Ndahindurwa looks normal at least.If they look inbred, it's because they were. LolView attachment 357124
Ndahindurwa looks normal at least.If they look inbred, it's because they were. LolView attachment 357124
Drop the linkSaw a Congolese guy mocking King Musinga on one of their anti-Tutsi lives the other day, and even I had a bit of a laugh. View attachment 357127
Central sudanics are identical to modern day Dinkas who are one of the tallest ethnicities in the worldIf they look inbred, it's because they were. LolView attachment 357124
Lol. He was actually not awful looking but still oddly tall and gangly. Generally, the royal men weren't particularly handsome. But it doesn't matter because Tutsi culture values things other than beauty, like self-control, dignity, and resilience -- which they had in plenty.Ndahindurwa looks normal at least.
They have on average 20-30% Nilotic ancestryI think the Tutsi have actual Nilotic genes in addition to their Cushitic derived Ancestral East African (proto-Nilotic) genes.
They have on average 20-30% Nilotic ancestry
Source? It's interesting, and close enough to our history, but the timelines, and some details, are different (inverted) from the history that we know. According to our history, the Bantu arrived before, not after.Central sudanics are identical to modern day Dinkas who are one of the tallest ethnicities in the world
Why aren't the Maasai as tall? I've always wondered. They have more Nilotic admixture than we do.In addition to the proto-Nilotic (AEA) ancestry they derive from the Cushitic component of their ancestry; the Tutsi are likely tall due to this Nilotic ancestry -- and this is why they pull so closely with the Maasai
They are 55-60% Proto-Nilotic, I think they are taller than the Masai, average height is like 6ft2 for TutsisIn addition to the proto-Nilotic (AEA) ancestry they derive from the Cushitic component of their ancestry; the Tutsi are likely tall due to this Nilotic ancestry -- and this is why they pull so closely with the Maasai
Source? It's interesting, and close enough to our history, but the timelines, and some details, are different (inverted) from the history that we know. According to our history, the Bantu arrived before, not after.
Why aren't the Maasai as tall? I've always wondered. They have more Nilotic admixture than we do.
They are 55-60% Proto-Nilotic, I think they are taller than the Masai, average height is like 6ft2 for Tutsis
Masai are still tall but not as tall as Tutsis, maybe it’s due to a genetic bottleneck or natural selectionSource? It's interesting, and close enough to our history, but the timelines, and some details, are different (inverted) from the history that we know. According to our history, the Bantu arrived before, not after.
Why aren't the Maasai as tall? I've always wondered. They have more Nilotic admixture than we do.
The first people were the central sudanics who found pygmies(Twa/mbuti) followed by Bantus, Tutsis/hima expanded later on from modern day Western Tanzania(kigera region) hence you guys lost your South Cushitic language by assimilating into the Bantus(Hutus) by taking their language and culture.Bantu arrived before, not after.
The Masai are basically the Nilotic Kenya Iron Age pastoralists (~35-65 Nilotic/S. Cushitic) but have elevated Nilotic ancestry, whereas Tutsis and Great Lakes pastoralist ethnic groups can be modelled as Kenya Iron Age pastoralists + around a quarter Bantu/West African, which Great Lakes pastoralist ydna/mtdna reflects. The Pastoral Iron Age samples are around 35% Nilotic, and Masais are at the 50% area, so the Masai have a 15% increase in Nilotic ancestry, this could probably be explained by Maa Nilotes migrating from eastern Equatoria much later than the ancestors of the Kalenjin and Datooga (who represented some of the Iron Age groups) and concurrently with some Luo groups. Tutsis are somewhere from 10-20% Bantu/West African admixed.Yeah, I never understood how this happened with them; my theory is that they descend from comparatively shorter Nilotic tribes in Eastern Equatoria -- their point of origin in South Sudan.
beauty is overrated. It’s all about keeping families close, holding power, dynasty and legacy.Lol. He was actually not awful looking but still oddly tall and gangly. Generally, the royal men weren't particularly handsome. But it doesn't matter because Tutsi culture values things other than beauty, like self-control, dignity, and resilience -- which they had in plenty.
Congolese people always have something to say about somalis despite us having no proximity in the diaspora or africa (expect camden and woolwich). Could care less about congo tbhSomalis could care less about Rwandans but their haters mention Somalis unprovoked, and force us to defend Rwandans.
![]()