>>2990566

...

Compared to Sub-Saharan Africans, yes.

>The closest populations on the MDS with respect to our ancient meta population (AEGY) are modern populations from Saudi-Arabia, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, Yemen and other Near-East populations
They are most closely related to modern Arabs.

jeez

You mean egyptians are closely related to those around them?
WOW I DIDN'T SEE IT COMING
Problem is afrocentrist tards when you're either yoruba or 100% pure bavarian phenotype

It's baffles me why they didn't compare it with modern Copts.

>Arabs
Bedouins to be precise. Palestinians too.

Thats only Middle Egypt though. Southern/Upper Egyptians are darker and probably more related to nubians. Going by the art, I see the majority of figures with this phenotype which leads me to believe that the brown-red phenotype was the racial type of the majority or dominant class pre-Plotemy.

And no im not wuzzing anything. these people are still substantially eurasian-mixed and obviously nothing to do with african-americans

No one said nordics you Veeky Forums faggots are no different from stormshits just a bunch of salt from sandniggers

I've never seen an unironically nordicist here.
Just because you can't detect bait for shit, doesn't mean they're real.

>CNN in charge of science news

>negroes think they wuz 'gypshuns
>it's actually white people and middle easterners that wuz
Geez can negers catch a break?

Native Egyptians were and still are "black". Those mummies were not native. They were fairly late, post invasion nobility. Ancient Egyptian heritage and culture followed the Nile south to north.

>Native Egyptians were and still are "black". Those mummies were not native.

Why not use earlier mummies for the DNA basis? The very practice of Egyptian style mummification came from Nilo-Saharan people.

Modern Egyptians are not black, they're mixed.

>15% to 20% of modern Egyptians’ DNA reflects sub-Saharan ancestry

One drop rule.

And subsaharan is a relatively new and racialized concept. Upper Egyptians(southern) go way further back in Egyptian history than the Arabs of the north. I'm pretty sure they don't count Nubians as subsaharan even though they make up the most ancient, and base of native Egyptian genetics.

>One drop rule
Stop applying your American autism to Egypt you fucking retard.

WE WUZ EASTERN EUROPEANZ

lol samefag

So modern egyptianz are we wuz pharaohz

Nope.

Seems to imply not North Africans though, and more closely related to the ancient Mesopotamian and near east populations.

Ancient Egyptians couldn't grow beards. There is no way they were closely related to Mesopotamians at large.

>

>all those anons who kept claiming modern Egyptian genetics are the same as their "ancestors" these last two years

>lying

Fuck off retard

They still derive 80-90% of their DNA from the ancient Egyptians. If anyone can claim ancient Egypt, it's still the Egyptians.

just last week we had a thread of some "study" saying the Egyptians were Europeans.

>posts cherry picked picture of modern Egyptian

user

>Southern/Upper Egyptians are darker
=/= were
>the brown-red phenotype
user the genetic evidence shows those people had no sub-Saharan influence, that trend is way more recent. They were an almost unchanged Neolithic population at that point, and have essentially disappeared.

One theory suggests this recent influence is because of the Arab slave trade.

>Native Egyptians were and still are "black".
>Those mummies were not native.
hahaha
so funny how that goes isn't it

No actually, if you read the fucking study linked here , then you know that Ancient Egyptians actually have more in common with all modern and ancient European populations that they tested, likely due to the additional African component in the modern population observed above.

Genetic drift is a real phenomenon, and denying that entire peoples can essentially disappear either rapidly or over time reveals your ideology.

Ancient Egyptian commoners were never studied though. Just Pharos of a time when Egypt was essentially a Greek vassal state. Those mummies are not native Egyptians. Human migration patterns alone dictate that settlement of the Nile went from south to north.

>Just Pharos
>Those mummies are not native Egyptians. Human migration patterns alone dictate that settlement of the Nile went from south to north.
no please read you're being dumb

No. Like said, ancient Egyptians are closer to Europeans if you compare them to SSA. Modern day Egyptians do not carry heavy amounts (50%-80%) of SSA DNA.

>Genetic drift is a real phenomenon, and denying that entire peoples can essentially disappear either rapidly or over time reveals your ideology.
At the face of a heavily urbanized and densly populated region like Egypt, it's impossible to entirely wipe out a demographic. You just outed yourself as a /pol/tard.

Are Nubians considered subsaharan? They are the most ancient Egyptian ethnic group.

>ancient Egyptians are closer to Europeans if you compare them to SSA

NO READ
ancient Egyptians are closer to ALL ancient and modern Europeans if you compare them to modern Egyptians. This study is fresh as fuck, very recent.

>do not carry heavy amounts
irrelevant
>it's impossible to entirely wipe out a demographic
that's neither true, nor what I even implied (wipe out pls).

>ancient Egyptians are most closely related to Neolithic and Bronze Age samples in the Levant
>When comparing this pattern with modern Egyptians, we find that the ancient Egyptians are more closely related to all modern and ancient European populations that we tested (Fig. 5b), likely due to the additional African component in the modern population observed above.

please get good already

>Nubians
>the most ancient Egyptian ethnic group
lol please see >feel free to post cherry picked images of modern Egyptian people ITT and then claim they represent the average ancient sample

Egypt was settled from south to north(the flow of the Nile). Which is why southern Egypt was referred to as upper Egypt. Ancient Egyptians have more cultural and phenotypical continuity with other Nile peoples. The mummies that were tested in these "studies" were foreigners. Though at that point Egypt was multicultural, but it's roots(pre-dynastic) follow the nile(south-north).

>"studies"
you're really outing yourself here, the desperation is almost palpable

How could they be closer if modern day Egyptians are nliterally only 20% admixed at most? The same study says that Egyptians never recieved any foreign genes throughout it's history besides the slave trade. Where does that 80% non-African from modern day Egyptians come from?

Also, there is a possibility that the African component dates 2000 years ago, which the article states.

This "study" is laughably flawed, and the fact that it is trying to be passed off as legit speaks volumes.

>those extremely minor curves on the orange line from 2000 to mid 2010
lel

>The same study says that Egyptians never recieved any foreign genes throughout it's history besides the slave trade.

this seems to be a blatant falsehood. Please quote the text.
>a possibility that the African component dates 2000 years ago, which the article states

even if that's true, that's literally 17 AD. Quote?

you are like a little baby
>wahhh wahhhh facts and evidence don't fit my convenient narrative wahhhh

Human migration patterns alone invalidate, the conclusion. How do people magically go from black to white once an arbitrary boundary drawn up by the Brits in the 19th century is crossed.

what the fuck do you think you're talking about? Human migration patterns? An arbitrary boundary drawn up by the Brits in the 19th century? You're incoherent and completely unsourced.

We finally have actual ancient Egyptian genomic data and you're just gonna cry about how your retarded spooks somehow invalidate it? gtfo

They didn't study ancient Egyptians though. They studied ancient Egyptian rulers, post invasion. It would be like finding obama's corpse in the future and concluding all Americans were Kenyan.

>this seems to be a blatant falsehood. Please quote the text.
>Our genetic time transect suggests genetic continuity between the Pre-Ptolemaic, Ptolemaic and Roman populations of Abusir el-Meleq, indicating that foreign rule impacted the town’s population only to a very limited degree at the genetic level.

>Under Ptolemaic and Roman rule, ethnic descent was crucial to belonging to an elite group and afforded a privileged position in society55. Especially in the Roman Period there may have been significant legal and social incentives to marry within one’s ethnic group, as individuals with Roman citizenship had to marry other Roman citizens to pass on their citizenship. Such policies are likely to have affected the intermarriage of Romans and non-Romans to a degree

>even if that's true, that's literally 17 AD. Quote?
My bad I didn't get it from that article but from this: cnn.com/2017/06/22/health/ancient-egypt-mummy-dna-genome-heritage/index.html

>"The genetics of the Abusir el-Meleq community did not undergo any major shifts during the 1,300-year timespan we studied," said Wolfgang Haak, group leader at the Max Planck Institute.

>They studied ancient Egyptian rulers, post invasion.
see, read the study.

>This lack of context greatly diminishes the possibility of ‘thick description’ of the analysed individuals, at least in terms of their names, titles and materially expressed identity.
>Rather it seems arguable that the complete spectrum of society is represented, ranging from Late Period priests’ burials that stand out by virtue of their size and contents to simple inhumations that are buried with little to no grave goods.
>By comparing ancient individuals from Abusir el-Meleq with modern Egyptian reference populations, we found an influx of sub-Saharan African ancestry after the Roman Period, which corroborates the findings by Henn and colleagues16. Further investigation would be needed to link this influx to particular historic processes. Possible causal factors include increased mobility down the Nile and increased long-distance commerce between sub-Saharan Africa and Egypt49. Trans-Saharan slave trade may have been particularly important as it moved between 6 and 7 million sub-Saharan slaves to Northern Africa over a span of some 1,250 years, reaching its high point in the nineteenth century50.

>Our genetic time transect suggests genetic continuity between the Pre-Ptolemaic, Ptolemaic and Roman populations of Abusir el-Meleq, indicating that foreign rule impacted the town’s population only to a very limited degree at the genetic level.

Do you even know what a genome is?

You're the one who thinks Egyptians were South African negroes you spasticated retarded subape

They're only talking about Greeks and Romans here. They mention the Hyskos just earlier.

>Especially from the second millennium BCE onwards, there were intense, historically- and archaeologically documented contacts, including the large-scale immigration of Canaanite populations, known as the Hyksos, into Lower Egypt, whose origins lie in the Middle Bronze Age Levant.

Suggesting strong long term contacts with the Middle East and Levant, stronger than those with sub-Saharan Africa.

No I don't, stop gaslighting you tryhard coon.

Does Nubian count as subsaharan? They are the most ancient Egyptian ethnic group. Human settlement of Egypt undoubtedly followed the flow of the Nile since humanity itself originated in east Africa.

>humanity itself originated in east Africa

you have your chronology way fucked up m67. Humans had spread all across the world by the time Egypt was even close to being founded.
know what the habitable zones on the planet were even like at around 10,000 BC? Different, cause of the Younger Dryas.

>They are the most ancient Egyptian ethnic group.

Fucking doubt it at this point.

Ancient egypt was not founded like a nation in the modern sense of the word. It was a gradual progression over 10s of thousands of years. People usually mark the unification of upper and lower Egypt as the "founding" of Egypt, but it was largely symbolic the day before and the day after were pretty much exactly the same. Egypt was never monolithic, it was always a collection of a variety of Nile based ethnic groups, with Levantine and Mediterranean influence coming around the time of unification.

>a gradual progression over 10s of thousands of years
not that long, but yeah the earliest glimmers of Egyptian culture date back at around 2000 years before the unification of the Upper and Lower Kingdoms.

Human habitation of that area, and thus the development of what would eventually become ancient Egyptian culture and people is likely far older than modern archeology gives it credit for.

I'm inclined to agree, cause of the strange water erosion on the enclosure walls of the Great Sphinx and shit.

Tbh Afrocentrists and Poltards are both missing the point. Yes, the evidence points towards the conclusion that the Ancient Egyptians were more related to middle eastern neolithic populations than they were SSA but the afrocentrists bring up a good point in questioning whether the evidence is representative of the whole Egyptian population. All the mummies were from one site, and the genetic material which was used to determine the genetic profile of the New Kingdom were derived from only 3 specimens. With nothing to say about the genomes of the Middle, Old, and Pre-dynastic Egypt. Basically there is still a lot of work needed to be done to determine the genotypic profiles of the ancient populations of the Egyptian population.

>tl;dr both /pol/tards and afrocentrists are retards looking to prove their own personal agenda

t.literal dumb nigger on Veeky Forums

Cnn always has to add some sort of stupid autistic editorial ideology component
Read the big think article

Projecting much Jamal?

t.Orlando Jacobe Rikkson

Where did I even impky that Egyptians were niggers, you dirty, unwashed, illiterate American subhuman? I was claiming the literal opposite.

lmao.

>niggercentrists always saying Egyptians are Arabic because of invasions
>they were the actual invaders
LMFAO

Stay salty Anglo make sure to reduce emissions! also pay for those Somali hitch mob settlements for your unborn sisters son Ahmedes Druga Sephyatz Mugabe

Just because all of this conflicted meming the ancient Egyptians are going to end up being Romanians aren't they

Then literally no one will care anymore it's not like anyone with concrete ideologies is interested in Egypt

why must you be like this Veeky Forums

you used to be better.

ITT

But they're shown to be near eastern not Greek

>they haven't took the Balkanpill

Most black people don't give a shit one way or another, this issue is exacerbated by the internet, and even more so on this website. seriously this place bathes in shit and wonder why it stinks

This is cool. Genetic admixtures can change over history. But lmao at those
>A-ancient Egyptians have more to do with me than modern Egyptians!
posters here
They're still largely the descendants of the ancient Egyptians.

Don't even bother trying to argue with the afro-centrist in this thread.

archived.moe/his/thread/2940431/#2942439

I tried to talk to him two weeks ago and he is still using the same arguments, ignoring counter-evidence and being an all-around idiot.

He literally said "show me your evidence of a good source" and I linked him to nature. Now he is doing the same thing again.

You're pathetic.

Not the guy you're talking about, but how is this
>The samples recovered from Middle Egypt span around 1,300 years of ancient Egyptian history from the New Kingdom to the Roman Period
Evocative of all of ancient Egypt?

nature.com/articles/ncomms15694

yeah, we need more studies on mummies from upper and lower Egypt, especially from the Old Kingdom and pre-dynastic era to be conclusive. still an interesting start though. i didnt think i would ever see the day this controversy might be ended

>have only the ability to speculate about origins for centuries
>have tools to study DNA finally
>huh, our assumptions based only on physical cultural evidence were wrong
>illegitimate

What? Are were seriously suggesting the "WE WUZ" folks were ever Egyptologists?

It may not be indicative of the area but of the pharaohs it definitely is and I'm sure more will come from this that will surprise everyone this year

>the closest living people to ancient Egyptians are Saudis

Wewuzzers and /pol/ both equally BTFO

IT NOT FAIR
ARTHUR KEMP TOLD ME THEY WERE GINGER NORDICS

>whats the 25th dynasty of Egypt

A bunch of invaders that ruled for less than a hundred years before they got kicked out?

>All the mummies were from one site
no
>the genetic material which was used to determine the genetic profile of the New Kingdom were derived from only 3 specimens

not quite, it's that they only have complete genomes from those three samples. The results from the rest of the 151 mummies are listed in Supplementary Data 1.

>All 166 samples from 151 mummified individuals (for details of the 90 individuals included in the later analysis, see Supplementary Data 1) used in this study were taken from two anthropological collections at the University of Tübingen and the Felix von Luschan Skull Collection

hehehehehehe

So Egypt got Blacked huh?

It probably has less to do with all those Nubians, and more with all those sub-saharan slaves the Muslims imported in the middle ages.

Also, is there an analogous research for Ancient Greeks and Romans?

This should serve as a warning for future civilizations. Egypt started white-ish and decayed the more it race-mixed with inferior blacks. Once you go black, you never go back (that is your civilization goes to the shitter and never returns).

Why is this surprising? Considering bronze age egypt was heavily connected with the near east, Anatolia and the Mediterranean via trade routes. They had a lot of intercultural contact and even spoke each others languages. Compared to that there was little to no contact with sub saharan africa at the time.