Sorry I haven't really been responding much to any threads I made. I had an inkling the site selected in the 2017 DNA study of "the Egyptians" took from a location (Abusir el-Meleq that sounded fairly Lower Egyptian. So I'd been trying to do some reading where I could and it'd appear that Abusir el Meleq was referred to as the Abydos of lower Egypt. If this is true, it'd explain how these group of mummies had Asiatic ancestry that extended into prehistoric times (even though they technically lived in Upper Egypt): Culturally these people were Lower Egyptians, and Lower Egyptians had more genetic influence from the Near East, even during the predynastic.
Posted by Oshun (Member # 19740) on :
In Africa, haplogroup T is primarily found among Afro-Asiatic-speaking populations, including the basal T* clade.[1] Some non-basal T clades are also commonly found among the Niger-Congo-speaking Serer
Datoga Tanzania Nilo-Saharan 1/57 1.75% Tishkoff 2007 and Knight 2003
Dispersals and genetic adaptation of Bantu-speaking populations in Africa and North America
Etienne Patin1,2,3,*, Science 05 May 2017
Note the European blue portions in the East African section but also to a much lesser extent with Bakiga (Kiga people of northern Rwanda and southern Uganda)
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by Oshun: Sorry I haven't really been responding much to any threads I made. I had an inkling the site selected in the 2017 DNA study of "the Egyptians" took from a location (Abusir el-Meleq that sounded fairly Lower Egyptian. So I'd been trying to do some reading where I could and it'd appear that Abusir el Meleq was referred to as the Abydos of lower Egypt. If this is true, it'd explain how these group of mummies had Asiatic ancestry that extended into prehistoric times (even though they technically lived in Upper Egypt): Culturally these people were Lower Egyptians, and Lower Egyptians had more genetic influence from the Near East, even during the predynastic.
And how do you know Asiatic influence in the Delta goes back to predynastic times? Do you have genetic studies of predynastic Lower Egyptians?? It was already explained in the original thread as well as other threads, that the Abusir el-Meleq samples tested date to Late New Kingdom to the Roman Period, this is hardly representative of 'purely' indigenous Egyptians.
And this is shown from the morphology of predynastic Lower Egyptians both cranially and post-cranially compared to samples from late periods such as those selected in the recent Nature paper.
Limb length proportions in males from Maadi and Merimde group them with African rather than European populations. Mean femur length in males from Maadi was similar to that recorded at Byblos and the early Bronze Age male from Kabri, but mean tibia length in Maadi males was 6.9cm longer than that at Byblos. At Merimde both bones were longer than at the other sites shown, but again, the tibia was longer proportionate to femurs than at Byblos (Fig 6.2), reinforcing the impression of an African rather than Levantine affinity.--Smith 2002
sample populations available from northern Egypt from before the 1st Dynasty (Merimda, Maadi and Wadi Digla) turn out to be significantly different from sample populations from early Palestine and Byblos, suggesting a lack of common ancestors over a long time. If there was a south-north cline variation along the Nile valley it did not, from this limited evidence, continue smoothly on into southern Palestine.--Kemp 2005
Previous studies have compared biological relationships between Egyptians and other populations, mostly using the Howells global cranial data set. In the current study, by contrast, the biological relationships within a series of temporally-successive cranial samples are assessed. The data consist of 55 cranio-facial variables from 418 adult Egyptian individuals, from six periods, ranging in date from c. 5000 to 1200 BC. These were compared with the 111 Late Period crania (c. 600-350 BC) from the Howells sample. Principal Component and Canonical Discriminant Function Analyses were undertaken, on both pooled and single sex samples. The results suggest a level of local population continuity exists within the earlier Egyptian populations, but that this was in association with some change in population structure, reflecting small-scale immigration and admixture with new groups. Most dramatically, the results also indicate that the Egyptian series from Howells global data set are morphologically distinct from the Predynastic and Early Dynastic Nile Valley samples (especially in cranial vault shape and height), and thus show that this sample **cannot be considered** to be a typical Egyptian series.-- Zakrzewski (2001)
Posted by Oshun (Member # 19740) on :
Yes the mummies tested lived and died in the NK and later time periods, but that doesn't mean the scientists couldn't test for when their ancestors mixed (which was earlier). Earlier northern Egyptians may have had an "African affinity" but it doesn't mean that they didn't possess any Levanite ancestors.
Posted by Elmaestro (Member # 22566) on :
because the Uniparentals are so Diverse and we only have 3 Good Autosomal samples, way to little to test time of admixture via LD, we won't be able to know when these mummies "mixed." A wise thing to do is use admixture Data from modern the Coptic Sudanese, since their autosomal profiles are so similar... You can Start here.
Take it or leave it.... Blue text highlights the strongest signals for the first Admixture event. Assuming a generation of 30 years we have 2.4kya +/-600 years
Posted by Tyrannohotep (Member # 3735) on :
quote:Originally posted by Elmaestro: because the Uniparentals are so Diverse and we only have 3 Good Autosomal samples, way to little to test time of admixture via LD, we won't be able to know when these mummies "mixed." A wise thing to do is use admixture Data from modern the Coptic Sudanese, since their autosomal profiles are so similar... You can Start here.
Take it or leave it.... Blue text highlights the strongest signals for the first Admixture event. Assuming a generation of 30 years we have 2.4kya +/-600 years
So, is this saying that the ancestry of modern Copts can be modeled as an admixture event taking place between a Neolithic Greek-like population and a Luxmanda-like one ~2,400 years ago? Or am I reading the chart wrong?
Posted by Elmaestro (Member # 22566) on :
quote:Originally posted by Tyrannohotep: So, is this saying that the ancestry of modern Copts can be modeled as an admixture event taking place between a Neolithic Greek-like population and a Luxmanda-like one ~2,400 years ago? Or am I reading the chart wrong?
You aren't reading the chart wrong.
Posted by Tyrannohotep (Member # 3735) on :
Then the accuracy of the model must depend on how much AE were like either population. Both Neolithic Greeks and Luxmanda must share in common the native Northeast African ancestry like the AE would have had, but I'd expect the Greeks to also have more Eurasian ancestry and Luxmanda more SSA.
Posted by Elmaestro (Member # 22566) on :
It's difficult to imply whether or not Ancient Greeks and Luxmanda shared ancestry with this method. However, on the other hand, yeah you can estimate what AEgyptians looked like if you believe Copts Carry A.Egyptian Admixture. It depends on how "literal" you take the modern Donors.
For instance... you can Say Greek-like Egyptians mixed with a Luxmandas SSA like Affinity, or the A.Egyptins were more Luxmanda-like and received Greek admixture... The clues to how each population might've looked are within the other models on the table as well. (Beja + Greece_N.; Somali + Greece_N.; Anatolia_N + Beja; Anatolia_N + Somali).. You can use the amplitudes as well as the other population combinations to deduce how each donor population probably looked like... Keep in mind potential admixture between/within the donors as well. for example Beja could have Greek-like/Anatolia-like Admixture which weakens the signal as a potential donor for Coptic Ancestry via LD.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ Sounds an awful lot like the old Saumuel Morton idea of a 'Pelasgic Race' whom he identified as inhabiting the Delta as well as other parts of the eastern Mediterranean i.e. Levant and Aegean.
Posted by xyyman (Member # 13597) on :
TRex is getting witty. lol! I think he missed the "Greek" thing.
quote:Originally posted by Tyrannohotep:
quote:Originally posted by Elmaestro: because the Uniparentals are so Diverse and we only have 3 Good Autosomal samples, way to little to test time of admixture via LD, we won't be able to know when these mummies "mixed." A wise thing to do is use admixture Data from modern the Coptic Sudanese, since their autosomal profiles are so similar... You can Start here.
Take it or leave it.... Blue text highlights the strongest signals for the first Admixture event. Assuming a generation of 30 years we have 2.4kya +/-600 years
So, is this saying that the ancestry of modern Copts can be modeled as an admixture event taking place between a Neolithic Greek-like population and a Luxmanda-like one ~2,400 years ago? Or am I reading the chart wrong?
Posted by Oshun (Member # 19740) on :
Can you please not do that "albino" stuff here? Lower Egyptians had influences from there from the start. Modern Copts probably give us a good idea of how many (though probably not all) Lower Egyptians looked like. Invasions would've just made the "Copt look" more common throughout Egypt.
Posted by Elite Diasporan (Member # 22000) on :
GET BACK ON TOPIC people! Take this albino crap to the Deshret. Last warning.
Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
Nice work in here.
Posted by Oshun (Member # 19740) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: And how do you know Asiatic influence in the Delta goes back to predynastic times?[/QB]
Because review of predynastic sites show influences that go beyond trade like subterranean homes.
quote:sample populations available from northern Egypt from before the 1st Dynasty (Merimda, Maadi and Wadi Digla) turn out to be significantly different from sample populations from early Palestine and Byblos, suggesting a lack of common ancestors over a long time. If there was a south-north cline variation along the Nile valley it did not, from this limited evidence, continue smoothly on into southern Palestine.--Kemp 2005
Being more mixed with non Africans doesn't mean Lower Egyptians weren't collectively distinct from Levanites, or do for example Beyonce or Rihanna pass as Europeans because they have European influences? Some Lower Egyptians would pass as Levanites, but many probably didn't. So imagine a population that would more frequently have people who looked like Solange, Prince, or Aaliyah. Then imagine heavy Levanite immigration for hundreds of years. When a Meghan Markle looking North African has her first child in that setting, how is it headlining news when these are likely what her descendants would've looked like?
Posted by Dinkum (Member # 22875) on :
Copts have been in place in Egypt for 30 000 years. They have the LEAST mixed DNA and just like their ancient ancestors, are overwhelmingly MIDDLE EASTERN in origin.
Ancient Egyptians closest relatives are the COPTS:
Posted by Dinkum (Member # 22875) on :
Copts are closely related to other North Africans who originated from the Middle East 30 000 - 20 000 years ago and 6000 years ago with the Middle Farmers.
Thats why all these peoples look alike.
These are the Copts that once lived in Upper Egypt, but have left because of persecution [img] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sa%27idi_people#/media/File:Upper_Egyptians-Sa%27idis.jpg [/img]
Posted by Dinkum (Member # 22875) on :
As for the skulls found at Maadi, Merimde,Tasian, Fayum A Culture. THEY WERE ALL MIDDLE EASTERN. Which fits in perfectly with the mummies at Abusir El Meleq:
FROM YALE UNIVERSTITY. ANCIENT EGYPTIANS RESEMBLED THE PEOPLE OF ISRAEL:
^^^ Maadi, Faiyum and Merimde were Lower Egyptian. Yes they were mixed with Near Eastern but they didn't create dynastic culture (and neither did the Tasians, if memory serves).
Posted by Oshun (Member # 19740) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dinkum: Copts have been in place in Egypt for 30 000 years. They have the LEAST mixed DNA and just like their ancient ancestors, are overwhelmingly MIDDLE EASTERN in origin.
Ancient Egyptians closest relatives are the COPTS:
Some Egyptians of ancient Egypt yes. But Copts didn't even exist as an identity until 1-2 thousand years after mass migrations into Egypt by Levanites. I'm not understanding therefore, how you believe the ancestors of Copts *like any other Egyptian) was incapable of mixture. Don't get me wrong: This doesn't mean they didn't represent ancient Egyptians. I also believe a "Copt" look wouldn't have been difficult to find in parts of Lower Egypt from the start. They also aren't being deceitful about claiming they represent AE. heavily mixed Egyptians were still of ancient Egyptian nationality and remained so for well over a thousand years until the end of the ancient period.
Posted by sudaniya (Member # 15779) on :
quote:Originally posted by Oshun: ^^^ Maadi, Faiyum and Merimde were Lower Egyptian. Yes they were mixed with Near Eastern but they didn't create dynastic culture (and neither did the Tasians, if memory serves).
Exactly! Ancient Egypt was a product of Southern Egypt; a region that is ethnically and culturally related to "Nubia" in Southern Egypt and North Sudan.
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
We are guessing at how much "admixture" there was in Lower Egypt. By that argument then every population in the Mediterranean was also "mixed". Levantines were Mixed with Africans coming out of Africa. Greeks and Romans were "mixed" as well. Yes we can try and claim that this as some 'objective truth' but we know that this isn't being "objective" as far as many historical revisionists go. Lower Egypt was no more mixed than Rome was. And nobody claims Rome was non European even though there was plenty of non Romans and non Europeans in Rome.
Lets not forget the monuments of Beni Hasan which are right next to places like Fayum:
Like I said before, ancient Minoans also portrayed themselves exactly like the ancient Egyptians in colour. Does this mean they were black? Not according to DNA, they were INDIGENOUS Europeans. Do does this mean ancient Egyptians were black? NO!
There is absolutely NO proof ancient Egyptians didn't start their own civilization.
Even 13 000 years ago, Egyptians were living throughout Egypt:
Again? Looks like you're stripping information of it's context once more (Cass). For one, it's not common for modern whites to be that dark. AND these Upper Egyptians had heavy connections to tropical Sudan? A place that would've been well below the Sahara of it's time when Egypt started?
No one's saying "Egyptians" didn't start their own civilization. But "Egyptians" as a nationality didn't exist before "Egypt" was established. Let discuss this again in a way that whites can perhaps understand: Australia's modern mainstream culture didn't exist before whites arrived there. If you ask them if they're Australians by nationality, nearly everyone living there (especially the whites) would say yes. But if you ask them if every Australian was for example, Aboriginal in cultural origin they'd say no. Increased settlements along the Nile is heavily supported which means, many people who originally hadn't settled along the Nile started to do so. This hope of yours that Sudan didn't influence Upper Egypt is about as flimsy a wish as hoping Near Easterners weren't influencing Lower Egypt.
Posted by sudaniya (Member # 15779) on :
Ancient Egypt was a Sudanese transplant and it was Southern Egyptians that created the civilization and dominated it politically, culturally, demographically, economically and militarily up until the New Kingdom. The ancient Egyptians were mahogany-brown - like other Northeast Africans, and we have Lower "Nubians" and Puntites of Northeast Sudan or Eritrea being depicted as virtually identical.
That some Southern European civilization was so enamoured with ancient Egypt to the extent that it potrayed some of its people like Lower "Nubians", ancient Egyptians and Puntites is amusing, but it's not evidence of anything. Even Kushites used the same tone as the ancient Egyptians on the tombs in Sudan.
The mahogany-brown skin-tone is found on stone art all over the Sahara and its a lot closer to other Africans than it is to any European population. Most ancient Egyptian images showcase mahogany-brown people.
Posted by Oshun (Member # 19740) on :
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: We are guessing at how much "admixture" there was in Lower Egypt. By that argument then every population in the Mediterranean was also "mixed". Levantines were Mixed with Africans coming out of Africa. Greeks and Romans were "mixed" as well. Yes we can try and claim that this as some 'objective truth' but we know that this isn't being "objective" as far as many historical revisionists go. Lower Egypt was no more mixed than Rome was. And nobody claims Rome was non European even though there was plenty of non Romans and non Europeans in Rome.
Rome was embedded deep into western Europe. Egypt was a country sandwiched between Sudan and the Levant. it's a faulty comparison to talk about Rome and Lower Egypt---which was (generally) geographically closer to the Levant than it was Sudan.
I do understand though the comparison to the cultural origin of Rome being European, even though many non Europeans would be absorbed into it over time. That seems a better comparison.
quote:Lets not forget the monuments of Beni Hasan which are right next to places like Fayum:
Holdit. Many local areas could be fairly different from one another in predynastic times. So unless there's cultural evidence to suggest the sites were the same it'd be dubious to say that. Faiyum probably had darker toned people like in the art you displayed, but the issue is proportion. This "Upper Egyptian" appearance would've varied in different parts of Egypt. It would've been greatest at Aswan and would've become less apparent in the Delta.
Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dinkum: Like I said before, ancient Minoans also portrayed themselves exactly like the ancient Egyptians in colour. Does this mean they were black? Not according to DNA, they were INDIGENOUS Europeans. Do does this mean ancient Egyptians were black? NO!
There is absolutely NO proof ancient Egyptians didn't start their own civilization.
Even 13 000 years ago, Egyptians were living throughout Egypt:
This babble box is hilarious. Guess what, you are debunked again.
quote:"I suspect there was no outside enemy, these were tribes mounting regular and ferocious raids amongst themselves for scarce resources," curator Renee Friedman said. "Nobody was spared: there were many women and children among the dead, a very unusual composition for any cemetery, and almost half bore the marks of violent death. Many more may have died of flesh wounds which left no marks."
But before I get to the work of Haas and Piscitelli, I'd like to return briefly to my last post, which describes a study of modern-day foragers (also called hunter gatherers), whose behavior is assumed to be similar to that of our Stone Age ancestors. The study found that modern foragers have engaged in little or no warfare, defined as a lethal attack by two or more people in one group against another group. This finding contradicts the claim that war emerged hundreds of thousands or even millions of years ago.
Defenders of the Deep Roots Theory have leveled various criticisms at the forager study. [*See Clarification below.] They complain that foragers examined in the studyand modern foragers in general--have been pacified by nearby states. Or the foragers are "isolated," living in remote regions where they rarely come into contact with other groups. In other words, these foraging societies are atypical.
But you could argue that all modern tribal societies are atypical, including those cited by Deep Rooters as evidence for their position. Take, for example, the infamous Yanomamo, an Amazonian society that is extremely warlike, according to anthropologist Napoleon Chagnon, who began observing them in the 1960s.
The Yanomamo practice horticulture, which makes them a poor proxy for nomadic Stone Age hunter gatherers. Atypical. Moreover, even Chagnon acknowledges that some Yanomamo are much violent than others. Of course, Deep Rooters assert that these relatively peaceful Yanomamo are atypical.
When Deep Rooters complain that a society is atypical, they really mean that the society is not as violent as predicted by the Deep Roots theory. They are guilty of egregious confirmation bias, and circular reasoning.
Deep Rooters display this same trait when it comes to Pan troglodytes, our closest genetic relative. Since the mid-1970s, researchers have observed chimpanzees from one troop killing members of another troop--proving, Deep Rooters claim, that the roots of intergroup violence are even older than the Homo genus.
Deep Rooters conveniently overlook the fact some Pan troglodytes communities have been observed for years without carrying out a lethal raid. Moreover, researchers have never observed a deadly attack by the chimpanzee species Pan paniscus, also known as Bonobos. Deep Rooters insist that only the most violent chimps are representative of our primordial ancestry, even though Pan paniscus is just as genetically related to us as Pan troglodytes.
To be fair, proponents of the view that war is a recent cultural inventionI'll call them Inventors--also play this game. They find reasons to discount extremely violent behavior--by either chimps or humansas atypical. For example, both chimp raids and Yanomamo warfare may be responses to recent encroachment on their habitat by outside societies.
But Inventors can also point to a far more persuasive source of data supporting their position: the archaeological record. The most ancient clear-cut evidence of deadly group violence is a mass grave, estimated to be 13,000 years old, found in the Jebel Sahaba region of the Sudan, near the Nile River. Of the 59 skeletons in the grave, 24 bear marks of violence, such as hack marks and embedded stone points.
Even this site is an outlier. The vast majority of archaeological evidence for warfarewhich consists of skeletons marked by violence, art depicting battles, defensive fortifications, and weapons clearly designed for war rather than huntingis less than 10,000 years old.
Deep Rooters try to dismiss these facts by resorting to the old argument that absence of evidence does not equal evidence of absence. They allege, in other words, that there is not significant evidence of any human activity prior to 10,000 years ago.
To rebut this charge, Haas and Piscitelli recently carried out an exhaustive survey of human remains more than 10,000 years old described in the scientific literature. They counted more than 2,900 skeletons from over 400 different sites. Not counting the Jebel Sahaba skeletons, Haas and Piscitelli found four separate skeletons bearing signs of violence, consistent with homicide, not warfare.
This "dearth of evidence," Haas continued, "is in contrast with later periods when warfare clearly appears in this historical record of specific societies and is marked by skeletal markers of violence, weapons of war, defensive sites and architecture, etc."
Haas and Piscitelli present their data in "The Prehistory of Warfare: Misled by Ethnography," a chapter in War, Peace, and Human Nature, a collection of essays published this year by Oxford University Press. The book was edited by anthropologist Douglas Fry, co-author of the forager study I described in my last post.
"Declaring that warfare is rampant amongst almost all hunters and gatherers (as well as those cunning and aggressive chimpanzees) fits well with a common public perception of the deep historical and biological roots of warfare," Haas and Piscitelli write. "The presumed universality of warfare in human history and ancestry may be satisfying to popular sentiment; however, such universality lacks empirical support."
Many people think that war, if ancient and innate, must also be inevitable. President Barack Obama seemed to be expressing this notion in 2009 when he accepted the Nobel Peace Prize, just nine days after he announced a major escalation of the U.S. war in Afghanistan.
"War, in one form or another, appeared with the first man," Obama said. He added, "We must begin by acknowledging the hard truth: we will not eradicate violent conflict in our lifetimes."
When will Deep Rooters acknowledge that they are wrong?
Clarification: Some readers might conclude based on my criticism of Deep Rooters that they are all hawks, warmongers, who think that war, because it is innate, is inevitable and perhaps even beneficial in some sense. Such views were once quite common, especially in the era of social Darwinism. President Teddy Roosevelt once said, for example, "All the great masterful races have been fighting races. No triumph of peace is quite so great as the supreme triumph of war." None of the Deep Rooters I have cited subscribe to such odious balderdash. All fervently hope that humanity can eradicate or at least greatly reduce the frequency of war. Deep Rooters believe that we will be better equipped to solve the problem of war if we accept the Deep Roots theory. Of course, I disagree with them on this point. As indicated by the above comments of President Barack Obamaas well as comments on my blog--the Deep Roots Theory leads many people to be pessimistic about the prospects for ending war, a view that can be self-fulfilling. I would nonetheless accept the Deep Roots theory if the evidence supported it, but the evidence points in the other direction. That is my main source of disagreement with Deep Rooters. In the interests of constructive dialogue, however, I'm providing a link, sent to me by anthropologist and prominent Deep Rooter Richard Wrangham, to a column supporting his position. In the column, political scientist and self-described "conservative Darwinian" Larry Arnhart asserts that "explaining the evolutionary propensity to war in human nature is not to affirm this as a necessity that cannot be changed. In fact, understanding war as a natural propensity can be a precondition for understanding how best to promote peace." Okay, so we all want peace. We just disagree on how to get there. More to come.
13,000 year old skeletons in mass grave near Nile are oldest evidence of group violence.
It obvious your head is filed with hot-air, not brains.
Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dinkum: Copts are closely related to other North Africans who originated from the Middle East 30 000 - 20 000 years ago and 6000 years ago with the Middle Farmers.
quote: The study on the partial calvarium discovered at Manot Cave, Western Galilee, Israel (dated to 54.7 ± 5.5 kyr BP, Hershkovitz et al. 2015), revealed close morphological affinity with recent African skulls as well as with early Upper Paleolithic European skulls, but less so with earlier anatomically modern humans from the Levant (e.g., Skhul). The ongoing fieldwork at the Manot Cave has resulted in the discovery of several new hominin teeth. These include a lower incisor (I1), a right lower first deciduous molar (dm1), a left upper first deciduous molar (dm1) and an upper second molar (M2) all from area C (>32 kyr) and a right upper second molar (M2) from area E (>36 kyr). The current study presents metric and morphological data on the new Manot Cave teeth. These new data combined with our already existing knowledge on the Manot skull may provide an important insight on the Upper Paleolithic population of the Levant, its origin and dietary habits.
—Author(s): Rachel Sarig ; Ofer Marder ; Omry Barzilai ; Bruce Latimer ; Israel Hershkovitz
The Upper Paleolithic inhabitants of Manot Cave: the dental perspective (Year: 2017)
quote:Originally posted by sudaniya: Ancient Egypt was a Sudanese transplant
Do you mean the ancient Egyptian civilization with it's large monuments temples and sphinx was a Sudanese transplant or do you mean that before the Egyptian civilization started the people who went from Sudan and after they got there built large monuments and temples and so on ?
Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by sudaniya: Ancient Egypt was a Sudanese transplant
Do you mean the ancient Egyptian civilization with it's large monuments temples and sphinx was a Sudanese transplant or do you mean that before the Egyptian civilization started the people who went from Sudan and after they got there built large monuments and temples and so on ?
I wonder what garbage you will come up with now.
Posted by Dinkum (Member # 22875) on :
The First Egyptians looked like this and were living in ancient Egypt 30 000 years ago and the whole of North Africa carrying MTDNA U6 which the Copts still carry:
The race war in Egypt is dated 13 000 years and was fought between Caucasians and Sudanese. (YES CHEDDAR MAN AND HIS RELATIVES WERE CAUCASIANS) It doesn't seem that these earlier Egyptians would have allowed people to come and live on their land.
About 6000 years ago the white Middle Eastern Farmers came into ALL OF EGYPT replacing the brown Caucasians (Cro-Magnon) They started civilization in Southern Egypt.
They resembled the Copts.
Posted by Dinkum (Member # 22875) on :
The ancient Egyptians were the most advanced peoples in Africa. What a damn joke to assume someone else founded their civilization. All the civilizations in Europe, North Africa and India were founded BY THE DESCENDANTS OF THE MIDDLE EASTERN FARMERS AND THIS INCLUDES EGYPT.
Posted by Oshun (Member # 19740) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dinkum: The First Egyptians looked like this and were living in ancient Egypt 30 000 years ago and the whole of North Africa carrying MTDNA U6 which the Copts still carry:
The race war in Egypt is dated 13 000 years and was fought between Caucasians and Sudanese. (YES CHEDDAR MAN AND HIS RELATIVES WERE CAUCASIANS) It doesn't seem that these earlier Egyptians would have allowed people to come and live on their land.
About 6000 years ago the white Middle Eastern Farmers came into ALL OF EGYPT replacing the brown Caucasians (Cro-Magnon) They started civilization in Southern Egypt.
They resembled the Copts.
Please stop making the same comments ad naseum without responding to anyone. Answer the following (since you haven't yet):
When did light skin become spread extensively though "Eurasia?" Because from what I've got the earliest was 12 BC and the latest was perhaps 6000kya. The southern Egyptians moving into Egypt from Sudan incorporated the techniques of the north with pre existing strategies. Nor did they begin to speak Semetic languages, which we would expect if they came from the Levant. Knowing you, you will talk about proto Afro Asiatic, but before you even go there please answer the question of when light skin started forming. It is unlikely the Near Eastern farmers heavily penetrated Sudan, because Near Eastern farming techniques cannot be as easily replicated in Sudan the way they can in the Levant. If they settled in Sudan it would've been well before their reliance on farming (which is hypothesized to be the event that spread lighter skin tones we see in modern Europeans).
Oh and why do so many of the Socotra look like this:
They do not have much African ancestry and have been isolated from other Near Easterners after they arrived there around 6kya. It is unlikely the modern "Copt" look was as widespread by then. Near Easterners came in all shades, which is why it doesn't work to insist they had to be light as modern Europeans based on their haplogroup alone.
Posted by Tyrannohotep (Member # 3735) on :
Since people like to claim that the higher West/Central African-like ancestry in the study's modern Egyptian samples relative to the mummies is a result of the Islamic slave trade, I want to bring up the fact that the Egyptians themselves weren't above taking in enslaved captives during their military campaigns. What are the odds that at least some of the Eurasian mtDNAs in these late dynastic mummies might have something to do with all the Middle Eastern captives the Egyptians would have brought home during the New Kingdom?
Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor:
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by sudaniya: Ancient Egypt was a Sudanese transplant
Do you mean the ancient Egyptian civilization with it's large monuments temples and sphinx was a Sudanese transplant or do you mean that before the Egyptian civilization started the people who went from Sudan and after they got there built large monuments and temples and so on ?
To me, Ancient Egypt was a Sudanese transplant means AE culture and people came from Sudan.
I see this in north moving pre-historic Sudanis. Also them that went west and came back east.
Sudani cultures spread downriver through time. Baines & Málek say the cultures from Khartoum to Naqada and Badari are so indistinct that the whole stretch amounts to some cultural uniformity (p.30).
Green Saharans who came to Upper Egypt were Saharo-Sudanese. The Sudanese who introduced the Sahara to some neolithic culture
The Ancient Egypt we know and love began when Naqada II spread north far as Fayoum.
So I got to agree with Sudaniya on that in the 2nd way Lioness interprets it.
Posted by Oshun (Member # 19740) on :
quote:Originally posted by Tyrannohotep: Since people like to claim that the higher West/Central African-like ancestry in the study's modern Egyptian samples relative to the mummies is a result of the Islamic slave trade, I want to bring up the fact that the Egyptians themselves weren't above taking in enslaved captives during their military campaigns. What are the odds that at least some of the Eurasian mtDNAs in these late dynastic mummies might have something to do with all the Middle Eastern captives the Egyptians would have brought home during the New Kingdom?
Very high. There are accounts where the Egyptians talk about enslaving Levanite migrants leading into the intermediate period.
Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dinkum: The First Egyptians looked like this and were living in ancient Egypt 30 000 years ago and the whole of North Africa carrying MTDNA U6 which the Copts still carry:
The race war in Egypt is dated 13 000 years and was fought between Caucasians and Sudanese. (YES CHEDDAR MAN AND HIS RELATIVES WERE CAUCASIANS) It doesn't seem that these earlier Egyptians would have allowed people to come and live on their land.
About 6000 years ago the white Middle Eastern Farmers came into ALL OF EGYPT replacing the brown Caucasians (Cro-Magnon) They started civilization in Southern Egypt.
They resembled the Copts.
quote:"Indeed, the rare and incomplete Paleolithic to early Neolithic skeletal specimens found in Egypt—such as the 33,000-year-old Nazlet Khater specimen (Pinhasi and Semal 2000), the Wadi Kubbaniya skeleton from the late Paleolithic site in the upper Nile valley (Wendorf et al. 1986), the Qarunian (Faiyum) early Neolithic crania (Henneberg et al. 1989; Midant-Reynes 2000), and the Nabta specimen from the Neolithic Nabta Playa site in the western desert of Egypt (Henneberg et al. 1980)—show, with regard to the great African biological diversity, similarities with some of the sub-Saharan middle Paleolithic and modern sub-Saharan specimens. This affinity pattern between ancient Egyptians and sub-Saharans has also been noticed by several other investigators (Angel 1972; Berry and Berry 1967, 1972; Keita 1995) and has been recently reinforced by the study of Brace et al. (2005), which clearly shows that the cranial morphology of prehistoric and recent northeast African populations is linked to sub-Saharan populations (Niger-Congo populations). These results support the hypothesis that some of the Paleolithic–early Holocene populations from northeast Africa were probably descendents of sub-Saharan ancestral populations."
--F X Ricaut · M Waelkens
Article: Cranial Discrete Traits in a Byzantine Population and Eastern Mediterranean Population Movements
Human Biology 11/2008; 80(5):535-64. DOI:10.3378/1534-6617-80.5.535 · 1.52 Impact Factor
"The race war in Egypt is dated 13 000 years and was fought between Caucasians and Sudanese."
quote: Forty two cases of malignant melanomas in Egyptian patients are presented and a review was made of 165 cases previously reported in the literature. The mean age was 48 years and males slightly predominated. Of the entire series studied, 67% of melanomas were cutaneous, 22% extracutaneous and 11% of unknown primary site. Lentigo maligna and superficial spreading melanomas are exceedingly rare. The foot was the most common site (43%) of cutaneous melanomas, followed by the head and neck region (26%). The frequency of foot involvement is higher than that reported on other fair skinned caucasians, but it is much lower than that observed in negroid races. The factors possibly responsible for this regional variation of melanomas among different races are discussed.
quote:Originally posted by Oshun: Oh and why do so many of the Socotra look like this:
They do not have much African ancestry and have been isolated from other Near Easterners after they arrived there around 6kya. It is unlikely the modern "Copt" look was as widespread by then. Near Easterners came in all shades, which is why it doesn't work to insist they had to be light as modern Europeans based on their haplogroup alone.
You are a moron. That is not an ethnic Socotri, but a slave imported from Tanzania.
There are black slaves all over the Arab world.
Native Socotris have straight or wavy hair and thin noses. They don't look like Bantus like that man.
They are dark for sure, but certainly not Negroid or Sub-Saharan whatsoever.
Posted by Oshun (Member # 19740) on :
Doing some reading, it seems as though "bantu" types have migrated to the island in recent history and that image you quoted may have been an oversight. However most of the features of that boy can be found on Africans.
The Soqotri have been isolated and did not benefit from the Arab slave trade. People that look like that child, this Natufian
And any existing Afrian influences from Sudan is about the most you're going to get from ancient Upper Egypt, especially the major areas. Be honest: Mixing these two types of people who either already look like Africans or would with just the slightest admixture is not helping the general goals people like you have.
Culturally they would've been African, and physically if we're to assume Upper Egyptians were somewhat related to lower Egyptians, they would've been mixed between Soqotri types, Natufian types and SSA from Sudan. Soqotri give us a picture of how people returning to Africa by 4000 B.C looked. People like this mixing with a Sudanese African is not going to produce people can't be labeled as African or "black."
Posted by Oshun (Member # 19740) on :
Pure Socotris DO NOT have curly hair nor do they look like Africans.
As for you spamming Somalians. They are UNRELATED to Socotris. Socotris are based on haplogroup J on the male side and R0a on the female side.
Socotris are ARABIANS, not Africans.
Posted by Perahu (Member # 18548) on :
quote:Originally posted by Oshun: The Soqotri have been isolated and did not benefit from the Arab slave trade. Their DNA is not significantly affected by Africans that have migrated to the island in recent years. Doing some reading, it seems as though "bantu" types have migrated to the island in recent history and that image may have been an oversight of that. However most of the features of that boy can be found on Africans.
Liar,
Many slaves from Zanzibar have been dumped on that island. Those curly haired people with broad noses on Socotra are of Tanzanian origin.
Scientists did not sample them because they were studying NATIVE Socotris only.
Posted by Lion (Member # 22807) on :
quote:Originally posted by Perahu:
quote:Originally posted by Oshun: Oh and why do so many of the Socotra look like this:
They do not have much African ancestry and have been isolated from other Near Easterners after they arrived there around 6kya. It is unlikely the modern "Copt" look was as widespread by then. Near Easterners came in all shades, which is why it doesn't work to insist they had to be light as modern Europeans based on their haplogroup alone.
You are a moron. That is not an ethnic Socotri, but a slave imported from Tanzania.
There are black slaves all over the Arab world.
Native Socotris have straight or wavy hair and thin noses. They don't look like Bantus like that man.
They are dark for sure, but certainly not Negroid or Sub-Saharan whatsoever.
You're a complete idiot, there is no Bantu standard. Now with evidence, something you do not have, people with the same phenotype that you are claiming to be Bantu, were the first Europeans, Asian and Americans.
Posted by Oshun (Member # 19740) on :
Pure Socotris DO NOT have curly hair nor do they look like Africans.
As for you spamming Somalians. They are UNRELATED to Socotris. Socotris are based on haplogroup J on the male side and R0a on the female side.
Socotris are ARABIANS, not Africans.
Soqotri are NOT significantly mixed. Genetic data has already revealed that. So either they are Bantu migrants (highly unlikely) or they're Soqotri. Soqotri have biodiversity that for the most part can fit in Africa.
I think you're missing what I'm getting at here: It doesn't matter who they were more closely related to. Their appearance when returning to Africa and settling into Upper Egypt wouldn't have offered so stark a contrast, that when mixing with incoming ancient Sudanese and Natufian-like peoples, they would look extremely different from people that are already accepted as Africans or "blacks" as some would say. Lower Egyptians would've been exposed to more recent migrations which means lighter skin and greater cultural similarities to Arabs.
Posted by Elite Diasporan (Member # 22000) on :
@Perahu Final warning. Derail again and you're taking a vacation.
Posted by Oshun (Member # 19740) on :
No one was claiming your people, but the Egyptians were culturally African and the ones that were the most responsible for making Egypt what had an appearance that would've fit in with the rest of Africa.
.... Yawn I'm going to avoid debating the technicalities here and play devil's advocate. Lets say all the Soqotri look like the boy you posted. So what? Did you not see the Jericho man and his the presence of "negroid" features? Or take into account that Abusir was Lower Egyptian and that Upper Egyptians would've had more Sudanese mixture? You know, the people that were moving north and shared a cultural connection with Upper Egypt and continued that cultural connection into dynastic times? Yeah, those guys. When you consider ALL these different types of people, Upper Egypt looked more like the girls you're attempting to dismiss and that is the point. They would've looked like Africans and they would've been culturally African.
Posted by Elite Diasporan (Member # 22000) on :
quote:Originally posted by Perahu:
quote:Originally posted by Elite Diasporan: @Perahu Final warning. Derail again and you're taking a vacation.
Stupid Zanj! Fuck off and don't claim my people ever again.
Enjoy your vacation.
Posted by Oshun (Member # 19740) on :
quote:Originally posted by Perahu:
quote: Yes you are an albino derivative, who lives in Yemen of Turkish origin.
Just like the Copts!!! HAHAHAHAHA The closest to Ancient Egyptians!!
Most Copts descend from Lower Egypt or are heavily mixed with Lower Egyptians. Not to say Upper Egyptians had no mixture, but theirs was more ancient and those back migrants would've resembled Africans more than the relatively recent migrants that influenced Lower Egypt. Upper Egyptians that built the ancient Egypt didn't look like many modern Copts and culturally they were closer to Africans.
quote:Originally posted by Perahu:
quote:Originally posted by Oshun: Yawn I'm going to avoid debating the technicalities here and play devil's advocate. Lets say all the Soqotri look like the boy you posted. So what? Did you not see the Jericho man and his the presence of "negroid" features? Or take into account that Abusir was Lower Egyptian and that Upper Egyptians would've had more Sudanese mixture? You know, the people that were moving north and shared a cultural connection with Upper Egypt and continued that cultural connection into dynastic times? Yeah, those guys. When you consider ALL these different types of people, Upper Egypt looked more like the girls you're attempting to dismiss and that is the point. They would've looked like Africans and they would've been culturally African.
Dark Caucasian is still Caucasian/Eurasian and nothing like your kind.
They have better brains. Negroids are not able to develop civilizations like Ancient Egypt.
So your stupidass believes that the bone structure of one's face determines brain ability? You know other explanations such as climate and ecology are much better at explaining differences in how social organization formed. Which reminds me: Why did those Upper Egyptians have so much culturally in common with Africans again? If being closer to "Caucasian/Eurasians" in function was the driving factor, why then was it the southern Egyptians, mixed with Sudanese and behaviorally African, that were the driving force of Egyptian civilization? Why were the Lower Egyptians more culturally connected Eurasia less developed?
Posted by Elite Diasporan (Member # 22000) on :
Everyone stay on topic or end up like Perahu.
Posted by -Just Call Me Jari- (Member # 14451) on :
My problem is that the media paraded this as all of the history and origins of Egypt being overturned heck I saw some sites claiming the original A.Egyptians weren’t native North Africans
Posted by -Just Call Me Jari- (Member # 14451) on :
Again from what I gather this may not be the case, I know they did DNA tests on mummies from the Christian Era of Sudan and found the populations were related to middle eastern people. Also it seems that this so called Eurasian dna of the Abusir mummies is similar to OOA populations like the natufians rather than modern Luekoderm and Tawny modern middle eastern people I assume this is what swenet is trying to drive home
My problem is the sensation this made 8% is not that big a deal imo
quote:Originally posted by Oshun: Or take into account that Abusir was Lower Egyptian and that Upper Egyptians would've had more Sudanese mixture
Posted by Elite Diasporan (Member # 22000) on :
Wait? Natufian ancestry in the Abusir mummies was only 8%? Where?
And welcome back @-Just Call Me Jari- Posted by -Just Call Me Jari- (Member # 14451) on :
The 8% was a reference to the difference between modern Egyptian SSA component and the Abusir population virtually absence of SSA lineage
To me an 8% difference is not a big deal like the media tried to make it .
As far as I can tell the Eurasian component in A.Egypt is typical of the OOA populations who inhabited the Levant and North Africa like the natufians. Also I don’t think people should see the Nubians as some trump card considering dna tests like the Sudanese Copts study
Again I’ve taken an intellectual hibernation the last 4 yrs esp with DNA so I’m not 100 % sure but from my independent studying this is what beyoku and swenet are trying to drive home
Sorry about the confusion I’m typing on my phone not a lot of room for editing
quote:Originally posted by Elite Diasporan: Wait? Natufian ancestry in the Abusir mummies was only 8%? Where?
And welcome back @-Just Call Me Jari-
Posted by Elite Diasporan (Member # 22000) on :
^^^Thanks for the correction. And you seem to be on the right track.
Posted by Oshun (Member # 19740) on :
quote:Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-: Again from what I gather this may not be the case, I know they did DNA tests on mummies from the Christian Era of Sudan and found the populations were related to middle eastern people. Also it seems that this so called Eurasian dna of the Abusir mummies is similar to OOA populations like the natufians rather than modern Luekoderm and Tawny modern middle eastern people I assume this is what swenet is trying to drive home
My presumptions were mostly rooted in the presence of M13 and YAP in Sudan's Neolithic period, and the relationship Southern Egypt shared culturally with Sudan. I also have to ask myself how mummies from southern Egypt like Ramses turned out the way he did. But I do presume a combination of Soqotri and Natufian like peoples would've been a major if not dominant force in southern Egypt's early dynastic/predynastic time.
I've sort of wondered this, but is the Natufian component African or Near Eastern? How plausible is it that the Natufian DNA we're seeing is from northern Africans who didn't leave and instead remained indigenous to the Nile? I ask because if they'd left with the Natufians that settled in the Levant and back migrated why the differences in agriculture, which correct me if I'm wrong didn't resemble the Near East? Why the linguistic differences? Phenotypic data suggests separation over long periods of time too and unlike lower Egyptians, Upper Egyptians remained culturally African.
Posted by sudaniya (Member # 15779) on :
What actual evidence is there that Soqotri type people were present (and dominant) in Upper Egypt?
Regarding the DNA study on Sudanese Copts:
The population emigrated to Sudan from Egypt relatively recently, so how could they have implications for the genetic history of Nubians in both Egypt and Sudan?
Keep in mind that the Copts don't mix outside their group -- at least not in the modern era.
Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
I know he didn't just insult Africans while posting under an African name. I was hoping someone would call him out on that .
That said, he is right on one point. You can't just attribute ethnicity to people in pictures based on nationality.
Posted by HabariTess (Member # 19629) on :
quote:Originally posted by Elite Diasporan: ^^^Thanks for the correction. And you seem to be on the right track.
How is he on the right track? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought recent studies revealed that what is considered Eurasian has been grossly overstated due to the lack of understanding of indigenous African substructure? Looking at the 2015 Nubian study, is I5 not found in the highest frequencies in the Horn of Africa, which they are calling a Eurasian clade?
Posted by -Just Call Me Jari- (Member # 14451) on :
This is what Im saying
quote:Originally posted by HabariTess: ut I thought recent studies revealed that what is considered Eurasian has been grossly overstated due to the lack of understanding of indigenous African substructure?
Posted by HabariTess (Member # 19629) on :
quote:Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-: This is what Im saying
quote:Originally posted by HabariTess: ut I thought recent studies revealed that what is considered Eurasian has been grossly overstated due to the lack of understanding of indigenous African substructure?
Hey, thanks for clarification.
Posted by sudaniya (Member # 15779) on :
Why is a relationship between ancient Egypt and Soqotri even being entertained? What evidence is there for this postulation? "Incoming Sudanese"? Is there a Eurasian population (however dark) that preceded indigenous Africans in Upper Egypt?
Posted by -Just Call Me Jari- (Member # 14451) on :
I think it’s because some people here (thanks to the results from Abusir) that Egypt had a Eurasian component that remained unchanged for thousand years etc. some of theses advocate these Eurasians were black phenotypically but genetically Eurasian like the folks on socotra.
Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
Pure Socotris DO NOT have curly hair nor do they look like Africans.
As for you spamming Somalians. They are UNRELATED to Socotris. Socotris are based on haplogroup J on the male side and R0a on the female side.
Socotris are ARABIANS, not Africans.
Soqotri are NOT significantly mixed. Genetic data has already revealed that. So either they are Bantu migrants (highly unlikely) or they're Soqotri. Soqotri have biodiversity that for the most part can fit in Africa.
I think you're missing what I'm getting at here: It doesn't matter who they were more closely related to. Their appearance when returning to Africa and settling into Upper Egypt wouldn't have offered so stark a contrast, that when mixing with incoming ancient Sudanese and Natufian-like peoples, they would look extremely different from people that are already accepted as Africans or "blacks" as some would say. Lower Egyptians would've been exposed to more recent migrations which means lighter skin and greater cultural similarities to Arabs.
You are right about what you say. The oldest Arab population signifies a “African” pheno- and genotype. The whole “they are slaves argument” is bullocks. We have data showing us the Nubian Complex of the oldest populations entering the Arabian Peninsula.
“Figure 1. Map showing the location of Middle Paleolithic sites with Nubian cores in Northeast Africa and the Arabian Peninsula.“
The Saudi mtDNA profile confirms the absence of autochthonous mtDNA lineages in Arabia with coalescence ages deep enough to support population continuity in the region since the out-of-Africa episode.
[…]
Introduction
At the beginning of this century, studies based on mtDNA complete genomes [15–18] confirmed that only two mtDNA lineages (named M and N), sister branches of the African macro-haplogroup L3 lineages, embraced all the mtDNA variation that exists out of Africa. Based on the phylogeography of M and N in Eurasia, it was proposed that M and N could respectively represent the maternal signals of both a southern and a northern route out of Africa [19].
[…]
For western Eurasian haplogroups we relied on recent reviews carried out by others: N1 [6,25–29], N2 [6,27–29], N3 [26,28–30], N5 [27,31], and X [6,26,27,32]. In addition, 553 Arabian samples previously published in Abu-Amero et al. [19]) were also included in our study.
[…]
Khor Angar (Djibouti) L3 Expected age (Kya) 70.8(52.7–88.1)
Damqawt (Yemen) N1a3a Expected age (Kya) 68.2(56.1–80.0)
—Rosa Fregel, Vicente Cabrera, […], and Ana M. González (2015)
Carriers of Mitochondrial DNA Macrohaplogroup N Lineages Reached Australia around 50,000 Years Ago following a Northern Asian Route
quote: haplogroup J
To resume, our results clearly reject the scenario put forward so far of a strict correlation between the Arab expansion in historical times and the overall pattern of distribution of J1-related chromosomes. Similarly, the causal association between STR-defined haplotypes and ethnic groups appear without any robust support, making its use inadequate for forensic or genealogical purposes. Instead, J1 variation provided the genetic background to correlate climatic changes to human demographic and socio-cultural events scarcely documented in the archaeological record – the dispersal of hunter gatherers after the termination of glacial conditions in the late Pleistocene and the desertification-driven retreat of tribes of Saharan and Arabian foragers in the transition to a food-producing economy.
—Sergio Tofanelli et al.
J1-M267 Y lineage marks climate-driven pre-historical human displacements
European Journal of Human Genetics (2009) 17, 1520 – 1524
quote: Population comparisons
Based on FST values, the mitochondrial genetic diversity of Soqotra is statistically different (P \ 0.01) from the comparative populations. An MDS plot of FST values shows that the Soqotra sample is clearly distinct from all sub-Saharan, North African, Middle East, and Indian populations (see Fig. 2). High differentiation of the East African groups such as the Sandawe, Hadza, Turu, Datog, and Burunge is shown on the left side of the graph. However, there is a general similarity of the remaining sub-Saharan African populations, particularly those from the Sahel band and the Chad Basin (with the exception of the Fulani nomads). Subsequently, there is a transitional zone formed by the populations from Ethiopia and the Nile Valley but also by some Yemeni groups, particularly the ones from the eastern parts of the country (Hadramawt). Finally, the cluster on the right part of the graph is composed by the Indian populations on the top, the Near and Middle Eastern groups in the middle and the populations of the Arabian peninsula at the bottom; Yemeni Jews being slightly different. The only outlier within the region of southwestern Asia is the Kalash sample that is situated on the extreme right part of the graph (see also Quintana-Murci et al., 2004). There is a general cline among all populations in the MDS plot from the Soqotri population to a cluster of Middle East and North African populations that splits into sub-Saharan and Indian populations.
Population differentiation of Soqotra from African, Middle East and Indian populations based on NRY-SNP data manifests a similar picture although the compara- tive populations are different and fewer than in the mi- tochondrial DNA analysis (see Fig. 3). A comparison of FST values shows that the only population that is not significantly different from Soqotra is that from Yemen (P [ 0.01). Similarly to mtDNA MDS plot, we observe a cline from the Soqotri population to a cluster of Middle East and North African populations that splits into sub- Saharan and Indian populations.
Phylogenetic affiliations
Within the Soqotri samples, we identified haplotypes belonging to three of the main branches of the mtDNA phylogeny (macrohaplogroups L, N, and R); notably hap- logroup M is absent (Table 2). There are only two sub- Saharan L haplotypes and they do not carry the 3594HpaI mutation so their classification is L3*; these haplotypes do not contain the specific mutations of L5b (23594HpaI) (Kivisild et al., 2004) and therefore they are possibly L3h2 as they both contain substitutions at 16111, 16184, and 16304 (see Behar et al., 2008). Macro- haplogroup N is represented by three different haplo- types of which only one can be unambiguously classified as N1a (it contains HVS-I motif 16147G-16172-16223-16248-16355). Two other N haplotypes have never been found outside Soqotra (see Table 2).
The most widespread mtDNA types in Soqotra belong to macrohaplogroup R (Table 2). The majority of R haplo- types can be classified as R0a [previously known as (preHV)1]. Three of the R haplotypes have not been previously reported. A network analysis of all Soqotri R0a haplotypes with additional sequences from Africa and Asia (see Fig. 4) shows a time to most recent common ancestor (TMRCA) of 23,339 6 8,232 YBP for R0a. It is shown that the majority of Soqotri R0a haplotypes fall into clade R0a1 (defined by variant 16355) whose TMRCA is 11,418 6 4,198 YBP. Furthermore, within R0a1, the unique Soqotri haplotypes form a new clade that is defined by variant 16172 and that we have named R0a1a1. Abu-Amero et al. (2007) identified a hap- lotype defined by variant 16355 and named it (preHV)1a1, thus it corresponds to R0a1a using the newer nomenclature and the unique Soqotri haplotypes are derived from this lineage). This Soqotri-specific clade has a very young TMRCA (3,363 6 2,378 YBP) that sug- gests the R0a1a1 haplotypes evolved on Soqotra and have not dispersed elsewhere. Two other Soqotri R hap- lotypes are not classified further than R* and are quite common in neighboring populations. Five haplotypes within macrohaplogroup R carry the 4216N1aIII variant that places them in clade JT. Of the JT haplotypes, two are unique to Soqotra; J1b is represented by two individuals and T* is represented by one individual.
The majority of NRY haplotypes in Soqotra belong to haplogroup J (85.7%), with most (45 out of 54) unclassified as J*(xJ1,J2) and a few (the remaining 9 samples) classified as J1 (see Fig. 5). It is interesting to note that NRY haplotypes lacking both M172 and M267, as in our unclassified J*, have not been previously identified on the Arabian Peninsula (Cadenas et al., 2008). Haplogroup E is represented at a frequency of 9.5% and three other haplogroups, F*(xJ,K), K*(xO,P) and R*(xR1b), are present in one individual each. It is worth noting that none of the ancient African haplogroups (A and B) were observed in Soqotra.
[…]
In comparison with datasets from neighboring regions, the Soqotri population shows evidence of long-term isolation and autochthonous evolution of several mitochondrial haplogroups.
—Viktor Cˇ erny ́ Out of Arabia—The Settlement of Island Soqotra as Revealed by Mitochondrial and Y Chromosome Genetic Diversity
quote:African and Middle Eastern populations shared the greatest number of alleles absent from all other populations (fig. S6B).
—Sarah A. Tishkoff, The Genetic Structure and History of Africans and African Americans
Further more we have other Southern Arabians:
Akhdam
Qarra
Hawt Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
Most Soqotri belong to the paternal haplogroup J, bearing the basal J*(xJ1,J2) clade at its highest frequencies (71.4%). The remaining individuals mainly carry the J1 subclade (14.3%).[2]
Maternally, the Soqotri primarily belong to the haplogroups N (24.3% N*; 6.2% N1a) and R0 (17.8% R0a1b; 13.8% R0a; 6.2% R0a1). The basal N* clade occurs at its highest frequencies among them. The next most common mtDNA lineages borne by Soqotri individuals are the haplogroups J (9.2% J*; 3.1 J1b), T (7.7% T2; 1.2% T*), L3 (4.3% L3*), H (3.1%), and R (1.2 R*)
Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
From my understanding the Soqotri represent the population which became the hub for “Eurasians”, coming from Africa.
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor: From my understanding the Soqotri represent the population which became the hub for “Eurasians”, coming from Africa.
when was Socatra first inhabited?
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
Mota Man Ethiopia , 4,500 year ago Y DNA E1b1
Modern Ethiopia Y DNA Haplogroup E 71% Haplogroup J 18% Haplogroup A 17% Haplogroup T 4%
Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor: From my understanding the Soqotri represent the population which became the hub for “Eurasians”, coming from Africa.
when was Socatra first inhabited?
Stop trolling. This goes beyond your comprehension!
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
you have posted a map from an article which makes no mention of Socotra. Why you did this I don't know. Perhaps you are worried you might not win the 2018 ES Spammer of the Year Award but I don't see anybody else at this point who could take the title from you.
Posted by Oshun (Member # 19740) on :
If my memory is correct, Soqotri inhabited the island at about 3,000 BC. Soqotri can give us an insight on how humans living in Eurasia looked 6,000 years ago.
Posted by Thereal (Member # 22452) on :
How is soqotra Eurasia? Its in between the horn of Africa and yemen.
Thanks ish.
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
this thread is straying too far off topic in my opinion so I just made a new thread on Socatra
The majority of male residents on Socotra are reported to be in the J* subclade of Y-DNA haplogroup J. Several of the female lineages on the island, notably those in mtDNA haplogroup N, are found nowhere else on Earth
I don't see how this island is a point of origin or has much relevance to Abusir el-Meleq
people kept pointing to North Egypt (Lower Egypt) to have more foreign admixture Then to discuss Socotra, that is a few countries south of Egypt. It's an isolated small place
Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: you have posted a map from an article which makes no mention of Socotra. Why you did this I don't know. Perhaps you are worried you might not win the 2018 ES Spammer of the Year Award but I don't see anybody else at this point who could take the title from you.
You are the ultimate definition of Spam. Just sayin’!
Had you read the actual paper, you would not have written all this BS here!
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: Mota Man Ethiopia , 4,500 year ago Y DNA E1b1
Modern Ethiopia Y DNA Haplogroup E 71% Haplogroup J 18% Haplogroup A 17% Haplogroup T 4%
Pointless bayesian proximity?!
Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by Thereal: How is soqotra Eurasia? Its in between the horn of Africa and yemen.
It’s not, that is what I have posted! They represent a old stem from Africa. Derived from those who became the hub for “Eurasians”.
Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
This totally disputes the initial Abusir claims:
quote:Burial practices of the Final Neolithic pastoralists at Gebel Ramlah, Western Desert of Egypt
During three seasons of research (in 2000, 2001 and 2003) carried out by the Combined Prehistoric Expedition at Gebel Ramlah in the southern part of the Egyptian Western Desert, three separate Final Neolithic cemeteries were discovered and excavated. Skeletal remains of 67 individuals, comprising both primary and secondary interments, were recovered from 32 discrete burial pits. Numerous grave goods were found, including lithics, pottery and ground stone objects, as well as items of personal adornment, pigments, shells and sheets of mica. Imports from distant areas prove far-reaching contacts. Analysis of the finds sheds important light on the burial rituals and social conditions of the Final Neolithic cattle keepers inhabiting Ramlah Playa. This community, dated to the mid-fifth millennium B.C. (calibrated), was composed of a phenotypically diverse population derived from both North and sub-Saharan Africa. There were no indications of social differentiation. The deteriorating climatic conditions probably forced these people to migrate toward the Nile Valley where they undoubtedly contributed to the birth of ancient Egyptian civilization.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: [qb] you have posted a map from an article which makes no mention of Socotra. Why you did this I don't know. Perhaps you are worried you might not win the 2018 ES Spammer of the Year Award but I don't see anybody else at this point who could take the title from you.
You are the ultimate definition of Spam. Just sayin’!
Had you read the actual paper, you would not have written all this BS here!
Again, you didn't even post an article link, you merely posted a picture with no explanation as to how it relates to socatra or Abusir el-Meleq, wasting everyones time
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor: This totally disputes the initial Abusir claims:
quote:Burial practices of the Final Neolithic pastoralists at Gebel Ramlah, Western Desert of Egypt
During three seasons of research (in 2000, 2001 and 2003) carried out by the Combined Prehistoric Expedition at Gebel Ramlah in the southern part of the Egyptian Western Desert, three separate Final Neolithic cemeteries were discovered and excavated. Skeletal remains of 67 individuals, comprising both primary and secondary interments, were recovered from 32 discrete burial pits. Numerous grave goods were found, including lithics, pottery and ground stone objects, as well as items of personal adornment, pigments, shells and sheets of mica. Imports from distant areas prove far-reaching contacts. Analysis of the finds sheds important light on the burial rituals and social conditions of the Final Neolithic cattle keepers inhabiting Ramlah Playa. This community, dated to the mid-fifth millennium B.C. (calibrated), was composed of a phenotypically diverse population derived from both North and sub-Saharan Africa. There were no indications of social differentiation. The deteriorating climatic conditions probably forced these people to migrate toward the Nile Valley where they undoubtedly contributed to the birth of ancient Egyptian civilization.
You make a lot of claims but don't explain how, stop spamming
Posted by xyyman (Member # 13597) on :
Don;t understand the statement??? Which Africa. East Africans and West Africans don't share these alleles? ------------
quote:African and Middle Eastern populations shared the greatest number of alleles absent from all other populations (fig. S6B).
—Sarah A. Tishkoff, The Genetic Structure and History of Africans and African Americans
Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor:
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: [qb] you have posted a map from an article which makes no mention of Socotra. Why you did this I don't know. Perhaps you are worried you might not win the 2018 ES Spammer of the Year Award but I don't see anybody else at this point who could take the title from you.
You are the ultimate definition of Spam. Just sayin’!
Had you read the actual paper, you would not have written all this BS here!
Again, you didn't even post an article link, you merely posted a picture with no explanation as to how it relates to socatra or Abusir el-Meleq, wasting everyones time
Well, I wasn’t talking to you. You just decided to butt in. If some dimwit claims that a particular phenotype is in the Arabian Peninsula (Soqotra) because of “slavery”, then I show that that’s not the case and that these traits go back to the middle Paleolithic.
What I said about the Soqotra is that they represent FOUNDER EFFECTS for out of Africa populations.
Nowhere did I say Soqotra are related to Abusir. You pulled that from your... well you know what.
M168 => M89 => J-M267
quote:To resume, our results clearly reject the scenario put forward so far of a strict correlation between the Arab expansion in historical times and the overall pattern of distribution of J1-related chromosomes. Similarly, the causal association between STR-defined haplotypes and ethnic groups appear without any robust support, making its use inadequate for forensic or genealogical purposes. Instead, J1 variation provided the genetic background to correlate climatic changes to human demographic and socio-cultural events scarcely documented in the archaeological record – the dispersal of hunter gatherers after the termination of glacial conditions in the late Pleistocene and the desertification-driven retreat of tribes of Saharan and Arabian foragers in the transition to a food-producing economy.
—Sergio Tofanelli et al.
J1-M267 Y lineage marks climate-driven pre-historical human displacements
European Journal of Human Genetics (2009) 17, 1520 – 1524
quote:In comparison with datasets from neighboring regions, the Soqotri population shows evidence of long-term isolation and autochthonous evolution of several mitochondrial haplogroups.
—Viktor Cˇ erny ́ Out of Arabia—The Settlement of Island Soqotra as Revealed by Mitochondrial and Y Chromosome Genetic Diversity
Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor:
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: [qb] you have posted a map from an article which makes no mention of Socotra. Why you did this I don't know. Perhaps you are worried you might not win the 2018 ES Spammer of the Year Award but I don't see anybody else at this point who could take the title from you.
You are the ultimate definition of Spam. Just sayin’!
Had you read the actual paper, you would not have written all this BS here!
Again, you didn't even post an article link, you merely posted a picture with no explanation as to how it relates to socatra or Abusir el-Meleq, wasting everyones time
Are you telling me I didn’t posted this earlier on?
“Figure 1. Map showing the location of Middle Paleolithic sites with Nubian cores in Northeast Africa and the Arabian Peninsula.“
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor: This totally disputes the initial Abusir claims:
quote:Burial practices of the Final Neolithic pastoralists at Gebel Ramlah, Western Desert of Egypt
During three seasons of research (in 2000, 2001 and 2003) carried out by the Combined Prehistoric Expedition at Gebel Ramlah in the southern part of the Egyptian Western Desert, three separate Final Neolithic cemeteries were discovered and excavated. Skeletal remains of 67 individuals, comprising both primary and secondary interments, were recovered from 32 discrete burial pits. Numerous grave goods were found, including lithics, pottery and ground stone objects, as well as items of personal adornment, pigments, shells and sheets of mica. Imports from distant areas prove far-reaching contacts. Analysis of the finds sheds important light on the burial rituals and social conditions of the Final Neolithic cattle keepers inhabiting Ramlah Playa. This community, dated to the mid-fifth millennium B.C. (calibrated), was composed of a phenotypically diverse population derived from both North and sub-Saharan Africa. There were no indications of social differentiation. The deteriorating climatic conditions probably forced these people to migrate toward the Nile Valley where they undoubtedly contributed to the birth of ancient Egyptian civilization.
You make a lot of claims but don't explain how, stop spamming
Yes, it does. But you aren’t intelligent enough to make a proper evaluation. Stop thinking you’re a think tank. For simplicity sake, they are saying these people came from the South. And show affinities with these from the South.
Gebel Ramlah exceeds Abusir by thousands of years. Gebel Ramlah shows a direct linkage to these surroundings (physical anthropology and archaeology) in the South who started to inhabit Northeast Africa.
quote:Pleistocene through to the Christian periods, reveals a break in population continuity between the Pleistocene (Jebel Sahaba) and the Final Neolithic (Gebel Ramlah, dating to the first half of the fifth millennium BC) samples. The dental traits from Jebel Sahaba align more closely with modern sub-Saharan populations, while Gebel Ramlah and later align closer to Egypt specifically and to the Sahara in general."
quote: In Egypt, the earliest evidence of humans can be recognized only from tools found scattered over an ancient surface, sometimes with hearths nearby. In Wadi Kubbaniya, a dried-up streambed cutting through the Western Desert to the floodplain northwest of Aswan in Upper Egypt, some interesting sites of the kind described above have been recorded.
"Remains in the immediate eastern foreland of Kurkur, just east of the Sinn el-Kiddab escarpment, are sparse. Numerous and widely distributed hearth mounds18 occur in the area. Pottery, though sparse, further demonstrates the association of early Nile Valley and Western Desert cultures. "
--John Coleman Darnell and Deborah Darnell
The Archaeology of Kurkur Oasis, Nuq‘ Maneih, and the Sinn el-Kiddab
A Tableau of Royal Ritual Power in the Theban Western Desert
The Theban Western Desert preserves several important tableaux of late Naqada II through Early Dynastic date. One of the longest and most artistically accomplished of these tableaux is Image 1located in a wadi northeast of Gebel Tjauti, on a branch of the ‘Alamat Tal Road (Figure 1). The strongly marked tracks, with associated ceramic material, lead to the head of the wadi, in the upper part of which, despite the lack of any clear path of ascent, are a number of dry stone structures, as well as the remains of “game traps.” Near the head of this wadi, apparently the haunt of hunters traveling the Alamat Tal Road, are several concentrations of rock inscriptions, providing extreme examples of the clustering of a particular genre of image in one area, and the dominance of one genre of representation at a discrete site. We have named the wadi after an inscription at Site No. 2 — the serekh of the late First Dynasty ruler Horus Qa-a.
quote: The Origin of the Predynastic: Western Desert and Central Sudan
With the intensification of archaeological research in the Egyptian Western Desert evidence of prehistoric humanoccupation has been consistently found in both the oasesregion and the playas region to the south. Major breaks in the chrono-cultural sequence are related to climaticvariations. After a major arid event during the latePleistocene, which completely dried up the Sahara,forcing the people to cluster along the Nile (and in theCentral Sahara massifs), the Holocene period wascharacterised by better climatic conditions due to anorthward shifting of the monsoon summer rain regime(Kuper and Kropelin 2006; Wendorf and Schild 2001).The desert was again settled, although cyclical minor aridspells required the population to move back and forthfrom the desert to the Nile or to remain in the oases. Fromthe 4th millennium BC another major arid event forcedthe people to concentrate in the oases area and to settlemore permanently to the Nile Valley"
Your contradictions are amusing.
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor: Yes, it does. But you aren’t intelligent enough to make a proper evaluation. Stop thinking you’re a think tank. For simplicity sake, they are saying these people came from the South.
You don't communicate well and it's not just me>>
quote:Originally posted by xyyman:
Don;t understand the statement??? Which Africa. East Africans and West Africans don't share these alleles? ------------
.
,
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor: This totally disputes the initial Abusir claims:
[QUOTE]Burial practices of the Final Neolithic pastoralists at Gebel Ramlah, Western Desert of Egypt
what claim ???
Everything is a guessing game with you, and your reaction is to post more and more quotes yet you have not even quoted the Ancient Mummy Genomes article to point out the part you think is wrong
Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor: Yes, it does. But you aren’t intelligent enough to make a proper evaluation. Stop thinking you’re a think tank. For simplicity sake, they are saying these people came from the South.
You don't communicate well and it's not just me>>
quote:Originally posted by xyyman:
Don;t understand the statement??? Which Africa. East Africans and West Africans don't share these alleles? ------------
.
,
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor: This totally disputes the initial Abusir claims:
[QUOTE]Burial practices of the Final Neolithic pastoralists at Gebel Ramlah, Western Desert of Egypt
what claim ???
Everything is a guessing game with you, and your reaction is to post more and more quotes yet you have not even quoted the Ancient Mummy Genomes article to point out the part you think is wrong
More of your usual stupidity. Your IQ is low that’s the problem here. Always falsifying people posts. Pathetic individual!
“The community, dated to the mid-fifth millennium B.C. (calibrated), was composed of a phenotypically diverse population derived from both North and sub-Saharan Africa. There were no indications of social differentiation. The deteriorating climatic conditions probably forced these people to migrate toward the Nile Valley where they undoubtedly contributed to the birth of ancient Egyptian civilization.“
I have posted on Ancient Mummy Genomes, what they hell are you talking about? I explained they used filters on their data to skew the outcome.
And this xyyman citing is not helping you, in fact it makes you look stupid and arrogant as hell. You are always in dispute with xyyman, but you now are supposedly in agreement? 😂
In that same post I have posted data showing the founder effects.
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:
Burial practices of the Final Neolithic pastoralists at Gebel Ramlah, Western Desert of Egypt
This community, dated to the mid-fifth millennium B.C. (calibrated), was composed of a phenotypically diverse population derived from both North and sub-Saharan Africa. There were no indications of social differentiation. The deteriorating climatic conditions probably forced these people to migrate toward the Nile Valley where they undoubtedly contributed to the birth of ancient Egyptian civilization.
Ish Gebor says this "totally disputes the initial Abusir claims" yet he won't tell us what claims he's talking about or quote the claims.
so tiring, round and round in a circle
Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:
Burial practices of the Final Neolithic pastoralists at Gebel Ramlah, Western Desert of Egypt
This community, dated to the mid-fifth millennium B.C. (calibrated), was composed of a phenotypically diverse population derived from both North and sub-Saharan Africa. There were no indications of social differentiation. The deteriorating climatic conditions probably forced these people to migrate toward the Nile Valley where they undoubtedly contributed to the birth of ancient Egyptian civilization.
Ish Gebor says this "totally disputes the initial Abusir claims" yet he won't tell us what claims he's talking about or quote the claims.
so tiring, round and round in a circle
As I said before you are not intelligent enough to make proper evaluations. I have explained why that data disputes the Abusir claims. The dishonesty with white supremacy is mind boggling. In fact you are so dumb, you will sit here going back-and-forth, instead of reading the actual data, which totally contradicts the Abusir claims from the lower Middle Kingdom when the Egyptian civilization decline started.
quote:
Q8: Note 8: Test of Population Continuity: the analysis here was not described. Other than collapsing mtDNA lineages into haplogroup frequencies to compare ancient and contemporary groups, there is no description of what the actual test was. Even if the method was described in Brandt et al. (2013) [not even in the main text, only in their supplement], the authors should lay out the assumptions, parameter choices and models invoked in using this method. Why for example, is TPC preferable over Approximate Bayesian Computation models typically used to test the relative liklihood of two different population demographies (in this case continuity w/ minimal drift vs. migration).
Answer: We have extended the description of our analysis both in the methods part of the manuscript and our supplementary information for clarification and to explain our main findings. Our intention to use the TPC as applied in Brandt et al. 2013 was to evaluate with a simple method whether we can assume genetic continuity (null hypothesis) between our ancient groups and modern-day populations. We agree that complex ABC models would have been the ideal choice to explore alternative scenarios that could explain discontinuity under varying parameters (drift, migration, time, etc.), but were not deemed necessary given that we can more reliably estimate the origin and timing of admixture with nuclear data.
—Brandt et al. 2013 Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:
Burial practices of the Final Neolithic pastoralists at Gebel Ramlah, Western Desert of Egypt
This community, dated to the mid-fifth millennium B.C. (calibrated), was composed of a phenotypically diverse population derived from both North and sub-Saharan Africa. There were no indications of social differentiation. The deteriorating climatic conditions probably forced these people to migrate toward the Nile Valley where they undoubtedly contributed to the birth of ancient Egyptian civilization.
Ish Gebor says this "totally disputes the initial Abusir claims" yet he won't tell us what claims he's talking about or quote the claims.
so tiring, round and round in a circle
Yes, and I backed it up with other data as well. I agree with you for once, it does spin circles around you.
One can only wonder why those authors of the Abusir paper have rejected these data in their assessment?
quote:"Indeed, the rare and incomplete Paleolithic to early Neolithic skeletal specimens found in Egypt—such as the 33,000-year-old Nazlet Khater specimen (Pinhasi and Semal 2000), the Wadi Kubbaniya skeleton from the late Paleolithic site in the upper Nile valley (Wendorf et al. 1986), the Qarunian (Faiyum) early Neolithic crania (Henneberg et al. 1989; Midant-Reynes 2000), and the Nabta specimen from the Neolithic Nabta Playa site in the western desert of Egypt (Henneberg et al. 1980)—show, with regard to the great African biological diversity, similarities with some of the sub-Saharan middle Paleolithic and modern sub-Saharan specimens. This affinity pattern between ancient Egyptians and sub-Saharans has also been noticed by several other investigators (Angel 1972; Berry and Berry 1967, 1972; Keita 1995) and has been recently reinforced by the study of Brace et al. (2005), which clearly shows that the cranial morphology of prehistoric and recent northeast African populations is linked to sub-Saharan populations (Niger-Congo populations). These results support the hypothesis that some of the Paleolithic–early Holocene populations from northeast Africa were probably descendents of sub-Saharan ancestral populations."
--F X Ricaut · M Waelkens
Article: Cranial Discrete Traits in a Byzantine Population and Eastern Mediterranean Population Movements
Human Biology 11/2008; 80(5):535-64. DOI:10.3378/1534-6617-80.5.535
quote:There is now a sufficient body of evidence from modern studies of skeletal remains to indicate that the ancient Egyptians, especially southern Egyptians, exhibited physical characteristics that are within the range of variation for ancient and modern indigenous peoples of the Sahara and tropical Africa.
In general, the inhabitants of Upper Egypt and Nubia had the greatest biological affinity to people of the Sahara and more southerly areas [...]
Any interpretation of the biological affinities of the ancient Egyptians must be placed in the context of hypothesis informed by the archaeological, linguistic, geographic or other data.
In this context the physical anthropological evidence indicates that the early Nile Valley populations can be identified as part of an African lineage, but exhibiting local variation.
This variation represents the short and long term effects of evolutionary forces, such as gene flow, genetic drift, and natural selection influenced by culture and geography"
--Kathryn A. Bard (STEPHEN E. THOMPSON Egyptians, physical anthropology of Physical anthropology)
quote:"As a result of their facial prognathism, the Badarian sample has been described as forming a morphological cluster with Nubian, Tigrean, and other southern (or "Negroid") groups (Morant, 1935, 1937; Mukherjee et al., 1955; Nutter, 1958, Strouhal, 1971; Angel, 1972; Keita, 1990). Cranial nonmetric trait studies have found this group to be similar to other Egyptians, including much later material (Berry and Berry, 1967, 1972), but also to be significantly different from LPD material (Berry et al., 1967). Similarly, the study of dental nonmetric traits has suggested that the Badarian population is at the centroid of Egyptian dental samples (Irish, 2006), thereby suggesting similarity and hence continuity across Egyptian time periods. From the central location of the Badarian samples in Figure 2, the current study finds the Badarian to be relatively morphologically close to the centroid of all the Egyptian samples. The Badarian have been shown to exhibit greatest morphological similarity with the temporally successive EPD (Table 5). Finally, the biological distinctiveness of the Badarian from other Egyptian samples has also been demonstrated (Tables 6 and 7).
These results suggest that the EDyn do form a distinct morphological pattern. Their overlap with other Egyptian samples (in PC space, Fig. 2) suggests that although their morphology is distinctive, the pattern does overlap with the other time periods. These results therefore do not support the Petrie concept of a \Dynastic race" (Petrie, 1939; Derry, 1956). Instead, the results suggest that the Egyptian state was not the product of mass movement of populations into the Egyptian Nile region, but rather that it was the result of primarily indigenous development combined with prolonged small-scale migration, potentially from trade, military, or other contacts.
This evidence suggests that the process of state formation itself may have been mainly an indigenous process, but that it may have occurred in association with in-migration to the Abydos region of the Nile Valley. This potential in-migration may have occurred particularly during the EDyn and OK. A possible explanation is that the Egyptian state formed through increasing control of trade and raw materials, or due to military actions, potentially associated with the use of the Nile Valley as a corridor for prolonged small scale movements through the desert environment."
You have nothing in return but for some air drop trolling.
Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
If we have to believe the people who wrote the Abusir paper, these people are descents of sub Sahara slaves who entered the region of the Nile Valley only 750 a.d..
quote:Originally posted by sudaniya: What actual evidence is there that Soqotri type people were present (and dominant) in Upper Egypt?
Regarding the DNA study on Sudanese Copts:
The population emigrated to Sudan from Egypt relatively recently, so how could they have implications for the genetic history of Nubians in both Egypt and Sudan?
Keep in mind that the Copts don't mix outside their group -- at least not in the modern era.
If we have to believe these claims Copts never mixed with any other group, or at least not in Africa. Because that is what made them unique for evaluation. Even within Egypt itself they are supposed to be a separate group.
quote: The ancient settlement of Abusir el-Malek sat on a small rise in the fertile floodplain between the Faiyum and the Nile. By 1500 B.C., it was a prosperous settlement with many temples and a vast burial ground and buildings stretching across a large area. Excavations in the early twentieth century revealed burials centered on a cult honoring Osiris, the Egyptian god of the afterlife.
The earliest evidence of occupation at the site dates from around 3000 B.C., with the majority of burials beginning 1,500 years later.
The cemetery continued to be used for centuries, with the earlier shaft tombs being filled with later burials from the Greek, Roman, and Islamic periods. Thousands of individuals were buried at the site over hundreds of years of use.
I think the general point of this thread is getting a little lost, perhaps? Abusir el-Meleq was Lower Egyptian. Copts are (mostly) the descendants of Lower Egyptians and Arabs that entered Egypt during the dynastic period. I'm far removed from holding out for Upper Egypt being completely SSA, even in places like Aswan. but I don't see SSA being as uniformly low as it appears to be in NK Lower Egypt. For now, it's my position that SSA is that low, because Lower Egyptians were much closer to the Levant during predynastic Egypt. Their ancestors probably didn't have much SSA to begin with. Their culture was also connected to the Levant before they became Egyptians.
Ramses and the Amarna STRs don't match New Kingdom data I'm seeing for Lower Egypt. I don't have an answer for why their genetic data looks that way. Crania studies have also been hinting that northern Upper Egypt changed during the NK to resemble Lower Egypt for decades. NK genetic material from people living in the parts of Egypt less affected by demographic changes show greater influences from below the Sahara. I'd also go out on a limb to say I do believe Beyoku's data could exist. Probably another place in Egypt among a much older group of Egyptians though, probably.
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Oshun:
Oh and why do so many of the Socotra look like this:
They do not have much African ancestry and have been isolated from other Near Easterners after they arrived there around 6kya.
Look at my Socatra thread for new detailed genetics on Socatra
Yes but we have tons of evidence both archeology and anthropology that proves ancient Upper Egyptians from predynastic times were an African people both physically and culturally. DNA evidence should be only one aspect of the story, not the end all be all like some folks try to proclaim or promote.
quote:Originally posted by Oshun: I think the general point of this thread is getting a little lost, perhaps? Abusir el-Meleq was Lower Egyptian. Copts are (mostly) the descendants of Lower Egyptians and Arabs that entered Egypt during the dynastic period. I'm far removed from holding out for Upper Egypt being completely SSA, even in places like Aswan. but I don't see SSA being as uniformly low as it appears to be in NK Lower Egypt. For now, it's my position that SSA is that low, because Lower Egyptians were much closer to the Levant during predynastic Egypt. Their ancestors probably didn't have much SSA to begin with. Their culture was also connected to the Levant before they became Egyptians.
Ramses and the Amarna STRs don't match New Kingdom data I'm seeing for Lower Egypt. I don't have an answer for why their genetic data looks that way. Crania studies have also been hinting that northern Upper Egypt changed during the NK to resemble Lower Egypt for decades. NK genetic material from people living in the parts of Egypt less affected by demographic changes show greater influences from below the Sahara. I'd also go out on a limb to say I do believe Beyoku's data could exist. Probably another place in Egypt among a much older group of Egyptians though, probably.
Posted by Tyrannohotep (Member # 3735) on :
quote:Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-: DNA evidence should be only one aspect of the story, not the end all be all like some folks try to proclaim or promote.
Especially if it's from a subpopulation we already knew stood out from other Egyptians in different time periods and regions. Findings like this can't necessarily be interpreted outside of a larger context as revealed by other data. That'd be like how some people here wanted to treat the DNA Tribes reports as the final word on AE affinities before this came out.
Furthermore, the bigger problem is often less with the data itself than with how the uninformed might interpret it. Recall that, in the ADMIXTURE charts, the largest ancestry component in the Abusir el-Meleq mummy genomes appeared to be the brown "Natufian" component. If you look at the ADMIXTURE charts in the study's supplementary material, you'll find Northeast African populations like the Somalis and Ethiopians have plenty of the same brown component. The trick is will be to figure out how much of that brown component is native to North Africa (e.g. "Basal Eurasian") and how much of it is genuinely Eurasian. If it's largely African, then the Abusir el-Meleq mummies aren't purely Eurasian transplants anyway.
Posted by -Just Call Me Jari- (Member # 14451) on :
Exactly and heck lets say the Abu Sier mummies were Eurasian, say they(or another hypothetical population) were determined to be Blonde Blue eyed R1b with fair skin and inhabited Egypt from the Predynastic era(I know Eurasian doesnt equal Blond hair etc)...SO WHAT This doesnt disprove the EVIDENCE WE ALREADY HAVE.....We have the A-Group Sudani burials intertwining with Upper Egyptian territory and with proto-Egyptian iconography like the Qatsul burner, We have the Cave Art in places like Gilf Gebir with Proto-Egyptian dieties like Nut and Hathor, we have the Badarian burials, the more advanced culture of Upper Egypt and Northern Sudan v the Lower Egyptian culture. We have TONS of A.Egyptian Art depicting Dark Brown and Black Skinned NAtives in various positions of the state from the Aristocracy to the Peasantry, We have the Neheshi infiltrations/intermarrying as early as the 4th Dynasty; the 12th Dynasty Uah-Ka Neshi revitalizing Kemetian culture and even using PR propaganda in the form of the Neferti prophesy to justify his Sudani ancestry. We have Ramses depicting some of the enemy Neheshi with the same Red skin as himself thus unintentionally grouping them with himself, something not seen with his Asiatic and Coastal Lybian enemies who he depicted as having lighter skin.
No DNA evidence will overturn the years of archeological and anthropology evidence that has been recovered so far. Especially when DNA and Genetics is a highy complicated and nuanced subject one that most lay people barely understand.
quote:Originally posted by Tyrannohotep:
quote:Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-: DNA evidence should be only one aspect of the story, not the end all be all like some folks try to proclaim or promote.
Especially if it's from a subpopulation we already knew stood out from other Egyptians in different time periods and regions. Findings like this can't necessarily be interpreted outside of a larger context as revealed by other data. That'd be like how some people here wanted to treat the DNA Tribes reports as the final word on AE affinities before this came out.
Furthermore, the bigger problem is often less with the data itself than with how the uninformed might interpret it. Recall that, in the ADMIXTURE charts, the largest ancestry component in the Abusir el-Meleq mummy genomes appeared to be the brown "Natufian" component. If you look at the ADMIXTURE charts in the study's supplementary material, you'll find Northeast African populations like the Somalis and Ethiopians have plenty of the same brown component. The trick is will be to figure out how much of that brown component is native to North Africa (e.g. "Basal Eurasian") and how much of it is genuinely Eurasian. If it's largely African, then the Abusir el-Meleq mummies aren't purely Eurasian transplants anyway.
Posted by Oshun (Member # 19740) on :
quote:Originally posted by Tyrannohotep:
quote:Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-: DNA evidence should be only one aspect of the story, not the end all be all like some folks try to proclaim or promote.
Especially if it's from a subpopulation we already knew stood out from other Egyptians in different time periods and regions. Findings like this can't necessarily be interpreted outside of a larger context as revealed by other data. That'd be like how some people here wanted to treat the DNA Tribes reports as the final word on AE affinities before this came out.
Furthermore, the bigger problem is often less with the data itself than with how the uninformed might interpret it. Recall that, in the ADMIXTURE charts, the largest ancestry component in the Abusir el-Meleq mummy genomes appeared to be the brown "Natufian" component. If you look at the ADMIXTURE charts in the study's supplementary material, you'll find Northeast African populations like the Somalis and Ethiopians have plenty of the same brown component. The trick is will be to figure out how much of that brown component is native to North Africa (e.g. "Basal Eurasian") and how much of it is genuinely Eurasian. If it's largely African, then the Abusir el-Meleq mummies aren't purely Eurasian transplants anyway.
Even if they weren't Eurasian transplants, the message that even the uninformed got from the study is that the Abusir sample is much closer to Near Easterners than SSA and that to argue that the brown "Natufian" component is genetically African, many Near Easterners would be understood as an extension of Africa as well.
Posted by Evergreen (Member # 12192) on :
It could be just me, but I find it ironic that we live in a time where many “Westerners” are hypersensitive about “The Wall” and culture replacement in Europe/North America. In a historic context I wonder about the dialogue Africans were having around the time of the inception of the Wall of Sneferu.
Posted by Tyrannohotep (Member # 3735) on :
quote:Originally posted by Evergreen: It could be just me, but I find it ironic that we live in a time where many “Westerners” are hypersensitive about “The Wall” and culture replacement in Europe/North America. In a historic context I wonder about the dialogue Africans were having around the time of the inception of the Wall of Sneferu.
FWIW, this is from the Middle Kingdom "Prophecy of Neferti" during the reign of Amenemhet I:
quote:One will build the Walls-of-the-Ruler, To bar Asiatics from entering Egypt; They shall beg water as supplicants, So as to let their cattle drink. Then Order will return to its seat, While Chaos is driven away.
Although to be sure, the later Senusret III adopted a similar policy against immigrants from the south as recorded on the Semna stela:
quote:Southern boundary, made in the year 8, under the majesty of the King of Upper and Lower Egypt, Khekure (Senusret III), who is given life forever and ever; in order to prevent that any [Southerner] should cross it, by water or by land, with a ship, (or) any herds of the [Southerners]; except a [Southerner] who shall come to do trading in Iken, or with a commission. Every good thing shall be done with them, but without allowing a ship of the [Southerners] to pass by Heh (Semna), going downstream forever.
My source for both passages is here.
Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by Oshun:
Oh and why do so many of the Socotra look like this:
They do not have much African ancestry and have been isolated from other Near Easterners after they arrived there around 6kya.
Look at my Socatra thread for new detailed genetics on Socatra
It's not new, it's revisioned to support an agenda.
quote:“haplogroup J
To resume, our results clearly reject the scenario put forward so far of a strict correlation between the Arab expansion in historical times and the overall pattern of distribution of J1-related chromosomes. Similarly, the causal association between STR-defined haplotypes and ethnic groups appear without any robust support, making its use inadequate for forensic or genealogical purposes. Instead, J1 variation provided the genetic background to correlate climatic changes to human demographic and socio-cultural events scarcely documented in the archaeological record – the dispersal of hunter gatherers after the termination of glacial conditions in the late Pleistocene and the desertification-driven retreat of tribes of Saharan and Arabian foragers in the transition to a food-producing economy. ”
~Sergio Tofanelli et al.
J1-M267 Y lineage marks climate-driven pre-historical human displacements
European Journal of Human Genetics (2009) 17, 1520 – 1524
Posted by Oshun (Member # 19740) on :
quote:Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-: Exactly and heck lets say the Abu Sier mummies were Eurasian, say they(or another hypothetical population) were determined to be Blonde Blue eyed R1b with fair skin and inhabited Egypt from the Predynastic era(I know Eurasian doesnt equal Blond hair etc)...SO WHAT This doesnt disprove the EVIDENCE WE ALREADY HAVE.....We have the A-Group Sudani burials intertwining with Upper Egyptian territory and with proto-Egyptian iconography like the Qatsul burner, We have the Cave Art in places like Gilf Gebir with Proto-Egyptian dieties like Nut and Hathor, we have the Badarian burials, the more advanced culture of Upper Egypt and Northern Sudan v the Lower Egyptian culture. We have TONS of A.Egyptian Art depicting Dark Brown and Black Skinned NAtives in various positions of the state from the Aristocracy to the Peasantry, We have the Neheshi infiltrations/intermarrying as early as the 4th Dynasty; the 12th Dynasty Uah-Ka Neshi revitalizing Kemetian culture and even using PR propaganda in the form of the Neferti prophesy to justify his Sudani ancestry. We have Ramses depicting some of the enemy Neheshi with the same Red skin as himself thus unintentionally grouping them with himself, something not seen with his Asiatic and Coastal Lybian enemies who he depicted as having lighter skin.
What Nehesi intermarriages are you talking about in the 4th dynasty? Also, while I don't boast the greatest understanding of Egyptology, the samples are always from Lower Egypt. Lower Egypt ancient and modern has become the face of Egypt despite the role of Upper Egypt. Everything you mentioned describes influences from southern Egypt and Nubia. Keeping artistic, genetic and archeological focus on Lower Egypt is what will likely continue.
Posted by -Just Call Me Jari- (Member # 14451) on :
Oshun you can find info on the 4th Dynasty ties to Nehesi Royalty here
quote:Six pear-shaped stone maceheads were recorded, one with a bull’s head in relief. Other small finds include various articles of jewelry: bracelets or armbands of shell, ivory, leather and horn, and many beads of stone, copper, shell and faïence. A few small carved animal figurines (dogs, lions and a hippopotamus) were also excavated. An ivory cylinder seal carved with three rows of animals (dogs, a crocodile, antelopes, jackals, a scorpion, snake and vultures) was found in Grave 1035. Of local manufacture, this cylinder seal is a type of artifact that originated in Mesopotamia, as did its orientalizing motifs.
When we consider the northern location of the Abusir el-Meleq cemetery not only are the occurrences of the cylinder seal and the several vessels of Palestinian influence significant, but also two types of skeletons have been distinguished in the anthropological study. An “Upper Egyptian” type occurs, but there is also a more robust “Lower Egyptian” type, which may represent the descendants of the Predynastic Ma’adi culture of Lower Egypt. In the fourth millennium BC, Abusir el-Meleq must have played some role in the colonization of Lower Egypt by peoples of the Upper Egyptian Nagada culture, which resulted in the subsequent disappearance of the Lower Egyptian Ma’adi culture. The site may have been an outlying post regulating the routes of communication to trade colonies in the Delta, such as Buto and Minshat Abu Omar.
Encyclopedia of the Archaeology of Ancient Egypt
Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by Oshun:
Oh and why do so many of the Socotra look like this:
They do not have much African ancestry and have been isolated from other Near Easterners after they arrived there around 6kya.
Look at my Socatra thread for new detailed genetics on Socatra
You just told as that everybody with a certain phenotype needs to cluster in Hg L. That is a false claim, as you know by now.
There have been "negroid/ Africoid populations" found all over the world. And with modern science we found out that they are genetically distant, but always carry the oldest DNA and RNA.
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor:
You just told as that everybody with a certain phenotype needs to cluster in Hg L.
show us the quote where I supposedly said that
in particular me saying "everybody" or "all " - any words to the effect "must have"
Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor:
You just told as that everybody with a certain phenotype needs to cluster in Hg L.
show us the quote where I supposedly said that
in particular me saying "everybody" or "all " - any words to the effect "must have"
Dear Lioness, I am refering to this part.
"They do not have much African ancestry and have been isolated from other Near Easterners after they arrived there around 6kya." Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor:
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor:
You just told as that everybody with a certain phenotype needs to cluster in Hg L.
show us the quote where I supposedly said that
in particular me saying "everybody" or "all " - any words to the effect "must have"
Dear Lioness, I am refering to this part.
"They do not have much African ancestry and have been isolated from other Near Easterners after they arrived there around 6kya."
That is not a quote of me it's Oshun
Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
