Page 2 of 16 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 160

Thread: 2018 Ancient Egyptian mummy genomes - Heavily Critique

  1. #11
    The alternative interpretations involve three major considerations: 1) sampling and methodology, 2) historiography and 3) definitions as they relate to populations, origins and evolution.”Tiny sample sizes: “The whole genome sample size is too small (n=3) to accurately permit a discussion of all Egyptian population history from north to south.”
    Schuenemann et al. (2017) only analysed mummified remains excavated at Abusir el-Meleq, who were mostly high-ranking officials of the Old Kingdom. These ancient individuals belonged exclusively to a group of prosperous inhabitants in the ancient community in Abusir el-Meleq, which explains why these samples have less African admixture compared to the general modern Egyptian population. Slaves with sub-Saharan African ancestry were not traditionally mummified and buried in Ancient Egypt. However, the mummies are assumed to be representative of the local population by the authors based on an incomplete archaeological report.

    It is possible that the genetic impact of Greek and Roman immigration was more pronounced in the north-western Delta and the Fayum, where most Greek and Roman settlement concentrated43,55, or among the higher classes of Egyptian society55. Under Ptolemaic and Roman rule, ethnic descent was crucial to belonging to an elite group and afforded a privileged position in society55. Especially in the Roman Period there may have been significant legal and social incentives to marry within one's ethnic group, as individuals with Roman citizenship had to marry other Roman citizens to pass on their citizenship. Such policies are likely to have affected the intermarriage of Romans and non-Romans to a degree55. Additional genetic studies on ancient human remains from Egypt are needed with extensive geographical, social and chronological spread in order to expand our current picture in variety, accuracy and detail.
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5459999/
    Last edited by ThirdTerm; 02-05-2019 at 11:31 PM.
    Давайте вместе снова сделаем мир великий!

  2. #12
    Registered Users
    Posts
    68
    Sex
    Y-DNA
    E-M183
    mtDNA
    U4b

    I think it's fair to say there is a strong case that modern Georgians are descended in part from the ancient Colchians, and of course we know know their modern genetic ancestry as well as the ancestry of multiple Caucasus populations from ancient time periods. I wouldn't say that modern Georgians resemble Nilotic peoples or Ethiopian Africans...I acknowledge this is a subjective judgement.
    Whatever you believe is up to you but Colchians were black-skinned and wolly-haired according to Herodotus.

    To me, this suggests that the Egyptians of Herodotus' time resembled modern Georgians more closely than Sub Saharan peoples, rather than the Colchians and Egyptians sharing a Sub Saharan appearance.
    How many Ethnic Georgians are black-skinned and woolly-haired today?

    Of course, Herodotus lived after the Dynastic era of Egypt. So even if there was a major shift in the Egyptian population by Herodotus' time, this source doesn't tell us about the ancient Egyptians of older eras.
    I already answered this point. According to most archeologists, Paleolithic/Mesolithic/Neolithic Egyptians were Negroid. It is only in the Late Neolithic-Copper Age Period that Negroid Egyptians mixed with neighbouring Levantines.

    I think it is reasonable based on skeletal and archaeological evidence to expect an ancient cline of ancestry to follow the path of the Nile. But the genetic evidence isn't there yet. And we don't know how patterns of genetic ancestry shifted over time in this area. We have to wait for aDNA studies.
    AuDNA is indeed necessary but craniometric race estimation is based on skull-shape.

  3. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by ThirdTerm View Post
    Schuenemann et al. (2017) only analysed mummified remains excavated at Abusir el-Meleq, who were mostly high-ranking officials of the Old Kingdom. These ancient individuals belonged exclusively to a group of prosperous inhabitants in the ancient community in Abusir el-Meleq,
    It is well known that those are the were grave sites of Asiatic/European Invaders. Those sampled (three) were all late period as well.

    Slaves with sub-Saharan African ancestry were not traditionally mummified and buried in Ancient Egypt. However, the mummies are assumed to be representative of the local population by the authors based on an incomplete archaeological report.


    The oldest mummy on Earth was not found in Egypt, but rather in the Libyan Sahara prior to dynastic unification. The mummies name was Uan Muhuggiag, and he was nick named "the black mummy". Keep in mind that this is the oldest known mummified remain found on Earth, and this was one of the pivotal pieces of evidence proving the African origins of ancient "Egypt".

    The racial situation based on actual research (rather than a Western Caucasoid fantasy) was actually the opposite of what you are suggesting.

    "The predominant craniometric pattern in the Abydos royal tombs is 'southern' (tropical African variant), and this is consistent with what would be expected based on the literature and other results (Keita, 1990). This pattern is seen in both group and unknown analyses... Archaeology and history seem to provide the most parsimonious explanation for the variation in the royal tombs at Abydos.. Tomb design suggests the presence of northerners in the south in late Nakada times (Hoffman, 1988) when the unification probably took place. Delta names are attached to some of the tombs at Abydos (Gardiner, 1961; Yurco, 1990, personal communication), thus perhaps supporting Petrie's (1939) and Gardiner's contention that north-south marriages were undertaken to legitimize the hegemony of the south. The courtiers of northern elites would have accompanied them.

    Given all of the above, it is probably not possible to view the Abydos royal tomb sample as representative of the general southern Upper Egyptian population of the time. Southern elites and/or their descendants eventually came to be buried in the north (Hoffman, 1988). Hence early Second Dynasty kings and Djoser (Dynasty 111) (Hayes, 1953) and his descendants are not buried in Abydos. Petrie (1939) states that the Third Dynasty, buried in the north, was of Sudanese origin, but southern Egypt is equally likely. This perhaps explains Harris and Weeks' (1973) suggested findings of southern morphologies in some Old Kingdom Giza remains, also verified in portraiture (Drake, 1987). Further study would be required to ascertain trends in the general population of both regions. The strong Sudanese affinity noted in the unknown analyses may reflect the Nubian interactions with upper Egypt in predynastic times prior to Egyptian unification (Williams, 1980,1986)..." (S. Keita (1992) Further Studies of Crania From Ancient Northern Africa: An Analysis of Crania From First Dynasty Egyptian Tombs, Using Multiple Discriminant Functions. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY 87:245-254)

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to Asante For This Useful Post:

     Shamayim (02-06-2019)

  5. #14
    Registered Users
    Posts
    538
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    Ashkenazi Jew
    Nationality
    American
    Y-DNA
    Q-Y2750
    mtDNA
    H47

    United States of America Israel
    Quote Originally Posted by Shamayim View Post
    Egypt was never a part of North Africa or a "Greater Caucasoid Horizon" unlike some people would like to believe. During the Paleolithic Period it belonged to the Nubian Complex[1] and was settled by Proto-Nilotes[2] while Northern Africa belonged to the Aterian Complex and was settled by Proto-Berbers. During the Mesolithic Period and the Neolithic Period, it belonged to Halfan and Qadan cultures whose bearers were closesly to Modern Sub-Saharan Africans[3]. Likewise, Predynastic Egyptians (Badarians) were described as a mixed Negroid-Europoid population[4,5].

    Biblical writters systematically linked Kushites and Egyptians, but never linked Levantines and Egyptians[5]. Last but not least, Greco-Roman authors considered that the Colchians were of Egyptian stock due to their black-skin and woolly-hair[6].
    The Bible clearly states that Egypt (Mizraim) was the brother of Canaan (the Levant). Egypt is also the father of the Ludim (often considered to be the Libyans), the Casluhim (ancestor of Philistines), and the Caphtorim (associated with either North Africa or Greece). In other words, the Bible clearly associates the origins of Egypt with other Eastern Mediterranean populations, whether West Asian, North African, or Southeast European.

    Also, I think it's a big mistake to try to project modern conceptions of "race" or even appearance onto [translations of] ancient descriptions of peoples. They're all relative to the describer. "Black" generally just means darker. "Woolly hair" can just mean curly. There are medieval European descriptions of Ashkenazi Jews as being "black." I very much doubt these descriptions had black Africans in mind...

  6. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to jonahst For This Useful Post:

     Power77 (02-06-2019),  Tz85 (02-06-2019)

  7. #15
    Registered Users
    Posts
    53
    Sex

    Ancient Egyptians being seen as Eurasians is what happens when geneticists carry out aDNA analysis devoid of any kind of historical or archaeological context. The Abusir study proves once again that while we should respect the data of these studies, their interpretation and conclusions often don't deserve to be taken seriously.

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to Mansamusa For This Useful Post:

     beyoku (02-12-2019)

  9. #16
    Registered Users
    Posts
    860
    Sex
    Location
    Earth
    Ethnicity
    Italian Slavic Jew
    Y-DNA
    E-V12 Egypt/Natufian
    mtDNA
    I5a Levant

    Italy Poland Germany Palatinate Israel
    Quote Originally Posted by Mansamusa View Post
    Ancient Egyptians being seen as Eurasians is what happens when geneticists carry out aDNA analysis devoid of any kind of historical or archaeological context. The Abusir study proves once again that while we should respect the data of these studies, their interpretation and conclusions often don't deserve to be taken seriously.
    "Phylogeographic refinement and large scale genotyping of human Y chromosome haplogroup E provide new insights into the dispersal of early pastoralists in the African continent Beniamino Trombetta (2015)

    "Undifferentiated E-V12* lineages (not E-V32 or E-M224, so therefore named "E-V12*") peak in frequency among Southern Egyptians (up to 74.5%).[
    DNA Tribes

    Balto - North Slavic 22.4%
    Northwest European 18.8%
    Italian Greek 18.1%
    Persian Jewish 9%
    Iberian 6.3%
    Ashkenazi Jewish 5.9%
    Basque 4.3%
    Sephardic Jewish 4.1%
    Balochi Punjab 3.7%
    Caucasus 2.5%
    Urals 1.3%
    Finnish 1.2%
    Lebanese Cypriot 1%
    Other 1.4%

    Sephardic Jewish Turkey 18.8%
    Argyll and Bute Scottish Highlands 18.6%
    Sardinia 18.4%
    Lithuania 15.7%
    Russia Voronezh 7%
    Belgium 5.6%
    Syrian Jewish 4.9%
    Libyan Jewish 4.4%
    Russia Tver 2.4%
    Azerbaijani Jewish 2.2%

  10. The Following User Says Thank You to Tz85 For This Useful Post:

     beyoku (02-12-2019)

  11. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by Psynome View Post
    To address one of the cited sources, [7]: the fact that Herodotus considered the Colchians and Egyptians similar in appearance is to me an argument that the Egyptians he had experience of were not especially Sub Saharan or Nilotic in appearance.

    I think it's fair to say there is a strong case that modern Georgians are descended in part from the ancient Colchians, and of course we know know their modern genetic ancestry as well as the ancestry of multiple Caucasus populations from ancient time periods.
    Well in order to determine the external anatomical features of a person or persons then the skeletal/morphological data is what is really important here. There has been consistent research indicating that the early farming populations of the "Near East" were in fact "black Africans" closely related physically to those populations that who now reside in regions south of the Sahara desert. I will again direct the attention to this study about the data, and the narrative that it implies;

    F. X. Ricaut, M. Waelkens. (2008). Cranial Discrete Traits in a Byzantine Population and Eastern Mediterranean Population Movements Human Biology - Volume 80, Number 5, October 2008, pp. 535-564

    "A late Pleistocene-early Holocene northward migration (from Africa to the Levant and to Anatolia) of these populations has been hypothesized from skeletal data (Angel 1972, 1973; Brace 2005) and from archaeological data, as indicated by the probable Nile Valley origin of the "Mesolithic" (epi-Paleolithic) Mushabi culture found in the Levant (Bar Yosef 1987). This migration finds some support in the presence in Mediterranean populations (Sicily, Greece, southern Turkey, etc.; Patrinos et al.; Schiliro et al. 1990) of the Benin sickle cell haplotype. This haplotype originated in West Africa and is probably associated with the spread of malaria to southern Europe through an eastern Mediterranean route (Salares et al. 2004) following the expansion of both human and mosquito populations brought about by the advent of the Neolithic transition (Hume et al 2003; Joy et al. 2003; Rich et al 1998). This northward migration of northeastern African populations carrying sub-Saharan biological elements is concordant with the morphological homogeneity of the Natufian populations (Bocquentin 2003), which present morphological affinity with sub-Saharan populations (Angel 1972; Brace et al. 2005). In addition, the Neolithic revolution was assumed to arise in the late Pleistocene Natufians and subsequently spread into Anatolia and Europe (Bar-Yosef 2002), and the first Anatolian farmers, Neolithic to Bronze Age Mediterraneans and to some degree other Neolithic-Bronze Age Europeans, show morphological affinities with the Natufians (and indirectly with sub-Saharan populations; Angel 1972; Brace et al 2005), in concordance with a process of demic diffusion accompanying the extension of the Neolithic revolution (Cavalli-Sforza et al. 1994)."

    "Following the numerous interactions among eastern Mediterranean and Levantine populations and regions, caused by the introduction of agriculture from the Levant into Anatolia and southeastern Europe, there was, beginning in the Bronze Age, a period of increasing interactions in the eastern Mediterranean, mainly during the Greek, Roman, and Islamic periods. These interactions resulted in the development of trading networks, military campaigns, and settler colonization. Major changes took place during this period, which may have accentuated or diluted the sub-Saharan components of earlier Anatolian populations. The second option seems more likely, because even though the population from Sagalassos territory was interacting with northeastern African and Levantine populations [trade relationships with Egypt (Arndt et al. 2003), involvement of thousands of mercenaries from Pisidia (Sagalassos region) in the war around 300 B.C. between the Ptolemaic kingdom (centered in Egypt) and the Seleucid kingdom (Syria/Mesopotamia/Anatolia), etc.], the major cultural and population interactions involving the Anatolian populations since the Bronze Age occurred with the Mediterranean populations form southeastern Europe, as suggested from historical and genetic data."

    "In this context it is likely that Bronze Age events may have facilitated the southward diffusion of populations carrying northern and central European biological elements and may have contributed to some degree of admixture between northern and central Europeans and Anatolians, and on a larger scale, between northeastern Mediterraneans and Anatolians. Even if we do not know which populations were involved, historical and archaeological data suggest, for instance, the 2nd millennium B.C. Minoan and later Mycenaean occupation of Anatolian coast, the arrival in Anatolia in the early 1st millennium B.C. of the Phrygians coming from Thrace, and later the arrival of settlers from Macedonia in Pisidia and in the Sagalassos territory (under Seleucid rule). The coming of the Dorians from Northern Greece and central Europe (the Dorians are claimed to be one of the main groups at the origin of the ancient Greeks) may have also brought northern and central European biological elements into southern populations. Indeed, the Dorians may have migrated southward to the Peloponnese, across the southern Aegean and Create, and later reached Asia Minor."

    Some of you may not "like" it, but it's pretty cut and dry as far as what happened in the Near East. The original populations (including the farmers) were black Africans, followed by the migrations from the drying Sahara into West Africa, the Nile Valley, Near East and southern Europe; and later populations from the Caucus (the Sea Peoples).

    I wouldn't say that modern Georgians resemble Nilotic peoples or Ethiopian Africans
    It's interesting that you mention the major African groups, except for the main one that created the state which is the "Niger-Congo" (Bantu) populations. It was this African type that was specifically noted by Brace to match the Neolithic Levantines;

    "The Niger-Congo speakers, Congo, Dahomey and Haya, cluster closely with each other and a bit less closely with the Nubian sample, both the recent and the Bronze Age Nubians, and more remotely with the Naqada Bronze Age sample of Egypt, the modern Somalis, and the Arabic-speaking Fellaheen (farmers) of Israel. When those samples are separated and run in a single analysis as in Fig. 1, there clearly is a tie between them that is diluted the farther one gets from sub-Saharan Africa" (Brace, 2005)

    "The surprise is that the Neolithic peoples of Europe and their Bronze Age successors are not closely related to the modern inhabitants, although the prehistoric/modern ties are somewhat more apparent in southern Europe. It is a further surprise that the Epipalaeolithic Natufian of Israel from whom the Neolithic realm was assumed to arise has a clear link to Sub-Saharan Africa... Interestingly enough, however, the small Natufian sample falls between the Niger-Congo group and the other samples used. Fig. 2 shows the plot produced by the first two canonical variates, but the same thing happens when canonical variates 1 and 3 (not shown here) are used. This placement suggests that there may have been a Sub-Saharan African element in the make-up of the Natufians (the putative ancestors of the subsequent Neolithic), .. When canonical variates are plotted, neither sample ties in with Cro-Magnon as was once suggested. The data treated here support the idea that the Neolithic moved out of the Near East into the circum-Mediterranean areas and Europe by a process of demic diffusion but that subsequently the in situ residents of those areas, derived from the Late Pleistocene inhabitants, absorbed both the agricultural life way and the people who had brought it." (Brace, 2005).

    I think that based on actual research that the population that you would see the greatest physical resemblance to the Neolithic and Bronze age populations of the region would be in so called "Sub Saharan Africa" today.

    ...I acknowledge this is a subjective judgement. To me, this suggests that the Egyptians of Herodotus' time resembled modern Georgians more closely than Sub Saharan peoples, rather than the Colchians and Egyptians sharing a Sub Saharan appearance.
    Are you aware of the population tug of wars that went on between the peoples of that region during that time? The region was much darker - African in complexion because the original inhabitants were Africans. The migration of nomadic peoples (such as the Sea Peoples for examples) were pivotal events that clearly brought about a population change throughout the entire Mediterranean. Those savage nomadic stateless people literally overran and destroyed the Bronze Age civilizations across the Mediterranean. These populations have never been described as Africans, but almost always Indo-European. Do you think that as Ricaut suggest the violent movement of these warlike peoples was an event that "diluted" the Sub Saharan African element of the region as suggested?

    And circumcision is a cultural practice that was widely shared by many peoples of West Asia. Herodotus is probably mistaken in thinking the Colchians were the earliest practicioners along with Egyptians.
    That is African..

    "Other ancient Egyptian practices show strong similarities to modern African cultures including divine kingship, the use of headrests, body art, circumcision, and male coming-of-age rituals, all suggesting an African substratum or foundation for Egyptian civilization..The Oxford encyclopedia of ancient Egypt, 2001. Volume 3. Oxford University Press. p.28

    ^^ The people who insist Egypt was not originally "BLACK" Africans (not admixed) African are ignorant of the conclusive research above or have cognitive dissonance.
    Last edited by Asante; 02-06-2019 at 02:03 AM.

  12. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Asante For This Useful Post:

     deku27 (02-06-2019),  Shamayim (02-06-2019)

  13. #18
    Registered Users
    Posts
    53
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by Tz85 View Post
    "Phylogeographic refinement and large scale genotyping of human Y chromosome haplogroup E provide new insights into the dispersal of early pastoralists in the African continent Beniamino Trombetta (2015)

    "Undifferentiated E-V12* lineages (not E-V32 or E-M224, so therefore named "E-V12*") peak in frequency among Southern Egyptians (up to 74.5%).[
    The possible place of origin for E-V12 is southern Egypt or northern Sudan (aka historic Nubia). Stop scoring own-goals!

  14. The Following User Says Thank You to Mansamusa For This Useful Post:

     beyoku (02-12-2019)

  15. #19
    Registered Users
    Posts
    2,348
    Ethnicity
    Pred.Anglo-Saxon + Briton
    Nationality
    Canadian
    Y-DNA
    R1b S21184, BY50830+
    mtDNA
    U4b1a2 - FGS

    Canada England Wales Netherlands France Cornwall
    Quote Originally Posted by Asante View Post

    That's why for example you have some of the highest concentrations of haplogroup R1b in Niger-Congo speaking Sub Saharan West-Central African populations or why you have haplogroup J at frequencies of over 50% in Bantu populations, and these populations do not look distinguished from their neighboring Africans. There is nothing that non black African people can actually add into our gene pool, because we have everything.
    I was under the impression these are usually Chadic speaking populations in central sub-saharan Africa. R1b-V88 may have popped up in Niger-Congo speaking tribes sporadically, but I didn't think it was all that common, and not so much on the western side of the continent.
    YDNA: R1b-Z220 (A7066+) (1800's Stepney, London(Bethnal Green), UK George Wood b. 1782
    maternal-grandfather YDNA: prob. I1 Gurr, George 1843, Feversham, Kent, England.
    maternal-grandmother YDNA: R1b-P311+ Beech, John Richard b. 1780, Lewes, England
    maternal-ggrandfather YDNA R1b-U106 Thomas, Edward b 1854, Sittingbourne, Kent
    paternal-ggf YDNA: R1b-L48. Gould, John Somerset England 1800s.
    paternal-ggf YDNA: R1b-L48. Scott, William Hamilton mdka Ireland(?) < 1800s

  16. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to ADW_1981 For This Useful Post:

     beyoku (02-12-2019),  Power77 (02-06-2019)

  17. #20
    Registered Users
    Posts
    68
    Sex
    Y-DNA
    E-M183
    mtDNA
    U4b

    Quote Originally Posted by jonahst View Post
    The Bible clearly states that Egypt (Mizraim) was the brother of Canaan (the Levant). Egypt is also the father of the Ludim (often considered to be the Libyans), the Casluhim (ancestor of Philistines), and the Caphtorim (associated with either North Africa or Greece). In other words, the Bible clearly associates the origins of Egypt with other Eastern Mediterranean populations, whether West Asian, North African, or Southeast European.
    First, I must say that I do not consider the Bible as a reliable source but, most Canaanites were regarded as African/Hamitic invaders who encroached upon the territory of Semites[1]. It fits quite well with the Y-DNA (60% E) and the auDNA (10-20% African) of the Natufians. Furthermore, they showed minor negroid affinities[2].

    Also, I think it's a big mistake to try to project modern conceptions of "race" or even appearance onto [translations of] ancient descriptions of peoples. They're all relative to the describer. "Black" generally just means darker. "Woolly hair" can just mean curly. There are medieval European descriptions of Ashkenazi Jews as being "black." I very much doubt these descriptions had black Africans in mind...
    Greco-Romans weren't color blind, they were infact extremely racist. They described Egyptians exactly like they described their Ethiopian neighbours[3]. Are you implying that Ethiopians weren't "black" too?

    [1]
    Quote Originally Posted by Lashon HaKodesh: History, Holiness, & Hebrew
    While the Levant (the eastern seaboard of the Mediterranean, including the Land of Israel and Mesopotamia) actually fell to Shem, Ham's descendants decided to annex it. Thus began a struggle between the two families.
    [2]
    Quote Originally Posted by The Races of Europe
    The wide, low-vaulted nose, in combination with prognathism, gives a somewhat negroid cast to the face. The browridges are smooth, and the whole system of muscularity in the male but slightly developed. These late Natufians represent a basically Mediterranean type with minor negroid affinities. There was, apparently, a change of race during the Natufian. These small Mediterraneans must have brought their microliths from some point farther south or east, impelled by changes of climate.
    [3]
    Quote Originally Posted by Diodorus Siculus
    But there are also a great many other tribes of the Ethiopians, some of them dwelling in the land lying on both banks of the Nile and on the islands in p105 the river, others inhabiting the neighbouring country of Arabia,12 and still others residing in the interior of Libya. 2 The majority of them, and especially those who dwell along the river, are black in colour and have flat noses and woolly hair.

Page 2 of 16 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 123
    Last Post: 01-24-2019, 09:15 PM
  2. Ancient Egyptian mummy genomes
    By rozenfeld in forum Ancient (aDNA)
    Replies: 256
    Last Post: 12-14-2018, 07:37 AM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-11-2017, 09:47 PM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-11-2017, 09:41 PM
  5. mtDNA I2 from an Egyptian mummy
    By Jean M in forum I
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 05-27-2017, 01:16 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •