Can you post the proto-mota coordinate?
4000-year-old hair from the Middle Nile highlights unusual ancient DNA degradation pattern and a potential source of early eastern Africa pastoralists
- Thread starter Abdirazaq
- Start date
The alchemist
VIP
Proto-Mota( Without SA + Eurasian),-0.56272837,0.04715103,0.00844811,-0.01816994,-0.00767743,-0.01277314,-0.01311748,0.00252006,0.130011,-0.15324418,-0.02188116,0.01151451,-0.05030099,-0.00063816,0.02455798,-0.04415771,0.03729095,-0.00435367,0.03069317,-0.01649585,0.01409658,0.02152539,-0.00447418,-0.00153823,-0.00535147
Thank you sxb
Every study I’ve seen that has to do with ancient Nubia from the Kerma period to the Christian period has shown that those people have shown some amount of ancient Eurasian admixture genetically and morphologically and that they’re similar to modern Nubians and horn Africans but Egyptian murals have shown that Nilotic type peoples played some role in these societies as soldiers at least.
my guess is that there was a small number of Nilotic type peoples from further south who filled certain types of positions in society (more expedient roles) and weren’t really given a proper burial the same way Kerma peoples and other Nubians were in order to preserve the body to some extent which is why we don’t see these people in and around Nubia in the archeological record.
I’ve seen the theory that lower Nubians were more Eurasian and upper Nubians were more Nilotic especially in the earlier period with a general shift towards a Eurasian like population as time went on but the evidence just doesn’t corroborate the claim.
I don’t see any reason why the Kerma language would be considered a nilo-Saharan one when the evidence of a Afro-asiatic language (probably Cushitic) is much stronger now considering how genetically similar the 4000 year old Kerma sample is to Cushitic speaking Neolithic pastoralists of east Africa (although language and genetics isn’t always 1:1 it’s a strong indicator of language relation) as to when the language shifted from a Afro-asiatic to a nilo-Saharan one is still up to debate (possibly pre-napatan or post-Meroitic) either way Kerma speaking a afro-asiatic language should be the default theory for now.
Last edited:
it’s also possible that when Egyptologist describe “ancient Nubia” they’re mixing a whole host of different kingdoms and polities together and that some polity (which would be essentially Nilotic) further south than Kerma is usually being depicted by the ancient Egyptians which is seen as “Nubian” by modern Egyptologists and doesn’t really explain the nuances of the political situation at the time. When I’m talking about some potential polity further south than Kerma I’m not talking about the pan-grave people or other groups closely related to the Kerma culture. It’s all speculation though.
Nilotic
VIP
Post in thread 'Who lived in kingdom of Kush?' https://www.somalispot.com/threads/who-lived-in-kingdom-of-kush.130742/post-3267014
Ok, I read your explanation but it seems incoherent. You say that Nubians (essentially the more nilotic shifted population) were a population from the western desert occasionally warring with the kushites (who were more Eurasian shifted population) but only setting their own kingdoms up post meroitic period and that can make sense however you also say “Greco-Roman writers consistently differentiated the Kushites of Meroe (the blackest people they knew) from the much lighter-skinned populations of Lower 'Nubia'.” As to distinguish between more Nilotic shifted upper Nubia and a more Eurasian shifted lower Nubia. I’d be tentative with historical sources of people from foreign lands visiting far out places as a source for evidence but nevertheless even if upper Nubians were darker in skin colour than lower Nubians it might not be a sign of a distinct population but potential environmental pressures e.g closer to equator = darker skin without genetic differentiation.
It seems like you’re throwing out as many theories as you can and trying to see what will stick even if these ideas don’t really work coherently together or maybe I’m missing some nuance to your explanation I don’t understand.
Either way theres clearly a history of interaction between Nilotic peoples and Kushites when looking at Egyptians murals, it can also be seen in the language shift of modern Nubians as well as the genetic make up of modern Nubians leading to some potential profound influence at some point in time, as to when this profound influence happened I’m not sure but it doesn’t show up in the archeological/genetic record of older populations and I’ve yet to see anything clear in the history books.
Wow, u seem very knowledgeable on history brother. How much do u know ab Somali history? @Jammy
LMAOOOSay it with me, walaal. WE. WUZ. KERMAAAAANS!
What are your genuine thoughts on this? Are you comfortable taking the authors’ comments at face value in that they are indeed identical to the PN (presumably South Cushitic) samples available?
The PCA isn’t enough for me, especially when considering IBM’s position. Truth is, on that PCA, a half-Anglo half-Igbo would plot pretty closely to the PN and Kadruka21 too (I think lol). What exactly are the f3 stats blah blah saying? It doesn’t seem super consistent with what you’d expect from a Cushitic speaker, no?
Maybe I’m reading it wrong, idk, I just presume proximity to zero value on B and C = closer genetically?
I mean it's a given that they'll likely share a lot of ancestry with Cushites but yeah, I'm not willing to say anything concrete until we see nMonte and qpAdm runs on the samples. You're correct about the PCA position and I don't think those formal stats are necessarily anything conclusive.
Honestly not as much as others in the forum, there’s some experts out here.
Nah, can see from what u wrote here that u know more than alot here. U should post more walaal and comment on more history threads
Could you please send the Nuba samples, I only have averages
Your idea for kerma speaking Afro-Asiatic is solely grounded on the presence of Eurasian admixture when almost nothing is known about the proto-Kushite languages. This exceeds speculation, it's just creating theories because one piece of evidence is true and trying desperately to tie that in with the theory.
Nilo-Saharan has always been the default for a reason. Linguistically it's the most convenient and explains a lot of the connections between dispersed languages from inner Sudan like the Nara and Ajangwe, placing their point of origin to the Nile sometime between Kerma and the peak of Kush has been common practice among linguists. Afro-Asiatic has barely ever entertained the discussion and most linguists are yet to find solid evidence suggesting the existence of a significant Afro-Asiatic language spoken in the Nile Valley at any point in ancient history. The eastern desert is the limit for afro-asiatic languages in Nubia and so far nothing else seems to indicate otherwise. This is not to absolutely deny any sort of Afro-Asiatic being spoken in the Nile valley, but we simply don't have anything to prove it, and using Genetics is not a good indicator especially when the Nilo-Saharan family already contains various peoples with Eurasian admixture.
Last edited:
The issue with the nilo-Sarahan language theory for what the ancient kushites used to speak is that the language family isn’t made on any solid ground either, it’s a disputed language family in and of itself and and that coupled with tying it with an ancient dead language is doubly theoretic. I wouldn’t count on that theory myself but time will tell.
What we do know is that ancient kushites were surrounded by Afro-asatic languages from Egypt to the north to Berber languages to the west/northwest and Cushitic languages to the southeast and east. Ancient kushites speaking an Afro-asiatic language isn’t a crazy claim when you consider the genetic evidence ties them in with all the other Afro-asiatic peoples around them so far.
Last edited:
The Nilo-Saharan family has its problems of course but you are essentially just re-assigning a totally new language family to Ancient Nubia just because one doesn't seem to be 100% convenient. What's more, is that this isn't grounded on anything more than Eurasian admixture which I think we don't need to go over why this doesn't help to bring us closer to an understanding of linguistics in Ancient Nubia. Ancient Nubians have been in consistent contact with Egyptians and inter-mixed with each other very often. Eurasian admixture as a result of this isn't a surprise at all.
It's not that Afro-Asiatic is a crazy claim, there's just no proof at all for it, and people who have tried suggesting and putting forth evidence for a possible connection do so through inconsistent methods that would otherwise mean other modern and widely accepted Afro-Asiatic languages technically shouldn't be part of the family.
Nilo-Saharan is disputed in specific areas but the many sub-groups of languages that constitute the family aren't disputed to the same degree. Saharan, Nilotic and Nubian are widely accepted to be connected groups, and Central Sudanic along with Eastern Sudanic is also widely accepted as possible families (Central Sudanic more than Eastern). There is most definitely an issue of dispute in several areas but this serves no value to try and displace the connection between North-Eastern Sudanic languages and those of Ancient Nubia especially when you consider languages like Old Nubian and the ancestral Proto-Nubian as well as their relation to the Nara language of Eritrea and connections to other Nilo-Saharan languages. It is a disputed family, yes, but the connections between some of these languages are unaffected by propositions of dispute and invalidity of the family hence there is a much stronger case for a general Nilo-Saharan speaking populace among the ancient Nubians.
There’s absolutely an issue with the classification of eastern Sudanic languages, it’s not a generally accepted language family, there are solid language families within Nilo-Saharan but those are mainly around eastern Africa and the Sahara.
there are papers that have demonstrated that meroitic could’ve been a Afro-asiatic language and for a discipline so small (only a couple people working on the language) I’d say that plenty evidence that you shouldn’t tie yourself so hard to the Nilo-Saharan theory.
for me the genetic and geographic evidence means I’ll lean towards the Afro-Astatic root but it’s mostly still speculative either way until the language can be fully understood. It seems like the more time passes the stronger the Afro-asiatic theory becomes.
Last edited:
