SCI First genome study of mummies reveals they were more Turkish and European than African

[Melodi]

Well this so upset a few apple carts, although 1400 BC is NOT the Old Kingdom period it is the New Kingdom/Empire period, still I suspect if this turns out to hold true for the earlier periods (when the DNA is done) then science will have to accept that the Ancient Egyptians were more related to the Anatolian, Levantine and even European populations than they were to Sub-Sharan Africa - best read at link with lots of pictures I tried editing and it just wasn't working well this evening on our rural broad band.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-4555292/Study-mummies-reveals-Turkish-European.html

The surprising ancestry of ancient Egyptians: First ever genome study of mummies reveals they were more Turkish and European than African

Researchers performed a detailed analysis of the DNA of ancient mummies
They found that ancient Egyptians were closely related to European populations
Traditional communities in the Levant and Neolithic Europe were close relatives
Study found that modern Egyptians share more ancestry with Sub-Saharan Africans than ancient Egyptians did

By Harry Pettit For Mailonline

Published: 16:00, 30 May 2017 | Updated: 17:54, 30 May 2017

e-mail

45
shares

95

View comments

The first ever full-genome analysis of Ancient Egyptians shows they were more Turkish and European than African.

Scientists analysed ancient DNA from Egyptian mummies dating from 1400 BC to 400 AD and discovered they shared genes with people from the Mediterranean.

They found that ancient Egyptians were closely related to ancient populations in the Levant - now modern day Turkey, Syria, Jordan, Israel and Lebanon.

They were also genetically similar to Neolithic populations from the Anatolian Peninsula and Europe.

The groundbreaking study used recent advances in DNA sequencing techniques to undertake a closer examination of mummy genetics than ever before.

Scroll down for video
A map showing the main areas of immigrant populations that contributed to Egyptian heritage between 1400 BCE and 400 CE
+6

A map showing the main areas of immigrant populations that contributed to Egyptian heritage between 1400 BCE and 400 CE
WHAT THE STUDY FOUND

Ancient Egyptians shared genes with several European populations.

They were closely related to ancient populations in the Levant - now modern day Syria, Jordan, Israel and Lebanon.

They were also genetically similar to Neolithic populations from the Anatolian Peninsula and Europe.

The study also found that modern Egyptians share more ancestry with Sub-Saharan Africans than ancient Egyptians did.

Ancient Egyptians likely had a more diverse genetic heritage because it was once one of the world's biggest trading hubs.

The study, published in Nature Communications, found that modern Egyptians share more ancestry with Sub-Saharan Africans than ancient Egyptians did.

The data shows that modern Egyptians share approximately eight per cent more ancestry on the nuclear level with Sub-Saharan African populations than with ancient Egyptians.

Egypt is a promising location for the study of ancient populations because it was a world-wide trading hub.

This is likely the reason that ancient Egyptians had such a diverse genetic heritage, the authors, from the University of Tuebingen and the Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History in Jena, said.

'The population history of Egypt is complex because it is found at the ispus of Africa, the gateway to a continent, and has seen much historical turnover,' Max Planck Director for the Science of Human History and study lead author Professor Johannes Krause told MailOnline.

'Ancient Egypt in the 1millenium BC had been dominated by many foreign powers.

The team's research involved unravelling the genetic history of Egyptians by comparing DNA samples taken from both modern and ancient natives.
RELATED ARTICLES

Previous
1
Next

The iPhone killer? Android inventor Andy Rubin unveils the...
Our best look yet at the iPhone 8? Leaks suggest Apple's new...
Is your boss a nightmare? Leaders with too much charisma are...
Billionaire Bigelow space mogul says he is 'absolutely...

Share this article
Share
45 shares

The researchers were aiming to establish an exhaustive genetic database to study the ancient past of Egypt for the first time.

'It has been much debated whether foreign dominations such as Assyrians, Nunbians, Greeks or Romans changed the gene pool of ancient Europe, making them more or less African,' Professor Krause told MailOnline.

'We wanted to test that and found that there is genetic continuity between the old kingdom and Roman period.
A new DNA analysis of Ancient Egyptians shows they were more Turkish and European than African. This image shows the sarcophagus of Tadja, Abusir el-Meleq, one of the mummies whose DNA was analysed in the new study
+6

A new DNA analysis of Ancient Egyptians shows they were more Turkish and European than African. This image shows the sarcophagus of Tadja, Abusir el-Meleq, one of the mummies whose DNA was analysed in the new study
Map of Egypt, showing the archaeological site of Abusir-el Meleq (orange X), from which the ancient mummies were taken, and the location of the modern Egyptian samples used in the study (orange circles)
+6

Map of Egypt, showing the archaeological site of Abusir-el Meleq (orange X), from which the ancient mummies were taken, and the location of the modern Egyptian samples used in the study (orange circles)
HOW THE STUDY WAS DONE

Mummified human DNA is normally difficult to study because of chemical treatment of the bodies before mummification, and due to the warm environment they are kept in.

But new genetic techniques used by the team allowed them to study mummified DNA in greater detail than ever before.

The team sampled 151 mummified individuals from the archaeological site of Abusir el-Meleq, along the Nile River in Middle Egypt.

In total, the authors recovered mitochondrial genomes from 90 individuals, and genome-wide datasets from three individuals.

The genome-wide samples are the first ever taken from mummified remains.

The team compared this ancient Egyptian DNA to genome samples from modern Egyptians to analyse differences in genetic makeup.

'However in the last 1,500 years Egypt became more genetically African, whereas the ancient Egyptians showed almost no sub-Saharan African ancestry and high affinity to ancient Near Eastern and European populations.'

The team sampled 151 mummified individuals from the archaeological site of Abusir el-Meleq, along the Nile River in Middle Egypt.

Recent advances in the study of ancient DNA present an intriguing opportunity to test existing understandings of Egyptian history using the ancient genetic data.

The new study managed to extract accurate, full-genome DNA data from three ancient Egyptian mummies, and usable segments of DNA from 90 mummies.

Pictured is the principal component analysis and genetic clustering of the genome-wide DNA from three ancient Egyptians analysed in the study
+6

Pictured is the principal component analysis and genetic clustering of the genome-wide DNA from three ancient Egyptians analysed in the study
Scientists analysed ancient DNA from Egyptian mummies dating from 1400 BC to 400 AD and discovered they shared genes with people from the Mediterranean (stock)
+6

Scientists analysed ancient DNA from Egyptian mummies dating from 1400 BC to 400 AD and discovered they shared genes with people from the Mediterranean (stock)
WHY IS IT DIFFICULT TO EXTRACT MUMMY DNA?

Although some of the first extractions of ancient DNA were from mummified remains, scientists have previously raised doubts as to whether genetic data from mummies would be reliable even if it could be recovered.

The hot Egyptian climate, high humidity levels in many tombs and some of the chemicals used in mummification techniques contribute to DNA degradation.

Scientists had therefore assumed that the long-term survival of DNA in Egyptian mummies was unlikely, making mummy genetic data unusable.

But using recent advances in modern genetics technology, the new study managed to extract accurate full-genome DNA data from three ancient Egyptian mummies, and usable segments of DNA from 90 mummies.

The team used next-generation sequencing methods to read stretches of any DNA present in a sample and retrieve those that resembled human DNA.

The complete reads allowed the team to spot telltale damage patterns associated only with ancient DNA.

This makes the new study's results much more reliable than those of any mummy DNA research that has come before.

The ability to extract nuclear DNA from such mummies, as well as show its reliability using robust authentication methods, is a scientific breakthrough that opens the door to further direct study of mummified remains.

The team used next-generation sequencing methods to read stretches of any DNA present in a sample and retrieve those that resembled human DNA.

The complete reads allowed the team to spot telltale damage patterns associated only with ancient DNA.

This makes the new study's results much more reliable than those of any mummy DNA research that has come before.

The extraction of reliable nuclear DNA from Egyptian mummies is hence a breakthrough in genetics that opens the door to more detailed studies of mummified remains.

They were able to use the data gathered to test previous hypotheses drawn from archaeological and historical data, and from studies of modern DNA.
The team found that ancient Egyptians were closely related to ancient populations in the Levant and Neolithic populations from the Anatolian Peninsula and Europe. Image shows researcher Verena Schuenemann at the Palaeogenetics Laboratory, University of Tuebingen
+6

The team found that ancient Egyptians were closely related to ancient populations in the Levant and Neolithic populations from the Anatolian Peninsula and Europe. Image shows researcher Verena Schuenemann at the Palaeogenetics Laboratory, University of Tuebingen

Professor Alexander Peltzer, from the University of Tuebingen, said: 'In particular, we were interested in looking at changes and continuities in the genetic makeup of the ancient inhabitants of Abusir el-Meleq.

'We wanted to test if the conquest of Alexander the Great and other foreign powers has left a genetic imprint on the ancient Egyptian population.'

The team wanted to determine if the investigated ancient populations were affected at the genetic level by foreign conquest and domination during the time period under study, and compared these populations to modern Egyptian comparative populations.

The study found that ancient Egyptians were most closely related to ancient populations in the Levant (modern day Turkey, Syria, Jordan, Israel and Lebanon), and were also closely related to Neolithic populations from the Anatolian Peninsula and Europe.

Coauthor Wolfgang Haack, group leader at the Max Planck Institute, added: 'The genetics of the Abusir el-Meleq community did not undergo any major shifts during the 1,300 year timespan we studied, suggesting that the population remained genetically relatively unaffected by foreign conquest and rule.'

 

[IceWave]

Oh no no no, this just won't do. Everyone KNOWS the phay-roes was negros!

 

[Oreally]

just more white supermacist mumbo jumbo, bro!

 

[Dozdoats]

DASS RACISSSSS!!!

 

[naturallysweet]

You mean we now hove proof that they weren't kings. Lol

 

[Hognutz]

That really screws up their "We wuz kangs" meme....

 

[Melodi]

That really screws up their "We wuz kangs" meme....

Not totally, there was at least ONE Sub-Sharan Dynasty that lasted about 100 years, they came in from Nubia/Kush (760 BCE to 656 BCE) and basically just slotted themselves in the way the Hyskos (620 to 1555 BCE) did. The Hyskos are believed to be from Canan and historians often wonder if the Hebrews came into Eygpt during this period with the Exodus occurring after they are driven out.

There is SOME African blood at least in the Egyptian royal house even in the New Kingdom era (which these mummies are from) during a brief period of representational art, the "Queen Mum" has a typically African wide nose and either her hair (or wig) are basically an Afro.

But then Tut's DNA was mostly European; at the time I thought it was mostly because the 18th dynasty kings of the Empire Period made a point of having hundreds of diplomatic wives from all over the place; from Asia to what is now Europe.

Now I think it is more likely that at least after the Hyskos period (or perhaps during it) a large wave of folks from the Middle East and Europe moved in OR the original population of the Nile Valley (which is in NORTH AFRICA) was settled by a combination of Anatolian/Mesopotamian/Turkish/Mediterranean farmers or at least they became the successful agriculturalists that built the 3,000 year old civilization.

We KNOW that some of these people moved into Europe and probably got even as far as Ireland, Germany and possibly Eastward into China; so North Africa is a no-brainer in terms of travel. A recent study I saw yesterday (no link I will try to find it) showed that ICE AGE people (thousands of years before) sometimes moved nearly 2,000 miles during their LIFETIMES (they can tell that now by chemicals in the bones and teeth).

I suspect that by the New Kingdom period when these mummies were found (the oldest may be late Middle Kingdom/Hyskos); the population looked a lot like the actors in an otherwise not very good TV Mini-Series on King Tut that some here may have watched (I saw it on the net a couple of years ago).

In that series people were all over the map; with the Grand Viser looking Black African (he's from a lower ranking family originally, in real history he will become Pharoh in old age); Tut looks like a European guy with a Suntan; one wife looks classically like she walked off a wall painting and his second wife (a village girl) looks typically Middle Eastern/Modern Egyptians. In other words, people were all over the map; because people living in Eygpt (and breeding with the locals) were from all over the map of a vast trading empire that directly ruled a huge area and traded probably as far the edges of Cornwall to the shores of India and West Africa.

So we will have to wait for further DNA testing on OLDER mummies to know what the population was like in the time of Imhotep and the building of the Great Pyramid - I'm open to anything at this point; I posted this article even though it was UK Daily Mail (I've got people hunting for the source material, it has got to be somewhere) because it just throw a monkey wrench into preconceived ideas and theories at least for the later period.

I'm interested in the what the archeology actually SAYS and not what people want it to say; I mean the Irish have survived discovering that while their culture is Celtic, the majority of the Irish people are not. Genetically some of the old stories were true and a huge portion of the native Irish are related to the Basques in Spain, as well as an even older hunter-gatherer population in the far West and some Celts on the East Coast.

Obviously some people moved in (possibly with a new religion aka The Druids or pre Druid) and brought a Celtic cultural influance in that people liked and copied.

Eygpt can learn to live with a largely Middle Eastern and European ancient past if they have to and like I said the more Southern African influance was always there; it just wasn't nearly as large a percentage of the population as previously thought at least not by the New Kingdom period.

 

[Melodi]

From Science Magazine

Scientists successfully sequenced DNA from mummies from the site of Abusir el-Meleq, one of which was buried in this sarcophagus.
bpk/Aegyptisches Museum und Papyrussammlung, SMB/Sandra Steiss

Scientists thought ancient Egyptian mummies didn’t have any DNA left. They were wrong

By Lizzie WadeMay. 30, 2017 , 11:00 AM

Ancient Egyptian mummies preserve many details of the deceased: facial features, signs of illness, even tattoos. But not, it seemed, DNA. After trying repeatedly to extract it, may scientists were convinced that the hot desert climate and, perhaps, the chemicals used in mummification destroyed any genetic material long ago. Now, a team of ancient DNA specialists has successfully sequenced genomes from 90 ancient Egyptian mummies. The game-changing results give scientists their first insight into the genetics of ordinary ancient Egyptians—which changed surprisingly little through centuries of conquests.

The sequencing success, reported this week in Nature Communications, “finally proves to everyone that there’s DNA preserved in ancient Egyptian mummies,” says Albert Zink, a biological anthropologist at the Institute for Mummy Studies in Bolzano, Italy. He participated in a 2010 study that identified DNA sequences from 16 ancient Egyptian royal mummies, including Tutankhamun. But that study used polymerase chain reaction, a method that efficiently finds and extracts targeted DNA fragments but cannot always reliably distinguish between ancient DNA and modern contamination.

The new study, led by Johannes Krause, a geneticist at the Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History in Jena, Germany, used next-generation sequencing methods to read stretches of any DNA present in a sample and fish out those that resembled human DNA. The complete reads allowed the team to spot tell-tale damage patterns associated only with ancient DNA. That makes the new analysis much more reliable, says Hannes Schroeder, an ancient DNA researcher at the University of Copenhagen. “It succeeds where previous studies on Egyptian mummies have failed or fallen short.”
Sign up for our daily newsletter

Krause, who has studied the DNA of Neandertals, Denisovans, and prehistoric migrants to Europe, recently gravitated toward ancient Egyptian mummies because of the empire’s tumultuous political history. At various points, it was conquered by Assyrians from the Near East, Nubians from farther south along the Nile, Persians, Greeks, and Romans, among others. “Our question was, did those foreign conquests have a genetic impact?” Krause says.

Krause turned to a collection of 151 mummy heads from the ancient settlement of Abusir el-Meleq, about 100 kilometers south of Cairo along the Nile. The settlement was devoted to Osiris, the god of the dead, making it a popular burial spot for many centuries. The heads were excavated (and removed from their bodies) in the early 20th century and now reside in two collections in Germany, at the University of Tübingen and Berlin’s Museum of Prehistory and Early History. Radiocarbon dating shows that the mummies span 1300 years of ancient Egyptian history, during many of the foreign conquests and then Egypt’s incorporation into first the Greek and then the Roman empires.

Whereas the mummies’ soft tissue contained almost no DNA, the bones and teeth were chock full of genetic material. Ninety of the mummies yielded DNA once housed in mitochondria, the power plants of cells. Mitochondria carry only a few genes, but they are so plentiful that it’s often easier to find their DNA than the single full human genome in a cell’s nucleus. Still, because mitochondrial DNA is passed down from mother to child, it leaves out the story of the father’s DNA. The nuclear genome, which contains DNA from both parents, is far more informative. Unfortunately, Krause says, only a few of the mummies’ nuclear genomes were well preserved, and even fewer passed his strict contamination tests. His team ended up with nuclear genome samples from only three mummies, each from a different time period.

Krause’s team compared the mummies’ mitochondrial and nuclear DNA to ancient and modern populations in the Near East and Africa. They discovered that ancient Egyptians closely resembled ancient and modern Near Eastern populations, especially those in the Levant. What’s more, the genetics of the mummies remained remarkably consistent even as different powers conquered the empire. It’s possible that the mitochondrial genomes simply don’t record the genetic contributions of foreign fathers, says Yehia Gad, a molecular geneticist at the National Research Centre in Cairo and a founder of the Egyptian Museum’s ancient DNA lab who worked with Zink on past mummy studies. But the three mummies with nuclear genome data also show striking genetic continuity, Krause points out.

Later, however, something did alter the genomes of Egyptians. Although the mummies contain almost no DNA from sub-Saharan Africa, some 15% to 20% of modern Egyptians’ mitochondrial DNA reflects sub-Saharan ancestry. “It’s really unexpected that we see this very late shift,” Krause says. He suspects increased trade along the Nile—including the slave trade—or the spread of Islam in the Middle Ages may have intensified contact between Northern and sub-Saharan Africa.

Geneticist Iosif Lazaridis of Harvard Medical School in Boston, who studies how and when ancient populations mixed, calls the new results “a big accomplishment.” But he wonders how representative Abusir el-Meleq is of ancient Egypt as a whole. “Egypt is a big place,” he says. Other regions may have experienced its conquests in different ways, some perhaps with more genetic mixing. But Lazaridis hopes for more revelations to come. “Now that it’s been proven that it’s possible to sample from mummies—well, there are literally thousands of mummies.”
Posted in:

ArchaeologyBiology

DOI: 10.1126/science.aan6902
http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017...mies-didn-t-have-any-dna-left-they-were-wrong

 

[Flippper]

I thought it was interesting that there is some research into king Tut's sister having died in Ireland, I believe if memory serves, they claimed they both came from Ireland. There was some interesting commentary that makes me think it's possible the princess was indeed buried in Ireland. There are quite a few youtube videos on the subject.

 

[Housecarl]

People often don't realize the level of maritime technology that existed "back then". Even if they weren't going out of sight of land regularly, travelling around the coastal Med would allow for going at least to the British Iles...and if you consider the folklore based navigation of the Pacific Islanders would be just as easily locally developed by mariners of that time in the Med voyages further afield shouldn't be discounted. IIRC wasn't coca found with/in a mummy?

 

[Melodi]

People often don't realize the level of maritime technology that existed "back then". Even if they weren't going out of sight of land regularly, travelling around the coastal Med would allow for going at least to the British Iles...and if you consider the folklore based navigation of the Pacific Islanders would be just as easily locally developed by mariners of that time in the Med voyages further afield shouldn't be discounted. IIRC wasn't coca found with/in a mummy?

I have never heard and have no evidence for Tut or his "sister" being in Ireland; and I'm usually pretty aware of both woo and mainstream archegology -I think that there was some 18th Dynasty Jewlery found a few years ago; but I'm pretty sure that was in the British Isles, if I recall correctly it was a bead found in a grave.

But Housecarl is correct; there was huge trade and movement of people during the late Bronze Age; and the tin-mines at what is now Cornwall were almost certaintly part of the Trade route and there is an GREEK bronze age trading post in Sweden; their amber would eventually make it to places like Egypt and people traveled those routes too.

 

[Melodi]

Almost forgot the Cocain Mummies controversy; yes there was both coca products and tobacco found in some mummies that were in European museums; after a huge backlash the examinations to show if this is a real situation with the original people buried or the result of lax practices of 19th century antiquarians who brought the Mummies to Europe has never been done.

I gather the Egyptian government refused to give permission to test mummies in Egypt and it has been made very clear in Europe/North America that it will be the "kiss of death" to anyone's career if they try to seek funding (which will not be given) to perform such tests even on the mummies in European and North American museums.

This angers me a great deal because the situation is so cut and dried...

The test will show one of two things:

1. Scientists need to be very careful with test results from older mummies outside of Egypt because in the 19th century it was common to smoke pipes and other things around mummies that might contaminate them and we have evidence this happened (important to know).

2. The mummies really DO have Coca and Tobacco in their systems; meaning the Sea Faring Folks of the Bronze Age were occasionally making it over to South or Central America and bringing trade goods back for the high elites.

The situation is so cut and dried because while there is a relative of tobacco that lives on this side of the water; precontact the Coca plant and relatives did not exist in any form here - so it HAD to have been brought over during a trading situation.

To me either outcome is really interesting and it is almost criminal not to take the time to scientifically answer the question (and perhaps rewrite history - again).

 

[LightEcho]

If we go by the biblical record, the world was washed away except for Noah's family group on the ark. They landed in the mountains of Ararat - Turkey, and came down from those un-liveable places to fertile valleys. Afterwards, with great increase in population in the area we now know as Iraq, we know of the Tower of Babel event. At that time, the people were gathered in one place with one language. It was from there that God confused their languages causing them to separate. I take it that this is where we see "specialization" of genetics with like-kinds going their directions together. Those who wanted to speak ebonics went to sub-Saharan points. Sub-Saharan Africa is not the cradle of mankind, but an in-bred group separated like all the other groups out of Babylon.

 

[vestige]

Those who wanted to speak ebonics went to sub-Saharan points.

Damn!

I always thought they went to Memphis, Detroit, Baltimore, Gary and a few other places.

 

[Faroe]

The DNA only confirms what is obvious to anyone who looks at Egyptian antiquities. Hardly the sub-Saharan style.

 

[summerthyme]

Damn!

I always thought they went to Memphis, Detroit, Baltimore, Gary and a few other places.

LOL... Well, they did... From sub-saharan Africa...

Summerthyme

 

[vestige]

Related video (If I can embed):

From article at: https://altright.com/

 

[Melodi]

The DNA only confirms what is obvious to anyone who looks at Egyptian antiquities. Hardly the sub-Saharan style.

Unfortunately, as someone very familiar with Egyptian antiquities, I can honestly say that isn't quite true; that is because from a very early time there was an artistic convention that stayed pretty stable for most of nearly 2,000 plus years.

That convention was that men were portrayed (regardless of clothing) with darker, almost copper skin tones; and women with light, pale creamish ones (or at least a much lighter shade of dusky).

There were exceptions, mostly when showing foreigners presenting tribute (then you got everything from Minoans in kilts to obviously Black Africans in furs with headdresses) but the Egyptians themselves pretty much stuck to these conventions for themselves unless someone was highly unusual.

For example the drarf Seneb in his Old Kingdom (early pyramid period) portrait with his full sized wife (may we all look to be so loved!) is one of my favorites and amazingly life-like, but notice the color traditions for skin tone are already in place; even for the depiction of an unusual couple.

During a rare (and sadly short) period for a fad of representation art (thankfully the generation before King Tut so we have a large number of examples) we do see at least one member of the royal family who looks somewhat African, others look more European/Middle Eastern.

Queen Tiye (who is shown dark with a mixture of Black African and other features)

King Tut and his half sister-wife; who we KNOW from DNA to be mostly European - again he is in copper skin tone but with a twist so is she (so maybe they both did have a copper hint to their skin tone?)

The throne this was taken from has a Minoan maker's mark on it, so it was probably not designed or created by an Egyptian making it more complicated.

I could go on for 30 pages but I won't; let's just say I am delighted that science can now solve some of the mysteries that art alone hasn't been able to.

 

[LightEcho]

Related video (If I can embed):

From article at: https://altright.com/

If you follow the Darwinian concept of evolution, and you say more advanced DNA came from primitive DNA, then this guy is saying that blacks are more like chimps than the whites... since "you can get white from black but you cannot get black from white". Science is not a collection of opinions. It should remain pure in its conclusions and always acknowledging its limitations.

 

[Melodi]

If you follow the Darwinian concept of evolution, and you say more advanced DNA came from primitive DNA, then this guy is saying that blacks are more like chimps than the whites... since "you can get white from black but you cannot get black from white". Science is not a collection of opinions. It should remain pure in its conclusions and always acknowledging its limitations.

I haven't had time to see the video, but DNA studies have shown THE MOST genetic diversity in Sub-Saharan Africa compare to ANYWHERE else so far; so while many of these people may "all look alike" to Europeans; actually they are the most genetically diverse suggesting they had the most time for various forms of genetic drift.

That doesn't mean it is certain that all human evolution (if you accept that theory) came about in Sub-Saharan Africa; myself I rather think it occurred in a number of ways and convoluted combinations from at least Africa to the Indonesian Islands; and recent finds in California suggest some early people may have gotten to California 150 to 200 THOUSAND years ago (that find has just been published and of course is being hotly debated, especially by people whose apple cart is over turns).

 

[LightEcho]

I haven't had time to see the video, but DNA studies have shown THE MOST genetic diversity in Sub-Saharan Africa compare to ANYWHERE else so far; so while many of these people may "all look alike" to Europeans; actually they are the most genetically diverse suggesting they had the most time for various forms of genetic drift.

That doesn't mean it is certain that all human evolution (if you accept that theory) came about in Sub-Saharan Africa; myself I rather think it occurred in a number of ways and convoluted combinations from at least Africa to the Indonesian Islands; and recent finds in California suggest some early people may have gotten to California 150 to 200 THOUSAND years ago (that find has just been published and of course is being hotly debated, especially by people whose apple cart is over turns).

What you are calling "diversity" is actually specialization or narrowing of DNA into subgroups. If the DNA is more advanced, how is it that we don't see it in mental capacity, socialization, culture or craft? What we do see is a degenerating narrowing of capabilities.

 

[Melodi]

What you are calling "diversity" is actually specialization or narrowing of DNA into subgroups. If the DNA is more advanced, how is it that we don't see it in mental capacity, socialization, culture or craft? What we do see is a degenerating narrowing of capabilities.

No, I'm talking about the diversity of DNA, not "diversity" like some PC Commentary on Social Justice or something - it is the SAME sort of DNA studies that are showing the Ancient Egyptians probably were not mostly Black African in origin.

Your DNA has NOTHING to do with culture, it may affect mental capacity (and I point out there were Universities in parts of Sub-Sharan Africa during the European Middle Ages) and Africa is probably where humans first discovered fire; with jewelry and body paints having been found from very-very early times.

What the DNA MEANS is that there may be a greater GENETIC difference between a Pygmy from the Ituri Rain Forest and the Farmers that lived beside them for a thousand years (and with whom they now intermarry). That a South African Bushman, may be less like a Watusi warrior on the genetic level than I am to a Chinese Peasant (and as far as I know I have no direct Chinese ancestry you'd have to go back to the Native American that gave me my teeth for a connection there, probably).

Don't just believe me, go do the research yourself; this isn't a matter of opinion, again this is just what the DNA studies have found so far.

On the other hand, DNA evidence is constantly getting better and extraction improving; the best advice is to ignore any newspaper study that uses worlds like "ends for all time the controversy" or "totally solves" this mystery; sometimes things do get solved but when it comes to ancient DNA - well it's complicated.

 

[marsh]

Then you have the red haired mummies of China and their plaid textiles.

 

[Melodi]

Then you have the red haired mummies of China and their plaid textiles.

Yep, there is a lot of evidence that people went both EAST as well as WEST during the early migrations out of the Ural Mountains and nearby areas; the Mummies of Umachi is a book I highly recommend to anyone interested in this (I am a textile person as well as a history geek) - but these mummies are found over a fairly long time period so it likely isn't just one group of people.

China has only reluctantly allowed Western archeologists to look into them because they are not happy about finding the "Red-Haired Warrior" traditions are actually true; anymore then they liked finding out that there is some potential DNA evidence that Roman soldiers really did settle down and found the town of "Li-Gen" The DNA on that one isn't total proof without artifacts because it is an Eastern Region in China and the DNA may go back to the earlier settlers (or even the great migrations of the Huns and the Mongols) but it is basically European DNA.

https://www.amazon.com/Mummies-Urumchi-Elizabeth-Wayland-Barber/dp/0393320197

And from the not-postable source the UK Telegraph
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...-villagers-descended-from-Roman-soldiers.html