Sumerians and Native Americans could be related?

[Diictodon]

Frank Snowden committed an error because melanchroes really mean blacks , it's close to mela which means black, Old Greek: *karümnó- 'black': karümnón = mélan
k[ǟ]lás = kelai̯nó- = kēlḗnē = mélaina
Old Greek: mélās = mélan= mélai̯na = dark , black

so melanchroes (μελάγχροες in greek )= black ...

Read carefully herodotus ( original

and we must know

New Latin Ulotrichi (plural) division of humankind having crisp or woolly hair (from Greek oulotrich-, oulothrix having curly or woolly hair, from oulos curly, woolly + trich-, thrix hair) + English -ous; akin to Greek eilein to roll, eilyein
Version:
[/B]“For the fact is as I soon came to realise myself, and then heard from others later, that the Colchians are obviously Egyptian. When the notion occurred to me, I asked both the Colchians and the Egyptians about it, and found that the Colchians had better recall of the Egyptians than the Egyptians did of them. Some Egyptians said that they thought the Colchians originated with Sesostris’ army, but I myself guessed their Egyptian origin not only because the Colchians are dark–skinned and curly–haired (which does not count for much by itself , because these features are common in others too) but more importantly because Colchians, Egyptians and Ethiopians are the only peoples in the world who practise circumcision and who have always done
[/B][/URL]
[/LIST]
For it is plain to see that Colchians are Egyptians; and this that I say I myself noted before I heard it from others. When I began to think on this matter, I inquired of both peoples; and the Colchians remembered the Egyptians better than the Egyptians remembered the Colchians; the Egyptians said that they held the Colchians to be part of Sesostris' army. I myself guessed it to be so, partly because they are dark-skinned and woolly-haired; though that indeed goes for nothing, seeing that other peoples, too, are such; but my better proof was that the Colchians ]Ethiopians[/URL] are the only nations that and the Syrians of Palestine acknowledge of themselves that they learnt the custom from the Egyptians, and the Syrians of the valleys of the Thermodon and the Parthenius, as well as their neighbours the Macrones, say that they learnt it lately from the Colchians. These are the only nations that circumcise, and it is seen that they do even as the Egyptians. But as to the Egyptians and Ethiopians themselves, I cannot say which nation learnt it from the other; for it is manifestly a very ancient custom. That the others learnt it from intercourse with Egypt I hold to be clearly proved by this — that Phoenicians who hold intercourse with Hellas cease to imitate the Egyptians in this matter and do not circumcise their children.

we can notice herodotus precised what he named colchians were egyptians meaning they were of the same stock and said they were oulotriches which means whooly /curly haired what arabs and berbers are not except those who have african black ancestry as people of Mauritania , some touaregs and arab sudaneses or yemenites ( who have ethiopians genes) and we know most arabs and berbers have long hairs ...
WE ALSO KNOW herodotus said colchians are egyptians because they have wooly hair and are black skinned and are companions of Sesostris which he said is an egyptian who ruled after the ethiopians kings of egypt and even the map of the bible shows there's peoples of Cham the ancestor of blacks in Georgia - abkhazia- adygea region ( it also talks about Nimrod people Nimrod being ancestor of first mesopotamian people the sumerians which call themselves blacked headed people and have veddoid blacks genes genes of the first people and OF arab coasts to india and very high in dravidians and of which the name Nim existing both in sumerian and dravidian has the same sense in both langages of "high"...
Saba in yemen is also mentioned when we know there's black himyarites in yemen vassals of Axoum in ethiopia meaning this map is truthful ...)
even the abkhazians certify there were blacks in Nart epos
. An episode from Nart epic (several thousand years old), which deals in a peculiar manner with the appearance of black people on the East coast of the Black Sea, is interesting in this respect.

“The Narts, all the hundred brothers, once saddled their steeds and as usual started on their way in search of glory. They travelled for many days spending the night where it found them and on the morrow starting on their way again. Thus they travelled for 18 months. Once, at the close of the day, they pitched camp under the shady branches of a large tree, made a fire and stated to cook supper. The smoke from their camp fire rose to the sky, and some people living at a distance of half a day’s ride from the place noticed it. They were black-skinned people. They were so black, that even a brave horseman would get frightened on seeing them.

“The black-skinned people understood that the Narts would do them no harm. So they arranged a great feast. The Narts spent a whole month as the black-skinned people’s guests’ and when they decided to return home, the natives presented them with a large number of cattle, and one hundred of the best black-skinned horsemen went together with them to visit the famous Narts and see how they lived. The black-skinned people liked the Apani mountains very much, and when the time of parting of the black-skinned guests returned to their home, while the other decided to stay in these
[/URL]

This map is so incorrect, I don't were to begin.
Firstly, Lowland East Cushites have no AASI ancestry that I can think off.
Secondly, aside from recent South Asian immigration, unmixed Yemeni/South Arabs don't have no where near that amount of AASI ancestry. Veddiod South Arabia is meme created by Athroforums that is based of Charlton Coons writings on Arabia. Real science AKA genetics, have shown that Maha/scoqortis to be mostly Natufian derived or Arabian Hunter Gather like with past 5,000 years of in-situ isolation causing increased selection for darker skin tone that may give off a pseudo-Weddiod look, with ultra dark skin, straight hair Caucasiod phenotype. Coupled this with actual Iran_N/CHG ancestry in them that could manifest phenotypically in some Maha individuals, such has hooked downturned noses and its no wonder that some Anthropological studies lumped them South Asians due that "Desi" look

 

[Doggerland]

Early Fertile Crescent Neolithic (Possible Sumerian ancestors), based on all available SNPs:

 

[adian808]

Well although we don't have Sumerian samples, it's safe to assume that Sumerians had considerable Iran_N admixture and Iran_N has a lot of ANE ancestry so we can can say that both Sumerians and Native Americans have common ANE/Yana/ANS roots in Eurasia. How ever direct linguistic relationship between Sumerians and Native Americans seems very remote. Also Turkic ancestry is associated with Hong-Kong millet farmers or Devil Gates ancestry which was mostly ENA. Tbh Mongolic, Tungustic and Turkic don't seem be ANE derived language groups, if anything, Proto IE and Uralic plus Yenesians seem to be language's derived from more ANE rich populations that may have ties in the wind swept tundra of Ice age Siberia, but that is stretching things to far back me thinks ������

FAKE
sumerians are veddoids

, the sumerian langage , the dravidian langage, the ugrian langages, the turkic langages , the mongolic langages the korean langages , the altaic langages , the sino caucasian langages , the native american langages are all rooted in black veddoid ancient langage:

According to the genetic map of veddoids since 50000 years ago of historian youtuver Masaman ( that is reliable ) https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-8a1e2300d2869577d4ed9ae64e0898d3 sumerians are veddoids the first people of middle east and india 50000 years ago ( see yourself the irak region of Sumer and Qatar and BAHREIN peopled first except to no one by ubaidians ancestors of sumerians were peopled except to no one by veddoids very long time before arabs and semites come According to sumerians their langage was the only one of asia and the world before the dispersal of langages in the enmerkar epos meaning their langage was the same the first people of asia ie the first blacks that out africa to go asia , precisely the veddoids that peopled first coasts of arabia , sumer region , elam , balochistan , india , pakistan , nepal east and south afghanistan and bangladesh and west burma ...
According to sumerians too their lmangage spread from Sumer to east ( towards East asia and central asia ) , to west ( Amorrites in palestine ) and to north in caucasus and in many caucasian langages there are same words sumerian:
Dainana in georgian is similar Inanna in sumerian and both are sub goddesses of fertility
An means sky in sumerian and chechen and ansar = god of the sky in chechen and An = god of the sky in sumerian and Antzva is god of the sky of abkhazians
sag = people in sumerian , chehcen and abkhaz , cwa sag meaning each people in abkhazian

Notice also north caucasian langages are related to chinese and yeniseian who are related in turn to native american
and number one cognate in sumerian , dravidian , north caucasian ,yeniseian and native american langages and austrinesian langages when we know austronesian paople were mongoloid people of sino tibetan stock who melt with australoids/veddoids
and yeniseian a sino caucasian langage is mother of native american langages and knowing according to sumerians sumerian langage spread to caucasus and knowing dravidians have a lot of veddoids genes the same way sumerians who have their whole genes as proved veddoid map of Masaman :
usum= first and foremost in sumerian , Proto-Sino-Caucasian:*HVcǝ̆́ closed to Proto-Yenisseian:*χu-saSino-Caucasian etymology: Sino-Caucasian etymology

Meaning: one
Ket: qūś (attr., inanim.), pred. quśǝm⁶
Yug: xus (attr., inanim.), pred. xusɛ⁶
Kottish: hūča; Ass. (Бол.) xanči-xit "one", huča (Кл.) "one"
Arin: khuzej (Ф., Срсл.) "one"; kuisa (Стр.) id.; qúsej (М., Сл., Кл., Ф.) id.; kusa in kusamančau (М., Сл., Срсл., Кл., Ф.) "nine"; (Лоск.) kus-ket "one"
Pumpokol: xúta (Сл., Срсл., Кл.) "one"
closed to as = first , one in native american when as /esda= one in sumerian and as = one , alone in tamil as in sumerian and ezh/ese = to rise in tamil and asit = one in Brahui dravidian and as = one in austronesian

also ala ,ila ,ela , ilam ,elam ,eelam , alam = land in tamil dravidian , ilim= land in sumerian , elamti = land in elamite, ala = land in ugrian korela /carelian , guatemaltec langage , alam = land in guatemaltec langage , el = land in turkic langages and ugrian Mari langage, eel = land in dravidian ...

 

[adian808]

Diictodon you ' re wrong

This map is so incorrect, I don't were to begin.
Firstly, Lowland East Cushites have no AASI ancestry that I can think off.
Secondly, aside from recent South Asian immigration, unmixed Yemeni/South Arabs don't have no where near that amount of AASI ancestry. Veddiod South Arabia is meme created by Athroforums that is based of Charlton Coons writings on Arabia. Real science AKA genetics, have shown that Maha/scoqortis to be mostly Natufian derived or Arabian Hunter Gather like with past 5,000 years of in-situ isolation causing increased selection for darker skin tone that may give off a pseudo-Weddiod look, with ultra dark skin, straight hair Caucasiod phenotype. Coupled this with actual Iran_N/CHG ancestry in them that could manifest phenotypically in some Maha individuals, such has hooked downturned noses and its no wonder that some Anthropological studies lumped them South Asians due that "Desi" look

First i never said Cushites has AASI ancestry but some may have AASI ancestry because AASI spread from east africa to egypt and sudan and from somalia in another wave in south arabia , socotra , coastal arabia to south irak sumer region to elam to balouchistan , to india to bangladesh and nepal and east and south afghanistan and tadjikistan and burma as we can see in this map of Masaman

and in human phenotype map http://humanphenotypes.net/basic/Veddid.html

Veddoids also have black african origin from african L3 mother of Mhaplogroup of veddoids , dravidians , australoids and aborigines
sECOND Veddoids have not been invented , as you can see Masaman talked about them and human phenotype too
they come from africa 50000 years ago and spread to middle east and india and from there to burma

Not only Masaman noticed it but even yoshua tribe said Mahri people have a strong amount of veddoid genes and have genetic illness of black people and veddoids and dravidians : sickle cell anemia
https://joshuaproject.net/people_groups/10380/y

Another one of Masaman

 

[adian808]

Early Fertile Crescent Neolithic (Possible Sumerian ancestors), based on all available SNPs:

Fake
sumerians are blacks , they are M haplogroup as the veddoids their ancestors and the dravidians !!!!!!

 

[lynxbythetv]

the schnoz's on those sumerian busts dont resemble southern indians.

J1 noses, thats the sumerians

 

[Palermo Trapani]

@adian808

μελάγχροες should be translated as 'dark' because it is a rather vague term and the translator imho should choose an equally vague term. Today we use the cognate word μελαγχρινός -η with a primary meaning brunet/ bunette.
Then we take into account the context, which shows that Colchians according to Herodotus were at least darker than the Greeks, they had curlier hair than the Greeks (who did not have straight hair either), had probably similar complexion to Egyptians and had some customs of likely East African origin. So I think a movement from (North?) East Africa is likely but I don't know what the scale and the timeframe was.

Thanks for that input on the meaning of the Greek word. So Prof. Frank Snowden made a mistake, I don't think so. It is true the Egyptians had skin tones darker than the Greeks, that was acknowledged by Greek writers early on. I cited Prof. Frank Snowden's Article on Herodotus and the Colchians. He also published, in my view, the most comprehensive review of all the extant Greek and Roman writers and their respective commentaries on what would be described in modern nomenclature as Black Africans in his work "Blacks in Antiquity" published by Harvard University Press in 1970. In this work Prof. Snowden examines all the texts regarding "Aethiopes" (i.e. Black Africans or more accurately population ethnic groups in sub-Saharan Africa) and compares those text to other ancient peoples they encountered.

On page 2 of his book (Chapter 1: Textual evidence, the Physical Characteristics of Ethiopians) he writes that the color of the Ethiopians skin was uppermost in the Greek and Romans minds when describing Ethiopians they encountered. Ethiopians therefore were classified by the Greeks and Romans first starting with skin tone and were the yardstick those writers measured other peoples with darker skin tones. Prof. Snowden notes that Indians were dark or black in skin tone but not all of them to the same extent as Ethiopians, citing Herodotus he mentions some Indians resembled Ethiopians in skin tone. Alexander the Great, upon reaching India reported that Indians were darker than all of mankind save Ethiopians, but Alexander the Great provided more context. Indians south the Ganges river were described as browned/darkened by the sun, but not as much as Ethiopians, those Indians in the North of the Ganges resembled Egyptians in terms of skin tone.

And Snowden does not that Greek writers did notice that among Ethiopians they encountered, there was a variation in skin tone citing Ptolemy who noted the peoples who inhabited the areas around the City of Meroe were deeply black and pure Ethiopians. The Romans, more so than the Greeks, developed a variety of ways to express degrees of skin tone among Ethiopians. Roman writers used terms equivalent to intense darkness in describing some Ethiopians they encountered. On page 4, he goes on to state that ancient Greek and Roman writers not only looked at variations in color among all the ancient peoples they encountered, but what the changes were when a child had a parent who was Ethiopian and European using the term "discolor" or "decolor" which were terms also often used to describe peoples in India and the Roman province of Mauritania. So children of unions between Europeans and Ethiopians were neither black or white, but decolores which was equivalent to the modern term mulatto (more common in 1970 when Prof. Snowden published his work).

Snowden (p.5) after going through all the words used by ancient Greeks and Romans to describe Ethiopians relative to skin term, which was the feature most frequently used to describe Ethiopians, he notes as early as Xenophanes (578 to 470 BC), other phenotypes regarding Ethiopians were noticed, first of which was the shape of the nose. Agatharchides he noted stated that Ethiopians differ in their external appearances from Greeks. Petronious, a 1st century Roman writer said a Roman or lets say European trying to pass for an Ethiopian would not do so just painting his skin dark, it would require a total change in facial and hair phenotypes (lips and hair being 2 cited).

On page 6, Snowden once again cites ancient writers who compared Ethiopians to Indians. Ethiopians were the darkest peoples the ancient Greeks encountered and Southern Indians resembled Ethiopians in terms of skin tone, but not in nose and hair phenotypes. This difference, Snowden writes, was documented as far back as Herodotus. It should be noted, as Snowden writes, that the ancient Greeks and Romans had no such terms or category similar to USA Jim Crow laws "Sociological Black citizens" and described multi-racial peoples as just that.

For example, the Greek-Roman writer Philostratus (170AD-250AD) noted that as one went up the Nile, the populations in terms of skin tone got darker. Those inhabiting the boundary between Egypt and Ethiopia (Nubia) at the 1st Cataract were bi-racial, darker than Egyptians but lighter than Ethiopians further up the Nile. In this context, the recent paper by Sirak et al 2021 "Social stratification without genetic differentiation at the site of Kulubnarti in Christian Period Nubia" documents what Philostratus wrote 350-400 years earlier. That is, Nubians living near the 2nd cataract of the Nile harbored on average 43% ancestry from a sub-Saharan African population, likely Nilotic related, and 57% West Eurasian, with its ultimate source being from Bronze Age Levant.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-021-27356-8

So, there is lots of quoting of ancient Greek writers without any contextualization other than when certain people see a term that means darker, they automatically assume it means a population genetically similar to ethnic groups from the interior of Africa (sub-Saharan Africa). That is 100% false. It is clear that way way back, the ancient Greeks described both Ethiopians (sub-Saharan Africans) and Indians from the South of India (South-Asians) as having dark skin tones. However, it was also noted that the Indians had nose and hair phenotypes that were totally different than Ethiopians living south of the 1st cataract of the Nile.

So when I read bloggers, be they afro-centrist, nordic-centrist, or any-type of centrist, try and insert racial or ethnic backgrounds into ancient peoples to fit a political/social agenda, I 100% dismiss it, because most of these people do not read all of the textual evidence. Furthermore, as more and more ancient DNA is being analyzed, we (us today) can see who the ancients were and we can go back and look at ancient Writers and see who actually got things write and who got things wrong (i.e. Herodotus Etruscan theory has been proven wrong by recent DNA evidence).

 

[Doggerland]

Fake
sumerians are blacks , they are M haplogroup as the veddoids their ancestors and the dravidians !!!!!!

Nope, they are Aryans and related to Iranians and Indians. Dravidians and Northern Indians are not a different race, it is a Myth.
The Aryans are the descendants of an Aboriginal Australian/Sahulid population or something related to them, but not the same. You can find them as EFCN and EFCN2 in the DNA tree:

https://i.ibb.co/RTQqWDR/Treewith-Apereduced.png

This is how the Eastern Fertile Crescent people would may look as living persons:

https://iv1.lisimg.com/image/5359002/558full-fiona-singh.jpg

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/3f/e9/39/3fe939dbb10e52ae16b3c9554df7e5ca.png

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/8c/4e/5b/8c4e5bc1307d68a81e43186234677c57.png

https://indianmalemodels.files.word...male_models_nazmul_dhaka_bangladesh.jpg?w=683

And sorry, the reconstructions are based on the DNA, I don’t have any intention to fake anything. Their alleles also indicate that they had straight hair, not afro hair.

This is where Eastern Fertile Crescent Ancestry Components are mostly found today (Blue):

https://i.pinimg.com/736x/b1/3b/61/b13b6141c5a7192cb7320d2f46633fdb--crescents-maps.jpg

Iran, Pakistan, Hindukush, India...

Here you can see ancient Africans I have reconstructed and ancient People who mostly resemble Africans in many features:

 

[Mmiikkii]

The Aryans are the descendants of an Aboriginal Australian/Sahulid population or something related to them, but not the same. You can find them as EFCN and EFCN2 in the DNA tree:

https://i.ibb.co/RTQqWDR/Treewith-Apereduced.png

Interesting Doggerland, I also think this exact same thing.

I even made a post on it
https://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/42626-We-come-from-Australia

 

[Tamakore]

Interesting Doggerland, I also think this exact same thing.
I even made a post on it
https://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/42626-We-come-from-Australia

If Aryans come from Australia/Sahul, why don't they have the high levels of Denisovan admixture (up to 6%) that Sahulids have?

 

[adian808]

If Aryans come from Australia/Sahul, why don't they have the high levels of Denisovan admixture (up to 6%) that Sahulids have?

Australian aborigines are not denisovans , they just meet some denisovans in asia and mixed with them , Denisovan genes dont' exceed 2 per cent
australian aborigines were primarily Mhaplogroup as dravidians and veddoids and sumerians ( veddoids) coming from L3 of Africa
i bet aborigines reach australia from africa through india and mix q lil bit with denisovans while ancestors of aryans migrate directly from africa to palestine to central asia and become light skinned

 

[adian808]

Nope, they are Aryans and related to Iranians and Indians. Dravidians and Northern Indians are not a different race, it is a Myth.
The Aryans are the descendants of an Aboriginal Australian/Sahulid population or something related to them, but not the same. You can find them as EFCN and EFCN2 in the DNA tree:

https://i.ibb.co/RTQqWDR/Treewith-Apereduced.png

This is how the Eastern Fertile Crescent people would may look as living persons:

https://iv1.lisimg.com/image/5359002/558full-fiona-singh.jpg

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/3f/e9/39/3fe939dbb10e52ae16b3c9554df7e5ca.png

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/8c/4e/5b/8c4e5bc1307d68a81e43186234677c57.png

https://indianmalemodels.files.word...male_models_nazmul_dhaka_bangladesh.jpg?w=683

And sorry, the reconstructions are based on the DNA, I don’t have any intention to fake anything. Their alleles also indicate that they had straight hair, not afro hair.

This is where Eastern Fertile Crescent Ancestry Components are mostly found today (Blue):

https://i.pinimg.com/736x/b1/3b/61/b13b6141c5a7192cb7320d2f46633fdb--crescents-maps.jpg

Iran, Pakistan, Hindukush, India...

Here you can see ancient Africans I have reconstructed and ancient People who mostly resemble Africans in many features:

Dravidians and sumerians are not aryans , they are M haplogroup people as veddoids ( sumerian acestors)
as show the genetic map of veddoid presence

veddoids were present in Sumer region 50000 years ago and so are ancestors of ubaidians and so of sumerians
Notice ubaidians were on coasts of Qatar as sais wikipedia on Qatar while veddoids were there since 50000 years ago the same as in Sumer
Also read Genesis of India of Bernard Sergent , it says with probe that dravidians and veddoids come fromafrica and have the sameculture them

 

[adian808]

Frank Snowden committed an error because melanchroes really mean blacks , it's close to mela which means black, Old Greek: *karümnó- 'black': karümnón = mélan
k[ǟ]lás = kelai̯nó- = kēlḗnē = mélaina
Old Greek: mélās = mélan= mélai̯na = dark , black

so melanchroes (μελάγχροες in greek )= black ...

Read carefully herodotus ( original versions):

μελάγχροες as we saw is black

Oulotriches is curly / wooly

and we must know this :

History and Etymology for ulotrichous (synonym of greek oulotriches )

New Latin Ulotrichi (plural) division of humankind having crisp or woolly hair (from Greek oulotrich-, oulothrix having curly or woolly hair, from oulos curly, woolly + trich-, thrix hair) + English -ous; akin to Greek eilein to roll, eilyein to roll, wrap.



Ulotrichous Definition & Meaning - Merriam-Webster


http://www.sacred-texts.com version:
“For the fact is as I soon came to realise myself, and then heard from others later, that the Colchians are obviously Egyptian. When the notion occurred to me, I asked both the Colchians and the Egyptians about it, and found that the Colchians had better recall of the Egyptians than the Egyptians did of them. Some Egyptians said that they thought the Colchians originated with Sesostris’ army, but I myself guessed their Egyptian origin not only because the Colchians are dark–skinned and curly–haired (which does not count for much by itself , because these features are common in others too) but more importantly because Colchians, Egyptians and Ethiopians are the only peoples in the world who practise circumcision and who have always done so.

​

1. https://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Herodotus/2b*.html version:
   

For it is plain to see that Colchians are Egyptians; and this that I say I myself noted before I heard it from others. When I began to think on this matter, I inquired of both peoples; and the Colchians remembered the Egyptians better than the Egyptians remembered the Colchians; the Egyptians said that they held the Colchians to be part of Sesostris' army. I myself guessed it to be so, partly because they are dark-skinned and woolly-haired; though that indeed goes for nothing, seeing that other peoples, too, are such; but my better proof was that the Colchians and Egyptians and Ethiopians are the only nations that have from the first practised circumcision. The Phoenicians and the Syrians of Palestine acknowledge of themselves that they learnt the custom from the Egyptians, and the Syrians of the valleys of the Thermodon and the Parthenius, as well as their neighbours the Macrones, say that they learnt it lately from the Colchians. These are the only nations that circumcise, and it is seen that they do even as the Egyptians. But as to the Egyptians and Ethiopians themselves, I cannot say which nation learnt it from the other; for it is manifestly a very ancient custom. That the others learnt it from intercourse with Egypt I hold to be clearly proved by this — that Phoenicians who hold intercourse with Hellas cease to imitate the Egyptians in this matter and do not circumcise their children.

we can notice herodotus precised what he named colchians were egyptians meaning they were of the same stock and said they were oulotriches which means whooly /curly haired what arabs and berbers are not except those who have african black ancestry as people of Mauritania , some touaregs and arab sudaneses or yemenites ( who have ethiopians genes) and we know most arabs and berbers have long hairs ...
WE ALSO KNOW herodotus said colchians are egyptians because they have wooly hair and are black skinned and are companions of Sesostris which he said is an egyptian who ruled after the ethiopians kings of egypt and even the map of the bible shows there's peoples of Cham the ancestor of blacks in Georgia - abkhazia- adygea region ( it also talks about Nimrod people Nimrod being ancestor of first mesopotamian people the sumerians which call themselves blacked headed people and have veddoid blacks genes genes of the first people of india

and OF arab coasts to india and very high in dravidians and of which the name Nim existing both in sumerian and dravidian has the same sense in both langages of "high"...
Saba in yemen is also mentioned when we know there's black himyarites in yemen vassals of Axoum in ethiopia meaning this map is truthful ...)
even the abkhazians certify there were blacks in Nart epos
. An episode from Nart epic (several thousand years old), which deals in a peculiar manner with the appearance of black people on the East coast of the Black Sea, is interesting in this respect.

“The Narts, all the hundred brothers, once saddled their steeds and as usual started on their way in search of glory. They travelled for many days spending the night where it found them and on the morrow starting on their way again. Thus they travelled for 18 months. Once, at the close of the day, they pitched camp under the shady branches of a large tree, made a fire and stated to cook supper. The smoke from their camp fire rose to the sky, and some people living at a distance of half a day’s ride from the place noticed it. They were black-skinned people. They were so black, that even a brave horseman would get frightened on seeing them.

“The black-skinned people understood that the Narts would do them no harm. So they arranged a great feast. The Narts spent a whole month as the black-skinned people’s guests’ and when they decided to return home, the natives presented them with a large number of cattle, and one hundred of the best black-skinned horsemen went together with them to visit the famous Narts and see how they lived. The black-skinned people liked the Apani mountains very much, and when the time of parting of the black-skinned guests returned to their home, while the other decided to stay in these places forever.”
https://abkhazworld.com/aw/publications/archives/971-when-did-africans-get-to-soviet-union-1973

Herodotus also said what he named Colchians were ancient egyptians because being the only one with ancient egyptians and ethiopians to practise circumcision besides being people of Sesostris which was an egyptian king after the ethiopians reign who migrate to Caucasus and being oulotriches meaning wooly/curly haired and black skinned what is common in black africa where circumcision is practised since immemorial times when it was not present in asia and europe except in asia in sumerians ( black veddoids) and dravidians people before aryans come in india and was still practised by some dravidians community and that untouchables that are mostly black skinned and called sudras which also mean blacks are said in india to be old practitionners of too bloody sacrifices and circumcison hence their situation in india because aryans hate too bloodied sacrifices and circumcision because it make blood to flow when we know humans originates in africa and were all black skinned before 8000 years before Jesus Christ meaning blacks were the first people and were the first to do circumcision when we know ancient egyptians said they come from Pount in North SOMALIA next to ethiopia http://www.histoire-secrete.fr/265475300 and diodore of sicily said the same way ancient egypt was an ethiopian colony led by Osiris , and told ancient egyptians told himself culture and culture of religion and royalty of egypt come from ethiopians and knowing somalis , ethiopians , darfouris and ancient egyptians have same EV32 haplogroup https://www.flickr.com/photos/anbessa2011/6284194929, we can said the colchians named by herodotus were blacks and the ancient egyptians were blacks
and we know ancient egyptians use the same brown color typical to blacks to describe themselves and pountites who have the same clothes ancient egyptians


ancient egyptians girls dancing

Pountites walking ...

[FONT=&quot]GENETICALLY THEY COME FROM THE HORN OF AFRICA, and according to Dnatribes from East Africa [/FONT][FONT=&quot]DNA Tribes Digest for January 1, 2012: Last of the Amarna Pharaohs: King Tut and His Relatives
In 1993, craniometric analysis of fossils of predynastic Egyptians from the Nagada period showed that they were closely related to other Afro-Asian populations in the Horn of Africa . The analysis of the fossils of Egyptians of Upper Egypt of the predynastic period shows that they are more related to the current Somalis than to the samples of Egyptians of Lower Egypt of the last dynasties 173 .
In December 2012,Zahi Hawass and his colleagues, revealed that Ramesses III and his patrilineal lineage belonged to the Y - chromosome haplogroup E1b1a 174 , 175 gene typical of West Africa!!!!!!!!

[/FONT]

 

[adian808]

Thanks for that input on the meaning of the Greek word. So Prof. Frank Snowden made a mistake, I don't think so. It is true the Egyptians had skin tones darker than the Greeks, that was acknowledged by Greek writers early on. I cited Prof. Frank Snowden's Article on Herodotus and the Colchians. He also published, in my view, the most comprehensive review of all the extant Greek and Roman writers and their respective commentaries on what would be described in modern nomenclature as Black Africans in his work "Blacks in Antiquity" published by Harvard University Press in 1970. In this work Prof. Snowden examines all the texts regarding "Aethiopes" (i.e. Black Africans or more accurately population ethnic groups in sub-Saharan Africa) and compares those text to other ancient peoples they encountered.

On page 2 of his book (Chapter 1: Textual evidence, the Physical Characteristics of Ethiopians) he writes that the color of the Ethiopians skin was uppermost in the Greek and Romans minds when describing Ethiopians they encountered. Ethiopians therefore were classified by the Greeks and Romans first starting with skin tone and were the yardstick those writers measured other peoples with darker skin tones. Prof. Snowden notes that Indians were dark or black in skin tone but not all of them to the same extent as Ethiopians, citing Herodotus he mentions some Indians resembled Ethiopians in skin tone. Alexander the Great, upon reaching India reported that Indians were darker than all of mankind save Ethiopians, but Alexander the Great provided more context. Indians south the Ganges river were described as browned/darkened by the sun, but not as much as Ethiopians, those Indians in the North of the Ganges resembled Egyptians in terms of skin tone.

And Snowden does not that Greek writers did notice that among Ethiopians they encountered, there was a variation in skin tone citing Ptolemy who noted the peoples who inhabited the areas around the City of Meroe were deeply black and pure Ethiopians. The Romans, more so than the Greeks, developed a variety of ways to express degrees of skin tone among Ethiopians. Roman writers used terms equivalent to intense darkness in describing some Ethiopians they encountered. On page 4, he goes on to state that ancient Greek and Roman writers not only looked at variations in color among all the ancient peoples they encountered, but what the changes were when a child had a parent who was Ethiopian and European using the term "discolor" or "decolor" which were terms also often used to describe peoples in India and the Roman province of Mauritania. So children of unions between Europeans and Ethiopians were neither black or white, but decolores which was equivalent to the modern term mulatto (more common in 1970 when Prof. Snowden published his work).

Snowden (p.5) after going through all the words used by ancient Greeks and Romans to describe Ethiopians relative to skin term, which was the feature most frequently used to describe Ethiopians, he notes as early as Xenophanes (578 to 470 BC), other phenotypes regarding Ethiopians were noticed, first of which was the shape of the nose. Agatharchides he noted stated that Ethiopians differ in their external appearances from Greeks. Petronious, a 1st century Roman writer said a Roman or lets say European trying to pass for an Ethiopian would not do so just painting his skin dark, it would require a total change in facial and hair phenotypes (lips and hair being 2 cited).

On page 6, Snowden once again cites ancient writers who compared Ethiopians to Indians. Ethiopians were the darkest peoples the ancient Greeks encountered and Southern Indians resembled Ethiopians in terms of skin tone, but not in nose and hair phenotypes. This difference, Snowden writes, was documented as far back as Herodotus. It should be noted, as Snowden writes, that the ancient Greeks and Romans had no such terms or category similar to USA Jim Crow laws "Sociological Black citizens" and described multi-racial peoples as just that.

For example, the Greek-Roman writer Philostratus (170AD-250AD) noted that as one went up the Nile, the populations in terms of skin tone got darker. Those inhabiting the boundary between Egypt and Ethiopia (Nubia) at the 1st Cataract were bi-racial, darker than Egyptians but lighter than Ethiopians further up the Nile. In this context, the recent paper by Sirak et al 2021 "Social stratification without genetic differentiation at the site of Kulubnarti in Christian Period Nubia" documents what Philostratus wrote 350-400 years earlier. That is, Nubians living near the 2nd cataract of the Nile harbored on average 43% ancestry from a sub-Saharan African population, likely Nilotic related, and 57% West Eurasian, with its ultimate source being from Bronze Age Levant.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-021-27356-8

So, there is lots of quoting of ancient Greek writers without any contextualization other than when certain people see a term that means darker, they automatically assume it means a population genetically similar to ethnic groups from the interior of Africa (sub-Saharan Africa). That is 100% false. It is clear that way way back, the ancient Greeks described both Ethiopians (sub-Saharan Africans) and Indians from the South of India (South-Asians) as having dark skin tones. However, it was also noted that the Indians had nose and hair phenotypes that were totally different than Ethiopians living south of the 1st cataract of the Nile.

So when I read bloggers, be they afro-centrist, nordic-centrist, or any-type of centrist, try and insert racial or ethnic backgrounds into ancient peoples to fit a political/social agenda, I 100% dismiss it, because most of these people do not read all of the textual evidence. Furthermore, as more and more ancient DNA is being analyzed, we (us today) can see who the ancients were and we can go back and look at ancient Writers and see who actually got things write and who got things wrong (i.e. Herodotus Etruscan theory has been proven wrong by recent DNA evidence).

Nature study is fake as proved Entropie of Passion histoire.net http://www.passion-histoire.net/viewtopic.php?f=40&t=40967&start=45
This is what we discover when reading the study. https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms15694 the samples can be grouped into three time periods: Pre-Ptolemaic, Ptolemaic and Roman Period. This study is therefore based on three periods : Pre-Ptolemaic, Ptolemaic and Roman. So we have nothing on: the Old, the Middle, and the New Kingdom. That is to say, the essential. Notwithstanding that it is based on a sample of upper caste, and no skeleton of the base population. I checked they don't explain anywhere why they selected a noble caste.
These are samples that were collected in a German museum. From this, the scientists deduced that since these mummies, of noble caste, of which only 4 predate Ptolemaic Egypt, had a DNA that was more near eastern than sub-Saharan, the present-day Egyptians who are closer to sub-Saharan than genetically close Easterners (which is also stipulated by the scientists of the study), are not the Egyptians of the time.

For once, it's an amazing tea towel.


the ancient Egyptians have the same dose of melanin than other black Africans and that this dose does not correspond to that of Europeans and Arabs and Berbers confirmed by genetics moreover a genetic analysis of the population of Gurna in Egypt shows that the inhabitants were grafted onto a population substrate native to East Africa dating back to prehistoric and predynastic and ancient Egyptian pharaonic times https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/14748828/
Notice also DNA Tribes Digest for January 1, 2012: Last of the Amarna Pharaohs: King Tut and His Relatives
and Ramses family is black : [FONT=&quot]In December 2012,[/FONT]Zahi Hawass[FONT=&quot] and his colleagues, revealed that [/FONT]Ramesses III and his [FONT=&quot][/FONT]patrilineal[FONT=&quot] lineage belonged to the Y - chromosome [/FONT]haplogroup [FONT=&quot]E1b1a 174 , 175 gene typical of West Africa!!!!!!!!!!![/FONT][FONT=&quot]




[/FONT]

 

[Doggerland]

Some data from the region, K12:

Distance to:	SwatValley1
7.84314988	Kalash_Pakistan
13.99498839	Punjabi_Indian
21.06713792	Iranian:Bandari
21.69682696	IranMeso
21.79689657	IndusValley_Merged
23.55949490	IndusValley5
26.09811296	Caspian_Sea_Mesolithic
29.24679299	Pre-Pottery_Neolithic_Iran_(n=6)
30.44835299	Iranian:Khorasan

Distance to:	SwatValley2
8.25333872	Punjabi_Indian
10.69682663	Kalash_Pakistan
17.91285572	IndusValley_Merged
21.59539071	IndusValley5
26.18482385	Iranian:Bandari
28.94173112	IranMeso
29.51716789	Zlaty_Kun
29.81278585	South_Indian
33.34142468	IndusValley1

Distance to:	Aboriginal_Austraian
8.35758937	Andaman
11.47565684	Leang_Panninge
11.50321694	Ancient_Papuan
18.55692324	Ust_Ishim
19.54793339	Tianyuan
22.04543263	IndusValley2
23.47319748	IndusValley3
24.02264557	Zlaty_Kun
31.75024094	Salkhit_Paleolithic_Mongolia

Distance to:	Ancient_Papuan
11.50321694	Aboriginal_Austraian
14.23359758	Andaman
18.81612341	Leang_Panninge
23.19949784	Tianyuan
23.93714269	Ust_Ishim
26.13933817	IndusValley3
29.50790572	Zlaty_Kun
29.98896630	IndusValley2
31.23704371	Mamanwa_Negrito

Indus Valley Civilisazion was a cultural melting pod of the South Asian region and may had contact to Mesopotamia, but not Sub Sahara Africa.
Indus Valley also contained people with relation to Proto-Eurasians:

Distance to:	IndusValley1
12.14990535	South_Indian
23.21789396	IndusValley2
24.80412869	IndusValley_Merged
29.67233560	IndusValley5
31.70123026	Punjabi_Indian

Distance to:	IndusValley2
21.52073883	Leang_Panninge
22.04543263	Aboriginal_Austraian
22.34083257	Andaman
23.21789396	IndusValley1
24.67227797	Ust_Ishim
24.80176405	IndusValley3
26.88729812	Zlaty_Kun
29.98896630	Ancient_Papuan
30.70707085	IndusValley_Merged

Distance to:	IndusValley3
17.96891761	Ust_Ishim
19.28751669	Zlaty_Kun
21.13834667	Leang_Panninge
23.47319748	Aboriginal_Austraian
24.18431516	IndusValley_Merged
24.80176405	IndusValley2
26.13933817	Ancient_Papuan
27.84287880	Andaman
30.83075088	IndusValley5

Distance to:	IndusValley4
31.22027226	Morocco_Jews
31.58165923	Syrian:C
31.98121480	Palestinian
32.77759296	Syrian:A
32.85546530	Sephardic_Jews

Distance to:	IndusValley5
10.06909629	IndusValley_Merged
23.56614733	Punjabi_Indian
28.52507669	Kalash_Pakistan
29.67233560	IndusValley1
29.88711930	South_Indian
30.83075088	IndusValley3

Distance to:	IndusValley_Merged
10.06909629	IndusValley5
20.10920187	Punjabi_Indian
24.18431516	IndusValley3
24.80412869	IndusValley1
25.53704760	South_Indian
25.89051564	Zlaty_Kun
26.42991676	Kalash_Pakistan
29.81944835	Ust_Ishim
30.70707085	IndusValley2

Egyptian Mummies merged:

Distance to:	Egyptian_Mummies
9.14064002	Chalcolithic_Israel
9.18698536	Palestine
9.29635412	Bedouin
9.77836898	Chalcolithic_Israel
10.42395318	Early_Bronze_Age_Jordan_(n=3)
12.76712575	Jordanians
13.05808179	Bedouin
13.39613377	Egyptans
13.99954999	Samaritians
14.96782215	Pre-Pottery_Neolithic_Levant_(n=15)
14.98009012	Canaanite
15.77556021	Natufian
15.84578177	Palestinian
17.05501393	Kuwait:1
17.32613921	Syrian:C
17.46629612	Lebanese
17.52702485	Early-Middle_Bronze_Age_North_Levant_(n=9)
18.43809914	Yemenese
20.36916297	Middle-Late_Bronze_Age_North_Levant_(n=24)
20.44841070	Syrian:A
20.63223207	Druze
20.63891712	Saudi
21.41452544	Yemen_Jews
23.10484365	Chalcolithic_North_Levant_(n=6)
23.58570966	Cypriot

Sumerian related:

Distance to:	Northern_Fertile_Crescent
7.88582272	Iranian:Iranians
8.20091458	Iranian:Mazandaran
9.53227150	Iranian
9.53227150	Iranian:Iranian
11.36681134	Iranian:Fars
11.49885212	Kurd:KAZ
13.55920352	Kurd:Sorani
14.49220135	Kurd:Kurmanji
15.97223842	Iranian:Khorasan
16.41538608	Azerbaijani:Azerbaijani_Iran
17.85382592	Iranian:Bandari
18.31608037	Azerbaijani:Azerbaijani
18.49108434	Azerbaijani:Azerbaijani_Turkey
18.94005808	Kura-Araxes_culture_(n=8)
19.14587945	Iraqi_Baghdad
20.44740326	Azeri_Jew
20.48147456	Epipaleolithic_Mesolithic_Caucasus_(CHG)_(n=2)
20.68029980	Azerbaijani:Azerbaijani_Dagestan
20.95621388	CHG_Satsurblia
21.34110588	CHG_Kotias
21.51510167	Iraqi_Jew
21.59995833	Iranian_Jews
21.71453661	Kurdish_Jew
22.27757168	Azerbaijan_Jews
22.35297072	Chalcolithic_Azerbaijan_(n=4)

Distance to:	Early_Eastern_Fertile_Crescent_Neolithic
6.27530876	Pre-Pottery_Neolithic_Iran_(n=6)
7.22832622	Caspian_Sea_Mesolithic
18.42912369	Neolithic_Iran
28.07399687	IranMeso
35.40605174	Iranian:Bandari

Africans and Archaic Hominid related:

Distance to:	West_Bantu
13.83203890	Pygmy
16.21763855	Denisova_Altai
19.41080884	Neanderthal_Altai
22.52694165	Chagyrskaya7_Neanderthal
28.08530043	Shum_Laka
28.91966286	Denisova_Neanderthal_Child
37.83820820	Khomani_San

Distance to:	Pygmy
3.19604443	Denisova_Altai
7.78120813	Neanderthal_Altai
11.50672847	Chagyrskaya7_Neanderthal
13.83203890	West_Bantu
14.26668146	Shum_Laka
18.35898145	Denisova_Neanderthal_Child
24.00738845	Khomani_San
33.78139429	Ancient_Zambia

Distance to:	Khomani_San
9.79510592	Shum_Laka
10.03355869	Ancient_Zambia
19.37566257	Denisova_Neanderthal_Child
19.66642062	Chagyrskaya7_Neanderthal
20.46050097	Neanderthal_Altai
21.88292485	Denisova_Altai
24.00738845	Pygmy
24.55231354	Tanzania_Neolithic
26.12210558	Malawi_Mesolithic
30.48411390	Toubou

Distance to:	Saharawi
7.42140148	Moroccan:Moroccans
8.67842728	Algerian
9.97305369	Moroccan:Moroccan
12.95813644	Guanches
13.93697959	Maghrebi
35.55286908	Epipaleolithic_Levant_(Natufians)_(n=6)

Ethiopian, 4500 years old, would fall into the 5th dynasty of Egypt:

Distance to:	Mota_Ethiopia
8.38065033	Tanzania_Neolithic
11.35961267	Malawi_Mesolithic
22.82426998	Ancient_Zambia
27.81763469	Toubou
32.51996617	Khomani_San
42.14902015	Shum_Laka
42.32397311	Kenia_Bronze_Age
46.53006447	Denisova_Neanderthal_Child
49.94087805	Chagyrskaya7_Neanderthal
51.88808052	Neanderthal_Altai
54.06267844	Denisova_Altai
56.39458041	Pygmy
62.10444187	Vestonice14
65.82852041	Cioclovina
67.52470659	Zlaty_Kun
68.38746303	Ust_Ishim
70.18345532	West_Bantu
70.88203722	Egyptans 
71.69688905	Salkhit_Paleolithic_Mongolia
71.70447127	Maghrebi
71.70914865	Saharawi
71.77855320	BerryAuBac
71.92348226	Yemenese
72.82066740	Kostenki12
73.37536644	Yana_Paleolithic

No relation to Egyptian Mummies or Modern Egyptians.


There is no significant Sub Saharan Ancestry in South Asians of the discussed era. African Ancestry is related to archaic hominids of Eurasia.
There where no "Blacks" in South Asia at this time to current evidence, because the last peopel with Sub Saharan ancestry (Denisovans, Neanderthals) had been already extinct.
What was present is Proto-Eurasian ancestry like it is found in Ust Ishim or Zlaty Kun.


Something about Denisovans, Neanderthals and their alleged uniqueness in the popular science media:


The "Denisovan DNA" or "Neanderthal DNA" and its percentage that is published in the media, is related to rare allele variants, that are not present in most populations and gathered special scientific significance. It is not related to the whole DNA similarity.
No human being has only 5% DNA similar to Neanderthals or Denisovans.
But: The most of Denisova and Neandetrhal DNA is related and similar to Sub Saharan Africans, not other populations. This is because, those populations split very early from each other and did not changed so much over time.
For example, you can compare the similarity of alleles in consumer and researcher DNA files:


Me and Denisova:


>> Total equal genotypes (including NoCalls): 346773 (49,029%)


Han Chinese and Denisova:


>> Total equal genotypes (including NoCalls): 303605 (45,242%)


Pygmy and Denisova:


>> Total equal genotypes (including NoCalls): 536331 (66,768%)


San and Denisovan:


>> Total equal genotypes (including NoCalls): 595630 (64,37%)


Papuan and Denisova:


>> Total equal genotypes (including NoCalls): 579504 (63,748%)


Neanderthal and Denisova:


>> Total equal genotypes (including NoCalls): 760541 (85,829%)


So if a media article or DNA test says, that you only share 5% DNA with a Denisovan, it is a misinterpretation of data. These statements are related to rare allele variants that are only found in this populations and are of special interest. Those variants dont say something about whole allele similarity or whole ancestry.

 

[traveller]

Doggerland, can you compare to the genotypes of the chimpanzee?

 

[Doggerland]

Doggerland, can you compare to the genotypes of the chimpanzee?

Han Chinese and Chimpanzee

>> Total equal genotypes (including NoCalls): 297919 (44,457%)
>>>> Equal genotypes (not including NoCalls): 297919 (44,457%)

Pygmy and Chimpanzee

>> Total equal genotypes (including NoCalls): 532086 (65,737%)
>>>> Equal genotypes (not including NoCalls): 532086 (65,737%)

San and Chimpanzee:

>> Total equal genotypes (including NoCalls): 589007 (63,202%)
>>>> Equal genotypes (not including NoCalls): 589007 (63,202%)

Papuan and Chimpanzee:

>> Total equal genotypes (including NoCalls): 575865 (62,817%)
>>>> Equal genotypes (not including NoCalls): 575865 (62,817%)

Neanderthal and Chimpanzee:

>> Total equal genotypes (including NoCalls): 742984 (80,119%)
>>>> Equal genotypes (not including NoCalls): 742984 (80,119%)

Denisovan and Chimpanzee:

>> Total equal genotypes (including NoCalls): 754613 (81,404%)
>>>> Equal genotypes (not including NoCalls): 754613 (81,404%)


What I should mention is, that there are not much significant differences in autosomal DNA test that can be found in chimpanzee and archaic hominids, when in comes to the available samples.
The differences known are different numbers of chromosomes and things like repeats in specific regions for the brain development and many other things related to physiology. There are many differences, also different retrovirus insertions.
But those are changes, that are not related to single alleles, so they dont appear in this % rating of DNA tests.
It is not possible to differentiate an ape from a Sub Saharan African human or Archaic hominid without focussing on chromosome count and repeats of DNA in specific regions.
For example, some years ago two SNPs had been identified that may be responsible for the difference in head shape of Neanderthals and Humans: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960982218314702
But those SNPs are not tested in any ancient sample available from a human.
Maybe humans like Salkhit or Ust Ishim had a neanderthal-like head shape, we dont know. Also this raises the question, if Neanderthal fossils are really of a different species than early humans. This question can only be answered in the future when more samples are available.

Chimp in K12b:

Distance to:    Chimpanzee
1.41223228    Gorilla
4.49563121    Denisova_Altai
4.54178379    Neanderthal_Altai
5.73703756    Orang_Utan
6.68963377    Chagyrskaya7_Neanderthal
7.28052196    Pygmy
7.80988476    Gibbon
7.99388516    Shum_Laka
10.28317072    Baboon
11.09776104    Rhesus_Monkey
12.68893219    Denisova_Neanderthal_Child
17.59471227    Khomani_San
20.68478426    West_Bantu
24.50100814    Spider_Monkey
27.14598681    Ancient_Zambia
31.96281746    Tarsier
32.60286030    Vaalkrans_Man
41.70900023    Toubou
41.88715794    Tanzania_Neolithic
42.19908648    Malawi_Mesolithic
49.62859559    Mota_Ethiopia
77.78799329    Zlaty_Kun
78.03284180    IndusValley3
78.71670979    BerryAuBac
79.10890026    Brillenhöhle

 

[adian808]

Some data from the region, K12:

Distance to:    SwatValley1
7.84314988    Kalash_Pakistan
13.99498839    Punjabi_Indian
21.06713792    Iranian:Bandari
21.69682696    IranMeso
21.79689657    IndusValley_Merged
23.55949490    IndusValley5
26.09811296    Caspian_Sea_Mesolithic
29.24679299    Pre-Pottery_Neolithic_Iran_(n=6)
30.44835299    Iranian:Khorasan

Distance to:    SwatValley2
8.25333872    Punjabi_Indian
10.69682663    Kalash_Pakistan
17.91285572    IndusValley_Merged
21.59539071    IndusValley5
26.18482385    Iranian:Bandari
28.94173112    IranMeso
29.51716789    Zlaty_Kun
29.81278585    South_Indian
33.34142468    IndusValley1

Distance to:    Aboriginal_Austraian
8.35758937    Andaman
11.47565684    Leang_Panninge
11.50321694    Ancient_Papuan
18.55692324    Ust_Ishim
19.54793339    Tianyuan
22.04543263    IndusValley2
23.47319748    IndusValley3
24.02264557    Zlaty_Kun
31.75024094    Salkhit_Paleolithic_Mongolia

Distance to:    Ancient_Papuan
11.50321694    Aboriginal_Austraian
14.23359758    Andaman
18.81612341    Leang_Panninge
23.19949784    Tianyuan
23.93714269    Ust_Ishim
26.13933817    IndusValley3
29.50790572    Zlaty_Kun
29.98896630    IndusValley2
31.23704371    Mamanwa_Negrito

Indus Valley Civilisazion was a cultural melting pod of the South Asian region and may had contact to Mesopotamia, but not Sub Sahara Africa.
Indus Valley also contained people with relation to Proto-Eurasians:

Distance to:    IndusValley1
12.14990535    South_Indian
23.21789396    IndusValley2
24.80412869    IndusValley_Merged
29.67233560    IndusValley5
31.70123026    Punjabi_Indian

Distance to:    IndusValley2
21.52073883    Leang_Panninge
22.04543263    Aboriginal_Austraian
22.34083257    Andaman
23.21789396    IndusValley1
24.67227797    Ust_Ishim
24.80176405    IndusValley3
26.88729812    Zlaty_Kun
29.98896630    Ancient_Papuan
30.70707085    IndusValley_Merged

Distance to:    IndusValley3
17.96891761    Ust_Ishim
19.28751669    Zlaty_Kun
21.13834667    Leang_Panninge
23.47319748    Aboriginal_Austraian
24.18431516    IndusValley_Merged
24.80176405    IndusValley2
26.13933817    Ancient_Papuan
27.84287880    Andaman
30.83075088    IndusValley5

Distance to:    IndusValley4
31.22027226    Morocco_Jews
31.58165923    Syrian:C
31.98121480    Palestinian
32.77759296    Syrian:A
32.85546530    Sephardic_Jews

Distance to:    IndusValley5
10.06909629    IndusValley_Merged
23.56614733    Punjabi_Indian
28.52507669    Kalash_Pakistan
29.67233560    IndusValley1
29.88711930    South_Indian
30.83075088    IndusValley3

Distance to:    IndusValley_Merged
10.06909629    IndusValley5
20.10920187    Punjabi_Indian
24.18431516    IndusValley3
24.80412869    IndusValley1
25.53704760    South_Indian
25.89051564    Zlaty_Kun
26.42991676    Kalash_Pakistan
29.81944835    Ust_Ishim
30.70707085    IndusValley2

Egyptian Mummies merged:

Distance to:    Egyptian_Mummies
9.14064002    Chalcolithic_Israel
9.18698536    Palestine
9.29635412    Bedouin
9.77836898    Chalcolithic_Israel
10.42395318    Early_Bronze_Age_Jordan_(n=3)
12.76712575    Jordanians
13.05808179    Bedouin
13.39613377    Egyptans
13.99954999    Samaritians
14.96782215    Pre-Pottery_Neolithic_Levant_(n=15)
14.98009012    Canaanite
15.77556021    Natufian
15.84578177    Palestinian
17.05501393    Kuwait:1
17.32613921    Syrian:C
17.46629612    Lebanese
17.52702485    Early-Middle_Bronze_Age_North_Levant_(n=9)
18.43809914    Yemenese
20.36916297    Middle-Late_Bronze_Age_North_Levant_(n=24)
20.44841070    Syrian:A
20.63223207    Druze
20.63891712    Saudi
21.41452544    Yemen_Jews
23.10484365    Chalcolithic_North_Levant_(n=6)
23.58570966    Cypriot

Sumerian related:

Distance to:    Northern_Fertile_Crescent
7.88582272    Iranian:Iranians
8.20091458    Iranian:Mazandaran
9.53227150    Iranian
9.53227150    Iranian:Iranian
11.36681134    Iranian:Fars
11.49885212    Kurd:KAZ
13.55920352    Kurd:Sorani
14.49220135    Kurd:Kurmanji
15.97223842    Iranian:Khorasan
16.41538608    Azerbaijani:Azerbaijani_Iran
17.85382592    Iranian:Bandari
18.31608037    Azerbaijani:Azerbaijani
18.49108434    Azerbaijani:Azerbaijani_Turkey
18.94005808    Kura-Araxes_culture_(n=8)
19.14587945    Iraqi_Baghdad
20.44740326    Azeri_Jew
20.48147456    Epipaleolithic_Mesolithic_Caucasus_(CHG)_(n=2)
20.68029980    Azerbaijani:Azerbaijani_Dagestan
20.95621388    CHG_Satsurblia
21.34110588    CHG_Kotias
21.51510167    Iraqi_Jew
21.59995833    Iranian_Jews
21.71453661    Kurdish_Jew
22.27757168    Azerbaijan_Jews
22.35297072    Chalcolithic_Azerbaijan_(n=4)

Distance to:    Early_Eastern_Fertile_Crescent_Neolithic
6.27530876    Pre-Pottery_Neolithic_Iran_(n=6)
7.22832622    Caspian_Sea_Mesolithic
18.42912369    Neolithic_Iran
28.07399687    IranMeso
35.40605174    Iranian:Bandari

Africans and Archaic Hominid related:

Distance to:    West_Bantu
13.83203890    Pygmy
16.21763855    Denisova_Altai
19.41080884    Neanderthal_Altai
22.52694165    Chagyrskaya7_Neanderthal
28.08530043    Shum_Laka
28.91966286    Denisova_Neanderthal_Child
37.83820820    Khomani_San

Distance to:    Pygmy
3.19604443    Denisova_Altai
7.78120813    Neanderthal_Altai
11.50672847    Chagyrskaya7_Neanderthal
13.83203890    West_Bantu
14.26668146    Shum_Laka
18.35898145    Denisova_Neanderthal_Child
24.00738845    Khomani_San
33.78139429    Ancient_Zambia

Distance to:    Khomani_San
9.79510592    Shum_Laka
10.03355869    Ancient_Zambia
19.37566257    Denisova_Neanderthal_Child
19.66642062    Chagyrskaya7_Neanderthal
20.46050097    Neanderthal_Altai
21.88292485    Denisova_Altai
24.00738845    Pygmy
24.55231354    Tanzania_Neolithic
26.12210558    Malawi_Mesolithic
30.48411390    Toubou

Distance to:    Saharawi
7.42140148    Moroccan:Moroccans
8.67842728    Algerian
9.97305369    Moroccan:Moroccan
12.95813644    Guanches
13.93697959    Maghrebi
35.55286908    Epipaleolithic_Levant_(Natufians)_(n=6)

Ethiopian, 4500 years old, would fall into the 5th dynasty of Egypt:

Distance to:    Mota_Ethiopia
8.38065033    Tanzania_Neolithic
11.35961267    Malawi_Mesolithic
22.82426998    Ancient_Zambia
27.81763469    Toubou
32.51996617    Khomani_San
42.14902015    Shum_Laka
42.32397311    Kenia_Bronze_Age
46.53006447    Denisova_Neanderthal_Child
49.94087805    Chagyrskaya7_Neanderthal
51.88808052    Neanderthal_Altai
54.06267844    Denisova_Altai
56.39458041    Pygmy
62.10444187    Vestonice14
65.82852041    Cioclovina
67.52470659    Zlaty_Kun
68.38746303    Ust_Ishim
70.18345532    West_Bantu
70.88203722    Egyptans 
71.69688905    Salkhit_Paleolithic_Mongolia
71.70447127    Maghrebi
71.70914865    Saharawi
71.77855320    BerryAuBac
71.92348226    Yemenese
72.82066740    Kostenki12
73.37536644    Yana_Paleolithic

No relation to Egyptian Mummies or Modern Egyptians.


There is no significant Sub Saharan Ancestry in South Asians of the discussed era. African Ancestry is related to archaic hominids of Eurasia.
There where no "Blacks" in South Asia at this time to current evidence, because the last peopel with Sub Saharan ancestry (Denisovans, Neanderthals) had been already extinct.
What was present is Proto-Eurasian ancestry like it is found in Ust Ishim or Zlaty Kun.


Something about Denisovans, Neanderthals and their alleged uniqueness in the popular science media:


The "Denisovan DNA" or "Neanderthal DNA" and its percentage that is published in the media, is related to rare allele variants, that are not present in most populations and gathered special scientific significance. It is not related to the whole DNA similarity.
No human being has only 5% DNA similar to Neanderthals or Denisovans.
But: The most of Denisova and Neandetrhal DNA is related and similar to Sub Saharan Africans, not other populations. This is because, those populations split very early from each other and did not changed so much over time.
For example, you can compare the similarity of alleles in consumer and researcher DNA files:


Me and Denisova:


>> Total equal genotypes (including NoCalls): 346773 (49,029%)


Han Chinese and Denisova:


>> Total equal genotypes (including NoCalls): 303605 (45,242%)


Pygmy and Denisova:


>> Total equal genotypes (including NoCalls): 536331 (66,768%)


San and Denisovan:


>> Total equal genotypes (including NoCalls): 595630 (64,37%)


Papuan and Denisova:


>> Total equal genotypes (including NoCalls): 579504 (63,748%)


Neanderthal and Denisova:


>> Total equal genotypes (including NoCalls): 760541 (85,829%)


So if a media article or DNA test says, that you only share 5% DNA with a Denisovan, it is a misinterpretation of data. These statements are related to rare allele variants that are only found in this populations and are of special interest. Those variants dont say something about whole allele similarity or whole ancestry.

you committed a huge error !
veddoids and dravidians come from M haplogroup coming from african L3 and as Bernard Sergent of french CNRS said veddoids and dravidians have african origin
sumerians themselves are veddoids you can see it in the map of genetical presence of veddoids since 50000 years ago of popular youtuber Masaman
https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-8a1e2300d2869577d4ed9ae64e0898d3-pjlq
https://i.ytimg.com/vi/slTy8MvLQ4U/maxresdefault.jpg

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/14748828/shows that ancient people of egypt was black ( analysis of people genes of Gurna an ancient city of ancient egypt today filled mainly by arabs )
Notice also DNA Tribes Digest for January 1, 2012: Last of the Amarna Pharaohs: King Tut and His Relatives shows Tuthankhamon , Akhenaton and Tiyi have east africans genes
and Ramses family is black : In December 2012,Zahi Hawass and his colleagues, revealed that Ramesses III and his patrilineal lineage belonged to the Y - chromosome haplogroup E1b1a who is typically west african
Besides of this ancient egyptians depicted themselves as brown skinned the same way puntites ancestors of somalis who are said to be ancestors of ancient egyptians according to themselves and in 1993, craniometric analysis of predynastic Egyptian fossils from the Nagada period showed that they were closely related to other Afro-Asiatic populations from the Horn of Africa. Analysis of fossils of Upper Egyptians from the predynastic period shows that they are more related to present-day Somalis than to samples of Lower Egyptians from later dynasties (C. Loring Brace, David P. Tracer, Lucia Allen Yaroch, John Robb, Kari Brandt, A. Russell Nelson, Clines and Clusters Versus "Race": A Test in Ancient Egypt and the Case of a Death on the Nile « By the use of the discriminant function procedure, we reinforce the conclusions drawn from an examination of our dendrograms. The Predynastic sample from Upper Egypt differs less from the Somalis to the south than do the Late Dynastic people from Lower Egypt. » [archive] even wikipedia says it https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/ %C3%89gypte_antique#cite_note-173 )

Are you saying Masaman and Zahi hawas and all those links are liars ?
notice also australoid who are M haplogroup come from african L3 haplogroup and you dodgerland said yourself bantu is similar to melanesian genes to 70 per cent !!!!!!!!!!!!
and you know australoids ( aborigines , melanesians) and veddoids who come from M haplogroup from african L3 have same color so called black africans ( brown skinned to graphite black skinned)

 

[adian808]

Some other In 1996, Lovell and Prowse reported the presence of individuals buried at Naqada in what they interpreted to be elite, high-status tombs, showing them to be an endogamous ruling or elite segment who were significantly different from individuals buried in two other, apparently nonelite cemeteries, and more closely related morphologically to populations in Northern Nubia than to neighbouring populations at Badari and Qena in southern Egypt. Specifically, the authors stated that the Naqada samples were "more similar to the Lower Nubian protodynastic sample than they are to the geographically more proximate Egyptian samples" in Qena and Badari
In 1999, Lovell summarised the findings of modern skeletal studies which had determined that "in general, the inhabitants of Upper Egypt and Nubia had the greatest biological affinity to people of the Sahara and more southerly areas" but exhibited local variation in an African context
In 2018, Godde assessed population relationships in the Nile Valley by comparing crania from 18 Egyptian and Nubian groups, spanning from Lower Egypt to Lower Nubia across 7,400 years. Overall, the results showed that the Mesolithic Nubian sample had a greater similarity with Naqada Egyptians. Similarly, Lower Nubian and Upper Egyptian samples clustered together.

In 2018, Godde assessed population relationships in the Nile Valley by comparing crania from 18 Egyptian and Nubian groups, spanning from Lower Egypt to Lower Nubia across 7,400 years. Overall, the results showed that the Mesolithic Nubian sample had a greater similarity with Naqada Egyptians. Similarly, Lower Nubian and Upper Egyptian samples clustered together. However, the Lower Egyptian samples formed a homogeneous unit, and there was a north-south gradient in the data set.^{[URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naqada_culture#cite_note-22"][22]}[/URL]
In 2020, Godde analysed a series of crania, including two Egyptian (predynastic Badarian and Nagada series), a series of A-Group Nubians and a Bronze Age series from Lachish, Palestine. The two pre-dynastic series had strongest affinities, followed by closeness between the Nagada and the Nubian series. Further, the Nubian A-Group plotted nearer to the Egyptians and the Lachish sample placed more closely to Naqada than Badari. According to Godde the spatial-temporal model applied to the pattern of biological distances explains the more distant relationship of Badari to Lachish than Naqada to Lachish as gene flow will cause populations to become more similar over time. Overall, both Egyptian samples were more similar to the Nubian series than to the Lachish series.^{[URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naqada_culture#cite_note-23"][23]} [/URL]

 

[MOESAN]

you committed a huge error !
veddoids and dravidians come from M haplogroup coming from african L3 and as Bernard Sergent of french CNRS said veddoids and dravidians have african origin
sumerians themselves are veddoids you can see it in the map of genetical presence of veddoids since 50000 years ago of popular youtuber Masaman
https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-8a1e2300d2869577d4ed9ae64e0898d3-pjlq
https://i.ytimg.com/vi/slTy8MvLQ4U/maxresdefault.jpg

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/14748828/shows that ancient people of egypt was black ( analysis of people genes of Gurna an ancient city of ancient egypt today filled mainly by arabs )

Veddoids and Dravidians have African origins, just like every Human! Sure they seem closer by the fact they evolved less as a whole than other Eurasians. Less evolved concerning their allover auDNA doesn't mean they are by force less developped in intelligence... But it doesn't mean that they come recently from your tenacious "black" Africa. Other Eurasians are brothers or cousins of these Veddoids, just with more mutations compared to or common ancestors. Don't wring poor B. Sergent's words please.
Concerning Sumerians, I hope your map is not covering a period of 5000 years, what would suppress any value to it! I suppose it concerns today pop's... And Sumerians of old times were not inhabiting only the most southern part of Mesopotamia.
And don't forget there was a gradient concerning types in ancient Egypt; Southern Egyptians were not exactly what were Northern Egyptians, concerning the basic pop. And we cannot put too much confidence into the pictures of ancient times which surely had some stereotypic bias. Also it would not be bad to abandon the word 'black' which doesn't signify a lot in itself.