quote:This analysis points to this pre-dynastic sample being similar to Epipaleolithic and early Neolithic Moroccans in that they posses a genetic profile vaguely related to both West Eurasians and Sub-Saharan Africans. More so, they typically fail to yield statistically significant results from two way admixture models of any modern Sub-Saharan and ancient West Eurasian source and the percentages of each cohort vary depending on the comparative samples or method of analysis. Though these North African samples can at times be used interchangeably as an “autochthonous” North African proxy, the two regions (North-West and North-East Africa ) seem to prefer different ancestral proxies themselves. For instance, while North-West Africans like Taforalt can be modeled most significantly with Natufians, AM14590 (the sample ID) of Naqada’s west Eurasian related DNA is most similar to Neolithic Iranians. In fact, it seems that the individual unearthed from one of the Belt Caves, Hotu, shares the most similarity with the “Non-African” portion of this pre-dynastic sample. Though, it could be the case that Hotu’s relatively low SNP count yielded high P values and ancestry estimates due to ascertainment bias, the overwhelming preference of this sample to model the bulk of the pre-dynastic samples ancestry should still be noted. When using the Natufian and Yoruba to model NaqadaI the proportions are more or less identical to that of Epipaleolithic and Early Neolithic Moroccans though the p-values are close to null.
posted
you are posting charts made by an anonymous blogger "Stro"
quote:
Pre-dynastic Egyptian DNA: A Sneak Peak into North East Africa’s Distant Past Leave a Comment / Backroom, Genetics, Inquiry & Investigation, Methods & Materials, North East Africa, Uncategorized / By Stro
For the greater parts of a century archaeologists have wrestled with the identity of ancient samples. None more controversial than ancient Egyptians in the last few centuries. Just to add more to the controversial nature of this field of study, there was research published late 2023 by Wurst and colleagues. This study sought to look at diseases in mummified individuals from around the globe. Here I’ll report a preliminary analysis on some of their samples that were pulled from Egypt. One ancient individual in particular from Gebelein dated to and culturally associated with the first Naqada period will be emphasized foremost. I also would like to freely discuss methods in processing ancient data in a series of posts forthcoming...
Here I’ll report a preliminary analysis on some of their samples that were pulled from Egypt. One ancient individual in particular from Gebelein dated to and culturally associated with the first Naqada period will be emphasized foremost...
To see how Pre-Dynastic ancestry was inherited, I calculated potential admixture proportions in East Africans and a few Egyptian samples gathered from outside of Africa. Unfortunately, site information for all samples of the dynastic periods were not available. Therefore I left the Identifiers as “unknown.” Within the other samples I included ancient and modern Nubians27–29 as well as Somalians and an ancient Kenyan30 who had previously shown evidence of having high Ancestral North African related ancestry...
For Naqada’s ancestry estimates I did not follow the methods seen in either Lazaridis 201910 or Loosdrect 20178 to where they excluded African populations in the reference grouping.
Genetic Predisposition of Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease in Ancient Human Remains Authors Christina WURST, Frank Maixner, Alice Paladin, Alexandra Mussauer, Guido Valverde, Jagat Narula, Randall Thompson, Albert Zink
On the upper right the SNP data for Egypt the following samples
Ancient Egypt
2288 / 1958 / 2287 / 1967
these samples are also highlighted below with a green dot in a list of only the Egyptian samples
if you look at the column on the left at number 11 That is the Predynastic Gebelein Naqada sample as it says, (#)1946 unfortunately, it's not one of the green dotted Egyptian samples with SNP data
Posts: 43382 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
I didn't know that is what you meant when you said "Courtesy of our own Elmaestro" I thought he had just called attention to the blog instead of wrote it. You are saying " Predynastic Egyptian genome sequenced" Where? Not by Wurst or Maesto Green circles are risk factors? Yes That predynastic Gebelein didn't get a green dot because information for all samples of the dynastic periods were not available but I did have enough for the phenotype call on skin
quote: "Although no PRSs could be calculated for the Egyptian individuals (due to the reasons mentioned above), a variety of risk alleles for ASCVD were found, dating back to the First Intermediate Period (Ind. 1967: cal BC 2131–1903)."
posted
The lack of posts in this thread really shows that many of you on Egyptsearch have been stagnated and area really BEHIND when it comes to relevant discussions in the African bio-anthro sphere or heck bio-anthro sphere in general. For such a site that CLAIMS they are all about Ancient Egyptian(or African in general) bio-anthro discussions! How the heck does such a bombshell like this lack many replies!?
And yes @BrandonP I will sticky this thread. Its such a damn shame that I even have to.
Posts: 1932 | From: NY | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
posted
This was an interesting read. I was going to reply yesterday but I was waiting for replies to roll in first. Apparently I missed a lot and I wanted to see what the more “tuned in” folks thought the biggest revelations here were, especially if Maestro was going to give more commentary. @askia I think a lot of folks are “chilled” about speaking too soon cause every major drop has been throwing curve balls, especially if you’re a hardliner on these things. I saw this was being teased prior, what would you guys say you expected and didn’t expect from this?
Posts: 88 | From: West Bumble... | Registered: Apr 2017
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Askia_The_Great: The lack of posts in this thread really shows that many of you on Egyptsearch have been stagnated and area really BEHIND when it comes to relevant discussions in the African bio-anthro sphere or heck bio-anthro sphere in general. For such a site that CLAIMS they are all about Ancient Egyptian(or African in general) bio-anthro discussions! How the heck does such a bombshell like this lack many replies!?
In fairness, this forum doesn't have that many active users anymore, and people do have lives outside of it. I know DJ for instance is quite busy as a lab technician, even though he'd be one of the posters with the most to say on this topic. The recent attempt on a certain real-estate businessman's life might have also distracted attention from this topic, although personally I'd rather focus on the predynastic Egyptian genetic findings than political stuff right now.
I just noticed you put in time period "time period added by Brandon P." Is this otherwise an untouched Wurst Table? This table is not in Stro's article in the OP
what are the top categories BW, BX, BY etc
How do we read this table? For instance I see that very dark brown bar "DarktoBlackSkin" 3), 4) It's showing for BOTH Predynastic and Late period
Yet the OK sample, 2) is less Dark, "Dark but exclude "Black" category
7), a Nubian less dark than that a lighter brown color called "Intermediate skin"
How are we to draw conclusions from this? It seems a group of random individuals, not enough to draw conclusions ?
Posts: 43382 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: I just noticed you put in time period "time period added by Brandon P." Is this otherwise an untouched Wurst Table? This table is not in Stro's article in the OP
This is his original version (which you can find if you scroll to the very bottom of his article just above the citations). I just added the text in red to make the samples' provenance clearer to laypeople. I didn't doctor the data itself, if that's what you're desperately trying to insinuate.
posted
How accurate are the results,I have'nt read everything but IDK Im at the point where Im weary of anything coming out supporting anything on "our side" so to speak
Also as Brandon pointed out there really are'nt many active users here, plus little academic level engagement/ideologies outside of DJ and Brandon
quote:Originally posted by Askia_The_Great: The lack of posts in this thread really shows that many of you on Egyptsearch have been stagnated and area really BEHIND when it comes to relevant discussions in the African bio-anthro sphere or heck bio-anthro sphere in general. For such a site that CLAIMS they are all about Ancient Egyptian(or African in general) bio-anthro discussions! How the heck does such a bombshell like this lack many replies!?
And yes @BrandonP I will sticky this thread. Its such a damn shame that I even have to.
Posts: 8872 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
@Askia you're right, just a brief reading shows some pretty big bombs dropped...
Just some of the stuff that caught my eye...
quote:What seems to be the case here is that a grand majority of pre-dynastic ancestry is extinct and not directly related to populations who haven’t directly inherited their lineage, like the modern Egyptians, Copts and other neighbors. Moreover it becomes even more obvious when we take into account that the actual best 3-way admixture model includes Ganj Dareh, Villabruna (a West Eurasian Huntergatherer from Sicily) and a 7 thousand year old East African Hunter-Gatherer from Tanzania’s Kisese rockshelter.50 (actual Best statistics are achieved with hunter-gatherers similar to Kisese II from Nyarindi, Kenya, Hotu and WHG/Villabruna but the former two samples both maintain a fraction of the SNP count.)
.....
quote:The results were not too surprising though not entirely predictable on all fronts. For one, it should be expected that individuals such as the Sudanese Copts would score among the highest amount of this ancestry given their history and genetic profile.28,31–33 For example, though they are dominated by paternal haplogroup J, their culture and genetics are linked to ancient populations of the region and was preserved by their endogamous practices. And given what’s being suggested by the autosomal result of NaqadaI, their frequency of macro-haplogroup B33 shouldn’t be undermined as well. An overall general trend is that later samples, particularly those of the Roman Era show more dilution of pre-dyanastic ancestry despite modern individuals from North East Africa showing signs of recurring pre-dynastic ancestry. The variation is alarming given that such high levels of the indigenous component likely could have been maintained in individuals through out time in the region.
So the Ancestry
1) Seems to be mix of SSa/Eusasian 2) Is Extinct or related to ancestry that is extinct
That's what I got so far...Waiting for the more intelligent posters to comment now..lol
Posts: 8872 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Also pretty big is in the admixture graph, only one Abusier mummy inherited the Gebelein ancestry, its virtually absent in the Abu sier ancestry...
In regards to the ancestry being similar to Early Neolithic Morrocans...We know that by the Late Neolithic Moroccans were admixed so would this be before the admixture with migrants from Europe
quote:We show that Early Neolithic Moroccans are composed of an endemic Maghrebi element still retained in present-day North African populations, resembling the genetic component observed in Later Stone Age communities from Morocco. However, Late Neolithic individuals from North Africa are admixed, with a North African and a European component. Our results support the idea that the Neolithization of North Africa involved both the development of Epipaleolithic communities and the migration of people from Europe.
Probably does'nt matter tbh, the estimates in the pie graph shows the Gebelein ancestry to be a good mix of Eurasian/SSA...
Posts: 8872 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-: @Askia you're right, just a brief reading shows some pretty big bombs dropped...
Just some of the stuff that caught my eye...
quote:What seems to be the case here is that a grand majority of pre-dynastic ancestry is extinct and not directly related to populations who haven’t directly inherited their lineage, like the modern Egyptians, Copts and other neighbors. Moreover it becomes even more obvious when we take into account that the actual best 3-way admixture model includes Ganj Dareh, Villabruna (a West Eurasian Huntergatherer from Sicily) and a 7 thousand year old East African Hunter-Gatherer from Tanzania’s Kisese rockshelter.50 (actual Best statistics are achieved with hunter-gatherers similar to Kisese II from Nyarindi, Kenya, Hotu and WHG/Villabruna but the former two samples both maintain a fraction of the SNP count.)
.....
quote:The results were not too surprising though not entirely predictable on all fronts. For one, it should be expected that individuals such as the Sudanese Copts would score among the highest amount of this ancestry given their history and genetic profile.28,31–33 For example, though they are dominated by paternal haplogroup J, their culture and genetics are linked to ancient populations of the region and was preserved by their endogamous practices. And given what’s being suggested by the autosomal result of NaqadaI, their frequency of macro-haplogroup B33 shouldn’t be undermined as well. An overall general trend is that later samples, particularly those of the Roman Era show more dilution of pre-dyanastic ancestry despite modern individuals from North East Africa showing signs of recurring pre-dynastic ancestry. The variation is alarming given that such high levels of the indigenous component likely could have been maintained in individuals through out time in the region.
So the Ancestry
1) Seems to be mix of SSa/Eusasian 2) Is Extinct or related to ancestry that is extinct
That's what I got so far...Waiting for the more intelligent posters to comment now..lol
This is all I could glean as well lol. For the most part it’s not too much of a surprise given what we’ve seen previously so I’m guessing the heat is in the phenotype calls in comparison to the admixture breakdown? Or is it more so what it confirms?
Posts: 88 | From: West Bumble... | Registered: Apr 2017
| IP: Logged |
posted
I've had more time with this data than most. I'll read along for a bit as I don't want to steer the conversation. If I can I will answer some questions though.
Posts: 1815 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yes, but I def. would not have guessed the lack of the Gebelein ancestry(or Predynastic ancestry for that matter) in Abu Sier, I would have guessed Predynastic ancestry would have a Eurasian strain that would be consistent and match with Abu Sier...the lack of it is pretty big as the only other ancesty that lacks it is outside the Nile Valley(Somali and Lebanon)
Also as cool as the phenotype calls I def. think what its confirming is pretty big...def/ some interesting discussions to be had
One scenario that could be gleamed is that the proto-Afro-Asiatic "Cluster" that many of us here are speculating about...could very well be extinct
another is how the ancestry is peaking consistently in dynastic Egypt but at low levels in Modern Egypt(Though that could be because its only in certain mummies/regions)..
quote:Originally posted by Itoli: This is all I could glean as well lol. For the most part it’s not too much of a surprise given what we’ve seen previously so I’m guessing the heat is in the phenotype calls in comparison to the admixture breakdown? Or is it more so what it confirms?
Posts: 8872 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Elmaestro: I've had more time with this data than most. I'll read along for a bit as I don't want to steer the conversation. If I can I will answer some questions though.
This may be a bit of an ask, but in generalized terms, how would you model the population history of the area w/ the context given by these results? Vague question I know but I’m interested in how far reaching this can be.
Posts: 88 | From: West Bumble... | Registered: Apr 2017
| IP: Logged |
posted
It would be even more awesome if we could get our hands on more predynastic samples to see if their ancestry makeup (or their phenotype calls) all looks like this one.
Anyway, I suspect the reason the software is modeling Gebelein as a SSA/West Eurasian mix is because it doesn't really fit snugly into either population, being intermediate between other Africans and OOAs as DJ would say. Note that the closest-fitting Eurasian proxies are Iranian Neolithic samples which have even more Basal Eurasian than Natufians IIRC.
quote:Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-: Yes, but I def. would not have guessed the lack of the Gebelein ancestry(or Predynastic ancestry for that matter) in Abu Sier, I would have guessed Predynastic ancestry would have a Eurasian strain that would be consistent and match with Abu Sier...the lack of it is pretty big as the only other ancesty that lacks it is outside the Nile Valley(Somali and Lebanon)
Also as cool as the phenotype calls I def. think what its confirming is pretty big...def/ some interesting discussions to be had
One scenario that could be gleamed is that the proto-Afro-Asiatic "Cluster" that many of us here are speculating about...could very well be extinct
another is how the ancestry is peaking consistently in dynastic Egypt but at low levels in Modern Egypt(Though that could be because its only in certain mummies/regions)..
quote:Originally posted by Itoli: This is all I could glean as well lol. For the most part it’s not too much of a surprise given what we’ve seen previously so I’m guessing the heat is in the phenotype calls in comparison to the admixture breakdown? Or is it more so what it confirms?
That’s definitely something that needs more exploration. I wonder how much of the modern genetic landscape is legitimate post-dynastic admixture and how much of it is just Egyptians of different “types” fluctuating in number (if that’s an apt description). Gonna be fun times ahead if we can get more data from more varied locations.
ETA; I have a bit of an “out there” theory (I know) about how Egyptian animosity towards Nubians may have played a role in what we see today but I’ll save it for another thread lol
Posts: 88 | From: West Bumble... | Registered: Apr 2017
| IP: Logged |
posted
Regional variation is definitely a factor to consider, but the near lack of predynastic ancestry in the Abusir el-Meleq mummies makes me wonder if they really do descend from Hyksos or some other Bronze Age Levantine immigrants. I recall Elmaestro saying they resembled Bronze Age Levantine samples quite a while ago.
quote:Originally posted by BrandonP: Regional variation is definitely a factor to consider, but the near lack of predynastic ancestry in the Abusir el-Meleq mummies
what about the approx 15% Naqada (Yellow) of Stro's last sample of the 3 Abusir el-Meleq mummies, #2134?
Posts: 43382 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by BrandonP: Regional variation is definitely a factor to consider, but the near lack of predynastic ancestry in the Abusir el-Meleq mummies
what about the approx 15% Naqada (Yellow) of Stro's last sample of the 3 Abusir el-Meleq mummies, #2134?
Abusir el-Meleq mummy JK 2134 is dated 776-569 BC Y-DNA J mtDNA J1d (one of the 3 full genome tested mummies)
According to Y-DNA analysis by Hassan et al. (2008), among Sudanese Arabs, 67% of Arakien, 43% of Meseria, and 40% of Galilean individuals carry the Haplogroup J. The remainder mainly belong to the E1b1b clade,
Posts: 43382 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Great article bro we all appreciate this, really.
What do you make of Somalis scoring no Naqada? This is surprisng to me given the fact that Beni Amer score it and Horners in general derive most of our ancestry from Lower Nubians, if you look at a lot of the material culture we find in Eritrea and Ethiopia they very often show affinities to C group culture, Kerma and Pan Grave culture. Also, I'm sure you're aware that those specific Nubians often cluster with Predynastic Egyptians in craniofacial studies.
Also what do you make of Iranian and WHG being the best proxy? I'm open to the idea that Hotu has North African ancestry given the fact that they score Basal Eurasian and a small Hadza component on admixture. I forgot who it was but one old anthropologist noted similarities between some Iberomaurusian remains and Hotu.
Posts: 175 | From: England | Registered: May 2020
| IP: Logged |
posted
Throwback to this post from Swenet. He's one of the very few individuals in this sphere that has argued for North African ancestry in Hotu from the beginning.
The Tomb of Two Brothers is an ancient sepulchre in Deir Rifeh, Egypt, [MK] Middle Kingdom (12th dynasty), the chamber tomb of the ancient Egyptian high status priests (NA)Nakht-Ankh and (KN)Khnum-Nakht,
Ancient DNA analysis of the mummies of Nakht-Ankh and Khnum-Nakht, found that the brothers belonged to the M1a1 mtDNA haplogroup with 88.05–91.27% degree of confidence, thus confirming the African origins of the two individuals. The presence of M1 in Africa is the result of a back-migration from Asia. The analysis of mitochondrial DNA and the Y chromosomes made it possible to establish that the two titular brothers were actually half brothers, having the same mother but different fathers. In 2023 Nakht-Ankh's was published by FTDNA under Y-DNA haplogroup H2 (H-Z19008) //discover.familyH-Z19008 haplogrouptreedna.com/y-dna/H-Z19008/notable
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: 15% is significant
Abusir el-Meleq mummy JK 2134 is dated 776-569 BC Y-DNA J mtDNA J1d (one of the 3 full genome tested mummies)
According to Y-DNA analysis by Hassan et al. (2008), among Sudanese Arabs, 67% of Arakien, 43% of Meseria, and 40% of Galilean individuals carry the Haplogroup J. The remainder mainly belong to the E1b1b clade,
In the context of the other samples it’s suspiciously insignificant. We can expect to see a lot of variation from the pre-dynastic given how Egypt was peopled but given the fact of how ubiquitous the pre-dynastic component is in the other samples, clearly this ancestry ended up being characteristic of the population. Something is definitely fishy about the Abusir mummies, hard to imagine how they can be explained away by simple regional variation.
Posts: 88 | From: West Bumble... | Registered: Apr 2017
| IP: Logged |
posted
@El Maestro on the predynastic remains AM14590, Gebelein, Naqada
is there genetic data available from a specimen sample on this mummy? If so where is it? Is there a table with STRs or other genetic data on it? This is not a rhetorical question, I am trying to figure out the raw data on you are creating these charts as for Naqada. I thought none of it had been tested?
Posts: 43382 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sorry for the late reply but I've had a busy weekend not to mention that since the attempted assassination attempt on Trump a lot of folks were calling me asking for my views and opinions as if I'm some kind of expert just because I have some knowledge on the occult forces behind the scenes and so-called "conspiracy theorists" like myself have been proven right time again.
Speaking of theorists, it seems this study has also confirmed my hunch as well as that of other posters in this forum. The predynastic Egyptians were indeed the missing link between Epipaleolithic Maghrebi and Epipaleolithic Levantines (Natufians).
Also, that their profile behaves as vaguely in between West Eurasians and Sub-Saharans shows that they appear close to the common ancestor of both.
That this predynastic ancestry was displaced by others or became extinct is not that surprising. Even Swenet brought up the fact that the displacement of indigenous Egyptian ancestry began during the Middle Kingdom with the advent of the Hyksos and hasn't stopped since then.
Also, I would love to read Elmaestro's take on these findings.
Oh and the findings that predynastsic and early Egyptians had dark to black skin should shut up Itoli, Metatron, and others who make claims otherwise, hopefully.
Posts: 26851 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by SlimJim: What do you make of Somalis scoring no Naqada? This is surprisng to me given the fact that Beni Amer score it and Horners in general derive most of our ancestry from Lower Nubians, if you look at a lot of the material culture we find in Eritrea and Ethiopia they very often show affinities to C group culture, Kerma and Pan Grave culture. Also, I'm sure you're aware that those specific Nubians often cluster with Predynastic Egyptians in craniofacial studies.
If I had to guess, Somali ancestry is diluted enough with Upper Nile and Arabian ancestry that it obfuscates the Proto-Afroasiatic connection they share with predynastic Egypto-Nubians.
quote:Also what do you make of Iranian and WHG being the best proxy? I'm open to the idea that Hotu has North African ancestry given the fact that they score Basal Eurasian and a small Hadza component on admixture. I forgot who it was but one old anthropologist noted similarities between some Iberomaurusian remains and Hotu.
Like I said, Hotu having more BE than Natufians says to me that it's the BE in them that makes them the best "fit" for the Eurasian-related ancestry in the predynastic sample.
Would it be possible for you to get your findings published in a peer-reviewed journal? I personally don't doubt your credibility, but I believe laypeople would have less reason to dismiss it out of hand if it came in the form of a published scientific paper instead of a blog post with a pseudonymous author.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Oh and the findings that predynastsic and early Egyptians had dark to black skin should shut up Itoli, Metatron, and others who make claims otherwise, hopefully.
To be fair to Itoli, he doesn't seem to be challenging these findings that much. He did say in the Metatron thread that he has basically been arguing both sides of this issue to "pick his brain". In all honesty, that approach of his isn't to my liking, as I'd rather someone take a clear stance on an issue than switch between sides for whatever reason, but at least he doesn't seem that invested in the Eurocentric narrative either.
quote:Originally posted by Itoli: In the context of the other samples it’s suspiciously insignificant. We can expect to see a lot of variation from the pre-dynastic given how Egypt was peopled but given the fact of how ubiquitous the pre-dynastic component is in the other samples, clearly this ancestry ended up being characteristic of the population. Something is definitely fishy about the Abusir mummies, hard to imagine how they can be explained away by simple regional variation.
The Abusir samples come from the Late Period and I and others in this forum, as well as Egyptologists themselves have warned about using them to represent all ancient Egyptians let alone from earlier periods. It was the same case with the Late Period Gizeh samples used as representative of all Egyptians. Many Eurocentrics love to obfuscate by cherry picking certain samples as representative of what they think ancient Egyptians looked like.
Posts: 26851 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
One thing I do wonder about the "dark to black" category in the phenotype calls is whether it recognizes gradients in dark skin. Could we imagine the "dark to black" Egyptians as being mahogany-skinned like the Egyptian characters in the "Table of Nations" sequences, or would the software reserve that category for ebony-skinned people (e.g. the Nubians in those same sequences)? How would someone with a mahogany complexion score compared to someone closer to ebony?
quote:Originally posted by SlimJim: What do you make of Somalis scoring no Naqada? This is surprising to me given the fact that Beni Amer score it and Horners in general derive most of our ancestry from Lower Nubians, if you look at a lot of the material culture we find in Eritrea and Ethiopia they very often show affinities to C group culture, Kerma and Pan Grave culture. Also, I'm sure you're aware that those specific Nubians often cluster with Predynastic Egyptians in craniofacial studies.
That's the thing, Somalis are NOT a Nile Valley people. The other Horn region groups you mentioned at least live close to the Nile Valley. That Somalis lack Gebelein (Naqada) ancestry is not surprising since although Brace's craniometric study groups Somalis close to Naqada, all non-metric studies show a disparity and even the metric dental studies show Somalis to have crown sizes intermediate between North Africans (Naqada) and typical Sub-Saharans. The finding for the Kadruka (Kerma) sample aren't surprising since all metric and nonmetric cranial data plot Kerma samples right next to Naqada. This is why Nubians especially Kushites are the kryptonite to the Euronuts because those old 'black foes' of the Egyptians turn out to be their close relatives.
quote:Also what do you make of Iranian and WHG being the best proxy? I'm open to the idea that Hotu has North African ancestry given the fact that they score Basal Eurasian and a small Hadza component on admixture. I forgot who it was but one old anthropologist noted similarities between some Iberomaurusian remains and Hotu.
Ditto to what Brandon said about the BE in Hotu giving the 'Eurasian' fit to the predynastic Egyptian. Basal Eurasian itself is African as seen in the Lazaridis chart I posted above.
This makes me wonder about the genomes of A-Group Nubians or that of Al-Khiday.
Posts: 26851 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ Fair enough.
quote:Originally posted by Itoli: In the context of the other samples it’s suspiciously insignificant. We can expect to see a lot of variation from the pre-dynastic given how Egypt was peopled but given the fact of how ubiquitous the pre-dynastic component is in the other samples, clearly this ancestry ended up being characteristic of the population. Something is definitely fishy about the Abusir mummies, hard to imagine how they can be explained away by simple regional variation.
The Abusir samples come from the Late Period and I and others in this forum, as well as Egyptologists themselves have warned about using them to represent all ancient Egyptians let alone from earlier periods. It was the same case with the Late Period Gizeh samples used as representative of all Egyptians. Many Eurocentrics love to obfuscate by cherry picking certain samples as representative of what they think ancient Egyptians looked like.
No there’s something a lot more weird going on. Look at the other samples from the late period, they have considerably more of the pre dynastic component. The Abusir mummies, if they’re representative, look a lot more like foreign transplants or an endogenous foreign community rather than assimilated migrants.
Posts: 88 | From: West Bumble... | Registered: Apr 2017
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Itoli: No there’s something a lot more weird going on. Look at the other samples from the late period, they have considerably more of the pre dynastic component. The Abusir mummies, if they’re representative, look a lot more like foreign transplants or an endogenous foreign community rather than assimilated migrants.
FWIW, an endogenous foreign community (possibly Hyksos-descended) does seem like a probable identity for them. We would need more Lower Egyptian samples from a broad time range to test for how commonplace such communities were in ancient Egypt.
quote:Originally posted by Itoli: No there’s something a lot more weird going on. Look at the other samples from the late period, they have considerably more of the pre dynastic component. The Abusir mummies, if they’re representative, look a lot more like foreign transplants or an endogenous foreign community rather than assimilated migrants.
FWIW, an endogenous foreign community (possibly Hyksos-descended) does seem like a probable identity for them. We would need more Lower Egyptian samples from a broad time range to test for how commonplace such communities were in ancient Egypt.
Yup. That’d be my bet as well.
Posts: 88 | From: West Bumble... | Registered: Apr 2017
| IP: Logged |
posted
Based on mtDNA Scheuneman et al claim that also Egyptians further back in time and from the the whole Egyptian Nile valley shared similar haplogroups as the remains from the Abusir el-Meleq study. Would be interesting to read the full study if it ever will get published.
Abstract from the, 9th International Symposium on Biomolecular Archaeology held in Toulouse, France in the summer of 2021 :
quote: Urban, Christian; Neukamm, Judith; Eppenberger, Patrick; Brändle, Martin; Rühli, Frank and Schuenemann Verena, 2021: Human mitochondrial haplogroups and ancient DNA preservation across Egyptian history
quote: Egypt represents an ideal location for genetic studies on population migration and admixture due to its geographic location and rich history. However, there are only a few reliable genetic studies on ancient Egyptian samples. In a previous study, we assessed the genetic history of a single site: Abusir el-Meleq from 1388 BCE to 426 CE. We now focus on widening the geographic scope to give a general overview of the population genetic background, focusing on mitochondrial haplogroups present among the whole Egyptian Nile River Valley. We collected 81 tooth, hair, bone, and soft tissue samples from 14 mummies and 17 skeletal remains. The samples span approximately 4000 years of Egyptian history and originate from six different excavation sites covering the whole length of the Egyptian Nile River Valley. NGS based ancient DNA 8 were applied to reconstruct 18 high-quality mitochondrial genomes from 10 different individuals. The determined mitochondrial haplogroups match the results from our Abusir el-Meleq study. Our results indicate very low rates of modern DNA contamination independent of the tissue type. Although authentic ancient DNA was recovered from different tissues, a reliable recovery was best achieved using teeth or petrous bone material. Moreover, the rate for successful ancient DNA retrieval between Egyptian mummies and skeletal remains did not differ significantly. Our study provides preliminary insights into population history across different regions and compares tissue-specific DNA preservation for mummies and skeletal remains from the Egyptian Nile River Valley.
And we are still waiting for the study conducted by Alexandra Mussauer et al, which is due to be published in 2025. The abstract was presented in the OT.
How much will these studies change current views of ancient Egyptian genetics?
-------------------- Once an archaeologist, always an archaeologist Posts: 3053 | From: Sweden | Registered: Mar 2020
| IP: Logged |
Baalberith
Ungodly and Satanic Entity
Member # 23079
posted
Elmaestro, clean your inbox. I want to send you a message about something and get your thoughts on it.
Posts: 345 | From: Hell | Registered: Jun 2019
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Oh and the findings that predynastsic and early Egyptians had dark to black skin should shut up Itoli, Metatron, and others who make claims otherwise, hopefully.
Is this information from an actual official release though? I haven't seen any official release paper on any scientific journal website. Not to rain on the forums parade (as this is a very interesting discussion) but this looks like it could be another DNATribes situation.....
Posts: 76 | From: United Kingdom | Registered: Mar 2023
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Oh and the findings that predynastsic and early Egyptians had dark to black skin should shut up Itoli, Metatron, and others who make claims otherwise, hopefully.
Is this information from an actual official release though? I haven't seen any official release paper on any scientific journal website. Not to rain on the forums parade (as this is a very interesting discussion) but this looks like it could be another DNATribes situation.....
Our own Elmaestro did the breakdown and phenotype calls with his own software, as you can see if you read the OP post's methods section.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Oh and the findings that predynastsic and early Egyptians had dark to black skin should shut up Itoli, Metatron, and others who make claims otherwise, hopefully.
Is this information from an actual official release though? I haven't seen any official release paper on any scientific journal website. Not to rain on the forums parade (as this is a very interesting discussion) but this looks like it could be another DNATribes situation.....
Our own Elmaestro did the breakdown and phenotype calls with his own software, as you can see if you read the OP post's methods section.
I hate to be the guy who says this but is ElMaestro a professional geneticist or anthropologist? If not how would this be any different to lets say a guy like Miro C over on twitter painting certain narratives?
Don't get it twisted this isn't a dig at anyone from a character perspective and I'm super grateful for the discussion these types of results generate. However I think it would be intelligent for all of us to remain at least sceptical until official peer-reviewed published data is released.
Posts: 76 | From: United Kingdom | Registered: Mar 2023
| IP: Logged |
posted
Nice. Shout out to the person who spotted these findings first (elMaestro?)
Some observations:
Notice this is Naqada I, (not Naqada II or Naqada III [let alone dynastic Egypt]). Relevance? Probably the SSA-like is going to go down from here, in the same way that Badarians will have more of it than Naqada I has. (Although I have, interestingly enough, seen some rare reports of Naqada period samples with 'southern' affinities at similar levels as Badarians).
As others have already pointed out, the common denominator between all these samples (ie, between farmer samples, or pastoralists, as in the case of Africa) is Basal Eurasian. So I wouldn't make a big deal out of what seem to be contradictions, like samples sharing in 'NA ancestry' (Raqefet Natufians, Hotu, predynastics, Horners, Loosdrecht's Taforalt) forming some interesting subgroups that we're not used to seeing (ie Dinka-admixed pastoralists-Somalis, Naqada-Hotu, Natufian-Taforalt). The common denominator is still NA ancestry. So, these Basal Eurasian-affiliated ancestry components have low genetic distance between each other (it's the other components [WHG, Dinka] that are driving these samples apart and are presumably also influencing the software programs to obscure the underlying affinity by variegating what is essentially one big component, or more likely a set of components, called Basal Eurasian). More interesting to me, is how admixtures and shared drift affect these subgroups. What could give such subgroups is Hotu and Shuqbah Natufians getting direct input from ancestors of predynastics, which increases shared drift with Egyptians, to the exclusion of Raqefet Natufian-Loosdrecht Taforalt, and to the exclusion of Dinka-admixed pastoralist-Somalis. (This is in addition to some possible backflow from Mesopotamia. But, needless to say, this backflow scenario wouldn't explain predynastics possessing this component, as I've already established in the first sentences of this paragraph). We'll have to wait and see how these subgroups fit the existing data, in terms of uniparentals and morphology. One could say that this shared drift scenario between Hotu and predynastics, could be reflected in some uniparentals (e.g. E-M123), which show Egyptians being in a MENA subgroup that generally excludes East Africans and Maghrebis. However, this doesn't really work because then the Raqefet Natufians with Y-DNAs sister to E-M123, should be in the Hotu-Naqada subgroup, which they aren't.
Keep in mind that Raqefet Natufians (discussed by the abstract in the OP) are not Shuqbah Nafufians. The difference is that the former, much like Natufians in general, have never been shown to have substantial morphological affinities to predynastics (generally speaking, Natufians, like many palaeolithic populations, don't resemble modern populations). That would be Shuqbah Natufians who resemble predynastics, and that's probably because they're largely transplants from Egypt, unlike most other Natufians, who are more like hybrids, with some having African ancestry that is not even Egyptian, but rather, Sub-Saharan African, as mtDNA L2 in PPN confirms. You can thank the blogs and all of its 'influencers', for overhyping and exaggerating the affinities of Egyptians and Natufians (see the 3 abstracts thread where Antalas, for instance, was even making direct links between Bedouins and Egyptians and Natufians) to the point where some would think Egyptians having better relationships with other farmers would be weird. Comment I made weeks ago:
And we can tell, as you pointed out, that northern Mediterranean samples from the Mesolithic (Muge) and Neolithic will have this admixture, even though talk of Natufian ancestry in Egyptians is all the rage now and no one is talking about the fact that predynastics and certain farmers were closer, morphologically (with only Shuqbah Natufians being closer, presumably). --Swenet
EDIT: @Slimjim. Too bad Briggs comments don't really help us connect the dots specifically in terms of the excess genetic affinity compared to Raqefet Natufians (Briggs has Hotu Cave as Type A + B + C, Egyptians as Type B, and Shuqbah Natufians as Type B, while Raqefet Natufians whose aDNA we have, have never been analyzed in this manner). But it is helpful that he called out African ancestry in that Hotu sample, which we now know has the highest % of Basal Eurasian in Eurasia. Taforalt might have the highest levels of Basal Eurasian so far out of all ancient samples, if that recent report is correct (and I'm not sure that it is).
Posts: 8876 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
The real question is then, is basically how representative of predynastic Egyptians is this? As you. said we would need to see more Predynastics sampled to really make any conclusions
Another thing is would the mainstream academia actually publish a predynastic A. Egypt study if it revealed such results without wording it to sound like its Eurasian dominated. Because if this is the trend for other predynastic samples then it kinda goes against the mainstream narritive they tried to spin with Abu Sier...IDK.
quote:Originally posted by BrandonP:
quote:Originally posted by Itoli: No there’s something a lot more weird going on. Look at the other samples from the late period, they have considerably more of the pre dynastic component. The Abusir mummies, if they’re representative, look a lot more like foreign transplants or an endogenous foreign community rather than assimilated migrants.
FWIW, an endogenous foreign community (possibly Hyksos-descended) does seem like a probable identity for them. We would need more Lower Egyptian samples from a broad time range to test for how commonplace such communities were in ancient Egypt.
Posts: 8872 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic