All  
Analyzing Mummy Genes: Were Ancient Egyptians closely Related to Middle Easterners?

Analyzing Mummy Genes: Were Ancient Egyptians closely Related to Middle Easterners?

Egypt has been thought of by many as a quintessentially African civilization. There is, however, evidence that the ancient Egyptians may have been less African than modern Egyptians, at least genetically. Recent genetic studies have shown that the people of ancient Egypt had ties to ancient Near Eastern populations such as Armenians. This is also consistent with the idea of a large migration out of the Middle East to settle parts of North Africa and Europe and mingle with local populations in those areas.

Modern Egyptians have a lot of genetic and cultural ties to Sub-Saharan Africa. It has long been believed by archaeologists that the Egyptian civilization grew from villages developing along the Nile which were similar to people farther south. So far, genetic studies of modern Egyptians as well as archaeological research have confirmed this. Studies of the ancient Egyptian mummies, however, tell a slightly more complex story.

Egyptian Mummy in Laboratory (Bigstock)

Egyptian Mummy in Laboratory (Bigstock)

Checking the Genes of Egyptian Mummies

In a recent study, genetic samples were taken from at least 90 mummies. What geneticists working alongside archaeologists found was that the mummies had closer genetic connections to the Middle East, specifically the Levant and Anatolia. This is an interesting find since it suggests that modern Egyptians are more African than ancient Egyptians.

One possible explanation for more genetic similarities between ancient Egyptians and Middle Eastern populations such as Syrians or Armenians would be the Hyksos. The Hyksos were a Middle Eastern people who occupied the Nile delta sometime before 1650 BC and came to rule Egypt until they were ousted by a native dynasty.

Scarab bearing the name of the Hyksos pharaoh Apophis. Made of steatite, from the time of the Second Intermediate Period.

Scarab bearing the name of the Hyksos pharaoh Apophis. Made of steatite, from the time of the Second Intermediate Period. (Keith Schengili-Roberts/ CC BY SA 2.5 )

This explanation fits well with the fact that it is the mummified remains of Egyptian nobles and royalty who have the Middle Eastern lineage, although it is also true that commoners were typically not mummified - so we don’t have their remains from which to extract genetic material to test the “Hyksos” hypothesis. In addition to many of them being Hyksos, there was probably intermarriage between the Hyksos and the native nobility.

One problem with this suggestion is that most of the mummies tested date to between 1380 BC and 425 AD, well after the Hyksos were driven out of Egypt (around 1550 BC). It is possible of course that the Egyptian pharaohs continued to be of at least partly Hyksos lineage even after the original Hyksos were expelled.

Hyksos chariot painting.

Hyksos chariot painting. ( Public Domain )

A Controversial Connection

One reason that this connection between ancient Egypt, the Levant, and Anatolia might be controversial is that many Africans take pride in ancient Egypt being an African civilization. The suggestion that it might have had more ties to the Middle East might appear, to some, to once again deny the virtues of African civilizations by saying that ancient Egypt was another Middle Eastern civilization and not truly African.

Of course, even if this is true and ancient Egypt was more Middle Eastern than African, Africa still has had many unambiguously indigenous civilizations including Mali, Great Zimbabwe, Aksum, the Swahili city-states, and Benin to name just a few. Africa still has a civilizational legacy without ancient Egypt.

The Aksum Obelisk, returned to Aksum, Ethiopia.

The Aksum Obelisk, returned to Aksum, Ethiopia. ( CC BY SA 3.0 )

 Middle Eastern Influence

Interestingly, this evidence may hint at a larger pattern that suggests a great movement of people out of the Middle East beginning in the Neolithic. In 2016, genetic evidence was found that Europeans are at least partially descended from farmers who had migrated into Europe from Anatolia perhaps 8,000 years ago.

It is possible that just as farmers migrated from the Middle East into Europe, they may have also migrated into Egypt and mingled with the native African populations to create the Egyptian culture. This Middle Eastern influence on the Nile valley is supported by the fact that Middle Eastern domesticates such as wheat, barley, sheep, and goats were all prevalent in ancient Egypt.

Agricultural scenes of threshing, a grain store, harvesting with sickles, digging, tree-cutting and ploughing from the tomb of Nakht, 18th Dynasty Thebes.

Agricultural scenes of threshing, a grain store, harvesting with sickles, digging, tree-cutting and ploughing from the tomb of Nakht, 18th Dynasty Thebes. ( Public Domain )

It is possible that in addition to technologies and ideas, there was also a movement of people from the Middle East into the Nile valley. Although this Middle Eastern genetic influence might be mainly restricted to Egyptian nobility, this genetic pattern could also be evidence of a hypothetical migration from the Near East during the Neolithic.

Other Implications

A movement of people out of Anatolia and the Levant into Africa and Europe has implications for the ancient Near Eastern traditions which teach that humanity originated from the Middle East. The most well-known tradition that teaches this would be the Judeo-Christian tradition, though Islam also believes it. In the Bible, the descendants of Noah settled the world known to the ancient Hebrews after the flood: The Middle East, North Africa, and the Eastern Mediterranean. The ancient Hebrews believed that all the nations known to them, the Greeks, the Assyrians, the Egyptians, and the Hittites among others, descended from Noah and his sons.

Noah and his companions give thanks after the flood. By Domenico Morelli.

Noah and his companions give thanks after the flood. By Domenico Morelli. ( Public Domain )

Defense of the reality of the flood of Noah, even a local one which only flooded the Mesopotamian flood plain, is a subject for a different article, but one question that can be considered in this article is whether there is evidence for the idea that the Mediterranean and Ancient Near Eastern worlds were settled by full, or partial, descendants of a figure like Noah.

Both Ancient Egypt and Europe appear to have genetic ties to Anatolia, while Ancient Egypt also has genetic ties to the Levant, according to current findings. Anatolia and the Levant are both proposed regions from where Noah’s descendants are said to have set out to repopulate the earth.

The fact that this genetic connection to Anatolia and the Levant exists for populations in Europe and North Africa, specifically Egypt, does not by itself prove that modern Europeans or ancient Egyptians are descended from survivors of a great flood which devastated those parts of the Middle East. It is, however, consistent with the idea.

Trade in ancient Egypt.

Trade in ancient Egypt. ( CC BY SA 3.0 )

It is also interesting to note that the legend of a great flood and a single man’s family repopulating the earth is shared by many cultures in the Middle East and eastern Mediterranean, including Mesopotamia, Egypt, Greece, and the Levant. Could these shared stories be evidence of a shared history and shared ancestry between these relatively disparate people in the Near East, North Africa, and Europe?

The evidence for now still needs more analysis, but it does suggest that the Biblical authors might have been onto something after all when they talked about the world being populated by a family that set out from the Mountains of Ararat in Anatolia. Most Middle Easterners, Europeans, and some North Africans such as the ancient Egyptians may have at least partially descended from a people that once lived there.

Depiction of Noah's ark landing on the mountains of Ararat.

Depiction of Noah's ark landing on the mountains of Ararat. ( Public Domain )

Top Image: ‘Ancient Times, Egyptian.’ Source: Public Domain

By Caleb Strom

References

“Mummy DNA unravels ancient Egyptians’ ancestry” by Tracy Watson (2017). Nature. Available at: https://www.nature.com/news/mummy-dna-unravels-ancient-egyptians-ancestry-1.22069

“Ancient Egyptians were closer to Armenians than to Africans; a new genetics study reveals” by admin (2017). People of Ar. http://www.peopleofar.com/2017/06/05/ancient-egyptians-were-closer-to-armenians-than-to-africans-a-new-genetics-study-reveals/

Hofmanová, Zuzana, et al. "Early farmers from across Europe directly descended from Neolithic Aegeans."  Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences  113.25 (2016): 6886-6891.

“Europe's first farmers came from Turkey: DNA from Anatolian skeletons show farming spread from the region 8,000 years ago” by Richard Gray (2016). Daily Mail . Available at: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3385337/Europe-s-farmers-came-Turkey-DNA-Anatolian-skeletons-farming-spread-region-8-000-years-ago.html#ixzz4pDEwshQl 

Kitchen, Andrew, et al. "Bayesian phylogenetic analysis of Semitic languages identifies an Early Bronze

Age origin of Semitic in the Near East."  Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences  (2009): rspb-2009.

Comments

The glaring problem with this research sample of 90 mummies is that they are chronologically-representative of very late Egyptian history, -- “most of the mummies tested date to between 1380 BC and 425 AD.“ Specifically the 90 mummies are representative of the following periods of Egyptian history: the Second Intermediate Period, the New Kingdom, the Third Intermediate Period, the Late Period, the Ptolemaic Period, and the Roman Period.
What has been omitted are research samples of mummies representing early periods of Egyptian history: the Pre-Dynastic Period, Early Dynastic Period, Old Kingdom, First Intermediate Period, and Middle Kingdom. Hence the broad conclusions that have been drawn are unwarranted.
It is universally acknowledged that during the Second Intermediate Period, Egypt was invaded and conquered by an enemy people whom the native Egyptian population termed as “vile Asiatics” (e.g. Hyksos, West Asians or “Middle Easterners”). These invaders occupied the royal throne and their conquering armies, as is characteristic of all conquering armies, raped the native women –thereby changing the genetic heritage and complexion of even the commoners. The Ptolemaic period was dominated by Macedonian Greeks, and this was followed by a period of Roman domination.
However, Egyptian history beginning with the Pre-Dynastic period stretches back into antiquity at least 4,000 years and arguably 5,500 years. Certainly, it is agreed upon by traditional chronologies that the Early Dynastic period began circa 3100 BC. So there are at least 1700 years of conventionally-chronicled history that is unaccounted for with your 90 samples. When we examine the early history of Egypt the evidence is that the peoples of the Upper Kingdom (Upper Nile Valley region or southern Egypt –as the Nile runs from south to north) migrated from the Great Lakes region of East Africa which is the source of the Nile. The peoples of the Upper Kingdom are culturally and “racially” related to the neighboring Nubian or Kushite kingdom to the south, although they were political enemies.
The people in the Lower Kingdom or northern Egypt especially the delta region were a more cosmopolitan and mulattoized population as they were at the tri-continental crossroads of Africa, Asia (west Asia or the so-called “Middle East”), and Europe where there was intermingling of peoples mostly peacefully, but sometimes through war and conquest. Hence in Lower Egypt and especially in the later periods of Egyptian history we get evidence of peopling from the Levant.

YUSUF NURUDDIN, THAT WAS A VERY PROFESSIONAL AND ACCURATE ACCOUNT OF ANCIENT EGYPTIAN HISTORY WHICH ORIGINATED WITH ITS PEOPLE ORIGINATING FROM THE GREAT LAKES AREA WHERE THE FIRST OF THREE NILES BEGAN, AND WHERE GOD “HAPI” DWELL, AT THE FOOTHILLS OF THE MOUNTAIN OF THE MOON, ACCORDING TO “hunefer papyrus”..   WE KNOW THAT THE “BOOK OF THE DEAD” WHICH WAS APPROVED BY ALL OF THE ANCIENT EGYPTIAN PRIESTS, THAT THE ORIGIN OF ANCIENT EGYPTIANS CAME FROM DEEP INSIDE THE INTERIOR OF EAST/CENTRAL  BLACK AFRICA, WHERE THERE ARE ONLY TWO MOUNTAINS REFERRED TO AS “MOUNTAINS OF THE MOON”, AND THEY ARE THE KILIMANJARO IN TANGANYIKA AND THE RWEZORI IN UGANDA.  WE ALSO KNOW THAT “LIPOMBO” WHICH MEANT STRETCHING OF THE SKULL INTO AN ELONGATED “CONESHAPE’ WHICH WAS POPULAR AMONG BLACK AFRICAN ELITES WAS A CONTINUAL PRACTICE AMONG EGYPTIAN LEADERS SUCH AS KING TUT, QUEEN NEFERTITI, KING AHKENATEN ETC.  WE ALSO KNOW THAT THIS PRACTICE IS PRESENTLY OCCURING IN THE CONGO.  THERE IS NO DOCUMENTED HISTORY OF ANY ASIATIC/EUROPEAN PEOPLE EVER PRACTICING THIS FORM OF SKULL MANIPULATION AMONG ITS LEADERS.  BY THE WAY, “GENES” DOS NOT IDENTIFY RACES OF PEOPLE, WHICH LL SCIENTISTS AGREE.   AS YOU POINTED OUT SO ELEOQUENTLY, IT WOULD NOT BE OF ANY SURPRISE THAT LATTER EGYPTIAN  PEOPLE WOULD BECOME INFECTED WITH GENES FROM SOME OF THE WEST ASIATICS WHO ARRIVED ON THE CONTINENT EITHER AS IMMIGRANTS, OR AS WARRIORS….

Charles Bowles

Quote "IT WOULD NOT BE OF ANY SURPRISE THAT LATTER EGYPTIAN PEOPLE WOULD BECOME INFECTED WITH GENES FROM SOME OF THE WEST ASIATICS". How racist of you.

The new descovery regarding the ancient Egyptians is based on the DNA/genetics, not the historical presumptions. Your theory is concurrent and based on the history books. The whole point of DNA analysis is the deviation of the course from historical books/studies to genetic evidence, which is the real deal nowadays.

Ancient people shifted back and forth, from location to locations in search for living. But even their mobile activities were limited to their localities. This discovery sheds light on a specific DNA haplogroup found in ancient Egyptian mummies. This particular Y-DNA haplogroup is R1b haplogroup that is strictly limited to Armenians in the entire Middle East/near East/Asia minor/west Asia etc. this particular R1b haplogroup has its subclades at certain frequencies that is limited to certain natives. For example Western Europeans’ dominant haplogroup is R1b, and so are Armenians. But R1b in Armenians Have different subclades that is consistent with ancient Europeans, more like European hunter gatherers. So therefore, this descovery illustrates that particular aspect of their relationship with Armenians than others. The hint in the context is the possibility, that either the ancient Egyptians and Armenians were blood related or modern Egyptians are not related to the ancient Egyptians or both.

One thing in the contest is not illustrated is the historical perception. Nearly impossible to relate nations with the comparisons of ancient artifacts, clay tablets with cuneiform inscriptions on them, or any archeological diggings. Nations went through so many wars, that no traces of ancient people left behind. And if things were to be left in the hands of Turks and Azeris, they would have destroyed everything that had other than Turkish bearings. When they destroyed all the ancient artifacts, churches or any evidence that had the Armenian bearings on them, then reality would definitely look like the formality.

Dear Yusuf,

Egyptian civilization is part of ω civilization which start in Europe. First egyptians was shepherds who came from nord, occupied nord Africa 7-8.000 years ago. They were white people. Are the same population with Indo-europeans who made the kurgans (gorganele) in modern Romania and Ukraina. See - Sumigu mic, Gataia, Romania an big tomb.
Sorin

Pages

Register to become part of our active community, get updates, receive a monthly newsletter, and enjoy the benefits and rewards of our member point system OR just post your comment below as a Guest.

Next article