Entwined African and Asian genetic roots of medieval peoples of the Swahili coast

[The alchemist]

@Step a side

Oh, yes, I kind of did not want to mention this right now but the proto Soomaali language had the word Geel and Tumal (not an Arabian word). Rendille got the word tumal. Meaning iron-working was present since the proto-Somali language stage. And geel as well. Geel is a South Arabian introduction (the word too, I think), and Iron was also imported from South Arabia, most likely and maybe other places due to trade. Still, I think really this debunks this notion that Somalis came from deep somewhere in Ethiopia. It seems based on linguistics, our people since 2700 years ago, since I speculate proto-Somali is at least that old (the proto-stage of a language can go back way further, but that's the minimum for me), was on the northern coast, and not from deep inside Ethiopia (the strange southern Ethiopia hypothesis). The camel is a desert animal and we know the topography in the north had demand for it. A model that says we lived deep into Ethiopia at the time and received the geel is impossible. If you read expeditions from Westerners that form caravans of many camels, you will see how Ethiopian geography is too difficult if you go beyond the lowlands. Many camels died traversing the land. And the notion that we lived in Ethiopia even further than when we received the geel, the proto-Somali stage is not possible because Y-DNA wise, we just came from the Nile Valley a couple of 100 years earlier. We have an upper bound on individuals in Egypt and the Levant upstream of our E-V32. Next, we completely lack the substantial Mota-related ancestry that is highly present among all the people living where we were hypothetically derived from based on that outdated theory.

We have to completely disassociate ourselves from this Ethiopian ethnogenesis thing and the south-north migration. It is the other way around.

 

[Step a side]

The Cushitic-heavy individual got

I don't know if I have the stamina to sift through 100s of documents on this one. One source I read indirectly was through a Somali scholar and I think Al-Idrisi I found through a peculiar site. You know what, I know how you can hack it.. ask ChatGPT. I know this sounds ridiculous, but that machine can literally quickly source you. Ask it simply, "Did so and so mention Hawiye, " it will respond in the affirmative (technically the machine can't know what affirmation is, but I will not go into how the AI craze is a farce), and then demand the references for sources. It will probably reference Arabic direct sources. Then you can request for it to drop English translation and/or scholarly review and whatever you seek. I think I have found the solution. Because, man, the last thing I want is to check countless texts at the moment, opportunity costs, you feel me? Still, I think this solution will work for you.

No, I don't think Rendille is basal to the others, it is just another separate divergent one that goes back to the same proto-dialect continuum. I don't know specifically if there is South Arabian words but I know there are word commonalities in all the Soomaali languages that is related to subsistence, tool use and stuff that is directly related to other interesting stuff.

I see. I favor the view that states Arabia is overrepresented sample-wise. That skew causes problems to base an interpretation. So I believe those lineages are likely from Northeast Africa. An Arabian introduction is almost possible to imagine for all the lineages including E-V32, which I don't think people really care to subscribe to unless you're one of those Twitter Arabs brothers.All in all, we need more samples in the Horn of Africa, the broader Nile Valley, including southeast Africa. And yeah, of course, ancient DNA from all those areas too, not to mention Arabian ancient DNA as well. I believe you will see E-M293 and E-V6 and probably new sub-clades too once we have more information on the map.

But you know what, if you check Nile Valley Cushitic mtDNAs too, you will see them popping early in Arabia. I think various migrations happened from Nile Valley to Arabia that is unaccounted for historically and archeologically. I also think certain lineages from Nile Valley likely came to Arabia with the earliest Semitic groups that came down. At this point, the imagination is as good as it gets. But this is a digression.

Yeh don’t worry. I will search up for the hawiye in the south. I remember someone saying that the word hadiya or something similar was used instead of actual Hawiye.

I personally accept a North African/Nile valley dispersion with the E-M78 towards the horn. But E-M293 and E-V6 really seem to have no presence in Egypt/Lower Nubia. It seems the entire parent branch has diversified in Arabia. I also remember reading the old paper of trombetta or cruciani that Eritrea seems to have been the place with the highest diversity of these lineages. We all know Eritrea/Djibouti was the entry point from Arabia throughout history.

Anyways this is just what I observed. We just wait and see for more African samples. Thanks for the feedback

 

[Step a side]

@Step a side

Oh, yes, I kind of did not want to mention this right now but the proto Soomaali language had the word Geel and Tumal (not an Arabian word). Rendille got the word tumal. Meaning iron-working was present since the proto-Somali language stage. And geel as well. Geel is a South Arabian introduction (the word too, I think), and Iron was also imported from South Arabia, most likely and maybe other places due to trade. Still, I think really this debunks this notion that Somalis came from deep somewhere in Ethiopia. It seems based on linguistics, our people since 2700 years ago, since I speculate proto-Somali is at least that old (the proto-stage of a language can go back way further, but that's the minimum for me), was on the northern coast, and not from deep inside Ethiopia (the strange southern Ethiopia hypothesis). The camel is a desert animal and we know the topography in the north had demand for it. A model that says we lived deep into Ethiopia at the time and received the geel is impossible. If you read expeditions from Westerners that form caravans of many camels, you will see how Ethiopian geography is too difficult if you go beyond the lowlands. Many camels died traversing the land. And the notion that we lived in Ethiopia even further than when we received the geel, the proto-Somali stage is not possible because Y-DNA wise, we just came from the Nile Valley a couple of 100 years earlier. We have an upper bound on individuals in Egypt and the Levant upstream of our E-V32. Next, we completely lack the substantial Mota-related ancestry that is highly present among all the people living where we were hypothetically derived from based on that outdated theory.

We have to completely disassociate ourselves from this Ethiopian ethnogenesis thing and the south-north migration. It is the other way around

Yes I was always against the south to north expansion of Somalis. It is north to south simply because of the things you mentioned like the iron, camel introduction as well as lack of Mota among others. It seems modern Somalis haven’t left their ancestral region since the Bronze Age while Oromo, other somaloid have dispersed away from their ancestral lands. The Afar and Saho etc have also stayed in their ancestral territories. It looks like Eritrea was our route towards Somalia . We dispersed from the Hararghe region during the early medieval period to proper colonise the entire horn.

 

[kaahin13]

Yes I was always against the south to north expansion of Somalis. It is north to south simply because of the things you mentioned like the iron, camel introduction as well as lack of Mota among others. It seems modern Somalis haven’t left their ancestral region since the Bronze Age while Oromo, other somaloid have dispersed away from their ancestral lands. The Afar and Saho etc have also stayed in their ancestral territories. It looks like Eritrea was our route towards the north. We dispersed from the Hararghe region during the early medieval period to proper colonise the entire horn.

somalis are the purest cushites out there. other cushites are heavily admixed whether with East African hunter gatherer or Yemeni ancestry. I’ve even seen saho “cushites” with 30% Arabian ancestry

 

[Shangani]

Some Benaadir people get high central Asian on their DNA test results. I’m talking as much as 20%+

I didn't get any central asian in mine and minimal Indian subcontinent mines overwhelming Somali and 25% Arabian peninsula.

 

[Step a side]

somalis are the purest cushites out there. I’ve seen saho “cushites” with 30% Arabian ancestry

Yep you are right, we have kept 90% of the original profile of the early pastoralist that reached the Horn of Africa. Our route towards Somalia was the lowlands of Eritrea however. The Arabian admixture in Sudan and Eritrea is an Iron Age sabean and recent phenomenon with Bedouin tribes like Rashaida and such coming towards the Horn.

 

[Step a side]

I didn't get any central asian in mine and minimal Indian subcontinent mines overwhelming Somali and 25% Arabian peninsula.

Yes not every Benaadir is the same from what I see with the different DNA profiles and when you look at the actual history of the region. When I visit shangaani I see dark Somali looking people as well as pale white persian looking people while others look pseudo Bangladeshi. Their genetic makeup is also not uniformly similar. Some would score more Indian less Arab. While others would score more Arabian less Indian while others would score higher Somali and central Asian. Benaadir coast is a mosaic of different peoples and cultures. The amoudi for example would score higher Arabian while the Qandarshe might score higher Indian-Persian etc.

 

[Zak12]

Now I'm interested in knowing the genetic landscape of medieval Somalia. I know cities like Mogadishu were diverse and had populations of Somalis, Arabs, Iranians and Swahilis.

 

[Moholin01]

There is a new study soon coming out and it contains an ancient sample from the Bronze Age in Khaybar (saudi arabia) >> Y haplogroup T.

Link for this? Or do you know who is gonna publish this and when?

@anonimo @Shimbiris

 

[Khaemwaset]

*Afrocentrists, not Hoteps.

The Afrocentric pull was a needed balance. For centuries, the study tradition of anthropology was way off the mark with the eurocentric interpretation of African history. Both are generally wrong, but the Afrocentric yank was an understandable reaction, granted it was an over-correction. Both were more ideological than honest.

As I have observed through the years, the majority of Humanities is ideology, very down to intricate systemized formations of inference methodology into technical aspects of information gathering and dissemination.

This finger-pointing at Afrocentrism in the form of ridicule is usually ignorant hypocrisy. Note the reference point of those people falls back on the faux pretense of educational integrity presented by the Eurocentric tradition. The mistake of centrality to validity as something representing universal perception is a fallacy. As time passes, we see more and more how wrong it was as things reconfigure anew.

Both Afrocentrism and Eurocentrism are stupid and embarrassing to see.
There is nothing wrong with telling Afrocentrists that they are stupid the same way you should do the same to Eurocentrists

 

[World]

Yes, I’ve heard the high % of Eritrean and Ethiopian DNA they get is actually Arab. I think one of the lads here mentioned i can’t remember if it was @Shimbiris or @Reformed J or maybe someone else.

But my point is, even if they have high percentage of Arabian it pales in comparison to Indian and Iranian. I suppose in Somali culture historically those with Arab ancestry were perceived better than those with Indian and Iranian which is why they over-emphasized one part of their heritage over the other. That’s my theory.

The high Eritrean/Ethiopian is actually Somali. Any Somali with even 10 % actual Arab admixture will have inflated Ethiopian/Eritrean DNA on 23andme.

 

[Angelina]

It's written in Af Soomaali as well as in Italian

Unfortunately, no one has translated Cerulli's works to English. I use Google translate to translate snippets of the book.

I wish someone would translate it to English.

The high Eritrean/Ethiopian is actually Somali. Any Somali with even 10 % actual Arab admixture will have inflated Ethiopian/Eritrean DNA on 23andme.

That means, Cadcads/Reer Barwani are predominately Somali. As of late, the vast majority of results I’ve seen on TikTok and YouTube of Banadiri Somalis has been 20-30% Somali and at least another 30% Ethiopian/Eritrean. Does that means they’re between like 50 to 70% Somali?

 

[World]

I wish someone would translate it to English.

That means, Cadcads/Reer Barwani are predominately Somali. As of late, the vast majority of results I’ve seen on TikTok and YouTube of Banadiri Somalis has been 20-30% Somali and at least another 30% Ethiopian/Eritrean. Does that means they’re between like 50 to 70% Somali?

Yep they’re usually around 40-70 % Somali.

 

[Step a side]

Link for this? Or do you know who is gonna publish this and when?

@anonimo @Shimbiris

Two separate studies. One Neolithic Qatari study called Human populations and demographics in Qatar from the Neolithic to the Late Iron Age. And another study I mentioned earlier which will be publish by Harvard that includes ancient sample from the Bronze Age in Khaybar (saudi arabia) >> Y haplogroup T
And a ancient sample from Yemen from the Iron Age has >>Y haplogroup J1
And two ancient samples from Socotra Island in Yemen >> Y haplogroup J1 and J2

there is this conference that was held in Poland not that long ago I believe not sure if they are linked together.

Large Circular Graves of the Bronze Age at Tayma, Saudi Arabia: Architecture, Chronology and Distribution

The study included archaeogenetic sampling:
https://publications.dainst.org/journals/ejb/article/view/3529/7176

 

[Angelina]

Yep they’re usually around 40-70 % Somali.

So basically would you say that cadcads simply originate from coastal ethnic Somali women who’ve been marrying trades men for centuries?

 

[Odious Delirium]

So basically would you say that cadcads simply originate from coastal ethnic Somali women who’ve been marrying trades men for centuries?

Yeah basically

 

[Moholin01]

Two separate studies. One Neolithic Qatari study called Human populations and demographics in Qatar from the Neolithic to the Late Iron Age. And another study I mentioned earlier which will be publish by Harvard that includes ancient sample from the Bronze Age in Khaybar (saudi arabia) >> Y haplogroup T
And a ancient sample from Yemen from the Iron Age has >>Y haplogroup J1
And two ancient samples from Socotra Island in Yemen >> Y haplogroup J1 and J2

there is this conference that was held in Poland not that long ago I believe not sure if they are linked together.

Large Circular Graves of the Bronze Age at Tayma, Saudi Arabia: Architecture, Chronology and Distribution

The study included archaeogenetic sampling:
https://publications.dainst.org/journals/ejb/article/view/3529/7176

Thanks

 

[The alchemist]

Both Afrocentrism and Eurocentrism are stupid and embarrassing to see.
There is nothing wrong with telling Afrocentrists that they are stupid the same way you should do the same to Eurocentrists

Usually, people who fixate on Afrocentrism are Eurocentric based on their historical perspective and occupy the other end. My point is what is wrong should be corrected either way and that Afrocentrism (not the meme, since there is Afrocentric-based research done that has contributed in their ways) is not exceptionally stupid. It would be disingenuous of us to say that Anta Diop did not contribute to anthropology while at the same time being wrong on things, and a lot of African history researchers that took to actively negate the previous historical traditional work of anthropology did a lot of good filtering.

There is sort of an unfair dichotomy, we pretend it is symmetrically wrong on either side. Sure I agree what is wrong is wrong, no matter what side, but still, remember that up to this day, the traditional disciplines are in large ways Western-centric. Somehow when Africans do their errors, it is pronounced, when Westerners categorically and chronologically spent centuries upon centuries of research bias and fabrication, which ultimately culminated into what we have today (and we still in large part use that research, so bias is going to be there no matter how conscious we are of it). A European professor that makes big errors is seen as a respected inaccuracy, and an African person that proposes a contradictory interpretation is mocked. There is a fundamental lack of respect towards African peoples in the study of humanities if we do not assimilate our language and rationale into a Western-centric way. It has to be palatable in the decorum for the White man otherwise it is not high-brow enough.

I rarely talk about this and I don't favor wrong perspectives either way. I have seen and criticized Afrocentric views on things, my point is, they are not really that ridiculous compared to the "status quo." It's only that we believe that the status quo, no matter how wrong, is more worthy of respect and serious consideration. At the same time, I think the Afrocentric movement is in some way, beyond just the errors, bears some responsibility for the reception it receives. It is a fact that Africans who explore their history are undervalued, but Afrocentrism is an ideology that centers things inherently as if there is a central African historical point of view, based on pan-African ideals which I am unequivocally against (it is married to reactive ideology, which in my opinion is a dangerous limitation of real maturity and ability to rise above issues). I also think Afrocentrism holds back better solutions to the problem. Ideally what we want is for each group to develop the tools to research and understand their place in history in their way. From that, we can learn from each other.

For example, I don't want Western academia or Afrocentrism to say what is a valid perspective on Somali history. You can find data points from diverse places that you can stand to value for what they provide piece by piece through the rigor of knowledge and add that to your corpus of understanding if it holds validity, but you cannot let some foreigners construct a holistic picture of your history and adopt the whole image without consideration; it's frankly bizarre and detrimental. Sadly that was how things were and still are to this day. We still read works by colonialist anthropologists that influenced and set the tone for later works. You cannot remove those colonial-time people from their colonial context, and their works are in large respects reaffirming that context to justify their presence. In a way, when you think about it, anthropology work is extremely effective in pacifying a people if you can convince them of a picture that presupposes an agreeable reception of the colonialist occupation through meticulous biased anthropological narrative-setting.

Then again, I would be lying if I said that I did not benefit from that research. But I delve into it with responsibility, analyzing with a very critical eye, as the majority of it is either conditional in value where you have to discern with an extra layer of research to extract maybe 10% of it as valid without drawing with the inherent constructivist bias and fabrication that seeks to set the trajectories and the rest is inaccurate, with rare moments of transparent accuracy here and there without hurdles. Still, you will find valuable information about rare things, maybe contact with an expression that can elucidate further inquiry and inspire something that further adds to our ethnic historical context.