Sub Saharan origins for pharaohs (new DNA studies)

[cachibatches]

I (and I'm sure a couple of folks following this thread) am more inclined to believe that you (or folks with your view point) never had any intention on listening to what I had to say in the first place. The fact that you would rather listen to a guy who post the same largely debunked/ignored, UNcontextualized wall of spam from "post 91" who also disregards the contemporary scholars at Oxford, Fitzwilliam, Manchester, Yale (authorities) as wrong on the subject (because they all agree that the ancient Egyptians were indeed black) speaks more about YOU and YOUR motives in my opinion.



What claim are you talking about and which source(s) are you referencing? Please be specific.



Do you have any clue as to what you're talking about? The vast genetic diversity of Africans has been present since BEFORE there were non Africans or the first successful wave of Africans populated the planet around 50,000 years ago. Hence the population of East Africa which is the source for non Africans represented a "SUBSET" of already present diversity of African populations:



So NOW what is your issue? Clearly you have to find some frivolous issue with this information because you coming to grips with facts like these is simply out of the question.



You're essentially calling me a liar because of your own lack of knowledge on this subject.



I can't help it if you don't know a thing about this subject, but please do some OBJECTIVE research before you attempt to engage in a debate with someone else (especially when you invoke doubts of the opposing party's integrity).



So the Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt (authorities on the matter) who outright states that the ancient Egyptians were "black" is STILL not enough for people like YOU to accept that fact. To bad we can't evoke motive on this forum

The Oxford dictionary states that the ancient Egyptians were black, but what DNA evidence are they citing?

Still waiting Asante. Four forums and six threads into this thing: where is your huge body of DNA evidence to counteract the scientific consensus posted on post 91?

This is drivel. You already tried to pawn off the J and other Eurasian haplotypes as coming from the Arab conquests, which geneticists reject. You did this because you know that they are Eurasian haplogoups. Are you now trying to say that they are African? Because you have lost that battle before you begin.

And again, the small number of models that try to claim Egyptians as Africans are the most damning of them all to your cause- if they are Africans even today, then where were those big waves of Arabs, Greeks, etc that altered the gene pool and made todays Egyptians lighter?

Of course they don't exist. There is not extant model by which "black Egypt" is even possible. If invaded by Eurasian, then it came from the stone ages by all models. If Egyptians are still Africans today, then there were no invasions and we are looking at the same people as they always were...not black.

You would need a model showing that they are today mixed Eurasian, and that the Eurasian comes from the Arab and other conquests. NO SUCH MODEL EXISTS.

Pre-historic East Africans were distinct from sub-Saharan Africans. So distinct in fact that their genetic legacy in East Africa causes modern populations to veer away from Africans and toward Eurasians (borrowed this from another poster).

Still waiting.

And in any event, they have nothing to do with you one way or the other. Your ancestors were on the other side of the continent, and you show tremendous dishonor to them by your jealousy of the ancestors of others.

 

[cachibatches]

Some unknown voice invoked that there was no relationship between Nubia and West Africa:



California St. University

Don't know why it's so important for this individual to separate African Americans from Nile Valley civilization (also African and of the similar ancient Saharan origin), but it's clear that this unknown voice has clear vendetta against that group of people.

But no hieroglyphic writing or pyramids?

This is more fraud. Many cultures build mounds...I might conclude West Africans are Kurgans or even Cahokia Indians, Even the most ancient West African cultures...Jenne Jenno, the Nok, Tichitt.. bear little resemblance and that can be seen on its face.

 

[sophie]

Some unknown voice invoked that there was no relationship between Nubia and West Africa:



California St. University

There's no such thing as a California State University. This guy teaches at CSU Dominguez Hills. There are maybe 2 or 3 CSUs worth citing academically. I would not consider CSUDH to be one of them.

 

[cachibatches]

There's no such thing as a California State University. This guy teaches at CSU Dominguez Hills. There are maybe 2 or 3 CSUs worth citing academically. I would not consider CSUDH to be one of them.

He is always going to have another lie and another.

But I am glad that he brought up Tishkoff et al, because he also likes to cite Lucotte, who is similarly damning to his black Egypt crusade. IF they are correct, then black Egypt is not possible.

 

[WarKing]

I believe the Ancient Egyptians where the same people as today

they not only depicted themselves different from sub-saharan africans but I also found this :

"1 Southern boundary, made in the year 8, under the majesty of the King of Upper and Lower Egypt, Khekuer, who is given life forever 2 and ever; in order to prevent that any negro should cross it, by water or 3 by land, with a ship, (or) any herds 4 of the negro; except a negro who shall come to do trading in Iken, 5 or with a commission. Every good thing shall be done with them, but without allowing 6 a ship of the negro to pass Heh, going downstream, forever."

this is from a King I believe speaking about the black populations of Africa....showing that they distinguished themselves from them...

 

[WarKing]

The Predynastic populations studied here, from Naqada and Badari, are both Upper Egyptian samples, while the Dynastic Egyptian sample (Tarkhan) is from Lower Egypt. The Dynastic Nubian sample is from Upper Nubia (Kerma). Previous analyses of cranial variation found the Badari and Early Predynastic Egyptians to be more similar to other African groups than to Mediterranean or European populations

It seems like a mistake has been made with earlier studies of the Badarian population

and I believe that modern studies are based on this now dismissed study :


"Mukherjee and associates placed their Badarian Egyptian sample within the sub-Saharan cluster, while puzzling over this unexpected affinity (Mukherjee et al., 1955: 86). Inspection of the original D2 matrix (their Table 5.6: 84) does, in reality, indicate a Badarian affiliation to North Africans, not sub-Saharan samples. It is therefore likely that an error was made in construction of their original figure when converting inter-sample distances to x- and y-coordinates. A similar plotting inaccuracy would have taken place in Figure 4 if the Badarian (BAD) sample had erroneously received a negative rather than positive x-coordinate." J. D. IRISH AND L. KONIGSBERG 2007 The Ancient Inhabitants of Jebel Moya Redux: Measures of Population Affinity Based on Dental Morphology

 

[Asante90]

So you see that even Herodotus clearly states that Ethiopians and Egyptians were not of the same race.

So let's see whose interpretations of ancient Greek observations are accurate:

"Too black a hue marks the coward as witness Egyptians and Ethiopians and so does also too white a complexion as you may see from women, the complexion of courage is between the two."
(Physiognomics, Vol. VI, 812a)

or

Aristotle makes reference to the hair form of Egyptians and Ethiopians: "Why are the Ethiopians and Egyptians bandy-legged? Is it because the bodies of living creatures become distorted by heat, like logs of wood when they become dry? The condition of their hair supports this theory; for it is curlier than that of other nations, and curliness is as it were crookedness of the hair."

or

Lycinus (describing a young Egyptian): "This boy is not merely black; he has thick lips and his legs are too thin . . . his hair worn in a plait behind shows that he is not a freeman."

Timolaus: "But that is a sign of really distinguished birth in Egypt, Lycinus, All freeborn children plait their hair until they reach manhood. It is the exact opposite of the custom of our ancestors who thought it seemly for old men to secure their hair with a gold brooch to keep it in place."
(Lucian, Navigations, paras 2-3)
(Physiognomics, Book XIV, p. 317)

Now who is right according to real scholars:

To the Greeks and Romans, Egypt was an African country, and their artists depicted the Egyptians as Africans, with black skin and tightly curled hair, described by the Greek historian Herodotos in the fifth century BC as 'woolly'.

Fitzwilliam

So in conclusion contemporary scholarship also acknowledges that the Greeks firmly described the ancient Egyptians as black people who came from the South (Aethiopians who told the Greeks that the Egyptians descend FROM THEM).

As for your claim to know what was happening in African populations at 48.000-50.000 BC, well, sorry but i think it just is wrong.

"My claim" that the ancient Africans possessed the great diversity prior to the first successful out of Africa migration will not be disputed by any serious geneticist and I have provided and can continue to provide ample support for what should COMMON KNOWLEDGE (but that is obviously lacking with you).

 

[WarKing]

Based on archaeological evidence and the traits of modern populations. It's pretty much an accepted fact that the peoples of the ancient Sahara were primarily Nilo-Saharan speaking Africans and to a lesser extent Niger-Congo speakers:

I was researching info on the writer of the article (christopher ehret) and it seems like he made a mistake in the dating :


"The main supporter for an ancient African origin for Afro-Asiatic tied to E3b is slashing huge amounts of time off his estimated dates (about 45% for proto Semitic)."


also, if you say that Nubians and Egyptians where of the same origin...then how come they didn't speak the same language


"Nubian is not Afro-Asiatic. Nubians and upper Egyptians shared a common culture in the Holocene with each other and the western desert ceramic cultures, but they apparently didn’t speak even remotely related languages by the time of state formation in Egypt"


both statements are from this article :

http://mathildasanthropologyblog.wo...ronze-age-origin-of-semitic-in-the-near-east/


I'm beginning to notice a few flaws in your arguments....

but none the less it is a interesting topic and you have made some interesting points

 

[Asante90]

It seems like a mistake has been made with earlier studies of the Badarian population and I believe that modern studies are based on this now dismissed study :

"Mukherjee and associates placed their Badarian Egyptian sample within the sub-Saharan cluster, while puzzling over this unexpected affinity (Mukherjee et al., 1955: 86). Inspection of the original D2 matrix (their Table 5.6: 84) does, in reality, indicate a Badarian affiliation to North Africans, not sub-Saharan samples. It is therefore likely that an error was made in construction of their original figure when converting inter-sample distances to x- and y-coordinates. A similar plotting inaccuracy would have taken place in Figure 4 if the Badarian (BAD) sample had erroneously received a negative rather than positive x-coordinate." J. D. IRISH AND L. KONIGSBERG 2007 The Ancient Inhabitants of Jebel Moya Redux: Measures of Population Affinity Based on Dental Morphology

Funny when I googled this quote only 4 results came up and all came from a website operated by a notorious White Nationalist (Kellscross) dedicated to proving that the ancient Egyptians were not only not black but of some European extract.

link

But if it this is in fact NOT a lie then please provide a link to the actual study. A statement such as that is inconsistent with almost any other contemporary study on the Badarians. On a side note however the definition of "North African" used by Irish could also include Sudan (which is also frequently grouped as such)"

and of course we know that the people in that region TODAY range from Nilotic (darfurians) to the more Ethiopic African type. But please provide a link to the full study.

Regardless the "Negroid" affinities of the ancient Egyptians were reinforced with Godde 2009:

On this basis, many have postulated that the Badarians are relatives to South African populations (Morant, 1935 G. Morant, A study of predynastic Egyptian skulls from Badari based on measurements taken by Miss BN Stoessiger and Professor DE Derry, Biometrika 27 (1935), pp. 293–309.Morant, 1935; Mukherjee et al., 1955; Irish and Konigsberg, 2007). The archaeological evidence points to this relationship as well. (Hassan, 1986) and (Hassan, 1988) noted similarities between Badarian pottery and the Neolithic Khartoum type, indicating an archaeological affinity among Badarians and Africans from more southern regions. Furthermore, like the Badarians, Naqada has also been classified with other African groups, namely the Teita (Crichton, 1996; Keita, 1990).

Nutter (1958) noted affinities between the Badarian and Naqada samples, a feature that Strouhal (1971) attributed to their skulls possessing “Negroid” traits. Keita (1992), using craniometrics, discovered that the Badarian series is distinctly different from the later Egyptian series, a conclusion that is mostly confirmed here. In the current analysis, the Badari sample more closely clusters with the Naqada sample and the Kerma sample. However, it also groups with the later pooled sample from Dynasties XVIII–XXV.


The reoccurring notation of Kerma affinities with Egyptian groups is not entirely surprising. Kerma was an integral part of the trade between Egypt and Nubia. -- Godde K. (2009) An Examination of Nubian and Egyptian biological distances: Support for biological diffusion or in situ development? Homo. 2009;60(5):389-404.

Also take not of that first paragraph. You see that is the type of evidence that is completely absent in ANY other fringe theory in regards to the origins and relationships of the ancient Egypt. If the ancient Egyptians came from the Middle East then what part of the Middle East? Which people? Which culture have been consistently noted to show close enough affinity to infer an origin? ANYONE who says that this does not matter in regards to answering the question of their origins is not too bright (to say it nicely) and such sentiments will NEVER be echoed by a contemporary scholar. Well unless that one person deputizes themselves as scholars and childishly calls all reputed scholarly institutes (Oxford, Yale, Manchester ect) wrong. But hey those types of folks are out there.

 

[Gen.Mannerheim]

Some unknown voice invoked that there was no relationship between Nubia and West Africa:



California St. University

This guy also believes that Nubia and Egypt were the same civilization, which is just plain silly. That's like saying that the U.S. North and the U.S. South are the same civilization...

 

[Asante90]

I was researching info on the writer of the article (christopher ehret) and it seems like he made a mistake in the dating :


"The main supporter for an ancient African origin for Afro-Asiatic tied to E3b is slashing huge amounts of time off his estimated dates (about 45% for proto Semitic)."


also, if you say that Nubians and Egyptians where of the same origin...then how come they didn't speak the same language


"Nubian is not Afro-Asiatic. Nubians and upper Egyptians shared a common culture in the Holocene with each other and the western desert ceramic cultures, but they apparently didn’t speak even remotely related languages by the time of state formation in Egypt"


both statements are from this article :

http://mathildasanthropologyblog.wo...ronze-age-origin-of-semitic-in-the-near-east/


I'm beginning to notice a few flaws in your arguments....

but none the less it is a interesting topic and you have made some interesting points

Mathilda has a silly agenda and refuses to debate those who context her stance outside of her blog where she has the ability to censor and delete comments. But if you feel that using her interpretations of information that she herself is scared to defend outside of her own blog then do so at your own discretion:

Here is what REAL contemporary scholars conclude on the language of ancient Egypt.

"Using primarily linguistic evidence, and taking into account recent archaeology at sites such as Hierakonpolis/Nekhen, as well as the symbolic meaning of objects such as sceptres and headrests in Ancient Egyptian and contemporary African cultures, this paper traces the geographical location and movements of early peoples in and around the Nile Valley. It is possible from this overview of the data to conclude that the limited conceptual vocabulary shared by the ancestors of contemporary Chadic-speakers (therefore also contemporary Cuhorsehockeyic-speakers), contemporary Nilotic-speakers and Ancient Egyptian-speakers suggests that the earliest speakers of the Egyptian language could be located to the south of Upper Egypt or, earlier, in the Sahara. The marked grammatical and lexicographic affinities of Ancient Egyptian with Chadic are well-known, and consistent Nilotic cultural, religious and political patterns are detectable in the formation of the first Egyptian kingships. The question these data raise is the articulation between the languages and the cultural patterns of this pool of ancient African societies from which emerged Predynastic Egypt."

--Anselin, A (2011) Some notes about an early African pool of cultures from which emerged Egyptian civilization.
In: Egypt in its African Context. 2009. Proceedings- Museum, University of Manchester, England. Karen Exell (ed). BAR International Series 2204 2011
Archaeopress Publishers of British Archaeological Reports

link

Now you can scour through everyone of her studies, comments, and interpretations of those studies and post them here. I will show you how silly, deceptive and childish such obfuscation on her part really is.

 

[Asante90]

I see that this has turned into mini stormfront and the moderators aren't regulating some these posters who being deviantly disrespectful to black people (for what reason you tell me). Can these people please be regulated to stick to the topic and stop evoking motive (as I've been told not to do) so that this discussion can continue smoothly.

 

[Asante90]

There's no such thing as a California State University.

Hmm let's see:

link

If you didn't catch the huge banner at the top left hand side of the webpage entitled "CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY" then I clicked on the home tab which takes you to the home page of "CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY" "DOMINGUEZ HILLS". Which is one of the branches of the central "CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY. If the official edu. website wasn't credible enough perhaps Wikipedia might be:

California State University, Dominguez Hills (abbreviated CSUDH or CSU Dominguez Hills) is a public university located in the South Bay region of Los Angeles County and was founded in 1960. The university is part of the California State University system. It offers 107 types of Bachelor's degrees, 45 different Master's degrees, and 17 types of teaching credentials.[5][6] The university does not confer Doctoral degrees.

The silliness MY GOODNESS!

This guy teaches at CSU Dominguez Hills. There are maybe 2 or 3 CSUs worth citing academically. I would not consider CSUDH to be one of them.

Professor Salim Faraji one of only a hand full of renown Nubiantologist who is invited to speak at and attend meeting with other scholars at the British museum. He is heading excavations in Sudan and southern Egypt in the name of scholarship. Now what possibly makes him or his institute unreliable as a source? Or is he simply not the right skin color to make such claims?

 

[Asante90]

This guy also believes that Nubia and Egypt were the same civilization, which is just plain silly. That's like saying that the U.S. North and the U.S. South are the same civilization...

No that SCHOLAR is proving that there is immense commonality between ancient Nile Valley civilizations (particularly Nubia in this case) and Western African societies. He's not saying that West African culture is a transplant of Nubia, but that through migration and cultural exchange elements of Nubian culture are clearly present in West African cultures. It's not that complicated to understand.

He is pioneering a study that no one ever bothered to look into and clearly his study has produced positive results of cultural exchange between both regions of the continent. Sorry if that hurts some of you. To know that the dreaded African American can have any commonality with very prominent ancient African civilizations outside of our respective regions of origin

 

[Asante90]

Oh and some anymous voice keeps echoing something about no pyramids being built in West Africa and that is proof that there is nothing in common between the Nile Valley and West Africa:

similar in frame to:

or

Some proud ancient Nok (Nigerian) art

The Nok culture of northern Nigeria, a civilization that existed from approximately 500 B.C. to about 500 A.D., is principally known for its terracotta figures. Relatively little is known about the purpose of these figures or the civilization that created such extraordinary sculptural representations of its people. A few of the remarkable characteristics that distinguish Nok pieces from terracottas of later cultures in Nigeria include the triangular, pierced eyes; the elaborate coiffure and beard; and the placement of the ears. This work depicts a person of high status wearing elaborate beaded jewelry, and with a crooked baton on his right arm and a hinged flail on the left. These are symbols of authority also found in ancient Egyptian depictions of the Pharaohs and the god Osiris. The Nok culture existed during the late Pharonic period and intra-African trading could have spread Egyptian influences into many other parts of Africa.

Minneapolis Art Institute

 

[sophie]

If you didn't catch the huge banner at the top left hand side of the webpage entitled "CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY" then I clicked on the home tab which takes you to the home page of "CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY" "DOMINGUEZ HILLS". Which is one of the branches of the central "CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY

Please don't test my patience. There is no such thing as the California State University as a central institution. The only thing bordering on it is San Jose State University, which is the oldest institution of higher learning in California, and the charter member of the CSU system. The California State University is a decentralized system of Universities subsidized by the state of California. They have a unified Board of Trustees but for the most part the CSU system has less centralized control than the University of California system. Subsequently this system varies widely in quality, from the top-200 in the country San Diego State University to the generally very good San Jose State University, Cal-Poly San Luis Obispo, San Francisco State University, and Fresno State University to the more middling CSU: Long Beach, Sacramento State University, to the mostly-a-joke Chico State University and CSU: Bakersfield. On the whole the CSUs are of lower quality than the smaller-but-more prestigious University of California system. California State University: Dominguez Hills is one of the smaller campuses in the system, with an enrollment of just 13,800. By contrast larger universities like San Jose State University, CSU: Long Beach, and Humboldt all boast enrollments of over 30,000. Your folly is in thinking that they are all one thing. It's rather like thinking UNC and NC State are the same. They aren't. Again, there is no such thing as The California State University. Now what I'd like to know is what a "renowned" Nubiantologist is doing at a University as small and obscure as CSUDH.

 

[Dachs]

Now what I'd like to know is what a "renowned" Nubiantologist is doing at a University as small and obscure as CSUDH.

You know how hard it is to get a decent job in academia, dude. I know several people who've published excellent work yet are stuck as adjuncts.

This guy's work sucks because it sucks, not because he has a position at Podunk State.

 

[WarKing]

Ramses II also had red hair naturally in his youth

and I'm still waiting for you to give me a reply to post 165 on the inscription made by Senusret III

warning to keep "negros" out

 

[cachibatches]

No that SCHOLAR is proving that there is immense commonality between ancient Nile Valley civilizations (particularly Nubia in this case) and Western African societies. He's not saying that West African culture is a transplant of Nubia, but that through migration and cultural exchange elements of Nubian culture are clearly present in West African cultures. It's not that complicated to understand.

He is pioneering a study that no one ever bothered to look into and clearly his study has produced positive results of cultural exchange between both regions of the continent. Sorry if that hurts some of you. To know that the dreaded African American can have any commonality with very prominent ancient African civilizations outside of our respective regions of origin

There were no pyramids in West Africa. That Igbo "pyramid" pictured above is a ten foot tall layered pile of mud. It has neither the scope, permanence, or quality to be considered next to an Egyptian pyramid. Due to its nature (made of mud) it is a relatively recent creation.

And there was no hieroglyphic writing. You are not going to bluff anyone into thinking there are imaginary connections.


Time to catalog your lies, and they are lies, because you have posted links to two of the five threads we have already contested in. Everyone can see that at this point, you are lying.

A) Started this thread on a premise that you know was long ago debunked. The JAMA data that it was based on is an admitted falsification. Post 92.

B) Tried to pass of that the J in modern Egyptians as coming from Arabs when every study ever done says that it comes from the stone ages. Post 91.

C) trying to claim that the Egyptians used to be "black" when every study says that they are darker now due to the Arab slave trade. Post 91 again.

D) Trying to claim a connection between Egypt and West Africa- a lie on its face. A Ten foot tall pile of layered mud is not a connection to Egypt. No pyramids, no hieroglyphic writing, none of the things that make Egypt special.

E) Tried to pass off that Greeks are a third African- a flat out lie. Youtube link on Post 153.

F) Tried to sell Tishkoff et al and Keita as proof of black Egypt, when it has been explained to you that they actually preclude any possibility of black Egypt. Pre-historic East Africans were distinct from sub-Saharan Africans. So distinct in fact that their genetic legacy in East Africa causes modern populations to veer away from Africans and toward Eurasians.

G) Still pushing old skeletal studies when it has been pointed out to you that A) There are contradictory studies (Raxter), and B) They are obsolete due to genetic technology and understanding of phenotypical development.

Shame on you, Asante. You are belittling your true ancestors by trying to pass of a mud pile as a pyramid. The Egyptians are not your ancestors. Your ancestors did not build pyramids. They did not write in hieroglyphic. Do you think you are fooling anyone? Do you not understand that in the internet age, we can find the lie in a matter of minutes?

Still waiting for a body of DNA evidence...or even one good study...that would prove anything you say. but I am not going to get it, am I?

 

[Plotinus]

Moderator Action: Thread closed.

I've repeatedly stated that we won't tolerate the kind of bickering we see here. This thread had already been closed once and re-opened on sufferance. I don't know what it is about this topic that makes people incapable of discussing it rationally. I'll close any further threads that I see on this topic rather than go through this time after time after time.

And Asante90 and cachibatches, this site does not exist just to be yet another location for your online war. Please either take it back to whatever unfortunate forum first hosted it, or just get a room.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889