|
Post by shango on Apr 4, 2005 17:26:25 GMT -5
More history:
There has been a long relationship between Ethiopia and India. that is why the dress of Ethiopians and Indians is so similar. Also, the megaliths of South India are strikingly similar to those in East Africa. These peoples have traded back for millenia BY SEA! It could be M1 came from India by way of this ancient trading of products and ideas.
Namaste!
|
|
|
Post by Dienekes on Apr 4, 2005 17:30:15 GMT -5
To All, The Somali have a similar background of African women being impregnated en masse by Arab invaders from across the Red Sea. Many of they people switche their original languages as well. Only 15% of Somali Y-chromosomes are of Eurasian origin, and only part of that belongs to haplogroup J*(xJ1) which is a signature of Arab intrusions.
|
|
|
Post by Soomaal on Apr 5, 2005 0:05:56 GMT -5
Somalis were never invaded by Arabs, there is a difference between being invaded and having an Arab patriarch in your genealogy.
Not all Africans are docile and let their woman get invaded and their men just die out. There is no reason to generalize Somalis have a very rich culture there is no reason to say that we switched our original languages. For example I can tell you all my ancestors all they way to about 1300-1500, they were all Somalis except for the patriarch.
Its pretty funny, that someone who has no knowledge on Somalis, can talk about them endlessly. You don't know the clans, people, culture, movements, history. You read a piece of genetic info and you think your an expert.
1.Somalis speak a Cushitc language, which is part of the Afro-Asiatic language family. The official language of Somalia is Somali not Arabic, Arabic is what I would consider a secondary language and few people are fluent Arabic speakers. Next time don't say stuff you have no idea about, it makes you look stupid.
2. Only 2 clans are descended from Arabs, the rest claim to be pure or are bantu-arab minorities along the riverine regions and coastal areas.
|
|
|
Post by Soomaal on Apr 5, 2005 0:21:55 GMT -5
Just out of curiosity, what true-blue, undisputed Negroid population then do you think/know East Africans most closely cluster to if not the Bantus, Dienekes? The Nilotes? If the Aethiopids were indeed intermediate as you and many others profess, what subrace of Negroid makes up the Somali maternal Negroid admixture, in your opinion? The Nilotids seem to be the closest undisputed Negroid population. Or is perhaps some other kind of generalized Negroid responsible? I'm not as genetically-inclined as most people here so I just want to cover all the possible bases. Forgive me if it seems like a stupid question. Somalis closest relatives are the Oromos and Afar, the Oromo are the closest people to Somalis in my opinion, because my clan descended from an Oromo woman, that and the fact that a some Somalis and Oromo's look identical.
|
|
|
Post by Dienekes on Apr 5, 2005 0:30:21 GMT -5
2. Only 2 clans are descended from Arabs, the rest claim to be pure or are bantu-arab minorities along the riverine regions and coastal areas. How many Somali clans are there?
|
|
|
Post by Soomaal on Apr 5, 2005 0:41:36 GMT -5
How many Somali clans are there? The major ones are Dir, Ishak(Isaaq), Darod, Hawiye and Rahanweyn. Dir is composed of many clans like the Isa and Gadabursi of Djibouti and many others in Ethiopia, Somalia and Kenya. Ishak clans lineage has two branches one branch has an Oromo mother while the other branch has a Amhara/Harari mother, and the father of both branches is an Arab Sheekh patriarch from Hejaz area. The name of the Isaaq patriarch is Ishaq Binu Ahmad. Darods lineage is that of an Arab man and a Dir(Somali) woman. The patriarchs name I believe is an Arab sheekh named Ismail Jabbarti. Hawiye claim to be pure Somalis. Rahanweyn are Somalis, I think that they have some bantu influence, but most of them are just like regular Somalis.
|
|
|
Post by topdog on Apr 5, 2005 2:21:29 GMT -5
This is an example of a red herring. When you can come up with some studies, we'll talk again. This isn't red-herring, its called exploding your erroneous 'East African Caucasoid' term which is just another sly 'Dark Caucasoid' hypothesis. Your 'East African Caucasoid' and Coon's 'Caucasoid Watusi' are one and the same. When you come up with some reliable, *sensible* studies that say East Africans are Caucasoids and not your worthless insight in attributing phenotypes to genes[maternally Negroid, paternally Caucasoid(?), we'll talk again. You're the one running.
|
|
|
Post by topdog on Apr 5, 2005 2:39:22 GMT -5
Of course they didn't, since the Bantu had a high frequency of E3a which is lacking in Ethiopians and Somalis. The Negroid features of these peoples are the result of East African males intermarrying with Negroid women. Nonsense, what happened to the East African women, did East African men abandon them and let them go extinct? This is how we get confusion when people attempt[unsucessfully in this case] to attach phenotypes to genes in order to explain physical characteristics in a population. Pseudo-science!
|
|
|
Post by Dienekes on Apr 5, 2005 3:07:39 GMT -5
Nonsense, what happened to the East African women, did East African men abandon them and let them go extinct? This is how we get confusion when people attempt[unsucessfully in this case] to attach phenotypes to genes in order to explain physical characteristics in a population. Pseudo-science! Things are clear. Western Eurasians belong to macro-haplogroups N and M which are rooted in African L3. However, in Africa there are clades of L other than L3. The fact that Eurasians are derived from L3 mean that the Proto-Eurasian population which left East Africa lacked those other L clades. So, there was once a population in East Africa that had L3-type mtDNA only. This, is not however the situation today where East Africans have the other clades of L as well. Therefore, between the time of the Proto-Eurasians and today, there was a change in the maternal composition of the Proto-Eurasian cradle in East Africa.
|
|
|
Post by shango on Apr 5, 2005 9:57:13 GMT -5
Things are clear. Western Eurasians belong to macro-haplogroups N and M which are rooted in African L3. However, in Africa there are clades of L other than L3. The fact that Eurasians are derived from L3 mean that the Proto-Eurasian population which left East Africa lacked those other L clades. So, there was once a population in East Africa that had L3-type mtDNA only. This, is not however the situation today where East Africans have the other clades of L as well. Therefore, between the time of the Proto-Eurasians and today, there was a change in the maternal composition of the Proto-Eurasian cradle in East Africa. Not necessarily, the population that left East Africa was small, maybe 100 people. Other clades of L1 and L2 could have been in the area and not have left.
|
|
|
Post by SensoUnico on Apr 5, 2005 10:22:12 GMT -5
Haji Ahmad, there is lots of information on Somalia and Somalis available on the internet. You mentioned the Darod and Isaq derived clans. There is also the Ram Nag, Samorone derived clans. It is available for anyone to read. Whether the information is accurate is another issue. The daughter of the great grandson of Ram Nag, his name was Dir Irrir married Darod. Very informative. As are the names for Bantus both pleasant and derogatory such as wagosha, jareer, adoon, habash and ooji.
|
|
|
Post by Valery on Apr 5, 2005 11:22:31 GMT -5
>Not necessarily, the population that left East Africa was small, maybe 100 people. Other clades of L1 and L2 could have been in the area and not have left.
if you assume that the first eurasians left Africa together and at the same time it's more likely that initial population was very small but probably much more numerous than the group of 100 people. Moreover, any lineages different from M and N could be present there and then were lost due to drift. On other hand both contemporary theories (classic "Levantine" and more recent "coastal" introduced by Toomas Kivisild) contradict your assumption since both claim that humans migrated to Eurasia separately and many kyears apart. Thus, were other mt lineages in East Africans these Ls would definitely appear somewhere in Eurasia, otherwise you need some artificial and rediculous assumptions (how ancient people mated or something of that kind - i've just read such sarcastic posts here).
I took a closer look at the "coastal" theory when Dr. Kivisild visited Moscow last year and his arguments convinced me more than "levantine" ones, although the "exodus" problem is very deep for me, i'm working on rather shallow phylogenies and calculations.
|
|
|
Post by topdog on Apr 5, 2005 13:32:08 GMT -5
Things are clear. Western Eurasians belong to macro-haplogroups N and M which are rooted in African L3. However, in Africa there are clades of L other than L3. The fact that Eurasians are derived from L3 mean that the Proto-Eurasian population which left East Africa lacked those other L clades. So, there was once a population in East Africa that had L3-type mtDNA only. This, is not however the situation today where East Africans have the other clades of L as well. Therefore, between the time of the Proto-Eurasians and today, there was a change in the maternal composition of the Proto-Eurasian cradle in East Africa. Its not just *Proto-Eurasian* cradles we're dealing with here, its essentially *Proto-NonAfricans*. Published data indicates that natural selection shaped mtDNA variation in humans, so it appears non-L3 clades became extinct. There is a study that fócuses specifically on this issue because geneticists have been puzzled that only M and N lineages are the only ones found outside of Africa. Its absurd to think of an 'all L3' population that didn't have other L lineages.
|
|
|
Post by Valery on Apr 5, 2005 17:50:14 GMT -5
>Published data indicates that natural selection shaped mtDNA variation in humans, so it appears non-L3 clades became extinct
you've confused cause with effect. It would be better if you describe this in your own words so that at least we'll see whether you understand the meaning of these terms.
Perhaps you repeated the title of Mishmar's paper but the object of that study has nothing to do with differentiation in its own right, this is a random process. The authors found that some changes in ATPs (non-synonymous replacements ie that cause amino-acid changes) can be explained by selection ie mt is affected not only by random mutations but also by selection which is probably adaptive. This wasn't proved before this publication although it was suspected. Were L1s to leave Afriica instead of L3 these clades would also face selection.
|
|
|
Post by Soomaal on Apr 5, 2005 20:23:40 GMT -5
Haji Ahmad, there is lots of information on Somalia and Somalis available on the internet. You mentioned the Darod and Isaq derived clans. There is also the Ram Nag, Samorone derived clans. It is available for anyone to read. Whether the information is accurate is another issue. The daughter of the great grandson of Ram Nag, his name was Dir Irrir married Darod. Very informative. As are the names for Bantus both pleasant and derogatory such as wagosha, jareer, adoon, habash and ooji. I believe the Dir are a bunch of clans that are put together kind of like Rahanweyn, but the Dir are considered more Somali or noble. Ram Nag and Irir Zumali are either pagan genealogies or are propaganda made by politicians to make certain clans bigger. For example some Hawiye believe Isaq and Hawiye are related, the reality is we don't live anywhere near each other, the Isaq live in the North and Northwest regions. Besides I know there was a person named Sheekh Isaaq because he has tomb/shrine in Mayd which is on the coast, his grandson Ismail Arre Saeed Garxajis is buried their also. I heard Darod was buried somewhere in sanaag. Its also a known fact the most of the Somalis use to live in Makhir coast area before they conquered the Oromo's
|
|