quote:

---

The Minoans were not Greeks, and their language, religion, and social structures were not Greek. Most of what is known or can be guessed about the Minoans comes from modern Archaeology on Crete. (The little island of Thera also has yielded an important Minoan site.) Evidence suggests that the Minoans emerged from a fusion between existing Cretan inhabitants and invaders from Asia Minor during the era 2900–2200 BCE. These people became master seafarers and built a society inspired partly by contact with the Egyptian Old Kingdom (ca. 2650–2250 BCE). By about 1900 BCE the Minoans were acquiring an Aegean Sea empire and were constructing palaces on Crete—at Cnossus, Phaestus, Mallia, and Khania—that were bigger and more elaborate than any buildings outside the Near East. So confident were the Minoans in their naval power that they declined to encircle their palaces with defensive walls.

Wealth came from Cretan farming and fishing, from taxes paid by subject peoples in the Cyclades and other Aegean locales, and from long-distance trade. Minoan objects discovered by archaeologists outside Crete indicate two-way commerce with Egypt, Asia Minor, and the Levant as well as with western Italy (a region that offered raw tin and copper, the components of Bronze). But much Minoan trade, especially after 1600 BCE, was with the northwestern Aegean mainland now called Greece, where Greek-speaking tribes had been settling since about 2100 BCE.

The Minoans' importance for Greek history is that they supplied the model for the Greeks' Mycenaean Civilization, which arose on the mainland ca. 1600 BCE. The Mycenaean fortress palaces at Mycenae, Tiryns, and elsewhere were warlike imitations of Minoan palaces on Crete. Mycenaean skills in metalworking, Pottery-making, and other handicrafts were improved by copying Cretan models. The Mycenaean form of writing—a syllabary script that modern scholars call Linear B, invented soon before 1400 BCE—was copied from the Minoan system (a yet-undeciphered script called Linear A). Eventually the Mycenaeans were ready to challenge Minoan supremacy in the Aegean.

Daily scenes of the Minoans' life are preserved on some of their beautiful art objects, which include cut gems, worked Gold, terra-cotta figurines, vase paintings, and frescoes. Sensuous and modern-seeming in design, Minoan pictorial art favors sea animals and other subjects from nature. Religious scenes often show a goddess (or priestess) with a subordinate male figure or with wild beasts, such as lions, in tame postures. Evidence of this kind leads many scholars to conclude that Minoan religion was centered on a mother goddess or a group of goddesses overseeing nature and bounty. Aspects of Minoan worship apparently infiltrated Greek religion in the cult of certain goddesses, such as Artemis and Hera.

The Minoans ascribed religious or magical power to dancing and to the remarkable athletic performance now known as bull leaping. Minoan reverence for the bull is probably reflected in Greek Myths of later days, such as the interrelated tales of Minos and of Theseus and the Minotaur, or the tale of Heracles and the Cretan bull.

Minoan high society probably revolved around a priest-king or priest-queen whose capital city was Cnossus and whose royal emblem was the labrus, a double-headed ax. Scenes in art suggest a confident, vivacious life at court. Upper-class Women—portrayed as wearing flounced skirts and open-breasted tunics—apparently played prominent roles in court life (as opposed to the secluded existence of women in Greece in later centuries).

The material level enjoyed by the Minoan ruling class was probably unsurpassed anywhere before the late 19th century CE. The Cnossus palace, reaching three stories in parts, boasted clay-piped plumbing and a clever system of air wells to bring light and ventilation to interior rooms. Coinage had not yet been invented, but Minoan wealth was measured in luxury items and in farm surplus such as sheep, pigs, and olive oil (great quantities of which were stored at Cnossus).

The Minoan golden age on Crete, ca. 1900–1450 BCE, was a time of peace but was troubled by natural disasters. Archaeology at Cnossus shows that the palace was destroyed twice by earthquake, ca. 1730 and 1570 BCE. Circa 1480 BCE Cretan coastal regions suffered damage and depopulation, possibly caused by tidal waves from the volcanic explosion of Thera, 70 miles away.

The Cnossus palace, on high ground, survived, but new archaeological signs of distress in the mid-1400s BCE include proliferation of war equipment and the first appearance on Crete of the horse (presumably imported as a tool of war). Overseas, Minoan pottery from this time is absent from certain sites—a sign of disrupted trade routes. Presumably a foreign enemy or number of enemies, taking advantage of Cretan natural disaster, had begun to cut into the Minoan Empire. These enemies surely included groups of Mycenaean Greeks.

In about 1400 BCE or soon after, all the Cretan palaces were destroyed by fire, presumably in war. The most obvious explanation for this simultaneous destruction is a Mycenaean invasion of Crete. Intriguingly, archaeological evidence suggests that, prior to this invasion, Mycenaean Greeks had already taken over the Cnossus palace and that it was they who were destroyed in the palace's ruin. There may have been rival Mycenaean armies, battling each other for control of Crete.

Although the Mycenaean victors seem to have abandoned Crete soon after 1400 BCE, the Minoan culture was finished.







Mycenaean is the term used by modern scholars to describe the earliest flowering of mainland Greek culture, ca. 1600–1200 BCE. The Mycenaeans were Greeks whose warlike society rose and fell long before the era of classical Greece. The classical Greeks of ca. 400 BCE half remembered their Mycenaean forebears as a race of heroes, celebrated in Myth and Epic Poetry.

In world prehistory, the Mycenaeans comprised the last of several great civilizations to emerge in the eastern Mediterranean during the Bronze age. The Mycenaeans' urban building, military organization, and Trade seem to have been partly copied from a few preexisting, non-Greek, Bronze Age cultures—namely, the Middle and New Kingdoms of Egypt, the Hittite kingdom of Asia Minor, and especially, the Minoan Civilization of Crete.

The Mycenaeans lived before the era of history-writing, and thus most details of their story—such as their rulers' names or the reasons why their entire society collapsed in fiery ruin around 1200 BCE—remain unknown. Modern knowledge relies mostly on artifacts uncovered by Archaeology at a few sites, such as Mycenae, Tiryns, and Pylos (in the Peloponnese) and Thebes, Orchomenus, and Athens (in central Greece). The artifacts include Pottery, stone carvings, jewelry, and armor—most of it found in the tombs of rulers—as well as the remnants of Mycenaean stone palaces and defenses. Particularly, the sites of Mycenae and Tiryns still show huge fortifications built by Mycenaean inhabitants in the 1300s and 1200s BCE

In addition, a few sites have yielded primitive Mycenaean written records, inscribed on clay tablets that seem to date from about 1400 BCE or 1200 BCE, depending on the site. Written in a script that modern scholars call Linear B, the records have been deciphered mainly as lists of inventory—produce, livestock, military equipment—and accounts of goods-distribution, religious rites, and similar daily events. The tablets provide precious information on the social structure, economy, and Religion of the Mycenaeans, as well as on the early-stage Greek Language that they spoke.

Aside from archaeology, some insight into the Mycenaeans has been gained from a cautious reading of Homer's epic poems, the Illiad and Odyssey. Although written ca. 750 BCE, more than 400 years after the Mycenaeans' disappearance, these poems derive from oral tradition that stretches back to the Mycenaeans. It is believed that the poems faithfully record certain aspects of Mycenaean upper-class life—such as the warrior code and the network of local kings—amid distortions and overlays.

The first Greek-speaking tribes arrived in mainland Greece ca. 2100 BCE, from the Danube region. But 500 years went by before the emergence of the culture that we call Mycenaean: The remarkable social and technological changes of these intervening centuries can only be guessed at. No doubt the Greeks were deeply influenced by the non-Greek people they had conquered, and from them the Greeks probably learned skills such as stone masonry, shipbuilding, navigation, the cultivation of the olive and certain other crops, and the worship of certain female deities (with associated, new spiritual concepts). Similarly, the Greeks were inspired by the palace society of Minoan Crete.

The Mycenaean era began around 1600 BCE, as archaeology reveals. Several sites in Greece came under control of powerful rulers who were buried in elaborate tombs, unlike the simple graves of prior centuries. And within a few generations the tomb designs altered again, suggesting further dynastic changes and evolving organization. The six treasure-filled tombs at Mycenae known as Grave Circle A—built in the era 1550–1500 BCE and discovered intact by Schliemann—provide clear proof of the rulers' wealth and overseas contacts. For example, the tombs contain items of Gold that were shaped by Greek smiths, but the raw metal probably came from Asia Minor or Egypt. The warlike nature of these leaders is suggested by the many weapons left as offerings in the tombs.

In Greece's terrain, where mountain ranges separate the flatlands, the Mycenaeans apparently emerged as four or so major kingdoms, each based at a large farming plain. Two of these domains were in the Peloponnese: the plain of Argos (with its capital at Mycenae) and the plain of Messenia (capital at Pylos). One was in central Greece: the plain of Boeotia (with the cities Thebes and Orchomenus vying for supremacy). And one was in the north, on the great plain of Thessaly (capital at Iolcus). Lesser kingdoms probably existed as well. But the greatest domain was Mycenae, as indicated by its signs of superior wealth and by the testimony of Greek myth. In Homer's Illiad, the Mycenaean king Agamemnon is the supreme commander, to whom all other kings, such as Odysseus and Nestor, owe obedience.

One event of the Mycenaean era that modern scholars are sure of is that by around 1450 BCE Mycenaeans had taken over the Cretan palace at Cnossus—probably as the result of a Mycenaean naval invasion of Crete. Mysteriously, the Mycenaeans seem to have abandoned Crete soon thereafter, ca. 1400 BCE But the years of occupation there taught Mycenaean rulers certain organizational skills—such as improved architectural techniques and the use of Cretan Writing (adapted at this time, as the Linear B script)—that ushered in 200 years of the Mycenaean heyday in mainland Greece, ca. 1400–1200 BCE

It was now that the Mycenaeans built their own palaces, adapted from the Minoan palaces on Crete. Mycenae and Tiryns were turned into elaborate, high-walled castles; other palaces, such as at Pylos, arose without huge defenses. The social and economic structure of these centers is partly revealed by the Linear B tablets. The palace was the seat of the king (wanax in Mycenaean Greek); beyond the capital city, a network of outlying villages paid taxes, obeyed the king's laws, and relied on him for defense against other rulers. Tha palace was also a center of industry, where metalworkers, weavers, perfumers, and many other crafts people turned out finished goods, to enrich the king or to be distributed by him. Raw materials came from local taxes (sheep's wool, for example) and from overseas trade.

The premier metal for war and industry was Bronze (the use of Iron being introduced to the Greek world only later). The search for bronze's two components—copper and tin—led Mycenaean sea traders far and wide. Large remains of Mycenaean pottery in Cyprus show that parts of that copper-rich island were colonized by Mycenaeans. On the western Asia Minor coast, the site of Miletus probably became a Mycenaean trading colony, mainly for the acquisition of raw metals. Toward the other end of the Mediterranean, extant pottery suggests a Mycenaean presence in western Italy, where tin could be found.

The Mycenaean rulers commanded armies of heavy infantry. The soldiers' standardized equipment, including bronze breastplates and helmets, is recorded on Linear B tablets. Various evidence paints a picture of Mycenaean kings or princes leading Viking-like raids overseas, of which the biggest were the (presumed) invasions of Crete and Cyprus. On certain Linear B tablets, Slaves are mentioned by names that suggest they came from Asia Minor; probably they were captured in Mycenaean raids there. The Greek myth of Jason (1) and the Argonauts may distortedly commemorate such an overseas expedition. But the Mycenaean kingdoms fought also against each other: the legend of the Seven Against Thebes seems clearly based on actual warfare between Mycenae and Thebes.

By about 1250 BCE the Mycenaean world had come under pressure, due partly to upheavals in the Near East. The decline of the Hittite kingdom in Asia Minor probably brought a gradual closing of the Mycenaeans' eastern trade routes. Deprived of raw metals for industry and conquest, Mycenaean society began to whither. The Greek legend of the Trojan War may recall the Mycenaeans' attempt to keep trade routes open by removing the interfering, non-Greek, Hellespontine city Troy, ca. 1220 BCE

Finally, it seems, the Mycenaean kingdoms turned against each other and destroyed each other, in a desperate bid for survival. Archaeology clearly reveals the fiery ruin of Thebes, Mycenae, and other centers in the 50 years leading down to 1200 BCE At Pylos, the final days are dramatically indicated in emergency troop movements and religious sacrifices recorded on Linear B tablets.

Modern historians used to believe that this wholesale destruction was the work of outsiders—specifically, Dorian Greeks invading from the northwest. But more recent scholarship concludes that the Dorian invasion, ca. 1100 BCE, was merely opportunistic: The Mycenaeans had already exhausted themselves through internal war.

In the villages outside of the wrecked palaces, Mycenaean society survived on an improverished scale during the 1100s BCE Social change in these rural areas can be glimpsed in the development of a certain Greek word: The official title quasireu, which during the Mycenaean heyday had indicated a local sheriff (a relatively low position), gradually changed to basileus and took on a new meaning, "king." These men became the new local rulers within the disintegrated Mycenaean kingdoms.


David Sacks
Ancient Greece: Minoan civilization. Encyclopedia of the Ancient Greek World.
New York: Facts On File, Inc., 1995

---

quote:

---

The three main subclades of haplogroup E3b (E-M78, E-M81,
and E-M34) and the paragroup E-M35* are not homogeneously
distributed on the African continent:
* E-M78 has been observed in both northern and eastern Africa,
* E-M81 is restricted to northern Africa,
* E-M34 is common only in eastern Africa, and
* E-M35* is shared by eastern and southern Africans
(Cruciani et al. 2002).

. . . .

Several observations point to eastern Africa as the homeland
for haplogroup E3b—that is, it had
(1) the highest number of different E3b clades,
(2) a high frequency of this haplogroup and a high microsatellite diversity,
(3) the exclusive presence of the undifferentiated E3b* paragroup.

. . . .

Haplogroup E-M78 was observed over a wide area, including
* eastern (21.5%) and
* northern (18.5%) Africa,
* Near East (5.8%),
* Europe (7.2%), where it represents by far the most common E3b subhaplogroup.

. . . .

The network of the E-M78 chromosomes reveals a strong geographic
structuring, since each of the clusters a, b, and g reaches high
frequencies in only one of the regions analyzed. Cluster a ...
is very common in the Balkans (with frequencies of 20%–32%),
and its frequencies decline toward western Europe,
7.4% in Sicily,
7.0% in continental Italy,
4.3% in Corsica,
3.0% in France,
2.2% in Iberia and
1.1% in Sardinia,
and northeastern (2.6%) Europe.
In the Near East, this cluster is essentially limited to Turkey (3.4%).
The relatively high frequency of DYS413 24/23 haplogroup E chromosomes
in Greece suggests that cluster a of the E-M78 haplogroup is common in
the Aegean area, too.

. . . .

... later (and previously undetected) demographic population expansions involving
* clusters a in Europe (TMRCA 7.8 ky; 95% CI 6.3–9.2 ky),
* b in northwestern Africa (5.2 ky; 95% CI 3.2–7.5 ky), and
* g in eastern Africa (9.6 ky; 95% CI 7.2–12.9 ky) should be considered the main
contributors to the relatively high frequency of haplogroup E-M78 in the surveyed
area.

The present distributions of these clusters also suggest episodes of
range expansions. ...the clinal frequency distribution of E-M78a
within Europe testifies to important dispersal(s), most likely Neolithic
or post-Neolithic. These took place from the Balkans, where the highest
frequencies are observed, in all directions, as far as Iberia to the west
and, most likely, also to Turkey to the southeast. Thus, it appears that,
in Europe, the overall frequency pattern of the haplogroup E-M78, the
most frequent E3b haplogroup in this region, is mostly ... consistent with
either a smallscale leapfrog migration from Anatolia into southeastern
Europe at the beginning of the Neolithic or with an expansion of indigenous
people in southeastern Europe in response to the arrival of the Neolithic
cultural package. At the present level of phylogenetic resolution, it is
difficult to distinguish between these possibilities.

. . . .

In conclusion, we detected the signatures of several distinct processes
of migration and/or recurrent gene flow associated with the dispersal of
haplogroup E3b lineages. Early events involved the dispersal of E-M78d
chromosomes from eastern Africa into and out of Africa, as well as the
introduction of the E-M34 subclade into Africa from the Near East. Later
events involved shortrange migrations within Africa (E-M78g and E-V6) and
from northern Africa into Europe (E-M81 and E-M78b), as well as an important
range expansion from the Balkans to western and southern-central Europe
(E-M78alpha). This latter expansion was the main contributor to the present
distribution of E3b chromosomes in Europe.


Fulvio Cruciani, et al
Phylogeographic Analysis of Haplogroup E3b (E-M215) Y Chromosomes
Reveals Multiple Migratory Events Within and Out Of Africa
Am. J. Hum. Genet. 74:1014–1022, 2004

---

quote:

---

LVIII. These Phoenicians who came with Cadmus and of whom the Gephyraeans were a part brought with them to Hellas, among many other kinds of learning, the alphabet, which had been unknown before this, I think, to the Greeks. As time went on the sound and the form of the letters were changed. [2] At this time the Greeks who were settled around them were for the most part Ionians, and after being taught the letters by the Phoenicians, they used them with a few changes of form. In so doing, they gave to these characters the name of Phoenician, as was quite fair seeing that the Phoenicians had brought them into Greece. [3] The Ionians have also from ancient times called sheets of papyrus skins, since they formerly used the skins of sheep and goats due to the lack of papyrus. Even to this day there are many foreigners who write on such skins.

LIX. I have myself seen Cadmean writing in the temple of Ismenian Apollo at Thebes of Boeotia engraved on certain tripods and for the most part looking like Ionian letters. On one of the tripods there is this inscription:

Amphitryon dedicated me from the spoils of Teleboae.

This would date from about the time of Laius the son of Labdacus, grandson of Polydorus and great-grandson of Cadmus.

http://plato-dialogues.org/tools/loc/phoenici.htm

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ARROW99:
actually the minons are thought to have come from the northwest. Greek and proto Greek experts like Dr Chadwick have traced the roots of their language to the NW of Greece. very little , however, is known past that. That they came from SW asia is just Afrocentric nonsense.

---

quote:

---

The Greeks are european and there is no distinction between them and other Europeans, northern or otherwise

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ARROW99:
All of Chadwick's books on the subject are readily avilable. Reading history is a good thing. If you read the material you are less apt to come up with these wild ideas based on supposition.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ARROW99:
Classical scholars feel that the black genes that exist in Greece, Italy and elsewhere were introduced over thousands of years via slavery and other later contacts.

---

Appeal to Authority fallacy, and heresay.

For the following reasons....

1) Geneticists attribute African ancestry in Greeks to the Neolithic era, preceding classical Greece.

2) Classical scholars are not geneticists. Any opinion of classical scholars on genetics would be irrelevant.

3) Because classical scholars are not geneticists, they do not generally venture irrelevant opinion on genetics.

Conclusion: Since you have *no actual reference* to classical scholars views on genetics, making wild statements about their presumed opinions on genetics constitutes heresay. And even if you could produce and actual classicist citation, it would not help you to either refute or evade the facts of genetics.
 

---

Posted by ARROW99 (Member # 11614) on :
 
Genetics makes no links between any black Africans and historicc Greeks , of any kind.
I asked you to prove that over and over and all you could say is that the genes are there with NO specifics to prove your case.
Reading the Brace study you cannot even prove that neolithics carrying the gene were still even black, when the gene was introduced etc. this is a shamp put forth by people who come from a cultural background that is out of the loop in the creation of the modern world who wish to piggyback onto the acomplishments of others.
 

---

Posted by rasol (Member # 4592) on :
 

quote:

---

Genetics makes no links between any black Africans and historic Greeks.

---

quote:

---

I asked you to prove that over and over

---

quote:

---

and all you could say is that the genes are there with NO specifics to prove your case.

---

Specifically, and for the umpteenth time - 24% of Greek males are of East African ancestry via E3b1, which is of alpha cluster which coallesces in Europe with the Neolithic.

This specifically means that the African ancestry in the Greeks does not come from post classical Greece but rather pre-classical Greece.

It's not our fault that you are too stupid to understand the specifics, and too much of a dishonest bigot to acknolwedge them.
 

---

Posted by tk101 (Member # 12361) on :
 
perhaps if you state were you got those figures,Rasol, the ineption will fade
 

---

Posted by ARROW99 (Member # 11614) on :
 
The problem is that you lack the educational background to understand how to sequence your data.

1. 24% of Greek males ARE NOT of East African . Twenty four percent carry a gene, if indeed that is the case, but what connection it has to Africa in terms of time is unknown.

2. It could easily come from post classical greece if the blacks involved carried the gene.

You are making a HUGE assumption that no serious scholar would ever make. You are trying to sell a point with no supporting evidence, you do that with Egypt all the time. You cannot even connect the "gene" with eastern Africa in any kind of specific time period. You cannot prove that the gene arrive in Europe directly from eastern Africa or give any specific time frame for that occurance. You can show no point of contact, no archeological evidence, no linguistic evidence and certanily no cultural evidence.

In short you have no specifics at all and are silly enough to try to say that the existence of the gene is a specific piece of evidence.

The hard cold fact are that you are 'busting a gut' to try to take credit for the acomplishments of people you have no connection to at all.

genetics alone cannot answer historical questions. In fact, in this case they are serving to confuse those who lack the training to properly deal with them.
 

---

Posted by Calypso (Member # 8587) on :
 
What is the provenance of E-M78 according to the AMERICAN JOURNAL OF HUMAN GENETICS:

quote:

---

In conclusion, high-resolution Y-chromosome haplotyping and particular microsatellite associations reveal regional population differentiations, an East Africa homeland for E-M78, and recent gene-flow episodes consistent with the Neolithic in Europe. In particular, the spatial distributions of J-M172*, J-M267, E-M78, and E-M123 indicate expansions from the Middle East toward Europe

---

quote:

---

Southern Italy (Apulia and Calabria) contains sites of the early Neolithic period (Whitehouse 1968), but we know from history that these regions were subsequently colonized by the Greeks (Peloponnesians). To test the relative contribution of Greek colonists versus putative earlier Neolithic settlers, an admixture analysis (Bertorelle and Excoffier 1998) was performed, using E-M78 and J-M172(xM12) as signatures of Greek and Anatolian lineages, respectively.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by tk101:
perhaps if you state were you got those figures,Rasol, the ineption will fade

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ARROW99:
and this means what?

---

quote:

---

24% of Greek males ARE NOT of East African.

---

quote:

---

Twenty four percent carry a gene

---

Wrong. E3b isn't a gene. It is a unique event polymorphism that functions as a 'marker'.

The marker identifies the source of the Y chromosome.

The Y chromosome is inherited directly from your father, therefore Y chromsome is direct paternal bloodline, as shown...



24 percent of Greeks are of direct African paternal lineages, from a time period that must stem from Neolithic migrations.
 

---

Posted by tk101 (Member # 12361) on :
 
yes your right Rasol, Arrow needs some help with elementry reasoning...

Arrow, why do find this fact so disturbing. Does it bother you that the Greeks you love to idolize as pure europeans, were simply of mixed ethnicities? i wish to know what are your sources to disprove what they have said...Personal opinions mean nothing, you should step up to the plate before its too late....
 

---

Posted by Tee85 (Member # 10823) on :
 
Nope, I think he's bothered that East African men were obviously boinking "Greek" women.
 

---

Posted by What Box (Member # 10819) on :
 
^^Thank you rasol, for showing Professor el unintelligente via picture (don know if it will help but it will make it easier for him to comprehend) that paternal lineages come from papi.

I was a second away from psting when I decided to see how many more posts followed his brain dead motionings of "the gene does not mean a thing".

btw, rasol, supercar, you get my private messages to you?
 

---

Posted by rasol (Member # 4592) on :
 
E-M35 has been found in Africa, the Near East, and Europe -> where it is believed
to have arrived in Neolithic times (Hammer et al. 1998; Semino et al. 2000)

^ Professor Arrow -> please remember the above when you come back next week, asking the same question, and pretending it was not answered.

And when you do, I will cut and paste this very reply, just to demonstrate that you are such a sorry,predictable, self deluding, lying troll.

Now, have a nice day.
 

---

Posted by ARROW99 (Member # 11614) on :
 
I'm not pretending it was not answered. Refresh my memory, what dig was it that ypou said showed the interaction of large numbers of Africans and Greeks? Did I miss that post?

You have yet to prove tht the people you spoke of were even still Africans when they arrived (if they did) but since you can't tell me when all this took place I'll excuse that.

All you know how to do is call names and nobody cares about that.
 

---

Posted by rasol (Member # 4592) on :
 

quote:

---

Refresh my memory, what dig was it that you said showed the interaction of large numbers of Africans and Greeks? Did I miss that post?

---

Hmm, I guess you did.

The "DIGS" of Anthropologist Larry Angel

Journal of Human Evolution (1972) 1, 307 - 313 "...one can identify NEGROID traits of nose and prognathism appearing in natufian hunters (McCown, 1939) and in Anatolian and MACEDONIAN first farmers (Angel, 1972 - The People of Lerna: Analysis of a Prehistoric Aegean Population), probably FROM NUBIA.

Any other redundant questions?.....
 

---

Posted by ARROW99 (Member # 11614) on :
 
WHERE!!! What village? What site? Hell, we know they were there, thats not the point. PROBABLY from Nubia????
And you base all of these contentions on PROBABLY and yet claim to be some sort of scholar. In fact, you do not know squat.
You cannot answer a damn thing rasol. Wake up son and get with the program.
First of all you are going back 20,000 years and point out something that (1) we all agree on and (2) has no substative connection to the greeks of history. Many people in the Balkans qualify as well but they are not african and were not in ancient times.
 

---

Posted by rasol (Member # 4592) on :
 

quote:

---

WHERE!!! What village? What site?

---

Already answered.

The People of Lerna: Analysis of a Prehistoric Aegean Population

Review of Lerna, a preclassical site in the Argolid, results of excavations conducted by the American School of Classical Studies at Athens. Vol. I. The Fauna by Nils-Gustaf Gejvall.


Field lists of skeletal material, 1935-1958 (includes lists of material from Agora, Corinth, Mycenae, Argos, Lerna, Eleusis, Pylos....


About Lerna:

In classical Greece, Lerna was a region of springs and a former lake near the east coast of the Peloponnesus, south of Argos. It is most famous as the lair of the Lernaean Hydra, the chthonic many-headed water snake, a creature of great antiquity when Heracles killed it, as the second of his labors.


Any other redundant questions?

When you're thru making a fool of yourself, by being too stupid to even read the links provided, just let us know.

My part is simply to cut and paste the provided answers which you are too lazy and stupid to read.

I don't mind, if you don't mind.
 

---

Posted by rasol (Member # 4592) on :
 

quote:

---

Hell, we know they were there, thats not the point. PROBABLY from Nubia????

---

Exactly. According to Professor Larry Angel - it's a direct quote.

Heartbreaking, ain't it?

Angel concluded this 30 years ago, based on skeletal study.

This was before the genetics proved that he was ABSOLUTELY CORRECT, since that is exactly where neolithic in Greece originates from, based on genetics, archeology and physical anthropology...

1) Nubia [Khartoum Mesolithic]

2) Pre-Badarian Egypt

3) Natufian/Levantine

4) Macedonia/Anatolia.

Don't like it?

Feel free to refute the esteemed Anthropologist Larry Angel.

Maybe you can personally attack Larry Angel in sheer ignorant desperation by calling him and 'afrocentric', like you did with Bar Yosef.

What a silly little man you are!
 

---

Posted by ARROW99 (Member # 11614) on :
 
I read what you put up but its just more speculation and silliness. I can assure you that the american school of Classical studies in athens does not share your way out views.

You are on a road that will never take you anywhere rasol, keep driving.
 

---

Posted by Calypso (Member # 8587) on :
 
He'll just keep ignoring the evidence. Not so much ignoring as denying.
 

---

Posted by ARROW99 (Member # 11614) on :
 
there is no evidence, probably is not fact, its probably. Thats the MO you guys use all of the time

Probably, could be, might be, etc
Its the same kind of logic that the UFO people use. greeks are not Africans.
Africans have nothing to do with western civilization aside from cheap labor and resources.
Africa hsitorically has been a backwater from the beginning, how could they contribute to what anyone else was doing. Thats not a diss, just a fact.
Even today the place is a disease infected mud hole that survives on American and European loans and welfare.
 

---

Posted by Calypso (Member # 8587) on :
 

quote:

---

I can assure you that the american school of Classical studies in athens does not share your way out views.

---

quote:

---

The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, founded in 1881, is the principal resource in Greece for American scholars conducting advanced research on the language, literature, art, history, archaeology, and philosophy of Greece and the Greek world from pre-Hellenic times to the present.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ARROW99:
there is no evidence, probably is not fact, its probably. Thats the MO you guys use all of the time

Probably, could be, might be, etc
Its the same kind of logic that the UFO people use. greeks are not Africans.
Africans have nothing to do with western civilization aside from cheap labor and resources.
Africa hsitorically has been a backwater from the beginning, how could they contribute to what anyone else was doing. Thats not a diss, just a fact.
Even today the place is a disease infected mud hole that survives on American and European loans and welfare.

---

quote:

---

Go argue with the Classical Studies school in Athens, I've made my points, enough is enough. have a great holiday and new year.

---

... Signing off from an insane asylum somewhere in Texas.
 

---

Posted by MyRedCow (Member # 10893) on :
 
Don't forget Sickle Cell Anemia.

http://home.nc.rr.com/ambiient/site/sickle.htm

This is an interesting site:

http://www.white-history.com/refuting_rm/7.html

More:

http://white-history.com/greece_negroes.htm

Have a Happy Festival of Lights





 

---

Posted by Morpheus 27 (Member # 10819) on :
 
Lol, defeated.

quote:

---

there is no evidence, probably is not fact, its probably. Thats the MO you guys use all of the time

---

Can you read, he said probably from nubia as in, that's who resembled - which was comfirmed later anyway!
 

---

Posted by tk101 (Member # 12361) on :
 
I have to say, this was the most comical topic i have seen...i learned something new and had fun reading....job well done
 

---

Posted by rasol (Member # 4592) on :
 

quote:

---

there is no evidence, probably is not fact

---

One of the things that make toying with you fun "professor" is that you are a Eurocentrist pseudo scholar who is probably ignorant of almost every facet of scholarship that might be associated with and actual college degree ['probably' you are and american high school flunk out].

All scientific theory is rooted in probability.

When a scientist states that something is 'probably' true, it is a very strong statement.

It must be based on a *preponderence* of evidence - ie - probability - not a lack of evidence.

In science - a lack of evidence means that you do not even have, a proper theory.

But then, you don't understand even elementary principals of science do you?


Here I'll show you:

30 years ago, anthropologist Larry Angel said there was probably a migration from Africa to Greece in the Neolithic.

Genetics has confirmed that Larry Angel was probably right.

Now, you probably hate this fact.

But, you probably don't understand genetics.

You are probably also extremely lazy and will never bother to read Larry Angel's study - beyound what I 'spoon feed you'.

But then, you're probably and idiot who hasn't a prayer of refuting Larry Angel's work even if you read it.

Deep down, you probably know this, and that is one reason you don't even bother to read it.

It would be like Forest Gump reading Albert Einstein, probably a waste of his 'precious' time.

For all these reasons, all of your pleading posts in all probability accomplish nothing except to make you look like the empty headed racist fool you probably are.

But don't feel insulted, after all...I said 'probably'.

Like Professor Angel, I base probability on the case evidence.

And having said that, I rest my case.

Good day Professor.
 

---

Posted by rasol (Member # 4592) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by MyRedCow:
Don't forget Sickle Cell Anemia.

---

Historically there has been a great deal of dissembling about the precense of Sickle Cell in ancient Greece.

Sickle Cell is technically 'a phenotype'.

It means blood cells shaped like sickles.

It's like dark skin, or blue eyes, or thin noses.

Now sickle cells are subject to selection and in theory, they are polygenic in origin, undergoing positive selection in malarial regions and negative selection in regions without malaria.


Meaning different peoples might develope sickle cells independantly.

For a long while, there was a 'hope' in Eurocentric circles that it would be proven that Southern Europeans developed sickle cell independantly of African ancestry.

But genetics strikes again, and revealed a shocking truth.

There are 4 known lineages [genotypes] of HBs, the autosome [gene] that 'causes' sickle cells.

One lineage developed in West Africa and is called Benin Hbs.

Another developed in Central Africa and is called Bantu/Haplotype [perhaps developed among pre-bantu native central Africans, and spread recently during the Bantu migration].

A 3rd developed independantly among South Asians, and is called the "Arab/India" Haplotype. [possibly spread from Southern India back into Arabia]

Now southern Europeans....have exactly one lineage of sickle cell phenotype - Benin Hbs.

It is specifically due to the African ancestry they inherit.

It is very interesting that Europeans who have both SouthWest Asian and African ancestry - don't have Arab Haplotype, but do have Benin Haplotype.

Couple side notes:

Sickle cell phenotype has also been found in pre-dynastic Egyptian tombs.

The diminuative Black peoples of Melanesia do not have 'any' form of sickle cell. They have completely unique adaptations that give them resistence to Malaria - one example of how they are more distant genetically from Africans than say, Greeks.



 

---

Posted by rasol (Member # 4592) on :
 
Since Arrow is so weak, let's move on to the more interesting protests from Eurocentrists.

Such as - it's only a gene.

Actually the Y chromosome consists of hundreds of genes, and is inherited entirely from the daddy and only the daddy.

In other words - your mothers daddy or maternal grandfather cannot contribute to your Y chromosome.

Some Eurocentrists run away from the Y chromosome via autosomal or other studies.

The argument is essentially that uni-parental inheritance matters less than autosomal genes inherited at random from either or both parents.

Autosomes [such as Benin Hbs] are important too, but they do not give a 'superior' or more accurate view of human genotype than the sex chromosome for the reason just noted.

Let's take a look at the Y chromsome graph again...


In terms of all the genes on the Y chromsome all those blue daddy figures to the right on the graph below 'don't matter'. You can't inherit their Y chromosome.

So it should be clear...

To have E3b is to inherit hundreds of African genes, not just one, moreover, many of those genes are quite literally related to what it means to be a 'man'. That's what the Y chromosome is after all....and that's why it works the way it does.

In sexual selection - you don't choose your wife because of her father's manly genes, you choose her because of her 'female' genes, she chooses you because of your 'maleness', and thats exactly what your son's receive. This prevents sexual selection from 'backfiring', wherein sons would recieve mother's female traits and daughters receive father's male traits, defeating the whole purpose of sex chromsomes.
 

---

Posted by MyRedCow (Member # 10893) on :
 
Rasol and others,

Modern Greece is a small southern European country on the fringe of Europa. Most Europeans are not E Y chromosme people. Most Africans are.

I bet you Arrow99 is not European American from Texas, but Hispanic. You can see who wrote the Negroes in Greece pages I pointed to.

These people on the fringes of Europe and North Africa are of no consequence in the modern world. The future really belongs to the USA, Asia (China, India, etc), the Nordic EU, the USA and Africa is playing and ever increasing role. So ignore Arrow99 like-minded folks.

Modern Greece is almost Middle Eastern.
 

---

Posted by Supercar (Member # 6477) on :
 
Posted last year here [and on the Nile Valley forum], but here is another "Afrocentric" source on the Minoans, whom the Myceneans and the "classical" Greeks inherited much from; think of the Minoans as one of the folks through whom African and "SW Asian" culture flowed into Europe. Of course, this flow of culture continued to be the case well into the 'classical' Greek periods, but reading on...


"The story of European civilization really begins on the island of Crete with a civilization that probably thought of itself as Asian (in fact, Crete is closer to Asia than it is to Europe). Around 1700 BC, a highly sophisticated culture grew up around palace centers on Crete: the Minoans. What they thought, what stories they told, how they narrated their history, are all lost to us. All we have left are their palaces, their incredibly developed visual culture, and their records. Mountains of records. For the Minoans produced a singular civilization in antiquity: one oriented around trade and bureaucracy with little or no evidence of a military state. They built perhaps the single most efficient bureaucracy in antiquity. This unique culture, of course, lasted only a few centuries, and European civilization shifts to Europe itself with the foundation of the military city-states on the mainland of Greece. These were a war-like people oriented around a war-chief; while they seemed to have borrowed elements of Minoan civilization, their's was a culture of battle and conquest. We call them the Myceneans after the best-preserved of their cities, and their greatest accomplishment, it would seem, was the destruction of a large commercial center across the Aegean Sea in Asia Minor: Troy. Shortly after this defining event, their civilizations fell into a dark ages, in which Greeks stopped writing and, it seems, abandoned their cities. It was an inauspicious start for the Europeans: while the Mesopotamians and the Egyptians had enjoyed almost two thousand years of continuous civilization, in Europe the experiement began with the brilliance of the Minoan commercial states translated into the brief, war-like city-states of the Myceneans, only to slip back into the tribal groups that had characterized European civilization for almost all of its history. In spite of this, the basic character of European civilization is laid down in this early experiment; even though they slip into obscurity, the Greeks will permanently remember the Myceneans as the defining moment in their history. ..

They [Minoans] were a people of magnificent social organization, culture, art, and commerce. There is no evidence that they were a military people; they thrived instead, it seems, on their remarkable mercantile abilities. This lack of a military culture, however, may have spelled their final downfall. For the Minoans also exported their culture as well as goods, and a derivative culture grew up on the mainland of Greece, the Myceneans, who were a war-like people. Strangely enough, the direct inheritors of their traditions may have been the agents of their destruction.

But we know now that Greek civilization began at least a millenium before the Age of Athens and almost eight hundred years before Homer. It began off the mainland of Greece, in the Aegean Sea, in the palaces of the bureaucrat-kings of Minoa...

The archaeological evidence points to only a few reasonable certainties about Minoan history. Around 3000 BC, Crete was settled by a people who probably came from Asia Minor, who, by 2000 BC was already living in cities, trading with other nations in the Mediterranean, and employing a hieroglyphic system of writing, probably derived from Egyptian hieroglyphics. This hieroglyphic writing would eventually evolve into a linear script. They built magnificent palace centers at Knossos, Phaistos, and Kato Zakros; these palaces seem to have dominated Cretan society. We have no idea what language they spoke, but they certainly spoke a non-Hellenic language (that is, a language not closely related to Greek) and probably spoke a non-Indo-European language. "

Source: http://www.wsu.edu:8080/~dee/MINOA/MINOANS.HTM
 

---

Posted by adrianne (Member # 10761) on :
 
is it true they were influcened by libyan and egyptians? the cretans i saw on one of the tombs in egypt . they looked like they came from africa.
 

---

Posted by Supercar (Member # 6477) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by adrianne:

is it true they were influcened by libyan and egyptians? the cretans i saw on one of the tombs in egypt . they looked like they came from africa.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by alTakruri:
Though the Minoans were an Aegean "white" people their art shows
that some of them retained features attributable to the harbingers
of E3b-M78 to Anatolia, the Balkans, and southern Europe, and/or
copper and bronze age migrants from northern Africa.

An Egyptian view of a Minoan phenotype as seen in these tax paying diplomats
at the left, is not actually Minoan art. However the artist painting for Senmut
had been exposed to real Minoan art styles as evinced by the fresco from Knossos
on the right



which is a segment from the more complete scene below.



The Africans and Europeans of Crete were of one culture and people. The
founding culture was North African but the population hailed from other
Aegean islands, the Peloponnese mainland, and the Levant as well. Africans
weren't the majority. The majority population was the unique comingling
that produced the disctinct Minoans as drawn by themselves above right.

Despite scholarly recognition of that fact no one labels Minoans "mixed."
As much as Eurocentrists cry that African doesn't mean black why then
do they insist that European means white? Quite oxymoronic, no?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by alTakruri:
The Sir Arthur Evans labelled "Captain of the Blacks" fresco. In this repro
they've deliberately excluded the head of the first black runner but you
can see it on p.137 if you have The Image of the Black in Western Art Vol. 1

Will keep looking for it on the 'net.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by alTakruri:
Evidence of the manipulation but still not what's in the book.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
. . . I find the particular info here as cited from certain Western/European scholars highly interesting.

http://www.cwo.com/~lucumi/crete.html

British archaeologist Arthur Evans (1851-1941), who conducted excavations on the island, was convinced of African migrations to ancient Crete. He pointed out that:

"The multiplicity of these connections with the old indigenous race of the opposite African coast, and which we undoubtedly have to deal with in the pre dynastic population of the Nile Valley, can in fact be hardly explained on any other hypothesis than that of an actual settlement in Southern Crete."

The research team of C.H. and H.B. Hawes, the latter of whom, like Evans, conducted important archaeological excavations in Crete, [...] noted that: "Anthropologists are inclined to the view that the Neolithic people of Crete were immigrants, and probably came from North Africa."

Historian H.R. Hall, also Oxford trained, shared Evans' position on the early population of Minoan Crete:

"While the majority of the original Neolithic inhabitants of Crete probably came from Anatolia, another element may well have come in oared boats from the opposite African coast, bringing with them to the southern plain of Messara the seeds of civilization that, transplanted to the different conditions of Crete, developed into the great Minoan culture, a younger more brilliant, and less long-lived sister of that of Egypt."

Whether the Minoan culture was more brilliant than that of Egypt is highly questionable at best, but on the other points Hall seems to just about to hit the mark. Evans, again, indeed considered Egypt and Libya as the springboards of Minoan civilization; so much so that he structured his own Minoan chronology on that of dynastic Egypt. He was particularly struck by the similarities in the contents of the of the tombs of the ancient Minoans and Egyptians:

"So numerous, in fact, are the points, of comparison presented by the contents of these early interments with those of pre dynastic Egypt that, far-fetched as the conclusion might appear at first sight, I was already some years since constrained to put forth the suggestion that about the time of the conquest of the lower Nile Valley by the first historic dynasty some part of the older population had actually settled in this southern foreland of Crete."

Gordon Childe also commented on the relations between Crete and pre dynastic Egypt:

"At least on the Mesara, the great plain of southern Crete facing Africa, Minoan Crete's indebtedness to the Nile is disclosed in the most intimate aspects of its culture. Not only do the forms of early Minoan stone vases, the precision of the lapidaries' technique and the aesthetic selection of variegated stones as his materials carry on the the pre dynastic tradition, Nilotic religious customs such as the use of the sistrum, the wearing of amulets in the forms of legs, mummies and monkeys, and statuettes plainly derived from Gerzean `block figures,' and personal habits revealed by depilatory tweezers of the Egyptian shape and stone unguent palettes from the early tombs and, later, details of costumes such as the penis-sheath and loin-cloth betoken something deeper than the external relations of commerce."

Cretan/Egyptian contacts pick up again in the sixteenth and fifteenth centuries B.C. During the reigns of Egyptian monarchs Makare Hatshepsut and Thutmose III (1504-1447 B.C.) the people of Crete, whom the Egyptians called Keftiu, were graphically portrayed as tribute bearers on the walls of the tombs of the Egyptian nobility.

SOURCES: [i]
African Presence In Early Europe, Edited by Ivan Van Sertima
Man, God And Civilization, by John G. Jackson

---

 

---

Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
 


Is this Theran fresco evidence of pre-1600 BCE relations between Aegean HWA NBW and Sirtean/Cyrenaican Meshwesh or Libu/Rebu?


I take it the nappy haired men at the top are Libyan but
those at the bottom are Mykenaean overlords in Minoa
judging by their shields and weaponry.

The woman with jug atop head would seem to be African
per that cultural skill.
 

---

Posted by Marc Washington (Member # 10979) on :
 
Bro. al Takruri, I spent the last some days working on a web page to contribute to this discussion. Just finised it and would like to add to it. The pictures you have are really dynamite. I'll download them if you don't mind. I had some comments following the web page (that can be ignored where they veer from the central thrust of the thread - just put them in as they overlapped the theme.


http://www.BeforeBC.de/02-16-700-00-03.htm
http://members.chello.hu/washington.marc/02-16-700-00-03.htm

Anatolia in Turkey most say is home of the world’s oldest civilization clocking in near 9000 BC with settlements home to tens of thousands. But (see note below) the great archeologist, James Mellaart, states these people were African! Zoom forward to 2100 BC: Anaolia becomes the homeland of IndoEuropean speakers. But, they didn’t originate there. Their origination was in the Russian Steppes. Furthermore, the original Africans, well, disappeared. I say what happened is that that extremely ancient African civilization spoke this so-called Indo-European and the whites coming from the Steppes absorbed the language. Is this empty speculation? I’d say not as the Tocharians (I have a few pictures) left African figurine of themselves and are Indo-European speakers. So, I propose that this was a huge African community until the Steppe people came. What, though, does this have to do with a web paqe on Minoans and the first Greeks being African? Because the Anatolians practiced bull-jumping (pic 2b), and, hold on to your hats, the Minoans left frecoes in Egypt (Avaris or Tell el Dab’a) and they are Africans bull-jumping (Pic 2a). I have a reference, am not speaking in thin air. Anyone can check out the reference themself, see proof for themself. And, a very intriguing, extremely ancient connection is the following: the Ghananians used the dot-encircled symbol of the sun on both cheeks (13b). But (get ready) you see the identical practice on a seated marble figure (pic 13a) from the Greek island of Euboea of (ready?) 2800 BC!!!!!!


Marc Washington


NOTE:

ANATOLIANS WERE AFRICAN: “The physical types appear to be depicted which may reflect the two dolichocephalic races recognized by the late Professor M. Senyurek in the skeletons from Hacilar; the robust Eurafrican race and the more gracile Proto-Mediterranean race. These naturalistic statues serve as a link between those of Catal Huyuk and the later, larger and more conventional group from Hacilar V-II.”

James Mellaart, Earliest civilizations of the Near East, (Thames and Hudson, London, 1965), p. 8.
 

---

Posted by Supercar (Member # 6477) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marc Washington:

...Their origination was in the Russian Steppes. Furthermore, the original Africans, well, disappeared. I say what happened is that that extremely ancient African civilization spoke this so-called Indo-European and the whites coming from the Steppes absorbed the language. Is this empty speculation?...

---

Yeap, the speculation is an empty one, because the Greek forebearers, i.e. Neolithic immigrants in ancient Greece mainland and the Minoans of Crete, are deemed not Indo-European speakers.
 

---

Posted by rasol (Member # 4592) on :
 
Marc, Supercar is correct.
You know, I actually considered for a time that you were really a Eurocentist mocking African scholarship by 'reducing to absurdity.'

I don't believe this any more, but I do believe you will continue to make outre' claims.

And Clyde Winters, out of ideological cynicism will continue to 'shine you on', because he views you as ridiculous, but 'on his side', which is more important to him than truth, and so essentially... a useful pawn.
 

---

Posted by rasol (Member # 4592) on :
 

Population 10 is Greece. Here we have a visual representation of European [red and dark green], Asian [lite green] and African [blue] paternal ancestry in modern Greeks. Greeks are less than 50% paternal European.
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
Good work guys, citing the significant yet desperately denied by folks like Hore. LOL @ Hore's desperate reactions to deny and repeating questions to the material!

Some brief and basic info about Greece's history:

• 1. The cultures of Greece before the advent of Indo-European speakers are known collectively as Aegean Civilizations, and covers areas from mainland/peninsular Greece to the adjacent islands. Agean civilization covers the time period from its development in the Neolithic to its decline in the Bronze Age with Indo-European Hellas (Greeks) making their first appearance in the Bronze Age. Agean civilization is usually divided into 3 parts-- Minoan, corresponding to Crete; Cycladic corresponding to the Cycladic islands; and Helladic, corresponding to mainland Greece. There are a few scholars who include a 4th division-- Cypriot, which corresponds to Cyprus although it was in much latter times that Cyprus was incorporated by the Hellas. It was Aegean civilization that created the roots for later Greek civilization with everything from urbanization, writing (Linear A), to science, architecture etc.

• The period after Aegean Civilization was known as the "Dark Age" a period characterized by cultural decline and absense of written records. There were 3 main waves of Indo-European immigration to Greece. The first were the Achaeans or Akhaias whose presence was made in the middle part of the Bronze Age. Many writings from the later Classical period described these first Greeks as "men tall of stature with fair skin, fair hair, and gray eyes". The 2nd wave of Hellas were the Ionians, and after them came the Dorians. It is believed by many scholars that the Dorian "invasion" at the very end of the Bronze Age is what caused the Dark Age.

• After the "Dark Age" came the period of Greek history we are all too familiar with-- the Classical Period. It is this period this "flowering" (or rather renaissance) of Greek culture that most scholars on Greek history tend to focus on. And it seems many would have us think that Greek civilization formed in this period first, and ignore the Bronze Age only as that 'legendary age' of myth, heroes, and gods.
  
  Well we know better!

Because the very roots of Greek civilization lie in the Aegean cultures of the Bronze Age and its begginings in the Neolithic, it is in those time periods we must focus on.

Again, Hore cited a Classicist- Cahill who acknowledged that the Indo-European Hellas came upon "indigenous farming people", yet he conveniently forgot to mention it was these people who built the first cities, wrote the first literature, and made the first science of the area.

Let's get a closer examination of these people shall we.

Takruri has already taken the first step in pointing out the origins of the Minoan. Most sources recognized that Minoan culture is the result of Asiatic migrants mainly from Anatolia who mixed peoples already settled there, but few will tell you that these first settled peoples were from Africa.

Early Minoan skull with prognathism

 

---

Posted by Obelisk_18 (Member # 11966) on :
 
Djehuti, didn't you say that early Minoan skulls looked like the skull of pharaohs like Seti I? You're saying Seti I was prognathous?
 

---

Posted by Supercar (Member # 6477) on :
 
Indeed, the skull depicted above does have that low sloping forehead, indicative of "Mesolithic" Nubian specimens:



The projecting zygomatic arches of Seti I suggest remnants of the old Natufian/Tasian types of the Holocene period. - Images and data referenced from Jim Harris' X-ray Atlas of the Royal Mummies.
 

---

Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
 

__Early Minoan skull _________ Skull of Seti I _______
 

---

Posted by Clyde Winters (Member # 10129) on :
 
Rasol

quote:

---

And Clyde Winters, out of ideological cynicism will continue to 'shine you on', because he views you as ridiculous, but 'on his side', which is more important to him than truth, and so essentially... a useful pawn.

---

quote:

---

The archaeological evidence points to only a few reasonable certainties about Minoan history. Around 3000 BC, Crete was settled by a people who probably came from Asia Minor, who, by 2000 BC was already living in cities, trading with other nations in the Mediterranean, and employing a hieroglyphic system of writing, probably derived from Egyptian hieroglyphics. This hieroglyphic writing would eventually evolve into a linear script. They built magnificent palace centers at Knossos, Phaistos, and Kato Zakros; these palaces seem to have dominated Cretan society. We have no idea what language they spoke, but they certainly spoke a non-Hellenic language (that is, a language not closely related to Greek) and probably spoke a non-Indo-European language. "

Source: http://www.wsu.edu:8080/~dee/MINOA/MINOANS.HTM

---

You are right they did speak a none Indo-European language.

There is evidence for the Minoan language. The language they spoke was related to the Mande group of languages. These Mande speakers formerly occupied a large part of the Fezzan ( in modern Libya)before they migrated to the Niger river valley. The Mande languages are members of the Niger-Congo Superfamily of languages.

Every since Arthur Evans discovered the Hieroglyphic and Linear A writing of Crete there has been a search for the authors of this writing.

Some Grecian traditions indicate that Libyans (called Garamante) formerly lived on Crete. This suggest that some of the Eteocretans may have spoken one of the ancient languages of Libya.


A major group from Libya that settled Crete were the Garamante. Robert Graves in (Vol.1, pp.33-35) maintains that the Garamante who originally lived in the Fezzan fused with the inhabitants of the Upper Niger region of West Africa.

This theory is interesting because the chariot routes from the Fezzan terminated at the Niger river. In addition, the Cretan term for king "Minos", agrees with the MandeManding word for ruler "Mansa". Both these terms share consonantal agreement : M N S.

The name Garamante, illustrates affinity to Mande morphology and grammar. The Mande language is a member of the Niger-Congo group of languages. The name for the Manding tribe called "Mande", means Ma 'mother, and nde 'children', can be interpreted as "Children of Ma", or "Mothers children " (descent among this group is matrilineal) .

The word Garamante,can be broken down into Malinke-Bambara into the following monosyllabic words Ga 'hearth', arid, hot'; Mante/Mande , the name of the Mande speaking tribes. This means that the term: Garamante, can be interpreted as "Mande of the Arid lands" or "Arid lands of the children of Ma". This last term is quite interesting because by the time the Greeks and Romans learned about the Garamante, the Fezzan was becoming increasingly arid.



Keftiu


The Egyptians called the Cretans Keftiu. There is agreement between the Keftiu names recorded by Egyptian scribes (T.E. Peet, "The Egyptian writing board BM5647 bearing Keftiu names". In , (ed.) by S Casson (Oxford, 1927, 90-99)), and Manding names.



Keftiu
The root kef-, in Keftiu, probably is Ke'be, the name of a Manding clan , plus the locative suffix {i-} used to give the affirmative sense, plus the plural suffix for names {u-}, and the {-te} suffixial element used to denote place names, nationalities and to form words.

On the Egyptian writing board there are eight Keftiu names. These names agree with Manding names:

Keftiu....... Manding

sh h.r........ Sye

Nsy ..........Nsye

'ksh .........Nkyi

Pnrt Pe,..... Beni (name for twins)

'dm ..........Demba

Rs............. Rsa

This analogy between Keftiu and Manding names is startling.

In conclusion, the evidence of similarity between Keftiu names and names from the Manding languages appear to support Graves view that the Eteocretans, who early settled Crete may have spoken a language similar to the Mande people who live near the Niger. Conseqently, there is every possibility that the Linear A script used by the Keftiu, which is analogous to the Libyco Berber writing used by the Proto-Mande .

See:

C. A. Winters, "The influence of the Mande scripts on ancient America", de l'IFAN>, t59, serB, no.1, (1977) pp.941-967.

C.A. Winters, "The ancient manding Script", In , (ed.) by Ivan van Sertima, ( London: Rutgers University Press Transaction Press , 1981) pp.208-214), may be written in an aspect of the Manding (Malinke/Bambara) language.


Black Greeks


Clyde Winters
 

---

Posted by Obelisk_18 (Member # 11966) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by alTakruri:

__Early Minoan skull _________ Skull of Seti I _______

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:

Population 10 is Greece. Here we have a visual representation of European [red and dark green], Asian [lite green] and African [blue] paternal ancestry in modern Greeks. Greeks are less than 50% paternal European.

---

If this is modern then why is America majority Q?? I read that that migrartion happened 15,000 years ago.

I don't understand.
 

---

Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
 

__Early Minoan skull ____ Mesolithic Wadi Halfa skull _
 

---

Posted by Supercar (Member # 6477) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Obelisk_18:

quote:

---

Originally posted by alTakruri:

__Early Minoan skull _________ Skull of Seti I _______

---

That skull isn't Seti I's dude, that's a mesolithic nubian.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tee85:
If this is modern then why is America majority Q??

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by alTakruri:
Thanks for the precision, couldn't really tell
by its post just exactly whose skull it was.

---

 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
Okay getting back to the topic,...

Here is Seti I




But Super is correct that Seti's skull displays features associated with Tasians and Natufians.

As for Marc Washington being a "scholar", well I'll just leave that alone.

Any comments about time line of Greek civilization below and its modern historiography?

• 1. The cultures of Greece before the advent of Indo-European speakers are known collectively as Aegean Civilizations, and covers areas from mainland/peninsular Greece to the adjacent islands. Agean civilization covers the time period from its development in the Neolithic to its decline in the Bronze Age with Indo-European Hellas (Greeks) making their first appearance in the Bronze Age. Agean civilization is usually divided into 3 parts-- Minoan, corresponding to Crete; Cycladic corresponding to the Cycladic islands; and Helladic, corresponding to mainland Greece. There are a few scholars who include a 4th division-- Cypriot, which corresponds to Cyprus although it was in much latter times that Cyprus was incorporated by the Hellas. It was Aegean civilization that created the roots for later Greek civilization with everything from urbanization, writing (Linear A), to science, architecture etc.

• The period after Aegean Civilization was known as the "Dark Age" a period characterized by cultural decline and absense of written records. There were 3 main waves of Indo-European immigration to Greece. The first were the Achaeans or Akhaias whose presence was made in the middle part of the Bronze Age. Many writings from the later Classical period described these first Greeks as "men tall of stature with fair skin, fair hair, and gray eyes". The 2nd wave of Hellas were the Ionians, and after them came the Dorians. It is believed by many scholars that the Dorian "invasion" at the very end of the Bronze Age is what caused the Dark Age.

• After the "Dark Age" came the period of Greek history we are all too familiar with-- the Classical Period. It is this period this "flowering" (or rather renaissance) of Greek culture that most scholars on Greek history tend to focus on. And it seems many would have us think that Greek civilization formed in this period first, and ignore the Bronze Age only as that 'legendary age' of myth, heroes, and gods.

quote:

---

alTakruri:

Precision: "its" refers to the unlabeled jpeg not the person who posted it.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Obelisk_18:

What features does Seti I share with Natufians and Tasians (who the hell are those) and what would be a good reconstruction of the man's crania look like?

---

You haven't missed this exemplary piece when it was posted the first time around in this very thread, have you?...

The projecting zygomatic arches of Seti I suggest remnants of the old Natufian/Tasian types of the Holocene period. - Images and data referenced from Jim Harris' X-ray Atlas of the Royal Mummies.

...And surely by now, with so many discussions on Natufians [and Tasians], you cannot still be unclear about these groups?
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
Tasians were an early cultural group of predynastic Egyptian people even older than the Badarians. Whereas Natufians of course were the early Neolithic culture of the Levant. The Natufians were said to closely resemble Tasians in a number of features which gives proof of African expansions into the Levant corresponding with the spread of Neolithic culture.
 

---

Posted by X-Ras (Member # 10328) on :
 
"At Voloshki a total of nine crania (six male and three female) have been found. Six of them are "Protomediterranean" and the other three (male) present also some Negroid features which remind of Mesolithic skulls from the M. East (Debetz, 1955), also similar to some of those from the coasts of N. Africa (Ferembach, 1962). However, they are quite different to the typically Negroid skulls found p.ex. in Kenya (Leaky, 1935) and in Sudan (Greene & Armelagos, 1972)."

http://www.aee.gr/hellenic/3aee/anthropos/original_contibut/youra_engl.html

This is from a Greek anthropologist, stating that sub-saharan affinities were found in Neolithic Greek crania. Where is ARROW99.
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
^ Why worry about Hore, I mean "arrow". If he does respond, all he'll do is try to distort or misinterpret the findings above.

Let's take a quick review of the study to show you what I mean when I say how some folks could distort it.

Notice how six of the crania were described as "Proto-Mediterranean". Little do most people know, that term is used to describe the remains of early elongated Africans found in North Africa as well as East Africa. We should all know by now the semantics of "Mediterranean". Also, note how they say the remaining 3 skulls are "negroid" which resemble Mesolithic skulls of the Middle East. The only Mesolithic skulls of the Middle East I know of that possess such "negroid" features is of course the Natufians of the Mesolithic Levant, which the author also cites affinities to other early North African crania. But then notice how the author then points out that even the "negroid" ones differ from the "typically Negroid" crania found by Leaky in Kenya and the Sudan. Again, we run into the Eurocentric semantics of not only "negroid" but how "negroid" is "typically negroid"! This is quite laughable if one remembers the study from Rightmire which also describes elongated ("Mediterranean") type crania in Kenya also!
 

---

Posted by X-Ras (Member # 10328) on :
 
LOL, I acknowledge that the author is playing games with how he defines "Negroid" but lets not forget that "Negroid" is a pseudo-taxon. What's undeniable is that crania with affinities to sub-Saharan Africans were found in Neolithic Greece. I remember Dienekes trying to dance around these very same crania and tried to call Poulianos an Afrocentrist, lol.
 

---

Posted by Obelisk_18 (Member # 11966) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by X-Ras:
LOL, I acknowledge that the author is playing games with how he defines "Negroid" but lets not forget that "Negroid" is a pseudo-taxon. What's undeniable is that crania with affinities to sub-Saharan Africans were found in Neolithic Greece. I remember Dienekes trying to dance around these very same crania and tried to call Poulianos an Afrocentrist, lol.

---

Ah, Dienekes, I remember that punk too. I never openly confronted him like you did but it's laughable how he denies the facts, not only in the african influences both in neolithic and classical greece, but of the uh,,, origins of ancient egypt, the fact that race doesn't exist, blacks have the highest natural diversity, and that ethiopians and somalis aren't that ****ing mixed, arrrrgh
 

---

Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
 
Anybody got a good zoom of this dagger? The second guy from the left
is very likely a "greater KM.t.y". His hair, profile, and lips, contrast with
the other men of the hunt. So does his choice of weaponry, the bow.
Is he also wearing the patented Ta Seti leather briefs?




 

---

Posted by Yonis (Member # 7684) on :
 
What about the lion?
If in Greece theirs no proof of lions during the time at home, then this hunt on the pic must have been in nowhere than the african continent which would mean whatever early connection.
 

---

Posted by rasol (Member # 4592) on :
 
Lion was also to the Middle East, until the Romans hunted them to extinction.

There are a few Lions still in India.
 

---

Posted by ARROW99 (Member # 11614) on :
 
Most of us accept the idea that man spread out of Africa to thge rest of the world. The problem is that the argument rasol and others want to make here is beside the point. What they are trying to do is imply that Africa is the germ of the modern world. Thats the MOTIVE for their argument and where they end up at the end of the day. They skip over tens of thousands of years like it was a generation. The hard xold reality is that nothing positive ever came out of Africa. If African civilization as we know it made any meaningful contribution to the world how did it miss totally Africa generally?
Fact is classical Greeks are not black africans, they are europeans. Every single Greek scholar bar none states that their culture was home grown.
To attach any sort of African tag on an area of Greece is nutty stuff that will never be accepted by serious scholars. It would be tragic if it were not so comical. We have people on this board who are critical of Dr Hawass because he does not support their narrow, racist, bigoted views even though he has a PHD and they lack even a BA.
Really, its the argument of losers. People who feel that they are not a part of the modern world and see themselves as victims. "Nothing is my fault, its the fault of the evil, colonialist Europeans." Since I have no place in the system I will simply attack it. The problem is the system doess not care. If the eurocentrists are really as bad as they are presented here why should they listen now?
 

---

Posted by X-Ras (Member # 10328) on :
 
Why are you denying the skeletal evidence of black Africans in Neolithic Greece ARROW99? I mean you asked for it, now you have it, the evidence is overwhelming.
 

---

Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by ARROW99:
Most of us accept the idea that man spread out of Africa to thge rest of the world. The problem is that the argument rasol and others want to make here is beside the point. What they are trying to do is imply that Africa is the germ of the modern world. Thats the MOTIVE for their argument and where they end up at the end of the day. They skip over tens of thousands of years like it was a generation. The hard xold reality is that nothing positive ever came out of Africa. If African civilization as we know it made any meaningful contribution to the world how did it miss totally Africa generally?
Fact is classical Greeks are not black africans, they are europeans. Every single Greek scholar bar none states that their culture was home grown.
To attach any sort of African tag on an area of Greece is nutty stuff that will never be accepted by serious scholars. It would be tragic if it were not so comical. We have people on this board who are critical of Dr Hawass because he does not support their narrow, racist, bigoted views even though he has a PHD and they lack even a BA.
Really, its the argument of losers. People who feel that they are not a part of the modern world and see themselves as victims. "Nothing is my fault, its the fault of the evil, colonialist Europeans." Since I have no place in the system I will simply attack it. The problem is the system doess not care. If the eurocentrists are really as bad as they are presented here why should they listen now?

---

The fact is you are talking nonsense. Nobody said that Greeks were black Africans. What we said was that both the cultures of Crete and Hellenic Greece were influenced by black Africans and had a segment of the population descended from black African migrants. Hellenic Greece in particular was heavily influenced by Egypt in terms of Architecture, religion and other ways. YOU on the other hand keep clinging to this notion of racial purity for ancient Greeks as if it is an absolute truth that is above all others. No group is PURE, especially not Europeans. What is true is that Europeans have created a MYTH of racial purity and superiority that they have FORCED down the throats of everyone else during the last 2000 years. Black Africans and blacks elsewhere on the planet have made signifigant contributions to human history, since MOST human history took place OUTSIDE of Europe and among the aboriginal populations of Africa and Asia, many of whom WERE black. It is Europe and their desire to reign supreme as the UNIVERSAL symbol of human intelligence who has tried to ERASE all traces of BLACKS in world history, in order to maintain a myth of RACIAL superiority among whites. Then when someone SPEAKS UP and tells the truth, some want to act shocked as if they are IGNORANT of the racist history of Europe and European peoples. Please..... get a life and stop trying to live as a child in a grown man's world. Grown men accept the reality that ALL humans are imperfect and NO ONE has the right to claim that they are GOD'S gift to mankind. Only CHILDREN scream and holler and try and keep all the attention and praise for being something THEY ARE NOT.
 

---

Posted by Willing Thinker (Member # 10819) on :
 
Arrow99,
What about what the Ancient Greeks said? - Are you aware of how long Pythagoras was in Egypt (for SCHOLARLY reasons) before he later 'invented' the 'Pythagorean theorem'. Every ancient Greek scholar is linked to africa or india. Daidolos is rumored to be A Egyptian or mixed (Like ancient Greece period).

quote:

---

If African civilization as we know it made any meaningful contribution

---

quote:

---

If African civilization as we know it made any meaningful contribution to the world how did it miss totally Africa generally?

---

[b]IT didn't.

There was Math and Science in Africa. Do you know where ammonium comes from?

How do you think they built the pyramids, Greeks?

Oh yeah, I forgot:

quote:

---

It was the egyptians NOT africans

---

And, just wondering, would you like to know what Greeks thought of europeans, with respect to themselves and africans. Or with respect to themselves racially? (Doubt it)
 

---

Posted by Myra Wysinger (Member # 10126) on :
 







Greeks are genetically related to sub-Saharans

Summary:

Much to our surprise, the reason why Greeks did not show a close relatedness with all the other Mediterraneans analyzed was their genetic relationship with sub-Saharan ethnic groups now residing in Ethiopia, Sudan and West Africa (Burkina-Fasso). Although some Greek DRB1 alleles are not completely specific of the Greek/sub-Saharan sharing, the list of alleles is self-explanatory. The time period when these relationships might have occurred was ancient but uncertain and might be related to the displacement of Egyptian-Ethiopian people living in pharaonic Egypt. (Source: HLA genes in Macedonians and the sub-Saharan origin of the Greeks)

.
 

---

Posted by rasol (Member # 4592) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by ARROW99: Most of us accept the idea that man spread out of Africa to thge rest of the world. The problem is that the argument rasol and others want to make here is beside the point.

---

quote:

---

What they are trying to do is imply that Africa is the germ of the modern world.

---

quote:

---

Thats the MOTIVE for their argument

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by alTakruri:
Anybody got a good zoom of this dagger? The second guy from the left
is very likely a "greater KM.t.y". His hair, profile, and lips, contrast with
the other men of the hunt. So does his choice of weaponry, the bow.
Is he also wearing the patented Ta Seti leather briefs?

---

 

---

Posted by salah (Member # 11739) on :
 
what is funny is that greeks have more african genes than most horners have non african genes but people always try to say horners are mixed.
 

---

Posted by X-Ras (Member # 10328) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by salah:
what is funny is that greeks have more african genes than most horners have non african genes but people always try to say horners are mixed.

---

quote:

---

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by tutemkasret:
Genetics makes no links between any black Africans and historicc Greeks , of any kind.
I asked you to prove that over and over and all you could say is that the genes are there with NO specifics to prove your case.
Reading the Brace study you cannot even prove that neolithics carrying the gene were still even black, when the gene was introduced etc. this is a shamp put forth by people who come from a cultural background that is out of the loop in the creation of the modern world who wish to piggyback onto the acomplishments of others.

quote:

---

---

I don't really know Arrow's agenda, but he does have a point here. Most of the posters on this site are African Americans that come from African tribes that haven't contributed anything to the modern world and were basically swinging on trees during the time of Egypt. So I don't understand the need to call northern Europeans barbarians when noone is more barbaric and primative than African Americans and the tribes they come from. And it does seem like they are trying to be a part of the building of civilization by so called "setting the record straight" about Egypt when Egypt has nothing to do with them.

---

Which tribes do "African Americans" come from that actually "swung from trees"??? Hell, I wanna know where I come from

Some people on this board are actually un-watered down "Africans" and not African Americans who say Egypt is "Black", just to let you know
 

---

Posted by tutemkasret (Member # 12109) on :
 
Well that's part of the problem you DON'T know nor CARE about where you come from which is sad. All the study of Egyptian and Greek genetics yet no African American dare cares about THEIR genetics. Most of the posters here are African Americans and as far as un-watered down Africans; you can't be un-watered down and worship arab, white and jewish gods sorry ..as far as swinging on trees thats just a euphemism for primative hunter gatherers lol it's not literal.
 

---

Posted by X-Ras (Member # 10328) on :
 
tutemkasret is trolling, thats all, just ignore him
 

---

Posted by Clyde Winters (Member # 10129) on :
 
Tutemkasret

quote:

---

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Genetics makes no links between any black Africans and historicc Greeks , of any kind.
I asked you to prove that over and over and all you could say is that the genes are there with NO specifics to prove your case.

---

The roots of Greek civilization was African. The
original founders of Grecian civilization were dark
pigmented Pelasgians.

Although these people of the Heroic age came from
diverse origins, the Aryan-Greeks called them
Pelasgians. According to the Greeks, the first man was
Pelasgus--ancestor of the Pelasgians. The Pelasgians
were a combination of different Black tribes called
Achaeans, Cadmeans, Leleges, Carians or Garamantes.

The term Pelasgian was applied to all these
pre-Hellenic inhabitants of Greece. R.J. Hopper, in
The Early Greeks, noted that "indeed the classical
Greeks believed in the separate existence of diverse
ethnic elements side by side, and thought particularly of the Pelasgians in this
connection".

According to tradition, the Pelasgians inhabited
Arcadia and many Aegean Islands. These Blacks took
their own writing to Greece which was later used by
the Aryan-Greeks. According to Herodotus quadrigas or
four-horse chariots were introduced to Greeks by the
Libyans .

The Aryan-Greeks adopted the language of the
Pelasgians and Egyptians. The linguistic evidence
shows that there was a differentiation of Greece into
East Greek and West Greek. The Black Greeks spoke East
Greek (Achaioi or Achaean). West Greek was spoken by
the Dorian or Aryan Greeks. The earliest Aryan tribe
called Ionians spoke a dialect of East Greek called Aeolic.

Many classical scholars teach the world that the Greek
language is entirely Indo-European. This view of Greek
is wrong.

Dr. Anna Morpurgo Davies, has made it clear that "less
than 40% of the words which have an Indo-European
etymology". According to Dr. Davies, 52.2 % of the
Greek terms in Chantraine's Dictionnaire Etymologique
de la langue Grecque (1968) have an unknown etymology.
The mixed nature of the Greek language results from
the early settlement of the Aegean by Blacks from Africa,
especially Egypt and Libya.

Some of these words are of African origin. Robert K.G.
Temple, in The Sirius Mystery, shows that many of the
most common words of the Greek vocabulary are of
Egyptian origin. Diop (1991) has also discussed the
Egyptian origin for many Greek terms.

Given the fact that the Greek language lacks full
cognation with Indo-European languages proves that
Indo Europeans were not the founders of Greecian
civilization. To know Greece, we must look to Egypt
and the rest of Africa to explain the origin of this
civilization.

There is also genetic evidence that supports and
African origin for the Greeks. Check out this papers:



HLA genes in Macedonians and the sub-Saharan origin of
the Greeks.


Arnaiz-Villena A, Dimitroski K,Pacho A, Moscoso J, Gomez-Casado E, Silvera-Redondo C, Varela P, Blagoevska M, Zdravkovska V,Martinez-Laso J.

Molecular Biology, H. 12 de Octubre, Universidad
Complutense, Madrid, Spain.
aarnaiz@...

HLA alleles have been determined in individuals from the Republic of Macedonia by DNA typing and sequencing.
HLA-A, -B, -DR, -DQ allele frequencies and extended haplotypes have been for the first time determined and the results compared to those of other Mediterraneans, particularly with their neighbouring Greeks. Genetic distances,neighbor-joining dendrograms and correspondence analysis have been performed. The following conclusions have been reached: 1) Macedonians belong to the
"older" Mediterranean substratum, like Iberians
(including Basques), North Africans, Italians, French, Cretans, Jews, Lebanese,Turks (Anatolians), Armenians
and Iranians, 2) Macedonians are not related with
geographically close Greeks, who do not belong to the "older" Mediterranenan substratum, 3) Greeks are found
to have a substantial relatedness to sub-Saharan
(Ethiopian) people, which separate them from other Mediterranean groups. Both Greeks and Ethiopians share quasi-specific DRB1 alleles, such as *0305, *0307,
*0411, *0413, *0416, *0417, *0420, *1110, *1112, *1304 and *1310. Genetic distances are closer between Greeks and Ethiopian/sub-Saharan groups than to any other Mediterranean group and finally Greeks cluster with Ethiopians/sub-Saharans in both neighbour joining
dendrograms and correspondence analyses. The time
period when these relationships might have occurred was ancient but uncertain and might be related to the
displacement of Egyptian-Ethiopian people living in
pharaonic Egypt.

PMID: 11260506 [PubMed -indexed for MEDLINE]



 

---

Posted by tutemkasret (Member # 12109) on :
 
This post should be directed towards Arrow99..I haven't denied any of the genetic evidence of African ancestory in Greece. I was commenting on the need to push this over and over again to Europeans that want to deny it that's all and the ethics of Afrocentricity.
 

---

Posted by rasol (Member # 4592) on :
 

the Benin haplotype accounts for HbS associated chromosomes in Sicily, Northern Greece, Southern Turkey, and South West Saudi Arabia, indicating that these genes had their origin in West Africa. - Graham R. Serjeant, MD, FRCP
 

---

Posted by ARROW99 (Member # 11614) on :
 
This has almost no historical importance.
 

---

Posted by rasol (Member # 4592) on :
 
^ It is of the utmost importance according to historians:

One can identify Negroid traits of nose and prognathism appearing in Natufian latest hunters (McCown, 1939) and in Anatolian and Macedonian first farmers, probably from Nubia - Larry Angel.

It's 'your' posts that are devoid of 'importance', Arrow.

No importance, no relevance, no substance and no meaning.
 

---

Posted by ARROW99 (Member # 11614) on :
 
rasol,

The quote you posted from Larry Angel does not make the issue of historical importance. Even if all this silliness were correct it would still not be important, certanily not to the historical era. In terms of pre history you do not have enough data to fill up a thumble.
 

---

Posted by rasol (Member # 4592) on :
 
^ Listen very carefully Arrow, before you get banned again for your inept trolling:

Your problem is...you present no evidence to the contrary of Professor Angel.

In fact, you present nothing of any value whatsover. You never have.

That's why you have never been given any credit whatsover for anything by anyone....ever.

And you never will, either.

Is that clear?
 

---

Posted by Alchemist (Member # 12318) on :
 
Rasol Rocks!
 

---

Posted by ARROW99 (Member # 11614) on :
 
You listen rasol. You seem to have a real problem reading the english language. I did not argue with Larry Angel. I said the topic was of little or no historical importance. Even if all of your radical afrocentric rascist babble on the subject were correct IT STILL WOULD NOT BE IMPORTANT to the historical era.
 

---

Posted by Africa (Member # 12142) on :
 
ARROW,
I've been reading your posts, I still don't understand what you're trying to explain...on that note I'm African myself and I know what Europeans and West Asians look like and they have mixed features if you use Africans as a base. They appear to be a mix of broad faced Africans and Elongated Africans. That's just my eyes but when you check their blood, it's the same story. That confirms something I suspected long time ago.
plan2replan Copyright © 2006 Africa
 

---

Posted by Myra Wysinger (Member # 10126) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by alTakruri:
More from the same thread mentioned above: The Sir Arthur Evans labelled "Captain of the Blacks" fresco. In this repro they've deliberately excluded the head of the first black runner but you can see it on p.137 if you have The Image of the Black in Western Art vol. 1.

---

I have the book. Sorry I took so long.

Late Minoan II art [Frank Snowden]
Dated 1500-1450 B.C. [Source]




.
 

---

Posted by Ephestion (Member # 12836) on :
 
The earliest inhabitants were the Cycladic Greeks and Minoan Greeks. The islanders were essentially Greeks. They were heavily influenced if not almost identical culturaly to Egyptians.
 

---

Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
 
Ha-cha-cha!!! A tip o' the hat and thank you very much.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Myra Wysinger:
I have the book. Sorry I took so long.

---

 

---

Posted by Ephestion (Member # 12836) on :
 
I must also report that there is a white asiatic group of people that were found in northern cyprus and in several regions in anatloia.

They are white but display two anomalies. One they have tight curly hair like African Negro but are not ata all related. The have mesomorphic bodies and mediteranean features ie medium length faces with rounded heads. From several pictures and from several paintings I am starting to get the idea that these easily tanning individuals were depicted as black despite being of this Anatlian type of stock possibly asiatic. They share teh same features with several Meso-American and South American tribes.
 

---

Posted by Willing Thinker (Member # 10819) on :
 
Really?

Also, their not related how???

Genetically, right?

You know your phenes from your genes(?), I hope.
 

---

Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
 
OK, I'll bite.
What pray tell is an "African Negro?"
While you're at it please list the
varous "negros" and define the term.

Thank you.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ephestion:
... African Negro ...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ephestion:
Negro is the classic endomorphic black negro,

---

^ The 'new' foolishness.

This is typical of the nonsense rhetoric of race - in which people throw arcane terms around hoping no one notices that they haven't a clue as to what the terms actually mean.

Endomorph basically means - fat, and round and designed to retain heat.

For example - neanderthal was endomorphic.

Probably the most endomorphic modern humans are the Eskimo.

Endomorphy is considered a kind of artic, or cold weather adaptation wherein fat preserves heat.

As black is tropical adaptation - the phrase typical endomorphic 'black' is and oxymoron.

ps - the rest of your post is ad hoc jibberish and so ignored.

At any rate, you've made it clear that you have no idea what you're talkinga about.
 

---

Posted by Ephestion (Member # 12836) on :
 
Ectomorph is the non V shaped tall guys? You know your racist differentiation better than me.
 

---

Posted by rasol (Member # 4592) on :
 
^ Why don't you try to find the answers, before going any further?
 

---

Posted by Evergreen (Member # 12192) on :
 
Interesting:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=ab2liYJwtt0
 

---

Posted by Ephestion (Member # 12836) on :
 
You, rasol, just cant handle the truth.
 

---

Posted by rasol (Member # 4592) on :
 
^ Truth is, your posts are silly, and so...easily 'handled'. Now go away.
 

---

Posted by Underpants Man (Member # 3735) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evergreen:
Interesting:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=ab2liYJwtt0

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:

quote:

---

there is no evidence, probably is not fact

---

One of the things that make toying with you fun "professor" is that you are a Eurocentrist pseudo scholar who is probably ignorant of almost every facet of scholarship that might be associated with and actual college degree ['probably' you are and american high school flunk out].

All scientific theory is rooted in probability.

When a scientist states that something is 'probably' true, it is a very strong statement.

It must be based on a *preponderence* of evidence - ie - probability - not a lack of evidence.

In science - a lack of evidence means that you do not even have, a proper theory.

But then, you don't understand even elementary principals of science do you?


Here I'll show you:

30 years ago, anthropologist Larry Angel said there was probably a migration from Africa to Greece in the Neolithic.

Genetics has confirmed that Larry Angel was probably right.

Now, you probably hate this fact.

But, you probably don't understand genetics.

You are probably also extremely lazy and will never bother to read Larry Angel's study - beyound what I 'spoon feed you'.

But then, you're probably and idiot who hasn't a prayer of refuting Larry Angel's work even if you read it.

Deep down, you probably know this, and that is one reason you don't even bother to read it.

It would be like Forest Gump reading Albert Einstein, probably a waste of his 'precious' time.

For all these reasons, all of your pleading posts in all probability accomplish nothing except to make you look like the empty headed racist fool you probably are.

But don't feel insulted, after all...I said 'probably'.

Like Professor Angel, I base probability on the case evidence.

And having said that, I rest my case.

Good day Professor.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ephestion:
Negro is the classic endomorphic black negro,

---

^ The 'new' foolishness.

This is typical of the nonsense rhetoric of race - in which people throw arcane terms around hoping no one notices that they haven't a clue as to what the terms actually mean.

Endomorph basically means - fat, and round and designed to retain heat.

For example - neanderthal was endomorphic.

Probably the most endomorphic modern humans are the Eskimo.

Endomorphy is considered a kind of artic, or cold weather adaptation wherein fat preserves heat.

As black is tropical adaptation - the phrase typical endomorphic 'black' is and oxymoron.

ps - the rest of your post is ad hoc jibberish and so ignored.

At any rate, you've made it clear that you have no idea what you're talkinga about.

---

LMBAO!

In my belief system everything is part of a purpose, and it

seems we've had more than a few such as this one who's purpose is COMEDY.
 

---

Posted by AlexandertheConqueror (Member # 13806) on :
 
Yup, the ancient Greeks were black. Everyone is black. The earth is black. black is black. Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black. Lets rename this forum to BlackSearch and discuss the blackness of black in everything relating to blacks in every topic about anything black. Hey wait a minute! Those smiley icons to the left seem to have a black african origin or some sort of influence because some of them are darker which means... Oh wait computers were developed by blacks in Africa and exported across the lands to...oh crap im black and I just built a pyramid! Thank you Black jesus!!!! Damn the Eurocentrists for forcing me to type in the english language but how could that be when English is African in origin! The Eurocentrists are actually European blacks keeping their African brothers down. Stop Black on Black crime. Peace out! Word
 

---

Posted by Clyde Winters (Member # 10129) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
Supercar

quote:

---

The archaeological evidence points to only a few reasonable certainties about Minoan history. Around 3000 BC, Crete was settled by a people who probably came from Asia Minor, who, by 2000 BC was already living in cities, trading with other nations in the Mediterranean, and employing a hieroglyphic system of writing, probably derived from Egyptian hieroglyphics. This hieroglyphic writing would eventually evolve into a linear script. They built magnificent palace centers at Knossos, Phaistos, and Kato Zakros; these palaces seem to have dominated Cretan society. We have no idea what language they spoke, but they certainly spoke a non-Hellenic language (that is, a language not closely related to Greek) and probably spoke a non-Indo-European language. "

Source: http://www.wsu.edu:8080/~dee/MINOA/MINOANS.HTM

---

You are right they did speak a none Indo-European language.

There is evidence for the Minoan language. The language they spoke was related to the Mande group of languages. These Mande speakers formerly occupied a large part of the Fezzan ( in modern Libya)before they migrated to the Niger river valley. The Mande languages are members of the Niger-Congo Superfamily of languages.

Every since Arthur Evans discovered the Hieroglyphic and Linear A writing of Crete there has been a search for the authors of this writing.

Some Grecian traditions indicate that Libyans (called Garamante) formerly lived on Crete. This suggest that some of the Eteocretans may have spoken one of the ancient languages of Libya.


A major group from Libya that settled Crete were the Garamante. Robert Graves in (Vol.1, pp.33-35) maintains that the Garamante who originally lived in the Fezzan fused with the inhabitants of the Upper Niger region of West Africa.

This theory is interesting because the chariot routes from the Fezzan terminated at the Niger river. In addition, the Cretan term for king "Minos", agrees with the MandeManding word for ruler "Mansa". Both these terms share consonantal agreement : M N S.

The name Garamante, illustrates affinity to Mande morphology and grammar. The Mande language is a member of the Niger-Congo group of languages. The name for the Manding tribe called "Mande", means Ma 'mother, and nde 'children', can be interpreted as "Children of Ma", or "Mothers children " (descent among this group is matrilineal) .

The word Garamante,can be broken down into Malinke-Bambara into the following monosyllabic words Ga 'hearth', arid, hot'; Mante/Mande , the name of the Mande speaking tribes. This means that the term: Garamante, can be interpreted as "Mande of the Arid lands" or "Arid lands of the children of Ma". This last term is quite interesting because by the time the Greeks and Romans learned about the Garamante, the Fezzan was becoming increasingly arid.



Keftiu


The Egyptians called the Cretans Keftiu. There is agreement between the Keftiu names recorded by Egyptian scribes (T.E. Peet, "The Egyptian writing board BM5647 bearing Keftiu names". In , (ed.) by S Casson (Oxford, 1927, 90-99)), and Manding names.



Keftiu
The root kef-, in Keftiu, probably is Ke'be, the name of a Manding clan , plus the locative suffix {i-} used to give the affirmative sense, plus the plural suffix for names {u-}, and the {-te} suffixial element used to denote place names, nationalities and to form words.

On the Egyptian writing board there are eight Keftiu names. These names agree with Manding names:

Keftiu....... Manding

sh h.r........ Sye

Nsy ..........Nsye

'ksh .........Nkyi

Pnrt Pe,..... Beni (name for twins)

'dm ..........Demba

Rs............. Rsa

This analogy between Keftiu and Manding names is startling.

In conclusion, the evidence of similarity between Keftiu names and names from the Manding languages appear to support Graves view that the Eteocretans, who early settled Crete may have spoken a language similar to the Mande people who live near the Niger. Conseqently, there is every possibility that the Linear A script used by the Keftiu, which is analogous to the Libyco Berber writing used by the Proto-Mande .

See:

C. A. Winters, "The influence of the Mande scripts on ancient America", de l'IFAN>, t59, serB, no.1, (1977) pp.941-967.

C.A. Winters, "The ancient manding Script", In , (ed.) by Ivan van Sertima, ( London: Rutgers University Press Transaction Press , 1981) pp.208-214), may be written in an aspect of the Manding (Malinke/Bambara) language.


Black Greeks


Clyde Winters

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
Tutemkasret

quote:

---

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Genetics makes no links between any black Africans and historicc Greeks , of any kind.
I asked you to prove that over and over and all you could say is that the genes are there with NO specifics to prove your case.

---

The roots of Greek civilization was African. The
original founders of Grecian civilization were dark
pigmented Pelasgians.

Although these people of the Heroic age came from
diverse origins, the Aryan-Greeks called them
Pelasgians. According to the Greeks, the first man was
Pelasgus--ancestor of the Pelasgians. The Pelasgians
were a combination of different Black tribes called
Achaeans, Cadmeans, Leleges, Carians or Garamantes.

The term Pelasgian was applied to all these
pre-Hellenic inhabitants of Greece. R.J. Hopper, in
The Early Greeks, noted that "indeed the classical
Greeks believed in the separate existence of diverse
ethnic elements side by side, and thought particularly of the Pelasgians in this
connection".

According to tradition, the Pelasgians inhabited
Arcadia and many Aegean Islands. These Blacks took
their own writing to Greece which was later used by
the Aryan-Greeks. According to Herodotus quadrigas or
four-horse chariots were introduced to Greeks by the
Libyans .

The Aryan-Greeks adopted the language of the
Pelasgians and Egyptians. The linguistic evidence
shows that there was a differentiation of Greece into
East Greek and West Greek. The Black Greeks spoke East
Greek (Achaioi or Achaean). West Greek was spoken by
the Dorian or Aryan Greeks. The earliest Aryan tribe
called Ionians spoke a dialect of East Greek called Aeolic.

Many classical scholars teach the world that the Greek
language is entirely Indo-European. This view of Greek
is wrong.

Dr. Anna Morpurgo Davies, has made it clear that "less
than 40% of the words which have an Indo-European
etymology". According to Dr. Davies, 52.2 % of the
Greek terms in Chantraine's Dictionnaire Etymologique
de la langue Grecque (1968) have an unknown etymology.
The mixed nature of the Greek language results from
the early settlement of the Aegean by Blacks from Africa,
especially Egypt and Libya.

Some of these words are of African origin. Robert K.G.
Temple, in The Sirius Mystery, shows that many of the
most common words of the Greek vocabulary are of
Egyptian origin. Diop (1991) has also discussed the
Egyptian origin for many Greek terms.

Given the fact that the Greek language lacks full
cognation with Indo-European languages proves that
Indo Europeans were not the founders of Greecian
civilization. To know Greece, we must look to Egypt
and the rest of Africa to explain the origin of this
civilization.

There is also genetic evidence that supports and
African origin for the Greeks. Check out this papers:



HLA genes in Macedonians and the sub-Saharan origin of
the Greeks.


Arnaiz-Villena A, Dimitroski K,Pacho A, Moscoso J, Gomez-Casado E, Silvera-Redondo C, Varela P, Blagoevska M, Zdravkovska V,Martinez-Laso J.

Molecular Biology, H. 12 de Octubre, Universidad
Complutense, Madrid, Spain.
aarnaiz@...

HLA alleles have been determined in individuals from the Republic of Macedonia by DNA typing and sequencing.
HLA-A, -B, -DR, -DQ allele frequencies and extended haplotypes have been for the first time determined and the results compared to those of other Mediterraneans, particularly with their neighbouring Greeks. Genetic distances,neighbor-joining dendrograms and correspondence analysis have been performed. The following conclusions have been reached: 1) Macedonians belong to the
"older" Mediterranean substratum, like Iberians
(including Basques), North Africans, Italians, French, Cretans, Jews, Lebanese,Turks (Anatolians), Armenians
and Iranians, 2) Macedonians are not related with
geographically close Greeks, who do not belong to the "older" Mediterranenan substratum, 3) Greeks are found
to have a substantial relatedness to sub-Saharan
(Ethiopian) people, which separate them from other Mediterranean groups. Both Greeks and Ethiopians share quasi-specific DRB1 alleles, such as *0305, *0307,
*0411, *0413, *0416, *0417, *0420, *1110, *1112, *1304 and *1310. Genetic distances are closer between Greeks and Ethiopian/sub-Saharan groups than to any other Mediterranean group and finally Greeks cluster with Ethiopians/sub-Saharans in both neighbour joining
dendrograms and correspondence analyses. The time
period when these relationships might have occurred was ancient but uncertain and might be related to the
displacement of Egyptian-Ethiopian people living in
pharaonic Egypt.

PMID: 11260506 [PubMed -indexed for MEDLINE]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by AlexandertheConqueror:

Yup, the ancient Greeks were black. Everyone is black. The earth is black. black is black. Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black Black. Lets rename this forum to BlackSearch and discuss the blackness of black in everything relating to blacks in every topic about anything black. Hey wait a minute! Those smiley icons to the left seem to have a black african origin or some sort of influence because some of them are darker which means... Oh wait computers were developed by blacks in Africa and exported across the lands to...oh crap im black and I just built a pyramid! Thank you Black jesus!!!! Damn the Eurocentrists for forcing me to type in the english language but how could that be when English is African in origin! The Eurocentrists are actually European blacks keeping their African brothers down. Stop Black on Black crime. Peace out! Word

---

^ No need to act foolish 'Alexander'. No one says the ancient Greeks were black persay, BUT there is evidence that they share mixed ancestry-- some of which is from Africa.

Such evidence came first from physical anthropology where there are skeletal remains dating from the Neolithic around the Aegean all the way to mainland Greece. These remains showed African affinity.

Recent evidence in the form of genetics first from Spanish immunologist Arnaiz-Villena in his study of HLA genes in Greeks. We also have genetic studies showing the origins of sickle cell anemia in Greeks to be also of African origin. And finally the African Y-chromosomal lineage E3b was also found among the Greek population. All of these genes and/or genetic markers all date from the same time period as the skeletal remains-- the Neolithic. The Neolithic was the very time period that agriculture and animal domestication was introduced to Europe, specifically Greece!

Now, at first glance you may think this all a bunch of Afrocentric nonsense but I assure you these are all facts and not everyone on this forum is black, let alone Afrocentric (that includes ME)!
 

---

Posted by Willing Thinker {What Box} (Member # 10819) on :
 
Sigh, this is a thread to get straight to the point cause when we made the point in passing mention, the fool littered the forum with foolishness, so we exposed him as a fool.

What's you problem fool?

I feel you but you don't feel us.

The fact of blackness in some of the great cultures of the world is one of the most suppresed "facts" in the world.

Here, we don't except that trash.

I do however tire of nubians, dynastic European races, and nubian caucasoids.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Alexander the pointless:
Yup, the ancient Greeks were black. Everyone is black. The earth is black. black is black. [...] Lets rename this forum to BlackSearch and discuss

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Alexander the pointless:

[...]The Eurocentrists are actually European blacks keeping their African brothers down. Stop Black on Black crime.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
Recent evidence in the form of genetics first from Spanish immunologist Arnaiz-Villena in his study of HLA genes in Greeks. We also have genetic studies showing the origins of sickle cell anemia in Greeks to be also of African origin. And finally the African Y-chromosomal lineage E3b was also found among the Greek population. All of these genes and/or genetic markers all date from the same time period as the skeletal remains-- the Neolithic. The Neolithic was the very time period that agriculture and animal domestication was introduced to Europe, specifically Greece!

Now, at first glance you may think this all a bunch of Afrocentric nonsense but I assure you these are all facts and not everyone on this forum is black, let alone Afrocentric (that includes ME)!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tyrannosaurus:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:

Recent evidence in the form of genetics first from Spanish immunologist Arnaiz-Villena in his study of HLA genes in Greeks. We also have genetic studies showing the origins of sickle cell anemia in Greeks to be also of African origin. And finally the African Y-chromosomal lineage E3b was also found among the Greek population. All of these genes and/or genetic markers all date from the same time period as the skeletal remains-- the Neolithic. The Neolithic was the very time period that agriculture and animal domestication was introduced to Europe, specifically Greece!

Now, at first glance you may think this all a bunch of Afrocentric nonsense but I assure you these are all facts and not everyone on this forum is black, let alone Afrocentric (that includes ME)!

---

To be honest, I am skeptical of the Arnaiz-Villena study. The Greeks cluster even closer to sub-Saharans than Siwa Egyptians, when simple geography would dictate the reverse! I can't argue with the other data though.

---

quote:

---

Professor "Arrow"-head wrote: And you base all of these contentions on PROBABLY and yet claim to be some sort of scholar

---

quote:

---

Tyr0 writes: Greeks cluster even closer to sub-Saharans than Siwa Egyptians, when simple geography would dictate the reverse!

---

quote:

---

Where do these genes come from - if not from Africa?

---

Or better yet, since these genes ARE African, how did Greeks inherit them- if not from Africans?
 

---

Posted by humanityiloveyou (Member # 14404) on :
 
My cousin who is mixed race





her father - the darkest member of the family.


victoria rowell with her biological mixed race daughter,who somewhat resembles my mixed race cousin,must be the prominence of the teeth.


No shock to imagine greeks having remote african origins.If within my own family the overt africaness has dissapated within one generation it can also in them.

our african ancestry is the damara from namibia,the mpondomise from the eastern cape,the khoisan,and one from zanzibar.Though my cousin does not have damara ancestry.


I can't tell if lauding up the afro-asiatic origins of greece is an attempt to diminish the enormous achievements of those descended from the germanic,celtic,slavic groups who have contributed so much to our current state? That seems to be the fear though of many.

Or is it simply a desire on our part [those of us of african ancestry] to have a stronger presence within history because we are so largely dismissed?
 

---

Posted by humanityiloveyou (Member # 14404) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Clyde Winters:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
Supercar
[QUOTE]




Keftiu


The Egyptians called the Cretans Keftiu. There is agreement between the Keftiu names recorded by Egyptian scribes (T.E. Peet, "The Egyptian writing board BM5647 bearing Keftiu names". In , (ed.) by S Casson (Oxford, 1927, 90-99)), and Manding names.



Keftiu
The root kef-, in Keftiu, probably is Ke'be, the name of a Manding clan , plus the locative suffix {i-} used to give the affirmative sense, plus the plural suffix for names {u-}, and the {-te} suffixial element used to denote place names, nationalities and to form words.

On the Egyptian writing board there are eight Keftiu names. These names agree with Manding names:

Keftiu....... Manding

sh h.r........ Sye

Nsy ..........Nsye

'ksh .........Nkyi

Pnrt Pe,..... Beni (name for twins)

'dm ..........Demba

Rs............. Rsa

This analogy between Keftiu and Manding names is startling.
Black Greeks


Clyde Winters

---

^^Up

---

Interesting post,those Keftiu
heads remind me of Akan heads -




 

---

Posted by humanityiloveyou (Member # 14404) on :
 
Africa is the germ of the world.What did the whitest of white [the germanic,baltic groups et al] contribute before being blessed [literally] with mediterranean influence which has an afro-asiatic root.It's like saying your grandmother has no value or contribution to your current existence.


The lithuanians and other balts have the highest blonde populaces in europe [yes more than sweden] yet what enormity did they contribute? they did'nt even have a written language till the 16th century,and only thanks to hordes of religious foreigners and Roman Catholicism - they were the last to give way to this influence.They currently enjoy the highest suicide rate in the world.

The same story across europe,religious foreigners come and the wood huts come down.

quote:

---

Originally posted by ARROW99:
Most of us accept the idea that man spread out of Africa to thge rest of the world. The problem is that the argument rasol and others want to make here is beside the point. What they are trying to do is imply that Africa is the germ of the modern world. Thats the MOTIVE for their argument and where they end up at the end of the day. They skip over tens of thousands of years like it was a generation. The hard xold reality is that nothing positive ever came out of Africa. If African civilization as we know it made any meaningful contribution to the world how did it miss totally Africa generally?
Fact is classical Greeks are not black africans, they are europeans. Every single Greek scholar bar none states that their culture was home grown.
To attach any sort of African tag on an area of Greece is nutty stuff that will never be accepted by serious scholars. It would be tragic if it were not so comical. We have people on this board who are critical of Dr Hawass because he does not support their narrow, racist, bigoted views even though he has a PHD and they lack even a BA.
Really, its the argument of losers. People who feel that they are not a part of the modern world and see themselves as victims. "Nothing is my fault, its the fault of the evil, colonialist Europeans." Since I have no place in the system I will simply attack it. The problem is the system doess not care. If the eurocentrists are really as bad as they are presented here why should they listen now?

---

quote:

---

I can't tell if lauding up the afro-asiatic origins of greece is an attempt to diminish the enormous achievements of those descended from the germanic,celtic,slavic groups who have contributed so much to our current state?

---

quote:

---

Or is it simply a desire on our part [those of us of african ancestry] to have a stronger presence within history

---

quote:

---

Or is it simply a desire on our part [those of us of african ancestry] to have a stronger presence within history because we are so largely dismissed?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:

quote:

---

Or is it simply a desire on our part [those of us of african ancestry] to have a stronger presence within history because we are so largely dismissed?

---

^ How about a desire to tell the truth, with regards to the heterogeneous origins of so called Western civilisation, as opposed to propagating the myth of the Aryan model of history?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Alive-(What Box):

quote:

---

I can't tell if lauding up the afro-asiatic origins of greece is an attempt to diminish the enormous achievements of those descended from the germanic,celtic,slavic groups who have contributed so much to our current state?

---

This thread is about their ancestry (they share genes with non Afrisan-speaking populations and Afrisan speaking folks alike btw).

We've pointed out their African ancestry.

How would pointing out the presence of African ancestry in Greeks "diminish the [modern] achievements" of another group of people (from elsewhere than Africa)? Also, "lauding up" is an interesting choice of words.

quote:

---

Or is it simply a desire on our part [those of us of african ancestry] to have a stronger presence within history

---

I don't think we (Africans) need a bigger presence historically speaking!!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by humanityiloveyou:
As to why Sub-Saharan africa does'nt have "civilization" .

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot:

Actually the early Greeks spok a language kindred to the Etruscans in Italy.

---

quote:

---

They were not connected to any civilization in Africa.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot:
Actually the early Greeks spok a language kindred to the Etruscans in Italy.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by alTakruri:
OK, I'll bite the bait. What do you mean? It seems
you're presenting mythography and mythory. Would

you care to
1) define "sub-Saharan Africa" and
2) qualify "civilization," please.

Without your private take on those terms I fail
to make anything rational out of your on face
valueless false and silly claim.

quote:

---

Originally posted by humanityiloveyou:
As to why Sub-Saharan africa does'nt have "civilization" .

---

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tee85:
Nope, I think he's bothered that East African men were obviously boinking "Greek" women.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ARROW99:
I'm not pretending it was not answered. Refresh my memory, what dig was it that ypou said showed the interaction of large numbers of Africans and Greeks? Did I miss that post?

You have yet to prove tht the people you spoke of were even still Africans when they arrived (if they did) but since you can't tell me when all this took place I'll excuse that.

All you know how to do is call names and nobody cares about that.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ARROW99:
there is no evidence, probably is not fact, its probably. Thats the MO you guys use all of the time

Probably, could be, might be, etc
Its the same kind of logic that the UFO people use. greeks are not Africans.
Africans have nothing to do with western civilization aside from cheap labor and resources.
Africa hsitorically has been a backwater from the beginning, how could they contribute to what anyone else was doing. Thats not a diss, just a fact.
Even today the place is a disease infected mud hole that survives on American and European loans and welfare.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ARROW99:
Go argue with the Classical Studies school in Athens, I've made my points, enough is enough. have a great holiday and new year.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot:
All I have done is quote standard history at it's most basic level. Only the radical fringe will ever accept this political revisionism you guys preach.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ta Setis revenge:

quote:

---

Originally posted by ARROW99:
I'm not pretending it was not answered. Refresh my memory, what dig was it that ypou said showed the interaction of large numbers of Africans and Greeks? Did I miss that post?

You have yet to prove tht the people you spoke of were even still Africans when they arrived (if they did) but since you can't tell me when all this took place I'll excuse that.

All you know how to do is call names and nobody cares about that.

---

So now your contention is...

The African didn't leave the continent of Africa until they began looking like Europeans...,
Is that what you are trying to tell us?...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Alive-(What Box):
!

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ta Setis revenge:

quote:

---

Originally posted by ARROW99:
I'm not pretending it was not answered. Refresh my memory, what dig was it that ypou said showed the interaction of large numbers of Africans and Greeks? Did I miss that post?

You have yet to prove tht the people you spoke of were even still Africans when they arrived (if they did) but since you can't tell me when all this took place I'll excuse that.

All you know how to do is call names and nobody cares about that.

---

So now your contention is...

The African didn't leave the continent of Africa until they began looking like Europeans...,
Is that what you are trying to tell us?...

---

If so it's mighty funny the past banned Texan member Hore/Arrow99/Celt/AmericanHammer/Patriot would say that - it was actually a radical fringe afrocentrist theory that attempted to explain whites by saying that the were albino Africans forced out of Africa (either rejected by 'mean' melanated Africans or outcompeted).

---

Are you about to give credence to the nonsense that the NATION OF ISLAM was trying to preach as a biblical hysteria?...

I hope not...
It's not going to wash....,
The NOI was called on the carpet for such bafoonary years ago BY Afrocentrists, I might add....

And as expected...
TONED down that rediculous rhetoric....,
They knew better....,
But at the same time....
So did many Jewish scholars who tried to historically justify a biblical myths of the Jewish experience... A biblical history plagerized by the Egyptian(African) experience and Mythology systems....,

TOTAL PLAGERIZATION....,

I know better than to think that you believe that Noah truly created an Ark!...,

There is no way you would think that, right?....,
 

---

Posted by Alive-(What Box) (Member # 10819) on :
 
I don't give credence to any such theory, did it appear so from my post? Obviously I was rideculing Professor Hore...

By the way, I'll Sleep When You're Dead (the member), I can see from a nerve I recently touched that we have yet another a-gang alias on the loose.
 

---

Posted by Ta Setis revenge (Member # 15713) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Alive-(What Box):
I don't give credence to any such theory, did it appear so from my post? Obviously I was rideculing Professor Hore...

By the way, I'll Sleep When You're Dead (the member), I can see from a nerve I recently touched that we have yet another a-gang alias on the loose.

---

OK, maybe I may have got it wrong concerning what you were trying to say...
If I'm wrong, I apologize.....,

But what the hell are you referring to about this gang thing?...,

This is got to be interesting....,

But seriously...
I truly apologize if I misinterpreted what you were trying to say....,
 

---

Posted by Alive-(What Box) (Member # 10819) on :
 
"But what the hell are you referring to about this gang thing?"

was talking to another member who knows what I'm talking about.
 

---

Posted by humanity (Member # 15871) on :
 
The cretans were tested to be anatolian no details were given on the dna data which is dubious,so I can't make any conclusions.

I've seen six ancient skulls reconstructed from crete [Thera or Knossos I can't recall] they gave them white skin/long hair, they all looked very broad flat nose,big mouth et al.The men to be very general resembled modern day pacific islanders/tongans,the women looked like the modern day bantu africans. They bared no resemblance to the profile based frescoes so who knows.

Some frescoes :









These heads are marked as minoan from the National Archeological Museum of Athens but honestly I don't know what to make of them.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2384/2206384459_95646dbe76.jpg?v=1200863297
-
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2405/2206519827_ff4dfa69d7.jpg?v=0

Etruscan -






one of the reconstructed skulls - minoan princess - they gave her fair skin,blue eyes et al.


I think the cretans and other aegeans like the rest of the "civilised" ancient world were multiracial societies to be overly general - european,indian,african and semite and those combining all four.
 

---

Posted by humanity (Member # 15871) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sundjata:

quote:

---

Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot:
Actually the early Greeks spok a language kindred to the Etruscans in Italy.

---

"half of the basic Greek vocabulary cannot be explained in terms of Indo-European"

http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/bmcr/1996/96.04.05.html

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ta Setis revenge:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Tee85:
[qb] Nope, I think he's bothered that East African men were obviously boinking "Greek" women.

---

They seemed to continue boinking them well into the later periods.




 

---

Posted by humanity (Member # 15871) on :
 
one of the reconstructed skulls [minoan priestess] - colored in w/fair skin,blue eyes et al.


 

---

Posted by Ed Hurst Frost (Member # 15975) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by humanity:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ta Setis revenge:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Tee85:
[qb] Nope, I think he's bothered that East African men were obviously boinking "Greek" women.

---

They seemed to continue boinking them well into the later periods.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Alive-(What Box):
"But what the hell are you referring to about this gang thing?"

was talking to another member who knows what I'm talking about.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot:
Yep, many of these guys have no class and even less education. You cannot make a silk purse out of a pig's ear.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot:

It is not a matter of winning. The points I have made are history as defined by Classical scholars. In the end only their views will detwemine what is accepted history and what is something else altogether.

---

quote:

---

Yep, many of these guys have no class and even less education. You cannot make a silk purse out of a pig's ear.

---

Yet I see in your case even as a so-called 'professor', education has made little difference in your racist and biased point of views.
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by humanity:

The cretans were tested to be anatolian no details were given on the dna data which is dubious,so I can't make any conclusions.

---

quote:

---

I've seen six ancient skulls reconstructed from crete [Thera or Knossos I can't recall] they gave them white skin/long hair, they all looked very broad flat nose, big mouth et al. The men to be very general resembled modern day pacific islanders/tongans,the women looked like the modern day bantu africans. They bared no resemblance to the profile based frescoes so who knows.

---

quote:

---

Some frescoes :









These heads are marked as minoan from the National Archeological Museum of Athens but honestly I don't know what to make of them.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2384/2206384459_95646dbe76.jpg?v=1200863297
-
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2405/2206519827_ff4dfa69d7.jpg?v=0

Etruscan -






one of the reconstructed skulls - minoan princess - they gave her fair skin,blue eyes et al.


I think the cretans and other aegeans like the rest of the "civilised" ancient world were multiracial societies to be overly general - european, indian, african and semite and those combining all four.

---

^ Disregarding the fact that 'race' doesn't really exist anyway, since when does a "civilized" society in the ancient world have to be "multiracial"?? The ancient Egyptians were among the most advanced civilization yet they were predominantly if not entirely African. Also, what did Indians have to do with the Aegean?? According to all anthropological studies, the populations that made up the Aegean were of three main groups-- Africans, Western Asians, and Europeans-- with emphasis on Africans and Western Asians who brought Neolithic culture and thus the origins of civilization to Europe. Something that people like patriot are so desperate to deny.

Humanity, I suggest you go back and read this thread from the beginning to get a better understanding.

And lastly, it's not surprising that despite such features of Minoan crania such as broad nose and wide mouths the artists still gave the reconstructions such 'white' appearances.
 

---

Posted by TheAmericanPatriot (Member # 15824) on :
 
The silly aspect of this is that none of these dopey theories can tie a single thread to Plato, Socrates, Sophocles, Aristotle or any of the others....not a thread from some distant mist or mythical negroids.
 

---

Posted by Egmond Codfried (Member # 15683) on :
 


[A Moor. J. van Streeck (1619-1673)]

Over the weekend I read some references to Appiah (1992), Malik and Nederveen Pieterse by R. Reedijk (2000) which state that only around 1770 the Black was found to be inferior based on his looks. That only at the beginning of the nineteenth century race was seen in connection to colour.

In my research: late eighteen century, pre-revolutionary France, needed 'scientific evidence' to discredit the Blue Blood (=Black Blood) myth, symbolised by a Moor, a Classical African. So all the hatred went just against this symbol of despotic oppression: the Moor.

Somehow I see old cultures only rising when different peoples start pooling their resources.

quote:

---

Originally posted by humanity:
The cretans were tested to be anatolian no details were given on the dna data which is dubious,so I can't make any conclusions.

I've seen six ancient skulls reconstructed from crete [Thera or Knossos I can't recall] they gave them white skin/long hair, they all looked very broad flat nose,big mouth et al.The men to be very general resembled modern day pacific islanders/tongans,the women looked like the modern day bantu africans. They bared no resemblance to the profile based frescoes so who knows.

Some frescoes :





These heads are marked as minoan from the National Archeological Museum of Athens but honestly I don't know what to make of them.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2384/2206384459_95646dbe76.jpg?v=1200863297
-
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2405/2206519827_ff4dfa69d7.jpg?v=0

Etruscan -






one of the reconstructed skulls - minoan princess - they gave her fair skin,blue eyes et al.


I think the cretans and other aegeans like the rest of the "civilised" ancient world were multiracial societies to be overly general - european,indian,african and semite and those combining all four.

---

 

---

Posted by Clyde Winters (Member # 10129) on :
 
Keftiu




.


The archaeological evidence points to only a few reasonable certainties about Minoan history. Around 3000 BC, Crete was settled by a people who probably came from Asia Minor, who, by 2000 BC was already living in cities, trading with other nations in the Mediterranean, and employing a hieroglyphic system of writing, probably derived from Egyptian hieroglyphics. This hieroglyphic writing would eventually evolve into a linear script. They built magnificent palace centers at Knossos, Phaistos, and Kato Zakros; these palaces seem to have dominated Cretan society. We have no idea what language they spoke, but they certainly spoke a non-Hellenic language (that is, a language not closely related to Greek) and probably spoke a non-Indo-European language. "

Source: http://www.wsu.edu:8080/~dee/MINOA/MINOANS.HTM


There is evidence for the Minoan language. The language they spoke was related to the Mande group of languages. These Mande speakers formerly occupied a large part of the Fezzan ( in modern Libya)before they migrated to the Niger river valley. The Mande languages are members of the Niger-Congo Superfamily of languages.

Every since Arthur Evans discovered the Hieroglyphic and Linear A writing of Crete there has been a search for the authors of this writing.

Some Grecian traditions indicate that Libyans (called Garamante) formerly lived on Crete. This suggest that some of the Eteocretans may have spoken one of the ancient languages of Libya.


A major group from Libya that settled Crete were the Garamante. Robert Graves in (Vol.1, pp.33-35) maintains that the Garamante who originally lived in the Fezzan fused with the inhabitants of the Upper Niger region of West Africa.

This theory is interesting because the chariot routes from the Fezzan terminated at the Niger river. In addition, the Cretan term for king "Minos", agrees with the MandeManding word for ruler "Mansa". Both these terms share consonantal agreement : M N S.

The name Garamante, illustrates affinity to Mande morphology and grammar. The Mande language is a member of the Niger-Congo group of languages. The name for the Manding tribe called "Mande", means Ma 'mother, and nde 'children', can be interpreted as "Children of Ma", or "Mothers children " (descent among this group is matrilineal) .




The word Garamante,can be broken down into Malinke-Bambara into the following monosyllabic words Ga 'hearth', arid, hot'; Mante/Mande , the name of the Mande speaking tribes. This means that the term: Garamante, can be interpreted as "Mande of the Arid lands" or "Arid lands of the children of Ma". This last term is quite interesting because by the time the Greeks and Romans learned about the Garamante, the Fezzan was becoming increasingly arid.



Keftiu


The Egyptians called the Cretans Keftiu. There is agreement between the Keftiu names recorded by Egyptian scribes (T.E. Peet, "The Egyptian writing board BM5647 bearing Keftiu names". In , (ed.) by S Casson (Oxford, 1927, 90-99)), and Manding names.



Keftiu
The root kef-, in Keftiu, probably is Ke'be, the name of a Manding clan , plus the locative suffix {i-} used to give the affirmative sense, plus the plural suffix for names {u-}, and the {-te} suffixial element used to denote place names, nationalities and to form words.

On the Egyptian writing board there are eight Keftiu names. These names agree with Manding names:

Keftiu....... Manding

sh h.r........ Sye

Nsy ..........Nsye

'ksh .........Nkyi

Pnrt Pe,..... Beni (name for twins)

'dm ..........Demba

Rs............. Rsa

This analogy between Keftiu and Manding names is startling.

In conclusion, the evidence of similarity between Keftiu names and names from the Manding languages appear to support Graves view that the Eteocretans, who early settled Crete may have spoken a language similar to the Mande people who live near the Niger. Conseqently, there is every possibility that the Linear A script used by the Keftiu, which is analogous to the Libyco Berber writing used by the Proto-Mande .

See:

C. A. Winters, "The influence of the Mande scripts on ancient America", de l'IFAN>, t59, serB, no.1, (1977) pp.941-967.

C.A. Winters, "The ancient manding Script", In , (ed.) by Ivan van Sertima, ( London: Rutgers University Press Transaction Press , 1981) pp.208-214), may be written in an aspect of the Manding (Malinke/Bambara) language.


Black Greeks


.
 

---

Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
 
^^^Sorry Egmond: While your theory is "politically correct" it is unfortunately historically "way off". Crete is the "oldest" of the Mediterranean/European civilizations, dating beyond 8,000 B.C. At that time, Whites had not even begone to think about migrating westward - they reached Europe at about 1,200 B.C. Likewise Indians - who are a hybrid of Dravidian and invading Arians - did not yet exist.

The choices for Cretan ethnicity are as follows: Descendants of the Khoisan Grimaldi - who entered Europe through Gibraltar at about 45,000 B.C. and subsequently migrated Eastward, reaching Eastern Siberia at about 25,000 B.C. At the time of Crete's founding, these people had inhabited Anatolia for thousands of years, (we know this because artifacts).

The other choice is Nile valley people migrating northward, this may be the best choice: once again, because of the artefactual record - that is because in Crete (as far as I know), no artifacts have been found with the Grimaldi signature: that is, Goddess figures (or as some say; Venus figures) of Steatopygia Females. This trait has allowed scientist to track Grimaldi's across Europe and Asia - It is absent in Crete.



It may also be telling; that the FIRST city in Greece - "Mycenae" was a joint undertaking between Crete and Egypt, at about 2,000 - 1600 B.C.

Note: There is no such thing as a Semite people; this is White-man B.S. used to confuse the issues of race. The Amorite ethnic group - to which Hebrews belong - originated in Anatolia. These were a pure-Black people. The current group of people; thought of as Semite: happened as a result of racial mixing after Whites had conquered all of the western civilizations.
 

---

Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
 
Egmond - knowing your interest in European Blacks of the middle ages; I thought that you might be interested in this.





The web page is in Russian, and the browser translation is very poor, but I managed to get the following.

Saint Prince Theodore of Smolensk and Yaroslavl, called the “Black” aka Theodore Stratélate; was born during terrible years for Russians: the time of the Mongolian invasion, about 1237-1239. With the saint Baptism, he accepted the name of the saint martyr Theodore Stratélate who was considered among the great Russian prince-warriors.

Prince Theodore was famous for his military exploits. In 1239, by the prayers of the Very Holy Mother of God, the saint Merkourios martyr-warrior delivered Smolensk which was going to fall vis-a-vis Batu, the Theodore child was not in the city. They had taken him along and hidden him in a sure place during the war. In 1240, his father, prince Rostislav, mourrut died. His older brothers, divided the paternal grounds between them, allocating to the Theodore child the small possession of Mozahisk. He passed its childhood there, and studied the Holy Scriptures, the Offices of church and military science.

In 1260, prince Theodore was married to Maria Vasilievna, girl of the saint prince Basile de Yaroslav), and Theodore became thus prince de Yaroslav. They had a son named Michael, but holy Theodore quickly became widowed. He spent most of his time in military campaigns, and his son was raised by his mother-in-law, the Xénia princess.


If you are going to look into this, you might also investigate:

Ivan Grekov
Saint Alexandre Nevsky and Saint Theodore Stratelate on the bottom of Laure de Saint Alexandre Nevsky 18th. century

Battle of the defenders of Novgorod against Souzdaliens.
15th. century old middle. Novgorod.
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
^ Ignoring the pseudo-afro-nonsense above...

quote:

---

Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot:

The silly aspect of this is that none of these dopey theories can tie a single thread to Plato, Socrates, Sophocles, Aristotle or any of the others....not a thread from some distant mist or mythical negroids.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Alive-(What Box):
! /Celt/AmericanHammer/Patriot would say that - it was actually a radical fringe afrocentrist theory that attempted to explain whites by saying that the were albino Africans forced out of Africa (either rejected by 'mean' melanated Africans or outcompeted).

---

I realize it's difficult for your mainstream scholars to comprehend, but while your goals are to merge and integrate with Europeans, this type of speculation makes less sense then Africans turning white due to having no food.

A perfect example of a classic type 2 Albino with pale skin, very little or no melanin production, eye color (translucence), poor eyesight, weak hair, Extremely low infertility rate (Known to have consulted with fertility clinics), poor bone formation (no ass, skinny boy build), hairy face (compensating for no melanin), all meeting primary symptoms as defined by;
International Albinism Research Center.
True, whether you realize it or not.



Notice hairy face and solar induced skin damage



BTW:

Since it's not expected whites really know anything about the Nation Of Islam outside of what's printed in the mainstream press, it's only expected that any attempt at presenting real facts will be wrong or badly skewed due to white fear.
FYI, the NOI has NEVER stated whites were albino, but rather they claimed that whites were result of a genetic experiment merging man with pig (pink), performed by a MAD black African scientist 10 thousand years ago.
LOL, even that sounds more plausible compared to, they just ran out of food. LMAO!!!

Another Albino. Notice, he doesn't have any food, but he damn sure has glasses to aid the mole-like vision in his Albino eyes.



This Albino's skin has so little melanin, his face tears like toilet tissue paper when impacted. The source of his unusually thin skin is due to the body compensating for internal cooling due to a lack of melanin to preform this function. Otherwise, with thicker, melanin-less skin, he would not radiate heat as effectively, and as as result, he would simply overheat and die.



Lastly, the reason provided for the migration, was NOT that Albinos were FORCED out, but rather, due to their low life expectancy living in the African climate, which even to you should be apparent, not a suitable environment for a person lacking solar radiation protecting melanin. A migration to the European environment, which although not ideal for melanin-less people (confirmed by increasing cases of Skin cancer in European whites/Albinos), was much more environmentally friendly then Africa.
Unlike Hammer, I have provided more then adequate validating data confirming whites are indeed, variates of Albinos.

Case closed!
 

---

Posted by Knowledgeiskey718 (Member # 15400) on :
 

quote:

---

this type of speculation makes less sense then Africans turning white due to having no food.

---

quote:

---

Doesn't matter much what other foodstuffs they consumed.

---

quote:

---

Only a FEW foods have ample Vitamin D at all. The majority of foods such as corn, ice, tomatoes, pork, chicken, have very little Vitamin D.

---

quote:

---

For example, for YOU to obtain YOUR daily allowance of Vitamin D from consuming chickens, you'd need to eat approximately 20-30 chickens per day, and that STILL would not meet YOUR daily requirement. I'm using YOU as an example, because as a black man, MY daily recommended Vitamin D allowance is somewhere between 30-50% lower then YOUR need.

---

quote:

---

Your need parallels that of a typical Albino who cannot convert Vitamin D from UVb and as a result, must obtain the majority from supplemental sources.

---

quote:

---

On this page they list foods rich in Vitamin D. Note, the list contains NO agricultural products. None at all!!!

---

quote:

---

LOL, got you frustrated and calling names

---

quote:

---

But a coastal fishing diet is!

---

quote:

---

Not to mention, you lack the required above mentioned archaeological evidence which if your theory is correct, should be abundantly available in European skeleton remains.
You got it, post it!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Knowledgeiskey718:
Titre du document / Document title
Hemochromatosis : A Neolithic adaptation to cereal grain diets
Auteur(s) / Author(s)
NAUGLER Christopher ;
Résumé / Abstract

http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=20115377

The Neolithic period in Europe marked the transition from a hunter-gatherer diet rich in red meat to an iron-reduced cereal grain diet. This dietary shift likely resulted in an increased incidence of iron deficiency anemia, especially in women of reproductive age. I propose that hereditary hemochromatosis and in particular the common HFE C282Y mutation may represent an adaptation to decreased dietary iron in cereal grain-based Neolithic diets. Both homozygous and heterozygous carriers of the HFE C282Y mutation have increased iron stores and therefore possessed an adaptive advantage under Neolithic conditions. An allele age estimate places the origin of the HFE C282Y mutation in the early Neolithic period in Northern Europe and is thus consistent with this hypothesis. The lower incidence of this mutation in other agrarian regions (the Mediterranean and Near East) may be due to higher dietary intakes of the iron uptake cofactor vitamin C in those regions. The HFE C282Y mutation likely only became maladaptive in the past several centuries as dietary sources of iron and vitamin C improved in Northern Europe.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Knowledgeiskey718:

quote:

---

posted by meniarmer: I have not yet discovered any scientist linking Albinism with "whiteness" in "whites". LOL

---

End of story......

---

quote:

---

Please stop being redundant and so obvious that you don't comprehend your own Cut and Pastes.
Your comic book article merely "SUGGESTS" that these genes "evolved" to make super white people.
Here you are race baiting once again.

---

quote:

---

Show me where you have proof these food sources were abandoned by Europeans and completely replaced by agriculture?
No use squirming, simple answer is, You can't, because none of your European comic writers will state that craziness.

---

quote:

---

Either way, the implication is that our European ancestors were brown-skinned for tens of thousands of years--a suggestion made 30 years ago by Stanford University geneticist L. Luca Cavalli-Sforza. He argued that the early immigrants to Europe, who were hunter-gatherers, herders, and fishers, survived on ready-made sources of vitamin D in their diet. But when farming spread in the past 6000 years, he argued, Europeans had fewer sources of vitamin D in their food and needed to absorb more sunlight to produce the vitamin in their skin. Cultural factors such as heavier clothing might also have favored increased absorption of sunlight on the few exposed areas of skin, such as hands and faces, says paleoanthropologist Nina Jablonski of PSU in State College.

---

quote:

---

Researchers have disagreed for decades about an issue that is only skin-deep: How quickly did the first modern humans who swept into Europe acquire pale skin? Now a new report on the evolution of a gene for skin color suggests that Europeans lightened up quite recently, perhaps only 6000 to 12,000 years ago. This contradicts a long-standing hypothesis that modern humans in Europe grew paler about 40,000 years ago, as soon as they migrated into northern latitudes. Under darker skies, pale skin absorbs more sunlight than dark skin, allowing ultraviolet rays to produce more vitamin D for bone growth and calcium absorption. "The [evolution of] light skin occurred long after the arrival of modern humans in Europe," molecular anthropologist Heather Norton of the University of Arizona, Tucson, said in her talk.

---

quote:

---

OK, pleased to see your WIKI source review has provided you some additional information of these foodstuffs. Although, I believe it is still missing fish, Goat/Sheep milk which are the essential Vitamin D supplements. If they raised Goats, I assume they consumed Goat's milk. Why they neglect to mention it and fish are, important and relevant to this disussion.
All the other foodstuffs are low in Vitamin D and with fully or near fully compromised Melanin systems Europeans would be fully dependent on supplementary sources of Vitamin D.

---

quote:

---

Having WORKING melanin systems, INUITS could obtain a good portion of their daily Vitamin D allowance through skin/kidney conversion. Like Africans, not fully dependent on supplements as Europeans.

---

quote:

---

So, as YOUR source suggests, Europeans DID NOT have available Vitamin D rich food sources stated above.

---

quote:

---

Biological Perspectives on Human Pigmentation
By Ashley H. Robins


Rickets have been described sporadically in European skeletal material(predominately from Scandinavia and Hungary)dating from the Neolithic period until medieval times. (Wells 1975)

---

quote:

---

You contradict your own Cut And Paste above, which clearly states that Early Europeans maintained dogs, sheep, Goat, cattle, and pigs.
Now you saying they didn't have them. LOL

KIK Wrote: Early Europeans also survived on similar hunter gatherer, fisher diets. Neolithic farming in Europe contained of crops, both wild and domesticated, which included einkorn wheat, millet and spelt and the keeping of dogs, sheep and goats, cattle and pigs.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Knowledgeiskey:
The Inuit have traditionally been hunters and fishers. They hunted, and still hunt, whales, walruses, caribou, seals, polar bears, muskoxen, birds, and at times other less commonly eaten animals such as foxes. The typical Inuit diet is high in protein and very high in fat - in their traditional diets, Inuit consumed an average of 75% of their daily energy intake from fat.


Early Europeans also survived on similar hunter gatherer, fisher diets.


Neolithic farming in Europe contained of crops, both wild and domesticated, which included einkorn wheat, millet and spelt and the keeping of dogs, sheep and goats, cattle and pigs.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Knowledgeiskey718:

quote:

---

posted by meniarmer: I have not yet discovered any scientist linking Albinism with "whiteness" in "whites". LOL

---

End of story......

---

Come back when you actually have a credible and valid source for your idiotic theory.
 

---

Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
 
^ Well of course taken out of context the statement can be mis leading.
For example;
Do white couples bear Albino children?

The answer is, of course they do. Can Albinism be equated with "whiteness"? Yes, of course it can.

Do scientist link albinism in whites with "whiteness" in "whites"?
Yes, they do.
Sources confirming the above are,
-World Health Organization
-Mayo Clinic
-International Albinism Research Center
-National Institute Of Health
-Center For Disease Control
-European Skin Cancer Center

Have these sources recently went on record as stating an Albino may look normal, just like you, and still carry the Albino mutation?
YOUR comic book 1 page article stated that 80% of ALL Europeans carried the gene mutation responsible for "whiteness", or Albinism and that Africans did not.
YEP!
Now, for the $2M question,
Is Albinism a rare defect?
No, not as rare as previously believed.
The recent announcement also EXPANDED the range of symptoms to include the past visual inspection, but now also includes additional vital genetic trait information such as, eyesight, translucence of eyes, UV susceptibility, and a range of other symptoms which so happen to capture a very large number of whites previously went undetected.
Get a check up. It could be you.

From NCBI Genetic Mutation Data base;

Ocular albinism and hypopigmentation defects in Slc24a5-/- mice. Vogel P, Read RW, Vance RB, Platt KA, Troughton K, Rice DS. Lexicon Pharmaceuticals Inc., 8800 Technology Forest Place, The Woodlands, TX 77381-1160, USA. pvogel@lexgen.com As part of a high-throughput mutagenesis and phenotyping process designed to discover novel drug targets, we generated and characterized mice with a targeted mutation in Slc24a5, a gene encoding a putative cation exchanger. Upon macroscopic examination, Slc24a5-/- mice were viable, fertile, and indistinguishable by coat color from their heterozygous and wild-type litter mates. Ophthalmoscopic examination revealed diffuse retinal hypopigmentation, and a histologic examination of the eye confirmed the presence of moderate-to-marked hypopigmentation of the retinal pigmented epithelium (RPE), ciliary body, and iris pigment epithelium (IPE). Hypopigmentation was most severe in the anterior layer cells of the IPE, where melanosomes were smaller, paler, and more indistinct than those of the anterior stroma and posterior IPE. The pigment granules of the posterior IPE appeared to be nearly as dark as those in stromal melanocytes; however, both cell layers were thinner and paler than corresponding layers in wild-type mice. Ultrastructural analysis of the RPE, IPE, and ciliary body pigmented cells confirmed that mutation of Slc24a5 results in marked hypopigmentation of melanosomes in optic cup-derived pigmented neuroepithelium in the eyes. Milder reductions in melanosome size and pigmentation were noted in neural crest-derived melanocytes. The severe hypopigmentation of neuroepithelium-derived cells in the eyes resulted in a novel form of ocular albinism in Slc24a5-/- mice. Our findings suggest that SLC24A5 may be a candidate gene for some forms of ocular albinism and for the BEY1/EYCL2 locus previously associated with central brown eye color in humans.

So, they state the slc24A5 mutation described in your articles as present in 80% of Europeans may very well be responsible for ocular albinism. What age were you when you were first prescribed seeing aids?

Where's your accredited sources?
 

---

Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
 
In a previous post, I indicated that the artefactual record negates Anatolia as the ancestral home of Cretans - this because no artifacts (Venus figures) of Steatopygia Females are known to have been found there. This may be an oversimplification: Though no actual Steatopygia figures have been found, similar female figures have been found of typical Anatolian figures.

Note the Head of this figure from Crete.




Compare the head with this figure from Anatolia.




But then, at about the time Mycenae was being built, artistic style seems to have changed. This "new" style seems to have carried over past the time of the White conquest.






In Anatolia and the Eastern Aegean Islands, a new artistic style also took hold.











 

---

Posted by Knowledgeiskey718 (Member # 15400) on :
 
Notice how you have to rely on misinterpretations, and lies, to continue your theory?

Nobody asked you for scientists linking albinism in whites, as they do with every other population around the world.


The question is what scientists agree with your theory of whites not being from Europe based on skin cancer levels?

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:

quote:

---

Sorry Rasol, but the data comes directly from the leading scientists in the field of skin cancer and melanoma.

---

^ name one who agrees with your claim that whites don't come from Europe, based on skin cancer levels.

none of your usual noise please - just the name of the scientist.

quote:

---

What's so difficult to comprehend about this?

---

^ i comprehend it quite well, you never answer questions, you just use questions as and opportunity for blow"soft" demogaguery.

feel free to prove me wrong, any time, by answering my question.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by meninarmer:

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
^ hmmm. dozens of windy posts from MN on this topic.

but i ask for a source by way of a name, that's all, just a name... and....... silence.

^ oh but since there's no answer, she will ignore the question and ask her own, in hopes of distracting from the non answer.

that's ok, mn, we'll just note that you can't name a single scholar who supports your position.

and then move on to your 'questions', just like you want us to.....

---

I have not yet discovered any scientist linking Albinism with "whiteness" in "whites". LOL
Although it's fairly obvious normal working melanin regulation genes act analogous to a Wall light dimmer switch, where you can regulate the flow of electricity to control the intensity of the bulb (Off/More or less light).
As people migrate to new environments, these switches ADJUST melanin levels to the OPTIMUM density, balancing light penetration for adequate vitamin D synthesis, and light absorbs ion for skin and internal organ protection from UVB and other harmful radiation exposure.
This is in a NORMAL operational system.

In the mutated (broken) system at the extreme, is Albino.
In Albinos, the regulation switch doesn't slide, or turn ON at all, but is switched off all the time.
Therefore, there is no regulation of melanin production and little to no protect from UVB and other radiation. hence, sun burn and melanoma.

Only two types of humans on earth follow the last scenario, Albinos (African, Asian, Indian, White) and whites.
What is the commonality shared between these two groups?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Knowledgeiskey718:
Notice ow you ave to rely on misinterpetations, and lies, to continue your teory?

Nobody asked you for scientists linking albinism in whites, as they do with every other population around the world.


The question is what scientists agree with your theory of whites not being from Europe based on skin cancer levels?

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:

quote:

---

Sorry Rasol, but the data comes directly from the leading scientists in the field of skin cancer and melanoma.

---

^ name one who agrees with your claim that whites don't come from Europe, based on skin cancer levels.

none of your usual noise please - just the name of the scientist.

quote:

---

What's so difficult to comprehend about this?

---

^ i comprehend it quite well, you never answer questions, you just use questions as and opportunity for blow"soft" demogaguery.

feel free to prove me wrong, any time, by answering my question.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by meninarmer:

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
^ hmmm. dozens of windy posts from MN on this topic.

but i ask for a source by way of a name, that's all, just a name... and....... silence.

^ oh but since there's no answer, she will ignore the question and ask her own, in hopes of distracting from the non answer.

that's ok, mn, we'll just note that you can't name a single scholar who supports your position.

and then move on to your 'questions', just like you want us to.....

---

I have not yet discovered any scientist linking Albinism with "whiteness" in "whites". LOL
Although it's fairly obvious normal working melanin regulation genes act analogous to a Wall light dimmer switch, where you can regulate the flow of electricity to control the intensity of the bulb (Off/More or less light).
As people migrate to new environments, these switches ADJUST melanin levels to the OPTIMUM density, balancing light penetration for adequate vitamin D synthesis, and light absorbs ion for skin and internal organ protection from UVB and other harmful radiation exposure.
This is in a NORMAL operational system.

In the mutated (broken) system at the extreme, is Albino.
In Albinos, the regulation switch doesn't slide, or turn ON at all, but is switched off all the time.
Therefore, there is no regulation of melanin production and little to no protect from UVB and other radiation. hence, sun burn and melanoma.

Only two types of humans on earth follow the last scenario, Albinos (African, Asian, Indian, White) and whites.
What is the commonality shared between these two groups?

---

---

quote:

---

So, they state the slc24A5 mutation described in your articles as present in 80% of Europeans may very well be responsible for ocular albinism. What age were you when you were first prescribed seeing aids?

---

quote:

---

^ Not the mutated version present in Europeans as your article STRONGLY suggests.

---

quote:

---

A team led by geneticist Keith Cheng of Pennsylvania State University(PSU) College of Medicine in Hersey found two variants in the same gene(slc24a5) that differed by just one amino acid. Nearly all Africans and East Asians had one allele, whereas 98% of the 120 Europeans had the other.

---

 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
One pet-peeve I have is when folks in a thread discuss something off-topic, especially when that particular topic is already covered in another thread!!

If you want to discuss the indigenity of whites to Europe, go HERE!! Of course I'd expect Meninarmer to talk about it here or elsewhere considering his utter humiliation on the last page like all ignorant trolls!
 

---

Posted by Knowledgeiskey718 (Member # 15400) on :
 
^^^^Indeed Dj, I tried to get him to leave this thread and discuss it back in Marc's thread, but the kid insists on posting here.
 

---

Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
 
.
 

---

Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
 
LOL, You Europeans are so sensitive.

Carry on you two 4-eyed mutants. I'll pick it up later. Watching Hopkins-Pavlik re-run and it's taken priority.

BTW KIK:
The differing allele you mentioned in Europeans is not present in Africans, but IT IS present in African Albinos. Go figure.
 

---

Posted by Knowledgeiskey718 (Member # 15400) on :
 

quote:

---

The differing allele you mentioned in Europeans is not present in Africans, but IT IS present in African Albinos. Go figure.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Knowledgeiskey718:

Indeed Dj, I tried to get him to leave this thread and discuss it back in Marc's thread, but the kid insists on posting here.

---

That's because he scared of all the facts presented to him there. (As if such facts can only remain in that thread alone and not posted anywhere else! LOL) Besides, when have you allowed a stupid kid do what he wants?! It's bad enough allowing these other trolls have run of this forum, I refuse to allow a dumb kid with a chip off his brain run even this thread!
 

---

Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
 
Is Mike the only one who can read and contribute
on my thread's topic? Get the hell outta my thread
with anything having nothing to do with

CLASSIC GREECE AND ITS POPULATION'S ORIGINS

CLASSIC GREECE AND ITS POPULATION'S ORIGINS


CLASSIC GREECE AND ITS POPULATION'S ORIGINS


CLASSIC GREECE AND ITS POPULATION'S ORIGINS


CLASSIC GREECE AND ITS POPULATION'S ORIGINS


CLASSIC GREECE AND ITS POPULATION'S ORIGINS


CLASSIC GREECE AND ITS POPULATION'S ORIGINS


CLASSIC GREECE AND ITS POPULATION'S ORIGINS


CLASSIC GREECE AND ITS POPULATION'S ORIGINS
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
^ Of course Mike is not the only one. Unfortunately trolls like minibrainer have low attention defecit as well as low intellects, but getting back to the topic...

quote:

---

Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot:

It's as nutty as a fruitcake Djehuti and you know better. You show me one thread, one single connection between some genetic marker and the acomplishments of classical Greece. Fact is you cannot do it. You cannot even tell me who these people were.

---

There is nothing "nutty" about it, and it is quite simple, dear professor. The genetic marker E3b as well as Benin HBS (sickle-cell) are all genetic evidence that verify past decades of findings via anthropological remains-- that Africans expanded into the Mediterranean during the Neolithic along with Southwest Asians to help found civilization in the Aegean and Greece. It was neolithic culture that brought agriculture and settled community life to Greece. These settled communities developed into the first urban centers or cities. These same communities also created the first writing, advanced sciences, complex government, advanced art-- everything we call 'civilization'. What does all of this have to do with 'Classical' Greece, you ask? Of course these early Neolithic to Bronze Age cultures comprise Archaic Greece which is the predecessor to Classical Greece! Do want me to break it down further for you, professor? Think of the alphabet-- A comes before B which comes before C. 'A' in this case is Archaic Greece which precedes and at the same time leads to Classical Greece!

Now, back to all the other posters who can think straight...

In an earlier page of this thread I posted a pic of a neolithic skull from Crete, and said that certain features remind me of ancient Egyptians such as Seti.

Takruri compared it to a mesolithic Nubian skull, but I think a comparison with dynastic Egyptians would be even better. Here is that same skull below compared to that of Seti II on the right.



^ Notice how both of them have low sloping foreheads as well as pronounced zygomatic arches; not to mention the high nose bridges which as we know is not unsual to Africans. But the alveolar prognathism of the Cretan skull looks more like that of say 18th dynasty members such as Tutankhamun.




^ Notice the so-called "buck-teeth".


Oh and that reconstructed Minoan priestess (despite her complexion and hair color) has features that remind me alot of the reconstruction of the Egyptian priest Natsef-Amun!


 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
up...
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
...
 

---

Posted by TheAmericanPatriot (Member # 15824) on :
 
This is out of an insane asylum, what a bunch of dopey nonsense. The guys on the white supremacy boards get pretty crazy but they would be hard pressed to to this garbage.
If we want a history, we just make one up. One good thing about it, everyone makes an A. Nobody is wrong beacuse facts are not neccessary.
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
^ Praytell us professor what exactly is so dopey or nonsensical about the anthropological information above?? My post was an assessment of skeletal remains discovered decades earlier as well as recent genetic data which all point to African influence in the Aegean during the Neolithic. Please offer something to rebut it, or else stand corrected.
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot:

Djehuti, The genetic markers and the work of anthropologists on human remains does not establish a history. It is a piece of information that has to be supported by extensive historical data. For example, who introduced the marker, how many, Historians want to look at change and continuity...what changes as the result of a historical event and what remains the same...

---

quote:

---

..The absurdity of your greece argument is that you cannot connect any of it to Homer, none of it to aristotle etc etc. You cannot even give these people a name or prove what happened to them or even from whom they got the marker..

---

quote:

---

It is afrocentric silliness at it's greatest.

---

quote:

---

You try to use these markers to connect Greece to Egypt and yet they predate even historical Egypt by centuries and more. I have heard some incoherent arguments in my time but even a typical untrained college freshman usually does better than this. It is what happens when people inject political ideology into academics.

---

Yes they predate Egypt's historical period; so what? We have shown you before what neolithic elements the predynastic Egyptians and even early dynastic Egyptians had in common with early Aegeans.

I suggest you read British Egyptologist David Rhol's book below:


The Lords of Avaris: Investigating the Origins of Western Civilization
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
...
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
up...
 

---

Posted by TheAmericanPatriot (Member # 15824) on :
 
You still have no connection Djehuti. You have to show me a piece of historical information showing a DIRECT connection between these people at classical Greece. Just assuming there is an evolutionary process there is not adequate.
This is irresponsible data and not acceptable. You are making an assumption without even as much as a thesis.
The only thing the marker shows is that at some point, some people who had PARTIAL East African ancestry were in the area.
We also know these people were at one time spread all over southern Europe. So far you have shown ius nothing. This is exactly why many educators want to phase out the African studies pograms as they are currently constructed.
 

---

Posted by zarahan (Member # 15718) on :
 
DJE is not saying that the ancient African mixes are responsible for CLASSICAL GREECE, he is talking about the AEGEAN civilization that preceded Classical Greece, such as that in Crete. There is a difference.


DJE mentioned: David Rohl's Lords of Avaris

Amazon blurb:

"The Lords of Avaris" is one man's journey in search of the legendary origins of the Western World. Our story begins in a small rock-cut tomb below the desolate ruin-mound of Jericho in the Jordan Valley. This is the start of an epic journey of discovery, in the Homeric mould, which ranges across the ancient lands and archaeological sites of the Mediterranean. From Joshua's Jericho to Romulus' Rome, the true chronicle of our pre-Christian past is uncovered revealing an extraordinary historical picture, previously unimagined by scholars.

The epic legends of the West, which permeate the writings of Greece and Rome, appear to have been based on the exploits of genuine historical figures and actual events. There really was an 'Heroic Age' of brazen-clad warriors, the last of which fought before the walls of Troy, just as described in Homer's "Iliad". At the beginning of the Middle Bronze Age - two thousand years before the assassination of Julius Caesar in the Roman Senate - a new people appeared on the stage of history to join the great civilisations of Mesopotamia and Egypt. These 'Indo-European'-speaking tribes were chariot-riding warriors from the northern mountains and plains.

They became the Hittites, the Aryan kings of Mitanni, the Vedic heroes of the Indus, and the founders of the later empires of Greece, Persia and Rome. They had many legendary names - the Divine Pelasgians of Greece, the Luwians of Troy and western Anatolia, the Rephaim and Anakim of the Bible, and the Hyksos rulers of Avaris who suppressed Egypt for generations. Their heroes and heroines are legionary: Inachus, mythical king of Argos in the Peloponnese; his daughter the beautiful Princess Io who married an Egyptian pharaoh; Danaus, the Hyksos ruler who, fleeing from Egypt to Greece, founded the Mycenaean dynasty which culminated in Agamemnon's ill-fated Trojan War; Cadmus, the bringer of writing to the West; Minos, the Cretan high-king of Knossos who built the infamous Labyrinth; Mopsus, warrior and sage who led a vast Greek, Philistine and Anatolian army into the Levant in a daring attempt to seize Egypt in the time of Ramesses III. All these, and more, are the stuff of legend - but "The Lords of Avaris" reveals these Classical heroes as flesh-and-blood characters from our ancestral past.

----------------------
Note Rohl mentioning that thrse new migrants came AFTER certain civs like that of Egypt. Classical Greek civ historically also came after the Aegean cultures were already established.


=====================
this one may alreay be on tap but here's genetic study as one aspect of the possibilities:

1: Tissue Antigens. 2001 Feb;57(2):118-27.

HLA genes in Macedonians and the sub-Saharan origin of the Greeks.

Arnaiz-Villena A, Dimitroski K, Pacho A, Moscoso J, Gómez-Casado E, Silvera-Redondo C, Varela P, Blagoevska M, Zdravkovska V, Martínez-Laso J.
Department of Immunology and Molecular Biology, H. 12 de Octubre, Universidad Complutense, Madrid, Spain. aarnaiz@eucmax.sim.ucm.es

HLA alleles have been determined in individuals from the Republic of Macedonia by DNA typing and sequencing. HLA-A, -B, -DR, -DQ allele frequencies and extended haplotypes have been for the first time determined and the results compared to those of other Mediterraneans, particularly with their neighbouring Greeks. Genetic distances, neighbor-joining dendrograms and correspondence analysis have been performed. The following conclusions have been reached: 1) Macedonians belong to the "older" Mediterranean substratum, like Iberians (including Basques), North Africans, Italians, French, Cretans, Jews, Lebanese, Turks (Anatolians), Armenians and Iranians, 2) Macedonians are not related with geographically close Greeks, who do not belong to the "older" Mediterranenan substratum, 3) Greeks are found to have a substantial relatedness to sub-Saharan (Ethiopian) people, which separate them from other Mediterranean groups. Both Greeks and Ethiopians share quasi-specific DRB1 alleles, such as *0305, *0307, *0411, *0413, *0416, *0417, *0420, *1110, *1112, *1304 and *1310. Genetic distances are closer between Greeks and Ethiopian/sub-Saharan groups than to any other Mediterranean group and finally Greeks cluster with Ethiopians/sub-Saharans in both neighbour joining dendrograms and correspondence analyses. The time period when these relationships might have occurred was ancient but uncertain and might be related to the displacement of Egyptian-Ethiopian people living in pharaonic Egypt.
 

---

Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot:
The guys on the white supremacy boards get pretty crazy but they would be hard pressed to to this garbage.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Knowledgeiskey718:

Courtesy of Refuting "Racial Reality" re Greeks

http://www.onedroprule.org/about1335.html


There is a fraudulent claim, promulgated by Racial Reality and Dienekes Pontikos, that the Arnaiz-Villena study HLA genes in Macedonians and the sub-Saharan origin of the Greeks (abstract and link to full study below) has been retracted or scientifically refuted. Rest assured, the study is perfectly valid. It would be helpful here to discuss the study that was retracted, and the reason why. It is The origin of Palestinians and their genetic relatedness with other Mediterranean populations (which contained some cross-referenced Greek data in a neighbor-joining dendogram and a correspondence analysis), and it was retracted solely and strictly for political reasons, as this Observer article makes crystal clear:

(Keep in mind we are dealing with the study on the relatedness of Jews and Palestinians at the moment, which was retracted, and not the one on the Greek-sub-Saharan relatedness, which was not retracted. The two must not be confused.)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4307083,00.html

Observer wrote:
Journal axes gene research on Jews and Palestinians
Robin McKie, science editor
Observer

Sunday November 25, 2001


A keynote research paper showing that Middle Eastern Jews and Palestinians are genetically almost identical has been pulled from a leading journal.

Academics who have already received copies of Human Immunology have been urged to rip out the offending pages and throw them away.

Such a drastic act of self-censorship is unprecedented in research publishing and has created widespread disquiet, generating fears that it may involve the suppression of scientific work that questions Biblical dogma.

'I have authored several hundred scientific papers, some for Nature and Science, and this has never happened to me before,' said the article's lead author, Spanish geneticist Professor Antonio Arnaiz-Villena, of Complutense University in Madrid. 'I am stunned.'

British geneticist Sir Walter Bodmer added: 'If the journal didn't like the paper, they shouldn't have published it in the first place. Why wait until it has appeared before acting like this?'

The journal's editor, Nicole Sucio-Foca, of Columbia University, New York, claims the article provoked such a welter of complaints over its extreme political writing that she was forced to repudiate it. The article has been removed from Human Immunology's website, while letters have been written to libraries and universities throughout the world asking them to ignore or 'preferably to physically remove the relevant pages'. Arnaiz-Villena has been sacked from the journal's editorial board.

Dolly Tyan, president of the American Society of Histocompatibility and Immunogenetics, which runs the journal, told subscribers that the society is 'offended and embarrassed'.

The paper, 'The Origin of Palestinians and their Genetic Relatedness with other Mediterranean Populations', involved studying genetic variations in immune system genes among people in the Middle East.

In common with earlier studies, the team found no data to support the idea that Jewish people were genetically distinct from other people in the region. In doing so, the team's research challenges claims that Jews are a special, chosen people and that Judaism can only be inherited.

Jews and Palestinians in the Middle East share a very similar gene pool and must be considered closely related and not genetically separate, the authors state. Rivalry between the two races is therefore based 'in cultural and religious, but not in genetic differences', they conclude.

But the journal, having accepted the paper earlier this year, now claims the article was politically biased and was written using 'inappropriate' remarks about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Its editor told the journal Nature last week that she was threatened by mass resignations from members if she did not retract the article.

Arnaiz-Villena says he has not seen a single one of the accusations made against him, despite being promised the opportunity to look at the letters sent to the journal.

He accepts he used terms in the article that laid him open to criticism. There is one reference to Jewish 'colonists' living in the Gaza strip, and another that refers to Palestinian people living in 'concentration' camps.

'Perhaps I should have used the words settlers instead of colonists, but really, what is the difference?' he said.

'And clearly, I should have said refugee, not concentration, camps, but given that I was referring to settlements outside of Israel - in Syria and Lebanon - that scarcely makes me anti-Jewish. References to the history of the region, the ones that are supposed to be politically offensive, were taken from the Encyclopaedia Britannica, and other text books.'

In the wake of the journal's actions, and claims of mass protests about the article, several scientists have now written to the society to support Arnaiz-Villena and to protest about their heavy-handedness.

One of them said: 'If Arnaiz-Villena had found evidence that Jewish people were genetically very special, instead of ordinary, you can be sure no one would have objected to the phrases he used in his article. This is a very sad business.'


It is worth exploring a few quotes from the above article, as they are very revealing:

Observer wrote:
Such a drastic act of self-censorship is unprecedented in research publishing and has created widespread disquiet, generating fears that it may involve the suppression of scientific work that questions Biblical dogma.


This shows the politics at work in certain circles of genetic research.

Sir Walter Bodmer wrote:
British geneticist Sir Walter Bodmer added: 'If the journal didn't like the paper, they shouldn't have published it in the first place. Why wait until it has appeared before acting like this?'


The fact that the journal initially published the paper shows the journal found nothing wrong with it scientifically. Indeed, all papers must pass peer review to be published. It also, apparently, saw nothing politically objectionable, until it received all those letters from people objecting to the supposedly politically incorrect wording.

Apparently, later on, in an attempt to discredit the study "scientifically," three scientists wrote in to Nature Magazine. Racial Reality and Pontikos claim it somehow "challenges" that the study was pulled for political reasons. This is utter nonsense, as the Observer article makes the political reasons for the withdrawal very plain. The three scientists are expressing their own opinions only, and their "lack of scientific merit" idea, which falls very weakly and definitely untrue, was not the reason for the retraction. This can be seen when viewing their own comment at the end of the article: "We believe that the paper should have been refused for publication on the simple grounds that it lacked scientific merit." In actuality, this "scientific refutation" is a thinly veiled and weak attempt, containing nonsensical and straw-man arguments, to discredit the study solely and strictly because of its politically controversial remarks.


Here is the article. Note that what Dienekes Pontikos quotes on his site is only a portion of the article, and this is done to make it seem, to the unsuspecting reader, as though it pertains to the Greek study, or to Arnaiz-Villena's methodology in general, which it most certainly does not; if the scientists truly had a problem with the Greek study, they would have written specifically about it, and if they truly had a problem with Arnaiz-Villena's methodology in all his studies, they would have written about that. They didn't, and to reiterate, their comments about the Palestinian/Jewish study are invalid, and this will be explained below. This deception is also found on Racial Reality's own site, and he has added it to Wikipedia's article on admixture in Europe, calling it the "Arnaiz-Villena Controversy." Note also that there is no controversy in the scientific community over the study on Greeks at all; such controversy exists only in the minds of the two aforementioned southern European White Nationalists. I have made requests to have the misinformation removed from Wiki, but it hasn't happened yet. Racial Reality dodges the bullet by rewording it slightly, while still saying essentially the same thing. So, I have given up. Dear Reader, please take what you find on Wiki with several grains of salt; it is notorious for falsification, and I frankly don't think this problem will ever be resolved:


http://www.nature.com/cgi-taf/DynaPage.taf?file=/nature/journal/v415/n6868/full/415115b_r.html

Quote:
Nature 415, 115 (10 January 2002); doi:10.1038/415115b


Dropped genetics paper lacked scientific merit


Sir – Even though the controversial withdrawal of a paper on the genetic relatedness of Palestinians and Jews by the journal Human Immunology (see Nature 414, 382; 2001) is a minor episode compared with the tragedies caused by ethnic/religious conflicts over past decades, the issues involved are worth revisiting.

The stated purpose of the paper by Antonio Arnaiz-Villena et al. was to "examine the genetic relationships between the Palestinians and their neighbours (particularly the Jews) in order to: (1) discover the Palestinian origins, and (2) explain the historic basis of the present ... conflict between Palestinians and other Muslim countries with Israelite Jews".

They conclude: "Jews and Palestinians share a very similar HLA genetic pool that supports a common ancient Canaanite origin. Therefore, the origin of the long-lasting Jewish–Palestinian hostility is the fight for land in ancient times."

It is difficult to believe that knowledge of genes may help to explain the present conflict. Although population genetics can address issues of relatedness of populations, mating patterns, migrations and so on, obviously it cannot provide evidence about reasons for conflicts between people.

Our primary concern, however, is that the authors might be perceived to have been discriminated against for political, as opposed to legitimate scientific, reasons.

Even a cursory look at the paper's diagrams and trees immediately indicates that the authors make some extraordinary claims. They used a single genetic marker, HLA DRB1, for their analysis to construct a genealogical tree and map of 28 populations from Europe, the Middle East, Africa and Japan. Using results from the analysis of a single marker, particularly one likely to have undergone selection, for the purpose of reconstructing genealogies is unreliable and unacceptable practice in population genetics.

The limitations are made evident by the authors' extraordinary observations that Greeks are very similar to Ethiopians and east Africans but very distant from other south Europeans; and that the Japanese are nearly identical to west and south Africans. It is surprising that the authors were not puzzled by these anomalous results, which contradict history, geography, anthropology and all prior population-genetic studies of these groups. Surely the ordinary process of refereeing would have saved the field from this dispute.

We believe that the paper should have been refused for publication on the simple grounds that it lacked scientific merit.

Neil Risch
Department of Genetics, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California 94305, USA

Alberto Piazza
Department of Genetics, Biology and Biochemistry, University of Torino, Via Santena 19, 10126 Torino, Italy

L. Luca Cavalli-Sforza
Department of Genetics, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California 94305, USA


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
© 2002 Nature Publishing Group
Privacy Policy


It is clear that the three above scientists are catering to popular political sentiments, and that is a damned shame. Let's examine what they say:

Three Scientists wrote:
Even a cursory look at the paper's diagrams and trees immediately indicates that the authors make some extraordinary claims. They used a single genetic marker, HLA DRB1, for their analysis to construct a genealogical tree and map of 28 populations from Europe, the Middle East, Africa and Japan. Using results from the analysis of a single marker, particularly one likely to have undergone selection, for the purpose of reconstructing genealogies is unreliable and unacceptable practice in population genetics.


The DRB1 locus is apparently a good one to research, since it is used quite often by different researchers. It may only be one locus, but a relationship between populations at even one locus is still a relationship. Arnaiz-Villena, et al., say data obtained by using this locus is informative and discriminating, indeed more discriminating than data from mtDNA and Y-chromosomes. However, Arnaiz-Villena et al. always use other loci in addition to DRB1, and draw conclusions from all the data. So, the claim that conclusions are drawn from testing one locus (even though it is a good one) is false and a straw-man argument.

The claim the locus is under selection is vague and indefinite. Which alleles are under selection at this locus? There is no information stating that any of the ones tested are. Are all alleles found at this locus under selection? There isn't enough information to regard this seriously.

At any rate, selection plays no role in the Arnaiz-Villena studies, since the frequency of the alleles are not being used to estimate level of admixture. For example, no one is saying that allele from Population B exists in Population A at a rate of 4%, therefore there is admixture of Population B into Population A at a rate of 4%. This is the only case selection can have an adverse effect, because if an allele is expanded due to its being beneficial, its rate in a population will likely exceed the true admixture rate. If one is calculating admixture rate, one is likely to get inflated results.

However, the mere presence of any allele specific to one population in another cannot occur by any other means than admixture. Selection can never cause the presence of such an allele.

The study we are dealing with here, the one on Palestinian / Jewish relatedness, apparently included calculations of genetic distances at the DRB1 locus. Genetic distances are calculated by comparing the frequencies of alleles in various populations. The aim of calculating genetic distances is to determine relatedness of populations. Again, alleles under selection would have no effect on calculating relatedness, only on calculating level of admixture. If a certain foreign allele is introduced into a given population and becomes very beneficial in it, it causes those with the allele to survive, at the expense of those who don't have it. Eventually, many people will have this allele, even though it may have been introduced via a very small admixing population. However, as people without the allele die off, and those with it increase in number, it follows that the relatedness of the population to the population from which the beneficial allele came increases, of course, without the admixture increasing. Therefore, a calculation of genetic relatedness would reflect this elevated relatedness, without revealing true admixture. But if one is only calculating relatedness, it is not a problem and is quite accurate. This is precisely what Arnaiz-Villena, et al. are doing in this and their other studies.

The "DRB1 locus is under selection" attempt to discredit the study goes out the window.

Interestingly, Y-chromosome and mtDNA analysis is essentially the same as using a single HLA locus with its respective alleles, as mentioned to me by Dr. Arnaiz-Villena in private correspondence. Even more interestingly, Y Chromosomes and mtDNA are also subject to selection, since they are linked to diseases. Yet these are frequently used to calculate admixture estimates, and no one seems to complain:

Arnaiz-Villena, et al., in 'Population genetic relationships between Mediterranean populations determined by HLA allele distribution and a historic perspective' (abstract below) wrote:
Other molecular markers, like mtDNA and Y Chr. are widely used for this type of research. They are also subject to selection since they are linked to diseases [...].


At any rate, the role selection plays is not necessarily significant in all cases, according a geneticist I recently spoke to. He explained that the four west African strains of HbS, which are definite indicators of sub-Saharan admixture when found elsewhere, are beneficial to those with malaria, and so selection would increase the frequency of the gene in malarial areas without the admixture increasing. However, in places like Sicily and southern Italy, the frequency of the HbS gene is still quite low, and generally not significantly different from estimates of African admixture using mtDNA, Y-chromosomes, or autosomal genes.

Let's face it: genetecists aren't going to use a marker or locus that isn't reliable. Period. To reiterate, Dr. Arnaiz-Villena has pointed out (in private correspondence) that HLA DRB1 is more discriminating than mtDNA or Y-chromosomes are.


Continuing with the dissection of the three scientists' article:

Three Scentists wrote:
The limitations are made evident by the authors' extraordinary observations that Greeks are very similar to Ethiopians and east Africans but very distant from other south Europeans;


Indeed, as shown by the neighbor-joining dendogram and correspondence analysis at the DRB1 locus shown in this Palestinian/Israeli study, Greeks are closely related to sub-Saharans. This is beyond question or challenge. This does not necessarily mean that overall, Greeks and sub-Saharans are similar. But a close relationship at even only one locus (already shown so far by two distinct methods of analyzing that locus) shows that admixture occurred. However, apparently the three scientists decided to ignore the actual study on Greeks (abstract & link below), because that study shows a relatedness in the samples between Greeks and sub-Saharans using several methods (including two ways of analyzing another locus entirely -- DQ), not just the neighbor-joining dendogram and correspondence analysis of DRB1 shown in the study on Palestinians and Jews, although those would certainly be sufficient; indeed, either one at the DRB1 locus alone would be sufficient. (This deliberate negligence on the part of the three scientists isn't surprising, because, as mentioned above, they criticized the basing of the main conclusions in the Israeli/Palestinian study -- that Palestinians and Israelis are related -- on only the DRB1 locus; this was most certainly not the case, since other loci were tested, and the conclusions were based on the similarities of all results.) Most convincingly, in the actual Greek study, several sub-Saharan-specific alleles were clearly found in the Greek population at the DRB1 locus when a direct search for alleles was undertaken. There is absolutely no getting around this. Sub-Saharan alleles could not be present in the Greek population without admixture having occurred. Anyone with the slightest knowledge of genetics and an ounce of common sense can see this. Alleles specific to one population do not appear in another by magic; only by admixture (as stated above).

Three Scientists wrote:
and that the Japanese are nearly identical to west and south Africans.


Firstly, according to another study, HLA Genes in Arabic-speaking Morrocans, the scientists (including Arnaiz-Villena) create what is definitely a similar tree to the one in the retracted study, and never mention that Japanese are related to sub-Saharan Africans, only that they are outliers together (along with Greeks, who really do have a relationship with sub-Saharans):

Quote:
Greeks are almost outliers together with Japanese and San (Bushmen).. . In fact, a gradient from Western (both African and European) to Middle Eastern Mediterraneans is observed, placing distinctly Greeks, Japanese and San (Bushmen) as outliers.


Three Scientists wrote:
It is surprising that the authors were not puzzled by these anomalous results, which contradict history, geography, anthropology and all prior population-genetic studies of these groups.


Often, genetics will reveal something we didn't previously know about a population. This isn't so puzzling. In fact, it happens all the time, on both individual and populational levels. But in the case of the Greeks having sub-Saharan admixture and Jews / Palestinians being related, the studies are in concord with others. There will be more on the Greek study itself below. It is only being mentioned here because of the cross-referenced data in the study on Palestinians and Jews.

Three Scientists wrote:
Surely the ordinary process of refereeing would have saved the field from this dispute.


This is a very silly and ignorant thing to say, since, as mentioned above, all studies must pass peer review before being published in scientific journals. As mentioned, the study on Palestinians and Jews passed peer review, proving it contained no glaring scientific errors, contrary to what the three scientists who wrote to Nature want us to believe.

An e-mail reply to my query to one of the three claiming a scientific weakness for the study is as follows:

One of the three scientists, in an e-mail reply wrote:
Thanks for writing. I was rather surprised by the following statement in the article you recommend that I read : 'If Arnaiz-Villena had found evidence that Jewish people were genetically very special, instead of ordinary, you can be sure no one would have objected to the phrases he used in his article”. I am not a Jew, but I have great respect for them, and I don’t think they are so ordinary, but I am one of those few geneticists that look at culture rather than genes. I am also scared by the amount of antisemitism I see around. Is the sentence above another bit of it? If so, it is better to not spread it around.
The Arnaiz article was refused on the basis of a mistake made by Arnaiz Villena or his colleagues that introduced into a scientific article politics about a very sad conflict that has been going on for decades now, and that we would all like to come to a reasonable end as soon as possible, ideally one dignified for both sides.
Arnaiz apologized, and so I suppose he has been forgiven for it and I am not sure the issue deserves continuing comment.


Quite surprising and revealing, isn't it? The scientist, who confirms the retraction of the study was political, actually thinks culture should be included in genetic investigations. Doing this can certainly prevent one from learning the truth about a population's genetic structure, since given genes do not necessarily correspond to a given culture. I must confess I am quite disappointed in this well-respected scientist, and will henceforth be somewhat wary of his work.

As mentioned above, that the study passed peer review shows nothing was wrong with it. This, together with the facts that: the study was indeed not pulled for scientific reasons; that no other scientists complained about the study scientifically; that no other scientists complained about other similar studies employing the DRB1 locus; and that the three scientists themselves complained about no other similar studies using the DRB1 locus, helps to show the study is scientifically sound. The fact that other scientists had written in to support Arnaiz-Villena after the retraction, further proves the study's validity:

Observer wrote:
In the wake of the journal's actions, and claims of mass protests about the article, several scientists have now written to the society to support Arnaiz-Villena and to protest about their heavy-handedness.

One of them said: 'If Arnaiz-Villena had found evidence that Jewish people were genetically very special, instead of ordinary, you can be sure no one would have objected to the phrases he used in his article. This is a very sad business.'


Sad business, indeed. Interestingly, the scientist who wrote the e-mail reply above thinks the above quote is Anti-Semitic, and should not be spread around. It is not, and is simply factual. This would equally apply to any other group (or individual) else with an ideological interest in the outcome of a genetics study.

So, to summarize, the study on the relatedness of Jews and Palestinians is perfectly valid from a scientific standpoint. The retraction was for political reasons, and the supposedly scientific objections by a few scientists are easily taken apart, and indeed are merely disguised attempts to show their dislike of the study for political reasons only.


-----


Now, it is time to move on to the study on the Greeks, which is called HLA genes in Macedonians and the sub-Saharan origin of the Greeks. Again, keep in mind that this study has not been retracted or challenged.

Here is the abstract:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=11260506&query_hl=20&itool=pubmed_docsum

Quote:
Tissue Antigens. 2001 Feb;57(2):118-27. Related Articles, Links


HLA genes in Macedonians and the sub-Saharan origin of the Greeks.

Arnaiz-Villena A, Dimitroski K, Pacho A, Moscoso J, Gomez-Casado E, Silvera-Redondo C, Varela P, Blagoevska M, Zdravkovska V, Martinez-Laso J.

Department of Immunology and Molecular Biology, H. 12 de Octubre, Universidad Complutense, Madrid, Spain. aarnaiz@eucmax.sim.ucm.es

HLA alleles have been determined in individuals from the Republic of Macedonia by DNA typing and sequencing. HLA-A, -B, -DR, -DQ allele frequencies and extended haplotypes have been for the first time determined and the results compared to those of other Mediterraneans, particularly with their neighbouring Greeks. Genetic distances, neighbor-joining dendrograms and correspondence analysis have been performed. The following conclusions have been reached: 1) Macedonians belong to the "older" Mediterranean substratum, like Iberians (including Basques), North Africans, Italians, French, Cretans, Jews, Lebanese, Turks (Anatolians), Armenians and Iranians, 2) Macedonians are not related with geographically close Greeks, who do not belong to the "older" Mediterranenan substratum, 3) Greeks are found to have a substantial relatedness to sub-Saharan (Ethiopian) people, which separate them from other Mediterranean groups. Both Greeks and Ethiopians share quasi-specific DRB1 alleles, such as *0305, *0307, *0411, *0413, *0416, *0417, *0420, *1110, *1112, *1304 and *1310. Genetic distances are closer between Greeks and Ethiopian/sub-Saharan groups than to any other Mediterranean group and finally Greeks cluster with Ethiopians/sub-Saharans in both neighbour joining dendrograms and correspondence analyses. The time period when these relationships might have occurred was ancient but uncertain and might be related to the displacement of Egyptian-Ethiopian people living in pharaonic Egypt.

PMID: 11260506 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]


Here is the link to the full article of the above abstract:

http://www.makedonika.org/processpaid.aspcontentid=ti.2001.pdf

The study found a clear relationship between Greeks and sub-Saharan populations. A neighbor-joining dendogram at the DRB1 locus shows this. Correspondence analyses using HLA-DRB1 allele frequencies data and low resolution HLA-DR and DQ (DQ, incidentally, is another locus) allele frequencies data support this. Genetic distances with HLA-DR and DQ generic typings support this. HLA-DRB1 genetic distance calculations support this. And finally, eleven DRB1 alleles were found to be shared by Greeks and sub-Saharans when a direct allele search was undertaken. These alleles, when not found in any real quantities in other populations geographically close to Greece, were searched for in other locations, and were found to exist mainly in Ethiopian and West African populations. Some are only found in Greeks and sub-Saharans, while a few are sporadically found in other populations, mainly around the Mediterranean (the Croatian island of Hvar and Lebanon) and Hungary. African ancestry in any of these populations should not be surprising. (Incidentally, two are found in Amerindians, who have been shown by other methods to have sub-Saharan admixture. One is found in Pacific peoples, who have also been shown to have low levels of sub-Saharan admixture by other methods.) This shows an introgression of sub-Saharan alleles into the Greek population. Again, the only way for alleles from one population to enter another one is by admixture. Selection cannot cause this. The DRB1 locus' being subject to selection has no bearing on these results (see above).

(It should also be noted that the idea put forth by one individual that the HLA alleles in question are Greek alleles and the sub-Saharan populations carrying them do so because of Greek admixture doesn't hold even a drop of water. This is because Greece's neighbours were tested for the alleles and were found not to have them to any significant degree. Since Greek colonists settled in many parts of the Mediterranean, if the alleles had been Greek in origin, they would be present in Greece's neighbours, like Italians, Turks, etc., at appreciable rates. Also, there is no historical evidence of significant Greek settlement in these sub-Saharan areas, particularly the West African ones. But there is indeed evidence of significant presence and settlement of sub-Saharans in Greece.)

Other tests that show other results should not surprise. There is another study, called High-resolution typing of HLA-DRB1 locus in the Macedonian population, by Petlichkovski, et al., 2004, which tests the same DRB1 locus and apparently doesn't report sub-Saharan material (see below on this), and finds Greeks to be similar to Macedonians and other southern Europeans (using genetic distance calculations). In the study itself (not in the abstract) the Arnaiz-Villena study is addressed, and it is mentioned that their results are not in agreement with those of Arnaiz-Villena, and the reasoning used is that the sampled populations were different. This makes perfect sense. The authors didn't try to discredit the Arnaiz-Villena study, which they couldn't do, anyway, because results are results. But isn't it strange that those with ideological investments in the purity of Greeks or other Mediterraneans who claim to object to the use of the DRB1 locus don't object to this study, and freely quote it, conveniently ignoring, of course, what is stated in boldface above? If that doesn't make things clear, nothing will! Incidentally, Racial Reality, who frequently berates those who don't look beyond abstracts into the studies themselves, should have taken his own advice in this case, as he is one of those who fraudulently quotes this study as "proof" of a lack of African ancestry in Greeks.

Petlichkovski, et al. wrote:
The observed closest standard genetic distance between the studied Macedonian population and the Greek population (SGD = 2.777, GD = 6.35) is not in concord with that published by Arnaiz-Villena et al. (21), who point out the close genetic relatedness of the Macedonian population to that of the Cretans and to the great genetic distance between the Macedonians and the Greeks coming from Attica, Cyprus, and northern Greece. Papassavas et al. (22) reveal a significant decrease of both DRB1*1104 and *1601 allele frequencies in the Cretan population used for the genetic distance analysis by Arnaiz-Villena et al., compared to their results. Bearing in mind the differences in the allele frequencies in the Macedonians in our study and those in the study of Arnaiz-Villena et al., we believe that the discordance of the observations in both the studies investigating the HLA polymorphism is probably due to the selection of different subject populations.


Specifically, this sentence from the abstract is used by Greek white nationalists in an attempt to fraudulently "prove" there is no sub-Saharan admixture in Greeks (as if this could really be done, since the Arnaiz-Villena Greek study, amongst others, has shown conclusively the opposite) is as follows:

Petlichkovski, et al. wrote:
The included African populations grouped on the opposite side of the tree.


The key word here is included, since the included African populations were not the sub-Saharan ones Arnaiz-Villena mentioned had a relationship with Greeks (Oromo, Amhara, Nuba, Fulani, Rimaibe, Mossi), but instead, were Egyptians, Moroccans, Algerians (all North Africans), and Mandenka (sub-Saharan, but from Senegal) -- populations which Arnaiz-Villena also found to be distant from Greeks. Quoting from inside the actual Petlichkovski study:

Petlichkovski, et al. wrote:
As expected, the included African populations (Moroccans, Egyptians, Mandenka, and Algerians) were grouped on the opposite side of the tree.


As we can see, Pontikos and Racial Reality are distorting things once again!

Now it is time to address additional claims made by some that the words of M.A. Jobling, M.E. Hurles, and C. Tyler-Smith, from their book Human Evolutionary Genetics, Garland Publishing: New York, 2004 (as quoted by Greek Nationalist Dienekes Pontikos) somehow refute the Greek study (which they don't). Once again, we are being misled, since the study being referred to is the one on Palestinians and Jews, even though they specifically refer to the Greek correspondence analysis reproduced in it from the original Greek study. I have this textbook, and the only mentioning of Arnaiz-Villena in the references is with regard to the Palesinians/Jews study. I am keeping this discussion in the Greek section of this article, incidentally, since it deals with Greek data, despite its coming from the other study.

Jobling, et al. [according to Dienekes] write:

Quote:
As an example, Figure 1.5 illustrates the arbitrariness of different possible population groupings based upon DNA sequence diversity at an HLA locus. Often an objective way to choose between different interpretations is not obvious (though objective methods are discussed later in this book), and in its absence, simple assertion often fills the vacuum.

Figure 1.5: Grouping populations – take your pick. Relationships between populations based on DNA sequence diversity data at the HLA-DRB1 locus, displayed as a correspondence analysis plot (similar to principal components analysis; see Chapter 6) in which clustered populations are genetically similar. (a) Populations, with names indicated; (b, c, d) Three alternative groupings of the populations (there are others). The grouping chosen by Arnaiz-Villena et al. (2001) is (d) (adduced as support for a sub-Saharan origin for the Greeks) but is essentially arbitrary. Why is it preferred to alternative groupings shown in (b) and (c)? If the population origins were unknown when the groupings were made, would it affect the outcome? Note that this locus is generally regarded as being under strong selection. Adapted from Arnaiz-Villena et al. (2001).[Q1]


Click here for larger version.

In actuality, Dienekes leaves out much of the text (surprise, surprise) so that the true reason of the inclusion of the correspondence analysis is not revealed, which is to show how different interpretations are often (not just with this diagram or this study) possible when it comes to results, with opposing camps going at it, as it were. Here is the full quote from that particular section, from pages 11-12:

Quote:
1.2.3 Interpretation, interpretation, interpretation

In many fields, as time passes, opinion upon how data should be interpreted changes. Indeed, there are often differences in opinion about data interpretation at any one time. This is particularly true of genetic data on human diversity. Debates described in Chapters 8 and 10, on the origins of modern humans and the genetic impact of the spread of agriculture in Europe, illustrate this. Particular methods of analysis, with different underlying paradigms, can be adopted by opposing "camps" within a particular field, and reconciliation becomes difficult. Some methods for analyzing diversity data seem particularly open to different interpretations. As an example, Figure 1.5 illustrates the arbitrariness of different possible population groupings based upon DNA sequence diversity at an HLA locus. Often an objective way to choose between different interpretations is not obvious (though objective methods are discussed later in this book), and in its absence, simple assertion often fills the vacuum.

[the following is the caption under the correspondence analysis]

Figure 1.5: Grouping populations – take your pick. Relationships between populations based on DNA sequence diversity data at the HLA-DRB1 locus, displayed as a correspondence analysis plot (similar to principal components analysis; see Chapter 6) in which clustered populations are genetically similar. (a) Populations, with names indicated; (b, c, d) Three alternative groupings of the populations (there are others). The grouping chosen by Arnaiz-Villena et al. (2001) is (d) (adduced as support for a sub-Saharan origin for the Greeks) but is essentially arbitrary. Why is it preferred to alternative groupings shown in (b) and (c)? If the population origins were unknown when the groupings were made, would it affect the outcome? Note that this locus is generally regarded as being under strong selection. Adapted from Arnaiz-Villena et al. (2001).[Q1]


Let me reiterate that the correspondence analysis being questioned is the one that contains Greek data in the retracted (for political reasons) study on Palestinians on Jews, not anything from the actual Greek study, even though the correspondence analysis is identical. Jobling, et al. do not (and cannot) take issue with Arnaiz-Villena's findings of sub-Saharan alleles in the Greek population, as shown in the Greek study itself. The alleles don't lie. Also, they don't (and can't) question the fact that the population distances were closest between Greeks and sub-Saharans at that and another locus, as shown in the Greek study itself. This, too, does not lie. The issue of the DRB1 locus being under selection has been addressed above, and is a non-issue, since Arnaiz-Villena was not attempting to actually quantify sub-Saharan admixture in Greeks or influx of sub-Saharans to Greece; he merely points out that admixture occurred, and that it is more than just an infinitessimal amount, since in the Greek study itself genetic distances show closeness at a few loci, and since quite a few (eleven) sub-Saharan alleles at the DRB1 locus were reported in Greeks in that study.

Jobling, et al. are only using the Greek correspondence analysis in the Palestinians/Jews study to illustrate how groups are chosen in diagrams, and they mention that choosing them objectively is not always done. They use Arnaiz-Villena, et al. as an example because they feel that since A-V knew the population origins, it may have skewed their objectivity with regard to a single diagram based on the DRB1 locus (this is their opinion only, and by no means are they stating this is the only time elements of studies have been called into question by those who happen to have different opinions). As stated above, this correspondence analysis is but one of many methods A-V use to determine sub-Saharan admixture in Greeks in the actual Greek study itself. But Jobling, et al. themselves admit that the population origins were known beforehand, which proves they aren't questioning the Greek-sub-Saharan relatedness at all. They are only questioning the supposed non-objectivity of the population groupings of one correspondence analysis. (In the Greek study itself, as stated above, there is another correspondence analysis, using HLA-DR and DQ [another locus] allele frequencies data, that isn't mentioned at all by Jobling, et al., since they aren't addressing that study at all, yet it comes up with essentially the same results.) Jobling, et al. actually aren't specifically questioning the grouping of Greeks with sub-Saharans in the correspondence analysis under scrutiny, either, since one of the alternative groupings they show, (b), also does this. Furthermore, since Greeks and sub-Saharans cluster together in the charts, it makes sense to group them together. This part really isn't arbitrary, and there is nothing wrong with Arnaiz-Villena's grouping them together. This aside, the Jobling, et al. book, incidentally, is an excellent book, and I highly recommend it.

No one is saying Greeks are primarily sub-Saharan in their overall genetic makeup. They are Europeans, after all. But that sub-Saharan admixture has been shown to exist genetically in Greeks (here at the HLA level) should not arouse skepticism. In fact, owing to Greece's former empire and contact with Egypt and other parts of Africa during this time; the mingling of various peoples in Roman-era Greece; the same mingling of peoples of different ethnicities (including sub-Saharans) in Greece during the Turkish period; and Greece's geographical location near Africa, the finding of a relatedness between Greeks and sub-Saharans due to the former's absorption of the latter does not by any stretch of the imagination contradict geography and history.

Other studies using markers other than HLA have also found sub-Saharan genetic material in Greeks. This flatly contradicts the claim by Racial Reality and Pontikos that sub-Saharan admixture in Greeks is unsupported by other studies.

The study Clinal patterns of human Y chromosomal diversity in continental Italy and Greece are dominated by drift and founder effects finds sub-Saharan Y-haplogroup A in a sample of 27 Greeks from the island of Lesvos (Mitilini) (data in full study, not in abstract).

Also, the Benin-originating strain of the HbS (sickle-cell) marker (#19) is found in Greeks. It could only have gotten there through admixture, whether indirect (through North Africans, for example, as the authors of the study suggest) or direct (through the influx of sub-Saharans at various times in Greek history). Either way, the end result is irrefutable post-Diasporic sub-Saharan ancestry:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=1687685&query_hl=25&itool=pubmed_docsum

Quote:
Hemoglobin. 1991;15(6):459-67. Related Articles, Links


The origin of the sickle mutation in Greece; evidence from beta S globin gene cluster polymorphisms.

Boussiou M, Loukopoulos D, Christakis J, Fessas P.

Unit for Prenatal Diagnosis, Laikon Hospital, Athens, Greece.

Study of the Hpa I polymorphism 3' to the beta-globin gene in the Greek population revealed absence of the site in 238 beta S chromosomes, in contrast to a much larger sample of chromosomes carrying the beta A gene, where this site was consistently positive. Subsequent haplotype analysis of the beta-globin gene cluster in 82 beta S chromosomes demonstrated that 79 (96%) belonged to haplotype #19, while the three exceptions (all Hpa I negative) could be explained by a delta-beta recombination event. Haplotype #19 was never encountered in a parallel study of the 83 beta A chromosomes. Comparison of the above results with similar surveys in other parts of the world and consideration of various historical events suggest that the beta S mutation was introduced into Greece over the last few centuries by the Saracen raids and/or by settlements of North African slaves brought in by the Arabs, Franks, Venetians, or Ottoman Turks, who have occupied the country over the last millennium.

PMID: 1687685 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]


Here is yet another study that finds a beta-thalassaemia allele specific to Africans in Greeks:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=3620356&query_hl=3&itool=pubmed_docsum

Quote:
Br J Haematol. 1987 Jul;66(3):379-83. Links

DNA haplotype heterogeneity of beta-thalassaemia in Greece: feasibility of prenatal diagnosis.

Athanassiadou A, Zarkadis I, Papahadjopoulou A, Maniatis GM.


We have carried out DNA haplotype analysis of 69 beta-thalassaemia patients in Greece and 42 of the parents using seven standard polymorphic sites. Our data show a high degree of heterogeneity of the chromosomal background in which beta-thalassaemia occurs in Greece, suggesting a high degree of heterogeneity in the beta-thalassaemia mutations involved. Haplotype I is found here to represent 45% of total beta-thalassaemia mutations detected, a proportion well below the 67% reported in earlier studies with Greek-American patients. Nine different haplotypes are detected and the ones carrying beta(+) mutations are the majority, including those which are linked to beta(+) mutations associated with a thalassaemia intermedia phenotype, and which constitute 11% of all haplotypes. One of these haplotypes (---- ) has never before been reported to occur in non-Africans, whether in beta thal or beta A chromosomes, and it is found here to be of African origin rather than the product of recombination. In 21 families haplotype analysis showed that prenatal diagnosis for a second child was feasible in 81% of the cases. Use of the AvaII-psi beta polymorphic site as well as the seven standard ones brought this proportion up to 90%.

PMID: 3620356 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]


In addition, sub-Saharan Chromosome 7 markers have been found in Greeks. These Chromosome 7 markers are cystic fibrosis mutations that are specific to sub-Saharans; Greeks are the only Europeans in which these sub-Saharan mutations are found:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=12392505&query_hl=20&itool=pubmed_docsum

Quote:
Tissue Antigens. 2002 Aug;60(2):111-21. Related Articles, Links


Population genetic relationships between Mediterranean populations determined by HLA allele distribution and a historic perspective.

Arnaiz-Villena A, Gomez-Casado E, Martinez-Laso J.

Department of Immunology and Molecular Biology, Universidad Complutense, Madrid, Spain. aarnaiz@eucmax.sim.ucm.es

HLA genes allele distribution has been studied in Mediterranean and sub-Saharan populations. Their relatedness has been tested by genetic distances, neighbour-joining dendrograms and correspondence analyses. The population genetic relationships have been compared with the history of the classical populations living in the area. A revision of the historic postulates would have to be undertaken, particularly in the cases when genetics and history are overtly discordant. HLA genomics shows that: 1) Greeks share an important part of their genetic pool with sub-Saharan Africans (Ethiopians and west Africans) also supported by Chr 7 Markers. The gene flow from Black Africa to Greece may have occurred in Pharaonic times or when Saharan people emigrated after the present hyperarid conditions were established (5000 years B.C.). 2) Turks (Anatolians) do not significantly differ from other Mediterraneans, indicating that while the Asians Turks carried out an invasion with cultural significance (language), it is not genetically detectable. 3) Kurds and Armenians are genetically very close to Turks and other Middle East populations. 4) There is no HLA genetic trace of the so called Aryan invasion, which has only been defined on doubtful linguistic bases. 5) Iberians, including Basques, are related to north-African Berbers. 6) Present-day Algerian and Moroccan urban and country people show an indistinguishable Berber HLA profile.

Publication Types:
Historical Article

PMID: 12392505 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE


The above study is another by Arnaiz-Villena, using the data from his main study on Greeks. The information on the Chromosome 7 markers comes from Dork, et al., 1998. Here is the quote from inside the above Arnaiz-Villena study:

Quote:
Other Negroid genes have also been found in Greeks. They are the only Caucasoid population who bears cystic fibrosis mutations typical of Black Africans (Chromosome 7). See Dork, et al. In Am. J. Hum. Genet., 1998: 63: 656-682.


Anthropologists, studying old remains of Greeks, sometimes found sub-Saharan-like individuals:

J. Lawrence Angel, in American Anthropologist, New Series, Vol. 74, No. 1/2 (Feb. - Apr., 1972) [review of Frank Snowden's "Blacks in Antiquity" book] reports:

Quote:
In my own skeletal samples from Greece I note apparent negroid nose and mouth traits in two of fourteen Early Neolithic (sixth millenium B.C.), only two or three more among 364 from fifth to second millenium B.C., one among 113 Early Iron Age, one or two among 233 Classic and Hellenistic skeletons, but four clear Negroids (all from one area of Early Christian Corinth) among ninety-five Roman period, two among eighty-five Medieval, and of course ten among fifty-two Turkish period Greeks, yet none among 202 of Romantic (nineteenth century) date.


An interesting quote from Biological Relations of Egyptians and Eastern Mediterranean Populations during pre-dynastic and Dynastic Times, Journal of Human Evolution, 1972 (1) pp. 307-313:


Quote:
Against this background of disease, movement and pedomorphic reduction off body size one can identify Negroid (Ethiopic or Bushmanoid?) traits of nose and prognathism appearing in Natufian latest hunters (McCown, 1939) and in Anatolian and Macedonian first farmers (Angel, 1972), probably from Nubia via the predecesors of the Badarians and Tasians [. . .]


Frank Snowden, who passed away in 2007 at age 96, had researched the presence of blacks in the ancient Greece from the standpoint of art and literature. His findings include:

Quote:
Both the literary and archaeological evidence points to a not infrequent crossing between blacks and whites. Nothing in the observations on such unions, whether marriage or concubinage, resembles certain modern strictures on racial mixture.

Of course one reason for the color bar which recently existed in the West was the belief that it was race mixing which led to the collapse of Greek, Roman, and other civilizations. . . .

No laws in the Greco-Roman world prohibited unions of blacks and whites. Ethiopian blood was interfused with that of Greeks and Romans. No Greek or Roman author condemned such racial mixture. . . . The scientists Aristotle and Pliny, like Plutarch, commented as scientists on the physical appearance of those born of black-white racial mixture but included nothing resembling certain modern strictures on miscegenation. . . . It is safe to assume, therefore, that in course of time many Ethiopians were assimilated into a predominantly white population. (Blacks in Antiquity, 193-195)


With respect to the number of blacks in ancient Greece, Snowden states:

Quote:
Even though we cannot state, in the manner of modern sociologists and historians,the ratio of Blacks to Whites in either Greece or Italy, we can say that Ethiopians were by no means few or rare sights and that their presence, whatever their numbers, constituted no color problem. (Blacks in Antiquity, 186)


Snowden also mentions:

Quote:
Black-white sexual relations were never the cause of great emotional crises and many blacks were physically assimilated into the predominantly white populations of the Mediterranean world.


...the number of references to Ethiopians in Greek literature of the fifth century BC, on the appearance of mulatto children following the presence of blacks in Greece in the army of Xerxes, and on the many artistic representations of the mid- and late-fifth century BC reflecting this anthropological evolution.


It is worth clicking on his name above and reading the article. His two books, Blacks in Antiquity and Before Color Prejudice, are excellent works and are highly recommended. They do not contain Afrocentric drivel, and Snowden cites all his sources and makes logical conclusions. In fact, the Arnaiz-Villena study's results of Ethiopian alleles in the Greek population correlate to Snowden's research, since most of the sub-Saharans Snowden speaks of originated in the Ethiopian region. So, history is corroborated by genetics, and vice-versa. Even most of the specific geographical regions match up, e.g., the Athens area, Cyprus, Aegean Islands, etc.

Snowden has been studying this field since the 1940's, and wrote a few articles at that time. One is called The Negro in Ancient Greece and is available online in PDF form. (I have the original article, as well as The Negro in Classical Italy, and will soon scan them both in.)


Here is another Arnaiz-Villena study mentioning the Greek-sub-Saharan relatedness:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=11543906&query_hl=20&itool=pubmed_docsum

Quote:
Hum Immunol. 2001 Sep;62(9):1051-61. Related Articles, Links


The correlation between languages and genes: the Usko-Mediterranean peoples.

Arnaiz-Villena A, Martinez-Laso J, Alonso-Garcia J.

Department of Immunology and Molecular Biology, H. 12 de Octubre, Universidad Complutense, 28041, Madrid, Spain. aarnaiz@eucmax.sim.ucm.es

The usko-Mediterraneans peoples are defined as ancient and present day populations that have lived in the Mediterranean/Middle-East/Caucasus area and have spoken a Basque related language. The present day existing populations show an HLA genetic relatedness which is more or less close according to geographical distance. The Greek sample is an outlying in all genetic analyses, because Greeks have a significant genetic input from sub-Saharan Ethiopians and Blacks. This probably occurred in Pharaonic times. Present day comparisons between genes and languages show a lack of correlation: Macedonian, Palestinians, Kurds, part of Berbers, Armenians, and Turks belong to the old Mediterranean substratum, but they do not speak a language included in the old Mediterranean Dene-Caucasian group. This is due to an "elite"-imposed culture and language. Other ethnic groups speak an "old Mediterranean language" or "usko-Mediterranean language" modified by Roman Latin (i.e., Spanish, Italians), or by other not fully explained processes (Jews). Therefore, the correlation between genes and languages may exist at a macrogeographical level, but not when more precise microgeographical studies are done, as shown in the present "usko-Mediterranean" peoples model.

PMID: 11543906 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]


The following study was done by other scientists and confirms the relatedness of the Greeks to sub-Saharans by calculating genetic distances at the DRB1 locus (this study, incidentally, and the Petlichkovski (2004) study above, show that the Greek study is indeed cited by other scientists, and not merely northern European White Nationalists and Afrocentrists, contrary to what Racial Reality and Pontikos would have us believe; the fact that we site it here on our respectable site also disproves those claims, since we are a group who seek the truth and demand all sources):


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=16473309&query_hl=25&itool=pubmed_docsum

Quote:
Eur J Med Genet. 2006 January - February;49(1):43-56. Epub 2005 Feb 10. Related Articles, Links


HLA genes in Southern Tunisians (Ghannouch area) and their Relationship with other Mediterraneans.

Hajjej A, Hmida S, Kaabi H, Dridi A, Jridi A, El Gaa1ed A, Boukef K.

National Blood Transfusion Centre, Tunis, Tunisia.

South Tunisian HLA gene profile has studied for the first time. HLA-A, -B, -DRB1 and -DQB1 allele frequencies of Ghannouch have been compared with those of neighboring populations, other Mediterraneans and Sub-Saharans. Their relatedness has been tested by genetic distances, Neighbor-Joining dendrograms and correspondence analyses. Our HLA data show that both southern from Ghannouch and northern Tunisians are of a Berber substratum in spite of the successive incursions (particularly, the 7th-8th century A.D. Arab invasion) occurred in Tunisia. It is also the case of other North Africans and Iberians. This present study confirms the relatedness of Greeks to Sub-Saharan populations. This suggests that there was an admixture between the Greeks and Sub-Saharans probably during Pharaonic period or after natural catastrophes (dryness) occurred in Sahara.

PMID: 16473309 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher]


There is more. AncestryByDNA, using autosomal markers, mentions that the average Greek and Italian type with approximately 5% sub-Saharan genetic material. Even though in some cases with respect to certain population groups, for an individual, a low reading such as this may be negated by the confidence interval, in Greeks and Italians low levels of sub-Saharan admixture are consistenly found, making them signature results for these populations. This means they are not stastical "noise," but true results.


That Greeks have some sub-Saharan admixture isn't open to question. The HLA alleles and genetic distance calculations (and neighbor-joining dendograms and correspondence analyses) speak for themselves, as do the other sub-Saharan markers described above, along with the cranial and skeletal, as well as historic, data.

But there is even more.

Sub-Saharan-originating Y-group E-M78 (a derivative of sub-Saharan-originating E3b) is found at relatively high levels in Greeks (and some other Mediterraneans), which suggests, in addition to the more recent admixture, a very ancient sub-Saharan contribution to the Greek genepool (Semino, 2004 and Cruciani, 2004). The fact that the most prevalent form of E-M78 found in Greeks is a later, mainly local (Mediterranean) variation is irrelevant, since the parental E-M78 originated in eastern Africa, as did all of its ancestral markers. Various descendants of E3b, E-M78's ancestor, are shown to exist in many Mediterraneans in this study (though all are simply marked "E3b"), which also shows sub-Saharan Y-group A in Cypriots (although it isn't specified whether these are Greek or Turkish, so, perhaps it is a cross-section; Greek-identified Cypriots are far more numerous). East-African-Specific M1 has also been reported in Greeks (Richards, 2000 and supplementary data).

We rest our case. It must be remembered, this posting is not about "proving" Greeks are "really Black" because of a minor amount of sub-Saharan ancestry. This is about showing sub-Saharan admixture occurred in Greece, and this is evidenced by different kinds of genetic research and supported by history and anthropology. More importantly, it is about refuting fraudulent claims (by those with ideological investments in Greece's "Whiteness") that Arnaiz-Villena's Greek information is invalid or unsound, or that the study on Greeks has been refuted or retracted. Arnaiz-Villena's study on Greeks is perfectly sound scientifically, as are all of his others. And, despite that there are some geneticists (usually those who specialize in mtDNA or Y Chr.) who don't have much faith in HLA studies, there are a great deal of geneticists who find HLA to be a very reliable and discriminating tool for studying population relationships, and the number of studies employing HLA for this purpose are legion. Indeed, some of those who specialize in HLA find mtDNA and Y Chr. to be less reliable. [/QB]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot:

You still have no connection Djehuti. You have to show me a piece of historical information showing a DIRECT connection between these people at classical Greece. Just assuming there is an evolutionary process there is not adequate.
This is irresponsible data and not acceptable. You are making an assumption without even as much as a thesis.

---

quote:

---

The only thing the marker shows is that at some point, some people who had PARTIAL East African ancestry were in the area.
We also know these people were at one time spread all over southern Europe. So far you have shown is nothing. This is exactly why many educators want to phase out the African studies pograms as they are currently constructed.

---

quote:

---

zarahan, Djehuti does not even have the historical evidence to connect africa with pre-Indo-European greece. All he has is a genetic marker that a quarter of the population has. For all he knows the people who spread the marker may have no longer even have been substantially african at all. The fact that the marker exists tells us almost nothing historically.

It is the same as seeing a light in the sky and saying, "since I do not know what that light is it must be a UFO."

---

LMAO Incorrect. The Y-chromosomal marker E3b shows that it originated in Africa and that its presence in the Mediterranean and southern Europe dates to the Neolithic. Not only that but HLA cell receptors important in immunity show the same thing...

Greeks share an important part of their genetic pool with sub-Saharan Africans (Ethiopians and west Africans) also supported by Chr 7 Markers. The gene flow from Black Africa to Greece may have occurred in Pharaonic times or when Saharan people emigrated after the present hyperarid conditions were established (5000 years B.C.)/Neolithic..-- Arnaiz Villena

And even the form of Sickle-cell anemia (Benin HBS) in Greece is African!



Add all the genetic data above with physical remains showing African or 'negroid' features dating from the neolithic. Not only the skulls from Crete that I posted above but even skeletal remains in mainland Greece such as neolithic Lerna (a site in Argos) as stated in previous pages of this thread.

Add to that the surviving artwork and depictions, particularly the Minoan frescoes from Crete...



The people of the Bronze Age Aegean. Physical appearnce.
"The inhabitants of the Aegean area in the Bronze Age may have been much like many people in the Mediterranean basin today, short and slight of build with dark hair and eyes and sallow complexions. Skeletons show that the population of the Aegean was already mixed by Neolithic times, and various facial types, some with delicate features and pointed noses, others pug-nosed, almost negroid, are depicted in wall paintings from the 16th century BC. But men and women are always represented with black hair, and the presence of fair-haired people is not attested in the Aegean until later Greek times. Some very tall men buried in the Mycenaean shaft graves may be descendants of invaders who entered the mainland at the end of the 3rd millennium. A few skeletons from the single graves that appear on the mainland at the very end of the Bronze Age suggest teh presence of new people from the north."--- Sinclair Hood, The Home of the Heroes: The Aegean Before the Greeks (1967) also found in Encyclopedia Britannica 1990 ed. Macropedia Article, Vol 20: Greek and Roman Civilizations

And although Disney World may not be a primary source, it could be thought of as a secondary source... in that many years ago when I was a kid I remember going to the 'Posiedon Adventure'. There in the hallways of the long waiting line were exact duplicates of the Minoan frescoes and I was surprised to see on many of them images of what looked like black people! With everything I know now, I'm no longer suprised.


Add to all of this, the archaeological data...

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:

http://www.cwo.com/~lucumi/crete.html

British archaeologist Arthur Evans (1851-1941), who conducted excavations on the island, was convinced of African migrations to ancient Crete. He pointed out that:

"The multiplicity of these connections with the old indigenous race of the opposite African coast, and which we undoubtedly have to deal with in the pre dynastic population of the Nile Valley, can in fact be hardly explained on any other hypothesis than that of an actual settlement in Southern Crete."

The research team of C.H. and H.B. Hawes, the latter of whom, like Evans, conducted important archaeological excavations in Crete, [...] noted that: "Anthropologists are inclined to the view that the Neolithic people of Crete were immigrants, and probably came from North Africa."

Historian H.R. Hall, also Oxford trained, shared Evans' position on the early population of Minoan Crete:

"While the majority of the original Neolithic inhabitants of Crete probably came from Anatolia, another element may well have come in oared boats from the opposite African coast, bringing with them to the southern plain of Messara the seeds of civilization that, transplanted to the different conditions of Crete, developed into the great Minoan culture, a younger more brilliant, and less long-lived sister of that of Egypt."

Whether the Minoan culture was more brilliant than that of Egypt is highly questionable at best, but on the other points Hall seems to just about to hit the mark. Evans, again, indeed considered Egypt and Libya as the springboards of Minoan civilization; so much so that he structured his own Minoan chronology on that of dynastic Egypt. He was particularly struck by the similarities in the contents of the of the tombs of the ancient Minoans and Egyptians:

"So numerous, in fact, are the points, of comparison presented by the contents of these early interments with those of pre dynastic Egypt that, far-fetched as the conclusion might appear at first sight, I was already some years since constrained to put forth the suggestion that about the time of the conquest of the lower Nile Valley by the first historic dynasty some part of the older population had actually settled in this southern foreland of Crete."

Gordon Childe also commented on the relations between Crete and pre dynastic Egypt:

"At least on the Mesara, the great plain of southern Crete facing Africa, Minoan Crete's indebtedness to the Nile is disclosed in the most intimate aspects of its culture. Not only do the forms of early Minoan stone vases, the precision of the lapidaries' technique and the aesthetic selection of variegated stones as his materials carry on the the pre dynastic tradition, Nilotic religious customs such as the use of the sistrum, the wearing of amulets in the forms of legs, mummies and monkeys, and statuettes plainly derived from Gerzean `block figures,' and personal habits revealed by depilatory tweezers of the Egyptian shape and stone unguent palettes from the early tombs and, later, details of costumes such as the penis-sheath and loin-cloth betoken something deeper than the external relations of commerce."

Cretan/Egyptian contacts pick up again in the sixteenth and fifteenth centuries B.C. During the reigns of Egyptian monarchs Makare Hatshepsut and Thutmose III (1504-1447 B.C.) the people of Crete, whom the Egyptians called Keftiu, were graphically portrayed as tribute bearers on the walls of the tombs of the Egyptian nobility.

SOURCES:
African Presence In Early Europe, Edited by Ivan Van Sertima
Man, God And Civilization, by John G. Jackson

---

quote:

---

Even if all of that is true it tells us almost nothing from an historical point of view. Classical Greece was a product of the Indo European invasion and had nothing to do (as far as we know) with any genetic marker they may well have been deposited there thousands of years before. Population movements have been the rule for the past 50,000 years. To stretch that into an african contribution to historical Greek culture is absurd.

---

Incorrect professor. Classical Greece is a product of peoples whose roots lie in the preceeding Archaic Greece which was the first Greek civilization and yes Africans had a significant role in it.
 

---

Posted by zarahan (Member # 15718) on :
 
AP maintained:
"Djehuti does not even have the historical evidence to connect africa with pre Indo European greece."

But you have laid out a) historical evidence, as seen right there in the wall and tomb paintings, the (b) genetic markers discussed earlier and above.

You said originally that Africans and Southwest Asians moved to the Aegean area and helped found civilization in the Aegean and Greece. You did not say swarms of Nubian or Egyptian charioteers were roaming around Crete or parts of Turkey. You said a mix of peoples were involved. Also various Southwest Asian and Near Eastern peoples DO carry African genetic markers in varying proportions (per Knowledge's posts above) so any presence of these markers also coming via Near Eastern peoples as part of that mix is not surprising, particularly the further back you go in history. Under the OOA model, all the SA/NE populations derive from migrating Africans, so corresponding genetic material from that original source is hardly unusual. The people seen today do not necessarily look like the people 4,000 years ago. A mix of routes, pathways, peoples and sources are involved in the Neolithic era.

AP seems to be missing your point. The Aegean civilizations existed before so called Indo-European Greece, and the Indo-Europeans adopted numerous aspects of that previous civilization. Also the pug-noses and very dark skin would only represent ONE TYPE of Afrocoid strain. There are other types. As noted by Hiernaux 1975, Africa has the tallest and the shortest people in the world, the broadest and the narrowest noses, etc etc.. So right there is historical evidence of an Africoid type on the wall and tomb paintings. The pug-noses just happen to be the most visible type that can be seen via the paintings. There may have been others that looked different, a routine occurrence with African peoples.

As for AP's claim of no "historical evidence to connect africa with pre Indo European greece" you have proven that false. The Minoan civilization is located on Crete, considered one of the "Greek" islands by later definition.

Adding to your data would be the well documented paper below which shows extensive contacts between Crete and Egypt in olden times, BEFORE the rise of Myceaean Greeks, particularly through Byblos, located in present day Lebanon:
Not only did this involve trade but cultural borrowing and interchange as well.

Some quotes:
See:
((http://www2.ulg.ac.be/archgrec/IMG/aegeum/aegaeum18(pdf)/08%20Watrous.pdf))


Deposits of votives from the area of the temples at Byblos exhibit a strongly Egyptian
f lavor. The famous Montet Jar from Byblos was filled with Egyptianizing objects and motifs,
such as jewellery, seals, amulets and votives as well as representations of an ibis, apes, baboons, the uraeus and the Horus child.4 Other groups of votives at Byblos included Egyptian-type stone vases, private Egyptian statuettes, objects, figurines, and amulets depicting the lotus, Osiris column, scarab, bull, lion, hippo and the royal crown of Lower Egypt which were
associated with Egyptian deities and the Pharaoh.5 This elite Egyptian(izing) material
contrasts with the contents of local private tombs which contain little or no such items.6 The
presence of many of these Egyptian motifs and titles at Byblos underlines the local nobility’s
use of the powerful Egyptian status and their assimilation of Egyptian ideology for their own
political enhancement.

Because Crete was poor in raw materials and “underdeveloped” relative to the Near East, it seems likely that it was Minoan mariners who first set sail for Levantine and Egyptian ports in search of silver, copper, tin, ivory and precious stones, in return for which they brought timber, and finished goods such as textiles, metal vases, weapons and decorated pottery.

It is also clear that the Cretans came into contact with some forms of Egyptian culture indirectly, via the Levant. Minoan seals with Egyptianizing designs, for example, at times resemble Levantine models more closely than Egyptian examples.[11]

In 1994 Judith Weingarten published a stimulating article on the sealings from the early palace at Phaistos.[23] By distinguishing among the groups of some 1500 well preserved seals that were used on five different door pommels, she found that three seals seemed to have an important position in the administrative hierarchy of the palace, since they had been used many more times than any of the others. Two of these seals had traditional abstract designs (CMS ii 5, nos.165 and 168), but the third seal (CMS ii 5, no. 268/9) was decorated with a scene of a bull battering down a fortified settlement. From earliest times (as on the Narmer palette), this design was one of the most royal of Egyptian motifs.

This sealing brings us to the question of Egyptian influence on the creation of Minoan
administration and political structure. Fiandra has shown that the administrative system
governing the storage and redistribution of goods in the First Palace at Phaistos is so similar
to the many such systems in Egypt and the Near East that it must have been derived from the
East.24 The distinctly Egyptian shape of the Phaistian door pommels also may point to the
area where the Minoans actually learned about the administrative system. On Crete the
Minoans devised two forms of writing for administrative purposes, the hieroglyphic script
(which may be the earlier of the two) and Linear A.25 At Byblos, the Phoenician alphabet is
thought to have been devised during the second millennium BC, probably by a local Byblite
scribe knowledgeable of Egyptian hierogylphic script, who wanted an efficient writing system
for the local Byblite language.26 Given the presence of Egyptian characters in the Cretan
hieroglyphic script, it too may have been formulated under similar circumstances in Crete.

In the area of funerary customs, however, the Minoans seem to have been more open to
Egyptian ideas. In MM I-II Crete, traditional Minoan burials continued to be made in tholoi
and house tombs, but some burials began to occur in clay coffins, a shape unknown in the
Eastern Mediterranean at this time, except in Egypt. At Mallia, the monumental royal tomb
built in MM I at Chrysolakkos may imitate the form of the Egyptian mastaba.34 For the first
time, too, MM I-II burials included quantities of Egyptian funerary paraphernalia:
stone palettes (for grinding cosmetics) the sistrum (for making music in the Afterworld)
Egyptian types of stone vases (for perfumes, unguents, cosmetics):
-alabastra
-cylindrical vessels
-block vases
-goblets
-carinated bowls
-double vases
-miniature amphoras
-ceremonial shells
-clay models of bread loaves.35

The funerary concept that the deceased travelled over water (viz. the Nile River) to
reach the Afterworld is well known in Egypt. The Minoans had clearly adopted this idea by
the Late Bronze Age, but Middle Minoan I-II grave goods, e.g. seashells and water-worn
pebbles found in tombs at Archanes and a clay ship model, probably from the Mesara, shows
that this practice began much earlier.36


In order to understand the appearance of funerary paraphernalia (and the ideas associated with them) in Cretan tombs, this development must be viewed within its larger sociopolitical context. Cretan burial practices in Middle Minoan I-II were also transformed in other ways. Burials became individual, placed in single clay coffins or jars. In addition, the deceased was provided with a larger (mostly Egyptianizing) range of grave goods, that included the provisioning of perfumes, cosmetics, model offerings, animal sacrifices (i.e real food, as was the practice in Egypt), which indicates that at this time the individual Minoan was envisioned as having greater direct access to an eternal life in an Afterworld. Seashells, sea pebbles and a boat model found in Middle Minoan tombs hint that the deceased had to travel overseas to get to this Afterworld, an eschatological concept that surely was based on Egyptian ideas.

The full meaning of this development on Crete is suggested by the development of
funerary practices in Egypt, where a similar, widespread “democratization of the Afterlife”
took place beginning in the First Intermediate Period and early Middle Kingdom.43 In Egypt
this change in burial customs can be seen in the elaboration of individual commoners’ tombs
that for the first time include royal iconography, written magical texts, private stelae and large numbers of amulets. Egyptian texts explain two important features of this democratization: 1) the Egyptian population was given access to an elaborate Afterlife (previously limited to the elite), and 2) the individual earned the right to an Afterlife (through judgment before Osiris in the Underworld) by following the ethical and legal dictates of society. If a similar development took place in Crete, the appearance of Egyptian funerary paraphernalia in Cretan tombs should be understood as only one aspect of a larger transformation of social roles in Minoan society.

During the era before Cretan contact with Egypt (EM I-III), Minoan cult was carried out largely within the communal cemetery, and would seem to have revolved around the importance of the living community’s ties with its deified ancestors. In Middle Minoan IA, the rise of multi-community, regional sanctuaries and the demise of communal burials are part of a redefinition of Minoan eschatology and worship. The Egyptian elements in Minoan tombs may indicate not just the acceptance of an Egyptianizing Afterworld, but also the idea that the deceased had to have lived a just life in order to earn an eternal Afterlife.44

-----------------------

None of the above says that the Egyptians "founded" Cretan culture or religion. The Cretans were their own bosses, but there was some cultural change as doucmented above, falsifying AP's argument that there was no "historical evidence to connect africa with pre Indo European greece." Last I remember, Egypt is in Africa...
 

---

Posted by TheAmericanPatriot (Member # 15824) on :
 
Exactly, you have no historical data. You have shown us that there was a marker that spread over much of southern Europe. Minoans were not black Africans. That they and many many others had a genetic marker is not historical data. Secondly, Indo Europenans did not come from that area at all. A thousand years is a very very long time, ten thousand years is an eternity in a conversation like this.
I'll grant you the genertic marker. You just have not been able to do anything with it.
Over several thousand years populations moved all over that area and beyond.
The genius of Greece was exported from Greece, it did not come into Greece.
The Greek Polis has nothing to do with anything in Africa. In fact, Greece and Egypt are almost mirror opposites in that and most areas.
Greek religion does not in any way resemble Egyptian religion. The Greeks cremated their dead, the exact opposite of the Egyptians.
The Greek afterlife was nothing like the Egyptian afterlife. Politics was not remotely related as the Egyptians were a very very conservative political culture.
Egypt did not have the organized legal system the Greeks had. All this and more is why no classical scholar has ever stated a thesis that agrees with yours.
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot:

Exactly, you have no historical data. You have shown us that there was a marker that spread over much of southern Europe...

---

quote:

---

..Minoans were not black Africans. That they and many many others had a genetic marker is not historical data.

---

quote:

---

..Secondly, Indo Europenans did not come from that area at all. A thousand years is a very very long time, ten thousand years is an eternity in a conversation like this.

---

quote:

---

..I'll grant you the genertic marker. You just have not been able to do anything with it...

---

quote:

---

Over several thousand years populations moved all over that area and beyond.
The genius of Greece was exported from Greece, it did not come into Greece. The Greek Polis has nothing to do with anything in Africa. In fact, Greece and Egypt are almost mirror opposites in that and most areas. Greek religion does not in any way resemble Egyptian religion. The Greeks cremated their dead, the exact opposite of the Egyptians. The Greek afterlife was nothing like the Egyptian afterlife. Politics was not remotely related as the Egyptians were a very very conservative political culture...

---

quote:

---

Egypt did not have the organized legal system the Greeks had. All this and more is why no classical scholar has ever stated a thesis that agrees with yours.

---

You're wrong about this! Of course the Egyptians had an organized legal system. In fact their system later influenced that of Greece. I suggest you look at this source here.
 

---

Posted by zarahan (Member # 15718) on :
 
^^ Sounds like AP is trying to duck and shift
the subject. He first set out claiming that
there was no "historical evidence
to connect africa with pre Indo European greece."

That has been refuted for you have shown (a) the
genetic markers, (b) the historical and cultural
evidence via the wall paintings.

Added to the mix was (c) the historical
interchange between Crete and Egypt before the
Myceanan rise.
((http://www2.ulg.ac.be/archgrec/IMG/aegeum/aegaeum18(pdf)/08%20Watrous.pdf))


On three counts, Ap's claim falls flat.
-----------------

Seems now he is trying to shift the ground,
perhaps not understanding that before the
Mycenean Greeks came there were other PRIOR
Aegean civilizations. He is now floating a
strawman argument that Egyot is responsible for
Greek civ. No one is saying that. This is a red herring.


However he digs himself in a deeper hole with claims such as this:


Egypt did not have the organized legal system
the Greeks had. All this and more is why no
classical scholar has ever stated a thesis that
agrees with yours.

As DJE has shown, Egyptian law was very well
organized. In fact the Greeks learned some
things fronm Egypt on that score. In addition to
DJE's link, add this:

FROM THE CONSERVATIVE ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITTANICA 1974 EDITION


"Ancient Egyptian law was remarkable in terms of
its lines of application, since it has as its
primary objective, the promotion of basic human
rights. There were, certainly, periods of
regression, but these were balanced by others in
which great forward strides were made..

"Yet Bocchoris freed the individual, suppressed
imprisonment for debt, prohibited the interest
of a debt from doubling the capital, and fixed
the rules of written contracts; he also
initiated certain reforms dealing with the
mobility of private property. All these changes
were eminently important, but correspond with
the spirit of th Egyptian law in the high points
of its history."


"Furthernmore, Egyptian law had a definite
effect on Greek law during the Hellenistic
period and later on Roman imperial law. Even
before this time, Egyptian influence has been
felt on Greek law, for in the early 6th century
BC Solon, an early Athenian lawgiver, came to
Egypt anbd was inspired by the legislative work
of Bocchoris. The result was a decisive turn in
Greek law, although the Greeks never emancipated
women as had the Egyptians."

(Encyclopedia Britannica 1974 ed. Macropedia
Article, Vol 6: "Egyptian Law" , pg 503)



AP, not to beat up on you, but you need to
go back and take a little more time to study
the relevant data, and understand what people
are saying. If you feel you have credible
evidence on hand, by all means bring it to bear
but so far your 2 claims:

(a) no contact between Africa and pre-Mycn. Greece

(b) no organized system of Egyptian law or linkage to Greek law

have been proven false. If you have additional info to support these 2 claims, bring it
forward.
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
^ Zarahan, you waste your time. 'Patriot' is nothing more than a bitter racist. Notice that all he does is argue against the evidence no matter how valid it is or how much of it is piled up in front of him, yet he presents absolutely nothing to counter the evidence!

He is just a mouthpiece talking for the same of talking, and is mouthpiece of racist white America. Seriously, it's guys like him that actually kind of make me proud Obama was elected!
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
Patriot, you may continue your futile protests here...
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
You know it's funny how the 'professor' speaks of the very notion of ancient blacks being present in southern Europe to be "out there", "wacky", "absurd", yet at the same time he espouses the notion of ancient whites of North Africa!! LMAO

Now how wacky is that! I mean hypocrisy is an understatement with this guy.
 

---

Posted by T. Rex (Member # 3735) on :
 
Now that we've established that the Ancient Greeks were mixed with Africans and Southwest Asians, does anyone have an opinion as to exactly what they would have looked like? I've noticed that it's difficult finding a reliable source with representative images of modern Greeks on the Internet. The only collections of photographs of modern Greeks that I've found so far are on Medicentrist websites with a "lily white Greek" agenda---needless to say, they pick the lightest-skinned Greeks.
 

---

Posted by ackee (Member # 16371) on :
 
if you can find the book the african presence in early europe you can find some pics.also a shell carving that resembles the pug nose greco african shown above. book edited by ivan sertema.
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
^ An even better idea would be to look a good look at *all* the Minoan frescoes. Disney World's Posiedon Adventure as an exact replica and you'd be surprised at all the African looking figures they have! The problem is you never see the whole series of Minoan pics but only the 'usual' scenes if you know what I mean.

quote:

---

Originally posted by T. Rex:

Now that we've established that the Ancient Greeks were mixed with Africans and Southwest Asians, does anyone have an opinion as to exactly what they would have looked like? I've noticed that it's difficult finding a reliable source with representative images of modern Greeks on the Internet. The only collections of photographs of modern Greeks that I've found so far are on Medicentrist websites with a "lily white Greek" agenda---needless to say, they pick the lightest-skinned Greeks.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot:
75% of greeks have not a single African marker.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot:
Greeks are a whhite european nation. The asia influence in Greece was Indo european out of Turkey.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot:
You are beating a dead horse mindover .

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot:
You have never been able to show a single connection of any black africaqns to greek culture.

---

Only genetic lineages which have been in Greece for over 6000 years, and still one of the most prevalent genetic markers in Greece; this is nothing right?



Population genetic relationships between Mediterranean populations determined by HLA allele distribution and a historic perspective.

quote:

---

HLA genomics shows that: 1) Greeks share an important part of their genetic pool with sub-Saharan Africans (Ethiopians and west Africans) also supported by Chr 7 Markers. The gene flow from Black Africa to Greece may have occurred in Pharaonic times or when Saharan people emigrated after the present hyperarid conditions were established (5000 years B.C.).

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot:
That is not an example. It tells us nothing.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot:
The real immigration occured with Greeks moving into Africa in huge numbers during the Classical period.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot:

Greeks are a white european nation. The asia influence in Greece was Indo european out of Turkey...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot:

Almost nothing is known of the Pelasgians and knowledge of their language is incomplete. To say they were black africans or even evolved from them is just a guess on your part. Anything that happened in the neolithic era 6000 years ago has nothing to do with classical greece or the founding of western civilization. This is all grabbing at straws and very thin ones at that. I asked Mindover to give me one single example of any cultural contribution by black africans to ancient greek civilization.

---

quote:

---

Mindover, It does NOT tell us Greece was a mixed society, it says nothing of the kind. You have no idea how many people were involved or how they were involved. All of those markers could have been put in play by 50 people 6000 years ago. I want a cultural contribution and you cannot give me one.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot:

They are NOT the roots of classical Greek civilization. Just saying it does not make it so and classical scholars refute every one of those points. Show me a single cultural trait classical greeks got from these mythical africans.

---

quote:

---

You tell me a hundred times but you tell me nothing. You know nothing about them at all save a single marker, which you cannot attach a cultural trait to.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by assopen:

Mary is clearly not answering Patriot's question and for obvious reasons. You see she already denied a Stolen Legacy: African philosophical influence on Greek classical civilisation. So she confines this "influence" to skulls and genes. LOL

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot:

I can show you skulls of Indians who lived in North America but they had nothing to do with modern american civilization.

---

quote:

---

By historical times everyone had pottery and urbanization. The Brits had urban communities and settled life in neolithic times. You guys are trying hard to build something out of nothing.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:

quote:

---

Originally posted by assopen:

Mary is clearly not answering Patriot's question and for obvious reasons. You see she already denied a Stolen Legacy: African philosophical influence on Greek classical civilisation. So she confines this "influence" to skulls and genes. LOL

---

Again, I'm not Lefkowitz, and neither have I denied any African philosophical influence as it was just that influence and NOT stolen. So don't get your panties in a bunch.

---

Oh really! So now you admit Greek classical philosophy wasn't "home grown" after all! What a flip flopper you are! lol


 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
^ To the Oversodomized ass above:

Yes Classical philosophy was! But the African influence you spoke of predated Classical times, nitwit! Get your head out of your boyfriends ass and start reading properly. Or maybe the rough loving you recieve from your boyfriends was too much and damaged your brain?
 

---

Posted by akoben (Member # 15244) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
^ To the Oversodomized ass above:

Yes Classical philosophy was! But the African influence you spoke of predated Classical times, nitwit!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
It's easy. They would have looked like modern Puerto-Ricans and Cubans. Heck, many of the Greek people living in the Aegean islands today look very 'Hispanic' and often get mistaken for Hispanics if not other Euro-meds like Italians or Spaniards here in the U.S.

---

Where did you hear of this?

Maybe we should have Dienekes and other "we are pure whites" Greeks to America and have people guess at their ancestry!
 

---

Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
 
Is this what you're talking about?
http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=005294#000033

quote:

---

Originally posted by ackee:
if you can find the book the african presence in early europe you can find some pics.also a shell carving that resembles the pug nose greco african shown above. book edited by ivan sertema.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by T. Rex:

Where did you hear of this?

Maybe we should have Dienekes and other "we are pure whites" Greeks to America and have people guess at their ancestry!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:

quote:

---

Refresh my memory, what dig was it that you said showed the interaction of large numbers of Africans and Greeks? Did I miss that post?

---

Hmm, I guess you did.

The "DIGS" of Anthropologist Larry Angel

Journal of Human Evolution (1972) 1, 307 - 313 "...one can identify NEGROID traits of nose and prognathism appearing in natufian hunters (McCown, 1939) and in Anatolian and MACEDONIAN first farmers (Angel, 1972 - The People of Lerna: Analysis of a Prehistoric Aegean Population), probably FROM NUBIA.

Any other redundant questions?.....

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ackee:
if you can find the book the african presence in early europe you can find some pics.also a shell carving that resembles the pug nose greco african shown above. book edited by ivan sertema.

---

This is not only something from Van Sertima's
books:

In the conservative Encyclopedia Britannica,
1974 ed, Macropedia "Minoan Civilization" it
says: "The early inhabitants of Crete were pug-
nosed, almost Negroid."

end-quote...
 

---

Posted by Clyde Winters (Member # 10129) on :
 
There is evidence for the Minoan language. The language they spoke was related to the Mande group of languages. These Mande speakers formerly occupied a large part of the Fezzan ( in modern Libya)before they migrated to the Niger river valley. The Mande languages are members of the Niger-Congo Superfamily of languages.

Every since Arthur Evans discovered the Hieroglyphic and Linear A writing of Crete there has been a search for the authors of this writing.

Some Grecian traditions indicate that Libyans (called Garamante) formerly lived on Crete. This suggest that some of the Eteocretans may have spoken one of the ancient languages of Libya.


A major group from Libya that settled Crete were the Garamante. Robert Graves in (Vol.1, pp.33-35) maintains that the Garamante who originally lived in the Fezzan fused with the inhabitants of the Upper Niger region of West Africa.

This theory is interesting because the chariot routes from the Fezzan terminated at the Niger river. In addition, the Cretan term for king "Minos", agrees with the MandeManding word for ruler "Mansa". Both these terms share consonantal agreement : M N S.

The name Garamante, illustrates affinity to Mande morphology and grammar. The Mande language is a member of the Niger-Congo group of languages. The name for the Manding tribe called "Mande", means Ma 'mother, and nde 'children', can be interpreted as "Children of Ma", or "Mothers children " (descent among this group is matrilineal) .

The word Garamante,can be broken down into Malinke-Bambara into the following monosyllabic words Ga 'hearth', arid, hot'; Mante/Mande , the name of the Mande speaking tribes. This means that the term: Garamante, can be interpreted as "Mande of the Arid lands" or "Arid lands of the children of Ma". This last term is quite interesting because by the time the Greeks and Romans learned about the Garamante, the Fezzan was becoming increasingly arid.



Keftiu


The Egyptians called the Cretans Keftiu. There is agreement between the Keftiu names recorded by Egyptian scribes (T.E. Peet, "The Egyptian writing board BM5647 bearing Keftiu names". In , (ed.) by S Casson (Oxford, 1927, 90-99)), and Manding names.



Keftiu
The root kef-, in Keftiu, probably is Ke'be, the name of a Manding clan , plus the locative suffix {i-} used to give the affirmative sense, plus the plural suffix for names {u-}, and the {-te} suffixial element used to denote place names, nationalities and to form words.

On the Egyptian writing board there are eight Keftiu names. These names agree with Manding names:

Keftiu....... Manding

sh h.r........ Sye

Nsy ..........Nsye

'ksh .........Nkyi

Pnrt Pe,..... Beni (name for twins)

'dm ..........Demba

Rs............. Rsa

This analogy between Keftiu and Manding names is startling.

In conclusion, the evidence of similarity between Keftiu names and names from the Manding languages appear to support Graves view that the Eteocretans, who early settled Crete may have spoken a language similar to the Mande people who live near the Niger. Conseqently, there is every possibility that the Linear A script used by the Keftiu, which is analogous to the Libyco Berber writing used by the Proto-Mande .

See:

C. A. Winters, "The influence of the Mande scripts on ancient America", de l'IFAN>, t59, serB, no.1, (1977) pp.941-967.

C.A. Winters, "The ancient manding Script", In , (ed.) by Ivan van Sertima, ( London: Rutgers University Press Transaction Press , 1981) pp.208-214), may be written in an aspect of the Manding (Malinke/Bambara) language.


Black Greeks

.
 

---

Posted by Clyde Winters (Member # 10129) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot:
Almost nothing is known of the Pelasgians and knowledge of their language is incomplete. To say they were black africans or even evolved from them is just a guess on your part. Anything that happened in the neolithic era 6000 years ago has nothing to do with classical greece or the founding of western civilization.
This is all grabbing at straws and very thin ones at that. I asked Mindover to give me one single example of any cultural contribution by black africans to ancient greek civilization.

Mindover, It does NOT tell us Greece was a mixed society, it says nothing of the kind. You have no idea how many people were involved or how they were involved. All of those markers could have been put in play by 50 people 6000 years ago. I want a cultural contribution and you cannot give me one.

---

The roots of Greek civilization was African. The
original founders of Grecian civilization were dark
pigmented Pelasgians.

Although these people of the Heroic age came from
diverse origins, the Aryan-Greeks called them
Pelasgians. According to the Greeks, the first man was
Pelasgus--ancestor of the Pelasgians. The Pelasgians
were a combination of different Black tribes called
Achaeans, Cadmeans, Leleges, Carians or Garamantes.

The term Pelasgian was applied to all these
pre-Hellenic inhabitants of Greece. R.J. Hopper, in
The Early Greeks, noted that "indeed the classical
Greeks believed in the separate existence of diverse
ethnic elements side by side, and thought particularly of the Pelasgians in this
connection".

According to tradition, the Pelasgians inhabited
Arcadia and many Aegean Islands. These Blacks took
their own writing to Greece which was later used by
the Aryan-Greeks. According to Herodotus quadrigas or
four-horse chariots were introduced to Greeks by the
Libyans .

The Aryan-Greeks adopted the language of the
Pelasgians and Egyptians. The linguistic evidence
shows that there was a differentiation of Greece into
East Greek and West Greek. The Black Greeks spoke East
Greek (Achaioi or Achaean). West Greek was spoken by
the Dorian or Aryan Greeks. The earliest Aryan tribe
called Ionians spoke a dialect of East Greek called Aeolic.

Many classical scholars teach the world that the Greek
language is entirely Indo-European. This view of Greek
is wrong.

Dr. Anna Morpurgo Davies, has made it clear that "less
than 40% of the words which have an Indo-European
etymology". According to Dr. Davies, 52.2 % of the
Greek terms in Chantraine's Dictionnaire Etymologique
de la langue Grecque (1968) have an unknown etymology.
The mixed nature of the Greek language results from
the early settlement of the Aegean by Blacks from Africa,
especially Egypt and Libya.

Some of these words are of African origin. Robert K.G.
Temple, in The Sirius Mystery, shows that many of the
most common words of the Greek vocabulary are of
Egyptian origin. Diop (1991) has also discussed the
Egyptian origin for many Greek terms.

Given the fact that the Greek language lacks full
cognation with Indo-European languages proves that
Indo Europeans were not the founders of Greecian
civilization. To know Greece, we must look to Egypt
and the rest of Africa to explain the origin of this
civilization.

There is also genetic evidence that supports and
African origin for the Greeks. Check out this papers:

[b]

HLA genes in Macedonians and the sub-Saharan origin of
the Greeks.


Arnaiz-Villena A, Dimitroski K,Pacho A, Moscoso J, Gomez-Casado E, Silvera-Redondo C, Varela P, Blagoevska M, Zdravkovska V,Martinez-Laso J.

Molecular Biology, H. 12 de Octubre, Universidad
Complutense, Madrid, Spain.
aarnaiz@...

HLA alleles have been determined in individuals from the Republic of Macedonia by DNA typing and sequencing.
HLA-A, -B, -DR, -DQ allele frequencies and extended haplotypes have been for the first time determined and the results compared to those of other Mediterraneans, particularly with their neighbouring Greeks. Genetic distances,neighbor-joining dendrograms and correspondence analysis have been performed. The following conclusions have been reached: 1) Macedonians belong to the
"older" Mediterranean substratum, like Iberians
(including Basques), North Africans, Italians, French, Cretans, Jews, Lebanese,Turks (Anatolians), Armenians
and Iranians, 2) Macedonians are not related with
geographically close Greeks, who do not belong to the "older" Mediterranenan substratum, 3) Greeks are found
to have a substantial relatedness to sub-Saharan
(Ethiopian) people, which separate them from other Mediterranean groups. Both Greeks and Ethiopians share quasi-specific DRB1 alleles, such as *0305, *0307,
*0411, *0413, *0416, *0417, *0420, *1110, *1112, *1304 and *1310. Genetic distances are closer between Greeks and Ethiopian/sub-Saharan groups than to any other Mediterranean group and finally Greeks cluster with Ethiopians/sub-Saharans in both neighbour joining
dendrograms and correspondence analyses. The time
period when these relationships might have occurred was ancient but uncertain and might be related to the
displacement of Egyptian-Ethiopian people living in
pharaonic Egypt.

PMID: 11260506 [PubMed -indexed for MEDLINE]

.
 

---

Posted by TheAmericanPatriot (Member # 15824) on :
 
incorrect clyde. You are just making things up with no evidence to prove your point.
 

---

Posted by akoben (Member # 15244) on :
 
^ "professor", shouldn't you be busy trying to teach your student Mary about the purity of Greek classical civilisation? She already believes half of it. lol
 

---

Posted by ackee (Member # 16371) on :
 
sorry being late getting back to you Alt.but yes thats the shell carving i was talking about. hello professor, what do you think of the myth of Danaos? what about Memmon and his Ethiopeans? these are myth/legends for sure but dont you think that under the cover of myths is cornel of truth? have you checked out Frank Snowden's book Before Colour Perjudice? andbtw he is in noway conisdered an afrocentric,matter of fact many consider him tame or at worst a sellout.
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
^ Of course, this is what the professor fails to realize is that the Greeks themselves in their own histories and legends state the historical prominence of Ethiopians and Libyans-- Africans, including their interactions and exchanges with them. But note these stories date to at least the Bronze Age. We have evidence of African presence going back further to the Stone Age.

to Clyde: nobody is buying your Mande-Pelasgian theories.

to Assopen: keep calling your Jewish mistress's name for nobody is buying your lies.
 

---

Posted by Defrag (Member # 10819) on :
 
My God what an ass whooping.

Reminds me of this utterlly unnecissary overkill:

total annihilation.

TAP's idea of an ideal black man

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_m5TMny3dQI&feature=channel_page

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ya2qguoEKY4&feature=channel_page
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
^ Defrag, you have to realize this not a matter of 'black' or 'white' so much as historical reality vs. racist fantasy.
 

---

Posted by ackee (Member # 16371) on :
 
yeah Djehuti but P.A will whine about going back to the stoneage just to make your point!he needs to see the kours pose used for early greek scultptures,the fluted coloums for temples and i remember you posted some greek alters that shows some possible connection so there is plenty for the the good professor to chew on.
 

---

Posted by TheAmericanPatriot (Member # 15824) on :
 
Djehuti, Classical scholars have dealt with all of the issues you mentioned concerning Greek Myths and legends. Lefkowitz said recently that many times more Greeks went to Africa than blacks to Greece.
This is what happens when non specialists start dealing with complicated issues. They have no earthly idea how to deal with the material they are reading.

This is all racist black politics and nothing more. Ancient Greece was a caucasian Indo European society and it's culture and philosophy was home grown. Some neolithic bush jumper running around in 10,000 BC, if in fact he existed at all, had nothing to do with it.
 

---

Posted by akoben (Member # 15244) on :
 
Historical reality - "Greek" classical philosophy is a stolen legacy.

Racial fantasy - "Greek" classical philosophy was pure (home grown).

Stolen Legacy thread still haunts some in here.

 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
^ Indeed, it really haunts you since that thread like Keita's paper actually discredits you. Moving on...

quote:

---

Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot:

Djehuti, Classical scholars have dealt with all of the issues you mentioned concerning Greek Myths and legends. Lefkowitz said recently that many times more Greeks went to Africa than blacks to Greece.
This is what happens when non specialists start dealing with complicated issues. They have no earthly idea how to deal with the material they are reading.

---

First of all Lefkowitz is as you just pointed out a Classical scholar, meaning her expertize is in the Classical period of Greek history, not the Archaic nor the Stone Age which is what we speak of. Second, Lefkowitz has said alot of things that are even out of her field such as (at one point) that Egyptians were not black which was merely a backtracking contradiction she made just so she can appease her fellow white scholars who are racist. So please understand the reason why we don't take Lefkowitz as some sort of authority. You don't want to get the jew-frightened asshole above started on that lady, anyway.

quote:

---

This is all racist black politics and nothing more. Ancient Greece was a caucasian Indo European society and it's culture and philosophy was home grown. Some neolithic bush jumper running around in 10,000 BC, if in fact he existed at all, had nothing to do with it. [/QB]

---

First, there is nothing 'racist' or 'political' about it! You honestly don't hear this kind of stuff from black politicians, even the racist ones do you?? I doubt it, since ancient Greece and hardly even Egypt is part of any modern black political agenda, especially now with Obama in power. This is scholarship pure and simple, since where else but here have you seen all the evidence gathered in favor of a black presence in Greece from Neolithic to Bronze Age times from mainstream academia in the form of archaeology, anthropology, and genetics.

Second, it's been explained to you ad-naseum Indo-European is a language affiliation that tells you little about what peoples spoke it or adopted it.

And lastly, get it through your head: there is no such thing as 'caucasian'!! Such notions of racial classification are made up social constructs. In science and reality they don't exist! That's why you have white supremacists not only claiming the existence of North African caucasians but also East African caucasians, just because of certain features like narrow faces and noses. This has been explained to you countless times but as a white supremacist yourself you continue to cling on to this fabrication from imperialist times.
 

---

Posted by akoben (Member # 15244) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
First of all Lefkowitz is as you just pointed out a Classical scholar, meaning her expertize is in the Classical period of Greek history, not the Archaic nor the Stone Age which is what we speak of.

---

Your "expertise" does not even include that Mary as you would have backed up your claims of a "home grown" Greek classical philosophy long ago. Instead you are continuously haunted by your inability to back up your racist dismissal of Professor George GM James. You dumb cowardly bitch. lol

quote:

---

You honestly don't hear this kind of stuff from black politicians, even the racist ones do you??

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:

quote:

---

Originally posted by T. Rex:

Where did you hear of this?

Maybe we should have Dienekes and other "we are pure whites" Greeks to America and have people guess at their ancestry!

---

It's not what I've "heard" so much as what I've actually witnessed. I have seen many photos of Greek islanders and have even seen Greeks in person here in the U.S. who get mistaken for Puerto-Rican, Dominican, or Brazilian (the 'white' ethny of course). But everyone with basic historical knowledge of these Latin countries know they are heavily African influenced genetically and culturally.

---

Greek islanders, you say? What, are mainland Greeks lighter-skinned?

BTW, I have actually been to Greece myself (was about 11 or 12), but I didn't really study the local population. I did notice that the climate was very warm and sunny though, with lots of palm trees growing; I would think any population indigenous to a latitude with that sort of climate would be more tan-skinned.
 

---

Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
 
^ LOL, The Robot is not programmed to understand he will never convince The American Idiot of anything. The American Idiot is as much in denial as MatterOverMind and Rasol's Albinism theory induced trauma.
Robot's aren't yet advanced enough to factor in symptoms of psychological brain lock.

Not Out Of Africa was initiated and funded by the Heritage Foundation. What more do you need to know.
 

---

Posted by akoben (Member # 15244) on :
 

 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by T. Rex:

Greek islanders, you say? What, are mainland Greeks lighter-skinned?

BTW, I have actually been to Greece myself (was about 11 or 12), but I didn't really study the local population. I did notice that the climate was very warm and sunny though, with lots of palm trees growing; I would think any population indigenous to a latitude with that sort of climate would be more tan-skinned.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Knowledgeiskey718:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Knowledgeiskey718:

Courtesy of Refuting "Racial Reality" re Greeks

http://www.onedroprule.org/about1335.html


There is a fraudulent claim, promulgated by Racial Reality and Dienekes Pontikos, that the Arnaiz-Villena study HLA genes in Macedonians and the sub-Saharan origin of the Greeks (abstract and link to full study below) has been retracted or scientifically refuted. Rest assured, the study is perfectly valid. It would be helpful here to discuss the study that was retracted, and the reason why. It is The origin of Palestinians and their genetic relatedness with other Mediterranean populations (which contained some cross-referenced Greek data in a neighbor-joining dendogram and a correspondence analysis), and it was retracted solely and strictly for political reasons, as this Observer article makes crystal clear:

(Keep in mind we are dealing with the study on the relatedness of Jews and Palestinians at the moment, which was retracted, and not the one on the Greek-sub-Saharan relatedness, which was not retracted. The two must not be confused.)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4307083,00.html

Observer wrote:
Journal axes gene research on Jews and Palestinians
Robin McKie, science editor
Observer

Sunday November 25, 2001


A keynote research paper showing that Middle Eastern Jews and Palestinians are genetically almost identical has been pulled from a leading journal.

Academics who have already received copies of Human Immunology have been urged to rip out the offending pages and throw them away.

Such a drastic act of self-censorship is unprecedented in research publishing and has created widespread disquiet, generating fears that it may involve the suppression of scientific work that questions Biblical dogma.

'I have authored several hundred scientific papers, some for Nature and Science, and this has never happened to me before,' said the article's lead author, Spanish geneticist Professor Antonio Arnaiz-Villena, of Complutense University in Madrid. 'I am stunned.'

British geneticist Sir Walter Bodmer added: 'If the journal didn't like the paper, they shouldn't have published it in the first place. Why wait until it has appeared before acting like this?'

The journal's editor, Nicole Sucio-Foca, of Columbia University, New York, claims the article provoked such a welter of complaints over its extreme political writing that she was forced to repudiate it. The article has been removed from Human Immunology's website, while letters have been written to libraries and universities throughout the world asking them to ignore or 'preferably to physically remove the relevant pages'. Arnaiz-Villena has been sacked from the journal's editorial board.

Dolly Tyan, president of the American Society of Histocompatibility and Immunogenetics, which runs the journal, told subscribers that the society is 'offended and embarrassed'.

The paper, 'The Origin of Palestinians and their Genetic Relatedness with other Mediterranean Populations', involved studying genetic variations in immune system genes among people in the Middle East.

In common with earlier studies, the team found no data to support the idea that Jewish people were genetically distinct from other people in the region. In doing so, the team's research challenges claims that Jews are a special, chosen people and that Judaism can only be inherited.

Jews and Palestinians in the Middle East share a very similar gene pool and must be considered closely related and not genetically separate, the authors state. Rivalry between the two races is therefore based 'in cultural and religious, but not in genetic differences', they conclude.

But the journal, having accepted the paper earlier this year, now claims the article was politically biased and was written using 'inappropriate' remarks about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Its editor told the journal Nature last week that she was threatened by mass resignations from members if she did not retract the article.

Arnaiz-Villena says he has not seen a single one of the accusations made against him, despite being promised the opportunity to look at the letters sent to the journal.

He accepts he used terms in the article that laid him open to criticism. There is one reference to Jewish 'colonists' living in the Gaza strip, and another that refers to Palestinian people living in 'concentration' camps.

'Perhaps I should have used the words settlers instead of colonists, but really, what is the difference?' he said.

'And clearly, I should have said refugee, not concentration, camps, but given that I was referring to settlements outside of Israel - in Syria and Lebanon - that scarcely makes me anti-Jewish. References to the history of the region, the ones that are supposed to be politically offensive, were taken from the Encyclopaedia Britannica, and other text books.'

In the wake of the journal's actions, and claims of mass protests about the article, several scientists have now written to the society to support Arnaiz-Villena and to protest about their heavy-handedness.

One of them said: 'If Arnaiz-Villena had found evidence that Jewish people were genetically very special, instead of ordinary, you can be sure no one would have objected to the phrases he used in his article. This is a very sad business.'


It is worth exploring a few quotes from the above article, as they are very revealing:

Observer wrote:
Such a drastic act of self-censorship is unprecedented in research publishing and has created widespread disquiet, generating fears that it may involve the suppression of scientific work that questions Biblical dogma.


This shows the politics at work in certain circles of genetic research.

Sir Walter Bodmer wrote:
British geneticist Sir Walter Bodmer added: 'If the journal didn't like the paper, they shouldn't have published it in the first place. Why wait until it has appeared before acting like this?'


The fact that the journal initially published the paper shows the journal found nothing wrong with it scientifically. Indeed, all papers must pass peer review to be published. It also, apparently, saw nothing politically objectionable, until it received all those letters from people objecting to the supposedly politically incorrect wording.

Apparently, later on, in an attempt to discredit the study "scientifically," three scientists wrote in to Nature Magazine. Racial Reality and Pontikos claim it somehow "challenges" that the study was pulled for political reasons. This is utter nonsense, as the Observer article makes the political reasons for the withdrawal very plain. The three scientists are expressing their own opinions only, and their "lack of scientific merit" idea, which falls very weakly and definitely untrue, was not the reason for the retraction. This can be seen when viewing their own comment at the end of the article: "We believe that the paper should have been refused for publication on the simple grounds that it lacked scientific merit." In actuality, this "scientific refutation" is a thinly veiled and weak attempt, containing nonsensical and straw-man arguments, to discredit the study solely and strictly because of its politically controversial remarks.


Here is the article. Note that what Dienekes Pontikos quotes on his site is only a portion of the article, and this is done to make it seem, to the unsuspecting reader, as though it pertains to the Greek study, or to Arnaiz-Villena's methodology in general, which it most certainly does not; if the scientists truly had a problem with the Greek study, they would have written specifically about it, and if they truly had a problem with Arnaiz-Villena's methodology in all his studies, they would have written about that. They didn't, and to reiterate, their comments about the Palestinian/Jewish study are invalid, and this will be explained below. This deception is also found on Racial Reality's own site, and he has added it to Wikipedia's article on admixture in Europe, calling it the "Arnaiz-Villena Controversy." Note also that there is no controversy in the scientific community over the study on Greeks at all; such controversy exists only in the minds of the two aforementioned southern European White Nationalists. I have made requests to have the misinformation removed from Wiki, but it hasn't happened yet. Racial Reality dodges the bullet by rewording it slightly, while still saying essentially the same thing. So, I have given up. Dear Reader, please take what you find on Wiki with several grains of salt; it is notorious for falsification, and I frankly don't think this problem will ever be resolved:


http://www.nature.com/cgi-taf/DynaPage.taf?file=/nature/journal/v415/n6868/full/415115b_r.html

Quote:
Nature 415, 115 (10 January 2002); doi:10.1038/415115b


Dropped genetics paper lacked scientific merit


Sir – Even though the controversial withdrawal of a paper on the genetic relatedness of Palestinians and Jews by the journal Human Immunology (see Nature 414, 382; 2001) is a minor episode compared with the tragedies caused by ethnic/religious conflicts over past decades, the issues involved are worth revisiting.

The stated purpose of the paper by Antonio Arnaiz-Villena et al. was to "examine the genetic relationships between the Palestinians and their neighbours (particularly the Jews) in order to: (1) discover the Palestinian origins, and (2) explain the historic basis of the present ... conflict between Palestinians and other Muslim countries with Israelite Jews".

They conclude: "Jews and Palestinians share a very similar HLA genetic pool that supports a common ancient Canaanite origin. Therefore, the origin of the long-lasting Jewish–Palestinian hostility is the fight for land in ancient times."

It is difficult to believe that knowledge of genes may help to explain the present conflict. Although population genetics can address issues of relatedness of populations, mating patterns, migrations and so on, obviously it cannot provide evidence about reasons for conflicts between people.

Our primary concern, however, is that the authors might be perceived to have been discriminated against for political, as opposed to legitimate scientific, reasons.

Even a cursory look at the paper's diagrams and trees immediately indicates that the authors make some extraordinary claims. They used a single genetic marker, HLA DRB1, for their analysis to construct a genealogical tree and map of 28 populations from Europe, the Middle East, Africa and Japan. Using results from the analysis of a single marker, particularly one likely to have undergone selection, for the purpose of reconstructing genealogies is unreliable and unacceptable practice in population genetics.

The limitations are made evident by the authors' extraordinary observations that Greeks are very similar to Ethiopians and east Africans but very distant from other south Europeans; and that the Japanese are nearly identical to west and south Africans. It is surprising that the authors were not puzzled by these anomalous results, which contradict history, geography, anthropology and all prior population-genetic studies of these groups. Surely the ordinary process of refereeing would have saved the field from this dispute.

We believe that the paper should have been refused for publication on the simple grounds that it lacked scientific merit.

Neil Risch
Department of Genetics, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California 94305, USA

Alberto Piazza
Department of Genetics, Biology and Biochemistry, University of Torino, Via Santena 19, 10126 Torino, Italy

L. Luca Cavalli-Sforza
Department of Genetics, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California 94305, USA


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
© 2002 Nature Publishing Group
Privacy Policy


It is clear that the three above scientists are catering to popular political sentiments, and that is a damned shame. Let's examine what they say:

Three Scientists wrote:
Even a cursory look at the paper's diagrams and trees immediately indicates that the authors make some extraordinary claims. They used a single genetic marker, HLA DRB1, for their analysis to construct a genealogical tree and map of 28 populations from Europe, the Middle East, Africa and Japan. Using results from the analysis of a single marker, particularly one likely to have undergone selection, for the purpose of reconstructing genealogies is unreliable and unacceptable practice in population genetics.


The DRB1 locus is apparently a good one to research, since it is used quite often by different researchers. It may only be one locus, but a relationship between populations at even one locus is still a relationship. Arnaiz-Villena, et al., say data obtained by using this locus is informative and discriminating, indeed more discriminating than data from mtDNA and Y-chromosomes. However, Arnaiz-Villena et al. always use other loci in addition to DRB1, and draw conclusions from all the data. So, the claim that conclusions are drawn from testing one locus (even though it is a good one) is false and a straw-man argument.

The claim the locus is under selection is vague and indefinite. Which alleles are under selection at this locus? There is no information stating that any of the ones tested are. Are all alleles found at this locus under selection? There isn't enough information to regard this seriously.

At any rate, selection plays no role in the Arnaiz-Villena studies, since the frequency of the alleles are not being used to estimate level of admixture. For example, no one is saying that allele from Population B exists in Population A at a rate of 4%, therefore there is admixture of Population B into Population A at a rate of 4%. This is the only case selection can have an adverse effect, because if an allele is expanded due to its being beneficial, its rate in a population will likely exceed the true admixture rate. If one is calculating admixture rate, one is likely to get inflated results.

However, the mere presence of any allele specific to one population in another cannot occur by any other means than admixture. Selection can never cause the presence of such an allele.

The study we are dealing with here, the one on Palestinian / Jewish relatedness, apparently included calculations of genetic distances at the DRB1 locus. Genetic distances are calculated by comparing the frequencies of alleles in various populations. The aim of calculating genetic distances is to determine relatedness of populations. Again, alleles under selection would have no effect on calculating relatedness, only on calculating level of admixture. If a certain foreign allele is introduced into a given population and becomes very beneficial in it, it causes those with the allele to survive, at the expense of those who don't have it. Eventually, many people will have this allele, even though it may have been introduced via a very small admixing population. However, as people without the allele die off, and those with it increase in number, it follows that the relatedness of the population to the population from which the beneficial allele came increases, of course, without the admixture increasing. Therefore, a calculation of genetic relatedness would reflect this elevated relatedness, without revealing true admixture. But if one is only calculating relatedness, it is not a problem and is quite accurate. This is precisely what Arnaiz-Villena, et al. are doing in this and their other studies.

The "DRB1 locus is under selection" attempt to discredit the study goes out the window.

Interestingly, Y-chromosome and mtDNA analysis is essentially the same as using a single HLA locus with its respective alleles, as mentioned to me by Dr. Arnaiz-Villena in private correspondence. Even more interestingly, Y Chromosomes and mtDNA are also subject to selection, since they are linked to diseases. Yet these are frequently used to calculate admixture estimates, and no one seems to complain:

Arnaiz-Villena, et al., in 'Population genetic relationships between Mediterranean populations determined by HLA allele distribution and a historic perspective' (abstract below) wrote:
Other molecular markers, like mtDNA and Y Chr. are widely used for this type of research. They are also subject to selection since they are linked to diseases [...].


At any rate, the role selection plays is not necessarily significant in all cases, according a geneticist I recently spoke to. He explained that the four west African strains of HbS, which are definite indicators of sub-Saharan admixture when found elsewhere, are beneficial to those with malaria, and so selection would increase the frequency of the gene in malarial areas without the admixture increasing. However, in places like Sicily and southern Italy, the frequency of the HbS gene is still quite low, and generally not significantly different from estimates of African admixture using mtDNA, Y-chromosomes, or autosomal genes.

Let's face it: genetecists aren't going to use a marker or locus that isn't reliable. Period. To reiterate, Dr. Arnaiz-Villena has pointed out (in private correspondence) that HLA DRB1 is more discriminating than mtDNA or Y-chromosomes are.


Continuing with the dissection of the three scientists' article:

Three Scentists wrote:
The limitations are made evident by the authors' extraordinary observations that Greeks are very similar to Ethiopians and east Africans but very distant from other south Europeans;


Indeed, as shown by the neighbor-joining dendogram and correspondence analysis at the DRB1 locus shown in this Palestinian/Israeli study, Greeks are closely related to sub-Saharans. This is beyond question or challenge. This does not necessarily mean that overall, Greeks and sub-Saharans are similar. But a close relationship at even only one locus (already shown so far by two distinct methods of analyzing that locus) shows that admixture occurred. However, apparently the three scientists decided to ignore the actual study on Greeks (abstract & link below), because that study shows a relatedness in the samples between Greeks and sub-Saharans using several methods (including two ways of analyzing another locus entirely -- DQ), not just the neighbor-joining dendogram and correspondence analysis of DRB1 shown in the study on Palestinians and Jews, although those would certainly be sufficient; indeed, either one at the DRB1 locus alone would be sufficient. (This deliberate negligence on the part of the three scientists isn't surprising, because, as mentioned above, they criticized the basing of the main conclusions in the Israeli/Palestinian study -- that Palestinians and Israelis are related -- on only the DRB1 locus; this was most certainly not the case, since other loci were tested, and the conclusions were based on the similarities of all results.) Most convincingly, in the actual Greek study, several sub-Saharan-specific alleles were clearly found in the Greek population at the DRB1 locus when a direct search for alleles was undertaken. There is absolutely no getting around this. Sub-Saharan alleles could not be present in the Greek population without admixture having occurred. Anyone with the slightest knowledge of genetics and an ounce of common sense can see this. Alleles specific to one population do not appear in another by magic; only by admixture (as stated above).

Three Scientists wrote:
and that the Japanese are nearly identical to west and south Africans.


Firstly, according to another study, HLA Genes in Arabic-speaking Morrocans, the scientists (including Arnaiz-Villena) create what is definitely a similar tree to the one in the retracted study, and never mention that Japanese are related to sub-Saharan Africans, only that they are outliers together (along with Greeks, who really do have a relationship with sub-Saharans):

Quote:
Greeks are almost outliers together with Japanese and San (Bushmen).. . In fact, a gradient from Western (both African and European) to Middle Eastern Mediterraneans is observed, placing distinctly Greeks, Japanese and San (Bushmen) as outliers.


Three Scientists wrote:
It is surprising that the authors were not puzzled by these anomalous results, which contradict history, geography, anthropology and all prior population-genetic studies of these groups.


Often, genetics will reveal something we didn't previously know about a population. This isn't so puzzling. In fact, it happens all the time, on both individual and populational levels. But in the case of the Greeks having sub-Saharan admixture and Jews / Palestinians being related, the studies are in concord with others. There will be more on the Greek study itself below. It is only being mentioned here because of the cross-referenced data in the study on Palestinians and Jews.

Three Scientists wrote:
Surely the ordinary process of refereeing would have saved the field from this dispute.


This is a very silly and ignorant thing to say, since, as mentioned above, all studies must pass peer review before being published in scientific journals. As mentioned, the study on Palestinians and Jews passed peer review, proving it contained no glaring scientific errors, contrary to what the three scientists who wrote to Nature want us to believe.

An e-mail reply to my query to one of the three claiming a scientific weakness for the study is as follows:

One of the three scientists, in an e-mail reply wrote:
Thanks for writing. I was rather surprised by the following statement in the article you recommend that I read : 'If Arnaiz-Villena had found evidence that Jewish people were genetically very special, instead of ordinary, you can be sure no one would have objected to the phrases he used in his article”. I am not a Jew, but I have great respect for them, and I don’t think they are so ordinary, but I am one of those few geneticists that look at culture rather than genes. I am also scared by the amount of antisemitism I see around. Is the sentence above another bit of it? If so, it is better to not spread it around.
The Arnaiz article was refused on the basis of a mistake made by Arnaiz Villena or his colleagues that introduced into a scientific article politics about a very sad conflict that has been going on for decades now, and that we would all like to come to a reasonable end as soon as possible, ideally one dignified for both sides.
Arnaiz apologized, and so I suppose he has been forgiven for it and I am not sure the issue deserves continuing comment.


Quite surprising and revealing, isn't it? The scientist, who confirms the retraction of the study was political, actually thinks culture should be included in genetic investigations. Doing this can certainly prevent one from learning the truth about a population's genetic structure, since given genes do not necessarily correspond to a given culture. I must confess I am quite disappointed in this well-respected scientist, and will henceforth be somewhat wary of his work.

As mentioned above, that the study passed peer review shows nothing was wrong with it. This, together with the facts that: the study was indeed not pulled for scientific reasons; that no other scientists complained about the study scientifically; that no other scientists complained about other similar studies employing the DRB1 locus; and that the three scientists themselves complained about no other similar studies using the DRB1 locus, helps to show the study is scientifically sound. The fact that other scientists had written in to support Arnaiz-Villena after the retraction, further proves the study's validity:

Observer wrote:
In the wake of the journal's actions, and claims of mass protests about the article, several scientists have now written to the society to support Arnaiz-Villena and to protest about their heavy-handedness.

One of them said: 'If Arnaiz-Villena had found evidence that Jewish people were genetically very special, instead of ordinary, you can be sure no one would have objected to the phrases he used in his article. This is a very sad business.'


Sad business, indeed. Interestingly, the scientist who wrote the e-mail reply above thinks the above quote is Anti-Semitic, and should not be spread around. It is not, and is simply factual. This would equally apply to any other group (or individual) else with an ideological interest in the outcome of a genetics study.

So, to summarize, the study on the relatedness of Jews and Palestinians is perfectly valid from a scientific standpoint. The retraction was for political reasons, and the supposedly scientific objections by a few scientists are easily taken apart, and indeed are merely disguised attempts to show their dislike of the study for political reasons only.


-----


Now, it is time to move on to the study on the Greeks, which is called HLA genes in Macedonians and the sub-Saharan origin of the Greeks. Again, keep in mind that this study has not been retracted or challenged.

Here is the abstract:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=11260506&query_hl=20&itool=pubmed_docsum

Quote:
Tissue Antigens. 2001 Feb;57(2):118-27. Related Articles, Links


HLA genes in Macedonians and the sub-Saharan origin of the Greeks.

Arnaiz-Villena A, Dimitroski K, Pacho A, Moscoso J, Gomez-Casado E, Silvera-Redondo C, Varela P, Blagoevska M, Zdravkovska V, Martinez-Laso J.

Department of Immunology and Molecular Biology, H. 12 de Octubre, Universidad Complutense, Madrid, Spain. aarnaiz@eucmax.sim.ucm.es

HLA alleles have been determined in individuals from the Republic of Macedonia by DNA typing and sequencing. HLA-A, -B, -DR, -DQ allele frequencies and extended haplotypes have been for the first time determined and the results compared to those of other Mediterraneans, particularly with their neighbouring Greeks. Genetic distances, neighbor-joining dendrograms and correspondence analysis have been performed. The following conclusions have been reached: 1) Macedonians belong to the "older" Mediterranean substratum, like Iberians (including Basques), North Africans, Italians, French, Cretans, Jews, Lebanese, Turks (Anatolians), Armenians and Iranians, 2) Macedonians are not related with geographically close Greeks, who do not belong to the "older" Mediterranenan substratum, 3) Greeks are found to have a substantial relatedness to sub-Saharan (Ethiopian) people, which separate them from other Mediterranean groups. Both Greeks and Ethiopians share quasi-specific DRB1 alleles, such as *0305, *0307, *0411, *0413, *0416, *0417, *0420, *1110, *1112, *1304 and *1310. Genetic distances are closer between Greeks and Ethiopian/sub-Saharan groups than to any other Mediterranean group and finally Greeks cluster with Ethiopians/sub-Saharans in both neighbour joining dendrograms and correspondence analyses. The time period when these relationships might have occurred was ancient but uncertain and might be related to the displacement of Egyptian-Ethiopian people living in pharaonic Egypt.

PMID: 11260506 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]


Here is the link to the full article of the above abstract:

http://www.makedonika.org/processpaid.aspcontentid=ti.2001.pdf

The study found a clear relationship between Greeks and sub-Saharan populations. A neighbor-joining dendogram at the DRB1 locus shows this. Correspondence analyses using HLA-DRB1 allele frequencies data and low resolution HLA-DR and DQ (DQ, incidentally, is another locus) allele frequencies data support this. Genetic distances with HLA-DR and DQ generic typings support this. HLA-DRB1 genetic distance calculations support this. And finally, eleven DRB1 alleles were found to be shared by Greeks and sub-Saharans when a direct allele search was undertaken. These alleles, when not found in any real quantities in other populations geographically close to Greece, were searched for in other locations, and were found to exist mainly in Ethiopian and West African populations. Some are only found in Greeks and sub-Saharans, while a few are sporadically found in other populations, mainly around the Mediterranean (the Croatian island of Hvar and Lebanon) and Hungary. African ancestry in any of these populations should not be surprising. (Incidentally, two are found in Amerindians, who have been shown by other methods to have sub-Saharan admixture. One is found in Pacific peoples, who have also been shown to have low levels of sub-Saharan admixture by other methods.) This shows an introgression of sub-Saharan alleles into the Greek population. Again, the only way for alleles from one population to enter another one is by admixture. Selection cannot cause this. The DRB1 locus' being subject to selection has no bearing on these results (see above).

(It should also be noted that the idea put forth by one individual that the HLA alleles in question are Greek alleles and the sub-Saharan populations carrying them do so because of Greek admixture doesn't hold even a drop of water. This is because Greece's neighbours were tested for the alleles and were found not to have them to any significant degree. Since Greek colonists settled in many parts of the Mediterranean, if the alleles had been Greek in origin, they would be present in Greece's neighbours, like Italians, Turks, etc., at appreciable rates. Also, there is no historical evidence of significant Greek settlement in these sub-Saharan areas, particularly the West African ones. But there is indeed evidence of significant presence and settlement of sub-Saharans in Greece.)

Other tests that show other results should not surprise. There is another study, called High-resolution typing of HLA-DRB1 locus in the Macedonian population, by Petlichkovski, et al., 2004, which tests the same DRB1 locus and apparently doesn't report sub-Saharan material (see below on this), and finds Greeks to be similar to Macedonians and other southern Europeans (using genetic distance calculations). In the study itself (not in the abstract) the Arnaiz-Villena study is addressed, and it is mentioned that their results are not in agreement with those of Arnaiz-Villena, and the reasoning used is that the sampled populations were different. This makes perfect sense. The authors didn't try to discredit the Arnaiz-Villena study, which they couldn't do, anyway, because results are results. But isn't it strange that those with ideological investments in the purity of Greeks or other Mediterraneans who claim to object to the use of the DRB1 locus don't object to this study, and freely quote it, conveniently ignoring, of course, what is stated in boldface above? If that doesn't make things clear, nothing will! Incidentally, Racial Reality, who frequently berates those who don't look beyond abstracts into the studies themselves, should have taken his own advice in this case, as he is one of those who fraudulently quotes this study as "proof" of a lack of African ancestry in Greeks.

Petlichkovski, et al. wrote:
The observed closest standard genetic distance between the studied Macedonian population and the Greek population (SGD = 2.777, GD = 6.35) is not in concord with that published by Arnaiz-Villena et al. (21), who point out the close genetic relatedness of the Macedonian population to that of the Cretans and to the great genetic distance between the Macedonians and the Greeks coming from Attica, Cyprus, and northern Greece. Papassavas et al. (22) reveal a significant decrease of both DRB1*1104 and *1601 allele frequencies in the Cretan population used for the genetic distance analysis by Arnaiz-Villena et al., compared to their results. Bearing in mind the differences in the allele frequencies in the Macedonians in our study and those in the study of Arnaiz-Villena et al., we believe that the discordance of the observations in both the studies investigating the HLA polymorphism is probably due to the selection of different subject populations.


Specifically, this sentence from the abstract is used by Greek white nationalists in an attempt to fraudulently "prove" there is no sub-Saharan admixture in Greeks (as if this could really be done, since the Arnaiz-Villena Greek study, amongst others, has shown conclusively the opposite) is as follows:

Petlichkovski, et al. wrote:
The included African populations grouped on the opposite side of the tree.


The key word here is included, since the included African populations were not the sub-Saharan ones Arnaiz-Villena mentioned had a relationship with Greeks (Oromo, Amhara, Nuba, Fulani, Rimaibe, Mossi), but instead, were Egyptians, Moroccans, Algerians (all North Africans), and Mandenka (sub-Saharan, but from Senegal) -- populations which Arnaiz-Villena also found to be distant from Greeks. Quoting from inside the actual Petlichkovski study:

Petlichkovski, et al. wrote:
As expected, the included African populations (Moroccans, Egyptians, Mandenka, and Algerians) were grouped on the opposite side of the tree.


As we can see, Pontikos and Racial Reality are distorting things once again!

Now it is time to address additional claims made by some that the words of M.A. Jobling, M.E. Hurles, and C. Tyler-Smith, from their book Human Evolutionary Genetics, Garland Publishing: New York, 2004 (as quoted by Greek Nationalist Dienekes Pontikos) somehow refute the Greek study (which they don't). Once again, we are being misled, since the study being referred to is the one on Palestinians and Jews, even though they specifically refer to the Greek correspondence analysis reproduced in it from the original Greek study. I have this textbook, and the only mentioning of Arnaiz-Villena in the references is with regard to the Palesinians/Jews study. I am keeping this discussion in the Greek section of this article, incidentally, since it deals with Greek data, despite its coming from the other study.

Jobling, et al. [according to Dienekes] write:

Quote:
As an example, Figure 1.5 illustrates the arbitrariness of different possible population groupings based upon DNA sequence diversity at an HLA locus. Often an objective way to choose between different interpretations is not obvious (though objective methods are discussed later in this book), and in its absence, simple assertion often fills the vacuum.

Figure 1.5: Grouping populations – take your pick. Relationships between populations based on DNA sequence diversity data at the HLA-DRB1 locus, displayed as a correspondence analysis plot (similar to principal components analysis; see Chapter 6) in which clustered populations are genetically similar. (a) Populations, with names indicated; (b, c, d) Three alternative groupings of the populations (there are others). The grouping chosen by Arnaiz-Villena et al. (2001) is (d) (adduced as support for a sub-Saharan origin for the Greeks) but is essentially arbitrary. Why is it preferred to alternative groupings shown in (b) and (c)? If the population origins were unknown when the groupings were made, would it affect the outcome? Note that this locus is generally regarded as being under strong selection. Adapted from Arnaiz-Villena et al. (2001).[Q1]


Click here for larger version.

In actuality, Dienekes leaves out much of the text (surprise, surprise) so that the true reason of the inclusion of the correspondence analysis is not revealed, which is to show how different interpretations are often (not just with this diagram or this study) possible when it comes to results, with opposing camps going at it, as it were. Here is the full quote from that particular section, from pages 11-12:

Quote:
1.2.3 Interpretation, interpretation, interpretation

In many fields, as time passes, opinion upon how data should be interpreted changes. Indeed, there are often differences in opinion about data interpretation at any one time. This is particularly true of genetic data on human diversity. Debates described in Chapters 8 and 10, on the origins of modern humans and the genetic impact of the spread of agriculture in Europe, illustrate this. Particular methods of analysis, with different underlying paradigms, can be adopted by opposing "camps" within a particular field, and reconciliation becomes difficult. Some methods for analyzing diversity data seem particularly open to different interpretations. As an example, Figure 1.5 illustrates the arbitrariness of different possible population groupings based upon DNA sequence diversity at an HLA locus. Often an objective way to choose between different interpretations is not obvious (though objective methods are discussed later in this book), and in its absence, simple assertion often fills the vacuum.

[the following is the caption under the correspondence analysis]

Figure 1.5: Grouping populations – take your pick. Relationships between populations based on DNA sequence diversity data at the HLA-DRB1 locus, displayed as a correspondence analysis plot (similar to principal components analysis; see Chapter 6) in which clustered populations are genetically similar. (a) Populations, with names indicated; (b, c, d) Three alternative groupings of the populations (there are others). The grouping chosen by Arnaiz-Villena et al. (2001) is (d) (adduced as support for a sub-Saharan origin for the Greeks) but is essentially arbitrary. Why is it preferred to alternative groupings shown in (b) and (c)? If the population origins were unknown when the groupings were made, would it affect the outcome? Note that this locus is generally regarded as being under strong selection. Adapted from Arnaiz-Villena et al. (2001).[Q1]


Let me reiterate that the correspondence analysis being questioned is the one that contains Greek data in the retracted (for political reasons) study on Palestinians on Jews, not anything from the actual Greek study, even though the correspondence analysis is identical. Jobling, et al. do not (and cannot) take issue with Arnaiz-Villena's findings of sub-Saharan alleles in the Greek population, as shown in the Greek study itself. The alleles don't lie. Also, they don't (and can't) question the fact that the population distances were closest between Greeks and sub-Saharans at that and another locus, as shown in the Greek study itself. This, too, does not lie. The issue of the DRB1 locus being under selection has been addressed above, and is a non-issue, since Arnaiz-Villena was not attempting to actually quantify sub-Saharan admixture in Greeks or influx of sub-Saharans to Greece; he merely points out that admixture occurred, and that it is more than just an infinitessimal amount, since in the Greek study itself genetic distances show closeness at a few loci, and since quite a few (eleven) sub-Saharan alleles at the DRB1 locus were reported in Greeks in that study.

Jobling, et al. are only using the Greek correspondence analysis in the Palestinians/Jews study to illustrate how groups are chosen in diagrams, and they mention that choosing them objectively is not always done. They use Arnaiz-Villena, et al. as an example because they feel that since A-V knew the population origins, it may have skewed their objectivity with regard to a single diagram based on the DRB1 locus (this is their opinion only, and by no means are they stating this is the only time elements of studies have been called into question by those who happen to have different opinions). As stated above, this correspondence analysis is but one of many methods A-V use to determine sub-Saharan admixture in Greeks in the actual Greek study itself. But Jobling, et al. themselves admit that the population origins were known beforehand, which proves they aren't questioning the Greek-sub-Saharan relatedness at all. They are only questioning the supposed non-objectivity of the population groupings of one correspondence analysis. (In the Greek study itself, as stated above, there is another correspondence analysis, using HLA-DR and DQ [another locus] allele frequencies data, that isn't mentioned at all by Jobling, et al., since they aren't addressing that study at all, yet it comes up with essentially the same results.) Jobling, et al. actually aren't specifically questioning the grouping of Greeks with sub-Saharans in the correspondence analysis under scrutiny, either, since one of the alternative groupings they show, (b), also does this. Furthermore, since Greeks and sub-Saharans cluster together in the charts, it makes sense to group them together. This part really isn't arbitrary, and there is nothing wrong with Arnaiz-Villena's grouping them together. This aside, the Jobling, et al. book, incidentally, is an excellent book, and I highly recommend it.

No one is saying Greeks are primarily sub-Saharan in their overall genetic makeup. They are Europeans, after all. But that sub-Saharan admixture has been shown to exist genetically in Greeks (here at the HLA level) should not arouse skepticism. In fact, owing to Greece's former empire and contact with Egypt and other parts of Africa during this time; the mingling of various peoples in Roman-era Greece; the same mingling of peoples of different ethnicities (including sub-Saharans) in Greece during the Turkish period; and Greece's geographical location near Africa, the finding of a relatedness between Greeks and sub-Saharans due to the former's absorption of the latter does not by any stretch of the imagination contradict geography and history.

Other studies using markers other than HLA have also found sub-Saharan genetic material in Greeks. This flatly contradicts the claim by Racial Reality and Pontikos that sub-Saharan admixture in Greeks is unsupported by other studies.

The study Clinal patterns of human Y chromosomal diversity in continental Italy and Greece are dominated by drift and founder effects finds sub-Saharan Y-haplogroup A in a sample of 27 Greeks from the island of Lesvos (Mitilini) (data in full study, not in abstract).

Also, the Benin-originating strain of the HbS (sickle-cell) marker (#19) is found in Greeks. It could only have gotten there through admixture, whether indirect (through North Africans, for example, as the authors of the study suggest) or direct (through the influx of sub-Saharans at various times in Greek history). Either way, the end result is irrefutable post-Diasporic sub-Saharan ancestry:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=1687685&query_hl=25&itool=pubmed_docsum

Quote:
Hemoglobin. 1991;15(6):459-67. Related Articles, Links


The origin of the sickle mutation in Greece; evidence from beta S globin gene cluster polymorphisms.

Boussiou M, Loukopoulos D, Christakis J, Fessas P.

Unit for Prenatal Diagnosis, Laikon Hospital, Athens, Greece.

Study of the Hpa I polymorphism 3' to the beta-globin gene in the Greek population revealed absence of the site in 238 beta S chromosomes, in contrast to a much larger sample of chromosomes carrying the beta A gene, where this site was consistently positive. Subsequent haplotype analysis of the beta-globin gene cluster in 82 beta S chromosomes demonstrated that 79 (96%) belonged to haplotype #19, while the three exceptions (all Hpa I negative) could be explained by a delta-beta recombination event. Haplotype #19 was never encountered in a parallel study of the 83 beta A chromosomes. Comparison of the above results with similar surveys in other parts of the world and consideration of various historical events suggest that the beta S mutation was introduced into Greece over the last few centuries by the Saracen raids and/or by settlements of North African slaves brought in by the Arabs, Franks, Venetians, or Ottoman Turks, who have occupied the country over the last millennium.

PMID: 1687685 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]


Here is yet another study that finds a beta-thalassaemia allele specific to Africans in Greeks:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=3620356&query_hl=3&itool=pubmed_docsum

Quote:
Br J Haematol. 1987 Jul;66(3):379-83. Links

DNA haplotype heterogeneity of beta-thalassaemia in Greece: feasibility of prenatal diagnosis.

Athanassiadou A, Zarkadis I, Papahadjopoulou A, Maniatis GM.


We have carried out DNA haplotype analysis of 69 beta-thalassaemia patients in Greece and 42 of the parents using seven standard polymorphic sites. Our data show a high degree of heterogeneity of the chromosomal background in which beta-thalassaemia occurs in Greece, suggesting a high degree of heterogeneity in the beta-thalassaemia mutations involved. Haplotype I is found here to represent 45% of total beta-thalassaemia mutations detected, a proportion well below the 67% reported in earlier studies with Greek-American patients. Nine different haplotypes are detected and the ones carrying beta(+) mutations are the majority, including those which are linked to beta(+) mutations associated with a thalassaemia intermedia phenotype, and which constitute 11% of all haplotypes. One of these haplotypes (---- ) has never before been reported to occur in non-Africans, whether in beta thal or beta A chromosomes, and it is found here to be of African origin rather than the product of recombination. In 21 families haplotype analysis showed that prenatal diagnosis for a second child was feasible in 81% of the cases. Use of the AvaII-psi beta polymorphic site as well as the seven standard ones brought this proportion up to 90%.

PMID: 3620356 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]


In addition, sub-Saharan Chromosome 7 markers have been found in Greeks. These Chromosome 7 markers are cystic fibrosis mutations that are specific to sub-Saharans; Greeks are the only Europeans in which these sub-Saharan mutations are found:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=12392505&query_hl=20&itool=pubmed_docsum

Quote:
Tissue Antigens. 2002 Aug;60(2):111-21. Related Articles, Links


Population genetic relationships between Mediterranean populations determined by HLA allele distribution and a historic perspective.

Arnaiz-Villena A, Gomez-Casado E, Martinez-Laso J.

Department of Immunology and Molecular Biology, Universidad Complutense, Madrid, Spain. aarnaiz@eucmax.sim.ucm.es

HLA genes allele distribution has been studied in Mediterranean and sub-Saharan populations. Their relatedness has been tested by genetic distances, neighbour-joining dendrograms and correspondence analyses. The population genetic relationships have been compared with the history of the classical populations living in the area. A revision of the historic postulates would have to be undertaken, particularly in the cases when genetics and history are overtly discordant. HLA genomics shows that: 1) Greeks share an important part of their genetic pool with sub-Saharan Africans (Ethiopians and west Africans) also supported by Chr 7 Markers. The gene flow from Black Africa to Greece may have occurred in Pharaonic times or when Saharan people emigrated after the present hyperarid conditions were established (5000 years B.C.). 2) Turks (Anatolians) do not significantly differ from other Mediterraneans, indicating that while the Asians Turks carried out an invasion with cultural significance (language), it is not genetically detectable. 3) Kurds and Armenians are genetically very close to Turks and other Middle East populations. 4) There is no HLA genetic trace of the so called Aryan invasion, which has only been defined on doubtful linguistic bases. 5) Iberians, including Basques, are related to north-African Berbers. 6) Present-day Algerian and Moroccan urban and country people show an indistinguishable Berber HLA profile.

Publication Types:
Historical Article

PMID: 12392505 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE


The above study is another by Arnaiz-Villena, using the data from his main study on Greeks. The information on the Chromosome 7 markers comes from Dork, et al., 1998. Here is the quote from inside the above Arnaiz-Villena study:

Quote:
Other Negroid genes have also been found in Greeks. They are the only Caucasoid population who bears cystic fibrosis mutations typical of Black Africans (Chromosome 7). See Dork, et al. In Am. J. Hum. Genet., 1998: 63: 656-682.


Anthropologists, studying old remains of Greeks, sometimes found sub-Saharan-like individuals:

J. Lawrence Angel, in American Anthropologist, New Series, Vol. 74, No. 1/2 (Feb. - Apr., 1972) [review of Frank Snowden's "Blacks in Antiquity" book] reports:

Quote:
In my own skeletal samples from Greece I note apparent negroid nose and mouth traits in two of fourteen Early Neolithic (sixth millenium B.C.), only two or three more among 364 from fifth to second millenium B.C., one among 113 Early Iron Age, one or two among 233 Classic and Hellenistic skeletons, but four clear Negroids (all from one area of Early Christian Corinth) among ninety-five Roman period, two among eighty-five Medieval, and of course ten among fifty-two Turkish period Greeks, yet none among 202 of Romantic (nineteenth century) date.


An interesting quote from Biological Relations of Egyptians and Eastern Mediterranean Populations during pre-dynastic and Dynastic Times, Journal of Human Evolution, 1972 (1) pp. 307-313:


Quote:
Against this background of disease, movement and pedomorphic reduction off body size one can identify Negroid (Ethiopic or Bushmanoid?) traits of nose and prognathism appearing in Natufian latest hunters (McCown, 1939) and in Anatolian and Macedonian first farmers (Angel, 1972), probably from Nubia via the predecesors of the Badarians and Tasians [. . .]


Frank Snowden, who passed away in 2007 at age 96, had researched the presence of blacks in the ancient Greece from the standpoint of art and literature. His findings include:

Quote:
Both the literary and archaeological evidence points to a not infrequent crossing between blacks and whites. Nothing in the observations on such unions, whether marriage or concubinage, resembles certain modern strictures on racial mixture.

Of course one reason for the color bar which recently existed in the West was the belief that it was race mixing which led to the collapse of Greek, Roman, and other civilizations. . . .

No laws in the Greco-Roman world prohibited unions of blacks and whites. Ethiopian blood was interfused with that of Greeks and Romans. No Greek or Roman author condemned such racial mixture. . . . The scientists Aristotle and Pliny, like Plutarch, commented as scientists on the physical appearance of those born of black-white racial mixture but included nothing resembling certain modern strictures on miscegenation. . . . It is safe to assume, therefore, that in course of time many Ethiopians were assimilated into a predominantly white population. (Blacks in Antiquity, 193-195)


With respect to the number of blacks in ancient Greece, Snowden states:

Quote:
Even though we cannot state, in the manner of modern sociologists and historians,the ratio of Blacks to Whites in either Greece or Italy, we can say that Ethiopians were by no means few or rare sights and that their presence, whatever their numbers, constituted no color problem. (Blacks in Antiquity, 186)


Snowden also mentions:

Quote:
Black-white sexual relations were never the cause of great emotional crises and many blacks were physically assimilated into the predominantly white populations of the Mediterranean world.


...the number of references to Ethiopians in Greek literature of the fifth century BC, on the appearance of mulatto children following the presence of blacks in Greece in the army of Xerxes, and on the many artistic representations of the mid- and late-fifth century BC reflecting this anthropological evolution.


It is worth clicking on his name above and reading the article. His two books, Blacks in Antiquity and Before Color Prejudice, are excellent works and are highly recommended. They do not contain Afrocentric drivel, and Snowden cites all his sources and makes logical conclusions. In fact, the Arnaiz-Villena study's results of Ethiopian alleles in the Greek population correlate to Snowden's research, since most of the sub-Saharans Snowden speaks of originated in the Ethiopian region. So, history is corroborated by genetics, and vice-versa. Even most of the specific geographical regions match up, e.g., the Athens area, Cyprus, Aegean Islands, etc.

Snowden has been studying this field since the 1940's, and wrote a few articles at that time. One is called The Negro in Ancient Greece and is available online in PDF form. (I have the original article, as well as The Negro in Classical Italy, and will soon scan them both in.)


Here is another Arnaiz-Villena study mentioning the Greek-sub-Saharan relatedness:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=11543906&query_hl=20&itool=pubmed_docsum

Quote:
Hum Immunol. 2001 Sep;62(9):1051-61. Related Articles, Links


The correlation between languages and genes: the Usko-Mediterranean peoples.

Arnaiz-Villena A, Martinez-Laso J, Alonso-Garcia J.

Department of Immunology and Molecular Biology, H. 12 de Octubre, Universidad Complutense, 28041, Madrid, Spain. aarnaiz@eucmax.sim.ucm.es

The usko-Mediterraneans peoples are defined as ancient and present day populations that have lived in the Mediterranean/Middle-East/Caucasus area and have spoken a Basque related language. The present day existing populations show an HLA genetic relatedness which is more or less close according to geographical distance. The Greek sample is an outlying in all genetic analyses, because Greeks have a significant genetic input from sub-Saharan Ethiopians and Blacks. This probably occurred in Pharaonic times. Present day comparisons between genes and languages show a lack of correlation: Macedonian, Palestinians, Kurds, part of Berbers, Armenians, and Turks belong to the old Mediterranean substratum, but they do not speak a language included in the old Mediterranean Dene-Caucasian group. This is due to an "elite"-imposed culture and language. Other ethnic groups speak an "old Mediterranean language" or "usko-Mediterranean language" modified by Roman Latin (i.e., Spanish, Italians), or by other not fully explained processes (Jews). Therefore, the correlation between genes and languages may exist at a macrogeographical level, but not when more precise microgeographical studies are done, as shown in the present "usko-Mediterranean" peoples model.

PMID: 11543906 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]


The following study was done by other scientists and confirms the relatedness of the Greeks to sub-Saharans by calculating genetic distances at the DRB1 locus (this study, incidentally, and the Petlichkovski (2004) study above, show that the Greek study is indeed cited by other scientists, and not merely northern European White Nationalists and Afrocentrists, contrary to what Racial Reality and Pontikos would have us believe; the fact that we site it here on our respectable site also disproves those claims, since we are a group who seek the truth and demand all sources):


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=16473309&query_hl=25&itool=pubmed_docsum

Quote:
Eur J Med Genet. 2006 January - February;49(1):43-56. Epub 2005 Feb 10. Related Articles, Links


HLA genes in Southern Tunisians (Ghannouch area) and their Relationship with other Mediterraneans.

Hajjej A, Hmida S, Kaabi H, Dridi A, Jridi A, El Gaa1ed A, Boukef K.

National Blood Transfusion Centre, Tunis, Tunisia.

South Tunisian HLA gene profile has studied for the first time. HLA-A, -B, -DRB1 and -DQB1 allele frequencies of Ghannouch have been compared with those of neighboring populations, other Mediterraneans and Sub-Saharans. Their relatedness has been tested by genetic distances, Neighbor-Joining dendrograms and correspondence analyses. Our HLA data show that both southern from Ghannouch and northern Tunisians are of a Berber substratum in spite of the successive incursions (particularly, the 7th-8th century A.D. Arab invasion) occurred in Tunisia. It is also the case of other North Africans and Iberians. This present study confirms the relatedness of Greeks to Sub-Saharan populations. This suggests that there was an admixture between the Greeks and Sub-Saharans probably during Pharaonic period or after natural catastrophes (dryness) occurred in Sahara.

PMID: 16473309 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher]


There is more. AncestryByDNA, using autosomal markers, mentions that the average Greek and Italian type with approximately 5% sub-Saharan genetic material. Even though in some cases with respect to certain population groups, for an individual, a low reading such as this may be negated by the confidence interval, in Greeks and Italians low levels of sub-Saharan admixture are consistenly found, making them signature results for these populations. This means they are not stastical "noise," but true results.


That Greeks have some sub-Saharan admixture isn't open to question. The HLA alleles and genetic distance calculations (and neighbor-joining dendograms and correspondence analyses) speak for themselves, as do the other sub-Saharan markers described above, along with the cranial and skeletal, as well as historic, data.

But there is even more.

Sub-Saharan-originating Y-group E-M78 (a derivative of sub-Saharan-originating E3b) is found at relatively high levels in Greeks (and some other Mediterraneans), which suggests, in addition to the more recent admixture, a very ancient sub-Saharan contribution to the Greek genepool (Semino, 2004 and Cruciani, 2004). The fact that the most prevalent form of E-M78 found in Greeks is a later, mainly local (Mediterranean) variation is irrelevant, since the parental E-M78 originated in eastern Africa, as did all of its ancestral markers. Various descendants of E3b, E-M78's ancestor, are shown to exist in many Mediterraneans in this study (though all are simply marked "E3b"), which also shows sub-Saharan Y-group A in Cypriots (although it isn't specified whether these are Greek or Turkish, so, perhaps it is a cross-section; Greek-identified Cypriots are far more numerous). East-African-Specific M1 has also been reported in Greeks (Richards, 2000 and supplementary data).

We rest our case. It must be remembered, this posting is not about "proving" Greeks are "really Black" because of a minor amount of sub-Saharan ancestry. This is about showing sub-Saharan admixture occurred in Greece, and this is evidenced by different kinds of genetic research and supported by history and anthropology. More importantly, it is about refuting fraudulent claims (by those with ideological investments in Greece's "Whiteness") that Arnaiz-Villena's Greek information is invalid or unsound, or that the study on Greeks has been refuted or retracted. Arnaiz-Villena's study on Greeks is perfectly sound scientifically, as are all of his others. And, despite that there are some geneticists (usually those who specialize in mtDNA or Y Chr.) who don't have much faith in HLA studies, there are a great deal of geneticists who find HLA to be a very reliable and discriminating tool for studying population relationships, and the number of studies employing HLA for this purpose are legion. Indeed, some of those who specialize in HLA find mtDNA and Y Chr. to be less reliable.

---

A magisterial write-up, comprehensive in scope.
I looked at the Petlichkovski study. As the
write-up clearly shows, it does not challenge
Arnaiz-Villena's findings but notes that the
differences in results were caused by different
populations studied.The trolls on Wikipedia
have distorted the entire Greek-sub-Sahara
article with a number of sly falsehoods and
distortions. They even have a section about
so-called Anaiz-Villena "controversy" which has
nothing to do with his unrefuted DNA research.
Unable to refute his data they resort to cheap
shot insinuations, unrelated to the issue at
hand.

Quote from Petlichkovski:

"As expected, the included African populations
(Moroccans, Egyptians, Mandenka, and Algerians)
were grouped on the opposite side of the tree...
Bearing in mind the differences in the allele
frequencies in the Macedonians in our study and
those in the study of Arnaiz-Villena et al., we believe
that the discordance of the observations in both the
studies investigating the HLA polymorphism is
probably due to the selection of different subject
populations."


Thankfully, the comprehensive analysis above
brings the truth forward. Curiously, the detailed
write-up above has "disappeared" from the one-
drop rule's website.

Petlichkovski's dendrogram was seized upon to
make a bogus claim of "contradicting" Anaiz-
Vilenna. But interestingly enough, it also shows
Egyptians clustering on the same twig with black
West Africans such as the Mandenka, before they
group with north Africans or Europeans. The
African samples as a whole, including Berbers
and Egyptians, seem to group up with each other
first before extending to Europeans.


 

---

Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by zarahan:

The trolls on Wikipedia
have distorted the entire Greek-sub-Sahara
article with a number of sly falsehoods and
distortions.

---

quote:

---

Curiously, the detailed write-up above has "disappeared" from the one-drop rule's website.

---

quote:

---

which is a segment from the more complete scene below.



The Africans and Europeans of Crete were of one culture and people. The
founding culture was North African but the population hailed from other
Aegean islands, the Peloponnese mainland, and the Levant as well. Africans
weren't the majority. The majority population was the unique comingling
that produced the disctinct Minoans as drawn by themselves above right.

Despite scholarly recognition of that fact no one labels Minoans "mixed."
As much as Eurocentrists cry that African doesn't mean black why then
do they insist that European means white? Quite oxymoronic, no?

---

Can you tell me where that picture that is from?
 

---

Posted by TheAmericanPatriot (Member # 15824) on :
 
Find me papers from Greek historians who back up your point, otherwise its just babble. there were no blacks in historical greece.
 

---

Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
 
Procession Fresco from the West Court and South
Propyleum of the Palace at Knossos circa 1500 BCE
now in the Herakleion Archaeological Museum

The actual site




Of course what I've presented are retouched.

as the above reconstruction shows time ravages. And

as this one shows what all of the fresco that really remains.

quote:

---

Originally posted by SirInfamous:

quote:

---

which is a segment from the more complete scene below.



The Africans and Europeans of Crete were of one culture and people. The
founding culture was North African but the population hailed from other
Aegean islands, the Peloponnese mainland, and the Levant as well. Africans
weren't the majority. The majority population was the unique comingling
that produced the disctinct Minoans as drawn by themselves above right.

Despite scholarly recognition of that fact no one labels Minoans "mixed."
As much as Eurocentrists cry that African doesn't mean black why then
do they insist that European means white? Quite oxymoronic, no?

---

Can you tell me where that picture that is from?

---

quote:

---

Greeks and Macedonians

A paper on the genetic relationship between Greeks and ethnic Macedonians had concluded that "Greeks are found to have a substantial relatedness to sub-Saharan (Ethiopian and West African) people, which separate them from other Mediterranean groups." The conclusions of the paper were related to the "Black Athena" debate and became embroiled in disputes between Greek and ethnic Macedonian nationalists. Shortly after this, three respected geneticists, Luca Cavalli-Sforza, Alberto Piazza and Neil Risch, argued that the scientific limitations of Arnaiz-Villena's methodology. They stated that "Using results from the analysis of a single marker, particularly one likely to have undergone selection, for the purpose of reconstructing genealogies is unreliable and unacceptable practice in population genetics.", making specific allusion to the findings on Greeks (among others) as "anomalous results, which contradict history, geography, anthropology and all prior population-genetic studies of these groups."

Arnaiz-Villena et al. countered this criticism in a response, stating "single-locus studies, whether using HLA or other markers, are common in this field and are regularly published in the specialist literature".

No multiple-marker analysis has ever duplicated Arnaiz-Villena's results. In The History and Geography of Human Genes (Princeton, 1994), Cavalli-Sforza, Menozzi and Piazza grouped Greeks with other European and Mediterranean populations based on 120 loci (view MDS plot). Then, Ayub et al. 2003 did the same thing using 182 loci (view dendrogram). Another study was conducted in 2004 at Skopje's University of Ss. Kiril and Metodij, using high-resolution typing of HLA-DRB1 according to Arnaiz-Villena's methodology. Contrary to Arnaiz-Villena's conclusion, no sub-Saharan admixture was detected in the Greek sample.

Fringe linguistic theories

Arnaiz-Villena and his collaborator Jorge Alonso-Garcia claim to have used Basque to decipher many of the ancient languages of the Mediterranean and Middle East which are known to be unrelated to Basque, including Egyptian, Hittite, Sumerian, Hurrian, Ugaritic, Akkadian/Babylonian, Elamite, and Phoenician, all of which they claim have been misidentified and mistranslated by the world's linguists and epigraphers for a century; indeed, they claim that the past century of work across many nations has been a "scientific fraud". Arnaiz-Villena's Egyptian translations, for example, include the cartouche of the bilingual Rosseta Stone in which Champollion identified the name of Ptolemy, which in his version does not include that name, meaning that it is actually Arnaiz-Villena who deserves credit for deciphering the hieroglyphs; the Code of Hammurabi contains "no hint of laws" but is a Basque funerial text; and his purported Basque material proper includes the Iruña-Veleia graffiti, which had been identified as modern forgeries by an official report made by a multidisciplinary team of 26 reputed experts half a year before his decipherment was published.They also claim to be able to read poorly attested languages such as Etruscan, Iberian, Tartessian, Guanche, and Minoan, which no-one else has been able to decipher with any certainty. They posit that these are all part of a "Usko-Mediterranean" branch of the speculative Dene-Caucasian language family, which they extend to include the Berber languages of North Africa, and advertises that Basque can even be used to translate the Indus script of Pakistan, Rongorongo of Easter Island, and the Mayan glyphs of Mesoamerica, showing that "Usko-Mediterannean technology and religion diffused across the planet." This thesis flatly contradicts basic Egyptological, Sumerian, Semitic, Indo-European, and Mesoamerican scholarship. Phoenician, Akkadian/Babylonian, Ugaritic, and Eblaite, for example, are clearly Semitic languages, whereas Arnaiz-Villena excludes the living Semitic languages from his family; Egyptian along with Berber and Semitic have been demonstrated to be Afro-Asiatic, and generations of linguists have been unable to find a connection with Basque; and Hittite is widely acclaimed as a key in the reconstruction of proto-Indo-European, which Arnaiz-Villena acknowledges is completely unrelated to Basque.

Few scholars have found it worth their time to refute Arnaiz-Villena's work. De Hoz says that it "lacks the slightest value and is contrary not just to the scientific method but to common sense", and that "it is an unmitigated disaster which in principle should not be reviewed", but that he does so because it was published using public funds by the respected Univerity Complutense, which might give it undeserved credibility, and that this was a "crime" against legitimate research which has gone unpublished for lack of funds. Pichler likewise describes the "decipherment" of the Canary Island inscriptions as "comic", pointing out that Arnaiz-Villena "translated" an inscription of the alphabet as if it formed words (starting with "fire deceased earth prayer" in Basque), and also found it amazing that the university would publish his books. The "Basque" words themselves are dubious, including some that are neologisms and some that are loanwords from Romance languages such as bake (from Latin pace "peace"), which therefore say nothing of ancient Basque connections. Lakarra calculates that 85% of Arnaiz-Villena's alleged Basque words are faulty or even non-existent. A similar dismiss is made also by Jacobsen on the Iberian translations, showing their shortcomings.


Suspension, accusations and counter-accusations

In 2002, Arnaiz-Villena was suspended without pay from the Hospital Doce de Octubre, after being charged with embezzlement of funds. He was accused of "purchase of products not used in his department's health care activities; purchase of hospital products used in health care activities but in quantities much greater than needed; falsification of statistical data apparently to justify purchases; humiliating treatment of department staff; delay in health care activities; and transfer of department products to the university."Though suspended from the hospital he continued his work at the University. One year later he was reinstated to the hospital because "his basic and Constitutional Human Rights had been broken" according to a three body Court. All accusations were declared invalid (2003). Another three-body Court judgment again declared invalid all the accusations. Arnaiz-Villena was in practice never punished because he belongs only to University staff (Full Professor) and not to the Hospital one. The Public Prosecutor in an unusual thirteen type-written sheets concluded the accusations were not proved and that some of Arnaiz-Villena collaborators were pressured to declare against him. Lastly, The Royal College of Physicians of Madrid carried out an extensive investigation at Arnaiz-Villena's request and concluded that none of the accusations were soundly based.

---

quote:

---

The Minoans were not Greeks, and their language, religion, and social structures were not Greek. Most of what is known or can be guessed about the Minoans comes from modern Archaeology on Crete. (The little island of Thera also has yielded an important Minoan site.) Evidence suggests that the Minoans emerged from a fusion between existing Cretan inhabitants and invaders from Asia Minor during the era 2900–2200 BCE. These people became master seafarers and built a society inspired partly by contact with the Egyptian Old Kingdom (ca. 2650–2250 BCE). By about 1900 BCE the Minoans were acquiring an Aegean Sea empire and were constructing palaces on Crete—at Cnossus, Phaestus, Mallia, and Khania—that were bigger and more elaborate than any buildings outside the Near East. So confident were the Minoans in their naval power that they declined to encircle their palaces with defensive walls.

Wealth came from Cretan farming and fishing, from taxes paid by subject peoples in the Cyclades and other Aegean locales, and from long-distance trade. Minoan objects discovered by archaeologists outside Crete indicate two-way commerce with Egypt, Asia Minor, and the Levant as well as with western Italy (a region that offered raw tin and copper, the components of Bronze). But much Minoan trade, especially after 1600 BCE, was with the northwestern Aegean mainland now called Greece, where Greek-speaking tribes had been settling since about 2100 BCE.

The Minoans' importance for Greek history is that they supplied the model for the Greeks' Mycenaean Civilization, which arose on the mainland ca. 1600 BCE. The Mycenaean fortress palaces at Mycenae, Tiryns, and elsewhere were warlike imitations of Minoan palaces on Crete. Mycenaean skills in metalworking, Pottery-making, and other handicrafts were improved by copying Cretan models. The Mycenaean form of writing—a syllabary script that modern scholars call Linear B, invented soon before 1400 BCE—was copied from the Minoan system (a yet-undeciphered script called Linear A). Eventually the Mycenaeans were ready to challenge Minoan supremacy in the Aegean.

Daily scenes of the Minoans' life are preserved on some of their beautiful art objects, which include cut gems, worked Gold, terra-cotta figurines, vase paintings, and frescoes. Sensuous and modern-seeming in design, Minoan pictorial art favors sea animals and other subjects from nature. Religious scenes often show a goddess (or priestess) with a subordinate male figure or with wild beasts, such as lions, in tame postures. Evidence of this kind leads many scholars to conclude that Minoan religion was centered on a mother goddess or a group of goddesses overseeing nature and bounty. Aspects of Minoan worship apparently infiltrated Greek religion in the cult of certain goddesses, such as Artemis and Hera.

The Minoans ascribed religious or magical power to dancing and to the remarkable athletic performance now known as bull leaping. Minoan reverence for the bull is probably reflected in Greek Myths of later days, such as the interrelated tales of Minos and of Theseus and the Minotaur, or the tale of Heracles and the Cretan bull.

Minoan high society probably revolved around a priest-king or priest-queen whose capital city was Cnossus and whose royal emblem was the labrus, a double-headed ax. Scenes in art suggest a confident, vivacious life at court. Upper-class Women—portrayed as wearing flounced skirts and open-breasted tunics—apparently played prominent roles in court life (as opposed to the secluded existence of women in Greece in later centuries).

The material level enjoyed by the Minoan ruling class was probably unsurpassed anywhere before the late 19th century CE. The Cnossus palace, reaching three stories in parts, boasted clay-piped plumbing and a clever system of air wells to bring light and ventilation to interior rooms. Coinage had not yet been invented, but Minoan wealth was measured in luxury items and in farm surplus such as sheep, pigs, and olive oil (great quantities of which were stored at Cnossus).

The Minoan golden age on Crete, ca. 1900–1450 BCE, was a time of peace but was troubled by natural disasters. Archaeology at Cnossus shows that the palace was destroyed twice by earthquake, ca. 1730 and 1570 BCE. Circa 1480 BCE Cretan coastal regions suffered damage and depopulation, possibly caused by tidal waves from the volcanic explosion of Thera, 70 miles away.

The Cnossus palace, on high ground, survived, but new archaeological signs of distress in the mid-1400s BCE include proliferation of war equipment and the first appearance on Crete of the horse (presumably imported as a tool of war). Overseas, Minoan pottery from this time is absent from certain sites—a sign of disrupted trade routes. Presumably a foreign enemy or number of enemies, taking advantage of Cretan natural disaster, had begun to cut into the Minoan Empire. These enemies surely included groups of Mycenaean Greeks.

In about 1400 BCE or soon after, all the Cretan palaces were destroyed by fire, presumably in war. The most obvious explanation for this simultaneous destruction is a Mycenaean invasion of Crete. Intriguingly, archaeological evidence suggests that, prior to this invasion, Mycenaean Greeks had already taken over the Cnossus palace and that it was they who were destroyed in the palace's ruin. There may have been rival Mycenaean armies, battling each other for control of Crete.

Although the Mycenaean victors seem to have abandoned Crete soon after 1400 BCE, the Minoan culture was finished.







Mycenaean is the term used by modern scholars to describe the earliest flowering of mainland Greek culture, ca. 1600–1200 BCE. The Mycenaeans were Greeks whose warlike society rose and fell long before the era of classical Greece. The classical Greeks of ca. 400 BCE half remembered their Mycenaean forebears as a race of heroes, celebrated in Myth and Epic Poetry.

In world prehistory, the Mycenaeans comprised the last of several great civilizations to emerge in the eastern Mediterranean during the Bronze age. The Mycenaeans' urban building, military organization, and Trade seem to have been partly copied from a few preexisting, non-Greek, Bronze Age cultures—namely, the Middle and New Kingdoms of Egypt, the Hittite kingdom of Asia Minor, and especially, the Minoan Civilization of Crete.

The Mycenaeans lived before the era of history-writing, and thus most details of their story—such as their rulers' names or the reasons why their entire society collapsed in fiery ruin around 1200 BCE—remain unknown. Modern knowledge relies mostly on artifacts uncovered by Archaeology at a few sites, such as Mycenae, Tiryns, and Pylos (in the Peloponnese) and Thebes, Orchomenus, and Athens (in central Greece). The artifacts include Pottery, stone carvings, jewelry, and armor—most of it found in the tombs of rulers—as well as the remnants of Mycenaean stone palaces and defenses. Particularly, the sites of Mycenae and Tiryns still show huge fortifications built by Mycenaean inhabitants in the 1300s and 1200s BCE

In addition, a few sites have yielded primitive Mycenaean written records, inscribed on clay tablets that seem to date from about 1400 BCE or 1200 BCE, depending on the site. Written in a script that modern scholars call Linear B, the records have been deciphered mainly as lists of inventory—produce, livestock, military equipment—and accounts of goods-distribution, religious rites, and similar daily events. The tablets provide precious information on the social structure, economy, and Religion of the Mycenaeans, as well as on the early-stage Greek Language that they spoke.

Aside from archaeology, some insight into the Mycenaeans has been gained from a cautious reading of Homer's epic poems, the Illiad and Odyssey. Although written ca. 750 BCE, more than 400 years after the Mycenaeans' disappearance, these poems derive from oral tradition that stretches back to the Mycenaeans. It is believed that the poems faithfully record certain aspects of Mycenaean upper-class life—such as the warrior code and the network of local kings—amid distortions and overlays.

The first Greek-speaking tribes arrived in mainland Greece ca. 2100 BCE, from the Danube region. But 500 years went by before the emergence of the culture that we call Mycenaean: The remarkable social and technological changes of these intervening centuries can only be guessed at. No doubt the Greeks were deeply influenced by the non-Greek people they had conquered, and from them the Greeks probably learned skills such as stone masonry, shipbuilding, navigation, the cultivation of the olive and certain other crops, and the worship of certain female deities (with associated, new spiritual concepts). Similarly, the Greeks were inspired by the palace society of Minoan Crete.

The Mycenaean era began around 1600 BCE, as archaeology reveals. Several sites in Greece came under control of powerful rulers who were buried in elaborate tombs, unlike the simple graves of prior centuries. And within a few generations the tomb designs altered again, suggesting further dynastic changes and evolving organization. The six treasure-filled tombs at Mycenae known as Grave Circle A—built in the era 1550–1500 BCE and discovered intact by Schliemann—provide clear proof of the rulers' wealth and overseas contacts. For example, the tombs contain items of Gold that were shaped by Greek smiths, but the raw metal probably came from Asia Minor or Egypt. The warlike nature of these leaders is suggested by the many weapons left as offerings in the tombs.

In Greece's terrain, where mountain ranges separate the flatlands, the Mycenaeans apparently emerged as four or so major kingdoms, each based at a large farming plain. Two of these domains were in the Peloponnese: the plain of Argos (with its capital at Mycenae) and the plain of Messenia (capital at Pylos). One was in central Greece: the plain of Boeotia (with the cities Thebes and Orchomenus vying for supremacy). And one was in the north, on the great plain of Thessaly (capital at Iolcus). Lesser kingdoms probably existed as well. But the greatest domain was Mycenae, as indicated by its signs of superior wealth and by the testimony of Greek myth. In Homer's Illiad, the Mycenaean king Agamemnon is the supreme commander, to whom all other kings, such as Odysseus and Nestor, owe obedience.

One event of the Mycenaean era that modern scholars are sure of is that by around 1450 BCE Mycenaeans had taken over the Cretan palace at Cnossus—probably as the result of a Mycenaean naval invasion of Crete. Mysteriously, the Mycenaeans seem to have abandoned Crete soon thereafter, ca. 1400 BCE But the years of occupation there taught Mycenaean rulers certain organizational skills—such as improved architectural techniques and the use of Cretan Writing (adapted at this time, as the Linear B script)—that ushered in 200 years of the Mycenaean heyday in mainland Greece, ca. 1400–1200 BCE

It was now that the Mycenaeans built their own palaces, adapted from the Minoan palaces on Crete. Mycenae and Tiryns were turned into elaborate, high-walled castles; other palaces, such as at Pylos, arose without huge defenses. The social and economic structure of these centers is partly revealed by the Linear B tablets. The palace was the seat of the king (wanax in Mycenaean Greek); beyond the capital city, a network of outlying villages paid taxes, obeyed the king's laws, and relied on him for defense against other rulers. Tha palace was also a center of industry, where metalworkers, weavers, perfumers, and many other crafts people turned out finished goods, to enrich the king or to be distributed by him. Raw materials came from local taxes (sheep's wool, for example) and from overseas trade.

The premier metal for war and industry was Bronze (the use of Iron being introduced to the Greek world only later). The search for bronze's two components—copper and tin—led Mycenaean sea traders far and wide. Large remains of Mycenaean pottery in Cyprus show that parts of that copper-rich island were colonized by Mycenaeans. On the western Asia Minor coast, the site of Miletus probably became a Mycenaean trading colony, mainly for the acquisition of raw metals. Toward the other end of the Mediterranean, extant pottery suggests a Mycenaean presence in western Italy, where tin could be found.

The Mycenaean rulers commanded armies of heavy infantry. The soldiers' standardized equipment, including bronze breastplates and helmets, is recorded on Linear B tablets. Various evidence paints a picture of Mycenaean kings or princes leading Viking-like raids overseas, of which the biggest were the (presumed) invasions of Crete and Cyprus. On certain Linear B tablets, Slaves are mentioned by names that suggest they came from Asia Minor; probably they were captured in Mycenaean raids there. The Greek myth of Jason (1) and the Argonauts may distortedly commemorate such an overseas expedition. But the Mycenaean kingdoms fought also against each other: the legend of the Seven Against Thebes seems clearly based on actual warfare between Mycenae and Thebes.

By about 1250 BCE the Mycenaean world had come under pressure, due partly to upheavals in the Near East. The decline of the Hittite kingdom in Asia Minor probably brought a gradual closing of the Mycenaeans' eastern trade routes. Deprived of raw metals for industry and conquest, Mycenaean society began to whither. The Greek legend of the Trojan War may recall the Mycenaeans' attempt to keep trade routes open by removing the interfering, non-Greek, Hellespontine city Troy, ca. 1220 BCE

Finally, it seems, the Mycenaean kingdoms turned against each other and destroyed each other, in a desperate bid for survival. Archaeology clearly reveals the fiery ruin of Thebes, Mycenae, and other centers in the 50 years leading down to 1200 BCE At Pylos, the final days are dramatically indicated in emergency troop movements and religious sacrifices recorded on Linear B tablets.

Modern historians used to believe that this wholesale destruction was the work of outsiders—specifically, Dorian Greeks invading from the northwest. But more recent scholarship concludes that the Dorian invasion, ca. 1100 BCE, was merely opportunistic: The Mycenaeans had already exhausted themselves through internal war.

In the villages outside of the wrecked palaces, Mycenaean society survived on an improverished scale during the 1100s BCE Social change in these rural areas can be glimpsed in the development of a certain Greek word: The official title quasireu, which during the Mycenaean heyday had indicated a local sheriff (a relatively low position), gradually changed to basileus and took on a new meaning, "king." These men became the new local rulers within the disintegrated Mycenaean kingdoms.


David Sacks
Ancient Greece: Minoan civilization. Encyclopedia of the Ancient Greek World.
New York: Facts On File, Inc., 1995

---

quote:

---

The three main subclades of haplogroup E3b (E-M78, E-M81,
and E-M34) and the paragroup E-M35* are not homogeneously
distributed on the African continent:
* E-M78 has been observed in both northern and eastern Africa,
* E-M81 is restricted to northern Africa,
* E-M34 is common only in eastern Africa, and
* E-M35* is shared by eastern and southern Africans
(Cruciani et al. 2002).

. . . .

Several observations point to eastern Africa as the homeland
for haplogroup E3b—that is, it had
(1) the highest number of different E3b clades,
(2) a high frequency of this haplogroup and a high microsatellite diversity,
(3) the exclusive presence of the undifferentiated E3b* paragroup.

. . . .

Haplogroup E-M78 was observed over a wide area, including
* eastern (21.5%) and
* northern (18.5%) Africa,
* Near East (5.8%),
* Europe (7.2%), where it represents by far the most common E3b subhaplogroup.

. . . .

The network of the E-M78 chromosomes reveals a strong geographic
structuring, since each of the clusters a, b, and g reaches high
frequencies in only one of the regions analyzed. Cluster a ...
is very common in the Balkans (with frequencies of 20%–32%),
and its frequencies decline toward western Europe,
7.4% in Sicily,
7.0% in continental Italy,
4.3% in Corsica,
3.0% in France,
2.2% in Iberia and
1.1% in Sardinia,
and northeastern (2.6%) Europe.
In the Near East, this cluster is essentially limited to Turkey (3.4%).
The relatively high frequency of DYS413 24/23 haplogroup E chromosomes
in Greece suggests that cluster a of the E-M78 haplogroup is common in
the Aegean area, too.

. . . .

... later (and previously undetected) demographic population expansions involving
* clusters a in Europe (TMRCA 7.8 ky; 95% CI 6.3–9.2 ky),
* b in northwestern Africa (5.2 ky; 95% CI 3.2–7.5 ky), and
* g in eastern Africa (9.6 ky; 95% CI 7.2–12.9 ky) should be considered the main
contributors to the relatively high frequency of haplogroup E-M78 in the surveyed
area.

The present distributions of these clusters also suggest episodes of
range expansions. ...the clinal frequency distribution of E-M78a
within Europe testifies to important dispersal(s), most likely Neolithic
or post-Neolithic. These took place from the Balkans, where the highest
frequencies are observed, in all directions, as far as Iberia to the west
and, most likely, also to Turkey to the southeast. Thus, it appears that,
in Europe, the overall frequency pattern of the haplogroup E-M78, the
most frequent E3b haplogroup in this region, is mostly ... consistent with
either a smallscale leapfrog migration from Anatolia into southeastern
Europe at the beginning of the Neolithic or with an expansion of indigenous
people in southeastern Europe in response to the arrival of the Neolithic
cultural package. At the present level of phylogenetic resolution, it is
difficult to distinguish between these possibilities.

. . . .

In conclusion, we detected the signatures of several distinct processes
of migration and/or recurrent gene flow associated with the dispersal of
haplogroup E3b lineages. Early events involved the dispersal of E-M78d
chromosomes from eastern Africa into and out of Africa, as well as the
introduction of the E-M34 subclade into Africa from the Near East. Later
events involved shortrange migrations within Africa (E-M78g and E-V6) and
from northern Africa into Europe (E-M81 and E-M78b), as well as an important
range expansion from the Balkans to western and southern-central Europe
(E-M78alpha). This latter expansion was the main contributor to the present
distribution of E3b chromosomes in Europe.


Fulvio Cruciani, et al
Phylogeographic Analysis of Haplogroup E3b (E-M215) Y Chromosomes
Reveals Multiple Migratory Events Within and Out Of Africa
Am. J. Hum. Genet. 74:1014–1022, 2004

---