...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Egyptology
»
Ancient Egyptian DNA from 1300BC to 426 AD
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Oshun: [QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Cass/: [qb] You haven't taken into account the south Levant was also (more) sparsely populated; it wasn't like Mesopotamia. Population sizes were probably very similar in south Levant and north Egypt (google some data). [/qb][/QUOTE]You're going to need to provide some evidence that would demonstrate the Levant in predynastic times was so sparsely populated it couldn't produce 2-4 over the course of an entire [b]generation[/b]. Second, if the Badari were having contact with Syria and Uruk and Faiyum had settlements labeled "Near Eastern," it's not all that hard to extend perceptions of the Nile Valley's contacts with the East beyond the Levant toward Middle East and Mesopotamia. Some Faiyum A settlements have been attributed to the Middle East, though I'd have to vet wiki's sources on this. So far, what I got was this: Faiyum: [QUOTE]Settler colonists from the Near East would most likely have merged with the indigenous cultures resulting in a mixed economy with the agricultural aspect of the economy increasing in frequency through time, which is what the archaeological record more precisely indicates. Both pottery, lithics, and economy with Near Eastern characteristics, and lithics with African characteristics are present in the Fayum A culture.[/QUOTE]Shirai, Noriyuki (2010). The Archaeology of the First Farmer-Herders in Egypt: New Insights into the Fayum Epipalaeolithic. Archaeological Studies Leiden University. Leiden University Press. Maadi: [QUOTE] Copper was known, and some copper adzes have been found. The pottery is simple and undecorated and shows, in some forms, [b]strong connections to Southern Israel.[/b] People lived in small huts, partly dug into the ground. The dead were buried in cemeteries, but with few burial goods. The Maadi culture was replaced by the Naqada III culture; whether this happened by conquest or infiltration is still an open question.[/QUOTE]Merimede: [QUOTE] From about 5000 to 4200 BC the Merimde culture, so far only known from a big settlement site at the edge of the Western Delta, flourished in Lower Egypt. The culture has strong connections to the Faiyum A culture as well as the Levant. [/QUOTE]I have no idea what "strong connection" is, and wiki has problems with giving you sources I can't read up on. Assuming this is correct though (I'm rather new at this and its more a preliminary assessment anyway), it isn't to say Upper Egypt had no contact or connection (especially through Lower Egypt where so far it appears Levanites and Middle Easterners were settling), but southern Egypt has had more of an an indistinguishable continuum of biological and cultural connection with Nubia and Northern Sudan. [QUOTE]But for your argument to work- south Levant would have to have had a much larger population, compared to north Egypt. [/QUOTE]Why? Also when I wrote that I didn't know that migration and settlements that resemble those from Syria were being argued. So simply extend the scale and there you go. Also interesting is that Syria had a lot of L lineages. Some of these "SSA" lineages in Egypt could have been from these locations. [QUOTE] Also, going along with Butzer's (1976) estimates, already by c. 1800 BCE [Middle Kingdom], north Egypt wasn't greatly dissimilar to south Egypt: of a 2 million total, 1.2 million lived in south/0.8 million in north (60 vs. 40%). The great disparity in population size between north and south (80 vs. 20%) is only observed 4000 - 2500 BCE; it doesn't give you enough time to work with. [/QUOTE]Yes if I concluded it was only 1% contribution per generation. At 1% per generation it would take several thousand years, but at 3-5% per generation diffusion would've tripled, or quintupled in speed. At a rate of 5% this would've taken 1.4 thousand years. At 3% it would've taken somewhere around 2.3 thousand years. 4,000-2,300 = 1,700 B.C. If my math's off on that, do say something. But just 'cause, let's say I did argue 1%. After my post I had decided to try reading more about predynastic Egypt. I'm still looking for sources, but I'm getting dates for Faiyium A that range from 6-9k BCE. This gives minimal timeline of 6k BC to 2.5 B.C of flow and a maximum of 9k BC to 2.5 BC. At 6k BC, a rate close to 2% would've probably been sufficient. From 9k to 2.5k B.C about 1% would've been all that was needed. Population disparities are irrelevant when the point is that the north was diffusing by the predynastic, nor will many of your opponents find that to be especially deterring since the South has been largely hailed as the dominant culture of Egypt in a similar vein to how Europe conquered lands to form the countries of Australia and the U.S in spite of other groups of people living there. But I digress. As I mentioned earlier, the important aspect of this isn't who had the larger population. The important part is to demonstrate that the North had a low enough population size during the predynastic where it'd be imaginable to perceive a few thousand people as far as Syria (apparently) settling and affecting the population over the course of thousands of years. [/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