...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Egyptology
»
Ancient west Eurasian ancestry in southern and eastern Africa 2013
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Swenet: [QB] [QUOTE] Originally posted by Djehuti Of course I was being facetious when I wrote the part you quoted. [b]No doubt the author and many others are trying to revive the Hamitic hypothesis.[/b][/QUOTE]^No, they don't, or, at least, they can't from this data. If anything, it destroys the Hamitic hypothesis as it suggests that most of the admixture in East African populations dates to 3kya and linguistically coincides with the introduction of Ethio-Semitic languages per [URL=http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/early/2009/04/27/rspb.2009.0408.full]Kitchen et al 2009's[/URL] glottochronological dating, and other indications. This admixture date is way too late to pertain to the Afrasan element among proto Egypto-Nubians that Euronuts obsessively want(ed) to include in such a Hamitic construct. In fact, European encounters with Egypto-Nubians (not with Abyssinians and related Horner populations) was the reason why the word 'Hamitic' acquired its current extra-biblical, Caucasian, connotations: [QUOTE]This belief, often referred to as the Hamitic hypothesis, is a convenient explanation for all the signs of civilization found in Black Africa. It was these Caucasoids, we read, who taught the Negro how to manufacture iron and who were so politically sophisticated that they organized the conquered territories into highly complex states with themselves as the ruling elites. This hypothesis was preceded by another elaborate Hamitic theory. The earlier theory, which gained currency in the sixteenth century, was that the Hamites were black savages, 'natural slaves'-and Negroes. This identification of the Hamite with the Negro, a view which persisted throughout the eighteenth century, served as a rationale for slavery, using Biblical interpretations in support of its tenets. The image of the Negro deteriorated in direct proportion to the growth of the importance of slavery, and it became imperative for the white man to exclude the Negro from the brotherhood of races. [b]Napoleon's expedition to Egypt in 1798 became the historical catalyst that provided the Western World with the impetus to turn the Hamite into a Caucasian.[/b] The Hamitic concept had as its function the portrayal of the Negro as an inherently inferior being and to rationalize his exploitation. In the final analysis it was possible because its changing aspects were supported by the prevailing intellectual viewpoints of the times. [/QUOTE]--Sanders et al 1969 Proponents of the post Napoleonic version of the Hamitic hypothesis (the one we still deal with in contemporary anthropology), on the other hand, push their touted admixture date to the terminal pleistocene, and, more importantly, they postulate the existence of an intrinsic and deterministic link between this admixture and morphometric overlap with Eurasians, so that every population in Africa with such morphometric overlap automatically becomes a recipient of the said admixture. Logically, Pagani et al 2012 and Pickrell et al 2013's admixture event estimates would not affect, nor explain the features of Gash cultured? Pwenet people depicted in Hatshepshut's Del Bahari temple. It would not explain nor affect the features of the LSA Great Rift Eburran cultured people who are attested since the Terminal Pleistocene, and logically predate it since the features appear 'as is' with no availability of earlier skeletal material that documents a transition. The radical facial differentiation of these LSA peoples relative to MSA predecessors may represent a parallel evolution event as they have a plethora of traits that are peculiar to them and are not seen in Ethio-Semitic and Cushitic speakers. [IMG]http://i45.tinypic.com/28au8t5.jpg[/IMG] [QUOTE]All the Upper Paleolithic peoples of Kenya were of Caucasoid or proto-Hamitic stock; they are represented by the Gamble's Cave and Naivasha skeletons, as well as the skeleton from Olduvai in northern Tanganyika. They were tall and dolichocephalic, with long face and narrow nose (the 'Elmenteitan type'); the other is brachycephalic, with a shorter face but also with a narrow nose. These two types are represented by Elmenteita A and F1 (Fig. 5 (2 and 3)) from Bromhead's site. The same types persist into the Neolithic, but now a third variation appears in the ultra-dolichocephalic skulls from Willey's kopje (Fig. 5 (4)); these differ from the Elmenteitan type by having a shorter face, a more prominent nose, and a different kind of mandible.[/QUOTE]--Sonia Cole, 1954 [/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