Sumerians and Native Americans could be related?

Come back when there is a whole bunch of samples.
 
the look you describe (above the list of percentages of common traits) doesn't evoke something typically African (SSA).
and I don't see on what they can produce these curious percentages.

Thanks for answer.
Question: how many phenotypical alleles have been analysed on how many people in every pop?
 
Glup! I answered to myself when I was thinking I was doing it to Doggerland. Sorry Doggerland!
 
earlier scientists of 19 th century can' t accept sumerians were blacks and said they were eurafrican people with a nose intermediary between those of africans and those of europeans, they also think sumerians were from australoid families but racism bias make them say sumerians were black red turanians
somesay they are ancestorsof ugrian langages with proof
but the truth show sumerians were australoid peoples:
the analysis of sumerian bones show thay are australoids
According to many experts, the Al-Ubaid people were ancestral to the Sumerians, or at least, to their culture. The Al-Ubaid skulls show a chaemaerrhine index with a mean value of 49.2. In other words, they had very broad noses. The skulls had both subnasal and alveolar prognathism, or fullness of the lower and upper lips. The average linear projection was 8 mm. for the skulls. Their heads were long and narrow.
Buxton and Rice found that of 26 Sumerian crania 17 were Australoid, five Austrics and four Armenoid. According to Penniman who studied skulls from Kish and other Sumerian sites, these three: the Australoid (Eurafrican), Austric and Armenoid were the "racial" types associated with the Sumerians. Here is Penniman's description of the Austric type found at Sumer:
"These people are of medium stature, with complexion and
hair like those of the Eurafrican, to which race they are
allied, dark eyes, and oval faces. They have small ill-filled
dolichocephalic skulls, with browridges poorly developed or
absent, bulging occiputs, orbits usually horizontal ellipses,
broad noses, rather feeble jaws, and slight sinewy bodies."

Both the Australoid and Austric type are found in India, where the former is known as Dravidian in its less extreme variety. Like all the different populations of India, both Dravidian and Austric are long-headed like most of the skulls at Sumer. As one goes further East, Austrics become mostly round-headed due possibly to the greater proportion of Mongoloid blood, and the Austronesians of the South Seas are primarily round-headed. Formerly, it was popular to ascribe the Australoid and Austric types to "dark Caucasoid" origin in the Mediterranean area

from a nationalist iranian pro shah site azargoshnasp.net seek recent_history/pan_turkist_philosophy/sumd/austricsumerian

BUT when we blacks say this people qualify us afrocentricists !!!!
for example this wikipedia wikipedia.org seek K 3364 which forget scientists have discovered bones and skulls closed to australoids proving sumerians were blacks but australoids and say sumerians are not negroid
i use this stage also to say negroid is a racist term coming from negre/ nigger the way blacks were called from 15th to 20 th centuries and it keeps on producing bias: like blacks have big nose stuff
i notice ASI/AASI and melanesians and australian aborigines who according to experts come from africa ( M haplogroups from african horn L3) are considered as blacks but not called like this
i think both them and africans are blacks and are brothers and should be both called melanoid instead of african blacks called negroid

The linguistic aspect of the thread is the most interesting one. The phenotypic aspect is very confuse in your post, and in your place I would not put too much faith in the ancient anthropologists works or I 'd try to distinct between the more or less serious ones and the strictly un reliable ones. BTW we are all cousins spite different and the term 'negroid' has nothing racist in it: it is based on Latin 'niger' which gave the French 'noir' in north and 'nègre' in south (Occitan) and 'negro' in Spanish, not based on 'nigger' which is an evolutive form of the same roots but took over centuries a contempt colour in the Anglo-Saxon word. It seems we all Eurasians are come from Africa, and you are not obliged to search more close cousins in some Asia dark populations; it's more complicated, and proximity is not tied only to external features so it isn't useful to construct some kind of affective feelings based on all that (your "brothers").
&: for an anthropologist, 'melanoid' is not sufficient (blackish skin), so you need an epithet (African melanoid and Asian melanoid) terms you can use if you want; personally when I say 'negroid' I think 'African melanoid', not 'nigger'. No offense, that said.
 
THE SUMERIAN AND THE TAMOUL ur = city, town, village in Tamil, ur = town, town in Sumerian as = one, alone in Sumerian, as = prime / one, alone in Tamil kur = mountain in Sumerian, kur = name of hill tribes in Tamil and Dravidian, kori / koeum = mountain in Altaic language. tamil arukan arhus Sumerian "benevolent person".

Tamil tribes carry Q-M242 at 6%-8%. The Marsh Arabs (2%) are considered the population with the strongest link to ancient Sumerians. The diversity of sub-lineages of Q-M242 before 15.3 kya resulted from the differentiation of Q-M242 in South Siberia since the Paleolithic Age. The appearance of the Paleo-Indian population is part of the great human diffusion throughout the Eurasia after the Last Glacial Maximum. The Tamils and the Marsh Arabs are partly descendants of the Paleo-Indian population from South Siberia.
 
Tamil tribes carry Q-M242 at 6%-8%. The Marsh Arabs (2%) are considered the population with the strongest link to ancient Sumerians. The diversity of sub-lineages of Q-M242 before 15.3 kya resulted from the differentiation of Q-M242 in South Siberia since the Paleolithic Age. The appearance of the Paleo-Indian population is part of the great human diffusion throughout the Eurasia after the Last Glacial Maximum. The Tamils and the Marsh Arabs are partly descendants of the Paleo-Indian population from South Siberia.

Probably that Q-M242 is related with neolithic WSHG who migrated into IVC. Both language similarity also seems to be with WSHG migration.

"The Japanese professor Tsutomu Kambe claimed to have found more than 500 similar words about agriculture between Tamil and Japanese in 2011"

"Comparative linguist Kang Gil-un identifies 1300 Dravidian Tamil cognates in Korean. He suggests that Korean is probably related to the Nivkh language and influenced by Tamil.[17]"

- american indian admixture in Iran territory:
2E7E74F400000578-3320218-The_researchers_found_that_western_Europe_appears_to_be_a_mixtur-m-3_1447674621591.jpg


 
Thanks for answer.
Question: how many phenotypical alleles have been analysed on how many people in every pop?

80alleles.
Face bone morphology 11
Ear morphology 8
Mouth morphology 7
Eye morphology 5
Nose morphology 7
Teeth morphology 5
Skull morphology 5
Eye color 19
Skin color 4
Hair morphology 2
Hand and arm morphology 3
Spine and torso 3
Height1

Some SNPs have an influence on more then one trait.
All can be found at GWAS Catalog and studies on the internet.

I only use alleles which are ethnically different in today's population. The reason for this is following: Not every population has samples that provide all 80 SNPs. When you compare SNPs that have in every population almost over 90% the same alleles, this would enhance the percentage for traits which are similar in every human population and that would not help to see differences, but enhance the percentage of similarity in incomplete samples, when they are rich in them.

The minimal SNPs that a (final) sample must provide is 40.
Forthat reason there is no Afontova Gora, Yana, Salkhit, Ofnet and many others. They all lacking too many SNPs.

For modern populations that are available on the internet like on NCBI i use the average alleles of the population for comparison.

For example:

The value for rs1235789 in the default population is A 0.5 T 0.5 so the allele will be AT
The value for rs1235789 in the default population is A 0.8 T 0.2 so the allele will be AA

For populations that are not to find open on the Internet I use Human Genome Project samples or the ones that can be found in the European Nucleotide Archive.
When it comes to ancient samples some are very good and provide all SNPs I need, but in general they are rare and often of poor quality/low in SNPs for traits.
I merge them into one by using the “Jurassic Park” method: I fill the gaps with SNPs of another individual of the same population, so a sample for comparison will consist of many individuals of the same population.

When there is more then one sample of a population which provides the SNPs I need, I consider to use the heterozygote variations, if they are present.

For example: Yamnaya induvidual 1 has rs123456 AA and Yamnaya individual 2 has rs123456 TT. I this case I use AT for that SNP because is is likely, that both variations existed in the population.

When many samples are available (which is normally not the chase) it would be needed to calculate this different:

9 Individuals have AA and only one has TT, AA will be the chosen alleles becauseit is unlikely that TT is the typical one, or AT.

I don’t use outliers if they where identified by a study or hobby anthropologist. For people who dont know what that is: A individual which has a very different ancestry admixture to the rest of the population.
 
12862_2011_Article_1910_Fig2_HTML.jpg

Figure 2
Phylogeny of Y-chromosome haplogroups and their frequencies (%) in Marsh Arab and Iraqi populations.
Al Zahery et al. (2011) investigated the issue of the origin of Marsh Arabs, who are presumed to be the descendants of the ancient Sumerians. Their mtDNA and Y chromosome haplogroups showed that Marsh Arabs are predominantly of Middle Eastern origin, thus refuting the theory that Marsh Arabs are recent migrants from the Indian sub-continent. Haplogroup Q was found at minor frequencies from 0.7% to 2.1% among Marsh Arabs (Figure 2) and haplogroup Q-M25 (0.7%) and haplogroup Q-M378 (2.1%) are descendant haplogroups of Q-M242, which is a very common Y-DNA haplogroup among Native Americans (92.3% in Navajo.)

So only 2.8% Q
Thats low %
If anything we need to look more
On the dominant y haplogroup
In this case j1 80% thats huge... :unsure:

P.s
I don't think they are descendents of sumerians
They might be groups of arabic and bedouin tribes
Who settled at some point in marsh area in iraq
 
Last edited:
They seems to be brutal w/o mercy:



The Great Death Pit: PG1237, with its 74 attendants, was the most spectacular of Ur’s royal tombs. Woolley called any burial without a tomb chamber a "death pit”. He named PG1237 “The Great Death Pit" because of the many bodies that were found within it. http://sumerianshakespeare.com/117701/117801.html

the royal tombs at ur have been long famous for their chilling scenario of young soldiers and courtesans who loyally took poison to die with their mistress. the authors investigate two of the original skulls with ct scans and propose a procedure no less chilling, but more enforceable. the victims were participants in an elaborate funerary ritual during which they were felled with a sharp instrument, heated, embalmed with mercury, dressed and laid ceremonially in rows.
 
They seems to be brutal w/o mercy:



The Great Death Pit: PG1237, with its 74 attendants, was the most spectacular of Ur’s royal tombs. Woolley called any burial without a tomb chamber a "death pit”. He named PG1237 “The Great Death Pit" because of the many bodies that were found within it. http://sumerianshakespeare.com/117701/117801.html


thats interesting (y)
i think we can get some idea what were the main haplogroups
in mesopotamia
by this future paper :

Altınışık N. Ezgi et al. First Genomic Insights into Pre-pottery Neolithic of Upper Mesopotamia :cool-v:

p.s
it is before the sumerian period but that can still give something to the puzzle
 
How about Q1b?
Jewish people has Q1b
Abraham was a Ur people.
 
The linguistic aspect of the thread is the most interesting one. The phenotypic aspect is very confuse in your post, and in your place I would not put too much faith in the ancient anthropologists works or I 'd try to distinct between the more or less serious ones and the strictly un reliable ones. BTW we are all cousins spite different and the term 'negroid' has nothing racist in it: it is based on Latin 'niger' which gave the French 'noir' in north and 'nègre' in south (Occitan) and 'negro' in Spanish, not based on 'nigger' which is an evolutive form of the same roots but took over centuries a contempt colour in the Anglo-Saxon word. It seems we all Eurasians are come from Africa, and you are not obliged to search more close cousins in some Asia dark populations; it's more complicated, and proximity is not tied only to external features so it isn't useful to construct some kind of affective feelings based on all that (your "brothers").
&: for an anthropologist, 'melanoid' is not sufficient (blackish skin), so you need an epithet (African melanoid and Asian melanoid) terms you can use if you want; personally when I say 'negroid' I think 'African melanoid', not 'nigger'. No offense, that said.
Dodgerland proved i was right, according to his site pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27417496/ sumerians were blacks and have 70 per cent genes of africans, 69 percent genes of adamanese who are from M haplogroup common to dravidians and australoids and 62 per cent genes of australian aborigines who are from M HAPLOGROUP TOO from L3 haplogroup of africa
Also ASI/AASI map of genetic presence qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-8a1e2300d2869577d4ed9ae64e0898d3 show Irak was peopled by ASI/AASIs 50000 years ago and bahrein ( the sumerian dilmun) and coastal arabia from horn of africa to irAK and from there to iran , pakistan , india and burma to southeast asia and australia coroborated by map of haplogroup Mdispersal from africa which show the M haplogroup people which were blacks come from african L3 and migrate from horn of africa to coastal arabia to irak and then iran and india and then southeast asia and oceania/ australia en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_M_(mtDNA)
Also sumerians were of same genes dravidians ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3770703/ The haplogroup M49 brings them closer to Bengal, Assam, Thibet and Burma (GENE of harappa peoples which we know to be Dravidian) Haplogroup M65a brings them closer to Tamils. Haplogroup 223 brings them closer to Bengal, Burma and Tamils. Haplogroup 234 brings them closer to northern India and Burma (gene of the harappa populations known to be Dravidian) Haplogroups 266 and 289 bring them closer to the Tamils. Haplogroup 311 brings them closer to Tamils, Bengal and Burma.
 
Marsh arabs are not sumerians, dravidians they are sumerian cousins

Tamil tribes carry Q-M242 at 6%-8%. The Marsh Arabs (2%) are considered the population with the strongest link to ancient Sumerians. The diversity of sub-lineages of Q-M242 before 15.3 kya resulted from the differentiation of Q-M242 in South Siberia since the Paleolithic Age. The appearance of the Paleo-Indian population is part of the great human diffusion throughout the Eurasia after the Last Glacial Maximum. The Tamils and the Marsh Arabs are partly descendants of the Paleo-Indian population from South Siberia.
you say yourself both marsharabs and dravidians are partly descendants of paleo indians which we know are AASIs
so marsharabs were not the first people of mesopotamia, they inherited from a people which were much older than them and we know axxording to bible first mesopotamians were black people
(fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fichier:Table_of_Nations.jpg ) the Nimrod people, Nimrod was a black a koushite with a sumerian name NIM which means high in sumerian and is closed of Nim in dravidian which is linked to something high , nimir meaning arise
When we know the map of ASI/AASI genetic presence qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-8a1e2300d2869577d4ed9ae64e0898d3 show ASI/AASI ( dravidians and australoids) predate marsharabs in irak because they were there since 50000 years old and inhabited irak , iran till india and burmese frontier and were known to be black , so sumerians were blacks , ASI/AASIs , dravidians and australoid folks, this explaining the similarity of sumerian with austric and dravidians language
 
That's not my opinion, that's what genetics of the samples say:

rs4787778 AA Hooked nose
rs2058742 GG Downturned nose tip
rs17640804 TT Slim nostrils
rs3751074 GG Long nose bridge

Do you know what kind of nose alleles natufian had? It seems to me that the natufian had african skull genetically. If iran neolithic got hooked nose, anatolia farmer had the nose of a person in the middle.:

6B54Hsw.jpg

E8kpDWn.png
 
Do you know what kind of nose alleles natufian had? It seems to me that the natufian had african skull genetically. If iran neolithic got hooked nose, anatolia farmer had the nose of a person in the middle.:

Anatolia HGs nose had an average long nose bridge and a down tuned nose tip. Other SNPs for nose are missing.

I once posted about the Natufians in another thread. Here are the similarities to modern populations again:

Middle East 75%
Swede 70%
Estonian 67% European 67% Ashkenazi Jewish 67% Northern South Asian 67%
Netherlands 65% United Kingdom 65%
Danish 61% Pygmy 61% African 61%
Basque 51%
Bedouin 50%
Sardinian 48%
Orcadian 46%
Adygei 45% Palestine 45%
French 44% Russian 44%
Italian 43%
Hungarian 39%
Turkish 36%
Ukrainian 21.4 %

IfI only use SNPs for skull physiology, it is only 50% matching with Africans.

About the nose again:

rs4787778 MISSING (nosebridge angle)
rs2058742 TT (Nose tip position is upturned)
rs17640804 TT (Breadth of nostrils is slim)
rs3751074 GG (Nose bridge lenght is long)

Seems that some People disliked that they or some of them had an upturned nose tip, because its not matching with their ideas of how they should look.

Hooked nose bridge with upturned nose tip:https://www.drhilinski.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/FinesseRhino196OblLatBefore1Diagram1.jpg

Straight nose bridge with upturned nose:https://i.pinimg.com/originals/45/80/20/45802075e38f029981bd778c81956d44.jpg

Hooked nose bridge with down turned nose tip:https://rhinoplasty-blog.com/wp-con...e-Historically-Better-Known-As-Roman-Nose.jpg

We don’t know that kind of nose bridge type they had, only nose tip.
 
Anatolia HGs nose had an average long nose bridge and a down tuned nose tip. Other SNPs for nose are missing.

I once posted about the Natufians in another thread. Here are the similarities to modern populations again:

Middle East 75%
Swede 70%
Estonian 67% European 67% Ashkenazi Jewish 67% Northern South Asian 67%
Netherlands 65% United Kingdom 65%
Danish 61% Pygmy 61% African 61%
Basque 51%
Bedouin 50%
Sardinian 48%
Orcadian 46%
Adygei 45% Palestine 45%
French 44% Russian 44%
Italian 43%
Hungarian 39%
Turkish 36%
Ukrainian 21.4 %

IfI only use SNPs for skull physiology, it is only 50% matching with Africans.

About the nose again:

rs4787778 MISSING (nosebridge angle)
rs2058742 TT (Nose tip position is upturned)
rs17640804 TT (Breadth of nostrils is slim)
rs3751074 GG (Nose bridge lenght is long)

Seems that some People disliked that they or some of them had an upturned nose tip, because its not matching with their ideas of how they should look.

Hooked nose bridge with upturned nose tip:https://www.drhilinski.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/FinesseRhino196OblLatBefore1Diagram1.jpg

Straight nose bridge with upturned nose:https://i.pinimg.com/originals/45/80/20/45802075e38f029981bd778c81956d44.jpg

Hooked nose bridge with down turned nose tip:https://rhinoplasty-blog.com/wp-con...e-Historically-Better-Known-As-Roman-Nose.jpg

We don’t know that kind of nose bridge type they had, only nose tip.


interesting:unsure:
and with who it match the best in terms of skull physiology ?
 
you say yourself both marsharabs and dravidians are partly descendants of paleo indians which we know are AASIs
so marsharabs were not the first people of mesopotamia, they inherited from a people which were much older than them and we know axxording to bible first mesopotamians were black people
(fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fichier:Table_of_Nations.jpg ) the Nimrod people, Nimrod was a black a koushite with a sumerian name NIM which means high in sumerian and is closed of Nim in dravidian which is linked to something high , nimir meaning arise
When we know the map of ASI/AASI genetic presence qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-8a1e2300d2869577d4ed9ae64e0898d3 show ASI/AASI ( dravidians and australoids) predate marsharabs in irak because they were there since 50000 years old and inhabited irak , iran till india and burmese frontier and were known to be black , so sumerians were blacks , ASI/AASIs , dravidians and australoid folks, this explaining the similarity of sumerian with austric and dravidians language

You even using a book made by a land of goatherders outs you as a crackpot. Considering how antisemitic Black Nationalists/Hoteps are I wouldn't be surprised if you hated the Jews as well.
 
interesting:unsure:
and with who it match the best in terms of skull physiology ?

Danish 80%
Hungarian 75% Swede 75%
Middle East 67%

Like I said in the Natufian thread, they seemed to have a connection to the founder population of SHG. Maybe this is based on interbreeding with LGM survivors or the idea of a Basal Eurasian, or whatever.

Compared to ancient populations Natufians had the highest match with Iberomaurusians in physiological traits.
There where also anthropologist in the last century who connected skulls found in denmark(The Borreby type) to Mechta Afalou skulls, this could be a coincidence, but maybe they are really much similar, according to genetics of skull morphology.
 
Danish 80%
Hungarian 75% Swede 75%
Middle East 67%

Like I said in the Natufian thread, they seemed to have a connection to the founder population of SHG. Maybe this is based on interbreeding with LGM survivors or the idea of a Basal Eurasian, or whatever.

Compared to ancient populations Natufians had the highest match with Iberomaurusians in physiological traits.
There where also anthropologist in the last century who connected skulls found in denmark(The Borreby type) to Mechta Afalou skulls, this could be a coincidence, but maybe they are really much similar, according to genetics of skull morphology.


how do you concluded it
what are the snp's who determine skull physiology ?
and what are the natufian values in each snp ?

maybe it is has a conection to the dzudzuana component in them:unsure:

p.s
it is nteresting to me since many of them were e-z830
although from what i read in anthrogenica most of the chances that they were a dead end linages :unsure:
 
Danish 80%
Hungarian 75% Swede 75%
Middle East 67%

Like I said in the Natufian thread, they seemed to have a connection to the founder population of SHG. Maybe this is based on interbreeding with LGM survivors or the idea of a Basal Eurasian, or whatever.

Compared to ancient populations Natufians had the highest match with Iberomaurusians in physiological traits.
There where also anthropologist in the last century who connected skulls found in denmark(The Borreby type) to Mechta Afalou skulls, this could be a coincidence, but maybe they are really much similar, according to genetics of skull morphology.

Hi Doggerland it's a bit offtopic,but could you please check the phenotype analysis for the BA Aegeans?

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8127963/

HIrisPLex predicted 1 BA Aegean individual to be in the "dark" category, while the other two were predicted to be most likely "dark to black". These 3 individuals are AA on rs1426654 (SLC24A5) but CC and CG (overwhelmingly GG in contemporary Europeans) on rsrs16891982 (SLC45A2). Besides, the two Aegeans that scored "dark to black" carried OCA2, which also contributes to pigmentation.



Is it possible for you to verify how accurate the phenotype analysis, in terms of BA Greeks being very dark skinned, is?
 

This thread has been viewed 57592 times.

Back
Top