Half of European men share King Tut's DNA

[Drawing-slim]

(It's old article but I found this interesting)
By Alice Baghdjian

LONDON (Reuters) - Up to 70 percent of British men and half of all Western European men are related to the Egyptian Pharaoh Tutankhamun, geneticists in Switzerland said.

Scientists at Zurich-based DNA genealogy centre, iGENEA, reconstructed the DNA profile of the boy Pharaoh, who ascended the throne at the age of nine, his father Akhenaten and grandfather Amenhotep III, based on a film that was made for the Discovery Channel.

The results showed that King Tut belonged to a genetic profile group, known as haplogroup R1b1a2, to which more than 50 percent of all men in Western Europe belong, indicating that they share a common ancestor.

Among modern-day Egyptians this haplogroup contingent is below 1 percent, according to iGENEA.

"It was very interesting to discover that he belonged to a genetic group in Europe -- there were many possible groups in Egypt that the DNA could have belonged to," said Roman Scholz, director of the iGENEA Centre.

Around 70 percent of Spanish and 60 percent of French men also belong to the genetic group of the Pharaoh who ruled Egypt more than 3,000 years ago.

"We think the common ancestor lived in the Caucasus about 9,500 years ago," Scholz told Reuters.

It is estimated that the earliest migration of haplogroup R1b1a2 into Europe began with the spread of agriculture in 7,000 BC, according to iGENEA.

However, the geneticists were not sure how Tutankhamun's paternal lineage came to Egypt from its region of origin.

The centre is now using DNA testing to search for the closest living relatives of "King Tut."

"The offer has only been publicised for three days but we have already seen a lot of interest," Scholz told Reuters.

(Edited by Paul Casciato)

[Fire Haired]

(It's old article but I found this interesting)
By Alice Baghdjian

LONDON (Reuters) - Up to 70 percent of British men and half of all Western European men are related to the Egyptian Pharaoh Tutankhamun, geneticists in Switzerland said.

Scientists at Zurich-based DNA genealogy centre, iGENEA, reconstructed the DNA profile of the boy Pharaoh, who ascended the throne at the age of nine, his father Akhenaten and grandfather Amenhotep III, based on a film that was made for the Discovery Channel.

The results showed that King Tut belonged to a genetic profile group, known as haplogroup R1b1a2, to which more than 50 percent of all men in Western Europe belong, indicating that they share a common ancestor.

Among modern-day Egyptians this haplogroup contingent is below 1 percent, according to iGENEA.

"It was very interesting to discover that he belonged to a genetic group in Europe -- there were many possible groups in Egypt that the DNA could have belonged to," said Roman Scholz, director of the iGENEA Centre.

Around 70 percent of Spanish and 60 percent of French men also belong to the genetic group of the Pharaoh who ruled Egypt more than 3,000 years ago.

"We think the common ancestor lived in the Caucasus about 9,500 years ago," Scholz told Reuters.

It is estimated that the earliest migration of haplogroup R1b1a2 into Europe began with the spread of agriculture in 7,000 BC, according to iGENEA.

However, the geneticists were not sure how Tutankhamun's paternal lineage came to Egypt from its region of origin.

The centre is now using DNA testing to search for the closest living relatives of "King Tut."

"The offer has only been publicised for three days but we have already seen a lot of interest," Scholz told Reuters.

(Edited by Paul Casciato)

It is not that big of a deal. Almost all R1b in west Europe is under a even deeper subclade R1b1a2a1a L11 and its father R1b1a2a1 L51. They arrived in western Europe at the earliest 5,000ybp. It is were Germanic Italo Celtic (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?93100-Germanic-Italo-Celts) languages come from it is also the people who brought the bronze age to western Europe. And also most likely brought red hair over 1%. U should read the link i put on Germanic Italo Celtic languages. It gives a pretty good explanation of how they got to west Europe and how they spread. U should also look at Y DNA spread by Indo Europeans (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?91971-Y-DNA-spread-by-Indo-Europeans-(R1a1a1-M417-R1b1a2a1-L51)-(R1b1a2a-L23-R1b1a1-M73-Etc-))its gives more explanation. When u say his DNA is similar that is really tricky to people who don't know that much about this.

What u should say is he has a common father who lived about 10,000ybp with 50% of western Europeans. If he had specifically western European branch R1b1a2a1 L51 or R1b1a2a1a L11 then that would mean somehow they were connected with west Europe or connected with someone who was connected with someone who was connected to Germanic or Italo Celtic tribes. I have heard arguments that R1b1a2 M269 is a European branch and that it is also proto Indo European like R1a1a1 M417. But i doubt it the first R1b branch to be in Europe is R1b1a2a L23. There is a really good chance if king tut just had R1b1a2 M269 that it has nothing to do with Europe or Indo Europeans.

People are over reacting to this R1b does not define Europeans at all. It became popular starting just 5,000ybp. R1b father R1 actulley was Mongliod and R1* still exists in some native Americans and Siberians and is somewhat popular. This does not tell anything about ancient human migrations just random inter marriage. I am sick of the stupid propaganda over this it is not that big of a deal.

[robar]

:picard2:

[Prisoner Of Ice]

Well Ranses II had red hair so it couldn't have been that uncommon at the time.

[Fire Haired]

Well Ranses II had red hair so it couldn't have been that uncommon at the time.

i have heard that before but is their real proof i saw this study someone showed but that is extremely hard to believe. U know it is impossible and it is total BS to say somehow every Egyptian leader was white or say stuff like afro centrits that they were black. sure the nubians were black but the real Egyptians were not. Africa does not always equal black which people just cant understand it is just a name for a continent. Europe is not a real continent they made the boundary at the ural mountains because white people live on the other side that intentionally made Europe so just because Indians and Chinese live in asia does not make them close relatives it gets so annoying when people get that confused.

[Prisoner Of Ice]

i have heard that before but is their real proof i saw this study someone showed but that is extremely hard to believe. U know it is impossible and it is total BS to say somehow every Egyptian leader was white or say stuff like afro centrits that they were black. sure the nubians were black but the real Egyptians were not. Africa does not always equal black which people just cant understand it is just a name for a continent. Europe is not a real continent they made the boundary at the ural mountains because white people live on the other side that intentionally made Europe so just because Indians and Chinese live in asia does not make them close relatives it gets so annoying when people get that confused.

Just google ramses II you can see it the hair is clearly red. There's also more mummies that have been genotyped to I.

Nobody said everyone was white. Egypt is a huge area, it was basically half the mediterranean! It also lasted thousands of years. They used to say there'd never be a black president but it went from slavery to black president in way less time than that, even when I was a kid it seemed far fetched.

Basically first egyptians were probably semitic types from E clade. Then came european types. Then came black semitic types. Then came hellenic types like cleopatra. Now there's arabic types in charge with some semitic berbers.

Some of the "nilotic" admixtures are found the most in peoples like saami lol. Meaning there's been a big influence from outside.

[Vasconcelos]

Just google ramses II you can see it the hair is clearly red.

Poor justification, it's common for a corpse's hair to get red with the ages, even if it was black. The reason it's belived he had red hair is because of testing done to it's roots, if I'm not mistaken.

[Figaro]

All sorts of sketchy blue-blood elite bloodlines have passed through and mingled in the British Isles. It's why it's been such an elite-favored zone.

Original monolith-builders from the Balkans...meets Egyptian royal+Scythian bloodlines...meets Gaulish druids (already related to those Egyptian royals)...meets Germanic-folk...etc...

Of course, little to none of this will be accepted by my peers. I'm sure my wittle feelings will remain intact.

[Prisoner Of Ice]

Poor justification, it's common for a corpse's hair to get red with the ages, even if it was black. The reason it's belived he had red hair is because of testing done to it's roots, if I'm not mistaken.

The roots are tested, it looks red, and he has 100% caucasian face and lots of mummies are turning out to be "european" clades lol.

Also I have heard black hair "often" turns red but i am not sure they have any real justification for that and chemically I don't think it makes any sense. Since we have DNA testing we don't have to guess any more, but the locals in egypt are not exactly champions of the truth and even this revelation was a leak. They are sitting on a bunch of dna results they have not released, as well, for some reason.

Unfortunately every country on earth wants to pretend their blood goes back to the same spot til the end of time, moreso the least real claim they have to it.

[Figaro]

Yay, common sense! It can be quite refreshing to see manifest...


The roots are tested, it looks red, and he has 100% caucasian face and lots of mummies are turning out to be "european" clades lol.

Also I have heard black hair "often" turns red but i am not sure they have any real justification for that and chemically I don't think it makes any sense. Since we have DNA testing we don't have to guess any more, but the locals in egypt are not exactly champions of the truth and even this revelation was a leak. They are sitting on a bunch of dna results they have not released, as well, for some reason.

Unfortunately every country on earth wants to pretend their blood goes back to the same spot til the end of time, moreso the least real claim they have to it.

[Vasconcelos]

Also I have heard black hair "often" turns red but i am not sure they have any real justification for that and chemically I don't think it makes any sense.

You're not a chemist, so whether it makes sense to you or not is irrelevant.

[Figaro]

Because he doesn't have an expensive piece of paper and a title? I get a bit sick and tired of today's worship of "experts"...


You're not a chemist, so whether it makes sense to you or not is irrelevant.

[Vasconcelos]

Because he doesn't have an expensive piece of paper and a title? I get a bit sick and tired of today's worship of "experts"...

People who dedicate their lives to the study and investigation of a certain field are a gazillion times more reliable than internet "geniuses".

[Artek]

And who else was a red-haired and European, Chinese Caesar? Genghis Khan? Moctezuma? Pathetic...

Do anyone know whether this R1b doesn't belong to the R1b-V88 branch which is overwhelmingly African-Middle Eastern?

[Methusalem]

So what Ramses III ydna haplogroup is e1b1a. Which is the most commen among westafricans. Also s recent study on maternal haplogroups ancient egyptians from zhe old kingdom and new kingdom showed thst most belong to a westafrican or central african haplogroup.

[Fire Haired]

So what Ramses III ydna haplogroup is e1b1a. Which is the most commen among westafricans. Also s recent study on maternal haplogroups ancient egyptians from zhe old kingdom and new kingdom showed thst most belong to a westafrican or central african haplogroup.

U need to show real sources. The Egyptians were not black i know that sounds exciting but it is not true. They were Caucasian north Africans like people there today. The Nubains down south in Sudan sure they were black but the real Egyptians were not. We dont need ancient DNA to find out who the Egyptiens were we already know. click here (http://www.nature.com/news/egyptian-mummies-yield-genetic-secrets-1.12793) there is no age on the mummy but it had European Y DNA I2. I know the people who wrote say total BS that it is though to originate in west Asia. They talk like that to sound smart and trick people. It did not originate in west Asia all its subclades are exclusive to Europe except I2a1b which also exists in Indo Iranian speaking Kurds who have about 15-10% but there is no doubt that is European inter marraige there has been two European invasion in those areas during the bronze and iron ages. the Cimmerians from the black sea in eastern Europe were I2a1b is very high conquered and settled areas around Iraq, Anatolia, and Syria from 2,700-2,600ybp. The proto Indo Iranian speakers came from northern Russian Yamna culture (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CC4QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FYamna_c ulture&ei=3WczUtXpKYjTqQGhjoDgCQ&usg=AFQjCNHb6Rh3o3cAWFpKHCAPoWXk2Xd4rQ&sig2=ZO1MSoLnLBFkkPhETxmOjA&bvm=bv.52164340,d.aWM) they formed into Abashevo (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CCwQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FAbashev o_culture&ei=F2gzUobbI8n0qAGP-IGwCA&usg=AFQjCNFWRl_JjtoHnzVVnbeKnv68KBbrAQ&sig2=_YKrViXlMw3qwewxX4N-Xg&bvm=bv.52164340,d.aWM) and Sinshta (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CC8QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FSintash ta_culture&ei=JWgzUq13yfytAYjfgbgC&usg=AFQjCNE5UwgrXIqIYbfZOnazekbu0OG_Jg&sig2=KmHPDhA_K6jpXoiVDrktkQ&bvm=bv.52164340,d.aWM) culture while migrating towards central asia.

That is where the mysterious 4,000 year old mixed European east Asian tarim mummies with Y DNa R1a1a in west china come from. Y DNa R1a1a was belived by alot of people to originate in south asia aka India because that is where it is most diverse. But now that we have the family SNP tree of R1a1a they found the ancestral subclades to Indo Iranian R1b Z93 are still somewhat popular in east Europe. click here (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&ved=0CDQQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fpolishgenes.blogspot.com%2F2011%2 F11%2Forigins-of-r1a1a1-in-or-near-europe-aka.html&ei=n2gzUs-uKcGnrAHz54HAAg&usg=AFQjCNGzjfaDl-mdALew_DFPK9ydyhG1sQ&sig2=Ca3yVH4wPHePstc58LIaiQ&bvm=bv.52164340,d.aWM) not a surprise that is the exact area since the 1950's the kurgen hypothesis has said proto indo Iranians languages originated. so what i am saying is there was a huge migration of European people throughout Asia from 5,000-3,500ybp they mixed alot culturally with people around iran then eventulley migrated throughout that area then from Iran went to Iraq as the medes and formed into the kurds.

I guess that explanation was way to long but u should look at eupedia's (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CCwQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.eupedia.com%2Feurope%2FHaplog roup_I2_Y-DNA.shtml&ei=VmkzUt35OcnvqQG7rIDACQ&usg=AFQjCNHayj46wv1SMX8uwEl9aH24P4U00w&sig2=uHcGkZ_WEwD82EKQbr4WDQ&bvm=bv.52164340,d.aWM) and wikpedia (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&ved=0CDYQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FHaplogr oup_I-M438&ei=aGkzUv2sC461qQHVvoGIBg&usg=AFQjCNEiSnsIvsx-15FO25kv1nmn1_9HwA&sig2=LZnC-n_4TbaG0H1PXqoyaA&bvm=bv.52164340,d.aWM) I2 page. what that shows is probably inter marriage with Greeks who have a pretty good amount of I2a1b over 10%. And Egyptiens had way more contact with sub sahran Africans and their ancestors had for 10,00's of years so it makes alot of sense Ramses had e1b1a.

[Fire Haired]

And who else was a red-haired and European, Chinese Caesar? Genghis Khan? Moctezuma? Pathetic...

Do anyone know whether this R1b doesn't belong to the R1b-V88 branch which is overwhelmingly African-Middle Eastern?

No it was R1b1a2 M269 i have also heard it was Germanic Italo Celtic branch R1b1a2a1a L11. He most likley did not get it from Europe if it was just R1b1a2 M269. Eupedia trys to say R1b1a2 M269 is the European branch that originated in Russia and is proto Indo European like R1a1a1 M417. But i think R1b1a2a L23 was the first R1b in Europe. R1b1a2a L23 is very popular in the mid east even in Iraq it deifntley is not from Indo iranian Kurds and besides that there has not been any strong Indo European settlement there. So there is a good chance it did not originate with indo European speaking people and not all was spread by Indo Europeans. There is still a trace of R1b1a2 M269 so my best guess is he got it from inter marriage with people from the mid east maybe even Hittites.

[Artek]

No it was R1b1a2 M269 i have also heard it was Germanic Italo Celtic branch R1b1a2a1a L11.
SNP's were not known, iGenea just found 16 Y-STR markers on one of the scenes from Discovery document, when haplotype was shown on the computer. And it's deeply unlikely that he belonged to the"Germanic Italo Celtic branch" even in case of being R1b.

He most likley did not get it from Europe if it was just R1b1a2 M269. Eupedia trys to say R1b1a2 M269 is the European branch that originated in Russia and is proto Indo European like R1a1a1 M417. But i think R1b1a2a L23 was the first R1b in Europe. R1b1a2a L23 is very popular in the mid east even in Iraq it deifntley is not from Indo iranian Kurds and besides that there has not been any strong Indo European settlement there. So there is a good chance it did not originate with indo European speaking people and not all was spread by Indo Europeans. There is still a trace of R1b1a2 M269 so my best guess is he got it from inter marriage with people from the mid east maybe even Hittites.

That's right, I agree with it. Without the last part of intermarriage, because it was almost women-exclusive.

[Pjeter Pan]

And they called Albanians and Bosnians non white :laugh:

[Methusalem]

U need to show real sources. The Egyptians were not black i know that sounds exciting but it is not true. They were Caucasian north Africans like people there today. The Nubains down south in Sudan sure they were black but the real Egyptians were not. We dont need ancient DNA to find out who the Egyptiens were we already know. click here (http://www.nature.com/news/egyptian-mummies-yield-genetic-secrets-1.12793) there is no age on the mummy but it had European Y DNA I2. I know the people who wrote say total BS that it is though to originate in west Asia. They talk like that to sound smart and trick people. It did not originate in west Asia all its subclades are exclusive to Europe except I2a1b which also exists in Indo Iranian speaking Kurds who have about 15-10% but there is no doubt that is European inter marraige there has been two European invasion in those areas during the bronze and iron ages. the Cimmerians from the black sea in eastern Europe were I2a1b is very high conquered and settled areas around Iraq, Anatolia, and Syria from 2,700-2,600ybp. The proto Indo Iranian speakers came from northern Russian Yamna culture (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CC4QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FYamna_c ulture&ei=3WczUtXpKYjTqQGhjoDgCQ&usg=AFQjCNHb6Rh3o3cAWFpKHCAPoWXk2Xd4rQ&sig2=ZO1MSoLnLBFkkPhETxmOjA&bvm=bv.52164340,d.aWM) they formed into Abashevo (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CCwQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FAbashev o_culture&ei=F2gzUobbI8n0qAGP-IGwCA&usg=AFQjCNFWRl_JjtoHnzVVnbeKnv68KBbrAQ&sig2=_YKrViXlMw3qwewxX4N-Xg&bvm=bv.52164340,d.aWM) and Sinshta (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CC8QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FSintash ta_culture&ei=JWgzUq13yfytAYjfgbgC&usg=AFQjCNE5UwgrXIqIYbfZOnazekbu0OG_Jg&sig2=KmHPDhA_K6jpXoiVDrktkQ&bvm=bv.52164340,d.aWM) culture while migrating towards central asia.

That is where the mysterious 4,000 year old mixed European east Asian tarim mummies with Y DNa R1a1a in west china come from. Y DNa R1a1a was belived by alot of people to originate in south asia aka India because that is where it is most diverse. But now that we have the family SNP tree of R1a1a they found the ancestral subclades to Indo Iranian R1b Z93 are still somewhat popular in east Europe. click here (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&ved=0CDQQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fpolishgenes.blogspot.com%2F2011%2 F11%2Forigins-of-r1a1a1-in-or-near-europe-aka.html&ei=n2gzUs-uKcGnrAHz54HAAg&usg=AFQjCNGzjfaDl-mdALew_DFPK9ydyhG1sQ&sig2=Ca3yVH4wPHePstc58LIaiQ&bvm=bv.52164340,d.aWM) not a surprise that is the exact area since the 1950's the kurgen hypothesis has said proto indo Iranians languages originated. so what i am saying is there was a huge migration of European people throughout Asia from 5,000-3,500ybp they mixed alot culturally with people around iran then eventulley migrated throughout that area then from Iran went to Iraq as the medes and formed into the kurds.

I guess that explanation was way to long but u should look at eupedia's (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CCwQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.eupedia.com%2Feurope%2FHaplog roup_I2_Y-DNA.shtml&ei=VmkzUt35OcnvqQG7rIDACQ&usg=AFQjCNHayj46wv1SMX8uwEl9aH24P4U00w&sig2=uHcGkZ_WEwD82EKQbr4WDQ&bvm=bv.52164340,d.aWM) and wikpedia (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&ved=0CDYQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FHaplogr oup_I-M438&ei=aGkzUv2sC461qQHVvoGIBg&usg=AFQjCNEiSnsIvsx-15FO25kv1nmn1_9HwA&sig2=LZnC-n_4TbaG0H1PXqoyaA&bvm=bv.52164340,d.aWM) I2 page. what that shows is probably inter marriage with Greeks who have a pretty good amount of I2a1b over 10%. And Egyptiens had way more contact with sub sahran Africans and their ancestors had for 10,00's of years so it makes alot of sense Ramses had e1b1a.

Man shut the fuck up. Anyone who uses vague, non-universal, unscientific terms like 'black' or 'white', which have a clear eurocentric prefix and are a leftover of Ango-European Imperialism, in a scientific discourse to describe ancient populations, is not credible. Fullstop. End of this pathetic discussion.
I am going to post again this quote of mine:

Egyptians just represent a Northeastafrican continuum similiar to Horners. Putting Egyptians into the 'Negroid'/'Black' or 'Caucasoid'/'White' separated category doesn't make sense since they just represent a fluid transition. A ethnic regionalizied Northeastafrican population with links towards the Middle East(Levante) and SSA.

And as I said recent studies on ancient Egyptians show clear genetic affinity towards modernday Westafricans and Centralafricans. Also a study on maternal haplogroups of ancient Egyptians from the old and new kingdom have shown this. It will probably published in a couple of months.

But here you go regarding autosomal STR profiles of Amarna period pharaohs:

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-XdY3E3uOsgw/TvzM6u5OgzI/AAAAAAAAEZ0/_pCkKg3r86M/s1600/dnatribes.jpg



Geographical analysis of the Amarna mummies was performed using their autosomal STR profiles based on 8 tested loci. Results are summarized in Table 1 and illustrated in Figure 1. Maps for individual Amarna mummies are included in Figures 2-8 in the Appendix.

Discussion: Average MLI scores in Table 1 indicate the STR profiles of the Amarna mummies would be most frequent in present day populations of several African regions: including the Southern African (average MLI 326.94), African Great Lakes (average MLI 323.76), and Tropical West African (average MLI 83.74) regions.

These regional matches do not necessarily indicate an exclusively African ancestry for the Amarna pharaonic family. However, results indicate these ancient individuals inherited some alleles that today are more frequent in populations of Africa than in other parts of the world (such as D18S51=19 and D21S11=34).


http://dnatribes.com/dnatribes-digest-2012-01-01.pdf


Study on Ramses III and his son conclude that they were E1b1a carriers:


We amplified 16 Y chromosomal, short tandem repeats (AmpF\STR Yfiler PCR amplification kit; Applied Biosystems).........Genetic kinship analyses revealed identical haplotypes in both mummies (table 1⇓); using the Whit Athey’s haplogroup predictor, we determined the Y chromosomal haplogroup E1b1a

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/96/Distribution_of_haplogroup_e1b1a_in_Rosa_2007.jpg

http://www.bmj.com/content/345/bmj.e8268


These results indicate that both Ramesses III and Unknown Man E (possibly his son Pentawer) shared an ancestral component with present day populations of Sub-Saharan Africa.... A previous issue of DNA Tribes Digest identified African related ancestry for King Tut and other royal mummies from the Amarna Period. In this issue, results indicate that the later pharaoh Ramesses III also inherited alleles that are most frequent in present day populations of Sub-Saharan Africa. This provides additional, independent evidence of Sub-Saharan African ancestry (possibly among several ancestral components) for pharaonic families of ancient Egypt.....In addition, these DNA match results in present day world regions might in part express population changes in Africa after the time of Ramesses III. In particular, DNA matches in present day populations of Southern Africa and the African Great Lakes might to some degree reflect genetic links with ancient populations (formerly living closer to New Kingdom Egypt) that have expanded southwards in the Nilotic and Bantu migrations of the past 3,000 years (see Figure 1)

http://dnatribes.com/dnatribes-digest-2013-02-01.pdf


These recent genetic studies all indicate that the ancient Egyptians have a closer genetic relationship to modern populations across Sub Saharan Africa and particularly the Nilotic populations of the Great Lakes region of Africa.

[Benacer]

King Tut is not actually R1b, there was never a truly official statement on his Y-DNA, only some speculating person who said it was so but never proved.

Also, many Egyptian mummies are red-haired because they hennaed their hair red. :picard2:

[Fire Haired]

Man shut the fuck up. Anyone who uses vague, non-universal, unscientific terms like 'black' or 'white', which have a clear eurocentric prefix and are a leftover of Ango-European Imperialism, in a scientific discourse to describe ancient populations, is not credible. Fullstop. End of this pathetic discussion.
I am going to post again this quote of mine:

Egyptians just represent a Northeastafrican continuum similiar to Horners. Putting Egyptians into the 'Negroid'/'Black' or 'Caucasoid'/'White' separated category doesn't make sense since they just represent a fluid transition. A ethnic regionalizied Northeastafrican population with links towards the Middle East(Levante) and SSA.

And as I said recent studies on ancient Egyptians show clear genetic affinity towards modernday Westafricans and Centralafricans. Also a study on maternal haplogroups of ancient Egyptians from the old and new kingdom have shown this. It will probably published in a couple of months.

But here you go regarding autosomal STR profiles of Amarna period pharaohs:

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-XdY3E3uOsgw/TvzM6u5OgzI/AAAAAAAAEZ0/_pCkKg3r86M/s1600/dnatribes.jpg




http://dnatribes.com/dnatribes-digest-2012-01-01.pdf


Study on Ramses III and his son conclude that they were E1b1a carriers:



http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/96/Distribution_of_haplogroup_e1b1a_in_Rosa_2007.jpg

http://www.bmj.com/content/345/bmj.e8268



http://dnatribes.com/dnatribes-digest-2013-02-01.pdf


These recent genetic studies all indicate that the ancient Egyptians have a closer genetic relationship to modern populations across Sub Saharan Africa and particularly the Nilotic populations of the Great Lakes region of Africa.

U are going off of politically correct hippies who went everyone to fell good. THERE IS A SUCH THING AS RACE DEAL WITH IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! click here (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?84361-All-Human-Races-According-to-DNA) and here (http://dodecad.blogspot.com/). The three major human races are Sub Saharan African, Caucasian, and Oceania Mongliod.Who was it that called Europeans the white man Native Americans, Australian aboriginals, sub shran Africans, and Indians. It is pretty obvisous the phiscal differences there are human families that uselly have disnct features Oceania branch of Mongliod Oceania though have black skin and nappy hair and look really no diff from sub sharan Africans.

U can look at ancient Roman and Greek writting

500bc so 2,500ybp by Greek poet Xenphanes here is a quote "
Men make their Gods in their own image, those of the Ethiopians are black and snob nosed, those of the Thracian's have blue eyes and red hair


There is apart of the Bible that mentions the black skin of Ethopians. The Romans gave some deep phyiscal descriptions of people in around them in Europe. Gauls, Germans, Scythian(all INdo Iranian tribes in central asia), Cimmerians snow white skin, fair hair and eyed. Italians, Iberian(including CeltIberians), Iyllirans(modern day Yugoslavian area), Greeks white to olive skinned dark hair and eyes. Egyptiens and other people in north Africa and mid east very dark skinned. I saw a quote form a roman writer saying we Romans are not as white as Germans and not as dark as Egyptians. U can see in painting from the Crusades how they show a huge difference in skin color between the Europeans and muslims.

I dont care if the Egyptian stuff u are showing me shows connections with west Africa. I can see Egyptian art ancient descriptions there is no doubt they were Caucasian north Africans. Sure there was inter marriage with non Egyptians but big deal. But it is good to learn more about this the west African thing would surprise me.

.

[Artek]

Sigh... here we go again


U can look at ancient Roman and Greek writting

500bc so 2,500ybp by Greek poet Xenphanes here is a quote "
Men make their Gods in their own image, those of the Ethiopians are black and snob nosed, those of the Thracian's have blue eyes and red hair
Ethiopians often show transitional traits and they can have straight noses. I also doubt that Thracians were a bunch of blue-eyed ginger clones. Most of them were not even ginger but rather brown haired.



There is apart of the Bible that mentions the black skin of Ethopians. The Romans gave some deep phyiscal descriptions of people in around them in Europe. Gauls, Germans, Scythian(all INdo Iranian tribes in central asia), Cimmerians snow white skin, fair hair and eyed. Italians, Iberian(including CeltIberians), Iyllirans(modern day Yugoslavian area), Greeks white to olive skinned dark hair and eyes. Egyptiens and other people in north Africa and mid east very dark skinned. I saw a quote form a roman writer saying we Romans are not as white as Germans and not as dark as Egyptians. U can see in painting from the Crusades how they show a huge difference in skin color between the Europeans and muslims.
Next bunch of ancient generalisation. All were the same-looking clones. What have a pigmentation traits to the cranial and "soft" traits, by the way?

[Methusalem]

U are going off of politically correct hippies who went everyone to fell good. THERE IS A SUCH THING AS RACE DEAL WITH IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! click here (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?84361-All-Human-Races-According-to-DNA) and here (http://dodecad.blogspot.com/). The three major human races are Sub Saharan African, Caucasian, and Oceania Mongliod.Who was it that called Europeans the white man Native Americans, Australian aboriginals, sub shran Africans, and Indians. It is pretty obvisous the phiscal differences there are human families that uselly have disnct features Oceania branch of Mongliod Oceania though have black skin and nappy hair and look really no diff from sub sharan Africans.

U can look at ancient Roman and Greek writting

500bc so 2,500ybp by Greek poet Xenphanes here is a quote "
Men make their Gods in their own image, those of the Ethiopians are black and snob nosed, those of the Thracian's have blue eyes and red hair


There is apart of the Bible that mentions the black skin of Ethopians. The Romans gave some deep phyiscal descriptions of people in around them in Europe. Gauls, Germans, Scythian(all INdo Iranian tribes in central asia), Cimmerians snow white skin, fair hair and eyed. Italians, Iberian(including CeltIberians), Iyllirans(modern day Yugoslavian area), Greeks white to olive skinned dark hair and eyes. Egyptiens and other people in north Africa and mid east very dark skinned. I saw a quote form a roman writer saying we Romans are not as white as Germans and not as dark as Egyptians. U can see in painting from the Crusades how they show a huge difference in skin color between the Europeans and muslims.

I dont care if the Egyptian stuff u are showing me shows connections with west Africa. I can see Egyptian art ancient descriptions there is no doubt they were Caucasian north Africans. Sure there was inter marriage with non Egyptians but big deal. But it is good to learn more about this the west African thing would surprise me.

.

Man you a very bad pseudo-scientific troll. Next Buttlerking for sure.

[Methusalem]

Sigh... here we go again

Ethiopians often show transitional traits and they can have straight noses. I also doubt that Thracians were a bunch of blue-eyed ginger clones. Most of them were not even ginger but rather brown haired.


Add to this that we can not confuse the ancient meaning of kush or 'ethiopian' with modern day inhabitants of Ethiopia. Since anyone below the Egypt was considered 'ethiopian' at that time. For example the Greek historian Herodotus specifically used it for all the lands south of Egypt, including Sudan and modern Ethiopia. And we know that this area was and is filled with different ethnic groups.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aethiopia

As I said we can't apply ancient social constructs on modern times as well modern day social constructs on ancient times. Hence discussions about ancient populations being 'white' or 'black' is unscientific and anti-intellectual.

[Fire Haired]

Sigh... here we go again

Ethiopians often show transitional traits and they can have straight noses. I also doubt that Thracians were a bunch of blue-eyed ginger clones. Most of them were not even ginger but rather brown haired.
[/FONT]
[/COLOR][/CENTER]

It is not me saying this it is a greek 2,500ybp argue with him not me. The reason why Ethopians and other east africans will soemtimes have pale skin and caucasin facial features. Is they have inter marraied with arabs alot alot alot. Look at the distrubtation of Y DNa J1 on wikpedia u can see it is extremley popular in former Nubia.

Also look at their globe13 results (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ArAJcY18g2GadF9CLUJnTUdSbkVJaDR2UkRtUE9ka UE#gid=2) Somali have 33,2% southwest asian.

[Methusalem]

It is not me saying this it is a greek 2,500ybp argue with him not me. The reason why Ethopians and other east africans will soemtimes have pale skin and caucasin facial features. Is they have inter marraied with arabs alot alot alot. Look at the distrubtation of Y DNa J1 on wikpedia u can see it is extremley popular in former Nubia.

Also look at their globe13 results (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ArAJcY18g2GadF9CLUJnTUdSbkVJaDR2UkRtUE9ka UE#gid=2) Somali have 33,2% southwest asian.

Bullshit. Bullshit. Bullshit. Horners never intermarried with Arabs. The kinky hair, dark skin and full lips in some cases (there is an huge range regarding these features. Some have straight hair and thin lips for example) is not due to 'negroid' admixture, but nothing else than a regional tropical adaption. Many ethnic groups along the equator show similar tropical adaptions like the Melanesians for example. Genetically speaking Horners are Eastafrican/Southwestasian. Both components are quite related to each other. They are neither 'Caucasoid' or 'negroid'. Also this mixture took place thousands of years ago. We can only speculate how primeval Southwestasians and Eastafricans have looked like. IMO Horners just present a modern day continuum between SSA, Northeastafrica and the Arabian peninsula. A continuum which was always more or less 'caucasoid' like hence you can say that 'caucasoid' features already evolved in the Horn of Africa, but with several ranges of tropical adaption (dark skin, fuller lips, curlier hair). However it is undeniable that modern Horners have some minor recent/non-recent admixture of neighboring populations from SSA, Northeastafrica and the Arabian peninsula. So the question is: are those more SSA/Middle Eastern looking Horners just part of the natural continuum variation within the Horn of Africa since thousands of years or just a result of recent/non-recent admixture from neighboring populations from SSA, Northeastafrica and the Arabian peninsula. I think both cases have their true core.

[Prisoner Of Ice]

You're not a chemist, so whether it makes sense to you or not is irrelevant.
So you assume anyway. I don't have chemistry degree but I have worked with chemistry and genetics as a programmer so I think I can handle the maths and stuff. The red hair nonsense is an assumption, it was tested for Ramses II and failed. There's absolutely no case we know of where that happened and it's been confirmed. Every red haired mummy DNA tested so far has proven to be r1a or r1b.

[Prisoner Of Ice]

No it was R1b1a2 M269 i have also heard it was Germanic Italo Celtic branch R1b1a2a1a L11. He most likley did not get it from Europe if it was just R1b1a2 M269. Eupedia trys to say R1b1a2 M269 is the European branch that originated in Russia and is proto Indo European like R1a1a1 M417. But i think R1b1a2a L23 was the first R1b in Europe. R1b1a2a L23 is very popular in the mid east even in Iraq it deifntley is not from Indo iranian Kurds and besides that there has not been any strong Indo European settlement there. So there is a good chance it did not originate with indo European speaking people and not all was spread by Indo Europeans. There is still a trace of R1b1a2 M269 so my best guess is he got it from inter marriage with people from the mid east maybe even Hittites.

He was most likely of hittite ethnic origin.

[Prisoner Of Ice]

People who dedicate their lives to the study and investigation of a certain field are a gazillion times more reliable than internet "geniuses".
Like I said so you assume. Why don't you stick to facts not to insults and appeals to authority. There's no archaeologist on earth who is a real scientist, don't know what planet you are on but 90% of what they say is pure BS and changes every day especially the further back you go.

If you are not an expert yourself then follow your own advice if it bothers you so much.

[Vasconcelos]

Like I said so you assume. Why don't you stick to facts not to bullshit and appeals to authority. There's no archaeologist on earth who is a real scientist, don't know what planet you are on but 90% of what they say is pure BS and changes every day especially the further back you go.

If you are not an expert yourself then shut your hole.

Where did I even mention archaeologists, or that whatever they say sticks forever? Fukcing hell..

And next time reply everything in one single post instead of a massive spam of one liners.

[Smeagol]

Poor justification, it's common for a corpse's hair to get red with the ages, even if it was black. The reason it's belived he had red hair is because of testing done to it's roots, if I'm not mistaken.


Professor P. F. Ceccaldi, with a research team behind him, studied some hairs which were removed from the mummy's scalp. Ramesses II was 90 years-old when he died, and his hair had turned white. Ceccaldi determined that the reddish-yellow colour of the mummy's hair had been brought about by its being dyed with a dilute henna solution; it proved to be an example of the cosmetic attentions of the embalmers. However, traces of the hair's original colour (in youth), remain in the roots, even into advanced old age. Microscopic examinations proved that the hair roots contained traces of natural red pigments, and that therefore, during his youth, Ramesses II had been red-haired. It was concluded that these red pigments did not result from the hair somehow fading, or otherwise altering post-mortem, but did indeed represent Ramesses' natural hair colour. Ceccaldi also studied a cross-section of the hairs, and he determined from their oval shape, that Ramesses had been "cymotrich" (wavy-haired). Finally, he stated that such a combination of features showed that Ramesses had been a "leucoderm" (white-skinned person). [Balout, et al. (1985) 254-257.]

Balout and Roubet were under no illusions as to the significance of this discovery, and they concluded as follows:

"After having achieved this immense work, an important scientific conclusion remains to be drawn: the anthropological study and the microscopic analysis of hair, carried out by four laboratories: Judiciary Medecine (Professor Ceccaldi), Société L'Oréal, Atomic Energy Commission, and Institut Textile de France showed that Ramses II was a 'leucoderm', that is a fair-skinned man, near to the Prehistoric and Antiquity Mediterraneans, or briefly, of the Berber of Africa." [Balout, et al. (1985) 383.]

[Smeagol]

Man shut the fuck up. Anyone who uses vague, non-universal, unscientific terms like 'black' or 'white', which have a clear eurocentric prefix and are a leftover of Ango-European Imperialism, in a scientific discourse to describe ancient populations, is not credible. Fullstop. End of this pathetic discussion.
I am going to post again this quote of mine:

Egyptians just represent a Northeastafrican continuum similiar to Horners. Putting Egyptians into the 'Negroid'/'Black' or 'Caucasoid'/'White' separated category doesn't make sense since they just represent a fluid transition. A ethnic regionalizied Northeastafrican population with links towards the Middle East(Levante) and SSA.

And as I said recent studies on ancient Egyptians show clear genetic affinity towards modernday Westafricans and Centralafricans. Also a study on maternal haplogroups of ancient Egyptians from the old and new kingdom have shown this. It will probably published in a couple of months.

But here you go regarding autosomal STR profiles of Amarna period pharaohs:

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-XdY3E3uOsgw/TvzM6u5OgzI/AAAAAAAAEZ0/_pCkKg3r86M/s1600/dnatribes.jpg




http://dnatribes.com/dnatribes-digest-2012-01-01.pdf


Study on Ramses III and his son conclude that they were E1b1a carriers:



http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/96/Distribution_of_haplogroup_e1b1a_in_Rosa_2007.jpg

http://www.bmj.com/content/345/bmj.e8268



http://dnatribes.com/dnatribes-digest-2013-02-01.pdf


These recent genetic studies all indicate that the ancient Egyptians have a closer genetic relationship to modern populations across Sub Saharan Africa and particularly the Nilotic populations of the Great Lakes region of Africa.

LOL! DNAtribes.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bP_hqvSMlqw?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-bg0hs3tt00

[Prisoner Of Ice]

Anyway from all my years of following archaeology this is what happened as far as I can tell, how things were in and after the ice age.

We know there was a big push from iberia into north africa about 20k years ago for example, and like I said the people highest in the "nilotic" component are actually saami, and the "mediterranean" component in sardinians is highest in nordics, and there's a lot more similar stuff like that. In addition the I clade is all around the coasts of all europe, but in none of the refugeums. If it had occupied the whole of west europe like has suddenly been claimed, it would not be like this as invasions come from the sea not the land. This shows a pattern of a very early maritime culture in NW europe that colonized sardinia and probably more of the mediterannean. In the actual ice age their refugeum was in greece (and no one disputes this but oh how they gloss it over). So yes the greeks were once 100% nordic!

The solutreans on the other hand were the european R group. These guys seem to have penetrated to north america from the east coast and tribes like the iroquois have r1a y-DNA and X mtDNA which came from europe. Sardinia is largely r1b, too, so it's obvious that prehistory europe was kind of like it is now, a bunch of r1b with a sprinkling of I haplogroup, and the nordic types had a very early maritime culture.

This is the only way you can acount for all the 'weird' admixture phenomenon we see for population genetics.

Egypt itself was (I think) started by some semitic E clade guys who looks kind of like in the movies, but they were an ethnicity that doesn't really exist today. Not arabs or black guys or jews but their own thing entirely, though each of these groups retains some part of that DNA.

Then they had a ong dynasty followed by a big decline, then it's obvious they got conquered by westerners and then they had a big upsurge again. Then in the bronze age collapse where the hittites disappeared they got all but conquered by semitic tribes similar to today's blacks (but then may not even have been black yet we don't know for sure) and eventually got black pharaos, then of course greece and roman and byzantine then muslim saudis last of all.

Any remotely honest egyptologist has that exact opinion or anyway very close so if you don't like it that's your problem.

The buildings on malta are probably the same guys...and note I am not a nordic, go see how much loki hates me if you need proof.

edit: and archaelogists made the dbunked claims about black hair turning red, not chemists so yeah whatever.

[Fire Haired]

Bullshit. Bullshit. Bullshit. Horners never intermarried with Arabs. The kinky hair, dark skin and full lips in some cases (there is an huge range regarding these features. Some have straight hair and thin lips for example) is not due to 'negroid' admixture, but nothing else than a regional tropical adaption. Many ethnic groups along the equator show similar tropical adaptions like the Melanesians for example. Genetically speaking Horners are Eastafrican/Southwestasian. Both components are quite related to each other. They are neither 'Caucasoid' or 'negroid'. Also this mixture took place thousands of years ago. We can only speculate how primeval Southwestasians and Eastafricans have looked like. IMO Horners just present a modern day continuum between SSA, Northeastafrica and the Arabian peninsula. A continuum which was always more or less 'caucasoid' like hence you can say that 'caucasoid' features already evolved in the Horn of Africa, but with several ranges of tropical adaption (dark skin, fuller lips, curlier hair). However it is undeniable that modern Horners have some minor recent/non-recent admixture of neighboring populations from SSA, Northeastafrica and the Arabian peninsula. So the question is: are those more SSA/Middle Eastern looking Horners just part of the natural continuum variation within the Horn of Africa since thousands of years or just a result of recent/non-recent admixture from neighboring populations from SSA, Northeastafrica and the Arabian peninsula. I think both cases have their true core.

I showed u a fact they have inter married somali with 32.3% southwest asian check the link. Also look at this Y dna j1 map. Y DNa J1 orignated in the mid east same with its father J and its grandfather IJ their brother is Paleoithic European Y DNa I that is why their father is called IJ. so how popular J1 is in east Africa.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/db/HG_J1_%28ADN-Y%29.PNG/300px-HG_J1_%28ADN-Y%29.PNG

It is not just adaption their is east African admixture in southern Arabs too look at the globe13 link in my older post. Not true the reason why Melnesains have dark skin and nappy hair is they most likely get it from the same source as Sub sahran africans their common ancestor had it. The idea they just adapted is the 1970 pre DNA era were people just made assumptions now we have DNA to look at to figure out if its true or not. the southwest asian and east african are not related to each other at all will u please finally check my link globe13 (http://dodecad.blogspot.com/).

Here is a graph of all of their groups mapped out the closer the more related
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Xal68HraeTs/UJBfD1d2CoI/AAAAAAAAAzU/yvTVW2WNvLQ/s640/1_2.png

There are three major Human families. Caucasin, Sub Sharan African, and Oceania Mongliod

Southwest asian is more related to NOrth Euro than it is to east African and east african is more related to west african than it is southwest asian. There is no more guessing in genetics we have the DNA. U are making assuptions on tropical adaption on african Americans u have seen with big lips not all sub shran Africans do and deifntley not all tropical people. U are making many assumptions how does curley hair help in hot weather i have heard arguments but they are just trying to explain why sub sharan africans have curley hair.

U cant say what i am saying is BS when it is written in the DNA the inter marraige happened that is why they have some caucasin features FACT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Prisoner Of Ice]

Dude like usual it's mostly the other way around. The black africans come from semitic tribes in the first place.

[Fire Haired]

Dude like usual it's mostly the other way around. The black africans come from semitic tribes in the first place.

what?????? u know semetic is based on language that is probably less than 10,000 years old. They are based on genetics of ethnic groups that lived before them. Black africans are black africans some mixed with mid easterns thats all.

[Prisoner Of Ice]

what?????? u know semetic is based on language that is probably less than 10,000 years old. They are based on genetics of ethnic groups that lived before them. Black africans are black africans some mixed with mid easterns thats all.

African hasn't been black for 10k years, dude. It's only been black a couple hundred years (if you could even say it's black today) and bantu came to west africa about 2k years ago. Regardless, it's perfectly correct to call E carriers semitic peoples, the language and people group have the same name.

D and E are brother clades. Mongols are a mixture not the source of anything at all (especially not one that pulls from all over the tree like you seem to think), just like in India and Pakistan, that's just the basics of Y-DNA tree.

[Fire Haired]

African hasn't been black for 10k years, dude. It's only been black a couple hundred years (if you could even say it's black today) and bantu came to west africa about 2k years ago. Regardless, it's perfectly correct to call E carriers semitic peoples, the language and people group have the same name.

D and E are brother clades. Mongols are a mixture not the source of anything at all (especially not one that pulls from all over the tree like you seem to think), just like in India and Pakistan, that's just the basics of Y-DNA tree.

U really need to study on this stuff sorry but what u are saying is retarded. Sub Sahran Africans show the highest diversity in mtDNa and Y DNa which shows Humanity probably began there. They have the oldest y dna and mtdna haplogroups they never left Africa they are not from any recent migrations. Sure they have diff ethnic groups that hav spread recently and killed each other but that happens everywhere Germans don't define white people just like Banto dont define black people. U need to take another look at the human Y DNa tree. I had to study it for months before getting the picture.

[ButlerKing]

Just google ramses II you can see it the hair is clearly red. There's also more mummies that have been genotyped to I.

Nobody said everyone was white. Egypt is a huge area, it was basically half the mediterranean! It also lasted thousands of years. They used to say there'd never be a black president but it went from slavery to black president in way less time than that, even when I was a kid it seemed far fetched.

Basically first egyptians were probably semitic types from E clade. Then came european types. Then came black semitic types. Then came hellenic types like cleopatra. Now there's arabic types in charge with some semitic berbers.

Some of the "nilotic" admixtures are found the most in peoples like saami lol. Meaning there's been a big influence from outside.


I though some scientist say it was dyed with hyena?

Anyway can be hundred percent sure that King Tut didn't look like a red hair Middle eastern/North African face instead of european?


http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3297/3233822931_2f6c7682e1_m.jpg
http://travel.nationalgeographic.com/u/TvyamNb-BivtNwcoxtkc5xGBuGkIMh_nj4UJHQKuor2ByuQMIkW-0jzJToouxyaPpR9Uy9z_2sEOAA/

[Smeagol]

I though some scientist say it was dyed with hyena?

Scientists have determined it's real.

[ButlerKing]

Scientists have determined it's real.

Well even if it's real we can't say that those with red hair will look nordic or look like a modern European. King Tut still look more like some North African.

The Mongolians are a perfect example of a Mongoloid race with red hair and they have only 7-19% Caucasian admixture but still 93-81% Mongoloid

http://img266.imageshack.us/img266/2116/181232zb1.jpg
http://i39.tinypic.com/nfgqc5.jpg

[Smeagol]

Well even if it's real we can't say that those with red hair will look nordic or look like a modern European. King Tut still look more like some North African.

Not Nordic, but scientists also determined he had white skin.

[ButlerKing]

Not Nordic, but scientists also determined ha had white skin.

White skin can be found in many middle easterner and South Asians. I've seen pale skinned egyptians, north indians, Arabs but they still look like the way they do.

[Smeagol]

White skin can be found in many middle easterner and South Asians. I've seen pale skinned egyptians, north indians, Arabs but they still look like the way they do.

Here's his reconstruction. I think he looks like a Jew.
http://mathildasanthropologyblog.files.wordpress.com/2008/07/recon-ramses.jpg

[ButlerKing]

Here's his reconstruction. I think he looks like a Jew.
http://mathildasanthropologyblog.files.wordpress.com/2008/07/recon-ramses.jpg

That face look semetic and middle eastern.

[Smeagol]

That face look semetic and middle eastern.

I would say he looks Levantine with Arabid influence.

[Fire Haired]

Not Nordic, but scientists also determined he had white skin.

What experts are u talking about. Also red hair is not Nordic at all (Origin of red hair (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?91491-Origin-and-ancient-History-of-red-hair)). It was introduced to Scandinavia just 3,500-4,000ybp with Germanic languages and Y DNA R1b S21 and I2a2a M223. Overall blonde hair and red hair even though both are light hair colors not related at all their distribution is also not connected unlike light eyes. U should look at Origin of European paleness(skin, hair, and eye color) (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?92883-Origin-of-European-Paleness(skin-hair-and-eye-color)). U can see that the genes associated with European pale skin are about as popular in other Caucasians so mid easterns and north Africans. So sometimes u will see white skinned north Africans. Also i show that red hair does pop up in Samaritans there are only 700 there have been globe13 aust dna tests in all of them. Not one had any of the only group to originate in Europe called north euro. pretty much they probably have no European blood. So it is extremely extremely rare but red hair does exist in mid easterns and possibly north Africans and it is not from European inter marriage.

[Smeagol]

What experts are u talking about.

I posted the study.


Also red hair is not Nordic at all

I know.

[Fire Haired]

Here's his reconstruction. I think he looks like a Jew.
http://mathildasanthropologyblog.files.wordpress.com/2008/07/recon-ramses.jpg

It is just freaking face all Caucasians have the same facial features i guess there may be some very very very very small differences. Plus this is compute graphic's.

[Fire Haired]

I posted the study.

were is it.




I know.

it seemed like u where saying it is. I think it is so dumb how some people think it is. Like in the 1800;'s there was theory;s red hair in Ireland is from Vikings.

[Smeagol]

were is it.

Posted it a few pages ago.

[Prisoner Of Ice]

Yeah we have had an indirect link to the studi on page one and the study itself quoted and still 10 posts about "fake" red hair. If you see the guy's hair it's not slightly red like some of the peruvian mummies but fire engine red.


It is just freaking face all Caucasians have the same facial features i guess there may be some very very very very small differences. Plus this is compute graphic's.

No, actually it's not jewish or standard caucasian, those are neanderthal features. The middle eastern kind of nose and LARGE is what neanderthal had, odd as that may seem. Face jutting forward like that, too. I would like to see an analysis of Ramses II and King Tut for neanderthal DNA. They obviously would be a lot higher than Otzi from their looks.

[Prisoner Of Ice]

U really need to study on this stuff sorry but what u are saying is retarded. Sub Sahran Africans show the highest diversity in mtDNa and Y DNa which shows Humanity probably began there. They have the oldest y dna and mtdna haplogroups they never left Africa they are not from any recent migrations. Sure they have diff ethnic groups that hav spread recently and killed each other but that happens everywhere Germans don't define white people just like Banto dont define black people. U need to take another look at the human Y DNa tree. I had to study it for months before getting the picture.

Dude believe me I know very well about all this stuff and I realize I am not towing the party line here but the SSA like the pygmy are not the same as the ones who are in america and who have wiped out most the rest of africa, which was not black until very recently. Actually I won't say I am bucking the trend even, the studies you see just don't show they are not really talking about west africans when they say all this crap. And since we know when the E clades got there in the "reconquest" I can't see how that means it's where anything started.

[Artek]

Yeah we have had an indirect link to the studi on page one and the study itself quoted and still 10 posts about "fake" red hair. If you see the guy's hair it's not slightly red like some of the peruvian mummies but fire engine red.
He had red hair but it doesn't prove his European or Indo-European origin in any case.

I don't know your true intentions but many extreme Eurocentrists just want to believe that every great civilisation can't rise without Europeans.


No, actually it's not jewish or standard caucasian, those are neanderthal features. The middle eastern kind of nose and LARGE is what neanderthal had, odd as that may seem. Face jutting forward like that, too. I would like to see an analysis of Ramses II and King Tut for neanderthal DNA. They obviously would be a lot higher than Otzi from their looks.
Actually, I would be very glad to see Neanderthal Y-DNA or mtDNA. Have they found anything or this is only about some weird percentages? As I said in a previous thread - we share about 50% of genome with banana. Still I can't see a proof of interbreeding between human and banana.

[Prisoner Of Ice]

He had red hair but it doesn't prove his European or Indo-European origin in any case.


Actually, I would be very glad to see Neanderthal Y-DNA or mtDNA. Have they found anything or this is only about some weird percentages? As I said in a previous thread - we share about 50% of genome with banana.

Yeah we have to test him to know for sure, but if tut and his father are r1b it doesn't seem unlikely. I am just going off the features, which are more archaic than otzi (who has higher than anyone living found so far).

The banana thing is not really true it's rather overstated. At the time they made those claims they were unable to sequence anything very long. It also looks only at coding proteins not RNA. So basically I'd simply say it's not true, and if anything the chimp comparison was misleading because it made people think we are much closer to them than is likely. Later on it's been found gorilla is closer to human, and if you compare two humans side by side base pair by base pair and include RNA you won't even get the results they used to talk about for chimp-human.

Plus y-dna in chimps is nothing like that in humans, has no commonality at all, so if the mutation rates are true then chimps are no closer to humans than a chicken. Which is why I can't trust results based on that. 300 million years is not likely time for human chimp ancestor though I seriously doubt it's only 7 million years either.

[Artek]

The banana thing is not really true it's rather overstated. At the time they made those claims they were unable to sequence anything very long. It also looks only at coding proteins not RNA. So basically I'd simply say it's not true, and if anything the chimp comparison was misleading because it made people think we are much closer to them than is likely. Later on it's been found gorilla is closer to human, and if you compare two humans side by side base pair by base pair and include RNA you won't even get the results they used to talk about for chimp-human.
That's true, the banana thing is overstated but I wanted to give an example that everything is related and humans must've had common ancestors with banana and anything else.

What about Neanderthals? If we really interbred with them, that it's not a homo neanderthalensis anymore - just a different looking subset of archaic homo sapiens because of a fertility fact.


Plus y-dna in chimps is nothing like that in humans, has no commonality at all, so if the mutation rates are true then chimps are no closer to humans than a chicken. Which is why I can't trust results based on that. 300 million years is not likely time for human chimp ancestor though I seriously doubt it's only 7 million years either.
I don't know a particular timeframe and I find it rather speculational, with huge margin error possible.

[Methusalem]

I showed u a fact they have inter married somali with 32.3% southwest asian check the link.

Somalis never intermarried with Arabs you dumbshit. The Southasian component is way old. This mixture is non-recent and took place thousands of years ago. We can only speculate how primeval Southwestasians and Eastafricans have looked like.


Also look at this Y dna j1 map. Y DNa J1 orignated in the mid east same with its father J and its grandfather IJ their brother is Paleoithic European Y DNa I that is why their father is called IJ. so how popular J1 is in east Africa.There are three major Human families. Caucasin, Sub Sharan African, and Oceania Mongliod

Southwest asian is more related to NOrth Euro than it is to east African and east african is more related to west african than it is southwest asian. There is no more guessing in genetics we have the DNA. U are making assuptions on tropical adaption on african Americans u have seen with big lips not all sub shran Africans do and deifntley not all tropical people. U are making many assumptions how does curley hair help in hot weather i have heard arguments but they are just trying to explain why sub sharan africans have curley hair.

U cant say what i am saying is BS when it is written in the DNA the inter marraige happened that is why they have some caucasin features FACT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



As I said the Southwest asian mixture is non-recent. We can only speculate how primeval Southwestasians and Eastafricans have looked like. Or do you have any fossil proof to support your claim that ancient Southwestasians looked 'caucasoid'? E1b1b originated also in Eastafrica. Are Balkanites with E1b1b half negroids? Are you possibly retarded?



It is not just adaption their is east African admixture in southern Arabs too look at the globe13 link in my older post. Not true the reason why Melnesains have dark skin and nappy hair is they most likely get it from the same source as Sub sahran africans their common ancestor had it. The idea they just adapted is the 1970 pre DNA era were people just made assumptions now we have DNA to look at to figure out if its true or not. the southwest asian and east african are not related to each other at all will u please finally check my link.

Nappy hair, dark skin etc. is tropical adaption and has zero to do with genetic influence. Melanesians cluster way far from SSA on every PCA plot but still have tropical adapted features.