wysingm
Craftsperson
Myra Wysinger
Posts: 19
|
Post by wysingm on May 25, 2010 20:20:02 GMT -5
Geneticist Dr. S.O.Y. Keita
He also answers a question about head binding of the Amarna Period of King Akhenaten.
|
|
|
|
Post by egyptianplanet on May 26, 2010 10:46:41 GMT -5
I noticed many in Egypt still have "tropical" limb proportions as well. I think that the body tends to be slender and the limbs like the hands and legs tend to be larger than average.
Edit: Forgot to add this. For those who have questions as to what "tropical" limb proportions mean, it means that the limbs are longer. Cold adapted populations, i.e those that developed around the Caucasus, tend to have smaller limb proportions due to adaptations. Due to the cold weather, their limbs tended to hug the bodies resulting in thick yet shorter limbs. Due to Egypt's warm, hot and dry climate, they maintained a warm body plan.
|
|
|
|
Post by sundiata on May 30, 2010 16:08:46 GMT -5
You couldn't possibly know that without measuring the indices. People who have tropical limb proportions usually live in the tropics and there has been no study investigating modern Egyptian limb proportions. Also, your definition of "tropical" adaptation is inaccurate. One can have longer limbs relative to height in any region with higher intensity of heat, but "tropical" denotes what would be an expected response to "tropical" heat, within a tropical environment. This is actually extreme and represents mostly what is seen among Sub-Saharan Africans and other tropical residents. You'd be hard pressed to show me evidence of modern Egyptians with these limb ratios, unless they come from the extreme south (which is in the tropics)...
|
|
|
|
Post by doctorisscientia on May 30, 2010 18:21:45 GMT -5
You couldn't possibly know that without measuring the indices. People who have tropical limb proportions usually live in the tropics and there has been no study investigating modern Egyptian limb proportions. Also, your definition of "tropical" adaptation is inaccurate. One can have longer limbs relative to height in any region with higher intensity of heat, but "tropical" denotes what would be an expected response to "tropical" heat, within a tropical environment. This is actually extreme and represents mostly what is seen among Sub-Saharan Africans and other tropical residents. You'd be hard pressed to show me evidence of modern Egyptians with these limb ratios, unless they come from the extreme south (which is in the tropics)... But the Ancient Egyptians had tropical body plans. If modern day Egyptians are indeed the wholly descendents of the ancients, wouldn't they have those same measurements? |
|
|
|
Post by sundiata on May 30, 2010 18:56:04 GMT -5
While I am sensitive to the connection that modern Egyptians share with their ancestors, I certainly would not argue that position.
|
|
|
|
Post by olehint on Jun 13, 2010 14:51:22 GMT -5
While I am sensitive to the connection that modern Egyptians share with their ancestors, I certainly would not argue that position. why |
|
|
|
Post by sundiata on Jun 18, 2010 8:38:43 GMT -5
^Because I wouldn't have any good arguments to demonstrate that point.
|
|
|
|
Post by egyptianplanet on Jun 19, 2010 17:17:01 GMT -5
sundiata do you believe that modern Egyptians are descendants of the Egyptians? (And this is a general question, no need to pin-point anything in particular).
Also I'm guessing the study of proportions would largely remain the same throughout history with the obvious fact humans, as a species, have gotten larger?
I think I read somewhere Keita mentioned Lower Egyptians may have slowly adapted to the different climate of the Delta, although this would have been very gradual.
Also, doctor, it's very foolish to assume modern Egyptians are wholly descendants of the ancients or many other populations for that matter. Egypt is so diverse from Alexandria to Aswan it's clear that nothing really is 100% in Egypt.
|
|
|
|
Post by truthteacher2007 on Jun 20, 2010 9:50:10 GMT -5
While I am sensitive to the connection that modern Egyptians share with their ancestors, I certainly would not argue that position. Well here's a question. Are modern day African Americans wholly descendants of continental Africans? Does anyone have an answer to this question? |
|
|
|
Post by homeylu on Jun 20, 2010 10:45:31 GMT -5
I noticed many in Egypt still have "tropical" limb proportions as well. I think that the body tends to be slender and the limbs like the hands and legs tend to be larger than average. Edit: Forgot to add this. For those who have questions as to what "tropical" limb proportions mean, it means that the limbs are longer. Cold adapted populations, i.e those that developed around the Caucasus, tend to have smaller limb proportions due to adaptations. Due to the cold weather, their limbs tended to hug the bodies resulting in thick yet shorter limbs. Due to Egypt's warm, hot and dry climate, they maintained a warm body plan. Correct me if I'm mistaken, but I think you may be suggesting that modern Egyptians have "elongated" features, which are not the same as tropical limb proportions, as some people mistakenly assume. Elongated features, similar to those from the "Horn" or 'Watusi /Masai' tribes include, slender body plans, narrow facial features such as the nose and lips, as opposed to the "broader" features of Africans from other parts of the continent. For example, an African with "broad" facial features could still have "tropical limbs" and a European with "narrow or elongated" features, could still have "cold-adapted" limbs. He actually makes the distinction in the video if you watch it again. These "elongated" features are indigineous to Africa, as evidenced by the skeletons found in the Gamble's Cave in Kenya, (sub-Sahara Africa) which exhibited all of these features--narrow nose, thin jaw-line, narrow skull, and very tall in height, which essentially refutes the possibility that such features are only limited to so-called "caucasoids". Many East Africans still exhibits such features even to this day. |
|
|
|
Post by doctorisscientia on Jun 20, 2010 16:01:26 GMT -5
While I am sensitive to the connection that modern Egyptians share with their ancestors, I certainly would not argue that position. Well here's a question. Are modern day African Americans wholly descendants of continental Africans? Does anyone have an answer to this question? Yes, for the most part; African-Americans are predominantly African, 87%. Non-African admixture accounts for 13% of the genetic makeup of the African-American populations. "Wholly" in that they predominantly biologically linked to the African continent and not elsewhere. Also, African-Americans have tropical body-plans. Somalis are wholly/predominant descendants of the ancient community in that particular local, even with the limited western derived African admixture among that population. |
|
|
|
Post by doctorisscientia on Jun 20, 2010 16:04:31 GMT -5
sundiata do you believe that modern Egyptians are descendants of the Egyptians? (And this is a general question, no need to pin-point anything in particular). Also I'm guessing the study of proportions would largely remain the same throughout history with the obvious fact humans, as a species, have gotten larger? I think I read somewhere Keita mentioned Lower Egyptians may have slowly adapted to the different climate of the Delta, although this would have been very gradual. Also, doctor, it's very foolish to assume modern Egyptians are wholly descendants of the ancients or many other populations for that matter. Egypt is so diverse from Alexandria to Aswan it's clear that nothing really is 100% in Egypt. The Ancient Egyptians possessed tropical body plans. If modern day Egyptians were in fact the predominant descendants of the Ancient Egyptians, would they not also possess tropical body plans and not body plans parallel to mixed populations of African descent, i.e. coastal Berbers/Arabs. |
|
|
|
Post by truthteacher2007 on Jun 20, 2010 16:41:55 GMT -5
Well here's a question. Are modern day African Americans wholly descendants of continental Africans? Does anyone have an answer to this question? Yes, for the most part; African-Americans are predominantly African, 87%. Non-African admixture accounts for 13% of the genetic makeup of the African-American populations. "Wholly" in that they are the predominantly biologically linked to the African continent and not elsewhere. Also, African-Americans have tropical body-plans. Somalis are wholly/predominant descendants of the ancient community in that particular local, even with the limited western derived African admixture among that population. And what of people like myself from the Caribbean and Latin America who are significantly more than 13%? What do you do with people like us? Are we not still part of the community even though we may be anywhere from 35% and greater non African admixture? And where is the proof that modern Egyptians DO NOT have tropical limb proportions? In the video series in which Keita was speaking he mentions that even North African Berbers had tropical limb proportions, further more that they were linked to other African peoples by the PN2 marker, meaning, they are still part of the African family. But here's the real question, what does it matter? I think everyone knows that Modern Egyptians are a big mixture at this point in time, so what? There has been a process of mixture happening there for quite a long time and so what? I really think its bogus to put populations into baskets, but then again, that's what the Eurocentric world view does. Are Egyptians tropical in their body plan? There is not going to be a definate answer one way or the other because it depends on the individual. I would say that most are, but there are also many more who are not and the thing is they are all related. This idea that we can put people into categories and thereby determine their relationships, or lack thereof to one another is one that was created out of a colonialist Eurocentric world view. Just as the Afro American who is 90% European and even has European Y DNA is still related to the Afro American who is only 12% European or less and has an African Y DNA, so too are Egyptians related to one another. As to what percentage of the population was strictly African DNA as opposed to those with extra African origins, in Ancient Egypt, we don't know and we cnt know because we weren't there. I would speculate that it depended on region and time period and here I'm speaking of the Dynastic period. I cant say with any certainty what percentage was or wasn't and even Keita is emphatic in explaining that we cant ascribe any one particular look to them nor can we tell exactly how dark the populaton was back then on a whole. We just don't know. What I do know is that based on the stauary from the Old Kingdom that I have observed in Egypt personally, all the typical phenotypes represented in the current population are also represented in the early dynastic period as well. What I have seen is that from the earliest times, there was no one phenotype representative of the entire population. There was a cultural ideal though and it was a southern one for the most part. What we do know is that this civilization was created in the south, it was of indiginous continental origin and not an import from Western Asia as many people have tried to claim. What I do know, for a fact, is that 50 years ago, the average, "mixed Egyptian" would be made to sit in segragation and labled racially inferior, just like mixed blood Afro Americans like Leena Horne, Rosa Parks and so many others, so who cares about how mixed this one is and that one aint? Did being mixed ever make somebody NOT a negro in this racist society? Its just that I think issues like this are a distraction and really irrelevant. Unless one believes in theories of racial superiority, notions of racial purity are meaningless. |
|
|
|
Post by sundiata on Jun 21, 2010 1:28:13 GMT -5
While I am sensitive to the connection that modern Egyptians share with their ancestors, I certainly would not argue that position. Well here's a question. Are modern day African Americans wholly descendants of continental Africans? Does anyone have an answer to this question? Bad analogy, I must say. Totally different histories in no way comparable in space or time. What is an "Egyptian"? |
|
|
|
Post by truthteacher2007 on Jun 21, 2010 10:54:42 GMT -5
Well here's a question. Are modern day African Americans wholly descendants of continental Africans? Does anyone have an answer to this question? Bad analogy, I must say. Totally different histories in no way comparable in space or time. No its not. Its a totally valid question, but one that I find most people who are hung up on how mixed or not Egyptians are are never able to answer. Who ones ancestors are has nothing to do with how mixed or not an individual is. My paternal line traces back to the Bateke people of Congo, ( or it was called that in the late 1700's when my ancestor was kidnapped and shipped off to Jamaica), yet my father's skin is white and his eyes are almost blue. Does that erase his genetic history? We all know we are mixed and therefore we don't look like our original Congo ancestors, but they are still our ancestors. I don't see how this is different from Egyptians. They all know there has been mixture in the past and the general consensus in Egypt is that the farther south you go the less diluted the old genetic stock and culture is. However, of those mixed northerners, they are still Egyptians. Their sense of identity is not based on our concepts of race and physical features, but on nationality and culture. |
|
