reply to post by Pocky
Zahi Hawass has now released the results of the dna testing. The test results are reported to reveal, among other things, King Tut's dna is found
in 70% to Brits & Spaniards and 60% of French (males,only).
news.discovery.com...
As is the case with all such testing, it must hold up to scientic scrutiny and the results verified. At this point, one can only hope the Egyptians
observed the accepted prodocols in testing. The Journal of American Medicine has published their paper on the dna test results, which, in itself,
expresses the Journal's view that the testing was carried out in a scientificly accepted method.
news.discovery.com...
jama.ama-assn.org...
I am hopeful these results hold up... this could be huge.
These results are consistent the conclusions of L.A. Waddell. Waddell charted civilizations primarily through linguistic, but also though cultural
adaptations. He concluded the Sumerians (who he identified as Aryans) as the progenitors of other ancient civilizations, such as the Indus Valley
Civilization and ancient Egyptians to "the classic greeks and Romans and Ancient Britons, to whom they [the Sumerians] passed on from hand to hand
down the ages the torch of civilization".
Waddell placed the Proto-Sumarians in the Danube Valley, adjacent to the Black Sea, from 4000 to 6000 BC.
I doubt Waddell would be suprised with these recent DNA results; in 1930, he authored, Egyptian Civilization: It's Sumerian Origin.
Waddell gets a bad rap because of his use of the word "Aryan". He, no doubt used the term in the early part of last century simply as a neutral
etho-linguistic classification; there is nothing to indicate otherwise.
Think I'll find me a copy of Waddell's, Makers of Civilization in Race and History, wait for more King Tut dna results to be made public and, then,
compare the two sets of conclusions: one is based on linguistics/culture, the other on dna. Preliminarily, however, they seem to verify each other.