This has been the subject of speculation for a long time, but now there is a peer-reviewed paper confirming the last rulers of the 18th Dynasty belonged to paternal haplogroup R1b.
Gad et al. seem to suggest the reason for the delay publicizing results has been due to controversy surrounding contamination. Seeing how remains are moved by a bunch of sweaty guys raining over a mummy being moved coffin to gurney, it's easy to understand the reservations.
I'm going to guess that subsequent papers are queued up with more 17th and 18th Dynasty profiles. Just guessing.
As we've seen with the two papers on the German Beaker farmstead genealogies, there is potential to really expand the knowledge on relationships spanning hundreds of years in Egypt. New questions will emerge, such as, what was driving the chaos of the whole 2nd Intermediate Period, what role did mercenaries play in forming new social classes, who were the barbarians invading?
I will assume for now (barring cuckoldry somewhere along the way) that Ahmose I was also R1b of the Atlantic type. But then the question, how many generations into the 17th dynasty?
 |
| Ahmose I |
Gad, Y. Z., Hassan, N. A.-M., Mousa, D. M., Fouad, F. A., El-Sayed, S. G., Abdelazeem, M. A., … Ismail, S. (2020). Insights from ancient DNA analysis of Egyptian human mummies: clues to disease and kinship. Human Molecular Genetics.doi:10.1093/hmg/ddaa223
I seem to remember his leaked STRs were predictive of L23, rather than V88, but I can't remember the detail.
ReplyDeleteThat's the first I'm hearing of any leaked STRs... any sources?
Deletehttps://www.igenea.com/en/tutankhamun
DeleteAnon, There was DNA testing done a couple decades ago (if I remember correctly, Zahi Hawass was involved), though it was more about confirming familiar relations between mummies, if I remember correctly. There was a "documentary" involved at one point (one of those History Channel / Discover Channel things) and some eagle-eyed viewers noticed that the STR results were visible on screen and were able to match his results with R1b. *However,* there was never any confirmation that those STR results were actually those of Tut, and Egyptian authorities refused to release the results, so there had been a lot of question marks regarding the R1b speculation.
DeleteHis R1b is probably R1b M269>Z2103. There's a sample of R1b M269 in nearby Isreal 1300 BC, so contemporary to 18th dynasty. It is surprising but not shocking to see R1b in Egypt at the same time.
ReplyDeleteR1b Z2103 entered the Middle East, from Eastern Europe (PC STeppe), by 2000 BC. It is most common in Iraq, Eastern Turkey, Armenia today ranging from 15-30%.
It is a ittle known fact, there's an Indo European lineage common in the heart of Middle East even though IE ancestry there is under 10%. When you take this into account, it is shocking to see R1b in Bronze age Egypt.
"There's a sample of R1b M269 in nearby Isreal 1300 BC"
DeleteThis guy:
"A Canaanite individual from a clay coffin burial in Tel Shaddud (ca.1250 BC), reported as of hg. R1b1a1b-M269, has been interpreted as a Canaanite official residing at this site and emulating selected funerary aspects of Egyptian mortuary culture, apparently connected to the administrative centre at Bet Sheʽan during the 19th and 20th Dynasties."
https://www.docdroid.net/aOxmq6A/tel-shaddud-pdf
Eurogenes:
“individual I2062 is listed in the anno files as belonging to Y-haplogroup R1b1a1a2, which is also known as R1b-M269. The reason that this is a surprise to me is because R1b-M269 is closely associated with the Bronze Age expansions of pastoralists from the Pontic-Caspian steppe in Eastern Europe … intriguingly, his autosomes do show a subtle signal of Yamnaya-related ancestry from the Pontic-Caspian steppe that is missing in earlier ancients from the Levant. …
Samples associated with the Kura-Araxes or Early Transcaucasian culture are particularly strong references for the eastern ancestry in I2062. This probably isn't a coincidence, and it might also explain his Y-haplogroup, because, at its maximum extent, the territory occupied by the Kura-Araxes culture stretched all the way from the Pontic-Caspian steppe to the southern Levant.”
https://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2019/04/r1b-m269-in-bronze-age-levant.html
Sounds like the Hyksos...
Is it possible the 18th dynasty also came from the Hyksos?
also the sample from Megiddo, probably the one you meant (!)
DeleteFlavus Josephus apparently traced the origins of the Hyksos to the vicinity of Israel, possibly Jews. I have "Antiquities of the Jews" but it's been a long time since I read it and I'm only going off of what was in a Wiki article.
DeleteBut certainly Hyksos in Lower Egypt are thought to have come from the East, probably the Northern Levant, so basically yes or maybe, I think
17th=18th was supposed to have driven on down from up south, based at Thebes. I would have guessed Chadic V88 myself.
DeleteThat doesn't rule out that the 17th were ancestrally Hyksos gone native. M269 would add credence to that.
V88 is in Egyptians, Berbers, Nubians, Kanembu, Toubou and Fulani... not just Chadic speakers... and it came from Europe.
DeleteIn other words....
ReplyDeleteIt isn't necessary or probable, his R1b, is from a Western European wanderer who went through Meditereaen sea into Egypt, became member of house of Pharaohs. That is interesting but not necessary, because there was also an R1b lineage common in heart of Middle East which is closer to Egypt.
Or R1b-V88, which was already in Africa since the Neolithic.
DeleteIt would make more sense that it was V88 coming from Upper Egypt, or even Z2103, but I thought igenica seemed to indicate it was M269 at least. I wish they would specify if it was L51 because that really offers very different scenarios for the origin of the earliest member of this or these dynasties.
DeleteThe new information doesn't indicate any of these potential sources (Hyksos, Beaker, Neolithic Southern Europe) as improbable. Rather it makes each of these possibilities more likely.
DeleteImportantly, it confirms the accuracy of the original leaked information from years ago, and indicates that the greater detail of this leaked information (e.g. STRs) was almost certainly accurate as well. This may reveal significantly more about the source.
Interesting comment from Maciamo of Eupedia regarding R1b-M296 in Israel (Megiddo) in the 16th century BC:
Delete"Without knowing the deep clade, R1a-M417 and R1b-M269 could have come from almost anywhere: straight from the Steppe, from the Balkans, from Central Asia, from Iran...
Fortunately we have other clues from mtDNA from Tell Megiddo.
- T2b7: was found in Bell Beaker Hungary and England, and in Bronze Age Poland and Bulgaria. Nowadays it is present in found in Finland, Sweden, the Netherlands, France, Switzerland and Italy.
- U2e1b (2 samples): the parent clade U2e1 was U2e1 found in Mesolithic Sweden, Estonia and Latvia, in Neolithic Ukraine, in Bell Beaker Czechia, in the Corded Ware and Unetice cultures, and in EBA Alsace. U2e1b was also present in Early Bronze Age England.
All these are clearly European maternal lineages, and all three were found among the R1b Bell Beakers and in Bronze Age Central and Western Europe. But none were found among Steppe populations or among Indo-Iranians. So it looks like there was a migration of Indo-Europeans from Europe itself to Israel during the Bronze Age."
https://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/40048-R1a-M417-and-R1b-M269-in-the-Bronze-Age-Levant-(16th-century-BC)?p=604978&viewfull=1#post604978
I wonder if that has something to do with this: https://bellbeakerblogger.blogspot.com/2016/02/alien-minorities-in-crete-and-cyprus.html
Now it is confirmed that the unexpected R1b identification for Tutankhamun was correct, we can also presume the published STR data for this was also correct. Comparing this to the haplotypes in yfull, we find that Tutankhamun's yDNA is closest to L51, rather than Z2103 or V88.
DeleteSo if we focus purely on the data, this seems to identify Beaker or Beaker-ancestral people as prime candidates for the 18th dynasty Egyptian elites.
a,
DeleteQuite possible they were part of a larger expansion from the interior Balkan coast as the Philistines were later. Being that Caphtor mentioned in the bible was possible Crete, and as you've linked Crete having immigration from most likely the Cetina Culture. But I am also curious as to the Western "paternity" of the Philistines mentioned in the Bible as being descended from Mizraim, which suggests a connection to Egypt. Of course that brings to mind groups such as the Hyskos and others in the Western Desert, or even the connections between Southern Spain the Upper Levant.
Thanks for linking
I have discovered some information that would appear both to associate Tutankhamun's DNA with early Beakers and to substantiate its likely presence in North Africa. It's a little complicated, so I might try to attach it as a link when I get the chance.
Deleteso are you going to let us in on the secret?
DeleteSorry,I've been busy at work and haven't quite finished typing it up yet. Don't expect too much. It's just a few extra pieces of data that leave us with as many questions as they do answers.
DeleteI put the info from Igenea into the Nevgen predcitor and it says R1b-DF27.
DeleteSo Tut was Basque?
https://www.igenea.com/en/tutankhamun
https://www.nevgen.org/
R1b-Y139456 comes out closer, I think, but it's a minor subclade. The point is that it looks Beakerish, rather than older African or Syrian.
DeletePottery from the C-group culture in Nubia and southern Egypt has similarities to Bell Beaker pottery, and the C-group is thought to have come from berber-type saharan pastoralists... this seems a likely explanation for Beakerish R1b in the 18th dynasty.
DeleteR1b-M269 has also been found in Guanches, along with pottery similar to Bell Beaker:
Deletehttps://bellbeakerblogger.blogspot.com/2016/11/millennium-canary-islander-dna-ordenez.html
Very interesting. According to Wikipedia, C-group culture began to be seen in Egypt at the time of Thutmose I (the first known ancestor of Tutankhamun on his paternal line), so we have Beaker-like pottery and yDNA arriving contemporaneously. The curious thing is that the culture appears to have moved in from the South rather than from Beakerish Europe to the North.
DeleteThat'sjust referring to Thutmose's conquest of Nubia. The C-group culture actually appeared in southern Egypt in the First Intermediate Period/Middle Kingdom.
Deletehttp://www.hierakonpolis-online.org/index.php/explore-the-nubian-cemeteries
OK, although perhaps Thutmose resulted in C-culture merging more fully into the Egyptian mainstream? We don't know whether R1b-L51 was represented in C-culture before that point, nor whether the Tutunkhamun's L51 line might have derived from the Medjay.
DeleteGuanches, and indeed other Mahgrebis, look infused with significant autosomal contributions from pre- or early Bell Beakers. Their genetic contributions to ancient Egypt look much less significant, but I suppose these could have derived from some early-Beaker European DNA mixed into mainly Berber populations.
I tried Tutankhamun's readings on the Nevgen predictor, and could only get R1b (generic, with 99.9% probability), rather than DF27 specifically. Examining scores of subclades, I did find one good DF27-positive possible alternative to Y139456, and this is Y24895. Its estimated age (mid-3rd millennium BC) and geographical coverage (South Western Spain, Portugal and Anglo-Norman) is similar, and so would similarly point to an Atlantean Beakerish origin for Tutankhamun's paternal line ancestry.
DeleteWe know that L51 Beaker spread over a huge area in Europe, but it looks like we are still underestimating the extent of its reach, given what seems to be its appearance within ancient Egyptian elites and the arrival of Beaker-like pottery there. The apparently Atlantean yDNA lineages and minor Beaker-like autosomal footprints in the Mahgreb suggest to me that some L51 Beaker people likely left descendants in nomadic Mahgrebi Berber populations, whose DNA subsequently found its way into Egyptian elites.
Given what we know about C-culture and the Medjay, a reasonable possibility is that some L51 Bell Beaker men acquired dominance in Medjay Berber populations, perhaps a little like how other L51 Bell Beaker men acquired dominance in Central European Corded Ware-descendant populations.
It is interesting how the Egyptian Medjay appear to have initially been derided as uncivilised barbarian immigrant 'stick throwers', but whose prowess at herding and combat ended up elevating them into such high-status military and managerial positions (including guarding the royal palaces) that local Egyptians were said to have been signing up to join them. Perhaps in the course of royal bodyguarding duties, some of their DNA did find its way into pharonic lineages?
The Medjay are associated with the Pan-grave culture rather than the C-group culture. C-group might have come from Saharan Berber types.
DeleteOK, although didn't these cultures and many of their peoples sort of collapse into each other in Nubia during the second intermediate period, with both then being subsumed into Egypt at around the same time? They each seem to have been militarised, settling around Egyptian fortresses. We're not sure whether they were ever wholly distinctive ethnically, especially after having been drafted in to work for the Egyptians.
DeleteMy information is at https://sites.google.com/view/history-and-dna/tutankhamun
ReplyDeleteBasically, it seems the data would suggest a Beakerish origin, rather than indigenous African or Middle Eastern.
Based on Tutankhamun's given STRs, my best estimates for a most recent common yDNA ancestor with modern R1b-Y139456 or R1b-DF27>Y24895 are 1,603 to 2,338 BC. These are the closest fits I've found.
ReplyDeleteHoly Shit. Thanks!
DeleteI've found an even closer fit (the closest I can find) - with R-L226 (a subclade of L21).
ReplyDeleteSTRs v modern L226 haplotype:
Tut - 13 24 14 11 11 14 10 13 13 30 16 14 19 10 15 12
L226- 13 24 14 11 11 14 11 13 13 29 17 15 19 11 15 12
Estimated distance based on these STRs is 2,825 years, which is almost exactly the distance between Tutankhamun (4,362 ybp) and L226's MRCA (1,500 ybp, per yfull) = 2,862 years.
L226 is a very odd SNP. It is clearly Atlantic Bell Beaker in formation (by my calculation from STRs, quite a bit older than yfull's estimate of 1,900 BC), but disappears into an apparent bottleneck for thousands of years before flourishing only in the common era in Ireland. It makes one wonder whether it was developing elsewhere (perhaps in a poorly sampled part of the world?), and calls to mind possible associations with the old Gaelic legend of the Egyptian Scota.
Did you add that to your article on Tutankhamun, and then remove it? I swear I read it on there. Maybe I'm losing my mind.
DeleteYou are assuming too much. One can't make a secure lineage from Ahmose I to Tutankhamun. Ahmose I belonged to Dynasty 17 and so did his son, Amenhotep I, no matter what any of the antique historisns believed. However, the successor of Amenhotep I was Thutmose I--and no one knows who his father was. So he was probably the originator of Dynasty 18, as his mother was not a queen, as he himself acknowledged in a letter to the Viceroy of Kush.
ReplyDeleteYou should be aware that King Ahmose belonged to the 17th Dynasty [no matter where some of the ancient historians placed him]. That line ended with Amunhotep I. His successor was a man who became Thutmose I and was likely the founder of Dynasty 18. Nobody knows who the father of Thutmose I was, although the name of his mother is known. But nobody knows who she was either. Since a mummy I believe to have been a son of Amunhotep I [predeceased him at a young age] was used as a control in the study published in 2020 and his y-haplogroup was L--that is probably the group of Dynasty 17. So Thutmose I was the guy who likely introduced R1b and was the distant ancestor of Tutankhamun. This is assuming, of course, that every son was the true child of his father.
ReplyDeleteAt D13S317 of his autosomal profile Tut's grandfather, Amunhotep III has the numeric value 16 which is nonexistent in the modern Egyptian population. 16 is null in the entire Middle East except in Oman, to which came the Portuguese. In fact, 16 at that marker is only found on the Iberian Peninsula, Basques included, but is even rare there. Of course it will be seen in persons who are connected by ancestry to the peninsula. So how? The mitochondrial haplogroup of Amunhotep III is H2b. The name of his mother is known but nothing more about her. The H group is distantly connected to the peninsula, also, insofar as I know. I am H1, myself. The blood group of the same pharaoh is A2, also rare in Egypt.