...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Egyptology
»
Because some fools don't know how to make their own thread about the race of kemet
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Djehuti: [QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Cass/: [qb] What on earth are you talking about? "What little we have from Palestine, mostly scraps of bone and a few teeth, is also [b]Caucasoid[/b]. For example, the Mesolithic Natufian skulls and long bones from that country are those of ancestral Mediterraneans." (Coon, 1965) [/qb][/QUOTE]Boy, don't play dumber than you actually are! "[i]They were clearly a Negroid people with wide faces flat- noses and long large heads... Several features stand out quite definitely'' he asserted; first the Natufians were a long-headed people - they had cap-shaped occiputs (the lower back part of the head). Secondly, the dimensions or their heads were greater than in the pre-dynastic Egyptians. Thirdly, their faces were short and wide. Fourthly, they were prognathous (with projecting jaws). Fifthly, their nasal bones were not narrow and high, but formed a wide, low arch. Sixthly, their chins were not prominent, but were masked by the fullness of the teeth-bearing parts of the jaw.[/i]" Sir Arthur Keith (1932) "[i]The skulls which Keith describes are of a peculiarly Mediterranean type, with a cephalic index ranging from 72 to 78, thus rivalling the subdolichocephalic head form of short statured Mediterraneans living today. The brain cases are of medium size, and the faces absolutely small. The lower jaws are also small and weakly developed, with little chin prominence and a prevalence of alveolar prognathism. The wide, low-vaulted nose, in combination with prognathism, gives a somewhat negroid cast to the face. The browridges are smooth, and the whole system of muscularity in the male but slightly developed. These late Natufians represent a basically Mediterranean type with minor negroid affinities.[/i]..." Carleton Coon (1939) "[i]If the late Pleistocene Natufian sample from Israel is the source from which that Neolithic spread was derived, there was clearly a sub-Saharan African element present of almost equal importance as the Late Prehistoric Eurasian element.[/i]" C. Loring Brace (2005) [b]Brace's 2005 dendogram based on craniometrics[/b] [IMG]http://tinypic.com/eg3539.jpg[/IMG] [QUOTE][qb]DNA also says the opposite of what you are posting- "However, [b]no affinity of Natufians to sub-Saharan Africans[/b] is evident in our genome-wide analysis, as **[i]present-day[/i]** sub-Saharan Africans do not share more alleles with Natufians than with other ancient Eurasians." http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2016/06/16/059311 [/qb][/QUOTE]Keyword "present-day" Sub-Saharans. I suggest you look up the phrase 'basal Eurasian' [URL=http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=008967;p=1]here[/URL], [URL=http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=009467]here[/URL], and [URL=http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=009299]here[/URL]. Not to mention the fact that Natufians carry paternal clade E-M34 and maternal clade L2b. [QUOTE][qb]About the Sonia Zakrzewski study, probably you mean 2004 and not 2002: I cannot find it anywhere though. Googling the paper and you just find it quote-mined, mostly by Afrocentrists. The source is: Zakrzewski, S. R. (2004). Intra-population and temporal variation in ancient Egyptian crania. American Journal of Physical Anthropology Supplement (38): 215 The Gizeh sample aka Howell's "E Series" dates 664–343 BCE., however the Sedment sample [i]dates a lot earlier[/i] and shows the same south Levant ties, so your argument doesn't really make sense. [/qb][/QUOTE]Although I cannot find the study at the moment, Zakrzewski makes it clear that many specimens from the E series are from the Ptolemaic era and thus it's no surprise that metrically and non-metrically they cluster with Aegean populations before native Egyptians. So my argument still stands. Also, the Sedment samples shows as much affinities to Maghreb Africans as they do early south Levant, but just like the E series they are considered [i]outliers[/i] removed from other ancient Nile Valley samples including other Egyptians to their immediate south. So if you're using the Sedment series as par examples of Egyptians you still fail. [/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