History91, you appear to be using a disjointed number of snippets from several threads, and even other websites,
that supposedly you are "replying" to, making it hard to pin down exactly what and who you are "arguing" against.
In several posts you appear to be copying and pasting comments from some other website, but are not copying over the full
reply and context of the person you are "debating." We can't see the full argument other people have made only your
"reply" or "spin." We can't tell then if you are misrepresenting what other people really said, and can't see their responses.
This makes the mass of stuff you have posted unwieldly and hard to follow as to who, what and where, and what replies
were made. But Reloaded does not have the space to copy over huge multi-page debates from some other forum. A simple link to the "debates" from these other places would suffice. In the interests of space, let's consolidate your massive number
of "volume" posts into one large one as shown below. This makes the flood somewhat more stable.------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't delete me just trying to get answers. More comments from the group Truth Seeker. Would love your feedback...
Not one single negroid mummy was found. Only one Nubian mummy was found in Egypt and that was of, Maiherpri, the royal fan bearer.
Not one Egyptian mummy displays Negroid features.
In modern craniofacial anthropometry, Negroid describes features that typify skulls of black people. These include a broad and round nasal cavity; no dam or nasal sill; Quonset hut-shaped nasal bones; notable facial projection in the jaw and mouth area (prognathism); a rectangular-shaped palate; a square or rectangular eye orbit shape; a large interorbital distance; a more undulating supraorbital ridge; and large, megadontic teeth.
- Garwin, April. "Forensic Anthropology - Ancestry". College of the Redwoods.
- Wilkinson, Caroline (2004). Forensic Facial Reconstruction. Cambridge University Press. pp. 84–85. ISBN 0521820030.
- Wilkinson, Caroline (2004). Forensic Facial Reconstruction. Cambridge University Press. pp. 84–85. ISBN 0521820030.
Last Edit: Sep 5, 2016 at 3:11am by history91
history91
Scribe
**
history91 Avatar
Posts: 116Male
Sep 5, 2016 at 2:58am
Quote
Edit
like
Post Options
Post by history91 on Sep 5, 2016 at 2:58am
Even Hawass concur's it is E1b1a.
In the genetic analyses for Hawass's 2012 paper (Revisiting the harem conspiracy and death of Ramesses III: anthropological, forensic, radiological, and genetic study.), they determined Unknown Man E to be Ramesses III's traitorous son Pentawere, revealed Ramesses III's Y-chromosome haplogroup to be E1b1a, one of the most widespread haplogroups in sub-Saharan Africa largely due to the Bantu expansion.
From the paper:
"Genetic kinship analyses revealed identical haplotypes in both mummies (table 1⇓); using the Whit Athey’s haplogroup predictor, we determined the Y chromosomal haplogroup E1b1a."
E1b1a is, historically, associated with North Africans and its spread started with them.
The DNATribes article on this subject had it right when they stated:
"In addition, these DNA match results in present day world regions might in part express population changes in Africa after the time of Ramesses III. In particular, DNA matches in present day populations of Southern Africa and the African Great Lakes might to some degree reflect genetic links with ancient populations (formerly living closer to New Kingdom Egypt) that have expanded southwards in the Nilotic and Bantu migrations of the past 3,000 years."
Ramesses III and African Ancestry in the 20th Dynasty of New Kingdom Egypt (February 2013)
This is backed by:
"The later and more gradual E1b1a expansion in Africa is as expected from the spread of cattle-herders from the north between 2.5 and 8 KYA, followed by the Bantu expansion to the southern tip of the continent beginning approximately 2.5 KYA and ending within the last few hundred years, incorporating the package of Bantu languages, cattle and iron-working [1, 3]."
Modeling the contrasting Neolithic male lineage expansions in Europe and Africa
Michael J Sikora (2013)
history91
Scribe
**
history91 Avatar
Posts: 116Male
Sep 5, 2016 at 2:59am
Quote
Edit
like
Post Options
Post by history91 on Sep 5, 2016 at 2:59am
What you need to realize is that E1b1a is Eurasian in origin; the Sub-Saharan people are a recent addition to Africa.
"E1b1a is an African lineage that expanded from northern Africa to sub-Saharan and equatorial Africa with the Bantu agricultural expansion." (Y-DNA Haplogroup E and its Subclades - 2012)
Ramses III did not and does not look Bantu to anyone! lol
“Migration out of Africa happened perhaps 50,000, 70,000 or even 200,000 years ago, long before 2,000 BC, when the first proto-Bantu appeared. Bantu people settled throughout Africa after 1,000 BC.. Early migrating Africans [OOA] … were certainly not Bantu.” – (Daems; 2007)
history91
Scribe
**
history91 Avatar
Posts: 116Male
Sep 5, 2016 at 3:00am
Quote
Edit
like
Post Options
Post by history91 on Sep 5, 2016 at 3:00am
Now again, you’ll find virtually nil disagreement as to the race of the Egyptians among the scientists who do the research and reputable scholars; even the much quoted and very black Afrocentrists’ favorite Dr Keita has said that modern Egyptians are mainly descended from the Pleistocene Egyptians..
Afrocentrists like to pretend Keita believes and has proven Egyptians were black Africans. I quote.
“it can be imagined that the modern diversity to be found in Egypt…. in terms of craniofacial features… skin colour… what have you, would likely have been very similar to that found in the past.”
He then goes on to point out that the heterogenous ‘mixed ancestry’ was there before the predynastic era (also true) and that the state formation was a local process (also true, it has a Badarian root). He then goes on to have a moan at Afrocentrists and Eurocentrists ( the real nuts who think Egyptians were all Nordics).
Keita also had this to say about the ancient Egyptians:
"There is no scientific reason to believe that the primary ancestors of the Egyptian population emerged and evolved outside of northeast Africa.... The basic overall genetic profile of the modern population is consistent with the diversity of ancient populations that would have been indigenous to northeastern Africa and subject to the range of evolutionary influences over time, although researchers vary in the details of their explanations of those influences."
Keita paper.
“current inhabitants of the Nile valley should be understood as being in the main, although not wholly, descendants of the pre-neolithic regional inhabitants,”
The haplotype V includes the berber m81, Egyptian m78 and other assorted E3b clades. They are native to North Africa, and are NOT Semitic markers.
As Dr Keita points out:
“Given these findings, it is more accurate to call V “Horn-supra-saharan African,” not ‘Arabic;’ it is indigenous to Africa”
A 2003 Y chromosome study was performed by Lucotte on modern Egyptians, with haplotypes V, XI, and IV being most common. Haplotype V is common in Berbers and has a low frequency outside North Africa. Haplotypes V, XI, and IV are all predominantly North African/Horn of African haplotypes, and they are far more dominant in Egyptians than in Middle Eastern or European groups. [33]
- Keita, S.O. (2005). "History in the interpretation of the pattern of p49a, f TaqI RFLP Y-chromosome variation in Egypt: a consideration of multiple lines of evidence". Am J Hum Biol. 17 (5): 559–67.doi:10.1002/ajhb.20428. PMID 16136533
Diop also acknowledged that the ancient Egyptians absorbed "foreign" genes at various times in their history (the Hyskos for example) but held that this admixture did not change their essential ethnicity.
- J. D. Walker, "The Misrepresentation of Diop's Views", Journal of Black Studies, Vol. 26, No. 1. (September 1995), pp. 77–85.
history91
Scribe
**
history91 Avatar
Posts: 116Male
Sep 5, 2016 at 3:03am
Quote
Edit
like
Post Options
Post by history91 on Sep 5, 2016 at 3:03am
This is a video they posted.
www.youtube.com/shared?ci=lI4Rttt1X94history91
Scribe
**
history91 Avatar
Posts: 116Male
Sep 5, 2016 at 10:28am
Quote
Edit
like
Post Options
Post by history91 on Sep 5, 2016 at 10:28am
“On the basis of historical, linguistic, and genetic data, it has been suggested that the Ethiopian population has been strongly affected by Caucasoid migrations since Neolithic times. On the basis of autosomal polymorphic loci, it has been estimated that 60% of the Ethiopian gene pool has an African origin, whereas ~40% is of Caucasoid derivation…. Our Ethiopian sample also lacks the sY81-G allele, which was associated with 86% and 69% of Senegalese and mixed-African YAP+ chromosomes, respectively. This suggests that male-mediated gene flow from Niger-Congo speakers to the Ethiopian population was probably very limited … Caucasoid gene flow into the Ethiopian gene pool occurred predominantly through males. Conversely, the Niger-Congo contribution to the Ethiopian population occurred mainly through females.*“
(Passarino et al. 1998)
history91
Scribe
**
history91 Avatar
Posts: 116Male
Sep 5, 2016 at 10:29am
Quote
Edit
like
Post Options
Post by history91 on Sep 5, 2016 at 10:29am
Anyway, the gist of these collected DNA studies is that Ethiopians are about 40% Caucasian, and are genetically a little more closely related to Mediterranean Caucasian groups like Berbers and Arabs than Western Africans, as is shown by this twig map. The actual amount of admixture varies from one group to another, but 40% is the average of all these samples.
“Notably, 62% of the Ethiopians fall in the first cluster, which encompasses the majority of the Jews, Norwegians and Armenians, indicating that placement of these individuals in a ‘Black’ cluster would be an inaccurate reflection of the genetic structure. Only 24% of the Ethiopians are placed in the cluster with the Bantu and most of the Afro-Caribbeans.”
history91
Scribe
**
history91 Avatar
Posts: 116Male
Sep 5, 2016 at 10:31am
Quote
Edit
like
Post Options
Post by history91 on Sep 5, 2016 at 10:31am
Your blatant lies have been refuted over and over and over again Ron.
You are of a totally different stock than were/ are the Egyptians.
Regardless, through the tons of scientific studies done, it has been established without a shadow of a doubt that the modern Egyptians are the lineal descendants of the ancient Egyptians from Pleistocene. That is through the Y-DNA, beautiful male line ancestry that continues from father to son in an unbroken chain.
Science indeed is a beautiful thing
history91
Scribe
**
history91 Avatar
Posts: 116Male
Sep 5, 2016 at 10:32am
Quote
Edit
like
Post Options
Post by history91 on Sep 5, 2016 at 10:32am
Here is a gentle reminder of your African American genetic make up
journals.plos.org/plosgenetics/article?id=info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pgen.1006059&version=meter+at+1&module=meter-Links&pgtype=article&contentId&mediaId&referrer&priority=true&action=click&contentCollection=meter-links-click
history91
Scribe
**
history91 Avatar
Posts: 116Male
Sep 5, 2016 at 10:33am
Quote
Edit
like
Post Options
Post by history91 on Sep 5, 2016 at 10:33am
And these too
DNA Companies on African Americans
• According to Ancestry.com, the average African American is 65 percent sub-Saharan African, 29% European and 2% native American.
• According to 23andme.com, the average African American is 75% sub-Saharan African, 22% European, and only 0.6% native American.
• According to Famiy Tree DNA.com, the average African American is 72.95% sub-Saharan African, 22.83% European and 1.7% native American.
• According to National Geographic’s Genographic Project, the average African American is 80% sub-Saharan African, 19% European and 1% native American.
• According to Africa DNA, Family Tree DNA, the average African American is 79% sub-Saharan African, 19% European, and 2% native American.
"Most African Americans are of West and Central African descent and are descendants of enslaved peoples within the boundaries of the present United States."
- Gomez, Michael A: Exchanging Our Country Marks: The Transformation of African Identities in the Colonial and Antebellum South, p. 29. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina, 1998
- Rucker, Walter C. (2006). The river flows on: Black resistance, culture, and identity formation in early America. LSU Press. p. 126. ISBN 0-8071-3109-1.
"On average, African Americans are of 73.2–80.9% West African, 18–24% European, and 0.8–0.9% Native American heritage, with large variation between individuals."
-Katarzyna Bryc; Adam Auton; Matthew R. Nelson; Jorge R. Oksenberg; Stephen L. Hauser; Scott Williams; Alain Froment; Jean-Marie Bodo; Charles Wambebe; Sarah A. Tishkoff; Carlos D. Bustamante (January 12, 2010). "Genome-wide patterns of population structure and admixture in West Africans and African Americans". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 107 (2): 786–791. doi:10.1073/pnas.0909559107. PMC 2818934free to read. PMID 20080753.
- Katarzyna Bryc; Eric Y. Durand; J. Michael Macpherson; David Reich; Joanna L. Mountain (8 January 2015). "The Genetic Ancestry of African Americans, Latinos, and European Americans across the United States". The American Journal of Human Genetics. 96 (1): 37–53. doi:10.1016/j.ajhg.2014.11.010.
- Soheil Baharian; Maxime Barakatt; Christopher R. Gignoux; Suyash Shringarpure; Jacob Errington; William J. Blot; Carlos D. Bustamante; Eimear E. Kenny; Scott M. Williams; Melinda C. Aldrich; Simon Gravel (May 27, 2015). "The Great Migration and African-American Genomic Diversity". PLOS Genetics. PLOS Genetics. doi:10.1371/journal.pgen.1006059
history91
Scribe
**
history91 Avatar
Posts: 116Male
Sep 5, 2016 at 10:35am
Quote
Edit
like
Post Options
Post by history91 on Sep 5, 2016 at 10:35am
Do you know when did the Bantus appear in the scene?
“Migration out of Africa happened perhaps 50,000, 70,000 or even 200,000 years ago, long before 2,000 BC, when the first proto-Bantu appeared. Bantu people settled throughout Africa after 1,000 BC.. Early migrating Africans [OOA] … were certainly not Bantu.” – (Daems; 2007)
history91
Scribe
**
history91 Avatar
Posts: 116Male
Sep 5, 2016 at 10:35am
Quote
Edit
like
Post Options
Post by history91 on Sep 5, 2016 at 10:35am
The archaic African was not Negroid
“African archaic humans are most similar in body to Neanderthals (and most likely other European and Asian archaic humans.” – (Churchill et al; 2002)
history91
Scribe
**
history91 Avatar
Posts: 116Male
Sep 5, 2016 at 10:36am
Quote
Edit
like
Post Options
Post by history91 on Sep 5, 2016 at 10:36am
“The Upper Paleolithic Europeans, who lived from about 30,000 to about 10,000 years ago, were modern Caucasoids.” – (Coon; 1962)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oss El Banna says from Truth:
I really need to understand your position that you are trying to defend. You keep contradicting yourself time after time.
1. Are they of sub Saharan origins or from East African origins?
2. Were they Negroid in phenotype or did they have thin elongated noses like the Ethiopians due to physical adaptations to the environment? If so why do they accuse “white man” of destroying the noses?
3. If as you say East Africans are distinct from West Africans in phenotype how do you suggest ancient Egyptians were of Negroid stock?
history91
Scribe
**
history91 Avatar
Posts: 116Male
6 hours ago
Quote
Edit
like
Post Options
Post by history91 on 6 hours ago
7. In your link you shared “worldhistoryconnected.press.illinois.edu/2.1/ehret.html” and it says and I quote “
We actually have DNA evidence which fits very well with an intrusion of people from northwestern African into southwestern Asia. The Y-chromosome markers, associated with the male, fade out as you go deeper into the Middle East.”
This actually supports my position more than it supports yours. Read it.
history91
Scribe
**
history91 Avatar
Posts: 116Male
6 hours ago
Quote
Edit
like
Post Options
Post by history91 on 6 hours ago
Ehret goes on religion and says “We see the same kind of thing in ancient Egypt. If we go to there, we discover that the Egyptian gods began as local gods. With Egyptian unification, we move from this henotheism to polytheism. To unify Egypt, after all, you have to co-opt the loyalty of local groups and recognize their gods. We have no direct evidence, but it's certainly implied by the things we learn about the gods in the written records we do have.”
This does not conflict with what I always say that ancient Egyptians never included Kesh/ Kush in this unification since Egypt the two lands had 42 nomes – 20 in the North and 22 in the south.
Ehret continues and says “What I see here is that earlier Middle Eastern polytheism is influencing Semitic religion. After all, the early Semites were just a few Africans arriving to find a lot of other people already in the area. So they're going to have to accommodate. Some groups, maybe ones who live in peripheries, in areas with lower population densities, may be able to impose the henotheistic religion they arrived with.”
This does not conflict with what he said “We actually have DNA evidence which fits very well with an intrusion of people from northwestern African into southwestern Asia.” and the spread of Henotheism. Which implies that the spread was north western toward Eastern and Southern directions into both Africa and Asia.
Ehret continues on agriculture “One of the archaeological possibilities is a group called the Mushabaeans. This group moves in on another group that's Middle Eastern. Out of this, you get the Natufian people. Now, we can see in the archaeology that people were using wild grains the Middle East very early, back into the late glacial age, about 18,000 years ago. But they were just using these seeds as they were. At the same time, in this northeastern corner of Africa, another people ¬ the Mushabaeans? ¬ are using grindstones along the Nile, grinding the tubers of sedges. Somewhere along the way, they began to grind grain as well. Now, it's in the Mushabian period that grindstones come into the Middle East.”
You do know what the Mushabian culture is and again he speaks of Northeastern corner of Africa. It is thought to have originated from the Levantine.
Ehret talks about Afrasan more than he talks about Nilo-Saharan or Bantuoid populations.
Last Edit: 6 hours ago by history91
history91
Scribe
**
history91 Avatar
Posts: 116Male
6 hours ago
Quote
Edit
like
Post Options
Post by history91 on 6 hours ago
From the Ehret’s interview on agriculture thatyou have shared, Ehret says the following “The possible fourth area of agricultural invention would involve people who cultivated grain in Ethiopia. They seem to have begun cultivation of grain independently, but adopted cattle from the Nilo-Saharans of the middle Nile region. To pin this down, we need archaeology from a whole big area, but so far it's missing.”
So with not enough archeological evidence available, you cannot conclude that agriculture began from Ethiopia and not from the cultures from the Levant that is greatly accepted to have been the introducers of agriculture like the Natufians or Mushabaeans.
Ehret then moves on to talk about pottery found in Southern Sahara. So again are you trying to point out that the progenitors of Egypt were of south of the Sahara or Ethiopia or from the Sub Saharan region?
history91
Scribe
**
history91 Avatar
Posts: 116Male
6 hours ago
Quote
Edit
like
Post Options
Post by history91 on 6 hours ago
Now, your article in the link you shared egyptology.yale.edu/expeditions/past-and-joint-projects/theban-desert-road-survey-yale-toshka-desert-survey/alamat-tal/wadi-of-the-horus-qa-a” Says nothing of Negroid origins of the ancient Egyptians; however, it says the following:
“The first vessel from the left (Figure 8) is one of a small number of early depictions of vessels with sails in Egyptian10 and Nubian11 art; again, in terms of location of the sail on the vessel, and considering the surrounding imagery, the sail and vessel in the Wadi of the Horus Qa-a recall the similarly located sail in the vessel carrying the prisoner on the most elaborate incense burner from Qustul.12“
Here it clearly distinguishes Egypt and Nubia through comparing similar art from that period. The rest of the article deals with rock art of animals and hunting and art depictions of different groups from the Naqada culture.
So how does this relate to the discussion at hand when the Naqada is of Chalcolithic Predynastic Egypt (ca. 4400–3000 BC), named for the town of Naqada, Qena Governorate.?
history91
Scribe
**
history91 Avatar
Posts: 116Male
6 hours ago
Quote
Edit
like
Post Options
Post by history91 on 6 hours ago
There was nothing of relevance that shows Egyptians were of Negroid or sub-Saharan Africa. Nor does it have anything to disprove lineal continuation of the Egyptians.
history91
Scribe
**
history91 Avatar
Posts: 116Male
6 hours ago
Quote
Edit
like
Post Options
Post by history91 on 6 hours ago
The link you shared egyptology.yale.edu/expeditions/past-and-joint-projects/theban-desert-road-survey-yale-toshka-desert-survey/kurkur “ again shows no evidence of sub-Saharan origins nor does it show any Ethiopian origins.
It discusses ancient routes taken to link predynastic Egypt with neighboring sites.
“Extensive late Predynastic-Early Dynastic occupation areas occur in association with the caravan tracks running through the Northwest Wadi (Figure 5),probably the most heavily populated portion of Kurkur from the mid-fourth through the early third millennia BCE. During that period the desert dwellers in the area of Kurkur appear to have abandoned more widespread and less densely used campsites and workstations, increasingly focusing their activities on the Northwest Wadi. At the same time, pottery of Egyptian Nile Valley origin becomes fairly common at Kurkur.”
All of the article is about Egypt and nothing of its origins being either sub-Saharan or East African (Ethiopian). :/
history91
Scribe
**
history91 Avatar
Posts: 116Male
6 hours ago
Quote
Edit
like
Post Options
Post by history91 on 6 hours ago
And now my favorite
11. Regarding the below comment and your link “http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19215865”.
And the graph you shared which you apparently do not understand., You are right about the number of STRs tested; however it does not state your claim and I quote you” Again showing that modern Egyptians cluster far away from the Ancients.”
As a matter of fact it mentions nothing in comparison to the ancient Egyptians. It rather confirms continuity and distances Oceanians and Americans
history91
Scribe
**
history91 Avatar
Posts: 116Male
6 hours ago
Quote
Edit
like
Post Options
Post by history91 on 6 hours ago
Terrill Hammons North Africans are Africans, not Negroid Africans or Sub-Saharan Africans.
This study that you shared says that Egypt has been on the cross roads to other civilizations and continents, nevertheless, confirms regional genetic continuity among populations of the Nile valley, Middle East and Arabian Peninsula. The case with Sudan and Ethiopia.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now the diagram below “Fig. 2. as mentioned in the study you shared below in your comment has this to say about it and note what it says about the Oceanian and American populations and what it says about the Upper Egyptians
Fig. 2. Multi-dimensional scaling (MDS) based on pair-wise FST genetic distances of Upper Egyptian and other diverse global populations. OCE, Oceanian; ME, Middle Eastern; NAF, North African; EAS, East Asian; SSA, sub-Saharan African; UEGY, Upper Egyptian; SAS, South Asian; EUR, European. The figure shows that Oceania and American populations are very distant from Upper Egyptians (marked by a grey triangle) and other populations. The Upper Egyptian population is closer to the Middle Eastern, North African, South Asian and European populations than others.
history91
Scribe
**
history91 Avatar
Posts: 116Male
5 hours ago
Quote
Edit
like
Post Options
Post by history91 on 5 hours ago
The study you shared mentions the following:
1. Population: A sample of 265 unrelated volunteers from five governorates (El-Minia, Assiut, Sohag, Qena and Aswan) in Upper (south) Egypt (Fig. 1), was collected. After obtaining appropriate ethical approval, the participants were questioned for their ethnic origin as inhabitants of Upper Egypt for at least
the third generation and they signed informed consents. The
residents are culturally and linguistically distinguishable from
those of the Northern population”
2. Assessment of genetic distances (FST) based on frequency data comparison with other local and regional population versus Upper Egyptians is collected initTable 4. Multi-dimensional scaling plot derived from the FST genetic distances among Upper Egyptians and other populations compared globally is shown in Fig. 2
3. Pair-wise FST genetic distances between sampled sub populations from Upper Egypt revealed no significant differences (data not shown), so they have been treated as a single population in subsequent analyses.
4. Local comparisons between Upper Egyptians were carried out with other ethnic groups in Egypt, based on frequency and molecular data. No differences were observed in comparison with a general Caucasian population from Cairo in any of the
nine loci compared [8] or with Egyptian Christians from Cairo.
5. The Upper Egyptian population is closer to the Middle Eastern, North African, South Asian and European populations than others.
6. Regarding the European populations, Turkish, Greeks and Italians, significant dissimilarity was found in 7 out of 15 loci, 1 out of 9 and 4 out of 13, respectively
So obviously you did not comprehend what this graph represents
smh
Last Edit: 5 hours ago by history91
history91
Scribe
**
history91 Avatar
Posts: 116Male
5 hours ago
Quote
Edit
like
Post Options
Post by history91 on 5 hours ago
As for the colorful bar chart on E-M78 distribution in Sudan, it only shows that the M78 distribution is pretty scarce in Sudan. Still do not know how this disproves the lineal continuation of the Egyptians and them being not indigenous. :/
history91
Scribe
**
history91 Avatar
Posts: 116Male
5 hours ago
Quote
Edit
like
Post Options
Post by history91 on 5 hours ago
As for the link you shared on Sonia R. Zakrzewski paper “Population continuity or population change: Formation of the ancient Egyptian state” This discusses the title alone says it all. It is to check for genetic diversity which was analyzed by studying craniometric variation within a series of six time-successive Egyptian populations in order to investigate the evidence for migration over the period of the development of social hierarchy and the Egyptian state from predynastic to Roman period. It rather concentrates upon the Predynastic and EDyn periods, but also includes assessment of the Badarian and Middle Kingdom (MK) populations for comparison purposes.
Even though this does not include a comparative study with the modern population of Egypt, it had this to say:
1. Many collections derive from early excavations, with only individuals of interest being shipped back to the European collector funding the excavation, and hence the material studied may not be completely representative of the cemetery population.
2. The paper suggests that the Badarian showed somewhat Negroid features but contrast with those of the early dynastic and later periods.
3. These results suggest that distinct morphological differences occur between the various samples, but that these differences are not patterned in either space or time.
This implies that an isolation by distance model may not be appropriate for these groups (although isolation by distance on a smaller distance scale would be undetect-
able in this data). This result is in contrast with earlier craniometric studies that found some evidence for distinct northern and southern morphological patterns (Hillson, 1978; Keita, 1990, 1992). This lack of biological patterning by geographic distance between the cemetery sites may result from the large scale of geographic distance between the cemeteries in this study.
This study is extremely old and does not relate to the topic at hand in terms of modern Egyptians being the lineal continuation of the ancient Egyptians or not
4. The analyses of the crania studied suggest that genetic
continuity occurs over the Egyptian Predynastic and
EDyn periods. The study also indicates that a relatively
high level of genetic differentiation was sustained over
this time period. This evidence suggests that the process
of state formation itself may have been mainly an indige-
nous process, but that it may have occurred in association
with in-migration to the Abydos region of the Nile Valley.
This potential in-migration may have occurred particu-
larly during the EDyn and OK. A possible explanation is
that the Egyptian state formed through increasing control
of trade and raw materials, or due to military actions,
potentially associated with the use of the Nile Valley as a
corridor for prolonged small scale movements through the
desert environment.
Due to their placement in all sectors of Figure 2, later groups are shown as
being more phenotypically heterogeneous. Furthermore,
as a result of its long broad vaults and broad faces, the
EDyn sample appears morphologically distinct relative to
the other temporal groups.
Due to the relatively small sample sizes arising from
the fragmentary nature of some of the crania and the lack
of skeletal material that cross-cuts all social ranks within
each time period, these results must remain provisional
and indicative. Further research on recently excavated
material, especially from the Delta area, is therefore
required in order to further address the issues raise
Last Edit: 5 hours ago by history91
history91
Scribe
**
history91 Avatar
Posts: 116Male
5 hours ago
Quote
Edit
like
Post Options
Post by history91 on 5 hours ago
The Zakrzewski apparently refers to old methods and studies and also references Keita. :/ We already know Keita acknowledges the lineal continuation of the Egyptians from Pleistocene till modern day.
I had even shared a video here.
Last Edit: 5 hours ago by history91
history91
Scribe
**
history91 Avatar
Posts: 116Male
5 hours ago
Quote
Edit
like
Post Options
Post by history91 on 5 hours ago
In regards to your reference of Pagani et al's Tracing the Route of Modern Humans out of Africa by Using 225 Human Genome Sequences from Ethiopians and Egyptians
If you read the study you will notice:
1.) "Notably, the two Egyptian samples we used include a low level of Cushitic ancestry but no Nilo-Saharan ancestry. This absence implies a lack of coverage of the full geographical range of Egyptians, including Nubians who today speak a Nilo-Saharan language (Dobon et al., 2015). There is also no evidence of coverage of individuals representing the Egyptian or Coptic language."
2). Regardless of the labels given to ancestries, which typically are presumed to be geographically or linguistically based, there are two problems with the data of Pagani et al. (2015). One problem is that their sample of modern Egyptians, like ours, does not reflect all modern Egyptians. Furthermore, it has not been established that original Nile Valley inhabitants are in some sense covered. The genetic compositions of core Afroasiatic (including Egyptian) and Nilo-Saharan speakers are not known fully. The authors chose a subset of five Ethiopian samples from a larger set (Pagani et al., 2012) on the basis of maximizing genetic and cultural diversity. This approach led to a choice of samples all containing substantial ancestral heterogeneity (Table (Table1),1), which confounds inference. We believe a better design principle for sample selection is to minimize ancestral heterogeneity, e.g., as used by Tishkoff et al. (2009) in their supervised clustering analysis. Of the Pagani et al. (2012) samples, better choices are Somali, rather than Ethiopian Somali, to represent Cushitic ancestry; Ari Blacksmith, rather than Wolayta, to represent Omotic ancestry; and South Sudanese, rather than Gumuz, to represent Nilo-Saharan ancestry (Table (Table1).1). Additionally, samples from Arabian, Levantine, and Maghrebi populations should have been included."
Contd from the paper....
"A second problem is that, of all the ancestries present in the Egyptian and Ethiopian samples, ancestry unique to and common in Ethiopians who currently speak an Omotic language is the most divergent (Shriner et al., 2014). Consequently, both “African” and “non-African” genomes are expected a priori to be more similar to the “African” component of Egyptian genomes than the “African” component of Ethiopian genomes, solely on the basis of genetic distance and independent of genealogical relationships among ancestries. "
history91
Scribe
**
history91 Avatar
Posts: 116Male
5 hours ago
Quote
Edit
like
Post Options
Post by history91 on 5 hours ago
Oss El Banna says : As for the Gurna meme, this talks about mtDNA, and that mainly is attributed to the 7th century Arab slave trade.