|
|
Post by theleader9 on Aug 10, 2011 15:19:46 GMT -5
I myself do turn reddish brown during the hot summer days we def got a different under tone then Negroids in fact one of my friend from Ghana said that we have really different undertone to our brown skins.
|
|
|
|
Post by hamiticsister101 on Aug 10, 2011 15:35:40 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by theleader9 on Aug 10, 2011 22:25:29 GMT -5
Sister the links don't work for me but Phenotypically Asians do look more negroid then many Hamitic people.
|
|
|
|
Post by hamiticsister101 on Aug 10, 2011 23:42:39 GMT -5
Sorry brother I thought it would work for you, the pictures are Negroids who live in the islands of East Asia. Asians look like Negroids the only difference is their skin color, except the northern ones and their straight hair and eye shape. Not all have small Asians, Burmese have large eyes so do a lot of Filipinos and Indonesians, etc. They are the sons of Japheth, the only Caucasoid sons of Japheth are the Indo-Aryans, and the Indo-Iranians, and the Indo-Europeans. Nordic Europeans are not Aryan at all their DNA is Haplogroup I, I comes from IJK (T). J is the Semitic DNA, T is the next highest Y-DNA in Somalis and Dravidians (Hamitic), so I Nordic are not Aryans who have R1b and or R1a, the Hamitic DNA is E1b1b and T (K), J is also found in us in small numbers. So this shows you why the Nordic Europeans resemble us the most, back in the day they were also warlike nomads and not like the farmer R's, just like the J1 Semites were and are nomads unlike the farmer J2 farmers of Mesopotamia, the same way the Hamites who are E1b1b/T are warlike nomads unlike the farmer/agricultural E1b1a/A/B Bantus. So Nordic Europeans should not be called Aryan since they are not from Iran or Indo-European, from the deserts of Syria or Northern Arabia or Southern Turkey.
|
|
|
|
Post by Noah on Aug 11, 2011 19:39:59 GMT -5
@ Hamitic Sister To post images, the pics have to be in the following format, with the image's url in the middle of the code: ![]() [/img] Let me know if that works for you. |
|
amun
New Member
Posts: 22
|
Post by amun on Aug 29, 2011 10:25:46 GMT -5
Interesting theory.  |
|
|
|
Post by Noah on Aug 29, 2011 19:13:29 GMT -5
Why hello there, amun! Welcome to the Hamitic Union board. I just read your message inviting me for a Free DNA test. I appreciate the offer. I'll first have to give it serious thought, though... you understand.  In the meantime, check your inbox for a new welcome message. |
|
|
|
Post by Noah on Aug 29, 2011 19:33:10 GMT -5
@ amun The origins of haplogroup E have actually gotten that much more interesting and complicated this past week with the publication of a new study in Science magazine indicating that much of the genetic diversity in modern human beings is due to admixture with archaic humans. The authors of the study observed this by examining HLA genes, wherein they noticed high frequencies of specific HLA types that are most common in and characteristic of archaic humans such as Neanderthals and Denisovans. What is especially interesting about this from a Hamitic perspective is that, like all essentially non-Negroid peoples, Hamitic peoples also have notable frequencies of those same antigens; specifically, HLA-A. By contrast, the authors indicate that Sub-Saharan Africans have low frequencies of Neanderthal and Denisovan-associated archaic admixture, but higher frequencies of genetic admixture with other, as-yet-unidentified primitive human species. news.discovery.com/human/neanderthals-interbreeding-humans-110825.htmlI'll try and devote a separate thread to this important topic later in the week. |
|
|
|
Post by theleader9 on Aug 30, 2011 14:35:09 GMT -5
Hello Amun welcome to the forums brother.
|
|
|
|
Post by Noah on Sept 19, 2011 18:36:28 GMT -5
It was recently brought to my attention that the consensus shift toward an Asian origin for haplogroup E has picked up even more steam of late. Given the many new streams of population data pointing in that direction, Peter Underhill, one of the main initial proponents of an African origin for haplogroup E, has now also signed on to the possibility that the clade likely originated someplace in Eurasia, from where it was later introduced into Africa. Along with him are Jacques Chiaroni and Luigi Luca Cavalli-Sforza, two other prominent population geneticists: "The similarity of patterns of different mutants indicates some secondary expansions. It is also interesting to sum the distributions of different haplogroups descending from the same mutation, as for example D and E, which both descend from DE-YAP, the first mutation that split into the E branch that perhaps returned to Africa (or arose there), whereas the other branch, D, is found today mainly in the Himalayas and Japan."
www.pnas.org/content/106/48/20174.full
The commercial genetic testing company Family Tree DNA also recently changed its haplogroup page to suggest that haplogroup E may have originated in Eurasia, from where it later spread to Africa: "Haplogroup E is one of the two branches of the mega-haplogroup DE. It originated approximately 50,000 years ago. Scientists believe that it either arose in Africa or represents a back migration."
www.familytreedna.com/snps-r-us.aspx
Similarly, 23andme, which is probably the most popular commercial genetic testing company at the moment, now indicates in its literature that haplogroup DE (haplogroup E's parent clade) may likewise have originated in Eurasia and was later introduced into Africa: "Haplogroup DE is so named because it traces back to the ancestral population of haplogroups D and E, as well as a few other rare lineages. It probably arose about 50,000 years ago, though it may be even older[...]
The location of origin for DE remains a mystery. At least 50,000 years ago a small group of people left Africa as part of the first major intercontinental migration by humans. It's possible that men carrying the DE haplogroup journeyed from Africa across the Red Sea and into the Arabian peninsula. But it is also possible that DE originated within the Arabian Peninsula itself, and later spread back to Africa."
|
|
|
|
Post by Noah on Nov 5, 2011 22:11:54 GMT -5
An important genetic study, Lacan et al. (2011), was published this past summer that analysed the DNA of six male specimens from Neolithic Spain (~7,000 years ago). As touched on in the Upper Paleolithic ties between E. Africa & Europe thread, there are numerous ties in terms of uniparental markers between Upper Paleolithic and Neolithic Europe and the Hamitic peoples of Africa; so this study was of particular interest. Of the six studied ancient Spanish remains, one belonged to the typically Hamitic-associated paternal haplogroup E1b1b1a1b (E-V13), which is also the most frequent E1b1b lineage in Europe today: "For the six male samples, two complete and four partial Y-STRs haplotypes were obtained (Table 3). They allowed classification of individuals into two different haplogroups: G2a (individuals ave01, ave02, ave03, ave05, and ave06, which seem to share the same haplotype) and E1b1b1 (individual ave07). The four markers chosen to confirm belonging to these haplogroups (Y-E1b1b1-M35.1, Y-E1b1b1a1b-V13, Y-G2-M287, and Y-G2a-P15) were typed with a rate of 66%, which permitted confirmation that four males were G2a and one was E1b1b1a1b (Table 3)[...]
The Ave07 haplotype was also compared with current Eb1b1a2 haplotypes previously published (10–14). It appeared identical at the seven markers tested to five Albanian, two Bosnian, one Greek, one Italian, one Sicilian, two Corsican, and two Provence French samples and are thus placed on the same node of the E1b1b1a1b-V13 network as eastern, central, and western Mediterranean haplotypes (Fig. S1)." This E1b1b-carrying Neolithic Spanish specimen, dubbed "Ave07" by the study's authors, was also analysed for mtDNA/maternal markers. The individual wound up belonging to the West Eurasian haplogroup U5, which is one of the oldest maternal lineages in Europe: "Mitochondrial HVS-I sequences were obtained for the seven individuals and can be classified into four different haplotypes (Table 2). All are still frequent in current European populations (Table S1), and three of them were also found in ancient Neolithic samples (Table S2). These haplotypes permitted the determination that the individuals ave01, ave02, and ave06 belonged to K1a, ave04 and ave05 to T2b, ave03 to H3, and ave07 to U5 haplogroups." The implications of this finding are quite significant for Hamitic ethnogenesis. This is because individual Ave07 from Neolithic Spain is currently one of (if not the) oldest E1b1b-carrying European specimens on record. And his companion maternal lineage is Eurasian, not Sub-Saharan. Not only is his maternal haplogroup U5 West Eurasian, it is also phylogenetically closely related to the U6 mtDNA clade. U6 is believed to have originated in West Asia, and has its highest diversity amongst contemporary Spaniards. Its highest modern frequencies are in North Africa, particulary among Berbers. U6 is also found amongst Hamitic peoples in the Horn (where its U6a sub-clade has its highest diversity) and the Canary Islands, home of the Afro-Asiatic-speaking ancient Guanche. We thus now have concrete evidence of the early presence of the Hamitic haplogroup E1b1b in Europe, and of a Eurasian maternal clade (U5 in this case) serving as its companion lineage. This is consistent with haplogroup E or its parent clade DE originating with males belonging to a population of general West Eurasian affinities. It also supports the observations that: - Certain or most of the Eurasian mtDNAs that today collectively make up the majority of the maternal lineages in the Hamitic-inhabited areas of North Africa and the Horn are the original companion mtDNAs to the ubiquitous Y-DNA haplogroup E1b1b. This is something that Ottoni et al. (2011) already suggested with regard to the Hamitic or ethnic Tuareg of Libya, who mostly belong to Eurasian mtDNA clades per Ottoni et al. (2009):
"Recent genetic studies of the Tuareg have begun to uncover the origin of this semi-nomadic northwest African people and their relationship with African populations. For centuries they were caravan traders plying the trade routes between the Mediterranean coast and south-Saharan Africa. Their origin most likely coincides with the fall of the Garamantes who inhabited the Fezzan (Libya) between the 1st millennium BC and the 5th century AD. In this study we report novel data on the Y-chromosome variation in the Libyan Tuareg from Al Awaynat and Tahala, two villages in Fezzan, whose maternal genetic pool was previously characterized. High-resolution investigation of 37 Y-chromosome STR loci and analysis of 35 bi-allelic markers in 47 individuals revealed a predominant northwest African component (E-M81, haplogroup E1b1b1b) which likely originated in the second half of the Holocene in the same ancestral population that contributed to the maternal pool of the Libyan Tuareg. A significant paternal contribution from south-Saharan Africa (E-U175, haplogroup E1b1a8) was also detected, which may likely be due to recent secondary introduction, possibly through slavery practices or fusion between different tribal groups. The difference in haplogroup composition between the villages of Al Awaynat and Tahala suggests that founder effects and drift played a significant role in shaping the genetic pool of the Libyan Tuareg."
- The L(xL3) lineages found in varying degrees amongst some Hamitic populations are intrusive. They were only later introduced through admixture with adjacent Sub-Saharan peoples. Some are ancient introductions, but most are quite recent acquisitions via the slave trade.
|
|
amun
New Member
Posts: 22
|
Post by amun on Nov 8, 2011 6:47:01 GMT -5
Interesting find, but to be frank, it doesn't give us new insights on the origins of E. As E-V13 is a relatively young clade of E-M78. It has been long known that E-M78 in Europe is generally not associated with Sub-Saharan ancestry, as modern Balkan groups who carry M78 lack it altogether. Regarding L(xL3) being intrusive in Hamitic groups, I don't think this is the case for African Hamites like Horners and Berbers. Roughly 25% of Ethiopian mtDNA is L0-2 and roughly 10% is L4/5/6. Many of these markers have an incredibly long presence in East Africa going back to paleolithic times and many are even believed to have originated there because of the high levels of clade diversity.
|
|
|
|
Post by Noah on Nov 8, 2011 23:11:48 GMT -5
The L(xL3) clades that are found amongst modern Hamitic peoples, whether in North Africa or the Horn, are definitely intrusive. Some are ancient introductions (but introductions nonetheless), whereas others are recent acquisitions. A number of factors indicate this. The frequency of the Sub-Saharan L(xL3) clades increases in tandem with the rise in the Sub-Saharan autosomal admixture component as one moves further down into Sub-Saharan Africa (have a look at the charts on the Egyptians & Proto-Mediterraneans thread for a visual illustration of this). Horners, the Tuareg, Sahrawi, etc. are thus today the more admixed Hamitic peoples, but not by much. This logically makes sense since said Hamitic populations actually border Negroid majority areas whereas North Africans are separated from Negroid populations by the expansive Sahara desert, which serves as an effective genetic barrier. The L(xL3) clades are also phylogenetically distant from haplogroup L3 and its Eurasian descendants, M and N: "L3 is more related to Eurasian haplogroups than to the most divergent African clusters L1 and L2".
www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?tool=pmcentrez&artid=55343
In addition, the oldest predominantly E1b1b-carrying population with an African origin on record -- namely, the extinct Afro-Asiatic-speaking Guanche of the Canary Islands -- has very few Sub-Saharan maternal lineages. mtDNA was recently extracted from ancient Guanche remains. 93% of the samples belonged to West Eurasian maternal clades, most of which also have direct matches in modern North Africa. "Teeth from 38 aboriginal remains of La Palma (Canary Islands) were analyzed for external and endogenous mitochondrial DNA control region sequences and for diagnostic coding positions. Informative sequences were obtained from 30 individuals (78.9%). The majority of lineages (93%) were from West Eurasian origin, being the rest (7%) from sub-Saharan African ascription. The bulk of the aboriginal haplotypes had exact matches in North Africa (70%). However, the indigenous Canarian sub-type U6b1, also detected in La Palma, has not yet been found in North Africa, the cradle of the U6 expansion. The most abundant H1 clade in La Palma, defined by transition 16260, is also very rare in North Africa. This means that the exact region from which the ancestors of the Canarian aborigines came has not yet been sampled or that they have been replaced by later human migrations. The high gene diversity found in La Palma (95.22.3), which is one of the farthest islands from the African continent, is of the same level than the previously found in the central island of Tenerife (92.42.8). This is against the supposition that the islands were colonized from the continent by island hopping and posterior isolation. On the other hand, the great similarity found between the aboriginal populations of La Palma and Tenerife is against the idea of an island-by-island independent maritime colonization without secondary contacts. Our data better fit to an island model with frequent migrations between islands."
www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/v17/n10/abs/ejhg200946a.html
 Guanche mummy
- Caucasoid physiognomy and genetics.
- Uniparental markers=mostly E1b1b (Y DNA); U6, H1 & other West Eurasian clades (mtDNA).
- Oldest predominantly haplogroup E-carrying population found.
We therefore see continuity in the maternal lineages of the Hamitic peoples in the Maghreb, as North Africans still mostly belong to West Eurasian mtDNA clades. This continuity in West Eurasian affinities between ancient and modern North Africans is further confirmed by the recent aDNA analysis of Iberomaurusian/Oranian/Mouillian remains. The Iberomaurusian samples were biologically non-Sub-Saharan: "The application of aDNA has proved very useful in studying genetics of human populations making it possible to trace and reconstitute their history in some regions of the world. With aDNA analysis it was possible to uncover the genetic heritage of prehistoric man (the Iberomaurusian) from the Taforalt grotto in Morocco (13,000 years BP) consisting of a North African and a Eurasian component.
The absence of Sub-Saharan polymorphisms suggested that Taforalt individuals did not originate from sub-Saharan region. The presence of the Sub-Saharan component in the genetic structure of current North Africans populations (Chaabani et al. 1989, Cherni et al. 2005) would be due to the gene flow from the sub-Saharan region after 13,000 years BP (Kefi et al 2005). This agrees with a recent analysis of STR/Alu combination polymorphisms that suggest that the sub-Saharan component of current North Africans is rather an ancient original component, which could be traced back to the first stage of Neolithic (around 9,000 YBP) characterized by an ethnic contribution from present-day Sudan (El Moncer et al. 2010)."
www.ata.org.tn/fichier_PDF/rsr2011kefi.pdf
This is basically what makes the aforementioned finding of West Eurasian mtDNA in what is probably the oldest E1b1b-carrying European on record so significant. That is, it is part of an overall pattern showing ancient Hamitic-associated peoples evincing predominant West Eurasian uniparental and/or autosomal affinities, just like modern Hamitic peoples. None of these ancient specimens have shown any major Sub-Saharan affinities. The fact that Spaniard Ave07 in the study quoted earlier belongs to the West Eurasian U5 clade that is associated with European Cro-Magnons -- the sister haplogroup to the U6 that is found in abundance in the extinct Guanche, modern Berbers and some Horners alike, and is associated with the Iberomaurusians (who are themselves morphologically Cro-Magnons) -- makes its presence that much more compelling and logical. "So, who were the Cro-Magnons? Their common ancestors were U6 from N. Africa and U5 from Europe. They had broad faces, were tall, slender, and long boned."
books.google.ca/books?id=bYAwsNjVAHMC&pg=PA96#v=onepage&q&f=false
"There is an intriguing further signal in the U6 data, witnessed by the Bayesian skyline plot. For the European haplogroup U5, which is one of the most ancient in Europe [11], we identified a strong expansion (an ~11-fold increase in effective population size) occurring in the Lateglacial period between the LGM and the beginning of the Holocene, followed by another large population expansion (~5-fold) after 5 ka, evidently associated with late Neolithic/early Bronze Age (rather than, for example, the early Neolithic expansion in Europe, which began ~8.5 ka). For U6, by contrast, the corresponding increases in effective sizes were less marked (~3-fold and ~1.5-fold, respectively), and the signal indicates that the expansion began earlier, ~22 ka. This coincides closely with the beginning of the Iberomaurusian industry in the Maghreb. These results therefore suggest that the Iberomaurusian was initiated by an expansion of modern humans of ultimately Near Eastern, carrying mtDNA haplogroup U6, who had spread into Cyrenaïca ~35-45 ka and produced the Dabban industry. The link back to the Near East and the European Early Upper Palaeolithic (which likely has the same source) may explain the suggested skeletal similarities between the robust Iberomaurusian "Mechta-Afalou" burials and European Cro-Magnon remains, as well as the case for continuity of the bearers of the Iberomaurusian industry from Morocco with later northwest African populations suggested by the dental evidence [57]."
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3016289/
Also note that U6 is believed to have been introduced into Africa via the same population movement(s) that brought the M1 mtDNA clade from West Asia. The only debates are when those movements took place and through what route; Southern Arabia or the Levant (my research indicates that there were a succession of waves, and that one of those later movements during the Neolithic introduced proto-Afro-Asiatic): "Maca-Meyer et al. [22] performed the first study of complete U6 mtDNA sequences (with 14 samples), defining a new U6 sub-haplogroup, U6c (characterized by the HV-I transition motif 16169-16172-16189), which was even more geographically restricted than U6b - limited to the west of North Africa and, as a derivative (U6c1, with an additional 16129 substitution), in the Canary archipelago. Using coding-region age estimates as maximum limits for radiation times, they proposed that the proto-U6 spread from the Near East to North Africa ~30 ka, alongside the Iberomaurusian industry, with U6a reflecting an African re-expansion from the Maghreb eastwards in Palaeolithic times, and U6a1 a further reverse movement from East Africa back to the Maghreb, possibly coinciding with the probable Afroasiatic linguistic expansion. The clades U6b and U6c, restricted to West Africa, had more localized expansions; they argued that U6b reached Iberia at the time of the diffusion of the Capsian culture in North Africa.
However, a larger study by Olivieri et al. [23] was closer to the earlier interpretation of Macaulay et al. [15]. They confirmed the origin of U6, or at least that of its immediate ancestor, in southwest Asia, with an ancient introduction (alongside haplogroup M1, and the Dabban industry) to North Africa via the Levant, possibly during the Greenland Interstadial 12, from ~44-48 ka. They reaffirmed that the various U6 sub-groups originated in the southern Mediterranean area, dispersing subsequently to East Africa."
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3016289/
|
|
amun
New Member
Posts: 22
|
Post by amun on Nov 9, 2011 6:57:53 GMT -5
The Berber mtDNA profile is to an extent similar to that of other Hamites, but at the same time is also quite different from Northeast Africans. Notably the high levels of European specific clades, such as H1, V, U5, T2b, are what set them apart. Their population history is significantly different from Red Sea region Hamites (who have much less European affinities but stronger Middle Eastern ones). Getting back to the L(xL3) topic, I think it is a bit simplistic to view all L(xL3) in the Horn as intrusive. First of all, L3 did not come out of thin air, it had a parental clade L3'4'6, both L4 and L6 are phylogenetically more related to L3, M, and N than to L0'1'5'2. The oldest branch of L3'4'6 is L6, which split off roughly 115 KYA (I am getting these dates from here). Remarkably, this marker is more diverse and frequent in Yemen than in the Horn. It is likely a remnant of early 'Out of Africa' attempts. And then we have L4, which split off roughly 95 KYA from L3'4, this marker is most diverse in East Africa. This shows that L4 and L6 along with L3 have their ancient origins in the Horn. However, as with all rather old haplogroups (we are dealing with coalescence times of over 70 KYA) tend to spill over to other regions. Most L3 lineages are native to the Horn (especially L3i, L3a, L3h2, and L3x) but there are some L3 lineages which spilled over to West Africa and accumulated diversity and frequency there (notably L3b, L3f1b, and L3e). As you can see things are quite complex. Regarding L0'1'5'2 in the Horn (which generally has frequencies of 20-30% there), it can be attributed mostly to ancient gene flow from the Sudan/Nile Valley region (which borders the Horn). But one has to keep in mind that those L0'1'5'2 markers in the Horn have coalescence times of 20 KYA and beyond, making recent 'Negroid' gene-flow scenarios highly improbable. This is in agreement with structure/admixture analyses. After the Paleo-Africans (Khoisan and the like) branch off you have a split between West-Central and East Africa, the West-Central autosomal cluster is generally not found in Afro-Asiatic Horners. A bit more on-topic, what's your take on E2 and E1a? These are basal branches of E which seem more diverse and frequent outside of East Africa, specifically in NC speakers. Their coalescence times of roughly 45-50 KYA coincides with the westward migration of L3b and L3e to West Africa. Perhaps West Africans are mainly a mixture between Lower Paleolithic native West Africans (Archaic Pygmy-like people?) and Upper Paleolithic more progressive East Africans. |
|
|
|
Post by Noah on Nov 10, 2011 2:13:20 GMT -5
Maghrebi populations do have a significant maternal component in common with Western European peoples. Most of said element consists of H lineages, which are believed to have ultimately originated in West Asia. That component did not arrive recently in North Africa (like, say, with Nordic invaders); it's a post-glacial expansion and quite common there. Here's an excellent study from 2010 by Pereira et al. that covers both Y DNA and mtDNA in various Tuareg populations. The Tuareg that are predominantly E1b1b carriers also have the much higher frequencies of Eurasian mtDNAs, especially haplogroup H: "Multidimensional Scaling (MDS) of FST distances based on available Y-SNP West Eurasian and African population datasets shows, as in the case of mtDNA, separation of the West Eurasian-North African and sub-Saharan populations (Figure 4). A certain separation between the Iberian and Near Eastern groups can be explained by the absence of samples from the Central Mediterranean for the Y-NRY dataset. However, while the Tuareg groups from the Niger bend (TGor and TGos) belong clearly on the West Eurasian side, the Tuareg from central Niger lean toward sub-Saharan variability[...]
we noticed some differences in the distribution of West Eurasian mtDNA haplogroups between Tuareg groups. Most of the West Eurasian haplogroups (30 out of 35 sequences, amounting to 6 out of 9 HVS-I haplotypes) and the East African M1 (11 out of 12 sequences but amounting to only 2 out of 3 HVS-I haplotypes) are observed in the two Tuareg populations – TGos and TGor – located within the bend of the Niger. Tuareg from the Republic of Niger, TTan, have much higher proportion of sub-Saharan (81%) haplogroups than of West Eurasian (16%) and East African (3%) ones[...]
analysis of multidimensional scaling (MDS) based on FST distances and using a large database of West Eurasian and African mtDNA sequences has shown a very good separation of the sub-Saharan and West Eurasian-North African gene pools (Figure 2). Only some East African populations are closer to the West Eurasian samples, respectively to the North African populations analysed here.[...]
The overall West Eurasian mtDNA gene pool in the Tuareg population as a whole (H1, H3 and V) seems to favour a rather a North African heritage." Haplogroup H is linked with the Cambridge Reference Sequence (CRS), which has been reported at notable frequencies amongst other Hamitic peoples in the Horn. For example, with regard to their Somali sample, Comas et al. (1999) report that "the presence of CRS mtDNA haplotypes (with different lengths of Cs at position 309) are typical European mtDNA haplotypes". Kivisild et al. (2004) likewise indicate the presence of H mtDNA lineages in the Horn alongside M1, U6, T, N1 and an assortment of other Eurasian maternal clades. Basically, a comparable haplogroup variety as found in North Africa, only with higher frequencies of M1 and N1 than U6 and H as well as a greater presence of L(xL3) lineages. The various L(xL3) lineages do have complicated histories. At the end of the day, however, they are pretty much all intrusive with respect to Hamitic populations (though many are quite ancient introductions). A number of factors again point to this. The L(xL3) lineages all originated in Africa; no non-African origins have been postulated for any of them. On the other hand, Hamitic peoples almost certainly did not. How can we be sure of that? For one thing, the abundance of Eurasian mtDNA clades throughout North Africa and the Horn unambiguously indicate successive waves of West Eurasian female migrants into the continent. That's who brought those Eurasian clades in the first place i.e. actual living, breathing West Eurasian females (since males of course don't pass on mtDNA). They didn't bring back L(xL3) haplogroups because those clades were not involved in the original Out-of-Africa expansions that first populated Eurasia. These Eurasian women obviously also did not migrate all that distance by themselves, let alone repeatedly. They were accompanied by male partners and/or protectors (husbands, brothers, fathers, uncles, etc.). Those Eurasian male travel companions simultaneously introduced their own Y DNA to the areas of Africa that they and their female companions came to occupy. Judging by: 1) the remarkably consistent demographic co-distribution of E1b1b paternal clades and Eurasian maternal lineages amongst the modern Hamitic populations in North Africa and the Horn, and 2) the same uniparental marker combination pattern (viz. haplogroup E + Eurasian mtDNA) in the oldest known predominantly E1b1b-carrying population, the ancient Guanche, as well as quite possibly the oldest E1b1b-carrying European individual, Spaniard Ave07, it is not unreasonable to conclude that the E clades were themselves the original paternal lineages of the Iberomaurusians. But not just them. The localized form of these Cro-Magnons in the Horn is found in the makers of the (pre-Negroid) Kenya Capsian industry i.e. the Paleo-Hamites. Both the culture and morphology of the Paleo-Hamites closely resemble the Combe Capelle specimens of Upper Paleolithic Europe. The Combe Capelle men were one of the first peoples to populate Europe, having expanded from West Asia -- the same general area as the Paleo-Hamites are believed to have expanded into Africa from. As the makers of the Chatelperronian industry, the Combe Capelle type itself bears a strong likeness to the Cro-Magnon proper of Western Europe. It is in fact often classified as a sub-type of Cro-Magnon, but Combe Capelle is more slender and long-faced like the Kenya Capsians whereas the Cro-Magnon is more robust and broad-faced like Iberomaurusians. These various ancient specimens are all long-headed, very tall and generally resemble each other, but not Negroid peoples. This is discussed in more detail in the Upper Paleolithic ties between E. Africa & Europe thread. The haplogroup E lineages found today amongst Negroid populations (though not in the recent past) thus indeed would have been introduced by interbreeding between haplogroup E-carrying Paleo-Hamitic males (Kenya Capsians, Iberomaurusians) and females descended from archaic haplogroup A & B-carrying Paleo-African males (Pygmies). I explain a bit earlier in the thread through what mechanism that diffusion likely happened. Carleton Coon also wrote about this admixture event(s) in his book The Living Races of Man: "By "Proper Negroes" we mean those peoples of Africa who are neither Pygmies nor Bushmen, Berbers, Arabs, or any of the clinal populations with a readily visible Caucasoid racial element. We mean the West Africans, some of the East Africans, and most of the Bantu. It was from these populations that most of the Negroes transported to the New World and to Arabia were drawn. We have left them to the end of the chapter because although they are the most numerous race in Africa, their origins are at the moment the least known. Moreover, we can understand them best after having reviewed the racial characteristics of the other peoples of Africa.
Earlier in this chapter we stated that to date no one has found a fully identifiable Negro skull, in the modern sense, in a Pleistocene deposit. This does not mean that Negroes as we know them did not exist then or that such a skull will not eventually be unearthed. Meanwhile we may note that a detailed analysis of 571 modern Negro crania, made by advanced mathematical techniques, has shown that these crania gravitate between two poles, a Mediterranean Caucasoid and a Pygmy one. The former type is again divisible into an ordinary Mediterranean and a Western Asian type, which suggests more than a single northern point of origin for the Caucasoid element. As we shall in greater detail in Chapter 8 and 9, the Negroes resemble Caucasoids closely in a number of genetic traits that are inherited in a simple fashion. Examples of these are fingerprints, types of earwax, and the major blood groups. The Negroes also have some of the same local, predominantly African, blood types as the Pygmies.
This evidence suggests that the Negroes are not a primary sub-species but rather a product of mixture between invading Caucasoids and Pygmies who lived on the edges of the forest, which at the end of the Pleistocene extended farther north and east than it does now. To this combination may have been added remnant Capoid genes acquired in the Sahara and East Africa. Variations among Negroids and Negroes would depend not so much on the relative proportions of the parent elements as on where a given group of people lived at a particular time and to what selective influences they had been exposed. We suggest that such a mixture has been going on for at least 15,000 years, or more than 600 generations, ample time for the present regional and local variables to have arisen. We must also remember that Negroes have been numerous only since the introduction of agriculture, which occurred in three successive stages, the last two dating only from the Christian era." |
|
