...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Egyptology
»
Nuclear aDNA Recovery; Sexing of a 4000-Year-Old Egyptian Mummy Head.
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Doug M: [QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Oshun: [qb] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Elmaestro: [qb] [QUOTE] MtHaplogroup is U5b2b5 Any thoughts? [/qb][/QUOTE]A couple: First, what makes someone genetically "African?" I've read research that's now saying L3 was the result of a back migration. Okay well if the L3 Africans aren't Near Eastern transplants and get to be "real Africans" and not "non African transplants," how come anybody outside of Haplogroup L, whether they've been in Africa for tens of thousands of years and morphologically no different from other Africans is not? No one cares about Haplogroup R in Cameroon. Even if the subclade was born in Africa, the general attitude was that haplogroup R wasn't. But no one complains about their "Africanity." Anyways, always be very careful of how much context you have. [QUOTE]When the mummy’s mtDNA sequence is viewed in the context of modern mtDNA diversity, however, the observed U5 lineage could potentially reflect interactions between Egypt and the Near East that date as far back as the Predynastic and Early Dynastic periods [85]. Trade between Egypt and the Near East is evidenced by, among other things, ceramic imports to Egypt [86]. In addition, dwellings similar to those found in Palestine suggest some immigration to Egypt from more arid Near Eastern areas from the late Predynastic to the Old Kingdom [85,87]. Both trade and immigration between Egypt and the Near East continued to increase over time. Demand in Egypt for cedar of Lebanon wood (a wood available and harvested in Lebanon and Syria during the MK) led to the further establishment of trade routes between Egypt and the Levant [85,86]. It is interesting, and perhaps not coincidental, that the individual with the mtDNA sequence most similar to Djehutynakht comes from a Lebanese individual.[/QUOTE]They are telling you to your face there was evidence of immigration from Palestine in the Old Kingdom and Predynastic. They found Near Eastern styled dwellings like I said. Who imports a house? THEN imagine 1,000 years of this going down. State formation began roughly 1,000 years before this mummy lived or died. For any of you holding out for a genetically uniform "African" set of haplogroups, especially in northern Egypt (which yes includes parts of Upper Egypt as far as I'm concerned) you will likely be disappointed. There's too much archaeology in the north that showed influence from the Near East. Think of all the data the Abusir researchers fell back on when they talked about how it fit with the archeological record. They [b]know[/b] they're going to find this. And this is probably why researchers like Keita didn't touch ideas of the north and south being uniform with a ten foot pole despite many Afrocentrics screaming that it was coonery. I don't think anyone just stumbled on this data. Before they tested the DNA they reviewed the morphology of the mummies to see where they'd likely relate to. They found a cline that was north to south and also found that over time the northern type features became more dominant. So what does that mean? The longer you extend from state formation and the further north you go the more likely you'll find this genetic type. 2000 B.C is 1,000 years past the initial formation of the state. Northern Egyptians had more than enough time to navigate south and intermarry with southerners. Many "Upper Egyptians" were unrelated tribes, etc that were then converted to "Naqada culture" before the end of the predynastic by violence or assimilation. They didn't bring the culture to the region though. Afrocentrics ought o Stop thinking of predynastic Egyptians as people who were a singular cultural monolith. In fact stop thinking of the Egyptians that way too. It'd be better to look at the Egyptians as a diverse group of people whose local history will often anchor them to their predynastic ancestors. Culturally lower Egyptian enclaves such as Abusir existed in Upper Egypt so it will be up to you guys when this data comes out, to have a better idea of the local history than these researchers put out. The Abusir paper was a lot better about putting the data into a more general historical context for the country, but was poor in offering the local history that would've made the results seem a bit less left field. I expect most other papers will not even give you as much as the Abusir researchers did. Finally, Levanite immigration into Egypt was starting by 2,000 B.C and into the second millennium which the researchers on the Abusir data point out. Take for instance the Oryx nome right above the nome we're talking about. [IMG]https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/58/Ibscha.jpg[/IMG] Egyptian art of the nomarch receiving foreigners. When waves of Near Easterners were undoubtedly in fear of their lives because of climate change anyone can probably imagine that they probably came in fair numbers. So please understand what you're dealing with: 1,000 years of mixing with Levanite influenced (if not transplanted) northern Egyptians and immigrants from the Near East. Review the record that shows this type becomes more dominant after the creation of the state. [/qb][/QUOTE]I personally do not agree with this generic flow of history as being primarily a "Northern" flow of immigrants into Egypt and therefore "ovurrunning" or changing the local population into Non Africans by the later dynastic. Again, for such a thing to be true ALL the facts need to line up and they dont. First the First Intermediate period was a period of instability in all of Egypt but especially in the North. The north was fractured into multiple competing Dynasties. What restored the unity of the country? Southerners. The Middle Kingdom openly stated in multiple instances that Southern Queens were the legitimacy and stability for the throne. The Prophecy of Neferti is but one example. Then you have the famous lady from Elephantine I posted earlier. Another example of royalty and legitimacy of the throne coming from the South. And in full context elaphantine was in the first nome of Egypt which was Ta Seti, which was like Plymouth rock in America. You don't see legitimacy to the throne or stability in the country EVER flowing from Northern provinces. All during the dynastic era, Northern provinces were the source of INSTABILITY in the country. So claiming that Levantines flowing into Egypt was the basis of Egyptian culture and stability is false. They might have been there but claiming that Egypt revolved around assimilation of these people is NONSENSE. Egypt depended more on assimilation of more southern people than Northern ones. So why on earth would Levantines dominate in AE during this time more than Southerners? Look at the tombs of Beni Hasan, they don't show any Levantines there outside of the FOREIGNERS you showed in the picture. If Levantines were truly as dominant in Egypt as you say they would have depicted themselves as such and elevated Levantine ancestry and culture to dominance and they did not because the Southerners kicked out such invaders. During the 2nd intermidiate period you had more instability during the invasion of Levantine invaders. And again we see stability and culture restored from the South. Where is there any temple or priesthood in Egypt that originated in or got its primacy from the Levant? None. The main religious centers of Amun originated in the South and was tied to an origin in Sudan during the 18th dynasty with priests and priestesess being associated with the south and legitimacy to the throne. The 18th dynasty comes to power using Southern Allies. The first queen of this era was often depicted as jet black symbolizing many things along with symbolizing legitimacy to the throne as the wife of Amun the Southern deity (tied to Sudan). Now where do you ever see that kind of power and elevation to ANY Levantine princess or priesthood? Never. So during this period there would have been even more flows of populations into Egypt from the South with the allies. Hathor and Isis and the Great Royal Wife and Gods Wife of Amun are all deities and roles stemming from Southern cultural roots which the AE upheld. They are also the basis of the "immaculate conception" concept in later Christianity. They are direct challenges to and rejection of Northern and foreign intrusions into the country. (In fact they got exported out of the country later by the Romans). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divine_Adoratrice_of_Amun Also, I suggest that folks read the records of the wars during the late 2nd itermediate period between the Southerners and Northern invaders. Those facts contradict everything you are saying. The Eurasian invaders came in, disrespected local tradtions, tried to usurp power and authority from the South and replace it with non local power and authority and were ultimately expelled. And this has ALWAYS been the nature of Levantine/Eurasian interaction with native Egyptian populations and culture. And this continues into the Ramessid era as the verious Indo European cultures came to threaten the Egyptian state including the Hittites, Babylonians, Assyrians, Persians and so forth. Again, the Southerners were the staunchest allies in this period. The Ramessid era started with a Southerner named Seti who was honoring the priesthood and tradition of Set from Nubt in Upper Egypt. He came with allies from the Medjay. This is all stated in his own annals and by later descendants on the year 400 stela. And again during the late period you see the most unambiguously black mummies of any period in AE history. And the priesthood of Amun and the Great Harem of Amun under southern priests stayed strong in this period right up to and after the Kushite period, when the last Southerners came to restore the AE culture. No Levantine populations have EVER been elevated to the status and prestige equated to Southerners in AE. EVER. To say this just is false. Therefore claims of Levantine women rising to become queens and birthing new dynasties are false and contradicted by the facts but that does not stop folks from repeating them. If what you are saying is true then Northern Dynasties would have been the basis of prestige and culture in the country. Northern ancestry would have been the basis of legitimacy to the throne. Norhtern dieties and Northern priesthoods and cults would have run the country but they didn't. Any time Northerners tried to control the country for themselves it triggered conflict, instability and war with the South. That is a fact and no amount of postulating and theorizing will change that. What you are saying is tantamount to saying that Asian and African immigrants into Rome changed Rome from being a European culture dominated by Europeans. It didn't. It would also mean immigration to America changes it from a white European dominated culture and population. It doesn't. Once a group is in power they tend to stay in power and resist outside forces trying to overthrow them and AE was no different. Groups in power tend to have their own traditions of identity, culture and bloodline and overthrowing that requires complete domination or destruction not "assimilation" or "immigration". And to be perfectly honest Europeans want Egypt to be white from DAY ONE all the way to the Kushites. That is their vision of ancient Egypt and if it takes REMAKING DNA to all be Eurasian, then so be it. In their minds it is justified and this isn't about 'immigration' of Eurasians in later periods, in their minds the culture and identity originated in Eurasians from the start and it was "Negroes" that caused the fall of the country. That has ALWAYS been the view of racists toward Egypt. In fact that is the underlying point of more "sub saharan" mixture after the Roman era. As if to say "Negroes" never were there before that because "Eurasian" DNA was dominant. You cant just make up facts at will to try and change the flow of AE history. None of the facts I mentioned are new facts. They have always been there. People pretending this handful of DNA changes something is the problem. Not to mention if you find mummies that re unquestionably black and African with U5 then what? [/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