Who needs Rameses for anything? Several pharaohs are confirmed to have dem there tropical limb proportions. In their study of 18th and 19th dynasty pharaohs Robins and Schute found this to be the case with several:
[quotes:]
"It can be seen that all the pharonic values, including those of 'Smakhare', lie much closer to the negro curve than to the white curve. Since stature equations only work satisfactorily in the individuals to whom they have applied have similar proportions to the population group from which they are derived, this provides justification for using negro equations for estimating stature from single bones of the New Kingdom pharoahs, renforcing the previous findings of Robins (1983). Furthermore, the Troller and Gleser white equations for the femur, tibia and humerus yield stature values that have a much wider spread than those from negro equations with mean values that are unacceptably large."
--Robins and Schute. The Physical Proportions and Stature of New Kingdom Pharaohs," Journal of Human Evolution 12 (1983), 455-465
and
[quote]
"Robins (1983) and Robins & Shute (1983) have shown that more consistent results are obtained from ancient Egyptian male skeletons if Trotter & Gleser formulae for negro are used, rather than those for whites which have always been applied in the past. .. their physical proportions were more like modern negroes than those of modern whites, with limbs that were relatively long compared with the trunk, and distal segments that were long compared with the proximal segments. If ancient Egyptian males had what may be termed negroid proportions, it seems reasonable that females did likewise." From: (Robins G, Shute CCD. 1986. Predynastic Egyptian stature and physical proportions. Hum Evol 1:313–324. Ruff CB. 1994.)
"Estimates of living stature, based on X-ray measurements applied to the Trotter & Gleser (1958) negro equations for the femur, tibia and humerus, have been made for ancient Egyptian kings belonging to the 18th and 19th dynasties. The corresponding equations for whites give values for stature that are unsatisfactorily high. The view that Thutmose III was excessively short is proved to be a myth. It is shown that the limbs of the pharaohs, like those of other Ancient Egyptians, had negroid characteristics, in that the distal segments were relatively long in comparison with the proximal segments. An exception was Ramesses II, who appears to have had short legs below the knees."
--Robins and Schute. The Physical Proportions and Stature of New Kingdom Pharaohs," Journal of Human Evolution 12 (1983), 455-465
But even such short legs are within the range of ultra diverse Africa, which has the greatest phenotypical variety in the world.
"Estimates of genetic diversity in major geographic regions are frequently made by pooling all individuals into regional aggregates. This method can potentially bias results if there are differences in population substructure within regions, since increased variation among local populations could inflate regional diversity. A preferred method of estimating regional diversity is to compute the mean diversity within local populations. Both methods are applied to a global sample of craniometric data consisting of 57 measurements taken on 1734 crania from 18 local populations in six geographic regions: sub-Saharan Africa, Europe, East Asia, Australasia, Polynesia, and the Americas. Each region is represented by three local populations.
Most diverse skin color
"Previous studies of genetic and craniometric traits have found higher levels of within-population diversity in sub-Saharan Africa compared to other geographic regions. This study examines regional differences in within-population diversity of human skin color. Published data on skin reflectance were collected for 98 male samples from eight geographic regions: sub-Saharan Africa, North Africa, Europe, West Asia, Southwest Asia, South Asia, Australasia, and the New World. Regional differences in local within-population diversity were examined using two measures of variability: the sample variance and the sample coefficient of variation. For both measures, the average level of within-population diversity is higher in sub-Saharan Africa than in other geographic regions. This difference persists even after adjusting for a correlation between within-population diversity and distance from the equator. Though affected by natural selection, skin color variation shows the same pattern of higher African diversity as found with other traits." -- Relethford JH.(2000). Human skin color diversity is highest in sub-Saharan African populations. Hum Biol. 2000 Oct;72(5):773-80.)
most diverse DNA
"Africa contains tremendous cultural, linguistic and genetic diversity, and has more than 2,000 distinct ethnic groups and languages.. Studies using mitochondrial (mt)DNA and nuclear DNA markers consistently indicate that Africa is the most genetically diverse region of the world." (Tishkoff SA, Williams SM., Genetic analysis of African populations: human evolution and complex disease. Nature Reviews Genetics. 2002 Aug (8):611-21.)
Most diverse everything, including limb proportions
"In sub-Saharan Africa, many anthropological characters show a wide range of population means or frequencies. In some of them, the whole world range is covered in the sub-continent. Here live the shortest and the tallest human populations, the one with the highest and the one with the lowest nose, the one with the thickest and the one with the thinnest lips in the world. In this area, the range of the average nose widths covers 92 per cent of the world range: only a narrow range of extremely low means are absent from the African record. Means for head diameters cover about 80 per cent of the world range; 60 per cent is the corresponding value for a variable once cherished by physical anthropologists, the cephalic index, or ratio of the head width to head length expressed as a percentage....." - Jean Hiernaux, "The People of Africa" 1975 p.53, 54
And conservative Egyptologist Frank Yurco, had this to say about Egypt's 12th Dynasty, one of Egypt's greatest:
"the XIIth Dynasty (1991-1786 B.C.E.) originated from the Aswan region. As expected, strong Nubian features and dark coloring are seen in their sculpture and relief work. This dynasty ranks as among the greatest, whose fame far outlived its actual tenure on the throne. Especially interesting, it was a member of this dynasty- that decreed that no Nehsy (riverine Nubian of the principality of Kush), except such as came for trade or diplomatic reasons, should pass by the Egyptian fortress at the southern end of the Second Nile Cataract. Why would this royal family of Nubian ancestry ban other Nubians from coming into Egyptian territory? Because the Egyptian rulers of Nubian ancestry had become Egyptians culturally; as pharaohs, they exhibited typical Egyptian attitudes and adopted typical Egyptian policies."
- (F. J. Yurco, 'Were the ancient Egyptians black or white?', Biblical Archaeology Review (Vol 15, no. 5, 1989)
So again, who needs Rameses, and who needs to wait until the 25th Dynasty to see tropically adapted pharoahs? And we haven't even covered the early dynastic material yet...
-------------------- Note: I am not an "Egyptologist" as claimed by some still bitter, defeated, trolls creating fake profiles and posts elsewhere. Hapless losers, you still fail. My output of hard data debunking racist nonsense has actually INCREASED since you began.. Posts: 5937 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Have you seen photos of northern Sudanese, Simple Girl? They have the exact same facial features as the ancient Egyptians---yes, even the "Caucasoid" ones. Here are some examples:
posted
Djehuti is right in asking what evidence says categorically that Rameses did "not have tropical limb proportions". All I had read from Lioness citation was presumably that his tibia was relatively shorter, when compared to those of other Dynasty specimens, wherein the tibia is reportedly longer relative to the femur bone.
What does cranio-metry say?
Harris and Wente reportedly made a connection between the Tasians and Natufians, just as Larry Angel suggested...
The difference between late XVII and XVIII dynasty royal mummies and contemporary Nubians is slight. During the XVIV and XX dynasties we see possibly some mixing between a Nubian element that is more similar to Mesolithic Nubians (low vaults, sloping frontal bone, etc.), with an orthognathous population. Since the Ramessides were of northern extraction, this could represent miscegenation with modern Mediterraneans of Levantine type. The projecting zygomatic arches of Seti I suggest remnants of the old Natufian/Tasian types of the Holocene period.
If the heads of Queens Nodjme and Esemkhebe are any indication, there may have been a new influx of southern blood during the XXI Dynasty.
In summation, the New Kingdom Pharaohs and Queens whose mummies have been recovered bear strong similarity to either contemporary Nubians, as with the XVII and XVIII dynasties, or with Mesolithic-Holocene Nubians, as with the XVIV and XX dynasties. The former dynasties seem to have a strong southern affinity, while the latter possessed evidence of mixing with modern Mediterranean types and also, possibly, with remnants of the old Tasian and Natufian populations. From the few sample available from the XXI Dynasty, there may have been a new infusion from the south at this period. - courtesy of www.geocities.com/Tokyo/Temple.
At most, Rameses would have been of mixed Nile-Valley [e.g. EpiPaleolithic or Mesolithic "Nubians"] and Levantine groups, and/or else the Tasian or Natufian types.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
How short does some tibia have to be for them not to be considered tropically adapted anymore? Just because Ramses legs were a little shorter, doesn't mean he was not tropically adapted? Lioness your citation doesn't say he was not tropically adapted
Posts: 89 | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't know. The evidence seems to be piling up suggesting that Ramses II was indeed pretty peculiar. It isn't just limb proportions with this guy. He always stands out among the pharaohs in nearly every variable (hair, limbs, height, crania, and even some of his practices like Seth worship and naming conventions). I agree with zarahan that he is not needed to show what the AE were, in fact examining him alone will only confuse a person on that issue.
Posts: 4021 | From: Bay Area, CA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
What about the genetic data. It confirmed that he had dark hair, dark eyes and dark skin, even darker than Amenhotep III.
If only someone could confirm this study.
quote:Originally posted by Wally: Results of formal tests of the Egyptian government No. 58 From 25 / 4 at 1 / 5 / 2000
SOME GENETIC FEATURES OF ANCIENT EGYPTIANS
As part of research conducted by the Cairo University in collaboration with the Higher Council of Antiquities, it has been possible to achieve the anthropological characteristics of the Pharaohs.
According to preliminary indications, we reached a number of traits of the Pharaohs. It was possible to identify genes for size, color and eye color and hair of the king in the Pharaonic era in which samples were collected. They were placed on mummies in sarcophagi. A group of researchers has been able to separate those genes that have proven that the ancient Egyptians were not taller as previously thought. Their size was rather average, with the exception of Ramses II, whose analysis of genes has proven to be cut.
It has also been demonstrated that his skin was brown and his hair was black, not red. The color red has been found on his mummy is due to a dye (probably henna). His eyes were black with a slight tinge of brown.
Amenhotep III was short of stature, the color of his skin was a light brown. His eyes and his hair was black dark. These features show that the kings were related. All the kings at that time had a common origin in the family tree of the royal family. It is possible to determine a precise dates and times in the future. This research will confirm certain anthropological traits that have been studied before on the Pharaonic mummies. This will give preliminary indications about the traits, diseases and characteristics of the Pharaohs.
What material points out that there is something out of the ordinary about Ramses II's cranial features? There is also evidence that points the other direction, for example, Coon likens his physical appearance to Ethiopians, his family served among the Medjay, and his family members are often painted as darker than the average ancient Egyptian.
Seti I
Tomb Wall of Prince Amenkhepeshet, Ramses II's son:
posted
^Yea, I'm kind of tentative in my reliance on that citation. I can personally accept the conclusions but it isn't a proper refutation. Not looking to play devil's advocate, but the examination done to debunk Diop was done with electron microscopy (direct observation). Estimating the likely hair and skin color by analyzing associated markers isn't always accurate, and I know this first hand through my own results from 23andme, some of which are dead wrong. This is because it is based on what's "most likely" to be expressed based on the polygenic inheritance.
Also, those pictures show dark brown Egyptians in the same tradition as Amenhotep's tomb, yet the above seems to claim that Amenhotep II was "light brown". I'd like to see exactly how they came to that conclusion. I'm just not convinced.
The best argument (in my opinion) against Ramses II's hair results, if you don't buy that he was a red head, is that the redness only represented a faint burgundy expression of pheomelanin, which is also seen (ostensibly) in other African populations.
Posts: 4021 | From: Bay Area, CA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
What about the genetic data. It confirmed that he had dark hair, dark eyes and dark skin, even darker than Amenhotep III.
If only someone could confirm this study.
quote:Originally posted by Wally: Results of formal tests of the Egyptian government No. 58 From 25 / 4 at 1 / 5 / 2000
SOME GENETIC FEATURES OF ANCIENT EGYPTIANS
As part of research conducted by the Cairo University in collaboration with the Higher Council of Antiquities, it has been possible to achieve the anthropological characteristics of the Pharaohs.
According to preliminary indications, we reached a number of traits of the Pharaohs. It was possible to identify genes for size, color and eye color and hair of the king in the Pharaonic era in which samples were collected. They were placed on mummies in sarcophagi. A group of researchers has been able to separate those genes that have proven that the ancient Egyptians were not taller as previously thought. Their size was rather average, with the exception of Ramses II, whose analysis of genes has proven to be cut.
It has also been demonstrated that his skin was brown and his hair was black, not red. The color red has been found on his mummy is due to a dye (probably henna). His eyes were black with a slight tinge of brown.
Amenhotep III was short of stature, the color of his skin was a light brown. His eyes and his hair was black dark. These features show that the kings were related. All the kings at that time had a common origin in the family tree of the royal family. It is possible to determine a precise dates and times in the future. This research will confirm certain anthropological traits that have been studied before on the Pharaonic mummies. This will give preliminary indications about the traits, diseases and characteristics of the Pharaohs.
What material points out that there is something out of the ordinary about Ramses II's cranial features? There is also evidence that points the other direction, for example, Coon likens his physical appearance to Ethiopians, his family served among the Medjay, and his family members are often painted as darker than the average ancient Egyptian.
Seti I
Tomb Wall of Prince Amenkhepeshet, Ramses II's son:
quote:Originally posted by Ceasar: How short does some tibia have to be for them not to be considered tropically adapted anymore? Just because Ramses legs were a little shorter, doesn't mean he was not tropically adapted? Lioness your citation doesn't say he was not tropically adapted
Of course it must be remembered that the Egyptians had limb proportions that were extra tropically adapted or "super-negroid" as it once was called. Just because Ramses' limbs fell short of this did not mean he was no longer tropically adapted. LOL Indeed many West and Central Africans have limbs that are not extra tropically adapted either.
Posts: 26847 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:What material points out that there is something out of the ordinary about Ramses II's cranial features? There is also evidence that points the other direction, for example, Coon likens his physical appearance to Ethiopians, his family served among the Medjay, and his family members are often painted as darker than the average ancient Egyptian.
Missed this.
This is based on typology. Coon thought that Ethiopians were Caucasoid. What I'd stated is that Ramses II was peculiar for an Egyptian. Even the geocities analysis of Harris and Wente' data show changing trends. The pharaohs were by and large, prognathous before the 19th Dynasty, for example. Other traits even lead to author to conclude that the 19th and 20th dynasty saw an increase in admixture from the Mediterranean, while previous pharaohs were more like Nubians. Why would he say that? Why did the Ramsides reestablish Seth worship, abandoned after the expulsion of the Hyksos? Why is Ramses taller, less tropically adapted, and lighter haired than the other pharaohs? Warrants a better explanation imo. Maybe he got it from his mother, as was implied by the Harris and Wente analysis.
Posts: 4021 | From: Bay Area, CA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ceasar: How short does some tibia have to be for them not to be considered tropically adapted anymore? Just because Ramses legs were a little shorter, doesn't mean he was not tropically adapted? Lioness your citation doesn't say he was not tropically adapted
Of course it must be remembered that the Egyptians had limb proportions that were extra tropically adapted or "super-negroid" as it once was called. Just because Ramses' limbs fell short of this did not mean he was no longer tropically adapted. LOL Indeed many West and Central Africans have limbs that are not extra tropically adapted either.
Yeh I remembering seeing a post on this forum where other black Africans had tropically body plans (west/central) but ancient Egyptians have super negroid body plans( their limbs were a lot longer). I remember also seeing a citation were African Americans had limb portions that were more similar to Egyptians than then the Egyptian was to the U.S whites. Lol I don't know about me though I am African Americans and my limbs are short as hell lol
Posts: 89 | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Harris and Wente noted that the Rameside crania resembled Mesolithic "Nubian" specimens from Wadi al-Halfa. The idea of "admixture" with a Mediterranean group is an assumption premised on his "northern" extraction, not anything particularly cranio-metric. They assumed that since the Rameside line would have come from northern Egypt, it is possible that they might represent a mixture between Mesolithic "Nubian"-like Nile Valley groups with "Mediterranean" types or that they could just as well have been remnants of the Tasian or Natufian types. Lower Egyptian crania have generally been more orthognathus than the more southern ones.
-------------------- The Complete Picture of the Past tells Us what Not to Repeat Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote: Originally posted by Sundjata: This is based on typology. Coon thought that Ethiopians were Caucasoid.
Yes. But isn't that defeating to his own concept of Africans, and not to the fact that his observations grouped Ramses II with Ethiopians?
quote: Originally posted by Sundjata: Even the geocities analysis of Harris and Wente' data show changing trends.
When I entered ES I used that exact same site for basing my opinion of what (East) Africans ought to generally look like, but now I know that that is typological as well.
The 19th dynasty is not a standout for having reduced prognatism. For example, there are known southern Middle Kingdom cranial series (Gebelein) that don't show prognathism.
quote:The Badarian generally exhibit the greatest facial prognathism of the samples studied (demonstrated by their relatively high position on PC2). Despite their small sample size, and general lack in facial prognathism, the MK appear very morphologically heterogeneous (as indicated by their location in all quadrants of the plot).
We also have to recognize that the 19th dynasty was a different family altogether, and not directly related to the 18th dynasty. This could (partly) explain why there is a slight differentiation between the 18th and 19th dynasty cranial features. I would like to see a multivariate analysis performed on 19th dynasty Pharao's to see whether they group among northern Africans, northeastern Africans, or in between, rather than looking at the absence/presence of a few cranial markers.
quote: Originally posted by Sundjata: Why did the Ramsides reestablish Seth worship, abandoned after the expulsion of the Hyksos?
I don't know, can you explain why you feel this is significant?
quote: Originally posted by Sundjata: Why is Ramses taller
With what material did you discern this?
Posts: 8876 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: Harris and Wente noted that the Rameside crania resembled Mesolithic "Nubian" specimens from Wadi al-Halfa. The idea of "admixture" with a Mediterranean group is an assumption premised on his "northern" extraction, not anything particularly cranio-metric. They assumed that since the Rameside line would have come from northern Egypt, it is possible that they might represent a mixture between Mesolithic "Nubian"-like Nile Valley groups with "Mediterranean" types or that they could just as well have been remnants of the Tasian or Natufian types. Lower Egyptian crania have generally been more orthognathus than the more southern ones.
True the last point, however they seem to imply some type of change occurred in their examination of Seqenenre Tao, claiming that he resembled "Nubian and Old Kingdom Giza" samples more so than later pharaohs. Yea, I agree with Kalonji as well, that a lot of it is based on typological thinking, but Keita (1993) even noticed the peculiarity of that statement.
By the way, the site is not up anymore, but I'd always assumed that the language on the site actually came from Harris and Wente, but it didn't. These interpretations are all from an independent researcher whose mini bio and contact info were available (though illusively tucked behind all of the links and data) on the geocities website. Good thing zarahan salvaged most of it.
Posts: 4021 | From: Bay Area, CA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Yes. But isn't that defeating to his own concept of Africans, and not to the fact that his observations grouped Ramses II with Ethiopians?
I give you that, even though it is the methodology that I disagree with. I stay away from coon.
quote:When I entered ES I used that exact same site for basing my opinion of what (East) Africans ought to generally look like, but now I know that that is typological as well.
The 19th dynasty is not a standout for having reduced prognatism. For example, there are known Middle Kingdom southern (Gebelein) cranial series that don't show prognathism
Was just an example of ONE of the differences listed between the dynasties/families under comparison which led the author to assume a "Mediterranean" connection.
quote:We also have to recognize that the 19th dynasty was a different family altogether, and not directly related to the 18th dynasty. This could (partly) explain why there is a slight differentiation between the 18th and 19th dynasty cranial features. I would like to see a multivariate analysis performed on 19th dynasty Pharao's to see whether they group among northern Africans, northeastern Africans, or in between, rather than looking at the absence/presence of a few cranial markers.
I entertain any likely scenario.
quote:I don't know, can you explain why you feel this is significant?
Not that significant, just a question. AE detested Seth and he wasn't officially worshiped until foreign rulers from two dynasties previous took him as their patron.
quote:With what material did you discern this?
It isn't stated directly, but in your very own citation and I've read this elsewhere. Don't have the notation handy but I'll edit my post when I find it.
Posts: 4021 | From: Bay Area, CA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Sundjata: Also, those pictures show dark brown Egyptians in the same tradition as Amenhotep's tomb, yet the above seems to claim that Amenhotep II was "light brown". I'd like to see exactly how they came to that conclusion. I'm just not convinced.
That makes two of us The study is not peer reviewed and very vague, which is typical of how the Egyptian authorities handle Ancient Egyptian genetic studies. I do think it's unlikely though, that someone can have genes that code for dark brown skin and come out looking like Zidane for example.
What exactly was wrong about your genetic results if you don't mind me asking.
Posts: 8876 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Yes. But isn't that defeating to his own concept of Africans, and not to the fact that his observations grouped Ramses II with Ethiopians?
I give you that, even though it is the methodology that I disagree with. I stay away from coon.
quote:When I entered ES I used that exact same site for basing my opinion of what (East) Africans ought to generally look like, but now I know that that is typological as well.
The 19th dynasty is not a standout for having reduced prognatism. For example, there are known Middle Kingdom southern (Gebelein) cranial series that don't show prognathism
Was just an example of ONE of the differences listed between the dynasties/families under comparison which led the author to assume a "Mediterranean" connection.
quote:We also have to recognize that the 19th dynasty was a different family altogether, and not directly related to the 18th dynasty. This could (partly) explain why there is a slight differentiation between the 18th and 19th dynasty cranial features. I would like to see a multivariate analysis performed on 19th dynasty Pharao's to see whether they group among northern Africans, northeastern Africans, or in between, rather than looking at the absence/presence of a few cranial markers.
I entertain any likely scenario.
quote:I don't know, can you explain why you feel this is significant?
Not that significant, just a question. AE detested Seth and he wasn't officially worshiped until foreign rulers from two dynasties previous took him as their patron.
quote:With what material did you discern this?
It isn't stated directly, but in your very own citation and I've read this elsewhere. Don't have to notation handy but I'll edit my post when I find it.
Ok I didn't attach too much value to Ramses lenght in the Cairo redux genetic report because they don't disclose the nr of mummies that were under investigation. This is not enough to discern how tall he was or whether it was taller than average, and average, compared to what population and time period.
Posts: 8876 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Sundjata: Also, those pictures show dark brown Egyptians in the same tradition as Amenhotep's tomb, yet the above seems to claim that Amenhotep II was "light brown". I'd like to see exactly how they came to that conclusion. I'm just not convinced.
That makes two of us The study is not peer reviewed and very vague, which is typical of how the Egyptian authorities handle Ancient Egyptian genetic studies. I do think it's unlikely though, that someone can have genes that code for dark brown skin and come out looking like Zidane for example.
What exactly was wrong about your genetic results if you don't mind me asking.
Well, there's a section on the website called "health and traits" where they try to estimate the likely hood that you'd posses a certain phenotype. Basically the same traits that the Pharaohs were tested for. Some are accurate, while others are not. For instance, my eye color is said to be brown, which they are, but my hair is said to be "slightly curly", which is wrong. My ABO is said to be O positive, also wrong. And other traits all the way from memory to pain sensitivity is tested for. They are wrong on almost half of what they estimate. The biggest problem is that next to the analysis there is a row for "applicable ethnicities" and it always reads "European". These results are based on studies with mostly European guinea pigs. They don't apply to Africans or non-Europeans for the most part.
Posts: 4021 | From: Bay Area, CA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Getting back to the issue of Ramses, here is what studies found about him and his family: The XVIV Dynasty is higher in ANB and SN-M Plane than the XX Dynasty. Ramesses IV is the only one in these two dynasties with strong alveolar prognathism, at least, as indicated by SNA. However, dental alveolar prognathism is quite common in both dynasties. Also, both have ANB and SN- M Plane at mean angles higher than even African Americans.
In terms of head shape, the XVIV and XX dynasties look more like the early Nubian skulls from the mesolithic with low vaults and sloping, curved foreheads. The XVII and XVIII dynasty skulls are shaped more like modern Nubians with globular skulls and high vaults. Merenptah, Siptah and Ramesses V all have pronounced glabellae. Ramesses IV has a bulging occiput similar to the "Elder Lady." Ramesses II and his son, Merenptah, both have rather weakly inclined mandibles with long ramus. Ramesses II's father, Seti I, does not possess this feature, though, suggesting that this was inherited from Ramesses II's mother, Queen Mut-Tuy. The gonial angle of Seti I is 116.3 compared to 107.9 and 109 for Ramesses II and Merenptah respectively.
The XVIV and XX dynasty heads do not have steep foreheads, receding zygomatic arches or prominent chins. Generally, both glabella and occiput are rounded and projecting to varying degrees. The sagittal contour is usually flattened, at least to some degree, although this sometimes begins before the bregma rather than in post-bregmatic position. The whole mandible is rarely squarish, although the body sometimes has a wavy edge. The latter feature, though, is very common in both ancient and modern Nubians. According to Gill (1986), an undulating mandible is a characteristic of Negroids.
The difference between late XVII and XVIII dynasty royal mummies and contemporary Nubians is slight. During the XVIV and XX dynasties we see possibly some mixing between a Nubian element that is more similar to Mesolithic Nubians (low vaults, sloping frontal bone, etc.), with an orthognathous population. Since the Ramessides were of northern extraction, this could represent miscegenation with modern Mediterraneans of Levantine type. The projecting zygomatic arches of Seti I suggest remnants of the old Natufian/Tasian types of the Holocene period.
If the heads of Queens Nodjme and Esemkhebe are any indication, there may have been a new influx of southern blood during the XXI Dynasty.
In summation, the New Kingdom Pharaohs and Queens whose mummies have been recovered bear strong similarity to either contemporary Nubians, as with the XVII and XVIII dynasties, or with Mesolithic-Holocene Nubians, as with the XVIV and XX dynasties. The former dynasties seem to have a strong southern affinity, while the latter possessed evidence of mixing with modern Mediterranean types and also, possibly, with remnants of the old Tasian and Natufian populations. From the few sample available from the XXI Dynasty, there may have been a new infusion from the south at this period.
James Harris from Edward Wente, X-ray Atlas of the Royal Mummies (Chicago: University of Chicago, 1980)
Posts: 26847 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Really?? I was always under the impression the descriptions came directly from Harris and Wente. Well, I stand corrected.
Posts: 26847 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
True the last point, however they seem to imply some type of change occurred in their examination of Seqenenre Tao, claiming that he resembled "Nubian and Old Kingdom Giza" samples more so than later pharaohs.
Which passage are you referencing here? And even if change "occurred in the examination of Sequenenre Tao", how does that affect the Rameside lineage of the 19th Dynasty?
I repeat, the author(s) only speculated as one of the few possibilities they noted about the peculiarities of the Rameside crania, i.e. as compared to those of the 18th Dynasty, that the Rameside Dynasty cranial pattern may be indicative of "mixing" between a "Nubian element" that is similar to the "Mesolithic Nubians" [the Wadi Halfan specimens] and some "orthognathous" population, and that the latter group could have been "modern Mediterraneans of Levantine type". The only reasons given for this choice of speculation is that the Rameside lineage were of "northern extraction", and that they were "orthognathous" -- nothing particularly substantive. The question that needs to be asked about this, should be: Why was the condition of being "orthognathous" cause for assuming that it could have occurred through "admxiture" with some other group? Here's why the author speculated as such: The "Mesolithic Nubian" specimens that the Rameside crania resembled were generally not as "orthognathous" as the Rameside folks, which is why the author assumed that it could well have been attained in the Rameside lineage via admixture between said "Mesolithic Nubian"-like "Nubian element" with some other population, which would have been generally more orthognathous than the former (Nubian element). Additionally, since the "projecting zygomatic arch" appears in the Rameside lineage, the author got the impression that yet another element must have mixed with the "Mesolithic Nubian" type element, and that element was determined to be either Tasians or Natufians. The author could have just as well have speculated that the "other" population with which the "Mesolithic Nubian"-like "Nubian element" had "admixed", were northern ancient Egyptians, as therein too, orthognathism is relatively more prevalent than the more southern groups, and they too, are in the "northern" territory, from which the Rameside lineage would have come.
The point is, despite concerted efforts in some quarters to make the Rameside line an "exotic" group, their cranial patterns are consistent with the prospect of their link with other Nile Valley groups, even if at some point, there could well have been "admixture" from say, the Levant, which at this point is just pure conjecture from a cranio-metric stanpoint, pending some other form of evidence, outside of craniometry.
quote: By the way, the site is not up anymore, but I'd always assumed that the language on the site actually came from Harris and Wente, but it didn't. These interpretations are all from an independent researcher whose mini bio and contact info were available (though illusively tucked behind all of the links and data) on the geocities website. Good thing zarahan salvaged most of it.
I knew this, which is why I informed Kalonji of the fact, when he cited a copy of a piece from that site in a previous exchange we had. I have also noted it in a blog post about Natufians. However, the geocite author was referencing cranio-metric data from Harris and Wente's "X-ray Atlas of the Royal Mummies".
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Sundjata: Also, those pictures show dark brown Egyptians in the same tradition as Amenhotep's tomb, yet the above seems to claim that Amenhotep II was "light brown". I'd like to see exactly how they came to that conclusion. I'm just not convinced.
That makes two of us The study is not peer reviewed and very vague, which is typical of how the Egyptian authorities handle Ancient Egyptian genetic studies. I do think it's unlikely though, that someone can have genes that code for dark brown skin and come out looking like Zidane for example.
What exactly was wrong about your genetic results if you don't mind me asking.
Well, there's a section on the website called "health and traits" where they try to estimate the likely hood that you'd posses a certain phenotype. Basically the same traits that the Pharaohs were tested for. Some are accurate, while others are not. For instance, my eye color is said to be brown, which they are, but my hair is said to be "slightly curly", which is wrong. My ABO is said to be O positive, also wrong. And other traits all the way from memory to pain sensitivity is tested for. They are wrong on almost half of what they estimate. The biggest problem is that next to the analysis there is a row for "applicable ethnicities" and it always reads "European". These results are based on studies with mostly European guinea pigs. They don't apply to Africans or non-Europeans for the most part.
What are explanations for these false positives besides their European template?
Posts: 8876 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
Who needs Rameses for anything? Several pharaohs are confirmed to have dem there tropical limb proportions. In their study of 18th and 19th dynasty pharaohs Robins and Schute found this to be the case with several:
[quotes:]
"It can be seen that all the pharonic values, including those of 'Smakhare', lie much closer to the negro curve than to the white curve. Since stature equations only work satisfactorily in the individuals to whom they have applied have similar proportions to the population group from which they are derived, this provides justification for using negro equations for estimating stature from single bones of the New Kingdom pharoahs, renforcing the previous findings of Robins (1983). Furthermore, the Troller and Gleser white equations for the femur, tibia and humerus yield stature values that have a much wider spread than those from negro equations with mean values that are unacceptably large."
--Robins and Schute. The Physical Proportions and Stature of New Kingdom Pharaohs," Journal of Human Evolution 12 (1983), 455-465
and
[quote]
"Robins (1983) and Robins & Shute (1983) have shown that more consistent results are obtained from ancient Egyptian male skeletons if Trotter & Gleser formulae for negro are used, rather than those for whites which have always been applied in the past. .. their physical proportions were more like modern negroes than those of modern whites, with limbs that were relatively long compared with the trunk, and distal segments that were long compared with the proximal segments. If ancient Egyptian males had what may be termed negroid proportions, it seems reasonable that females did likewise." From: (Robins G, Shute CCD. 1986. Predynastic Egyptian stature and physical proportions. Hum Evol 1:313–324. Ruff CB. 1994.)
"Estimates of living stature, based on X-ray measurements applied to the Trotter & Gleser (1958) negro equations for the femur, tibia and humerus, have been made for ancient Egyptian kings belonging to the 18th and 19th dynasties. The corresponding equations for whites give values for stature that are unsatisfactorily high. The view that Thutmose III was excessively short is proved to be a myth. It is shown that the limbs of the pharaohs, like those of other Ancient Egyptians, had negroid characteristics, in that the distal segments were relatively long in comparison with the proximal segments. An exception was Ramesses II, who appears to have had short legs below the knees."
--Robins and Schute. The Physical Proportions and Stature of New Kingdom Pharaohs," Journal of Human Evolution 12 (1983), 455-465
But even such short legs are within the range of ultra diverse Africa, which has the greatest phenotypical variety in the world.
"Estimates of genetic diversity in major geographic regions are frequently made by pooling all individuals into regional aggregates. This method can potentially bias results if there are differences in population substructure within regions, since increased variation among local populations could inflate regional diversity. A preferred method of estimating regional diversity is to compute the mean diversity within local populations. Both methods are applied to a global sample of craniometric data consisting of 57 measurements taken on 1734 crania from 18 local populations in six geographic regions: sub-Saharan Africa, Europe, East Asia, Australasia, Polynesia, and the Americas. Each region is represented by three local populations.
Most diverse skin color
"Previous studies of genetic and craniometric traits have found higher levels of within-population diversity in sub-Saharan Africa compared to other geographic regions. This study examines regional differences in within-population diversity of human skin color. Published data on skin reflectance were collected for 98 male samples from eight geographic regions: sub-Saharan Africa, North Africa, Europe, West Asia, Southwest Asia, South Asia, Australasia, and the New World. Regional differences in local within-population diversity were examined using two measures of variability: the sample variance and the sample coefficient of variation. For both measures, the average level of within-population diversity is higher in sub-Saharan Africa than in other geographic regions. This difference persists even after adjusting for a correlation between within-population diversity and distance from the equator. Though affected by natural selection, skin color variation shows the same pattern of higher African diversity as found with other traits." -- Relethford JH.(2000). Human skin color diversity is highest in sub-Saharan African populations. Hum Biol. 2000 Oct;72(5):773-80.)
most diverse DNA
"Africa contains tremendous cultural, linguistic and genetic diversity, and has more than 2,000 distinct ethnic groups and languages.. Studies using mitochondrial (mt)DNA and nuclear DNA markers consistently indicate that Africa is the most genetically diverse region of the world." (Tishkoff SA, Williams SM., Genetic analysis of African populations: human evolution and complex disease. Nature Reviews Genetics. 2002 Aug (8):611-21.)
Most diverse everything, including limb proportions
"In sub-Saharan Africa, many anthropological characters show a wide range of population means or frequencies. In some of them, the whole world range is covered in the sub-continent. Here live the shortest and the tallest human populations, the one with the highest and the one with the lowest nose, the one with the thickest and the one with the thinnest lips in the world. In this area, the range of the average nose widths covers 92 per cent of the world range: only a narrow range of extremely low means are absent from the African record. Means for head diameters cover about 80 per cent of the world range; 60 per cent is the corresponding value for a variable once cherished by physical anthropologists, the cephalic index, or ratio of the head width to head length expressed as a percentage....." - Jean Hiernaux, "The People of Africa" 1975 p.53, 54
And conservative Egyptologist Frank Yurco, had this to say about Egypt's 12th Dynasty, one of Egypt's greatest:
"the XIIth Dynasty (1991-1786 B.C.E.) originated from the Aswan region. As expected, strong Nubian features and dark coloring are seen in their sculpture and relief work. This dynasty ranks as among the greatest, whose fame far outlived its actual tenure on the throne. Especially interesting, it was a member of this dynasty- that decreed that no Nehsy (riverine Nubian of the principality of Kush), except such as came for trade or diplomatic reasons, should pass by the Egyptian fortress at the southern end of the Second Nile Cataract. Why would this royal family of Nubian ancestry ban other Nubians from coming into Egyptian territory? Because the Egyptian rulers of Nubian ancestry had become Egyptians culturally; as pharaohs, they exhibited typical Egyptian attitudes and adopted typical Egyptian policies."
- (F. J. Yurco, 'Were the ancient Egyptians black or white?', Biblical Archaeology Review (Vol 15, no. 5, 1989)
So again, who needs Rameses, and who needs to wait until the 25th Dynasty to see tropically adapted pharoahs? And we haven't even covered the early dynastic material yet...
Zarahan please don't fall prey to the snake anymore. Just step on it.
Everyone already knows that thousands of skeletons have been unearthed and studied and have all fallen within the range of the Ethiopians and Beja who do have supra-Negroid traits.
Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Of course. The same slow snake fails to realize that Beja and Ethiopian types also possess features she and her idiotic ilk associate with "caucasians" and thus like to call 'mix' when they are in fact pure Africans.
Posts: 26847 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Yes, Dana's comment may be exaggerated-- it was hundreds-- but it is YOUR claims that have always been false!
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: Djehuti is right in asking what evidence says categorically that Rameses did "not have tropical limb proportions". All I had read from Lioness citation was presumably that his tibia was relatively shorter, when compared to those of other Dynasty specimens, wherein the tibia is reportedly longer relative to the femur bone...
LOL See how falsity is easily exposed?
Ramses I
Seti I
Ramses II
They have the tropical adaptation of black skin like all other Africans why not skeletons?
Posts: 26847 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic