Genetical Change in Ancient Egypt Author(s): A. Caroline Berry, R. J. Berry and Peter J. Ucko Source: Man, New Series, Vol. 2, No. 4 (Dec., 1967), pp. 551-568 Published by: Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2799339 . Accessed: 04/08/2013 12:29 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact
[email protected].
.
Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Man.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 67.115.155.19 on Sun, 4 Aug 2013 12:29:58 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
GENETICAL
CHANGE A.
IN ANCIENT
EGYPT
CAROLINE BERRY
University CollegeLondon
R. J.BERRY RoyalFreeHospitalSchoolofMedicine, London PETERJ. UCKO University CollegeLondon
contactsand colonisations Egypt has been subjectto numerousinfiltrations, butto whatextentincomerscontributed to thegene itslong history, throughout in thepasthas beendirected pool of thepopulationis not clear.Most speculation and local to theoriginratherthanthedegreeof racialmixingof bothforeigners havebeen inhabitants at different Suchinterpretations periodsofEgyptianhistory. For example,Kees (I96I: 36) wrote: based primarily on artisticrepresentations. thereliefs androckpaintings, 'Judging by thesmallsculptures fromHierakonpolis, thepeople who were in authority, includingthevictoriousEgyptiankings,still formedracewithshortskullsfromwhichthe belongedto themysterious delicately of artistic Amratians developed'(seealsoPetrieI90I: 252-4). Suchinterpretations thatbothconfromthedifficulty representations may be correct,but theysuffer clusionsand the assessment mustinevitablybe speculative of theirsignificance & Ucko I964: 524-8; Ucko I96$: 222-3). Thisis attested (seeMorse,Brothwell by thetendencyin thepast(summarised by ChantreI904) to postulateall sortsof a singular improbableracialamalgamsin Egypt:mixturesof peoplerepresenting varietyof groups(viz. Libyan,Caucasian,Arab, Pelasgian,Negro, Bushman, Mongol, Hamitic,Hamito-Semitic-evenRed Indianand Australianaboriginal) natureof these were allegedto have migratedintotheNile valley.The fantastic was exposedby Elliot Smith(I9II), althoughevenhe recognisedan speculations Armenoidadmixture withEarlyDynasticpopulations. The work undertakenin about I900 on skeletalremainsalso purportedto recognisenumerousraceswithcontinuedfusionsbetweenseveralsub-sections of themthroughout thehistoryofEgypt(e.g. MacIveri9oo; Thomson & MacIver I905;
thattheliterature PetrieI906). Indeed,Keith(I90$: 92) complained at that
time includedhopelesscontradictions of three,six, one and two races. Such stillpersistdespitethe work of Morant(i925) who recognised contradictions merelya singleupperanda singlelowerEgyptiantype:forexample,Falkenburger (I947) divided skeletalmaterialinto Cromagnon,Negro and Mediterranean types. in thelightof all thematerialavailablefrom This confusion maybe surprising Egyptbut can to some extentbe understoodin the contextof Egyptianhistory contactswith'foreigners' fromneigh(see below) withitsfrequent and intensive bouringcountries. Undoubtedly, however,themajorelementleadingto confusion in osteologicalmaterialforevaluating hasbeenthelackofusablegeneticalmarkers
This content downloaded from 67.115.155.19 on Sun, 4 Aug 2013 12:29:58 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
5S2
A. CAROLINE
BERRY, R. J. BERRY AND PETER J. UCKO
populationmovementsand mnixing (see Berry,Evans & SennittI967; Berry & SmithMs.). Thisarticleis an attemptto measurechangein ancientEgyptbyusing non-metrical skull variantsto characterise different samplesgenetically, rather than by the two 'classical' sourcesof information-artistic and representations metricalevaluationsof skeletalmaterial. External humaninfluences onEgypt To give the necessarybackgroundto the interpretation of studieson hiuman remains,it is necessaryat the outsetto outlineand discussthe more important contactsof Egyptwiththe outsideworld,fortheextentand effects of some of theseare not generallyknown. TABLEi. ChronologyofEgypt. Period
Date B.C.
c. 4500 ?
Predynastic Predynastic Predynastic
c. 3200-2680
Archaic: DynastiesI-III
c. 268o-2258 c. 2258-2052
Culture Badarian(Tasian) Amratian (EarlyNaqada: Naqada I) Gerzean(LateNaqada: Naqada II)
Old Kingdom:Dynasties IV-VI Ist Intermediate Period:Dynasties VII-X
C. 2134-I786
Middle Kingdom: DynastiesXI-XII
C. 1786-i570 2nd Intermediate Period: DynastiesXIII-XVII, includingthe HyksosPeriod New Kingdom or Empire: DynastiesXVIII-XX
C. 1570-Io85
c. xo85-332 Late Period: DynastiesXXI-XXXI, includingthePersianand SaitePeriods
c. 332-30 C. 30 B.C.-64I A.D.
Ptolemaic Egypt Roman and ByzantinePeriods
For the predynastic period(beforec. 3,200 B.C.) (see table i) textualproofof foreignincursions is, of course,lacking,but thechangein materialculturewhich definesthebeginning oftheGerzeanculturehasoftenbeeninterpreted byEgyptologistsas reflecting thearrivalof a new people intoEgypt.This assumedchange in populationis commonlycorrelated withlinguistic analysisof ancientEgyptian whichfindsthatthelanguagecomprisesboth 'Hamitic' and 'Semitic' elements. The 'Semitic' elementsare presumedto have arrivedwith the bearersof the Gerzeanculture(e.g. BaumgartelI965: 21). Invasionorinfiltration bypeoplefrom outsideEgyptis alsogenerally assumedto explaintheapparently suddenemergence of literacy,kingshipand urbanisation at the time of the foundingof the first literatedynasty(c. 3,200 B.C.). This assumptionis based on the appearanceof a varietyof 'foreign'elementsin the materialcultureof Egypt at thistime(e.g. cylinderseals of Mesopotainiantype,motifsresemblingthoseof JemdetNasr Mesopotamia,panelledbrickarchitecture, etc.) whichapparently had no antecedentsin prehistoric Egypt.At thesametimethereis evidencefromtheanalysis of potterytypesof contactwithPalestine.This was probablya two-waytrading relationship whichcontinuedthroughout theFirstDynastyand whichby theend of thearchaicperiod(c. 2,700 B.C.) culminated in a permanent Egyptiantrading relationship with the port of Byblos on the Levantinecoast. During the first
This content downloaded from 67.115.155.19 on Sun, 4 Aug 2013 12:29:58 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
GENETICAL
CHANGE IN ANCIENT
EGYPT
553
of Egyptalso therewas,judgingfromstonevesseltypes,close contact dynasties betweenEgyptand Crete. of themodem ThroughoutthehistoryofEgypt,textsreferto theinhabitants themby habitat, republicof theSudanby different names,sometimesdescribing who spokelanguagesdistinct makingit clearthattheywereconsidered foreigners fromAncientEgyptian.To the westlived severaldifferent groupsof people to namesand whomtheynotonlydescribedas whom theEgyptiansgave particular fromthemselves in artisticrepresentations. but also distinguished foreigners At manyperiodsin itshistoryEgyptreceived'visitors'both fromtheseareas and fromfurther afield.For example,alreadyin theearlyFourthDynasty7,000 Thereis also NubianswerecarriedofftoEgyptandpresumably placedin servitude. evidencelaterin theOld KingdomthatNubianswere employedin inscriptional Period therewere probably the Egyptianarmy.During the firstIntermediate intothedeltafromthenorth.In theTwelfthDynastyEgyptmayhave incursions controlledPalestineand Syria,and 'northern'peoplesbegan arrivingin Egypt eitherto settleor to trade.So greatbecame the influenceof thesepeople that in c. I,720 B.C. theywere on thefragmentation oftheadministration, eventually, as pharaohsand gain power over northern able to proclaimthemselves Egypt. Thereis littleevidencethatthis'Hyksos' periodwas due to anylargescaleinvasion ofEgypt. Followingthereconquestof Egyptby theThebanDynasty(New Kingdom), extentstretched fromtheEuphan empirewhichat itsgreatest Egyptestablished ratesto thefourth cataract.Greatnumbersofcaptivesweredeliberately carriedoff, as rewardstoEgyptian someto be usedin labourforcesand someto be distributed officers and soldiers.On the highestpoliticalplane,pharaohsat thistimecontracteddiplomatic withforeign marriages fromvariouspartsoftheNear princesses theracialcompositionof thecourtand its deEast,but thesewill have affected pendendesratherthanof thebulkof thepeople. Mercenaries duringtheearlypartoftheNew Kingdomweremainlyfromupper Nubia. Lateron people calledthe Sherdenwere muchemployed,and rewarded fortheirserviceswithplotsof land whichtheyand theirdescendants (likeother veterans)cultivated(iCernyi965). These Sherdenwere the fore-runners of numerouspeopleswho descendedupon theeasternMediterranean littoralduring the thirteenth centuryB.C. At firstmany of theseincursionswere probably peaceful.'These roamingsoftheMeshweshandtheLibu in upperEgyptwerebut a ramification ofLibyantribesin thenorth,in thedelta, ofa largescalepenetration andbelowMemphisat Heracleopolis. Thispenetration was probablyon thewhole peacefuland resultedin theoccupationof thewesterndeltawhereLibyans,under theirchiefs, foundeda numberof principalities eachwithan important townas its centre'(c:ernyI965: is). In c. 950 B.C., however,one Libyanfamilysetitselfup as rulersofEgyptandforthenext200 yearsEgyptwas governedbyrival'Libyan' c. 730 B.C. Egyptfellundertheruleof theEgyptianised Fronm dynasties. stateof Napata on theupperNile. This rulewas endedby theAssyrianconquerorAshurbanipalin 663 B.C. Thereis no evidenceundereitherof theseforeignregimes intoEgyptexceptfora few southern of any largescale incursionof foreigners officials in the mainly Thebaid. Assyriafella fewyearsafterherconquestofEgyptand a nativedynastyruled
This content downloaded from 67.115.155.19 on Sun, 4 Aug 2013 12:29:58 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
554
A. CAROLINE
BERRY,
R. J. BERRY
AND
PETER
J. UCKO
in Egyptuntiltheconquestby theAchaemenidCambysesin S2S B.C. Only the highestofficials in the land were expatriatePersians,forAchaemenidpolicyinvolvedrulingthroughthenativebureaucracy. DuringtheSaiteperiodthefirst Greektradingcolonywas setup in theEgyptian delta.AlexanderconqueredEgyptin 332B.C. and afterhisdeathlargenumbersof Greeksoldiersweresettledin thedeltaand theFayum.By thereignof PtolemyII Philadelphusthe bulk of the administration had passedinto Greekhands,cities withGreekcitizenship and specialprivileges had beenfoundedand theFayumhad becomelargelya Greekprovince.Thereis no doubtthatEgyptiansand Greeks livedsideby sideand intermarried. The Roman conquestof Egyptmade littledifference to thissituation;Greeks theRoman presencebeingmarkedonlyby legioncontinuedto runthecountry, ariesand certainhighofficials. DespiteEgypt'slong historyof contactswithforeignpeoples,therefore, it is clearthatthereis in factlittleevidenceto suggestcontinuedracialadmixturebetweentheindigenousEgyptianpopulationand foreignpeoplesto theextentthat significant changesto thebasicEgyptiangenepool occurredthroughout Egyptian history.Kees'sstatement (I96I: 34) thatEgyptwas 'a landwith... an ethnically of' Semitic'northerners disparate population'mustdependlargelyon theinfluence in thedeltain thesecondmillennium southof B.C., thedegreeof Nubianinfluence Edfu throughout Egyptianhistory,and on the extentof Greekpenetration into lowerEgyptand theFayumin thethirdand secondcenturies B.C. Procedure
The only directand objectiveevidenceabout populationmixingis fromthe are especiallyimportantfor the studyof human remains.Such investigations predynastic periodbecausetheyare theonlymeansof checkingdeductionsabout populationswhich are exclusivelybased on archaeologicalanalysisof material of craniometricdifferences culture.Althoughthe geneticalinterpretation is difficult (e.g. De Beer I965) even withmodermstatistical analyses(e.g. Crichton evidencewhere I966), greatweighthas oftenbeenplacedon slightarchaeological datahas suggestedthearrivalof a new 'race' duringpreanalysisof craniometric in Arkell& Ucko I965: I53, I55). times(see discussion dynasticor protodynastic muchof theavailablematerialusing to re-investigate Henceitseemedworthwhile variantsas geneticalindicators. non-metrical variantshave been used by anthropologists formany Althoughnon-metrical years(reviewedby BrothwellI963; I965), it is onlysincetheirgeneticalcontrol in themousewas determined and hisco-workers by Griuneberg (Griineberg I963) in comparisons ofnon-living thattheirusefulness couldbe appreciated. populations to manisnotwithoutdanger,butbothhuman The extrapolation ofmousegenetics variation(reviewedby Berryin familyand populationstudieson non-metrical thatthevariants areinherited in a similarwayin both press)supportthecontention mice and men. Furthermore Howe & Parsons(I967) have shownthe environmentalfactors wheninformation on incidenceof a large to be oflittleimportance numberofvariants is combined.Thereis no doubtthatnon-metrical variants have for many anthroconsiderableadvantagesover morphologicalmeasurements
This content downloaded from 67.115.155.19 on Sun, 4 Aug 2013 12:29:58 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
GENETICAL
CHANGE
IN ANCIENT
EGYPT
555
pologicalpurposes.In practicaltermsscoringof variationis quick and easy; age (at any ratein matureindividuals)and sex do not affectnon-metrical variation; lack of correlations betweencharacters makesthe computationof multivariate statistics much simplerthan is the case for metricalcharacters;and thereare groundsfor believingthat estimatesof divergencebetweensamplesbased on in non-metrical differences variantincidencemore accuratelyreflectgenetical differences thanstatistics calculatedfrommetricaldata(Berry& SmithMs). All the skullswe used were classifiedfor thirtynon-metrical variants(for anatomicaldescriptions, seeBerry& BerryI967) by one of us (A.C.B.). Juveniles were excluded.The frequencies of each variantin sixteendifferent population sampleswere tabulated. Thereare two ways of interpreting suchdata.The firstis to takeeach variant Thishasbeenthenormal separately and traceitsincidencein different populations. procedurewithpastworkers(e.g. Hess I945; BrothwellI96I). However a more digestiblemethodof assimilating the crude data is to calculatea multivariate distancestatistic based on all the variants.There are severalways of doing this: Laughlin& Jorgensen (I956) andBrothwell(I958) haveuseda versionofPenrose's 'size and shape' statistic, but we prefera methoddevisedby C. A. B. Smithand firstused to measurechangein inbredstrainsof mice by Grewal(I962). In this methoda single'measureof divergence'is calculatedbetweeneachpairof populations.The validityof estimating geneticaldistancein thisway hasbeendiscussed by Berry(I964), Berry,Evans & Sennitt(I967), Howe & Parsons(I967), and Berry & Smith(Ms). The measureof divergencebetween two populations (I, 2) of size n1and n2is takenas (01i02)2-(iIn.+ i/n2)forany variant, where0 is theangulartransformation of thepercentage incidence(p), measuredin radians, suchthatO= sin-' (i - 2p). This has the advantageover themore usualangular transformation (0= sin' VIp in degrees)thatthevarianceof 0 in a sampleof sizen is nearlyi/nindependently of thevalueof n,insteadof 820-7n.The meanmeasure of divergence forall thirty characters in two populationsis a quantitative expression of the separationof the populations.The virtualabsence of correlation betweenvariantsmakespermissible theaveragingof measuresof divergencefor individualvariantswithouthavingto perform thecomplexadjustments necessary in computingsimilarstatistics fromskeletalmeasurements, whichtendto be much morehighlycorrelated (Rao I948). A standard principal component analysis hasalsobeencarriedouton therawdata. Samplesclassified We usedthreecriteria in selectingour material: I. Accessibility: all the materialwe used was preservedeitherin the SubDepartmentof Anthropology, BritishMuseum(NaturalHistory)(hereafter to asB), ortheDuckworthLaboratory referred oftheFacultyofArchaeology and Anthropology of theUniversity of Cambridge(referred to as C). As far as we know all themajorcollectionsofEgyptianskeletalmaterialin Great Britainare at one or otherof theseplaceswiththeexceptionof two small seriesfromAswanand El Amrahin theanatomydepartments of Edinburgh and Aberdeenuniversities, respectively.
This content downloaded from 67.115.155.19 on Sun, 4 Aug 2013 12:29:58 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
5S6
A. CAROLINE
BERRY,
R. J. BERRY
AND
PETER
J. UCKO
Reliabledatedcontext:it is unfortunate thatmuchof theexistingliterature is basedon inadequately datedmaterial(forexample,see Massoulard's(I949) despairing efforts to separatedatedfromundatedpredynastic material). 3. Availabilityof at least thirtycraniain reasonableconditionin each series (althoughone of our seriesonly containedtwenty-eight specimens).
2.
Sinceit was necessary to studyactualspecimens, we werenot able to makeuse of a numberof seriesforwhicharchaeologicaland metricaldata were available
(e.g.Jackson I937:
I44-53),
butforwhichtheskullswerelost,re-buried ornon-
identifiable fromexistingrecords.Furthermore we had to limitour studyto materialavailablein GreatBritain. We classified sixteensamplesfromfourteenlocalities(fig.i), a totalof 775 skulls:
I. Forty-eight Badarianspecimens fromthesiteof Badari(C). Theseformpart of thematerialmeasuredby Stoessiger(I927) and Derry(Morant1935) and can be presumedto be well datedto theBadarianperiod.It is notimpossible thata few specimens wereoflaterpredynastic datefromthesiteofDeir Tasa, butwherever it hasprovedpossibleto checkparticular gravesin whichcraniawerefound,they have been indubitably Badarian. 2, 3, 4. Materialfromlaterpredynastic periodsis availablefromthe sitesof Naqada, Abydos,Diospolis Parva,Hierakonpolisand El Amrah,but littleof it can be reliablydated.For the presentstudyit was decidedto avoid combining predynastic materialfromdifferent sites.As a consequence, materialfromall sites exceptNaqada and Hierakonpoliswas too smallto be used. SeveralhundredskullswereexcavatedbyPetrieatNaqada (C), andhe apparently firstdividedthematerial intothreegroups:SD 30-40, SD 4I-69, SD 70-80. Howeverthisleftmanyexampleswhichcouldnotbe dated(FawcettI9OI-2: 422; PetrieI906: 42), so tllatin theliterature thewholeserieshas oftenbeencombined as homogeneousand representing the 'Naqada race' (e.g. Fawcett I9OI-2; CrichtonI966). This procedureis illegitimate and has been attackedby several authors (e.g.Thomson& MaclverI9o5: I3I, Moranti925). In thepresent study onlythosespecimenswhichcould be identified withsequencedatedgraveshave been included.Althoughthereis disputeabout thevalue of sequencedating(see Arkell & Ucko i965), thisseemsthe only way to date thisparticularmaterial. Sequencedateshave been adoptedas theywere publishedin Petrie(I920: plates 5I-2). We have separatedthe materialinto: 2. an earlypredynastic groupof 28 of specimens (SD 30-39); 3. a generalpredynastic groupof32 specimens (definitely predynastic date, but which could not be more accuratelyassignedparticular sequencedates);4. a latepredynastic groupof 30 specimens(SD 43-69). Specimensdated to SD 40-2 have beenomittedto avoid anyoverlapbetween thefirsttwo groups.Theremustremainsomedoubtas to theaccuracyof dating of tenskullsfromgraveswithnumbersbelow goo,becausetheymayhave originatedfromBallasand not Naqada. S. Fiftyskulls(froma totalof c. i5o at C) fromHierakonpoliswhich must be of latepredynastic is presumably date,althoughno moreaccurateinformation available (Quibell& GreenI902: 22; Garstang I907: 136-7; KempI963: 26).
This content downloaded from 67.115.155.19 on Sun, 4 Aug 2013 12:29:58 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
GENETICAL
CHANGE
IN ANCIENT
M1EDITERR/NEAN
Je
Gizeho '
557
M
PENINSULla
? >\1
o olTarkhan OFSIN~ql
F
Sedment 'n,*
X~Boadri
|
Qurneh
Abydos)
ANoqad
Thebes\
Hierakonpolis)
\
fst Catsxroct Aswon L O WER NUBIA4
L IBYA N DESERT
/
UPPER
100 mile's
o
0 t
> o
tXv
s
\
7l Kierma
NUBIA
0
EGYPT
200
/ %Jbe/
Moyca
FIGURE1. Map ofEgyptshowingsitesfromwhichskullshavebeenclassified.
This content downloaded from 67.115.155.19 on Sun, 4 Aug 2013 12:29:58 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
558
A. CAROLINE
BERRY,
R. J. BERRY
AND
PETER
J. UCKO
6. A sampleof 62 skullsof DynastyI date fromthe royaltombsat Abydos (B and C), all fromgraveswhichborderedaround the pharaohs'largetombs, beingmostlikelythoseof craftsmen and workers. 7. Fifty-skulls (C) fromTarkhan,said to be of DynastyI-II, but aboutwhich no further detailsare known(PetrieI9I4: 43-4). 8. Fiftyskulls(C) fromSedment,said to be of DynastyIX, but about which is known(Petrie& Brunton nothing further I924; Woo I930-I). skulls(C) fromQumeh,saidto be ofDynastyXI, butagainabout 9. Fifty-four whichnothingfurther is known. io. Seventy-eight skulls(C) fromQau: thematerialwas initiallydividedinto thatwhichcouldbe acceptedas fallingwithinBrunton'srelativesequenceVI-VIII (44 specimens), and thatfallingwithinhissequenceIX-X (34 specimens) (Brunton I927: 5-8), but thetwo groupsdid not differ and so werecombined. i i. Fiftyskulls(fromovera thousandin the'E' seriesat C: Davin & Pearson 1924) fromthe site of Gizeh, dated to DynastiesXXVI-XXX. Althoughthis ofMemphisincludedthegravesof manyforeigners, all thosethatcould cemetery be checkedprovedto haveEgyptiannamesand it can reasonably be assumedthat
thisis a goodSaitesample(PetrieI907:
29).
Fifty-two skulls(B) fromthe siteof Hawara whichalthoughlargelyimcannothavebeenearlierthanfirstcentury possibleto dateaccurately A.D. and not laterthanfourthcentury A.D. In all caseswhereit was possibleto correlate human remainswithgravedetailstheyprovedto be 'Greek' (i.e. peopleofwidelydiffering racialoriginswho had acquiredGreekcitizenship). 13, 14. We made use of two samplesfromtheupperNile valleyin Nubia: 5o skulls(C) fromKermadatedto theTwelfthto Thirteenth Dynasties(CollettI93 3), where thepopulationhas oftenbeen assumedto be quite distinctfromthatof Egypt(seebelow),and 32 skulls(C) fromthesiteofJebelMoya above Khartoum (Mukherjee,Rao & Trevori9SS). I5, i6. Finallywe includedtwo non-Nilepopulationsamples:S4 skullsfrom Lachish inPalestine (B) ofabout700 B.C. (RisdonI939), and56Ashanti skulls (B) aboutwhichno accuratedetailsof provenanceare known. I2.
Results The frequencies of individualvariantsare set out in table2. In some casesthe frequencies arebasedon lowernumbersthanthetotalsforthepopulation,because of the need to use damagedspecimens.Measuresof divergencetogetherwith estimates ofthestandard errors ofthosestatistics aregivenintable3. Certainsamples did not differ fromeach otherand were combinedformostof thecomparisons. in the frequencies of individual Table 3 also shows the numbersof differences variants'significant'(accordingto a conventionaltestof significance) at both the 5 per cent.and i per cent.probability levelsforall populationcomparisons made. Finallywe carriedout a principalcomponentanalysisto testwhetherthe measuresof divergence betweenpopulationswereusuallytheresultof differences in thefrequencies variants ofonlya fewvariants, or whethera numberofdifferent werenormallyinvolved.The resultsofthisanalysisareshownin table4.
This content downloaded from 67.115.155.19 on Sun, 4 Aug 2013 12:29:58 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
CHANGE IN ANCIENT
GENETICAL > ;q s t+o??-m?H
.^
So
t.Hoo>
+ oo
en t- \0 0?
~~~ ~ O
0.
0 .
0.
0 \0 \O^
~
X
~ O
M
\
0
,00
XumH>
Xn 00 X
a ;
;-
.6 F,
;.
z,
.0 0
O
.0
CJ-
H0
0
0
m
.0
.0
..0
-l
;n
.0
0
.0
o
.0
.0
v0
,\ 0n-0 Q \0
0
;4
7~~~~-
6m \ b 40
P4
o
\b
0H>C
*? *?
+n~>
Xo;n
6
;n
o
o
0
q
6ml
ob
o
0
0
0
0
.0
.
o
.0 t-
0
o0
08
C
O
0
N
?10
H
>H
D
+mw
0 o6 o
o
(4
0
0
enu
n
xx
000+
u~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~E o o eO x Hox
* ?o~+o00
;
Znu-
0
0.
Obo
>+o?
moobobuou>> 0
;
>WI
0
'n
>
e
sbH+
0
\?-?
04
oXob
knr\O
0
0.0
0H cH0\
*? oo*?Hc \? en?-
0
t-
l
.0
Q
o -Q
.0
Il
en+e
6\
o
.0
.0
WI 0
0
\0 \0
0
\Z44
\0m>bb
+a
0
o
o
It \0
a0
0
O X
0
t-
H
>
"
ooc ;
\0
08
H
0
.0
o
o
m H
E
"I
X
00e X
el
oo
o
en
o
tebt.ooom
.% ,m.
S
m
6
o
o~
iH
559
EGYPT
0x
;n 4 0
;I
o
o
>b
m
;
\
l>
Z
-
1+oxmobmbtOb4
t
ooo
;n
o
o6
;n Xo i- x
;o6
ooZ- 6H
o
6
o
o;
o
\b x
l o4
Z s; 1tSSSSM 'W tX~~~~~~e
o"
WI eq
.t \0 ~-~~~~ n o;
o6
r- .t ei
oH>m+t , Zn o;
0H(.
en X>o
n ;n
t o
en
6
el
> Z- > nq o
o
C 0 \b C
t6;
This content downloaded from 67.115.155.19 on Sun, 4 Aug 2013 12:29:58 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
a
6
o
A.
56o
CAROLINE
R.
BERRY,
J.
BERRY
AND
PETER
UCKO
J.
49 i'
00
ZSL
s
0-4
Q 4n'A is
or \0
in
00
m tn " 0 eq M
_V,
TR
\0 N
4c
tv
'40
;q
0
tt
4!
60
404
u
'!3 0
00
ts
0.0
S3,-
r 7,Z4-
cl
.a
>
Iz.
.4m
Cs 43
0 1-4
fn
0-
.0
0 >
'A
0
"
0
l4t
Vb cl
in N U4
44
U
cli
0 Vb fi 34
m
ts ts
tn
;q
c-3o
0 U
04
2 -0
1-0 c-i U 0 > to
tn 14-ti
!5 P
"MIm
00
00
0,
0
0
00
In
6 64
ri m
C's A.
z
g4
z
-A
d
S.
CZ
dt
This content downloaded from 67.115.155.19 on Sun, 4 Aug 2013 12:29:58 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
A H
4 m
GENETICAL
CHANGE IN ANCIENT
56I
EGYPT
TABLE 4. Principal component analysis of non-metricalvariant frequencies(Egyptian and
Components ordered according to magnitude of latentroot (and hencenotequivalent to thenumbering in table2)* I 2 3
4 5 6 7 8
Nubianpopulations only). Latentrootof correlation matrix
varSo-called percentage for by iance accounted eachcomponent
5.72
I9.74
3.98 3'32 2@59 21I4
I3.72 II.46
4'74
IP74
16-34
8-95
7.39 5X98
9 IO II
0o9I
4.3I 3*94 31I3
I2
0?36
1.25
I3
0-32
IlIO
14-30
I.25 I*14
077 0
2.67 0
Thisis a is thebestdiscriminant foreachpopulationcomparison. *i.e. The first component of thevariantfrequency. weightedcombination
Discussion There are no meansat the momentof measuringtotalgeneticaldifferences (McLaren & betweenpopulationsin termsof numbersof gene substitutions WalkerI966). Withthetechniques at our disposal,all we can do is expressphenoit is difficult to assesswhat is a units.Furthermore typicdifferences in arbitrary betweentwo samples.The conventionhas been 'significant'geneticaldifference adoptedin thepresentcontextto regarda measureof divergenceas indicatinga meaningful difference ('significant')if it is more thandouble its standarderror. Divergenceswhichare greaterthantwicetheirstandarderrorare indicatedby an in table3; a doubleasterisk asterisk indicatesa value of overthreeformeasureof in thisway divergencedividedby itsstandarderror.Resultshave beenpresented method to make clearthe basic problemof decidingwhetherthe non-metrical is usefulfor geneticalconmparisons of theseparticularhuman populations.All involvingKeirma,Lachishand the Ashantiare exceptone of the comparisons all from otherpopulationsby a valuetwicetheirstandarderror(and distinguished themajorityof comparisons betweenLachishand theAshantiand otherpopulationsby valuesgreaterthanthreetimestheirstandarderror).As theseare exactly thepopulationswhichwe would expect,on culturaland archaeological evidence, biologicallyto differ mostfromtheEgyptiansof anyperiod,it seemsreasonable to acceptthatthemethodgivesmeaningful results forthishumanskeletalmaterial. Moreoverabout threepopulationsonly would be expectedto be 'significantly different' in table 3. differences' by chance,whereasthereare 52 'significant Further analysiscanbe seenin thefact supportforthevalidityofthisnon-metrical thattheEarlyand Generalpredynastic fromeach Naqada samplesdid not differ siteswas homogeneous,and other,thattheArchaicmaterialfromtwo different thattheMiddleKingdomsamplesfromdifferent sites-as well as thetwo samples from originally dividedfromthesiteof Qau (see above)-were indistinguishable each other. These three homogeneousgroups were used for most of the
This content downloaded from 67.115.155.19 on Sun, 4 Aug 2013 12:29:58 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
562
A. CAROLINE
BERRY,
R. J. BERRY
AND
PETER
J. UCKO
as all madegood archaeological comparisons, and culturalsense.The samplefrom Hierakonpolis (5) was keptseparatefromtheEarlyand GeneralNaqada samples (z and 3) foralthoughit did not differ 'significantly' fromthem,neitherdid it differ fromtheLate Naqada sample(4) whichwas distinct fromtheotherNaqada samples. ThisLate Naqada sample(4) is significantly different fromall otherpopulations with whichit has been compared,exceptthe otherlate predynastic one from Hierakonpolis.The GeneralNaqada samplefallsbetweentheEarlyand Lateones, as would be expected.Virtuallyall the divergenceof the Late fromtheEarly Naqada sampleis accountedforin termsof decreasein thefrequency of a single variant(no. 2I) from45 percent.to o percent.(table2). Therecan be no doubt thatthisis a realdifference andnota scoringerror,as theNaqada skullswereclassifiedat randombeforebeingsortedintotheirthreegroups.A 'significant' populabasedon onlya singlevariantoccursin thisone casein our study; tiondivergence theprincipalcomponentanalysis(table4) makesit clearthaton averagea number of variantscontribute decreasingly to the populationdivergences, the bestitem in all its discriminating by about20 per cent.The Late Naqada sampleis distinct theHierakonpolis comparisons, one lessso, butin additiontheybothhave a low frequency of variant2I. The lowestincidenceof thisparticular variantin other populationswas in the Ashantipopulationof Ghana (althoughtheLate Naqada sampleis overallless like the Ashantipopulationthanthe Early Naqada one). Howeverthischangein one variantat theend of predynastic timesseemsto have been onlya temporary one, and laterEgyptiansamplesare similarin thisrespect to theearlierpredynastic populations. If it is to be acceptedthatthisnon-metrical methodis usefulin analysingthe Egyptianskeletalmaterial,severalindividualcomparisons requireexplanationin the light of Egyptologicalknowledge.However, the most strikingfact that in the emergesfroma studyof table3 is theremarkable degreeof homogeneity thesameconpopulationofEgyptovera periodof about 5,ooo years,effectively clusionas frommetricalanalysis(seebelow). Our samplesdid notincludematerial fromeitherthe deltaproperor theEdfu-Aswanarea whichare themostlikely to have containedforeignsettlers. Moreoverwe do not know thedegreeof admixturewhich took place betweenEgyptiansand foreigners at any period of thegeneticalconstancyshownby our Egyptianhistory(see above). Nevertheless resultsis not as surprising as it mightat firstseem,if one takesinto accountthe extentof the historically attestedincursionsinto Egypt throughoutits history. This does not meanthatthereare no heterogeneities or changesin our resultswhich might clearlythereare-but at no time are theremajor discontinuities different implyreplacement of the populationon a largescale by a genetically people. Comparisons withcraniometric work Osteometryof ancientEgyptianpopulationsbegan over a hundredyearsago is virtuallymeaningless (e.g. Morton I844) but much of the earlierliterature becauseof thelack of standardisation of techniquesand theadvancesin genetical and statisticalunderstanding since that time (for reviews,see Batrawi I946;
This content downloaded from 67.115.155.19 on Sun, 4 Aug 2013 12:29:58 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
GBNETICAL
CHANGE IN ANCIENT
EGYPT
563
acceptedpositionis thatofRisdon(I939, Massoulard1949: ch. io). The generally followingMorant I925 and Smith & JonesI908). He groupedlow values of statistic based on metrical of raciallikeness'(a multivariate Pearson's'coefficient populations(males Egyptianand neighbouring data)betweenpairsof twenty-two only)(two morewereaddedby Batrawi& MorantI947), and concludedthatthe withinthan populationsfell into two classes,with much greatersimilarities to havebeen seriesincludeall thoseconsidered betweenclasses.Thesetwenty-four treatedin a reliablemanner. The two classesare the main basisof Morant'sconclusionthat'in earlypreracesof man livingin Egypt; one in the dynastictimestherewere two distinct Thebaidandtheother,itis supposed,in theFayum.Theymaybe calledtheUpper and Lower Egyptianraces.They were as closelyrelatedto one anotheras two adjacentpeople are generallyfoundto be, and therecan be no doubtthatthey divergedfromthesamebranchofthehumantreeatno veryearlydate.The Lower Egyptiantypeseemsto have remainedunchangedfromEarlyDynasticto Ptolemaictimesexceptthata relatively smallpartof thepopulationwas modifiedvery slightly, possiblyby admixturewith some unknownforeignrace. The Upper fromtheveryearliesttimesin whichwe Egyptiantypewas slowlytransformed have acquaintancewithit, and by late Dynastictimesthe populationof Upper the Egyptwas ofalmostpureLower Egyptiantype. . . Thesetwo typesrepresent extremesof the pure nativeEgyptianpopulationfromEarly Predynasticto Ptolemaictimesand therelationsbetweenthemare of the same natureas those whichtwo allied,adjacentand contemporaneous raceswould bearto one another in general.The vastmajorityof theDynasticseriesof craniafromUpperEgypt betweentheUpper and Lower Egyptiantimes'(I925: 4, 5). are intermediate Our morelimiteddata do not fallneatlyinto two such groups.Furthermore calculatedforthe same (or similar)population forthe twentydistancestatistics thereis a strongnegative workersand ourselves, comparisons by thecraniometric result,becauseon thetwo other correlation of - o048 ? O*I7. This is a surprising basedon metricaldata betweendistancestatistics occasionson whicha correlation (Berry, datahasbeenattempted and distancestatistics calculatedfromnon-metrical Evans & SennittI967; Berry& SmithMs), therehas been a positivecorrelation of the orderof 30-40 per cent.If it is acceptedthatgeneticaldifferences by theuse of and to someextentmeasured, betweenpopulationscan be detected, thismustmean thateitherthe data or the materialof the multivariate statistics, of racial craniometric workersor ourselvesare faulty.However,the coefficient on purely hasbeencriticised calculatedbythecraniometricians) likeness (thestatistic statistical grounds(FisherI936; SeltzerI937), and Barnard(I934-5) concludedon oftheEgyptianpoputoolforthecomparison thesegroundsthatitwasaninefficient and the inadequaciesofsamplesusedby theearly lations.Despitethesecriticisms, of our results we feelit usefulto discusstheinterpretation metricalinvestigators, in the contextof the resultsgenerallyacceptedby Egyptologists and whichare withinan accuratechronological derivedfrommetricalstudies,albeitframework. The earliest cultureto haveyieldedhumanremainsis theBadarian.I predynastic Stoessiger (I927: I44) claimedthattheBadarians(fromthe siteof Badari) were inbeingsomewhatmoredolichocephalic distinct fromlaterpredynastic populations and prognathous and somewhatnarrowerin the parietalregionand shorterof 3-M.
This content downloaded from 67.115.155.19 on Sun, 4 Aug 2013 12:29:58 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
564
A. CAROLINE
BERRY,
R. J. BERRY
AND
PETER
J. UCKO
face thanlaterpredynastic peoples.However a laterstudy(MorantI937: 63-6) emphasised thattheremainsof thisdatefromthesitesof Badariand Mostagedda weredefinitely ofthesamepopulation,anditwas shownthattheywerenotunlike fromlaterexamples theotherpredynastic populations. The 'Badariantype'differed and a lower nasal index,but this by havinga greaterdegreeof prognathism difference indicatedno more thanthattheywere not membersof preciselythe same population.Morant claimed also that the Badarianswere more closely relatedto theearlypredynastic populationthatsucceededtheBadarianthanto the from late predynastic one and also showedthattheBadarianswere quitedistinct Roman Egyptians.2Our resultsagree with thoseof Stoessigerin so faras the fromthe later predynastic Badarian populationappearssignificantly different It is not possiblefromour data to populationsfromNaqada and Hierakonpolis. as to how closelyor distantly makeanyassessment relatedthevarioussamplesare. From our resultsthe Badariansappeardistinctfromall otherpopulationswith whichtheyhad beencompared(includingGraeco-Egyptians at Hawara,as already claimedby Morant)exceptforthoseof theOld Kingdom,and thosefromGizeh and Lachish.It is verydifficult to envisageany situationwherebythe Badarians relatedto eitherof theselate populationsand yetnotto the would be genetically Middle Kingdom populations,and we must conclude that the non-metrical betweenwhatmusthave been disparate analysisdoes not in thiscase distinguish populations. It has commonlybeen claimedwithregardto theBadarians(and also forthe prehistoric populationof Khartoum(DerryI949: 32-3) whichsome authorities (e.g. ArkellI956: I23-6) considerculturallyrelatedto the Badarian)thatthey whichlaterdisappearfromtheNile valleypopulaexhibitseveralNegro features thehomogeneity ofthehistoric Egyptian tions.IndeedMorant(1925: 8) expressed populationsin termsof theirfreedomfrom'Negro blood .., it is notpossibleto effect ofanysuch(Negro) admixture thatcan havetakenplace detecttheslightest times'.Most authorsare at painsto disclaimany Negro afterearlyPredynastic elementin theEgyptianpopulationsafterthe predynastic periodexceptforthe I947: I44). Althoughthereis populationof SudaneseKerma(e.g. Falkenburger data do distinguish sub-Saharan no doubtthatmetricaland craniometric populathebasicweaknessof all claimsto distinguish tionsfromsomeotherpopulations, or decryNegro elementson the basisof metricalanalysesis the absenceof any to isolate particular features whichcan be derigorouspopulationcomparisons situationthatF. P. (I928: 68), scribedas negroid.It is typicalof thisunsatisfactory on theoriginalStoessiger report,couldsummarise althoughbasinghimself entirely the Badarianskullmaterialin termswhich deniedany seriousNegro element: to 'It is rathermore prognathousthanthe Naqada skullsbut any resemblance as to bara nearconnexion, andiftherewereanyrelation, Negrotypesareso distant it musthave been a long way back in evolutionary history... Badarianswerea withtheIndians,both radiatingfromsome Asiaticcentre'. Our fellow-branch non-metrical analysisdoes not enableus to say anythingabout so-calledNegro butit is noticeablethattheKermasampleis muchmoredistinct features fromall otherpopulations(includingtheBadarian)in our data thanin the craniometric of evidence.Thereis thuslittleevidenceof anykindto supporttheclassification the Badariansas eitherNegro or Hamitic (see Arkell & Ucko I965: I55), a
This content downloaded from 67.115.155.19 on Sun, 4 Aug 2013 12:29:58 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
GENETICAL
CHANGE IN ANCIENT
EGYPT
s65
classification confusion:'The southern group, whichcan onlylead to considerable whichis clearlyof Hamiticorigin,consistsof people with smallphysiqueof negroidtypewhicharehoweverdifferent fromrealNegroes' (VandierI952: I2). The classicaldistinction betweentheUpper and LowerEgyptiantypeshas also ledto somemisunderstanding andforDerry(I939: 5I; I947: 249-5I) andothers thepredynastic in a secondary source populationwas thesouthern race(summarised by Gardiner(I96I: 392) as dolichocephalic, shortishand with Negro features) the northern whereasthe populationof the Old Kingdomand laterrepresents race(talland withlargeskulls(GardinerI96I)). In fact,as we haveseen,Morant's is a geographical a temporalone. originaldistinction one, and onlysecondarily The changein potterytypefromWhiteCross-linedto Decoratedbetweenthe earlyand thelatepredynastic period(Amratian to Gerzean)hasbeeninterpreted by some(e.g. Baumgarteli965: 2i) as due to thearrivalintoEgyptofa new groupof evidenceto supportthis conclusionand people. There is no anthropometric as one of us has arguedrecently(Arkell & Ucko i965: I53, I55), furthermore, thereis no good archaeological evidenceto supportsuchan invasionofforeigners. Whetherour findings on thebasisof one non-metrical variantfora 'significant' difference betweenEarly and Late Naqada populationsshould be acceptedas important supportforthetheoryofinvasionto starttheGerzeanperiodis opento thatthe debate.Even ifit is maintained on thebasisof our non-metrical findings it mustbe Early and Late Naqada populationswere reallygenetically different, was less noted that in late predynastic timesat Hierakonpolisthis difference accentuated and thatby archaictimes,at leastat TarkhanandAbydos,thepopulationagainresembledtheearlierpredynastic populationbothoveralland in terms ofthevariantfrequency in LateNaqada. Nevertheless it is this whichwas different distinction betweena southern (Upper) and northern (Lower) racewhichhas led to postulatea dynasticinvasionat thebeginningof theFirst manyEgyptologists Dynasty.ThusEmery(I96I: 39-40) writesthat'towardstheclose of thefourth a civilisedaristocracy or master millenniUMB.C. we findpeopleapparently forming racerulingoverthewhole ofEgypt... a peoplewhose skullsare of greatersize [equatedby Derry(i956: 8o) withgreatercranialcapacityand a largerbrain],and whosebodieswerelargerthanthoseof thenatives,thedifference beingso marked thatanysuggestion thatthesepeoplederivedfromtheearlierstockisimpossible.. .' thattheheightofthepredynastic skullexceeded Derry(I947: 249-5 I) maintained its widthwhile forhistoricpopulationsfromEgypt the oppositewas trueand one. Should thattheactualheightof theskullwas greaterthanin thepredynastic thisdifference be real,it mayreflect no morethanthealreadynotedgeographical difference. Our datashowno difference betweentheearlypredynastic population of Naqada and eitherthe archaicpopulationof Tarkhanor the 'workmen' of archaicAbydos.It is also interesting to notethatwe foundno difference between thelatepre-dynastic populationofHierakonpolis andthearchaicpopulations. This givessomeaddedsupportto those(e.g. Arkell& Ucko i965: iss) who question thenecessity ofinvokingan invasionintoEgyptin orderto explaintheemergence of theFirstDynastyofEgypt. Craniometric work on materialfromthe dynasticperiodsof ancientEgyptis comparatively little.We have seenthatcraniometricians claimthatmosthistoric littlefromtheArchaic(northern) populations differed populations. Our data(from
This content downloaded from 67.115.155.19 on Sun, 4 Aug 2013 12:29:58 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
566
A. CAROLINE
BERRY,
R. J. BERRY
AND
PETER
J. UCKO
Hierakonpolis,from Archaic,Middle Kingdom and Saite sites) confirmthis finding,but theMiddle Kingdom and Saite populationsare distinctfromeach other. Althoughitis oftenassumedthattheKermapopulationwas negroid(seeabove), betweenthispopulationand difference Barnard(1934-5; 367) foundno significant (whereit is possiblethat at Dendereh thatfromthe Sixthto TwelfthDynasties at thistime). Our population mercenlary foreign theremay have been a large Furtherexamined. all other populations from distinct be analysisshowsKermato significant a that period the with Ptolemaic only is it that moreBarnardclaimed forthePtolemaicpopulachangein theEgyptianpopulationbecomesnoticeable, earlierpopulationat the from the both different significantly tionfromDenderehis shows no difference Our analysis population. Kerma the from same site and Greek later the populationof and of Gizeh population betweenthe Egyptian this result. cannot explain Hawara.We databasedon skeletal andnon-metrical To sumup, theanalysesofbothmetrical betweensampleswhichis atvariancewithan assumption remainsshowa similarity development. duringanyperiodofEgypt'shistorical of greatracialintermingling This can mean: enoughto revealanyintermningling; usedarenotsensitive i. thatthetechniques were few in numberrelativeto the existing 2. morelikely,thattheincomers to any thegene-poolof futuregenerations population,and did notinfluence markeddegree; fromtheEgyptianpopulation. genetically 3. thattheincomersdid not differ NOTES
and Cambridge, to thelateDr J. C. TrevoroftheDuckworthLaboratory, We aregrateful in Dr K. P. OakleyoftheBritishMuseum(NaturalHistory)foraccessto theskullcollections theircare.Mr A. J. Lee drewthefigure.Our thanksare due to our colleaguesMr D. R. C. A. B. Smithfor H. Griineberg, F.R.S., and Professor Dr D. Dixon, Professor Brothwell, and especiallyto Dr J. P. Garlickand of our manuscript, theircommentsand criticisms Mr H. S. Smithformuchvaluablediscussion. fromtheBadarian, as distinct a Tasianculture to defime I Itisinteresting tonotethatintrying markedtypeswithwiderheadsand Tasianskullsas strongly (I937: 27) described Bruntoni grave ones.Bruntonevendateda particular jaws thantheBadarianor Amratian muchsquarer evidence orcraniometric withit.Thatthereislittlearchaeological bythetypeofskullassociated Arkell & fora separateTasian cultureis now fairlyclear(see Baumgarteli955: 2I-II; Ucko I965: i5o).
datato a few complexcraniometric reducewhatareextremely sourcestypically 2 Secondary andEl-Mustagedda fromEl-Badari thehumanskeletons e.g.'The studyof sentences, generalised wasofmixedorigin,somehavinga fine hasshownthatalreadyat thatearlyage thepopulation anidsome a heavilybuiltskull.Theirskullswere closelyrelatedto thoseof thepeople of I965: I3). Naqada I and IF' (Baumgartel REFERENCES
orient. Egypt.Biblthca ofprehistoric E.J. The cultures A.J.I956. Reviewof Baumgartel, Arkell, 13, I23-7.
in the Nile valley.Curr. development & P. J. Ucko I965. Review of predynastic 6, I45-66. Anthrop. in fourseriesofEgyptianskulls. ofskullcharacters M. M. I934-5. Secularvariations Barnard, Ann.Eugen.6, 352-7I. of the Batrawi,A. I946. The racialhistoryof Egyptand Nubia. 2, The racialrelationships Inst.76, 13I-56. ofEgyptandNubia.J.R. anthrop. ancientandmodernpopulations & G. M. MorantI947. A studyof a FirstDynastyseriesof Egyptianskullsfrom 34, I8-27. SakkaraandofanEleventhDynastyseriesfromThebes.Biometrika
This content downloaded from 67.115.155.19 on Sun, 4 Aug 2013 12:29:58 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
GENETICAL
CHANGE
IN ANCIENT
EGYPT
567
I. London:OxfordUniv.Press. Baumgartel, A. J. i955. Thecultures ofprehistoric Egypt, 1965. Predynastic Egypt.Cambridge:Univ. Press. J. Anat.IOI, Berry,A. C. & R. J. BerryI967. Epigeneticvariationin thehumancranium. 36I-79.
LanBerry,R. J. I964. The evolutionofan islandpopulationof thehousemouse.Evolution, caster,Pa I8, 468-83.
in miceandmen.In Theskeletal biology -inpress.The biologyofnon-metrical variation ofearlier human populations (ed.) D. R. Brothwell. London. and ecologyof Apodemus , I. M. Evans & B. F. C. SennittI967. The relationships sylvaticus fromtheSmallIslesof theInnerHebrides,Scotland. J. Zool. 152, 333-46. characterization ofratpopulations fromskeletal - & C. A. B. Smith.Ms. The genetical data. characters of the skullin differentiating Brothwell,D. R. i958. The use of non-metrical populations. Dt. Ges.Anthrop. 6, I03-9. 1 In Sciencein archaeology (eds)D. R. I96I. The biologyof earlierhumanpopulations. Brothwell& E. Higgs.London:Thames& Hudson. 1 I963. Diggingup bones,theexcavation, treatment andstudyof humanskeletalremains. London:BritishMuseumTrustees. 1 In Homenaje a Juan in theskeleton. I965. Of miceandmen:epigenetic polymorphism 2. Mexico: Instituto Interamericano. Comasensu 65 anniversaria Indigenista G. I927. Qau andBadarii. London:Quaritch. Brunton, London:Quaritch. I937. Mostagedda andtheTasianculture. III totheendoftheTwenty-First CamthedeathofRamesses Dynasty. Cerny,J. i965. Egyptfrom bridge:Univ.Press. orientale: E. I904. Recherches dansl'Afrique Egypte. Lyons:A. Rey. Chantre, anthropologiques Collett,M. I933. A studyof Twelfthand Thirteenth DynastyskullsfromKerma(Nubia). Biometrika 25, 254-84. ofEgyptianandAfrican Negrocrania. Crichton, J.M. I966. A multiplediscriminant analysis Pap. Peabody Mus.57, 47-67. andprehistory. De Beer,G. R. I965. Genetics Cambridge:Univ.Press. constants of thehumanskull.Biometrika Davin,A. G. & K. PearsonI924. On thebiometric I6, 328-63.
I939. Note on theremains of Shashanq.Ann.Serv.39, 549-5I. at Helwan. Preliminary noteon thehumanremains fromtheroyalexcavations Ann.Serv.suppI. 3, 249-5I. by A. J. Arkell.London: I949. Reporton thehumanremains.In EarlyKhartoum OxfordUniv. Press. racein Egypt.J. Egypt. Archaeol. I956. The dynastic 42, 8o-5. Pelican. Emery,W. B. I96I. Archaic Egypt.Harmondsworth: F. I947. La composition racialede l'ancienneEgypte.Anthropologie, Paris5I, Falkenburger,
Derry,D. E.
-
I947.
239-50.
of thehumanskull Fawcett,C. D. I9OI-2. A secondstudyof thevariationand correlation withspecialreference to theNaqada crania.Biometrika I, 408-67. of raciallikeness'and thefutureof craniometry. J. R. Fisher,R. A. I936. 'The coefficient Inst.46, 57-63. anthrop. F. P. I928. The Badarianskull. In TheBadariancivilisation by G. Brunton& G. CatoniThompson.London:Quaritch. A. I96I. EgyptofthePharaohs. Oxford:Univ. Press. Gardiner, M. J.I907. Excavations atHierakonpolis, atEsna,andinNubia.Atn.Serv.8, I32-48. Garstalig, in theC57BL strainofmice.Genet.Res. Grewal,M. S. I962. The rateof geneticdivergence Camb.3, 226-37. H. I963. Thepathology Oxford:Blackwell. Griineberg, ofdevelopment. Hum.Biol. 17, I07-36. Hess,L. i945. The metopicsutureand themetopicsyndrome. andenvironment in thedetermination ofminor Howe,W. L. & P. A. ParsonsI967. Genotype and bodyweightin mice.J. Embryol. skeletalvariants exp.Morph.17, 283-92. I by R. Mond & 0. H. Myers Jackson, J. W. I937. Osteology.In Cemeteries ofArmant (EgyptExplor.Soc. mem.42). Oxford:Univ.Press. London:Faber. Kees,H. I96I. Ancient Egypt:a cultural topography. racesoftheThebaid Keith,A. I905. Review of Theancient by A. Thomson& D. R. Maclver. Man,5, 9I-6. note.J. Egypt. Kemp, B. J. I963. Excavationsat Hierakonpolis Fort,I905: a preliminary Archaeol.49, 26-8.
This content downloaded from 67.115.155.19 on Sun, 4 Aug 2013 12:29:58 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
A. CAROLINE
568
BERRY,
R. J. BERRY
AND
PETER
J. UCKO
in Greenlandic Eskimocrania.Acta Laughlin,W. S. & J.B. Jorgensen I956. Isolatevariation Genet.6, 3-12. workinEgypt.J.R. anthrop. Inst.30, 95-I03. MacIver,D. R. I900. Recentanthropometric powerofrodentdeoxyribonucleic acid McLaren,A. & P. M. B. WalkerI966. Discriminating in agar.Nature, on incubation Lond.211, 486-90. (Trav.M6m. Inst.Ethnol.53). Paris: Massoulard, E. I949. Pr6histoire etprotohistoire d'Egypte Institut d'Ethnologie. to Roman times. Morant,G. M. I925. A studyof Egyptiancraniologyfromprehistoric Biometrika 17, I-52. I935. A studyof predynastic EgyptianskullsfromBadari based on measurements andProfessor D. E. Derry.Biometrika takenby MissB. N. Stoessiger 27, 293-308. by G. Brunton. 1937. The predynastic EgyptianskullsfromBadari.In Mostagedda London:Quaritch. in ancient Egypt.Am.Rev.resp. Morse,D., D. R. Brothwell& P. J.Ucko I964. Tuberculosis Dis. 90, 524-4I. Pennington; Morton,S. G. I844. Craniaaegyptiaca (Trans.Am. phil. Soc. 9). Philadelphia: London:Madden. inhabitants ofJebel Moya(Sudan). Mukherjee, R., C. R. Rao &J. C. Trevori955. Theancient Cambridge:Univ.Press. J.R. anthrop. Inst.31, 248-55. Petrie,W. M. Flinders I9OI. The racesofearlyEgypt. I906. Migrations.J. R. anthrop. Inst.36, I-44. Egypt13). London:Quaritch. I907. GizehandRifeh(Publ.Brit.Sch.Archaeol. Archaeol. I, 43-4. I914. The British SchoolofArchaeology inEgypt.J.Egypt. I920. Prehistoric Egypt(Publ.Brit.Sch. Archaeol.Egypt31). London:Quaritch. & G. BruntonI924. Sedment (Publ. Brit. Sch. Archaeol.Egypt34, 35). London: Quaritch. 2 (Mem.EgyptianRes. Acc. 5). London: Quibell,J.E. & F. W. GreenI902. Hierakonpolis. Quaritch. ofbiologicalclassificaofmultiple measurements inproblems Rao, C. R. I948. The utilization Soc. IO, I59. tion.J.R. statist. fromPalestine excavated Risdon,D. L. I939. A studyofthecranialandotherhumanremains at Tell Duweir(Lachish)by theWeilcome-Marston archaeological research expedition. Biometrika 31, 99-I66. of raciallikeness. Am.J. phys.Anthrop. 23, Seltzer,C. C. 1937. A critiqueof thecoefficient IOI-9.
of upon the civilization Smith,G. Elliot I9II. The ancientEgyptiansand theirinfluence Europe.London,New York: Harper. Bull.archaeol. Surv.Nubia2, & F. Wood JonesI908. Reporton thehumanremains. 29-55.
B. N. I927. A studyoftheBadariancrania recentlyexcavatedby the British Stoessiger, in Egypt.Biometrika Schoolof Archaeology I9, iio-5o. racesoftheThebaid. Oxford:Clarendon. Thomson,A. & D. R. Maclveri9o5. Theancient fromEgypt.J.R. anthrop. Inst.95, 2I4-39. Ucko,P. J.i965. Anthropomorphic ivoryfigurines i. Paris:Picard. Vandier, J. I952. Manueld'archiologie igyptienne NinthDynastyEgyptianskullsfromSedment. Woo, T. L. I930-I. A studyof seventy-one Biometrika 22, 65-93.
This content downloaded from 67.115.155.19 on Sun, 4 Aug 2013 12:29:58 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
