...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Egyptology
»
No difference between Egyptians and Nubians?
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by xyyman: [QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Tyrannohotep: [qb] How did the OP get his hands on the full text of the article? All I've been able to dig up on Google are abstracts. Which is a shame, because this looks like a cool paper. [/qb][/QUOTE]I have my contacts now…..I have a fairy god-father. Someone likes me out there. Almost any paper I want can be forwarded to me. That said. Continuing …oh! Tables/Charts are on ESR http://egyptsearchreloaded.proboards.com/thread/2748/egyptians-nubians [b]Discussion The Egyptian and Nubian samples grouped by population (the Egyptians were located towards the center of the graph while the Nubians plotted around the Egyptians on the periphery), without forming separate clusters. [/b]Variation was high among the samples, but low within. Spatial patterning was significant in statistical tests and visually grouped according to geographic region on the PCO chart (Fig. 2). [b]Thus, the first part of the hypothesis was supported that Keita’s (2005) model describes the patterns seen in these data.[/b] Regarding the second component, the patterning of these relationships must be examined through the individual and joint population histories of the [b]Egyptians and the Nubians, along with the knowledge of events in the Paleolithic.[/b] The hiatus groups (A- and C-Groups, Middle Horizon Nubians and Meroitic Nubians) show[b] no biological evidence of a new population inhabiting Nubia or a population that genetically assimilated into another population and then returned[/b] (cranial nonmetric traits have not been demonstrated to adapt to the local environment in the same manner as craniometrics and so interpretations do not need to be shaped by this caveat). It is important to temper the discussion of A- and C-Group relationships with the knowledge of no hiatus and with the strong genetic drift component of their population history (as is evidenced in the results here and in Godde (2009b, 2013b, 2018)) where Nubian samples tend to cluster by site. Thus, the position of the Sayala C-Group on the fringe of the samples is consistent with Godde (2009b, 2013b, 2018) and is [b]likely a result of genetic drift when considering their position along the Nile and sociocultural practices, and not a result of new or returning peoples from a hiatus. [/b]C-Group settlements were [b]small, widespread, and practiced endogamy [/b](Strouhal and Jungwirth, 1984). This initial interpretation of endogamy is supported by Smith (1998) who proffers they were resistant to Egyptianization, unlike another Middle Horizon Nubian group: the Kerma people. Thus, it is not surprising that both C-Group samples are positioned in exterior points on the PCO plot. Interestingly, the Pan-Grave people (another Middle Horizon Nubian group), who usually plot in extreme outlying positions of Nubian PCO plots (c.f., Godde, 2009b, 2013b; Godde, 2018), are located near the X-Group and Semna South Christian samples. However, the R matrix tells us the Pan-Grave people were more internally homogeneous, probably as a result of genetic drift and/or low levels of gene flow. The Pan-Grave people are thought to have been[b] Medjay posted by the Egyptians to watch the C-Group [/b](Trigger, 1976). An alternative explanation advanced by Adams (1977) is that [b]they were a nomadic group of Nubians occupying the Eastern Desert. Their mortuary practices were unique, having buried their dead in oval-shaped graves in C-Group cemeteries and further away from the river and into the desert [/b](Trigger, 1976). [/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