User Tag List

Page 1 of 7 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 62

Thread: Judeans autosomal DNA2957 days old

  1. #1
    Established Member
    Junior Member
    Last Online
    @
    Join Date
    2010-06-18
    Posts
    113
    Gender
    Phenotype
    Mediterranid
    Jordan Lebanon Syrian Arab Republic

    Default Judeans autosomal DNA

    Ancient Egyptians, Judeans, autosomal DNA (Behar study) and skeletons from Tel Lachish Mass Grave ca. 701 BCE

    Will Moroccan Jews prove to be the Diaspora community that best preserved the genetic heritage of the ancient Hebrews? A group of genetics researchers led by Israeli scientist, Dr. Doron Behar, conducted a genome wide study (i.e. all the genetic data currently available) published in early 2010 to compare Jewish populations, Ashkenazi, Sephardi, and Mizrahi, to see if any genetic information was shared among them and to extrapolate ancient geographical origins.

    Dr. Behar and his team compared Jewish populations to non-Jewish populations from the Middle East and Europe to find the geographical region (via the people that live there) that shows the greatest similarity to Jews today. What Dr. Behar found was that “these results cast light on the variegated genetic architecture of the Middle East, and trace the origins of most Jewish Diaspora communities to the Levant” (Behar 2010: 1). Basically said, Jews are from the Levant. The Levant region consists of several countries which include Egypt, Israel, the Palestinian Territories, Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria.

    Specifically, Dr. Behar found that some, but not all, Jewish populations formed a “cluster” (meaning they are very genetically similar) and thus, share some common origin, with Druze and Cypriot populations (Behar 2010: 1).

    Plotting all the data onto a format that, simply put, shows the probability of genetic similarity and deep genetic origins (see attached picture below of Kernel Density Plot), Behar found not all Jewish populations are identical. Behar found that Ashkenazi and Sephardi Jews overlap, but are somewhat distinct from all other populations. Moroccan Jews formed their own group (cluster) not too distant from Ashkenazi and Sephardi Jews but distinct, Yemenite Jews formed their own group (cluster) that overlapped with Palestinians and Saudi Arabians, while Mizrahi Jewish populations from Iraq and Iran overlapped with Jordanians, Syrians, and Druze populations.

    What this means is that Diaspora Jewish communities formed into three distinct groups (see picture below):

    Group 1: Located between Middle Eastern and European populations and consists of Ashkenazi and Sephardi Jews, and Moroccan Jews who formed their own group.

    Group 2: The Middle Eastern and Caucasus Jewish communities were positioned within the large conglomerate of non-Jewish populations of the Levant region.

    Group 3: Contained only a tight cluster of Yemenite Jews.

    What does Archaeology say to this? The 701 BCE Time Capsule of Lachish

    No ancient Jewish DNA samples have ever been formally published, but we do have a time capsule of data from 701 BCE found at the Judean city of Lachish in the form of a mass grave that was excavated there. The Assyrians invaded Judah in 701 BCE and conquered the city of Lachish. Lachish was a major city during the Kingdom of Judah, second only to the Judean Capital city of Jerusalem. What was found in excavations there left a “snap shot” of life in ancient Israel during the time of the Bible.

    A large, mass burial was found dating to the 701 BCE Assyrian siege and conquest of Lachish when the Assyrians conquered and brutally murdered the civilian population and exiled the ruling class. The excavator (J.L. Starkey) observed that the skeletons were likely secondary burial (i.e. the victims died somewhere else, decomposed, and were re-buried here) and piled in a disorderly fashion, sometime after their deaths at the hand of the Assyrians during their conquest of Lachish. Starkey estimated that 1,500 individuals were buried in this mass grave. From these skeletons, 695 skulls were sent to London, England for analysis. The bodies were those of men, women, and children – the Judean civilian population of Lachish from 701 BCE or 2710 years ago.

    What is relevant to our discussion here is that the skull types of these Judeans were found to be most similar to ancient Egyptian populations. In other words, these Judeans would have looked like ancient Egyptians.

    According to the Bible, the Hebrew tribes descended from Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, lived in Egypt for 400 or 430 years (the biblical record gives both dates as exactness in dating may not have been as important to the ancient Semitic mind). The Hebrew ruling class intermarried with the Egyptian ruling class, Joseph and his wife, Asenath, daughter of the Egyptian Priest of Heliopolis (On) and patriarch and matriarch of the half-tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh (Gen. 41:45), and a mixed-multitude which included Egyptians left Egypt during the Exodus (Exodus 12:38).

    The relationship between Egypt and the Semitic region of the Levant is one of the most well documented facts in the archaeological record of the region. Further, the Hebrew-Semitic peoples themselves most likely originated from the general region of Egypt based on analysis of the linguistic structure and history of languages, with Semitic belonging to the Afro-Asiatic group which includes Semitic, Egyptian, Berber, Chadic, Cushitic, and possibly Omotic. Thus, the evidence we have from archaeology in the form of excavated skeletons supports the connection between the ancient Hebrews/Judeans/Israelites and the ancient Egyptians.

    In his study, Dr. Behar found that among all Jewish populations Moroccan Jews clustered most closely with Egyptians when analyzing the genetic data for “admixture” or intermarriage between two distinct populations. Does this mean that Moroccan Jews have preserved the most direct connection to the ancient Hebrews in their blood? Will the debate between Hg J or E come down on the side of E if and when ancient Judean DNA is extracted from skeletal remains? We will never know until we test ancient Hebrew skeletons like those found at Lachish to determine the results of their ancient DNA.

    Jerusalem, Israel
    Rosh Hashanah 5771

    Sources:

    Doron Behar, et al, (2008). “The Genome Wide Structure of the Jewish People,” Nature 466, 238–242. Available Online: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal...ture09103.html

    David Ussishkin. (1993). “Lachish,” Pp. 897 – 911 in New Encyclopedia of Excavations in the Holy Land. Carta: Jerusalem.

    Any thoughts?

  2. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Saracen For This Useful Post:

    Semitic Duwa (2010-09-10), Svin (2010-12-04)

  3. # ADS
    Advertisement bot
    Join Date
    2013-03-24
    Posts
    All threads
       
     

  4. #2
    Established Member
    Molecular Biologist
    Last Online
    Yesterday @ 22:43
    Join Date
    2010-01-07
    Posts
    4,585
    Gender
    Y-DNA
    E1b1a8*
    mtDNA
    L0a1a2
    Ethnicity
    "Black"
    Politics
    Praise the Sun
    Religion
    Sun Worship
    African Union(OAS) United States

    Default

    Yes, it will come down to the side of E.

    Hamites = African = E settled into the Levant first according to their own legend (Canaan).
    This is where their language likely comes from as the article above states.
    Later the outsiders came into the Levant, mixed with them and adopted their language.
    This is why Lachish = Egypt, UPPER Egypt at that point......which clusters closely with Nubia.

    Egypto-Nubian:
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	nubian11.jpg 
Views:	31 
Size:	37.5 KB 
ID:	23342
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	africa_1.jpg 
Views:	27 
Size:	25.4 KB 
ID:	23343
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	1D7_72dpi.png 
Views:	24 
Size:	271.3 KB 
ID:	23347
    +
    Lachish:
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Lachish3ChiefElders.jpg 
Views:	26 
Size:	74.2 KB 
ID:	23345
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	layard.jpg 
Views:	24 
Size:	72.3 KB 
ID:	23346
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Judahites.jpg 
Views:	24 
Size:	24.7 KB 
ID:	23344
    =

    E-M123 (Proto-"Semites") = your Early"Canaanites" from the spawn of "Ham". All this is is a group of Egypto-Nubian/ Horners that happened to be residing long term in the Levant.

    My Afrocetric 2 cents

  5. The Following User Says Thank You to beyoku For This Useful Post:

    jibarodepr (2010-09-10)

  6. #3
    Established Member
    Fly up
    Last Online
    @
    Join Date
    2010-06-20
    Posts
    2,559
    Gender
    Religion
    Logic

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Saracen View Post
    Will Moroccan Jews prove to be the Diaspora community that best preserved the genetic heritage of the ancient Hebrews? A group of genetics researchers led by Israeli scientist, Dr. Doron Behar, conducted a genome wide study (i.e. all the genetic data currently available) published in early 2010 to compare Jewish populations, Ashkenazi, Sephardi, and Mizrahi, to see if any genetic information was shared among them and to extrapolate ancient geographical origins.The Levant region consists of several countries which include Egypt, Israel, the Palestinian Territories, Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria.
    It seems they cut into two groups : Western Jews (Ashkenazis/Sephardis/Moroccan/Syrians) and East Jews (Iraqi /Iranian Jews). By the way you have trouble with geography , Egypt is not part of the Levant region.
    Plotting all the data onto a format that, simply put, shows the probability of genetic similarity and deep genetic origins (see attached picture below of Kernel Density Plot), Behar found not all Jewish populations are identical. Behar found that Ashkenazi and Sephardi Jews overlap, but are somewhat distinct from all other populations. Moroccan Jews formed their own group (cluster) not too distant from Ashkenazi and Sephardi Jews but distinct, Yemenite Jews formed their own group (cluster) that overlapped with Palestinians and Saudi Arabians, while Mizrahi Jewish populations from Iraq and Iran overlapped with Jordanians, Syrians, and Druze populations.
    According to Behar study , Moroccan Jews are a sub-group of Sephardim. They only make their own sub-cluster if you want. The rest you are right , the Western Jewish group seem to cluster closely to Cypriots.
    What is relevant to our discussion here is that the skull types of these Judeans were found to be most similar to ancient Egyptian populations. In other words, these Judeans would have looked like ancient Egyptians.
    Judeans were Canaanite , closely related to other peoples of the same region (Phoenicians for example or modernday Lebanese). They were more or less neighbours to Egyptians (taking in account that Sinai is long territory). However on if they did or not look like anient Egyptians , I won't go into that discussion.
    According to the Bible, the Hebrew tribes descended from Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, lived in Egypt for 400 or 430 years (the biblical record gives both dates as exactness in dating may not have been as important to the ancient Semitic mind). The Hebrew ruling class intermarried with the Egyptian ruling class, Joseph and his wife, Asenath, daughter of the Egyptian Priest of Heliopolis (On) and patriarch and matriarch of the half-tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh (Gen. 41:45), and a mixed-multitude which included Egyptians left Egypt during the Exodus (Exodus 12:38).

    The relationship between Egypt and the Semitic region of the Levant is one of the most well documented facts in the archaeological record of the region. Further, the Hebrew-Semitic peoples themselves most likely originated from the general region of Egypt based on analysis of the linguistic structure and history of languages, with Semitic belonging to the Afro-Asiatic group which includes Semitic, Egyptian, Berber, Chadic, Cushitic, and possibly Omotic. Thus, the evidence we have from archaeology in the form of excavated skeletons supports the connection between the ancient Hebrews/Judeans/Israelites and the ancient Egyptians.
    According to the Bible yes , but it shouldn't be seen as a historical source anyway. Archelogists found ruins of Canaanite-kind houses in Egypt , especially in the ruins of Avaris in north Egypt , and some prisonners were actually called "Shasou of YHWH" which can be the first attestation of Proto-Hebrew or Proto-Jews in the region. However Avaris was laterly abondonned by native Egyptians and by all its inhabbitants (including probably Canaanite prisonners)There is no "edvidence" of the origin of Semitic or Hebrew people in Egypt. Like I said you , Israelites (who are the proto-Jews , not Hebrews who are a biblical people) were Canaanite in every sense of the word (language , culture , religion , society etc..). These people were called "Asiatic" by Egyptians , and they were even colonized by the Egypt kingdom (especially the southern parts of its , archeologists found the first attestation of the Israel kingdom in an Egyptian ruin). Semitic belongs to the Afrasian family , more specifically , the northern group (i.e Berber , Egyptian and Semitic for instance). However , I have already posted once a quote on a study on Semitic languages , this recent study suggested that Semitic languages were probably born somwhere in the Levant , where the oldest Semitic languages as well as the most diverse ones were found. Egyptians and Ancient Israelites might have shared similar ancestries but were clearly two different populations.
    In his study, Dr. Behar found that among all Jewish populations Moroccan Jews clustered most closely with Egyptians when analyzing the genetic data for “admixture” or intermarriage between two distinct populations. Does this mean that Moroccan Jews have preserved the most direct connection to the ancient Hebrews in their blood? Will the debate between Hg J or E come down on the side of E if and when ancient Judean DNA is extracted from skeletal remains? We will never know until we test ancient Hebrew skeletons like those found at Lachish to determine the results of their ancient DNA.
    Can you post your source ? I mean Dr.Behar saying Moroccan Jews cluster close with Egyptian , I doubt about it , as Moroccan Jews belong to Sephardi group , who are like other Western ones clustering close to Cypriots. I guess some Sephardi (among the most genetically near-eastern ones) can cluster closely with Palestinians , but Egyptians ?
    Quote Originally Posted by beyoku View Post
    Hamites = African = E settled into the Levant first according to their own legend (Canaan).
    This is where their language likely comes from as the article above states.
    Later the outsiders came into the Levant, mixed with them and adopted their language.
    This is why Lachish = Egypt, UPPER Egypt at that point......which clusters closely with Nubia.
    There is nothing like "Hamites" and all these Christian legends. Levantines are not even "hamites" but rather "Semites" , see how these legends are contradictory. By haplogroup J1 is closely associated with North Afrasian spectrum as it scores high among its populations. I do agree with E-M123 being part of the Semitic spectrum by the way.
    Quote Originally Posted by Beyoku
    your Early"Canaanites" from the spawn of "Ham". All this is is a group of Egypto-Nubian/ Horners that happened to be residing long term in the Levant.
    My Afrocetric 2 cents
    There is no way thinking all inhabbitants of Egypt were horners , most likely Egyptians were a mix of Middle-Easterner and Horner ancestry , I still think , that Egypt , especially the northern parts was enough different by ancestry from people in the southern fringe.
    Last edited by Ekarfi; 2010-09-10 at 18:47.

  7. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Ekarfi For This Useful Post:

    jibarodepr (2010-09-10), moleson (2010-09-10), Svin (2010-09-12)

  8. #4
    Established Member
    Cake Scientist Aware_Dog's Avatar
    Last Online
    @
    Join Date
    2009-10-23
    Posts
    1,256
    Gender
    Y-DNA
    E1b1b1*
    mtDNA
    L3h2
    Metaethnos
    Ethiopian
    Ethnicity
    Awareian
    Ethiopia African Union(OAS) United Nations

    Default

    The first mention of the Israelites is from the Merneptah Stele from Pharaon Merneptah's mortuary temple at thebes.

    This is a good program by Nova -PBS that attempts at synthesizing the Bible with archaeology:
    The Bible's Buried Secrets (NOVA PBS)

  9. #5
    Established Member
    Molecular Biologist
    Last Online
    2013-08-30 @ 20:26
    Join Date
    2010-06-30
    Posts
    3,382
    Gender

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ekarfi View Post
    There is no way thinking all inhabbitants of Egypt were horners , most likely Egyptians were a mix of Middle-Easterner and Horner ancestry , I still think , that Egypt , especially the northern parts was enough different by ancestry from people in the southern fringe.
    ok, sure. The entire AE population cluster closer to southerly populations than they do to peoples in the Levant or elsewhere. The AE population was of Central Sudanic, Northeast African, and Central Saharan origin. Not Middle Eastern.

    Northern Egypt shows more physical variation than the south, but not necessarily as part of any significant 'race' mix, but local, built-in variation. They were closer to southerners than any other peoples. In comparisons with "Middle Eastern" populations of the same ancient period, the Egyptians link more closely with other Africans than the Middle Easterners. Africans vary in how they look because they have the highest built-in molecular diversity to begin with.

    QUOTE(s):
    "..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)

    "Individuals from different geographical regions frequently plotted near each other, revealing aspects of variation at the level of individuals that is obscured by concentrating on the most distinctive facial traits once used to construct ''types.''The high level of African interindividual variation in craniometric pattern is reminiscent of the great level of molecular diversity found in Africa." (S.O.Y Keita. Exploring northeast African metric craniofacial variation at the individual level: A comparative study using principal component analysis. Am. J. Hum. Biol. 16:679-689, 2004.)

    Quote on northern Egypt analysis- the Qarunian (Faiyum) remains (c. 7000 BC)
    "The body was that of a forty-year old woman with a height of about 1.6 meters, who was of a more modern racial type than the classic 'Mechtoid' of the Fakhurian culture (see pp. 65-6), being generally more gracile, having large teeth and thick jaws bearing some resemblance to the modern 'negroid' type." (Beatrix Midant-Reynes, Ian Shaw (2000). The Prehistory of Egypt. Wiley-Blackwell. pg. 82)

    "Overall, when the Egyptian crania are evaluated in a Near Eastern (Lachish) versus African (Kerma, Kebel Moya, Ashanti) context) the affinity is with the Africans. The Sudan and Palestine are the most appropriate comparative regions which would have 'donated' people, along with the Sahara and Maghreb. Archaeology validates looking to these regions for population flow (see Hassan 1988)... Egyptian groups showed less overall affinity to Palestinian and Byzantine remains than to other African series, especially Sudanese." (Keita 1993)

    2009 study finds the Nubians were ethnically the closest population to the ancient Egyptians not Europeans or Middle Easterners, confirming Egyptologist Frank Yurco's data from the 1980s and 1990s.

    Quotes:
    "The Mahalanobis D2 analysis uncovered close affinities between Nubians and Egyptians. Table 3 lists the Mahalanobis D2 distance matrix... In some cases, the statistics reveal that the Egyptian samples were more similar to Nubian samples than to other Egyptian samples (e.g. Gizeh and Hesa/Biga) and vice versa (e.g. Badari and Kerma, Naqada and Christian). These relationships are further depicted in the PCO plot (Fig. 2).

    The clustering of the Nubian and Egyptian samples together supports this paper's hypothesis and demonstrates that there may be a close relationship between the two populations. This relationship is consistent with Berry and Berry (1972), among others, who noted a similarity between Nubians and Egyptians.

  10. #6
    Established Member
    Fly up
    Last Online
    @
    Join Date
    2010-06-20
    Posts
    2,559
    Gender
    Religion
    Logic

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Doctoris Scientia View Post

    Northern Egypt shows more physical variation than the south, but not necessarily as part of any significant 'race' mix, but local, built-in variation.
    No , if Northern Egyptians looked different overall from southern ones , it's because of their obvious Middle-Easterner ancestries. I can also post quotes which say the opposite of yours but it would be off-topic.
    Last edited by Ekarfi; 2010-09-10 at 19:16.

  11. #7
    Established Member
    Member
    Last Online
    @
    Join Date
    2010-01-29
    Posts
    6,302
    Location
    New York, US
    Gender
    Y-DNA
    G1*
    mtDNA
    HV4a2a
    Metaethnos
    Mesopotamian
    Ethnicity
    Suraya
    Religion
    Transhumanism
    United States Assyria United States

    Default

    I do not recall if Behar has ever included data on the Rhodesli in any of his research endeavors. Does anyone recall if he has? I do not know how significant the relationship between the Moroccan Jews and Egyptians is, but I do know that from among the populations I have examined, the Rhodesli Jews are a relatively significant match to the Egyptians, with respect to their Y-DNA haplogroup frequencies. The Ashkenazi, on the other hand, match the Lebanese Sunnis and Shias best.

    Edit: I should add that the majority of the Rhodesli, I believe, are of Sephardim origin.
    Last edited by Humanist; 2010-09-10 at 19:25. Reason: Sephardim

  12. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Humanist For This Useful Post:

    Ekarfi (2010-09-10), Semitic Duwa (2010-09-10)

  13. #8
    Established Member
    Molecular Biologist
    Last Online
    Yesterday @ 22:43
    Join Date
    2010-01-07
    Posts
    4,585
    Gender
    Y-DNA
    E1b1a8*
    mtDNA
    L0a1a2
    Ethnicity
    "Black"
    Politics
    Praise the Sun
    Religion
    Sun Worship
    African Union(OAS) United States

    Default

    Judeans were Canaanite , closely related to other peoples of the same region (Phoenician for example or modernday Lebanese are the best representant of ancient Levantine If you want my opinion). They were more or less neighbours to Egyptians (taking in account that Sinai is long territory). Howeve on if they did or not look like anient Egyptians , I won't go into that discussion , then we will hear pro-Afro-centrist screaming out loud.
    Please give us the details, I am an Afrocentrist and I want to go there. The photos of Lachish did you see them? Tell me who they look like. The fact that they have no representations of themselves but only representations of them created by OTHERS tells us we can never be sure how they looked. Furthermore Semites dont have to come from Egypt but Proto-Semeitc does. Afroasiatic being an African language family at one point or another leads Africans out of Africa into the Levant for others to adopt the language in the first place. Abraham was from UR - somewhere in a place where their languages were NOT Afro-Asiatic until they adopted Semitic languages from "Afro-Semites" from the East.

  14. #9
    Established Member
    Fly up
    Last Online
    @
    Join Date
    2010-06-20
    Posts
    2,559
    Gender
    Religion
    Logic

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by beyoku View Post
    Please give us the details, I am an Afrocentrist and I want to go there. The photos of Lachish did you see them? Tell me who they look like. The fact that they have no representations of themselves but only representations of them created by OTHERS tells us we can never be sure how they looked. Furthermore Semites dont have to come from Egypt but Proto-Semeitc does. Afroasiatic being an African language family at one point or another leads Africans out of Africa into the Levant for others to adopt the language in the first place. Abraham was from UR - somewhere in a place where their languages were NOT Afro-Asiatic until they adopted Semitic languages from "Afro-Semites" from the East.
    If you want details lol , what kind of details do you want ? Proto-Semitic was likely born in Levant , please read here . Afrasian is a very archaic and complicated group , way more older and complex than IE. proto-Semitic was more than likely born in Southwest Asia. Then about "E-m123" haplogroup found among Levantines , what can I answer you ? It is native to the region and was probably born there , I mean Bejas also carry J1 at high frequency , what are you going to say ? "Afro-Semites" from the East ? what's that ? are you Christian? because mixing genetic/prehistory with religion I don't really get it , the day you'll find in UR , the tomb of Abraham , then we will discuss on that. Yes I did look at the photos of Lachish and what? all the people I see look Middle-Easterner.
    Last edited by Ekarfi; 2010-09-10 at 20:39.

  15. The Following User Says Thank You to Ekarfi For This Useful Post:

    Semitic Duwa (2010-09-10)

  16. #10
    Established Member
    Molecular Biologist
    Last Online
    Yesterday @ 22:43
    Join Date
    2010-01-07
    Posts
    4,585
    Gender
    Y-DNA
    E1b1a8*
    mtDNA
    L0a1a2
    Ethnicity
    "Black"
    Politics
    Praise the Sun
    Religion
    Sun Worship
    African Union(OAS) United States

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ekarfi View Post
    If you want details , what kind of details do you want ? Proto-Semitic was likely born in Levant , please read here . Afrasian is a very archaic and complicated group , way more older and complex than IE. proto-Semitic was more than likely born in Southwest Asia. Then about "E-m123" haplogroup found among Levantines , what can I answer you ? It is native to the region and was probably born there , I mean Bejas also carry J1 at high frequency , what are you going to say? . There were no "Afro-Semites" from the East , are you a Christian? because mixing genetic/prehistory with religion I don't really get it , the day you'll find in UR , the tomb of Abraham , then we will discuss on that. Yes I did look at the photos of Lachish and what? all the people I see look Middle-Easterner.
    man....
    Where does E-M123 come FROM and how did it get into the Levant? You act as if it was Born from "Thin Air"

    E1b1a for all intents and purposes has an origin around possible Senegal.
    E1b1a8 one particular sublade, has an origin some 2000km away around Nigeria.
    What this indicates is men carrying the Paraclade migrated into Nigeria where the the subclade was "Born" became dominant.

    E1b1b1 originates in Sub Saharan East Africa. One particular subclade E1b1b1c , has an origin some 2000km away in or around the Levant. What this indicates is men carrying the Paraclade migrated into the Levant where the the subclade was "Born" became dominant.

    Dont think that the nature of migration and how lineages are spread somehow CHANGES because one mutation is now found amongst Negroes (E1b1a). The other mutation (E1b1b1c) is just found amongst populations that are mixed with Negroes (levantines). E1b1b1c got into the Levant the the same way E1b1a~ got into South Africa - The migration of Sub Saharan Negro Africans from one place to another.

    Once you get that though your thick skull then your can realized the language these Sub Saharan Africans migrating into the Levant at that time was most likely Proto-Semitic or Proto-Afro-Asiatic. This is why one Linguist (Christopher Ehret) speaks of the "first Semites" as Africans migrating INTO the Levant. This is why I bring up "UR" UR is in Sumeria. Early Sumerians did NOT speak AfroAsiatic languages. Their language is Isolate. Later the Akkadians from the Levant ("West" please excuse my early gaffe) bring Semitic which is adopted. The point being.....in mythology the land of Abraham (UR) in early history are not an AfroAsiatic speaking people. LATER these people ENTER the levant where the "Hamites/Canaan=Africans=E1b1b" people reside and mixed with them. Later on they get into Egypt and mixed with Even more "Hamites/Mizriam/Egypt/E1b1b" people and emerge as a "mixed multitude.

    It doesnt matter where E-M123 or Proto-Semeitc was formed. Either way they both go back to Ancient East African Sub Saharan Negroes. How stereotypically "Negro" looking these people were is a different story and can be debated. But at one point or another anyone coming out of Africa into the Levant is surely "more Negro" than someone coming from the Caucas region or Turkey into the Levant. E1b1b1c traces the migration from the Horn of Africa and the Levant. The climate at the time of these migrations leaves certain parts of the nile as favored stopping points. The fact that Southern Egyptians crania cluster with Nubians is no surprise. The fact that Southern Egyptians and Nubian cluster crania with Horners is no surprise. Also the fact that some Sites in Lachish cluster with Egyptians is also of no surprise. Why Because the people of the Levant show partial ancestry from African that migrated from the Horn through Egypt INTO the Levant. The language of the Levant is this signature from Africa. E1b1b1~ in the levant is also a signature from Africa. They find inscriptions of "Proto-Canaanite" in Southern Egypt and Nubia. Finding skulls in the levant that cluster with SOUTHERN EGYPTIANS:...............

    The first report on the Lachish skulls included a
    thorough examination of pathology, metrics, artificial
    deformation, and epigenetic affinity. Utilizing
    craniometrics, Risdon (1939) concluded that the
    group was very similar to dynastic Egyptian material.
    In fact, he stated that the entire population was
    of foreign origin, representing descendants of a group
    derived primarily from Upper Egypt. This conclusion
    was subsequently supported by a craniometric study
    by Musgrave and Evans (1981). Keita (1988, p. 377)
    likewise examined the skulls metrically, omitting
    those that were either “artificially deformed, female,
    warped, split, [or] juvenile,” using only those measurements
    that he believed were consistent population
    discriminators. He concluded that the group was
    fairly heterogeneous, having close relationships
    to North African, Egyptian, and Nubian groups, thus
    lending support to an
    ........Is also not surprising. Why?
    Well if Egypto-Nubians are depected as this:
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	nubian11.jpg 
Views:	37 
Size:	37.5 KB 
ID:	23363

    And the Levantines in question were shown like this:
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Judahites.jpg 
Views:	36 
Size:	24.7 KB 
ID:	23362

    What we to expect? I am sorry that does not look like a "Middle Easterner" unless your are speaking of an nappy beady headed African that happens to live in the Middle East. While some of what I am saying is "Afrocentric" Some of it is not. On one hand everyone wants to be mixed with horners and be in the E1b1b "club". But then they never want to recognized what E1b1b "perks" were given to them from the E1b1b "founding members"............Their Language, their Gods, Circumcision, Writing, Afros etc.

    Dude dont hate me cause I am beautiful.

  17. The Following User Says Thank You to beyoku For This Useful Post:

    jibarodepr (2010-09-10)

Page 1 of 7 1 2 3 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 21
    Last Post: 2010-10-26, 21:04

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
<