posted
I would like to use this thread as a repository on: -The interconnection and plasticity of "Nubia/Nubians" and "Ancient Egypt"....Particularly Ancient Southern Egypt. -The plasticity on what/who is considered Nilo-Saharan vs that of Afro-Asiatic. -The hypothesized distinct or overlapping territory of the two groups. -The distinct or overlapping genetics of the two groups in terms of Ancient and Modern DNA. -The Biohistorical affiliation of Ancient Saharans and their relations to these two (and other) groups. -Cultural/Genetic influences of Saharans/Egytians/Sudanese on each other.
I am using the term "plasticity" in this manner and theme: . Another phrase that could be used in substitute is the "Arbitrary Designation" of the above.
This thread is not be about the "Caucaosid", "Negroid" or "Black" character (or lack thereof) of Ancient Egyptians, Although the the destination of what is "Nubian" vs what is "Egyptian" has sometimes been based solely on this. Please dont derail the thread with OT posts].
I created this post after noticing new research, and even old research shows that there is not quite a clear break between the two regions (Nubia/Egypt) and what is considered Nubian/Egyptian proper. There are differences and there are vast similarities that go back 1000's of years. In many publications historians and others cannot seem to agree on what is what and who is who. An older example is Nabta Playa in Egypt being described as a "Nubian" Settlement. A more recent example would be the "Badarian" and "Tasian" being indications of "Nubian Influence"...? Some of this has to do with bi-directional migration between the two regions. Other research notes the common origin or adaption, continuity / lack of early distinction between the two groups/regions, etc.
Here are some good publications to start the discussion:
Something else to ponder on is the main lineage in the Region M-78 and particular the "Southern Egyptian" V12 lineage. When looking at where the sample comes from the location in question seems quite "Nubian" IMO, inside the modern but outside of the ancient Border.
[/QUOTE]
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Right but there are a few issues to the wider picture.
-It makes no sense to put a dichotomy between what is "Nubian" and Egyptian in the first place as Parts of Nubia are in Egypt when looking at the "region". When looking at "People" its somewhat the same but if you wanted to make an Ethnic distinction between the two, the lineage in question E-M78(12) is likely a "Nubian" lineage and Not Egyptian.
-In The time frame in which the lineage likely originated Southern Egypt and Northern Nubia might not even have been inhabited as it was too arid. The entire Saharan was likely not inhabited at certain times too.....SO the lineage has nothing to do with either of these groups as far as where it originated but probably is associated with more southern groups that expanded south.
-When you read the link that I am going to post below the entire area and Western deserts of Sudan and seem to have nothing to do with E-m35 (Afroasiatic) speakers at all and more indicates the [presence of Nilo-Saharan folks and Saharan folks. At times affiliated with those more Western Nilo-Saharans with Autosomal west African ancestry.....But mostly Southrern Sudanese who are very heavy in A and B.
quote: Thus it became possible to draw conclusions about the affinities the Wadi Howar material shared with prehistoric as well as modern populations and to answer questions concerning the diachronic links between the Wadi Howar’s prehistoric populations. When the Wadi Howar remains were positioned in the context of the selected prehistoric (Jebel Sahaba/Tushka, A-Group, Malian Sahara) and modern comparative samples (Southern Sudan, Chad, Mandinka, Somalis, Haya) in this fashion three main findings emerged. Firstly, the series as a whole displayed very strong affinities with the prehistoric sample from the Malian Sahara (Hassi el Abiod, Kobadi, Erg Ine Sakane, etc.) and the modern material from Southern Sudan and, to a lesser extent, Chad. Secondly, the pre-Leiterband and the Leiterband sub-sample were closer to the prehistoric Malian as well as the modern Southern Sudanese material than they were to each other. Thirdly, the group of pre-Leiterband individuals approached the Late Pleistocene sample from Jebel Sahaba/Tushka under certain circumstances. A theory offering explanations for these findings was developed. According to this theory, the entire prehistoric population of the Wadi Howar belonged to a Saharo-Nilotic population complex. The Jebel Sahaba/Tushka population constituted an old Nilotic and the early population of the Malian Sahara a younger Saharan part of this complex. The A-Group, on the other hand, was not a Saharo-Nilotic population . The pre-Leiterband groups probably colonised the Wadi Howar from the east, either during or soon after the original Saharo-Nilotic expansion. Consequently, they retained stronger affinities with the Late Pleistocene Jebel Sahaba/Tushka population from the eastern Saharo-Nilotic periphery. Unlike the pre-Leiterband groups, the Leiterband people originated somewhere west of the Wadi Howar. They entered the region in the context of a later, secondary Saharo-Nilotic expansion. In the process, the incoming Leiterband groups absorbed many members of the Wadi Howar’s older pre-Leiterband population. The increasing aridification of the Wadi Howar region ultimately forced its prehistoric inhabitants to abandon the wadi. Most of them migrated south and west. They, or groups closely related to them, were the ancestors of the majority of the Nilo- Saharan-speaking pastoralists of modern-day Southern Sudan and Eastern Chad.
Chad affinity is based on = 7 Tubu, 3 Kanembu, 1Kanuri, 4 Buduma, 2 Kuri, 1 Sara, 4 Mundang.
Notice what they say about the A-Group Nubians.....that they were not a part of the Saharan Nilotic Complex. I of course I didnt read all 1400 pages but They seem to be using a "true Negro" type analysis as they note North African affinities with the Kanuri and Kanembou. If A-Group cluster with Egyptians then.... That said the Y-Chromosome analysis of A-Group Nubians proves them to be "Nilotic" enough, or at least carry A3b2 at overwhelming frequencies which is a lineage NOW mostly associated with Southern Sudanese and Horn
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
First off you should stop using the term "Nubia" as it was created to denote an ethno-cultural entity and polity never existed beyond maybe 2000 years ago. Period. The word is something made up in the Roman period to identify Sudanese who lived in the gold mining areas to the south of Egypt, based on the ancient Egyptian word for gold. But the Egyptians NEVER used the word "Nub" which is the heiroglyph for gold to refer to other Africans to their South on the Nile. The word Nub was sacred as it identified the skin of the gods, perfection and transmutation into Ra in the afterlife. Only idiots would turn around and claim the word means "negroes" or "blacks" to the south of Egypt.
Throw the word away first and everything else will make more sense as the word itself is what is being used to create the false dichotomy to begin with.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by beyoku: [QB]In The time frame in which the lineage likely originated Southern Egypt and Northern Nubia might not even have been inhabited as it was too arid. The entire Saharan was likely not inhabited at certain times too.....SO the lineage has nothing to do with either of these groups as far as where it originated but probably is associated with more southern groups that expanded south.
I think there's a typo here. Don't you mean either "northern groups that expanded south" or "southern groups who expanded north"?
Posts: 7069 | From: Fallbrook, CA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
The Nubian were called Kushite by the Egyptian.The first city in Sumer was named Kish.NW India, Pakistan and Afghanistan was called Hindu Kush.
The Kushite were also called Nahasi by the Egyptian.Moses had Nahasian priest in the bible when he set up the brazen Serpent symbol.
Posts: 5374 | From: sepedat/sirius | Registered: Jul 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
@ Doug M - Right, I am breaking the word down as they are using it and how these modern writers view "Nubia" as an area. Of course we know the deeper meaning and the erroneous usage of the word. With that said TODAY there is a specific region that these writers note as "Nubia" and certain groups called "Nubians". Sure the labelling can be seen as artificial but so are the borders that make up most of the African Nations. That is pretty much a different argument for a different day. Its kinda like the term Negroid. I dont really see its validity considering the abundance of African physical diversity.....but if they want to bring up "Negroids", sure lets talk about who exactly is Negroid from their understanding of the word.
@ Truthcentric, Yes Southerners that expanded North. Basically some of the dates they give for an origin of Em78, V12 or V22 - Its almost impossible for these lineages to have originated in Southern Egypt or on the Nile because either there was nobody there, or it was too arid for Humans and the refugium was further south....in Sudan or the Horn. Hence why even Ancient Northern Egyptian body plans are "Tropical" ... The populations in question have a somewhat recent (in evolutionary terms) genesis South and expanded North. Egypt and its environment didnt always have the opportunity for long term settlement to bring about a intermediate type body plan which SHOULD be native to the region outside the tropics.
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by beyoku: @ Truthcentric, Yes Southerners that expanded North. Basically some of the dates they give for an origin of Em78, V12 or V22 - Its almost impossible for these lineages to have originated in Southern Egypt or on the Nile because either there was nobody there, or it was too arid for Humans and the refugium was further south....in Sudan or the Horn. Hence why even Ancient Northern Egyptian body plans are "Tropical" ... The populations in question have a somewhat recent (in evolutionary terms) genesis South and expanded North. Egypt and its environment didnt always have the opportunity for long term settlement to bring about a intermediate type body plan which SHOULD be native to the region outside the tropics.
Good point, but I am curious...exactly what kind of tropical environment do you have in mind as the habitat for these prehistoric ancestors of Nile Valley Africans?
There seems to be some disagreement among us over how "indigenous" these people were to the Sahara and Nile Valley area. You're obviously advocating for a more southerly origin here, but I swear I've heard other ES poster (think it was Swenet) argue for an indigenous Saharan heritage based on hair morphology. Or am I misunderstanding something?
Posts: 7069 | From: Fallbrook, CA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Son of Ra: Then what were the 'Nubians' called?
They were called Nehesi or people from the Kingdoms of Ta Seti, Wawat or Yam. And then later Kushites.
NUB was the Egyptian word for gold and ONLY used in refeference to Egyptians or Egyptian places and was sacred.
Gold was the color of the gods and used in reference to royalty.
Gold was used as a symbol of Re and transformation (golden coffins, and hence the origin of the idea of transmutation into gold, which symbolizes perfection of the soul).
For example NubKheperRe Inyotef of the 17th dynasty or "golden Is The Manifestation of Re".
Or the predynastic/early dynastic city Nubt (the golden city) in Southern Egypt which is often called Naqada by Egyptologists (why?).
Likewise, Set was the patron deity of Nubt and is often called Set the Nubti in Egyptian writing (year 400 stela).
And all Egyptian kings had multiple names, like the "golden" horus name.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by beyoku: @ Truthcentric, Yes Southerners that expanded North. Basically some of the dates they give for an origin of Em78, V12 or V22 - Its almost impossible for these lineages to have originated in Southern Egypt or on the Nile because either there was nobody there, or it was too arid for Humans and the refugium was further south....in Sudan or the Horn. Hence why even Ancient Northern Egyptian body plans are "Tropical" ... The populations in question have a somewhat recent (in evolutionary terms) genesis South and expanded North. Egypt and its environment didnt always have the opportunity for long term settlement to bring about a intermediate type body plan which SHOULD be native to the region outside the tropics.
Good point, but I am curious...exactly what kind of tropical environment do you have in mind as the habitat for these prehistoric ancestors of Nile Valley Africans?
There seems to be some disagreement among us over how "indigenous" these people were to the Sahara and Nile Valley area. You're obviously advocating for a more southerly origin here, but I swear I've heard other ES poster (think it was Swenet) argue for an indigenous Saharan heritage based on hair morphology. Or am I misunderstanding something?
Well I dont think we are talking about one type of African. We could make a really complex argument but in the most simplistic terms There seems to be a Nilotic Saharan population, with affinities to Modern Nilo-Saharan and West African folk. And a Horn/Red Sea populations with affinities to modern Horn Africans. Swenet is his own person and has his own theories, more importantly, none of our hypothesis are mutually exclusive. I hypothesize that the Nilotic element was most important in the past and has reduced over time while IN the lower Nile valley, while the Horn type lineages increased over time. One of the main reasons I believe this is the modern AFRICAN lineages in most samples of Egyptians compared to the and Saharo-Sudanese nature of ancient Nile Valley material culture.
Nearly all the material culture in question is linked to Nilo Saharan folks of the Sahara and Sudan. These people are for the most part lacking in E1b1b lineages. They exist but are not dominant. IE: Look at the study I posted on the ancient inhabitants of Wadi Howar:
"They, or groups closely related to them, were the ancestors of the majority of the Nilo- Saharan-speaking pastoralists of modern-day Southern Sudan and Eastern Chad." Chad affinity is based on = 7 Tubu, 3 Kanembu, 1Kanuri, 4 Buduma, 2 Kuri, 1 Sara, 4 Mundang."
These populations are for the most part represented by lineages other than E1b1b. Instead carry A3b2, B2a1a, E1a, E-M2 and R-V88. Under what circumstances are these lineages not dominant in the African diversity of the modern descendants? Even the ancient DNA hints at this. IF E1b1b lineages are the representation of ancient Saharan then where are these lineages in the Sub Saharans that pressed south during the last Arid Episode? Other than the latest low resolution Sahel samples all you have is M-293, V12 and V22.
I dont doubt the presence of Eurasians or Eurasians type lineages I just dont look for them because I dont care about Eurasian minor influence or bio-genetic "purity". Arguments about "hair" is petty and trivial.
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
But when entire pre/proto-dynastic samples in the area of the Middle Nile show they have predominantly wavy hair, that's not something you can just scrub to the side either. If we're discussing biological anthropology, there is no scientific reason to marginalize the role hair plays. And hair clearly isn't the only phenotypical trait that very sharply delineates these Middle Nile populations from many other Africans. Non-Metric cranio-facial traits do too. There is clearly a:
1) Middle Nile/rest of Africa, or a 2) Ancient Africa/modern Africa
dichotomy in some of the physical characters of (pre)dynastic Middle Nile populations. I think 2) is just retarded but I can't ignore it because there are no studies that have tested for this. 1) is the most reasonable scenario, but people in general are avoiding 1) like the plague. No one wants to talk about it. I remember some of the resistance I encountered when I created a thread on this topic. Denialism is a hell of a drug.
ADDENDUM: Just read the OP of this thread. Is this just another example of the Middle Nile pattern I've been noting?
quote:The A-Group, on the other hand, was not a Saharo-Nilotic population .
Even though its a stretch to say the A-group weren't Nilo-Saharan speakers based on this, in the hypothetical scenario that the A-group and the Malian samples derive from the same proto-Nilo-Saharan community >10kya, this cranio-metric divergence of the A-Group shouldn't be happening. There certainly aren't any ecolocial reasons that would explain it, given the wet Sahara environment that would have been mutual to their ancestors in the early holocene.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
What areas/or region in the middle nile had predominantly wavy hair before the dynastic period of egypt?and what areas you consider the middle nile?
The middle nile is from first cataract to khartoum and pre-dynastic nubia/sudan has not been studied has much,except the lower nubia area.
The areas you are talking about,is that the lower nubian region or the area around Semna? and if lower nubia has whole you talking about are saying that the populations of lower nubia,the A-group population was higher than southern/upper regions? and did most at that time in lower nubia had wavy hair?or was just semna for this limited study on hair?
I know that the lower nubia population had been studied the most before pre-dynastic egypt and if the the rest of nubia had a larger population then lower nubia it could mean that wavy hair was not predominant.
I don't think pre-dynastic A-group lower nubians had wavy hair.
The only study i have seen about a few wavy hair nubians was the Semna region.
Posts: 2560 | From: Somewhere | Registered: May 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
Personally I still suspect the "wavy" hair seen in certain Nile Valley mummies has something to do with post-mortem decay, but that remains to be tested and the topic has been discussed ad nauseum here anyway.
posted
^Would have been a reasonable suspicion if it weren't for the fact that hair form is scientifically determined by measuring cross section width. Hair that is chemically treated for aesthetic reasons won’t change in cross section width (so presumably, hair that is altered by post-mortem chemical changes won't either).
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Firewall: I have a few questions.
What areas/or region in the middle nile had predominantly wavy hair before the dynastic period of egypt?and what areas you consider the middle nile?
The middle nile is from first cataract to khartoum and pre-dynastic nubia/sudan has not been studied has much,except the lower nubia area.
The areas you are talking about,is that the lower nubian region or the area around Semna? and if lower nubia has whole you talking about are saying that the populations of lower nubia,the A-group population was higher than southern/upper regions? and did most at that time in lower nubia had wavy hair?or was just semna for this limited study on hair?
I know that the lower nubia population had been studied the most before pre-dynastic egypt and if the the rest of nubia had a larger population then lower nubia it could mean that wavy hair was not predominant.
I don't think pre-dynastic A-group lower nubians had wavy hair.
The only study i have seen about a few wavy hair nubians was the Semna region.
Didn't you used to post here as 'brick'? You're not fooling anyone. You know what study is being referred to. You were in denial then, and you're still in denial now. Like I said, denial is a hell of a drug.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Firewall: I have a few questions.
What areas/or region in the middle nile had predominantly wavy hair before the dynastic period of egypt?and what areas you consider the middle nile?
The middle nile is from first cataract to khartoum and pre-dynastic nubia/sudan has not been studied has much,except the lower nubia area.
The areas you are talking about,is that the lower nubian region or the area around Semna? and if lower nubia has whole you talking about are saying that the populations of lower nubia,the A-group population was higher than southern/upper regions? and did most at that time in lower nubia had wavy hair?or was just semna for this limited study on hair?
I know that the lower nubia population had been studied the most before pre-dynastic egypt and if the the rest of nubia had a larger population then lower nubia it could mean that wavy hair was not predominant.
I don't think pre-dynastic A-group lower nubians had wavy hair.
The only study i have seen about a few wavy hair nubians was the Semna region.
Didn't you used to post here as 'brick'? You're not fooling anyone. You know what study is being referred to. You were in denial then, and you're still in denial now. Like I said, denial is a hell of a drug.
Denial,about what?i never really talk to you about hair,and have always said most nubians were woolly haired in the past,like most are still today.
Posts: 2560 | From: Somewhere | Registered: May 2012
| IP: Logged |
You've already shown that data to him a couple of months ago, and this is not the thread to talk about hair.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
I take that back and i will mention some lower nubians had wavy hair. I seen the chart and link lioness posted,and i remember now,but like said i rarely looked at hair samples,and just did not remember.
The other question was how widespread it was around the A-GROUP pre-dynastic times in lower nubia.
Posts: 2560 | From: Somewhere | Registered: May 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
Like i said in the past,A-GROUP lower nubians should not be representative for the rest of nubia,since THE A- group lower nubians looked more like upper egyptians,then southern/upper nubians.
This gets back to my original point,and i think it's safe for me to say wavy hair was not widespread in the middle nile or nubia around the A group period.
Posts: 2560 | From: Somewhere | Registered: May 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Swenet:]You've already shown that data to him a couple of months ago, and this is not the thread to talk about hair.
sorry, no more hair discussion [/QB]
I Agree,it's off topic,and i rather get back on topic. I came to this thread because of interesting topic of dna.
Posts: 2560 | From: Somewhere | Registered: May 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
Egypt's southern boundary, at the southern edge of Upper Egypt, was traditionally held to be the First Cataract. This was an area of harsh rapids and waterfalls some six hundred miles due south of the main exit point of the Nile into the Mediterranean. During the Old Kingdom, this was Egypt's farthest extent. During the Middle and New Kingdom periods, however, Egyptian armies pushed further south, as far as the Sixth Cataract, in an attempt to invade and conquer Nubia and Kush, two countries that lay farther south. Kush is associated with present-day central Sudan, while some scholars place Kush in modern Ethiopia.
Relatively recent discoveries of small tombs in a pyramid style in Sudan suggest that while Egypt did not rule the lands south of the First Cataract, they did have cultural contacts in the deep south, and trade of both goods and ideas was quite common.
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
For one populations are usually composed of many different Y-DNA and MtDNA lineages. A mix of many different lineages composed their entire genome (autosomal or not). Some of those lineages originate in Africa (like E Y-DNA) others don't (post OOA of course).
quote:Originally posted by beyoku: Nearly all the material culture in question is linked to Nilo Saharan folks of the Sahara and Sudan. These people are for the most part lacking in E1b1b lineages. They exist but are not dominant.
I think it's a wrong assumption based on limited actual data. The only reason you think that is because of sample artifact. Africans/Nilo-Saharans still living in South of North African countries or in the Sahara are not sampled for their DNA in those studies. When they are, they have shown to have some of the highest percentage of e1b1b (M35) lineage in the world!!
Let's say it again. Nilo-Saharans have some of the highest percentage of e1b1b/E-M35/E-M78/E-215 in the world!!
While Berbers (and other people like Balkans) also have a high percentage of M35/M81 Y-DNA their MtDNA sample show them with a high percentage of what is usually considered haplogroups from outside of Africa in origin (Hg U, R, N, etc) See here and here. So Berber are mostly admixed people. Maybe their male non-African Y-DNA probably got eliminated in some form of conflict with the original male E Y-DNA carriers leaving only the non-African female MtDNA.
The truth is some Nilo-Saharans like Masalit and Fur got some of the highest percentage e1b1b(E-M35/E-M78) Y-DNA in the world. They also have a low percentage of foreign Y-DNA (like Hg J). Showing they probably got their e1b1b lineage from the original M35/M78 carrying population they are part of.
Massalit people and Fur people possesses some of the highest level of M35/M78 in the world. That is 72% (23/32), (E-M215+E-M78 on the graph below) and 59% (19/32) respectively.
E-M35/E-M215 (E-M78) is just another branch of the African E and E-P2 haplogroups.
posted
@ Amun-Ra The Ultimate - Those Sudanese in a larger picture are kinda like and anomaly as far as the Y-chromosome makeup of Nilo-Saharans as a whole. But even then notice what/who the specific article is speaking of - I guess I should have clarified that:
quote: They, or groups closely related to them, were the ancestors of the majority of the Nilo-Saharan-speaking pastoralists of modern-day Southern Sudan and Eastern Chad.
It says nothing of Northern or Western Sudanese. Also when looking at those Neolithic A-Group remains they too seem to approximate to a more Southern Sudanese Y-chom configuration based on high frequencies of Haplogroup A. But even then, following my post of the thread this just shows the overlapping nature of what is considered an AA lineages vs those typically seen as NS.
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by beyoku: @ Amun-Ra The Ultimate - Those Sudanese in a larger picture are kinda like and anomaly as far as the Y-chromosome makeup of Nilo-Saharans as a whole. But even then notice what/who the specific article is speaking of - I guess I should have clarified that:
Frankly, I think you could have come up with better than this. Anomaly? Sounds like something somebody would says when the data contradicts his prejudice. No value at all. You should simply revised your position when facing contradicting data.
Is the 11.1% of E-M35 (E-M78) in Nilo-Saharan from Kenya in the Cruciani study an "anomaly" too? What about the Bornu people in the above table?
E-M35 carrying people are part of the genetic make up of the original Nilo-Saharans speakers and other African people who lived in Sudan/East Africa a long time ago. That's what the data show.
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
They are not an anomaly because they carry M35 lineages. They are an anomaly because they are overwhelmingly E-M35 carrying Nilo Saharan speakers. In a larger picture of Nilo-Saharan samples from the continent they stand out because of this. See my quote:
quote: These populations are for the most part represented by lineages other than E1b1b. Instead carry A3b2, B2a1a, E1a, E-M2 and R-V88.
See also:
quote: If E1b1b lineages are the representation of ancient Saharan then where are these lineages in the Sub Saharans that pressed south during the last Arid Episode?
Most of the E1b1b lineages that have pushed south outside of the Nile valley have a somewhat recent connection to the Horn and have a White Nile/Blue Nile/ Rift Valley distribution. If E1b1b was included with the lineages that left the Western and Central Sahara that pushed south it surely shows an absence in most Western and Central Sub Saharan Africans. E1b1b shows some discontinuity among NS speakers somewhat like Mtdna M1. But then again I cannot even figure out why you are arguing. IN the very first post I noted the southern Distribution of V12 lineages in an area ("Nubia") usually associated with the speakers of Nilo-Saharan languages? See also:
-The distinct or overlapping genetics of the two groups in terms of Ancient and Modern DNA. -The plasticity on what/who is considered Nilo-Saharan vs that of Afro-Asiatic.
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by beyoku: They are not an anomaly because they carry M35 lineages. They are an anomaly because they are overwhelmingly E-M35 carrying Nilo Saharan speakers.
The way I see it, the original Nilo-Saharan speaking population (call them proto-Nilo-Saharan if you feel like it) were composed of many different lineages and the E-M35 was part of them. Other E lineages were also part of their population.
quote: In a larger picture of Nilo-Saharan samples from the continent they stand out because of this. See my quote:
quote: These populations are for the most part represented by lineages other than E1b1b. Instead carry A3b2, B2a1a, E1a, E-M2 and R-V88.
See also:
Interesting, prove it! Show me the study, aka the haplogroups frequencies of Nilo-Saharan speakers that display that and I will be able to analyse it.
quote: Most of the E1b1b lineages that have pushed south outside of the Nile valley have a somewhat recent connection to the Horn and have a White Nile/Blue Nile/ Rift Valley distribution. If E1b1b was included with the lineages that left the Western and Central Sahara that pushed south it surely shows an absence in most Western and Central Sub Saharan Africans.
There's a lot of ethnic groups still not included in African studies (and their sample size are pretty small). If the Hassan studies wasn't done we wouldn't know Nilo-Saharans are among the biggest carriers of E-M35 in the world.
Southern Africans like Southern African Khwe, Southern African Bantu and Southern African !Kung got above 10% of E-M35* too (from Cruciani).
In fact, it's really interesting because since they have ***ONLY*** E-M35* paragroup, it means they didn't receive their E-M35 mutation from a population which had E-78 or E-V6 (or other known E-35 "children" populations), thus, I think you will agree with me, this demonstrate that those southern people received their E-M35 from the original M35 carriers population to which they were part of (the ultimate contrary from recent!!). That is the E-M35 carrying population which didn't have time yet to create new mutation. Think about it.
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
The south African groups in question do not have E-M35* They carry a mutation called E-M293 which was hypothesized to be carried south by Horn African Southern Cushitic speakers.
As for other references in Nilo-Saharan lineages. I dont have the time to look that up. Let me just say that high E1b1b lineages in Nilo-Saharan groups are for the most part an anomaly. This does NOT mean that E1b1b was not an original Nilo-Saharan lineage........This just means that their samples are not the Norm compared to previous samples of Nilo-Saharan speakers. Its like the Fulani in Sudan per Hassan, their high frequency of E-m35 lineages was an anomaly compared to all previous samples of Fulani.
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by beyoku: The south African groups in question do not have E-M35* They carry a mutation called E-M293 which was hypothesized to be carried south by Horn African Southern Cushitic speakers.
Cushitic speakers? The study you just posted says Nilotic speakers. Tell me if I'm wrong.
Without realizing it you just posted something that completely support my position and I challenge anybody to say otherwise.
It's not big surprise that the E-M35* paragroup in Southern African population has been further defined by a new mutation, as it's often the case with paragroups. They still didn't obtain their E-M35 haplogroup from people carrying E-M78 mutation (for example) but instead they probably obtained it from Nilotic speaking people from Tanzania!! The study you just post confirms it!!
Everybody who actually read the study knows I'm right, but here some pointers quotes from the study:
quote: The haplogroup E3b1f distribution spans different language phyla and subsistence economies. When the Wafiome are excluded because of low sample size (n 2), the Tanzanian Datog population has both the highest haplogroup E3b1f-M293 frequency (43%) and Y-STR diversity (Table 1) of any group surveyed. The Datog are pastoralists who speak a Southern Nilotic language.
So the Datog who are Nilo-Saharan speakers carries both the highest frequencies and greatest diversity of the E-M35 derived M293 mutation. Demonstrating that they are probably the originator of this haplogroup.
quote:The high level of Y-STR diversity on the M293 background in the Datog population, coupled with highest frequency, suggests that the Datog have carried M293 longer than any other population.
Same as above.
The study you posted even goes further, by finding some linguistic linkage between Nilo-Saharan speakers and Southern African E-M35 carriers:
quote: East African population in our dataset, the Datog dominate the M293(DYS389I-10) diversity (Fig. 1) and overall M293 diversity (Table 1). Newman (36), in his study of the Sandawe subsistence strategies, describes one Sandawe clan, the Alagwa, which is derived from people with Barabaig heritage. Barabaig is a dialect of Datog, a Southern Nilotic language, and Barabaig individuals self-report their ethnicity as Datog. This Barabaig clan became incorporated into the Sandawe because of their purported rainmaking abilities and eventually came to occupy a dominant position within the Sandawe society (36). Ethnographic evidence and shared Y-STR haplotypes support exchange between Tanzanian click-speaking groups and Southern Nilotic-speaking groups in Tanzania (10). Given the high frequency and diversity of E3b1f-M293 in the Datog, our data provide tentative support for a Southern Nilotic linguistic affiliation of the population responsible for introducing pastoralism to southern Africa.
Thank you.
For those, who are more visual. Here's an extrapolated E3b1f-M293 map distribution in Africa and thus a partial E1b1b/E-35 distribution map in Africa limited to M293 carriers.
And here's a table with the frequency and diversity of the corresponding E-35* and E3b1f-M293 from the study.
posted
^ So by these accounts then these Sub-Saharan populations could be called 'Eurasian' just like the North African ones.
By the way, I agree with the whole plasticity or rather arbitrariness of Egypt vs. Nubia. Modern day Egypt also comprises ancient Lower Nubia a.k.a. Ta-Seti which was also considered the 1st nome of Kemet (ancient Egypt).
I've been skimming this thread and you guys are going all over the place about 'hair' and SNP groups of predynastic Egyptians and Nubians. What exactly is the issue you are trying to address?
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
If we accept that wavier hair is an adaptation to drier climates as some people on this forums have submitted, then if AEs really did have wavy hair in significant numbers, that would give them ancient roots in the Sahara as Swenet has said. On the other hand, beyoku seems to be implying a recent sub-Saharan derivation for the AEs' ancestors.
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: Would have been a reasonable suspicion if it weren't for the fact that hair form is scientifically determined by measuring cross section width. Hair that is chemically treated for aesthetic reasons won’t change in cross section width (so presumably, hair that is altered by post-mortem chemical changes won't either).
I recall that the trichometer data showed cross-section widths within the "curlier" range for AE mummies, which doesn't exactly jive with your claim. Anyone remember this?
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ So by these accounts then these Sub-Saharan populations could be called 'Eurasian' just like the North African ones.
By the way, I agree with the whole plasticity or rather arbitrariness of Egypt vs. Nubia. Modern day Egypt also comprises ancient Lower Nubia a.k.a. Ta-Seti which was also considered the 1st nome of Kemet (ancient Egypt).
I've been skimming this thread and you guys are going all over the place about 'hair' and SNP groups of predynastic Egyptians and Nubians. What exactly is the issue you are trying to address?
What sub-saharan populations called be called euro-asian? the Dato and datog ?
Posts: 2560 | From: Somewhere | Registered: May 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ The Cushitic peoples Beyoku cited as having mtDNA lineages M,N,J, and T. There are also Nilotic people who have hg U. According to the Euronuts this makes them 'Eurasian'. Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ The Cushitic peoples Beyoku cited as having mtDNA lineages M,N,J, and T. There are also Nilotic people who have hg U. According to the Euronuts this makes them 'Eurasian'.
Oh, so you saying anyone that has M,N,J, AND T mtDna lineages euronuts would called them euroasian instead of african,even if they were born in africa and have african Y-DNA?
I did not read everything in one of the links and i only open one above.
Do most of Dato and datog have those mtDna lineages?
I know that M AND N could be really african,and i think it is. What do you think?
Posts: 2560 | From: Somewhere | Registered: May 2012
| IP: Logged |
Datog are Nilotic ancestry group and speak a Nilotic language. None of those studies says anything else. I'm sure if we test more Nilotic people we will find many M35 carriers such as Datog, Masalit, Fur, Maasai, Kenyan Nilotes, etc (see studies posted above). Nilotic people are part of the people in which the M35 haplogroup originated. E-P2 carriers.
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
My point is that E1b1b lineages are not usually found in Central and Western Sub Saharan Africa where Saharans are ALSO known to have spread to. This is somewhat changing with new research but......
Where they are found in the Rift Valley around and around the White Nile they are usually associated with recent ancestry or migration from Sub Saharan Horn Africans.
Nilotic speakers in Southern Sudan are not assumed to have recent contact with E1b1b carrying Horn Africans. FWIW, the Dinka, Shilluk and Nuer do not have V32 lineages showing discontinuity with Northern Sudanis, Horners and Kenyans. IMO their lineages represent an older instance. OTOH, with Nilotic speakers in Kenya such as the Masaai, Samburu etc its the exact opposite so maybe they shouldn't be used as a yardstick for E1b1b carrying Nilo-Saharan speakers. It looks the same with the Datog. Some Kenyan Nilotics show continuity with Horn Africans in terms of North East African MTDNA, or Non-African mtdna lineages (R0,N1,I,K,T,V,J) presumably carried RECENTLY southward along with E1b1b lineages. Some Southern Sudanese have these lineages too but there frequencies are somewhat limited.
As far as I know the High E-M35 lineages in Western Sudanese shouldnt have anything to do with any recent connection with Horn Africans. So while they are an anomoly they are a good case, unlike many groups below Ethiopia.
quote:TruthCentric - beyoku seems to be implying a recent sub-Saharan derivation for the AEs' ancestors.
Kind of but Not really. I believe as you go back there is not going to be so much of a difference between inhabitants of the Sahara and those below it. One of the reason is because Saharan are possibly the fore-runners of Sub Saharans. ALso due to the Saharan pump there were movements between the "Sahara" and "Sub Sahara". These populations weren't sedentary.
What i DONT think there is going to be is any distinction of Ancient Egyptians specifically Autosomally. I think the E1b1b lineages in Modern Egyptians can be a misdirection. Its like the presence of the R1b % Mtdna H combination in Modern Europeans that is mostly missing from Ancient Europeans. Also what does the limited Autsomal DNA say?
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
Datog are Nilotic ancestry group and speak a Nilotic language. None of those studies says anything else. I'm sure if we test more Nilotic people we will find many M35 carriers such as Datog, Masalit, Fur, Maasai, Kenyan Nilotes, etc (see studies posted above). Nilotic people are part of the people in which the M35 haplogroup originated. E-P2 carriers.
Did you see the autosomal results? There were primarily not of "Nilo-Saharan" ancestry. Also I never argued that E-m35 was not an original lineages of Nilo-Saharan speakers.
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
Datog are Nilotic ancestry group and speak a Nilotic language. None of those studies says anything else. I'm sure if we test more Nilotic people we will find many M35 carriers such as Datog, Masalit, Fur, Maasai, Kenyan Nilotes, etc (see studies posted above). Nilotic people are part of the people in which the M35 haplogroup originated. E-P2 carriers.
Did you see the autosomal results? There were primarily not of "Nilo-Saharan" ancestry. Also I never argued that E-m35 was not an original lineages of Nilo-Saharan speakers.
The autosomal results doesn't show that at all. Explain why you think that? Anyway they are not the only M35 carriers. The Masalit, the Fur, Kenyan Nilotes are others ones too. Why the hell do you say Nilotes are lacking in M35 lineages (E1b1b) when it's not true? When I show you Nilotes with E1b1b you say it's an anomaly or try to claim cushitic ancestry.
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
Take note the Maroon cluster which I believe was Central Sudanic diverges from the Red-Nilo-Saharan. In essence they are both seen as "Nilo-Saharan" ancestry clusters. Notice the Purple cluster denoting Cushitic.
Compare the absence of the Cushitic AAC in Southern Sudan and Central African AA speakers with its presence in Eastern African Nilo-Sahara and Afro-asiatic speakers.
Notice the Datog, Akie, Mbugu, and particularly the Samburu.........all of which are listed as Nilo-Saharan speakers. All of which lack for the most part the Central Sudanic (Maroon) and Nilotic (Red) Ancestral Clusters found in Southern Sudanese Nilo-Saharans.
Do you think it is possible that the Samburu and the Datog stand out compared to their neighbors because of an excess of Cushitic ancestry (Purple)? Are they fully assimilated Nilo-Saharans or are they language switched Cushites?
Take a look at the Lou, Obabms Daddies Ethnic group. Are they Nilo-Saharna speakers that have been largely assimilated by Niger Kordofanian speakers or are they a Bantu Group that language shifted to Nilo-Saharan?
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Bottom line, no matter how you slice it, genetics is not race and all of these ancient populations carrying ancient African lineages belonged to the same "race": black Africans.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: Many Nilo-Saharan–speaking populations in East Africa, such as the Maasai, show multiple cluster assignments from the Nilo-Saharan (red) and Cushitic (dark purple) AACs, in accord with linguistic evidence of repeated Nilotic assimilation of Cushites over the past 3000 years (32) and with the high frequency of a shared East African–specific mutation associated with lactose tolerance (33).
quote: Additionally, the Nilo-Saharan–speaking Luo of Kenya show predominantly Niger-Kordofanian ancestry in the STRUCTURE analyses (orange) (Figs. (Figs.33 and and4,4, Fig. 5, B and C, and fig. S15) and cluster together with eastern African Niger-Kordofanian–speaking populations in the phylogenetic trees (Fig. 1 and figs. S7 and S8).
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
Take note the Maroon cluster which I believe was Central Sudanic diverges from the Red-Nilo-Saharan. In essence they are both seen as "Nilo-Saharan" ancestry clusters. Notice the Purple cluster denoting Cushitic.
Compare the absence of the Cushitic AAC in Southern Sudan and Central African AA speakers with its presence in Eastern African Nilo-Sahara and Afro-asiatic speakers.
Notice the Datog, Akie, Mbugu, and particularly the Samburu.........all of which are listed as Nilo-Saharan speakers. All of which lack for the most part the Central Sudanic (Maroon) and Nilotic (Red) Ancestral Clusters found in Southern Sudanese Nilo-Saharans.
Do you think it is possible that the Samburu and the Datog stand out compared to their neighbors because of an excess of Cushitic ancestry (Purple)? Are they fully assimilated Nilo-Saharans or are they language switched Cushites?
Take a look at the Lou, Obabms Daddies Ethnic group. Are they Nilo-Saharna speakers that have been largely assimilated by Niger Kordofanian speakers or are they a Bantu Group that language shifted to Nilo-Saharan?
What you just proved is that there's no correlation between language groups spoken in Africa and genetic. There's more regional correlation by the effects of geographic distance and regional genetic drift.
The purple color could as easily be attributed to Nilotes than to Cushite. AA speakers in Central Africa which are supposed to be linguistically (thus supposedly genetically) closer to Cushite have none of that purple color (they have a mix of orange and brown color)!!
All Kenyans from all languages seems to have purple color (as well as orange clusters and red). Many many Nilo-Saharans and labelled Afro-Asiatic speakers seems have a lot of orange as well as Niger-Kongo speakers. In short, there's no correlation between languages and genetic clusters. They all have the same origin in E-P2 population in Eastern Africa (Sudan/Ethiopia,Somalia) that's why they share a mix of DNA with regional clusters representing the effect of genetic drift (at low level) and relative isolation from one another due to geographical distance.
Also let's recall that the Masalit and Fur got some of the highest level of E1b1b (E-35) in the world. Even some South Africans got a high level of E1b1b.
It's easy to see for anybody looking at Figure 4, there's no pure Cushite, no pure Nilo-Saharans. They are all mixed of DNA corresponding to the mixed of DNA pre-existing in the population they all originate from. That is, imo, the population who was speaking the 'Negro-Egyptian' language proposed by Theophile Obenga using the comparative linguistic methodology. Let's recall that all those language groups have their homeland originating in that same Sudan/Ethiopian/East African region.
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
What you just proved is that there's no correlation between language groups spoken in Africa and genetic.
Objective statistical analysis:
Genetic clustering of populations was generally consistent with language classification, with some exceptions (Fig. 1 and fig. S32). For example, the click-speaking Hadza and Sandawe, classified as Khoesan, were separated from the SAK populations in the D2 and (δμ)2 phylogenetic trees (Fig. 1) and fig. S7). However, this observation is consistent with linguistic studies indicating that these Khoesan languages are highly divergent (42,51) and may reflect gene flow between the Hadza and Sandawe with neighboring populations in East Africa subsequent to divergence from the SAK. Additionally, the Afroasiatic Chadic–speaking populations from northern Cameroon cluster close to the Nilo-Saharan–speaking populations from Chad, rather than with East African Afroasiatic speakers (Fig. 1), consistent with a language replacement among the Chadic populations. --Tishkoff 2009
quote:Also let's recall that the Masalit and Fur got some of the highest level of E1b1b (E-35) in the world.
They don't. They don't even have E-M35 per Hassan. They have a few rather young E-M78 subclades, which, again, testifies to their aquisition of these sub clades through admixture with Afrasan speakers or an intermediate.
Some people just don't know when to quit their barrage of non-sense Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Indeed, from what I understand the highest frequency of E1b1b in the world is in the Horn specifically Somalia where it is over 80%. The oldest E1b1b* (original) is found among Southern African Khoisan.
quote:Originally posted by Firewall:
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ The Cushitic peoples Beyoku cited as having mtDNA lineages M,N,J, and T. There are also Nilotic people who have hg U. According to the Euronuts this makes them 'Eurasian'.
Oh, so you saying anyone that has M,N,J, AND T mtDna lineages euronuts would called them euroasian instead of african,even if they were born in africa and have african Y-DNA?
I did not read everything in one of the links and i only open one above.
Do most of Dato and datog have those mtDna lineages?
I know that M AND N could be really african, and i think it is. What do you think?
The M and N hgs found in Africa are specifically M1 and N1 and they could be African in origin or they could have originated in Arabia among Out-of-African colonists among M* and N* and then back-migrated to Africa. The other clades-- J and T are definitely downstream Eurasian clades that back-migrated at relatively later dates though still in early times before the Holocene.
Datog are Nilotic ancestry group and speak a Nilotic language. None of those studies says anything else. I'm sure if we test more Nilotic people we will find many M35 carriers such as Datog, Masalit, Fur, Maasai, Kenyan Nilotes, etc (see studies posted above). Nilotic people are part of the people in which the M35 haplogroup originated. E-P2 carriers.
What about the maternal lineages or autosomal genes Beyoku cited? You can't just rely on one line of genetic evidence and ignore others. You claim the Eurasian clades in Africa are outliers or rare, but they still exist and really they aren't as rare as you make it sound if you include BOTH Y-chromosomal AND mitochondrial along with autosomal. My point is that the division between African and non-African is not as great as some (both Eurocentrics and Africanists) make it out to be. Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
quote- E-M215 and E-M35 are quite common among Afro-Asiatic speakers. The linguistic group and carriers of E-M35 lineage have a high probability to have arisen and dispersed together from the region of origin of this language family. Amongst populations with an Afro-Asiatic speaking history, a significant proportion of Jewish male lineages are E-M35. Haplogroup E-M35, which accounts for approximately 18% to 20% of Ashkenazi and 8.6% to 30% of Sephardi Y-chromosomes, appears to be one of the major founding lineages of the Jewish population.
I could be wrong but i thought E1b1b origin was from nilo-saharan speakers and this spread was from them has well.
What is your view on this beyoku and Amun-Ra The Ultimate?
It seems the origin from the map above points to southern ethiopia,a area of Nilo-saharan speakers in ethopia.
The arrow seems to go from lower nubia to western sudan has well where the fur and others live at and it goes from lower nubia(nilo-saharan speakers) to somalia.
Again a area of nilo-saharan speakers.
There are some nubians that live in darfur has well,and chad.
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
[/QUOTE]
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic