quote:

---

Some researchers posit population continuity between Late Palaeolithic hunter–gatherers of the late Pleistocene and Holocene agriculturalists from Lower (northern) Nubia, in northeast Africa. Substantial craniodental differences in these time-successive groups are suggested to result from in situ evolution. Specifically, these populations are considered a model example for subsistence-related selection worldwide in the transition to agriculture. Others question continuity, with findings indicating that the largely homogeneous Holocene populations differ significantly from late Pleistocene Lower Nubians. If the latter are representative of the local populace, post-Pleistocene discontinuity is implied. So who was ancestral to the Holocene agriculturalists? Dental morphological analyses of 18 samples (1075 individuals), including one dated to the 12th millennium BCE from Al Khiday, near the Upper Nubian border, may provide an answer. It is the first Late Palaeolithic sample (n = 55) recovered within the region in approximately 50 years. Using the Arizona State University Dental Anthropology System to record traits and multivariate statistics to estimate biological affinities, Al Khiday is comparable to several Holocene samples, yet also highly divergent from contemporaneous Lower Nubians. Thus, population continuity is indicated after all, but with late Pleistocene Upper—rather than Lower Nubians as originally suggested—assuming dental traits are adequate proxies for ancient DNA.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
^ That paper actually came out back in 2012 Population continuity after all? potential late Pleistocene dental ancestors of Holocene Nubians have been found!. I believe Swenet was the first to post this finding. By the way Brandon could you hit back a response to the PM you sent me? I have something else to add the topic you brought up.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
I found the full paper here!

---

Good work!
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
Results from the paper:

The new distance matrix (Supplementary Table
S5) and MDS (Fig. 2) place Gebel Sahaba (GSA) even farther from the rest (MMD=0.14-
0.44); affinities among the latter changed minimally, including the new Neolithic samples
(AKN, GHB, R12). Al Khiday Late Palaeolithic (AKH) is close to Hierakonpolis C-Group
(MMD=0.04), Al Khiday Neolithic (0.01), Neolithic Ghaba (0.06), Kerma Ancien/Moyen
(0.02), Kerma Classique (0.01), and Napatan Tombos (0.04); these distances do not differ
significantly (Supplementary Table S6). Of all samples, Late Palaeolithic Al Khiday is
farthest from Final Neolithic Gebel Ramlah (MMD=0.19), Meroitic (0.17), and Gebel Sahaba
(0.17). An improvement in MMD performance is supported by the MDS. Beyond Gebel
Sahaba being farther from the remaining, more homogeneous samples, the latter reveal a
Lower/Upper Nubian division indicative of a north-to-south cline in ASUDAS frequencies

Discussion on Al-Khiday:

What is new, however, is the 12th millennium Al Khiday sample. None of the crania
have been reconstructed but they appear robust (Supplementary Figs. S5-S6), perhaps not
unlike contemporaneous Lower Nubians, Northwest African Iberomaurusians [29], or Central
African Ishango [64]. Odontometrics have also not been recorded, but all teeth appear much
larger than more recent samples, again not unlike the above material [27]. Yet, compared to
Gebel Sahaba, Al Khiday teeth are simpler like in Holocene Nubians (Supplementary Table
S5; Fig. 2). In particular, distances with the Hierakonpolis C-Group and five Upper Nubian
10
samples do not differ significantly. However, Al Khiday also expresses traits indicative of
sub-Saharan origin [57,65-66 (Supplementary Note S3)], but like geographically proximate
East Africans, and one Central African sample (Supplementary Note S3, Table S7, Fig. 3).
Site location is a likely factor, as during humid periods it would literally have been in ‘sub’-
Saharan Africa. Of course, regardless of climate, the Nile and tributaries acted as north-south
migration routes during the whole of prehistory. Evidence of exchange is seen by an increase
in sub-Saharan-like traits between Lower and Upper Nubian Holocene samples (Fig. 2,

Hopefully Zarahan or someone can upload the graphs and post them here since I don't have the time to do it myself.

Though I am curious as to where al-Khiday would fit in Irish's greater MMD graph of Africans.


 

---

Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
 
Al Khiday is a very important site in Central Sudan near the 6th cataract because of the presence of multiple cemetery sites from the late mesolithic, to Neolithic and Meroitic periods. Oddly enough a lot of the papers on these remains involve understanding dietary behaviors during these time periods. It is located South of Khartoum and right to the West of modern day Eritrea.

Map:
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0169524.g001
 

---

Posted by Elmaestro (Member # 22566) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doug M:
Al Khiday is a very important site in Central Sudan near the 6th cataract because of the presence of multiple cemetery sites from the late mesolithic, to Neolithic and Meroitic periods. Oddly enough a lot of the papers on these remains involve understanding dietary behaviors during these time periods. It is located South of Khartoum and right to the West of modern day Eritrea.

Map:
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0169524.g001

---

What's more important is the answer to this question:
How related were these settlements through time?

I see some parallels here with what might have went on in Wadi Howar.
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
^ Good question.

Al-Khiday is located just 20 km (12.43 mi) southwest of Khartoum.



Yet the contemporary Lower Nile Valley both Nubia and Egypt was allegedly dominated by populations exhibiting typical Sub-Saharan morphology both cranially and dentally. So where do the immediate ancestors of the Holocene Egypto-Nubians come from?? Perhaps a strong possibility would be the Eastern Desert region.

As for the ancestors of the Epipaleolithic Egypto-Nubians, Irish says the below:

Discussion

Assuming phenetic affinities reflect genetic relatedness, Gebel Sahaba appears too divergent
to be ancestral to succeeding Nubians—differing significantly based on 36 and 21 traits. Such
findings were reported previously [22-30,33-34]. These same studies indicate the Gebel
Sahaba/Tushka/Wadi Halfa population was not indigenous to Nubia or the region, instead
showing affinities to sub-Saharan Africans, notably West Africa. This too is not new, and two
earlier studies reported cranial similarities with sub-Saharan samples: West African Ashanti
[41], and late Palaeolithic Ishango, Democratic Republic of the Congo [40, also see 64].
This is expediently illustrated in a 2D plot of 36-trait distances (Fig. 3) among Gebel
Sahaba, Al Khiday, pooled Lower (LNU) and Upper (UNU) Holocene Nubian samples (from Table 1), and 12 early Holocene through historic samples from West, Central, and East subSaharan Africa ([23-24,55,57], Supplementary Note S3, Table S7). Of interest, the Ashanti
crania from [41] comprise the Ghana (GHA) sample near Gebel Sahaba. The latter’s location
shows it most akin to West Africans and three Central African samples, sharing traits
common among subcontinental populations [57,65-66]. None of these distances differ
significantly (Supplementary Table S7). Except Gebel Sahaba, inter-sample distances parallel
geographic locations [also 23,55-56], where Dimension 1 approximates west-to-east, and
Dimension 2, north-south,.

A sub-Saharan population in late Pleistocene Nubia should not be unexpected, given
northward expansions of Sahelian vegetation and sub-Saharan fauna during Saharan ‘green’
periods; the most recent initiated 15,000 BP [67], before its maximum around 9000 BP [67-
69]. It may seem surprising that these apparent migrants originated so far away, but many
well-watered migration routes were available then [22,26,68]. In any event, information on
biological distinctiveness and non-local derivation is not novel, as mentioned. Nevertheless,
diachronic change in a continuous, geographically stable Lower Nubian population from the
late Pleistocene onward is still proposed as a viable explanation [3].

Irish makes the assumption that the Jebel Sahabans were foreigners to the Nile Valley originating from "Sub-Sahara", but this assumption is only based on their affinities to modern Sub-Saharans, specifically Ghanian Ashanti which again is shown in his older MDS-MMD graph.



I'm not saying that Irish is wrong, but I personally am just more cautious and not as presumptuous as he is. According to his graph above not only are Senegamibians closest to the centroid value but they are closer in distance to Capsians than the Jebel Sahabans are to Ghanians yet Senegambians are still grouped with Sub-Saharans and not North Africans. In fact, the Sahabans are literal outliers falling outside of the chart! I am automatically reminded of the Upper Paleolithic Nazlet Khater of Egypt whose cranial features resemble those of modern Sub-Saharans than modern North Africans or Eurasians yet his contemporary all the way in South Africa Hofmeyer shows Eurasian affinities!
 

---

Posted by BrandonP (Member # 3735) on :
 

quote:

---

Yet the contemporary Lower Nile Valley both Nubia and Egypt was allegedly dominated by populations exhibiting typical Sub-Saharan morphology both cranially and dentally. So where do the immediate ancestors of the Holocene Egypto-Nubians come from?? Perhaps a strong possibility would be the Eastern Desert region.

---

I agree. I believe the pre-Mesolithic al-Khiday population would be descended from a movement originating in the Eastern Desert/Red Sea Hills region that made its way southwestward into central Sudan. Probably they would be early Afroasiatic speakers whereas the "sub-Saharan"-like Lower Nubians would be Nilo-Saharans or related.
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
^ That they came from the northeast is the common presumption just like the presumption that Jebel Sahabans came from the west. Though there's no way to know what language the al-Khiday people spoke. Again, I don't like to jump to conclusions without further evidence.

But note the proximity of al-Khiday to modern Nilo-Saharan speaking peoples.






This makes you wonder about the "Nilotic" genome discussed here.
 

---

Posted by zarahan aka Enrique Cardova (Member # 15718) on :
 
Interesting stuff. I don't have the supplementary tables at present.
Where did he get his "pharaonic" samples?
 

---

Posted by BrandonP (Member # 3735) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by zarahan aka Enrique Cardova:
Interesting stuff. I don't have the supplementary tables at present.
Where did he get his "pharaonic" samples?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by zarahan aka Enrique Cardova:

Interesting stuff. I don't have the supplementary tables at present.
Where did he get his "pharaonic" samples?

---

He got the sample from Soleb Nubia during New Kingdom occupation. I don't have time to pull up the paper, but I could send it to you later.
 

---

Posted by Thereal (Member # 22452) on :
 
Huh? Sub Saharan Africa is suppose to be a geographic location and not be used to mean negro or whatever code talk Euros like to use.
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
^ Correct. Sub-Sahara is simply a geographic region and precisely a sub-region of the African continent the same as North Africa. Unfortunately due to centuries of Eurocentric biased scholarship the African continent was racialized and split into North vs. Sub-Sahara with the former identified as "caucasoid" and the latter "negroid". However, when one looks at all the bio-anthropological data as a whole it's more complicated than that.

In regards to this topic of dental morphology which was discussed before here, the author of the study in discussion, Dr. Joel Irish, has years ago identified a “Sub-Saharan African Dental Complex” he calls "Afridonty" for short, yet he groups North African dental morphology with that of Western Eurasians (Europeans and Southwest Asians). The problem with this is that Irish admits that the primary difference between Sub-Saharans and North Africans is largely a difference in crown sizes with the former having large 'megadont' teeth similar to Australian Aborigines and Papua-Melanesians while the latter has small 'microdont' teeth similar to Western Eurasians.

[By the way, here is an excellent paper by Benoiston et al. on the differences in dental crown size and dimensions between mesolithic and neolithic Nubians of El Barga]

And yet Irish states this about the North African dental complex:
"Thus, I proposed (Irish, 1993b, 1998a) that the North African dental trait complex is one which parallels that of Europeans, yet displays higher frequencies of Bushman Canine, two-rooted UP1, three-rooted UM2, LM2 Y- groove, LM1 cusp 7, LP1 Tome's root, two-rooted LM2, and lower frequencies of UM1 enamel extension and peg/reduced or absent UM3. North Africans also exhibit a higher frequency of UM1 Carabelli's trait than sub-Saharan Africans or Europeans."

^ All the traits in bold are those that characterize his "Sub-Saharan dental complex" or "Afridonty"! But again he does not class North Africans as "Afridonty" despite not only being on the same continent but sharing most of the same dental traits due to difference in crown size?!

As for the dental traits themselves, statistical analysis show that various populations score in one or more of the traits in higher or lower frequencies depending on the population. The same holds true for the dental traits of North Africans which again differ largely in crown size as well as higher frequencies of UM1 enamel extension and peg/reduced or absent UM3 and the highest frequency of UM1 Carabelli's trait.

Thus he came up with the following MMD chart.

quote:

---

Even looking at the Sub-Saharan grouping alone BrandonP correctly noticed:

I was going to say that the SSA cluster in that chart seems to cover a much broader, more dispersed territory than the North African one. I swear, the Tanzanians and Chadians seem to be positioned closer to the North African cluster than they are to the Khoisan peoples of southernmost Africa. It's almost as if SSA itself is not really a singular race.

---

Also, while the Mesolithic Nubians (Jebel Sahabans) are in the Sub-Saharan grouping they are clear outliers literally off the chart due to their archaic features that separate them from the West Africans Irish presumes them to be closely related to. Which makes me think Irish at times just presumes too much.

Zarahan, I found the paper with Irish's "Pharaonic" sample from Soleb. It was the paper Diachronic and Synchronic Dental Trait Affinities of Late and Post-Pleistocene Peoples from North Africa.
 

---

Posted by Big O (Member # 23467) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
^ Good question.

Al-Khiday is located just 20 km (12.43 mi) southwest of Khartoum.



Yet the contemporary Lower Nile Valley both Nubia and Egypt was allegedly dominated by populations exhibiting typical Sub-Saharan morphology both cranially and dentally. So where do the immediate ancestors of the Holocene Egypto-Nubians come from?? Perhaps a strong possibility would be the Eastern Desert region.

As for the ancestors of the Epipaleolithic Egypto-Nubians, Irish says the below:

Discussion

Assuming phenetic affinities reflect genetic relatedness, Gebel Sahaba appears too divergent
to be ancestral to succeeding Nubians—differing significantly based on 36 and 21 traits. Such
findings were reported previously [22-30,33-34]. These same studies indicate the Gebel
Sahaba/Tushka/Wadi Halfa population was not indigenous to Nubia or the region, instead
showing affinities to sub-Saharan Africans, notably West Africa. This too is not new, and two
earlier studies reported cranial similarities with sub-Saharan samples: West African Ashanti
[41], and late Palaeolithic Ishango, Democratic Republic of the Congo [40, also see 64].
This is expediently illustrated in a 2D plot of 36-trait distances (Fig. 3) among Gebel
Sahaba, Al Khiday, pooled Lower (LNU) and Upper (UNU) Holocene Nubian samples (from Table 1), and 12 early Holocene through historic samples from West, Central, and East subSaharan Africa ([23-24,55,57], Supplementary Note S3, Table S7). Of interest, the Ashanti
crania from [41] comprise the Ghana (GHA) sample near Gebel Sahaba. The latter’s location
shows it most akin to West Africans and three Central African samples, sharing traits
common among subcontinental populations [57,65-66]. None of these distances differ
significantly (Supplementary Table S7). Except Gebel Sahaba, inter-sample distances parallel
geographic locations [also 23,55-56], where Dimension 1 approximates west-to-east, and
Dimension 2, north-south,.

A sub-Saharan population in late Pleistocene Nubia should not be unexpected, given
northward expansions of Sahelian vegetation and sub-Saharan fauna during Saharan ‘green’
periods; the most recent initiated 15,000 BP [67], before its maximum around 9000 BP [67-
69]. It may seem surprising that these apparent migrants originated so far away, but many
well-watered migration routes were available then [22,26,68]. In any event, information on
biological distinctiveness and non-local derivation is not novel, as mentioned. Nevertheless,
diachronic change in a continuous, geographically stable Lower Nubian population from the
late Pleistocene onward is still proposed as a viable explanation [3].

Irish makes the assumption that the Jebel Sahabans were foreigners to the Nile Valley originating from "Sub-Sahara", but this assumption is only based on their affinities to modern Sub-Saharans, specifically Ghanian Ashanti which again is shown in his older MDS-MMD graph.



I'm not saying that Irish is wrong, but I personally am just more cautious and not as presumptuous as he is. According to his graph above not only are Senegamibians closest to the centroid value but they are closer in distance to Capsians than the Jebel Sahabans are to Ghanians yet Senegambians are still grouped with Sub-Saharans and not North Africans. In fact, the Sahabans are literal outliers falling outside of the chart! I am automatically reminded of the Upper Paleolithic Nazlet Khater of Egypt whose cranial features resemble those of modern Sub-Saharans than modern North Africans or [QUOTE]Eurasians yet his contemporary all the way in South Africa Hofmeyer shows Eurasian affinities!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
^ 'MENA' is a modern geographic concept encompassing both 'Middle East' and North Africa. Such concepts often can't be applied to population genetic structure especially those from ancient even prehistoric times. But from what we know there was ANA (Ancestral North African) structure different from Sub-Saharans as well as various Eurasian ones such as early Levant populations such as the Natufians which show some admixture from ANA and even a little SSA as well. That said when it comes to dental morphology there is a difference between North African morphology and Sub-Saharan with the former being intermediate between the latter and Eurasians and this is also reflected in cranial morphology among other things.

This is why some Afrocentrics are wrong to assume North Africans/Egypto-Nubians are synonymous with Sub-Saharans but Eurocentrics are also wrong to say they are synonymous with Eurasians. They are in fact intermediate to both groups not because of admixture between the two but that they represent an intermediate population branch between Eurasia and Sub-Sahara. This is the case for at least Nile Valley inhabitants of Holocene to historical times but the pre-Holocene inhabitants however show Sub-Saharan affinities indicating population replacement.

quote:

---

Originally posted by zarahan aka Enrique Cardova:

Interesting stuff. I don't have the supplementary tables at present.
Where did he get his "pharaonic" samples?

---

He got the sample from Soleb Nubia during New Kingdom occupation. I don't have time to pull up the paper, but I could send it to you later.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Big O:

What is a "Eurasian affinity" in terms of physical appearance relative to modern populations?

---

quote:

---

Also the finding of Pleistocene Nubians having very close affinity to recent West African populations is indicative of what exactly? Where were the Somali/Ethiopic or modern Sudanese peoples during this time, and why is there no affinity towards them?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Thereal:

Yeah, Eurasian too is suppose to be a geographic location, as the Australo-Melanesian overlap with Africans and the latter are suppose to be Eurasians.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by SlimJim:

Yeah you're right those kinda terms are inaccurate when looking at these groups and are largely modern terms, but I meant the ancestry of Egypt/Nubia that's typically represented as Natufian/Levantine, most users here including myself believe there is a native North East African side to Natufians that's wrongly said to be Eurasian in origin, I was asking if this Al Khiday population could be a candidate for this kind of population that could have introduced North East African ancestry into the Natufians, and are partly responsible for the presence of "Natufian" like ancestry in ancient Egypt/Nubia

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Big O:
[qb]
What is a "Eurasian affinity" in terms of physical appearance relative to modern populations?

---

That depends on what specific suite of traits one is using since Eurasians vary in terms of features. In this instance we are discussing non-metric dental that is odontic traits. Even here Eurasians vary. I suggest you take a look at my thread on odontology as indicator of genetics.

---

quote:

---

Also the finding of Pleistocene Nubians having very close affinity to recent West African populations is indicative of what exactly? Where were the Somali/Ethiopic or modern Sudanese peoples during this time, and why is there no affinity towards them?

---

quote:

---

To your question, the Pleistocene Nubians' affinity to West Africans is actually not that close at all since they are outliers due to possessing many archaic traits that West Africans do not have. This is why I question Irish's claim of West African origin for these Nubians.

---

quote:

---

To your second question, Irish actually does not do a good job of including East Africans even other Sudanese in his studies.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:

quote:

---

Originally posted by SlimJim:

Yeah you're right those kinda terms are inaccurate when looking at these groups and are largely modern terms, but I meant the ancestry of Egypt/Nubia that's typically represented as Natufian/Levantine, most users here including myself believe there is a native North East African side to Natufians that's wrongly said to be Eurasian in origin, I was asking if this Al Khiday population could be a candidate for this kind of population that could have introduced North East African ancestry into the Natufians, and are partly responsible for the presence of "Natufian" like ancestry in ancient Egypt/Nubia

---

It's hard to say. I haven't heard of any dental trait studies done on Natufians. But according to this new Irish paper, not only does Al-Khiday show dental traits in common with Holocene Egypto-Nubians but that their cranial morphology also shows some ties albeit with more robust archaic traits. The Natufians are somewhat of an odd group. In terms of their affinities with Nile Valley peoples their cranial shape is most similar to predynastic Delta folk like Merimde and Upper Egyptian Tasians except somewhat smaller but their nasal features and prognathism makes them intermediate between Nubians and West African groups. Genetically they seem to be intermediate between an early North African group (with some admixture from a Hadza-like Sub-Saharan East Africans) and a group called 'Basal Eurasians'.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Big O:

But that to me this is where Western racial hypocrisy sets in. When it comes to Africa rarely are East African variants used as the reference population for Africa, and instead these African variants are treated often as non African despite being indigenous. When it comes Eurasia, with their vast completely arbitrary collective why are their biological templates never pigeon holed like Africa?..

---

You're right, and notice it is always North Africans who get segregated from the rest of Africans and grouped with Eurasians. However, Eurasians are NOT arbitrarily grouped into one collective particularly as it pertains to odontic traits. As I explained to Thereal, Eurasian populations are divided into a number of dental complexes. The only one Irish uses in his studies of Africans is the West Eurasian complex all the other Eurasian complexes being irrelevant.

But again noting the hypocrisy you speak of, Irish's former colleague and leading expert in the use of non-metric dental characteristics in bio-anthropology was the late Dr. Christy G. Turner II of Arizona State University whose odontological data at ASU is still widely used by experts like Irish himself. It was Turner who recognized that East Asian peoples were divided into two main dental complexes-- a more generalized simpler Sundadonty and more derived and complex Sinodonty.





^ Yet nobody denies that both complexes are related as are the peoples they belong to. Yet when it comes to Africa, Irish separates North Africans completely from 'Afridonty' and groups them with Western Eurasians despite the obvious affinities which I already listed prior. I believe even Dr. Turner himself pointed out the discrepancy in this!

quote:

---

How can Western Eurasians be a biological template when we KNOW that they have received MASSIVE amounts of African geneflow over the last 5,000 years. What discretion is used by researchers to imply that these Western Eurasians themselves have biological variants due to recent African geneflow? With that being said how on Earth can they be described as anything other than mulattoes of their respective region?

---

quote:

---

He reinforced that claim in the earlier study with the graphic that you posted back in 2013 though;'

"In contrast, Irish and Turner (1990) and Irish (2000, 2005) noted that Pleistocene Nubians (in particular those of Jebel Sahaba skeletons) were as a group quite different from recent Nubians for dental discreet traits yet shared great phenetic affinity with recent West African populations ." -- T.W. Holiday 2013 ("Population Affinities of the Jebel Sahaba Skeletal Sample")

So he's been making this claim of West African affinity in pre-historic Nubia for quite a while now. I wouldn't imagine that it was a fluke when the researchers evidence keeps supporting this.

---

quote:

---

But as you can see in the quote from his 2013 study however, that there was apparently a head to head comparison between recent Afro-Asiatic and Nilotic speakers and modern West African groups. He finds that these modern groups in the East African region do not share close affinity with the Pleistocene inhabitants. Are we talking about a ghost population?

And if so, did this ghost population share a common ancestor with modern day West Africans? Did they die off? Where are they TODAY?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by SlimJim:

I was thinking they could be the Levantine-like ancestors of Egypt and Nubia because they seem to have an affinity with lower Nubians who are known to have significant "Levantine" like ancestry, they are robust so it gives leeway for morphological change where they become more gracile as they change to a soft diet possibly strengthening their affinity with lower Nubia/upper Egypt making them an even better fit for a Levantine-related population native to Egypt. They also practiced avulsion, which was practiced by Natufians, Taforalt and recently by Beja tribe nomads, I could see THIS Egyptian Al Khiday population spreading into the Maghreb and the Levant, introducing Egyptian ancestry as we see with certain E and M lineages whilst introducing these cultural practices.

---

quote:

---

Thanks for that description of the natufians btw, I appreciate it.

---

quote:

---

When you say early North African group with Hadza like ancestry I assume you mean Taforalt? I would have thought Natufians were more Eurasian shifted than Basal Eurasian seeing as they carry Basal Eurasian whilst carrying Hunter Gatherer ancestry which would surely shift them even more to the Eurasian side on the PCA, don't you think this would mean Basal Eurasian would sit somewhere in between the pre-historic Levantines/Iranians and Taforalt in this PCA?:

---

A more recent study from either Lazaridis or Reich shows that Taforalt did not derive their Basal Eurasian from Natufians but the other way around or rather some intermediate population (Egypt?) but yes the Natufians are more Western hunter-gatherer shifted.



^ Note not only the brown Hadza-ancestry but the silver ancestry associated with Iran but also possessed by Mota. Also note that a single 'Sub-Saharan' label fails to account for difference between Khoisan southern African types, West African/Yoruba-Ibadan types, and Hadza East African types.

There are so many questions than answers, which is why I don't like to make assumptions without hard evidence.
 

---

Posted by SlimJim (Member # 23217) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:

quote:

---

Originally posted by SlimJim:

I was thinking they could be the Levantine-like ancestors of Egypt and Nubia because they seem to have an affinity with lower Nubians who are known to have significant "Levantine" like ancestry, they are robust so it gives leeway for morphological change where they become more gracile as they change to a soft diet possibly strengthening their affinity with lower Nubia/upper Egypt making them an even better fit for a Levantine-related population native to Egypt. They also practiced avulsion, which was practiced by Natufians, Taforalt and recently by Beja tribe nomads, I could see THIS Egyptian Al Khiday population spreading into the Maghreb and the Levant, introducing Egyptian ancestry as we see with certain E and M lineages whilst introducing these cultural practices.

---

There's no way to know without DNA samples from Al-Khiday remains. But judging from the skeletal descriptions they are more likely to be directly ancestral to some Egypto-Nubians than they are to the Natufians who were far more gracile and pedomorphic in form. Again, I'm not denying a relation but that such relation for now seems more tenuous. It's like Irish's claim of Mesolithic Nubians' direct ties to modern West Africans. As for Lower Nubians having Levantine-like genetic ancestry, I take it you are referring to the Christian-era Kulubnarti remains, such may very well be the result of Eurasian back-migrations that took place during dynastic times. As for tooth-avulsion, such ritual practice was also found in the Central Sahara and also continues today among Nilotic tribes in the Kordofan region of Sudan.

quote:

---

Thanks for that description of the natufians btw, I appreciate it.

---

No problem.

quote:

---

When you say early North African group with Hadza like ancestry I assume you mean Taforalt? I would have thought Natufians were more Eurasian shifted than Basal Eurasian seeing as they carry Basal Eurasian whilst carrying Hunter Gatherer ancestry which would surely shift them even more to the Eurasian side on the PCA, don't you think this would mean Basal Eurasian would sit somewhere in between the pre-historic Levantines/Iranians and Taforalt in this PCA?:

---

A more recent study from either Lazaridis or Reich shows that Taforalt did not derive their Basal Eurasian from Natufians but the other way around or rather some intermediate population (Egypt?) but yes the Natufians are more Western hunter-gatherer shifted.



^ Note not only the brown Hadza-ancestry but the silver ancestry associated with Iran but also possessed by Mota. Also note that a single 'Sub-Saharan' label fails to account for difference between Khoisan southern African types, West African/Yoruba-Ibadan types, and Hadza East African types.

There are so many questions than answers, which is why I don't like to make assumptions without hard evidence.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by sudanese:
Question:

Will you concede once the 4, 000 year old study comes out and aligns with the Abusir paper? The results from the Kenyan pastoral paper was essentially a death-knell to notions of a 'black' Egypt.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by SlimJim:

quote:

---

Originally posted by sudanese:
Question:

Will you concede once the 4, 000 year old study comes out and aligns with the Abusir paper? The results from the Kenyan pastoral paper was essentially a death-knell to notions of a 'black' Egypt.

---

Define black Egypt?
Black is very vague and subjective.

Also didn't the abstract say mitochondrial haplogroups? so no autosomal data...

there are ethiopians that are HV1b and J1, whilst some carry A3b2 and L0b... in reality they could carry the exact same ancestries in the exact same proportions, so I wouldn't put so much weight on haplogroups in this situation.

And how was the kenya pastoral paper a "death knell"?

Either way, I think most would agree that ancient Egyptians will be strongly Levantine like, the question is what causes this affinity, real Eurasian ancestry or common north African ancestry, its probably both but to varying degrees, depending on time period, region etc...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by sudanese:
If Neolithic Kenyans were that Eurasian shifted, how and why would you think that Egyptians that didn't absorb and acquire significant Nilotic and hunter-gatherer genes could be black?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by sudanese:
essentially a death-knell to notions of a 'black' Egypt.

---

What a foolish notion, their study isn't going to prove anything just like it didn't the first time. Though it did show the depth with which these researchers will go in order and use sensualistic titles for their headlines in regards to the racial makeup of AE. And now their back for more.

Hopefully, this time they don't use Roman era enslavement. The truth is there will never be a death-knell for "black" ancient Egypt. The people of that continent and their ancestors have been on this earth for close to 200,000 to 100,000 years. So, until OOA is disproven, the origins of the AE being native to the land and apart of the greater African population, will remain true.

Still, these studies are cute exercises, but I highly doubt they did 4,000 years of research that in anyway proves that all or even a quarter of the AE population can be represented by the mummies buried in the remote area of Abusir el-Meleq. It's the height of being nonsensical, especially if the basis of their conclusion for them not being "black" comes down to the premise of "Eurasian" mtDNA.

Without even attempting to involve ancient East African components into the study. As a clue to the so called "Eurasian" element.
......

"The issue of how much Paleolithic migration from the Near East there may have been is intriguing, and the mitochondrial DNA variation may need to be reassessed as to what can be considered to be only of “Eurasian origin" because if hunters and gatherers reamed between the Saharan and supra-Saharan regions and Eurasia it might be difficult to determine exactly "where" a mutation arose " In Hot Pursuit of Language in Prehistory ed. by John Benjamins.(2008)

quote:

---

Originally posted by BrandonP:

quote:

---

Originally posted by sudanese:
If Neolithic Kenyans were that Eurasian shifted, how and why would you think that Egyptians that didn't absorb and acquire significant Nilotic and hunter-gatherer genes could be black?

---

I doubt all their "Eurasian-like" ancestry was actually Eurasian. Some of it may be, but a good chunk of it is probably North African from proto-Afroasiatic speakers. I'm looking at the text of the paper right now, and out of 41 samples, only five have mtDNA haplogroups of unequivocally Eurasian origin (since you seem to be fixated on mTDNA). The rest are either L or M1 (the latter an originally stay-at-home African lineage IMO). Sorry, but this probably isn't the "death knell" you're thinking of.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by sudanese:

Question:

Will you concede once the 4, 000 year old study comes out and aligns with the Abusir paper?

---

quote:

---

The results from the Kenyan pastoral paper was essentially a death-knell to notions of a 'black' Egypt.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by SlimJim:

Define black Egypt?
Black is very vague and subjective.

---

Actually 'black' strictly speaking is a description of skin color. Hence, you have Australian Aborigines, Melanesians, and peoples from India who are 'black' but skin color alone doesn't say much about genetic relation.

What's funny is that Classical authors from Greece and Rome blatantly described the Egyptians as 'black' with terms like the Greek melanchro or Latin maure, and even Hebrew texts from early Judaeans called the Egyptians 'kushi' having the same meaning. So I find the very argument denying a black Egypt to be utterly absurd.

This is why Eurocentrics nowadays or at least the smart ones no longer argue against the 'black' label but instead argue on definitions of genetic populations, thus black not necessarily being 'sub-Saharan' synonymous with "negroid". This is actually nothing more than a resurrection of the 'Hamitic Hypothesis' that is "black-skinned Caucasoids" [sic]! In fact, back in the hey-day of Egyptomania from the late 19th-20th centuries, with the French and British inventing the discipline of 'Egyptology', the early physical anthropologists of those days openly admitted that the Egyptian 'racial type' is "Abyssinian" i.e. Ethiopian but that such a type was considered to be part of the "Caucasian" or "White race" as opposed to the "Negroid" or Black race. So despite the obvious heavy melanin content, they made the ridiculous assertion of 'blackened whites'. LOL

This is why I no longer engage in unscientific arguments of racial typology but would rather discuss scientific arguments based on biological affinities.

And this is why you have a troll with the moniker of "Sudanese" who doesn't bother addressing the topic of this thread which is odontic traits but instead claims that not only Egyptians but ancient Kenyans were not black either and I take it, neither were ancient Sudanese! LOL
 

---

Posted by Mansamusa (Member # 22474) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by sudanese:

quote:

---

Originally posted by SlimJim:

quote:

---

Originally posted by sudanese:
Question:

Will you concede once the 4, 000 year old study comes out and aligns with the Abusir paper? The results from the Kenyan pastoral paper was essentially a death-knell to notions of a 'black' Egypt.

---

Define black Egypt?
Black is very vague and subjective.

Also didn't the abstract say mitochondrial haplogroups? so no autosomal data...

there are ethiopians that are HV1b and J1, whilst some carry A3b2 and L0b... in reality they could carry the exact same ancestries in the exact same proportions, so I wouldn't put so much weight on haplogroups in this situation.

And how was the kenya pastoral paper a "death knell"?

Either way, I think most would agree that ancient Egyptians will be strongly Levantine like, the question is what causes this affinity, real Eurasian ancestry or common north African ancestry, its probably both but to varying degrees, depending on time period, region etc...

---

I'm defining black in relation to a predominance of non-Eurasian ancestry; even ANA and the intermediate Taforalt population would do, but we haven't seen anything of the sort just yet.

If Neolithic Kenyans were that Eurasian shifted, how and why would you think that Egyptians that didn't absorb and acquire significant Nilotic and hunter-gatherer genes could be black?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:

quote:

---

Originally posted by SlimJim:

Define black Egypt?
Black is very vague and subjective.

---

Actually 'black' strictly speaking is a description of skin color. Hence, you have Australian Aborigines, Melanesians, and peoples from India who are 'black' but skin color alone doesn't say much about genetic relation.

What's funny is that Classical authors from Greece and Rome blatantly described the Egyptians as 'black' with terms like the Greek melanchro or Latin maure, and even Hebrew texts from early Judaeans called the Egyptians 'kushi' having the same meaning. So I find the very argument denying a black Egypt to be utterly absurd.

This is why Eurocentrics nowadays or at least the smart ones no longer argue against the 'black' label but instead argue on definitions of genetic populations, thus black not necessarily meaning 'sub-Saharan' meaning "negroid". This is actually nothing more than a resurrection of the 'Hamitic Hypothesis' that is "black-skinned Caucasoids" [sic]! In fact, back in the hey-day of Egyptomania from the late 19th-20th centuries, with the French and British inventing the discipline of 'Egyptology', the early physical anthropologists of those days openly admitted that the Egyptian 'racial type' is "Abyssinian" i.e. Ethiopian but that such a type was considered to be part of the "Caucasian" or "White race" as opposed to the "Negroid" or Black race. So despite the obvious heavy melanin content, they made the ridiculous assertion of 'blackened whites'. LOL

This is why I no longer engage in unscientific arguments of racial typology but would rather discuss scientific arguments based on biological affinities.

And this is why you have a troll with the moniker of "Sudanese" who doesn't bother addressing the topic of this thread which is odontic traits but instead claims that not only Egyptians but ancient Kenyans were not black either and I take it, neither were ancient Sudanese! LOL

---

quote:

---

“We now recognize that populations of Nubia and Egypt form a continuum rather than clearly distinct groups,” Mr. Emberling writes, “and that it is impossible to draw a line between Egypt and Nubia that would indicate where 'black' begins.”

---

quote:

---

They say also that the Egyptians are colonists sent out by the Ethiopians, Osiris having been the leader of the colony. 2 For, speaking generally, what is now Egypt, they maintain, was not land but sea when in the beginning the universe was being formed; afterwards, however, as the Nile during the times of its inundation carried down the mud from Ethiopia, land was gradually built up from the deposit. Also the statement that all the land of the Egyptians is alluvial silt deposited by the river receives the clearest proof, in their opinion, from what takes place at the outlets of the Nile; 3 for as each year new mud is continually gathered together at the mouths of the river, the sea is observed being thrust back by the deposited silt and the land receiving the increase. And the larger part of the customs of the Egyptians are, they hold, Ethiopian, the p95 colonists still preserving their ancient manners. 4 For instance, the belief that their kings are gods, the very special attention which they pay to their burials, and many other matters of a similar nature are Ethiopian practices, while the shapes of their statues and the forms of their letters are Ethiopian; 5

---

quote:

---

"Lycinus (describing an Egyptian): 'This boy is not merely black; he has thick lips and his legs are too thin... his hair worn in a plait shows that he is not a freeman.' Timolaus: 'but that is a sign of really distinguished birth in Egypt, Lycinus. All freeborn children plait their hair until they reach manhood...' - Lucian (Lycinus) of Samosata

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:

And this is why you have a troll with the moniker of "Sudanese" who doesn't bother addressing the topic of this thread which is odontic traits but instead claims that not only Egyptians but ancient Kenyans were not black either and I take it, neither were ancient Sudanese! LOL

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by sudanese:

I'm defining black in relation to a predominance of non-Eurasian ancestry; even ANA and the intermediate Taforalt population would do, but we haven't seen anything of the sort just yet.

If Neolithic Kenyans were that Eurasian shifted, how and why would you think that Egyptians that didn't absorb and acquire significant Nilotic and hunter-gatherer genes could be black?

---

quote:

---

As TubuYal23 cited:

"The issue of how much Paleolithic migration from the Near East there may have been is intriguing, and the mitochondrial DNA variation may need to be reassessed as to what can be considered to be only of “Eurasian origin" because if hunters and gatherers reamed between the Saharan and supra-Saharan regions and Eurasia it might be difficult to determine exactly "where" a mutation arose " In Hot Pursuit of Language in Prehistory ed. by John Benjamins.(2008)

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:

quote:

---

Originally posted by sudanese:

I'm defining black in relation to a predominance of non-Eurasian ancestry; even ANA and the intermediate Taforalt population would do, but we haven't seen anything of the sort just yet.

If Neolithic Kenyans were that Eurasian shifted, how and why would you think that Egyptians that didn't absorb and acquire significant Nilotic and hunter-gatherer genes could be black?

---

There are two problems with your assumptions.

1. The first 'Eurasians' originated as an offshoot of Africans.

2. There were multiple Out-of-African migrations into Southwest Asia subsequent to the initial one and these intermixed with whatever "Eurasian" i.e. formerly-African peoples were there.

quote:

---

As TubuYal23 cited:

"The issue of how much Paleolithic migration from the Near East there may have been is intriguing, and the mitochondrial DNA variation may need to be reassessed as to what can be considered to be only of “Eurasian origin" because if hunters and gatherers reamed between the Saharan and supra-Saharan regions and Eurasia it might be difficult to determine exactly "where" a mutation arose " In Hot Pursuit of Language in Prehistory ed. by John Benjamins.(2008)

---

This is the only plausible explanation for Lazaridis's Basal Eurasian ancestry associated with the Gulf area of eastern Arabia and southwest Iran and why its associated skeletal remains show African features.

---

quote:

---

Despite the numerous studies proposing early human population expansions from Africa into Arabia during the Late Pleistocene, no archaeological sites have yet been discovered in Arabia that resemble a specific African industry, which would indicate demographic exchange across the Red Sea. Here we report the discovery of a buried site and more than 100 new surface scatters in the Dhofar region of Oman belonging to a regionally-specific African lithic industry - the late Nubian Complex - known previously only from the northeast and Horn of Africa during Marine Isotope Stage 5, ∼128,000 to 74,000 years ago. Two optically stimulated luminescence age estimates from the open-air site of Aybut Al Auwal in Oman place the Arabian Nubian Complex at ∼106,000 years ago, providing archaeological evidence for the presence of a distinct northeast African Middle Stone Age technocomplex in southern Arabia sometime in the first half of Marine Isotope Stage 5.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by BrandonP:

I don't think "sudanese" is a troll. Having looked into their posting history, I believe they may be the same person as "sudaniya" who for the most part was on our side. Their latest posts in this thread do seem to be out of character though.

---

quote:

---

I'm defining black in relation to a predominance of non-Eurasian ancestry; even ANA and the intermediate Taforalt population would do, but we haven't seen anything of the sort just yet.

If Neolithic Kenyans were that Eurasian shifted, how and why would you think that Egyptians that didn't absorb and acquire significant Nilotic and hunter-gatherer genes could be black?

---

quote:

---

In sum, the most parsimonious explanation is ancestors of Holocene agriculturalists were in Nubia—just not at Wadi Halfa, Gebel Sahaba, and Tushka. Though cultural diffusion with incorporation of non-local resources occurred [70-71], with perhaps some immigration, it is unnecessary to hypothesize a significant post-Pleistocene influx of agriculturalists. The results suggest most future Nubian agriculturalists were in residence the entire time, though previously in the guise of Neolithic agro-pastoralists and intensive collectors.

---

quote:

---

Substantial gene flow and migrations from the north entered the Northern Sudanese Nile Valley after its original Saharo-Nilotic inhabitants had adopted Neolithic subsistence strategies. The incomers partly replaced and interbred with the Saharo-Nilotes of the region. The people of the A-Group and the inhabitants of sites like Kadruka were representatives of the resulting non- Saharo-Nilotic population. Conversely, the Saharo-Nilotic groups further south, both in the Nile Valley and in the adjacent areas of the Sahara, remained largely unaffected by the northern influence.

---

quote:

---

The Al Khiday Late Palaeolithic sample also expresses trait frequencies indicative of Afridonty, with the exception of a comparatively low frequency for 24 Groove Pattern LM2. It additionally expresses relatively high frequencies of 2 Labial Curvature UI1 and 20 Midline Diastema UI1. It does not, however, evidence the additional complex traits to the same degree as Gebel Sahaba (Supplementary Table S1). Instead, Al Khiday is most akin to the neighbouring East African samples (Fig. 3, Supplementary Table S7) that, given the site’s geographic location, is not unexpected. Both pooled Holocene samples, particularly Upper Nubia, also show phenetic similarities to the East Africans. This association is indicative of a north-south cline in trait frequencies, as discussed in the main text. Thus, Al Khiday is patently indigenous to greater northeast Africa, as are its Holocene successors in Nubia. The population of Gebel Sahaba/Tushka (and Wadi Halfa) apparently originated farther afield, and given the significant phenetic distances from subsequent Nubian samples, would have contributed little or nothing to them genetically.

---

If you take a multidisciplinary approach you can easily estimate that nubians will most likely hold that intermediate position between Nilo-Saharans and non Africans Genetically possibly going back as far as the late Pleistocene. In a similar way to how north Africans did with the exception of the late Neolithic Khef el Baroud samples. Though local Saharo-Nilotic admixture was absorbed in the region, I don't believe it'd fully characterize the Sub-Saharan affinity in earlier North East Africans.
 

---

Posted by Mansamusa (Member # 22474) on :
 
I wonder how much an understanding of the spread of Afroasiatic languages helps explain West Eurasian-like ancestry in Africans. C. Ehret describes Semitic as a small Asiatic offshoot of a fundamentally African language group. Can the same be said about Ancient SW Asian ancestry commonly shared between SW Asians and Africans? Ehret's classification:


Ehret (2011), History and the Testimony of Language, p. 212.

Ancient Egyptian falls under the same clade as Semitic (Boreoafroasiatic). So at one point in time, Ancient Egyptian ancestors would have been closer to Semite Asiatic ancestors than most or all other Africans. But that would be before the dynastic era, before the mixing with Nilo-Saharans and other Afroasitic groups such as Cushitic speakers.
 

---

Posted by Elmaestro (Member # 22566) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mansamusa:
I wonder how much an understanding of the spread of Afroasiatic languages helps explain West Eurasian-like ancestry in Africans. C. Ehret describes Semitic as a small Asiatic offshoot of a fundamentally African language group. Can the same be said about Ancient SW Asian ancestry commonly shared between SW Asians and Africans?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Elmaestro:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mansamusa:
I wonder how much an understanding of the spread of Afroasiatic languages helps explain West Eurasian-like ancestry in Africans. C. Ehret describes Semitic as a small Asiatic offshoot of a fundamentally African language group. Can the same be said about Ancient SW Asian ancestry commonly shared between SW Asians and Africans?

---

The west Eurasian-Like ancestry in Africa should predate Afroasiatic no matter which circumstance. It just so happens that the majority of AA expanded with North Africans and West Asians later on.

I hold the hypothesis that the earliest offshoots of AA accompanied east African related ancestry due to the earliest probable speakers sharing East African Forager related ancestry. and then again we have the outlying constraint which is omotic, who shows no evidence of West Eurasian admixture.

...but this is off-topic.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by BrandonP:
FWIW, I doubt most Paleolithic backmigrants into North Africa would look that much different from the natives anyway. Iberomaurisians and IAM still had exclusively ancestral (that is, dark) skin color alleles despite all the mtDNA U6 they carried. It’s probably a combination of EEF, steppe, and maybe Iranian Neolithic ancestry that is the ultimate source for the lighter skin tones of many modern North Africans. Those would have come in well after the Paleolithic.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mansamusa:
Black has no scientific meaning and means different things in different political contexts. All Africans, Arabs, and Indians are Black in Great Britain for instance.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Antalas:

quote:

---

Originally posted by BrandonP:
FWIW, I doubt most Paleolithic backmigrants into North Africa would look that much different from the natives anyway. Iberomaurisians and IAM still had exclusively ancestral (that is, dark) skin color alleles despite all the mtDNA U6 they carried. It’s probably a combination of EEF, steppe, and maybe Iranian Neolithic ancestry that is the ultimate source for the lighter skin tones of many modern North Africans. Those would have come in well after the Paleolithic.

---

Having dark skin doesn't mean they looked like any other dark skinned population. WHG were dark skinned and yet still looked pretty much european, dravidians are dark skinned yet they don't look like nigerians or papuans, same could be said for amerindians, etc

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Antalas:

quote:

---

Originally posted by BrandonP:
FWIW, I doubt most Paleolithic backmigrants into North Africa would look that much different from the natives anyway. Iberomaurisians and IAM still had exclusively ancestral (that is, dark) skin color alleles despite all the mtDNA U6 they carried. It’s probably a combination of EEF, steppe, and maybe Iranian Neolithic ancestry that is the ultimate source for the lighter skin tones of many modern North Africans. Those would have come in well after the Paleolithic.

---

Having dark skin doesn't mean they looked like any other dark skinned population. WHG were dark skinned and yet still looked pretty much european, dravidians are dark skinned yet they don't look like nigerians or papuans, same could be said for amerindians, etc

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mansamusa:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Elmaestro:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mansamusa:
I wonder how much an understanding of the spread of Afroasiatic languages helps explain West Eurasian-like ancestry in Africans. C. Ehret describes Semitic as a small Asiatic offshoot of a fundamentally African language group. Can the same be said about Ancient SW Asian ancestry commonly shared between SW Asians and Africans?

---

The west Eurasian-Like ancestry in Africa should predate Afroasiatic no matter which circumstance. It just so happens that the majority of AA expanded with North Africans and West Asians later on.

I hold the hypothesis that the earliest offshoots of AA accompanied east African related ancestry due to the earliest probable speakers sharing East African Forager related ancestry. and then again we have the outlying constraint which is omotic, who shows no evidence of West Eurasian admixture.

...but this is off-topic.

---

Considering the distance in time between the initial OOA movement from NE Africa and later Afroasiatic expansions, aren’t we talking about very distinct SW Eurasian/NEA ancestries. I would imagine Afrasian ancestry or certain branches of it would form it’s own specific cluster.

On your question about Christian Nubians being Black, this type of questioning will get us nowhere. Black has no scientific meaning and means different things in different political contexts. All Africans, Arabs, and Indians are Black in Great Britain for instance.

We would benefit from using new scientific terminology, such as N. East African or even Afrasian ancestry. The White genetic bloggers, with their Horner and N. African nationalist sidekicks, are defining ancient African ancestry to mean ancestry directly related to modern day SSAs. Anything found outside of Africa or found to be distantly related to modern SSA is labeled as Eurasian or at least NonAfrican.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mansamusa:
Considering the distance in time between the initial OOA movement from NE Africa and later Afroasiatic expansions, aren’t we talking about very distinct SW Eurasian/NEA ancestries. I would imagine Afrasian ancestry or certain branches of it would form it’s own specific cluster.

On your question about Christian Nubians being Black, this type of questioning will get us nowhere. Black has no scientific meaning and means different things in different political contexts. All Africans, Arabs, and Indians are Black in Great Britain for instance.

We would benefit from using new scientific terminology, such as N. East African or even Afrasian ancestry. The White genetic bloggers, with their Horner and N. African nationalist sidekicks, are defining ancient African ancestry to mean ancestry directly related to modern day SSAs. Anything found outside of Africa or found to be distantly related to modern SSA is labeled as Eurasian or at least NonAfrican.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by BrandonP:
We get it, you guys are so invested in anti-Blackness that you’ll force any rift between what you see as “Black people” and anyone else you want to lay claim to/have a higher opinion of. You might want to take a moment to ask yourself why you feel that way.

I mean, sure, dark-skinned peoples are diverse and don’t all look the same. Everyone here knows that. But people who make as big a deal about this fact as you do clearly have an investment in denying certain populations would be admissible as “Black” in any sense of the world. The implications behind that should be fucking obvious by now. [/QB]

---

What does that have to do with "anti-blackness" ?? So now acknowledging the fact that not all dark skinned population are related to each other or look the same means I'm anti-black ?
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
Guys, Antalas whether unwittingly or not is distracting from the relevant bio-anthropological data we are discussing which he has yet to address, and instead tries to degenerate this thread into another 'were they black?', 'who is black?,' 'what is black?'.

I will have none of it! For now I'll just ignore him.

Elmaestro, bro!! You raised some excellent points in the previous page which I was going to address and I will soon! I just got to pull up a couple of sources to for me to cite but you are definitely on to something and I think I'm on to it too!
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Elmaestro:
@Djehuti

The third question is highly relevant.
Irish is lowkey proposing genetic continuity since the Holocene (which isn't particularly novel):

quote:

---

In sum, the most parsimonious explanation is ancestors of Holocene agriculturalists were in Nubia—just not at Wadi Halfa, Gebel Sahaba, and Tushka. Though cultural diffusion with incorporation of non-local resources occurred [70-71], with perhaps some immigration, it is unnecessary to hypothesize a significant post-Pleistocene influx of agriculturalists. The results suggest most future Nubian agriculturalists were in residence the entire time, though previously in the guise of Neolithic agro-pastoralists and intensive collectors.

---

See also Galland 2016

quote:

---

The MANOVA results consistently found significant distinction between the Mesolithic and the other four cultural groups, and between early farmers and late farmers in the case of the mandible. However our results do not suggest any strong morphological differentiation occurring through time from the A-group to Meroitic cultural horizons, which is in agreement with previous studies that report no drastic change in skeletal series spanning from the A-group to the Christian period 6,9,10,19.

---

10.1038/srep31040

The parallel I alluded to earlier was with with Becker 2011. To where samples or people more akin to the Mesolithic Nubians or the Saharo-sudanese Complex (preLeiterband and Leiterband) didn't directly spawn the Neolithic Nubian samples and in turn any Predynastic Sample. However, Later North Africans Absorbed local Nilo-Saharan Pastoralists & Agriculturalists.

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

Substantial gene flow and migrations from the north entered the Northern Sudanese Nile Valley after its original Saharo-Nilotic inhabitants had adopted Neolithic subsistence strategies. The incomers partly replaced and interbred with the Saharo-Nilotes of the region. The people of the A-Group and the inhabitants of sites like Kadruka were representatives of the resulting non- Saharo-Nilotic population. Conversely, the Saharo-Nilotic groups further south, both in the Nile Valley and in the adjacent areas of the Sahara, remained largely unaffected by the northern influence.

---

Becker 2011

While Becker essentially jumped from the Pleistocene to the A group. It seems like there might have been continuity since the late Pleistocene judging by the Al-Khiday samples. Irish basically Attributes the earliest samples of al-Khiday to being somewhat a mixture of *East African Foragers* and probably biological North Africans. This is something that we're beginning to see genetically as well. Furthermore These samples are most distant from some of the Mesolithic or "Pre-Leiterband" predecessors of these Nilotic groups.

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

The Al Khiday Late Palaeolithic sample also expresses trait frequencies indicative of Afridonty, with the exception of a comparatively low frequency for 24 Groove Pattern LM2. It additionally expresses relatively high frequencies of 2 Labial Curvature UI1 and 20 Midline Diastema UI1. It does not, however, evidence the additional complex traits to the same degree as Gebel Sahaba (Supplementary Table S1). Instead, Al Khiday is most akin to the neighbouring East African samples (Fig. 3, Supplementary Table S7) that, given the site’s geographic location, is not unexpected. Both pooled Holocene samples, particularly Upper Nubia, also show phenetic similarities to the East Africans. This association is indicative of a north-south cline in trait frequencies, as discussed in the main text. Thus, Al Khiday is patently indigenous to greater northeast Africa, as are its Holocene successors in Nubia. The population of Gebel Sahaba/Tushka (and Wadi Halfa) apparently originated farther afield, and given the significant phenetic distances from subsequent Nubian samples, would have contributed little or nothing to them genetically.

---

If you take a multidisciplinary approach you can easily estimate that nubians will most likely hold that intermediate position between Nilo-Saharans and non-Africans genetically possibly going back as far as the late Pleistocene. In a similar way to how north Africans did with the exception of the late Neolithic Khef el Baroud samples. Though local Saharo-Nilotic admixture was absorbed in the region, I don't believe it'd fully characterize the Sub-Saharan affinity in earlier North East Africans.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by BrandonP:

quote:

---

Originally posted by sudanese:
If Neolithic Kenyans were that Eurasian shifted, how and why would you think that Egyptians that didn't absorb and acquire significant Nilotic and hunter-gatherer genes could be black?

---

I doubt all their "Eurasian-like" ancestry was actually Eurasian. Some of it may be, but a good chunk of it is probably North African from proto-Afroasiatic speakers. I'm looking at the text of the paper right now, and out of 41 samples, only five have mtDNA haplogroups of unequivocally Eurasian origin (since you seem to be fixated on mTDNA). The rest are either L or M1 (the latter an originally stay-at-home African lineage IMO). Sorry, but this probably isn't the "death knell" you're thinking of.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by sudanese:

quote:

---

Originally posted by BrandonP:

quote:

---

Originally posted by sudanese:
If Neolithic Kenyans were that Eurasian shifted, how and why would you think that Egyptians that didn't absorb and acquire significant Nilotic and hunter-gatherer genes could be black?

---

I doubt all their "Eurasian-like" ancestry was actually Eurasian. Some of it may be, but a good chunk of it is probably North African from proto-Afroasiatic speakers. I'm looking at the text of the paper right now, and out of 41 samples, only five have mtDNA haplogroups of unequivocally Eurasian origin (since you seem to be fixated on mTDNA). The rest are either L or M1 (the latter an originally stay-at-home African lineage IMO). Sorry, but this probably isn't the "death knell" you're thinking of.

---

Did the paper not also posit that the admixture event took place around 6000 years ago? What would they look like (genetically) without the 40% Dinka-like admixture and 20% Mota related ancestry?

Are Somalis not 40% Eurasian? Did their paternal ancestors not originate in Egypt-North Sudan? Without admixing with the Dinka-like Nilotes, is it not reasonable to infer that they would have been more Eurasian?

I'm essentially playing devils advocate here.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mansamusa:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Elmaestro:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mansamusa:
I wonder how much an understanding of the spread of Afroasiatic languages helps explain West Eurasian-like ancestry in Africans. C. Ehret describes Semitic as a small Asiatic offshoot of a fundamentally African language group. Can the same be said about Ancient SW Asian ancestry commonly shared between SW Asians and Africans?

---

The west Eurasian-Like ancestry in Africa should predate Afroasiatic no matter which circumstance. It just so happens that the majority of AA expanded with North Africans and West Asians later on.

I hold the hypothesis that the earliest offshoots of AA accompanied east African related ancestry due to the earliest probable speakers sharing East African Forager related ancestry. and then again we have the outlying constraint which is omotic, who shows no evidence of West Eurasian admixture.

...but this is off-topic.

---

On your question about Christian Nubians being Black, this type of questioning will get us nowhere. Black has no scientific meaning and means different things in different political contexts. All Africans, Arabs, and Indians are Black in Great Britain for instance.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by sudanese:

Did the paper not also posit that the admixture event took place around 6000 years ago? What would they look like (genetically) without the 40% Dinka-like admixture and 20% Mota related ancestry?

---

quote:

---

Are Somalis not 40% Eurasian? Did their paternal ancestors not originate in Egypt-North Sudan? Without admixing with the Dinka-like Nilotes, is it not reasonable to infer that they would have been more Eurasian?

---

quote:

---

I'm essentially playing devils advocate here.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by sudanese:

quote:

---

Originally posted by BrandonP:

quote:

---

Originally posted by sudanese:
If Neolithic Kenyans were that Eurasian shifted, how and why would you think that Egyptians that didn't absorb and acquire significant Nilotic and hunter-gatherer genes could be black?

---

I doubt all their "Eurasian-like" ancestry was actually Eurasian. Some of it may be, but a good chunk of it is probably North African from proto-Afroasiatic speakers. I'm looking at the text of the paper right now, and out of 41 samples, only five have mtDNA haplogroups of unequivocally Eurasian origin (since you seem to be fixated on mTDNA). The rest are either L or M1 (the latter an originally stay-at-home African lineage IMO). Sorry, but this probably isn't the "death knell" you're thinking of.

---

Did the paper not also posit that the admixture event took place around 6000 years ago? What would they look like (genetically) without the 40% Dinka-like admixture and 20% Mota related ancestry?

Are Somalis not 40% Eurasian? Did their paternal ancestors not originate in Egypt-North Sudan? Without admixing with the Dinka-like Nilotes, is it not reasonable to infer that they would have been more Eurasian?

I'm essentially playing devils advocate here.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mansamusa:

quote:

---

Originally posted by sudanese:

quote:

---

Originally posted by BrandonP:

quote:

---

Originally posted by sudanese:
If Neolithic Kenyans were that Eurasian shifted, how and why would you think that Egyptians that didn't absorb and acquire significant Nilotic and hunter-gatherer genes could be black?

---

I doubt all their "Eurasian-like" ancestry was actually Eurasian. Some of it may be, but a good chunk of it is probably North African from proto-Afroasiatic speakers. I'm looking at the text of the paper right now, and out of 41 samples, only five have mtDNA haplogroups of unequivocally Eurasian origin (since you seem to be fixated on mTDNA). The rest are either L or M1 (the latter an originally stay-at-home African lineage IMO). Sorry, but this probably isn't the "death knell" you're thinking of.

---

Did the paper not also posit that the admixture event took place around 6000 years ago? What would they look like (genetically) without the 40% Dinka-like admixture and 20% Mota related ancestry?

Are Somalis not 40% Eurasian? Did their paternal ancestors not originate in Egypt-North Sudan? Without admixing with the Dinka-like Nilotes, is it not reasonable to infer that they would have been more Eurasian?

I'm essentially playing devils advocate here.

---

What is Eurasian about ancestry from N. Sudan? The belief in Eurasian ancestry is based on the idea of Neolithic expansion from the S. Levant into their paternal ancestors.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by SlimJim:

If they have affinities with East African hunter gatherers than these al Khiday people are likely the descendents of the people who introduced Mota/Hadza ancestry into Taforalt and much of Eurasia as most Middle Easterners can be modelled as part Mota, alongside Egyptian/Basal Eurasian.

---

quote:

---

AFAIK modern Sudanese ppl don't have any Mota ancestry, neither did the Christian period remains, so I'm guessing these people are not the direct ancestors of Lower Nubians who's SSA will be mostly Nilotic.

---

quote:

---

Could this mean there will be a population in Egypt/Sudan strongly North African like with little to no ties to foragers representing the North African/Eurasian like component of Nubia which would go on to mix with Nilotes?

---

It's possible.

The period when sub-Saharan Africa was most influential in Egypt was a time when neither Egypt, as we understand it culturally, nor the Sahara, as we understand it geographically, existed. Populations and cultures now found south of the desert roamed far to the north. The culture of Upper Egypt, which became dynastic Egyptian civilization, could fairly be called a Sudanese transplant...--Joseph O. Vogel (1997)

Also, if we are to go by the Egyptain ancient murals, depictions of Nubians go back to early dynastic times and Nubians have always looked similar to the Egyptians in terms of facial features and only until the Middle Kingdom and especially New Kingdom do you see "negroid" very Nilotic-looking types portrayed among the prisoners brought back from Ta-Nehesa (Nubia). Dr. Keita and other experts have noted that even the Kerman Kushites of Middle Kingdom Khartoum are morphologically most similar to predynastic Naqada Egyptians. But again as far as autosomal data, unless you can cite DNA from these peoples we can only go by their bones including teeth. Irish says they all belong to the North African cluster and not Sub-Saharan.

Now that you mention it, I am curious as to where exactly the Nilotes fit in Irish's MMD chart.


 

---

Posted by BrandonP (Member # 3735) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:


Now that you mention it, I am curious as to where exactly the Nilotes fit in Irish's MMD chart.

---

quote:

---

This paper reexamines some of the methods and craniometric findings in the classic volume The Ancient Inhabitants of Jebel Moya (Sudan) (1955) by Mukherjee, Rao & Trevor, in light of recent archaeological data and relative to a new dental morphological study. Archaeological evidence characterises these inhabitants as having been heavily influenced by outside sources; yet they managed to establish and maintain their own distinctive culture as seen in the site features and surviving artefact collections. The dental study, modelled after the original craniometric-based investigation and using the same or similar comparative samples, detected complementary indications of outside biological influence. In the study, up to 36 dental traits were recorded in a total of 19 African samples. The most influential traits in driving inter-sample variation were then identified, and phenetic affinities were calculated using the Mahalanobis D2 statistic for non-metric traits. If phenetic similarity provides an estimate of genetic relatedness, these affinities, like the original craniometric findings, suggest that the Jebel Moyans exhibited a mosaic of features that are reminiscent of, yet distinct from, both sub-Saharan and North African peoples. Together, these different lines of evidence correspond to portray the Jebel Moya populace as a uniform, although distinct, biocultural amalgam.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mansamusa:

I wonder how much an understanding of the spread of Afroasiatic languages helps explain West Eurasian-like ancestry in Africans. C. Ehret describes Semitic as a small Asiatic offshoot of a fundamentally African language group. Can the same be said about Ancient SW Asian ancestry commonly shared between SW Asians and Africans? Ehret's classification:



Ehret (2011), History and the Testimony of Language, p. 212.

---

quote:

---

Ancient Egyptian falls under the same clade as Semitic (Boreoafroasiatic). So at one point in time, Ancient Egyptian ancestors would have been closer to Semite Asiatic ancestors than most or all other Africans. But that would be before the dynastic era, before the mixing with Nilo-Saharans and other Afroasitic groups such as Cushitic speakers.

---

But the ancestors of proto-Semitic were not Asiatic but Africans who migrated into Asia.



But to piggyback on Elmaestro's point, the Afroasiatic speakers in the Nile Valley also absorbed/assimilated some Nilo-Saharan words (if not speakers) in the region as well judging by the Egyptian language itself.

More from Ehret: Ancient Egyptian as an African Language, Egypt as an African Culture:

But several notable early Egyptian crops came from Sudanic agriculture, independently invented between 7500 and 6000 B.C. by the Nilo-Saharan peoples (Ehret 1993:104-125). One such cultivated crop was the edible gourd. The botanical evidence is confirmed in this case by linguistics: Egyptian bdt, or "bed of gourds" (Late Egyptian bdt, "gourd; cucumber"), is a borrowing of the Nilo-Saharan word *bud, "edible gourd." Other early Egyptian crops of Sudanic origin included watermelons and castor beans. (To learn more on how historians use linguistic evidence, see note at end of this article.)

Between about 5000 and 3000 B.C. a new era of southern cultural influences took shape. Increasing aridity pushed more of the human population of the eastern Sahara into areas with good access to the waters of the Nile, and along the Nile the bottomlands were for the first time cleared and farmed. The Egyptian stretches of the river came to form the northern edge of a newly emergent Middle Nile Culture Area, which extended far south up the river, well into the middle of modern-day Sudan. Peoples speaking languages of the Eastern Sahelian branch of the Nilo-Saharan family inhabited the heartland of this region.

From the Middle Nile, Egypt gained new items of livelihood between 5000 and 3000 B.C. One of these was a kind of cattle pen: its Egyptian name, s3 (earlier *sr), can be derived from the Eastern Sahelian term *sar. Egyptian pg3, "bowl," (presumably from earlier pgr), a borrowing of Nilo-Saharan *poKur, "wooden bowl or trough," reveals still another adoption in material culture that most probably belongs to this era.
 

---

Posted by BrandonP (Member # 3735) on :
 
^ I want to add that there appears to be some disagreement among linguists as to how the different Afroasiatic families relate to one another. For example, Edward Lipinksi has argued that Semitic is more closely related to Berber and then Cushitic than to Egyptic.

This diagram below is supposed to show how various other linguists sort relationships between the Afroasiatic families.

 

---

Posted by Mansamusa (Member # 22474) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by SlimJim:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mansamusa:

quote:

---

Originally posted by sudanese:

quote:

---

Originally posted by BrandonP:

quote:

---

Originally posted by sudanese:
If Neolithic Kenyans were that Eurasian shifted, how and why would you think that Egyptians that didn't absorb and acquire significant Nilotic and hunter-gatherer genes could be black?

---

I doubt all their "Eurasian-like" ancestry was actually Eurasian. Some of it may be, but a good chunk of it is probably North African from proto-Afroasiatic speakers. I'm looking at the text of the paper right now, and out of 41 samples, only five have mtDNA haplogroups of unequivocally Eurasian origin (since you seem to be fixated on mTDNA). The rest are either L or M1 (the latter an originally stay-at-home African lineage IMO). Sorry, but this probably isn't the "death knell" you're thinking of.

---

Did the paper not also posit that the admixture event took place around 6000 years ago? What would they look like (genetically) without the 40% Dinka-like admixture and 20% Mota related ancestry?

Are Somalis not 40% Eurasian? Did their paternal ancestors not originate in Egypt-North Sudan? Without admixing with the Dinka-like Nilotes, is it not reasonable to infer that they would have been more Eurasian?

I'm essentially playing devils advocate here.

---

What is Eurasian about ancestry from N. Sudan? The belief in Eurasian ancestry is based on the idea of Neolithic expansion from the S. Levant into their paternal ancestors.

---

Pastoral Neolithic remains carried K1a and HV1b1, thats indicative of real Eurasian ancestry.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mansamusa:

I wonder how much an understanding of the spread of Afroasiatic languages helps explain West Eurasian-like ancestry in Africans. C. Ehret describes Semitic as a small Asiatic offshoot of a fundamentally African language group. Can the same be said about Ancient SW Asian ancestry commonly shared between SW Asians and Africans? Ehret's classification:



Ehret (2011), History and the Testimony of Language, p. 212.

---

Careful about tying language too closely to biological population. While it's true proto-languages were originally spoken by specific populations, the spread of these languages is not necessarily tied to the spread of the people themselves. For example Indo-European being spoken among very dark skinned (black) Sri-Lankans or in the case of Africa, Afro-asiatic Hausa spoken by northern Nigerians who genetically aren't much different from other Nigerians. That said, the Eurasian-like genetic profile predates Afroasiatic adn is simply tied to Northeast Africans sharing common ancestry with the original proto-Eurasians who left Africa. Note that Semitic speakers of Southwest Asia carry African lineages like E-M215 (E1b1b) and even maternal L2b.

quote:

---

Ancient Egyptian falls under the same clade as Semitic (Boreoafroasiatic). So at one point in time, Ancient Egyptian ancestors would have been closer to Semite Asiatic ancestors than most or all other Africans. But that would be before the dynastic era, before the mixing with Nilo-Saharans and other Afroasitic groups such as Cushitic speakers.

---

But the ancestors of proto-Semitic were not Asiatic but Africans who migrated into Asia.



But to piggyback on Elmaestro's point, the Afroasiatic speakers in the Nile Valley also absorbed/assimilated some Nilo-Saharan words (if not speakers) in the region as well judging by the Egyptian language itself.

More from Ehret: Ancient Egyptian as an African Language, Egypt as an African Culture:

But several notable early Egyptian crops came from Sudanic agriculture, independently invented between 7500 and 6000 B.C. by the Nilo-Saharan peoples (Ehret 1993:104-125). One such cultivated crop was the edible gourd. The botanical evidence is confirmed in this case by linguistics: Egyptian bdt, or "bed of gourds" (Late Egyptian bdt, "gourd; cucumber"), is a borrowing of the Nilo-Saharan word *bud, "edible gourd." Other early Egyptian crops of Sudanic origin included watermelons and castor beans. (To learn more on how historians use linguistic evidence, see note at end of this article.)

Between about 5000 and 3000 B.C. a new era of southern cultural influences took shape. Increasing aridity pushed more of the human population of the eastern Sahara into areas with good access to the waters of the Nile, and along the Nile the bottomlands were for the first time cleared and farmed. The Egyptian stretches of the river came to form the northern edge of a newly emergent Middle Nile Culture Area, which extended far south up the river, well into the middle of modern-day Sudan. Peoples speaking languages of the Eastern Sahelian branch of the Nilo-Saharan family inhabited the heartland of this region.

From the Middle Nile, Egypt gained new items of livelihood between 5000 and 3000 B.C. One of these was a kind of cattle pen: its Egyptian name, s3 (earlier *sr), can be derived from the Eastern Sahelian term *sar. Egyptian pg3, "bowl," (presumably from earlier pgr), a borrowing of Nilo-Saharan *poKur, "wooden bowl or trough," reveals still another adoption in material culture that most probably belongs to this era.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by BrandonP:
^ I want to add that there appears to be some disagreement among linguists as to how the different Afroasiatic families relate to one another. For example, Edward Lipinksi has argued that Semitic is more closely related to Berber and then Cushitic than to Egyptic.

This diagram below is supposed to show how various other linguists sort relationships between the Afroasiatic families.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mansamusa:

quote:

---

Originally posted by SlimJim:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mansamusa:

quote:

---

Originally posted by sudanese:

quote:

---

Originally posted by BrandonP:

quote:

---

Originally posted by sudanese:
If Neolithic Kenyans were that Eurasian shifted, how and why would you think that Egyptians that didn't absorb and acquire significant Nilotic and hunter-gatherer genes could be black?

---

I doubt all their "Eurasian-like" ancestry was actually Eurasian. Some of it may be, but a good chunk of it is probably North African from proto-Afroasiatic speakers. I'm looking at the text of the paper right now, and out of 41 samples, only five have mtDNA haplogroups of unequivocally Eurasian origin (since you seem to be fixated on mTDNA). The rest are either L or M1 (the latter an originally stay-at-home African lineage IMO). Sorry, but this probably isn't the "death knell" you're thinking of.

---

Did the paper not also posit that the admixture event took place around 6000 years ago? What would they look like (genetically) without the 40% Dinka-like admixture and 20% Mota related ancestry?

Are Somalis not 40% Eurasian? Did their paternal ancestors not originate in Egypt-North Sudan? Without admixing with the Dinka-like Nilotes, is it not reasonable to infer that they would have been more Eurasian?

I'm essentially playing devils advocate here.

---

What is Eurasian about ancestry from N. Sudan? The belief in Eurasian ancestry is based on the idea of Neolithic expansion from the S. Levant into their paternal ancestors.

---

Pastoral Neolithic remains carried K1a and HV1b1, thats indicative of real Eurasian ancestry.

---

You think 2 out of more than 30 samples or so having K1a can help explain 40% "Eurasian-like" ancestry?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Big O:
[qb]
What is a "Eurasian affinity" in terms of physical appearance relative to modern populations?

---

quote:

---

That depends on what specific suite of traits one is using since Eurasians vary in terms of features. In this instance we are discussing non-metric dental that is odontic traits. Even here Eurasians vary. I suggest you take a look at my thread on odontology as indicator of genetics.

Since Eurasians vary in odontological traits depending on the region as well as population, Irish is specifically referring to Western Eurasians as comprising Europeans and Southwest Asians who are the neighboring Eurasian populations to Africa of course.

---

My issue with that notion of West Eurasian being a population standard is that it has been noted that the Near East has received African geneflow over the last 10,000 years. If they have known African ancestry than that would essentially make them a mixed raced group with shared affinities with African groups.



African origins of Basal Eurasian is coupled with a known African skeletal morphology.

F. X. Ricaut, M. Waelkens. (2008). Cranial Discrete Traits in a Byzantine Population and Eastern Mediterranean Population Movements Human Biology - Volume 80, Number 5, October 2008, pp. 535-564

"A late Pleistocene-early Holocene northward migration (from Africa to the Levant and to Anatolia) of these populations has been hypothesized from skeletal data (Angel 1972, 1973; Brace 2005) and from archaeological data, as indicated by the probable Nile Valley origin of the "Mesolithic" (epi-Paleolithic) Mushabi culture found in the Levant (Bar Yosef 1987). This migration finds some support in the presence in Mediterranean populations (Sicily, Greece, southern Turkey, etc.; Patrinos et al.; Schiliro et al. 1990) of the Benin sickle cell haplotype. This haplotype originated in West Africa and is probably associated with the spread of malaria to southern Europe through an eastern Mediterranean route (Salares et al. 2004) following the expansion of both human and mosquito populations brought about by the advent of the Neolithic transition (Hume et al 2003; Joy et al. 2003; Rich et al 1998). This northward migration of northeastern African populations carrying sub-Saharan biological elements is concordant with the morphological homogeneity of the Natufian populations (Bocquentin 2003), which present morphological affinity with sub-Saharan populations (Angel 1972; Brace et al. 2005). In addition, the Neolithic revolution was assumed to arise in the late Pleistocene Natufians and subsequently spread into Anatolia and Europe (Bar-Yosef 2002), and the first Anatolian farmers, Neolithic to Bronze Age Mediterraneans and to some degree other Neolithic-Bronze Age Europeans, show morphological affinities with the Natufians (and indirectly with sub-Saharan populations; Angel 1972; Brace et al 2005) , in concordance with a process of demic diffusion accompanying the extension of the Neolithic revolution (Cavalli-Sforza et al. 1994)."

Sickle cell being found in the Levant makes African geneflow into the region.

quote:

---

To the first question, the Pleistocene Nubians' affinity to West Africans is actually not that close at all since they are outliers due to possessing many archaic traits that West Africans do not have. This is why I question Irish's claim of West African origin for these Nubians.

---

That's something that I have some disagreement with. Not only Irish but Holiday have been consistent in their conclusion that these specimens in Jebel Sahaba are not distinct from recent Sub Saharan African specimens, and in fact group with them over similarly dated ancient Northern African specimens, and recent inhabitants in Northeast Africa (Nilotes and Afro-Asiatic speakers).

"Bivariate analyses distinguish Jebel Sahaba from European and circumpolar samples, but do not tend to segregate them from recent North or sub-Saharan African samples. Multivariate analyses (principal components analysis, principal coordinates analysis with minimum spanning tree and neighbour-joining cluster analyses) indicate that the body shape of the Jebel Sahaba humans is most similar to that of recent sub-Saharan Africans and different from that of either the Levantine Natufians or the northwest African ‘Iberomaurusian’ samples. Importantly, these results corroborate those of both Irish and Franciscus, who, using dental, oral and nasal morphology, found that Jebel Sahaba was most similar to recent sub-Saharan Africans and morphologically distinct from their penecontemporaries in other parts of North Africa or the groups that succeed them in Nubia . Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd."

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/oa.2315

The fact that primary lineage of modern West Africans which is E-M2 is shown to have at sometimes been in the ancient Sudan region has not been brought up. The morphologies of West Africans/SSA's are the most distinct in the World for the most part. The fact these Jebel Sahaba specimens have closest affinity towards this distinct modern group is clearly an indication of shared ancestry at the least. Dr. Winters has made the argument via a linguistic source about ancient Egyptians dogs that it was in the Upper Nile that the Niger-Congo speaker originated, not Western Africa. A northward and Western migration from this region would make sense given these facts wouldn't you say?


 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Big O:

My issue with that notion of West Eurasian being a population standard is that it has been noted that the Near East has received African geneflow over the last 10,000 years. If they have known African ancestry than that would essentially make them a mixed raced group with shared affinities with African groups.

---

quote:

---

Sickle cell being found in the Levant makes African geneflow into the region.

---

Yes and not just the Levant but southern Europe as well.



But that's besides the point because the peoples of these regions today for the most part don't look African admixed even if they have such ancestry.

quote:

---

That's something that I have some disagreement with. Not only Irish but Holiday have been consistent in their conclusion that these specimens in Jebel Sahaba are not distinct from recent Sub Saharan African specimens, and in fact group with them over similarly dated ancient Northern African specimens, and recent inhabitants in Northeast Africa (Nilotes and Afro-Asiatic speakers).

---

quote:

---

The fact that primary lineage of modern West Africans which is E-M2 is shown to have at sometimes been in the ancient Sudan region has not been brought up. The morphologies of West Africans/SSA's are the most distinct in the World for the most part. The fact these Jebel Sahaba specimens have closest affinity towards this distinct modern group is clearly an indication of shared ancestry at the least. Dr. Winters has made the argument via a linguistic source about ancient Egyptians dogs that it was in the Upper Nile that the Niger-Congo speaker originated, not Western Africa. A northward and Western migration from this region would make sense given these facts wouldn't you say?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Antalas:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mansamusa:
Black has no scientific meaning and means different things in different political contexts. All Africans, Arabs, and Indians are Black in Great Britain for instance.

---

I don't think any person in the UK would consider north africans, arabs or indians as black so where did you get that from ?

---

I do think some North African and Arabs will be considered "Black". Logical when a person "looks Black" no distinction is made.




Half of North Africans look like the following:










It goes back to this previous argument:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Antalas:
Having dark skin doesn't mean they looked like any other dark skinned population.


WHG were dark skinned and yet still looked pretty much european, dravidians are dark skinned yet they don't look like nigerians or papuans, same could be said for amerindians, etc.

---

Of which Nigerians do you speak? And why did you select Nigerians as an example (sample) demographic?

Are the dravidians, papuans or amerindians outliers to their surrounding?

But indeed, Africans are most diverse.


 

---

Posted by Ish Geber (Member # 18264) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Antalas:

quote:

---

Originally posted by BrandonP:
We get it, you guys are so invested in anti-Blackness that you’ll force any rift between what you see as “Black people” and anyone else you want to lay claim to/have a higher opinion of. You might want to take a moment to ask yourself why you feel that way.

I mean, sure, dark-skinned peoples are diverse and don’t all look the same. Everyone here knows that. But people who make as big a deal about this fact as you do clearly have an investment in denying certain populations would be admissible as “Black” in any sense of the world. The implications behind that should be fucking obvious by now.

---

What does that have to do with "anti-blackness" ?? So now acknowledging the fact that not all dark skinned population are related to each other or look the same means I'm anti-black ?

---

quote:

---

"For the Taforalt individuals to be considered as being Basal Eurasians, we expect that their genomes do not share significantly more alleles with the Neanderthal genome than that sub- Saharan Africans do."

---