6.5 ka Levantine chalcolithic DNA

These snps are highly susceptible to selection. It's the same reason why Horners are so dark skinned despite being sometimes close to 40% West Eurasian, and why SLC24A5 swept to reasonably high levels in the San in the last 2000 years. (They live in a part of Africa that gets less of the sun's rays than people like Nigerians or the Horn, which are closer to the equator.)

I know some Europeans find this hard to accept, but it is what it is.

Are you saying that human gonna develop SLC24A5 only by being away for sun? Without any founder effect?
 
Are you saying that human gonna develop SLC24A5 only by being away for sun? Without any founder effect?

No, I'm not. The San, for example, initially got it from West Eurasian genes that trickled down from the Horn. That's how evolution works: it operates on standing variation. On the other hand, some group first had to get the mutation. My bet is somewhere in the Near East. They sure didn't have it in Western Europe (WHG).

That mutation isn't going to make someone "European" fair, of course. That's clear. Pigmentation is the result of many genes working together. Still, it's a big driver of de-pigmentation. Look at the San compared to Nigerians.
 
No, I'm not. The San, for example, initially got it from West Eurasian genes that trickled down from the Horn. That's how evolution works: it operates on standing variation. On the other hand, some group first had to get the mutation. My bet is somewhere in the Near East. They sure didn't have it in Western Europe (WHG).

That mutation isn't going to make someone "European" fair, of course. That's clear. Pigmentation is the result of many genes working together. Still, it's a big driver of de-pigmentation. Look at the San compared to Nigerians.

But that's what i was saying somehow. How if prehistoric Middle-Easterner seens Natufians have genes for Fair Skin and maybe even Blue Eyes and more. Why in modern times it's not anymore the case? More than just regional selection due of climate, there must have been a demic increase that makes those features disappear. Now Eastern African could have been suffer the same exemple with being at some point very " middle-eastern " and got an increase of sub-saharian gene that make them lose their features, but maybe not the genes themselves. Now we know that prehistoric Iranians were more " dark " than middle-easterners of the same time and for North Africans, we dont really know a part of Iberomaurusians call from Genetiker. But certainly that one of them, or both made Fair Features more scarce than at some point.
 
But that's what i was saying somehow. How if prehistoric Middle-Easterner seens Natufians have genes for Fair Skin and maybe even Blue Eyes and more. Why in modern times it's not anymore the case? More than just regional selection due of climate, there must have been a demic increase that makes those features disappear. Now Eastern African could have been suffer the same exemple with being at some point very " middle-eastern " and got an increase of sub-saharian gene that make them lose their features, but maybe not the genes themselves. Now we know that prehistoric Iranians were more " dark " than middle-easterners of the same time and for North Africans, we dont really know a part of Iberomaurusians call from Genetiker. But certainly that one of them, or both made Fair Features more scarce than at some point.

There's definitely additional North African ancestry in present day Middle Easterners, and Egyptians seem to be the best proxy for now. It's more pronounced in Palestinian Bedouins than in, for example, Saudis or Syrians so it probably came through the Sinai.

I'd guess this has to do with the dispersal of Afro-Asiatic languages, but I'm not sure how big the impact was and whether it made the people less lightly pigmented. Looking at Negev Bedouins they still seem to have a different look than Syrians or settled Palestinians - overall darker and more long-headed/long-faced.
 
There's definitely additional North African ancestry in present day Middle Easterners, and Egyptians seem to be the best proxy for now. It's more pronounced in Palestinian Bedouins than in, for example, Saudis or Syrians so it probably came through the Sinai.

I'd guess this has to do with the dispersal of Afro-Asiatic languages, but I'm not sure how big the impact was and whether it made the people less lightly pigmented. Looking at Negev Bedouins they still seem to have a different look than Syrians or settled Palestinians - overall darker and more long-headed/long-faced.

I can see that a lot of Neguev Bedouins have the same physical traits than Maghrebians, but that a part. I think at the time semitic languages were already in the middle-east ( 3000 BC ), we would not found any additional African ancestry in them, so i'm not sure about the fact that Afro-Asiatic languages came from Africa at this point.
 
Ancient Egyptians also portrayed their earlier dynasty people with blue eyes. Seeing ancient Egyptians were mostly Middle Eastern in origin, its likely the same blue eyed fair skin people migrated from Israel into Egypt:
76e370b143ee7bcb3a08bbc905f182a6.jpg
The ancient Egyptians' ''European'' Dynasties were sometimes made up of ancient Greeks actually or general sea peoples a blue eyed mutation has been recorded around the Black sea I suggest you look that up. All ancient Egyptians in some of those photos?

And yes the ancient Mesopotamian ancient Egyptians were all a similar peoples from the Fertile Cresent they got obliterated during the Iron Age. But I suggest you take ''all the ancients had blue eyes '' to some kind of Nordicist BNP type website, as that's based on falsehood, sorry.

The Indo Europeans had a specific description being blue eyed wasn't one of them
 
Not all the middle-east is or was semetic, one needs to be more precise, apart from african areas, the semetic areas is the arabian peninsula and the levant and the levant became semetic after the Chalcolithic period.
Anatolia, south caucasus and mostly everything north of the zargos mountains was not semetic
proto-semetic ( apart from the horn area of africa ) was only southern arabian peninsula .
.
problem is that the term middle-east covers different lands for different scholars/people
Levant became Semitic after the Iron Age everywhere in the Near East / Middle East became Semitic after the Iron Age.
 
For all the other stuff no, Near Easterners Turks Armenians Levantines whatever you want do not have significant ''North African admixture'' what they have is a significant Red Sea admixture well Levantines have it people of the Caucasus don't as much. Because they are coastal Pre Historic people and also because when the great flood of Sumer happened these people left Anatolia and the Levant and settled along the Red Sea coast which is now modern day ''Red Sea'' of Egypt they were probably most similar to the Hittites racially. I did have an article about the connection to the early Phoenicians and Hittites it must be online, somewhere.
 
EASPECIALLY FOR LENAB. Where did all the light skin, blue eyed blondes in Asia originate????

Thats right, they ORIGINATED FROM THE INDO-EUROPEAN ANDRONOVA CULTURE:

The Indo-Europeans migrated Europe and encountered the Blonde, blue eyed hunter - gatherers in Central Europe. The descendants of the this admixture migrated Asia

Now you know why so many Asians have blonde hair and blue eyes:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blond#Asia

Blonde blue eyed Asians originating from the INDO-EUROPEANS:
afghan10.jpg
 
This bullshit that ancient peoples of the Middle East and Egypt could not possibly have had blue eyes needs to end:

https://www.livescience.com/63396-ancient-israel-immigration-turkey-iran.html

If I red well, the concerned survey speaks of 22 persons, whose 49% would have had blue eyes, spite it's said with some caution - so, yes, at some stage of history, there had been blue eyed people among the Near-Easterners. But we cannot base ourself upon this survey to affirm this percentage was common all over Near East: it would be conter-intuitive. Concerning I-Eans and "blond-blue", caution here again. It seems the regions where super-lightening of pigmentation occurred at respectable level were around Northern Ukraina (someof CWC), Central-North Europe (see GAC & SHG), before further densification of fair pigmentation all around the Eastern Baltic - the link with I-Ean was very tiny, it begun rather at the jonction of eastern Neolithic farmers and north-eastern HG's. It's only later that some I-Ean tribe became dominantly fair pigmented. And please, post adults pictures as examples, not children.
SO I agree, but with reserve.
 
Yamnaya and Middle-East could have been " repigmented " afterwards by migrations. Typically Yamnaya had mostly Caucasian women that could have over the years lower the amount of fair features into the general population. Such case can be confirmed by the fact that Yamnaya_Samara seems not to be fair featured, while Early Samara individuals might have been fair features for some part. Prehistorc Middle-Easterners could have been mostly like Prehistoric Eastern Europeans until they got an Iranian or African input that made them more " dark ". You can see this even today with modern Europeans, that can have desactivated genes for Blue Eyes or Fair Hairs but not have it. Or having pretty dark complexion like almost Olive skin but still have the genes for fair skins.
 
EASPECIALLY FOR LENAB. Where did all the light skin, blue eyed blondes in Asia originate????

Thats right, they ORIGINATED FROM THE INDO-EUROPEAN ANDRONOVA CULTURE:

The Indo-Europeans migrated Europe and encountered the Blonde, blue eyed hunter - gatherers in Central Europe. The descendants of the this admixture migrated Asia

Now you know why so many Asians have blonde hair and blue eyes:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blond#Asia

Blonde blue eyed Asians originating from the INDO-EUROPEANS:
afghan10.jpg

I think the blue eye and red hair slowly happened by a collision of East and west eurasian genes. It can be explained by the genetic fact that two major genes are responsible for blue eye color: HERC2 and OCA2. And also red hair appeared for the first time in ANE AG3.
For a long time, I have quoted russian anthropologist opinions that ancient people from mesolithic to neolithic (even iron age, now modern times of ural people) were intermediate living in the zone of east europ to the altai. Russian anthropologists still don’t know why the ancient people and modern ural people are intermediate. I think it is so simple that they were mixed with east and west gens since ANE age, being segregated and developed independently as a difference race. And their amalgamation could gradually create the blue eye and red hair in the zone from east europe to altai.
Especially red hair genes were found in AG3 to east hunter gatherer. Scythian also had red hairs, and the highest red hair frequency zone is now in Udmurt. Thus, I think such a long time red hair could be existed from altai to east europe of intermediate people before east asian appeared in iron age.

Now it is very important the fact of whether the WSHG had blue eyes and red hair but still no result?. There is a possibility that WSHG would enter Sumer with blue eye gene, altai words and altai wrestling culture ( or maybe recent neolithic Q1b did, becoming an ancestor of Abraham in Ur? ). We have already known that lake baikal pottery in Hottu cave and WSHG entered IVC.
 
@Johen:
to date, I know NO pop with majority of red hairs, the maxi's being in NW Ireland, W Scotland and Udmurt - (surely because among red haired people, a lot have some other problems concerning health and this colour as a whole has not been favoured too much during history, spite the story about Ramses II and his "clan").
I doubt WSHG would have been light pigmented for hair and eyes at a high % -
The light pigmentation is present, not at an exclusive level, among the West Uralic and IE pops : as the features seemingly 'eastasian' increase in the pops of Urals and Siberia, the light pigmentation of eyes/hair decreases. So maybe the partly 'eastasian' or maybe undifferentiated north-eurasian (ANElike) pop knew a mutation concerning hairs, but it doesn't seem this mutation gained much ground in it. I repeat more than a mutation causes red hairs as well as blond hairs and beside this, Udmurt have more 'caucasoid' input than 'eastasian'.
 
@Johen:
to date, I know NO pop with majority of red hairs, the maxi's being in NW Ireland, W Scotland and Udmurt - (surely because among red haired people, a lot have some other problems concerning health and this colour as a whole has not been favoured too much during history, spite the story about Ramses II and his "clan").
I doubt WSHG would have been light pigmented for hair and eyes at a high % -
The light pigmentation is present, not at an exclusive level, among the West Uralic and IE pops : as the features seemingly 'eastasian' increase in the pops of Urals and Siberia, the light pigmentation of eyes/hair decreases. So maybe the partly 'eastasian' or maybe undifferentiated north-eurasian (ANElike) pop knew a mutation concerning hairs, but it doesn't seem this mutation gained much ground in it. I repeat more than a mutation causes red hairs as well as blond hairs and beside this, Udmurt have more 'caucasoid' input than 'eastasian'.

Do we even have a study for Ramses 2 that confirms snp's for red hairs? The guy is dead at 91 years old with red hairs? ( Unlikely ). It shouldn't even be a real thing at this point...
 
Do we even have a study for Ramses 2 that confirms snp's for red hairs? The guy is dead at 91 years old with red hairs? ( Unlikely ). It shouldn't even be a real thing at this point...

Sense at last.
 
What I found in Wiki, whatever the genetic confirmation:
. Professor Ceccaldi determined that: "Hair, astonishingly preserved, showed some complementary data?especially about pigmentation: Ramses II was a ginger haired 'cymnotriche leucoderma'." The description given here refers to a fair-skinned person with wavy ginger hair.[73][74] Subsequent microscopic inspection of the roots of Ramesses II's hair proved that the king's hair originally was red, which suggests that he came from a family of redheads.[75] This has more than just cosmetic significance: in ancient Egypt people with red hair were associated with the deity Set, the slayer of Osiris, and the name of Ramesses II's father, Seti I, means "follower of Seth."[76]

Mummy of Ramesses II


During the examination, scientific analysis revealed battle wounds, old fractures, arthritis, and poor circulation.[citation needed] Ramesses II's arthritis is believed to have made him walk with a hunched back for the last decades of his life.[77] A recent study excluded ankylosing spondylitis as a possible cause.[78] A significant hole in the pharaoh's mandible was detected. Researchers observed "an abscess by his teeth (which) was serious enough to have caused death by infection, although this cannot be determined with certainty".
 
As for his red hair:

Indeed, no old man would have hair that color.

"White at the time of death, and possibly auburn during life, they have been dyed a light red by the spices (henna) used in embalming...the moustache and beard are thin...The hairs are white, like those of the head and eyebrows...the skin is of earthy brown, splotched with black... the face of the mummy gives a fair idea of the face of the living king."[68][69]"

In one sentence it says that: "
Subsequent microscopic inspection of the roots of Ramesses II's hair proved that the king's hair originally was red, which suggests that he came from a family of redheads.[75]"

That is a book to which I can't get access.

It's possible, I suppose, but I'd like to see the examination done again, and I'd like to see some snps.
 

This thread has been viewed 98423 times.

Back
Top