Home | Quotations | Misc Notes | Notes 2 | Hair | DemicDiff | Diversity | DNA| Asian IQ | Keita2008 data | Blood |  Debunk3

Egypt in Africa |  Black-Greek-DNA links | Notes 3 |Notes 4| Notes 5 | Notes 6 | Notes 7 | Misc news clips | Ethiopians | Nubians | 
African Tmeline| Mesopotamia | Egypt- A Tropical Civ | Notes8| Notes 9 | Notes 10 | Notes 11

Quotes:

"It is a further surprise that the Epipalaeolithic
Natufian of Israel from whom the Neolithic realm was
assumed to arise has a clear link to Sub-Saharan Africa."

"This dimensions supports the picture documented by genetics that the
extension of Neolithic agriculture from the Near East westward
to Europe and across North Africa was accomplished by a
process of demic diffusion (11–15). If the Late Pleistocene
Natufian sample from Israel is the source from which that
Neolithic spread was derived, then there was clearly a Sub-
Saharan African element present of almost equal importance as
the Late Prehistoric Eurasian element."

"This placement suggests that there may have been a
Sub-Saharan African element in the make-up of the Natufians
(the putative ancestors of the subsequent Neolithic) .."

"If this analysis shows nothing else, it demonstrates that the 
oft-repeated European feeling that the Cro-Magnons are ‘‘us’’ 
(47) is more a product of anthropological folklore than the 
result of the metric data available from the skeletal remains."

"In dendrograms such as Fig. 1, the little Natufian sample
clusters with the Mesolithic of France, the North African
Epipalaeolithic, and the European Upper Palaeolithic, but the
lengths of each of these twigs show that the relationships are
comparatively remote. These are all Late Pleistocene or very
early post-Pleistocene groups, and they are also noticeably more
robust than more recent human groups. The three Niger-Congospeaking
groups (the Congo from Gabon, the Dahomey from
Benin, and the Haya from Tanzania) cluster together away from
most of the other samples. They do show a somewhat more
distant link to the Nubians and the Nubian Bronze Age, who are
so close to each other that they were combined for subsequent
analyses."

SOURCE: C. Loring Brace, et al. The questionable contribution of the 
Neolithic and the Bronze Age to European craniofacial form.
PNAS, January 3, 2006. vol. 103. no. 1

Death of the Natufians? Touted 'Natufian killer" studies shows precisely the opposite.

Natufians “pinned” in place finally as unrelated to the European Neolithic? Hardly.. The Natufians physically still remain key pioneers of the Neolithic due to (a) their physical variability and (b) tropical characteristics as part of that variability that show affinities to Sub-Saharan Africans and tropically adapted older Euros who resembled Sub-Saharan Africans.

“PINNED” in PLACE? Assorted “biodiversity” and Aryan proponents tout the study of Pinhasi et al 2004, which found: “Epipalaeolithic populations from the Natufian Levant were noticeably different to the Mesolithic populations described from the Danube Gorge, the western Mediterranean, and central Europe.”
But such “difference” is less than earth-shattering. The Natufians had extensive variability as noted by Pinhasi et al in the same study. 
[Quote] “However, results of the principal components analyses for region 1 indicate an overlap in morphological variability between Natufian, C¸ atal Ho¨yu¨ k, and C¸ ayo¨nu¨ specimens...” 

In short, touted study shows substantial overlap in various physical features between the Natufians and other comparison groups. It is clear then that the Natufians, while not IDENTICAL to the other groups, share many of the same diverse features. Statistical averages seeking an ‘average’ Natufian “type” obscure this variability. It is therefore not necessary for the “average” Natufian to match the “average" of the other groups. The index of overlapping variability shows that the Natufian variation is quite within the range of the other comparison groups. This undermines the attempts of “biodiversity” proponents to create a bogus Natufian “true type”, that can be discounted if there is not a perfect or “unequivocal” match someplace else.

Assorted “biodiversity” proponents also use a later study by Pinhasi et al 2009 (Pinhasi & Cramon-Taubadel (2009) Craniometric Data Supports Demic Diffusion Model. PLoS ONE 4(8)) to imply that (a) for the Natufians to have any influence they must be involved in some sort of direct line of migration or diffusion into Europe and (b) that Pinhasi “excludes” the Natufians from any relationship with Europeans. 

In fact, the touted “Natufian killer” study does nothing of the sort, and actually undermines the “reality based” “biodiversity” claim in 4 ways: (a) The study looks at Southwest Asian movement into Europe and does not specifically address the Natufians, (b) Pinhasi 2004 shows overlapping variability between one of the Aceramic sites (Çayönü) and the Natufians, (c) it is not necessary for absolutely identical Natufian features -circa 11,500 BC- to show up in Europe (the Greek site Nea Nikomedia- circa 6,150 BC) to “prove” Natufian relevance, and (d) one of the touted affinity diagrams from the study actually shows the Natufians clustering with Central European Mesolithic. This latter points confirms Brace 2005 and Holiday (1999, 1997) who found that older Euros as in the Mesolithic and Neolithic, resembled today’s tropical, sub-Saharan Africans.

==========================

[b]Conservative mainstream Oxford
Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt shows
ancient Egypt derived from an African
cultural sub-stratum[/b]

[QUOTE:]

[i]"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.."[/i]

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

[img]http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_70QeGoT_fmI/SwN5Zck3u8I/AAAAAAAAAW4/V8IBJPJN68A/s1600/keita2008m35.jpg[/img]

[quote]"The genetic data do not support a model of demic difusion by farmers from the Levant to explain the Neolithic in northern or Eastern Africa, or the spread of the Afro-Asiatic languages into Africa." [endquote]
--From: Bengston, John D. (ed.), In Hot Pursuit of Language in Prehistory: Essays in the four fields of anthropology. 2008. John Benjamins Publishing: pp. 3-16)

"Thus, we propose that the current distribution
of Ethiosemitic reflects a process of language
diffusion through existing African populations
with little gene flow from the Arabian Peninsula
(i.e. a language shift)."

Oxford encyclopedia of ancient Egypt	Encyclopedia of the Archaeology of Ancient Egypt and Ancient Egypt: Anatomy of a Civilization	Limb proportion studies	The Egyptians: (n introduction 2005) textbook
Quotes: [i]"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.."[/i] Source: Donald Redford (2001) The Oxford encyclopedia of ancient Egypt, Volume 3. Oxford University Press. p. 28	Quotes: 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.. In general, the inhabitants of Upper Egypt and Nubia had the greatest biological affinity to people of the Sahara and more southerly areas." (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) and "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)	Quotes: "The raw values in Table 6 suggest that Egyptians had the “super-Negroid” body plan described by Robins (1983).. This pattern is supported by Figure 7 (a plot of population mean femoral and tibial lengths; data from Ruff, 1994), which indicates that the Egyptians generally have tropical body plans. Of the Egyptian samples, only the Badarian and Early Dynastic period populations have shorter tibiae than predicted from femoral length. Despite these differences, all samples lie relatively clustered together as compared to the other populations." (Zakrzewski, S.R. (2003). "Variation in ancient Egyptian stature and body proportions". AJPA 121 (3): 219-229. Quote: "Intralimb (crural and brachial) indices are significantly higher in ancient Egyptians than in American Whites (except crural index among females), i.e., Egyptians have relatively longer distal segments (Table 4). Intralimb indices are not significantly different between Egyptians and American Blacks... Many of those who have studied ancient Egyptians have commented on their characteristically ‘‘tropical’’ or ‘‘African’’ body plan (Warren, 1897; Masali, 1972; Robins, 1983; Robins and Shute, 1983, 1984, 1986; Zakrzewski, 2003). Egyptians also fall within the range of modern African populations (Ruff and Walker, 1993), but close to the upper limit of modern Europeans as well, at least for the crural index (brachial indices are definitely more ‘‘African’’).. In terms of femoral and tibial length to total skeletal height proportions, we found that ancient Egyptians are significantly different from US Blacks, although still closer to Blacks than to Whites." ("Stature estimation in ancient Egyptians..' Raxter and Ruff et al. Am J Phys Anthropol. 2008, Jun;136(2):147-55	Quotes: "Ancient Egyptian civilization was, in ways and to an extent usually not recognized, fundamentally African. The evidence of both language and culture reveals these African roots. The origins of Egyptian ethnicity lay in the areas south of Egypt. The ancient Egyptian language belonged to the Afrasian family (also called Afroasiatic or, formerly, Hamito-Semitic). The speakers of the earliest Afrasian languages, according to recent studies, were a set of peoples whose lands between 15,000 and 13,000 B.C. stretched from Nubia in the west to far northern Somalia in the east. They supported themselves by gathering wild grains. The first elements of Egyptian culture were laid down two thousand years later, between 12,000 and 10,000 B.C., when some of these Afrasian communities expanded northward into Egypt, bringing with them a language directly ancestral to ancient Egyptian. They also introduced to Egypt the idea of using wild grains as food." (Christopher Ehret (1996) "Ancient Egyptian as an African Language, Egypt as an African Culture." in: Egypt in Africa, Theodore Celenko (ed), Indiana University Press) "Ancient Egypt belongs to a language group known as 'Afroasiatic' (formerly called Hamito-Semitic) and its closest relatives are other north-east African languages from Somalia to Chad. Egypt's cultural features, both material and ideological and particularly in the earliest phases, show clear connections with that same broad area. In sum, ancient Egypt was an African culture, developed by African peoples, who had wide ranging contacts in north Africa and western Asia." (Morkot, Robert (2005) The Egyptians: An Introduction. Routledge. p. 10)
"Populations and cultures now found south of the desert roamed far to the north. The culture of Upper Egypt, which became dynastic Egyptian civilization, could fairly be called a Sudanese transplant." (Egypt and Sub-Saharan Africa: Their Interaction. Encyclopedia of Precolonial Africa, by Joseph O. Vogel, AltaMira Press, Walnut Creek, California (1997), pp. 465-472 )	"..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." (Barry Kemp, "Ancient Egypt Anatomy of a Civilisation. (2005) Routledge. p. 52-60)

CRETAN (MINOAN) POPULATION IMAGES

FEMALE FIGURES








MALE FIGURES

Egypt in Africa |  Black-Greek-DNA links | Notes 3 |Notes 4| Misc news clips | Ethiopians