The Afar People

Som

VIP
They existed in Europe as late as 3,000 BCE. Ironically, the whitest areas today in Europe like the Baltic have the most of their ancestry.



They are not the majority look. The normal look for a Somali is to well look Somali (slim features).



Arab admixture in Sudanese Arabs happened later, as late as the Middle Ages. To me, they look more Arab than Habeshas. Habeshas look really weird and unlike any Arabs.
Sudanese arabs have different looks, most of them remind me of dark skinned Egyptians, some others are bantu looking like Omar Al bashir (former president) who is from an arab tribe.
Habeshas on the other hand have more slim feauters and they have a lot of people with big aquiline noses that you would find among arabs or south Europeans
 

Som

VIP
European hunter-gatherers existed in pure form in Europe as late as 3,000 BCE. Especially in the Baltics.



The only thing that makes us more African is the absorption of the Somalia specific hunter-gatherers who were adapted to the climatic conditions of Somalia (arid). We are more Somali than them, not more ''African'' (what a BS term) lol.
Somalis are 38% west eurasian and 62% subsaharan african.
Aren't we more nilo-saharian than habeshas even if we consider the somali hunter gatherer mix in the 62%?
And tbh those somalis hunter gatherers were either "negroid" (don't like this term) or khoisan.
I Would understand your point if those Somali hunter gatherers had some west eurasian mix or something
 

Apollo

VIP
Somalis are 38% west eurasian and 62% subsaharan african.
Aren't we more nilo-saharian than habeshas even if we consider the somali hunter gatherer mix in the 62%?
And tbh those somalis hunter gatherers were either "negroid" (don't like this term) or khoisan.
I Would understand your point if those Somali hunter gatherers had some west eurasian mix or something

Not all of Somalis non-Eurasian ancestry is Nilote. 12% is indigenous ancestry from Somalia.

The hunter-gatherers specific to Somalia are extinct. The population who have the most admixture from them are ethnic Somalis only, nobody else. There is no evidence that they looked Negroid as ethnic Somalis today have their admixture at the greatest extent have the least Negroid craniometric traits in the Horn. They lived in the arid parts of Somaliweyn for over 40,000 years. They were likely adapted to arid conditions and looked different from other Africans.
 

Som

VIP
Not all of Somalis non-Eurasian ancestry is Nilote. 12% is indigenous ancestry from Somalia.

The hunter-gatherers specific to Somalia are extinct. The population who have the most admixture from them are ethnic Somalis only, nobody else. There is no evidence that they looked Negroid as ethnic Somalis today have their admixture at the greatest extent have the least Negroid craniometric traits in the Horn. They lived in the arid parts of Somaliweyn for over 40,000 years. They were likely adapted to arid conditions and looked different from other Africans.
Ok but those hunter gatherers were still native africans right? This means they were probably genetically close to native africans of either nilotic, bantu, pigmy or khoisan ancestry. These are the major native subsaharan groups, I'm not saying it's any of them but i would bet my money on khoisan since some historians suggest early khoisan presence in southern somalia.
Again if the 12% hunter gatherer was non-subsaharan african then I would agree with your point cause it would mean that somalis have the same levels of so called 'negroid' ancestry as other horners .But i guess that's not the case
 

Apollo

VIP
1920px-Koppen-Geiger_Map_Africa_present.svg.png


The Kalahari Khoisan are not adapted to the Kalahari desert. They were pushed into it relatively recently by Bantu farmers (just a few centuries ago). The San Bushmen also carry some ancient origins with the Congo Pygmies. As for the Nilotes living in the red areas of the Sahel, they have recent origins from the more tropical areas in Africa (blue colored areas).

This only leaves the hunter-gatherers of Somalia as the only population to have adapted to arid climates in Sub-Saharan Africa. They likely were the only SSAs who looked pseudo-Caucasoid (dark Caucasoid).
 

Sophisticate

~Gallantly Gadabuursi~
Staff Member
1920px-Koppen-Geiger_Map_Africa_present.svg.png


The Kalahari Khoisan are not adapted to the Kalahari desert. They were pushed into it relatively recently by Bantu farmers (just a few centuries ago). The San Bushmen also carry some ancient origins with the Congo Pygmies. As for the Nilotes living in the red areas of the Sahel, they have recent origins from the more tropical areas in Africa (blue colored areas).

This only leaves the hunter-gatherers of Somalia as the only population to have adapted to arid climates in Sub-Saharan Africa. They likely were the only SSAs who looked pseudo-Caucasoid (dark Caucasoid).

Apollo you're making it to complicated for them. Easy on the topographical map. To know Somalis have some of the smallest nasal cavities known to man. I just look in the mirror. I question anyone who can't see what's as plain as day. Sadly, there are coons who don't understand nor believe this despite whatever scales, measurements or even ancedotal evidence one posts to make it clear. You know who they are. :lol:
 
Somalis are 38% west eurasian and 62% subsaharan african.
Aren't we more nilo-saharian than habeshas even if we consider the somali hunter gatherer mix in the 62%?
isnt the full african ancestry of our sub saharan african ancestry extinct? how would we know our actual percentages? using people like dinkas as a reference isnt accurate since they're bantu and possibly eurasian admixed and the masais have Cushitic admixture which isnt an accurate population to use either. i feel like until we get a full nilo saharan we wont know how african we are. and we haven't gotten the somali hunter gatherer dna to use and evaluate
 
Last edited:

Som

VIP
isnt the full african ancestry of our sub saharan african ancestry extinct? how would we know our actual percentages? using people like dinkas as a reference isnt accurate since they're bantu and possibly eurasian admixed and the masais have Cushitic admixture which isnt an accurate population to use either. i feel like until we get a full nilo saharan we wont know how african we are. and we haven't gotten the somali hunter gatherer dna to use and evaluate
The dinka are the closest people to our extinct nilotic like ancestors. It isn't 100% accurate but we can be sure (if the studies are truly representative of somalis) that we have 62% african ancestry.
 
The dinka are the closest people to our extinct nilotic like ancestors. It isn't 100% accurate but we can be sure (if the studies are truly representative of somalis) that we have 62% african ancestry.
according to global 25 the average somali is 54% african
Vahaduo-Admixture-JS-21-01 dinka.png
 

Apollo

VIP
@Apollo @Som how do we know the percentage of Paleolithic somalis in modern somalis? and why is it so low?

It is about 8% to 12%, confirmed from autosomal analysis and mtDNA analysis. It is low because they got replaced by Neolithic Cushites who came in from Northeast Sudan with cows, goats and other livestock.
 
Not all of Somalis non-Eurasian ancestry is Nilote. 12% is indigenous ancestry from Somalia.

The hunter-gatherers specific to Somalia are extinct. The population who have the most admixture from them are ethnic Somalis only, nobody else. There is no evidence that they looked Negroid as ethnic Somalis today have their admixture at the greatest extent have the least Negroid craniometric traits in the Horn. They lived in the arid parts of Somaliweyn for over 40,000 years. They were likely adapted to arid conditions and looked different from other Africans.

Are there any physical remains of indigenous Somalis (pre-cushite)?

Btw, Somalis look like this

You don't have permission to view the spoiler content. Log in or register now.
We tend to be darker but have more slender features.
 
Interesting.
Is that accurate? I'm open to changing my mind but most studies say somalis are 38% west eurasian and 62% african
It’s not fully accurate but it’s pretty close to accurate since I used the closest population references to our African ancestry available. I’d like to know what population references were used in those studies that gave us 62% african. Using an African reference with Eurasian admixture will inflate the African percentage and vice versa with the Eurasian percentage
 

Aurelian

Forza Somalia!
VIP
1. It's not as rare as you think, there's many somalis with features you'd describe as ''Madow,'' whether you are honest enough to acknowledge it or not.

2. we are more diverse because we assimilated more people, as we conquered and expanded, I am honest enough to admit that. but the original oromos, had the same features many of us have today [that I too have]; broad forehead, thinner lips and aquiline nose, etc. the hamitic/cushitic features described by historians. btw, we all came from the same son of Nuh [alayis salam], as in, amharas, oromos, somalis, afars, etc, all come from the same ancient ancestor.

3. lol @ looks ethiopian, what does that even mean?
somalis marry those closest to them, it makes sense, the eastern oromo clans are closer to them geographically, so they marry them, it's not about who's ''pure'' and who isn't.
My father's clan is not from an area that borders somalis, yet I have been mistaken for being somali more times than I can count, so it's not about being ''pure.''
Maybe the nose is rare, but the lips aren't, I have saw many surprisingly wooqoys with big lips
 
It’s not fully accurate but it’s pretty close to accurate since I used the closest population references to our African ancestry available. I’d like to know what population references were used in those studies that gave us 62% african. Using an African reference with Eurasian admixture will inflate the African percentage and vice versa with the Eurasian percentage
what eurasian population did they compare us to?
 
Top