posted
Browsin through Wikipedia and its sayin Yurco said somewhere between pages 62-100 that DNA studies prove modern Egyptians are 90% the same as AE and that inflow from Turks, Greeks and other groups only changed the genetic composition of Egyptians by 10%. Is there any literature on this? Wikipedia cites Black Athena revisited so I cant really tell if he said it or not..
beyoku Member # 14524
posted
Bullshit, Ancient DNA has proved this incorrect. Unless they are talking about Sub Saharan and Saharan immigrants that hold Egyptian citizenship.
Genetics have proved even Modern Europeans are very very different from their ancient ancestors.
This just in:
62-100 that DNA studies prove modern Americans are 90% the same as Ancient Americans.*~
*Mexican immigrants with American citizenship. ~Native American reservation populations.
Oshun Member # 19740
posted
Can you give me some research on this?? Im makin a wiki.
zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova Member # 15718
posted
quote:Originally posted by Oshun: Browsin through Wikipedia and its sayin Yurco said somewhere between pages 62-100 that DNA studies prove modern Egyptians are 90% the same as AE and that inflow from Turks, Greeks and other groups only changed the genetic composition of Egyptians by 10%. Is there any literature on this? Wikipedia cites Black Athena revisited so I cant really tell if he said it or not..
^^Sounds like typical Wiki distortion and BS. Can you post the exact Yurco quote and citation where he said this? Some months ago I heard a similar claim and asked for proof and the poster vanished. BUt maybe you saw this new citation and quote. Can you post it? Thanks. We'll wait...
Vansertimavindicated Member # 20281
posted
Hey i have an idea you filthy stringy haired reprobate!!!! make a wiki on Clyde Winters!!!!
I DARE YOU!!!! HAHAHAHA!!!!
iT MUST SUCK TO BE A WHITE LOSER!!!
zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova Member # 15718
posted Wikipedia cites Black Athena revisited so I cant really tell if he said it or not..
^^The only problem is that Yurco says no such thing in Black Athena Revisited. The "citation" on Wikipedia claiming this is therefore bogus.
Djehuti Member # 6698
posted
quote:Originally posted by Oshun: Browsin through Wikipedia and its sayin Yurco said somewhere between pages 62-100 that DNA studies prove modern Egyptians are 90% the same as AE and that inflow from Turks, Greeks and other groups only changed the genetic composition of Egyptians by 10%. Is there any literature on this? Wikipedia cites Black Athena revisited so I cant really tell if he said it or not..
That depends on where exactly in Egypt they got their modern samples from, and perhaps when and where the ancient samples are from. Egypt is indeed a much more diverse place than in ancient times. Why it even has the label of an 'Arab' Republic.
I don't know exactly which study Yurco was referring to (if Yurco really did so), but I do know that back in 2004 (the year of his death) a study was published called 'The Levant versus the Horn of Africa: Evidence for Bidirectional Corridors of Human Migrations' here and it provided a map showing Y hg analysis several modern African populations including Egyptians.
^ Note the Egyptian sample comes from 'Arab' Egyptians of major centers like Cairo, yet still shows a significant percentage of African E lineages though with a majority of lineages that are Eurasian including some dubiously labeled as such.
The authors of the study such as Underhill, Luis, etc. state that the African lineages are an older substratum while the Eurasian lineages are recent. This study deals with modern populations so I don't about any ancient genetic sampling.
Again, I don't know what study Yurco is referring to though I have heard all too often from Hawass about a DNA comparison study between ancient Giza inhabitants and modern day ones and that they were nearly identical.
The Giza community is quite rural as far as northern Egyptian communities go, so it's not surprising there are Giza men who look like this.
Then again, it was shown several times in this forum that some ancient skeletal samples in the Giza area, particularly those from the Persian to Greco-Roman periods are those of foreigners as per the findings of Dr. Zakrzewski.
So again, this all goes back to exactly which study this is and where in Egypt and in what period do the ancient samples come from and where in modern Egypt the samples come from.
By the way, I don't have Black Athena Revisited, though I can check it out from the library.
Djehuti Member # 6698
posted
quote:Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova: "Wikipedia cites Black Athena revisited so I cant really tell if he said it or not.. "
^^The only problem is that Yurco says no such thing in Black Athena Revisited. The "citation" on Wikipedia claiming this is therefore bogus.
LOL Well in that case, nevermind!
It's why I questioned whether Yurco made such a reference-- since when the hell can you trust wiki regarding such info?
Oshun Member # 19740
posted
I didnt. That's why I wanted to know if anyone read Black Athena revisited. It says on wikipedia the Yurco passage from (pages 62-100) mentioned or theorized a 90% genetic commonality between ancient and modern Egyptians. Meh....
Mike111 Member # 9361
posted
^By all accounts, it seems that University of Chicago Egyptologist Frank Yurco DID say it - so what???
When researching ANYTHING two things must be in place.
1) You understand that Albinos will lie - or obfuscate the truth. 2) You MUST know the history of the subject population.
The Libyans power had grown such that soon after the death of Pharaoh Ramesses III, some of his successors were apparently compelled to share power with a Libyan general named Sheshong, who apparently was Lord of Bubastis and also titled Great Chief of Meshwesh. He seems to have been related by marriage to the Ramesside dynasty (either his grandmother was also mother of a king, or his aunt had married a king).
Libyans continued to rule - with interruptions by the Nubians (25th dynasty), Assyrians (after the Nubians), Ahmose II who was probably the 5th ruler of Egypt during the 26th Dynasty - he was probably pure Egyptian, The Persians (27th dynasty, then back to the Libyans with king Amyrtaios (28th dynasty) and ending with Nectanebo II (30th dynasty). 360-343 B.C.
The Greeks:
By now a mulatto people, ruled from 332 B.C. to 51 B.C.
The Romans:
Also a mulatto people, ruled from 51 B.C. to 627 A.D.
The Arabs - a pure Black people, ruled from 627 to 868.
The Turks
868 is the beginning of TURKISH rule with the Tulunid dynasty: It was during the rule of Abbasid caliph Harun ar-Rashid (ruled 786-809), that the caliphs began assigning Egypt to Turks rather than to Arabs. The first Turkish dynasty was that of Ibn Tulun who entered Egypt in 868.
.
By the end of World War II, the power of "Pure" Turks had been broken, leading to the ascension of "Turk mulattoes" who self-identified as Egyptians.
.
.
Total time of Turk rule:
1144 years and counting.
(Note: the rule of Kafur was too short to count, and the Fatimid Dynasty wound-up Turkish anyway).
Mike111 Member # 9361
posted ^So the, with an understanding of Egyptian history, and knowing that THESE people would represent Egyptians in the Pre-modern period:
. These stele are from Kom Abou Billou, the necropolis of Terenouthis; one of Egypts oldest. Containing burials from the time of Pharaoh Pepy I (2,300 B.C.) and continuing in constant use, through the Graeco-Roman period.
And THESE people represent Egyptians in the "Modern" period.
Mike111 Member # 9361
posted ^As you can clearly see;
"Modern" Egyptians are almost completely - a Turkish Mulatto people.
With that information in hand;
THEN, and only THEN, may you consider material such as the following.
Mike111 Member # 9361
posted
Origins of the Egyptians
(A discussion)
Quote: Over the years, the findings of archaeology, biological anthropology and population genetics have shed light on the origins of the Egyptians. The indigenous Nile Valley population became firmly established during the Pleistocene epoch when nomadic hunter-gatherers began living along the Nile River. Traces of these proto-Egyptians appear in the form of artifacts and rock carvings in the terraces of the Nile and the desert oases. Beginning in the predynastic period, some differences between the populations of Upper and Lower Egypt were ascertained through their skeletal remains, suggesting a gradual clinal pattern north to south.
When Lower and Upper Egypt were unified c. 3150 BC, the distinction began to blur, resulting in a more "homogeneous" population in Egypt, though the distinction remains true to some degree to this day. Some biological anthropologists such as Shomarka Keita believe the range of variability to be primarily indigenous and not necessarily the result of significant intermingling of widely divergent peoples. Keita describes the northern and southern patterns of the early predynastic period as "northern-Egyptian-Maghreb" and "tropical African variant" (overlapping with Nubia/Kush) respectively. He shows that a progressive change in Upper Egypt toward the northern Egyptian pattern takes place through the predynastic period. The southern pattern continues to predominate in Abydos, Upper Egypt by the First Dynasty, but "lower Egyptian, Maghrebian, and European patterns are observed also, thus making for great diversity."
A 2006 bioarchaeological study on the dental morphology of ancient Egyptians by Prof. Joel Irish shows dental traits characteristic of indigenous North Africans and to a lesser extent Southwest Asian and southern European populations. Among the samples included in the study is skeletal material from the Hawara tombs of Fayum, which clustered very closely with the Badarian series of the predynastic period. All the samples, particularly those of the Dynastic period, were significantly divergent from a neolithic West Saharan sample from Lower Nubia. Biological continuity was also found intact from the dynastic to the post-pharaonic periods. According to Irish:
[The Egyptian] samples [996 mummies] exhibit morphologically simple, mass-reduced dentitions that are similar to those in populations from greater North Africa (Irish, 1993, 1998a–c, 2000) and, to a lesser extent, western Asia and Europe (Turner, 1985a; Turner and Markowitz, 1990; Roler, 1992; Lipschultz, 1996; Irish, 1998a). Similar craniofacial measurements among samples from these regions were reported as well (Brace et al., 1993)... an inspection of MMD values reveals no evidence of increasing phenetic distance between samples from the first and second halves of this almost 3,000-year-long period. For example, phenetic distances between First-Second Dynasty Abydos and samples from Fourth Dynasty Saqqara (MMD ¼ 0.050), 11-12th Dynasty Thebes (0.000), 12th Dynasty Lisht (0.072), 19th Dynasty Qurneh (0.053), and 26th–30th Dynasty Giza (0.027) do not exhibit a directional increase through time... Thus, despite increasing foreign influence after the Second Intermediate Period, not only did Egyptian culture remain intact (Lloyd, 2000a), but the people themselves, as represented by the dental samples, appear biologically constant as well... Gebel Ramlah [Neolithic Nubian/Western Desert sample] is, in fact, significantly different from Badari based on the 22-trait MMD (Table 4). For that matter, the Neolithic Western Desert sample is significantly different from all others [but] is closest to predynastic and early dynastic samples.
A group of noted physical anthropologists conducted craniofacial studies of Egyptian skeletal remains and concluded similarly that "the Egyptians have been in place since back in the Pleistocene and have been largely unaffected by either invasions or migrations. As others have noted, Egyptians are Egyptians, and they were so in the past as well."
Genetic analysis of modern Egyptians reveals that they have paternal lineages common to indigenous North Africans/Berber populations primarily, and to Near Eastern peoples to a lesser extent — these lineages would have spread during the Neolithic and maintained by the predynastic period. Studies based on maternal lineages also link Egyptians with people from modern Eritrea and Ethiopia who are characterized by haplogroup M1 believed to have originated in West Asia.
University of Chicago Egyptologist Frank Yurco confirmed this finding of historical and regional continuity, saying:
Certainly there was some foreign admixture [in Egypt], but basically a homogeneous African population had lived in the Nile Valley from ancient to modern times... [the] Badarian people, who developed the earliest Predynastic Egyptian culture, already exhibited the mix of North African and Sub-Saharan physical traits that have typified Egyptians ever since (Hassan 1985; Yurco 1989; Trigger 1978; Keita 1990; Brace et al., this volume)... The peoples of Egypt, the Sudan, and much of East Africa, Ethiopia and Somalia are now generally regarded as a Nilotic (i.e. Nile River) continuity, with widely ranging physical features (complexions light to dark, various hair and craniofacial types) but with powerful common cultural traits, including cattle pastoralist traditions (Trigger 1978; Bard, Snowden, this volume). Language research suggests that this Saharan-Nilotic population became speakers of the Afro-Asiatic languages... Semitic was evidently spoken by Saharans who crossed the Red Sea into Arabia and became ancestors of the Semitic speakers there, possibly around 7000 BC... In summary we may say that Egypt was distinct North African culture rooted in the Nile Valley and on the Sahara.
Mike111 Member # 9361
posted
quote:Originally posted by Mike111:
1) You understand that Albinos will lie - or obfuscate the truth.
Please note that in the "Supposed" scholarly/scientific discussion above;
NOWHERE ARE THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE RULED EGYPT FOR THE LAST 1144 YEARS MENTIONED!
pg 65, Frank Yurco, Black Athena Revisited Edited by Mary R. Lefkowitz, Guy MacLean Rogers
Mike111 Member # 9361
posted
Hey lioness, I wondered where you were, glad to have you back. All the others do is run away after they take a Black history lesson. I know that I can depend on you to post mindless junk in response.
But this is good, not because it actually says anything, but rather because it is an excellent example of Albino bullsh1t.
Quote: A homogeneous African population had lived in the Nile Valley from ancient to modern times.
That is of course ABSOLUTELY TRUE!
The bullsh1t part comes in with what's NOT said. And with the added-on sentence, Quote:
It simply happened that North African Nilotic peoples showed a wide variety of skin complexions, hair types, and craniofacial structures.
Now Lioness, I know, that you know, that Etymologically, the terms Nilotic and Nilote (also spelled Nilot) derive from the Nile Valley, specifically the Upper Nile and its tributaries, where most Sudanese Nilo-Saharan-speaking people live.
Here is a map of their range:
(Areas where Nilotic Languages are spoken)
Previously I had shown that Frank Yurco was one of your typical "Degenerate Albino Liars" and of course Mary R. Lefkowitz is queen of the cabal, so now we can add Guy MacLean Rogers to the list.
He,he,he: Yes Lioness, I'm just having fun. Obviously in their rush to get out their degenerate lies, they misspoke.
Okay, back to their nonsense.
Quote: A homogeneous African population had lived in the Nile Valley from ancient to modern times. Of course this is true. But that ONLY referrers to people like THIS!
The reason why they added-on the other sentence was to get the ignorant to envision people like THIS!
. This young woman is obviously a MUTT! A Turk Quadroon (1/4 Black) it appears: (she is too pale to be a mulatto - 1/2 Black).
Which brings up the "Play-on-words" that these degenerate Albino liars used that spurred these threads.
Quote: A group of noted physical anthropologists conducted craniofacial studies of Egyptian skeletal remains and concluded similarly that "the Egyptians have been in place since back in the Pleistocene and have been largely unaffected by either invasions or migrations.
YES, there ARE still PURE-BLOOD Black Egyptians in Egypt!
He,he,he:
But they're not who the degenerate lying Albinos were trying to get the ignorant reader to envision. When they wrote that, they were trying to get the ignorant to think of these people.
. Why?
Very simple; for hundreds of years now, the Albinos have been trying to create a fake history for themselves. They were menial Albinos who now find themselves, masters of the world; they desire a history commensurate with their new-found status.
Since they have no real history of their own, they have been trying to make one, where they were a part of all of the Black mans great achievements.
How do the people in the Egyptian Poe-poree above figure into all of that?
Simple - they are "Mulattoes".
In order to get a Mulatto, you need one Black, and one Albino.
So by definition, if those people actually descended from from ancient Egyptians AND NOT modern invaders; then that would prove that Albinos were a part of ancient Egyptian civilization.
He,he,he:
That's were I come in:
As you know, at every turn, I make sure to point out that they are Turk invaders, and most certainly NOT, native to Egypt.
the lioness Member # 17353
posted
^^^all the man wanted was to see the actual Yurco quote, instead a Mike picture and propaganda fest, trying to tell him how to think
pg 65, Frank Yurco, Black Athena Revisited Edited by Mary R. Lefkowitz, Guy MacLean Rogers
Not surprising, Yurco has always been on the AE-aren't-black side. He's just more sophisticated than earlier Eurocentrics. Don't know why some are trying to claim him otherwise.
the lioness Member # 17353
posted
^^^^^ what section of the above quote is suggesting the Egyptians weren't black? He says they were African Nilotics. The Dinka for example are the largest Nilotic group in Sudan and many are some of the darkest people in Africa.
pg 65, Frank Yurco, Black Athena Revisited Edited by Mary R. Lefkowitz, Guy MacLean Rogers
^^Indeed lioness. So where do the Wiki "citations" get the so called claim that: "modern Egyptians are 90% the same as AE and that inflow from Turks, Greeks and other groups only changed the genetic composition of Egyptians by 10%."
^^A perfect Exhibit of the bogus Wikipedia claims being pushed with doctored "scholarship" and "references"..
Originally posted by Oshun: Browsin through Wikipedia and its sayin Yurco said somewhere between pages 62-100 that DNA studies prove modern Egyptians are 90% the same as AE and that inflow from Turks, Greeks and other groups only changed the genetic composition of Egyptians by 10%. Is there any literature on this? Wikipedia cites Black Athena revisited so I cant really tell if he said it or not..
Swenet Member # 17303
posted
@Zaharan
You're probably right about Yurco never having said the percentage thing mentioned in the OP, but it probably isn't that far off from what he actually believed.
Gotsta give it to Angelina this time. Yurco is useless where the populational affinities of the Ancient Egyptians are concerned. His habit of flip flopping on this specific topic is testament to this.
Let us not forget it was him, among others, who vehemently lied about the existence of the Ramses III scenery, as reproduced by Diop and others.
Djehuti is right in saying earlier that flip flopping on the topic of the biological origins of the ancient Egyptians is a general tendency of many Egyptologists. From Yurco, to Shaw, to Hawass, etc.
You can tell what a dunce he must have been, for citing Strouhal 1971, aka Mr. ''the original Europid Nubians were overran by several negroid waves'', as a reference to counter the dynastic race theory.
the lioness Member # 17353
posted
This is what wikipedia said:
[4] Frank Yurco, chapter from Black Athena Revisited. Press, 1996. pp. 62–100
______________________________
this is what Yurco said
^^^^ Here is the key Yurco statement:
"...a homogeneous African population had lived in the Nile Valley from ancient to modern times"
the key wiki statement:
"Recent DNA studies have indicated that ancient Egyptians had an approximate 90% genetic commonality with modern Egyptians, which would make the current population largely representative of the ancient inhabitants[4]"
Oshun interprets the wikipedia as saying:
quote:Originally posted by Oshun: Browsin through Wikipedia and its sayin Yurco said somewhere between pages 62-100 that DNA studies prove modern Egyptians are 90% the same as AE and that inflow from Turks, Greeks and other groups only changed the genetic composition of Egyptians by 10%. Is there any literature on this? Wikipedia cites Black Athena revisited so I cant really tell if he said it or not..
Wikipedia says nothing about Turks and Greeks. Although Turks and Greeks had taken over Egypt Oshun has not provided evidence that modern Egypt therefore has large percentages of people with Turkish or Greek ancestry
Oshun Member # 19740
posted
You're reading into those specific groups as I said other groups. The wiki implied that foreign (esp. non African) invasions in general only changed the genetic composition by 10%
zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova Member # 15718
posted Wikipedia says nothing about Turks and Greeks
^^Yurco says noting about any 90% Egyptians...
claus3600 Member # 19584
posted
@Lioness
I seem to remember you saying that you post on wikipedia. Is this true?
claus3600 Member # 19584
posted
Shomarka Keita 'No one can say exactly what colour they {Ancient Egyptians} were, but one might reasonably say that the typical Upper Egyptian to Nubian color would have been the modal colour in most of the country.'
In another e-mail Keita writes that 'Without an analysis of histology of the skin and accurate portraits one cannot say how they looked. We can extrapolate by lookng at the variability of the modern Egyptian with a focus on Upper Egyptian, considering a predictive approach based on latitude, and imagining what they would have been like without the gene flow from the Near East and Europe over thousands of years. This will help you conceptualise the variability of the Nile indigenous population...My research cannot indicate skin colour in any empirical sense.'
Mike111 Member # 9361
posted
claus3600 - Keita's comments seem rather dated. There has not been serious discussion of the AE race in quite a while. That because of the overwhelming evidence of their phenotype and analysis of mummies. The exception being Hawasse's refusal to release Tuts DNA. Would you mind telling the date of those comments?
As much as I admire Keita's work, I sometimes find him pusillanimous. I hear that he doesn't believe in the concept of race, so won't use it in the context of Egypt...however, I did hear him say in reference to a hypothetical relating to an African-American 'quote, unquote 'black''. Why this can't be used in relation to the Kemetians I don't know.
Robin Walker suggests that this is because Keita is a Muslim and is reluctant to use the term 'black' for fear of alienating Arab Muslims.
Mike111 Member # 9361
posted
^Great word there "pusillanimous" he,he, I had to look it up.
But ya, as soon as someone starts talking that nonsense of "No Races" you know that you are dealing with some sort of apologist, and it's best to leave.
Vansertimavindicated Member # 20281
posted
the ancient Egyptians were sub saharan Africans and the ancestors of the ancient Egyptians are the modern day Black populations is
1) South Africa 2) tropical west Africa 3) central africa 4) African Americans in the United states
IF YOU DONT BELIEVE ME JUST LOOK AT THE DNA ANALYSIS OF KING TUT AND HIS ENTIRE FAMILY!
pg 65, Frank Yurco, Black Athena Revisited Edited by Mary R. Lefkowitz, Guy MacLean Rogers
And since this was in Mary Lefkowitz book we can see why she included such nonsense. It is in direct contradiction to what studies of population biolgoy have shown.
The homogeneity of the ancient Egyptians ended forever with the arrival and settlement of the Greek Ptolemies after which time according to population biologists there are notable differences in the types of populations that were found.
These determinations were made on the basis of genetically determined traits which are those used by Brace and others.
Thus Yurco was apparently was expressing his own opinion or hopes about the situation of the present United Arab Republic of Egypt.
On the other hand it looks like he's talking mainly about the Upper Egyptian population, for the most part, in which case he would be mostly right in saying they have been largely linked to the ancient Egyptians and Nilotes in general, OF COURSE.
It shows what kind of intelligience and capacity these people have for interpreting information they read. Doesn't it LYIN_SS?
pg 65, Frank Yurco, Black Athena Revisited Edited by Mary R. Lefkowitz, Guy MacLean Rogers
And since this was in Mary Lefkowitz book we can see why she included such nonsense. It is in direct contradiction to what studies of population biolgoy have shown.
The homogeneity of the ancient Egyptians ended forever with the arrival and settlement of the Greek Ptolemies after which time according to population biologists there are notable differences in the types of populations that were found.
These determinations were made on the basis of genetically determined traits which are those used by Brace and others.
Thus Yurco was apparently was expressing his own opinion or hopes about the situation of the present United Arab Republic of Egypt.
On the other hand it looks like he's talking mainly about the Upper Egyptian population, for the most part, in which case he would be mostly right in saying they have been largely linked to the ancient Egyptians and Nilotes in general, OF COURSE.
It shows what kind of intelligience and capacity these people have for interpreted information they read. Doesn't it LYIN_SS?
I don't know if it does.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: This is what wikipedia said:
[4] Frank Yurco, chapter from Black Athena Revisited. Press, 1996. pp. 62–100
^^^Oshun had pointed to this wikipedia quote.
-I had access to most of Yurco's pages in this book but not all so I can't tell for sure Yurco did not mention "90%" specifically. The footnote [4] suggests that he did. But put aside for the moment if it was Yurco that said that. Lets first deal with what wikipedia said:
quote:Originally posted by Oshun: The wiki implied that foreign (esp. non African) invasions in general only changed the genetic composition by 10%
^^^^ yes that sums up what they said.
Here is one thing Frank Yurco did say:
...a homogeneous African population had lived in the Nile Valley from ancient to modern times"
Somebody could argue that the statements are consistent, that invasions in general only changed the genetic composition of Egypt by 10% and that therefore you could call the population "homogeneous"
Let's assume with only 10% admixture is the same as a claim modern Egypt is "homogeneous" and 90% of the people are descendants of the ancient Egyptians.
You are saying no, "The homogeneity of the ancient Egyptians ended forever with the arrival and settlement of the Greek Ptolemies" and that to call modern Egypt 90% homogeneous is: " in direct contradiction to what studies of population biolgoy have shown"
OK dana, prove it with population studies you mention quoted, that Egypt is not homogeneous. Prove it with population studies you mention that wikipedia is wrong to say "Recent DNA studies have indicated that ancient Egyptians had an approximate 90% genetic commonality with modern Egyptians"
let's see some data, some facts to prove that is wrong
Vansertimavindicated Member # 20281
posted
the ancient Egyptians were sub saharan Africans and the ancestors of the ancient Egyptians are the modern day Black populations is
1) South Africa 2) tropical west Africa 3) central africa 4) African Americans in the United states
IF YOU DONT BELIEVE ME JUST LOOK AT THE DNA ANALYSIS OF KING TUT AND HIS ENTIRE FAMILY!
posted
Yurco can't be used to cite genetic continuity, let alone of 90%. And how someone appears aint who gotta be who the closest relative is. I'm bettin the studies he cited when trying to suggest homogeneity didnt involve genetic comparisons. What DNA has been taken from Egyptian mummies so far doesnt support a genetic similarity to modern Egyptians (overall) of 90% exists. And if it did it would probably be among SOME upper Egyptians. Has anyone seen Batwari 1945 and 1946? He seems to use this to suggest continuity.
quote:
The homogeneity of the ancient Egyptians ended forever with the arrival and settlement of the Greek Ptolemies after which time according to population biologists there are notable differences in the types of populations that were found.
You got studies on that. Itd be a big help for the wiki!!!
Swenet Member # 17303
posted
From what I recall Batrawi is of the mindset that Upper Egyptians and lower Nubians were mostly indistinguishable, and that after a certain period (I believe it was the New Kingdom), Upper Egyptians started to resemble Lower Egyptians.
Vansertimavindicated Member # 20281
posted
the ancient Egyptians were sub saharan Africans and the ancestors of the ancient Egyptians are the modern day Black populations is
1) South Africa 2) tropical west Africa 3) central africa 4) African Americans in the United states
IF YOU DONT BELIEVE ME JUST LOOK AT THE DNA ANALYSIS OF KING TUT AND HIS ENTIRE FAMILY!
It turns out that DNA analysis irrefutably proves that the Egyptians share VERY LITTLE Dna with the modern populations in the Horn of Africa and the Sudan! And it renders anyone who dares to say that the modern population in Egypt was anything close to the ancient Egyptians!
posted
Yeah, I lost hope in Yurco once I heard about his flip-flopping and lying about the scene from RamsesIII tomb.
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: @Zaharan
You're probably right about Yurco never having said the percentage thing mentioned in the OP, but it probably isn't that far off from what he actually believed.
Gotsta give it to Angelina this time. Yurco is useless where the populational affinities of the Ancient Egyptians are concerned. His habit of flip flopping on this specific topic is testament to this.
Let us not forget it was him, among others, who vehemently lied about the existence of the Ramses III scenery, as reproduced by Diop and others.
Djehuti is right in saying earlier that flip flopping on the topic of the biological origins of the ancient Egyptians is a general tendency of many Egyptologists. From Yurco, to Shaw, to Hawass, etc.
You can tell what a dunce he must have been, for citing Strouhal 1971, aka Mr. ''the original Europid Nubians were overran by several negroid waves'', as a reference to counter the dynastic race theory.
Clyde Winters Member # 10129
posted
quote:Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-: Yeah, I lost hope in Yurco once I heard about his flip-flopping and lying about the scene from RamsesIII tomb.
Why have you lost hope in Yurco, he and Keita are saying the same thing.
There is no difference between Keita's theory of continuity between ancient and modern Egyptian populations than that of Frank Yurco.
quote: In 2008, S. O. Y. Keita wrote that "There is no scientific reason to believe that the primary ancestors of the Egyptian population emerged and evolved outside of northeast Africa.... The basic overall genetic profile of the modern population is consistent with the diversity of ancient populations that would have been indigenous to northeastern Africa and subject to the range of evolutionary influences over time, although researchers vary in the details of their explanations of those influences." [135]
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: This is what wikipedia said:
[4] Frank Yurco, chapter from Black Athena Revisited. Press, 1996. pp. 62–100
______________________________
this is what Yurco said
Here is the key Yurco statement:
"...a homogeneous African population had lived in the Nile Valley from ancient to modern times"
Here is the key Keita statement: " The basic overall genetic profile of the modern population is consistent with the diversity of ancient populations..."
The statement of Keita is just about the same as Yurco's.
.
Keita supports the Eurocentric view that the same population in North Africa today has characterized North Africa since pre-Egyptian times; and that Egypt was a multiracial society that contained 'white' people. This is why many trolls claim posters who support Keita can't read.
.
Troll Patrol Member # 18264
posted
And the best of all is:
"Analysis of Predinastic skeletal material showed tropical African elements in the population of the earliest populations of the earliest Badarian culture" [...]
"a homogeneous African population had lived in the Nile Valley from ancient to modern times"
Case closed!
Clyde Winters Member # 10129
posted
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol: And the best of all is:
"Analysis of Predinastic skeletal material showed "tropical African elements" in the population of the earliest populations of the earliest Badarian culture" [...]
"a homogeneous African population had lived in the Nile Valley from ancient to modern times"
Case closed!
Correct both Yurco and Keita see "tropical African elements" among the ancient Egyptians. This only means that there were some Blacks in Egypt. This is the mainstream view of ancient Egypt.
Troll Patrol Member # 18264
posted
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: ^By all accounts, it seems that University of Chicago Egyptologist Frank Yurco DID say it - so what???
When researching ANYTHING two things must be in place.
1) You understand that Albinos will lie - or obfuscate the truth. 2) You MUST know the history of the subject population.
The Libyans power had grown such that soon after the death of Pharaoh Ramesses III, some of his successors were apparently compelled to share power with a Libyan general named Sheshong, who apparently was Lord of Bubastis and also titled Great Chief of Meshwesh. He seems to have been related by marriage to the Ramesside dynasty (either his grandmother was also mother of a king, or his aunt had married a king).
Libyans continued to rule - with interruptions by the Nubians (25th dynasty), Assyrians (after the Nubians), Ahmose II who was probably the 5th ruler of Egypt during the 26th Dynasty - he was probably pure Egyptian, The Persians (27th dynasty, then back to the Libyans with king Amyrtaios (28th dynasty) and ending with Nectanebo II (30th dynasty). 360-343 B.C.
The Greeks:
By now a mulatto people, ruled from 332 B.C. to 51 B.C.
The Romans:
Also a mulatto people, ruled from 51 B.C. to 627 A.D.
The Arabs - a pure Black people, ruled from 627 to 868.
The Turks
868 is the beginning of TURKISH rule with the Tulunid dynasty: It was during the rule of Abbasid caliph Harun ar-Rashid (ruled 786-809), that the caliphs began assigning Egypt to Turks rather than to Arabs. The first Turkish dynasty was that of Ibn Tulun who entered Egypt in 868.
.
By the end of World War II, the power of "Pure" Turks had been broken, leading to the ascension of "Turk mulattoes" who self-identified as Egyptians.
.
.
Total time of Turk rule:
1144 years and counting.
(Note: the rule of Kafur was too short to count, and the Fatimid Dynasty wound-up Turkish anyway).
Cosign, although Anwar Sadat had Nubian ancestry from the South. He is known as the last pharaoh.
One day another will rise again.
The others you've posted indeed have Ottoman elements. This is a historical fact.
Troll Patrol Member # 18264
posted
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol: And the best of all is:
"Analysis of Predinastic skeletal material showed "tropical African elements" in the population of the earliest populations of the earliest Badarian culture" [...]
"a homogeneous African population had lived in the Nile Valley from ancient to modern times"
Case closed!
Correct both Yurco and Keita see "tropical African elements" among the ancient Egyptians. This only means that there were some Blacks in Egypt. This is the mainstream view of ancient Egypt.
You fail to comprehend.
This is why you try to twist it. The closest to ancient Egyptians are people from the South of Egypt.
Here is another scholar saying the same.
Sonia R. Zakrzewski*
Little change in body shape was found through time, suggesting that all body segments were varying in size in response to environmental and social conditions. The change found in body plan is suggested to be the result of the later groups having a more tropical (Nilotic) form than the preceding populations. Am J Phys Anthropol, 2003.
The results indicate overall population continuity over the Predynastic and early Dynastic, and high levels of genetic heterogeneity, thereby suggesting that state formation occurred as a mainly indigenous process. Nevertheless, significant differences were found in morphology between both geographically-pooled and cemetery-specific temporal groups, indicating that some migration occurred along the Egyptian Nile Valley over the periods studied. Am J Phys Anthropol, 2007.
Hence "tropical African elements"!!!!!!!!!!!! Not cold adapted or something other then tropical African affinity, got it!!!!!!!!!! Meaning the ancient Egyptians were indigenous Africans from the South. And the post below is a nice addition.
mena7 Member # 20555
posted
Egypt/kemet was a united states of 42 african tribes/sepat/nomes that you can find today in the so call subsahara africa among them the sonike,mande,haoussa,yoruba,ibo,akan,luo,ga,bamun,jukun,darfur,kongo,wolof,tutsi,kalenjin,adja,fon,galla,igara,beja,torro,hutu,mangbetu etc.The modern egyptian are a mulato turk/euro .The 42 tribes of egypt egypt42 also migrate in large number in south spain,central italy and greece thats why south euro dna match north african/egyptian mulato dna .Cranology,dnalogy,bonelogy are distraction if the descendant of egyptian are black/brown in africa thats mean they were black in egypt .
posted 
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
