Cranial morphology studies prove Cushitic Kerma to be the closest related peoples to Early dynastic

Status
Not open for further replies.
Kerma (Cushitic) is the closest population to Early Dynastic Egypt.

"The Predynastic populations studied here, from Naqada and Badari, are both Upper Egyptian samples, while the Dynastic Egyptian sample (Tarkhan) is from Lower Egypt. The Dynastic Nubian sample is from Upper Nubia (Kerma). Previous analyses of cranial variation found the Badari and Early Predynastic Egyptians to be more similar to other African groups than to Mediterranean or European populations (Keita, 1990; Zakrzewski, 2002). In addition, the Badarians have been described as near the centroid of cranial and dental variation among Predynastic and Dynastic populations studied (Irish, 2006; Zakrzewski, 2007). This suggests that, at least through the Early Dynastic period, the inhabitants of the Nile valley were a continuous population of local origin, and no major migration or replacement events occurred during this time.

Studies of cranial morphology also support the use of a Nubian (Kerma) population for a comparison of the Dynastic period, as this group is likely to be more closely genetically related to the early Nile valley inhabitants than would be the Late Dynastic Egyptians, who likely experienced significant mixing with other Mediterranean populations
(Zakrzewski, 2002). A craniometric study found the Naqada and Kerma populations to be morphologically similar (Keita, 1990). Given these and other prior studies suggesting continuity (Berry et al., 1967; Berry and Berry, 1972), and the lack of archaeological evidence of major migration or population replacement during the Neolithic transition in the Nile valley, we may cautiously interpret the dental health changes over time as primarily due to ecological, subsistence, and demographic changes experienced throughout the Nile valley region."

Source:

Starling, JT Stock. (2007). Dental Indicators of Health and Stress in Early Egyptian and Nubian Agriculturalists: A Difficult Transition and Gradual Recovery. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY 134:520–528
 
Last edited:
dendrogram2.jpg



Our results suggest that the Gurna population has conserved the trace of an ancestral genetic structure from an ancestral East African population, characterized by a high M1 haplogroup frequency. The current structure of the Egyptian population may be the result of further influence of neighbouring populations on this ancestral population."

Source: Stevanovitch A, Gilles A, Bouzaid E, et al. (2004) Mitochondrial DNA sequence diversity in a sedentary population from Egypt.Ann Hum Genet. 68(Pt 1):23-39.)
 
I always assumed it was Cushites who built ancient Egypt. Let’s be real, like backward Berbers or Arabs had the brains to pull of a civilization like that.
:siilaanyolaugh:
And if Berbers built Ancient Egypt, why was its sister civilization (the land of Punt) in the Horn of Africa? Wouldn’t it be in present day Morocco or Algeria? But instead you find all the cultural similarities and heritage with Cushitic people and not other Hamites. That’s proof enough in my book.
:damedamn:
 
I’ve always suspected the Egyptians were Cushitic, there’s no other explanation. They just have more Levantine/West Asian admixture than we Somalis do.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Trending

Top