Is this region purposely avoided by modern scholars? we literally have more ancient samples from east africa than from there ; the only region where some scholars had to write at least two papers urgently asking for more samples. We know more about the fricking genomic profile of a mesolithic scandinavian than ancient egyptians.
>the only region where some scholars had to write at least two papers urgently asking for more samples.
Who?
>study on "Punic North Africa"
>12 samples from a single site near sicily with a clear non-semitic toponym
>not carthage
>not lixus
>not utica
>study on "Egypt"
>3 samples from a single hyksos site near the Levant
>not memphis
>not thebes
>not abydos
>hyksos site
There are no hyksos sites outside the eastern delta.
Abusir is an Hyksos site.
It’s not. Abusir had no sites associated with hyksos
The only sites associated with hyksos phenomenon are in the eastern delta: avaris and tell yahudiyeh.
Find me a single site outside it. I'm waiting
>But when one turns to the Hyksos Period material from Abusir el - Malaq and Sidmant ( Mayana )
Minoan Pottery in Second Millennium Egypt - Page 91
>When we consider the northern location of the Abusir el-Meleq cemetery, not only are the occurrences of the cylinder seal and the several vessels of Palestinian influence significant, but also two types of skeletons have been two types of skeletons have been distinguished in the anthropological study.
Encyclopedia of the Archaeology of Ancient Egypt - Page 93
>Other parallels can be cited from Hyksos tombs of Abusir el - Melek in Egypt73
Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization - Numéros 13 à 17 - Page 19
Yeah, except the samples are hundreds of years apart. They also don't resemble Levantines from the same era.
Distance to: Egyptian_1879bc:Nakht-Ankh
0.05598422 Levant_Beirut_IAIII_Egyptian
0.05787340 EGY_Hellenistic_contam
0.06220644 EGY_Late_Period
0.06948542 England_Roman_Near_Eastern_o
0.09244834 Levant_Megiddo_IBA
0.09406293 Levant_JOR_EBA
0.10221588 Levant_Sidon_MBA
0.10231239 Levant_Ashkelon_IA2
0.10275393 Levant_Beirut_Hellenistic
0.10363510 Levant_Natufian
Distance to: Egyptian_1879bc:Nakht-Ankh
0.04199247 Egyptian
0.05445303 SaudiB
0.05591073 Tunisian_Rbaya
0.05614163 BedouinA
0.05716855 Yemenite_Dhamar
0.06347228 Yemenite_Amran
0.06455630 Yemenite_Al_Bayda
0.07031330 Yemenite_Ma'rib
0.07301396 Libyan
0.07354311 Palestinian
Why this 1800-1900 BC Upper Egyptian sample resemble Hyksos?
the Black person quotes are not proving what he claims. Sporadic Hyksos stuff was found as far as baghdad.
He literally posts a book called “minoan pottery in egyptian sites”
Guess that means these sites were minoan!
Only the eastern delta had hyksos. And one samples had E-V22 and U6 which are neither found in asia
The only source found after googling the quotes is discussing predynastic egypt material.
Finding some Palestinian vessels ( from predynastic times) doesn't mean it was a hyksos site
https://books.google.com.eg/books?id=AWSGAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA93&lpg=PA93&dq=When+we+consider+the+northern+location+of+the+Abusir+el-Meleq+cemetery,+not+only+are+the+occurrences+of+the+cylinder+seal+and+the+several+vessels+of+Palestinian+influence+significant,+but+also+two+types+of+skeletons+have+been+two+types+of+skeletons+have+been+distinguished+in+the+anthropological+study.&source=bl&ots=zgFeF2uoQ8&sig=ACfU3U1oTE-8CNMih9iN8ugvycEBnRmfvw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjw6fi30ef5AhU1nf0HHV_OCE8Q6AF6BAgDEAI#v=onepage&q=When%20we%20consider%20the%20northern%20location%20of%20the%20Abusir%20el-Meleq%20cemetery%2C%20not%20only%20are%20the%20occurrences%20of%20the%20cylinder%20seal%20and%20the%20several%20vessels%20of%20Palestinian%20influence%20significant%2C%20but%20also%20two%20types%20of%20skeletons%20have%20been%20two%20types%20of%20skeletons%20have%20been%20distinguished%20in%20the%20anthropological%20study.&f=false
Found the other source and it discusses hyksos period (and other periods) material not hyksos material
Sneaky Black person
If there were any hyksos in the archeology, this page would mention it
https://www.britannica.com/place/Abu-Sir
Schuenemann et al. Itself and its references doesn't say it was Hyksos
>with a clear non-semitic toponym
kerkoaune was a name given by archeologists, not the original name
~~*((academics*~~)) have something against north africa probably because thats where atlantis was
they are scared to be labelled as racists for proving that it wasn't inhabited by black folks
North Africa was heavily colonized by semites (Punic Carthaginians, and their mercenary armies), and there is an absurd amount of academic work published on the topic.
actually all the works show that it was not "heavily" colonized by semites and the carthaginian army was mostly composed of north african soldiers (foreign mercenaries were from Iberia, gaul, italy, etc not from the middle east)
>the carthaginian army was mostly composed of north african soldiers
That's why I stated it was a mercenary armies. North Africa was heavily colonized by a Semitic empire with the assistance of hundreds of thousands of foreign mercenaries. There.
north africa has never been colonized by "semitic empire" you confuse cultural/commercial exchanges with political/military control
>"There is no clear evidence for the presence of Carthaginian military
bases, whether on the Mediterranean or the Atlantic coast. There seem to
have existed tributary cities where mercenaries were recruited, however,
such as in the region of Metagonia where Hannibal drafted mercenaries
according to Polybius. Silius Italicus also attests to a large number of North African troops. In fact, a large part of the “Punic” presence on the Algerian coast belongs to the period of the Numidian kings beginning in the third century "
Carthage was a semitic empire. The entire political apparatus and all ruling classes were Levantine Semites who spoke and wrote in a language which is an ancestor of Hebrew, engaged in Canaanite rituals, and were deeply connected to Levantine mythology and religion. The vassals, allies, and subjects of the empire do not alter its foundations.
yes the culture was phoenician but not the people at least based on the latest datas and again carthage did not rule over north africa only a small part of it
>not the people
Sure, they had an ethnically diverse population among their multiple periphery settlements, but the political and upper classes in their major settlements were certainly of near-eastern ancestry (obviously with varying degrees of admixture, because there was nothing to stop them from copulating with members of other societies).
>carthage did not rule over north africa only a small part of it
True, though they did make deep incursions into that region, had thriving settlements in coastal areas, and left their mark in general.
>but the political and upper classes in their major settlements
there is no reason to believe this since we do have testimonies of mixed unions they were absolutely not endogamous the same way many modern north africans claim to be arab yet are genetically fully berber or with very low amount of arab ancestry.
>True, though they did make deep incursions into that region, had thriving settlements in coastal areas, and left their mark in general.
I agree
>we do have testimonies of mixed unions
Absolutely not saying there wouldn't have been. For a mercantile colonizing civilization of Levantine character, this would have been advantageous in many contexts, especially in areas surrounding the more active ports.
Punics were a minority and the majority of punic armies/commanders were made of berbers
The Sahel region of West and Central Africa are far more avoided. The artifacts there and the books that remain in people's collections are far more vulnerable to being lost and are already degrading, but nobody's doing anything to save them.
North Africa has more literature better preserved and documented, and a lot of the artifacts aren't nearly as vulnerable and are more abundant. Both regions need to be looked at, of course.
The Punic Mediterranean - a new ancient DNA perspective
>Towards the end of the 6th century BCE, the former colony Carthage in present-day Tunisia emerged as a hegemonial power in the Western Mediterranean. While keeping the Phoenician language as well as many aspects of cultural practices, a new set of "Punic" customs spread rapidly from the Northwest African coast throughout the Western Mediterranean, including coastal sites in Iberia, Ibiza, Sicily and Sardinia. In this study we produced novel ancient DNA evidence from human remains buried in Western Mediterranean Punic necropoli. So far, ancient DNA data from Punic sites has been sporadic, and here we generated genome-wide ancient DNA as well as new Radio Carbon dates to fill this gap. Together, this new data allowed us to probe whether cultural links to North Africa are also accompanied by North African genetic ancestry. Moreover, we studied putative genetic connections to the Levant and Aegan.
Insights into ancient Egyptian genomes in the First Millennium BC
>Egypt provides a privileged location to study historical population dynamics as it is at the crossroads between the ancient civilizations in Africa, Asia, and Europe. In the first millennium BC, ancient Egypt witnessed foreign domination by the neighboring populations including Libyans, Nubians, Assyrians, Greeks, Romans, and others, whose roles vary from trade exchange to invasion and rule. Despite being potential to addressing questions on the population’s demographic, retrieval of ancient DNA from the Egyptian mummies has greatly been challenged by the presence of contamination. Here we report a preliminary, rigorously tested genome-wide dataset from mummies using high-throughput DNA sequencing and targeted capture techniques. The individuals in our study are recovered from Upper and Lower Egypt sites and spanning around 900 years of ancient Egyptian history, from the Third Intermediate to the Roman period.
>12 samples from a little town of 1.2k inhabitants full of sicilian settlers
>3samples from a random site in middle egypt from late periods
compare this to the 10.956 ancient samples from Europe or the 305 from the middle east...
They Fear the Nafri BVLL
Also because those countries are literal shitholes
>what there are africans who aren't blacks
>NO THAT CAN'T BE
>tfw im safe the dna targetting virus
feels good man
Welcome to doing any genetic, archaeological, historic, medical research work in Africa. A lot of the time it's because it's hard to do, others because "well there's no demand or interest/we can't make money off it".
African DNA samples in regards to medical work is so fricking scant most of the sizable ones we do have come from African Americans and is only relevant in the USA.