Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Egyptian origins (race/ethnicity)

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234 6>
Author
Don Quixote View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar

Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 29-Dec-2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4734
  Quote Don Quixote Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Egyptian origins (race/ethnicity)
    Posted: 19-Nov-2011 at 09:00
The Nile Valley was the oldest and one of the most used migration corridors so I would expect mixed population. 
Back to Top
medenaywe View Drop Down
AE Moderator
AE Moderator
Avatar
Master of Meanings

Joined: 06-Nov-2010
Location: /
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 17084
  Quote medenaywe Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Nov-2011 at 09:09
agree  with you Don.Question was white people were or not part of this area!Had been ruled Egypt by white pharaohs during existed history of this civilization.
Back to Top
Don Quixote View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar

Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 29-Dec-2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4734
  Quote Don Quixote Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Nov-2011 at 09:20
Originally posted by medenaywe

agree  with you Don.Question was white people were or not part of this area!Had been ruled Egypt by white pharaohs during existed history of this civilization.

When you say 'white' do you mean "European"? If so, I agree with your statement, European people have nothing to do with Ancient Egyptian population. I expect some mixture of North African people with varying nuances of skin coloring and some Middle Easterners and possibly some from the Arabian Peninsula.
Back to Top
medenaywe View Drop Down
AE Moderator
AE Moderator
Avatar
Master of Meanings

Joined: 06-Nov-2010
Location: /
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 17084
  Quote medenaywe Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Nov-2011 at 09:24
But main migration stream was from African continent out!Why do not accept we come from it?
Back to Top
Don Quixote View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar

Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 29-Dec-2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4734
  Quote Don Quixote Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Nov-2011 at 09:48
Originally posted by medenaywe

But main migration stream was from African continent out!Why do not accept we come from it?

Of course the main migration was out of Agfrica but there were back migrations to Africa; migration corridor means that people moved in all directions, left and right. It's illogical to suppose that the only possible direction for migration was toward Africa, and never toward it.

Why do you mean "why not accept where we came from"? I don't have any problems with the out-of-Africa-theory; but this was quite a long time before the Ancient Egyptians came about. So what those 2 events have to do with each other? Migration out of Africa was between 80,000-60,000 years ago, there was a backlash to Africa some 30,000 years ago. The Ancient Egyptians came about in like between 4-3,000 BC, or 5,000 years ago. So, considering that whoever came back to Africa in 30,000-20,000 years ago passed through the Levant and exactly where Egypt is located, the last event is closer to the time when Egyptians came about to start with.
Back to Top
MKGlouisville View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl

Troll

Joined: 22-Nov-2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 30
  Quote MKGlouisville Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Nov-2011 at 10:22
Originally posted by Ancient Dravidian

The Egyptians looked like the Dravidians of India today. Dravidians are classified as Saharan-Mediterranian Black peoples.


Why would a population indigenous to southern India be a mixture of Saharan African and Mediterraneans?

The Horn Africans are more related to the Nubian type. They are fully Saharan. It's proven, that the Egyptians, the Sumerians, the Elamites and the Dravidians were very similar in racial, cultural and linguistic terms hinting at the common ancestry of these groups.


Question: Why have you seemingly completely disregarded the articles from three scholars who are regarded as authorities on the subject, who have both concluded that the closest people biologically and culturally to the early ancient Egyptians are Sub Saharan East Africans and Nilotic Saharan populations? Those scholars have demonstrated this fact through anthropology, genetics, archaeology, linguistics and culture. Those are just the facts about this ancient African civilization.

"The Egyptians came, according to their own records, from a mysterious land...This region was the Egyptian 'Land of the Gods,' Pa-Nuter, in old Egyptian, or Holyland, and now proved beyond any doubt to have been quite a different place from the Holyland of Sinai.


Actually a recent 2010 genetic study has confirmed that the land of Punt was located in what is modern day Ethiopia and Eritrea as most scholars have postulated for the better half of the last century:

"Analysis of mummified baboons in the British Museum has revealed the location of the land of Punt as the area between Ethiopia and Eritrea. To the Egyptians, Punt was a place of fragrances, giraffes, electrum and other exotic goods, and was sometimes referred to as Ta-netjer, or 'God’s land'."


http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/history/baboon-mummy-analysis-reveals-eritrea-and-ethiopia-as-location-of-land-of-punt-1954547.html

The mere fact that the ancient Egyptians depicted the land of Punt as having giraffes, hippos ect automatically ruled out a non African location for their self described homeland.

The migration of M-35 from the Horn of Africa (specifically Ethiopia) confirms the Egyptian claim that this was their ancestral homeland. This genetic marker is still to this day the signature marker of Egypt and Northern Africa:






Edited by MKGlouisville - 19-Nov-2011 at 10:40
Back to Top
MKGlouisville View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl

Troll

Joined: 22-Nov-2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 30
  Quote MKGlouisville Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Nov-2011 at 10:34
Originally posted by Don Quixote

The Nile Valley was the oldest and one of the most used migration corridors so I would expect mixed population. 


I mean seriously why do some people have such a problem with accepting the conclusive findings (posted in the OP) which indicate that the original populace of ancient Egypt were black Africans from the south. These authorities back their opinion by anthropology, genetics, linguistics and archaeological evidence. All of which point to the Sub Saharan East African and Nilotic Saharan African origins of ancient Egypt. As time went on populations from the Mediterranean moved began to settle on the Nile. The recent peer reviewed study below confirms this to be the case in regards to the population history of ancient Egypt:

"The question of the genetic origins of ancient Egyptians, particularly those during the Dynastic period, is relevant to the current study. Modern interpretations of Egyptian state formation propose an indigenous origin of the Dynastic civilization (Hassan, 1988). Early Egyptologists considered Upper and Lower Egyptians to be genetically distinct populations, and viewed the Dynastic period as characterized by a conquest of Upper Egypt by the Lower Egyptians. More recent interpretations contend that Egyptians from the south actually expanded into the northern regions during the Dynastic state unification (Hassan, 1988; Savage, 2001), and that the Predynastic populations of Upper and Lower Egypt are morphologically distinct from one another, but not sufficiently distinct to consider either non-indigenous (Zakrzewski, 2007). 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 (Keita, 1990; Zakrzewski, 2002). In addition, the Badarians have been described as near the centroid of cranial and dental variation among Predynastic and Dynastic populations studied (Irish, 2006; Zakrzewski, 2007). This suggests that, at least through the Early Dynastic period, the inhabitants of the Nile valley were a continuous population of local origin, and no major migration or replacement events occurred during this time.

Studies of cranial morphology also support the use of a Nubian (Kerma) population for a comparison of the Dynastic period, as this group is likely to be more closely genetically related to the early Nile valley inhabitants than would be the Late Dynastic Egyptians, who likely experienced significant mixing with other Mediterranean populations (Zakrzewski, 2002). A craniometric study found the Naqada and Kerma populations to be morphologically similar (Keita, 1990). Given these and other prior studies suggesting continuity (Berry et al., 1967; Berry and Berry, 1972), and the lack of archaeological evidence of major migration or population replacement during the Neolithic transition in the Nile valley, we may cautiously interpret the dental health changes over time as primarily due to ecological, subsistence, and demographic changes experienced throughout the Nile valley region."

-- AP Starling, JT Stock. (2007). Dental Indicators of Health and Stress in Early Egyptian and Nubian Agriculturalists: A Difficult Transition and Gradual Recovery. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY 134:520–528

These are just the facts.
Back to Top
Ancient Dravidian View Drop Down
Janissary
Janissary


Joined: 19-Jul-2011
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 21
  Quote Ancient Dravidian Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Nov-2011 at 10:59
Originally posted by MKGlouisville

Originally posted by Don Quixote

The Nile Valley was the oldest and one of the most used migration corridors so I would expect mixed population. 


I mean seriously why do some people have such a problem with accepting the conclusive findings (posted in the OP) which indicate that the original populace of ancient Egypt were black Africans from the south. These authorities back their opinion by anthropology, genetics, linguistics and archaeological evidence. All of which point to the Sub Saharan East African and Nilotic Saharan African origins of ancient Egypt. As time went on populations from the Mediterranean moved began to settle on the Nile. The recent peer reviewed study below confirms this to be the case in regards to the population history of ancient Egypt:

"The question of the genetic origins of ancient Egyptians, particularly those during the Dynastic period, is relevant to the current study. Modern interpretations of Egyptian state formation propose an indigenous origin of the Dynastic civilization (Hassan, 1988). Early Egyptologists considered Upper and Lower Egyptians to be genetically distinct populations, and viewed the Dynastic period as characterized by a conquest of Upper Egypt by the Lower Egyptians. More recent interpretations contend that Egyptians from the south actually expanded into the northern regions during the Dynastic state unification (Hassan, 1988; Savage, 2001), and that the Predynastic populations of Upper and Lower Egypt are morphologically distinct from one another, but not sufficiently distinct to consider either non-indigenous (Zakrzewski, 2007). 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 (Keita, 1990; Zakrzewski, 2002). In addition, the Badarians have been described as near the centroid of cranial and dental variation among Predynastic and Dynastic populations studied (Irish, 2006; Zakrzewski, 2007). This suggests that, at least through the Early Dynastic period, the inhabitants of the Nile valley were a continuous population of local origin, and no major migration or replacement events occurred during this time.

Studies of cranial morphology also support the use of a Nubian (Kerma) population for a comparison of the Dynastic period, as this group is likely to be more closely genetically related to the early Nile valley inhabitants than would be the Late Dynastic Egyptians, who likely experienced significant mixing with other Mediterranean populations (Zakrzewski, 2002). A craniometric study found the Naqada and Kerma populations to be morphologically similar (Keita, 1990). Given these and other prior studies suggesting continuity (Berry et al., 1967; Berry and Berry, 1972), and the lack of archaeological evidence of major migration or population replacement during the Neolithic transition in the Nile valley, we may cautiously interpret the dental health changes over time as primarily due to ecological, subsistence, and demographic changes experienced throughout the Nile valley region."

-- AP Starling, JT Stock. (2007). Dental Indicators of Health and Stress in Early Egyptian and Nubian Agriculturalists: A Difficult Transition and Gradual Recovery. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY 134:520–528

These are just the facts.

Of course, the Nubians and other North Saharan populations would share genes with their neighbors the Egyptians. That is quite natural. But the paintings on the walls show clear pictures. The Egyptian people were of the Nilo-Dravdian type, not clearly Horn African or even Subsaharan. We shouldn't take historians as serious as you do. Many carry a dirty political agenda to misinform the common people. Use your own eyes and senses and only then take notes from others. I have seen your picture comparisons and liked it, but they don't look really Egyptian, sorry. But they certainly look genetically related in a distant way.
Back to Top
MKGlouisville View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl

Troll

Joined: 22-Nov-2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 30
  Quote MKGlouisville Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Nov-2011 at 13:16
Originally posted by Ancient Dravidian

 
Of course, the Nubians and other North Saharan populations would share genes with their neighbors the Egyptians. That is quite natural. But the paintings on the walls show clear pictures.


That's the problem! You are making an outlandish claim which goes against all of the biological evidence presented in this thread thus far, in favor of making subjective arguments about their highly stylized artwork.

Anthropology and Genetics>>>>Subjective view points of artwork

Anthropology groups the ancient Egyptians with more southerly African populations. Those Africans mainly being from more southerly areas of Northeast Africa (Ethiopia, Somalia, Sudan). Genetic evidence confirms that the original migrants to settle on the Nile were Nilotic Africans from the ancient Sahara and of course from Sub Saharan East Africa. Conversely none of this  evidence shows any ties between ancient Egypt and Dravidians.

 
The Egyptian people were of the Nilo-Dravdian type, not clearly Horn African or even Subsaharan.


Based on what? Subjective opinions on artwork?

P.S. The Dinka of the Sudan are not "Sub" Saharan Africans either but they are still black are they not. They are in fact the darkest Africans.

We shouldn't take historians as serious as you do. Many carry a dirty political agenda to misinform the common people.


I did not cite any historians, I cited leading bio-geneticist and linguistic/cultural scholars on the matter. This is

I have seen your picture comparisons and liked it, but they don't look really Egyptian, sorry.


OK dude that's just your opinion and I have mine in regards to artwork, I don't see a resemblance in your Dravidian comparison. This is why such artwork subjective and is not the a reliable indicator to answer this question. However my opinion seems to be in line with what the biological evidence indicates about their phenotype.
Back to Top
Don Quixote View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar

Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 29-Dec-2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4734
  Quote Don Quixote Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Nov-2011 at 14:28
Originally posted by MKGlouisville

Originally posted by Don Quixote

The Nile Valley was the oldest and one of the most used migration corridors so I would expect mixed population. 


I mean seriously why do some people have such a problem with accepting the conclusive findings (posted in the OP) which indicate that the original populace of ancient Egypt were black Africans from the south. These authorities back their opinion by anthropology, genetics, linguistics and archaeological evidence. All of which point to the Sub Saharan East African and Nilotic Saharan African origins of ancient Egypt. As time went on populations from the Mediterranean moved began to settle on the Nile. The recent peer reviewed study below confirms this to be the case in regards to the population history of ancient Egypt:

"The question of the genetic origins of ancient Egyptians, particularly those during the Dynastic period, is relevant to the current study. Modern interpretations of Egyptian state formation propose an indigenous origin of the Dynastic civilization (Hassan, 1988). Early Egyptologists considered Upper and Lower Egyptians to be genetically distinct populations, and viewed the Dynastic period as characterized by a conquest of Upper Egypt by the Lower Egyptians. More recent interpretations contend that Egyptians from the south actually expanded into the northern regions during the Dynastic state unification (Hassan, 1988; Savage, 2001), and that the Predynastic populations of Upper and Lower Egypt are morphologically distinct from one another, but not sufficiently distinct to consider either non-indigenous (Zakrzewski, 2007). 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 (Keita, 1990; Zakrzewski, 2002). In addition, the Badarians have been described as near the centroid of cranial and dental variation among Predynastic and Dynastic populations studied (Irish, 2006; Zakrzewski, 2007). This suggests that, at least through the Early Dynastic period, the inhabitants of the Nile valley were a continuous population of local origin, and no major migration or replacement events occurred during this time.

Studies of cranial morphology also support the use of a Nubian (Kerma) population for a comparison of the Dynastic period, as this group is likely to be more closely genetically related to the early Nile valley inhabitants than would be the Late Dynastic Egyptians, who likely experienced significant mixing with other Mediterranean populations (Zakrzewski, 2002). A craniometric study found the Naqada and Kerma populations to be morphologically similar (Keita, 1990). Given these and other prior studies suggesting continuity (Berry et al., 1967; Berry and Berry, 1972), and the lack of archaeological evidence of major migration or population replacement during the Neolithic transition in the Nile valley, we may cautiously interpret the dental health changes over time as primarily due to ecological, subsistence, and demographic changes experienced throughout the Nile valley region."

-- AP Starling, JT Stock. (2007). Dental Indicators of Health and Stress in Early Egyptian and Nubian Agriculturalists: A Difficult Transition and Gradual Recovery. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY 134:520–528

These are just the facts.

Those are no "conclusive findings", those are suppositions. I had been in such discussion before and I don't intend to get into them again, so I'm write my opinion and end up with it. The population of Egypt was mixed, since it's impossible the people living in the most ancient and most used migration corridors to have been from one ethnicity.
The question here is why some people would insist that they were only from one ethnicity /not to use the already obsolete term 'race'/, and that this ethnicity happened to be black Africans from the South only. The genetic research concludes that there was migration from the Middle East in North Africa like 30,000 years ago, therefore whoever was in Northj Afgrica by 4-3,00 BC was already mixed:

"...Haplogroup T originated at least 30,000 years ago, making it one of the oldest haplogroups found in Eurasia, which may explain its vast dispersal around Africa and South Asia. It also makes its place of origin uncertain. The modern distribution T in Europe strongly correlates with a the Neolithic colonisation of the continent by Middle Eastern farmers, who also included members of haplogroups E1b1b, G2a, J1 and J2. The hotspot in Estonia is very likely due to a founder effect in the Neolithic population.

Although haplogroup T is more common today in East Africa than anywhere else, its association with the rise of agriculture in the Middle East is a strong argument in favour of a Middle Eastern origin, and a colonisation of East Africa by Middle Eastern farmers. Another argument in that sense is that T is descended from haplogroup K, which is itself absent from Africa and spawned most of the Eurasian haplogroups (L, N, O, P, Q, R and T), which are thought to have a common origin around Central Asia. The strong incidence of T from the Caucasus to central and southern Iran hint that early farmers might have descended from the Caucasus to southern Mesopotamia and southwest Iran. T might therefore be linked to the ancient Sumerians and Elamites....http://www.eupedia.com/europe/origins_haplogroups_europe.shtml

As far as lingustic is concerned, Ancient Egyptian is an Afro-Asiatic language, and closer to Berber and even Arabic that to the languages south of it, like Ancient Nubian, that were from the Nilo-Saharan group; so, this is one more evidence of mixed population.

Now, those are the facts. To present several craniometrics and to make vague assertion about "conclusive research". "most linguists and anthropologists" while avoiding any other research that shows different facts is not presenting facts, but picking and choosing what one wants to sell. I'm not buying.



Edited by Don Quixote - 19-Nov-2011 at 15:12
Back to Top
medenaywe View Drop Down
AE Moderator
AE Moderator
Avatar
Master of Meanings

Joined: 06-Nov-2010
Location: /
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 17084
  Quote medenaywe Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Nov-2011 at 14:42
Egypt was therefore compared with Tower of Babel,old kingdom that had solved unsolved problem:all people to live together!Metaphor was that:it was impossible than why we could have tried again!Gate of the Gods is plural,many gods many nations could have lived together.
Back to Top
Don Quixote View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar

Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 29-Dec-2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4734
  Quote Don Quixote Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Nov-2011 at 15:07
Originally posted by medenaywe

Egypt was therefore compared with Tower of Babel,old kingdom that had solved unsolved problem:all people to live together!Metaphor was that:it was impossible than why we could have tried again!Gate of the Gods is plural,many gods many nations could have lived together.

This is interesting, I came upon this article http://blog.world-mysteries.com/science/skyground-correlation-and-the-tower-of-babel/
that proposes that the Tower of Babel was the Giza pyramids. It dips in several mythologies, etc and it's worth reading, IMHO, even if one is not buying the conclusion.


Edited by Don Quixote - 19-Nov-2011 at 15:11
Back to Top
medenaywe View Drop Down
AE Moderator
AE Moderator
Avatar
Master of Meanings

Joined: 06-Nov-2010
Location: /
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 17084
  Quote medenaywe Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Nov-2011 at 15:25
With gold plated tops they have had orion belt stars all the time in front of them,hadn't they?
Back to Top
MKGlouisville View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl

Troll

Joined: 22-Nov-2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 30
  Quote MKGlouisville Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Nov-2011 at 22:36
Originally posted by Don Quixote

Those are no "conclusive findings", those are suppositions.]


If a recent peer reviewed overall of research conducted on the population history of the Nile Valley is not sufficient enough then I think that the encyclopedia of the archaeology of ancient Egypt is conclusive/authoritative to do so:

"There is now a sufficient body of evidence from modern studies of skeletal remains to indicate that the ancient Egyptians, especially southern Egyptians, exhibited physical characteristics that are within the range of variation for ancient and modern indigenous peoples of the Sahara and tropical Africa.. In general, the inhabitants of Upper Egypt and Nubia had the greatest biological affinity to people of the Sahara and more southerly areas." (Nancy C. Lovell, " Egyptians, physical anthropology of," in Encyclopedia of the Archaeology of Ancient Egypt, ed. Kathryn A. Bard and Steven Blake Shubert, ( London and New York: Routledge, 1999) pp 328-332)


and

"must be placed in the context of hypotheses informed by archaeological, linguistic, geographic and other data. In such contexts, the physical anthropological evidence indicates that early Nile Valley populations can be identified as part of an African lineage, but exhibiting local variation. This variation represents the short and long term effects of evolutionary forces, such as gene flow, genetic drift, and natural selection, influenced by culture and geography." ("Nancy C. Lovell, " Egyptians, physical anthropology of," in Encyclopedia of the Archaeology of Ancient Egypt, ed. Kathryn A. Bard and Steven Blake Shubert, ( London and New York: Routledge, 1999). pp 328-332)


They are basically stating that the ancient Egyptians generally looked like black Africans further to the south.

The population of Egypt was mixed, since it's impossible the people living in the most ancient and most used migration corridors to have been from one ethnicity.


Yes most scholars note that the original Egyptian populace was a mixture of Nilotic Africans and Horn Africans. After the establishment of the civilization is when small scale steady migration into the Nile from the Middle East began to take place. By Late Dynastic times Egyptian was a pretty "mixed" society, which had starks biological distinctions from it's Pre-Dynastic and Early Dynastic ancestors (as stated in the peer reviewed article above).

The question here is why some people would insist that they were only from one ethnicity /not to use the already obsolete term 'race'/,


Please provide peer reviewed biological evidence which states that the early ancient Egyptians were the product various black African populations those of the Levant.

The genetic research concludes that there was migration from the Middle East in North Africa like 30,000 years ago, therefore whoever was in Northj Afgrica by 4-3,00 BC was already mixed:


Actually the oldest skeletal remains found in Egypt is considered to be a descendant of more southerly African populations


Ricaut 2008


Elamites....http://www.eupedia.com/europe/origins_haplogroups_europe.shtml

What does this have to do with the biological affinities of the ancient Egyptians? Do Egyptians have a high level (or even detectable level) of Haplogroup T? Where is the study that I can read which confirms this to be true?

As far as lingustic is concerned, Ancient Egyptian is an Afro-Asiatic language, and closer to Berber and even Arabic that to the languages south of it, like Ancient Nubian, that were from the Nilo-Saharan group; so, this is one more evidence of mixed population.

You're actually wrong again! The ancient Egyptian language was closest to those Afro-Asiactic languages spoken in Chad and Somalia:

"Ancient Egypt belongs to a language group known as 'Afroasiatic' (formerly called Hamito-Semitic) and its closest relatives are other north-east African languages from Somalia to Chad. Egypt's cultural features, both material and ideological and particularly in the earliest phases, show clear connections with that same broad area. In sum, ancient Egypt was an African culture, developed by African peoples, who had wide ranging contacts in north Africa and western Asia." (Morkot, Robert (2005) The Egyptians: An Introduction. Routledge. p. 10)

Also Nubians were the closest population biologically to the ancient Egyptians than anyone else and the studies presented on this very page confirm this to be true.

Now, those are the facts.[QUOTE]

Just to illustrate how obviously biased you are in this discussion (most likely due to emotional attachment issues), I will point out how you are disregarding PEER REVIEWED research from numerous authors because you simply don't like what they all seem to conclude in favor of a random website, which cites nothing to back it's claims. Is it that serious that you have to be that biased?

[QUOTE]I'm not buying.

Doesn't hurt me any, you're the one who wishes to remain ignorant of the facts.

Back to Top
Don Quixote View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar

Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 29-Dec-2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4734
  Quote Don Quixote Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Nov-2011 at 23:08
I'm not going to argue and insinuate who is ignorant and who is not. Here some live studies, not blind quotes that I one cannot follow /and read the whole thing for themselves/. Everyone here can follow and make their own conclusions:
Ancient Egyptian cluster with European Neolithic, North Africa, modern Europe and India:
"...Abstract

The biological affinities of the ancient Egyptians were tested against their neighbors and selected prehistoric groups as well as against samples representing the major geographic population clusters of the world. Two dozen craniofacial measurements were taken on each individual used. The raw measurements were converted into C scores and used to produce Euclidean distance dendrograms. The measurements were principally of adaptively trivial traits that display patterns of regional similarities based solely on genetic relationships. The Predynastic of Upper Egypt and the Late Dynastic of Lower Egypt are more closely related to each other than to any other population. As a whole, they show ties with the European Neolithic, North Africa, modern Europe, and, more remotely, India, but not at all with sub-Saharan Africa, eastern Asia, Oceania, or the New World. Adjacent people in the Nile valley show similarities in trivial traits in an unbroken series from the delta in the north southward through Nubia and all the way to Somalia at the equator. At the same time, the gradient in skin color and body proportions suggests long-term adaptive response to selective forces appropriate to the latitude where they occur. An assessment of “race” is as useless as it is impossible. Neither clines nor clusters alone suffice to deal with the biological nature of a widely distributed population. Both must be used. We conclude that the Egyptians have been in place since back in the Pleistocene and have been largely unaffected by either invasions or migrations. As others have noted, Egyptians are Egyptians, and they were so in the past as well. © 1993 Wiley-Liss, Inc...."http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ajpa.1330360603/abstract


Pre-Dynastic Egyptians from Naqada (#59), 26th-30th Dynasty Egyptians from Gizeh (#60), 12th-13th Dynasty Nubians from Kerma (#61) with Northwest Indians from Punjab and Kashmir (#44), Ancient and Modern Greeks (#48), Scandinavians from Finland, Sweden and Norway (#51, #52), and Modern Germans (#53). (NOTE: Somalis are #63)

THIS IMAGE HAS BEEN COMPRESSED. CLICK TO VIEW THE FULL-SIZE VERSION:
Posted Image


http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/104081817/abstract





Edited by Don Quixote - 19-Nov-2011 at 23:16
Back to Top
Don Quixote View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar

Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 29-Dec-2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4734
  Quote Don Quixote Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Nov-2011 at 23:10
Pre-Dynastic and 12th-29th Dynasty Egyptians cluster with Afghans and North Indians on the edge of a larger cluster of Europeans and West Asians.

THIS IMAGE HAS BEEN COMPRESSED. CLICK TO VIEW THE FULL-SIZE VERSION:
Posted Image


http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/abstract/110471697/ABSTRACT

Ancient Egyptians from Badari, Pre-Dynastic Egyptians from Naqada, and 26th-30th Dynasty Egyptians from Gizeh cluster with Europeans and West/South Asians on the negative end of the prognathism scale.

THIS IMAGE HAS BEEN COMPRESSED. CLICK TO VIEW THE FULL-SIZE VERSION:
Posted Image


http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/68503808/abstract


Edited by Don Quixote - 19-Nov-2011 at 23:11
Back to Top
Don Quixote View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar

Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 29-Dec-2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4734
  Quote Don Quixote Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20-Nov-2011 at 01:53
Ancient Egyptian language shows the closest relationship  to Semitic, Berber and Beja:
"...According to Loprieno4, Ancient Egyptian shows thë closest relationship to Semitic, Berber and Beja, and more distant relationship to the rest of Cushitic and Chadic. ..."
"...The Ancient Egyptian language represents an autonomous branch of the Afro-Asiatic or Hamito-Semitic phylum, one of the most widespread language families in the world.The individual branches of the Afro-Asiatic phylum are :
-Ancient Egyptian ;
-Semitic languages including Eastern Semitic (Akkadian), Northwest Semitic (Canaaite, Hebrew, Ugaritic, Aramaic. Phœnician} and Southwest Semitic (Arabic, South Arabian and Ethiopic) ;-
-Berber languages (or Libyco-Berber) ;
- Cushitic languages (i.e. among others Beja, Agao, Somali, etc.) ;
- Chadic languages (i.e. among others Hausa)...."
...http://ema.revues.org/index1025.html
Back to Top
TheAlaniDragonRising View Drop Down
AE Moderator
AE Moderator
Avatar
Spam Fighter

Joined: 09-May-2011
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6086
  Quote TheAlaniDragonRising Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20-Nov-2011 at 07:20
Originally posted by MKGlouisville

Originally posted by Don Quixote

Those are no "conclusive findings", those are suppositions.]


If a recent peer reviewed overall of research conducted on the population history of the Nile Valley is not sufficient enough then I think that the encyclopedia of the archaeology of ancient Egypt is conclusive/authoritative to do so:

"There is now a sufficient body of evidence from modern studies of skeletal remains to indicate that the ancient Egyptians, especially southern Egyptians, exhibited physical characteristics that are within the range of variation for ancient and modern indigenous peoples of the Sahara and tropical Africa.. In general, the inhabitants of Upper Egypt and Nubia had the greatest biological affinity to people of the Sahara and more southerly areas." (Nancy C. Lovell, " Egyptians, physical anthropology of," in Encyclopedia of the Archaeology of Ancient Egypt, ed. Kathryn A. Bard and Steven Blake Shubert, ( London and New York: Routledge, 1999) pp 328-332)


and

"must be placed in the context of hypotheses informed by archaeological, linguistic, geographic and other data. In such contexts, the physical anthropological evidence indicates that early Nile Valley populations can be identified as part of an African lineage, but exhibiting local variation. This variation represents the short and long term effects of evolutionary forces, such as gene flow, genetic drift, and natural selection, influenced by culture and geography." ("Nancy C. Lovell, " Egyptians, physical anthropology of," in Encyclopedia of the Archaeology of Ancient Egypt, ed. Kathryn A. Bard and Steven Blake Shubert, ( London and New York: Routledge, 1999). pp 328-332)


They are basically stating that the ancient Egyptians generally looked like black Africans further to the south.

The population of Egypt was mixed, since it's impossible the people living in the most ancient and most used migration corridors to have been from one ethnicity.


Yes most scholars note that the original Egyptian populace was a mixture of Nilotic Africans and Horn Africans. After the establishment of the civilization is when small scale steady migration into the Nile from the Middle East began to take place. By Late Dynastic times Egyptian was a pretty "mixed" society, which had starks biological distinctions from it's Pre-Dynastic and Early Dynastic ancestors (as stated in the peer reviewed article above).

The question here is why some people would insist that they were only from one ethnicity /not to use the already obsolete term 'race'/,


Please provide peer reviewed biological evidence which states that the early ancient Egyptians were the product various black African populations those of the Levant.

The genetic research concludes that there was migration from the Middle East in North Africa like 30,000 years ago, therefore whoever was in Northj Afgrica by 4-3,00 BC was already mixed:


Actually the oldest skeletal remains found in Egypt is considered to be a descendant of more southerly African populations


Ricaut 2008


Elamites....http://www.eupedia.com/europe/origins_haplogroups_europe.shtml

What does this have to do with the biological affinities of the ancient Egyptians? Do Egyptians have a high level (or even detectable level) of Haplogroup T? Where is the study that I can read which confirms this to be true?

As far as lingustic is concerned, Ancient Egyptian is an Afro-Asiatic language, and closer to Berber and even Arabic that to the languages south of it, like Ancient Nubian, that were from the Nilo-Saharan group; so, this is one more evidence of mixed population.

You're actually wrong again! The ancient Egyptian language was closest to those Afro-Asiactic languages spoken in Chad and Somalia:

"Ancient Egypt belongs to a language group known as 'Afroasiatic' (formerly called Hamito-Semitic) and its closest relatives are other north-east African languages from Somalia to Chad. Egypt's cultural features, both material and ideological and particularly in the earliest phases, show clear connections with that same broad area. In sum, ancient Egypt was an African culture, developed by African peoples, who had wide ranging contacts in north Africa and western Asia." (Morkot, Robert (2005) The Egyptians: An Introduction. Routledge. p. 10)

Also Nubians were the closest population biologically to the ancient Egyptians than anyone else and the studies presented on this very page confirm this to be true.

Now, those are the facts.[QUOTE]

Just to illustrate how obviously biased you are in this discussion (most likely due to emotional attachment issues), I will point out how you are disregarding PEER REVIEWED research from numerous authors because you simply don't like what they all seem to conclude in favor of a random website, which cites nothing to back it's claims. Is it that serious that you have to be that biased?

[QUOTE]I'm not buying.

Doesn't hurt me any, you're the one who wishes to remain ignorant of the facts.


I found what you have said to be very interesting, and I have also taken into consideration what others have said too, to be as open to opinion as possible, and what I have discovered in what you have posted doesn't really contradict with what others have said. The reason for this isn't that you are wrong that much, it is because the findings you have shown heavily relies on southern Egypt for the findings you're trying to put over, and of course shouldn't be such a surprise to come up with findings due to what we already know of the connections between Egypt and Nubia(Sudan) from ancient times to the present day. As for the ancient population of Egypt as a whole and the likeness modern day Egyptians have with them now, I would ask you about ancient Egyptian paintings on walls and how the likenesses are like those of the people now. Are you saying that the ancient Egyptians painted themselves as being white instead of black? If the ancient Egyptians weren't a mixed population, then when did they become the mix that they are, taking into consideration the paintings too? 
What a handsome figure of a dragon. No wonder I fall madly in love with the Alani Dragon now, the avatar, it's a gorgeous dragon picture.
Back to Top
Ancient Dravidian View Drop Down
Janissary
Janissary


Joined: 19-Jul-2011
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 21
  Quote Ancient Dravidian Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20-Nov-2011 at 07:32
Europeans again (Scandinavians! LOL ).. very funny study indeed.. could you cite a serious study, too
Back to Top
MKGlouisville View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl

Troll

Joined: 22-Nov-2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 30
  Quote MKGlouisville Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20-Nov-2011 at 08:01
Word of advice Don Quixote, the next time you copy and paste and entire argument word for word from Anthroscape, you should read the entire thread first. If you did then you would have seen where "Racialreality" was beaten so bad in the debate that in an act of cowardice he banned his primary opponent from the forum in the middle of the debate. But since you took the easy way out I will do the same:







Now if you would really like to have an original debate on the biological affinities of the ancient Egyptians than we do so. Otherwise your copied and pasted talking points will be met with the same talking points that thoroughly debunk them. Fair enough?


Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234 6>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.109 seconds.