Nomads don't build civilizations?

Apollo

Staff Member
No DNA tests were done pre- New Kingdom/Ptolemaic dynasty . So until this very day there is NO actual representative Ancient Egyptian sample.

Referring to Ptolemaic dynasty to New Kingdom as representative of the Ancient Egyptian sample is fraudulent. Even those who carried out the tests made a clear disclaimer saying that those tests are NOT representative.

So why do you keep pushing this narrative?
People did secondary analyses on those samples and found no real major ethnic turn over. You can detect admixture events even without having ancestral samples/ghost populations.

Don't hold your breath on Beja-like Ancient Egyptians. It won't happen. Ancient Nubia is where those people lived.

Ancient Egypt was based on Mesopotamian technology. They did not develop the basics of that civilization on their own. AE-Mesopotamian ties are super old.
 

madaxweyne

madaxweyne
VIP
It would be great if we could form a united cushetic/ region union (not merging Nations). But the main issue is religion. If the day comes that we create an economic pact one can only hope.
Religion doesn't matter anymore in my opinion why because their are Arab Christians in Palestine Iraq and Egypt who are considered by muslims to be their Arab brothers

Also don't confusee ancient conflicts for modern day conflicts like Ahmed the left handed that's like saying Arabs want to kill Christian Europeans because of the crusades which they don't btwo
They even invite millions of Christians to Palestine and bethlehem

Anyhow they are still our cushite cousins regardless of religion or whatever
 
People did secondary analyses on those samples and found no real major ethnic turn over. You can detect admixture even without having ancestral samples/ghost populations.

Don't hold your breath on Beja-like Ancient Egyptians. It won't happen.

Ancient Egypt was based on Mesopotamian technology. They did not develop the basics of that civilization on their own. AE-Mesopotamian ties are super old.
How could they determine that there was no major ethnic turn over when there was no samples pre-New Kingdom? Isn't it blatantly obvious that they wouldn't find any ethnic turn over if they were only analysing samples from the same time period?

Pre-dynastic Upper Egyptians were ethnically and racially the same as their southern neighbours and that's been proven. The Ancient Egyptian civilisation started in Upper Egypt, not in the North of the country. These are facts.

Mesopotamia and Ancient Egyptian art, culture, language etc have little to no connection unless you're a MENA supremacist spokesman which would make you the equivalent of an Arabian centrist.
 
How could they determine that there was no major ethnic turn over when there was no samples pre-New Kingdom? Isn't it blatantly obvious that they wouldn't find any ethnic turn over if they were only analysing samples from the same time period?

Pre-dynastic Upper Egyptians were ethnically and racially the same as their southern neighbours and that's been proven. The Ancient Egyptian civilisation started in Upper Egypt, not in the North of the country. These are facts.

Mesopotamia and Ancient Egyptian art, culture, language etc have little to no connection unless you're a MENA supremacist spokesman which would make you the equivalent of an Arabian centrist.

[[Mesopotamia and Ancient Egyptian art, culture, language etc have little to no connection unless you're a MENA supremacist spokesman which would make you the equivalent of an Arabian centrist.]]

True that... and also morrocan Berbers entertain that its MENA.
 

Apollo

Staff Member
How could they determine that there was no major ethnic turn over when there was no samples pre-New Kingdom? Isn't it blatantly obvious that they wouldn't find any ethnic turn over if they were only analysing samples from the same time period?

Pre-dynastic Upper Egyptians were ethnically and racially the same as their southern neighbours and that's been proven. The Ancient Egyptian civilisation started in Upper Egypt, not in the North of the country. These are facts.

Mesopotamia and Ancient Egyptian art, culture, language etc have little to no connection unless you're a MENA supremacist spokesman which would make you the equivalent of an Arabian centrist.
There is no concrete evidence that there was a historic racial difference between Delta and Upper AEs. Present-day Delta and Upper Copts are identical, suggesting that in the past there was no real difference. Similar thing exists in Somalis, the difference between ethnic North and ethnic South Somalis is extremely minimal. The present-day noticeable racial difference between Delta and Upper Muslim Egyptians is because of more recent intermixing with Sudanese Arabs nearer to the Sudan-Egyptian border. Cultural barriers were removed because they are both Arabic speaking Muslims. Also, some places in Upper Egypt may have purchased more SSA slaves who got there on caravan routes headed for Delta Egypt or the Ottomans.

As for the ethnic turnover thing, they can chop the genome into segments and look for if there were major admixture events in a population. People did that for the AE samples and found no real significant ones. The SSA segments in those AEs were not recently significantly reduced.
 
There is no concrete evidence that there was a historic racial difference between Delta and Upper AEs. Present-day Delta and Upper Copts are identical, suggesting that in the past there was no real difference. Similar thing exists in Somalis, the difference between ethnic North and ethnic South Somalis is extremely minimal. The present-day noticeable racial difference between Delta and Upper Muslim Egyptians is because of more recent intermixing with Sudanese Arabs nearer to the Sudan-Egyptian border. Cultural barriers were removed because they are both Arabic speaking Muslims. Also, some places in Upper Egypt may have purchased more SSA slaves who got there on caravan routes headed for Delta Egypt or the Ottomans.

As for the ethnic turnover thing, they can chop the genome into segments and look for if there were major admixture events in a population. People did that for the AE samples and found no real significant ones. The SSA segments in those AEs were not recently significantly reduced.
Red herrings.

You're evidence for there being no racial difference is on the presumption that Upper Egyptians Copts are AE, which is itself categorically false. Why would there be this discourse if I agreed with you on that premise in the first place?

Euro/MENA/Arabian centrists would have us believe that an Ancient Upper Egyptian was more closely related to a Mesopotamian than a Lower Nubian who shared the same culture, same religion, same art, same gods etc.

As or the ethnic turn over argument... Let's read what the researchers who took the DNA tests from those samples you keep quoting as representative have said:

"More specifically, it can supplement and serve as a corrective to archaeological and literary data that are often unevenly distributed across time, space and important constituents of social difference (such as gender and class) as well as modern genetic data from contemporary populations that may not be fully representative of past populations."


"However, we note that all our genetic data were obtained from a single site in Middle Egypt and may not be representative for all of ancient Egypt. It is possible that populations in the south of Egypt were more closely related to those of Nubia"

The study itself mentions the fact that there has been a huge Greek settlement in the area where the DNA's were extracted:

"Written sources indicate that by the third century BCE Abusir el-Meleq was at the centre of a wider region that comprised the northern part of the Herakleopolites province, and had close ties with the Fayum and the Memphite provinces, involving the transport of wheat, cattle-breeding, bee-keeping and quarrying42. In the early Roman Period, the site appears to have been the main centre in its own district42. Abusir el-Meleq's proximity to, and close ties with, the Fayum are significant in the context of this study as the Fayum in particular saw a substantial growth in its population during the first hundred years of Ptolemaic rule, presumably as a result of Greek immigration33,4"


Ancient Egyptian mummy genomes suggest an increase of Sub-Saharan African ancestry in post-Roman periods
Verena J. Schuenemann,1,2,* Alexander Peltzer,3,4,* Beatrix Welte,1 W. Paul van Pelt,5 Martyna Molak,6Chuan-Chao Wang,4 Anja Furtwängler,1 Christian Urban,1 Ella Reiter,1 Kay Nieselt,3 Barbara Teßmann,7Michael Francken,1 Katerina Harvati,1,2,8 Wolfgang Haak,a,4,9 Stephan Schiffels,b,4 and Johannes Krausec,1,2,4

Source: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5459999/


This is what you keep on quoting as representative when those who carried out the tests claimed that essentially the DNA's tested is NOT representative.
 

Diaspora ambassador

Representative of Bari
Religion doesn't matter anymore in my opinion why because their are Arab Christians in Palestine Iraq and Egypt who are considered by muslims to be their Arab brothers

Also don't confusee ancient conflicts for modern day conflicts like Ahmed the left handed that's like saying Arabs want to kill Christian Europeans because of the crusades which they don't btwo
They even invite millions of Christians to Palestine and bethlehem

Anyhow they are still our cushite cousins regardless of religion or whatever
You cannot compare our conflict with the arab ones.

Simply because our conflict is not ever yet. Our territories are still being occupied. Until all somali regions are liberated the conflict will continue. It may not be full out war but it will be shady diplomacy and local hostilities.
 
Ah shit, here we go again. I'm really getting sick to death about this debate, of wether the Ancient Egyptians were black, white, yellow, blue or beige.
And im even more sick, of anyone and everyone claiming it. From pale Northern Italians to blick AAs and Afro-Caribbeans to langaab smelly Copts and Armenians to savage sandnigger Arabs and Berbers, and now confused skinny Geljires.

Alhamdulillah, my ancestors were humble fishermen off the North Bari coast, from my father's side, and humble nomads wandering the Southwestern Frontiers of Somaliweyn, from my mother's side.

This is me, who I am, and I'm pleased with this. I don't have any hurt and bitterness, that they were this, and not part of a glorious Ancient Empire. A Civilization mind you, that i, as a Muslim, should be vehemently against and dislike, due to the many crimes it had committed. In the forms of persecuting and enslaving the Children of Isreal (When they were pious believers). As well as mistreating, going against, not believing, not accept, harming, jailing, and many other crimes, against three Prophets of Allah SWT: Musa AS and his brother Harun AS and Yusuf AS.
Yusuf saw was made a vizier and second only to the pharoah, who treated him like his own son.
Mind you nabi Ibrahim saw was graciously welcomed by the pharoah and given Hagara, the grandmother of the prophet muhammad saw.
 

madaxweyne

madaxweyne
VIP
You cannot compare our conflict with the arab ones.

Simply because our conflict is not ever yet. Our territories are still being occupied. Until all somali regions are liberated the conflict will continue. It may not be full out war but it will be shady diplomacy and local hostilities.
That's a nationalist war has nothing to do with religion if it did you would care and about hararis but you don't even though they were United with somalis for a long time
 

Abdullnur

Logic over everything
Where does this self hatred come from

You do know that not everyone was a nomad.
We did have the all you need to become a kingdom, sultanate and empires. From sea faring people to nomads every single part of our society has a great history. For starters it was the nomads that mostly expanded their territories that is the reason the 5 somali regions are so big compared to the somali population. The coastal empires and sultanates defeated the portugees, romans etc with some help from the ottomans. The fight against the brittish and italians our ancastors where great fighters. Do not blame them all for our misfortunes now. Just sit back and see the republic grow again in the decades to come.

You using the word empire every loosely. And it's not self hatred more like self observation. Why weren't we able to what other people seem to natural do.
 

Abdullnur

Logic over everything
The reason why Somalis are nomads is because we live in a damn desert.

Central-Northern Somalia cannot support large dense populations that are farmers. Comparing places that don’t even receive 300mm of rainfall a year to England, China, Ethiopia is ridiculous.

The jubba and shaballe were very lush . would have been a good start.
 

Abdullnur

Logic over everything
You are babbling nonsense I couldn't get any of it

I think I know you're problem because I was their you keep contemplating Somali history or Somali people as it's own distinct group with no influences and connections this is false

Somalis are not a group of their own and they belong to the cushitic people's of North East Africa including the Ethio semitic speaking cushites

That where the somalis started of as a people from among those people

I hope this makes things clear for you

So our whole culture is bastardized.?? I would have to agree with you , and thus making my point .
 

Diaspora ambassador

Representative of Bari
You using the word empire every loosely. And it's not self hatred more like self observation. Why weren't we able to what other people seem to natural do.
Why are you searching for european empires in the sence of empires. The ajuraan and awdal both reached empire status in their peaks. But i gues everyone has his/her own opinion about that. Seriously did you think that the habasha empire could deal with invasions like the ajuuraan who dealt with two invasions around the same time. The difference is other empires go out and colonise and ours did not realy do so. But advanced almost all of the sultanates had. From kabinets to ambassadors.
 

4head

The one and only 4head
As far as i'm concerned, desert people in general don't have greater civilisation than the agricultural based civilisations. If Sumer (Ancient Mesopotamia, 4500 years ago) were able to build a civilisation, it's primarily because of 1) good climate. The rivers of Euphrate and the Tiger river were in aboundance. They could feed a lot of people, even more than the actual people of Canada.
2) you need people. As i said, desert people are not that numberous. The climate is harsh, they are barely surviving. They are divided into small human groups, that they call "tribes" or "clans". And 3) you need agriculture. Without agriculture, without a writing script. Sumerians had it before everyone because of the need of writing what they were producing but also for religious reasons. Without organised religions and without agriculture, Sumerians wouldn't discover scripture.

Somalis have a lot in common with other desert-like people in Africa but also in the Arabica Peninsula. Without Islam, Somalis and Arabs were living in harsh and difficult times. Don't get me wrong, Yemeni Sabeans had scripture and even a small civilisation. But as usual, it doesn't last that long. For millenium, these people lived in desert, wandering about life and in a small group of people. Why the need of a greater civilisation when you can walk in the desert with your tribe and your people? Anyway, we didn't have a great civilisation. But the Ajuraans tried to estabilish a civilisation, but unfortunetely it didn't last that long. The rebellious trait of Somalis didn't allow that.



Somalis should be more docile, kin to domination just like Ethiopians:duck:
 

Abdullnur

Logic over everything
Why are you searching for european empires in the sence of empires. The ajuraan and awdal both reached empire status in their peaks. But i gues everyone has his/her own opinion about that. Seriously did you think that the habasha empire could deal with invasions like the ajuuraan who dealt with two invasions around the same time. The difference is other empires go out and colonise and ours did not realy do so. But advanced almost all of the sultanates had. From kabinets to ambassadors.

What did the ajuran produce , don't get me wrong nice kingdom but not and empire.
 

Trending

Latest posts

Top