The 13 sites in question.
Lower Egyptian sites
Upper Egyptian sites
From L to R, U to D: Valley of the Queens, Deir el-Medina, Deir el-Bahri | Deir el-Bahari, Thebes.
Note: Wadi Takarkori isn't present on Goggle Map, hence I used Tadrart Acacus for reference (the Wadi is located in its soutern portion).
Last edited:
Garaad Awal
Zubeyri, Hanafi Maturidi
This is what I am talking about
Garaad Awal
Zubeyri, Hanafi Maturidi
Links?
The alchemist
VIP
The Takarkori site is near where the first North African child was mummified. I wonder how close they genetically were, contexting the 2000-year time difference.
Ancient Egyptians will show considerable West Asian genetics primarily mediated by characteristics of Levant inhabitants.
If you remove the Levantine layer of Natufian with their accompanied West Asian substructure, a Somali will have more Natufian-like DNA indigenous to the region than them, no question. This, of course, changes the further back you go in time. A Mesolithic Egyptian will not be similar to a sample from the Middle Kingdom whatsoever in terms of endemic proportions. Ancient Egypt was more of a cultural and traditional, civilizational continuity, but the genetics were very context-specific because the region was clearly more dynamic.
We can expect differential synergistic substructures in Egypt at different times and places. This narrow one-dimensional picture of the region is why most people are conceptually handicapped and blindsided. You have Egyptians on one hand who are set on a very pre-defined association of continuity, you have Eurocentric types who want to just come to negate the association between whatever is below Egypt creating a false picture of the region, and then you have the African centrism groups who want to emphasize a one-dimensional false picture of the region as well.
All these groups are wrong because they mask complexity on one side or the other because of ideology.
The fact that Somalis carry Natufian-like DNA tells me the endemic DNA of such Meslolithic derivation stemmed from somewhere in Southern Egypt with a continuity toward Nubia. It's quite clear this is the case when you see the Early Kenyan Pastoralists. Egyptians are not the center point of the Nile Valley nor what defines the region.
Still, I think it is good to see the result. I wonder what it really means by how pastoralism came via demic diffusion. I have said in the past that pastoralism might developed before farming in the region. But we will see. Because if it is true that those Libyan samples are strictly endemic, then we have to write a model on pastoralism and suddenly my idea about domestication in the pre-historical Nile Valley suddenly doesn't suddenly become strong. There was indirect evidence that the horned mountain sheep was independently domesticated around the time of those samples, I think.
Ancient Egyptians will show considerable West Asian genetics primarily mediated by characteristics of Levant inhabitants.
If you remove the Levantine layer of Natufian with their accompanied West Asian substructure, a Somali will have more Natufian-like DNA indigenous to the region than them, no question. This, of course, changes the further back you go in time. A Mesolithic Egyptian will not be similar to a sample from the Middle Kingdom whatsoever in terms of endemic proportions. Ancient Egypt was more of a cultural and traditional, civilizational continuity, but the genetics were very context-specific because the region was clearly more dynamic.
We can expect differential synergistic substructures in Egypt at different times and places. This narrow one-dimensional picture of the region is why most people are conceptually handicapped and blindsided. You have Egyptians on one hand who are set on a very pre-defined association of continuity, you have Eurocentric types who want to just come to negate the association between whatever is below Egypt creating a false picture of the region, and then you have the African centrism groups who want to emphasize a one-dimensional false picture of the region as well.
All these groups are wrong because they mask complexity on one side or the other because of ideology.
The fact that Somalis carry Natufian-like DNA tells me the endemic DNA of such Meslolithic derivation stemmed from somewhere in Southern Egypt with a continuity toward Nubia. It's quite clear this is the case when you see the Early Kenyan Pastoralists. Egyptians are not the center point of the Nile Valley nor what defines the region.
Still, I think it is good to see the result. I wonder what it really means by how pastoralism came via demic diffusion. I have said in the past that pastoralism might developed before farming in the region. But we will see. Because if it is true that those Libyan samples are strictly endemic, then we have to write a model on pastoralism and suddenly my idea about domestication in the pre-historical Nile Valley suddenly doesn't suddenly become strong. There was indirect evidence that the horned mountain sheep was independently domesticated around the time of those samples, I think.
Garaad Awal
Zubeyri, Hanafi Maturidi
Pastoralism was developed before farming. African pastoralism was indigenous to the Eastern Sahara
Links for the study:
isba10.ut.ee
As for the Egyptian genomic study by Nada Salem, well, it’s in another conference, but the abstract was already online for quite a while.
Programme - ISBA 10
The final conference programme will become available on the 1st of June 2023.
Curious, are you implying that Mesolithic southern Egyptians (Basically Mesolithic Nubians from Wadi Halfa) would be heavily Natufian? Aren’t these people very “SSA” in terms of dental non-metric traits?
That being said, what do you mean by the Natufian component “excluding the Levantine & West Asian stuff”? The ~30% IBM-like material, I presume?
Last, from what I’ve heard, this study will only have Predynastic Egyptians (not Mesolithic but rather late Neolithic), hence if you have to make a guess, what would their profiles look like?
Dental non-metric traits show that most samples are relatively homogeneous to each other, with some outliers in Lower Egypt, and a rather removed out group in the southern Western Desert. While cranial metrics showed strong continuity between Middle Kingdom Thebans with predynastic people of the region.
Of course it’s not “homogeneous” in the sense that some Bush tribes are homogeneous.
Didn’t dental non-metric Traits also show that they’re similar to Nubians? And if so, do you also expect the predynastic Egyptian samples to also be similar to the Kadruka sample genetically, or do you expect the results to end up similar to the Ptolemaic/Roman period samples? Maybe something in between?
Either result wouldn’t surprise me but I do know one thing, when these papers come out you’re going to have people with certain narratives trying to push their agenda and in the process they’re going to twist the evidence to suit them. Most sides pushing agendas won’t be happy with the results because they won’t be able to say “they were black as coal” or “they were white as snow” which is basically the level of understanding Americans have when it comes to recognising the differences between people.
I do not expect them to be similar to the Kadruka sample. You see, dental non-metric analysis actually places predynastic Egyptians, especially the Abydos predynastic sample IN the Egyptian cluster. They're grouped with other Egyptians in terms of 22-trait dendrogram analysis.
They are overlapping with Nubians when cranial dendrograms, PCO, or what have you are applied, but I normally take all these, including my previous statements with caution as Early Dynastic Helwan (near Cairo) was grouped with Nubians too. This shows some similarities in cranial forms might not be rashly attributed to Eurasian vs. proto-Nilotic, rather, there has to be some lingering component from the Mesolithic Helwan culture or similar places.
Moreover, there are similarities between cranial forms when comparing predynastic Egyptians to Nubians, but the Nubians are differentiated via having a higher nasal and gnathic index (with the exception being A-Group Nubians).
Of course, they would not be similar to Ptolemaic/ Roman samples (significantly less Anatolian and less Iran-related material), but the previous result with Nuerat_OldKingdom IMO is a good indication since it's so far the closest temporally (Kadruka came from the Middle Kingdom iirc).
Plus, there are others in the know on this site (namely Shimbiris), and this person said that Old Kingdom samples are "Ancient North Africans with little proto-Nilotic-like component. Whereas later groups from the MK are more West Asian." Granted they are not exactly Predynastic Egyptians, but so far I have yet to come across evidence suggesting a major population introgression during the transition of the Predynastic-Early Dynastic/ Old Kingdom.
That is not really my concern, per se. It's generally accepted that these people were neither.
Last edited:
Interesting, it seems things get even more complicated when you factor in different Eurasian ancestries. Do you mean to say that you expect these samples to be mostly a pure form of native North African ancestry in layman’s terms (which diverged from natufian and entered Africa way before natufians themselves)? If so then these samples would be differentiated from almost everything discovered so far and would probably be a great fit for most of the Eurasian ancestry in modern horn African groups, and in the process point evidence towards the ethnogenesis of modern horn Africans probably happening somewhere around Nubia.
I can see the pure ancient North African theory being the most likely of cases, but it also means that no population currently exists that shows a similar genetic affinity, maybe modern Copts? But I’d imagine their genetic ancestry comprises of Anatolian and Iran related ancestry too, it could be the case that modern middle Easterners with very high levels of Natufian ancestry will have the greatest affinity with these new samples but I’m talking way over my head now.
Last edited:
I just heard something from an associate (about an hour ago. Call him associate_2), but he's vague about it. I do not know if he was even talking about the supposedly existing Predynastic sample.
Maybe we'll get glimpses of the results in a few days since the conference is approaching, and the scholars concerned will often discuss the results during their presentations.
Ultimately, I think (do not quote me for it) they'll be heavily Natufian like the Nuerat sample. I shouldn't be saying this, but another person (not Shimbiris, call him associate_3) divulged to me the components in an Old Kingdom profile he saw: It harbored 5% ANF-like, ~10% Iran-like, some minor IBM, and with the rest being Natufian-like.
As for the "native North Africans" you mentioned...Well, I have seen many subscribing to this theory, but we do not have lithic industries outside the Helwan Mesolithic that support this stance. Perhaps a population once lived in Mesolithic Egypt and harbored more IBM and Omotic-like components than their Natufian kins. This component MIGHT be interpreted as the Natufian-like material in Horn Africans. However, bear in mind these are just speculations.
While we're talking about the ethnogenesis of Horn Africans, it might bring us to an even older age and a more southern place: Al-Khiday from Mesolithic Sudan. The famous anthropologist Joel D. Irish has conducted a dental survey of this prehistoric group and found them clustering closely with later Nubians rather than the Mesolithic SSA-like Waldi Halfa specimen.
I have seen many theories. Some even consider the recently published Middle Neolithic Moroccans (the SKH individuals) similar to Predynastic Egyptians.
For the Copts, I'm afraid their profiles are not good representatives of stuff like Old Kingdom, Early Dynastic, or Predynastic. They harbor too many Anatolian and Iranian-related components. To be honest with you, I'm in the dark as well.
Last edited:
Missed this thread somehow.
I'm more interested in the Takarkori samples than any of the Egyptian ones tbh.
They don't have any extra Neanderthal ancestry compared to SSA populations but are still closest to Taforalt. Could they be almost purely ANA? That would be an amazing find that for such a late period (only ~7000BP).
I'm more interested in the Takarkori samples than any of the Egyptian ones tbh.
They don't have any extra Neanderthal ancestry compared to SSA populations but are still closest to Taforalt. Could they be almost purely ANA? That would be an amazing find that for such a late period (only ~7000BP).
Step a side
VIP
Kadruka is far too the south and way Nilotic shifted in my opinion. These upcoming pre dynastic samples will be similar to old kingdom Egyptians and probably the best source for our North African ancestry.
@Cognitive we have pre dynastic samples from Egypt already right? Would they be similar to these new ones you think?
Garaad Awal
Zubeyri, Hanafi Maturidi
They can't be pure ANA if they are closest to the 55% West Eurasian Taforalt & IBM samples.
It's hard to gauge what they mean by closest though, maybe they're only slightly closer. They obviously don't have any significant West Eurasian if they have SSA levels of Neanderthal ancestry.
But If they completely lack deeper African ancestry the same way that Taforalt does then it would make sense for them to be closest to Taforalt since the West-Eurasian ancestry is downstream of the ANA (they belong to clade excluding other SSA lineages). Any SSA population they tested against with any ancestry splitting off > 100kya would drift away from them.
Edit:
They did say they seem to belong to a previously unknown and isolated lineage. So it probably isn't directly related to ANA.
Last edited:
I am not sure if out of the seven 1 or 2 would be predynastic. Though I did hear from associate_2 that there will be a potential Gebelein predynastic genome at the year’s end.
Let’s wait and see. I’m quite curious too. Apparently associate_2 has gathered some information but he only divulged a little.
Funnily because associate_2 knows the team in question, I actually spent a whole month informing him on other documented predynastic collections across Europe and the Americas in hopes for a contribution to future sequencing. He’s bothered to death by me
.I have absolutely no clue on the Takarkori samples, btw.
Could they be the direct ancestors of beings such as Fulani and Toubou? Perhaps serving as their North African source. That being said I wonder if they’d harbor some basal West African? I don’t think they’ll carry Eastern Saharan ancestry though. Too west.
Could they be the direct ancestors of beings such as Fulani and Toubou? Perhaps serving as their North African source. That being said I wonder if they’d harbor some basal West African? I don’t think they’ll carry Eastern Saharan ancestry though. Too west.
Trending
-
Madow talks about why athletes prefer caadan women over madow women- Started by Dibleyy
- Replies: 49
-
-
Has anone received backhanded compliment when you say your somali?- Started by pinkyandthebrain
- Replies: 89
