quote:

---

OK A-M13 L3f
Ok A-M13 L0a1
OK B-M150 L3d
OK E-M2 L3e5
OK E-M2 L2a1
OK E-M123 L5a1
OK E-M35 R0a
OK E-M41 L2a1
OK E-M41 L1b1a
OK E-M75 M1
OK E-M78 L4b
OK J-M267 L3i
OK R-M173 L2
OK T-M184 L0a


MK A-M13 L3x
MK E-M75 L2a1
MK E-M78 L3e5
MK E-M78 M1a
MK E-M96 L4a
MK E-V6 L3
MK B-M112 L0b

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
This seems to confirm the theory that Ancient Egyptians were composed of many different African ethnic groups who settled along the Nile during the dessication of the Sahara. Unified under one state by Narmer. All African people seem represented here from Nilo-Saharan to Niger-Congo speakers passing by Khoisan and Cushitic/Chadic speakers.

---

Hmm, that's interesting. I could of sworn that you were criticising me a couple of days ago for ''not liking the DNA results'' when I said that the Sahel, Horner and Nilo-Saharan influences would dwarf the Bantu influences, and here are the results, vindicating my views with prophetic accuracy. Prey tell, where are the Bantu specific lineages dominating over Horner, Nilo-Saharan and Chadic specific lineages in this cross section of AE lineages?
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 
I think beyoku says these results are not from royals in case anybody was wondering
 

---

Posted by Son of Ra (Member # 20401) on :
 
^^^Yeah he said that.
 

---

Posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova (Member # 15718) on :
 
Doctoris Scientifica says:
Most of these uni-paternal lineages appear either "Chadic" or "NE African"; these results suggest that both 1) the Sahelian region via the Central Sahara and 2) the Horn of Africa via the Eastern Sahara, played a role in the peopling of Ancient Egypt. The Eurasian lineages aren't out of the ordinary either.

The presence of "West African" lineages in Ancient Egypt also supports an ancient arrival of at least some of the West African admixture present in Egypt today.

^^All these African links again confirms what has
already been found by studies in:

limb proportion,

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

cranial



------------------------------------------------------------------------------

dental


------------------------------------------------------------------------------

historical


------------------------------------------------------------------------------


and archaeo/anthro-cultural data --QUOTE


QUOTE:

"The evidence also points to linkages to
other northeast African peoples, not
coincidentally approximating the modern
range of languages closely related to
Egyptian in the Afro-Asiatic group
(formerly called Hamito-Semetic). These
linguistic similarities place ancient
Egyptian in a close relationship with
languages spoken today as far west as
Chad, and as far south as Somalia.

Archaeological evidence also strongly
supports an African origin. A widespread
northeastern African cultural assemblage,
including distinctive multiple barbed
harpoons and pottery decorated with
dotted wavy line patterns, appears during
the early Neolithic (also known as the
Aqualithic, a reference to the mild
climate of the Sahara at this time).
Saharan and Sudanese rock art from this
time resembles early Egyptian
iconography. Strong connections
between Nubian (Sudanese) and
Egyptian material culture continue in
later Neolithic Badarian culture of Upper
Egypt. Similarities include black-topped
wares, vessels with characteristic
ripple-burnished surfaces, a special
tulip-shaped vessel with incised and
white-filled decoration, palettes, and
harpoons...

Other ancient Egyptian practices show
strong similarities to modern African
cultures including divine kingship, the
use of headrests, body art, circumcision,
and male coming-of-age rituals, all
suggesting an African substratum or
foundation for Egyptian civilization.."

-- Source: Donald Redford (2001) The
Oxford encyclopedia of ancient Egypt,
Volume 3. Oxford University Press. p.28


------------------------------------------------------------------------------

DNA

 

---

Posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate (Member # 20039) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
This seems to confirm the theory that Ancient Egyptians were composed of many different African ethnic groups who settled along the Nile during the dessication of the Sahara. Unified under one state by Narmer. All African people seem represented here from Nilo-Saharan to Niger-Congo speakers passing by Khoisan and Cushitic/Chadic speakers.

---

Hmm, that's interesting. I could of sworn that you were criticising me a couple of days ago for ''not liking the DNA results'' when I said that the Sahel, Horner and Nilo-Saharan influences would dwarf the Bantu influences, and here are the results, vindicating my views with prophetic accuracy. Prey tell, where are the Bantu specific lineages dominating over Horner and Chadic specific lineages in this cross section of AE lineages?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
What I see here is that all African language
families, thus all African people, are
represented here.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
Ramses III was determined to be E1b1a, thus
closer to West Africans and Bantu

---

quote:

---

Haplogroups of the E1b1a clade, and in
particular haplogroups E1b1a7 and E1b1a8 are most
frequently found in West, Central and South East
Africa, with a particular modal 6 NRY STR
haplotype (15-12-21-10-11-13) considered a
possible signature haplotype of the expansion of
the Bantu speaking peoples (Thomas et al. 2000;
Pereira et al. 2002; Veeramah et al. 2010).
This STR haplotype was only observed in a
single Anuak, the ethnic group with by far the
highest frequency of E1b1a7. It was also observed
in a single Amhara sample and two Dasanach.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:
I think beyoku says these results are not from royals in case anybody was wondering

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
This seems to confirm the theory that Ancient Egyptians were composed of many different African ethnic groups who settled along the Nile during the dessication of the Sahara. Unified under one state by Narmer. All African people seem represented here from Nilo-Saharan to Niger-Congo speakers passing by Khoisan and Cushitic/Chadic speakers.

---

quote:

---

"African peoples are the most diverse in the world whether analyzed by DNA or skeletal or cranial methods. The peoples of the Nile Valley vary but they are still related. The people most related ethnically to the ancient Egyptians are other Africans like Nubians not cold-climate/light skinned Europeans or Asiatics.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:
that's Raxter 2008 try Raxter 2011

---

quote:

---

Bivariate analyses distinguish Jebel Sahaba from European and circumpolar samples, but do not tend to segregate them from recent North or sub-Saharan African samples

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:
look at this, trying to argue "most diverse" but "no statistically significant differences" at the same time

---

quote:

---

"Analysis of Predinastic skeletal material showed tropical African elements in the population of the earliest populations of the earliest Badarian culture" [...]

---

quote:

---

Little change in body shape was found through time, suggesting that all body segments were varying in size in response to environmental and social conditions. The change found in body plan is suggested to be the result of the later groups having a more tropical (Nilotic) form than the preceding populations.

---

quote:

---

The results indicate overall population continuity over the Predynastic and early Dynastic, and high levels of genetic heterogeneity, thereby suggesting that state formation occurred as a mainly indigenous process. Nevertheless, significant differences were found in morphology between both geographically-pooled and cemetery-specific temporal groups, indicating that some migration occurred along the Egyptian Nile Valley over the periods&time; studied.

---

quote:

---

Originally :


[QUOTE]
OK A-M13 L3f
Ok A-M13 L0a1
OK B-M150 L3d
OK E-M2 L3e5
OK E-M2 L2a1
OK E-M123 L5a1
OK E-M35 R0a
OK E-M41 L2a1
OK E-M41 L1b1a
OK E-M75 M1
OK E-M78 L4b
OK J-M267 L3i
OK R-M173 L2
OK T-M184 L0a


MK A-M13 L3x
MK E-M75 L2a1
MK E-M78 L3e5
MK E-M78 M1a
MK E-M96 L4a
MK E-V6 L3
MK B-M112 L0b

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by xyyman:
Yeah. No source cited there either. All I see is A table with DNA results. No author, no reference etc.

The haplogroups are VERY diverse. Almost ALL African HG are represented. Data does not seem right. I am wondering if we are being played. That's all.

This combination looks strange

OK T-M184 L0a
OK E-M35 R0a

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by xyyman:
Yeah. No source cited there either. All I see is A table with DNA results. No author, no reference etc.

The haplogroups are VERY diverse. Almost ALL African HG are represented. Data does not seem right. I am wondering if we are being played. That's all.

This combination looks strange

OK T-M184 L0a
OK E-M35 R0a

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by beyoku:

quote:

---

Originally posted by xyyman:
Yeah. No source cited there either. All I see is A table with DNA results. No author, no reference etc.

The haplogroups are VERY diverse. Almost ALL African HG are represented. Data does not seem right. I am wondering if we are being played. That's all.

This combination looks strange

OK T-M184 L0a
OK E-M35 R0a

---

Read the rest of that other thread.
I few posters here know the story about the source.

Regarding the results what is strange about this?
Do you know the range of T and L0a, m35 and R0a?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Son of Ra:

Credit actually goes to beyoku for presenting this to everyone. And also credit to Firewall for actually PMing me this in the first place.

Anyways...This is really interesting and the fight for an African Ancient Egypt is starting to come to a close..

quote:

---

OK A-M13 L3f
Ok A-M13 L0a1
OK B-M150 L3d
OK E-M2 L3e5
OK E-M2 L2a1
OK E-M123 L5a1
OK E-M35 R0a
OK E-M41 L2a1
OK E-M41 L1b1a
OK E-M75 M1
OK E-M78 L4b
OK J-M267 L3i
OK R-M173 L2
OK T-M184 L0a


MK A-M13 L3x
MK E-M75 L2a1
MK E-M78 L3e5
MK E-M78 M1a
MK E-M96 L4a
MK E-V6 L3
MK B-M112 L0b

---

Click on link to see what beyoku states.
http://www.forumbiodiversity.com/showthread.php/43154-Egyptian-Old-Kingdom-and-New-Kingdom-Ancient-DNA-results


He makes some really good points. It appears its not the full study and I think beyoku states he is not able to post the full one for some reason.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
This seems to confirm the theory that Ancient Egyptians were composed of many different African ethnic groups who settled along the Nile during the dessication of the Sahara. Unified under one state by Narmer. **All African people seem represented here from Nilo-Saharan to Niger-Congo speakers passing by Khoisan and Cushitic/Chadic speakers.**

---

Hmm, that's interesting. I could of sworn that you were criticising me a couple of days ago for ''not liking the DNA results'' when I said that the Sahel, Horner and Nilo-Saharan influences would dwarf the Bantu influences, and here are the results, vindicating my views with prophetic accuracy. Prey tell, where are the Bantu specific lineages dominating over Horner, Nilo-Saharan and Chadic specific lineages in this cross section of AE lineages?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:

I think beyoku says these results are not from royals in case anybody was wondering

---

Does it matter? Unless you are suggesting that the royals' genetics differ significantly from the greater populace so as they are derived from different populations.

Recall the STR results for the royals per DNA Tribes.
 

---

Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
 
I find it interesting that these people realize
that playing the inauthentic DNA results card, as
they did with the Hawass et al results, is only
going to make them look like cretins this time
around. I haven't seen a single butt-hurt Euronut
try to emotionally cope with these results with
that pre-defeated excuse, yet.

I'm surprised at the low level of instructive
comments these people are capable of making about
the DNA results. Among the few people who are
saying something instructive aren't even native
to that forum; they're (ex-)ES posters. They have
a mod who tags the spread of Afro-Asiatic
languages to the spread of R-V88 (a mid holocene
lineage for Christ's sake), and denies an
association of this Phylum with NRY E-M35


I've seen Euronuts say a lot, but I just wasn't
prepared for that in 2013. I had to rub my eyes
and re-read that. Makes me think ES really IS the
place to be, even with all the house-hold nutjobs.
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
^ LOL That's right, Swenet! The Euronuts are on their last leg and they know it!! I warned those fools years ago that the DNA on the ancient Egyptians will come out and when it does they won't like the results, but they were confident that it will go in their favor. It's just as I predicted! Ha ha ha

Speaking of fools, where is White Nobody?? You would think he would crash this thread big time due to the 'uncomfortable' findings.
 

---

Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
I warned those fools years ago that the DNA on the
ancient Egyptians will come out

---

For some reason, the Euronuts didn't get the memo
that it was an ominous sign (for their case) that
the Egyptian authorities were committed to having
these tests come out a certain way (showing
ancient to modern genetic continuity), while
they, at the same time, were unable to come out
with results supporting their desired outcome.
Not only were they unable to come up with DNA
results that document this, they were chronically
holding back hundreds of successfully sequenced
aDNA results. Hawass and other proponents of the
establishment have had ample opportunity and
incentive to shut those darn Afrocentrists up,
with all the genetic data they've been secretly
holding on to. If I were an Euronut, this
indecisiveness on the part of the Egyptian
authorities would mean something to me.



 

---

Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
 
Armor King in forumbiodiversity has interesting posts.
I am surprised they did not banned him yet.
 

---

Posted by -Just Call Me Jari- (Member # 14451) on :
 
The Modern Egyptian authorities can only play games for so long. The fact is while they withheld info on the Africaness of Egyptian Genetics, they were getting their asses handed to them on the Anthropology and Archeology side.

The poor Euroclown establishment only has Genetics to base their claims, I mean look at Cachibatches on Historum, he avoids Anthopology and physical remains like the plague and harps on distorted and debunked Genetic studies.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
I warned those fools years ago that the DNA on the
ancient Egyptians will come out

---

For some reason, the Euronuts didn't get the memo
that it was an ominous sign (for their case) that
the Egyptian authorities were committed to having
these tests come out a certain way (showing
ancient to modern genetic continuity), while
they, at the same time, were unable to come out
with results supporting their desired outcome.
Not only were they unable to come up with DNA
results that document this, they were chronically
holding back hundreds of successfully sequenced
aDNA results. Hawass and other proponents of the
establishment have had ample opportunity and
incentive to shut those darn Afrocentrists up,
with all the genetic data they've been secretly
holding on to. If I were an Euronut, this
indecisiveness on the part of the Egyptian
authorities would mean something to me.

---

 

---

Posted by xyyman (Member # 13597) on :
 
As you can tell I have reservation since I was NOT privy to the INSIDE scoop....nevertheless...wasn't it you who had the inside scoop in the Amarna's being E1b1a(I am not talking about Rameses III).

Just saying.

don't you find it odd..
OK T-M184 L0a
OK E-M35 R0a

I always speculated that AEian would be hg-A, E1b1b followed by E-M35 in that order.

Here is an interesting Table from Cruciani


 

---

Posted by xyyman (Member # 13597) on :
 
Remember when many brothas here lost their heads when they heard the Tut was R1b-M269 I was one of the few here that remained cool. Why? Because primarily it did NOT make geographic sense.

This is welcome news but...
 

---

Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
 
Wow i never seeen that chart before.
I have to save it.

The dna info for the all nubian groups in sudan is not in that chart.


Keep in mind for the nubians that info is only for north sudan/nile valley nubians,not the central sudan or western sudan nubians in sudan.


The info for the A HAPLOGROUP for nubians(north sudan) is not included but other then that the overall info on average looks almost the same has the the info i posted awhile ago of course with some differences.

The songhai info looks interesting.
I don't think i seen the info for the songhai before,but most of the others i have.
 

---

Posted by beyoku (Member # 14524) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by xyyman:
As you can tell I have reservation since I was NOT privy to the INSIDE scoop....nevertheless...wasn't it you who had the inside scoop in the Amarna's being E1b1a(I am not talking about Rameses III).

Just saying.

don't you find it odd..
OK T-M184 L0a
OK E-M35 R0a

I always speculated that AEian would be hg-A, E1b1b followed by E-M35 in that order.

Here is an interesting Table from Cruciani

---

I think you have a problem with knowledge. This is why you have so many issues:
First of all, "E1b1b" (assuming you mean E3b and NOT E-M215) IS "E-M35." Become familiar with the nomenclature. T-M184 peaks in Sub Saharan Africa at over 80%
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_T-M184#Africa

You can read a study here on how long the lineage is estimated to have been in Africa and when it is estimated to have been spread south into the Horn of Africa (Somalia)
http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/v13/n7/full/5201390a.html

L0a does not need to be explain. E-M35 also should not have to be explained. That leaves R0a. R0 is likely an old Arabian lineage. It was previously known as Pre-Hv1.
You can read more about its spread here:
http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?108-HV1-and-Red-Sea-Population-Movements

These exact configurations can be found easily in Ethiopia and Sudan. I have no idea why you find THESE lineage surprising. These are some of the LEAST surprising lineages along with the E-M78's M1a's and L2a1's.
 

---

Posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate (Member # 20039) on :
 
If you consider E descendant haplogroups to be African and F descendant to be foreign (Y-DNA). It's always surprising to find foreign DNA in any ancient populations. Like the black African presence is real but at the same time surprising and trivial in the Ancient Greece or Roman civilizations.

It's like the R-V88 found in high concentration in Cameroon or the high level of E haplogroup in the Balkans in Europe. It doesn't prevent those Balkans to look Europeans and those Cameroonian people to look (and 'be' of course) African in the full sense of the word.

In other words, someone can be 99% African and still carry a foreign haplogroup, like a F-descendant haplogroup. Y-DNA and MtDNA haplogroups form only a small part of your whole genome. Only the direct male and female line respectively.

This child for example can be a R-V88 carrier:


It's takes about 5 generations for some foreign Y-DNA to be over 90% localized if the foreign male and his descendents only intermarry with local females (and not within his foreign haplogroup).

For example, a F-descendant haplogroup can marry a local woman

1) F descendant male (R-V88 hg carrier) 100% foreign
2) Children with a local female = 50% foreign for the full genome (since about 50% comes from the local female)
3) their children = 25%
4) their children= 12.50%
5) and their children=6.25%

After 10 generations it must be much below 1% or in fact even much below 0.5%

(it's an approximation because it's not clear which genes will be transmitted from one generation to the next beside for Y-DNA of course which are only carried and transmitted from male to male)

Those children which only have 6.25% of foreign DNA after 5 generations (or less than 0.5% after 10 generations) still carry a F descendant haplogroup like R-V88. So in takes about 5 generations to be 93.75% local (when people only intermarry with locals and not within their haplogroups). In reality, it takes more generations since there's some level of intra-haplogroup interbreeding even if the majority of people around you are locals.

(obviously of those 6.25% DNA only a 0.1% are actually polymorphic in humans, but that's another subject)

If I made an error in my calculation or otherwise please tell me of course.
 

---

Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
 
Thing is
most of the geneticists reports
support Hamiticism
though they'd never admit it.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Clyde Winters:

quote:

---

Originally posted by xyyman:
Yeah. No source cited there either. All I see is A table with DNA results. No author, no reference etc.

The haplogroups are VERY diverse. Almost ALL African HG are represented. Data does not seem right. I am wondering if we are being played. That's all.

This combination looks strange

OK T-M184 L0a
OK E-M35 R0a

---

Interesting...it appears to support the Afro-asiatic myth.

.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:
Thing is
most of the geneticists reports
support Hamiticism
though they'd never admit it.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:
Just as in Hamiticism
emphasis is placed on North Africa(ns)
as separate and unrelated to the rest of Africa(ns)
also
in the background
macroHg E is proposed as a back migration

Private communication with certain geneticists reveals
Fulani madness

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:
1st of all forget DNAtribes
they ain't scientific they proprietary
their results are not replicable
because their data is private

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:
http://www.genebase.com/learning/article/2

goto above and find back

Med, East, & North African E is the back migration focus

just as in Hamiticism


Raw data is one thing
its interpretation is another


Access to reports is opening
but
notice the R-V88 south-north expansion report
is safe behind a paywall

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:
DNAtribes is not scientific

replicability is the hallmark of science

the JAMA is not DNAtribes
anybody can use JAMA the way DNAtribes did
check ES archives for examples

RIII's hg owes nothing to DNAtribes

Bottomline
u have no idea of the data behind any actual DNAtribes digest entries

Scientific studies/reports data is upfront

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:
Cut the pop-psych bullshit I mean I could say you're in a full of **** mood but that's got
nothing to do with the matter

Genebase is a popular personal&population genetics website

It's one example and they give scientific sources

The E as back migration goes back to an old Cruciani study and has never totally died.

U c there's more you never read than what u have read

---

quote:

---

Using the principle of the phylogeographic parsimony, the resolution of the E1b1b trifurcation in favor of a common ancestor of E-M2 and E-M329 strongly supports the hypothesis that haplogroup E1b1 originated in eastern Africa , as previously suggested [10], and that chromosomes E-M2, so frequently observed in sub-Saharan Africa, trace their descent to a common ancestor present in eastern Africa .

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:
Where the **** r u comin' from?

Who said RIII was unrelated to most Africans?

See what I wrote on RIII's hg based on that same BMJ Hawass2012

Slow the **** down

because I see shrouded Hamiticism in geneticists reports
doesn't mean I believe or support Hamiticism

U r just lookin 4 a fight instead of digesting what I m sayin'

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
If you consider E descendant haplogroups to be African and F descendant to be foreign (Y-DNA). It's always surprising to find foreign DNA in any ancient populations. Like the black African presence is real but at the same time surprising and trivial in the Ancient Greece or Roman civilizations.

It's like the R-V88 found in high concentration in Cameroon or the high level of E haplogroup in the Balkans in Europe. It doesn't prevent those Balkans to look Europeans and those Cameroonian people to look (and 'be' of course) African in the full sense of the word.

In other words, someone can be 99% African and still carry a foreign haplogroup, like a F-descendant haplogroup. Y-DNA and MtDNA haplogroups form only a small part of your whole genome. Only the direct male and female line respectively.

This child for example can be a R-V88 carrier:


It's takes about 5 generations for some foreign Y-DNA to be over 90% localized if the foreign male and his descendents only intermarry with local females (and not within his foreign haplogroup).

For example, a F-descendant haplogroup can marry a local woman

1) F descendant male (R-V88 hg carrier) 100% foreign
2) Children with a local female = 50% foreign for the full genome (since about 50% comes from the local female)
3) their children = 25%
4) their children= 12.50%
5) and their children=6.25%

After 10 generations it must be much below 1% or in fact even much below 0.5%

(it's an approximation because it's not clear which genes will be transmitted from one generation to the next beside for Y-DNA of course which are only carried and transmitted from male to male)

Those children which only have 6.25% of foreign DNA after 5 generations (or less than 0.5% after 10 generations) still carry a F descendant haplogroup like R-V88. So in takes about 5 generations to be 93.75% local (when people only intermarry with locals and not within their haplogroups). In reality, it takes more generations since there's some level of intra-haplogroup interbreeding even if the majority of people around you are locals.

(obviously of those 6.25% DNA only a 0.1% are actually polymorphic in humans, but that's another subject)

If I made an error in my calculation or otherwise please tell me of course.

---

^"Haplogroup I is a descendent of suprahaplogroup F (encompassing haplogroup descendents G-T, see Figure 3).

Haplogroup F is thought to represent a second and later stage of human migration out of Africa 50 thousand years ago (kya)(see Figures 4 and 5)."

http://www.genebase.com/learning/article/12




http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0002929707624173
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 
Y-DNA haplogroups by populations of Sub-Saharan Africa





Y-DNA haplogroups by populations of Near East and North Africa



 

---

Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
 
Can you post info on hg F geographies and ethnies in Africa.
 

---

Posted by xyyman (Member # 13597) on :
 
Ahem! We sometimes eat the gravy and forget the steak on the plate. What is fascinating about the data is...BOTH the "first" and "second" AMH are represented in the NiloSaharans. With high frequency in ALL groups. This is not simple genetic drift. That is what my first guess would be hg-A or hg-e1b1b for AEians.

@Beyoku. Yeah That was a typo.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Firewall:
Wow i never seeen that chart before.
I have to save it.

The dna info for the all nubian groups in sudan is not in that chart.


Keep in mind for the nubians that info is only for north sudan/nile valley nubians,not the central sudan or western sudan nubians in sudan.


The info for the A HAPLOGROUP for nubians(north sudan) is not included but other then that the overall info on average looks almost the same has the the info i posted awhile ago of course with some differences.

The songhai info looks interesting.
I don't think i seen the info for the songhai before,but most of the others i have.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:
Where the **** r u comin' from?

Who said RIII was unrelated to most Africans?

See what I wrote on RIII's hg based on that same BMJ Hawass2012

Slow the **** down

because I see shrouded Hamiticism in geneticists reports
doesn't mean I believe or support Hamiticism

U r just lookin 4 a fight instead of digesting what I m sayin'

---

I'm not looking for a fight, I just disagree with you about that point about hamiticism, and I tell you why. Typical in a discussion forum. Don't be too sensitive. The Cruciani quote above refute your claims.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:
[QB] Thing is
most of the geneticists reports
support Hamiticism
though they'd never admit it.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:
[QB] What???

Cruciani refutes E back migration he doesn't refute that some uphold E back migration.

Cruciani listed a few proponents of E back migration in an old report.
A Back Migration from Asia to Sub-Saharan Africa Is Supported by High-Resolution Analysis of Human Y-Chromosome Haplotypes

There are still proponents of that old opinion.

That's all I'm saying.

---

where is the mention of E ?

They are talking a lot about the Fulbe in Cameroon

R1b - M269
R-M173
K-M9


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC447595/

Am J Hum Genet. 2002 May; 70(5): 1197–1214.
Published online 2002 March 21.
PMCID: PMC447595
A Back Migration from Asia to Sub-Saharan Africa Is Supported by High-Resolution Analysis of Human Y-Chromosome Haplotypes
 

---

Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
 
haplogroup E

Possible place of origin
East Africa, or possibly Asia


Origins

Underhill (2001) proposed that haplogroup E may have arisen in East Africa. Some authors as Chandrasekar (2007), continue to accept the earlier position of Hammer (1997) that Haplogroup E may have originated in Asia, given that:

# E is a clade of Haplogroup DE, with the other major clade, haplogroup D, being East Asian.

# DE is a clade within M168 with the other two major clades, C and F, considered to have a Eurasian origin.

However, several discoveries made since the Hammer articles are thought to make an Asian origin less likely:

# Underhill and Kivisild (2007) demonstrated that C and F have a common ancestor meaning that DE has only one sibling which is non-African.

# DE* is found in both Asia and Africa, meaning that not only one, but several siblings of D are found in Asia and Africa.

# Karafet (2008), in which Hammer is a co-author, significantly rearranged time estimates leading to "new interpretations on the geographical origin of ancient sub-clades". Amongst other things this article proposed a much older age for haplogroup E-M96 than had been considered previously, giving it a similar age to Haplogroup D, and DE itself, meaning that there is no longer any strong reason to see it as an offshoot of DE which must have happened long after DE came into existence and had entered Asia.
 

---

Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
 
Haplogroup F-M89

Possible place of origin
Most probably South Asia, Southwest Asia or Middle East


Origins
This megahaplogroup contains mainly lineages that are not typically found in sub-Saharan Africa, suggesting that its ancestral haplogroup CF may have been carried out of Africa very early in the modern human diaspora, and F-M89 may have appeared 48,000 (38,700-55,700) years ago, probably in Eurasia.

According to the phylogeographic distribution of haplotypes observed among South Asian populations defined by social and linguistic criteria, the possibility arose of haplogroup F might have originated in or near India, and F-M89* might share a common demographic history with H-M69, C5, R2 and L1. The presence of several subclusters of F-M89 and K that are largely restricted to the Indian subcontinent is consistent with the scenario that a coastal (southern route) of early human migration out of Africa carried ancestral Eurasian lineages first to the coast of the Indian subcontinent, or that some of them originated there.

Other sources mention that this ancient haplogroup may have first appeared in North Africa, the Levant, or the Arabian Peninsula as much as 50,000 years ago (50,300±6500). It is sometimes believed to represent a "second-wave" of expansion out of Africa. However, the location of this lineage's first expansion and rise to prevalence appears to have been in South Asia or somewhere close to it within the extended Middle East. All of Haplogroup F's descendant haplogroups also show a pattern of radiation from South Asia (haplogroups H, F* and K) or the Middle East (haplogroups G and IJ).


Several lineages derived from Haplogroup F-M89 appear to have migrated into Africa from a homeland in Southwest Asia sometime during prehistory. Y-chromosome haplogroups associated with this hypothetical "Back to Africa" migration include J, R1b, and T.
 

---

Posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate (Member # 20039) on :
 
Here's a basic (low resolution) Y-DNA phylogenetic tree:



It's always good too keep that in mind when discussing haplogroups. At higher resolution you could see for example the F haplogroup further splitting into I, J, R, K haplogroups etc. Same for A, B and E haplogroups.
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:
Can you post info on hg F geographies and ethnies in Africa.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:
[QB] What???

Cruciani refutes E back migration he doesn't refute that some uphold E back migration.

Cruciani listed a few proponents of E back migration in an old report.
A Back Migration from Asia to Sub-Saharan Africa Is Supported by High-Resolution Analysis of Human Y-Chromosome Haplotypes

There are still proponents of that old opinion.

That's all I'm saying.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:
Just as in Hamiticism
emphasis is placed on North Africa(ns)
as separate and unrelated to the rest of Africa(ns)
also
in the background
macroHg E is proposed as a back migration

---

quote:

---

To fill this gap, we analyzed a sample of
240 unrelated subjects from a northwest Algeria
cosmopolitan population using mtDNA sequences and
Y-chromosome biallelic polymorphisms, focusing on
the fine dissection of haplogroups E and R, which
are the most prevalent in North Africa and Europe
respectively. The Eurasian component in
Algeria reached 80% for mtDNA and 90% for
Y-chromosome. However, within them, the North
African genetic component for mtDNA (U6 and M1;
20%) is significantly smaller than the paternal
(E-M81 and E-V65; 70%).

---

--Bekada et al 2013

These people don't even make it a secret that
they're straight up counting E-M81 and E-M78 as
Eurasian lineages.
 

---

Posted by Son of Ra (Member # 20401) on :
 
@Swenet

Dang...The Eurofcks are not even trying to hide their Eurocentrism anyone, they just don't care anymore. E-M81 Eurasian???? What???? O_0
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-RFDBC3MrhRc/TwSONGTqaEI/AAAAAAAAAKA/tx02k-dvLNs/s1600/E_Snp_Phylogeography.jpg

And also U6 and M1 are no longer Eurasian, but African due to mutation. Their now African clades...


No southwest Asian specific clades for M1 or U6 were discovered. U6 and M1 frequencies in North Africa, the Middle East and Europe do not follow similar patterns, and their sub-clade divisions do not appear to be compatible with their shared history reaching back to the Early Upper Palaeolithic.
http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2148/12/234

I'm not saying U6 and M1 were African, but mutated to African.
 

---

Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
 
Phylogeography of the human mitochondrial L1c haplogroup: Genetic signatures of the prehistory of Central Africa


Chiara Batini et al.


http://biologiaevolutiva.org/dcomas/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Batini2007.pdf
 

---

Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
 
Haplogroup F is the parent haplogroup for all of the Y-DNA haplogroups from G through R. More than 90% of the world's human population descends from this group. Because these haplogroups are found almost entirely outside of sub-Saharan Africa, it is presumed that either the population migrating out of Africa was Haplogroup F or Haplogroup F appeared soon after the emigration from Africa, about sixty to eightly thousand years ago. Some argue the emigration was as late as 45,000 years ago.


Today, Haplogroup F is uncommon compared to its "offspring." It is not well studied as most of the attention has been paid to their descendant haplogroups.

Haplogroup F is most frequent on the Indian subcontinent and is rare in Europe, so rare that a Y-DNA Haplogroup F Project has only just been formed (as of November, 2007). Your project admin recommends this individual join this project, in addition to Danish Demes.


http://danishdemes.org/YDNA-results-HgF.html


In human genetics, Haplogroup F* (M89) is a Y-chromosome haplogroup (Note: due to technical restrictions, the title of this page does not contain an "*").

This haplogroup first appeared in Africa some 45,000 years before present. It is believed to represent the "second-wave" of expansion out of Africa.

Haplogroup F* is an ancestral haplogroup to Y-chromosome haplogroups G (M201), H (M52), I (M170), J (12f2.1), and K (M9) along with its descendant haplogroups (L, M, N, O, P, Q, and R).

--University of Bridgeport
 

---

Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
 
Haplogroup M

Possible place of origin
South Asia or North Africa


Haplogroup M1
Much of discussion concerning the origins of haplogroup M has been related to its subclade haplogroup M1, which is the only variant of macrohaplogroup M found in Africa.


Much of discussion concerning the origins of haplogroup M has been related to its subclade haplogroup M1, which is the only variant of macrohaplogroup M found in Africa. Two possibilities were being considered as potential explanations for the presence of M1 in Africa:


# M was present in the ancient population which later gave rise to both M1 in Africa, and M more generally found in Eurasia.

# The presence of M1 in Africa is the result of a back-migration from Asia which occurred sometime after the Out of Africa migration.


Asian origin theory
According to this theory, anatomically modern humans carrying ancestral haplogroup L3 lineages were involved in the Out of Africa migration from East Africa into Asia. Somewhere in Asia, the ancestral L3 lineages gave rise to haplogroups M and N. The ancestral L3 lineages were then lost by genetic drift as they are infrequent outside Africa. The hypothesis of Asia as the place of origin of macrohaplogroup M is supported by the following:


# The highest frequencies worldwide of macrohaplogroup M are observed in Asia, specifically in India, Bangladesh, and Japan, where frequencies range from 60%-80%. The total frequency of M subclades is even higher in some populations of Siberia or the Americas, but these small populations tend to exhibit strong genetic drift effects, and often their geographical neighbors exhibit very different frequencies.


# With the exception of the African specific M1, India has several M lineages that emerged directly from the root of haplogroup M.


# Only two subclades of haplogroup M, M1 and M23, are found in Africa, whereas numerous subclades are found outside Africa (with some discussion possible only about sub-clade M1, concerning which see below).


1. Specifically concerning M1
# Haplogroup M1 has a restricted geographic distribution in Africa, being found mainly in North Africans and East Africa at low or moderate frequencies. If M had originated in Africa around before the Out of Africa migration, it would be expected to have a more widespread distribution

# According to Gonzalez et al. 2007, M1 appears to have expanded relatively recently. In this study M1 had a younger coalescence age than the Asian-exclusive M lineages.

# The geographic distribution of M1 in Africa is predominantly North African/supra-equatorial and is largely confined to Afro-Asiatic speakers,[16] which is inconsistent with the Sub-Saharan distribution of sub-clades of haplogroups L3 and L2 that have similar time depths.


# One of the basal lineages of M1 lineages has been found in Northwest Africa and in the Near East but is abssent in East Africa.

# M1 is not restricted to Africa. It is relatively common in the Mediterranean, peaking in Iberia. M1 also enjoys a well-established presence in the Middle East, from the South of the Arabian Peninsula to Anatolia and from the Levant to Iran. In addition, M1 haplotypes have occasionally been observed in the Caucasus and the Trans Caucasus, and without any accompanying L lineages. M1 has also been detected in Central Asia, seemingly reaching as far as Tibet.

# The fact that the M1 sub-clade of macrohaplogroup M has a coalescence age which overlaps with that of haplogroup U6 (a Eurasian haplogroup whose presence in Africa is due to a back-migration from West Asia) and the distribution of U6 in Africa is also restricted to the same North African and Horn African populations as M1 supports the scenario that M1 and U6 were part of the same population expansion from Asia to Africa.

# The timing of the proposed migration of M1 and U6-carrying peoples from West Asia to Africa (between 40,000 to 45,000 ybp) is also supported by the fact that it coincides with changes in climatic conditions that reduced the desert areas of North Africa, thereby rendering the region more accessible to entry from the Levant. This climatic change also temporally overlaps with the peopling of Europe by populations bearing haplogroup U5, the European sister clade of haplogroup U6.
 

---

Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
 
Haplogroup M


African origin hypothesis
According to this theory, haplogroups M and N arose from L3 in an East African population that had been isolated from other African populations. Members of this population were involved in the out Africa migration and only carried M and N lineages. With the possible exception of haplogroup M1, all other M and N clades in Africa were lost by genetic drift.


The African origin of Haplogroup M is supported by the following arguments and evidence.

# L3, the parent clade of haplogroup M, is found throughout Africa, but is rare outside Africa. According to Toomas Kivisild (2003), "the lack of L3 lineages other than M and N in India and among non-African mitochondria in general suggests that the earliest migration(s) of modern humans already carried these two mtDNA ancestors, via a departure route over the Horn of Africa."


# Ancestral L3 lineages that gave rise to M and N have not been discovered outside Africa.

# Specifically concerning at least M1:

* Haplogroup M1 is largely restricted to Africa where the highest frequencies of M1 can be found in Northeast Africa, particularly in Ethiopia. M1 is found in Europe and the Near East but at considerably lower frequencies than in Africa.
____________
Dispersal

A number of studies have proposed that the ancestors of modern haplogroup M dispersed from Africa through the southern route across the Horn of Africa along the coastal regions of Asia onwards to New Guinea and Australia. These studies suggested that the migrations of haplogroups M and N occurred separately with haplogroup N heading northwards from East Africa to the Levant. However, the results of numerous recent studies indicate that there was only one migration out of Africa and that haplogroups M and N were part of the same migration. This is based on the analysis of a number of relict populations along the proposed beachcombing route from Africa to Australia, all of which possessed both haplogroups N and M.

A 2008 study by Abu-Amero et al., suggests that the Arabian Peninsula may have been the main route out of Africa. However as the region lacks of autochthonous clades of haplogroups M and N the authors suggest that the area has been a more recent receptor of human migrations than an ancient demographic expansion center along the southern coastal route as proposed under the single migration Out-of-Africa scenario of the African origin hypothesis.
 

---

Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
 
^Sources are welcomed. Otherwise it's seen as plagiarizing.
 

---

Posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate (Member # 20039) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:
[QB] What???

Cruciani refutes E back migration he doesn't refute that some uphold E back migration.

Cruciani listed a few proponents of E back migration in an old report.
A Back Migration from Asia to Sub-Saharan Africa Is Supported by High-Resolution Analysis of Human Y-Chromosome Haplotypes

There are still proponents of that old opinion.

That's all I'm saying.

---

where is the mention of E ?

They are talking a lot about the Fulbe in Cameroon

R1b - M269
R-M173
K-M9


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC447595/

Am J Hum Genet. 2002 May; 70(5): 1197–1214.
Published online 2002 March 21.
PMCID: PMC447595
A Back Migration from Asia to Sub-Saharan Africa Is Supported by High-Resolution Analysis of Human Y-Chromosome Haplotypes

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:
[QB] What???

Cruciani refutes E back migration he doesn't refute that some uphold E back migration.

Cruciani listed a few proponents of E back migration in an old report.
A Back Migration from Asia to Sub-Saharan Africa Is Supported by High-Resolution Analysis of Human Y-Chromosome Haplotypes

There are still proponents of that old opinion.

That's all I'm saying.

---

where is the mention of E ?

They are talking a lot about the Fulbe in Cameroon

R1b - M269
R-M173
K-M9


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC447595/

Am J Hum Genet. 2002 May; 70(5): 1197–1214.
Published online 2002 March 21.
PMCID: PMC447595
A Back Migration from Asia to Sub-Saharan Africa Is Supported by High-Resolution Analysis of Human Y-Chromosome Haplotypes

---

Yes, this Cruciani study is referring to the back migration in Africa of F descendant haplogroup like R1b. Which of course is true. Any F descendent haplogroups in Africa are the product of a back migration. No link with Hamiticism. Obviously this is a good thing, we don't want humans or Africans to be genetically isolated from one another too much. A diversity of DNA is a good thing for the survival of any population.

For egyptologist, there's indeed many people still refuting the black African origin of Ancient Egyptians. That's why we're happy about the study results posted by Beyoku. Study like the one posted by Beyoku when it will be published, the results of Ramses III analysis and future aDNA analysis of Kemites remains, as well as archeological works like the one done near Nabta Playa in the sahara desert will change things slowly but surely. There's no way around it.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Troll Patrol:
^Or it's simply within the lineage within Africa. Which is a more logical proposal. Or are you suggesting they all of a sudden stopped mutating?

If you suggest any other theory. I am waiting for you to explain all the back migrations....for example: how did they all manage to navigate back, and what was the purpose for them to all navigate back?

Where is all of the fossil records to back this up?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Troll Patrol:
^Or it's simply within the lineage within Africa. Which is a more logical proposal. Or are you suggesting they all of a sudden stopped mutating?

If you suggest any other theory. I am waiting for you to explain all the back migrations....for example: how did they all manage to navigate back, and what was the purpose for them to all navigate back?

Where is all of the fossil records to back this up?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Son of Ra:

[QUOTE]
OK A-M13 L3f
Ok A-M13 L0a1
OK B-M150 L3d
OK E-M2 L3e5
OK E-M2 L2a1
OK E-M123 L5a1
OK E-M35 R0a
OK E-M41 L2a1
OK E-M41 L1b1a
OK E-M75 M1
OK E-M78 L4b
OK J-M267 L3i
OK R-M173 L2
OK T-M184 L0a


MK A-M13 L3x
MK E-M75 L2a1
MK E-M78 L3e5
MK E-M78 M1a
MK E-M96 L4a
MK E-V6 L3
MK B-M112 L0b

---

"back migration" doesn't mean R1b started in Cameroon and then later came back to Cameroon.

It means in a more general sense that all people come from Africa and the ones who had been living Out of Africa (Near East/Mesopotamia) came back into Africa and went to Cameroon for the first time - this before dynastic Egypt and that's how the R1b got there, prior to historical periods
 

---

Posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate (Member # 20039) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Troll Patrol:
^Or it's simply within the lineage within Africa. Which is a more logical proposal. Or are you suggesting they all of a sudden stopped mutating?

If you suggest any other theory. I am waiting for you to explain all the back migrations....for example: how did they all manage to navigate back, and what was the purpose for them to all navigate back?

Where is all of the fossil records to back this up?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Son of Ra:

[QUOTE]
OK A-M13 L3f
Ok A-M13 L0a1
OK B-M150 L3d
OK E-M2 L3e5
OK E-M2 L2a1
OK E-M123 L5a1
OK E-M35 R0a
OK E-M41 L2a1
OK E-M41 L1b1a
OK E-M75 M1
OK E-M78 L4b
OK J-M267 L3i
OK R-M173 L2
OK T-M184 L0a


MK A-M13 L3x
MK E-M75 L2a1
MK E-M78 L3e5
MK E-M78 M1a
MK E-M96 L4a
MK E-V6 L3
MK B-M112 L0b

---

"back migration" doesn't mean R1b started in Cameroon and then later came back to Cameroon.

It means in a more general sense that all people come from Africa and the ones who had been living Out of Africa (Near East/Mesopotamia) came back into Africa and went to Cameroon for the first time - this before dynastic Egypt and that's how the R1b got there, prior to historical periods

---

Of course, that's what 'back migration' means. People who left Africa, then developed new mutation(s) like F (actually called M89), outside Africa (around India it seems in this case), then came back to Africa. Something that took of course many millennium. Nice graph. A picture worth a thousands words I guess.

For example, as you stated above, Cruciani is talking about the back migration of F descendant haplogroups (R, etc) in his study called: A Back Migration from Asia to Sub-Saharan Africa Is Supported by High-Resolution Analysis of Human Y-Chromosome Haplotypes.
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 

 

---

Posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate (Member # 20039) on :
 
^^^I was tempted to post a similar graph too. More like this one (because F is believed to have originated near India as far as I know, not really something that I follow):upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ef/Haplogroup_F_%28Y-DNA%29.PNG

Now lets get back to the fun and relevant part of this thread:


Old Kingdom (2686-2181 BCE):

ySNP, mtDna

A-M13, L3f
A-M13, L0a1
B-M150, L3d
E-M2, L3e5
E-M2, L2a1
E-M123, L5a1
E-M35, R0a
E-M41, L2a1
E-M41, L1b1a
E-M75, M1
E-M78, L4b
J-M267,L3i
R-M173, L2
T-M184, L0a

Middle Kingdom (2055-1650 BCE):

ySNP, mtDna

A-M13, L3x
E-M75, L2a1
E-M78, L3e5
E-M78, M1a
E-M96, L4a
E-V6, L3
B-M112, L0b

Black Africans interested in African history rejoice. Part of our heritage is being restored!!! Yippi!!!
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Son of Ra:

[QUOTE]
OK A-M13 L3f
Ok A-M13 L0a1
OK B-M150 L3d
OK E-M2 L3e5
OK E-M2 L2a1
OK E-M123 L5a1
OK E-M35 R0a
OK E-M41 L2a1
OK E-M41 L1b1a
OK E-M75 M1
OK E-M78 L4b
OK J-M267 L3i
OK R-M173 L2
OK T-M184 L0a


MK A-M13 L3x
MK E-M75 L2a1
MK E-M78 L3e5
MK E-M78 M1a
MK E-M96 L4a
MK E-V6 L3
MK B-M112 L0b

---

For example, as you stated above, Cruciani is talking about the back migration of F descendant haplogroups (R, etc) in his study called: A Back Migration from Asia to Sub-Saharan Africa Is Supported by High-Resolution Analysis of Human Y-Chromosome Haplotypes. [/QB]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:
yes but notice several posts back in a separte paper also by Cruciani he discuses E3b (M35)

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:
yes but notice several posts back in a separte paper also by Cruciani he discuses E3b (M35)

---

Ok, and what does he say about E3b that are relevant to this thread? I don't see by looking at your post what Tukuler would find interesting in that study. All the contrary, it says: Recently, it has been proposed that E3b originated in sub-Saharan Africa and expanded into the Near East and northern Africa at the end of the Pleistocene [Underhill et al. 2001] Which is of course true.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Troll Patrol:
^Or it's simply within the lineage within Africa. Which is a more logical proposal. Or are you suggesting they all of a sudden stopped mutating?

If you suggest any other theory. I am waiting for you to explain all the back migrations....for example: how did they all manage to navigate back, and what was the purpose for them to all navigate back?

Where is all of the fossil records to back this up?

---

Are you questioning me? I'm not sure I understand your question. If F haplogroups originate in lets say around India. That is at one time one individual was the first one to have the F mutation and that male was living in India. Then this individual had (eventually, after a few generations) many male descendants who somehow spread their F mutation (by having male child of course) across the world. As far as in Africa (Cameroon). Eventually developing new F descendant mutation along the way (like R, J, etc). That is the way between lets say India and Cameroon. Obviously maybe the first R-V88 descendant to step a foot beyond the Sahara desert, for example, was already 90% African in every sense of the word as stated a few post above (the one with the picture of an African child). We don't know the full genome.

**If*** you accept that the F haplogroup originate outside Africa, then any F descendant haplogroup is the product of a back migration. There's no way around it. I don't even need to explain why, how, for what reason, etc. It's basic logic.

The only thing you could say is that: no, the F haplogroup, the first male person who had the F mutation, didn't originate outside Africa, but it indeed originated in Africa(maybe in Cameroon or around it or elsewhere in Africa). Of course, its absurd considering the distribution (frequency, diversity) of F haplogroup around the world. No geneticist hold that absurd position.

---

I think my questions are fairly simple.


-How did all of these people with different Hg migrate/ navigate back and why?


-Where are the fossil records of this hypotheses?


-And, what was the cost of one sample early 2000?

x* 608=


What is so hard about not understanding these questions?

Btw, I don't accept what "you consider as a fact".

Simply because I have cited multiple sources stating different. From your claim. I am sure, you've seen them.


Y-DNA haplogroup F is the parent of all Y-DNA haplogroups G through T and contains more than 90% of the world’s population. Haplogroup F was in the original migration out of Africa, or else it was founded soon afterward, because F and its sub-haplogroups are primarily found outside, with very few inside, sub-Saharan Africa. The founder of F could have lived between 60,000 and 80,000 years ago, depending on the time of the out-of-Africa migration.

The major sub-groups of Haplogroup F are Haplogroups G, H, [IJ], and K, which are discussed elsewhere at this site. The minor sub-groups, F*, F1, and F2 have not been well studied, but apparently occur only infrequently and primarily in the Indian subcontinent. F* has been observed in two individuals in Portugal, possibly representing a remnant of 15th and 16th century contact of Portugal with India.

http://www.isogg.org/tree/ISOGG_HapgrpF.html


"I is a branch of haplogroup F* (M89 mutation), which first appeared in Africa some 45,000 years before the present. F* is believed to represent the "second-wave" of expansion out of Africa between 45 and 40 thousand years ago, that went directly to the Middle East"

http://www.familytreedna.com/public/albrosurnameproj/default.aspx?section=news
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 
.


>>why is F being discussed? what's the point?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Son of Ra:

OK A-M13 L3f
Ok A-M13 L0a1
OK B-M150 L3d
OK E-M2 L3e5
OK E-M2 L2a1
OK E-M123 L5a1
OK E-M35 R0a
OK E-M41 L2a1
OK E-M41 L1b1a
OK E-M75 M1
OK E-M78 L4b
OK J-M267 L3i
OK R-M173 L2
OK T-M184 L0a


MK A-M13 L3x
MK E-M75 L2a1
MK E-M78 L3e5
MK E-M78 M1a
MK E-M96 L4a
MK E-V6 L3
MK B-M112 L0b

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:


>>why is F being discussed? what's the point?

---

Let's talk Haplogroup I-M170.


Anyway back to the main topic,i hope more news come out soon.
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
I warned those fools years ago that the DNA on the
ancient Egyptians will come out

---

For some reason, the Euronuts didn't get the memo
that it was an ominous sign (for their case) that
the Egyptian authorities were committed to having
these tests come out a certain way (showing
ancient to modern genetic continuity), while
they, at the same time, were unable to come out
with results supporting their desired outcome.
Not only were they unable to come up with DNA
results that document this, they were chronically
holding back hundreds of successfully sequenced
aDNA results. Hawass and other proponents of the
establishment have had ample opportunity and
incentive to shut those darn Afrocentrists up,
with all the genetic data they've been secretly
holding on to. If I were an Euronut, this
indecisiveness on the part of the Egyptian
authorities would mean something to me.

---

Do you remember when Hawass and the SCA did their first DNA testing on royal mummies back in the late 90s?? They withheld the results and claimed the reason why was that they were afraid the results could be misconstrued that the pharaohs were Jews?!! LOL It makes me seriously question if this 'Jewish' lineage they spoke of wasn't J2 but E1b1b!

quote:

---

Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-:

The Modern Egyptian authorities can only play games for so long. The fact is while they withheld info on the Africaness of Egyptian Genetics, they were getting their asses handed to them on the Anthropology and Archeology side.

The poor Euroclown establishment only has Genetics to base their claims, I mean look at Cachibatches on Historum, he avoids Anthropology and physical remains like the plague and harps on distorted and debunked Genetic studies.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:

Thing is
most of the geneticists reports
support Hamiticism
though they'd never admit it.

---

Precisely what I'm saying. Because the Eurocentrics can no longer use skeletal or even cranial remains to support their claims, they've moved on to genetics which is a relatively recent science and therefore 'ripe for the picking'. Fortunately like skeletal assessment and other sciences before it, the more time passes and the more advances made such as in SNP resolution and refinement especially with the discovery of unknown haplotypes that too will be a lost cause.
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:

If you consider E descendant haplogroups to be African and F descendant to be foreign (Y-DNA). It's always surprising to find foreign DNA in any ancient populations. Like the black African presence is real but at the same time surprising and trivial in the Ancient Greece or Roman civilizations.

It's like the R-V88 found in high concentration in Cameroon or the high level of E haplogroup in the Balkans in Europe. It doesn't prevent those Balkans to look Europeans and those Cameroonian people to look (and 'be' of course) African in the full sense of the word.

In other words, someone can be 99% African and still carry a foreign haplogroup, like a F-descendant haplogroup. Y-DNA and MtDNA haplogroups form only a small part of your whole genome. Only the direct male and female line respectively.

This child for example can be a R-V88 carrier:


It's takes about 5 generations for some foreign Y-DNA to be over 90% localized if the foreign male and his descendents only intermarry with local females (and not within his foreign haplogroup).

For example, a F-descendant haplogroup can marry a local woman

1) F descendant male (R-V88 hg carrier) 100% foreign
2) Children with a local female = 50% foreign for the full genome (since about 50% comes from the local female)
3) their children = 25%
4) their children= 12.50%
5) and their children=6.25%

After 10 generations it must be much below 1% or in fact even much below 0.5%

(it's an approximation because it's not clear which genes will be transmitted from one generation to the next beside for Y-DNA of course which are only carried and transmitted from male to male)

Those children which only have 6.25% of foreign DNA after 5 generations (or less than 0.5% after 10 generations) still carry a F descendant haplogroup like R-V88. So in takes about 5 generations to be 93.75% local (when people only intermarry with locals and not within their haplogroups). In reality, it takes more generations since there's some level of intra-haplogroup interbreeding even if the majority of people around you are locals.

(obviously of those 6.25% DNA only a 0.1% are actually polymorphic in humans, but that's another subject)

If I made an error in my calculation or otherwise please tell me of course.

---

This is assuming that all F-descended lineages are Eurasian in the first place. Recall that F is a cousin of E with E deriving from DE and F deriving from CF and both CF and DE deriving from CT. It's likely F itself originated in Africa as their a significant frequency of underived F* in the Sudan. Also, most genes especially those of the autosomes and genes of the X chromosome in females are recombinant so it depends on what alleles and on what loci on is looking for.
 

---

Posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate (Member # 20039) on :
 
^^^ I guess I can't force people to avoid enunciating fringe theory born on the ES forum. IMO, it does a disservice to African history. For example, there's no need to try to "steal" haplogroups origin from other people. The Beyoku post being a case in point. Ancient Egyptians being mostly African derived haplogroups like A, B and E. Ramses III being E1b1a as well as the DNA Tribes results are other cases in point. Ancient Egyptians were fully black Africans (aka like modern so-called sub-saharan Africans). No need for fringe theory for this.

While everybody can enunciate fringe theory, as I said above, it's anybody's right, I think it does a disservice to African history. It makes the whole black African origin of Ancient Egyptian look extremely fringe when in reality it is (now) completely confirmed by modern genetic analysis of aDNA from Ancient Egyptian remains.

This is one of the most "mainstream" geneticists way to view the haplogroups origin situation:



We don't even need to state fringe theory about haplogroups origin. Ancient Egyptians were mostly from the A, B, E descendant haplogroups which are usually considered African in origin (aka not the product of a back migration from Eurasia).
 

---

Posted by Son of Ra (Member # 20401) on :
 
@Amun-Ra The Ultimate

Good post.
 

---

Posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate (Member # 20039) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Son of Ra:
@Amun-Ra The Ultimate

Good post.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:
.


>>why is F being discussed? what's the point?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Son of Ra:

OK A-M13 L3f
Ok A-M13 L0a1
OK B-M150 L3d
OK E-M2 L3e5
OK E-M2 L2a1
OK E-M123 L5a1
OK E-M35 R0a
OK E-M41 L2a1
OK E-M41 L1b1a
OK E-M75 M1
OK E-M78 L4b
OK J-M267 L3i
OK R-M173 L2
OK T-M184 L0a


MK A-M13 L3x
MK E-M75 L2a1
MK E-M78 L3e5
MK E-M78 M1a
MK E-M96 L4a
MK E-V6 L3
MK B-M112 L0b

---

---

Because F is important in the downstream of the following mutations which took place. In this route it's reasonable that some of the markers have developed indigenously.

That's why.

And the questions addressed are reasonable.

It's funny "so well informed people" always run away from these questions. And the sample set of one person during those days is not what is is today. Things have changed drastically.


http://www.familytreedna.com/PDF/2008-HaploChart_GR_lores.pdf


FIGURE 3 | The phylogenetic tree of binary Y-chromosomal haplogroups.

FROM THE FOLLOWING ARTICLE:

The human Y chromosome: an evolutionary marker comes of age

Mark A. Jobling & Chris Tyler-Smith
Nature Reviews Genetics 4, 598-612 (August 2003)



The phylogeny is based on that of the Y Chromosome Consortium (YCC)3, with minor modifications72, 112, 115, 119. Clades and clade names are coloured to match the pie charts in Fig. 2. The Y clade contains all of the the haplogroups A–R. Paragroups, which are lineages that are not defined by the presence of a derived marker, are indicated by an asterisk (for example, P*). The nomenclature system allows the union of two haplogroups, such as D and E, to be indicated by juxtaposed letters (DE). A designation such as R(xR1a) indicates the partial typing of markers in a haplogroup, in this case describing all chromosomes in clade R except those in R1a. Details of the markers, together with further information about nomenclature rules, can be found at the YCC web site (see online links box). Note that this phylogeny and nomenclature should be regarded as the YCC2003 Tree, and may be used as a reference.
 

---

Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Firewall:

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:


>>why is F being discussed? what's the point?

---

Let's talk Haplogroup I-M170.


Anyway back to the main topic,i hope more news come out soon.

---

We certainly could talk about that one.

If so we need the sum up the alleles. And their functions. That will explain the a few things.
 

---

Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
^^^ I guess I can't force people to avoid enunciating fringe theory born on the ES forum. IMO, it does a disservice to African history. For example, there's no need to try to "steal" haplogroups origin from other people. The Beyoku post being a case in point. Ancient Egyptians being mostly African derived haplogroups like A, B and E. Ramses III being E1b1a as well as the DNA Tribes results are other cases in point. Ancient Egyptians were fully black Africans (aka like modern so-called sub-saharan Africans). No need for fringe theory for this.

While everybody can enunciate fringe theory, as I said above, it's anybody's right, I think it does a disservice to African history. It makes the whole black African origin of Ancient Egyptian look extremely fringe when in reality it is (now) completely confirmed by modern genetic analysis of aDNA from Ancient Egyptian remains.

This is one of the most "mainstream" geneticists way to view the haplogroups origin situation:



We don't even need to state fringe theory about haplogroups origin. Ancient Egyptians were mostly from the A, B, E descendant haplogroups which are usually considered African in origin (aka not the product of a back migration from Eurasia).

---

quote:

---

Haplogroup F was in the original migration out of Africa

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:

If you consider E descendant haplogroups to be African and F descendant to be foreign (Y-DNA). It's always surprising to find foreign DNA in any ancient populations. Like the black African presence is real but at the same time surprising and trivial in the Ancient Greece or Roman civilizations.

It's like the R-V88 found in high concentration in Cameroon or the high level of E haplogroup in the Balkans in Europe. It doesn't prevent those Balkans to look Europeans and those Cameroonian people to look (and 'be' of course) African in the full sense of the word.

In other words, someone can be 99% African and still carry a foreign haplogroup, like a F-descendant haplogroup. Y-DNA and MtDNA haplogroups form only a small part of your whole genome. Only the direct male and female line respectively.

This child for example can be a R-V88 carrier:


It's takes about 5 generations for some foreign Y-DNA to be over 90% localized if the foreign male and his descendents only intermarry with local females (and not within his foreign haplogroup).

For example, a F-descendant haplogroup can marry a local woman

1) F descendant male (R-V88 hg carrier) 100% foreign
2) Children with a local female = 50% foreign for the full genome (since about 50% comes from the local female)
3) their children = 25%
4) their children= 12.50%
5) and their children=6.25%

After 10 generations it must be much below 1% or in fact even much below 0.5%

(it's an approximation because it's not clear which genes will be transmitted from one generation to the next beside for Y-DNA of course which are only carried and transmitted from male to male)

Those children which only have 6.25% of foreign DNA after 5 generations (or less than 0.5% after 10 generations) still carry a F descendant haplogroup like R-V88. So in takes about 5 generations to be 93.75% local (when people only intermarry with locals and not within their haplogroups). In reality, it takes more generations since there's some level of intra-haplogroup interbreeding even if the majority of people around you are locals.

(obviously of those 6.25% DNA only a 0.1% are actually polymorphic in humans, but that's another subject)

If I made an error in my calculation or otherwise please tell me of course.

---

This is assuming that all F-descended lineages are Eurasian in the first place. Recall that F is a cousin of E with E deriving from DE and F deriving from CF and both CF and DE deriving from CT. It's likely F itself originated in Africa as their a significant frequency of underived F* in the Sudan. Also, most genes especially those of the autosomes and genes of the X chromosome in females are recombinant so it depends on what alleles and on what loci on is looking for.

---

Yes, that what I am saying. Has proper research being to such? No it hasn't.


It was once assumed the entire Hg E was borne outside of Africa. "Somewhere in the Middle East". F is complicated and important, because it will remove a lot of the suspicious/ suggestive hypotheses.


And ever since Cruciani started out he fetched on the theory of "back migrations" everything to him is/ was basically due back migrations. Nothing was born from the African continent originally.


Suggested is that after F in Africa they stopped mutating into the following downstream mutations. And continued in "Eurasia". However no explanation is given to such a theory.



--The Lancet, Volume 379, Issue 9819, Pages 915-922
 

---

Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
 
Co-introgression of Y-chromosome haplogroups and the sickle cell gene across Africa's Sahel

Rihab E Bereir et al.




Map of Africa showing the hypothetical movement of Y-chromosome haplogroups across the Sahel. The yellow color of the arrow is for the haplogroups in non-sicklers and the white arrow is for sicklers. The various colors represent approximate estimations of the frequency of the S gene in the continent with red representing the highest frequency followed by the dark and light blue for lower frequencies.


http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/v15/n11/pdf/5201892a.pdf
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 
therefore there is no such thing as a non-African haplogroup

therefore there was never a migration of Paleolithic people from outside of Africa back into Africa

therfore mutations can't occur outside Africa




^^^ seems to be the implication being used


Haplogroup F may have originated in North Africa or the Mid East 45-48kya

But If people are going to talk about hap F -M89 in regard to Africa they should at least site a frequency level in a namable modern African population.

Where are the examples? No examples , no case


Not saying it doesn't exist at all in Africa but it's near non existant in Africa. It's not even listed on the Y DNA chart I posted for Africa.
And its not relevant to the original post on these OK and MK Egyptians, not listed.
 

---

Posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate (Member # 20039) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Troll Patrol:

http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/v15/n11/pdf/5201892a.pdf

---

quote:

---

Our results suggest that the sickle cell gene may have been preferentially introduced through males of migrating west African tribes (Figure 1), particularly Hausa-Fulani, and Bagara in the large migrations that began in the eighteenth century and escalated during the nineteenth and early twentieth century . The estimates of a recent figure of 1–3 generations for the introduction of the gene and associated haplotypes to eastern Sahel, is consistent with demography during the past 100 years and with a hypothesis of a recent origin of malaria as a major human infection

---

quote:

---

The data presented here provide strong evidence that the Hb S gene was generated in Africa by at least three separate mutational events involving three or more different chromosomes [Edit:Senegal, Benin and Bantu I would say]. In addition, the data suggest that the Hb S gene migrated from West Africa to North Africa through the well documented trans-Saharan caravan routes (12). Also, the data are entirely compatible with the Bantu expansion having originated in an area close to the frontier of present day Nigeria and Cameroon. From Evidence for the multicentric origin of the sickle cell hemoglobin gene in Africa

---

Here's a map of sickle cell gene distribution in the world:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Sickle_cell_distribution.jpg

Maybe if you say why you post this, in relation to this thread, instead of just dumping it with no explanations. It would make it more interesting. Just a suggestion. I'm no expert on the sickle cell gene, so I'm curious why you posted this on this thread.
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 


^^^ P25 aka R1b was found in Fulbe as well as U5 on the maternal side
 

---

Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:
therefore there is no such thing as a non-African haplogroup

therefore there was never a migration of Paleolithic people from outside of Africa back into Africa

therfore mutations can't occur outside Africa




^^^ seems to be the implication being used


Haplogroup F may have originated in North Africa or the Mid East 45-48kya

But If people are going to talk about hap F -M89 in regard to Africa they should at least site a frequency level in a namable modern African population.

Where are the examples? No examples , no case


Not saying it doesn't exist at all in Africa but it's near non existant in Africa. It's not even listed on the Y DNA chart I posted for Africa.
And its not relevant to the original post on these OK and MK Egyptians, not listed.

---

quote:

---

The DE haplogroup appeared approximately 50,000 years bp in North East Africa and subsequently split into haplogroup E that spread to Europe and Africa and haplogroup D that rapidly spread along the coastline of India and Asia to North Asia. The IJ haplogroup characterizes part of the second wave of emigration from Africa that occurred via the Middle East 45,000 years bp and defines two branches I and J that emigrated northwards and eastwards into Europe

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:


^^^ P25 aka R1b was found in Fulbe as well as U5 on the maternal side

---

quote:

---

The Sahel that extends from the Atlantic Ocean to the Ethiopian highland is a historical reservoir of Africa’s cultures and grandest populations and a known arena of ancient and recent migrations.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Troll Patrol:

http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/v15/n11/pdf/5201892a.pdf

---

Without explanations this seems like one of the worst thread on this site to post this. This thread is about Ancient DNA of Kemetian mummies and this is about the relatively recent development of sickle cell genes (at least according to this study, the one you posted).

Just consider this quote from the text:

quote:

---

Our results suggest that the sickle cell gene may have been preferentially introduced through males of migrating west African tribes (Figure 1), particularly Hausa-Fulani, and Bagara in the large migrations that began in the eighteenth century and escalated during the nineteenth and early twentieth century . The estimates of a recent figure of 1–3 generations for the introduction of the gene and associated haplotypes to eastern Sahel, is consistent with demography during the past 100 years and with a hypothesis of a recent origin of malaria as a major human infection

---

On another study they say :

quote:

---

The data presented here provide strong evidence that the Hb S gene was generated in Africa by at least three separate mutational events involving three or more different chromosomes [Edit:Senegal, Benin and Bantu I would say]. In addition, the data suggest that the Hb S gene migrated from West Africa to North Africa through the well documented trans-Saharan caravan routes (12). Also, the data are entirely compatible with the Bantu expansion having originated in an area close to the frontier of present day Nigeria and Cameroon. From Evidence for the multicentric origin of the sickle cell hemoglobin gene in Africa

---

Here's a map of sickle cell gene distribution in the world:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Sickle_cell_distribution.jpg

Maybe if you say why you post this, in relation to this thread, instead of just dumping it with no explanations. It would make it more interesting. Just a suggestion. I'm no expert on the sickle cell gene, so I'm curious why you posted this on this thread.

---

quote:

---

Complementary evidence for parallel origins of sickle cell is discernable in ethnicity, some notable examples being the concurrency of gene population spread attributed to expansions of Iron Age Bantu speakers both south and eastwards in Africa emerging from the area of present-day Cameroon, and subsequently across the Atlantic by events associated with the ‘Middle Passage’.

---

quote:

---

King Tutankhamun died from sickle-cell disease, not malaria, say experts. A team from Hamburg's Bernhard Noct Institute for Tropical Medicine (BNI) claim the disease is a far likelier cause of death than the combination of bone disorders and malaria put forward by Egyptian experts earlier this year.


The BNI team argues that theories offered by Egyptian experts, led by antiquities tsar Zahi Hawass, are based on data that can be interpreted otherwise. They say further analysis of the data will confirm or deny their work. Hawass' claim, published in the Journal of the American Medical Association this February, and followed by a swarm of accompanying television shows, claimed King Tut suffered from Kohler's disease, a bone disorder prohibiting blood flow, before succumbing to malaria.


Multiple bone disorders, including one in Tutankhamun's left foot, led to the Kohler's diagnosis, while segments of a malarial parasite were found via DNA testing. Yet the BNI team claims the latter results are incorrect. “Malaria in combination with Köhler's disease causing Tutankhamun's early death seems unlikely to us,” say Prof Christian Meyer and Dr Christian Timmann.


Instead the BNI team feels sickle-cell disease (SCD), a genetic blood disorder, is a more likely reason for the Pharaoh's death aged just 19. The disease occurs in 9 to 22 per cent of people living in the Egyptian oases, and gives a better chance of surviving malaria; the infestation halted by sickled cells.


They say the disease occurs frequently in malarial regions like the River Nile, and that it would account for the bone defects found on his body.


“The genetic predisposition for (SCD) can be found in regions where malaria frequently occurs, including ancient and modern Egypt.” says Meyer. “The disease can only manifest itself when a sickle cell trait is inherited from both parents: it is a so-called 'recessive inheritance'.” A family tree for the Pharaoh suggested by Hawass himself appears to back the BNI team's case.


The relatively old age of Tutankhamun's parents and relatives – up to 50 years – means they could very well have carried sickle-cell traits, and could therefore have been highly resistant to malaria. The high likelihood that King Tut's parents were siblings means he could have inherited the sickle cell trait from both and suffered from SCD.


“Sickle-cell disease is an important differential diagnosis: one that existing DNA material can probably confirm or rule out,” conclude Timmann and Meyer. They suggest that further testing of ancient Egyptian royal mummies should bear their conclusions in mind.


King Tut's young demise has long been a source of speculation. As well as malaria, recent decades have seen scholars argue that he was murdered, and that he died from infection caused by a broken leg.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:
familypedia.wikia.com/

Haplogroup IJ (Y-DNA)

It is notable that no example of a Haplogroup IJ* Y-chromosome has been found among any modern human population; the existence of the Haplogroup IJ node has been inferred from the fact that certain mutations are shared in common among all Y-chromosomes belonging to the descendant haplogroups I and J. The lack of any examples of Haplogroup IJ* belonging to neither Haplogroup I nor Haplogroup J complicates any attempt to deduce the geographical location where Haplogroup IJ first appeared; however, the fact that both Haplogroup I and Haplogroup J are found among modern populations of the Caucasus, Anatolia, and Southwest Asia tends to support the hypothesis that Haplogroup IJ derived from Haplogroup F in the vicinity of West Asia or the Middle East and subsequently spread throughout Western Eurasia.

__________________________________________________

If might infer that Ij is African due to

"The IJ haplogroup characterizes part of the second wave of emigration from Africa that occurred via the Middle East 45,000 years bp and defines two branches I and J that emigrated northwards and eastwards into Europe" -ISOGG

Again the early origin is uncertain
however the lineage that has been found in modern populations is J1 and J2 and these are mutations that are believed to have occured in Arabia and the the frequencies of J in North Africa are dued to the spread of Islam rather than and archaic IJ

You can do the same with any sub clade, follow the parent to OOA and then use this method to determine any haplogroup therefore is African
You might as well say there is no such thing as an Asian or European person

---

quote:

---

The DE haplogroup appeared approximately 50,000 years bp in North East Africa and subsequently split into haplogroup E that spread to Europe and Africa and haplogroup D that rapidly spread along the coastline of India and Asia to North Asia. The IJ haplogroup characterizes part of the second wave of emigration from Africa that occurred via the Middle East 45,000 years bp and defines two branches I and J that emigrated northwards and eastwards into Europe

---

http://www.isogg.org/tree/ISOGG_YDNATreeTrunk.html




--The Lancet, Volume 379, Issue 9819, Pages 915-922
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 
It doesn't matter if IJ is African

the presence of J1 and J2 in North Africa is due to the spread of Islam 7-8th century AD

not IJ tens of thousands of years ago
 

---

Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:
It doesn't matter if IJ is African

the presence of J1 and J2 in North Africa is due to the spread of Islam 7-8th century AD

not IJ tens of thousands of years ago

---

Yes, it does matter. It may have spread in abundance afterwards...as you state. But eventually it follows a logical path within Africa, being distributed. As Djehuti and others mentioned before, including myself.

J1 is not J2 btw. The allele and chromosomes are important, to understand the nuclear clades. When trying to understand aDNA vs TMRCA.


I suggest a parallel divergence of mutations.





So, when are you going to show the distribution of V88 and U5 amongst the Fulbe?
 

---

Posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate (Member # 20039) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Troll Patrol:

This news amuses me when euronuts claim to be the direct descendants of King Tut. Yet, they lack the Sickle-Cell disease.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Troll Patrol:

This news amuses me when euronuts claim to be the direct descendants of King Tut. Yet, they lack the Sickle-Cell disease.

---

Yeah, I saw that news line about the possibility of King Tut having died of Sickle cell. It's the only researcher who have elaborated this theory and frankly it's based on flimsy assumption. Personally, I don't think King Tut died of sickle cell. I wouldn't base any theory on Ancient Egyptian origin on it. Have you seen the map of sickle cell anemia gene distribution? Even your own study negate that possibility (have you read it?). The gene being a relatively recent development. There's more chance of king tut having died of malaria or any other causes of death than this imo.

---

Your personal "opinion". VS.


“The genetic predisposition for (SCD) can be found in regions where malaria frequently occurs, including ancient and modern Egypt.” says Meyer. “The disease can only manifest itself when a sickle cell trait is inherited from both parents: it is a so-called 'recessive inheritance'.” A family tree for the Pharaoh suggested by Hawass himself appears to back the BNI team's case.


The relatively old age of Tutankhamun's parents and relatives – up to 50 years – means they could very well have carried sickle-cell traits, and could therefore have been highly resistant to malaria. The high likelihood that King Tut's parents were siblings means he could have inherited the sickle cell trait from both and suffered from SCD.

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/history/king-tut-died-from-sicklecell-disease-not-malaria-2010531.html


But the German researchers said in a letter published online Wednesday by the Journal of the American Medical Association that closer scrutiny of his foot bones pointed to sickle cell disease, in which red blood cells become dangerously misshaped.

"(The) radiological signs are compatible with osteopathologic lesions seen in sickle cell disease (SCD), a hematological disorder that occurs at gene carrier rates of nine percent to 22 percent in inhabitants of Egyptian oases."

Read more at: http://phys.org/news196516256.html#jCp













 

---

Posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate (Member # 20039) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Troll Patrol:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Troll Patrol:

This news amuses me when euronuts claim to be the direct descendants of King Tut. Yet, they lack the Sickle-Cell disease.

---

Yeah, I saw that news line about the possibility of King Tut having died of Sickle cell. It's the only researcher who have elaborated this theory and frankly it's based on flimsy assumption. Personally, I don't think King Tut died of sickle cell. I wouldn't base any theory on Ancient Egyptian origin on it. Have you seen the map of sickle cell anemia gene distribution? Even your own study negate that possibility (have you read it?). The gene being a relatively recent development. There's more chance of king tut having died of malaria or any other causes of death than this imo.

---

Your personal "opinion". VS.


“The genetic predisposition for (SCD) can be found in regions where malaria frequently occurs, including ancient and modern Egypt.” says Meyer. “The disease can only manifest itself when a sickle cell trait is inherited from both parents: it is a so-called 'recessive inheritance'.” A family tree for the Pharaoh suggested by Hawass himself appears to back the BNI team's case.


The relatively old age of Tutankhamun's parents and relatives – up to 50 years – means they could very well have carried sickle-cell traits, and could therefore have been highly resistant to malaria. The high likelihood that King Tut's parents were siblings means he could have inherited the sickle cell trait from both and suffered from SCD.

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/history/king-tut-died-from-sicklecell-disease-not-malaria-2010531.html


But the German researchers said in a letter published online Wednesday by the Journal of the American Medical Association that closer scrutiny of his foot bones pointed to sickle cell disease, in which red blood cells become dangerously misshaped.

"(The) radiological signs are compatible with osteopathologic lesions seen in sickle cell disease (SCD), a hematological disorder that occurs at gene carrier rates of nine percent to 22 percent in inhabitants of Egyptian oases."

Read more at: http://phys.org/news196516256.html#jCp

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Troll Patrol:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Troll Patrol:

This news amuses me when euronuts claim to be the direct descendants of King Tut. Yet, they lack the Sickle-Cell disease.

---

Yeah, I saw that news line about the possibility of King Tut having died of Sickle cell. It's the only researcher who have elaborated this theory and frankly it's based on flimsy assumption. Personally, I don't think King Tut died of sickle cell. I wouldn't base any theory on Ancient Egyptian origin on it. Have you seen the map of sickle cell anemia gene distribution? Even your own study negate that possibility (have you read it?). The gene being a relatively recent development. There's more chance of king tut having died of malaria or any other causes of death than this imo.

---

Your personal "opinion". VS.


“The genetic predisposition for (SCD) can be found in regions where malaria frequently occurs, including ancient and modern Egypt.” says Meyer. “The disease can only manifest itself when a sickle cell trait is inherited from both parents: it is a so-called 'recessive inheritance'.” A family tree for the Pharaoh suggested by Hawass himself appears to back the BNI team's case.


The relatively old age of Tutankhamun's parents and relatives – up to 50 years – means they could very well have carried sickle-cell traits, and could therefore have been highly resistant to malaria. The high likelihood that King Tut's parents were siblings means he could have inherited the sickle cell trait from both and suffered from SCD.

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/history/king-tut-died-from-sicklecell-disease-not-malaria-2010531.html


But the German researchers said in a letter published online Wednesday by the Journal of the American Medical Association that closer scrutiny of his foot bones pointed to sickle cell disease, in which red blood cells become dangerously misshaped.

"(The) radiological signs are compatible with osteopathologic lesions seen in sickle cell disease (SCD), a hematological disorder that occurs at gene carrier rates of nine percent to 22 percent in inhabitants of Egyptian oases."

Read more at: http://phys.org/news196516256.html#jCp

---

I'll grant you, it's a possibility like any other but I wouldn't base any theory on Ancient Egyptian origin on it. The analysis of aDNA posted by Beyoku, as well as DNA Tribes and Ramses III being E1b1a and future aDNA study are much more solid bases to analyze the Ancient Egyptian origin and ethnicity than assumption based on peripheral evidence. Even the study you posted about sickle cell contradicts you because it shows different geographical (thus ethnic) origin of the sickle cell gene (Benin, Nigeria, Bantu, iirc). It also talk about **recent** development of such traits (something you avoid responding to). So, there's no way to know which "strain" (bad word I know) of sickle cell gene was present in Ancient Egypt, it may also have been an independent one, if there ever was that is, which I don't believe. Even the traits already present in Africa are not from the same origin (they are from 3 different origin Senegal, Benin and Bantu iirc). Can you really base any theory about Ancient Egyptian origin and ethnicity on this? No.

---

quote:

---

Complementary evidence for parallel origins of sickle cell is discernable in ethnicity, some notable examples being the concurrency of gene population spread attributed to expansions of Iron Age Bantu speakers both south and eastwards in Africa emerging from the area of present-day Cameroon, and subsequently across the Atlantic by events associated with the ‘Middle Passage’.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Troll Patrol:
]I don't see how it is contracting?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by beyoku:
What a clusterfuck of wasting time talking about M89. There have been more discussion about all kinds of bullshit vs the actual data that has been posted. Come on ES. We can do better than that.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:
Maybe you meant this other Euronut Cruciani paper ?>

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:

Just as in Hamiticism
emphasis is placed on North Africa(ns)
as separate and unrelated to the rest of Africa(ns)
also
in the background
macroHg E is proposed as a back migration

---

Don't know what the balance is among researchers,
ie, the amount of people who secretly subscribe
to this view and who don't. I would like to say
they are only a small minority, but some details
may point to the opposite. Some researchers are
literally two faced snakes, in that they say one
thing in their papers, but come out saying the
opposite in their private conversations with you.
Charlie Bass already posted his email
correspondences with Kanya Godde, who apparently
thinks, in private, that Nubians are unrelated to
Sub-Saharan Africans and derive from separate
Homo Erectus archaics. When you contrast these
private held views with what she publishes and
whom she quotes in the introduction sections of
her papers, to sum up past research on the matter
(Keita among others), you get a totally different
picture.

I'm also right now talking to someone in private
about an Egyptologist who has written several
books, which seemingly cite data that support
Egypto-Nubian relationships, but in this
Egyptologists' private conversation with the
person I'm talking to, the floodgates of
Eurocentrism open up every time this Egyptologist
writes back. You're right on the money that some
of these people are not who they're
publicly making themselves out to be.

Before I conclude this post, look at this:

quote:

---

To fill this gap, we analyzed a sample of
240 unrelated subjects from a northwest Algeria
cosmopolitan population using mtDNA sequences and
Y-chromosome biallelic polymorphisms, focusing on
the fine dissection of haplogroups E and R, which
are the most prevalent in North Africa and Europe
respectively. The Eurasian component in
Algeria reached 80% for mtDNA and 90% for
Y-chromosome. However, within them, the North
African genetic component for mtDNA (U6 and M1;
20%) is significantly smaller than the paternal
(E-M81 and E-V65; 70%).

---

--Bekada et al 2013

These people don't even make it a secret that
they're straight up counting E-M81 and E-M78 as
Eurasian lineages.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:

look at this:

quote:

---

To fill this gap, we analyzed a sample of
240 unrelated subjects from a northwest Algeria
cosmopolitan population using mtDNA sequences and
Y-chromosome biallelic polymorphisms, focusing on
the fine dissection of haplogroups E and R, which
are the most prevalent in North Africa and Europe
respectively. The Eurasian component in
Algeria reached 80% for mtDNA and 90% for
Y-chromosome. However, within them, the North
African genetic component for mtDNA (U6 and M1;
20%) is significantly smaller than the paternal
(E-M81 and E-V65; 70%).

---

--Bekada et al 2013

These people don't even make it a secret that
they're straight up counting E-M81 and E-M78 as
Eurasian lineages.

---

Yes

the corollary to Hamiticism is Caucasian NE Africa
despite NE Africa is not nor even near the Caucasus

I was exposed to this by what was available in the 70s
particularly YY benJochannan as in the map below



This is what informs academia and remains in the background behind academicians minds

that arrow from the Great Lakes northward to Nile AP NA and Europe
is where
similar arrows in geneticists' reports trace their pedigree

don't like to dwell on this kind of thing
but
from time to time it demands a look see
 

---

Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:

What???

Cruciani refutes E back migration he doesn't refute that some uphold E back migration.

Cruciani listed a few proponents of E back migration in an old report.
A Back Migration from Asia to Sub-Saharan Africa Is Supported by High-Resolution Analysis of Human Y-Chromosome Haplotypes

There are still proponents of that old opinion.

That's all I'm saying.

---

where is the mention of E ?

They are talking a lot about the Fulbe in Cameroon

R1b - M269
R-M173
K-M9


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC447595/

Am J Hum Genet. 2002 May; 70(5): 1197–1214.
Published online 2002 March 21.
PMCID: PMC447595
A Back Migration from Asia to Sub-Saharan Africa Is Supported by High-Resolution Analysis of Human Y-Chromosome Haplotypes

---

Yes, this Cruciani study is referring to the back migration in Africa of F descendant haplogroup like R1b. Which of course is true. Any F descendent haplogroups in Africa are the product of a back migration. No link with Hamiticism. Obviously this is a good thing, we don't want humans or Africans to be genetically isolated from one another too much. A diversity of DNA is a good thing for the survival of any population.

For egyptologist, there's indeed many people still refuting the black African origin of Ancient Egyptians. That's why we're happy about the study results posted by Beyoku. Study like the one posted by Beyoku when it will be published, the results of Ramses III analysis and future aDNA analysis of Kemites remains, as well as archeological works like the one done near Nabta Playa in the sahara desert will change things slowly but surely. There's no way around it.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:

yes but notice several posts back in a separte paper also by Cruciani he discuses E3b (M35)

---

Ok, and what does he say about E3b that are relevant to this thread? I don't see by looking at your post what Tukuler would find interesting in that study. All the contrary, it says: Recently, it has been proposed that E3b originated in sub-Saharan Africa and expanded into the Near East and northern Africa at the end of the Pleistocene [Underhill et al. 2001] Which is of course true.

---

read the whole think at the link if you feel like it. I was assuming it is what Tukuler was talking about. Maybe I didn't excerpt the relevant parts, didn't look at it super closely yet, wait until Tukuler shows up maybe he will have more to say about it

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Son of Ra:
Would it be correct to say Ancient Egypt was like some Pan African African Union civilization? Based of the studies we've seen so far?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Son of Ra:
Would it be correct to say Ancient Egypt was like some Pan African African Union civilization? Based of the studies we've seen so far?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova:
Amun Ra says:
The analysis of aDNA posted by Beyoku, as well as DNA Tribes and Ramses III being E1b1a and future aDNA study are much more solid bases to analyze the Ancient Egyptian origin and ethnicity than assumption based on peripheral evidence.


Patrol and most ES vets do not analyze Ancient Egyptian origin solely
on one line of evidence, nor is DNA the last word in any analysis. DNA
is just another line of evidence that has to be confirmed and balanced
against others. DNA evidence can be manipulated
or distorted just like any other. How often has
sampling been manipulated for example in Nile Valley studies.
As S.O.Y Keita himself recommends on one of the
Cambridge videos- there is a need for multiple lines of data- including:

--Limb proportion
--Cranial
--Dental
--Cultural/historical
--Archaealogical
--DNA


Together or separately they confirm that as one scholar says:

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

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:

quote:

---

Originally posted by beyoku:
What a clusterfuck of wasting time talking about M89. There have been more discussion about all kinds of bullshit vs the actual data that has been posted. Come on ES. We can do better than that.

---

You are right of course. If there's anybody who can steer the discussion in a new direction it's you since you have access to the full study I think.

There's nothing much I can add except to say I'm extremely happy about the results. It seems the Ancient Egyptian were composed of a wide variety of mainly African lineages (A, B and E) who settled along the Nile after the desertification of the Sahara. It seems to go in line with previous aDNA studies about Kemetians, that is the DNA Tribes study and the study about Ramses III being E1b1a. A bold step for black African people to reclaim their historical heritage. After the publishing of the report, I hope for more aDNA studies,also for more archeological studies to be done in Egypt, Africa and the Ancient Sahara regions. I also hope than in the next few years mainstream egyptology will catch up with those genetic results and other discoveries made in the Nabta Playa sites, Mali, Niger, etc.

I can't wait to see the full study!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:
Sickle Cell in Egypt has so far been shown to be exclusively of the Benin variety. No reason to believe this would have been different in ancient times. Indeed, the distribution of the Benin haplotype closely matches the path mtDNA L1b1a8, l2a1k and NRY E-M78 carrying Nile Valley groups would have traversed in the Middle East and Eastern Europe in the Epi-Palaeolithic.

---

quote:

---

Our results suggest that the sickle cell gene may have been preferentially introduced through males of migrating west African tribes (Figure 1), particularly Hausa-Fulani, and Bagara in the large migrations that began in the eighteenth century and escalated during the nineteenth and early twentieth century . The estimates of a recent figure of 1–3 generations for the introduction of the gene and associated haplotypes to eastern Sahel, is consistent with demography during the past 100 years and with a hypothesis of a recent origin of malaria as a major human infection

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova:



Patrol and most ES vets do not analyze Ancient Egyptian origin solely
on one line of evidence, nor is DNA the last word in any analysis. DNA
is just another line of evidence that has to be confirmed and balanced
against others. DNA evidence can be manipulated
or distorted just like any other. How often has
sampling been manipulated for example in Nile Valley studies.
As S.O.Y Keita himself recommends on one of the
Cambridge videos- there is a need for multiple lines of data- including:

--Limb proportion
--Cranial
--Dental
--Cultural/historical
--Archaealogical
--DNA

---

quote:

---

If I go back to the HVR1-only level, then there's a large number of
matches listed, but split quite obviously between Jewish and African
groups -- a number of different specific tribes from Cameroon,
Guinea-Bissau, and Sierra Leone, in particular, are listed. There are
*no* matches listed from Egypt, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Somalia, or Sudan,
which is the area of the world where you'd expect to see an
African/Jewish overlap.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:

While I'm at it
R in Cameroon is not Fulbe but Ouldeme et al ttbomk

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Troll Patrol:

So, when are you going to show the distribution of V88 and U5 amongst the Fulbe?

---

(I don't know why you are asking me about this we already discuessed it in U6 pt2 and Genomic Ancestry threads


The Complex and Diversified Mitochondrial Gene Pool
of Berber Populations

C. Coudray1∗ 2008'


" Eurasian U macrohaplogroup is subdivided into U1 to U9 (with the exception of U6 restricted to North Africa) and K lineages. U has an extremely broad geographical distribution and accounts for about 20% of European mtDNA sequences (Herrnstadt et al. 2002). In this study, it is represented by four haplogroups: U2, U3, U4 and U5. U2 can be found at low frequencies in populations of western Asia and the Caucasus. Here, it was observed only in the Berbers from Bouhria, by two subclades, U2b (1 sequence) and U2e (2 sequences). U3 is observed at 1.1% (U3a) and 1.3% (U3) in samples from Figuig and Siwa, respectively. This haplogroup has a frequency peak in the Near East (Achilli et al. 2007). U4 haplogroup is spread at moderate frequencies all over Europe, western Siberia, and southwestern Asia (Richards et al. 2000). Only one sequence from Bouhria belongs to U4. U5, one of the most ancient subhaplogroup of U, occurs in most cases as occasional haplotypes that are derived from European lineages (Achilli et al. 2005; Richards et al. 2000). In 16.7% of Siwi samples, it appears as U5b, a lineage suggesting back-migration of people from Europe to the South (Torroni et al. 2006). One Berber from Asni also bears this sequence......

genetic ex- changes could have taken place during prehistory, while Eu- ropean populations retreated from ice sheets and expanded from refuge, around 15,000 years ago (as evidenced by the H and U5b mitochondrial lineages). Alternatively, these ex- changes could have occurred during history, with the invasion and the occupation during nearly seven centuries (from the 8th to the 15th century) of the Iberian Peninsula by Almora- vide then Almohade Muslim Berber troops."

_______________________________________

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15791543

Saami and Berbers--an unexpected mitochondrial DNA link.

Am J Hum Genet.

It is striking that the sequence divergence of U5b1b, the subclade encompassing mtDNAs from the Saami, Yakut, Berbers, and Fulbe, was 1.7 ± 0.5 substitutions, thus corresponding to only 8.6 ± 2.4 ky.....

Thus, although these previous studies have highlighted the role of the Franco-Cantabrian refuge area as a major source of the hunter-gatherer populations that gradually repopulated much of central and northern Europe when climatic conditions began to improve ~15 ky ago, the identification of U5b1b now unequivocally links the maternal gene pool of the ancestral Berbers to the same refuge area and indicates that European hunter-gatherers also moved toward the south and, by crossing the Strait of Gibraltar, contributed their U5b1b, H1, H3, and V mtDNAs to modern North Africans.


_________________________________^^^29, Fulbe, Senegal

quote:

---

Originally posted by Troll Patrol:
I read somewhere in a source once, that Vikings took slaves to Northwest Africa as well. Guess who those were? Saami. Yes, Saami.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:
I haven't studied it in-depth either, I'm just
making inferences. I'm well aware that many
researchers think of sickle cell is a relatively
recent disease, but I've seen no molecular
specifics for it. In fact, Sickle Cell consistent
internal lesions keep cropping up in both
dynastic and pre-dynastic mummies. Yes, some
TMRCA estimates have been performed, but the
authors themselves admit that the estimated
haplotypes involve very recent Sahelian
expansions. I'm simply putting the pieces of the
puzzle together.

--West/Central Africa is the region the Benin SC
associated haplotype peaks, and it is also where
L1b and L2a emerged ~30kya and ~50kya,
respectively, in a Pre-Niger Congo context. From
this expansive region both lineages expanded to
North Africa 15-10kya in the form of L1b1a and
L2a1. See Zheng et al 2012

--Both of these lineages (L1b1a and L2a1) have
been found in Neolithic Eurasian aDNA. The former
in Chalcolithic Spain and the latter in Pre
Pottery Neolithic Syria. Both are also found in
dynastic Egyptian aDNA (see the OP).

--Ancient L2a1 survives in some modern Jewish
groups and L1b1a and L2a1 survives in (Eastern)
Europeans and their examples of L2a1 are closer
to West/Central African versions than Ethiopian
versions:

quote:

---

If I go back to the HVR1-only level, then there's a large number of
matches listed, but split quite obviously between Jewish and African
groups -- a number of different specific tribes from Cameroon,
Guinea-Bissau, and Sierra Leone, in particular, are listed. There are
*no* matches listed from Egypt, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Somalia, or Sudan,
which is the area of the world where you'd expect to see an
African/Jewish overlap.

---

link

The oldest Eurasian versions of L1b1a
and L2a1 coalesce to ~10kya, consistent with
Epi-Palaeolithic migration from Egypt, associated
with E-M78.

--Benin sickle cell regions in Africa have high
L1b and L2a and, surprise surprise, Benin sickle
predominates in European nations where 1/3, 2/3
or 3/3 of the aforementioned Epi-Palaeolithic
associated lineages have been found been found.
In all implied regions, namely, West/Central
Africa, the Nile Valley, the Levant, South-
Eastern Europe the predominant SC variant is
always the Benin one.

Coincidence? I think not.

---

quote:

---

We conducted a molecular investigation of
the presence of sicklemia in six predynastic
Egyptian mummies (about 3200 BC) from the
Anthropological and Ethnographic Museum of Turin.
Previous studies of these remains showed the
presence of severe anemia, while histological
preparations of mummified tissues revealed
hemolytic disorders. DNA was extracted from
dental samples with a silica-gel method specific
for ancient DNA. A modification of the polymerase
chain reaction (PCR), called amplification
refractory mutation system (ARMS) was then
applied. ARMS is based on specific priming of the
PCR and it permits diagnosis of single nucleotide
mutations. In this method, amplification can
occur only in the presence of the specific
mutation being studied. The amplified DNA was
analyzed by electrophoresis. In samples of three
individuals, there was a band at the level of
the HbS mutated fragment, indicating that
they were affected by sicklemia. On the basis of
our results, we discuss the possible uses of new
molecular investigation systems in
paleopathological diagnoses of genetic diseases
and viral, bacterial and fungal infections.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by King_Scorpion:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10815786

On the basis of a sample of 117 chromosomes,
we have demonstrated the multicentric origin of
the sickle mutation in Northern Oman. Three major
haplotypes coexist: 52.1% Benin (typical and
atypicals), 26.7% Arab-India, and 21.4% Bantu.
These haplotypes are not autochthonous to Oman
but originated elsewhere and arrived in Oman by
gene flow. The distribution of haplotypes is
in excellent agreement with the historical
record, which establishes clear ancient contacts
between Oman and sub-Sahara west Africa and
explains the presence of the Benin haplotype;
contacts with Iraq, Iran, present-day Pakistan,
and India explain the presence of the Arab-India
haplotype. More recent contacts with East Africa
(Zanzibar/Mombasa) explain the presence of the
Bantu haplotype. The pattern of the Arab-India
haplotype in the populations of the Arabian
peninsula reinforces the hypothesis that this
particular mutation originated in the Harappa
culture or in a nearby population and in addition
reveals that the Sassanian Empire might have been
the vehicle by which this Indo-European sickle
mutation migrated (gene flow) to the present-day
Arabian peninsula, including Oman.[/QB]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:
I haven't studied it in-depth either, I'm just
making inferences. I'm well aware that many
researchers think of sickle cell is a relatively
recent disease, but I've seen no molecular
specifics for it. In fact, Sickle Cell consistent
internal lesions keep cropping up in both
dynastic and pre-dynastic mummies. Yes, some
TMRCA estimates have been performed, but the
authors themselves admit that the estimated
haplotypes involve very recent Sahelian
expansions. I'm simply putting the pieces of the
puzzle together.

--West/Central Africa is the region the Benin SC
associated haplotype peaks, and it is also where
L1b and L2a emerged ~30kya and ~50kya,
respectively, in a Pre-Niger Congo context. From
this expansive region both lineages expanded to
North Africa 15-10kya in the form of L1b1a and
L2a1. See Zheng et al 2012

--Both of these lineages (L1b1a and L2a1) have
been found in Neolithic Eurasian aDNA. The former
in Chalcolithic Spain and the latter in Pre
Pottery Neolithic Syria. Both are also found in
dynastic Egyptian aDNA (see the OP).

--Ancient L2a1 survives in some modern Jewish
groups and L1b1a and L2a1 survives in (Eastern)
Europeans and their examples of L2a1 are closer
to West/Central African versions than Ethiopian
versions:

quote:

---

If I go back to the HVR1-only level, then there's a large number of
matches listed, but split quite obviously between Jewish and African
groups -- a number of different specific tribes from Cameroon,
Guinea-Bissau, and Sierra Leone, in particular, are listed. There are
*no* matches listed from Egypt, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Somalia, or Sudan,
which is the area of the world where you'd expect to see an
African/Jewish overlap.

---

link

The oldest Eurasian versions of L1b1a
and L2a1 coalesce to ~10kya, consistent with
Epi-Palaeolithic migration from Egypt, associated
with E-M78.

--Benin sickle cell regions in Africa have high
L1b and L2a and, surprise surprise, Benin sickle
predominates in European nations where 1/3, 2/3
or 3/3 of the aforementioned Epi-Palaeolithic
associated lineages have been found been found.
In all implied regions, namely, West/Central
Africa, the Nile Valley, the Levant, South-
Eastern Europe the predominant SC variant is
always the Benin one.

Coincidence? I think not.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by xyyman:
That is one of my point. When I said the results look funky. The data is like kumbaya African....

quote:

---

Originally posted by Son of Ra:
Would it be correct to say Ancient Egypt was like some Pan African African Union civilization? Based of the studies we've seen so far?

---

---

Not really though. You may see a lot of different lineages maybe because you are unfamiliar with the lineages. The Eurasian ones aside. Nearly all the lineages in question can be explained by looking at only a few ancestral groups - The ancestors of Proto Afroasitcs from the Horn of Africa, Ancestors of Nilo-Saharans and the affinity with West Africans via the Sahel / Chad Basin.

Most of this modern diversity can be found in Siwa Egyptians.


The only thing the dont have is a3b2 and E2.
 

---

Posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova (Member # 15718) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by xyyman:
Linguistics also. Even geography plays a very important part.

quote:

---

Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova:



Patrol and most ES vets do not analyze Ancient Egyptian origin solely
on one line of evidence, nor is DNA the last word in any analysis. DNA
is just another line of evidence that has to be confirmed and balanced
against others. DNA evidence can be manipulated
or distorted just like any other. How often has
sampling been manipulated for example in Nile Valley studies.
As S.O.Y Keita himself recommends on one of the
Cambridge videos- there is a need for multiple lines of data- including:

--Limb proportion
--Cranial
--Dental
--Cultural/historical
--Archaealogical
--DNA

---

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:
[QB] Again, I may very well be wrong about the overlap
between the Epi-Palaeolithic coalescing
haplogroups and Benin HbS in Eurasia (a much
weaker, but competing case can be made for the
idea that these Benin HbS cases are exclusively
associated with later, more recent mtDNA L type
associated migrations), but one thing I'm not
wrong in is that SC is an ancient condition.
Pred. mummies with SC characteristics in their
bone and skin tissue have already been confirmed
to be HbS positive! The only thing that hasn't
conclusively been proven is whether these ancient
SC cases are of the Benin type, but this is
implied due to the overwhelming, almost exclusive
share of Benin HbS in modern Egypt.

quote:

---

We conducted a molecular investigation of
the presence of sicklemia in six predynastic
Egyptian mummies (about 3200 BC) from the
Anthropological and Ethnographic Museum of Turin.
Previous studies of these remains showed the
presence of severe anemia, while histological
preparations of mummified tissues revealed
hemolytic disorders. DNA was extracted from
dental samples with a silica-gel method specific
for ancient DNA. A modification of the polymerase
chain reaction (PCR), called amplification
refractory mutation system (ARMS) was then
applied. ARMS is based on specific priming of the
PCR and it permits diagnosis of single nucleotide
mutations. In this method, amplification can
occur only in the presence of the specific
mutation being studied. The amplified DNA was
analyzed by electrophoresis. In samples of three
individuals, there was a band at the level of
the HbS mutated fragment, indicating that
they were affected by sicklemia. On the basis of
our results, we discuss the possible uses of new
molecular investigation systems in
paleopathological diagnoses of genetic diseases
and viral, bacterial and fungal infections.

---

--Marin et al 1999

---

quote:

---

Note also:
There is absolutely no reason why Benin HbS
should exceed Bantu HbS in frequency, or indeed,
even be present in noteworthy freqs, if, as you
say, HbS has a recent origin. The Zanj slaves
that were imported to Arabia in Medieval times
would logically be primarily associated with
Bantu HbS, not Benin HbS. How can Benin HbS in
Oman, to the tune of 52%, be explained in the
scenario that it originated only recently?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Son of Ra:
Credit actually goes to beyoku for presenting this to everyone. And also credit to Firewall for actually PMing me this in the first place.

Anyways...This is really interesting and the fight for an African Ancient Egypt is starting to come to a close..

quote:

---

OK A-M13 L3f
Ok A-M13 L0a1
OK B-M150 L3d
OK E-M2 L3e5
OK E-M2 L2a1
OK E-M123 L5a1
OK E-M35 R0a
OK E-M41 L2a1
OK E-M41 L1b1a
OK E-M75 M1
OK E-M78 L4b
OK J-M267 L3i
OK R-M173 L2
OK T-M184 L0a


MK A-M13 L3x
MK E-M75 L2a1
MK E-M78 L3e5
MK E-M78 M1a
MK E-M96 L4a
MK E-V6 L3
MK B-M112 L0b

---

Click on link to see what beyoku states.
http://www.forumbiodiversity.com/showthread.php/43154-Egyptian-Old-Kingdom-and-New-Kingdom-Ancient-DNA-results


He makes some really good points. It appears its not the full study and I think beyoku states he is not able to post the full one for some reason.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:
Anglo Pyramidologist appears on the thread as "Book Gremlin'

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:
Anglo Pyramidologist appears on the thread as "Book Gremlin'

---

I try to post on that site but half of my posts get moderated out. Can you believe it? The contents of my posts are similar to the ones on this thread.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by beyoku:
That site is no worse than the nonsense that goes on here. If you got banned i would guess what they thought was duplicate accounts or something. WHo knows.

I know that it is not wise to just hop on a forum blasting facts without a proper evaluation of what the board already knows. You have to wade in and swim....you just cannot flood the board with comments.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:

^^^ I guess I can't force people to avoid enunciating fringe theory born on the ES forum. IMO, it does a disservice to African history. For example, there's no need to try to "steal" haplogroups origin from other people. The Beyoku post being a case in point. Ancient Egyptians being mostly African derived haplogroups like A, B and E. Ramses III being E1b1a as well as the DNA Tribes results are other cases in point. Ancient Egyptians were fully black Africans (aka like modern so-called sub-saharan Africans). No need for fringe theory for this.

While everybody can enunciate fringe theory, as I said above, it's anybody's right, I think it does a disservice to African history. It makes the whole black African origin of Ancient Egyptian look extremely fringe when in reality it is (now) completely confirmed by modern genetic analysis of aDNA from Ancient Egyptian remains.

This is one of the most "mainstream" geneticists way to view the haplogroups origin situation:



We don't even need to state fringe theory about haplogroups origin. Ancient Egyptians were mostly from the A, B, E descendant haplogroups which are usually considered African in origin (aka not the product of a back migration from Eurasia).

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:

It doesn't matter if IJ is African

the presence of J1 and J2 in North Africa is due to the spread of Islam 7-8th century AD

not IJ tens of thousands of years ago

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:
Anglo Pyramidologist appears on the thread as "Book Gremlin'

---

I try to post on that site but half of my posts get moderated out. Can you believe it? The contents of my posts are similar to the ones on this thread.

---

I'm banned. I had some Egypt and anti-Nazi stuff up and member 'toilet man' snitched on me
Perhaps beyoku has the technique down for avoiding being banned while posting counter-Eurocentric information. Did his alias 'four' get banned? zarahan used to be a member. He pretended to be a white supremacist but then flipped the script (but they got rid of him quick)
The site is owned by white supremacist 'Racial Reality" who has a separate website also. Neverthless it has many posters and there are mant interesting posts on Africa there.
Anglo Pyramidologist had been banned under different names because he was questioning moderator Crimson Guard's white supremacy credentials but now appears as Book Gremlin.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by beyoku:
If you got banned i would guess what they thought was duplicate accounts or something. WHo knows.

I know that it is not wise to just hop on a forum blasting facts without a proper evaluation of what the board already knows. You have to wade in and swim....you just cannot flood the board with comments.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by xyyman:
They probably thought he was making shyte up. ....you know...just a table with no proof. Not saying they are not ostriches....

He probably needs to repeat. ...."pikes and eels"

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:
, he is lying about
the supposed need for autosomal DNA.

---

quote:

---

Specifically, both of these ancient individuals inherited the alleles D21S11=35 and CSFIPO=7, which are found throughout Sub-Saharan Africa but are comparatively rare or absent in other regions of the world . These African related alleles are different from the African related alleles identified for the previously studied Amarna period mummies (D18S51=19 and D21S11=34).11 This provides independent evidence for African autosomal ancestry in two different pharaonic families of New Kingdom Egypt.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by xyyman:
[qb] Beyoku is a respected poster there, while anything is possible it's unlikely he lied to us about that study preview (he's more like an uncle tom kind of poster, no offense).

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by beyoku:

Their entire intent is to obfuscate

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by beyoku:
Tishkoff, Cruciani, Wells, Stringer, Hassan

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by beyoku:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by xyyman:
[qb] Beyoku is a respected poster there, while anything is possible it's unlikely he lied to us about that study preview (he's more like an uncle tom kind of poster, no offense).

---

I have been called many things, Never that.
My posting history on that site....as well as this one almost always revolve around posting Published studies on Africana for the people of African descent on the board. I am interested in what you think is uncle tomish but I will tell you this:

It gets to a point in your research.....and dealing with professionals in the field (your sources)..where you cannot simply say what you want to say any way you want to say it. Some of the things/images that you write/type/post could jeopardize your relationship with your sources therefore stopping the flow of information and correspondence. If one wants to correspond with Tishkoff, Cruciani, Wells, Stringer, Hassan et al you have to work from the assumption that your web identity is under their eye. There is a reason for everything, reasons that may not be clear at first glance. There is also a reason why that info was posted there first and not here.

As for autosomal data. The first time they run some mummies through ADMIXTURE i can already tell you what is going to happen. This is not based on any secret data just a logical conclusion based on whats happening behind the scenes. Their entire intent is to obfuscate, leave people waiting in the wind for data, or show the Material to be some discrete extinct unit.

1 - There will be no supplemental or K break down.
2 - The Egyptian sample will be royal. The will be multiple samples for the reason below.
3 - Of course the samples will form one cluster as they are inbred.

We will then infer some type of relationship based on the minor presence (or lack thereof) of this "Egyptian" cluster in other Aficans/Non Africans.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by beyoku:

I dont have the full study. I dont know when the full study will be published.
It was assumed to be published this year but the work was cut short due to the political situation in the country.

I CAN say they are not Royal.
This could be a snapshot of ONE location or up to 4 locations in the Nile Valley....
at this time I cannot say which. This is all the limited data I have.

---

quote:

---

At this point we don't know if the lineages represent wide spread migration INTO or out of the Nile Valley.
I don't want to jump the gun. I would assume the E1b1a would be OUT OF.
Mainly because the lack of E1a which is a CORE West African Sahelian lineage.
I don't know how a CORE lineage like this, from an area that has great pre-historical clout.....
could be missing in a migration from the West that included E1b1a. The E2a and the E2 which could be E2b is also up for grabs.
These are two very old lineages E2b being widespread. Peaking in Burkina Faso, Cameroon and South Africa.
E2a is on the other hand concentrated around the Great Lakes region.

---

quote:

---

IMO A3b2 is Saharan. And i don't quite know about B2a

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Son of Ra:

Would it be correct to say Ancient Egypt was like some Pan African African Union civilization? Based of the studies we've seen so far?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:
Yes

this is my personal experience
though I won't give implicit examples
because the correspondences were and remain private confidential person-person

PC won't allow 'em to write
what they really think
and privately discuss among each other

let this one example suffice

I asked if a mistake was made placing Nigeria in NA in one report

the response was due to Fulani
I was told
despite language and location of Fulani in WA
linkage disequilibrium and other data (uncited btw)
indicates Fulani are 40-50% NA

no lie

Fulani madness

Like Hassan's Fulani Madness
in using Fulani in E Afr nrY
to say Fulani are separate
different special than "the Negroes"
all the while he and all the others
avoid the halPulaaren homeland
Futa Toro
never using them in any studies
nowhere in print that I can find.

Hamiticism is alive and well
underground
waiting to boldly resurface
by any name
old or new

---

I agree totally. There is no other way to explain the sometimes glaring discrepancies and inconsistencies
in some of these studies on African population genetics.

It's the same game being played on a different ball field. The irony is despite the focus being genetics,
these folks still apparently go by phenotype stereotypes. Note for example they include Chad as 'North Africa' and by implication 'Eurasia' due to
the presence of NRY hg R clade, even though it's frequency there is quite minimal compared to that in Cameroon.
Yet they don't seem keen in including the Benue-Congo (ancestral Bantu) speaking locals as
'North African'. Meanwhile as Zarahan often states Somalia is included as 'North African' despite Somalis having the the highest frequency of E clade.

I've even read reports about Fulani having alleged mitochondrial 'Euraisan' ancestry via hg J. Though this same clade is present among other ethnies that look 'stereotypically' West African. Overall, the Fulani have genetic profiles that are no different from other West Africans who look stereotypically "negroid".

By the way, excellent citation of Yosef Ben-Jochannan. He was a great scholar who like Diop was quick to point out the hypocrisy
and irrationality of the Euronuts. That map and accompanying description looks rather handy.
 

---

Posted by Son of Ra (Member # 20401) on :
 
^^^^I keep hearing that Fulanis are a mix of West Africans and North Africans, while others state mostly West African. Which one is it? I know they're not Eurasian...
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:

I haven't studied it in-depth either, I'm just
making inferences. I'm well aware that many
researchers think of sickle cell is a relatively
recent disease, but I've seen no molecular
specifics for it. In fact, Sickle Cell consistent
internal lesions keep cropping up in both
dynastic and pre-dynastic mummies. Yes, some
TMRCA estimates have been performed, but the
authors themselves admit that the estimated
haplotypes involve very recent Sahelian
expansions. I'm simply putting the pieces of the
puzzle together.

--West/Central Africa is the region the Benin SC
associated haplotype peaks, and it is also where
L1b and L2a emerged ~30kya and ~50kya,
respectively, in a Pre-Niger Congo context. From
this expansive region both lineages expanded to
North Africa 15-10kya in the form of L1b1a and
L2a1. See Zheng et al 2012

--Both of these lineages (L1b1a and L2a1) have
been found in Neolithic Eurasian aDNA. The former
in Chalcolithic Spain and the latter in Pre
Pottery Neolithic Syria. Both are also found in
dynastic Egyptian aDNA (see the OP).

--Ancient L2a1 survives in some modern Jewish
groups and L1b1a and L2a1 survives in (Eastern)
Europeans and their examples of L2a1 are closer
to West/Central African versions than Ethiopian
versions:

If I go back to the HVR1-only level, then there's a large number of
matches listed, but split quite obviously between Jewish and African
groups -- a number of different specific tribes from Cameroon,
Guinea-Bissau, and Sierra Leone, in particular, are listed. There are
*no* matches listed from Egypt, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Somalia, or Sudan,
which is the area of the world where you'd expect to see an
African/Jewish overlap.link

The oldest Eurasian versions of L1b1a
and L2a1 coalesce to ~10kya, consistent with
Epi-Palaeolithic migration from Egypt, associated
with E-M78.

--Benin sickle cell regions in Africa have high
L1b and L2a and, surprise surprise, Benin sickle
predominates in European nations where 1/3, 2/3
or 3/3 of the aforementioned Epi-Palaeolithic
associated lineages have been found been found.
In all implied regions, namely, West/Central
Africa, the Nile Valley, the Levant, South-
Eastern Europe the predominant SC variant is
always the Benin one.

Coincidence? I think not.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Son of Ra:

^^^^ I keep hearing that Fulanis are a mix of West Africans and North Africans, while others state mostly West African. Which one is it? I know they're not Eurasian...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Son of Ra:

^^^^ I keep hearing that Fulanis are a mix of West Africans and North Africans, while others state mostly West African. Which one is it? I know they're not Eurasian...

---

Question: What exactly is the difference between 'North' Africa and 'West' Africa??
That is to say, what constitutes the two regions in the first place??

P.S. there is a lot of genetic overlap between the populations of both regions.

---

People like Henn don't seem to agree to that, by cherry picking certain West African groups that clearly do not cluster with North Africans.
 

---

Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Son of Ra:

^^^^ I keep hearing that Fulanis are a mix of West Africans and North Africans, while others state mostly West African. Which one is it? I know they're not Eurasian...

---

Question: What exactly is the difference between 'North' Africa and 'West' Africa??
That is to say, what constitutes the two regions in the first place??

P.S. there is a lot of genetic overlap between the populations of both regions.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Son of Ra:

^^^^I keep hearing that Fulanis are a mix of West Africans and North Africans, while others state mostly West African. Which one is it? I know they're not Eurasian...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Son of Ra:

People like Henn don't seem to agree to that, by cherry picking certain West African groups that clearly do not cluster with North Africans.

---

Precisely Tukuler's and my point. It is a tactic Eurocentrics play called "stacking the decks",
wherein they pick and choose certain groups to represent Sub-Saharans while
certain groups in North Africa are chosen to represent North Africans.
As I've stated, there is actually a great deal
of overlap between 'Sub-Saharan' West Africa and
Northwest Africa a.k.a. the Maghreb, when overall populations
as a whole are taken into account.

Getting back to the main issue of Egypt, the same applies in regards to the so-called 'difference'
between Northeast Africa i.e. Egypt and Sudan
vs. "Sub-Saharan" East Africa i.e. the Horn and Great Lakes region.
As Zarahan has noted in the Hamitic or Cacazoid zeal of some scholars,
even the Horn is included as 'North Africa' despite
being firmly located south of the Sahara!!
It's the same game of 'stacking the decks'.

The irony is that these DNA findings not only
from the royals published on DNA Tribes, but
even these latest findings shown by Beyoku on commoners
all display characteristics associated with deep
'Sub-Sahara'. The only option the Euronuts have now
is to include the Great Lakes area and the Guinea Forest region as 'North Africa' too! LMAO
 

---

Posted by Son of Ra (Member # 20401) on :
 
@Djehuti

True. The Fulani are a large group consisting of many different tribes. But IMO I think the proto Fulanis originated in the Sahara during the holocene.

And yeah I certainly agree with you man on the Ancient Egypt part. For the Eurocentrics to claim Ancient Egypt or North Africa, they'll have to claim ALL of Africa. That is why Eurocentricsm is falling a part.

They would have to claim all of Africans because PN2 binds all Africans together. You see even though Africa is a big continent like Asia, unlike Asia, Africa had constant gene flow where in Asia, the people were isolated by mountains and different regions and what not. I believe you were the one who said this. For example some Euronuts want to pretend U6 is the origins of all Berbers, when Berbers origins don't even go back that far. Euronuts like to use U6 to try and claim Berbers are Eurasians in origins, yet U6 is no longer Eurasian and U6 clades are not even found outside of Africa.

If we play their little games, they would have to claim some East and West African populations since certain populations in those regions carry U6 too and they are ISOLATED. Thats how their arguments fall flat.

And like you said...Ancient Egypt too. Euronuts now have to claim the Nubians because its now said that the Nubians are the CLOSETS to the Ancient Egyptians.

So now they try to claim the Nubians. But they also claim horners such as Somalis and Ethiopians because both horners and Nubians are related. And horners are of the same Northeast African stock as Nubians, Ancient Egyptians, Beja,etc. But what Euronuts don't know is that they will have to claim to claim AFRICAN AMERICANS!!!! Why??? Because studies have shown Somalis will group FIRST with African Americans than they would Europeans and even Near easterners...Their NEIGHBORS!!! LMAO!!!


^^^Don't you see the epic failness?

They'll have to claim the WHOLE pie.
 

---

Posted by Clyde Winters (Member # 10129) on :
 
The Fulani are not From the Middle East




.
 

---

Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Son of Ra:

PN2 binds all Africans together.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Son of Ra:
[qb] Would it be correct to say Ancient Egypt was like some Pan African African Union civilization? Based of the studies we've seen so far?

---

I don't think Ancient Egypt is a "pan African" civilization the sense that some build it up to
be- as if it was some sort of "central headquarters"
for civilization in Africa. Africa doesn't need any
"central headquarters". The genesis, the source is
on the bio-historical ground level- the Sahara and
other regions. These are "the groundings"...

---

quote:

---

RECAP FROM OLD THREAD


Conservative mainstream Oxford
Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt slams
diffusionism of 'Afrocentrists' - shows
ancient Egypt derived from an African
cultural sub-stratum

[QUOTE:]


Archaeological evidence also strongly supports an African origin. A widespread
northeastern African cultural assemblage,
including distinctive multiple barbed
harpoons and pottery decorated with
dotted wavy line patterns, appears during
the early Neolithic (also known as the
Aqualithic, a reference to the mild
climate of the Sahara at this time).
Saharan and Sudanese rock art from this
time resembles early Egyptian iconography . Strong connections
between Nubian (Sudanese) and
Egyptian material culture continue in
later Neolithic Badarian culture of Upper
Egypt. Similarities include black-topped
wares, vessels with characteristic
ripple-burnished surfaces, a special
tulip-shaped vessel with incised and
white-filled decoration, palettes, and
harpoons...

Other ancient Egyptian practices show
strong similarities to modern African cultures including divine kingship, the
use of headrests, body art, circumcision,
and male coming-of-age rituals, all
suggesting an African substratum or
foundation for Egyptian civilization
(rather than diffusion from sub-Saharan
Africa, as claimed by some Afrocentric
scholars.)"

Source: Donald Redford (2001) The
Oxford encyclopedia of ancient Egypt,
Volume 3. Oxford University Press. p.
28

---

quote:

---

Some have argued that that
African-Americans Should not “interfere”
with Nile Valley history, and have “no
connection” to said history, and
self-styled “concerned” Egyptians, both
bogus and real sometimes put in an
apparent appearance to lecture said
‘African Americans.” or “Black
Americans.” But if the conservative
mainstream reference itself shows that
numerous ancient Egyptian cultural links
and similarities to other parts of “Black
Africa”, including MODERN African
cultures, how come African Americans
are supposed to sit quietly and say
nothing?

“African Americans" are not obsessively
tracing their history back to Egypt as
alleged by assorted blowhards and pundits.
They don't need to any such tracing, nor do
they need "permission" from self-styled
Arab nativists, alleged "Egyptian"
natives/nativists, Egypto-Arabs,
or white people to study
and comment on Egypt.

---

quote:

---

The Sahara was once a lush greenbelt
extending across one-third of Africa,
allowing the easy movement of peoples.
Its climatic cycles - the famous Saharan
"pump" - was to create conditions for the
movement of peoples into the Nile
Valley, the Sahelian zone and elsewhere.
But it remains the foundation.

Informed African-Americans thus do not
conceive of Egypt as being created out of
thin air. Nor do they rely on the truism
that "Egypt is in Africa."
They begin at the Saharan zone, which
provided the main source for the
peopling of the Nile Valley, and laid the
foundation, and was the genesis of the
Nile Valley Civilization, and also was the
genesis of the West African kingdoms adjoining it.
The Sahara is the linking pin- the motor of
Africa's bio-cultural evolution. This is where
"African Americans" start.

---

quote:

---

The eternal Sahara is the key, the starting point,
the genesis, the fundamental force. Egypt
follows AFTER and derives from that broad Saharan
foundation, not before. So do the civilizations of
Western Africa. There is no need to seek
"inspiration" from latecomers like Rameses or Cleopatra.
The "inspiration" springs from the starting point,
the African cultures that gave rise to the Egyptian
dynastic civilization. It is from that genesis, that
launching point, that other developments are appreciated,
in all their cIt ontinuity.

---

quote:

---

[Quote by another conservative
mainstream scholar:]

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

---

quote:

---

The Sahara was also a key player in the
great West African civilizations that were
to arise as well- Mali, Ghana, Timbuktu
etc., ranging from the Saharan trade, to
the transmission of knowledge, to the
transmission of new methods and
technologies.

The Sahara is the great linking pin and
transmission belt culturally. It is also the
great climate and environmental motor
that shaped one-third of Africa. As one
study notes:

From:
Climate-Controlled Holocene
Occupation in the Sahara: Motor of
Africa's Evolution
by Rudolph Kuper and Stefan Kröpelin*

”Radiocarbon data from 150
archaeological excavations in the now
hyper-arid Eastern Sahara of Egypt,
Sudan, Libya, and Chad reveal close
links between climatic variations and
prehistoric occupation during the past
12,000 years. Synoptic multiple-indicator
views for major time slices demonstrate
the transition from initial settlement after
the sudden onset of humid conditions at
8500 B.C.E. to the exodus resulting from
gradual desiccation since 5300 B.C.E.
Southward shifting of the desert margin
helped trigger the emergence of
pharaonic civilization along the Nile,
influenced the spread of pastoralism
throughout the continent, and affects
sub-Saharan Africa to the present
day.”

---

quote:

---

Informed African Americans place Egypt
in its proper context as a tropical
civilization. They don’t begin any
exploration of African civilizations with
Egypt, they start with AFRICA ITSELF,
from which the genesis, the foundational
elements sprung, that provided the
basis or substratum for that civilization.
The Sahara is one such central
foundational element. It is in that broad
Saharan zone for example that the ancients
created theih huge megaliths of stone, and
designed calendars and other astonomical alignments.
It is from that broad zone that the cattle cults of
NE Africa developed- cults that were to figure so
prominently in Egyptian religion. It is from the
African genesis that other concepts such as divine
kingship, and the art iconography of Egypt developed.
It is from the Saharan zone (which extends well into
the Sudan) that patterns of technology in pottery,
toolmaking, mummification, and numerous other influences
emerged that were to distinguish ancient Egypt.
ANy "inspiration" taken by African-American begins
with a foundation based on the ground, in Africa.

---

quote:

---

There are other
“African Americans” who look even
further back than the Saharan mix
mentioned above. They look back to the
dawn of modern humanity, which
emerged from “sub-Saharan” Africa, then
proceeded to Northeast Africa, (also "sub Saharan"
by the way), and from there to the rest of the
globe by various exit routes. Again, the
starting point for any discussion remains AFRICA itself.

---

quote:

---

RECAP FROM OLD THREAD


Conservative mainstream Oxford
Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt slams
diffusionism of 'Afrocentrists' - shows
ancient Egypt derived from an African
cultural sub-stratum

[QUOTE:]


Archaeological evidence also strongly supports an African origin . A widespread
northeastern African cultural assemblage,
including distinctive multiple barbed
harpoons and pottery decorated with
dotted wavy line patterns, appears during
the early Neolithic (also known as the
Aqualithic, a reference to the mild
climate of the Sahara at this time).
Saharan and Sudanese rock art from this
time resembles early Egyptian iconography . Strong connections
between Nubian (Sudanese) and
Egyptian material culture continue in
later Neolithic Badarian culture of Upper
Egypt. Similarities include black-topped
wares, vessels with characteristic
ripple-burnished surfaces, a special
tulip-shaped vessel with incised and
white-filled decoration, palettes, and
harpoons...

Other ancient Egyptian practices show strong similarities to modern African cultures including divine kingship, the use of headrests, body art, circumcision, and male coming-of-age rituals, all suggesting an African substratum or foundation for Egyptian civilization (rather than diffusion from sub-Saharan Africa, as claimed by some Afrocentric scholars.) "

Source: Donald Redford (2001) The
Oxford encyclopedia of ancient Egypt,
Volume 3. Oxford University Press. p.
28

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:
There are many AE mummies in museums all over the
world like Ginger, Janus (link) and the mummies
in Italy sequenced by Marin et al. With these
mummies falling under regional European
jurisdiction, they don't have to put up with the
high maintenance queens in the Egyptian antiquities
establishment. I'm surprised about why none of these
mummies haven't been sequenced yet for the purpose
of ascertaining population affinity, like they
did/attempted with Otzi and Kennewick man.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:

quote:

---

RECAP FROM OLD THREAD


Conservative mainstream Oxford
Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt slams
diffusionism of 'Afrocentrists' - shows
ancient Egypt derived from an African
cultural sub-stratum

[QUOTE:]


Archaeological evidence also strongly supports an African origin . A widespread
northeastern African cultural assemblage,
including distinctive multiple barbed
harpoons and pottery decorated with
dotted wavy line patterns, appears during
the early Neolithic (also known as the
Aqualithic, a reference to the mild
climate of the Sahara at this time).
Saharan and Sudanese rock art from this
time resembles early Egyptian iconography . Strong connections
between Nubian (Sudanese) and
Egyptian material culture continue in
later Neolithic Badarian culture of Upper
Egypt. Similarities include black-topped
wares, vessels with characteristic
ripple-burnished surfaces, a special
tulip-shaped vessel with incised and
white-filled decoration, palettes, and
harpoons...

Other ancient Egyptian practices show strong similarities to modern African cultures including divine kingship, the use of headrests, body art, circumcision, and male coming-of-age rituals, all suggesting an African substratum or foundation for Egyptian civilization (rather than diffusion from sub-Saharan Africa, as claimed by some Afrocentric scholars.) "

Source: Donald Redford (2001) The
Oxford encyclopedia of ancient Egypt,
Volume 3. Oxford University Press. p.
28

---

It probably meant: rather than diffusion "to" sub-Saharan Africa, as claimed by some Afrocentric scholars. Not "from". Clearly that's a typo in the original text considering the rest of the quote.

Some Afrocentrists in the past (like Diop) claimed diffusion *from* Ancient Egypt, labeling almost all modern African to be descendant of Ancient Egyptian people, which is wrong in my opinion as well as what the encyclopedia tries to say. It's the other way around. Most modern Africa people including Ancient Kemetian and Kushite descend from common ancestors in the Sahara. An "African origin", an "African substratum" or an African "foundation" to Ancient Egypt (as well as other modern African people).

Saying an "African substratum or foundation for Egyptian civilization" is like saying diffusion *from* Africa toward Ancient Egypt(as well as other modern African population and civilizations). Obviously other fields such as archeology, linguistic and now genetics also shows the African origin (aka the black African, the so called Sub-Saharan origin) of the Ancient Egyptian civilizations. Ancient Kemetians share common relatively recent A, B and E ancestors with the rest of African people (as well as autosomal DNA STR values). As well as other strong cultural and religious linkage.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Son of Ra:
Credit actually goes to beyoku for presenting this to everyone. And also credit to Firewall for actually PMing me this in the first place.

Anyways...This is really interesting and the fight for an African Ancient Egypt is starting to come to a close..

quote:

---

OK A-M13 L3f
Ok A-M13 L0a1
OK B-M150 L3d
OK E-M2 L3e5
OK E-M2 L2a1
OK E-M123 L5a1
OK E-M35 R0a
OK E-M41 L2a1
OK E-M41 L1b1a
OK E-M75 M1
OK E-M78 L4b
OK J-M267 L3i
OK R-M173 L2
OK T-M184 L0a


MK A-M13 L3x
MK E-M75 L2a1
MK E-M78 L3e5
MK E-M78 M1a
MK E-M96 L4a
MK E-V6 L3
MK B-M112 L0b

---

Click on link to see what beyoku states.
http://www.forumbiodiversity.com/showthread.php/43154-Egyptian-Old-Kingdom-and-New-Kingdom-Ancient-DNA-results


He makes some really good points. It appears its not the full study and I think beyoku states he is not able to post the full one for some reason.

---

• Father: Sethnakhte
• Mother: Queen Tiy-merenese
• Wives: Isis, Titi, and Tiy
• Sons: Ramesses IV, Ramesses V, Amenhirkhopshef, Khaemwaset, Parahiremenef, Sethirhkopshef
• Daughter: Titi
• Son: Ramesses VI out of Isis

quote:

---

"Just think that this race of black men, today our slave and object of our scron is the very race to which we
owe our arts, sciences and even the use of speech."

---

--1787 French philosopher and historian Constantine de Volney
 

---

Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
 
^Ps,


 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Troll Patrol:
"Just think that this race of black men, today our slave and object of our scron is the very race to which we
owe our arts, sciences and even the use of speech."

---

--1787 French philosopher and historian Constantine de Volney [/QUOTE]

^^^^ He is referring to the Copts, who he describes as being of " "the black race"
full context>


It is claimed that the name comes Copts them Coptos City , where they retired , they say , during the persecutions of the Greeks , but I think it more natural and more ancient origin . The Arabic term Qoubti , a Copt , seems an obvious change from the Greek Have goupti -os , an Egyptian , because it should be noted that there was pronounced or the ancient Greeks and the Arabs did , or g before Aug neither the letter p, always replace these letters q and b: Copts are properly the representatives of Egypt [ 52] , and it is a singular fact that this makes sense even more likely . Considering the face of many individuals of this race, I found a particular character set my attention all have a yellowish skin tone and smoky, which is neither Greek nor Arabic all have the face puffy , swollen eye , flat nose , fat lip , in a word , real mulatto figure . I was tempted to attribute it to the climate [53] , when, having been visiting the Sphinx , its appearance gave me the key to the riddle . Seeing this character head negro in all its features , I remembered this remarkable passage of Herodotus , where he says [54] : For me, I believe that the Colchians are a colony of the Egyptians because, like them, have black skin and curly hair , that is to say , that the ancient Egyptians were true negroes of the species of all natural Africa [55] , and therefore their blood explains how ally for several centuries the Romans and Greeks, must have lost the intensity of its first color, however retaining the imprint of its original mold. We can even give this observation a very general scope , and to assume that the face is a kind of own monument in many cases to establish or clarify the testimony of history, the origins of the people. Among us, a period of nine hundred years could not erase the nuance that distinguished the inhabitants of Gaul, of the men of the North, under Charles the Fat , came to occupy the richest of our provinces. Travelers who go by sea from Normandy in Denmark , speak with surprise fraternal resemblance of the inhabitants of these two countries , preserved despite the distance of place and time . The same occurs when we move from Franconia in Burgundy , and if we carefully went through France, England or any other country, we would find traces of emigration written on the face of the inhabitants. Jews do not they are not erasable, wherever they are established ? In states where the nobility of an alien people introduced by conquest, if that nobility has developed indigenous ally , its people have a special imprint. The kalmouque blood still visible in India , and if anyone had studied the various nations of Europe and northern Asia , it may end up analogies that has forgotten.


But returning to Egypt, because it makes the story offers many reflections in philosophy. What about meditation, see the current barbarism and ignorance of the Copts , from the combination of profound genius of the Egyptians and the brilliant mind of the Greeks just think that this race of black men today our slave and the object of our scorn, is the very one to which we owe our arts, our sciences , and even the use of speech ; imagine , finally, that it is among the people who say most friends of liberty and humanity , which is sanctioned slavery as barbaric and set problem if black men have an understanding of the species of white !
Language is another monument whose indications are no less just and less informative . One whose Copts were using heretofore , agrees to find the facts which I have established . On the one hand , the shape of their letters and most of their words show that the Greek nation , living in a thousand years , strongly impressed its mark on Egypt , but on the other hand, alphabet Coptic five letters , and a lot of dictionary words which are like debris and remnants of ancient Egyptian .These words, discussed with criticism, have a significant analogy with the idioms of the adjacent former peoples, such as the Arabs , Ethiopians , Syrians and even residents of the Euphrates , and can be established as a fact that all these languages ​​were only derived from a common fund dialects. For more than three centuries , the Copts fell into disuse , the conquering Arabs, disdaining the language of the conquered peoples , they have imposed their yoke with the obligation to learn their language. This obligation became law when, at the end of the first century of the hedjire the Caliph Ouâled

_________________________________________________

original French


http://www.gutenberg.org/files/38242/38242-h/38242-h.htm


On prétend que le nom de Coptes leur vient de la ville de Coptos, où ils se retirèrent, dit-on, lors des persécutions des Grecs; mais je lui crois une origine plus naturelle et plus ancienne. Le terme arabe Qoubti, un Copte, me semble une altération évidente du grec Ai-goupti-os, un Égyptien; car on doit remarquer que y était prononcé ou chez les anciens Grecs, et que les Arabes n'ayant, ni g devant a o u, ni la lettre p, remplacent toujours ces lettres par q et b: les Coptes sont donc proprement les représentans des Égyptiens[52]; et il est un fait singulier qui rend cette acception encore plus probable. En considérant le visage de beaucoup d'individus de cette race, j'y ai trouvé un caractère particulier qui a fixé mon attention: tous ont un ton de peau jaunâtre et fumeux, qui n'est ni grec ni arabe; tous ont le visage bouffi, l'œil gonflé, le nez écrasé, la lèvre grosse; en un mot, une vraie figure de mulâtre. J'étais tenté de l'attribuer au climat[53], lorsque, ayant été visiter le Sphinx, son aspect me donna le mot de l'énigme. En voyant cette tête caractérisée nègre dans tous ses traits, je me rappelai ce passage remarquable d'Hérodote, où il dit[54]: Pour moi, j'estime que les Colches sont une colonie des Égyptiens, parce que, comme eux, ils ont la peau noire et les cheveux crépus; c'est-à-dire, que les anciens Égyptiens étaient de vrais nègres de l'espèce de tous les naturels d'Afrique[55]; et dès lors on explique comment leur sang, allié depuis plusieurs siècles à celui des Romains et des Grecs, a dû perdre l'intensité de sa première couleur, en conservant cependant l'empreinte de son moule originel. On peut même donner à cette observation une étendue très-générale, et poser en principe que la physionomie est une sorte de monument propre en bien des cas à constater ou éclaircir les témoignages de l'histoire, sur les origines des peuples. Parmi nous, un laps de neuf cents ans n'a pu effacer la nuance qui distinguait les habitans des Gaules, de ces hommes du Nord, qui, sous Charles-le-Gros, vinrent occuper la plus riche de nos provinces. Les voyageurs qui vont par mer de Normandie en Danemarck, parlent avec surprise de la ressemblance fraternelle des habitans de ces deux contrées, conservée malgré la distance des lieux et des temps. La même observation se présente, quand on passe de Franconie en Bourgogne; et si l'on parcourait avec attention la France, l'Angleterre ou toute autre contrée, on y trouverait la trace des émigrations écrite sur la face des habitans. Les Juifs n'en portent-ils pas d'ineffaçables, en quelque lieu qu'ils soient établis? Dans les états où la noblesse représente un peuple étranger introduit par conquête, si cette noblesse ne s'est point alliée aux indigènes, ses individus ont une empreinte particulière. Le sang kalmouque se distingue encore dans l'Inde; et si quelqu'un avait étudié les diverses nations de l'Europe et du nord de l'Asie, il retrouverait peut-être des analogies qu'on a oubliées.

Mais en revenant à l'Égypte, le fait qu'elle rend à l'histoire offre bien des réflexions à la philosophie. Quel sujet de méditation, de voir la barbarie et l'ignorance actuelle des Coptes, issues de l'alliance du génie profond des Égyptiens et de l'esprit brillant des Grecs; de penser que cette race d'hommes noirs, aujourd'hui notre esclave et l'objet de nos mépris, est celle-là même à laquelle nous devons nos arts, nos sciences, et jusqu'à l'usage de la parole; d'imaginer enfin que c'est au milieu des peuples qui se disent les plus amis de la liberté et de l'humanité, que l'on a sanctionné le plus barbare des esclavages, et mis en problème si les hommes noirs ont une intelligence de l'espèce des blancs!
Le langage est un autre monument dont les indications ne sont pas moins justes ni moins instructives. Celui dont usaient ci-devant les Coptes, s'accorde à constater les faits que j'établis. D'un côté, la forme de leurs lettres et la majeure partie de leurs mots démontrent que la nation grecque, dans un séjour de mille ans, a imprimé fortement son empreinte sur l'Égypte[56]; mais d'autre part, l'alphabet copte a cinq lettres, et le dictionnaire beaucoup de mots qui sont comme les débris et les restes de l'ancien égyptien. Ces mots, examinés avec critique, ont une analogie sensible avec les idiomes des anciens peuples adjacents, tels que les Arabes, les Éthiopiens, les Syriens et même les riverains de l'Euphrate; et l'on peut établir comme un fait certain que toutes ces langues ne furent que des dialectes dérivés d'un fonds commun. Depuis plus de trois siècles, celui des Coptes est tombé en désuétude; les Arabes conquérants, en dédaignant l'idiome des peuples vaincus, leur ont imposé avec leur joug, l'obligation d'apprendre leur langue. Cette obligation même devint une loi, lorsque, sur la fin du premier siècle de l'hedjire, le kalife Ouâled
 

---

Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
 
^You must think Copts are white ethnic group of people and always have been?

quote:

---

"The Copt samples displayed a most interesting Y-profile, enough (as much as that of Gaalien in Sudan) to suggest that they actually represent a living record of the peopling of Egypt. The significant frequency of B-M60 in this group might be a relic of a history of colonization of southern Egypt probably by Nilotics in the early state formation, something that conforms both to recorded history and to Egyptian mythology."

---

quote:

---

- But returning to Egypt, because it makes the story offers many reflections in philosophy.

-What about meditation,

-see the current barbarism and ignorance of the Copts,

(Ending of the sentence and beginning of the new sentence of the subordinate clause.)

-from the combination of profound genius of the Egyptians and the brilliant mind of the Greeks just think that this race of black men today our slave and the object of our scorn,

-is the very one to which we owe our arts, our sciences , and even the use of speech; imagine , finally, that it is among the people who say most friends of liberty and humanity,

-which is sanctioned slavery as barbaric and set problem if black men have an understanding of the species of white!

---

It's very important to understand these words.

Now who was considered the slaves by the European during those days, 1787?
 

---

Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
 
It's just "her" usual passive-aggressive trolling.

In Volney's era Copts were thought to be the most
likely "true" descendents of the ancient Egyptians.

I first came across one of Volney's Copt quotes
in J G Jackson.

quote:

---

“And the Genius proceeded to enumerate and point out the objects to me: Those piles of ruins, said he, which you see in that narrow valley watered by the Nile, are the remains of opulent cities, the pride of the ancient kingdom of Ethiopia.* Behold the wrecks of her metropolis, of Thebes with her hundred palaces,** the parent of cities, and monument of the caprice of destiny. There a people, now forgotten, discovered, while others were yet barbarians, the elements of the arts and sciences. A race of men now rejected from society for their sable skin and frizzled hair, founded on the study of the laws of nature, those civil and religious systems which still govern the universe.”

---

quote:

---

"All the Egyptians, have a bloated face, puffed-up eyes, flat nose, thick lips – in a word, the true face of the mulatto. I was tempted to attribute it to the climate, but when I visited the Sphinx, its appearance gave me the key to the riddle. On seeing that head, typically Negro in all its features, I remembered the remarkable passage where Herodotus says:

'As for me, I judge the Colchians to be a colony of the Egyptians because, like them, they are black with woolly hair...'

In other words, the ancient Egyptians were true Negroes of the same type as all native-born Africans. That being so, we can see how their blood, mixed for several centuries with that of the Greeks and Romans, must have lost the intensity of its original color, while retaining nonetheless the imprint of its original mold.
. . . .
What a subject for meditation, just think, that this race of Black men, today our slave and the object of our scorn, is the very race to which we owe our arts, sciences, and even the use of speech! Just imagine, finally, that it is in the midst of people who call themselves the greatest friends of liberty and humanity that one has approved the most barbarous slavery, and questioned whether Black men have the same kind of intelligence as whites!"

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:
It's just "her" usual passive-aggressive trolling.

In Volney's era Copts were thought to be the most
likely "true" descendents of the ancient Egyptians.

I first came across one of Volney's Copt quotes
in either Diop, Jackson, or ben Jochanan

quote:

---

“And the Genius proceeded to enumerate and point out the objects to me: Those piles of ruins, said he, which you see in that narrow valley watered by the Nile, are the remains of opulent cities, the pride of the ancient kingdom of Ethiopia.* Behold the wrecks of her metropolis, of Thebes with her hundred palaces,** the parent of cities, and monument of the caprice of destiny. There a people, now forgotten, discovered, while others were yet barbarians, the elements of the arts and sciences. A race of men now rejected from society for their sable skin and frizzled hair, founded on the study of the laws of nature, those civil and religious systems which still govern the universe.”

---

---

quote:

---

"In Libya, which is mostly desert and oasis, there is a visible Negroid element in the sedentary populations, and at the same is true of the Fellahin of Egypt, whether Copt or Muslim. Osteological studies have shown that the Negroid element was stronger in predynastic times than at present, reflecting an early movement northward along the banks of the Nile, which were then heavily forested."

---

quote:

---

"Just think that this race of black men, today our slave and object of our scron is the very race to which we
owe our arts, sciences and even the use of speech." -1787 French philosopher and historian Constantine de Volney

---

quote:

---

(Copts) "all have a yellowish skin tone and smoky, which is neither Greek nor Arabic all have the face puffy , swollen eye , flat nose , fat lip in a word , real mulatto figure "-Volney

---

^^^ this is from the same section of the other quote.

Tukuler thinks that DNA Tribes shouldn't be taken too seriously from an academic point of view because they are a private for profit company and their reports are not subject to peer review.

Another similar private company, DNA Consultants, mentions Ancient Egyptian DNA and Copts:







One could argue with dumbed down terms like "Egyptian gene"
nevertheless, they are claiming to have found genetic links between Copts, Africans and Ancient Egyptians.
As per DNA Tribes they didn't break down Egypt into a subset that separated Copts.
 

---

Posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate (Member # 20039) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:




One could argue with dumbed down terms like "Egyptian gene"
nevertheless, they are claiming to have found genetic links between Copts, Africans and Ancient Egyptians.
As per DNA Tribes they didn't break down Egypt into a subset that separated Copts.

---

If you read the what is written below the map, it talks about a gene of Sub-Saharan African origin. Have you seen it? So every genetic research thus far about adna of Ancient Egyptians comes down to the same thing. Please tell me what you think about it, the lioness. The closer you are to so called Sub-Saharan Africans, the closer you are to Ancient Egyptians.

So if a particular modern Copt is closer to modern Sub-Saharan Africans, then he will be closer to Ancient Egyptians. If a Russian is closer to Sub-Saharan Africans, then he will be closer to Ancient Egyptians. etc.

DNA Tribes didn't match modern Egypt but sub-Saharan Africans, and it's a more complete study because it study not just one gene but many of them and, as you know, it mostly matches so called Sub-Sahara (sub-coastal) Africans. That is in the Great Lakes, Southern, Western and Sahelian regions (using autosomal STR DNA).

Same thing with the peer-reviewed study (used by DNA tribes btw) which also shows Ramses III and the Unknown man E to be E-M2 (E1b1a).

This thread (the original post with the preview of DNA results) also shows the same thing. So, all research thus far show that the closer you are to "sub-Saharan" Africans, the closer you are to Ancient Egyptians. What do you think the lioness?
 

---

Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
 
^


Once again the delusional lioness has been debunked.

I find it ironic everything of European origin is being defended with tooth and nail by lioness, and everything of African origin is being fought with tooth and nail by this lioness.


Eurocentrism at its best, shining bright. Yet, this lioness is trying to pretend to be a African American woman.
 

---

Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
 
Yes another Lyin'Ass Fuckuption
posting a quote from Volney w/o
being familiar in the least with
Volney's works.

Your short quote from Volney was
fine and certainly could not be
refuted by a lengthier quote from
the same man.

As shown Volney's opinion that the
best modern representatives in Egypt
of "the" ancient Egyptian phenotypes
-- which he explicitly states is just
another indigenous African people --
are the Copts who have a "mulato"
look due to centuries of miscegenation
with north Meds.

Nothing changes Volney's opinion
whether one regards it as right
or wrong. It is what it is, like
it or lump it too too bad.



 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:
[QB] Yes another Lyin'Ass Fuckuption

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:

^^^ I guess I can't force people to avoid enunciating fringe theory born on the ES forum. IMO, it does a disservice to African history. For example, there's no need to try to "steal" haplogroups origin from other people. The Beyoku post being a case in point. Ancient Egyptians being mostly African derived haplogroups like A, B and E. Ramses III being E1b1a as well as the DNA Tribes results are other cases in point. Ancient Egyptians were fully black Africans (aka like modern so-called sub-saharan Africans). No need for fringe theory for this.

While everybody can enunciate fringe theory, as I said above, it's anybody's right, I think it does a disservice to African history. It makes the whole black African origin of Ancient Egyptian look extremely fringe when in reality it is (now) completely confirmed by modern genetic analysis of aDNA from Ancient Egyptian remains.

This is one of the most "mainstream" geneticists way to view the haplogroups origin situation:



We don't even need to state fringe theory about haplogroups origin. Ancient Egyptians were mostly from the A, B, E descendant haplogroups which are usually considered African in origin (aka not the product of a back migration from Eurasia).

---

I don't understand what you mean by "fringe theory". There is nothing "fringe" about speculating whether certain clades truly were of African origin since their postulated 'Near-Eastern' origins are rather close to the African continent and that some early derivatives if not original upstream markers of that clade are found on the African continent as well. This is what I'm getting at! You're right about certain clades may be quintessentially African such but that doesn't mean it is somehow fringe to question the Eurasian identity of some clades. This doesn't mean I don't accept any scenarios of back-migrations as there was nothing to stop Eurasians from migrating back to Africa, however like Keita I tend to be cautious since migrations back-and-forth between Africa and Southwest Asia a.k.a. the 'Near East' seemed to have been continuous.

---

^^Mainstream scientists building models of African
DNA patterns and migration cannot be exactly called fringe.

---------------------------------------------

certain clades may be quintessentially
African such but that doesn't mean it is somehow
fringe to question the Eurasian identity of some
clades.

^^Indeed. And what is deemed "Eurasian" in some quarters
can be heavily a product of selective sampling-
such as sampling the far north of Egypt and using
only those samples as "representative" of the
vast majority of Egypt, excluding the historic
south.

And finally, some claims of "Eurasian" this or
that are exercises in biased labeling. Keita criticizes
that labeling when he notes that ancient groups
moved over a vast area adjacent to Africa, and
moved in an out of Africa- back and forth millennia ago.
He questions how such become conveniently "Eurasian"..
There is still robust debate on the origin of various haplogroups.
need steal anything. The labeling game so often used
is like a black guy crossing over into Mexico
and suddenly becomes "Hispanic", but when he moves
back into Texas, the reverse doesn't happen. He is still "Hispanic"..
Keita's comment below:


 

---

Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
 
Zarahan,



 

---

Posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate (Member # 20039) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova:
^^Mainstream scientists building models of African
DNA patterns and migration cannot be exactly called fringe. [/QB]

---

It's not the mainstream scientists building models of African DNA pattern which are fringe. It's the one of people like Djehuti!! Even mainstream scientists admit, as I mentioned in the other thread, that M1 could be of African origin. It's not the case with other M and N MtDNA. They are very rare in unadmixed African populations. Other populations like Europeans do have a high amount of MtDNA M and N descendants hg as well as Y-DNA F descendants hg. Related to genetic events after the main Out of Africa migration.

The good news is that if the beyoku preview of the aDNA results is true and representative of Ancient Egyptians, then we don't even need to state fringe theory about haplogroups origin and try to steal the hg for all the other populations on earth. Personally, if it wasn't the case, I would just continue to point out the cultural and religious similarity, and possibly direct influence of "SSA" in the case of Kemet, between ancestral "religions"/spirituality on earth like I do now with Ancient Greece, Rome, Shinto, South Korea, China, Aztec, Celtic, Druid, Kemet, Kush and ancient African states of course. All great civilizations which practiced ancestral traditional spiritual knowledge. In such case, I would personally exclude Ancient Egypt from the proper African history and put it in the interesting and essential, international history category. Which would be strange because it would mean DNA Tribes, DNA consultants and the Ramses III study weren't right or representative of the Kemetian population structure. It's not the proper fora for this, but I also love to read about other African civilizations history like the Wagadu state, Great Zimbabwe, Kongo, Yoruba, Bunyuoro Kitara, Timbuktu, Luba, Zulu, etc etc. I make no secret about it, especially civilizations which are not the products of Muslim and European colonisation and influence. Thus authentically African to a high degree (even if there was trading and relations with other nations). Other people have other interests which is ok too. If an African is interested in Scandinavian, Chinese or Ancient Greece history, it's all good of course. Even to see how Africans localized/africanized foreign religions like islam and christianity though syncretism, for example, can be interesting. Those civilizations are indeed very interesting. I personally, love historical movie and TV series (and books) about Ancient Rome and Vikings (other civilizations TV/Movies are more rare). Usually Ancient Greece movies are more about mythical and fantasy history of the gods and deities, than proper history of the Ancient Greece who developed mathematics, democracy, freedom of speech, etc. (probably inspired to some degree by Kemet of course).

What pushed me to joined this forum is after the DNA Tribes results were published. (Even if I read Obenga, Diop, others historians, and web sites before about the "Africanity" of Ancient Egypt). I was still looking for genetic proof which the JAMA and DNA Tribes analysis of the 18th Dynasty royal mummies results provided.

Y-DNA, A, B and E are said to be African even by mainstream geneticists.

MtDNA L, and possibly, M1, are said to be African even by mainstream geneticists.

Which happens to be the same hg that we see in Ancient Egyptians aDNA remains posted by beyoku. While the DNA Tribes, DNA consultants, BMJ Ramses III (and Unknown Man E) aDNA origin already pointed us into that direction. Now it's just about waiting for the preview study to be published. Then, to further our knowledge, as always, waiting for more aDNA study from other remains, in Ancient Egypt, Kush, the Sahara and the rest of Africa. As well as other archeological, linguistic and historical studies of course to learn more about the history of Africa.
 

---

Posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate (Member # 20039) on :
 
the lioness, cat got your tongue or what? Why are you not answering my reply to you? You can say it if you agree.
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
If you read the what is written below the map, it talks about a gene of Sub-Saharan African origin. Have you seen it? So every genetic research thus far about adna of Ancient Egyptians comes down to the same thing. Please tell me what you think about it, the lioness. The closer you are to so called Sub-Saharan Africans, the closer you are to Ancient Egyptians.

So if a particular modern Copt is closer to modern Sub-Saharan Africans, then he will be closer to Ancient Egyptians. If a Russian is closer to Sub-Saharan Africans, then he will be closer to Ancient Egyptians. etc.

DNA Tribes didn't match modern Egypt but sub-Saharan Africans, and it's a more complete study because it study not just one gene but many of them and, as you know, it mostly matches so called Sub-Sahara (sub-coastal) Africans. That is in the Great Lakes, Southern, Western and Sahelian regions (using autosomal STR DNA).

Same thing with the peer-reviewed study (used by DNA tribes btw) which also shows Ramses III and the Unknown man E to be E-M2 (E1b1a).

This thread (the original post with the preview of DNA results) also shows the same thing. So, all research thus far show that the closer you are to "sub-Saharan" Africans, the closer you are to Ancient Egyptians. What do you think the lioness? [/QB]

---

One could say as sson as they said the gene was Sub Sharan African it's a wrap. I don't want to hear about Copts, get that Copt **** out of there.

Yet if you look at the whole picture it's harder to understand.
If this so called "Egyptain gene" is Sub Saharan in origin why would a mulatto population, the Copts have the most of it?

According to what they are saying if the Egyptian gene is Sub Saharan in origin and the Copts have the most of it, it implies they have a particular type of Sub Saharan African gene that is more specific to Egypt than other parts of Africa, so much so that even though they are a mixed population they still have more of this gene than other Africans.

That may not be true, as with DNA Tribes there needs to be peer review and other scientists analyzing the same and new data

There is a new type of DNA testing being developed which is going to be more accurate than how it's done now.

Also in looking at what DNA Tribes says

Match Likelihood Index

Southern African 326.94
African Great Lakes 323.76
Tropical West African 83.74

This doesn't mean that Egypt was derived from these places, it means in those places you are more likely to find the same DNA as the ancient Egyptians. But they didn't mention Copts.

Similarly what zarahan said below doesn't separate Copts from other Egyptians when he makes the remark that Modern Egyptians cluster with Middle Easterners like Arabs.
But the Copts are only 10-20% of modern Egyptians and they predate the Arabs in Egypt by hundreds of years

So we don't know how DNA Tribes analysis would have looked if Copts were separated. I don't know.

Copts ?
Southern African 326.94
African Great Lakes 323.76
Tropical West African 83.74





.
 

---

Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
 
^


Slowminded one. Phenotype and genotype are not always #

quote:

---

The new topology of the tree has important implications concerning the origin of haplogroup E1b1. Secondly, within E1b1b1 (E-M35), two haplogroups (E-V68 and E-V257) show similar phylogenetic and geographic structure, pointing to a genetic bridge between southern European and northern African Y chromosomes. Thirdly, most of the E1b1b1*(E-M35*) paragroup chromosomes are now marked by defining mutations, thus increasing the discriminative power of the haplogroup for use in human evolution and forensics.

Within E-M35, there are striking parallels between two haplogroups, E-V68 and E-V257 [...]

However, the absence of E-V68* and E-V257* in the Middle East (Table S2) makes a maritime spread between northern Africa and southern Europe a more plausible hypothesis.

[...]

Haplogroup E1b1 which is characterized by a high degree of internal diversity is the most represented Y chromosome haplogroup in Africa. Here we report on the characterization of 12 mutations within this haplogroup, eleven of which were discovered in the course of a resequencing and genotyping project performed in our laboratory. There are several changes compared to the most recently published Y chromosome tree [2]. Haplogroup E1b1 now contains two basal branches, E-V38 (E1b1a) and E-M215 (E1b1b), with V38/V100 joining the two previously separated lineages E-M2 (former E1b1a) and E-M329 (former E1b1c). Each of these two lineages has a peculiar geographic distribution. E-M2 is the most common haplogroup in sub-Saharan Africa, with frequency peaks in western (about 80%) and central Africa (about 60%).

---

--Beniamino Trombetta et al.,
A New Topology of the Human Y Chromosome Haplogroup E1b1 (E-P2) Revealed through the Use of Newly Characterized Binary Polymorphisms




















 

---

Posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate (Member # 20039) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
If you read the what is written below the map, it talks about a gene of Sub-Saharan African origin. Have you seen it? So every genetic research thus far about adna of Ancient Egyptians comes down to the same thing. Please tell me what you think about it, the lioness. The closer you are to so called Sub-Saharan Africans, the closer you are to Ancient Egyptians.

So if a particular modern Copt is closer to modern Sub-Saharan Africans, then he will be closer to Ancient Egyptians. If a Russian is closer to Sub-Saharan Africans, then he will be closer to Ancient Egyptians. etc.

DNA Tribes didn't match modern Egypt but sub-Saharan Africans, and it's a more complete study because it study not just one gene but many of them and, as you know, it mostly matches so called Sub-Sahara (sub-coastal) Africans. That is in the Great Lakes, Southern, Western and Sahelian regions (using autosomal STR DNA).

Same thing with the peer-reviewed study (used by DNA tribes btw) which also shows Ramses III and the Unknown man E to be E-M2 (E1b1a).

This thread (the original post with the preview of DNA results) also shows the same thing. So, all research thus far show that the closer you are to "sub-Saharan" Africans, the closer you are to Ancient Egyptians. What do you think the lioness?

---

One could say as sson as they said the gene was Sub Sharan African it's a wrap. I don't want to hear about Copts, get that Copt **** out of there.

Yet if you look at the whole picture it's harder to understand.
If this so called "Egyptain gene" is Sub Saharan in origin why would a mulatto population, the Copts have the most of it?

According to what they are saying if the Egyptian gene is Sub Saharan in origin and the Copts have the most of it, it implies they have a particular type of Sub Saharan African gene that is more specific to Egypt than other parts of Africa, so much so that even though they are a mixed population they still have more of this gene than other Africans.

That may not be true, as with DNA Tribes there needs to be peer review and other scientists analyzing the same and new data

There is a new type of DNA testing being developed which is going to be more accurate than how it's done now.

Also in looking at what DNA Tribes says

Match Likelihood Index

Southern African 326.94
African Great Lakes 323.76
Tropical West African 83.74

This doesn't mean that Egypt was derived from these places, it means in those places you are more likely to find the same DNA as the ancient Egyptians. But they didn't mention Copts.

Similarly what zarahan said below doesn't separate Copts from other Egyptians when he makes the remark that Modern Egyptians cluster with Middle Easterners like Arabs.
But the Copts are only 10-20% of modern Egyptians and they predate the Arabs in Egypt by hundreds of years

So we don't know how DNA Tribes analysis would have looked if Copts were separated. I don't know.

Copts ?
Southern African 326.94
African Great Lakes 323.76
Tropical West African 83.74





. [/QB]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:

I kind of agree with you. It is just that modern Copts are probably from different origin. From example, many modern Copts in Sudan got y-DNA hg J which didn't originate in "sub-sahara" Africa like the "egyptian gene" according to DNA consultants (and other research of course). So the question for any modern people, in Egypt or around it, is how much do the modern population is representative of the past population. How much sub-saharan genes do they have. Since I don't know about the genetic structure of modern Copt, I can't speculate.

But what I know, and what you must agree with me, is that for any Copt, if one is closer to modern sub-saharan Africans then he will be closer to Ancient Egyptians. That's what the genetic studies show. Even your own post. If a Copt got admixed and got a lot of foreign genes like J, K, mtdna H, U, V, he's probably not very close genetically with Ancient Egyptians. Said in other words, if the modern Copt are the closest to "sub-Saharan" African people more than any population on earth, then it's all good. It's just basic logic using the data we have at the moment.

I will repeat it again, in another way, for example, if DNA tribes decide to use copt as a distinct population (we don't know, they may already did) and if the Copt have the highest MLI for example, then those specific copt need to be the closest to sub-Saharan Africans, because DNA Tribes already excluded modern Egyptians, North Africans, Europeans, Asians, etc from being the closest to Ancient Egyptians aDNA . So those Copts would need to be the closest to Sub-Saharan Africans more than any other population on earth (already in the DNA tribes database).

It's true for the Copts, but it's true for any population already in the DNA tribes database. Those modern Copts, you wish are close to aDNA from Ancient Egyptians, CANT be closer to any population already in the DNA Tribes database other than Sub-Saharan African.

Same thing with the Beyoku results, they MUST, if you believe the preview study to be accurate of course, have mostly African A, B or E y-DNA haplogroups or African L mtDNA haplogroups. If those people have European R, K, N, or whatever non African haplogroups then they don't match most of the Ancient Egyptians aDNA.

Modern sub-Saharan Africans (and possibly modern Copts, we don't know, so can't speculate) and Ancient egyptians mostly share the same hg (or the same autosomal STR) ancestors which are not shared by other population like Europeans, Eurasian, etc, beside through admixture of course.

Notice that according to Beyoku's study preview, both side, male y-DNA and female mtDNA are African. Same for the DNA tribes autosomal STR study (which study both sides since autosomal means non-sexual).

I said it many times on this forum, I don't think modern Africans are the direct descendants of Ancient Egyptians, but I believe both Ancient Egyptians and modern so called Sub-Saharan Africans share the same ancestors. That is the A, B, E and L ancestors. If modern Copts, share those ancestors with modern Africans, then it's all good. So the question is always, how much sub-Saharan genes do they have? Do you agree? [/QB]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
I will say it again, since it was a long post:

Personally, I don't think most modern Africans are the direct descendants of Ancient Egyptians, but I believe both Ancient Egyptians and modern so called Sub-Saharan Africans share the same ancestors. That is the A, B, E and L ancestors. If modern Copts, share those ancestors with modern Africans, then it's all good. So the question is always, how much sub-Saharan genes do they have? Do you agree?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Troll Patrol:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
I will say it again, since it was a long post:

Personally, I don't think most modern Africans are the direct descendants of Ancient Egyptians, but I believe both Ancient Egyptians and modern so called Sub-Saharan Africans share the same ancestors. That is the A, B, E and L ancestors. If modern Copts, share those ancestors with modern Africans, then it's all good. So the question is always, how much sub-Saharan genes do they have? Do you agree?

---

How and what about oral traditions and other remaining fractions amongst modern Africans relating to ancient Egypt?

This is of course beside from what "you believe or personally think". Which isn't based on actual field research, but pure opinion. Hence, believe. And that's in fact the problem with "thinking" what it should be...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:
It's possible that Copt have a type of Sub Saharan DNA that is much lesser in other Africans since they are only partially African yet according to an unconfirmed private DNA testing firm, are closest in DNA to the AEs


wiki:

A study of Copts group in Sudan found relatively high frequencies of Sub-Saharan Haplogroup B (Y-DNA). The Sudanese Copts are converts to Egyptian Christianity and not ethnically related to Egyptian Copts. According to the study, the presence of Sub-Saharan haplogroups may also consistent with the historical record in which southern Egypt was colonized by Nilotic populations during the early state formation.[50]

However, it is not generally accepted that Sudanese Copts are ethnically related to those of Egypt, as conversion of ethnic Nubian kings to Christianity occurred in the 6th century AD. According to tradition, a missionary sent by Byzantine empress Theodora arrived in Nobatia and started preaching the gospel about 540 AD. It is possible that the conversion process began earlier, however, under the aegis of Coptic missionaries from Egypt. The Nubian kings accepted the Monophysite Christianity already practiced in Egypt and acknowledged the spiritual authority of the Egyptian Coptic patriarch of Alexandria over the Nubian church, which in turn adopted the Coptic name for their church

[50]
Hassan, Hisham Y.; Underhill, Peter A.; Cavalli-Sforza, Luca L.; Ibrahim, Muntaser E. (2008).
"Y-Chromosome Variation Among Sudanese:Restricted Gene Flow, Concordance With Language, Geography, and History"

---

quote:

---

Tutankhamun[edit source | editbeta]
Scientists at a Zurich-based DNA genealogy centre, iGENEA, in a in Discovery Channel documentary 2011 claimed that Tutankhamun had Haplogroup R1b1a2, to which more than 50% of European men, but less than 1% of modern-day Egyptians belong to.[16]

---

However, why do not 50% of European man carry the Sickle Cell disease.?


How come?


King Tut died from sickle-cell disease, not malaria


http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/history/king-tut-died-from-sicklecell-disease-not-malaria-2010531.html


No, wiki can't safe you.
 

---

Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Troll Patrol:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
I will say it again, since it was a long post:

Personally, I don't think most modern Africans are the direct descendants of Ancient Egyptians, but I believe both Ancient Egyptians and modern so called Sub-Saharan Africans share the same ancestors. That is the A, B, E and L ancestors. If modern Copts, share those ancestors with modern Africans, then it's all good. So the question is always, how much sub-Saharan genes do they have? Do you agree?

---

How and what about oral traditions and other remaining fractions amongst modern Africans relating to ancient Egypt?

This is of course beside from what "you believe or personally think". Which isn't based on actual field research, but pure opinion. Hence, believe. And that's in fact the problem with "thinking" what it should be...

---

I said believe and personally, because it's technically possible, on the current level of knowledge, that many "sub-Saharan" African people are direct descendants of Ancient Egyptians. Oral tradition about origin is always lets say a bit fluid. Although, since we know from mainstream geneticists and linguists that most DNA and languages originate in the same north-east African direction from sub-Sahara Africa, it provides some credential to such oral tradition (which always point to the same direction either from the north or from the north east, as far as I know). There's a lot of religious, linguistic (like similar words) and cultural aspect (like headrests), among many others, shared between Kemetians and so called sub-Saharan Africans (more like sub coastal Africans). Higher resolution of aDNA can provide some answers, as well as other archeological/linguistic/historic study, but I prefer to work with what we know for sure. Also while most modern African people (DNA and modern languages) originate in Eastern Africa (after the OOA of course), I'm not sure the timing is right for the Ancient Egypt period. Again, those timings are also very fluid since they always rely on a specific "rate of changes", which may not be similar in every situations.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:
It's possible that Copt have a type of Sub Saharan DNA that is much lesser in other Africans since they are only partially African yet according to an unconfirmed private DNA testing firm, are closest in DNA to the AEs

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:
It's possible that Copt have a type of Sub Saharan DNA that is much lesser in other Africans since they are only partially African yet according to an unconfirmed private DNA testing firm, are closest in DNA to the AEs

---

I'll grant you, it's possible. But as Throll Patrol said many modern Copts probably have have a mixture from Levantines and Greeks genes, while Ancient Egyptians have a mixture of Sub-Saharan African genes. Those who are the closest to Sub-Saharan Africans will be the closest to Ancient Egyptians aDNA. Ancient Egyptians aDNA are NOT to closest to modern Egyptians (well most of them), modern North Africans, Europeans or West Asians. They are the closest with Sub-Saharan Africans.

So in baby talk: NOT Europe, NOT Western Asia, NOT the rest of North Africa, YES "sub-Sahara" Africa.

Sub-Saharan Africans are the closer to Ancient Egyptians than all those people. They share the same ancestors.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Troll Patrol:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Troll Patrol:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
I will say it again, since it was a long post:

Personally, I don't think most modern Africans are the direct descendants of Ancient Egyptians, but I believe both Ancient Egyptians and modern so called Sub-Saharan Africans share the same ancestors. That is the A, B, E and L ancestors. If modern Copts, share those ancestors with modern Africans, then it's all good. So the question is always, how much sub-Saharan genes do they have? Do you agree?

---

How and what about oral traditions and other remaining fractions amongst modern Africans relating to ancient Egypt?

This is of course beside from what "you believe or personally think". Which isn't based on actual field research, but pure opinion. Hence, believe. And that's in fact the problem with "thinking" what it should be...

---

I said believe and personally, because it's technically possible, on the current level of knowledge, that many "sub-Saharan" African people are direct descendants of Ancient Egyptians. Oral tradition about origin is always lets say a bit fluid. Although, since we know from mainstream geneticists and linguists that most DNA and languages originate in the same north-east African direction from sub-Sahara Africa, it provides some credential to such oral tradition (which always point to the same direction either from the north or from the north east, as far as I know). There's a lot of religious, linguistic (like similar words) and cultural aspect (like headrests), among many others, shared between Kemetians and so called sub-Saharan Africans (more like sub coastal Africans). Higher resolution of aDNA can provide some answers, as well as other archeological/linguistic/historic study, but I prefer to work with what we know for sure. Also while most modern African people (DNA and modern languages) originate in Eastern Africa (after the OOA of course), I'm not sure the timing is right for the Ancient Egypt period. Again, those timings are also very fluid since they always rely on a specific "rate of changes", which may not be similar in every situations.

---

You base your "conclusions" on assumptions.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Troll Patrol:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:
It's possible that Copt have a type of Sub Saharan DNA that is much lesser in other Africans since they are only partially African yet according to an unconfirmed private DNA testing firm, are closest in DNA to the AEs

---

I'll grant you, it's possible. But as Throll Patrol said many modern Copts probably have have a mixture from Levantines and Greeks genes, while Ancient Egyptians have a mixture of Sub-Saharan African genes. Those who are the closest to Sub-Saharan Africans will be the closest to Ancient Egyptians aDNA. Ancient Egyptians aDNA are NOT to closest to modern Egyptians (well most of them), modern North Africans, Europeans or West Asians. They are the closest with Sub-Saharan Africans.

So in baby talk: NOT Europe, NOT Western Asia, NOT the rest of North Africa, YES "sub-Sahara" Africa.

Sub-Saharan Africans are the closer to Ancient Egyptians than all those people. They share the same ancestors.

---

What I am saying is that Coptic is a religion not an ethnic group, as lioness is trying to claim with that wiki quote.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Troll Patrol:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Troll Patrol:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
I will say it again, since it was a long post:

Personally, I don't think most modern Africans are the direct descendants of Ancient Egyptians, but I believe both Ancient Egyptians and modern so called Sub-Saharan Africans share the same ancestors. That is the A, B, E and L ancestors. If modern Copts, share those ancestors with modern Africans, then it's all good. So the question is always, how much sub-Saharan genes do they have? Do you agree?

---

How and what about oral traditions and other remaining fractions amongst modern Africans relating to ancient Egypt?

This is of course beside from what "you believe or personally think". Which isn't based on actual field research, but pure opinion. Hence, believe. And that's in fact the problem with "thinking" what it should be...

---

I said believe and personally, because it's technically possible, on the current level of knowledge, that many "sub-Saharan" African people are direct descendants of Ancient Egyptians. Oral tradition about origin is always lets say a bit fluid. Although, since we know from mainstream geneticists and linguists that most DNA and languages originate in the same north-east African direction from sub-Sahara Africa, it provides some credential to such oral tradition (which always point to the same direction either from the north or from the north east, as far as I know). There's a lot of religious, linguistic (like similar words) and cultural aspect (like headrests), among many others, shared between Kemetians and so called sub-Saharan Africans (more like sub coastal Africans). Higher resolution of aDNA can provide some answers, as well as other archeological/linguistic/historic study, but I prefer to work with what we know for sure. Also while most modern African people (DNA and modern languages) originate in Eastern Africa (after the OOA of course), I'm not sure the timing is right for the Ancient Egypt period. Again, those timings are also very fluid since they always rely on a specific "rate of changes", which may not be similar in every situations.

---

You base your "conclusions" on assumptions.

---

For you what I replied to you above, sounds like some definitive conclusions? (well, you at least put the word in quotes). Re-read what I said. I gave some arguments like the timings and the need for higher resolution for aDNA. I prefer to work with what we have 100% for sure. One way or the other, it doesn't bother me the least bit.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Troll Patrol:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:
It's possible that Copt have a type of Sub Saharan DNA that is much lesser in other Africans since they are only partially African yet according to an unconfirmed private DNA testing firm, are closest in DNA to the AEs

---

I'll grant you, it's possible. But as Throll Patrol said many modern Copts probably have have a mixture from Levantines and Greeks genes, while Ancient Egyptians have a mixture of Sub-Saharan African genes. Those who are the closest to Sub-Saharan Africans will be the closest to Ancient Egyptians aDNA. Ancient Egyptians aDNA are NOT to closest to modern Egyptians (well most of them), modern North Africans, Europeans or West Asians. They are the closest with Sub-Saharan Africans.

So in baby talk: NOT Europe, NOT Western Asia, NOT the rest of North Africa, YES "sub-Sahara" Africa.

Sub-Saharan Africans are the closer to Ancient Egyptians than all those people. They share the same ancestors.

---

What I am saying is that Coptic is a religion not an ethnic group, as lioness is trying to claim with that wiki quote.

---

Good point.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Troll Patrol:
I did read what you posted, try to understand my approach. It's not an insult rather a suggestion.

It will be so much more beneficial to what you already know.

---

Instead of pompously tell me to do some field research, what don't you just laid out the main aspects that you learned through them in you posts. Your main arguments. It's hard for me to learn or to counter arguments with what you have in your head. I provide some argumentation about the timings (of DNA and linguistic data), and also about the need for higher resolution of aDNA. We are on the same side. I just go with what I got and is available to me 100% for sure. Yes, I'm willing to learn from you, other people or any new studies. For example, I learned recently about the Marin study and the Benin sickle cell gene may be present in Ancient Egypt in Ancient time (I didn't know about the Marin study). Now I include it in my knowledge/discourse. Although, I need access to the Marin study, or a quote from it, to confirm the sickle cell variety found in Ancient Egyptian remains. It's never mentioned and Swenet didn't know for sure either. Nobody provides quotes about the variety found as far as I know. Still, it's a very interesting aspect.
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Troll Patrol:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:
It's possible that Copt have a type of Sub Saharan DNA that is much lesser in other Africans since they are only partially African yet according to an unconfirmed private DNA testing firm, are closest in DNA to the AEs

---

I'll grant you, it's possible. But as Throll Patrol said many modern Copts probably have have a mixture from Levantines and Greeks genes, while Ancient Egyptians have a mixture of Sub-Saharan African genes. Those who are the closest to Sub-Saharan Africans will be the closest to Ancient Egyptians aDNA. Ancient Egyptians aDNA are NOT to closest to modern Egyptians (well most of them), modern North Africans, Europeans or West Asians. They are the closest with Sub-Saharan Africans.

So in baby talk: NOT Europe, NOT Western Asia, NOT the rest of North Africa, YES "sub-Sahara" Africa.

Sub-Saharan Africans are the closer to Ancient Egyptians than all those people. They share the same ancestors.

---

What I am saying is that Coptic is a religion not an ethnic group, as lioness is trying to claim with that wiki quote.

---

Good point.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
Those who are the closest to Sub-Saharan Africans will be the closest to Ancient Egyptians aDNA.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Troll Patrol:
I did read what you posted, try to understand my approach. It's not an insult rather a suggestion.

It will be so much more beneficial to what you already know.

---

Instead of pompously tell me to do some field researchs, what don't you just laid out the main aspect that you learned through them in you posts. Your main arguments. It's hard for me learn or to counter arguments with what you have in your head. I provide some argumentation about the timings (of DNA and linguistic data), and also about the need for higher resolution of aDNA. We are on the same side. I just go with what I got and is available to me 100% for sure. Yes, I'm willing to learn from you, other people or any new studies. For example, I learned recently about the Marin study and the Benin sickle cell gene may be present in Ancient Egypt in Ancient time. Now I include it in my discourse. Although, I need access to the Marin study to confirm the sickle cell variety found in Ancient Egyptian remains. It's never mentioned and Swenet didn't know for sure either. Nobody provides quotes. Still, it's a very interesting aspect.

---

quote:

---

Northern Egyptians group with Africans: QUOTE – Smith 2002:
"Limb length proportions in males from Maadi and Merimde group them
with African rather than European populations. Mean femur length in
males from Maadi was similar to that recorded at Byblos and the early
Bronze Age male from Kabri, but mean tibia length in Maadi males was
6.9cm longer than that at Byblos. At Merimde both bones were longer
than at the other sites shown, but again, the tibia was longer proportionate
to femurs than at Byblos (Fig 6.2), reinforcing the impression of an
African rather than Levantine affinity.“

---

quote:

---

Northern Egypt near the Mediterranean shows the same pattern- limb length data puts its peoples closer to tropically adapted Africans that cold climate Europeans

"...sample populations available from northern Egypt from before the 1st Dynasty (Merimda, Maadi and Wadi Digla) turn out to be significantly different from sample populations from early Palestine and Byblos, suggesting a lack of common ancestors over a long time. If there was a south-north cline variation along the Nile valley it did not, from this limited evidence, continue smoothly on into southern Palestine.

The limb-length proportions of males from the Egyptian sites group them with Africans rather than with Europeans."

---

quote:

---

"When the Elephantine results were added to a broader pooling of the physical characteristics drawn from a wide geographic region which includes Africa, the Mediterranean and the Near East quite strong affinities emerge between Elephantine and populations from Nubia, supporting a strong south-north cline."

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Troll Patrol:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:
It's possible that Copt have a type of Sub Saharan DNA that is much lesser in other Africans since they are only partially African yet according to an unconfirmed private DNA testing firm, are closest in DNA to the AEs

---

I'll grant you, it's possible. But as Throll Patrol said many modern Copts probably have have a mixture from Levantines and Greeks genes, while Ancient Egyptians have a mixture of Sub-Saharan African genes. Those who are the closest to Sub-Saharan Africans will be the closest to Ancient Egyptians aDNA. Ancient Egyptians aDNA are NOT to closest to modern Egyptians (well most of them), modern North Africans, Europeans or West Asians. They are the closest with Sub-Saharan Africans.

So in baby talk: NOT Europe, NOT Western Asia, NOT the rest of North Africa, YES "sub-Sahara" Africa.

Sub-Saharan Africans are the closer to Ancient Egyptians than all those people. They share the same ancestors.

---

What I am saying is that Coptic is a religion not an ethnic group, as lioness is trying to claim with that wiki quote.

---

Good point.

---

It's an ethnoreligious group, a group DNA tribes distinguishes genetically in their database from Egyptian Arabs and also Egyptian Siwa berbers
(but not in the Amarna article) (see Populations -Egypt)

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
Those who are the closest to Sub-Saharan Africans will be the closest to Ancient Egyptians aDNA.

---

If Copts, according to DNA Consultants, are closest of all people in percentage to some types of ancient Egypton DNA markers and they are only partially Sub Saharan then your statement is incorrect,

If Copts, according to DNA Consultants, are closest of all people in percentage to some types of ancient Egypton DNA markers then you might be able to say

> Those who are the closest to Sub-Saharan African Coptic DNA will be the closest to Ancient Egyptians aDNA.

Logically some random Sub Saharan might be
near 100% African
and a Copt might be susbstancially less let's say 40-60& Sub Saharan yet this Copt might be closer in affinty to the Ancient Egyptians, it goes against the supposition

---

quote:

---

Haplogroup E1b1 which is characterized by a high degree of internal diversity is the most represented Y chromosome haplogroup in Africa. Here we report on the characterization of 12 mutations within this haplogroup, eleven of which were discovered in the course of a resequencing and genotyping project performed in our laboratory. There are several changes compared to the most recently published Y chromosome tree [2]. Haplogroup E1b1 now contains two basal branches, E-V38 (E1b1a) and E-M215 (E1b1b), with V38/V100 joining the two previously separated lineages E-M2 (former E1b1a) and E-M329 (former E1b1c). Each of these two lineages has a peculiar geographic distribution. E-M2 is the most common haplogroup in sub-Saharan Africa, with frequency peaks in western (about 80%) and central Africa (about 60%).

---

--Beniamino Trombetta et al.,
A New Topology of the Human Y Chromosome Haplogroup E1b1 (E-P2) Revealed through the Use of Newly Characterized Binary Polymorphisms



 

---

Posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate (Member # 20039) on :
 
the lioness, you can't push that DNA consultant quote that much. It's clear that there's a commercial goal behind it. Their so called Egyptian gene, matches Maya Indians, Northeast Europeans, and from the look at the map "Siberian" near Alaska, some East Asian people, Australia and of course Africans. Populations which are not even related to one another beside by being human. You can't deny that. Their goal is to push their would be customers to take the "Ancient Egyptian gene" test by making every geographical populations on earth a possible possessor of that gene. Aka a very widespread gene from the looks of it. That's why I never quote them and told you that the DNA tribes test is more complete because it uses data we know about from peer reviewed studies (beside their modern population database) and they use more than one gene (they use autosomal STR aDNA data obtained from those studies). Same as Beyoku's post or the BMJ study about Ramses III and Unknown man E.
 

---

Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
the lioness, you can't push that DNA consultant quote that much. It's clear that there's a commercial goal behind it. Their so called Egyptian gene, match Maya Indians, Northeast Europeans, and from the look at the map "Siberian" near Alaska, some East Asian people, Australia and of course Africans. Population which are not even related to one another beside by being human. You can't deny that. Their goal is to push their would be customers to take the "Ancient Egyptian gene" test by making every geographical populations on earth a possible possessor of that gene. Aka a very widespread gene from the look of it. That's why I never quote them and told you that the DNA tribes test is more complete because it uses data we know about from peer reviewed studies (beside their modern population database) and they use more than one gene (they use autosomal STR aDNA data obtain from those studies). Same as Beyoku's post or the BMJ study about Ramses III and Unknown man E.

---

quote:

---

Coptic Egypt: background

The first centuries of Christianity

There are few sources of information on the beginning of Christianity in Egypt. According to tradition, Saint Mark brought the new faith to Egypt. There may have been a second missionary in the first century AD, named Apollos. Only from the time of the bishop Demetrius (AD 189-221/2) are there more substantial sources for Christianity. These early sources indicate that the new religion was beginning to flourish in Alexandria. A catechetical school was founded at about this time, and soon became an important centre of theological research. In the second century AD there seems to have been only one bishop in Egypt, at Alexandria. Later in his career Demetrius ordained three bishops, perhaps one for each of the Greek cities in the country (Alexandria, Naukratis, Ptolemais). Over the following century the numbers increased massively; in AD 320 bishop Alexander of Alexandria was able to assemble 100 bishops in a synod, and 94 Egyptian bishops are known to have attended the synod at Serdica (AD 342) . After AD 325 the archbishop of Alexandria also had authority over areas outside Egypt, in the province of Libya. Alexandria was always an important theological centre, sometimes even more important than the new Christian capital Constantinople. Disputes between these centres seem rooted more in their views of one another, than in the substance of their beliefs and expressions of belief; mutual suspicion seems to have been the main cause of the growing rifts between churches. In AD 451 at the council of Chalcedon the teaching of the archbishop Dioscorus was condemned as monophysite, and so heretical; according to the council, archbishop Dioscorus held the views of Eutyches, whose monophysite or "one nature" teaching maintained that Christ had a single nature, and was not simultaneously human and divine. This accusation was rejected by Dioscorus, and the Coptic Church does not consider itself monophysite in the manner portrayed at Chalcedon: the end of the Coptic liturgy declares that the two natures "human" and "divine" are united in one "without mingling, without confusion, without alteration". This makes the conflict around the Chalcedon council all the more regrettable. The result was a lasting schism: the patriarchy of Alexandria became separated from the official line of the Roman Empire and its Church. From this time there are two rival patriarchs at Alexandria: a monophysite patriarch and a dyophysite (or Melkite) patriarch. In AD 482 the emperor Zeno attempted to reconcile the two factions, but without success.

Persecution and establishment

Before Christianity became a state religion under Constantine, the Egyptian Christian community suffered heavy persecution. An important part of Roman state religion was the cult of the emperor. For Jews and Christians, who both believed in one god, this practice presented a problem. However, the Jews received special exemption: they did not need to join the ruler cult, for religious reasons. The Christians were first seen as Jews, but when they became a separate religious group, they did not receive the same status. In the third century AD persecution of the Christians grew particularly intense, for example under Septimius Severus in AD 201. In the reign of Decius in AD 249 there was the first persecution across the whole empire. Under Gallienus (AD 253-268) the persecutions were reversed by an edict, by which the Christians received their freedom. However, under Diocletian (AD 284-305) there was again in AD 300 heavy persecution, so intense that the Coptic Church dates its years not to the birth of Christ (BC-AD) but to the 'Era of Martyrs', starting from the first year of the reign of the persecuting emperor Diocletian. The oppression ended finally only on the 30th April 311, when an edict was released establishing Christianity as a permitted religion (religio licita).

Under Byzantine rule, the monophysite strand of Christianity was also subject to persecution, as the imperial authorities struggled to impose orthodoxy from Constantinople. The division between monophysite and orthodox Christianity has been seen as a major factor contributing to the defeat of Byzantine forces in Egypt and Syria in the mid-seventh century, at the Arab conquest of Egypt in AD 639-642.

Christian Egyptians in the Islamic Period

During most of the Islamic Period, Christian Egyptians formed the backbone of the country's administration and many, along with people of other faiths such as Jews, rose to ministerial positions. Like all non-Moslems they paid a special poll tax. At certain periods, and despite clear Islamic teachings on tolerance, they endured certain restrictions, often because of complaints over their undue influence. Their conversion to Islam was a long process: according to the geographer Al-Muqaddasi, Copts were still in the majority in the 10th century, almost four centuries after the Moslem annexation of Egypt. The European Crusades, instigated by Pope Urban II in 1095, must have had a particularly negative impact: the local Christian population probably sided most often with their Moslem compatriots, while some Moslems sided with the Frankish invaders. The Crusades may be one main reason why more Egyptian Christians converted to Islam. Nowadays about 10 % of Egyptians are Christians following different churches, mainly the Coptic Orthodox Church. Despite sporadic times of discord, as in the reign of the eccentric but brilliant Fatimid ruler al-Hakim, the story of the Copts in Egypt reflects a generally tolerant country by comparison with the fate of religious minorities in medieval and later Europe.

The Egyptian language in Byzantine and Islamic Egypt - Coptic

The main language in the eastern part of the Roman Empire was Greek, also used by the Egyptian Christians (Copts). Some Egyptians had started to write their own language using Greek letters (old Coptic) before the advent of Christianity; Coptic later became the principal script and language of Christian Egypt below the official Greek (then Arabic) level, and it remains alive today in the Coptic Church, for liturgical use. Greek was the state language used for administration and education, until replaced by Arabic at the end of the 7th century. In the first century after the Moslem annexation of Egypt, documents might be produced in three languages, Greek, Coptic and Arabic. Coptic enjoyed a revival under Islam: most of the Coptic books in collections today date to the Islamic Period. Contrary to the common perception that Coptic was only used for liturgy, there are many Coptic texts in medicine, mathematics, and alchemy. From the 11th century onwards, Arabic was used to write Christian material often side by side with Coptic, producing biligual texts which were instrumental in the process of the European decipherment of Egyptian language by Kircher and successors such as Champollion.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
[QB] the lioness, you can't push that DNA consultant quote that much. It's clear that there's a commercial goal behind it.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
[QB] the lioness, you can't push that DNA consultant quote that much. It's clear that there's a commercial goal behind it.

---

the opposite is the case, Copts are a tiny market compared to African Americans.
There is no way you can argue that an American company is being commercial, doing so by artificially emphasiszing Copts.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
[QB] the lioness, you can't push that DNA consultant quote that much. It's clear that there's a commercial goal behind it.

---

the opposite is the case, Copts are a tiny market compared to African Americans.
There is no way you can argue that an American company is being commercial, doing so by artificially emphasiszing Copts.


(concise frill free post)

---

Unbelievable, this ignorant idiot keeps on ranting. Simply because you want to "win" the argument you've lost a long time ago already.





Egypt's Coptic Pope to pay weekend visit to Upper Egypt's Sohag

April 19, 2013, 6:21 a.m.


Source: Ahram

"During two-day visit, Coptic-Orthodox Pope Tawadros II will meet with local priests, monks and government officials, in addition to inaugurating new church.

Egypt's Coptic-Orthodox Pope Tawadros II is set to arrive in the Upper Egyptian city of Sohag late Thursday, where he is expected to stay for two days.

While in Sohag, Tawadros will stay at the White Monastery of Saint Shenouda the Archimandrite.

A spokesman for Sohag's Coptic archbishopric said the pope planned to meet with local Coptic priests and monks, before inaugurating a new church on Friday."


http://www.copticworld.org/articles/1948/
 

---

Posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate (Member # 20039) on :