Where do the white kablye of north africa come from

[Fire Haired]

I have been looking at genetics of Berbers( the biggest and oldest ethnicisty in north Africa about 6,000-10,000 years old) and i have heard and read about the Kabyle in the Atlas mountains. Who are known for blonde hair and blue eyes and also surprisingly red hair. Some sub groups of Kablye have 18% blonde hair that is more than Spain, Italy, southern France, Greece, and southern Yugoslaviens. These are all the Europeans who live in the Mediterranean they may have inter married with, central and northern Yugoslavians have about 20-30% blonde hair but that is not enough for these Berbers to get 18% from inter marriage they would have to be nearly 100% Yugoslavien.

Greece and Yugoslaiva over 4,000 years ago would have had alot more blonde hair just inter marriage with dark haired near easterns has lowered the percentage. Same with French the ancient Gauls of France where very well known for blonde hair the only area of France with less than 20% blonde hair also has very high amounts of middle eastern Y DNA haplogroups which most likely came from Rome.

I have known about these people for a few months. I thought they where very rare and there was not enough DNA tests on them to know where they came from but what made me want to make this thread.

At church i heard a missionary who went to Moorco( far northwest Africa mainly in the Atlas mountains) tell about the different ethnic groups he saw. He said that the Moorconas thought he was apart of a ethnic group that lived in the mountains because he had light skin and blue eyes. He went up to he went up to these mounatins the Mooracns said the pale skinned people lived. The Missonary said there are millions of these people and they looked surprisingly European many had light skin and sometimes blue eyed or blonde hair and red hair.

He said these people where actulley seen as a very ancient ethnic group and have been isolated from inter marriage with other berbers for a very long time because they are isolated in the mountains. And lived there before Arab Muslim invasion and that they used to be powerful and are very traditional berbers. also that Most are palish skinned with dark hair and eyed but some did have blonde hair or red hair.

The people the Missonary talked about remained me of the Kabyle i wondered if they where who he was talking about. So i researched the Kablye every thing the MIssonary said was perfectly accurate and matched the Kabyle. They are the Largest speaking Berber ethnic group in Algeria and second biggest in all of Africa there are 5-7 million of them. Kabyle live mainly in the Atlas mountains and far northern Algeria. They are very proud Berbers and fought for more recognition of the Berber language in 1980. The mountains serve as a refuge from outside influences. The Kablye fought against being culturally influenced by ancient Romans over 2,000 years ago, Arab Muslims (over 1,300 years ago), and French colonist in the 1800's.

I know at some point they had of inter married with a very light haired light eyed sometimes red haired group of Europeans before Ancient Rome because the Romans mentioned them and their language is over 4,000 years old. The Pale skin, blonde hair, and red hair of Kabyle is so spread out and they are one of the biggest ethnic groups of north Africa it had to be thousands and thousands of years ago when a group of Europeans inter married with them

. It makes alot of sense they live right at the border of north Africa and Spain but it could not have been Spaniards. Maybe over 8,000 years ago people in spain had alot of blonde hair and red hair i dont know.

Here are some examples of typical Kablye people

Iberian Migration after the last Ice age 15,000 years ago
​

This is my theory for the light skinned sometimes blonde haired or red haired Kablye people. In the Last Glacial Maximum i will just call it last ice age from 26,500-19,000 years ago most of central and northern Europe was covered in ice and was uninhabitble. Most Humans in Europe took refuge in southern Europe. There have been mtDNA traces of people who took refuge in Iberia then helped resettle Europe after the glaciers retreated. They spread mtDNA H1, H3, V, and U5b1(1).

I have explianed the reasons why this last ice age resstlment of Europe really did happen so many times on this website and it takes a very long time and most people dont read so i am going to try to guve a short explination or just read my resourse (1).

The mtDNA haplogroups H1, H3, V, and U5b1 which are from the migrations out of Iberia 15,000ybp after the last ice age are about 15-30% in most Europeans and north west Africans, 30-50% in Iberians, and 30-40% and in Scandinavians. But these haplogroups are very rare in the middle east and non north west Africa.

The mtDNA of the Kablye people is H=32.3%, U=29.03%(U6= 17.74%), L=8.07%(L3a=4.84%, L1=3.23%), V=4.84%, T=3.23%, J=3.23%, M1=3.23%, R=3.23%, N=1.61%)(2). It did not say how much H1 and H3 they had just 32.3% H. H1, and H3 are the main haplogroups that spread from Iberia 15,000ybp. They are actulley very common in northwest Africa The Turag in Libya have 61% H1(3). H1 and H3 are just as popular in North west Africa as in most of Europe while H1 and H3 are much less popular in the middle east and the rest of north Africa. There have been DNA studies of H1 in north Africa and they concluded that it did not come from recent Iberian inter rmarraige and that it came from Iberia at least 8,000-9,000 years ago(3).

two 12,000 year old mtDNA V samples came from the Atlas mountains in Morocco which pretty much proves these migration happened(4). The only four that where able to find a fir sure haplogroup all had H they possibly had H1 or H3. Also Berbers have their own subclade of mtDNA U5b1 which is a European haplogroup. U5 originated in Europe over 50,000-60,000 years ago.

The sami of far northern Scandinavia have about 50% V(which came from Iberian refuge), and 40-50% U5b1( which came form Iberian refuge). The Sami U5b1 is most related to the Berber U5b1 their common ancestor is estimated to have lived 8,000ybp in Iberia. I think those ages are off probably right after the glacier in Europe retreated 15,000-19,000 years ago. They gave a date to 8,000-9,000 years ago when H1 arrived in North Africa from Iberia this means it came in the same migration as U5b1, But like i said before the dating are probably off.

We dont know if these Iberians would have been dark haired and eyed like modern Iberians. austomnal DNA( basically it tells ur full ancestry) from a 7,000 year old hunter gather in northern Spain his closest modern relatives are Finnish and Sami people in Scandinavia(6). This is because Sami and Finnish ancestors have been separated from other Europeans for at least 10,000 years.

So, they have not inter married mainly with near eastern farmers who came in the Neolithic age (6,000-10,000ybp) and have kept many austome genes the rest of Europe lost. It is true that the Iberians that migrated to North Africa 12,000-15,000ybp would be most related to modern Sami and Finnish that does not exactly mean they had light hair and eyes like Sami and Finnish.

The original European aust. DNA group according to the globe13 test is called north European because it is most popular in northern Europe but is popular in all of Europe. modern Iberians have 30-40% north European, and 50-60% Mediterranean most western Europeans have 30-40% meditreaen and 50-60% north European(8).

In aust, DNA from farmers in Europe in the Neolithic age had over 59% Mediterranean, the Med component in Europe came with farmers from the middle east.Since alot of Iberians ancestry is from those farmers who where dark haired and eyed maybe the light hair, light eyes, and red hair in Iberia disappeared. Sami and Finnish people most likely come mainly from those Iberians in the last ice age 15,000ybp and they have mainly light hair and eyes so there is a good chance these Iberians that went to north Africa 12,000-15,000ybp did too.

A very important note to take is Kablye have red hair. Red hair today almost only exists in western Europe with the borders of Indo European Y DNA R1b L11's subclades. except for the Udmurts in volga Russia who have 15% red hair(7). Also the ancinet Indo Iranien Indo Europeans who migrated out of the steppes to cetral asia about 5,000ybp also had high amounts of red hair. Red hair is sometimes still found today in indo Iranian speaking areas today like Kurds in Iraq, Kalash in Pakistan, Pashuten in Afghanistan.

All red hair in the world comes from Indo Europeans who where from many differnt ethnic groups in central Russia and the caucus who mixed 6,000-8,000ybp. Except Udmurt in volga Russia but the Udmurts live in the area where the Indo European languages spread from so they get red hair from the same source as Indo Europeans did.

8,000-10,000 years ago red hair would have only existed in people around central Russia and Ukriane and it would have been extremely popular. Then if the Kablye have red hair and did not get it from Indo European migrations where the heck did it come from. This might mean red hair existed in Paleolithic Spain.

The Kablye do have 15% R1b M269(2) it did not say if they had the western European type R1b l11 but they defintley do and they most likley got it from Spainish. It is true that some ethnic groups in northern Spain like Basque have 1-3% red hair but the Kablye would have gotten R1b from southern Spanish. So i dont think that is a explanation for their red hair. the Kabyle are evidence red hair originated in Spain in the last glacial Maximum 26,600-19,000 years ago.

I know this seems long and many people have complained i write way to much, but i actulley tried to keep this short and cut it down alot. I cant make it too short and easy to read because i would be leaving out important information.

I think there needs to be more DNA study of the Kabyle people. They should intentionally study the blonde haired ones or very european looking ones, Sine they will have more blood from what ever European group they got those features from. For now i think it was Iberians who migrated there about 15,000 years ago.

If anyone has other ideas please post it. here is a link to the DNA we have so far of Kablye people it is just mtDNA and Y DNA haplogroups http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kabyle_people#cite_note-15

Resources ​

(1)http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22560092
(2)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kabyle_people#cite_note-15
(3)http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0013378
(4)http://www.buildinghistory.org/distantpast/nafricaadna.shtml
(5)http://www.eupedia.com/europe/neolithic_europe_map.shtml
(6)http://fennoscandia.blogspot.com/2013/06/la-brana-and-saamis-ii.html
(7)http://www.eupedia.com/genetics/origins_of_red_hair.shtml
(8)https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ArAJcY18g2GadF9CLUJnTUdSbkVJaDR2UkRtUE9kaUE#gid=2

 

[adamo]

because theyre high in mtdna H and U as you pointed out, from iberia

 

[Fire Haired]

because theyre high in mtdna H and U as you pointed out, from iberia

i agree they get it from Iberia but the fact they have mtdna U and H does not prove it. H and U are not European they are Caucasian. Which includes north Africans and mid easterns. 17% of the 29% U in Kabyle is north African U6 it is almost only in north africa and is 40,000-50,000 years old. the most popular H sublade in north africa is H1 and H3 which did migrate their from Iberia 15,000ybp.

 

[adamo]

exactly, the have low % R1b and quite some H1,H3 as well crossing gibraltar into morocco / algeria = some look white albeit not the majority

 

[Fire Haired]

i totally agree but the Kabyle have 15% r1b highest in north Africa but that is not enough to affect the entire population many do look white i dont know about most.

 

[ElHorsto]

It is possible that there is a minor north-euro admixture, but red-hair does not come from north europeans per se, imho. Or do the Saami, Finns and Balts have more red-haired than european average?
An alternative theory for red hair:
Red hair is often hidden by pigmentation in dark brown haired individuals. North-south mixed people (like Irish, Swiss and possibly Mordvins and Udmurts, but also more southern like Jews and some Italians) have highest chances to be red-haired, because low-pigment genes can let the reddishness shine through. That's why red-haired people also have very pale rosy skin.

 

[Fire Haired]

It is possible that there is a minor north-euro admixture, but red-hair does not come from north europeans per se, imho. Or do the Saami, Finns and Balts have more red-haired than european average?

here is a map of red hair next to a map of y dna r1b in europe

R1b l11 subclades come from those Indo Europeans that came to western Europe 5,000ybp. the R1b in the rest of europe is not from them which is probably why there is no red hair. The sami and finnish have at most 1% red hair and it is probably from Germanic inter marriage. So Finnish and Sami orignalley probably had no red hair so far the only people are random ethnic groups who lived in central russia and Ukraine 8,000-10,000ybp who also became some of thye early indo Europeans 6,000ybp and spread to Europe and asia 5,000ybp and udmurt people who live in volga russia which is near to where those indo Europeans lived. so it seems red hair is a Russian trait at least it used to be it may have devloped in Russia and only existed in Russia till 5,000 years ago. So if the red hair in kabyle is not of indo european or russia origin they are the only in the world and would mean red hair probably started in spain 15,000ybp. it does seem that kablye have inter married with a light haired group of people. red hair right now does not group with very light haired people since red hair is a light hair color people group with red hair is also have light hair but just because finnish have 60% light hair does not mean they have alot of red hair. So i think who ever the kabyle inter married with it was a very blonde haired group of people who also had some red hair which could only be southern Scandinavians not gauls or celts. or maybe there is a extinct group of people like this who lived in spain 15,000 years ago but that would be extremely hard to prove

An alternative theory for red hair:
Red hair is often hidden by pigmentation in dark brown haired individuals. North-south mixed people (like Irish, Swiss and possibly Mordvins and Udmurts, but also more southern like Jews and some Italians) have highest chances to be red-haired, because low-pigment genes can let the reddishness shine through. That's why red-haired people also have very pale rosy skin.

i did not think of that irish have about 12-15% red hair and only about 10% blonde hair and almost 80% brown hair. Udurt have even less blonde hair and more red and brown hair. i dont know about southern jews i have not seen any studies on jewish hair color. i think u need more evidence on the relationship with people who have more brown hair and more blonde hair and how it effects red hair percentages. red hair is a light hair color like blonde hair i dont know though if the genes for red hair and blonde hair are related i dont think they are. with kablye people it seems they inter married with a very blonde haired people with red hair and the only modern people that could have inter married with them are southern Scandinavians.

 

[ElHorsto]

i did not think of that irish have about 12-15% red hair and only about 10% blonde hair and almost 80% brown hair. Udurt have even less blonde hair and more red and brown hair. i dont know about southern jews i have not seen any studies on jewish hair color. i think u need more evidence on the relationship with people who have more brown hair and more blonde hair and how it effects red hair percentages. red hair is a light hair color like blonde hair i dont know though if the genes for red hair and blonde hair are related i dont think they are. with kablye people it seems they inter married with a very blonde haired people with red hair and the only modern people that could have inter married with them are southern Scandinavians.

Red hair gene is certainly not related to blondness. Near-easterners can be red haired but almost never blond.
Regarding jews I have no evidence except common clichés and stereotypes. And this Wikipedia article:

"Red hair is also fairly common amongst the Ashkenazi Jewish populations, possibly because of the influx of European DNA over a period of centuries."

But I doubt that the red-hair gene itself necessarily came from European DNA. Probably the european admixture just helped to make the reddishness visible.

 

[Fire Haired]

Red hair gene is certainly not related to blondness. Near-easterners can be red haired but almost never blond.
Regarding jews I have no evidence except common clichés and stereotypes. And this Wikipedia article:

"Red hair is also fairly common amongst the Ashkenazi Jewish populations, possibly because of the influx of European DNA over a period of centuries."

both red hair and blonde hair orignated in Europe. both redheads and blonde almost always have blue eyes then sometimes green eyes. i think both evolved seperatley for similar reason but are unrelated to each other. the Ancient Jews where dark brown haired it even mentions hair color in the bible it said young men have black hair old men had grey hair. in teh bible it says abrahman came from mespotamia 4,000ybp in modern iraq. abrham was a nomad he was called by God to go to isreal or it was cannon then the whole thing about jews being in egypt then going back to Isreal, teh jews would have inter married with the native people in isreal and that area so genetically ancient jews where not Mesopotamian they where southwest asian. modern jews austomnal dna(which tells full ancestry) if u take away teh european part it perfectly matches modern Syrians, Palestinians and other people around isreal. jews where southwest asians not europeans the reason modern ones in europe look white is because they inter married with europeans so the ancient jews had no red hair unless they inter married with cimmerians or sythiens who had migrated in that area from 3,000-2,500ybp.

i live in a area with mainly middle eastern and south asian people. there is a assyrian from iran the same area many kurdish live he said that he does not know if there are any redheads in Iraq and Iran but he has heard of some but he said he as seen blondes.

the red hair in the mid east today almost only exists in indo Iranian speaking ethnic groups(kurdish, Kaslash, Pashuten, Pamiri) who have high levals of european ancestry in austomnal DNA and y dna. i really doubt red hair is also native to the middle east. the genes we know of so far that create pale skin and also the genes that create blue eyes in Europeans did originate in the middle east about 50,000-60,000ybp and became more popular in mainly Europeans, but also kind of in northern mid easterns, Anatolian, and caucus peoples ancestors. but red hair is almost defintley a european trait and it probably only existed in central Russia from 15,000-6,000ybp then spread it could have been as high as 30% in some central russians.

wikpedia like to be politcalley correct and say that red hair is not only european but it is. those so called redh haired chinese live in the same province of china where they found 4,000 years old indo iranien white redheads. also where teh ancient indo Iranian speaking tocherians lived who from what Chinese say where tall had high noses, red hair, blue eyes, and big beards a perfect description of a red haired european plus we have paintngs of tocherians and that is exactley what they looked like. also indo Iranian speaking geneticalley European people and east asians in western china have inter married for about 4,500 years so they are very mixed in western china so some chinese looking people with blue eyes and red hair.

But I doubt that the red-hair gene itself necessarily came from European DNA. Probably the european admixture just helped to make the reddishness visible.

i dont know how to respond because i odnt know that much about the genes that create red hair. i think it is european here are my reasons

1. redheads have the palish natural kin in the world. teh genes that create pale skin in europeans did orignate in teh mid east 60,000ybp but became dominate in Europeans ancestors and also people in the caucus and Anatolia's ancestors but more in Europeans. redheads had to have been born in a white people group not brown sometimes white middle easterns. who ever the first people to have red hair where they already would have had alot of blue eyes sure blue eyes began in the mid east 60,000ybp but they became popular in only Europeans ancestors. red hair most likely evolved for a similar reason as blonde hair maybe survival in the last ice age of Europe over 20,000 years ago. the only natural redheads so far discovered are either european or get it from european ancestry.

 

[Johannes]

The so-called "white" Berbers or Kabyles are descendants of Moors who were expelled from Spain. Most of the DNA was from European women who married Berbers. Many Berbers who migrated to the Iberian peninsula after the conquest -- especially during the 1-13th centuries were men who fought in the Muslim's Army. They married European women and then left Spain after they were ethnically cleansed by the Castilians. The Berbers are about 80% E1b1 and 10% I and R1b. The other 10% is Arab DNA J. The Kybales just happen to have more European DNA on average because they lived in isolation since the Middle Ages

 

[Drac II]

The so-called "white" Berbers or Kabyles are descendants of Moors who were expelled from Spain. Most of the DNA was from European women who married Berbers. Many Berbers who migrated to the Iberian peninsula after the conquest -- especially during the 1-13th centuries were men who fought in the Muslim's Army. They married European women and then left Spain after they were ethnically cleansed by the Castilians. The Berbers are about 80% E1b1 and 10% I and R1b. The other 10% is Arab DNA J. The Kybales just happen to have more European DNA on average because they lived in isolation since the Middle Ages

The flaw with this theory is that we know from as far back as Pharaonic times that some areas of North Africa, particularly Libya, seem to have had a lot of people with blondish or rufous features, so the presence of these fairer types among North Africans predates Islamic times by thousands of years. Ancient Egyptian tomb and temple portrayals of Libyans usually stereotyped them as having pale complexion, blond, light brown or red hair and light eyes. In those same paintings the Egyptians stereotyped themselves as having darker complexion, hair and eyes than the Libyans, and more like what today we usually think of as typically North African pigmentation. So thanks to ancient Egyptian art we have evidence that North Africa since at least Pharaonic times has been populated by both "dark" and "fair" Caucasian types.

 

[Johannes]

The flaw with this theory is that we know from as far back as Pharaonic times that some areas of North Africa, particularly Libya, seem to have had a lot of people with blondish or rufous features, so the presence of these fairer types among North Africans predates Islamic times by thousands of years. Ancient Egyptian tomb and temple portrayals of Libyans usually stereotyped them as having pale complexion, blond, light brown or red hair and light eyes. In those same paintings the Egyptians stereotyped themselves as having darker complexion, hair and eyes than the Libyans, and more like what today we usually think of as typically North African pigmentation. So thanks to ancient Egyptian art we have evidence that North Africa since at least Pharaonic times has been populated by both "dark" and "fair" Caucasian types.

The figures in Egyptian art are very symbolic and have nothing to do with the phenotypes of real people's. The only representatives that reflect reality are the blacks. the rest are pure symbols to differentiate from others. For example, the colors of the Semites and Libyans are the same and I am sure they were not as white as they are represented. Maybe in Libya there were some fair types but Morocco and Algeria is very far to the west. You seem to forget that millions of Muslims fled the Iberian peninsula during the 12-14 centuries of Christian Reconquista. Thus a lot of European DNA (most Andalusi Muslims were Europeans) was transferred to the Berbers. Thus it explains why some are fair. In fact I read a National Geographic special on Andalusian towns in Morocco that exist alonf the northern part of the country.

 

[Drac II]

The figures in Egyptian art are very symbolic and have nothing to do with the phenotypes of real people's. The only representatives that reflect reality are the blacks. the rest are pure symbols to differentiate from others. For example, the colors of the Semites and Libyans are the same and I am sure they were not as white as they are represented. Maybe in Libya there were some fair types but Morocco and Algeria is very far to the west. You seem to forget that millions of Muslims fled the Iberian peninsula during the 12-14 centuries of Christian Reconquista. Thus a lot of European DNA (most Andalusi Muslims were Europeans) was transferred to the Berbers. Thus it explains why some are fair. In fact I read a National Geographic special on Andalusian towns in Morocco that exist alonf the northern part of the country.

That is hardly the case. The physical characterizations in those old paintings are quite clear. There is no reason why the Egyptians should have been accurate in their depiction of black Africans and for some mysterious reason they would not apply the same parameters to themselves and Syro-Palestinians and Libyans. We can tell very well that each of these groups were generally stereotyped as follows in Egyptian art (from darkest to lightest):

1- Nubians/Africans from below Egypt: very dark skin, very curly hair, dark eyes, Negroid facial features

2- Egyptians: lighter skinned than sub-Saharan Africans, straight or wavy dark hair when not braided, dark eyes, Caucasoid facial features

3- Syro-Palestinians: lighter skinned than the Egyptians but often with a yellowish "tinge", straight or wavy dark hair, dark eyes, Caucasoid facial features

4- Libyans: the palest skinned types in Egyptian art, straight or wavy hair when not braided and usually lighter in color, often with light eyes too, Caucasoid facial features

The fact that Iberian Muslims fled to North Africa does not change the fact that lighter pigmented types already inhabited the area thousands of years before. Their presence among modern North Africans can't simply be attributed to a historical source like that of Muslim times. The presence of these types in North Africa predates historical record.

 

[Johannes]

That is hardly the case. The physical characterizations in those old paintings are quite clear. There is no reason why the Egyptians should have been accurate in their depiction of black Africans and for some mysterious reason they would not apply the same parameters to themselves and Syro-Palestinians and Libyans. We can tell very well that each of these groups were generally stereotyped as follows in Egyptian art (from darkest to lightest):

1- Nubians/Africans from below Egypt: very dark skin, very curly hair, dark eyes, Negroid facial features

2- Egyptians: lighter skinned than sub-Saharan Africans, straight or wavy dark hair when not braided, dark eyes, Caucasoid facial features

3- Syro-Palestinians: lighter skinned than the Egyptians but often with a yellowish "tinge", straight or wavy dark hair, dark eyes, Caucasoid facial features

4- Libyans: the palest skinned types in Egyptian art, straight or wavy hair when not braided and usually lighter in color, often with light eyes too, Caucasoid facial features

The fact that Iberian Muslims fled to North Africa does not change the fact that lighter pigmented types already inhabited the area thousands of years before. Their presence among modern North Africans can't simply be attributed to a historical source like that of Muslim times. The presence of these types in North Africa predates historical record.

Do you honestly believe that Libyans and Semites looked that white-skinned as in the portraits? You yourself just said they are "stereotypes." That is exactly what I meant. The only accurate descriptions are of the Egyptians because they were black to brown in complexion. The only candidates for that description are Germanic or Celtic peoples of the north sans the braided and wooly hair.

Do you know were the the term "Maurus" comes from? It means black or very dark. This was the description of the North Africans by Greeks and Romans. NO greek or roman ever mentioned white skinned Libyans or North Africans for that matter.

 

[Angela]

I wonder why it's so important to make the Libyans "whiter" than the Syrians?

Regardless, I don't see any difference, and nor do Egyptologists who I'm sure have actually seen the painting.

See: The Meaning of Skin Color in Eighteenth Dynasty Egypt:
https://www.academia.edu/353602/The_Meaning_of_Skin_Color_in_Eighteenth_Dynasty_Egypt

If this is a veiled discussion of "race", I think it strains the bonds of credulity to think that North Africans did not contain an SSA before the modern era. I would agree that it may not have been as large as it is today for most North Africans, but that is another matter.

 

[Johannes]

I wonder why it's so important to make the Libyans "whiter" than the Syrians?

Regardless, I don't see any difference, and nor do Egyptologists who I'm sure have actually seen the painting.

See: The Meaning of Skin Color in Eighteenth Dynasty Egypt:
https://www.academia.edu/353602/The_Meaning_of_Skin_Color_in_Eighteenth_Dynasty_Egypt

If this is a veiled discussion of "race", I think it strains the bonds of credulity to think that North Africans did not contain an SSA before the modern era. I would agree that it may not have been as large as it is today for most North Africans, but that is another matter.

The colors were used to categorize the large amounts of peoples the Egyptians encountered. This did not reflect reality. The contrast was made to make a clear distinction between races or peoples. The Libyans and Berbers were probably similar to Semites but perhaps a shade darker. "Maurus" means black in Greek.

 

[Angela]

The colors were used to categorize the large amounts of peoples the Egyptians encountered. This did not reflect reality. The contrast was made to make a clear distinction between races or peoples. The Libyans and Berbers were probably similar to Semites but perhaps a shade darker. "Maurus" means black in Greek.

Perhaps you should read the paper in the provided link again. The Egyptologist, who, as I pointed out above, has undoubtedly seen the paintings in person, sees no such difference in skin pigmentation. The Egyptians had a limited range of pigment. Anything you perceive as a difference is either in your imagination or the result of differential weathering.

In addition, you seem to be unaware that fair haired and light eyed people do exist in both the Near East and North Africa, although they are indeed in the minority. I have a feeling you might be someone who has an interest in the work of the traditional physical anthropologists. Look up the plates.

Also, you might investigate things like the cave art from Tassili (3,000 BC).

 

[Drac II]

I wonder why it's so important to make the Libyans "whiter" than the Syrians?

Ask the ancient Egyptians, who themselves were North Africans BTW, since it is them who portrayed them that way. Maybe it is because these lighter types were more abundant among them than among Syrians. Just look at the "pockets" of people that have such lighter pigmentation that still survive in modern times among the more isolated communities of Berbers.

Regardless, I don't see any difference, and nor do Egyptologists who I'm sure have actually seen the painting.

See: The Meaning of Skin Color in Eighteenth Dynasty Egypt:
https://www.academia.edu/353602/The_Meaning_of_Skin_Color_in_Eighteenth_Dynasty_Egypt

I beg to differ. Many scholars have indeed noticed that the Libyans were more prone to be stereotyped by the Egyptians as having lighter features than the other peoples they portrayed:

http://www.digital.library.upenn.edu/women/edwards/pharaohs/pharaohs-3.html

"Now, the typical Libyans of ancient Egyptian art were a fair-skinned, red-haired, and blue-eyed race, whose descendants survive to this day eastward of Algeria."

https://books.google.com/books?id=J...the light-skinned, blue-eyed Libyans"&f=false

"In the west their neighbors were the light-skinned, blue-eyed Libyans. In the east there were tall people with yellowish-tan skin, prominent noses, and thick facial hair, including short beards, typical of Western Asia."

https://books.google.com/books?id=6...X&ei=R_1uVYObBcWisAWY4IOICg&ved=0CC4Q6AEwAzgK

"...the dynastic Egyptians usually represented the Libyans as fair-skinned and blue-eyed"

https://books.google.com/books?id=l...ks, we have come to know as Libyans."&f=false

"Along the Mediterranean, at all events, there has always been a habitable region, partly pastureland and partly arable, the home of the white-skinned, red-haired, and blue-eyed people whom, following the example of the Greeks, we have come to know as Libyans."

 

[Drac II]

The colors were used to categorize the large amounts of peoples the Egyptians encountered. This did not reflect reality. The contrast was made to make a clear distinction between races or peoples. The Libyans and Berbers were probably similar to Semites but perhaps a shade darker. "Maurus" means black in Greek.

Wrong, and besides the different pigmentation of hair, eyes and skin given to these different peoples we can also see that the Egyptians portrayed themselves and the Libyans as having different facial traits than the "Semites", who are given more "aquiline" features. Berbers are not "Semitic".

 

[Angela]

Ask the ancient Egyptians, who themselves were North Africans BTW, since it is them who portrayed them that way. Maybe it is because these lighter types were more abundant among them than among Syrians. Just look at the "pockets" of people that have such lighter pigmentation that still survive in modern times among the more isolated communities of Berbers.



I beg to differ. Many scholars have indeed noticed that the Libyans were more prone to be stereotyped by the Egyptians as having lighter features than the other peoples they portrayed:

http://www.digital.library.upenn.edu/women/edwards/pharaohs/pharaohs-3.html

"Now, the typical Libyans of ancient Egyptian art were a fair-skinned, red-haired, and blue-eyed race, whose descendants survive to this day eastward of Algeria."

https://books.google.com/books?id=J...the light-skinned, blue-eyed Libyans"&f=false

"In the west their neighbors were the light-skinned, blue-eyed Libyans. In the east there were tall people with yellowish-tan skin, prominent noses, and thick facial hair, including short beards, typical of Western Asia."

https://books.google.com/books?id=6...X&ei=R_1uVYObBcWisAWY4IOICg&ved=0CC4Q6AEwAzgK

"...the dynastic Egyptians usually represented the Libyans as fair-skinned and blue-eyed"

https://books.google.com/books?id=l...ks, we have come to know as Libyans."&f=false

"Along the Mediterranean, at all events, there has always been a habitable region, partly pastureland and partly arable, the home of the white-skinned, red-haired, and blue-eyed people whom, following the example of the Greeks, we have come to know as Libyans."

Yes, Drac, we know: the Iberians are exemplars of "pure", "white", Europeans, and they also have significant amounts of North African dna, and therefore the "Libyans" of antiquity had to all have been blonde, redhaired, and blue eyed people. It's so obvious that one wonders why you need to repeat it over and over again. Do you perhaps think people are unpersuaded?

There do indeed appear to have been fair haired Libyans. I just posted to that effect. There were also darker Libyans. Does it appear to you that the "Libyan" in the original frieze is fair haired? If, by the prior, you are trying to imply that there was no SSA in the Libyans of that period, then I think that is highly unlikely. It's not like a minority SSA component is a stain that always shows through, you know.

Have you seen the film "The Human Stain" by the way? It's based on a true story. You might find it informative.

Sorry for the digression.