Kandakes of Kush

[Nilotic]

I don’t doubt the fact that at some point in history, you may have invaded North Sudan for a short time, but all genetic studies in terms of Autosomal point towards North Sudan being occupied by a population that clusters with modern day inhabitants. BTW, the Christian Nubian study you said that they were paternally African. That’s not true, none of the samples had Nilo-Saharan Y-DNA. They were majority E1b1b, and they also were not 100 % maternally Euroasian but mixed just like modern day Horners and Bejas.

Ah, so now you no doubt we had a presence in the North? We only left the Gezira in the 13th and 15th Centuries, so our presence there was not brief.

People corresponding perfectly to the physical appearance and dimensions of the Nilotics were depicted on those walls because they were encountered; the map on ancient Sudanese kingdoms shows them extending into areas recognised as having been occupied by Nilotics until recently.

The Kasu and the Nubae (Nubians) were very much likely similar to populations in Darfur today, minus the recent Arab admixture that reach Darfur as well in the last 400 years.

Kush was an empire and Nilotics played some role -- unless the depictions are somehow wrong and should (strangely) only be dismissed in relation to this specific population.



Here's what we know:

The Nubians have their origins in Darfur and like Darfurian populations, they are a composite of Nilotic and indigenous North African ancestry -- marked by E-M35 lineages; Nubians experienced recent Eurasian introgression -- especially during the Arab expansion into Sudan; the specific Kulubnarti population are not ancestral to modern Nubians and have entirely different admixture composites, from a different admixture event.

I don't know why you want to dismiss the genetic studies showing that the Nubians were the products of recent admixture, and why you want to present them as having always been Beja-like, when these studies say otherwise.

E1b1b is African. What great authority says otherwise?

Do you honestly believe that the Kasu (Kush), the Nubians and other groups (minus the Beja) were more similar to Cushitic populations in the Horn rather than other Saharan populations in Darfur prior to the Arab expansion?

Nilotics and Saharans are separate but related groups, and they dominated Sudan; it wasn't the Beja type people.

 

[World]

Ah, so now you no doubt we had a presence in the North?

No genetic studies point towards North Sudan being Nilotic-like in terms of autosomal. The Christian early Medivial period Sudan study destroys the myth that North Sudan was Nilotic-like before Islam, as they cluster with modern day inhabitants.

People corresponding perfectly to the physical appearance and dimensions of the Nilotics were depicted on those walls because they were encountered; the map on ancient Sudanese kingdoms shows them extending into areas recognised as having been occupied by Nilotics until recently.

The Kasu and the Nubae (Nubians) were very much likely similar to populations in Darfur today, minus the recent Arab admixture that reach Darfur as well.

Kush was an empire and Nilotics played some role -- unless the depictions are somehow wrong and should be dismiss only in relation to this specific population.

This is the same claim that I’ve seen African Americans or Nigerians make when claiming that Ancient Egyptians are black, or w/e. These are all images, not proof at all.

Here's what we know:

The Nubians have their origins in Darfur and like Darfurian populations, they are a composite of Nilotic and indigenous North African ancestry -- marked by E-M35 lineages; Nubians experienced recent Eurasian introgression -- especially during the Arab expansion into Sudan; the specific Kulubnarti population are not ancestral to modern Nubians and have entirely different admixture composites, from a different admixture event.

I don't know why you want to dismiss the genetic studies showing that the Nubians were the products of recent admixture, and why you want to present them as having always been Beja-like, when these studies say otherwise.

E1b1b is African. What great authority says otherwise?

I’ve never claimed that modern day Nubians are the same as Kulubnarti population, they obviously have some additional ancestry, just like how modern day Nilotes have additional West African ancestry, or modern Egyptians have additional SSA ancestry compared to Ancient Egyptians. I’ve said that North Sudan has never had a Nilotic-like population, and that study proves that in the pre-Islamic era, the population clusters with modern day North Sudanese.

Also, whilst E1b1b is African, the subclade that I am talking about is E-V12 which is not Sub Saharan African, but has North African origin. The majority of the Christian Nubian Y-DNA belonged to this subclade, like modern Beja.

 

[Nilotic]

No genetic studies point towards North Sudan being Nilotic-like in terms of autosomal. The Christian early Medivial period Sudan study destroys the myth that North Sudan was Nilotic-like before Islam, as they cluster with modern day inhabitants.


This is the same claim that I’ve seen African Americans or Nigerians make when claiming that Ancient Egyptians are black, or w/e. These are all images, not proof at all.




I’ve never claimed that modern day Nubians are the same as Kulubnarti population, they obviously have some additional ancestry, just like how modern day Nilotes have additional West African ancestry, or modern Egyptians have additional SSA ancestry compared to Ancient Egyptians. I’ve said that North Sudan has never had a Nilotic-like population, and that study proves that in the pre-Islamic era, the population clusters with modern day North Sudanese.

Also, whilst E1b1b is African, the subclade that I am talking about is E-V12 which is not Sub Saharan African, but has North African origin. The majority of the Christian Nubian Y-DNA belonged to this subclade.

The admixture event period took place in the common era -- long after Kush was already established, so I don't see your point.

The study on the Kulubnarti population itself clearly "places admixture occurring on average during the early-2nd to late-3rd centuries CE...

..So populations in that area obviously weren't always Beja-like prior to that relatively recent period, and you keep ignoring this out of some strange insistence on erasing the Saharans (Darfur) as a separate group in a ploy to attach them to "Cushitics" instead.

You seem to think that a demographic binary is legitimate and that only Dinka-like Nilotics and "Cushitics" exist in this analysis; you also seem to think that the origins of the Nubians in Darfur is somehow irrelevant. The un-admixed Nubians were similar to modern Darfurians -- the region they came from.

I cited genetic studies specifically saying that an ‘unadmixed’ Nubian gene-pool is genetically similar to Nilotes.

..And that the admixture event for the modern Nubian population took place 750 years ago.

Now, I actually think that the Nubians (prior to Arab introgression) clustered with the Midob, Fur, Masalit, Zaghawa and other Saharan populations in Darfur and Chad; the Nubians are migrants from Darfur and would not have been similar to "Cushitic" groups, without the recent Arab admixture event.

"Sub-Saharan" African isn't the only type of African; Nilotics have E1b1b as well (lower frequencies) and yet we have zero Eurasian admixture because that component is still indigenous African.

 

[World]

The admixture event period took place in the common era -- long after Kush was already established, so I don't see your point.

Autosomal evidence so far shows that North Sudan was mixed in the pre-Islamic era, no evidence shows that there was ever a Nilotic-like population.

The study on the Kulubnarti population itself clearly "places admixture occurring on average during the early-2nd to late-3rd centuries CE...

..So populations in that area obviously weren't always Beja-like prior to that relatively recent period, and you keep ignoring this out of some strange insistence on erasing the Saharans (Darfur) as a separate group in a ploy to attach them to "Cushitics" instead.

Continuous waves of admixture contributed to the gene pool at Kulubnarti, ”corresponding to admixture as recent as ~100–500 years (95% CI) and as distant as ~650–1900 years (95% CI) before the lifetime of the individual”, so the admixture for some individuals dates back over 3000 years ago and as recent as 900 years ago, which goes back to my point saying that the region has always been mixed.

You seem to think that a demographic binary is legitimate and that only Dinka-like Nilotics and "Cushitics" exist in this analysis; you also seem to think that the origins of the Nubians in Darfur is somehow irrelevant. The un-admixed Nubians were similar to modern Darfurians -- the region they came from.

I cited genetic studies specifically saying that an ‘unadmixed’ Nubian gene-pool is genetically similar to Nilotes.

That quote is taken out of context, and you’ve twisted it for your argument. It’s hilarious. That was not talking about modern Nubians, but Kulubnarti Nubians. Let me post it in full:


“Here, we specifically use Dinka as a proxy for Nilotic-related ancestry based on evidence that groups such as the Dinka occupying the region around the White Nile show long-term genetic continuity, genetic isolation, and genetic links to
ancestral East African people, and that an “unadmixed” Nubian gene-pool is genetically most similar to Nilotic people .

We tested 32 modern and geographically and temporally-diverse ancient West Eurasian populations, also including a pool of three ancient Egyptians who had a majority proportion of West
Eurasian-related ancestry (‘Egypt_published’, comprised of published data from two individuals from the Pre-Ptolemaic New Kingdom and Late Period and one individual from the Ptolemaic Period) , as WestEurasia_Test (Methods). Negative f3-statistics (|Z|>7.5) indicate that Kulubnarti Nubians were admixed between these ancestry types (Supplementary Data 5), confirming that a significant West Eurasian-related ancestry component was present even in this part of Nubia prior to the later migrations that contributed to the present-day genetic landscape.“

What you posted merely says that they were testing to see whether Kulubnarti Nubians were admixed, and used Dinka as a proxy for their East African ancestry under the assumption that their East African ancestry is Nilotic-related, and not Bantu for example. I have no idea how you twisted it. When testing admixture for Somalis, Dinka(however this is flawed, as they have recent West Africa admixture) is sometimes used for a proxy of their Nilotic-related ancestry, this is basically the same thing.

"Sub-Saharan" African isn't the only type of African; Nilotics have E1b1b as well (lower frequencies) and yet we have zero Eurasian admixture because that component is still indigenous African.

I don’t think you know what you are talking about.

Please don’t tell me you actually think the Dinka having 15 % E1b1b Y-DNA means you should have 15 % Euroasian autosomal admixture, do you?

 

[Nilotic]

Autosomal evidence so far shows that North Sudan was mixed in the pre-Islamic era, no evidence shows that there was ever a Nilotic-like population.

So you're going to continue to completely ignore the origins of the Nubians in Darfur and their links with other Saharan populations in order to include them in the "Cushitic" group? The historians are clear that the Nubae-Nobatae migrated to the Nile from Darfur.

That quote is taken out of context, and you’ve twisted it for your argument. It’s hilarious. That was not talking about modern Nubians, but Kulubnarti Nubians. Let me post it in full:

Wrong. It's the other way round. That particular quote is in relation to the study on modern Nubians, not the people of Kulubnarti Island in Lower Nubia.

That particular citation was first featured in a study on modern Nubians preceding the Kulubnarti paper.

The citation is in this source:

Northeast African genomic variation shaped by the continuity of indigenous groups and Eurasian migrations

Author summary Northeast Africa has geographic and historical links to Eurasia via the Middle East and the Arabian Peninsula, but the demographic history of the region itself has been more elusive. We investigate genomic diversity of northeast African populations and found a clear bimodal...

journals.plos.org

don’t think you know what you are talking about.

Please don’t tell me you actually think the Dinka having 15 % E1b1b Y-DNA means you should have 15 % Euroasian autosomal admixture, do you?

No, I don’t think we should have a Eurasian profile at 15% precisely because the component is African; the Eurasian component of North African ancestry is primarily maternal. That's my point.

The Darfurians have E1b1b markers at high frequencies as well as Nilotic markers; the un-admixed Nubians (as migrants from Darfur) would have been similar to the groups in Darfur and Chad -- not "Cushitics".

 

[Nilotic]

The source clearly puts an emphasis on average. You do understand the importance of drawing conclusions from averages instead of extremes from the spectrum? The source clearly...

places admixture occurring on average during the early-2nd to late-3rd centuries CE

Now, admixture may have taken place considerably earlier to that period (for a minority), but the average admixture period for the Kulubnarti population was during the 2nd to late-3rd centuries CE.

 

[World]

I didn’t know I was wasting my time with a guy who thinks haplogroups matter in regards to autosomal DNA. Wait till he finds out that 50 % of Hausa’s carry the Western Euroasian R1b haplogroup which is most common in Europeans.

 

[Nilotic]

I didn’t know I was wasting my time with a guy who thinks haplogroups matter in regards to autosomal DNA. Wait till he finds out that 50 % of Hausa’s carry the Western European R1b haplogroup.

I already know that, my dude. I know the particular variant -- R-V88.

Imagine arguing with a guy that doesn't even know that Darfurians are actually not Nilotics. The Nara, Nubians, Kanuma, Taman, Masalit, Fur and the Zaghawa are all part of a Central Saharan complex; they're not "Cushitics" and and are not Nilotics, however, they were all much closer to Nilotics prior to certain admixture events.

The Darfurians (where the Nubians originate) are genetically still closer to Dinka-like Nilotics, so go figure.


My point stands...the bulk of the Kasu and the Nubians prior the 2nd to late-3rd centuries were mostly Central Saharans (Darfur-like) and were not "Cushitic" groups. This all assumes that the "relatively isolated" Kulubnarti settlement was representative of dynamics all around North Sudan.

 

[King Khufu]

Some of the rhetoric seems to be lifted straight out of Stormfront.
(Aka I'm talking down to sound cool)

Get in here and you sometimes have to do a double take
(Im fake flexing with fake knowledge)

FOH!
Hell naw we don't do that.
You lacking knowledge. . .

Prove that research.



Article explaining Donkey breed making way around, how that happen?

https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rspb.2010.0708

This is just an interesting article on E1B1A (not in agreement totally but in for food for thought.)

Richard Henry Proves That the Paternal Haplogroup E1B1A Is the Real Israelite Lineage | Press Release Distribution

Richard Henry has proof that the descendants of the black slaves who left West Africa are the descendants of the Biblical Israelites. He says that people falsely believe that the paternal haplogroup J...

www.prdistribution.com