posted
Many scholars have allowed Eurocentrist to spread the myth that the Somalians, Ethiopians and etc. represent the ancient Egyptians. This is a myth. The descendants of the Egyptians live in West Africa and Central-East Africa
It is a myth because it is clear from the research of Diop that after the fall of ancient Egypt the Egyptians migrated westward into West and Central-East Africa, not Ethiopia and Somalia which were already heavily occupied when Egypt fell into decline.
We also know that the Ethiopians are mainly associated with Punt. We find that around the time Egypt went into decline groups like the Nubians were coming from the east occupying the Sudan and Upper Egypt, while the Indo-European people who made up the backbone of todays Berber speaking people were beginning to occupy much of North Africa and the Delta. As a result, the only lands available for settlement when Egypt went into decline was West-Central-East Africa, not Ethiopia and the Horn.
The Eurocentrists chose the Ethiopians and Somalians as representatives of the Egyptians because these people had the fine features, usually associated with Europeans. But the history and anthropology make it clear the Ethiopians and Somlaians are not representatives of the ancient Egyptians who settled West Africa after Egypt went into decline.
Stop perpetuating the myth the Somalians-Ethiopains represent the ancient Egyptians.
posted
Please, respectfully, explain to me why is it proposed that they migrated at all. Is there evidence to show that they were forced to re-settle by imposing subsequent invaders?
I always assumed they (the Natives) mixed with subsequent invaders when the Dynastic empires went into decline.
Posts: 747 | From: Atlanta, GA USA | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by homeylu: Please, respectfully, explain to me why is it proposed that they migrated at all. Is there evidence to show that they were forced to re-settle by imposing subsequent invaders?
I always assumed they (the Natives) mixed with subsequent invaders when the Dynastic empires went into decline.
I do not believe that they all migrated but many migrated out of Egypt.
There were no exact numbers given for the people who exited Egypt during these periods. The migration of Semitic speaking people into the area is evidenced by the decline in the use of the Egyptian language after the fall of the 25th Dynasty, and rise of a period of open entry into Egypt by people during Assyrian rule of Egypt.
There were many restrictions placed on Egyptians by the Greeks. This is clear evidence of the decline of Egyptians expressing their own culture. The fact that the Greeks adopted many aspects of Egyptian culture and language in no way, supports the view that Egypt under the Greeks was an African civilization. The Greeks in India also adopted Indian religions and even began to manufacture Buddhas with European chracteristics to show their attempts to make the cultural ideology of the defeated people in their own image.
During the Greek rule of Egypt we see a decline in the arts and the beginning of a style of statuary during this period of people with obvious European features, as were the mummy portraits of the Roman period. Granted, in the culture of Hellenistic Egypt the same pharoanic insitutions were in place and rarely disrupted but, they were all made in the image of the Greeks and lack any resemblance to the cultural ideology of the ancient Egyptians.
Most of the Egyptian were not allowed in the principal Greek cities and there was a large scale migration of Europeans into Egypt during this period according to Alan K. Bowman, Egypt After the Pharaohs 332BC-AD642 (p.122). Bowman also notes that under the Greeks "The trickle of Jewish immigrants in the third century BC swelled significantly" (p.123). The major Egyptian cities during Greeco-Roman rule were settled by non-Egyptians.
Bowman wrote that "The major languages in this millennium in Egypt were Greek,, Egyptian in the form of demotic, hieroglyphic, hieratic and Coptic and Latin. Greek was in predominant use as a written language during the whole period" (p.157). Coptic, Egyptian written in Greek letters was develped by Christian missionaries to spread the gospel in the third century.
Let's not forget that many Egyptians during the Greeco-Roman period were slaves. And Bowman makes it clear that Egyptians and Greeks did not have equality.
The change in population is evident in the decline of many traditional Egyptian urban centers under Greeco-Roman rule, and rise of new urban centers mainly occupied by Europeans and a few Egyptian slaves.
The continuity between ancient Egyptian gods and Greeco-Roman gods worshipped in Egypt fail to support a view that Egypt was an African civilization under the Greeks.The Greeks easily adopted many Egyptian religions and introduced their own gods for worship even in small towns as noted by Bowman (p.170).
It is evident that after the Greeks took control of Egypt few Semitic speaking people settled the area from West Asia, as they did during the Assyrian period. Yet having read Bowman, you do know that many Jewish people did settle Egypt at this time.
In conclusion, there is no textual evidence outlining the number of people immigrating into Egypt after the fall of the 25th Dynasty, yet a cursory reading of the Greek and Roman literature written in Egypt during this period, and the rise of Greek as the state language, make it clear to me, that the Egyptian population shrank in Egypt due to population pressure by first the Semite speaking people during the Assyrian period, and especially Europeans during the Greeco-Roman eras. Consequently, we can not recognize Egypt as an African civilization after the fall of the 25th Dynasty.
quote:Originally posted by homeylu: Please, respectfully, explain to me why is it proposed that they migrated at all. Is there evidence to show that they were forced to re-settle by imposing subsequent invaders?
I always assumed they (the Natives) mixed with subsequent invaders when the Dynastic empires went into decline.
Ancient Kush extended across a large part of the Sudan. In this vast region encompassing the Napatan and Meroitic civilizations there were many different nationalities, that spoke a myriad of languages.
Due to the ethnic diversity of the Napatans, it is clear that at least from the Napatan period of Kush the rulers of the empire had decided that no single language spoken in the empire would be used to record political, administrative and religious information. To maintain an equilibrium within and among the Napatan nationalities Egyptian was used as the lingua franca of the Napatan empire.
The leaders of the Napatan empire probably used Egyptian because it was an international language, and few Kushites were of Egyptian ethnic origin.Egyptian remained the lingua franca for the Kushites during the Napatan and early Meroitic periods in Kushite history. After the Assyrians defeated the Egyptians the ethnic composition of the Kushite empire began to change. Many Egyptians began to migrate into Kushite, to avoid non-Egyptian rule.
Beginning with the Assyrian defeat of the Twenty-Fifth Dynasty large numbers of nomadic people from the Middle East began to migrate into Egypt. These foreign people began to take over many Egyptian settlements. In response, Egyptians fled to Nubia and Kush to avoid non-Egyptian rule.
Other political and military conflicts erupted after the Assyrians defeated the Twenty-Fifth Dynasty. These incidents led many Egyptians to migrate out of Egypt into Nubia and Kush. For example, Herodotus’ mentions the mutiny of Psamtik I’s frontier garrison at Elephantine—these deserters moved into Kush.
The archaizing trend in Kush among the post Twenty-Fifth Dynasty Kings testify to a possible large migration of Egyptians into Kush. In 343 BC Nectanebos II, fled to Upper Egypt. Later according to the Natasen period stela we have evidence of other Egyptians migrating into Kush from Egypt (Torok, 1997, p.391).
Between the 260’s-270’s BC Upper Egyptian Nationalists were fighting the Ptolemy (Greek) rulers of Egypt. The rebellion was put down by Ptolemy II. This military action led to Egyptians migrating out of Egypt into Kush (Torok, pp.395-396). Rebellions continued in Egypt into the 2nd Century BC (Torok, p.426).
Between Ptolomy II and Ptolemy V, the Greeks began to settle Egypt. This was especially true in the 150’sBC. These conflicts led to many Egyptians migrating into Nubia and the Sudan. By the time the Romans entered Egypt, many Egyptians had already left Egypt and settled in the Meroitic Sudan.
Roman politics also forced many Egyptians to migrate into Kush. This was compounded by the introduction of the Pax Agusta policy of the Romans which sought the establishment of Roman hegemony within territories under Roman rule . This led to the emigration of many Romans into Egypt, and the migration of Egyptians into Kush.
During most of Kushite history the elites used Egyptian for record keeping since it was recognized as a neutral language.As more and more Egyptians, fled to Kush as it came under foreign domination . Egyptians became a large minority in the Meroitic Empire. Because of Egyptian migrations to Kush, by the rule of the Meroitic Queen Shanakdakheto, we find the Egyptian language abandoned as a medium of exchange in official records, and the Meroitic script takes its place.
The textual and historical evidence is clear. There was a large migration of Egyptian speaking nationals into Kush. This made Egyptian a major language spoken by Meroitic citizens. The change in demographics in the Meroitic Empire probably led to the shift from Egyptian to Tocharian, which would have been see as a neutral language because only a few Indians and native Buddhists were probably living in the empire at the time.
There were Ancient Egyptians with broad features but the crania generally cluster with more Southerly Africans such as the Nubians, Somali and Ethiopians. Their language descends from the region and their DNA indicates predominately East African origins.
Where is the archeological evidence for Egyptians settling in West and Central Africa?
Posts: 647 | From: Atlanta | Registered: Jan 2009
| IP: Logged |
There were Ancient Egyptians with broad features but the crania generally cluster with more Southerly Africans such as the Nubians, Somali and Ethiopians. Their language descends from the region and their DNA indicates predominately East African origins.
Where is the archeological evidence for Egyptians settling in West and Central Africa?
Please post your sources which claim the Egyptian language originated among Somali and Ethiopians. Please post a study of the DNA recovered from an ancient Egyptian skeleton. We need this DNA to determine what DNA they possessed.
Please list the differences between West African and Egyptian crania.
posted
Where is the archeological evidence for Egyptians settling in West and Central Africa?
Posts: 4254 | From: dasein | Registered: Jun 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Clyde you seem to be jumping the gun here, as Angish pointed out where is the archological evidence..I mean first off you have to discount the clear evidence and diffusion of Egyptian Culture both Up and Down the Nile by So called Nubians and Ethiopian(Abbysinians) influencing and being influenced by Egypt. Look at the Ethiopia sacred Holy Land series to see how much Axum was to A. Egypt.
To me this proves that A. Egyptians and West Africans share a common Ancestor but the Egyptians were a fusion of east African(Ethiopids) and Sahrans(West Africans) as can be seen by the Badarian remains..
The Badarian culture comes from multiple sources giving them a mixed race origin which is mostly connected to Africa rather than Europe.Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Just call me Jari wrote: ---------------------------------- the Egyptians were ...... east African (Ethiopids) ...... ----------------------------------
Folks, what did I tell you about the poster above?
I told you he was one of those closeted illiterate race loon pseudos like his friend Djehuti.
His statement above proves me right once again.
Posts: 3085 | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Dr. Winters is a pseudo-scholar, easy target for anti-Afrocentrists like you. Dr. Diop does not advance the same arguments as he.
Posts: 4254 | From: dasein | Registered: Jun 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: Clyde you seem to be jumping the gun here, as Angish pointed out where is the archological evidence..I mean first off you have to discount the clear evidence and diffusion of Egyptian Culture both Up and Down the Nile by So called Nubians and Ethiopian(Abbysinians) influencing and being influenced by Egypt. Look at the Ethiopia sacred Holy Land series to see how much Axum was to A. Egypt.
To me this proves that A. Egyptians and West Africans share a common Ancestor but the Egyptians were a fusion of east African(Ethiopids) and Sahrans(West Africans) as can be seen by the Badarian remains..
The Badarian culture comes from multiple sources giving them a mixed race origin which is mostly connected to Africa rather than Europe.
There is no diffussion of culture from Egypt to Ethiopia. The earliest civilization in Ethiopia was the Tihama culture. This culture which expanded into Arabia came from Kush--not Egypt.
Please list the elements of Egyptian culture transmitted to the Ethiopians.
Those girls at the top don't look too much alike to me. But the profile of Fulani who extend from east to west Africa and North Africa like this Fulani man of Niger have always reminded me of the profile of Ramses.
Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
the original egyptians looked like any africans you would find south,west ,east, all types of black africans were there lokk at the busts of pharoahs from the first dynasty till the 6th dynasty and youl see variety of african types,
Posts: 142 | From: england sw | Registered: Aug 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by viola75: the original egyptians looked like any africans you would find south,west ,east, all types of black africans were there lokk at the busts of pharoahs from the first dynasty till the 6th dynasty and youl see variety of african types,
posted
The Amarna mummies are closer to the Southern African (average MLI 326.94), African Great Lakes (average MLI 323.76), and Tropical West African (average MLI 83.74) regions—not the Horners.
.
It is a myth that egyptians mainly looked like Horners. Eurocentrics created this myth because many whites share facial features associated with some Horners.
.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Below we compare Egyptians to West Africans. The Amarna mummies are closer to the Southern African (average MLI 326.94), African Great Lakes (average MLI 323.76), and Tropical West African (average MLI 83.74) regions—not the Horners.
.
This study supports the linguistic evidence supporting a relationship between West African languages and Egyptian.
The Iconography also supports this relationship.
.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
is this in a peer reviewed journal? Supposing its not though, would it really be wise to take this with so much weight? How well can it support linguistic evidence? And what linguistic evidence are you guys talking about???
quote:Originally posted by Smiley Coast: is this in a peer reviewed journal? Supposing its not though, would it really be wise to take this with so much weight? How well can it support linguistic evidence? And what linguistic evidence are you guys talking about???
The Linguistic Methods of Chiekh Anta Diop
By Clyde Winters
Chiekh Anta Diop has contributed much to the Afrocentric social sciences. Here we discuss many of Diop's views on using the linguistic sciences to rediscover the ancient history of Blacks.
Chiekh Anta Diop has made important contributions to linguistic theory in relation to African historiography. Diop's work illustrates that it is important for scholars to maintain a focus on the historical and linguistic factors which define the "personnalitè culturelle africaine" (Diop 1991, 227).
Language is the sanctum sanctorum of Diop's Afrocentric historical method. The Diopian view of historiography combines the research of linguistics, history and psychology to interpret the cultural unity of African people.
C. Anta Diop is the founder of modern Afrocentricism . Diop (1974,1991) laid the foundations for the Afrocentric idea in education. He laid these foundations using both the historical and anthropological/linguistic methods of research to explain the role of the Blacks in World History.
There are three components in the genetic model: 1) common Physical type, 2) common cultural patterns and 3) genetically related languages. (Winters 1989a) Diop over the years has brought to bear all three of these components in his illumination of Kemetic civilization. (Diop 1974,1977,1978,1991)
The opposition of many Eurocentric scholars to Afrocentric -ism results from white hostility to Diop's idea of a Black Egypt, and the view that Egyptians spoke an African ,rather than Afro-Asiatic language.
Recently, Eurocentric American scholars have alleged to write reviews of Diop's recent book (Diop 1991). Although these reviewers mention the work of Diop in their articles, they never review his work properly, because they lack the ability to understand the many disciplines that Diop has mastered.(Lefkowitz 1992; Baines 1991)
For example Lefkowitz (1992) in The New Republic, summarizes
Diop (1974) but never presents any evidence to dispute the findings of Diop. The most popular "review" of Diop (1991) was done by Baines (1991) review in the New York Times Book Review. In this "review" Baines (1991) claims that "...the evidence and reasoning used to support the arguments are often unsound".
Instead of addressing the evidence Diop (1991) presents of the African role in the rise of civilization that he alleges is "unsound", he is asking the reader to reject Diop's thesis without refutation of specific evidence presented by Diop of the
African contributions to Science and Philosophy. Baines (l991)
claims that Diop's Civilization or Barbarism, is not a work of originality, he fails to dispute any factual evidence presented by Diop.
Baines (1991) wants the public to accept his general negative comments about Civilization or Barbarism ,based on the fact that he is an Egyptologist. This is not enough, in academia
to refute a thesis one must present counter evidence that proves the falseness of a thesis not unsubstantiated rhetoric. We can not accept the negative views of Baines on faith alone.
In the recovery of information concerning the African past, Diop promotes semantic anthropology, comparative linguistics and the study of Onomastics. The main thesis of Diop is that typonymy and ethnonymy of Africa point to a common cradle for Paleo-Africans in the Nile Valley (Diop 1978, 67).
Onomastics is the science of names. Diop has studied legends, placenames and religious cult terms to discover the unity of African civilization. Diop (1981, 86) observed that:
"An undisputed linguistic relationship between two geographically remote groups of languages can be relevant for the study of migrations. A grammatical (or genetic) relationship if clear enough is never an accident".
As a result, Diop has used toponyms (place-names), anthroponyms (personal names) and ehthnonyms (names of ethnic groups/tribes) to explain the evidence of analogous ethnic (clan) names in West Africa and the Upper Nile (Diop 1991).
In Precolonial Black Africa, Diop used ethnonyms to chart the migrations of African people in West Africa. And in The African Origin of Civilization, Diop used analyses acculturaliste or typological analysis to study the origin and spread of African cultural features from the Nile Valley to West Africa through his examination of toponyms (Diop 1974, 182-183). In the Cultural Unity of Black Africa, Diop discussed the common totems and religious terms many African ethnic groups share (Diop 1978, 124).
LINGUISTIC TAXONOMY
This linguistic research has been based on linguistic classification or taxonomy. Linguistic taxonomy is the foundation upon which comparative and historical linguistic methods are based (Ruhlen 1994). Linguistic taxonomy is necessary for the identification of language families. The determination of language families give us the material to reconstruct the proto-language of a people and discover regular sound correspondences.
There are three major kinds of language classifications: genealogical, typological, and areal. A genealogical classifica-tion groups languages together into language families based on the shared features retained by languages since divergence from the common ancestor or proto-language. An areal classification groups languages into linguistic areas based on shared features acquired by a process of convergence arising from spatial proximity. A typological classification groups languages together into language types by the similarity in the appearance of the structure of languages without consideration of their historical origin and present, or past geographical distribution.
COMPARATIVE METHOD
Diop has used comparative and historical linguistics to illuminate the Unity of African civilization. Diop (1977, xxv) has noted that
"The process for the evolution of African languages is clearly apparent; from a far we (have) the idea that Wolof is descendant by direct filiation to ancient Egyptian, but the Wolof, Egyptian and other African languages (are) derived from a common mother language that one can call Paleo-African, the common mother language that one can call Paleo-African, the common African or the Negro- African of L. Homburger or of Th. Obenga."
The comparative method is used by linguists to determine the relatedness of languages, and to reconstruct earlier language states. The comparative linguist has two major goals (1) trace the history of language families and reconstruct the mother language of each family, and (2) determine the forces which affect language. In general, comparative linguists are interested in determining phonetic laws, analogy/ correspondence and loan words.
Diop is a strong supporter of the comparative method in the rediscovery of Paleo-African. The reconstruction of Paleo-African involves both reconstruction and recognition of regular sound correspondence. The goal of reconstruction is the discovery of the proto-language of African people is the recovery of Paleo-African:
(1) vowels and consonants
(2) specific Paleo-African words
(3) common grammatical elements; and
(4) common syntactic elements.
The comparative method is useful in the reconstruction of Proto-languages or Diop's Paleo-African. To reconstruct a proto-language the linguist must look for patterns of correspondences. Patterns of correspondence is the examination of terms which show uniformity. This uniformity leads to the inference that languages are related since uniformity of terms leads to the inference that languages are related since conformity of terms in two or more languages indicate they came from a common ancestor.
HISTORICAL LINGUISTICS
A person's language provides us with evidence of the elements of a group's culture. Diop has noted that reconstruction of Paleo-African terms can help us make inferences about a group's culture going backwards in time to an impenetrable past undocumented by written records. This is semantic anthropology, a linguistic approach which seeks to discover aspects of man's culture from his language. Thusly, linguistic resemblances can help the anthropologist make precise inferences about a groups culture elements.
Linguistic resemblances denote a historical relationship. This suggest that resemblances in fundamental vocabulary and culture terms can help one reconstruct the culture of the speakers of genetically related languages.
LINGUISTIC CONSTANCY
The rate at which languages change is variable. It appears that linguistic change is culture specific. Consequently, the social organization and political culture of a particular speech community can influence the speed at which languages change.
Based on the history of language change in Europe most linguists believe that the rate of change for all languages is both rapid and constant.(Diagne, 1981,p.238) The idea that all languages change rapidly is not valid for all the World's languages.
African languages change much slower than European languages. (Armstrong, 1962) For example, African vocabulary items collected by Arab explorers over a thousand years ago are analogous to contemporary lexical items.(Diagne,1981, p.239) In addition there are striking resemblances between the ancient Egyptian language and Coptic, and Pharonic Egyptian and African languages.(Diagne, 1981; Diop, 1977; Obenga, 1993)
The political stability of African political institutions has caused languages to change very slowly in Africa. Pawley and Ross (1993) argue that a sedentary life style may account for the conservative nature of a language.
African oral traditions and the eye witness accounts of travelers to Africa, make it clear that African empires although made up of diverse nationalities illustrated continuity. To accomodate the plural nature of African empires Africans developed a Federal system of government. (Niane , 1984) In fact we can not really describe ancient African state systems as empires, since this implies absolute rule or authority in a single individual. This political state of affairs rarely existed in ancient Africa, because in each African speech community local leadership was elected by the people within the community. (Diop, 1987) For example the Egyptians often appointed administrators over the conquered territories from among the conquered people. (Diop ,1991)
The continuity of many African languages may result from the steady state nature of African political systems, and long standing cultural stability since neolithic times. (Diop, 1991 ; Winters 1985) This cultural stability has affected the speed at which African languages change.
In Africa due to the relative stability of socio-political structures and settled life, there has not been enough pressure exerted on African societies as a whole and African speech communities in particular, to cause radical internal linguistic changes within most African languages. Permanent settlements led to a clearly defined system of inheritance and royal succession. These traits led to stability on both the social and political levels.
This leads to the hypothesis that linguistic continuity exist in Africa due to the stability of African socio-political structures and cultural systems. This relative cultural stability has led African languages to change more slowly then European and
Asian languages. Diop (1974) observed that:
First the evolution of languages, instead of moving everywhere at the same rate of speed seems linked to other factors; such as , the stability of social organizations or the opposite, social upheavals. Understandably in relatively stable societies man's language has changed less with the passage of time.(pp.153-154)
There is considerable evidence which supports the African continuity concept. Dr. Armstrong (1962) noted the linguistic continuity of African languages when he used glottochronology to test the rate of change in Yoruba. Comparing modern Yoruba words with a list of identical terms collected 130 years ago by Koelle , Dr. Armstrong found little if any internal or external changes in the terms. He concluded that:
I would have said that on this evidence African languages are changing with glacial slowness, but it seems to me that in a century a glacier would have changed a lot more than that. Perhaps it would be more in order to say that these languages are changing with geological slowness. (Armstrong, 1962, p.285).
Diop's theory of linguistic constancy recognizes the social role language plays in African language change. Language being a variable phenomena has as much to do with a speaker's society as with the language itself. Thus social organization can influence the rate of change within languages. Meillet (1926, 17) wrote that:
Since language is a social institution it follows that linguistics is a social science, and the only variable element to which one may appeal in order to account for a linguistic change is social change, of which language variations are but the consequences.
THE BLACK AFRICAN ORIGIN OF EGYPT
Diop has contributed much to African linguistics. He was a major proponent of the Dravidian-African relationship (Diop 1974, 116), and the African substratum in Indo-European languages in relationship to cacuminal sounds and terms for social organiza-tion and culture (1974, 115). Diop (1978, 113) also recognized that in relation to Arabic words, after the suppression of the first consonant, there is often an African root.
Diop's major linguistic effort has been the classification of Black African and Egyptian languages . Up until 1977 Diop'smajor area of interest were morphological and phonological similarities between Egyptian and Black African languages. Diop (1977, 77-84) explains many of his sound laws for the Egyptian-Black African connection.
In Parènte Génétique de l'Egyptien pharraonique et des Langues Négro Africaines (PGEPLNA), Diop explains in some detail
his linguistic views in the introduction of this book. In PGEPLNA , Diop demonstrates the genetic relationship between ancient Egyptian and the languages of Black Africa. Diop provides thousands of cognate Wolof and Egyptian terms in support of his Black African-Egyptian linguistic relationship.
PALEO-AFRICAN
African languages are divided into Supersets (i.e., a family of genetically related languages, e.g., Niger-Congo) sets, and subsets. In the sets of African languages there are many parallels between phonological terms, eventhough there may be an arbitrary use of consonants which may have a similar sound. The reason for these changes is that when the speakers of Paleo-African languages separated, the various sets of languages underwent separate developments. As a result a /b/ sound in one language may be /p/ or /f/ in a sister language. For example, in African languages the word for father may be baba , pa or fa, while in the Dravidian languages we have appan to denote father.
Diop has noted that reconstruction of Paleo-African terms can help us make inferences about an ethnic group's culture going backwards in time to an impenetrable past undocumented by written records. This is semantic anthropology, a linguistic approach which seeks to discover aspects of man's culture from his language. Thusly, linguistic resemblances can help the anthropologists make precise inferences about a linguistic group's cultural elements.
BLACKS IN WEST ASIA
In PGEPLNA Diop makes clear his views on the role of African languages in the rise of other languages. Using archaeological evidence Diop makes it clear that the original West Asians: Elamites and Sumerians were of Black origin (1974, 1977, xxix-xxxvii).
Diop (1974, 1991) advocates the unity of Black Africans
and Blacks in West Asia. Winters (1985,1989,1994) has elaborated on the linguistic affinity of African and West Asian languages.
This view is supported by linguistic evidence. For example these languages share demonstrative bases:
Proximate Distant Finite
Dravidian i a u
Manding i a u
Sumerian bi a
Wolof i a u
The speakers of West Asian and Black African languages also share basic culture items:
Chief city,village black,burnt
Dravidian cira, ca uru kam
Elamite Salu
Sumerian Sar ur
Manding Sa furu kami,"charcoal'
Nubia sirgi mar
Egyptian Sr mer kemit
Paleo-African *sar *uru *kam
OBENGA
Obenga (1978) gives a phonetic analysis of Black African and Egyptian. He illustrates the genetic affinity of consonants within the Black African (BA) and Egyptian languages especially the occlusive bilateral sonorous, the occlusive nasal apico-dental /n/ and /m/ , the apico-alveolar /r/ and the radical
proto-form sa: 'man, female, posterity' in Black Africa.
Language
Agaw asau, aso 'masculine
Sidama asu 'man'
Oromo asa id.
Caffino aso id.
Yoruba so 'produce'
Meroitic s' man
Fonge sunu id.
Bini eso 'someone'
Kikongo sa,se,si 'father'
Swahili (m)zee 'old person'
Egyptian sa 'man'
Manding si,se 'descendant,posterity,family'
Azer se 'individual, person'
Obenga (1978) also illustrated the unity between the verbs 'to come, to be, to arrive':
Language
Egyptian ii, ey Samo, Loma dye
Mbosi yaa Bisa gye
Sidama/Omo wa Wolof nyeu
Caffino wa Peul yah, yade
Yoruba wa Fonge wa
Bini ya Mpongwe bya
Manding ya,dya Swahili (Ku)ya
between t =/= d, highlight the alternation patterns of many Paleo-African consonants including b =/= p, l =/= r ,and
g =/= k.
The Egyptian term for grain is 0 sa #. This corresponds to many African terms for seed,grain:
Galla senyi
Malinke se , si
Sumerian se
Egyptian sen 'granary'
Kannanda cigur
Bozo sii
Bambara sii
Daba sisin
Somali sinni
Loma sii
Susu sansi
Oromo sanyi
Dime siimu
Egyptian ssr 'corn'
id. ssn 'lotus plant'
id. sm 'herb, plant'
id. isw 'weeds'
In conclusion, Diop has done much to encourage the African recovery of their history. His theories on linguistics has inspired many African scholars to explain and elaborate the African role in the history of Africa and the world. This has made his work important to our understanding of the role of Black people in History.
REFERENCES
Armstrong,R.G. (1962). Glottochronology and African linguistics. Journal of African History,3(2), 283-290.
Baines, J. (1991, August 11). Was civilization made in Africa? The New York Times Review of Books, 12-13.
Bynon,T. (1978). Historical linguistics. London: Cambridge University Press.
Crawley,T. 1992. An Introduction to Historical Linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Delafosse,M. (1901). La Langue Mandigue. Paris.
Diagne,P. (1981). In J. Ki-Zerbo (Ed.), General history of Africa I: Methodology and African prehistory (233-260). London: Heinemann Educational Books Ltd.
Diop, C.A. (1974). The African Origin of Civilization: Myth or Reality. Westport, Conn.:Lawrence Hill and Company.
Diop,C.A. (1977). Parentè gènètique de l'Egyptien Pharaonique et des languues Negro-Africaines. Dakar: Institut Fondamental d'Afrique Noire.
Diop, C.A. (1978). Precolonial Black Africa. Wesport, Conn. :Lawrence Hill and Company.
Diop, C.A. 1981. A methodology for the study of migrations. In African Ethnonyms and Toponyms, by UNESCO. (Unesco: Paris) 86--110.
Diop, C.A. (1991). Civilization or Barbarism. Brooklyn,N.Y.:
Lawrence Hill Books.
Dweyer, D.J. (1989). 2. Mande. In John Bendor-Samuel (Ed.), The Niger-Congo Languages (47-65). New York: University Press of America.
Ehret,C. (1988). Language change and the material correlates of language and ethnic shift. Antiquity, 62, 564-574.
Ehret,C. & Posnansky (Eds.). (1982). The Archaeological and linguistic reconstruction of African history. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Hock,H.H. (1988). Principles of historical linguistics. Amsterdam: Mouton de Gruyter.
Labov,W.(1965). The social motivation of a sound change. Word, 19, 273-309.
Labov.,W. (1972). The internal evolution of linguistic rules. In Stokwell,R.P. and Macaulay, R.K.S. (eds.) Linguistic change and generative theory (101-171). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Lefkowitz, M. (1992, February 10). Not out of Africa. The New Republic, 29-36.
Mbiti, J. S. 1970. African religions and Philosophy. Garden City: Anchor Press.
Meillet, A. 1926. Introduction à l'etude comparatif des languages Indo-Europeennes. Paris.
Moitt,B. (1989) Chiekh Anta Diop and the African diaspora: Historical continuity and socio-cultural symbolism. Presence Africaine, 149/150, 347-360.
Pawley,A. & Ross,M. (1993). Austronesian historical linguistics and culture history. Annual Review of Anthropology, 22, 425-459.
McIntosh, S. K. & McIntosh, R. (1983). Forgotten Tells of Mali. Expedition, 35-47.
Niane,D.T.(Ed.). (1984). Introduction. General History of Africa IV (1-14). London: Heinemann Educational Books.
Obenga,T. (1978). The genetic relationship between Egyptian (ancient Egyptian and Coptic) and modern African languages. In
UNESCO (Ed.), The peopling of ancient Egypt and the deciphering of the Meroitic script (65-72). Paris: UNESCO.
Obenga, T. (1993). Origine commune de l'Egyptien Ancien du Copte et des langues Negro-Africaines Modernes. Paris: Editions L'Harmattan.
Lord,R. (1966). Comparative Linguistics. London: St. Paul's House.
Olderogge, L. (1981). Migrations and ethnic and linguistic differentiations. In J. Ki-Zerbo (Ed.),General History of Africa I: Methodology and African History (271-278). Paris: UNESCO.
Robins, R.H. (1974). General Linguistics. Bloomington: Indiana State University Press.
Ruhlen, M. 1994. The origin of language. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Welmers, W. (1968). Niger Congo-Mande. In T.A. Sebeok (Ed.), Current Trends in Linguistics, 7,113-140.
Williams, B. (1987). The A-Group Royal Cemetery at Qustul:Cemetery L. Chicago: Oriental Institute, University of Chicago Press.
Winters,C.A. (1985). The Proto-Culture of the Dravidians, Manding and Sumerians.Tamil Civilization,3(1), 1-9.
Winters,C.A. (1986). The Migration routes of the Proto-Mande. The Mankind Quarterly,27(1), 77-96.
Winters, C.A. 1989. Tamil, Sumerian, Manding and the genetic model. International Journal of Dravidian Linguistics, 18 (1), 98-127.
Winters, C.A. (1994). Afrocentrism:A valid frame of reference. Journal of Black Studies, 25 (2), 170-190.
Yurco,F. 1989. Were the ancient Egyptians Black? Biblical Archaeology.
posted
I respect the Baja people but they were not part of the Egyptian Confederation. Historically the Baja people are an independent people who respect their freedom.
If they represent the Blymme people the earliest mention of the Beja people was in Buddhist text.
Egyptian documents make it clear that the Blymmes entered the area after the founding of Napatan and Meroitic civilization, so even if some people claim that the Beja=Blymmes this is conjecture. Consequently, even if Beja= Blymmes, they donot represent the Kushite people who founded the Napata and Meroe civilizations, because both the Noba and Blymmes entered Kush after its founding.
There is increasing evidence that the Beja may provide a key to fully understanding the Meroitic language. Some years ago I deciphered the Kharamadoye inscription.
…… Hrmdoye ne qor ene ariteñ lne mdes ne mni-t kene mk lebne ye re qe-ne q yi-t hl-ne y es bo he-ne q r lebne tro. S-ne ariteñ net er ek li s-ne d-b li lh ne q r kene qor ene mnpte.
This was heard already before 1670 years at a moment the Blemmyan King Kharamadoye drove his compatriots to a point of national statehood at the northern area of the then ailing Meroitic kingdom in what is today's Sudanese North and Egyptian South. Using Meroitic scripture, the scribes of Kharamadoye immortalized down to our times an inscription on walls of the Mandulis temple at Talmis (modern Kalabsha). The beginning of the inscription reads in a plausible English translation as follows:
Kharamadoye the monarch and chief of the living Ariteñ, the great son and patron of Amani, you (who) revitalizes (man). The lord's voyage of discovery indeed gives the creation of Good. Act (now Amani) he travels to support good. Make a good welfare swell (for) the offering of the Chief, (he) desires indeed the restoration of eminence. The patron of good Ariteñ bows in reverence (before Amani) to evoke exalted nourishment (for) the patrons to leave a grand and exalted legacy to behold good. Oh Amani make indeed (a) revitalization (of) the monarch (and) commander of Great Napata…..”
When I first saw this claim that the Beja, represented the Blemmyan people of the Meroitic and Egyptian inscriptions I thought it might be hollow indeed. But after comparing Meroitic to Beja, the claim has considerable merit.
What I found from this cursory examination was most interesting. I will need to gather more vocabulary items from Beja, but I did find a number of matches:
Meroitic ……English……….. Beja i ‘arrive at this point’ ………… bi ‘went’ t ‘he, she’ ……………………..ta ‘she’ ya ‘go’………………………….yak ‘start’ rit ‘look’……………………….rhitaa ‘you saw’ an(a) plural suffix……………..aan ‘these’ d(d) ‘say’………………………di(y) ‘say’ lb ‘energy, dynamic…………liwa ‘burn’ ken ‘to realize’……………….kana ‘to know’ bk ‘ripen’……………………..bishakwa ‘to be ripe’
The vocabulary items are interesting, but since they come from a grammar book there was not enough to provide an extensive comparison.
Meroitic and Beja share many grammatical features. For example, the pronouns are usually can be placed in front or at the end verbs e.g., Beja ti bi ‘she went’, Meroitic t-i ‘he goes’. In Beja, adi is used to indicate complete action Taman adi ‘I ate it completely’, Meroitic –a, serves the same purpose akin ne a ‘he has become completely learned’. In both languages the adverb is placed behind the noun Beja takii-da ‘small man’, Meroitic pt ‘praise’: pt es ‘manifest praise’. In Beja the future tense is form by ndi, Tami a ndi “I will eat’, Meroitic –n, s-ne yo-n Aman ‘The patron will bow in reverence to Aman’.
This makes it clear to me that the Beja language may be related to Meroitic and that the Beja represent the Blemmy nation of Old. But it does indicate that the Beja were not part of the Egyptian Confederation.
.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
Support for your point, here are other images of ancient Egyptians most of the non-eastern type - especially in the Neolithic era or as you approach it from, say, 3000 years ago when they appear to have been mostly Bushmen and the Pygmy (Bes, Queen of Punt - last picture):
However, if you look at the profile of the servants of the Queen, they are sharp. With better nutrition, the diminuitive ancient Puntites could have become the taller East African population; but that would mean that whites gained their features from these black Africans? Africa did, after all, have the range of physical types there being 20 times more mtDNA lines among Africans than among whites.
The aquiline trait had always been in East Africa and wasn't brought by whites.
Yet, at that same time was the Bes-type Pygmy population with broad, wide features. Those some simplistically delimit African populations by: "REAL NEGROES." But, "REAL NEGROES" are, historical art shows us, both broad featured and aquline.
So, it looks like the spectrum of physical types existed in the black population from prehistoric times and the claim by whites that East Africans of ancient times bears witness to an indigenous African population admixed with invasive whites finds no support, is contradicted by the record left to us in art.
And then we get the hybrid in physiognomy with prehistoric aquiline blacks (Bushman - and many of them, too, are broad-featured) and broad-featured (full lips, full nose) blacks (the Pygmy): their offspring. The better nutrition of the post Neolithic times would have resulted in taller populations: but whose roots are firmly sprouted and nourished in the black soil of prehistoric Africa of which Egypt was a seamless indispensable part.
. .
-------------------- The nature of homelife is the fate of the nation. Posts: 2334 | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^Great points.People fail to realize that since African people were here first and they had so-called fine features, Europeans got these features from Africans.
.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
However, if you look at the profile of the servants of the Queen, they are sharp. With better nutrition, the diminuitive ancient Puntites could have become the taller East African population; but that would mean that whites gained their features from these black Africans? Africa did, after all, have the range of physical types there being 20 times more mtDNA lines among Africans than among whites.
The aquiline trait had always been in East Africa and wasn't brought by whites.
Yet, at that same time was the Bes-type Pygmy population with broad, wide features. Those some simplistically delimit African populations by: "REAL NEGROES." But, "REAL NEGROES" are, historical art shows us, both broad featured and aquline.
So, it looks like the spectrum of physical types existed in the black population from prehistoric times and the claim by whites that East Africans of ancient times bears witness to an indigenous African population admixed with invasive whites finds no support, is contradicted by the record left to us in art.
And then we get the hybrid in physiognomy with prehistoric aquiline blacks (Bushman - and many of them, too, are broad-featured) and broad-featured (full lips, full nose) blacks (the Pygmy): their offspring. The better nutrition of the post Neolithic times would have resulted in taller populations: but whose roots are firmly sprouted and nourished in the black soil of prehistoric Africa of which Egypt was a seamless indispensable part.
. .
This is just your opinion. Please provide specific counter examples supporting your claim.
Pictures prove nothing, everyone knows that Africans have a variety of features which unite the all.
KocaKola if you are right we need hard evidence.
KocaKola here is linguistic evidence linking West Africans and Dravidians to the Egyptian language. Please provide linguistic evidence linking the Beja and Egyptian languages.
The Linguistic Methods of Chiekh Anta Diop
By Clyde Winters
Chiekh Anta Diop has contributed much to the Afrocentric social sciences. Here we discuss many of Diop's views on using the linguistic sciences to rediscover the ancient history of Blacks.
Chiekh Anta Diop has made important contributions to linguistic theory in relation to African historiography. Diop's work illustrates that it is important for scholars to maintain a focus on the historical and linguistic factors which define the "personnalitè culturelle africaine" (Diop 1991, 227).
Language is the sanctum sanctorum of Diop's Afrocentric historical method. The Diopian view of historiography combines the research of linguistics, history and psychology to interpret the cultural unity of African people.
C. Anta Diop is the founder of modern Afrocentricism . Diop (1974,1991) laid the foundations for the Afrocentric idea in education. He laid these foundations using both the historical and anthropological/linguistic methods of research to explain the role of the Blacks in World History.
There are three components in the genetic model: 1) common Physical type, 2) common cultural patterns and 3) genetically related languages. (Winters 1989a) Diop over the years has brought to bear all three of these components in his illumination of Kemetic civilization. (Diop 1974,1977,1978,1991)
The opposition of many Eurocentric scholars to Afrocentric -ism results from white hostility to Diop's idea of a Black Egypt, and the view that Egyptians spoke an African ,rather than Afro-Asiatic language.
Recently, Eurocentric American scholars have alleged to write reviews of Diop's recent book (Diop 1991). Although these reviewers mention the work of Diop in their articles, they never review his work properly, because they lack the ability to understand the many disciplines that Diop has mastered.(Lefkowitz 1992; Baines 1991)
For example Lefkowitz (1992) in The New Republic, summarizes
Diop (1974) but never presents any evidence to dispute the findings of Diop. The most popular "review" of Diop (1991) was done by Baines (1991) review in the New York Times Book Review. In this "review" Baines (1991) claims that "...the evidence and reasoning used to support the arguments are often unsound".
Instead of addressing the evidence Diop (1991) presents of the African role in the rise of civilization that he alleges is "unsound", he is asking the reader to reject Diop's thesis without refutation of specific evidence presented by Diop of the
African contributions to Science and Philosophy. Baines (l991)
claims that Diop's Civilization or Barbarism, is not a work of originality, he fails to dispute any factual evidence presented by Diop.
Baines (1991) wants the public to accept his general negative comments about Civilization or Barbarism ,based on the fact that he is an Egyptologist. This is not enough, in academia
to refute a thesis one must present counter evidence that proves the falseness of a thesis not unsubstantiated rhetoric. We can not accept the negative views of Baines on faith alone.
In the recovery of information concerning the African past, Diop promotes semantic anthropology, comparative linguistics and the study of Onomastics. The main thesis of Diop is that typonymy and ethnonymy of Africa point to a common cradle for Paleo-Africans in the Nile Valley (Diop 1978, 67).
Onomastics is the science of names. Diop has studied legends, placenames and religious cult terms to discover the unity of African civilization. Diop (1981, 86) observed that:
"An undisputed linguistic relationship between two geographically remote groups of languages can be relevant for the study of migrations. A grammatical (or genetic) relationship if clear enough is never an accident".
As a result, Diop has used toponyms (place-names), anthroponyms (personal names) and ehthnonyms (names of ethnic groups/tribes) to explain the evidence of analogous ethnic (clan) names in West Africa and the Upper Nile (Diop 1991).
In Precolonial Black Africa, Diop used ethnonyms to chart the migrations of African people in West Africa. And in The African Origin of Civilization, Diop used analyses acculturaliste or typological analysis to study the origin and spread of African cultural features from the Nile Valley to West Africa through his examination of toponyms (Diop 1974, 182-183). In the Cultural Unity of Black Africa, Diop discussed the common totems and religious terms many African ethnic groups share (Diop 1978, 124).
LINGUISTIC TAXONOMY
This linguistic research has been based on linguistic classification or taxonomy. Linguistic taxonomy is the foundation upon which comparative and historical linguistic methods are based (Ruhlen 1994). Linguistic taxonomy is necessary for the identification of language families. The determination of language families give us the material to reconstruct the proto-language of a people and discover regular sound correspondences.
There are three major kinds of language classifications: genealogical, typological, and areal. A genealogical classifica-tion groups languages together into language families based on the shared features retained by languages since divergence from the common ancestor or proto-language. An areal classification groups languages into linguistic areas based on shared features acquired by a process of convergence arising from spatial proximity. A typological classification groups languages together into language types by the similarity in the appearance of the structure of languages without consideration of their historical origin and present, or past geographical distribution.
COMPARATIVE METHOD
Diop has used comparative and historical linguistics to illuminate the Unity of African civilization. Diop (1977, xxv) has noted that
"The process for the evolution of African languages is clearly apparent; from a far we (have) the idea that Wolof is descendant by direct filiation to ancient Egyptian, but the Wolof, Egyptian and other African languages (are) derived from a common mother language that one can call Paleo-African, the common mother language that one can call Paleo-African, the common African or the Negro- African of L. Homburger or of Th. Obenga."
The comparative method is used by linguists to determine the relatedness of languages, and to reconstruct earlier language states. The comparative linguist has two major goals (1) trace the history of language families and reconstruct the mother language of each family, and (2) determine the forces which affect language. In general, comparative linguists are interested in determining phonetic laws, analogy/ correspondence and loan words.
Diop is a strong supporter of the comparative method in the rediscovery of Paleo-African. The reconstruction of Paleo-African involves both reconstruction and recognition of regular sound correspondence. The goal of reconstruction is the discovery of the proto-language of African people is the recovery of Paleo-African:
(1) vowels and consonants
(2) specific Paleo-African words
(3) common grammatical elements; and
(4) common syntactic elements.
The comparative method is useful in the reconstruction of Proto-languages or Diop's Paleo-African. To reconstruct a proto-language the linguist must look for patterns of correspondences. Patterns of correspondence is the examination of terms which show uniformity. This uniformity leads to the inference that languages are related since uniformity of terms leads to the inference that languages are related since conformity of terms in two or more languages indicate they came from a common ancestor.
HISTORICAL LINGUISTICS
A person's language provides us with evidence of the elements of a group's culture. Diop has noted that reconstruction of Paleo-African terms can help us make inferences about a group's culture going backwards in time to an impenetrable past undocumented by written records. This is semantic anthropology, a linguistic approach which seeks to discover aspects of man's culture from his language. Thusly, linguistic resemblances can help the anthropologist make precise inferences about a groups culture elements.
Linguistic resemblances denote a historical relationship. This suggest that resemblances in fundamental vocabulary and culture terms can help one reconstruct the culture of the speakers of genetically related languages.
LINGUISTIC CONSTANCY
The rate at which languages change is variable. It appears that linguistic change is culture specific. Consequently, the social organization and political culture of a particular speech community can influence the speed at which languages change.
Based on the history of language change in Europe most linguists believe that the rate of change for all languages is both rapid and constant.(Diagne, 1981,p.238) The idea that all languages change rapidly is not valid for all the World's languages.
African languages change much slower than European languages. (Armstrong, 1962) For example, African vocabulary items collected by Arab explorers over a thousand years ago are analogous to contemporary lexical items.(Diagne,1981, p.239) In addition there are striking resemblances between the ancient Egyptian language and Coptic, and Pharonic Egyptian and African languages.(Diagne, 1981; Diop, 1977; Obenga, 1993)
The political stability of African political institutions has caused languages to change very slowly in Africa. Pawley and Ross (1993) argue that a sedentary life style may account for the conservative nature of a language.
African oral traditions and the eye witness accounts of travelers to Africa, make it clear that African empires although made up of diverse nationalities illustrated continuity. To accomodate the plural nature of African empires Africans developed a Federal system of government. (Niane , 1984) In fact we can not really describe ancient African state systems as empires, since this implies absolute rule or authority in a single individual. This political state of affairs rarely existed in ancient Africa, because in each African speech community local leadership was elected by the people within the community. (Diop, 1987) For example the Egyptians often appointed administrators over the conquered territories from among the conquered people. (Diop ,1991)
The continuity of many African languages may result from the steady state nature of African political systems, and long standing cultural stability since neolithic times. (Diop, 1991 ; Winters 1985) This cultural stability has affected the speed at which African languages change.
In Africa due to the relative stability of socio-political structures and settled life, there has not been enough pressure exerted on African societies as a whole and African speech communities in particular, to cause radical internal linguistic changes within most African languages. Permanent settlements led to a clearly defined system of inheritance and royal succession. These traits led to stability on both the social and political levels.
This leads to the hypothesis that linguistic continuity exist in Africa due to the stability of African socio-political structures and cultural systems. This relative cultural stability has led African languages to change more slowly then European and
Asian languages. Diop (1974) observed that:
First the evolution of languages, instead of moving everywhere at the same rate of speed seems linked to other factors; such as , the stability of social organizations or the opposite, social upheavals. Understandably in relatively stable societies man's language has changed less with the passage of time.(pp.153-154)
There is considerable evidence which supports the African continuity concept. Dr. Armstrong (1962) noted the linguistic continuity of African languages when he used glottochronology to test the rate of change in Yoruba. Comparing modern Yoruba words with a list of identical terms collected 130 years ago by Koelle , Dr. Armstrong found little if any internal or external changes in the terms. He concluded that:
I would have said that on this evidence African languages are changing with glacial slowness, but it seems to me that in a century a glacier would have changed a lot more than that. Perhaps it would be more in order to say that these languages are changing with geological slowness. (Armstrong, 1962, p.285).
Diop's theory of linguistic constancy recognizes the social role language plays in African language change. Language being a variable phenomena has as much to do with a speaker's society as with the language itself. Thus social organization can influence the rate of change within languages. Meillet (1926, 17) wrote that:
Since language is a social institution it follows that linguistics is a social science, and the only variable element to which one may appeal in order to account for a linguistic change is social change, of which language variations are but the consequences.
THE BLACK AFRICAN ORIGIN OF EGYPT
Diop has contributed much to African linguistics. He was a major proponent of the Dravidian-African relationship (Diop 1974, 116), and the African substratum in Indo-European languages in relationship to cacuminal sounds and terms for social organiza-tion and culture (1974, 115). Diop (1978, 113) also recognized that in relation to Arabic words, after the suppression of the first consonant, there is often an African root.
Diop's major linguistic effort has been the classification of Black African and Egyptian languages . Up until 1977 Diop'smajor area of interest were morphological and phonological similarities between Egyptian and Black African languages. Diop (1977, 77-84) explains many of his sound laws for the Egyptian-Black African connection.
In Parènte Génétique de l'Egyptien pharraonique et des Langues Négro Africaines (PGEPLNA), Diop explains in some detail
his linguistic views in the introduction of this book. In PGEPLNA , Diop demonstrates the genetic relationship between ancient Egyptian and the languages of Black Africa. Diop provides thousands of cognate Wolof and Egyptian terms in support of his Black African-Egyptian linguistic relationship.
PALEO-AFRICAN
African languages are divided into Supersets (i.e., a family of genetically related languages, e.g., Niger-Congo) sets, and subsets. In the sets of African languages there are many parallels between phonological terms, eventhough there may be an arbitrary use of consonants which may have a similar sound. The reason for these changes is that when the speakers of Paleo-African languages separated, the various sets of languages underwent separate developments. As a result a /b/ sound in one language may be /p/ or /f/ in a sister language. For example, in African languages the word for father may be baba , pa or fa, while in the Dravidian languages we have appan to denote father.
Diop has noted that reconstruction of Paleo-African terms can help us make inferences about an ethnic group's culture going backwards in time to an impenetrable past undocumented by written records. This is semantic anthropology, a linguistic approach which seeks to discover aspects of man's culture from his language. Thusly, linguistic resemblances can help the anthropologists make precise inferences about a linguistic group's cultural elements.
BLACKS IN WEST ASIA
In PGEPLNA Diop makes clear his views on the role of African languages in the rise of other languages. Using archaeological evidence Diop makes it clear that the original West Asians: Elamites and Sumerians were of Black origin (1974, 1977, xxix-xxxvii).
Diop (1974, 1991) advocates the unity of Black Africans
and Blacks in West Asia. Winters (1985,1989,1994) has elaborated on the linguistic affinity of African and West Asian languages.
This view is supported by linguistic evidence. For example these languages share demonstrative bases:
Proximate Distant Finite
Dravidian i a u
Manding i a u
Sumerian bi a
Wolof i a u
The speakers of West Asian and Black African languages also share basic culture items:
Chief city,village black,burnt
Dravidian cira, ca uru kam
Elamite Salu
Sumerian Sar ur
Manding Sa furu kami,"charcoal'
Nubia sirgi mar
Egyptian Sr mer kemit
Paleo-African *sar *uru *kam
OBENGA
Obenga (1978) gives a phonetic analysis of Black African and Egyptian. He illustrates the genetic affinity of consonants within the Black African (BA) and Egyptian languages especially the occlusive bilateral sonorous, the occlusive nasal apico-dental /n/ and /m/ , the apico-alveolar /r/ and the radical
proto-form sa: 'man, female, posterity' in Black Africa.
Language
Agaw asau, aso 'masculine
Sidama asu 'man'
Oromo asa id.
Caffino aso id.
Yoruba so 'produce'
Meroitic s' man
Fonge sunu id.
Bini eso 'someone'
Kikongo sa,se,si 'father'
Swahili (m)zee 'old person'
Egyptian sa 'man'
Manding si,se 'descendant,posterity,family'
Azer se 'individual, person'
Obenga (1978) also illustrated the unity between the verbs 'to come, to be, to arrive':
Language
Egyptian ii, ey Samo, Loma dye
Mbosi yaa Bisa gye
Sidama/Omo wa Wolof nyeu
Caffino wa Peul yah, yade
Yoruba wa Fonge wa
Bini ya Mpongwe bya
Manding ya,dya Swahili (Ku)ya
between t =/= d, highlight the alternation patterns of many Paleo-African consonants including b =/= p, l =/= r ,and
g =/= k.
The Egyptian term for grain is 0 sa #. This corresponds to many African terms for seed,grain:
Galla senyi
Malinke se , si
Sumerian se
Egyptian sen 'granary'
Kannanda cigur
Bozo sii
Bambara sii
Daba sisin
Somali sinni
Loma sii
Susu sansi
Oromo sanyi
Dime siimu
Egyptian ssr 'corn'
id. ssn 'lotus plant'
id. sm 'herb, plant'
id. isw 'weeds'
In conclusion, Diop has done much to encourage the African recovery of their history. His theories on linguistics has inspired many African scholars to explain and elaborate the African role in the history of Africa and the world. This has made his work important to our understanding of the role of Black people in History.
REFERENCES
Armstrong,R.G. (1962). Glottochronology and African linguistics. Journal of African History,3(2), 283-290.
Baines, J. (1991, August 11). Was civilization made in Africa? The New York Times Review of Books, 12-13.
Bynon,T. (1978). Historical linguistics. London: Cambridge University Press.
Crawley,T. 1992. An Introduction to Historical Linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Delafosse,M. (1901). La Langue Mandigue. Paris.
Diagne,P. (1981). In J. Ki-Zerbo (Ed.), General history of Africa I: Methodology and African prehistory (233-260). London: Heinemann Educational Books Ltd.
Diop, C.A. (1974). The African Origin of Civilization: Myth or Reality. Westport, Conn.:Lawrence Hill and Company.
Diop,C.A. (1977). Parentè gènètique de l'Egyptien Pharaonique et des languues Negro-Africaines. Dakar: Institut Fondamental d'Afrique Noire.
Diop, C.A. (1978). Precolonial Black Africa. Wesport, Conn. :Lawrence Hill and Company.
Diop, C.A. 1981. A methodology for the study of migrations. In African Ethnonyms and Toponyms, by UNESCO. (Unesco: Paris) 86--110.
Diop, C.A. (1991). Civilization or Barbarism. Brooklyn,N.Y.:
Lawrence Hill Books.
Dweyer, D.J. (1989). 2. Mande. In John Bendor-Samuel (Ed.), The Niger-Congo Languages (47-65). New York: University Press of America.
Ehret,C. (1988). Language change and the material correlates of language and ethnic shift. Antiquity, 62, 564-574.
Ehret,C. & Posnansky (Eds.). (1982). The Archaeological and linguistic reconstruction of African history. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Hock,H.H. (1988). Principles of historical linguistics. Amsterdam: Mouton de Gruyter.
Labov,W.(1965). The social motivation of a sound change. Word, 19, 273-309.
Labov.,W. (1972). The internal evolution of linguistic rules. In Stokwell,R.P. and Macaulay, R.K.S. (eds.) Linguistic change and generative theory (101-171). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Lefkowitz, M. (1992, February 10). Not out of Africa. The New Republic, 29-36.
Mbiti, J. S. 1970. African religions and Philosophy. Garden City: Anchor Press.
Meillet, A. 1926. Introduction à l'etude comparatif des languages Indo-Europeennes. Paris.
Moitt,B. (1989) Chiekh Anta Diop and the African diaspora: Historical continuity and socio-cultural symbolism. Presence Africaine, 149/150, 347-360.
Pawley,A. & Ross,M. (1993). Austronesian historical linguistics and culture history. Annual Review of Anthropology, 22, 425-459.
McIntosh, S. K. & McIntosh, R. (1983). Forgotten Tells of Mali. Expedition, 35-47.
Niane,D.T.(Ed.). (1984). Introduction. General History of Africa IV (1-14). London: Heinemann Educational Books.
Obenga,T. (1978). The genetic relationship between Egyptian (ancient Egyptian and Coptic) and modern African languages. In
UNESCO (Ed.), The peopling of ancient Egypt and the deciphering of the Meroitic script (65-72). Paris: UNESCO.
Obenga, T. (1993). Origine commune de l'Egyptien Ancien du Copte et des langues Negro-Africaines Modernes. Paris: Editions L'Harmattan.
Lord,R. (1966). Comparative Linguistics. London: St. Paul's House.
Olderogge, L. (1981). Migrations and ethnic and linguistic differentiations. In J. Ki-Zerbo (Ed.),General History of Africa I: Methodology and African History (271-278). Paris: UNESCO.
Robins, R.H. (1974). General Linguistics. Bloomington: Indiana State University Press.
Ruhlen, M. 1994. The origin of language. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Welmers, W. (1968). Niger Congo-Mande. In T.A. Sebeok (Ed.), Current Trends in Linguistics, 7,113-140.
Williams, B. (1987). The A-Group Royal Cemetery at Qustul:Cemetery L. Chicago: Oriental Institute, University of Chicago Press.
Winters,C.A. (1985). The Proto-Culture of the Dravidians, Manding and Sumerians.Tamil Civilization,3(1), 1-9.
Winters,C.A. (1986). The Migration routes of the Proto-Mande. The Mankind Quarterly,27(1), 77-96.
Winters, C.A. 1989. Tamil, Sumerian, Manding and the genetic model. International Journal of Dravidian Linguistics, 18 (1), 98-127.
Winters, C.A. (1994). Afrocentrism:A valid frame of reference. Journal of Black Studies, 25 (2), 170-190.
Yurco,F. 1989. Were the ancient Egyptians Black? Biblical Archaeology.
posted
KocaKola we have evidence that many West African groups fomerly lived in Egypt.
quote:Originally posted by Wally: ANCIENT EGYPTIAN: Bu nafret su em bu bon, "a state of good has become a state of evil" WOLOF : Bu rafet mel ni bu bon, "a state of good has become a state of evil"
ANCIENT EGYPTIAN: mer on ef, "he loved" WOLOF : maar on ef, "he loved passionately"
ANCIENT EGYPTIAN: mer on es, "she loved" WOLOF : maar on es, "she loved passionately"
ANCIENT EGYPTIAN: mer on sen, "they loved" WOLOF : maar on sen, "they loved passionately"
ANCIENT EGYPTIAN: bu huru - badness, wickedness YORUBA: bu buru - badness, wickedness
ANCIENT EGYPTIAN: en en - not, no! COPTIC: Anon - not, no! YORUBA: en en - not, no!
ANCIENT EGYPTIAN: bu - place, condition WOLOF: bu - place, condition
ANCIENT EGYPTIAN: mer - love COPTIC: me, mere, merit - love, beloved
...
Diop's major work is his identification of Ancient Egypt, Nubia and parts of the Sahara as the original homeland of the people of Senegal. There is abundant archaeological and linguistic evidence supporting the Egyptian origin of the West Africans. Much of West Africa was heavily forested until the last part of the first millennium B.C. ( McIntosh & McIntosh, 1983; Winters, 1986). The Niger Delta, for example, was uninhabited until after 500 B.C. (McIntosh & McIntosh, 1983, 39-42). Diop has marshaled linguistic and archaeological data to support an African origin for the people of West Africa. He used toponyms and ethnonyms to prove the migration of West Africans from the Central and Eastern Sudan (Diop, 1981).
We can use onomastics to study African migrations (Diagne,1981; Diop, 1981 and Olderogge,1981) .
In the recovery of information concerning the African past, Diop promotes semantic anthropology, comparative linguistics and the study of Onomastics. The main thesis of Diop is that typonymy and ethnonymy of Africa point to a common cradle for Paleo-Africans in the Nile Valley (Diop 1978, 67). Onomastics is the science of names. Diop has studied legends, placenames and religious cult terms to discover the unity of African civilization. Diop (1981, 86) observed that: "An undisputed linguistic relationship between two geographically remote groups of languages can be relevant for the study of migrations. A grammatical (or genetic) relationship if clear enough is never an accident". As a result, Diop has used toponyms (place-names), anthroponyms (personal names) and ehthnonyms (names of ethnic groups/tribes) to explain the evidence of analogous ethnic (clan) names in West Africa and the Upper Nile (Diop 1991). In Precolonial Black Africa, Diop used ethnonyms to chart the migrations of African people in West Africa. And in The African Origin of Civilization, Diop used analyses acculturaliste or typological analysis to study the origin and spread of African cultural features from the Nile Valley to West Africa through his examination of toponyms (Diop 1974, 182-183). In the Cultural Unity of Black Africa, Diop discussed the common totems and religious terms many African ethnic groups share (Diop 1978, 124).
Diop (1981) provides the methodology to study African migrations.. He explains how to use linguistics, ethnonyms and toponyms to study African migrations. In this article he illustrates how Senegalese people originated in the Nubian Hills and migrated Westward into the senegambian region.. Some of the clan names used to support this research include:
Nuer Fulani Kao ka Bari Bari Jallogh Jallo
''''' Tukulor Kan Kan Ci Sy Wan Wan
There are three parts to Diop’s method. You begin with identifying a linguistic relationship between the target groups. Secondly, you find sound equivalent ethnonyms, e.g., mati (Senegal)---> Maat (ancient Egyptian) and Aatou (Senegal)-->Alum (ancient Egyptian). And Egyptian Anw =Osiris written with a pillar compares favorably to Wolof enw (yenw)=carry on the head: (k)enw = pillar. The third part of the method is the use of ethnic data.
This method advocated by Diop was used by Wally. He first presented the linguistic evidence and then he confirmed his finding by comparing West African ethnonyms to ancient Egyptian terms.
Diagne,P. (1981). In J. Ki-Zerbo (Ed.), General history of Africa I: Methodology and African prehistory (233-260). London: Heinemann Educational Books Ltd.
Diop, C.A. (1978). Precolonial Black Africa. Wesport, Conn. :Lawrence Hill and Company.
Diop, C.A. 1981. A methodology for the study of migrations. In African Ethnonyms and Toponyms, by UNESCO. (Unesco: Paris) 86--110.
McIntosh, S. K. & McIntosh, R. (1983). Forgotten Tells of Mali. Expedition, 35-47.
Olderogge, L. (1981). Migrations and ethnic and linguistic differentiations. In J. Ki-Zerbo (Ed.),General History of Africa I: Methodology and African History (271-278). Paris: UNESCO.
Winters, Clyde Ahmad. (1986). The Migration Routes of the Proto-Mande", The Mankind Quarterly 27, no1 , pp. 77-96.
The Egypto-Roman sources make it clear that the Beja entered Egypt in Roman times. Most Beja live outside Egypt. If the Beja formerly lived in Egypt there should be evidence of there migration out of Egypt.
Please provide evidence that the Beja who live outside Egypt , migrated to their present habitation sites from ancient Egypt.
quote:Originally posted by KoKaKoLa: Clyde... The closest language to Ancient Egytian beside Coptic.. is Bedawiyet spoken by the Beja . They are all from the AFRO ASIATIC languages family.
Wolof and Yoruba are not related to Ancient Egyptian.
quote:Originally posted by KoKaKoLa: Beja live IN Egypt, the people you cited DO NOT.
Two, Beja are linguistically,culturally and phenotypically much closer to the ancient Egyptians than any other
Four, Certain Bejas can trace back their lineage to certain pharaohs.
Ancient Egyptians were not related to West, Central and Southern Africans.
Clyde you are just wasting you time claiming the unclaimable
LOL. You're wrong.
1) This dendrogram has nothing to do with West Africans.
2) The Beja are mentioned in Roman sources as entering Egypt during the Roman period--not earlier.
3)How can Beja be related to Egyptian pharoahs when they are not mentioned in Egyptian sources until roman times?
3)Beja in Egypt speak Arabic. Provide linguistic evidence linking the Beja and Egyptian.
.
1) West Africans have nothing to do with Egyptians (Modern, Ancient and Predynastic)
2) Bejas always have been in North East Africa. Where do you think they came from? Jamaica?
3)
quote:. Priest-Kings Pinedjem I, Psusennes I and Osorkon the Elder and their armies are believed to be the ancestors of Egypt's Western Desert Bejawi. Omdas Sheikh Qamhat Khawr al`allaqi was last remnant of one of Egypt's oldest surviving lineages. His death in 1936 was widely considered the death knell for the Qamhat Bisharin. Egyptologist Heinrich Brugsch traced Qamhat Khawr kiji tribal clans through female lines to the 20th Dynasty Wehem Mesut. Egyptologist Zakaria Goneim traced their ancestress mother to an even earlier dynasty.
And here comes the Beja prince who descend from the pharaohs
4) Beja in Egypt speak Arabic and Bedawiyet.
LOL. These so-called Beja princes look like a couple of Turks. They don't even look like the Beja below.
This is not evidence. provide example from Egyptian sources and language. You don't seem to have any. You are a fraud.
posted
KocaKola when are you going to answer these questions:
1) The Beja are mentioned in Roman sources as entering Egypt during the Roman period--not earlier. Show us Egyptian text mentioning Beja dating earlier than Roman period.
2)How can Beja be related to Egyptian pharoahs when they are not mentioned in Egyptian sources until roman times?
3)Beja in Egypt speak Arabic. Provide linguistic evidence linking the Beja and Egyptian.Where are your lexical and grammatical features uniting Beja and Egyptian?
.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by KoKaKoLa: Clyde... The closest language to Ancient Egytian beside Coptic.. is Bedawiyet spoken by the Beja . They are all from the AFRO ASIATIC languages family.
Wolof and Yoruba are not related to Ancient Egyptian.
Below are examples of egyptian and the Wolof and Yoruba languages. Now gives us examples from Beja and Egyptian if the languages are related.
quote:Originally posted by Wally: African Americans' Wolof Ancestry...
Mtau Ntr Bu nafret su em bu bon, "a good place has become an evil place" Wolof Bu rafet mel ni bu bon, "a good place has become an evil place" (good place = "bu nafret/bu rafet (evil place = "bu bon/bu bon
Mtau Ntr mer on ef, "he loved" Wolof maar on ef, "he loved passionately"
Mtau Ntr mer on es, "she loved" Wolof maar on es, "she loved passionately"
Mtau Ntr mer on sen, "they loved" Wolof maar on sen, "they loved passionately"
Mtau Ntr and Wolof Demonstratives (this, that, these, those - P > B)
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: The Amarna mummies are closer to the Southern African (average MLI 326.94), African Great Lakes (average MLI 323.76), and Tropical West African (average MLI 83.74) regions—not the Horners.
.
It is a myth that egyptians mainly looked like Horners. Eurocentrics created this myth because many whites share facial features associated with some Horners.
.
Clyde in your opinion what are the Southern African in particular, cultural ties to ancient Egypt?
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: it is clear from the research of Diop that after the fall of ancient Egypt the Egyptians migrated westward into West and Central-East Africa, not Ethiopia and Somalia which were already heavily occupied when Egypt fell into decline.
^^^ Here you didn't even mention Southern Africa. The statement also come across as somewhat contradicting the thread title. here you say it's not a myth, Egyptians migrated including to Central East Africa. this means perhaps you intended a thread title more like:
The Greatest Myth: Africans of The Horn represent the ancient Egyptians.
One were to believe the DNATribes report add N. Africans as well:
The Greatest Myth: North Africans or Africans of The Horn represent the ancient Egyptians.
>>>what is the evidence thatafter the fall of ancient Egypt the Egyptians migrated westward into West and Central-East Africa to a degree more so than those who stayed in Egypt? Also where's the Egyptian style architectural know-how manifesting itself in West Africa?
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic