...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Deshret
»
OT: 100 things you SHOULD know about Africa
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by legeonas: [QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Supercar: Do you think that the Cro-magnon crania look like those of contemporary Europeans?[/QUOTE]As much as Grimaldi man looked like contemporary Africans [QUOTE]The Abydos royal tomps are in what was part of the "Nagadan complex". You use them separately as if you didn't know that; but then, you likely didn't. Those Royal Tombs are 'contemporaneous' with those found in Ta-Seti group burials at Qustul. The former doesn't precede the latter. [/QUOTE]Provide a source for your claim [QUOTE]Wegner offered very little rebuttal in way of William's claim, and in fact, William even responded to such critiques by demonstrating how they misquote him, and engage in strawman argumentation. You can read Bruce William in his own words here: http://wysinger.homestead.com/menes.pdf That the Ta-Seti elites would have been instrumental in the lead up to the formation of the Egyptian state, is without doubt; the importance of the "white crown" regalia throughout dynastic Egypt is evidence enough of this. This point, as raised by Williams, has not been refuted![/QUOTE]Hardly. [QUOTE]One hears constantly that the ancient Egyptians were derived from the Nubians. What's the evidence for this pray tell? Inscriptions, which ones? Rather, if you go back to Predynastic times, as long as human habitation is attested, there were some people in the Egyptian Nile Valley, as shown by stone tools discovered. These go back to Homo Erectus! Later, as the Sahara grew habitable during the Neolithic Wet Period, ca. 10,000 B.C., many Nile Valley and other river valley dwelling Africans streamed onto the Sahara, after the game animals, as they were yet hunter-gatherers. On the Sahara, there are the rock paintings to document their presence, from ca. 8000 B.C. onwards. They depict a transition to cattle pastoralism, probably around 7000 B.C. Later still they adopted agriculture and pottery making. As the Sahara began to grow arid, after 5000 B.C., some of these people returned to the Nile Valley. There, they intermingled with the local folk, and out of this arose both the Khartoum Neolithic (distinctly Nubian culture) and the Badarian and Delta Predynastic cultures in what is now Egypt. Early on their pottery is alike, but it traces back to both their Saharan ancestors. So also, their cattle pastoralism traces back to the Saharans. The Khartoum Neolithic culture though later becomes distinct from those developing in Egypt. Thereafter, the Predynastic Egyptians of the Valley developed the Naqadan culture, that eventually unified the land. In Naqada II, some Egyptians moved south of the First Cataract into Lower Nubia. There they intermingled with the Abkan peoples and produced the A-Group culture. During Naqada III, when chieftains emerged, and writing appeared, the A-Group were depicted as wearing pharaonic symbols (white crown) as shown on the Qustul Incense Burner, and using the falcon and serekh, as depicted on the Gebel Sheikh Suleiman rock carving. While some have quibbled that the incense burner was imported from Egypt, there's no way that the Gebel Sheikh Suleiman rock scene was imported from anywhere, and William Murnane in JNES (1987) demonstrated beyond cavil that it was not King Djer's rock carving, but a product of much earlier A-Group, from the horizon of Serekhs without royal names. As for the incense burner, its material is not Egyptian, nor are decorated incense burners typical of the Egyptian Naqada culture. So, it probably is an A-Group document. Thus the A-Group was using pharaonic imagery, and writing in a very early state, just as were the Upper Egyptian Naqada III emerging chieftains. So, where's the Nubian origin of Egyptian culture in all this? Khartoum Neolithic culture followed its own developmental track, but it had nothing to do with Naqada II-III Egypt. Sincerely, Frank J. Yurco University of Chicago [/QUOTE] [QUOTE]It is supported by studies like: [i]"A biological affinities study based on frequencies of cranial nonmetric traits in skeletal samples from three [b]cemeteries at predynastic Naqada[/b], Egypt, confirms the results of a recent nonmetric dental morphological analysis. Both cranial and dental traits analyses indicate that the [b]individuals buried in a cemetery characterized archaeologically as high status are significantly different from individuals buried in two other, apparently nonelite cemeteries and that the nonelite samples are not significantly different from each other.[/b] [b]A comparison with neighboring Nile Valley skeletal samples suggests that the [b]high status cemetery represents an endogamous ruling or elite segment of the local population at Naqada, which is more closely related to populations in northern Nubia than to neighboring populations in southern Egypt.[/b][/i] Extract from: American Journal of Physical Anthropology, Vol. 101, Issue 2, October 1996, Pages: 237-246[/QUOTE]So it indicates an affinity of people. similar ancestry, not that one started the other. Furthermore, notice that other populattins in Southern Egypt were not the same. Which speaks to variwty in the region. Great post. [QUOTE]It's relative, and nothing to do with earlier Nile Valley groups not having tropical body plans. Simply put, S. Zakrzewski said that: [i]The nature of the body plan was also investigated by comparing the intermembral, brachial, and crural indices for these samples with values obtained from the literature. No significant differences were found in either index through time for either sex. The raw values in Table 6 suggest that Egyptians had the “super-Negroid” body plan described by Robins (1983). The values for the brachial and crural indices show that the distal segments of each limb are longer relative to the proximal segments than in many “African” populations ( data from Aiello and Dean, 1990 ). This pattern is supported by Figure 7 ( a plot of population mean femoral and tibial lengths; data from Ruff, 1994 ), which indicates that the [b]Egyptians generally have tropical body plans.[/b] Of the Egyptian samples, [b]only the Badarian and Early Dynastic[/b] period populations have shorter tibiae than predicted from femoral length. [b]Despite these differences, **all samples** lie relatively **clustered together** as compared to the other populations."[/b][/i][/QUOTE] [QUOTE]She gave the paper at a symposium at Poznan. Here is a published summary of the paper and the discussion, it was not received well: S. Zakrzewski, "Human skeletal diversity in the Egyptian Nile Valley" - The speaker used the study of skeletal material in the absence of genetic evidence. She studied how diverse was the Predynastic Egyptian population. The source for this work were the collections in museums, not material from recent archaeological work. She found, not unexpectedly, that there were was a sexual differentiation being males taller than females. Also that through time, from the Badarian to the Early Dynastic, the stature increased. She said that if there was no significant change in the population, then there must have been dietary deficiencies. She concluded that from the Badarian, with a clear prognathism, there was a change because there were many broader crania in the Early Dynastic. The increasing variation could be due to population increase or the influx of outside individuals into the population (without involving migrations). J. J. Castillos objected to this paper's conclusions mainly because of the imprecise nature of the time periods (Badarian, Early Predynastic, Late Predynastic, Early Dynastic) which were taken from sometimes old and obsolete museum records and which are understood differently by different scholars. The speaker replied that she used the chronology as given in the museums and she could do nothing about that. Then J. J. Castillos objected to conclusions on height variation based on just a few examples (small samples), she replied that it was regulated in the statistical approach to make the results significant in spite of that. Finally, J. J. Castillos objected to the amount of variation in stature, for women of about 3 to 4 cm in 1,500 years, which he found hardly significant, she replied that it was nevertheless significant. ******** The conclusion of the paper as published in American Journal of Physical anthropology 121:228 This study found an increase in stature within Egyptians from the Predynastic until the start of the dynastic period, followed by a later decline in height. this increase in stature with intensification of agriculture was predicted as a result of greater reliability of food production, and the formation of social ranking. The later decreases in stature coincides with even greater social complexity, and is expected as it implies that the formation of social classes is allied to differential access to nutrition and health care, with higher ranked individuals being preferentially treated and fed. This change in stature was much greater in males than in females. Long bone lenghts also increased from the Badarian to the Early dynastic periods more for males than for females, and again decreased to a greater extent through the OK and MK periods among males than females. this greater response to changes in socioeconomic status by males was previously described in modern children (Malina et al., 1985; Stinson 1985). the present study thus supports the greater response to environmental stresses, including positive stresses, in males than in females. The present study suggests that changes in stature and body size occurred in Egypt with the development of social ranking, through a reflection of differential access to food and other resources. These results must remain provisional due to the relatively small sample sizes and the lack of skeletal material that cross-cuts all social and economic groups within each time period. Further research on recently excavated skeletal material is therefore needed to further address the issues raised.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE]...and what specific lineages did Dr. Kamal find from "ancient Specimens", which remarkably survived DNA contamination?[/QUOTE]You will have to ask her. [QUOTE]The script has nothing to do with Europeans or Indians, and you haven't produced any shred of evidence of this.[/QUOTE]It was a hypothesis. Havew you presented any evidence to refute it? No. [QUOTE]During the height of Mali's wealth, no European country could compare, and especially not London.[/QUOTE]In brute wealth? Maybe. Technology, maybe not. Still not China. [QUOTE]BTW, on what "primary texts" dating back to the height of Malian wealth, are you basing the population numbers...written by whom, and where at the time? [/QUOTE]It was the same source I posted that link praising Timbuktu. As reliable as the claim and source of Robin's. http://www.ecowas.info/timbuk.htm This one claims 100,000 the same as London. But during the Songhai period. 16th century I believe. [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
Contact Us
|
EgyptSearch!
(c) 2015 EgyptSearch.com
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3