit that you were talking out the side of
your neck when you said preOOA ancestry in extant
Africans was not scientific?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
Yes, and it also mentions

---

So you admit that you were talking out the side of
your neck when you said preOOA ancestry in extant
Africans was not scientific?

---

For example, modern Khoisan and Aka-Mbuti related people don't share this common ancestry with OOA migrants (since they are mostly from non-CT and non-L3 haplogroups) beside through recent admixtures.

---

When looking at the image what does "OOA" mean (Orange Component)?
Where do you see that "modern Khoisan and Aka-Mbuti related people don't share this common ancestry with OOA migrants"?

Talking out ass again.

 

---

Posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate (Member # 20039) on :
 
The older mythical clade mentioned by Djehuti below supposedly splitting modern East and West Africans:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:

I for one believe that predominant Sub-Saharan clades such as PN2 did expand into the Nile Valley region post OOA but that there were some remnant peoples if not individuals who carry the older clades . As such this would give the peoples of East Africa including the Nile Valley an intermediate positioning between OOA peoples and other Africans

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by beyoku:

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:
What exactly is "not based on science" and a "leap
of faith" about what Djehuti said?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:

quote:

---

Originally posted by beyoku:

---

You can't use the admixture K=2 graph to demonstrate the OOA substructure since those K=2 graphs (which are not always similar btw) are based on modern populations and also take into account RECENT back migrations of non-Africans into Africa.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by beyoku:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:

quote:

---

Originally posted by beyoku:

---

You can't use the admixture K=2 graph to demonstrate the OOA substructure since those K=2 graphs (which are not always similar btw) are based on modern populations and also take into account RECENT back migrations of non-Africans into Africa.

---

You just owned yourself. What back-migration are found in Mbuti, San, Anuak, Dinka, Biaka? What does "OOA" stand for in that image? If what you say is true, you should be able to say what "OOA" means as written by the author......and describe the present of that Component in SAN, Biaka, Mbuti as apposed to the differences in the K=2 analysis.

YOU WILL NOT DO THIS BECAUSE YOU CANNOT DO THIS!
Basically you are talking out your ass and when someone calls you on it you just dismiss the science on a whim.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:

quote:

---

Originally posted by beyoku:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:

quote:

---

Originally posted by beyoku:

---

You can't use the admixture K=2 graph to demonstrate the OOA substructure since those K=2 graphs (which are not always similar btw) are based on modern populations and also take into account RECENT back migrations of non-Africans into Africa.

---

You just owned yourself. What back-migration are found in Mbuti, San, Anuak, Dinka, Biaka? What does "OOA" stand for in that image? If what you say is true, you should be able to say what "OOA" means as written by the author......and describe the present of that Component in SAN, Biaka, Mbuti as apposed to the differences in the K=2 analysis.

YOU WILL NOT DO THIS BECAUSE YOU CANNOT DO THIS!
Basically you are talking out your ass and when someone calls you on it you just dismiss the science on a whim.

---

You don't even know what you're talking about yourself. Even Bantu-Niger-Congo got orange color in your graph (which btw are not always similar).

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:
@Amun Ra

Ignoring that load of propagandistic bs for a
minute (that Tishkoff citation clearly says that
OOA populations derive from East Africans, not West
Africans), what in the scientific literature rules
out the presence of lineages in the Nile Valley
that would put its carriers in an intermediate
position?

---

The literature cannot rules out what you invented. It doesn't even know of your theory.

For example a basic look at the haplogroups of the OOA migrants and modern Africans is enough to rule out your mythical clade. Like this graph, which I didn't create:



We can see above that Africans are from the A, B and E Y-DNA haplogroups.

The E haplogroup is the haplogroup shared between BOTH modern East and West Africans (along with other A and B haplogroups also unrelated to OOA migrants) **after** the OOA migrants (from the CT and DE haplogroups) already left Africa.
 

---

Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
 
Again, you keep referring back to your own lying
ass propaganda. Not a textual reference that supports
your propaganda in sight. Aside from the fact that
you're horribly oblivious to the fact that your
spam tree is outdated, phylogenetic trees by
definition only depict observed lineages.

Are you really that intellectually deprived to
condense Africa's evolutionary history into a
simplified Y Chromosome tree? Holy sh!t
 

---

Posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate (Member # 20039) on :
 
For textual reference you can use this:

quote:

---

Using the principle of the phylogeographic parsimony, the resolution of the E1b1b trifurcation in favor of a common ancestor of E-M2 and E-M329 strongly supports the hypothesis that haplogroup E1b1 originated in eastern Africa, as previously suggested [10], and that chromosomes E-M2, so frequently observed in sub-Saharan Africa, trace their descent to a common ancestor present in eastern Africa .

---

-- from A New Topology of the Human Y Chromosome Haplogroup E1b1 (E-P2) Revealed through the Use of Newly Characterized Binary Polymorphisms (Trombetta 2011)

Basically it says the chromosomes E-M2, so frequently observed in sub-Saharan Africa [for example over 80% of West Africans and African-Americans are from that haplogroup], trace their descent to a common ancestor present in eastern Africa.

So Sub-Saharan Africans like West Africans and East Africans can trace their descent from a common E-P2 ancestor present in Eastern Africa .

I discuss things in more details in this thread: Common Origin of black Africans, Ancient Egyptians and Kushites people in Eastern Africa (after the OOA migrations):
http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=009076
 

---

Posted by beyoku (Member # 14524) on :
 
@ Amun Ra you have some explaining to do.

Amun - I never said that. I said BOTH modern East and West Africans, descendants of the CT and L3 haplogroups,share a common ancestry with OOA migrants.

Beyoku - What back-migration are found in Mbuti, San, Anuak, Dinka, Biaka? What does "OOA" stand for in that image?


Amun - You don't even know what you're talking about yourself. Even Bantu-Niger-Congo got orange color in your graph (which btw are not always similar).

LULZ.
 

---

Posted by beyoku (Member # 14524) on :
 
wig·gle room
nouninformal
capacity or scope for negotiation or operation, especially in order to modify a previous statement or decision.
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 

 

---

Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
 
*And your reference says that the contents of
Djehuti's post constitute a "leap of faith", where?

*What does Trombetta 2011 even have to do with
any of this?

*Where do Trombetta et al say that "West Africans
and East Africans can trace their descent from a
common E-P2 ancestor present in Eastern Africa"?

*Why would modern day Y Chromosome trees rule out/
confirm human activity in the Nile Valley?

*How exactly would SNP ascertainment bias pull
various Afro-Asiatic speaking towards Eurasia,
and why would such a random process always be in
the direction of Eurasia, but never towards other
Africans?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
For textual reference you can use this:

quote:

---

Using the principle of the phylogeographic parsimony, the resolution of the E1b1b trifurcation in favor of a common ancestor of E-M2 and E-M329 strongly supports the hypothesis that haplogroup E1b1 originated in eastern Africa, as previously suggested [10], and that chromosomes E-M2, so frequently observed in sub-Saharan Africa, trace their descent to a common ancestor present in eastern Africa .

---

-- from A New Topology of the Human Y Chromosome Haplogroup E1b1 (E-P2) Revealed through the Use of Newly Characterized Binary Polymorphisms (Trombetta 2011)

Basically it says the chromosomes E-M2, so frequently observed in sub-Saharan Africa [for example over 80% of West Africans and African-Americans are from that haplogroup], trace their descent to a common ancestor present in eastern Africa.

So Sub-Saharan Africans like West Africans and East Africans can trace their descent from a common E-P2 ancestor present in Eastern Africa .

I discuss things in more details in this thread: Common Origin of black Africans, Ancient Egyptians and Kushites people in Eastern Africa (after the OOA migrations):
http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=009076

---

 

---

Posted by beyoku (Member # 14524) on :
 
That dude is gone.


 

---

Posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate (Member # 20039) on :
 
^^^Trite. Maybe some dummy thinks
he of the last word is right. - Tukuler
 

---

Posted by beyoku (Member # 14524) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by beyoku:
@ Amun Ra you have some explaining to do.

Amun - I never said that. I said BOTH modern East and West Africans, descendants of the CT and L3 haplogroups,share a common ancestry with OOA migrants.

Beyoku - What back-migration are found in Mbuti, San, Anuak, Dinka, Biaka? What does "OOA" stand for in that image?


Amun - You don't even know what you're talking about yourself. Even Bantu-Niger-Congo got orange color in your graph (which btw are not always similar).

LULZ.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amanutcase The Ultimate:

The older mythical clade mentioned by Djehuti below supposedly splitting modern East and West Africans:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:

I for one believe that predominant Sub-Saharan clades such as PN2 did expand into the Nile Valley region post OOA but that there were some remnant peoples if not individuals who carry the older clades . As such this would give the peoples of East Africa including the Nile Valley an intermediate positioning between OOA peoples and other Africans

---

The belief in this mythical clade which is not based on science. Can be compared to a "leap of faith", "Magical Thinking" among racist people on this site (Swenet, Djehuti, Beyoku and Truthcentric). The idea is to promote the splittism approach mentionned by zarahan, to disconnect Ancient Egypt from the rest of Africa pulling it toward Eurasia, and promote the debunked hamitic race myth based on racist pseudo-science from the 19th century.

I discuss the Common Origin of black Africans, Ancient Egyptians and Kushites people in this thread:
http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=009076

---

The older clades I speak of have NOTHING to do with "splitting" Africans by any geographic basis such as East vs. West but are simply very old clades like CT, BT, or even A! In fact the original topic of this thread proves my point because neolithic Nubians were found to carry A derived lineages!

But as usual the nutcase distorts my words by projecting his own paranoid racialized fears of "Hamitic" or "Caucasoid" even though the very genetics we discuss debunks all racial typology!!



As Tukuler posted...



Therefore I'm no longer responding to the idiocy that he is.
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Truthcentric:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
But really my actual point is overall WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE?? Whether more recent PN2 descendant or ancestral OOA, the point is these populations were *all* equally African. I mean really if one wants to nitpick all the nuances go ahead, but I noticed it is Euronut racialists who tend to do this while Afrocentrics like Ahmanut try to downplay it. As if such genetic differences take away from their African or even black identity.

---

To be fair, guys like Hawass and Kemp (the scholars whom Claus was arguing against) strike me as the sort who don't want Egyptians to be connected to other Africans in any sense. They'll take advantage of any distinction between Egyptians and the so-called "sub-Saharan" norm to justify the rift they've established in their minds. Even if Nile Valley Africans were perfect genetic clones of any extant sub-Saharan population, the orthodoxy will look for something else that they believe sets Egypt apart.

That Kemp, Hawass, and the rest weren't completely off-base when they suggested population substructure throughout Africa doesn't mean their underlying mentality can be excused.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by beyoku:
That dude is gone.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
^^^Trite. Maybe some dummy thinks
he of the last word is right. - Tukuler

---

quote:

---

I said BOTH modern East and West Africans, descendants of the CT and L3 haplogroups, share a common ancestry with OOA migrants.

For example, modern Khoisan and Aka-Mbuti related people don't share this common ancestry with OOA migrants (since they are mostly from non-CT and non-L3 haplogroups) beside through recent admixtures.

---

Notice he is distinguishing two groups. For the sake of simplicity lets use colors to represent the two groups......i dont know how about Orange for the "OOA Group" and Red for the Africa Specific group. Wait a minute...these colors looks somewhat fimiliar.



Amun ra is now shaking in his boots as he is called on the nonsense idea that Pygmies and San dont share OOA Ancestry. Clearly We can see they do when looking at the Chart....ALL African populations share Orange. Amun Ra was then asked "what does "OOA" mean (Orange Component)?" on the Chart above. Of course he does not want to answer cause its just more self ownage...but anyone that has been paying attention to this Baffoon knows he makes it all up as he goes along....case and point one minute he says this:

quote:

---

For example, modern Khoisan and Aka-Mbuti related people don't share this common ancestry with OOA migrants (since they are mostly from non-CT and non-L3 haplogroups) beside through recent admixtures.

---

quote:

---

After the OOA migrations, African populations who stayed back in Africa were not static, fixated in time. They continued to interact, admix with each others as well as migrating in different directions, sharing cultures, developing new languages. For example, creating the E, E-P2, L3eikx, L3bf haplogroups as well as many downstream A and B haplogroups and admixing with each others (especially through patrilocality). Source

---

Those two ideas are totally at odds with each other. But it doesn't stop here. He goes off the deep end...drowning in stupidity. He says the OOA image cannot be used because populations back migrate:

quote:

---

You can't use the admixture K=2 graph to demonstrate the OOA substructure since those K=2 graphs (which are not always similar btw) are based on modern populations and also take into account RECENT back migrations of non-Africans into Africa.

---

quote:

---

You don't even know what you're talking about yourself. Even Bantu-Niger-Congo got orange color in your graph (which btw are not always similar).

---

quote:

---

I said BOTH modern East and West Africans, descendants of the CT and L3 haplogroups, share a common ancestry with OOA migrants.

---

If Orange is "OOA migrants." why would Amun Ra protest that "Even Bantu-Niger-Congo got orange color in your graph" According to Amun ra they SHOULD have Orange as they "hare a common ancestry with OOA migrants".

What it is is a clusterfvck from an individual that doesnt know what he is talking about, full of contradictions and just makes it up as he goes along. The ownage of Amun ra has been broken down so even a caveman reading the page can understand this guys tomfoolery. This is why ES is a laughing stock. The things above have become part and parcel of this site because these bozos are the most vocal and nobody seems to be correcting them.

You should be able to explain these inconsistencies and contradictions. We dont need you to simply repeat them.
 

---

Posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova (Member # 15718) on :
 
Beyoku says:
The ownage of Amun ra has been broken down so even a caveman reading the page can understand this guys tomfoolery. This is why ES is a laughing stock.

Why would Amun-Ra be "representative" of ES? Many
here have already taken him to task on several issues. And
why is your "anthro-sphere" which itself is filled with
trolls, racists, distorters and crimson "guardsmen"
be any kind of standard or role model so much better
than ES? If this is indeed the case, and things are
so much better elsewhere, why do you keep coming
back to this forum? You yourself spend loads of time
in these other venues debating people with the most
laughable, racist claims. Are they also "laughing
stocks" or is your view of what's "representative" selective?
 

---

Posted by beyoku (Member # 14524) on :
 
How often do you think i actually post on those sites? I had never been a regular poster on antrhoscape (crimson et al board.)

ForumBiodiversity was good but it got hacked. The people of African origin/descent were leages above what is found here as far as analyzing African DNA. That site has a much higher caliber of participation as far as understanding simple things like population structure and autosomal dna and how it relates to Uni-Parental markers........Why is that the case??? Because, many of the users have gotten their own DNA tested and can understand the science from a first person view. Anyone that has tested their own DNA with the various "Calculators" from K=3 all the way to K=36 can understand that they get different output although their DNA is not changing. Because of this they dont make stupid ideas about insufficient sampling and are familiar with "What a K is"........and how dumb it is to make higher inferences using skin tone or uni-parental markers. Because of that and moderation of course....my posting transitioned from here to there. But that was a few years ago, for the most part I go back to clown the admin on Ancient Egyptian dna and Afroasiatic articles that come out.

ES is a laughing stock because it is not cutting edge compared to any other site out there, we dont post new data here. At ES we have a clown arguing over BASIC ideas about DNA....riddled with contradictions and inconsistencies and he will go on unchallenged. Some of the other jackasses you named that go out on the web to "do battle" from an ES Background say and do some of the same stuff. Ideas grounded in Dogma....not knowledge. People can see that a mile away. Years ago I changed my name, for the same reason as stated by another user.....didnt want to be associated with this site. Anthroscape is shiit too, but i go there. I go to plenty of shiit sites. Sometimes a i stumble upon something I haven't read before.

EDIT. Let me state that in Highschool I went to a **** school. In 1996 Ice T came to my home town and said "What is the worst school in the state...that is where i want to go"......he came to our school. Although that is my home school and I show my face there even 10 and 15 years later when I am in town...........I can still admit the fact that the school was ****. If I had time I would volunteer at the school, even though it is ****.
 

---

Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
 
^And you haven't even mentioned the ancient Egypt
forum where anti-Semitism and scientific racism
reign freely.

Fact is, the membership count on this site is
almost(?) 18000 and the vast majority of the
Anthro enthusiasts who (used to) fit in that huge
number have no idea what they're talking about
when it comes to genetics, linguistics, physical
anthropology, etc. and/or systematically
misrepresent and marginalize inconvenient
things they do understand. The people who know
what they're talking about and have been honest
can be counted on a couple of hands and, for the
most part, aren't even here any more. As for
members that can say intelligent things about
recent trends in population genetics without
resorting to Google.... well.. uhmm... hmm... let
me think..... (crickets).

ES' collective strong point has been history, i.e.
merely reiterating memorized facts about AE, Nubia
and various other African cultures and polities.
In any other important facet it simply can't
compete and it's about time it stopped being in
denial. I know it, you know it, the lurkers know
it and the blogosphere knows it.
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
^ Obviously the 'Ancient Egypt' section of the forum is what makes Egyptsearch the laughing stock of the anthro-blogosphere. I don't even post in that madhouse section anymore as it is too sunken in as you say anti-Jewish anti-white depravity. It is literally the area of the Afronuts.

I've also heard that one or two of those nuts are actually Euronuts in disguise looking to discredit this forum (and I'm not talking about lioness LOL). All of this has put me on edge as I really want to make some valid contributions but I'm worried these trolls would pollute my threads.
 

---

Posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova (Member # 15718) on :
 
I have no problem with people pointing out assorted errors
AmunRa has made. Go for it. However they need not do so in
every thread, nor in threads Beyoku et al frequent to be "validated"
either. Many have taken him to task on multiple topics, and his approach.
I would also dispute Beyoku's blanket notion that sheer dogma
drives all ES members when they do battle on other
web venues. This is not the case at all. To the
contrary, their arguments are grounded in hard fact
and scholarship which most often defeats the other
side. This is why assorted biased moderators often
try to sandbag them, even a low-key, careful guy like Morpheus.
Trying to make out that these ES vets are blinkered
ideologues who know nothing is a clear distortion and
misrepresentation of many posters here.
 

---

Posted by beyoku (Member # 14524) on :
 
Who is Morpheus and where is Morpheus?
Does Morpheus post here?
 

---

Posted by Truthcentric (Member # 3735) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by beyoku:
Who is Morpheus and where is Morpheus?
Does Morpheus post here?

---

Morpheus is another handle for the ES poster once called Mansa Musa. Morph still works as an admin on MootStormfront (albeit that website is only active at sporadic moments), but on most other forums he now calls himself "EgalitarianJay".
 

---

Posted by beyoku (Member # 14524) on :
 
So he is not on this forum anymore. I wonder why? This forum needs more posters like evergreen. A poster that is always bringing new data to the table.... Naw wallowing in and or misinterpreting data from 20 years ago.
 

---

Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
 
I remember him. From what I recall he was a solid
guy. I think he was the one who was in contact with
Keita and told him about the Mekota & Vermehren paper


 

---

Posted by beyoku (Member # 14524) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:
I remember him. From what I recall he was a solid
guy. I think he was the one who was in contact with
Keita and told him about the Mekota & Vermehren paper

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:

---

For the record, I don't believe European hunter-gatherers were black and all of a sudden became 'white'. Obviously there was a process of *gradual lightening* that first began even before they entered Europe. Dr. Jablonski made this clear in her works on the evolution of human skin. During the late Pleistocene much of Central Asia and Anatolia which are already at higher latitudes were cloudy regions at that time receiving less sun-light. The hypothesis was that European hunter-gatherers were at least 'brown' in color if not lighter and of course we have Khoisan of southern Africa as an example of less than the typical black complexion of Sub-Saharans so obviously the selective pressures for lighter color were already active. [/QB][/QUOTE]


Hello,


It seems that pale skin may have evolved in Europeans as recently as 6,000 years ago. Since genetic mutations for lighter skin only occurred ( separately) in two populations, East Asians and Europeans, as recently as 6,000 years ago ( at least in Europeans), when and how did ( some) Middle Easterners become lighter skinned? I'd have to assume that it occurred very, very recently but I'm hoping that someone here has a more definite answer. I don't mean to derail this thread. If my question is too far off from the original subject of this thread please feel free to move it to a more appropriate thread.


European Skin Turned Pale Only
Recently, Gene Suggests

http://galsatia.files.wordpress.com/2007/04/blanche_paleur.pdf

Derived immune and ancestral pigmentation alleles in a 7,000-year-old Mesolithic European

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v507/n7491/full/nature12960.html
 

---

Posted by BlessedbyHorus (Member # 22000) on :
 
Correct me as a the guy, but the argument on this thread is that one person doesn't understand that Eurasians are a subset of East Africans and because of that he/she believes East Africans are mixed? Again that is the argument that I am getting. And if that's the case; East Africans showing more genetic distant towards Eurasian's compared to other Africans does not mean East Africans are admixed or less Africans, but that Eurasians come from East Africans.


Because of that Eurasians have less genetic variations compared to Africans, since a small group only migrated out from East Africa. Again does not mean East Africans are any less African.

IMO I like to this is like with Greeks. Compared to most Europeans they are closer to Africans in terms of genetic distance, but are still wholly European.
 

---

Posted by Truthcentric (Member # 3735) on :
 
^ Yeah, that's pretty much the argument put forward.
 

---

Posted by Ardo (Member # 1797) on :
 
Welcome to ES Somner!

Looking forward to more from you
but 2007 was a long time ago and
more current study disputes the 6k
origin of pink skin.

Looking forward to more from you
but 2007 was a long time ago and
more current study disputes the 6k
http://www.g3journal.org/content/3/11/2059.full.pdf+html
origin of pink skin iirc although
not from aDNA as in your 2014 article.
 

---

Posted by beyoku (Member # 14524) on :
 
For all intents and purposes some Ethiopians ARE "Mixed". Ethiopians are not the only Africans that have "mixture" and the "Mixture" comes from South West Asians and they themselves are also "mixed."

The fact that some Ethiopians are Mixed does not exempt the fact that East Africans are closer to Eurasian populations. All one need to do is look at an East African population that we assume is not "Mixed". That brings us here:

quote:

---

" These results mean that we have not identified any sub-Saharan African sample that we are confident has no evidence of back-to-Africa migration. Our best candidate at present is the Dinka.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ardo:
Welcome to ES Somner!

Looking forward to more from you
but 2007 was a long time ago and
more current study disputes the 6k
origin of pink skin.

Looking forward to more from you
but 2007 was a long time ago and
more current study disputes the 6k
http://www.g3journal.org/content/3/11/2059.full.pdf+html
origin of pink skin iirc although
not from aDNA as in your 2014 article.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Truthcentric:
^ Yeah, that's pretty much the argument put forward.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by beyoku:

quote:

---

" These results mean that we have not identified any sub-Saharan African sample that we are confident has no evidence of back-to-Africa migration. Our best candidate at present is the Dinka.

---

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by BlessedbyHorus:
Correct me as a the guy, but the argument on this thread is that one person doesn't understand that Eurasians are a subset of East Africans and because of that he/she believes East Africans are mixed? Again that is the argument that I am getting. And if that's the case; East Africans showing more genetic distant towards Eurasian's compared to other Africans does not mean East Africans are admixed or less Africans, but that Eurasians come from East Africans.

---

quote:

---

Using the principle of the phylogeographic parsimony, the resolution of the E1b1b trifurcation in favor of a common ancestor of E-M2 and E-M329 strongly supports the hypothesis that haplogroup E1b1 originated in eastern Africa, as previously suggested [10], and that chromosomes E-M2, so frequently observed in sub-Saharan Africa, trace their descent to a common ancestor present in eastern Africa .

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate :
^^^It's written black on white. Clear as water.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:

quote:

---

Originally posted by BlessedbyHorus:
Correct me as a the guy, but the argument on this thread is that one person doesn't understand that Eurasians are a subset of East Africans and because of that he/she believes East Africans are mixed? Again that is the argument that I am getting. And if that's the case; East Africans showing more genetic distant towards Eurasian's compared to other Africans does not mean East Africans are admixed or less Africans, but that Eurasians come from East Africans.

---

Yes, but it's ***BOTH*** modern East and West Africans which share a common origin with Eurasians in Eastern Africa, not only modern Eastern Africans. Basically, both modern East and West Africans share a common origin in Northeastern Africa *after* the OOA migrations.

quote:

---

Using the principle of the phylogeographic parsimony, the resolution of the E1b1b trifurcation in favor of a common ancestor of E-M2 and E-M329 strongly supports the hypothesis that haplogroup E1b1 originated in eastern Africa, as previously suggested [10], and that chromosomes E-M2, so frequently observed in sub-Saharan Africa, trace their descent to a common ancestor present in eastern Africa .

---

-- from A New Topology of the Human Y Chromosome Haplogroup E1b1 (E-P2) Revealed through the Use of Newly Characterized Binary Polymorphisms (Trombetta 2011)


^^^It's written black on white. Clear as water.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:

quote:

---

Originally posted by BlessedbyHorus:
Correct me as a the guy, but the argument on this thread is that one person doesn't understand that Eurasians are a subset of East Africans and because of that he/she believes East Africans are mixed? Again that is the argument that I am getting. And if that's the case; East Africans showing more genetic distant towards Eurasian's compared to other Africans does not mean East Africans are admixed or less Africans, but that Eurasians come from East Africans.

---

Yes, but it's ***BOTH*** modern East and West Africans which share a common origin with Eurasians in Eastern Africa, not only modern Eastern Africans. Basically, both modern East and West Africans share a common origin in Northeastern Africa *after* the OOA migrations.

quote:

---

Using the principle of the phylogeographic parsimony, the resolution of the E1b1b trifurcation in favor of a common ancestor of E-M2 and E-M329 strongly supports the hypothesis that haplogroup E1b1 originated in eastern Africa, as previously suggested [10], and that chromosomes E-M2, so frequently observed in sub-Saharan Africa, trace their descent to a common ancestor present in eastern Africa .

---

-- from A New Topology of the Human Y Chromosome Haplogroup E1b1 (E-P2) Revealed through the Use of Newly Characterized Binary Polymorphisms (Trombetta 2011)


^^^It's written black on white. Clear as water.

---

So would you say its black and white that East Africans
like Kikuyu, or East Africans like Hutu or Oromo are closer
to Eurasians than Africans?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
and they share a common origin with most
other Africans like West Africans and Bantu at a
time period after the OOA migrations.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:

quote:

---

Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:

quote:

---

Originally posted by BlessedbyHorus:
[qb] ....

[QUOTE] .....

---

-- from A New Topology of the Human Y Chromosome Haplogroup E1b1 (E-P2) Revealed through the Use of Newly Characterized Binary Polymorphisms (Trombetta 2011)


^^^It's written black on white. Clear as water.

---

So would you say its black and white that East Africans
like Kikuyu, or East Africans like Hutu or Oromo are closer
to Eurasians than Africans?

---

Certainly not. Those people (Kikuyu, Hutu, Oromo, East Africans) are obviously African and they share a common origin with most other Africans like West Africans and Bantu at a time period after the OOA migrations. Your question doesn't even make sense. Are Kikuyu not Africans? Why do you say "than Africans", which they are themselves?

I said ***BOTH*** modern East and West Africans which share a common origin with Eurasians.

In other word, and as an example, Yoruba, Somali, Oromo, kikuyu, Igbo, Zulu, Kongo and Bantu people share a common origin with Eurasian. As they are from the Y-DNA CT and mtDNA L3 lineages in large part of their populations (lineages they share with OOA migrants). They also share other African lineages (L2a, L0a, etc).

Africans like Aka-Mbuti-Twa-like people as well as Khoisan don't share those common CT and L3 lineages for the most part so are not related to OOA migrants beside through more recent admixtures.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
^^^In what ways does this debunk what I said? You lost your own plot a long time ago in this thread.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by beyoku:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
^^^Trite. Maybe some dummy thinks
he of the last word is right. - Tukuler

---

.............

First this guy said that substructure in Africa is defined by A/B and L0-L2 vs L3 and M168 Africans. This is his MO. And the former group AB/L0-L2 or for the sake of accuracy "Pygmies and San" are divergent and dont share OOA Ancestry with the East and West Africans. See Below

quote:

---

I said BOTH modern East and West Africans, descendants of the CT and L3 haplogroups, share a common ancestry with OOA migrants.

For example, modern Khoisan and Aka-Mbuti related people don't share this common ancestry with OOA migrants (since they are mostly from non-CT and non-L3 haplogroups) beside through recent admixtures.

---

Notice he is distinguishing two groups. For the sake of simplicity lets use colors to represent the two groups......i dont know how about Orange for the "OOA Group" and Red for the Africa Specific group. Wait a minute...these colors looks somewhat fimiliar.



Amun ra is now shaking in his boots as he is called on the nonsense idea that Pygmies and San dont share OOA Ancestry. Clearly We can see they do when looking at the Chart....ALL African populations share Orange. Amun Ra was then asked "what does "OOA" mean (Orange Component)?" on the Chart above. Of course he does not want to answer cause its just more self ownage...but anyone that has been paying attention to this Baffoon knows he makes it all up as he goes along....case and point one minute he says this:

quote:

---

For example, modern Khoisan and Aka-Mbuti related people don't share this common ancestry with OOA migrants (since they are mostly from non-CT and non-L3 haplogroups) beside through recent admixtures.

---

But a second later he spans this:

quote:

---

After the OOA migrations, African populations who stayed back in Africa were not static, fixated in time. They continued to interact, admix with each others as well as migrating in different directions, sharing cultures, developing new languages. For example, creating the E, E-P2, L3eikx, L3bf haplogroups as well as many downstream A and B haplogroups and admixing with each others (especially through patrilocality). Source

---

Those two ideas are totally at odds with each other. But it doesn't stop here. He goes off the deep end...drowning in stupidity. He says the OOA image cannot be used because populations back migrate:

quote:

---

You can't use the admixture K=2 graph to demonstrate the OOA substructure since those K=2 graphs (which are not always similar btw) are based on modern populations and also take into account RECENT back migrations of non-Africans into Africa.

---

When asked what populations back-migrated into the San and Pygmies he is MUTE.
Take Note - If there are multiple populations in Africa OOA and non OOA that "continued to interact, admix with each others" obviously the San and Pygmies SHOULD show composite ancestry according to his quote. BUT since he is making it up he wants them to be pure to go back to his other idea that San and Pygmies didnt mix with OOA.
What is his solution....more nonsense:

quote:

---

You don't even know what you're talking about yourself. Even Bantu-Niger-Congo got orange color in your graph (which btw are not always similar).

---

So he highlights the even the "Bantu-Niger-Congo got orange color" in the grapgh.
Well of COURSE they do. And this goes back to him not wanting to even say what "OOA" means in the graph. And leads back to something he is saying but doesnt even understand:

quote:

---

I said BOTH modern East and West Africans, descendants of the CT and L3 haplogroups, share a common ancestry with OOA migrants.

---

If Orange is "OOA migrants." why would Amun Ra protest that "Even Bantu-Niger-Congo got orange color in your graph" According to Amun ra they SHOULD have Orange as they "hare a common ancestry with OOA migrants".

What it is is a clusterfvck from an individual that doesnt know what he is talking about, full of contradictions and just makes it up as he goes along. The ownage of Amun ra has been broken down so even a caveman reading the page can understand this guys tomfoolery. This is why ES is a laughing stock. The things above have become part and parcel of this site because these bozos are the most vocal and nobody seems to be correcting them.

You should be able to explain these inconsistencies and contradictions. We dont need you to simply repeat them.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
^^^You're a racist idiot. The evidences are obviously discussed in the part of my post above YOU decided not to quote.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
^^^You're a racist idiot. The evidences are obviously discussed in the part of my post above YOU decided not to quote.

---

I see not a single shred of evidence that East and
West Africans diverged following OOA.

---

quote:

---

Using the principle of the phylogeographic parsimony, the resolution of the E1b1b trifurcation in favor of a common ancestor of E-M2 and E-M329 strongly supports the hypothesis that haplogroup E1b1 originated in eastern Africa, as previously suggested [10], and that chromosomes E-M2, so frequently observed in sub-Saharan Africa, trace their descent to a common ancestor present in eastern Africa .

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
For example, East and West Africans share
the common E-P2 lineage which appeared after the
OOA migrations.

---

According to which reliable piece of evidence? And
even IF E was younger than OOA, how would it prove
that East and West Africans split after OOA?

Yes, this is the part where you sh!t your pants and
flee the scene (as you always have), isn't it?
 

---

Posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate (Member # 20039) on :
 
It proves that East and West Africans (and most sub-Saharan Africans in general) and I quote " trace their descent to a common ancestor present in eastern Africa . "

E-P2 wasn't part of the OOA migrations (OOA migrants were from the upstream CT haplogroup as all OOA populations are descendant from the upstream CT haplogroup).

They also share various mtDNA ancestors as we can see here for example (using the haplogroups frequency tables):
http://drum.lib.umd.edu/handle/1903/11443
 

---

Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
 
The discussed East and West Africans being dominant
In Y E proves that that these males trace their
descent to E? So? The critical pieces you're
desperately trying to avoid:

1) explain how any of the bs you blurted
out above proves that E is younger than OOA.

2) explain how merely being dominant in a particular
haplogroup confines a population's history to the
age and other specifics of that haplogroup. For
instance, some Berber populations are 100% E-M81.
Does that mean their ancestral population would
poof out of existence if one were to time travel
to slightly before the emergence of E-M81


 

---

Posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate (Member # 20039) on :
 
You're grasping at straws and wasting my time.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:


1) explain how any of the bs you blurted
out above proves that E is younger than OOA.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
You're grasping at straws and wasting my time.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
Are you saying E is NOT younger than the OOA migrations?

---

You made the claim, you prove it. Here, let me
help you out and put you back on track to proving
your bs:


1) explain how any of the bs you blurted
out above proves that E is younger than OOA.

2) explain how merely being dominant in a particular
haplogroup confines a population's history to the
age and other specifics of that haplogroup. For
instance, some Berber populations are 100% E-M81.
Does that mean their ancestral male population
would poof out of existence if one were to time
travel to slightly before the emergence of E-M81


 

---

Posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate (Member # 20039) on :
 
^^^Don't be ridiculous. I'm not here to answer all you're stupid questions.

You're the one who must prove that E is NOT younger than the OOA migrations? And that E was part of the OOA migrations? Or that East and West Africans don't share the E-P2 haplogroup. Which you can't. OOA migrants were from the upstream CT haplogroup. Most East and West Africans from the downstream E haplogroups (over 80% of their populations).



All this is discussed in more depth here:

Common Origin of black Africans, Ancient Egyptians and Kushites people
http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=009076
 

---

Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
^^^Don't be ridiculous. I'm not here to answer all you're stupid questions.

---

So there you have it. You're full of bs. Not a
single reference in support of your crackpot
claims. You failed to prove

1) that E is younger than OOA
2) that haplogroup profiles necessarily preserve
all deep ancestry

hence:

3) your unintelligible gibberish why E is somehow
a sound basis to say that the East and West African
populations under discussion split before OOA is
exactly that: gibberish.
 

---

Posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate (Member # 20039) on :
 
^^You're the one who is full of bs. It's obvious you're trying to waste my time by making me answer stupid questions while not providing any evidence to contradict what I posted. Are you're saying ridiculously that E was part of the OOA migrations and is older than CT or not? I guess it's easier ask empty questions over and over again than prove somebody is wrong.

Look at this graph. It's pretty simple to understand even for a racist like you:


You're the one desperate to prove I'm wrong and thus must prove so with evidences. I'm perfectly comfortable with what I posted above and in those following threads.

Common Origin of black Africans, Ancient Egyptians and Kushites people
http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=009076

and here too:
http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=008317;p=11#000505
 

---

Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
Blablablabla

---

Meanwhile, in the real world, Y E and/or the branch
it sits on is older than any Eurasian clade in any
current Y phylogenetic tree. Of course, the clown
above me wouldn't know that because he's never read
a single population genetics paper in his life.


 

---

Posted by beyoku (Member # 14524) on :
 
LOL.
When the going gets tough his azz is gone.

 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:

^^^Don't be ridiculous. I'm not here to answer all you're stupid questions.

You're the one who must prove that E is NOT younger than the OOA migrations? And that E was part of the OOA migrations? Or that East and West Africans don't share the E-P2 haplogroup. Which you can't. OOA migrants were from the upstream CT haplogroup. Most East and West Africans from the downstream E haplogroups (over 80% of their populations).



All this is discussed in more depth here:

Common Origin of black Africans, Ancient Egyptians and Kushites people
http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=009076

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
Certainly not. Those people (Kikuyu, Hutu, Oromo, East Africans) are obviously African and they share a common origin with most other Africans like West Africans and Bantu at a time period after the OOA migrations. Your question doesn't even make sense. Are Kikuyu not Africans? Why do you say "than Africans", which they are themselves?

---

quote:

---

Originally edited by Djehuti:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:

^^^Don't be ridiculous. I'm not here to answer all you're stupid questions.

You're the one who must prove that E is NOT younger than the OOA migrations? And that E was part of the OOA migrations? Or that East and West Africans don't share the E-P2 haplogroup. Which you can't. OOA migrants were from the upstream CT haplogroup. Most East and West Africans from the downstream E haplogroups (over 80% of their populations).



All this is discussed in more depth here:

Common Origin of black Africans, Ancient Egyptians and Kushites people
http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=009076

---

Hey guys doesn't Amanut's own graph refute him?? According to the graph CF carriers were in Eurasia before E-M96 (E*) even diverged, and the same is true with DE.

Anyway, the nutcase is too stupid to realize that we are not racists trying to white-wash or de-Africanize people who are obviously African BUT there is no arguing that some Africans are closer related to Eurasians than to other Africans.

As I tried explaining to the idiot even PN2 derived E carrying Africans in general are closer related to Eurasians than they are to say Africans who carry B or A. Again, his OWN graphs shows this.

This is why racial typology is scientifically invalid and bankrupt, and why people who rely on such typology for their racial agendas will always fail!

---

quote:

---

Originally edited by Djehuti:
Hey guys doesn't Amanut's own graph refute him??
According to the graph CF carriers were in Eurasia
before E-M96 (E*) even diverged, and the same is
true with DE.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
Certainly not. Those people (Kikuyu, Hutu, Oromo, East Africans) are obviously African and they share a common origin with most other Africans like West Africans and Bantu at a time period after the OOA migrations. Your question doesn't even make sense. Are Kikuyu not Africans? Why do you say "than Africans", which they are themselves?

---

I asked the question because Beyoku up above says that quote:

" does not exempt the fact that East Africans are closer to Eurasian populations.
All one need to do is look at an East African population that we assume is not "Mixed"."


So based on your statement above, is Beyoku wrong? Are Kikuyu, Oromo,
Hutu etc, who are all East Africans, closer to Eurasians than other
African populations? If not, where are the errors in Beyoku's claim?

---

quote:

---

Other studies (PRÜFER ET AL 2014, MEYER ET AL 2012,
TISHKOFF ET AL 2009) have shown that, while the San and Mbuti are the most diverged
from all other populations sampled, the Mandenka and Yoruba populations have only
recently separated and the Dinka population shares some ancestry with non-African
populations. The San and Mbuti projections onto YRI show a slight excess of rare alleles,
suggesting some admixture from their ancestors into the ancestors of YRI

---

quote:

---

These results mean that we have not identified any sub-Saharan African sample that we are confident has no evidence of back-to-Africa migration. Our best candidate at present is the Dinka but it is possible that with a phased genome or large sample sizes we would detect evidence of non-African ancestry in this population as well.

---

Dinka sit closest to Eurasians.....have less Neanderthal and Yoruba.....they are Primarily an A/B population........they share "some ancestry with non-African populations." yet they are the "best candidate at present" for a "sub-Saharan African sample that we are confident has no evidence of back-to-Africa migration"

Anyone looking for the context of the quote can simply GOOGLE IT.
 

---

Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
 
Like casting pearls before swines, tho.
 

---

Posted by beyoku (Member # 14524) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:
Like casting pearls before swines, tho.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by beyoku:

---

quote:

---

I asked the question because Beyoku up above says that quote:

"does not exempt the fact that East Africans are closer to Eurasian populations.
All one need to do is look at an East African population that we assume is not "Mixed"."

---

quote:

---

http://i58.tinypic.com/1o0gw8.png

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:
mtDNA analysis in ancient Nubians supports the existence of gene flow between sub-Sahara and North Africa in the Nile valley

quote:

---

The Hpal (np3,592) mitochondrial DNA marker is a selectively neutral mutation that is very common in sub-Saharan Africa and is almost absent in North African and European populations. It has been screened in a Meroitic sample from ancient Nubia through PCR amplification and posterior enzyme digestion, to evaluate the sub-Saharan genetic influences in this population. From 29 individuals analysed, only 15 yield positive amplifications, four of them (26.7%) displaying the sub-Saharan African marker. Hpa 1 (np3,592) marker is present in the sub-Saharan populations at a frequency of 68.7 on average. Thus, the frequency of genes from this area in the Merotic Nubian population can be estimated at around 39% (with a confidence interval from 22% to 55%). The frequency obtained fits in a south-north decreasing gradient of Hpa I (np3,592) along the African continent. Results suggest that morphological changes observed historically in the Nubian populations are more likely to be due to the existence of south-north gene flow through the Nile Valley than to in-situ evolution.

---

I can't wrap my mind around why this paper is so undercited, aside from Cuckoo Mathilda and her confused puppets. Notice I'm not saying that this paper has been ignored by ES members, as its potential to be misconstrued has been nipped in the bud several times. But why isn't it pro-actively quoted as much as, say, DNA Tribes' Amarna analysis?

First of all, judging by the abstract, the authors aren't even saying that these Nubians had 61% non-African mtDNAs, and secondly, their title and abstract are suggesting that they were testing the contributions of Niger Congo speaking Africans in the ancient Nile Valley genepool (which doesn't make sense due to the fact that these lineages predate anything Niger-Congo, but oh well..):

Thus, the frequency of genes from this area in the Merotic Nubian population can be estimated at around 39%

^They clearly aren't counting Northeast African specific mtDNA Ls (which we now know, are prominent).

Thirdly, it is NORMAL for Sudanese to only have ~30% hpa I np 3592 associated uniparentals (L1 and L2):

quote:

---

For mtDNA analysis, a total of 56 haplotypes were observed, all belonging to the major sub-Saharan African and Eurasian mitochondrial macrohapolgroups L0, L1, L2, L4, L5, L3A, M and N in frequencies of 12.1, 11.9, 22, 4.2, 6.2, 29.5, 2, and 12.2% respectively.

---

--Hassan, 2009

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by beyoku:
PLease answer Zarahan's question. In fact please explain the position of the Dinka....having less Neanderthal than the Yoruba, having shared ancestry with Eurasians while at the same time being the best proxy from an African population with NO Admixture compared to the Yoruba.
And also being heavy in A/B non L3. You cant.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:
@Charlie

I agree with what you're saying. When I wrote that, I
was arguing from the perspective that C.L. Fox was
talking about external influences on indigenous Nile
Valley populations:

to evaluate the sub-Saharan genetic influences in
this population

Now, a couple of years later, I no longer think that's
what she was doing. However, I do think the results
can be repurposed for the case that this sample was
predominantly African. The reason is because, if
you're arguing from C.L. Fox' perspective that the
Nubian population was originally Caucasoid, you need
a lot of African geneflow to get from 0% to 26.7% HpaI
when you're dealing with Afro-Asiatic mtDNA M1
populations (certainly more than 26.7%). Taking modern
samples with known craniometric overlap with Meroites,
you'd need more than 50% mtDNA L types to go from
immigrant non-African to 26.7% HpaI.

---