Much beloved by the Afrocentrist idiots who like to pretend Keita believes and has proved 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).
Very enlightening.
Mathilda's Anthropology Blog. 
Yes it is great to hear a sensible and well informed scientist says that both extremes are wrong. Yeah!
Great post. Thanks for turning me on to S. O. Keita, an impressive intellect. The evidence that he presents is fascinating. Don’t need the “idiots.”
So True. But I think you are making the incorrect conclusions. based on Keita’s words.
You should look at his other videos. Some of them he clearly goes to say that the Southern Egyptians that you see are who are darker are best representative of the type of Modern Egyptians that mirror the Ancient ones.
He also speaks about the mummies and specifically says that they have a “Somali Look” very “Elongated African.” Like other people of the Horn. He also calls these features indigenous and points out that they don’t have to come about due to admixture…..Because they are found in populations that have no Admixture. On numerous occasions he compares them with Somalis.
Even in this video he states that all the looks you have TODAY are what you would have found back then. While that is true he follows up speaks of mainly Migration of Non Egyptians into NORTHERN Egypt (1:35) creating more (Non-African) diversity in the North of the Country. He doesn’t say they were never there, but he demonstrates that throughout history later migrating Non-Egyptians have more representation amongst the population especially in the North.
At 1:49 He again says we can look at Modern DNA profiles and see what is most likely migrations due to more modern times VS. more Ancient influences :
I myself again would point at the Southern Egyptians (along with Northern Sudanese) having more indigenous African Ancestry and being less mixed than the Northern Egyptians, Particularly with Southerners having More M78*, V12, V22. Plus you can be “Nubian” AND Egyptian, the two are not mutually exclusive.
– And remember:
“Nubian” is 1 specific Ethnic group.
“Nubia” is a specific Area”
-Not all people that live in Nubia belong to the Nubian Ethnic group.
In Ancient times “Nubian” didnt exist and ALL groups living below the second cataract were called “Southerners.” This included North Sudanese, South Sudanese Nilotic people, Ethiopians, Beja, Ext. All the groups were “Nubians” – The word as an Ethnic groups cannot be applied today as it was back then.
I see you speak about Egyptians but i really dont understand exactly what you are trying to say about them or how you are describing their physical affinities? Also another reply you sent shows that you see Africa in a limited context. I dont know anyone that would specify they have been to Egypt and vaguely say they have been to “SS Africa” as if Sub-Saharan Africa is one monolithic place. Where in SS Africa did you go? You then say Egyptians were occasionally Black but “assorted shades of brown and mixed looking.” – To any African that describes basically ALL OF AFRICA.
This is where i loose you.
“Assorted shades of Brown” = Black.
Very few Africans in Africa (Or outside) are truly Black in skin color. There are really only a handful of places (Maybe 6 or 7) where you can find Africans that are Pitch Black.
FYI: Brown African or people of African descent call themselves “Black.” Even some South East Asians who are as dark or Darker than Africans socially call themselves “Brown.”
And these Southern Egyptians that are Brown really wouldn’t be called mixed in America. Not at all. Because they look similar to other North East Africans who are not called mixed. And even mixed people dont resemble North East Africans specifically Egyptians. Regardless of how mixed these populations are, their features are unique to the population. You can just mix an Arab or a European and an African to get someone who looks like an Egyptian or an Ethiopian. You will get Obama.
I haven’t ever said that any Non-African DNA was post dynastic. BUT i will say there was a point where their WAS only African DNA in the Nile Valley. I am not knowledgeable enough to try in date that period. I will say MOST of what we see is within the last 2000 years. It is particularly helpful that we can look at genetics and SNP patterns and Date admixture from the Arab expansion. Also i believe the paintings and statues we generalized. With Statues and paintings the Egyptians used specific formulas to show proportions. It cant be true if its formulated. Also Keita speaks on seeing some of these reconstructions that are not available to the public. He notes that statues to be more Norther Egyptian looking but the Skulls, skeleton and facial reconstruction to be more like Southern Egyptian or “stereotype African”
While i cannot discount that Women are painted yellow, that could just be their color. On the other hand, It truly DID denote some type of weakness as often repeated by Egyptologists. That still does not reduce the fact to me (or Other Africans) that the usual color that depictions of men and many women for that matter was brownish red. Brownish red is THE color of MOST Africans and MOST of the African Diaspora. It is of no coincidence that Such groups would see that as part of their culture as they do ALL other African Civilizations be it : Nubia, Axum, Ghana, Benin, Songhai states, Ancient Mali, Ancient Zimbabwe, etc. For us (Africans) it is not as if we need to be from Ethiopia to be interested in Ancient Axum. To us, Like Ancient Egypt, it is just another African Civilization. Africans admire ALL of these civilizations – does that make it “Afrocentric”?
Keita has pointed out in some of his papers (on this blog) that Lower dynastic Egyptians are part way between European phenotypes and upper Egyptians, which is the same as they are now roughly.
The DNA studies of modern lower Egypt really don’t allow for much mass immigration after the dynastic era. About 60% of the Y chr are African (Lucotte) and The R1 and some of the J1 and R1b have been there since the Neolithic. Unless you want to assume that the invaders were mainly or equally women (unlikley) you are looking at at most 10% immigration into Lower Egypt overall from Eurasia after the Neolithic, which would be kind of balanced out by the huge number of black Africans dragged into North Africa in the Barbary slave era.
Keita is quite right to observe a similarity between upper Egyptians and Somali. A population moved from Egypt/Nubia from Somalia. these people are essentially mixed in ancestry (from a long way back). However, he’s not commenting on their skin tone, which due to latitude and less sub saharan mixture would be overall lighter than Somali. You kind of need to grasp that he uses ‘African’ and ‘indgenous’ slightly differently to the norm. He calls modern white North Africans ‘indigenous Africans’, he cautions in the vid about assuming ‘African’ meaning anything specific in terms of phenotype.
there was a point where their WAS only African DNA in the Nile Valley
That would be about 35,000 years ago. There were several major population movements in that area. Eurasians (Cro Magnon like people) about 35k ago, then the mixed Afro/Asian people from Egypt/Nubia expanded all over North and East Africa, then another Asian expansion from the near East into North Africa about 10,000 years ago (Capsian) and then about 8,000 years ago Eurasian farmers moved into North and East Africa.
When he says ‘the mixed ancestry was already there’, that’s what he meant. Egypt was an African civilisation, it wasn’t a black African civilisation made up of people different to modern Egyptians.
Ethiopians are about 40% Eurasian. His ‘elongated Africans’ have a lot of Eurasian ancestry in them.
On the other hand, It truly DID denote some type of weakness as often repeated by Egyptologists
I’ve read a lot of Egyptology books and I’ve never seen that. I’ve seen it pointed out a lot of times that women have lighter skin and are depicted as lighter in a lot of artforms.
There are a plethora of lifelike statues of ancient Egyptians which unlike the tomb paintings are meant to be portraits. They don’t look any different to modern Egyptians- probably becasue they weren’t any different.
I am sorry, i am unsure where you are getting your information from.
Where do you get a figure of 10% from?
What exactly would that 10% be? Who would it represent and when?
Also, there is no evidence of MASS migration into Africa from anywhere 35K years ago. Which Eurasians? I see you constantly saying this but you have to be specific and tell us which Eurasians these are? One group of Eurasians – Europeans were migrating from Central Asia carrying R1 and downstream mutations and possibly had not even made it to Europe at that time. There is no Mass Migration into Africa at this time. It could be possible but you have to tell us What Y-Chromosomes and Mtdna they were carrying and show a study that says it………..I am sorry but we cant just take your word for granted. Even in East African which DOES have Admixture, they are still Black people. And some of their neighbors look just like them.
Other Africans are also Elongated and they live in the Sahara and also Central Africa:
Case and point :
“In Arabia prehistoric archaeology has barely been started. Yet we can be reasonably confident, until other evidence upsets the theory, that these deserts were the home of the slender variety of Caucasoid man.
In East Africa this type has survived among the slender, narrow-faced Watusi and other cattle people.” – Carlton S. Coon
Coon calls the Tutsi ‘Slender Caucasoids’ yet they are primarily E3a. They have not Admixture from Eurasians what so ever. But Coon places them as Caucasians. You don’t have to be mixed to be Elongated………And that is the problem of using outdated ideas. Keita is speaking of many different groups when he says “Elongated”
Egyptian weather is a bout the same as Somalia, Nubia is even worse.
One last thing – You haven’t ever read about why women were painted as a lighter color than men? You should read a bit more on the cultural aspects of ancient Egypt.
I am always trying to learn new things. If you can post those studies about Major Migration that would be MUCH appreciated.
Read the DNA studies on this blog. Honestly you’ll have to just go through the blog. Type ‘Eurasian back migration Africa’ and you should get a lot of them up. There’s another one not on this blog called ‘the timing of a back migration into Asia’ which puts it at about 30k. I have all of them on this blog.. I’m just not going through every single one here again. Feel free to start reading the papers. here’s what J Hawks has to say on it, if you think I’m making this up.
There was a big Eurasian back migration about 35k ago involving mtDNA U and M1, and Y chr R1- the dates in the older papers for R1 are way too young BTW. The only arguing on this is event the exact date. It wiped out the older peoples across North Africa; there is no ancient Y chr or mt DNA specific to that area at all, only Eurasian derived HG’s date back to any kind of time depth across North Africa. Nubia seems to be where they stalled and mixed with African populations.
DNA tests on Moroccan bones about 12k old show entirely Eurasian mt DNA (Taforalt), and the skulls look a lot like Cro Magnon Europeans at that time.
About 10k ago the North Africans change into a small faced typically Mediterannean people- Y chr studies show Eurasian J1 enrtering Africa about 10k ago, and in the Neolithic Levantine colonists come in too. The DNA studies show very little recent Arab or European ancestry in North Africa. Most of it goes back to the Neolithic and older.
It’s one of the reasons I get a little short with some people. I know just how little immigration there’s been into the Egypt era in the historical era. Virtually no European mt DNA, some minimal Y chr. The Arabs converted the locals, they didn’t kill them. Like I said on my ‘Egyptians aren’t Arabs’ entry, they are mostly native Africans with some neolithic and Mesolithic Eurasian added in.
You need to get away from ‘native African’ meaning black African, particularly in Keitas work. He can be a bit confusing in that respect. Generally his elongated groups do have an awful lot of Eurasian in them. Coons calling Watusi caucasoid isn’t really that up to date or particularly accurate either; they aren’t Caucasoid.
You can’t tell me what he (Keita) meant.
Until he says “yes, I meant what she says I meant” you are just spinning your wheels like most of you white folks who want to believe (“Egyptians were white” or “white folks were there, too”).
You know, of course, that very soon it will be you who is the “idiot” just like all those white folks who insisted Cleopatra was white which would be most of you people: idiots, I would say… 200 years of lies or stupidity… which one?
Mahari Mengistu
Wwell since he explictity says that Egyptians looked pretty much the same,. and some of texts explicitly say that modern Egyptians are for the most part the people who have been in the Nile since the Peistocene. I am not spinning my wheels, I am quoting.
Reconstruction of Cleo’s sister (pretty European looking according to anthropologists) a few entries along.
To Mathilda’s comments I would add that it is a widely-circulating myth that the E1b1b/E3b haplogroup is more prevalent in Southern/Upper Egypt than it is in Northern/Lower Egypt. It isn’t. In fact, the opposite is true: The “lighter-skinned” Egyptians of Northern Egypt have a considerably higher frequency of E1b1b than do the “darker-skinned” Lower Egyptians according to both Cruciani et al. (2004) and Zalloua et al. (2008). Both studies actually found an almost 20% higher frequency of E1b1b in Northern Egypt than in Southern Egypt.
I would also add that Keita’s evocation of the outmoded “Elongated African” hypothesis is very hypocritical, as it indicates a bias for certain purely adaptive/selective traits such as limb elongation, which group Egyptians and many other North and Northeast Africans with Sub-Saharan Africans (since they both evolved in tropical environments) versus other selective traits such as elongated and elevated noses, which cluster the former with Caucasoid groups rather than with Sub-Saharan Africans.
Limb elongation has long been demonstrated to be the product of long-term physical adaptation to intense heat. Longer limbs help organisms better dissipate heat, which is why even animals and hominids (such as the Turkana Boy) that evolved in tropical environments have elongated limbs: this particular morphological adaptation helps their bodies better release heat and therefore improves their chances at survival. It doesn’t mean that they are more ‘related’ to let alone of the same race as anatomically modern humans whose bodies also happen to have similarly adapted to their own tropical environments.
No less than Darwin himself has pointed out that selective traits are useless in ascertaining biological relationships between populations since they are a function of adaptation and not ancestry. Only traits with no demonstrated selective value, such as those measured by Loring Brace in his 1993 study of ancient Egyptian crania, can be used to that end. And interestingly, Brace in that study found both Egyptians and the Somalis that descended from them to cluster closer with Eurasian groups than with the studied Sub-Saharan populations… AFTER the parts of the human skull that are under selective control were omitted from consideration.
Click to access brace.pdf
I would therefore caution readers not to put too much stock into what Shomarka Keita (whose real birth name is Jon Derryll Walker, by the way) says. He is definitely not a disinterested commentator on the subject of race, a concept which he constantly says does not exist yet can’t seem to stop talking about.
I’m sorry to say, We do NOT look like Somalis or Ethiopians.
I am a southern Egyptian, And why do people always wanna compare us to Everyone else in the Sub Sahara? We are Egyptians and thats it. We don’t belong to anyone. North Africans has it’s own looks.
I think that Africans do not sea themselves as black, they see themselves as member of a specific tribe or people and would object at being indistinguishable from one another and they would feel closer to north African than to American with African ancestry who are very western in thinking and attitude.
correction see and not see. oops
Donald – Great comment. I looked at some of the older articles and see your conclusion. The only comment i can make is the sampling size is low. Also, They were low resolution samples so some of that M78* that they are looking at would probably be V65 which is found predominantly in Northern Coastal Africa. V65 was a sub-clade that was UNKNOWN at that time.
Generally ALL the LATESTS studies place The majority of M78*(underived) and M78(v12) in Southern Egypt and Northern Sudan. It was these newer studies that actually prompted Cruciani to change the Origin of M78 [Which is STILL as sub-clade of M35] from East Africa to North East Africa.
Furthermore – Keita’s analysis of “Elongated African” is preaching exactly to people like you. Case and point : The Somalis ARE a Sub-Saharan Population. Ethiopians ARE a Sub-Saharan Population. Other people in the Nile Valley ARE Sub-Saharan populations. Saying the Somalis ‘Descended from Egyptians’ {M78 v12 to M78 v32} is Just as Factual as stating that Egyptians Descended from Ethiopians. {M35* to M78*}. As a matter of fact there is a Shorter timespan between the “Descent” of Egyptian from Ethiopian – Which i explained already. To add to this matter the “Somalis” that studied were in fact NOT From Somalia but from the Ogaden region of ETHIOPIA. These Ogaden Somalis are heavily mixed with other Ethiopians.
Google and Ogaden Somali to see exactly how they compare with a Somali from Somalia.
Brace followed up on that 1993 study and notes that many of those populations cluster with other Africans before anyone else. Keita also explains the fallacy of such studies. And that is why he considered it OUTDATED. That is why i posted the quote from Carlton Coon – to show that HE TOO thought that the Tutsi – Who are as African as ever were considered “Caucasian” based on facial features. But they are not, and they have little to No E3b….They also have no Admixture from Eurasia. The entire Concept of Black Caucasians or African Caucasians is false….and you should use admixture to explain facial features : If the Tutsi can have these features why cant other Africans? Hey you can say NOW that he was incorrect and they are not Caucasoid but they are STILL Elongated. Ethiopians are STILL Elongated, as are Somalis, As are Other Central and even West Africans.
Mathilda – Good Information BUT – I still don’t see anything that is “Massive” or “Huge” 35 kya. M1 is not 35 Thousand years old. If R1’s date is too young you cant just stay it is “because it is,” when geneticist say it isnt. I have read papers saying that R1 was expanding into Europe at that time, Where it is predominantly found. Also I have not seen any papers that place the migration of groups carrying R1 into Africa prior to the Neolithic.
Another thing that you fail to understand is that the Maghreb doens’t include Egypt for a Reason. The Maghreb has a totally different history as far as language, culture and people than Egypt. Egyptian culture, language, genetics, and just about everything else is situated and revolved around the Nile Valley and Sudanese Sahara. Egypt was populated Primarily of Africans from the Nile Valley and Sahara, long long ago, which is different from the population of the Maghreb which show ancestry primarily from the Neolithic………and from Non-Africans.
Also there is no “Mediterannean Type”
That is about as silly as saying there is a “Caribbean Type” That is just an another outdated Term coined by people such as Coon who labled the Watutsi, along with the Ethiopians, Massai, Dinka, Somali, Nubian, Egyptians, etc ALL as “Mediterannean” or “Hamite” Simply taking a look at the Watutsi shows how this idea is utter garbage in 2009.
“The DNA studies show very little recent Arab or European ancestry in North Africa. ” – That is not true. Looking at Short Tandem Repeats we can see that most of the Haplogroup J we see in Northern Africa is a by product of Arab expansion with Islam.
So after all of this I am still unsure of what or who your are trying to say this group its? When i see the color Brown in a painting, especially when it is WITHIN AFRICA i simply see Black Africans. And the pictures and Paintings within Egypt of Ancient Egyptians are REALLY Dark Brown, especially the large ones. Darker than myself. In Sudan, their pictures are also dark, In Ethiopia, you can see Bibles and churches and they also use a brown color. In Nigeria, Brown is used. Why is it so hard to see that Brown paint is used to represent Brown Africans. Brown Africans worldwide are called “Black.” No offense but if you try showing the regular day to day brown that that the Egyptians used to a 3 Year old they would tell you its a “Brown Person.” Even more ridiculous is the fact that we argue over it when there are currently Brown Africans STILL in Egypt. Genetically they are Still predominantly African like other Brown Africans. And yet somehow, someway, these modern Brown Africans LESS REPRESENT the Ancient photos of Brown Africans which are somehow MORE related to Non-Brown Africans who look LESS like the Brown Ancients.
This has to be some type of Western thing. It defies logic.
NOW i did read the info on the other blog you linked me to, its makes sense but so does one of the rebuttals – The Afro-Asiatic language is still well – African, as only one of its families are even spoken out of Africa. Also, the oldest painting in the Sahara show Brown People. BUT Maybe the Y dna that we are looking for is in fact there: Haplogroup E??? It’s that old. Maybe DE* did leave out and come back via the Levant bringing U6 and M1? I think that if North African languages were more diverse and included some that were NOT African in origin then we would have some definite proof. Maybe the Proof is M123? It left and came back?
M1 is not 35 Thousand years old
Sez you, essentially
The ages vary in each paper, but sometime over 30k is the consensus for M1 and U in north Africa.
The Y chr associated with it are hazy.The expansion dates for M1 from the Nile are are over 20k, and its’ dated long after the expansion from Eurasia. As for paternal Eurasian ancestry in Egypt… About 35% max in lower Egypt, with about half of that coming from the Neolithic. I’ve got papers on here dating the G, K2 and some J to the Neolithic. The DNA from Taforalt is all Eurasian.. It didn’t teleport across the Nile area as it moved West? The historical Arab and European contributions to all of North Africa are in a small minority.
In essence; only about 7% of current Lower Egyptian Y DNA ancestry dates to historical invasions, just one or two percent in upper Egypt. The population is the same now as it ever was
Another thing that you fail to understand is that the Maghreb doens’t include Egypt for a Reason. The Maghreb has a totally different history as far as language, culture and people than Egypt. Egyptian culture, language, genetics, and just about everything else is situated and revolved around the Nile Valley and Sudanese Sahara. Egypt was populated Primarily of Africans from the Nile Valley and Sahara, long long ago, which is different from the population of the Maghreb which show ancestry primarily from the Neolithic………and from Non-Africans.
Modern Egyptians are Africans friom the Nile valley for the most part (at least 65% in lower Egypt, 80% in upper). Then it was added to from the Levant in the Neolithic. As I said, non-dynastic contributions are around 7% overall in that area.
It’s funny; Egyptians show less slightly Eurasian Y chromosomes than Ethiopians but are regarded as not African by Afrocentrists because they aren’t black.
The Mahgrebian population is mostly as it has been for about the last 8K, as is Egypt. And no, it had very close cultural ties to Egypt from the expansion of the Neolithic farmers. The Eurasian DNA didn’t magically skip over the Nile area as it went West in the Capsian and Neolithic eras. Eurasian mtDNA dates dack 12k in North Africa, and the paternal DNA of North Africa is mainly native to Africa. That goes for Egypt too. You need to loose the idea that ‘native African’ means black (Keita says somthing along those lines)- it doesn’t.
Also, Egyptian culture has to do with Egypt, the Levant and the Western Sahara; not the Sudan. There’s never been any evidence of some cultural wave coming from the Sudan or Nubia area. The population movements in the early dynasties are North to south, as they were in the Neolithic. The cultures along the Nile are all related and fairly similar, but Egyptian culture is not Sudanese Saharan in origin at all. I’d like to know what that claim is based on.
The thing is.. the mummies look just like modern Egyptians (Brace says as much- he never once said Egyptians cluster with any black African population), the DNA shows that any immigration into Egypt total after about 8k ago is about 5% tops.. There’s no evidence to support ancient Egyptians being at all different to the modern.
Ok you loose me, you say the European and Arab expansion into Egypt is small but the “Eurasian” was large and came a long time ago. If these “Eurasians” were not “Arabs” or “Europeans” then specifically, which Ethnic group were they? Eurasian is such a broad term and i still dont know WHO you are talking about. Where specifically did they migrate FROM?
I am not sure what “Afrocentrists” say.
But we are not talking about Afrocentrists.
Egyptians in ALL shades are Africans as they live in Africa. Their culture and language WAS African, their genetics are still predominantly African. All Africans are not black, and all Egyptians are not NON-Black.
Again i will clarify, as Keita states the phenotypes and tones that you find in Egypt TODAY is exactly what you would find back then. That includes those from the Darkest to the Lightest. Keiti then goes on to say although the migration has been MINOR…………..MOST of that Migration has been in Northern Egypt. No one is saying other people were not there and didn’t migrate INTO Africa. I am not speaking about ‘purity,’ We know about the migrations. I have read about that. But the point i was trying to show is that EGYPT shows affinity (Genetics, Skeletal proportions, Skull proportions) with other populations in the Nile Valley (Nubia, Ethiopia, Somali). That would include Sudan and the African Horn. The Maghreb is NOT part of the Nile valley. (Even the Delta is not considered part of he Nile Valley.) Looking at Egyptian Y-dna it is more similar to those in the Nile valley and NOT those in the Maghreb. Likewise looking at Maghreb MTDNA which is predominantly Eurasian, It is different than the MTDNA in Egypt which again clusters closest to other populations of the Nile Valley – One study in particular clustered them closest with Northern Ethiopians. The nile valley was the corridor for migration and it runs south to north.
Knowing all this you keep saying that Egyptians are the same as they are which is true, BUT if we specify WHICH Egyptians are more representative of the Ancients everyone knows that we would point to Southern Egyptians. Many of those southern Egyptians have a tone that we socially call “Black” and show affinities with other Nile valley “Black” Africans. These people look JUST like the paintings. Their skin color is on average the SAME as the paintings. The majority of the paintings cannot represent any other populations as far as tone………Other than those in the Nile Valley. That “Brown” color would not include many in the Maghreb – Who the Egyptians themselves routinely painted as WHITE – as many of them are today……As opposed to the Brown that they painted themselves – as many “Black Africans” including some southern Egyptians are today.
I don’t see “Egyptians” as a separate Ethnic group. BUT if i did M78* and V12 would represent the TRUE Egyptian Markers the same way M81 represents the TRUE Berber Marker.
I have read where you say that Tuareg are NOT “Berbers” as they only adopted the language and they have LESS of the “Berber Marker” M81.
Well Northern Egyptians have less of the “Egyptian Markers ” M78* and v12 – Are they NOT true Egyptians? Genetically M78* and V12 are found greatest in Southern Egypt and Northern Sudan. There is a DEEP history of Sudan and Egypt and I am actually surprised that you think their is not. This claim is simply on Research. Egypt has connections with ALL the surrounding areas that would include the Levant, Sudan, the EASTERN Desert and well as the western.
There is a full presentation someone linked to you from Keita in a different article you should talk the time and see the whole thing. Just think of this : Egypt was unified from the south, At that time they simply incorporated Ta-Seti and it was since then their southern Most nome. You must read about Qustal, you must read about the relationship between Nubian A group and Naqada – Which some believe to have a common ancestor. Read “Forbears of Menes in Nubia: Myth or Reality” – although this is old info (1987) the connections between Nubia and Egypt are only stronger with newer research.
A-Group Nubian graves and pottery extend all the way up to upper Egypt. It is debatable that even some of the iconography that we see in Egypt comes from Nubia and Sudan.
I know you read about genetics and anthropology but how long have you been studying cultural aspects of North East Africa?
M81 shows an older age in Egypt than in NW Africa oddly- just saw it in a Y chr study.
The people that backmigrated into Africa about 35k ago I won’t call anything other than Eurasian as they just wouldn’t fit into any modern population definition. They were cousins to the European cro Magnons.
The M78 marker goes back a very long time. There were waves of Eurasian input across North Africa, Upper Egypt had less from each wave. It has more VERY ancient Egyptian ancestry. But like I said, you get another wave across north Africa in the Capsian, and another in the neolithic. Lower Egyptians have had more Eurasian ancestry in them since well before state formation.
I’m not debating you see the pottery along the Nile- a nice red and black ware that gives way to a later grey ware. I’ve got it on the blog somewhere. But a culturally homogenous group doesn’t have to be genetically homogenous. The people have a gradual clinal change as you move S to N. A lot of the Lower Nubians weren’t very black looking Africans, and a lot of the upper Egyptians were. There was a lot of overlap.
BUT if we specify WHICH Egyptians are more representative of the Ancients everyone knows that we would point to Southern Egyptians
NO, we wouldn’t. They are typical of the ancient upper Egyptians and the people all along the Nile up until about 10k ago when the Capsian people came from the Near East. Long before the Egyptian state formed, Lower Egyptiasn had acquired a lot more Eurasian ancestry. They’d been there over 3,000 years when the state formed. Lower Egyptians are just as ‘authentically dynastic Egyptian’ as upper.
You don’t get it, Igbo.
The term “elongated” has about as much biological value as the term “black skin” because both are the products of physical adaptation to one’s environment. As already pointed out, dark skin is strongly correlated with latitude: the more equatorial an environment one’s ancestors have evolved in, the darker one’s skin invariably is. Similarly, the hotter the environment one’s ancestors have evolved in, the more elongated one’s limbs consequently are.
This is what I meant by Keita is a fraud. Of this, there is no doubt. You see, Keita knows perfectly well that limb elongation is brought about strictly by selective adaptation to one’s environment (and if he doesn’t, then he certainly isn’t the authority Afrocentrists would have us believe he is). Yet he deliberately chooses to ignore this simple fact because doing so would deprive him of the opportunity to point to Egyptians and say, “hey, they have elongated limbs, and wait, so do those Somalis/Ethiopians in the Horn, and even those Maasai to the south of them” — thereby attempting to insinuate a biological link between these (at least with regard to the Maasai) genetically disparate peoples whose bodies have independently adapted to their own tropical environments.
This is why I brought up the Turkana Boy example. Although a homo erectus (not even a homo sapiens sapiens), Turkana Boy also exhibits that same “elongated” physique as Keita’s unscientific “Elongated Africans”. You know why that is? It’s because Turkana Boy’s hominid ancestors have also evolved in a hot, tropical environment, one not unlike the habitat which spawned the gazelle and other elongated fauna native to such regions:
Click to access 3_reproduction.pdf
Neither Turkana Boy, nor the gazelle, nor the Maasai are any more biologically related to each other than they are to Egyptians or to Somalis/Ethiopians or to Veddoids (the latter of whom Brace himself cites in his study as an example of non-African peoples with elongated physiques) based alone on the fact that they all — human and non-human alike — happen to have evolved elongated physiques, as Keita would have people believe.
Bottom line: Limb elongation is a purely adaptive trait with zero value in determining biological affinities between populations. The same goes for elevated and elongated noses, as already explained in my previous post.
Keita is well aware of this latter factoid as well, which is partly why he wails so loudly (and in vain, by the way) against Brace’s studies. Unfortunately for him, however, being a professional complainer will not make those non-adaptive biological affinities go away.
You see, unlike Keita, Brace does not factor in selective traits in that study of his I linked you to above. He only measures traits with no demonstrated adaptive/selective value. In other words, he is documenting pure, raw, biological affinities between populations, not traits that have evolved purely as an evolutionary response to one’s environment. And what he comes away with — again, after having REMOVED from consideration things like nasal elevation and elongation, which are under selective control — is that Egyptians cluster with Eurasians and not with Sub-Saharan Africans. The same goes for the Somalis that descended from them (few if any Somalis carry E-M215*; they’re just about all V32).
By the way, the Cruciani et al. (2007) study uses the same Somali sample as the one from his 2004 study, And that sample was not culled from the Ogaden as you claim. In Cruciani’s own words, “the sample comprised 6,501 unrelated male subjects belonging to 81 populations worldwide. Appropriate informed consent was obtained from all participants. Geographic origin and sample size for each population are reported in table 1”. Table 1 of the study lists Somali under “Eastern Africa”, not “Ogaden” or “Ethiopia”. By contrast, it lists the Amhara, Oromo, Falasha, and Wolayta Ethiopian ethnic groups as the “Ethiopian Amhara”, “Ethiopian Oromo”, “Ethiopian Jews”, and “Ethiopian Wolayta”, respectively.
Still, it is very appropriate that you should bring up the Tutsi since, if there is indeed such a thing as a so-called “Elongated African”, they are most certainly it. You see, all of the arguably “Caucasoid”-like traits one may perhaps see in the odd Tutsi are purely the product of adaptation to the environment. In other words, the Tutsi’s elongated physiques and relatively less broad noses than other Black Africans (the latter being the only truly Caucasoid-like trait they possess, phenotypical and genetic alike) come from long-term adaptation to a dry, hot environment. The Tutsis may live in the forests of Central Africa now, but their physiques suggest that this was almost certainly not the case X amount of years ago.
Contrast that with the North Africans and Horn Africans who have well-documented and substantial Eurasian genetic ancestry (as Mathilda has already indicated many times over on this excellent blog), are Duffy positive, with non-adaptive Eurasian cranial affinities and HLA antigen profiles that unequivocally group them with Eurasians rather than Sub-Saharan Africans, and it’s an entirely different story.
As the Scandinavians or northern European do not or should not credit themselves for the Roman civilization or the Greek civilization, (they were considered barbaric hordes then); neither should any other people than the Egyptians for the Egyptian civilization or the Ethiopian for the Punt civilization. I think that is why I feel irritated by Afrocentric or euro centrists. Am I making sense?
As the Scandinavians or northern European do not or should not credit themselves for the Roman civilization or the Greek civilization, (they were considered barbaric hordes then); neither should any other people than the Egyptians for the Egyptian civilization or the Ethiopian for the Punt civilization. I think that is why I feel irritated by Afrocentric or euro centrists. Am I making sense
No that’s fair- sorry for the tardy repsonse I was busy over the weekend.
Punt was probably in the Yemen area rather than in the horn though- although genetically theres not a lot between the people either side of the Gate of Tears.
The understanding of human origin is still very fuzzy. There are not enough data. So I think my intuition works too. I am half north African an my intuition tells me that north African are a lighter version of the woodabee and the colour radiant is the same at the southern tip of Africa where the original inhabitant where also a similar color at the north African. You might say that is what the Afro centrist are saying but it is not what I mean. I also think European are the result of the same phenomenon and have features originated in Africa as the Asians. The problem I have with centrics of any king is they have a simplistic and arrogant attitude. Civilization is also a term which has been used to humiliate people who were deemed barbaric. I find that the western civilization dominant today has some barbaric and predatory features.
The enormous amount of resources devoted to weapons of mass destruction compared to say, a sustainable future, combating cancer, aids, etc…
forgive me for the typos. I just wish we would learn from the past instead of using it to prove points which are irrelevant to the present. Lack of sustainability has been one of the downfall of some of the ancient civilizations, climatic change. There is an article in Culture Change : effects of Ecology on Human physical variation that I find very interesting though a bit aggressive.
I am sorry, I am technologically challenged and I don’t know yet how to compress data. Please believe that I love everyone and wish and pray that we all will have a happy future in harmony with our environment without wiping out our precious diversity. I should shut up now… Sorry again
No, I get it exactly. Elongated LIMB proportions show LONG TERM Adaptation and residence of Tropical Africa. Showing that Egyptians have Long Term Adapted traits that are shared with other Africans but NOT with Europeans is the point that he was trying to prove – Ancient Egyptians didn’t Migrate from “Europe” or “Siberia” as their bodies plans are not adapted to cold.
The fact that they also share most of their Genetic markers with other Africans is further proof of an Indigenous African People.
More info – Guess what they also share Language with other Africans of the Afro-Asiatic phylum. Egyptian language is EGYPTIAN – It is African, and NOT Semitic.
When you look at an Ancient Egyptian paintings on a wall in Egypt, the people are primarily colored “BROWN” ask yourself – “Who is primarily BROWN in Africa? What about East Africa and North East Africa? Also who would be BROWN in Europe?
IN regards to the *Genetics the Somalis that were sampled lived in Denmark. That is a different study.
The study that sampled Ogaden Somalis was the Cranial studies done by Brace in 1993 and 2005.
It was These Ethiopian Somalis and Nubians that were showed close in proximity to Egyptians.
And there you go again with “Caucasoid Traits” in the Tutsi. If the Tutsi dont have “Caucasoid Genes” then how did they get “Caucasoid Traits” ? – Why are those Traits even called “Caucasoid Traits” if they were not spread by “Caucasoid” people. Keita says many of these traits existed in Africa before – “Caucasoids” existed, or before Europe was populated. 60kya. Turkana Boy and Veddoids dont matter because “Veddoids” didnt populate Egypt. We don’t have to look outside of Africa to to see who primarily populated Egypt. You can look around as see what features/genes/language/body types you find RIGHT IN THE NILE VALLEY. There is no NEED to go to India to search for an explanation.
What are the Genetic markers of “Caucasoid” people in the first place? Please give a definition of that.
On Ethiopians. You can be Ethiopian, have admixture from 10 thousand years ago and STILL be “Black” Being “Black” is not mutually exclusive to being anything else. I have heard of HLA studies of Ethiopians but also HLA studies of Greeks that say THEY are mixed with Ethiopians and other Africans. Greeks are still “White” and Ethiopians are still “Black” Are both studies valid or do we dismiss one but promote the other – Why is that? And when you speak of Eurasians? Which Eurasians are you speaking of? ****Not that I am saying this is the case – But some of the “Eurasians” coming into Africa at one point or another could have been “Black” themselves. There are currently “Black” people that inhabit “Eurasia.”
Rant –
Many Europeans try claim proximity to Egyptians. In order to do that they try to claim proximity to “Eurasians” (South West Asians) so they can claim proximity to Ethiopians who mixed with s/w Asians, so they can claim proximity to Nubians so they can finally claim proximity to Egyptians. This is foolishness! – Why does trying to show how UN-African Ancient Egyptians are/were always have to do with PROMOTING African genetics/Language/culture/body types?
I just dont get this!
First they are “un-African because of Afro-Asiatic!
Then they are un-African because of E3b and L3.
They are “un-African” because of the Sahara and the Nile river.
They are also now “un-African” because of their African Body type. Which was actually called “SUPER-Tropical” (previously called Super-Negroid, a term i dont use).
As i asked Mathilda i will ask you – What exactly are you attempting to say about the population of Ancient Egypt? What is your opinion of who would best represent them based on your knowledge?
And there you go again with “Caucasoid Traits” in the Tutsi
Do I? I don’t really rembmer doing anything about the Tutsi
Donald // March 28, 2009 at 5:09 pm
“”Still, it is very appropriate that you should bring up the Tutsi since, if there is indeed such a thing as a so-called “Elongated African”, they are most certainly it. You see, all of the arguably “Caucasoid”-like traits one may perhaps see in the odd Tutsi are purely the product of adaptation to the environment. In other words, the Tutsi’s elongated physiques and relatively less broad noses than other Black Africans (the latter being the only truly Caucasoid-like trait they possess, phenotypical and genetic alike) come from long-term adaptation to a dry, hot environment. The Tutsis may live in the forests of Central Africa now, but their physiques suggest that this was almost certainly not the case X amount of years ago.””
That is why i quoted carlton coon. Also (In my opinion) “Caucasian” has not been able to be demonstrated as a genetic group. I ask many people who are genetically “Caucasoids” but its hard to get that answer. On the other hand its so easy to say African = A, B, and E.
I have a hard time grouping Haplgroup J people of the Arab Peninsula in the same genetic group as Hap R Europeans based on Y chromosomes.
On the other hand its so easy to say African = A, B, and E.
Except when E isn’t African. E was probably north African and not East African in origin. Caucasoid populations actually shows up better on the SNP studies. Tutsi are non Caucasoid, although the skull shapes are similar. Same for the Ainu. Some shared characteristics are coincidence, some from shared ancestry in East Africa.
The elongated limbs in Egyptians indeed show that they have evolved in a tropical environment. What you seem to be forgetting, however, is that such hot environments exist in many other places in the world besides Africa; places such as the Middle East, South Asia, and Oceania (areas known to have genetic affinity with the North/Horn of Africa axis, by the way). This is actually why I brought up the Veddoids of South Asia: They are a non-African population who have acquired elongated physiques due to long term physical adaptation to life at a tropical latitude, much like the gazelle and the Maasai in Africa, neither of whom (I hope) are related to each other on that basis alone. All this to say that Egyptians could just as easily have acquired said elongated physiques and that “brown” skin you speak of in the tropical portions of the Middle East or South Asia or even in Oceania as in Africa. I’ll let Brace himself explain it:
“The elongation of the distal segments of the limbs is also clearly related to the dissipation of metabolically generated heat. Since heat stress and latitude are clearly related, one would expect to find a correlation between the two sets of traits that are associated with adaptation to survival in areas of great ambient temperature-namely skin color and limb proportions. This is clearly the case in such areas as equatorial Africa, the tropical portions of South Asia, and northern Australia, although there is little covariation with other sets of inherited traits. In this regard, it is interesting to note that the limb proportions of the Predynastic Naqada people in Upper Egypt are reported to be “super-negroid,” meaning that the distal segments are elongated in the fashion of tropical Africans (Robins and Shute, 1986). It would be just as accurate to call them “super-Veddoid or “super-Carpentarian” since skin color intensification and distal limb elongation is apparent wherever people have been long-term residents of the tropics. The term “super-tropical” would be better since it implies the results of selection associated with a given latitude rather than the more “racially loaded” term “negroid.””
Egyptians also don’t share markers with the nebulous “other Africans”. They share both Y DNA and mtDNA markers specifically with their fellow North Africans as well as the Horn Africans that descended from them. Most Sub-Saharan Africans don’t even carry E1b1b much less M78. And the ones that do, acquired it through admixture and at a typically low frequency.
Third, ancient Egyptians spoke the Egyptian language, which is accorded its own branch in the Afro-Asiatic linguistic phylum right alongside Semitic. That you should think this makes Egyptians somehow less related to Semitic-speaking peoples and more so to Sub-Saharan Africans — who overwhelmingly speak completely unrelated Niger Congo and Nilo Saharan languages rather than Afro-Asiatic languages — is frankly absurd.
Fourth, Brace et al. (1993) did not cull their Somali sample from the Ogaden/Ethiopia either. All Brace states in that study is that he used “a sample of modern Somali”. In Table 2 of the study, he specifies that this Somali crania came from the American Museum of Natural History in New York; nowhere does he state that the sample came from the Ogaden or Ethiopia or “Ethiopian-Somalis”. Likewise, in Table 1 of his 2005 study, Brace identifies the Somali sample as having come from Somalia, not the Ogaden or Ethiopia. Lastly, the Sanchez et al. (2005) study on Somali Y chromosomes was culled from Somali immigrants to Denmark, probably most being refugees fleeing the civil war in Somalia (not the Ogaden) since the Scandinavian countries have a pretty liberal and accommodating immigration policy. The study’s authors confirm this: “A total of 389 DNA samples from unrelated males (the numbers of individuals are given in parentheses) from Turkey (59), Iraq (64), Somalia (201) (all immigrants to Denmark)…”
Fifth, the HLA study you’re alluding to which groups Greeks with Sub-Saharan Africans rather than Europeans has long been discredited. It was, first of all, politically-motivated, and it used just one single genetic marker (as opposed to the multiple marker HLA studies I was alluding to in my previous post), HLA DRB1, to arrive at its conclusions. This same shoddy methodology was again employed by the study’s lead researcher, one Antonio Arnaiz-Villena, to another study of his, which earned that study some harsh criticism from the likes of Luigi Luca Cavalli-Sforza and Neil Risch in a riposte titled “Dropped genetics paper lacked scientific merit”. Both of the latter scholars denounced this other study as unscientific and insisted that it should never have made it into publication. This other Arnaiz-Villena study was subsequently removed from publication by Nature, the journal which had originally published it. No multiple-marker analysis has ever duplicated Arnaiz-Villena’s results either, whereas, when properly conducted, HLA studies consistently group Greeks with other Europeans. And if that weren’t bad enough, Arnaiz-Villena himself was also recently under investigation for having allegedly embezzled funds at the hospital he worked at. Whether or not he is guilty of these charges, they along with the forgoing don’t exactly inspire confidence.
http://dienekes.ifreepages.com/blog/archives/000361.html
http://racialreality.blogspot.com/2004/09/study-clarification-ii.html
Finally, there are no “black” people currently living in Eurasia (unless, of course, one counts the Siddis and other displaced Black Africans). There are, however, black-SKINNED people. The difference is that the former — “black people” — is a euphemism for the Sub-Saharan African people formerly referred to as “Negro”, whereas the latter refers to a dark skin color shared by many peoples inhabiting the African continent and areas outside of it alike (e.g. Dravidians, Aborigines, Aeta, etc.). This dark skin color, again, came about due to long-term physical adaptation to a tropical environment. And tropical environments, as we’ve also already seen, are hardly exclusive to Africa.
This is a re-post, as I’m not sure if my original post got through. If the same material appears again in duplicate form, I apologize, as that was not my intention.
Igbo:
The elongated limbs in Egyptians indeed show that they have evolved in a tropical environment. What you seem to be forgetting, however, is that such hot environments exist in many other places in the world besides Africa; places such as the Middle East, South Asia, and Oceania (areas known to have genetic affinity with the North/Horn of Africa axis, by the way). This is actually why I brought up the Veddoids of South Asia: They are a non-African population who have acquired elongated physiques due to long term physical adaptation to life at a tropical latitude, much like the gazelle and the Maasai in Africa, neither of whom (I hope) are related to each other on that basis alone. All this to say that Egyptians could just as easily have acquired said elongated physiques and that “brown” skin you speak of in the tropical portions of the Middle East or South Asia or even in Oceania as in Africa. I’ll let Brace himself explain it:
“The elongation of the distal segments of the limbs is also clearly related to the dissipation of metabolically generated heat. Since heat stress and latitude are clearly related, one would expect to find a correlation between the two sets of traits that are associated with adaptation to survival in areas of great ambient temperature-namely skin color and limb proportions. This is clearly the case in such areas as equatorial Africa, the tropical portions of South Asia, and northern Australia, although there is little covariation with other sets of inherited traits. In this regard, it is interesting to note that the limb proportions of the Predynastic Naqada people in Upper Egypt are reported to be “super-negroid,” meaning that the distal segments are elongated in the fashion of tropical Africans (Robins and Shute, 1986). It would be just as accurate to call them “super-Veddoid or “super-Carpentarian” since skin color intensification and distal limb elongation is apparent wherever people have been long-term residents of the tropics. The term “super-tropical” would be better since it implies the results of selection associated with a given latitude rather than the more “racially loaded” term “negroid.””
Egyptians also don’t share markers with the nebulous “other Africans”. They share both Y DNA and mtDNA markers specifically with their fellow North Africans as well as the Horn Africans that descended from them. Most Sub-Saharan Africans don’t even carry E1b1b much less M78. And the ones that do, acquired it through admixture and at a typically low frequency.
Third, ancient Egyptians spoke the Egyptian language, which is accorded its own branch in the Afro-Asiatic linguistic phylum right alongside Semitic. That you should think this makes Egyptians somehow less related to Semitic-speaking peoples and more so to Sub-Saharan Africans — who overwhelmingly speak completely unrelated Niger Congo and Nilo Saharan languages rather than Afro-Asiatic languages — is frankly absurd.
Fourth, Brace et al. (1993) did not cull their Somali sample from the Ogaden/Ethiopia either. All Brace states in that study is that he used “a sample of modern Somali”. In Table 2 of the study, he specifies that this Somali crania came from the American Museum of Natural History in New York; nowhere does he state that the sample came from the Ogaden or Ethiopia or “Ethiopian-Somalis”. Likewise, in Table 1 of his 2005 study, Brace identifies the Somali sample as having come from Somalia, not the Ogaden or Ethiopia. Lastly, the Sanchez et al. (2005) study on Somali Y chromosomes was culled from Somali immigrants to Denmark, probably most being refugees fleeing the civil war in Somalia (not the Ogaden) since the Scandinavian countries have a pretty liberal and accommodating immigration policy. The study’s authors confirm this: “A total of 389 DNA samples from unrelated males (the numbers of individuals are given in parentheses) from Turkey (59), Iraq (64), Somalia (201) (all immigrants to Denmark)…”
Fifth, the HLA study you’re alluding to which groups Greeks with Sub-Saharan Africans rather than Europeans has long been discredited. It was, first of all, politically-motivated, and it used just one single genetic marker (as opposed to the multiple marker HLA studies I was alluding to in my previous post), HLA DRB1, to arrive at its conclusions. This same shoddy methodology was again employed by the study’s lead researcher, one Antonio Arnaiz-Villena, to another study of his, which earned that study some harsh criticism from the likes of Luigi Luca Cavalli-Sforza and Neil Risch in a riposte titled “Dropped genetics paper lacked scientific merit”. Both of the latter scholars denounced this other study as unscientific and insisted that it should never have made it into publication. This other Arnaiz-Villena study was subsequently removed from publication by Nature, the journal which had originally published it. No multiple-marker analysis has ever duplicated Arnaiz-Villena’s results either, whereas, when properly conducted, HLA studies consistently group Greeks with other Europeans. And if that weren’t bad enough, Arnaiz-Villena himself was also recently under investigation for having allegedly embezzled funds at the hospital he worked at. Whether or not he is guilty of these charges, they along with the forgoing don’t exactly inspire confidence.
http://dienekes.ifreepages.com/blog/archives/000361.html
http://racialreality.blogspot.com/2004/09/study-clarification-ii.html
Finally, there are no “black” people currently living in Eurasia (unless, of course, one counts the Siddis and other displaced Black Africans). There are, however, black-SKINNED people. The difference is that the former — “black people” — is a euphemism for the Sub-Saharan African people formerly referred to as “Negro”, whereas the latter refers to a dark skin color shared by many peoples inhabiting the African continent and areas outside of it alike (e.g. Dravidians, Aborigines, Aeta, etc.). This dark skin color, again, came about due to long-term physical adaptation to a tropical environment. And tropical environments, as we’ve also already seen, are hardly exclusive to Africa.
E = African meaning : Haplogroup E shows “Recent” as in Post OOA, and probably less than 15kya admixture from an African population.
Haplogroup E is probably East African in Origin and not North African or even North East African – Unless you want count Ethiopia as north East African. Ethiopia as diverse as it is still has MOST of he Clades in their ancestral state. Especially the old ones: M35* M215* E1* E2* (P75) E3* (P2) etc. These are found in high numbers in Oromo and Amhara and even southernly groups like the Woylata (Omotic speakers) -For exampled
M35* is found at like 10% in Oromo and Amhara.
M33* – Oromo
E3* (P2 Clade)-Which is the ancestor of M215 and M2 is found at like 11-12% in the Oromo and Amhara.
E-V6 found over 10% in the Oromo, and Amhara
E-P72 – Oromo and Amhara
E-M281 – Again Found in Oromo.
These are the largest two groups that live in the City. When you go to the city where many of these samples are taken you dont find the southernly groups like the Woylata that have a large chunk of M35* as well and have the MOST E-v6 in Ethiopia. Ethiopia also have some of the OLDER mutations of M2. Also Ethiopians have LARGE parts of Haplogroup A and B showing the country uniqueness is based only on its AFRICAN HaploGROUP Diversity. The opposite is probably true for Chad and Mali based on their diversity of P75, M33 and M2 lineages.
No one will make an argument for an Egyptian or North African origin of Haplogroup E. If it didn’t happen in Ethiopia it probably happened in Neighboring Sudan. Even Kenya and Tanzania or Uganda are better candidates of Haplogroup E’s origin than Anywhere in North Africa.
Also if you take a look at the Haplogroup E Chart from ISOGG There are TONS of mutations. All of them happened in African except for
-M123 – which has 1 Main (M34 ) and 3 minor downstream mutations. – Cruciani
-V13 – Which has 1 minor and 1 major mutaiton.
That is it. That is 8 out of 101 mutations. It shows you how truly African it is. Haplgroup E is very Diverse. There are more Mutations in Hap E than their are in Haplogroups R, J combined.
E* Has been found in SOUTH AFRICA too. If they sampled more i am sure it will popup in Ethiopia or Sudan. I doubt would would see any E* in North Africa.
Igbo- will reply later- I have a headache Im not ignoring anyone.
Donald
You have some of he same misconceptions that Mathilda has regarding Black people and African in Particular.
First of All “Black African” cannot simply be a euphemism for “Sub-Saharan” because there are Black Africans that live IN The Sahara. Anyone with Eyes can see Saharan countries such as Mali, Chad Sudan, Senegal ALL have populations that are primarily “Black” Why you and other continue to promote this myth is contrary to reason. – Especially for an African. Most groups that inhabit the inner Sahara are “Black Africans” most people that inhabit the Northern Coasts of African are NOT so Black Africans or simply White. Have you actually been TO Africa or simply seen a Map of Africa and the Sahara?
And again Veddoids still don’t matter because South Eastern Asians are not the people that primarily populated Egypt! Egypt was primarily populated from Groups carrying Haplogroup E from Inner Africa. Do you agree or disagree? You dont have to look OUTSIDE of Africa to find the body types if they are already IN Africa.
And Explain how “Horn Africans” descend from Egyptians. ALL The indigenous ancestral markers of Native Egyptian come FROM Ethiopia. Not the other way around. M35* is not an Egyptian marker. M35* M215* as well well as P2* are ALL Ethiopian and probably have an origin IN Ethiopia. Ethiopians also have old Markers such as B-M60, and A-M13 that separates them from Egyptians. Saying Horn Africans come from Egyptians is like telling me my wife and I gave birth to our parents.
The latest study that mentions M78* places the origin of it in SUDAN and not Egypt. Doest that mean modern Egyptians “descended” from Sudanese? Looking at it from an idea of “Who descended from who” is simplifying a complex issue. But if you want to look at it that way ALL groups that have Downstream mutations of P2 “Descend From” “Sub Saharan” East Africans.
And Egyptians do too share Genes with “Other Africans. M33 and M2 (E3a) is found IN the Nile Valley. B-M60 (Typical of Nilotic people) are found in High frequencies in Copts as noted by Hassan 2008. MTdna L1, L2 and L3 are found ALL over Africa including the Nile Valley. Most sub Saharans that DO have M78 have them in the highest frequencies seen Within Africa and in ANY population.
Regarding the Crania – I have seen different studies use the Same data set. In one study i noted this?
“Characterization of Biological Diversity ThroughAnalysis of Discrete Cranial Traits”
“Somalia 58–64 (53) 10–12 (5) Erigavo District, Ogaden Somali (US)
Another study cant find it sorry said “Somali Ogaden”
Black People = People with Dark skin. They are not African. But they can still be “Black”
Alternatively
North Africans on the Coast and even some Indians, Arabs Turks etc – can still be “White” but they are not European Whites. Im sure you understand this.
Regarding the Greek study. Yeah, its stupid, they only studied ONE gene. But I have read a Ethiopian study where they ALSO only studied ONE GENE and people take that as gospel.
Conclusion
Again, what are you trying to say. Are you saying People speaking a Language that is Native to Africa (unlike Semitic), with an African Body type that is typical of long term habitation of the Tropics, with primarily African Y-Chromosomes are somehow “UN-African”?
Why are you using African Language, African, Genes, African skin tones, African Culture, and African Geography to show how Un-African a population was? No African will understand this.
Mali, Chad Sudan, Senegal ALL have populations that are primarily “Black”
It’s a general term Igbo. Saharan people are mainly dark skinned but of mixed Eurasian and African ancestry. And these countries are southern Saharan/ sub Saharan, not North African, and are generally only on the fringes of my area, same as Europe and Pakistan are.
The latest study that mentions M78* places the origin of it in SUDAN and not Egypt. Doest that mean modern Egyptians “descended” from Sudanese?
Could you provide a quote? Because the Cruciani said Egypt/Libya. And Battaglia I think was on the border of Egypt and Sudan (Nubia) which is where the Halfan population was centered- which is exactly in the area I ‘ve always claimed for it (southern Egypt) and isn’t sub Saharan. My point is that the population there seems to have been pretty much the same for the last 25k, so they are primarily locals with mixed Eurasian and African ancestry. The maternal DNA assocated with this ancient population is m1, and U, but they’ve got so blended together you should really only see them as either Nubian Egyptian or mixed race.
Lake Nubia
Conclusion
Again, what are you trying to say. Are you saying People speaking a Language that is Native to Africa (unlike Semitic), with an African Body type that is typical of long term habitation of the Tropics, with primarily African Y-Chromosomes are somehow “UN-African”?
No, as quite frankly I’m getting a bit sick of saying; Egyptians have mainly been in situ for the last 8k. Their DNA is mainly Eurasian in origin even with their African Y chromsomes, and that lower Egyptians have been minimally unaffected by migration for the last 25k or so. My issue isn’t with calling Egyptians African, it’s just the amount of dishonesty and effort made to make people believe that modern Egyptians look any different to the ancient or are somehow a different popualtion. Modern Egyptians have a tropical body limb, show a minimal amount of immigration over the last 8k and look exactly like the mummies and artwork. And yet many black Africans and Americans feel they can’t call them African. Can you explain to me why, when every bit of information show theres been absolutely no change in the Egyptiasn populatron that people (including you) seem to feel the need to insist that they are somehow different now in skin tone or hair texture. They aren’t.
As for ‘what is black’. Take your pick because I’m really not bothered by American racial hang ups, which really don’t apply in Africa because black Africans wouldn’t call Southern Egyptians black (experience) and the Egyptians there don’t either.
BTW, Semitic Berber and Egyptian all form one lingustic branch of the AA family and are closely related. There’s evey chance that AA languages entered Africa with farming. It’s not some act of un- Africanising Egyptian to observe (as quite a few published linguists and other scholars have that AA languages seem to match the spread of the neolithic into Africa from Asia. Two population waves from Eurasia moved into Africa 10k then 8k ago, and there’s good reason to think that AA came with them. The fact you get typically Eurasian male ancestry dating to the Neolithic in the heart of Africa in Chadic speakers is striongly suggestive of this.
mathilda37, Pass Over the Aspirin, I need 10..lol
Seriously, Some people lack of logic makes me just wanting to punch them in the brain.
I see where your going , Nevermind.
BTW . I haven’t ever said that the population had changed or it was different. What i did speak of is the demographics changing. Anyone that has been to Egypt will know what I am saying. And Keita didnt say the populations was the same he said “The Diversity was.” Also Africans DO call Egyptians, Southern AND Northern Egyptians – African. I am not sure what type of experiences you have but in Africa it is NOT the case. We call ALL Africans “African.”
Btw MOST Africans dont refer to themselves as simply “Africans” It usually follows as:
Ethnic group > Country > Continent.
Igbo>Nigeria>African
Even if you are Egyptian that is usually the description AFTER your local origin or Ethnic group where your are Nubian, Saidi, Abada, Gi’afra, Gi’afraor, Fellahin, Bahri , Coptic etc.. This is the description they would give to someone that knows about Egypt otherwise MOST Egyptians call themselves “Egyptian”
What you don’t understand is there are Ethnic groups in Egypt just as there are in Sudan and Ethiopia I just decided not to speak about them because i didn’t want to confuse you. That is why i said that i would NOT call “Egyptian an ethnic group.” but you speak as if Egyptians are some Monolithic population, that they are not.
Being black is not an “American Racial hangup.” It is a matter of FACT to say Black does NOT equal Sub-Saharan because there are Blacks that live IN the Sahara. – Are you challenging this fact? The Sahara is not limited to North Africa. And who separates the Sahara into a North and a South? There is no North and South Sahara. There is:
-A Northern COAST
-A Sahara Desert
-A Sahel
The Sahel is just as green as the Coasts. And groups that live in these Saharan Countries are not Mixed – Mali? Chad? Niger? Senegal? – Seriously WHERE have you been in Africa? And what does “on the fringes of MY Area mean?” What is ‘your’ area and where are you from?
I doubt that R1 brought A.A. in to Africa. R1 is basically restricted to a few Ethnic groups while M35 is widespread all over North, East, South, and the middle east, etc. That really a fantasy, the ONLY clades that can really unite all Afro-Asiatic speakers is M35 and downstream. You cant really do it any other way. Any population that speaks AfroAsiatic has M35. And M35 generally cuts OFF in areas that DONT speak it – outside Africa. You can see a star like pattern disseminating from the horn of Africa when you look at each branch of Afro-Asiatic. You can all so see a star like patter disseminating from the horn of Africa when you see all downstream mutations of M35. In general the Languages go the SAME Way as the gene does. Not saying this is the case but it could easily be:
M35*-Proto AA
m81 -berber
M78 Egyptian/Chadic/Cushtic
V6 – Omotic/Ongota
M123* Semitic
Again not saying this is the case but oscams razor works well in this case.
And in many cases Egyptian is linked with Chadic. Probably moreso than being linked with Berber or Semitic. WHO are these authors that say that AfroAsiatic could have an outside origin to Africa? I would like to study that further:
-Newman (1980) Link Chadic with Berber.
-Orel & Stobova (1995) Linked Berber with Semitic but Chadic with Egyptian.
-Diakonoff (1996) formulated “North-South Afrasian” That included Chadic and Egyptian only.
Wadi Halfa – SUDAN, not Egypt. WHO Told you it was in Egypt? This is in Sudanese Nubia? Many Nubian Pre-Dynastic sites are in this Area. Again it doesn’t have to be Sub-Saharan to be “Black” At many of these times that you state there was not a Sahara even in existence. So why study populations based on a on barely inhabitable place (Sahara)NOW, when that wasn’t the case long ago. Just about every depiction you see in the Ancient Sahara are of Black People.
Word of Advice.
From what I read I think you have a preconceived notion already in your head of what certain populations are Supposed to be but it is conflicting with what the populations factually and actually ARE. (Sub-Saharan = Black is a perfect example) Also your are ignoring or just not knowledgeable in the history of Sudan to began to analyze Egypt. Study of Egypt ultimately takes you to Sudan and Nubia. I am surprised that you can understand why some could say that Egyptian culture is a “Sudanese Transplant” One author even places the origin of the “Egyptian Marker” IN Sudan. From some of these facts your are not even able to see that you are wrong. I am absolutely SURE i can present images of West Africans along with Sudanese, Ethiopians and Egyptians and you would not be able to tell who is who. The fact that 3 of these groups are “Black” and Egyptian (who dont contain blacks in your opinion) can Confused with the other 3 groups of Blacks is a racial hangup that YOU have to get around, not American Blacks, nor I.
Also it seems to me that you are studying North Eastern Africa from a European standpoint and not from a North East African one. I dont want to fault you for this but as Luis stated (and with me assuming your were European) you MUST study the migrations of Europeans Y-DNA which is much less complex before you step to that of North East Africa. Many times I have seen people separate E3b from E3a (Both found in the Nile Valley BTW) – as if they are somehow racially different KNOWING they wouldn’t take that action if they knew their own genetics and R1a and R1b. If you think that European migrations and DNA is “Boring” then possible you are interested in North East African genetics because you dont understand it. Many many Europeans try to study Ancient Egypt trying to place themselves into it. Its too hard. Because even down to the Simplest concept : Skin color -Ancient Egyptians and Nubians many times were painting in the same color : Brown. And “Brown” is the shade of MOST Africans.
In order to Remove Ancient Egypt of this “Black” and “African” reality you have to take a lot of things with it. Personally this is what i see you (and other) attempt at doing, list of some things:
-AfroAsiatic is not characteristic of Africa nor “Blacks.”
-Most “AfroAsiatic speakers are Caucasoid”
-Egyptian civilization spread from North to South.
-E3b is somehow vastly different from E3a.
M78 is somehow Vaslty different from M35 even though it comes FROM M35.
-L3 is not “African”
-Haplogroup E or E3b is Asian or North African, hence somehow “white”
-Reddish Brown isn’t really Reddish Brown.
-White represents ancient Libyans but Reddish brown doesn’t represent reddish brown Egyptians but rather “White Egyptians”
-Brown isn’t an African color”
-M1 isnt primarily a North East African clade – REGARDLESS of its origin.
-Somalis come from Ancient Egyptians but Ancient Egyptians looked different from Somalis?
-Somalis and Oromo ‘come FROM’ Egypt but Egypt DOESN’T ‘come FROM’ Ethiopia.
-Egypt has no ties with Sudan.
-Africans migrating out of Africa carrying African genes change into “Eurasians” after crossing the Levant. But the same is NOT true for migrating Eurasians into Africa.
-etc
There are multiple other examples I could draw from but all of the above is basically false and misdirection. Keita says a LOT of things. For anyone that has read his work or seen his lectures he is very critical in his words. All in all he STILL gives an accurate description of Ancient Egypt:
“The ‘role of the blacks’ in ancient Egypt is ‘nothing less than having been a part of the original Nile Valley population – Keita.
I know really know what else i can say on the subject. Keep on studying.
The Halfan population was named after the first site of discovery- not the origin point of the culture Igbo.
AfroAsiatic is not characteristic of Africa nor “Blacks.”
That is unfair- I initially backed Ehrets African origin model of AA (publicly on this blog- with supporting posts) until it became clear Ehret was an idiot and his older dates were impossible. There are also plenty of scholars who don’t back an African origin for AA langauges- so pretending this is some Eurocentric play on my part is actually pretty insulting
E3b is somehow vastly different from E3a
It is. Different age, distribution.. and so on.
Brown isn’t an African color”
Right, It’s also a middle Eastern and Asian colour.
M1 isnt primarily a North East African clade – REGARDLESS of its origin
No it’s Asian, and it does seem to be a good marker for how much Asian ancestry a populaiton has. Claiming it’s African really doesn’t describe it’s origin, although it describes it’s ditribution.
-Somalis and Oromo ‘come FROM’ Egypt but Egypt DOESN’T ‘come FROM’ Ethiopia
Well no. Duh. There’s no evidence of any traceable movement from Ethiopia- I’m just pointing out a migration from the South of Egypt int East Africa. Any movement from east Africa into Egypt was so massively long ago it will be a sod to pick out of the Y chr patterns. The expansion from Egypt is pretty easy to spot though, it’s recent and took maternal Asian M1 with it.
M78 is somehow Vaslty different from M35 even though it comes FROM M35.
Again. Parent popualtions are not a perfect guide to the population a mutation defines.
Egyptian (who dont contain blacks in your opinion)
Actually I’ve had about enough of you now Igbo. Since I’ve made it perfectly clear on many occasions that Upper Egyptians had a fairly hefty amount of SS ancestry in them about half predynastic but la bit ess later, this is really just you being picky because I’m pointing out they- like Ethiopians- have a fair amount of Eurasian ancestry. I’m sorry if I’m not over exaggerating the ‘black’ content of them like Keita. Being A European, I’m going to call someone with with mid-dark skin and half Eurasian ancestry mixed- Keita and the average American will call them black. This is about the fact that I won’t call Africans with about half Eurasian ancestry black, and this doesn’t tally with how you define black.
L3 is not “African”
I don’t remember typing that.. i think I’ve said an L3 haplotype was the OOA mt DNA. And ‘Africans don’t call Egyptians black’ I believe is what I typed, or the gist of it.
BTW, the language Y chr association is just impossible because of the huge time depth. Anything over 10k and you are onto a loser.
Igbo, there are Y chr studies of Egyptians- of late the show only a minimal input from the nears East historically so a ‘changing demographic’ is not going to cut it. They just don’t look any different now- 10% is NOT enough to change any grooups appearance.
you think that European migrations and DNA is “Boring” then possible you are interested in North East African genetics because you dont understand it.
Actually I do… pretty well. I also understand that you are getting pissy because I’m not agreeing with the way you want to define Egyptians. I’m also not keen on insults.. feel free not to post here again Igbo.
I doubt that R1 brought A.A. in to Africa. R1 is basically restricted to a few Ethnic groups while M35 is widespread all over North, East, South, and the middle east, etc
R1/R1b is pretty well spread across the Sudan and into Cameroon and all across N Africa.
Keep studying Igbo you might learn something about North African genetics.
Igbo Is Playing a game , Talking in circles, As IF people cant see what his doing.
Igbo, Most Coptics, Such as me, are from the south, and we are called Sadie’s, and the funny thing is your bringing up Fal7hines into this. Do you know what a fallh7 is? Is a name of a farmer. Fallh7 means= Farmer, Farmers in Egypt are known to be the bottom class, because they have No Education..It does NOT mean an Ethnic group as your trying to make mathilda37, Believe. A farmer could be from anywhere in Egypt.
Hate to break it to you. As an Egyptian, I have never met anyone Egyptian that has ever says, we’re Africans, We say we’re Egyptians. We never call ourself Africans, because we know what the meaning of an African means a Black Person. And you know nothing about the Shara desert or the Sub_Shara. the Shara desert is like the Atlantic Ocean, I’d like to see you cross it by foot..
By the way Igbo, Egypt sits on 2 continents, Africa as well as Asia. Egypt is called a transcontinental country.
Egypt is sometimes regarded as an Asian state, and it is usually considered part of the transcontinental geopolitical region of the Middle East.
Hey Igbo.
Thi is what Egyptians Look like..
Enjoy it..Igbo
pharon – Not playing games. Fellahin means farmer yes but it is exchangeable as an Ethnic description used by Egyptians. I have asked Egyptians to Explain their different ethnic groups in comparison to what is seen in Nigeria or Sudan. They have and that is something THEY have said. It may not TECHNICALLY be true but it is just the same as “Egyptians” or other Northern Africans calling themselves “Arab” and using it as an Ethnic group. Or Sudanese calling themselves “Arabs” or the word “Arab” itself which i am told means “Nomad”
So you DO Know what I am talking about now that I am explained.
Also Pharon – people live IN the desert. People still CROSS THE DESERT. Not by foot but by Camel. “African” does NOT mean “Black Person” That is exactly what Keita is talking about. There are plenty of people that live in Africa, whose people for the most part have always lived in Africa and they are not “Black”
As an Egyptian let me ask you a few questions to clarify WHO I am talking about.
-Where in Egypt did you live?
-Are you still there, When were you last in Egypt.
-Would you call “Nubians” in Egypt OR Sudan “Black Africans”
-Are their any other people in Egypt OR Sudan – Who are not “Nubians” but are the same skin tone and have similar features to Nubians?
Igbo
A Fallh7 is a Farmer and it is NOT an exchangeable description in Egypt, Thats a BIG assumption on your behalf. And I don’t know what any Egyptian have told you that, Unless this person isn’t an Egyptian. But any Egyptian in Egypt knows what a fallh7 is.
And any true Egyptian, does NOT say we’re Arabs, See Arabs is a culture and NOT a race.
You have made the mistake of saying that we speak Arabic, No we don’t, Your assuming like many others that we speak Arabic.
I am a Coptic.
http://www.coptic.net/articles/CoptsAndChristendom.txt
http://www.copts.net/history.asp
Know the difference.
So you really think you can cross the Sahara Desert by camel or by foot, I’d love to see that.
And yes, An African does men a Black person, I don’t care what your Racist hero (Keita) says .
People that live in North Africa never ever call them selves by the continents name..We always refer to our counties name.
And I don’t think to where I live has anything to do with this subject.
I think Told someone before where I’m from, Anyway, I’m from Naquada, or ..Na _Ada, 20 mills from Luxor, Egypt.
The nubians in Egypt are called nubians or noobiean .
Nubians and Egyptians do NOT have the same color or skin tone, Thats a big LIE that Afrocentric love to use. The Soodnies are same skin tone as the Nubians.
1 – There are too Egyptians and Other North Africans that Identify themselves as Ethnically Arab. We all know thats he truth and doesn’t need to be argued. You can be BOTH Egyptian AND Arab. “Arab” has been used as a cultural affiliation as WELL as an Ethnic one for ages. Even Sudanese who are definitely “Black” Africans call themselves “Arab” as a cultural terms as well as an Ethnic one.
2. Egyptians speak Arabic for the most part. There are also Copts but they are a minority. Arabic is the Language that is spoken in Egypt as well as MOST North African Countries. When i speak of “Egyptians” i am NOT speaking of ONLY the Coptic minority.
3. How can you say you are from Egypt (a desert Country) and you don’t know that people still live in and cross the desert? Groups such as the Fulani and Tuareg live in the desert from the coast of Sudan and Eritrea to the East, ALL THE WAY to Mali and Senegal to the west. They are probably the largest Nomadic group in Africa, if not the planet. Who do you think “Lives” in the Western Sahara “state?” Who do you think lives in Darfur? Nigeria and other surrounding countries in the Sahara get salt from Lake Chad that is brought via Camel Caravan through the desert.
People like the Beja (Beni Amer) have ALWAYS lived in Eastern Egypt since before the history of Egypt. They are just as “Egyptian” as any other part of the population that has always been there, simply another Ethnic group OF Egypt.
Also “Nubia” has ALWAYS been that part of Southern Egypt. When in history has the ‘Nubian’ Desert of EGYPT actually BELONGED To the current border of Sudan? – Never. Therefore the populations that have lived IN that section of southern Egypt have ALWAYS been Egyptians. People that live in the Nubian desert are not NEWCOMERS to Southern Egypt. Being “Nubian” does not mean that you cant be Egyptian. That like saying the Egyptians thae live in the Egyptian ‘Sinai’ are NOT “Egyptians.”
The Sinai of Egypt and the Nubian desert of Egypt are just that Geographical areas OF EGYPT.
4. You say that Nubians dont have the same skin color as some Egyptians? PLEASE answer this one for me then:
-What would you call the Egyptian skin tone?
-What would you call the Nubian skin tone?
-What would you call the VERY Dark southern Southern Sudanese skin tone?
-What do you call the “Average” skin tone of a Black person like actor Denzel Washington, or striker Thierry Henry?
What I don’ get is why are the Watusis considered anything but black?
I applaud Igbo on this last post. It is perhaps the most PROFOUND in the entire Ancient Egyptians portion of this blog, which explains why some questions are not accurately addressed (if answered at all).
No one can say exactly what colour they were, but one might reasonably say that the typical Upper Egyptian to Nubian color would have been the modal colour in most of the country.
Actually Keita is on Youtube saying they looked the same (see the vid), and that they are mainly the same population today in one of his papers.. I have proof of these statements. Do you of yours? And as if his is the only qualified opinion if that were true…
Also, he also said only the predynastic upper Egyptians looked like his ‘tropical Africans’, whio are all essentially a blend of Eurasian and African (but he takes a race blind approach)- which is the same conclusion eveyone else came to about the Badari (mixed) but worded in a PC way. .
Keita points out the Badarai crania ARE NOT typical of later upper Egyptian or any lower Egyptians crania. He is quite clear lower Egyptian crania are part way between this mixed ‘tropical’ phenotype and European norms, which is what is normal for modern lower Egyptians (look at their DNA for verification).
By heterogeneous however he does not mean racially but that they were diverse in phenotype while being of local African origin.
Would that be why he said their mixed ancestry was there from state formation? HE HAS SAID THEY ARE THE SAME NOW. get over it. And modern Egytians Y chr show they are of north African origin- you are interpreting ‘African’ to mean black, something he tells people of for doing on the vid. He uses the term ‘African’ to describe modern Egyptians and North Africans.
From Keita…
Anyway, the mummy DNA and modern Egyptian y chr makes mass immigration from Eurasian in the post Dynastic era into Egypt impossible.
I find it amusing that you’re sole interest seems to be ‘proving’ that Egyptians had black skin (from the art this seems unlikely). So it’s okay with you that they are basically the same population as long as they had darker skin?
That’s just tragic.
Morpheus debunked,