It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Migration back into Africa

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 14 2016 @ 05:23 PM
link   
Apologies if this has been posted, I did only check in this forum.

As we all are told, our species migrated out of Africa many moons ago. However recent genetic analysis of the southern African Khoisan tribes revealed that they contain western Eurasian genes. The author of this paper proposed the question and used this evidence as their conclusion.

This migration back into Africa was approximately 3000 years ago, and infact may not be the only time. These genes reveal segments in their DNA with European and Asain origins. However I am unsure if this could be very old DNA, I am no biologist. Regardless, this tribe was previously thought to be purely African ancestry but of the 32 people who were tested every single person had these segments. It is conclusive to me that there must have been some kind of European/Near Eastern migration back into the deep south.

Source

Now any thoughts to why there would be a migration so far south? Were they sea faring or was it land migration? Also is this linked to the collapse of the Bronze Age in anyway?
So many new questions!



Stay frosty ATS
edit on 14-5-2016 by Sparta because: onemore




posted on May, 14 2016 @ 05:34 PM
link   
The Bantu migration South began around 1000BCE,and they mixed with the Khoisan, perhaps they passed on the Asian and Eurasian genes that they had picked up in the northeast
en.wikipedia.org...



posted on May, 14 2016 @ 05:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sparta
Apologies if this has been posted, I did only check in this forum.

As we all are told, our species migrated out of Africa many moons ago. However recent genetic analysis of the southern African Khoisan tribes revealed that they contain western Eurasian genes. The author of this paper proposed the question and used this evidence as their conclusion.

This migration back into Africa was approximately 3000 years ago, and infact may not be the only time. These genes reveal segments in their DNA with European and Asain origins. However I am unsure if this could be very old DNA, I am no biologist. Regardless, this tribe was previously thought to be purely African ancestry but of the 32 people who were tested every single person had these segments. It is conclusive to me that there must have been some kind of European/Near Eastern migration back into the deep south.

Source

Now any thoughts to why there would be a migration so far south? Were they sea faring or was it land migration? Also is this linked to the collapse of the Bronze Age in anyway?
So many new questions!



Stay frosty ATS


People have been banging other civilizations for all of history..



posted on May, 14 2016 @ 05:43 PM
link   
a reply to: Marduk

An interesting idea. However these researchers are getting dates by comparing the mutation rate and how far it has come. Giving them a date of 2700 - 3300 years ago.


In particular, we also find evidence for two admixture events in the history of Kenyan, Tanzanian, and Ethiopian populations, the earlier of which involved populations related to west Eurasians and which we date to ∼2,700–3,300 y ago.



posted on May, 14 2016 @ 05:48 PM
link   
Could have been due of white slavery .. there are a lot of study about this



Raids into the north were launched especially from Novgorod, which was well connected to the Crimea and, from there on, to the Caspian Sea and the slave markets of Central Asia. Raids were done by private warlords and princely troops, and they extended all the way to the coasts of the Gulf of Bothnia and Lapland.

Read more at: phys.org...

Link

Also
Link



posted on May, 14 2016 @ 06:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sparta
a reply to: Marduk

An interesting idea. However these researchers are getting dates by comparing the mutation rate and how far it has come. Giving them a date of 2700 - 3300 years ago.


1000BCE is 3016 years ago, I'll let you do the rest of the math


originally posted by: dollukka
Could have been due of white slavery .. there are a lot of study about this



Isn't that medieval ?

We are talking about dates in the BCE


edit on 14-5-2016 by Marduk because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 14 2016 @ 06:06 PM
link   
a reply to: Marduk

Haha brutal, my fault for not reading properly, thought you wrote 1000 years ago!



posted on May, 15 2016 @ 06:57 AM
link   
a reply to: Sparta

Not only migration can be responsible but also slave trade, the eastern african kingdom's were fabulously wealthy and despite later annihilation by the Portuguese they were often quite ancient, perhaps they even built upon earlier empires all of which are today most often overlooked or erroneously thought to have been founded by the Islamic settlers when in fact gold and gemstone trade from these now lost coastal city's stem's probably right back to the bronze age.

Of course with wealth come new appetites and slavery was one of those appetites with exotic slaves being most prized, a golden haired european would for instance have fetched quite a sum of money and so too would an east asian slave.

Long before the Barbary slave trade which predated the Atlantic slave trade and was intimately linked to the Islamic nation's, indeed long before islam there were great slave trading empire's.

Before the rise of rome for example the Carthaginian empire and of course you had Egypt, Kush and many other's that would have served as both customers and facilitators in the slave network's that then criss crossed the old world.

It is likely that a river of slaves such as for instance much prized blond woman and boy's would have been passed along these routes via Egypt, Kush and into east africa then down these lost city states as far as central eastern and south eastern africa as gems and gold flowed in the opposite direction.

So is this really proof of migration or is this essentially the same thing, forced migration.

Just an interesting article, not as far back but still,
www.africaresource.com...

Of course to throw a fly in the ointment there were of course tribal migrations back and forth due to ice age's going right back to the hunter gatherer cultures, there are also many despite it not being a politically correct subject to broach whom point out evidence of strong european ethnic influence in north africa and the lighter skinned races there having strong semitic and european mixed ancestry blended with there african ancestry and there are also some surprising find's among the genetic signatures of the Pharaoh's of ancient egypt many of whom may have been very light skinned.

edit on 15-5-2016 by LABTECH767 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 15 2016 @ 07:10 AM
link   
I'm willing to bet that Humanity have been back and forth like the proverbial YoYo...mostly due to climate shifts, the end of the ice age (extreme Northern flooding) and other natural calamities forced the migrations back to and then after the dust settles, back out again.

I wouldn't be surprised if they found genetic markers that showed 10,000 BCE - 12,000 BCE...when the Ice age is thought to have come to an abrupt conclusion, after the Nrothern hemisphere was bombarded by a series of space borne objects, comets and meteors have been theorised to have peppered the North, and there is evidence worldwide to support the theory.

The result would have been calamity, and would have driven an exodus from the Northern regions, back Southwards.



posted on May, 15 2016 @ 09:41 AM
link   
How about a modern day migration back to Africa.....100 Million African people ,highly educated fiscally aware and repatriated would change the future of Africa forever......just well supported consistant geographical relocation or influx of the newest generation back to Mother Africa could build Africa into a world power within 50-100 years .



posted on May, 15 2016 @ 11:58 AM
link   
a reply to: MysterX


I wouldn't be surprised if they found genetic markers that showed 10,000 BCE - 12,000 BCE...when the Ice age is thought to have come to an abrupt conclusion, after the Nrothern hemisphere was bombarded by a series of space borne objects, comets and meteors have been theorised to have peppered the North, and there is evidence worldwide to support the theory.

The result would have been calamity, and would have driven an exodus from the Northern regions, back Southwards.


That is precisely what happened at the onset of the Younger Dryas. In Europe people retreated southward to spain. In North Africa people moved into new areas and came in conflict with existing groups over resources, as was detailed in this thread;A Younger Dryas War On The Nile.
It wasn't so much people moving just from north to south, which was the case in europe and asia, the abrupt change in climate just put people on the move in general, as they gtried to adapt their life style to a new world, one that was very different from the one that their immediate ancestors lived in.
In the new world the change caused the Clovis people to move out of their ancestral home lands of the southern and eastern US, to end up in california and move both north and south into mexico and as far north as washington.
In South America it caused people whom had been living at Monte Verde, in Chile, to start moving north into north america, to found the north american tool complexes, Mesa, Sluiceway, Haskett and Agate Basin.
And although the return of glacial conditions were severe it was the aridity, following the event, that really put the crunch on people. Even in regions that remained remained temperate,it severely changed rainfall patterns, and in some regions it stopped raining altogether, in places in cal in didn't rain for nearly six hundred years.
Whats more important is that it appears as though that event spawned a series of climate calamities that extended into the bronze bronze age.



posted on May, 15 2016 @ 04:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sparta
Apologies if this has been posted, I did only check in this forum.

As we all are told, our species migrated out of Africa many moons ago. However recent genetic analysis of the southern African Khoisan tribes revealed that they contain western Eurasian genes. The author of this paper proposed the question and used this evidence as their conclusion.

This migration back into Africa was approximately 3000 years ago, and infact may not be the only time.


Uhm... no offense, but let's do a timeline check here.

3,000 years ago is 1000 BC. This is after the time of Ramesses the Great. The Iron Age is in full swing across the Mediterranean and elsewhere. Giant kingdoms are established in the Middle East and in India and China. The South Seas are becoming populated.

So, yes, this is a "migration back into Africa" but honestly at that point everyone was migrating everywhere else. It's hardly a shock and technically not part of an "out of Africa" thesis.



posted on May, 15 2016 @ 06:28 PM
link   
a reply to: LABTECH767

Yeah I was on the thinking of some form of slavery. My only problem with it is how far it was to travel to takes the slaves. You could imagine a couple European prisoners taken by slavers and taken deep into the ancient kingdoms of Africa, they would have been fascinated by them I imagine.

a reply to: Byrd

I don't understand what you mean about not part of an out of Africa thesis? I did not write the paper fella, the shock would be Europeans made their way into Southern Africa and settled/integrated into the communities there. Why? How? I was aiming for more questions and discussion about how European DNA found its way into a Southern African tribe at the beginning of the Iron Age.

I was more along the line of thinking that some Europeans migrated back into Africa leaving behind the memory of the Bronze Age in fire. The giant kingdoms of India and China are not relevant to the tribes of Africa in this discussion I think.

edit on 15-5-2016 by Sparta because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 16 2016 @ 09:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sparta
I don't understand what you mean about not part of an out of Africa thesis?


Directed at others than at you -- some of the discussion is bringing up very ancient migrations and the OOA hypothesis.


I was aiming for more questions and discussion about how European DNA found its way into a Southern African tribe at the beginning of the Iron Age.

I was more along the line of thinking that some Europeans migrated back into Africa leaving behind the memory of the Bronze Age in fire.


I would suspect it was a general incursion into the population. All it takes are a few successful breeders. For instance, Egyptians were in contact with Europeans (Greeks, etc) and there was a lot of intermarriage. Egyptians were also in contact with Ethiopia and Sudan (again, intermarriages) - and those people also mingled and moved and traded and had relationships with other people. My own suspicion is that the source is this rather than a group of people fleeing thousands of miles across Africa until they hit the ocean.



posted on May, 16 2016 @ 03:19 PM
link   
Sparta,
One thing to remember Eurasian is not European
There have been several papers over the last couple of years about eurasian admixture among africans, and several different scenarios have been proposed. In the near term there is a major influx of "eurasian" genes into east and south africa, via levantine and arabian populations, during islamic expansion and the jewish diaspora several centureis before.
Then there are major influxes again from the same sources, during the climate turns during the bronze age, in fact the biggest of that period coincides with the 4.2 kilo year event.
What i find fascinating, is some newer papers are showing back migrations of "eurasians" into africa, around the LGM and even deeper in antiquity 40-70kya, and that HG E, that is now essentially restricted to Africa, is actually eurasian, and that the basal Hg's of A0 and A00 are archaic introgressions into modern humans in africa, who came from eurasia.
And, as to your op about the Khoisan, they shows minute traces of both denisovan and neanderthal genes, and some groups have been genetically isolated for more than 40 k years, so some of that eurasian admixture is very ancient indeed.



posted on May, 19 2016 @ 07:44 PM
link   
This just showed up on, Dienekes' Blog,

The mitogenome of a 35,000-year-old Homo sapiens from Europe supports a Palaeolithic back-migration to Africa .


After the dispersal of modern humans (Homo sapiens) Out of Africa, hominins with a similar morphology to that of present-day humans initiated the gradual demographic expansion into Eurasia. The mitogenome (33-fold coverage) of the Peştera Muierii 1 individual (PM1) from Romania (35 ky cal BP) we present in this article corresponds fully to Homo sapiens, whilst exhibiting a mosaic of morphological features related to both modern humans and Neandertals. We have identified the PM1 mitogenome as a basal haplogroup U6*, not previously found in any ancient or present-day humans. The derived U6 haplotypes are predominantly found in present-day North-Western African populations. Concomitantly, those found in Europe have been attributed to recent gene-flow from North Africa. The presence of the basal haplogroup U6* in South East Europe (Romania) at 35 ky BP confirms a Eurasian origin of the U6 mitochondrial lineage. Consequently, we propose that the PM1 lineage is an offshoot to South East Europe that can be traced to the Early Upper Paleolithic back migration from Western Asia to North Africa, during which the U6 lineage diversified, until the emergence of the present-day U6 African lineages.


Well theres one ancient back migration, into north Africa.

edit on p0000005k46542016Thu, 19 May 2016 19:46:10 -0500k by punkinworks10 because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
3

log in

join