Here's the link if the img doesn't show up: http://www.geocities.com/jerod_motley/
(For some reason Yahoo isn't showing the img. Here's a new link.)
This paper here is very interesting. It goes into detail a great bit about African languages, but what I found interesting is that it broke down and went in depth about Diop's proposed relationship between Wolof and Ancient Egyptian. In contrast it demonstrated a definite relationship between ancient Egyptian and Chadic. Read through and hopefully provide some feedback.
quote:
Originally posted by ausar:
Said,are you aware of a Chadic linguist named Mohammed Garba? He demonstrates the similarity with Chadic from the vulture glyph in Kemetian language.
Yes I am aware of him. I have many studies and papers on my hard drive detailing the relationship of Chadic to ancient Egyptian. Ancient Egyptian is still closer to languages spoken exclusively in Africa than those outside of Africa.
quote:
Originally posted by ausar:
Just read the paper. Great paper except the fact that he erroneously expouses false history saying that the pyramid were built by slaves. Certainly he is correct is asserting that Egyptians committed great humn rights abuses and had a uneven soceity where the elite was more educated than the impoverished. But no evidence has ever been found linking the construction of the pyramids to slavery or slaves. If anything most of the people who constructred temples,pyramids or other building projects were off season farmers and soliders.
I agree, there has never been any proof that slaves built pyramids in ancient Egypt. The science used and the fact that building of pyramids cannot even be duplicated now should be proof enough.
The article is very timely as well as a recent discussion here had prompted me to investigate the frequently presented proof of word meaning and connection to Egyptian with the language Wolof. I too had difficulty in finding convincing evidence of words claimed to show an AE connection and hence support for the suggested meaning of those words between Wolof and Egyptian.
In particular I was looking for support, of which almost all advocates for the word Kemmau and its supposed root Kem (Black), use Wolof as support for its meaning and connection to the rest of Africa. Clearly this is due to Diops work, which is in review here in this artical.
In connection to the word Kem or the Word for black I found this.
Wolof
The word for “to be black” in Wolf is “Nyool, or Nuul”, depending on the translation. Nuul a nuul means very very black.
To say “Im Black and pretty”, you would say “dama jul ak am taar”. Not anywere close to what is touted on the net, as an assosiation to Egyptian
I could not find one referente to the word Wolof, Khem ="burnt to black." Which is often posted on web pages as the Wolof equivilent of the egyptian root word Kem.
I did however find the word Keem means “burnt rice”.
I have come to my own conclusions as to the meaning of Kmemu and related words and will post when i can back what I have tos ay. Hopfully this will be soon.
I agree he may have been incorrect about the slaves, but his final statement is exceptional and should be read by those currently discussing in the Egypt in Africa thread.
My refences material is below.
http://www.africanculture.dk/gambia/ftp/wollof.pdf http://www.africanculture.dk/gambia/ftp/wolfgram.pdf
Ozzy
quote:
Originally posted by Ozzy:
Excellent post. The article was extreemly interesting to me in that he explores with some fantastic examples the ease in which word association can be made between languages.The article is very timely as well as a recent discussion here had prompted me to investigate the frequently presented proof of word meaning and connection to Egyptian with the language Wolof. I too had difficulty in finding convincing evidence of words claimed to show an AE connection and hence support for the suggested meaning of those words between Wolof and Egyptian.
In particular I was looking for support, of which almost all advocates for the word Kemmau and its supposed root Kem (Black), use Wolof as support for its meaning and connection to the rest of Africa. Clearly this is due to Diops work, which is in review here in this artical.
In connection to the word Kem or the Word for black I found this.
Wolof
The word for “to be black” in Wolf is “Nyool, or Nuul”, depending on the translation. Nuul a nuul means very very black.
To say “Im Black and pretty”, you would say “dama jul ak am taar”. Not anywere close to what is touted on the net, as an assosiation to Egyptian
I could not find one referente to the word Wolof, Khem ="burnt to black." Which is often posted on web pages as the Wolof equivilent of the egyptian root word Kem.I did however find the word Keem means “burnt rice”.
I have come to my own conclusions as to the meaning of Kmemu and related words and will post when i can back what I have tos ay. Hopfully this will be soon.
I agree he may have been incorrect about the slaves, but his final statement is exceptional and should be read by those currently discussing in the Egypt in Africa thread.
My refences material is below.
http://www.africanculture.dk/gambia/ftp/wollof.pdf http://www.africanculture.dk/gambia/ftp/wolfgram.pdf
Ozzy
Thought Writes:
Given the extensive interaction between the Wolof and the Berber and Tucklor groups north of the Zenaga River I imagine it would be difficult to differentiate between the AE loan words and the Berber loan words.
quote:
Originally posted by Thought2:
Thought Writes:Given the extensive interaction between the Wolof and the Berber and Tucklor groups north of the Zenaga River I imagine it would be difficult to differentiate between the AE loan words and the Berber loan words.
I thimk he actualy showed it is not hard, as its not just the words but the language structure that is different. borrwing of words is not as simple as replacing one word or adopting one word for a description or object. If a word is adopted then the structure of the language would dictate its variences, (Plurals, gender etc). And if not just simple borrowing of words and infact dirrectly related the structure becomes even more important in suporting the connection. Its clear from this articals many many examples that Diops connections do not follow these priciples.
However I did find his Chadic examples very convincing.
I would like to read more of his work if anyone has seen any.
Ozzy
quote:
Originally posted by Ozzy:
I thimk he actualy showed it is not hard, as its not just the words but the language structure that is different. borrwing of words is not as simple as replacing one word or adopting one word for a description or object. If a word is adopted then the structure of the language would dictate its variences, (Plurals, gender etc). And if not just simple borrowing of words and infact dirrectly related the structure becomes even more important in suporting the connection. Its clear from this articals many many examples that Diops connections do not follow these priciples.However I did find his Chadic examples very convincing.
I would like to read more of his work if anyone has seen any.
Ozzy
Thought Writes:
One of the problems across the board is the fact that there are not enough African and pan-African scholars researching these issues. With every interaction there is mutual exchange. If Berber loan words can be found in Wolof I have to assume that Wolof words can be found in Berber tongues. Has there been a solid research paper that has evaluated the connections between the Tuareg language and the Songhai? How about Zenaga and Wolof? What about the Berber tongue spoken in the Siwa oasis and Zenaga? If there are please point me in the right direction? If there are none or very few then we have to say that the general thesis Diop proposed is no where near a closed book. At any rate, language tells us only PART of the story as it relates to human relationships and interactions.
quote:
Originally posted by Thought2:
Thought Writes:One of the problems across the board is the fact that there are not enough African and pan-African scholars researching these issues. With every interaction there is mutual exchange. If Berber loan words can be found in Wolof I have to assume that Wolof words can be found in Berber tongues. Has there been a solid research paper that has evaluated the connections between the Tuareg language and the Songhai? How about Zenaga and Wolof? What about the Berber tongue spoken in the Siwa oasis and Zenaga? If there are please point me in the right direction? If there are none or very few then we have to say that the general thesis Diop proposed is no where near a closed book. At any rate, language tells us only PART of the story as it relates to human relationships and interactions.
He didnt say that diop was wrong in trying to connect the African languages, in fact he maintains the oposite, he said that he believes that all African languages are related.
He did however show that Diops methods were flawed and the relationship that Diop was trying to show was infact not the case. That connection he was trying to show was a direct connection to Ancient Egyptian, and in doing so prove Egypts connection to Africa.
He pointed out that research needs to be done with the data taking one were it leads, by this he followed on to say that he believed although Diop had all good intentions and was by no means wrong in his usumption that African languages including Egyptian are related in some way, But Diop was "looking" for those connections to Wolof and there fore made many fundimental mistakes, instead of letting his research take him were it lead.
I think he showed clearly that the Egyptian Wolof direct connection was not there, and showed the connection although breif of many other languages was there.
I feel if you are to argue this then one should rebut his article.
And I agree that it would be benificial for more African scholars, to be researching these topics, but why does this make a difference to this type of article.?
Lastly the statment "With every interaction there is mutual exchange", is not correct, Culturaly speeking it has been clear that domination is often the moving force in intorducing language change, not simply interaction.
Another often forgoten or ignored impact on language influences are the women. As it is in all cultures a natural need to avoid interbreading forces men to look outsied their tribe and sometimes far outside their areas, for mates, when this happens when comming into contact differnet language groups, the women often have an great influence on the tribal language as they are the ones left with the children. Over a short period of time if a number of mates are taken from the same area the impact on the language can be great and ireversable. I know this has nothing to do with the artical but it shows the complexities of language change as apposed to a linier thinking of simple interaction and mutual exchange. Its by no means that simple.
In any case I can see many reasons why and were there would not be any mutual exchange of language and how we would not always see loan words evenly exchanged.
Ozzy
quote:
Originally posted by Kem-Au:
I'm feeling a little lazy. Can someone please sum the articles up for me? Do they compare sentence structure?
Kem I coulnt begin to sum the article up but he is among other things showing how easy it is to find and make word assosiations and yes he is comparing sectence structure. RE: He says that for laguage comparisments their needs to be comparitive structure to exist,RE: if someone was to try to connect English and Spanish as comming from the same language group, not only would one need to find simular words of which their are many, but also consider the differences in structure like, English verbs saty constant "open", we say I open, you open, we open , they open, the verb says constant, were as in spanish the word for open is "abrir" which changes from, yo abro, tu abres, nosotros abrimos, vosotros abris. The root word changes, then it also changes further depending on present tence, future, etc. He points out a simular difference between Wolof and AE. Then comes the word placement etc. He points out this as well. There may be and are many simular words in English and Spanish but this does not say that one is a direct evolution of the other.
The many other aspects of language structure will show the connections and the structure of the African language family tree. This is what I feel he is getting at.
Ozzy
[This message has been edited by Ozzy (edited 15 May 2004).]
quote:
Originally posted by Ozzy:
And I agree that it would be benificial for more African scholars, to be researching these topics, but why does this make a difference to this type of article.?
Thought Writes:
I believe that it makes a difference because this concept has not been fully evaluated and therefore the case is not yet closed. One article does not prove or disprove anything.
quote:
Originally posted by Ozzy:
In any case I can see many reasons why and were there would not be any mutual exchange of language and how we would not always see loan words evenly exchanged.
Thought Writes:
Perhaps my usage of the term "mutual exchange" created a a concept that I did not mean. I did not mean EQUAL exchange.
quote:
Originally posted by Ozzy:
Kem I coulnt begin to sum the article up but he is among other things showing how easy it is to find and make word assosiations and yes he is comparing sectence structure. RE: He says that for laguage comparisments their needs to be comparitive structure to exist,RE: if someone was to try to connect English and Spanish as comming from the same language group, not only would one need to find simular words of which their are many, but also consider the differences in structure like, English verbs saty constant "open", we say I open, you open, we open , they open, the verb says constant, were as in spanish the word for open is "abrir" which changes from, yo abro, tu abres, nosotros abrimos, vosotros abris. The root word changes, then it also changes further depending on present tence, future, etc. He points out a simular difference between Wolof and AE. Then comes the word placement etc. He points out this as well. There may be and are many simular words in English and Spanish but this does not say that one is a direct evolution of the other.The many other aspects of language structure will show the connections and the structure of the African language family tree. This is what I feel he is getting at.
Ozzy
[This message has been edited by Ozzy (edited 15 May 2004).]
That doesn't sound too far fetched. When I get some time I'll have to make sure to check it out.
quote:
Originally posted by Thought2:
Thought Writes:Given the extensive interaction between the Wolof and the Berber and Tucklor groups north of the Zenaga River I imagine it would be difficult to differentiate between the AE loan words and the Berber loan words.
I don't this makes much of a difference Thought, honestly. Swahili is regarded linguistically as a Bantu langugae despite that it has Arabic lone words. Swahili is still regarded as distant from Arabic. I think the argument that Chadic is closer to ancient Egyptian is far batter to argue because there are significant correlations between the two, not conincidental relationships.
The author of that paper isn't saying Wolof and ancient Egyptian aren't related. he's just saying the methods used by Diop to demonstrate a relationship between two falls short of a showing a close relationship.
quote:
Originally posted by S.Mohammad:
I don't this makes much of a difference Thought, honestly. Swahili is regarded linguistically as a Bantu langugae despite that it has Arabic lone words. Swahili is still regarded as distant from Arabic. I think the argument that Chadic is closer to ancient Egyptian is far batter to argue because there are significant correlations between the two, not conincidental relationships.The author of that paper isn't saying Wolof and ancient Egyptian aren't related. he's just saying the methods used by Diop to demonstrate a relationship between two falls short of a showing a close relationship.
Thought Writes:
I wonder how the Berber language was dispersed from the Nile region to NW Africa completly passing EVERY region of the Western Sahara during the neolithic period? Very odd, if true.
quote:
Originally posted by S.Mohammad:
http://www.linguistics.ucla.edu/people/schuh/Papers/language_and_history.pdf
This paper here is very interesting. It goes into detail a great bit about African languages, but what I found interesting is that it broke down and went in depth about Diop's proposed relationship between Wolof and Ancient Egyptian. In contrast it demonstrated a definite relationship between ancient Egyptian and Chadic. Read through and hopefully provide some feedback.
There is one word to describe this paper - obfuscation.
The relationship between Pharaonic Egyptian and Wolof is simple to demonstrate:
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"
EGYPTIAN:mer on ef, "he loved"
WOLOF :maar on ef, "he loved passionately"
EGYPTIAN:mer on es, "she loved"
WOLOF :maar on es, "she loved passionately"
EGYPTIAN:mer on sen, "they loved"
WOLOF :maar on sen, "they loved passionately"
For a more detailed analysis see my:
http://www.geocities.com/wally_mo/egypt_lang.html
P.S.:
a)Any Wolof speaking individual will tell you that the word "khem" means "burnt to black."
b)Kem means "black" in modern day Coptic also, there is no alternative meaning for this word.
Mar – to lick. Or to be thursty
Naar – A Moor.
Esen – to scratch or to itch.
Again one of my resources is below.
http://www.africanculture.dk/gambia/ftp/wollof.pdf
http://www.africanculture.dk/gambia/ftp/wolfgram.pdf
Im happy to be corrected if you can supply a reasonable resource.
BTW, Diop notes that set-kem = black wife in Wolof. Don't know of any other references, but I'll post some links if I come across any. And I know that's not a dictionary, but being from Senegal, Diop was likely a Wolof speaker.
http://www.africawithin.com/diop/origin_egyptians.htm
quote:
Originally posted by Thought2:
Thought Writes:I wonder how the Berber language was dispersed from the Nile region to NW Africa completly passing EVERY region of the Western Sahara during the neolithic period? Very odd, if true.
I think the Berber language originated in East Africa as demonstarted by the presence of Somali Y chromosones found in North Africans. Of course its tricky science to try to connect the spread of language through genes, but archaeology may help a bit in this respect. I really don't have an answer, but my point is that AE and Wolof may share a relationship, but it isn't a close relationship. Wolof belongs to the West Atlantic Branch of the Niger-Congo language family and is more related to Serer, Fulfide(Fulani), and Tukulor. Greenberg especially noted this relationship when he was debunking Meinhoff's "Hamitic" classification of the Fulani. But there is something worth noting about the Fulani, they stretch from west Africa all the way into the Eastern Sudan.
quote:
Originally posted by Wally:
There is one word to describe this paper - obfuscation.
The relationship between Pharaonic Egyptian and Wolof is simple to demonstrate:
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"EGYPTIAN:mer on ef, "he loved"
WOLOF :maar on ef, "he loved passionately"EGYPTIAN:mer on es, "she loved"
WOLOF :maar on es, "she loved passionately"EGYPTIAN:mer on sen, "they loved"
WOLOF :maar on sen, "they loved passionately"For a more detailed analysis see my:
http://www.geocities.com/wally_mo/egypt_lang.htmlP.S.:
a)Any Wolof speaking individual will tell you that the word "khem" means "burnt to black."b)Kem means "black" in modern day Coptic also, there is no alternative meaning for this word.
Wally, if you look closer than just the similar vocabulary and look at others things that constitute a relationship between languages you will see than ancient Egyptian is closer to Chadic than Wolof. Wolof and Chadic speakers are sub-Saharan and very Negroid so saying a greater relationship exists between Chadic and AE(they're both classed under the Afrasian language family) doesn't in anyway refute the notion that AE was and is an African language.
quote:
Originally posted by Ozzy:
Wally, please direct me to a dictionary of Wollof that lists Khem as burnt to black. And I can not find an official dictionary that lists any words you have used here or on your site. The closest I could come was these.Mar – to lick. Or to be thursty
Naar – A Moor.
Esen – to scratch or to itch.
Again one of my resources is below.
http://www.africanculture.dk/gambia/ftp/wollof.pdf
http://www.africanculture.dk/gambia/ftp/wolfgram.pdf
Im happy to be corrected if you can supply a reasonable resource.
The Peace Corps compiled dictionary is helpful but not exhaustive. The most authoritative interpretation of the word "khem" or "maar" would of course be a Wolof.
You may wish to try:
http://www.wolofonline.com/[/URL]
Either that or write to a Senegal or Gambian embassy. I'm sure they would be helpful
in explaining these words to you.
Also, a good reference for Coptic Egyptian:
http://mycopticchurch.com/coptic/lexicon.asp[/URL]
Try entering <black> <egypt> for example.
quote:
Originally posted by S.Mohammad:
Wally, if you look closer than just the similar vocabulary and look at others things that constitute a relationship between languages you will see than ancient Egyptian is closer to Chadic than Wolof. Wolof and Chadic speakers are sub-Saharan and very Negroid so saying a greater relationship exists between Chadic and AE(they're both classed under the Afrasian language family) doesn't in anyway refute the notion that AE was and is an African language.
I don't disagree with you at all.
quote:
Originally posted by Ozzy:
Wally, please direct me to a dictionary of Wollof that lists Khem as burnt to black. And I can not find an official dictionary that lists any words you have used here or on your site. The closest I could come was these.Mar – to lick. Or to be thursty
Naar – A Moor.
Esen – to scratch or to itch.
Again one of my resources is below.
http://www.africanculture.dk/gambia/ftp/wollof.pdf
http://www.africanculture.dk/gambia/ftp/wolfgram.pdf
Im happy to be corrected if you can supply a reasonable resource.
The Peace Corps compiled dictionary is helpful but not exhaustive. The most authoritative interpretation of the word "khem" or "maar" would of course be a Wolof.
You may wish to try: http://www.wolofonline.com/
Either that or write to a Senegal or Gambian embassy. I'm sure they would be helpful
in explaining these words to you.
Also, a good reference for Coptic Egyptian: http://www.mycopticchurch.com/coptic/lexicon.asp
Try entering <black> <egypt> for example.
The following excert is from the website: http://www.africamaat.com (it's in French) - keep in mind that the Egyptian hieroglyphs for km and kmt includes the piece of burnt charcoal as the primary symbol.
> the exact translation of this C-W communication requires the recourse to African tradition . Indeed, the "black" concept is related to the charcoal, solid residue of carbonization of wood (towards 300/400 degrees Celsius) or with coal even as a solid combustible material of black color and vegetable origin is very widespread in Africa with the same significance and the same concrete form.
Egyptian pharaonic : km, "black",
Copte (Egyptian vocalized): Kamè, kami, kémi, kèm, kam, black coal,
Wolof (Senegal): khem, black, to carbonize by excess of cooking,
Bambara (Mali): Kami, braises, lit coal,
Mbochi (Congo): i-kamà, to carbonize, reduce out of coal,
Mossi/More (Burkina faso): kim, to burn.
[This message has been edited by Wally (edited 24 May 2004).]
quote:
Originally posted by ausar:
Most contemporary linguistic seem to feel that imazghen[Berber] languages spread from the Lower Nile and isolated from other Afro-Asiatic speakers.
I found this interesting article about this subject:
The "Berber" script has a very interesting story behind it. Ancient Berber is thought to have sprung off the Punic script roughly around the 6th century BC. It was used throughout North Africa until the 3rd century AD. Strangely though, the inscriptions remain unread, as linguists cannot link the written language to any of the dozen modern Berber languages spoken in North Africa. However, it is widely accepted by scholars that it was a Berber language given the continuity of the population.
http://www.ancientscripts.com/berber.html
In this respect, although it doesn't really question the Berber language and where it came from, it is interesting to notice that both the Berber script and Meriotic Script remain unread. In the case of Berber script being unread I don't think scholars and linguists have given it a chance because they've only compared to other KNOWN Berber languages and made the assumption that it was written in Berber. i this assumption is made in order to avoid possibly connecting this unread language to other African populations If this was the case, this unread language would show at least some kind of relationship to the other Berber languages. It could be a lost Semitic language, since the Berber script is thought to have been derived from the Punic Script.
I think this unread Berber Script or should I say the language, should be compared to other afrasian languages and possibly even Meriotic, since neither of these languages have no correspondence to the people in whose area they are now found. It could be that this unread language written in the Berber script originated from a population in either the Upper Nile or the Sahara and became isolated from even Berber languages themselves
quote:
Originally posted by ausar:
Why is it that the Tuareg preserve this script and not people like the Kaybele or any other Imazghen group? Linguist think the Merotic script might be related to the Beja people.
Thought Writes:
How do the Garamantes fit into all of this?
quote:
Originally posted by Thought2:
Thought Writes:How do the Garamantes fit into all of this?
Well, I havemy own theories for this. Both those unread languages could be offshoots of proto-Afrasian.
You brought up an xcellent point about the Garamantes as well as ausar mentioning why do the Tuareg still write in this ancient Berber script. I think this Berber script spread from south to North. The Garamantes could be a possible people who spread it although Nina from Richardpoe.com tries to claim them as Berbers, something they never identified themselves as. Once the meriotic and this unread language are fully understood it is my guess that they will both unlock the key to the spread of Afrasian languages from the region in Sudan to points North, south, east, and west. I have the strange sense that both the unread language written in Berber and meriotic are related.
quote:
Originally posted by ausar:
Garamantes are Nilo-Saharan people relaed to the Tibbu. The fact some people connect them to Berber is pure conjecture based on the fact Tuategs still write with the Libyo-Berber script . To related them to Berbers is not serious due to the fact that Berber used in Greco-Roman times were not a ethnicity. You have various tribes in northern Africa that were hetrogenous that the Romans called. Notice also that the Garamantes are from Fezzan and not from anywhere along the coast like Algeria or Morocco.
Exactly, Garamantes are a Nilo-Saharan speaking people whose modern descendants may very well be the Tibbu, Teda, and even the Kanuri. Maybe even the Haratin too. Nina mis-identified them as Berbers for the fact that Herodotus mentions them as one of the peoples of Libya, therefore she automatically assumes them to be Berber, as if ALL North Africans are ancestrally Berbers.
quote:
Originally posted by Horemheb:
Some recent DNA studies identify them as Berbers as well. Combining their origins in Libya and some DNA analysis to confirm means they probably are from a berber or mixed Berber group.
What "DNA" studies have identified Garamantes, Teda, Tibbu, and Kanuri as Berbers? Please don't make anymore trolling strawman posts without posting studies. None of these groups are Berbers, ethno-linguistically speaking.
quote:
Originally posted by Horemheb:
But they are genetically, check Cavalli Sforza. Mexican and Spanish population both speak spanish but they are not genetically the same. It is dangerous to hang your hat on language.
If they are the same and you have the studies which specifically state that Garamantes, Kanuri, Teda, Tibbu, and Haratin are genetically "Berbers"(not possible, nothing can be genetically Berber) then post it, don't talk about it.
I believe the ancestors of the modern Berbers are the Metcha-Arbi,Caspsians,and possibly some other groups that appeated in later times in Libya that displaced the original population. The ancient definition of Libya is not the same as the modern nation of Libya.
By the way,I don't believe Tuaregs are related to northern Berber tribes like the Kaybele or Shawia. I believe they are people from the Horn of Africa who migrated to the Sahel and other parts of Northern Africa.
In my reading it seemed to be clear that their was some connection with many African Languages to the word Kem, but not connecting to the word Black, which most of the languages had a specific word for, the connection was to burnt, to say anything regarding the color of a thing or indead skin was not expressed with any resemblance to any dirivitive of "Kem".
Egyptian in this case seemed to be the odd one out. Could it be that current translations of Egyptian is the one incorrect?
As you can see by Wallys examples all his examples show the kem words as being used for descriptions of burnt or simular.
In regards to the AE version, if you can supply me with a reason why when in the word kem, "burnt stick and croc tail", KM, looses the burnt stick in your examples of extended kem words like kemau Kemit, Kemet etc. The significance of the word =KM loses it meaning in the extended words when the burnt stick is removed.
I have little to support my view as yet but, Im not even sure that the words Kemit, Kemau etc are correctly translated, as they do not contain the total of the original KM Hieroglyph.
If anyone has an explanation for this I would be greatfull.
Also, Most of these words seem to be translated from left to right RE: Kemau. Black people, as apossed to right to left which AE was writen.
Ozzy
quote:
Originally posted by Ozzy:
Back on the subject of Wolof, In every resource I can get my hands on I was unable to find support for the words Khem as Wally has on his site and posted here other than the keem word which means burnt rice, which I posted earlier. I have emailed three Senegal government departments for an official responce.In my reading it seemed to be clear that their was some connection with many African Languages to the word Kem, but not connecting to the word Black, which most of the languages had a specific word for, the connection was to burnt, to say anything regarding the color of a thing or indead skin was not expressed with any resemblance to any dirivitive of "Kem".
Egyptian in this case seemed to be the odd one out. Could it be that current translations of Egyptian is the one incorrect?
As you can see by Wallys examples all his examples show the kem words as being used for descriptions of burnt or simular.
In regards to the AE version, if you can supply me with a reason why when in the word kem, "burnt stick and croc tail", KM, looses the burnt stick in your examples of extended kem words like kemau Kemit, Kemet etc. The significance of the word =KM loses it meaning in the extended words when the burnt stick is removed.
I have little to support my view as yet but, Im not even sure that the words Kemit, Kemau etc are correctly translated, as they do not contain the total of the original KM Hieroglyph.
If anyone has an explanation for this I would be greatfull.
Also, Most of these words seem to be translated from left to right RE: Kemau. Black people, as apossed to right to left which AE was writen.
Ozzy
I think its wise enough to conclude that there is no evidence for a very close relationship between Wolof and AE, despite Diop's sincere effort. I just don't see one, even if the words for black and or burnt do match up. I think people should do their own research before quoting others as evidence, as in Wally's case. I don't the validity in most of whats on his page, but as far as the linguistic evidence goes for Wolof and AE, the evidence is meager at best.
This aside, there were a couple of statements posted that simply are not true.
1. Ozzy: "Also, Most of these words seem to be translated from left to right RE: Kemau. Black people, as apossed to right to left which AE was writen."
AE could be written in any direction, even up and down:
http://www.touregypt.net/featurestories/writing.htm
2. Ozzy: "In regards to the AE version, if you can supply me with a reason why when in the word kem, "burnt stick and croc tail", KM, looses the burnt stick in your examples of extended kem words like kemau Kemit, Kemet etc. The significance of the word =KM loses it meaning in the extended words when the burnt stick is removed."
The words kemmau, kemit, etc do not lose the burn stick. Here are images from Budges dictionary. Note the Kam words in question all include the burnt stick:
http://www.geocities.com/jerod_motley/kam.html
quote:
Originally posted by ausar:
I believe the ancestors of the modern Berbers are the Metcha-Arbi,Caspsians,and possibly some other groups that appeated in later times in Libya that displaced the original population. The ancient definition of Libya is not the same as the modern nation of Libya.
Thought Writes:
Interesting point. I wonder how the Blacks of Gerba Island Tunisia fit into your concept?
quote:
Originally posted by Ozzy:
Back on the subject of Wolof...
Thought Writes:
I do not believe that Wolof is as close to AE as Coptic or Hausa linguistically. However, in attempting to reconstruct relationships we should factor in a number of variables including genetics, anthropology and history. Wolof is a Niger-Kordofanian language, but are the Wolof REALLY closer to an Akan speaker than a AE on a genetic basis?
[This message has been edited by ausar (edited 25 May 2004).]
quote:
Originally posted by Thought2:
Thought Writes:I do not believe that Wolof is as close to AE as Coptic or Hausa linguistically. However, in attempting to reconstruct relationships we should factor in a number of variables including genetics, anthropology and history. Wolof is a Niger-Kordofanian language, but are the Wolof REALLY closer to an Akan speaker than a AE on a genetic basis?
Thats another discussion, but in order to assess that relationship one must look at Wolof's closest relatives lignuistically also(Fulani, Serer, Tukulor) to assess and Joseph Greenberg concluded that Fulfide(language of the Fulani) was not Afrasian and Wolof and Fulfide are in the same west Atlantic Branch of Niger-Congo. I believe the Fula may have had more extensive contact with Afrasians than Wolof so I think the matter is settled. If AE and Wolof share any type of relationship its very distant at best.
Sentence structure:
"My mother"
Mi madre -- Spanish
Minha mae -- Portuguese
La mia madre -- Italian
"Come to my house"
Venido a mi casa -- Spanish
Vindo a minha casa -- Portuguese
Venuto alla mia casa -- Italian
Word Comparisons:
"Sky"
Cielo -- Spanish
Ceu -- Portuguese
Cielo -- Italian
Etc:
It's obvious that just from these few examples, these three languages belong to the same linguistic family. They are labeled Latin or Romance languages.
Alas, poor Africa is stuck with dubious terms such as "AfroAsiatic," "Niger-etc."
As the Ancient Egyptians would say "Bw nfrt su m bw bn" - "A state of beauty has become a state of evil" or the modern Wolof "Bw rft mel ni bw bn" - the same...
[This message has been edited by Wally (edited 26 May 2004).]
Ozzy
Also, the author made the point that there were sounds present in AE that were not found in Wolof. This would make more sense if any among us had actually heard an AE speak. How do we know a sound existed in AE but not Wolof?
All in all, I wouldn't say Wolof is closer than other languages to AE. The languages are either related, or they aren't. But that article did nothing to prove that there was no relation between Wolof and AE. I also wouldn't doubt that a number of other languages were also close to AE.
quote:
Originally posted by S.Mohammad:
I believe the Fula may have had more extensive contact with Afrasians than Wolof so I think the matter is settled.
Thought Writes:
Why would the mater be settled when you have presented no evidence?
quote:
Originally posted by ausar:
The dark skinned Tunisan people in Djerba Island have genetic frequencies that are like those in Eastern Africa....Siwi don't look like other Berber populations in Magreb but are probabaly closer to Eastern Africans in phenotype.[This message has been edited by ausar (edited 25 May 2004).]
Thought Writes:
It would be interesting to compare the genetic relationship between Tuareg, Teda, Kanuri, Black Tunisians from Gerba Island. I believe these Blacks could be the remnant of the original Berbers that brought the tongue to the Maghreb.
Has anyone examined and compared the Garamante pyramids and the Merotic Pyramids?
quote:
Originally posted by Thought2:
Thought Writes:Why would the mater be settled when you have presented no evidence?
The evidence was presented in that pdf I posted. Wolof and AE are NOT closely related, I'm not saying that there is no relationship between the two, I'm just saying the relationship between Wolof and AE is not close enough to warrant them both being in the same language family. The relationship to Chadic is much stronger. You have not proven that even if the Wolof üpicked up some Berber words for one and for two whether those Berber words were closely related to AE. There is no record of any close contact between AE's and Wolof. All I've seen is people copying Diop's comparisons verbatim without actually doing their own comparison between Wolof and AE. Even Christopher Ehret and Greenberg would never place Wolof and AE in the same family. There may indeed be a common distant relationship among all African languages but the relationship between AE and Wolof is not VERY close, otherwise we're reviving the old Hamitic Hypothesis by Meinhoff's sloopy comparisons.
quote:
Originally posted by Kem-Au:
I finally read the article, and though I can't say how close Wolof is to AE compared to other languages, I can say that that article does nothing to disprove Diop's work. We can argue forever over the use of individual words, but the author does not engage Diop's similarities in sentence structure between Wolof and AE.Also, the author made the point that there were sounds present in AE that were not found in Wolof. This would make more sense if any among us had actually heard an AE speak. How do we know a sound existed in AE but not Wolof?
All in all, I wouldn't say Wolof is closer than other languages to AE. The languages are either related, or they aren't. But that article did nothing to prove that there was no relation between Wolof and AE. I also wouldn't doubt that a number of other languages were also close to AE.
Here is link for some Wolof words http://www.smcm.edu/academics/hss/studyabroad/gambia/GambiaHB/2002vocabulary.htm#Color
Here you will see that the words for black in Wolof is called Nyool, not anything close to Kem or Khem. The notion that AE and Wolof are somehow very closely related is officially debunked, if it was very close Ehret and Greenberg would have noticed it. Diop worship and comparing a few sentences will not change this.
quote:
Originally posted by S.Mohammad:
Here is link for some Wolof wordsHere you will see that the words for black in Wolof is called Nyool, not anything close to Kem or Khem. The notion that AE and Wolof are somehow very closely related is officially debunked, if it was very close Ehret and Greenberg would have noticed it. Diop worship and comparing a few sentences will not change this.
One flawed article will also not not change anything either. I'd sooner believe a Wolof speaker about his own language. Nothing has been officially debunked. You, the author of that article, and everyone else who leaped for joy after reading it are entitled to your opinion. But it is just that, an opinion.
[This message has been edited by Kem-Au (edited 27 May 2004).]
quote:
Originally posted by Kem-Au:
One flawed article will also not not change anything either. I'd sooner believe a Wolof speaker about his own language. Nothing has been officially debunked. You, the author of that article, and everyone else who leaped for joy after reading it are entitled to your opinion. But it is just that, an opinion.[This message has been edited by Kem-Au (edited 27 May 2004).]
I don't see where that pdf I posted was flawed and where I was wrong. In these days its practiically useless to use Diop's linguistic comparison to prove the Africaness of the ancient Egyptian language, we no longer need that. I'm just arguing from the linguistic point of view that Wolof and AE aren't related. Diop's anthropological work is unquestion and him and Keita don't necessarily conflict with another, they both believe in the diversity of indigenous Africans. If you would like to have a Wolof explain this to you, go ahead, but there is no foundation of a CLOSE and I emphasise CLOSE, relationship.
quote:
Originally posted by S.Mohammad:
Here is link for some Wolof words [URL=http://www.smcm.edu/academics/hss/studyabroad/gambia/GambiaHB/2002vocabulary.htm#Color]http://www.smcm.edu/academics/hss/studyabroad/gambia/GambiaHB/2002vocabulary.htm#Color[/ URL]Here you will see that the words for black in Wolof is called Nyool, not anything close to Kem or Khem. The notion that AE and Wolof are somehow very closely related is officially debunked, if it was very close Ehret and Greenberg would have noticed it. Diop worship and comparing a few sentences will not change this.
What absolute nonsense. Professor Diop was a
WOLOF intellectual, who was certainly versed in
his own language. One can grant it that a Wolof
intellectual has a firmer grasp of his native
language than say a Wolof farmer, let alone,
anyone not a Wolof speaker. I mean, do you think
the professor was inventing these words??
As a matter of fact, when I listed a Wolof word
for "black" as kem, a Wolof brother emailed me
with this correction; that it should be spelled
"khem" and more specifically be defined as
"burnt to black" and I immediately corrected this
small but significant error. I mean he was a Wolof
for God's sake, so I didn't need to consult some
"official" dictionary.
For those who feel the need to see it in an "official"
dictionary, for example, the word "kef(kof)" is in
the Peace Corps compiled dictionary:
kef - verb; to snatch
The Coptic equivalent is "keh"
The Lord Diop writes:
"Walaf, a Senegalese language spoken in the
extreme west of Africa on the Atlantic Ocean, is
perhaps as close to ancient Egyptian as Coptic. An
exhaustive study of this question has recently been
carried out...As we shall see, the kinship is
genealogical in nature.
Egyptian.............Walaf
[hieroglyphics]
kef=to grasp,........kef=seize a prey
to take a strip
(of something)
PRESENT............PRESENT
kef i..............kef na
kef ek.............kef nga
kef et.............kef na
kef ef.............kef ef na
kef es.............kef es
kef n..............kef nanu
kef ton............kef ngen
kef sen............kef nanu
PAST...............PAST
kef ni.............kef (on) na
kef (o) nek........kef (on) nga
kef (o) net........kef (on) na
kef (o) nef........kef (on) ef na
kef (o) nes........kef (on) es
kef (o) nen........kef (on) nanu
kef (o) n ten......kef (on) ngen
kef (o) n sen......kef (on) nanu
EGYPTIAN..........WALAF
feh=go away.......feh=rush off
We have the following correspondences
between the verb forms,
with identity of similarity of meaning:
all the Egyptian verb
forms, except for two, are also recorded
in Walaf.
EGYPTIAN..............WALAF
feh-ef................feh-ef
feh-es................feh-es
feh-n-ef..............feh-on-ef
feh-n-es..............feh-ones
feh-w.................feh-w
feh-wef...............feh-w-ef
feh-w-es..............feh-w-es
feh-w-a-ef............feh-il-ef
feh-w-n-es............feh-w-on-es
feh-in-ef.............feh-il-ef
feh-in-es.............feh-il-es
feh-t-ef..............feh-t-ef
feh-t-es..............feh-es
feh-tyfy f............feh-ati-fy
feh-tysy..............feh-at-ef
feh-tw-ef.............feh-tw-ef
feh-tw-es.............feh-tw-es
feh-kw(i).............feh-i-kw
feh-n-tw-ef...........feh-an-tw-ef
feh-a-tw-es...........feh-an-tw-es
feh-y-ef..............feh-y-ef
feh-y-es..............fey-y-es
EGYPTIAN.............WALAF
mer=love.............mar=lick
mer-ef...............mar-ef
mer-es...............mar-es
mer-n-el.............mar-on-ef
mer-n-es.............mar-on-es
mer-w................mar-w
mer-w-ef.............mar-w-ef
mer-w-n-f............mar-w-on-ef
mer-w-n-es...........mar-w-on-es
mer-in-ef............mar-il-ef
mer-in-es............mar-il-es
mer-t-ef.............mar-t-ef
mer-t-es.............mar-t-es
mer-tw-ef............mar-tw-ef
mer-tw-es............mar-tw-es
mer-tyfy.............mar-at-ef
mer-t-tysy...........mar-aty-es
mar-kwi..............mari-kw
mer-y-ef.............mar-y-ef
mer-y-es.............mar-y-es
mer-n-tw-ef..........mar-an-tw-ef
mer-n-tw-es..........mar-antw-es
Amen
[This message has been edited by Wally (edited 27 May 2004).]
[This message has been edited by Wally (edited 27 May 2004).]
quote:
Originally posted by Kem-Au:
One flawed article will also not not change anything either. I'd sooner believe a Wolof speaker about his own language. Nothing has been officially debunked. You, the author of that article, and everyone else who leaped for joy after reading it are entitled to your opinion. But it is just that, an opinion.[This message has been edited by Kem-Au (edited 27 May 2004).]
Id sooner believe a wolof speaker also, but I can not find one reference in any Dictionary or resource (In German, English, French, and I even had a frined read an Arabic on for me)that has the word Khem for burnt to black, only the word keen, I have emailed a few Gambian government agencies to get an official reply.
Even Wallys links did not have the word. I downloaded the Dictionary from his link too, no Khem word.
And Kem Im not sure I jumped out of my seat when I read it, but I was impressed with what he had writen when I had been finding the same problems when searching for the words in Wolof.
My original seach was in actual fact to find the word Kem or simular in Wolof to support a thought I have, so the outcome so far was not what I was looking for. But since no has been able to supply any support for the words other than quoting Diop I feel this is a problem. If a word could not be found in an English Dictionary that was claimed to exist, then it would be dificult for most to accept, or have I missed some problem there may be with recording the whole of the Wolof language.
quote:
Originally posted by Ozzy:
Id sooner believe a wolof speaker also, but I can not find one reference in any Dictionary or resource (In German, English, French, and I even had a frined read an Arabic on for me)that has the word Khem for burnt to black, only the word keen, I have emailed a few Gambian government agencies to get an official reply.Even Wallys links did not have the word. I downloaded the Dictionary from his link too, no Khem word.
And Kem Im not sure I jumped out of my seat when I read it, but I was impressed with what he had writen when I had been finding the same problems when searching for the words in Wolof.
My original seach was in actual fact to find the word Kem or simular in Wolof to support a thought I have, so the outcome so far was not what I was looking for. But since no has been able to supply any support for the words other than quoting Diop I feel this is a problem. If a word could not be found in an English Dictionary that was claimed to exist, then it would be dificult for most to accept, or have I missed some problem there may be with recording the whole of the Wolof language.
Seek and yee shall find.
quote:
Originally posted by Kem-Au:
I do not speak Wolof, but the black wife phrase in Wolof is another example of the word Kam meaning black. Also, Diop used sentence structure to relate Wolof to AE, which has already been posted. It will take far more evidence then what I have seen to prove that there is no relationship. The degree of the relationship is subject to the individual.This aside, there were a couple of statements posted that simply are not true.
1. Ozzy: "Also, Most of these words seem to be translated from left to right RE: Kemau. Black people, as apossed to right to left which AE was writen."
AE could be written in any direction, even up and down:
http://www.touregypt.net/featurestories/writing.htm2. Ozzy: "In regards to the AE version, if you can supply me with a reason why when in the word kem, "burnt stick and croc tail", KM, looses the burnt stick in your examples of extended kem words like kemau Kemit, Kemet etc. The significance of the word =KM loses it meaning in the extended words when the burnt stick is removed."
The words kemmau, kemit, etc do not lose the burn stick. Here are images from Budges dictionary. Note the Kam words in question all include the burnt stick:
http://www.geocities.com/jerod_motley/kam.html
Kem I dont have a copy of Budges Dictionary, so I assume by what you have said that he lists J6 or I6 from Gardners dictionary as a burnt stick.
http://www.jimloy.com/hiero/gardner2.htm
As the word KM is I6 (Crocodile Tail in Gardners dict) over an M3 (A stick) I assumed that the stick being refered to was the M3. And as the stick (M3)is not reproduced in the other words only I6 is I was wondering how it can retain its full meaning as black when the full word no longer exists.
So are you saying that the I6 on its own means KM = Black. and has a phonic value of both K&M? and when included with the stick m3 means what?
If I have got this wrong please correct me.
Ozzy
quote:
Originally posted by Wally:
Seek and yee shall find.
Looking but aint found!
PS: Spoke to a few guys down in Santa Cruz today and they found me a Senegal guy who says he speaks Wollof, (Amazing how many African languages are down there) he said he was not aware of the word Khem or Kem, and he confirmed the word for black, beeing as it sounded to me as Nuul. I can not confirm he speaks the language as i do not, but I see no reason for they guy to lie. I asked him to tell me what black wife was in Wollof and his responce sounded nothing like what has been posted. The man is not an intelectual, he is in fact a recent imigrant (possibly not legal), but why would the every day Wolof speaker differ from the intilectual Wolof speaker such as Diop. In particular if the words are based on the ancinet aspects of the language.
I will wait for the official answer from Senegal.
Ozzy
[This message has been edited by Ozzy (edited 27 May 2004).]
http://highculture.8m.com/images/Affinities/lingustic03.gif
Lick not love! Your examples are incorrect as can be seen by your own posts and Diops presentations.
Quote Wally :
EGYPTIAN:mer on ef, "he loved"
WOLOF :maar on ef, "he loved passionately"
EGYPTIAN:mer on es, "she loved"
WOLOF :maar on es, "she loved passionately"
EGYPTIAN:mer on sen, "they loved"
WOLOF :maar on sen, "they loved passionately
Wolof Mar = Lick as is even shown in Diops own work.
Ozzy
[This message has been edited by Ozzy (edited 27 May 2004).]
[This message has been edited by Ozzy (edited 27 May 2004).]
quote:
Originally posted by Ozzy:
Kem I dont have a copy of Budges Dictionary, so I assume by what you have said that he lists J6 or I6 from Gardners dictionary as a burnt stick.
http://www.jimloy.com/hiero/gardner2.htmAs the word KM is I6 (Crocodile Tail in Gardners dict) over an M3 (A stick) I assumed that the stick being refered to was the M3. And as the stick (M3)is not reproduced in the other words only I6 is I was wondering how it can retain its full meaning as black when the full word no longer exists.
So are you saying that the I6 on its own means KM = Black. and has a phonic value of both K&M? and when included with the stick m3 means what?
If I have got this wrong please correct me.
Ozzy
Remember I can't read AE, so I'm not sure what certain glyphs mean on their own. The only point is that the burnt stick glyph is present in many of the words the have KM in them like KMT and kemmau, as you can see in the link I posted. It is right out of Budge's text.
What does the burnt stick mean? I don't know. I know that AE's used determinants in their writing to help the reader determine the meaning of a word, so the burnt stick may be one of those and not actually represent a sound.
quote:
Originally posted by Wally:
What absolute nonsense. Professor Diop was a
WOLOF intellectual, who was certainly versed in
his own language. One can grant it that a Wolof
intellectual has a firmer grasp of his native
language than say a Wolof farmer, let alone,
anyone not a Wolof speaker. I mean, do you think
the professor was inventing these words??
As a matter of fact, when I listed a Wolof word
for "black" as kem, a Wolof brother emailed me
with this correction; that it should be spelled
"khem" and more specifically be defined as
"burnt to black" and I immediately corrected this
small but significant error. I mean he was a Wolof
for God's sake, so I didn't need to consult some
"official" dictionary.
For those who feel the need to see it in an "official"
dictionary, for example, the word "kef(kof)" is in
the Peace Corps compiled dictionary:
kef - verb; to snatch
The Coptic equivalent is "keh"
The Lord Diop writes:
"Walaf, a Senegalese language spoken in the
extreme west of Africa on the Atlantic Ocean, is
perhaps as close to ancient Egyptian as Coptic. An
exhaustive study of this question has recently been
carried out...As we shall see, the kinship is
genealogical in nature.Egyptian.............Walaf
[hieroglyphics]
kef=to grasp,........kef=seize a prey
to take a strip
(of something)PRESENT............PRESENT
kef i..............kef na
kef ek.............kef nga
kef et.............kef na
kef ef.............kef ef na
kef es.............kef es
kef n..............kef nanu
kef ton............kef ngen
kef sen............kef nanuPAST...............PAST
kef ni.............kef (on) na
kef (o) nek........kef (on) nga
kef (o) net........kef (on) na
kef (o) nef........kef (on) ef na
kef (o) nes........kef (on) es
kef (o) nen........kef (on) nanu
kef (o) n ten......kef (on) ngen
kef (o) n sen......kef (on) nanuEGYPTIAN..........WALAF
feh=go away.......feh=rush off
We have the following correspondences
between the verb forms,
with identity of similarity of meaning:
all the Egyptian verb
forms, except for two, are also recorded
in Walaf.EGYPTIAN..............WALAF
feh-ef................feh-ef
feh-es................feh-es
feh-n-ef..............feh-on-ef
feh-n-es..............feh-ones
feh-w.................feh-w
feh-wef...............feh-w-ef
feh-w-es..............feh-w-es
feh-w-a-ef............feh-il-ef
feh-w-n-es............feh-w-on-esfeh-in-ef.............feh-il-ef
feh-in-es.............feh-il-es
feh-t-ef..............feh-t-ef
feh-t-es..............feh-es
feh-tyfy f............feh-ati-fy
feh-tysy..............feh-at-ef
feh-tw-ef.............feh-tw-ef
feh-tw-es.............feh-tw-es
feh-kw(i).............feh-i-kw
feh-n-tw-ef...........feh-an-tw-ef
feh-a-tw-es...........feh-an-tw-es
feh-y-ef..............feh-y-ef
feh-y-es..............fey-y-esEGYPTIAN.............WALAF
mer=love.............mar=lick
mer-ef...............mar-ef
mer-es...............mar-es
mer-n-el.............mar-on-ef
mer-n-es.............mar-on-es
mer-w................mar-wmer-w-ef.............mar-w-ef
mer-w-n-f............mar-w-on-ef
mer-w-n-es...........mar-w-on-es
mer-in-ef............mar-il-ef
mer-in-es............mar-il-es
mer-t-ef.............mar-t-ef
mer-t-es.............mar-t-es
mer-tw-ef............mar-tw-ef
mer-tw-es............mar-tw-es
mer-tyfy.............mar-at-ef
mer-t-tysy...........mar-aty-esmar-kwi..............mari-kw
mer-y-ef.............mar-y-ef
mer-y-es.............mar-y-es
mer-n-tw-ef..........mar-an-tw-ef
mer-n-tw-es..........mar-antw-esAmen
[This message has been edited by Wally (edited 27 May 2004).][This message has been edited by Wally (edited 27 May 2004).]
Its evident your are blinded by Diop worship. I checked 3 different sources for what black meant in Wolof and they all said Nyool. Ozzy even asked a Wolof speaker and he said something similar to it. Why are you so insistent on what Diop said when in this day and age its not needed? AE is an African language, notz to mention it also had numerous Nilo-Saharan loan words in its vocabulary indicating early contact with speakers from the south and west of Egypt, which isn't surprising. The language is African, it doesn't take Diop worship to confirm that and I am in no way trying to de-Africanize AE, by posting that pdf which says it more related to Chadic than Wolof how am I de-Africanizing it? Afrasian languages started and evolved from Africa, not the outside of Africa.
quote:
Originally posted by S.Mohammad:
Its evident your are blinded by Diop worship. I checked 3 different sources for what black meant in Wolof and they all said Nyool. Ozzy even asked a Wolof speaker and he said something similar to it. Why are you so insistent on what Diop said when in this day and age its not needed? AE is an African language, notz to mention it also had numerous Nilo-Saharan loan words in its vocabulary indicating early contact with speakers from the south and west of Egypt, which isn't surprising. The language is African, it doesn't take Diop worship to confirm that and I am in no way trying to de-Africanize AE, by posting that pdf which says it more related to Chadic than Wolof how am I de-Africanizing it? Afrasian languages started and evolved from Africa, not the outside of Africa.
I have a difficult time understanding both you and Ozzy
on this subject.
Professor Diop was a WOLOF intellectual, who was certainly
versed in his own language. One can grant it that a Wolof
intellectual has a firmer grasp of his native language than say a
Wolof farmer, let alone, anyone not a Wolof speaker. You are
accusing the late professor of inventing these words! That is
exactly what you are accusing him of. He says the words Kem
and Khem are legitimate words, and you say they aren't. Diop
also translated Einstein's theory of relativity into Wolof. I think
I'll go with Diop's analysis, thank you very much. Respecting
someone's genius is hardly hero worship. And accusing someone
of worshiping a scholar is hardly an argument.
And Ozzy seems to think that there's a contradiction between
Mar - "to lick" and Maar - "to love passionately" ; they are two
different words! - but with the same verbal conjugation for heaven's
sake. And he too, indirectly, doubts Diop's veracity.
The following analysis is by Clyde Winters at: http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Academy/8919/theory2.htm
---The use of these suffuxial pronouns in Egyptian and Black
African languages is also similar.
Egyptian: i i n i , 'I have come'
Mboshi : i me yaa, "I have come"
Egyptian: mr n f, "he loved"
Wolof : maar on ef, "he loved madly"
Egyptian: mr n s, "she loved"
Wolof : maar on es, "she loved madly"
Egyptian: mr n sn, "they loved"
Wolof : maar on sen, they loved madly"
The Wolof term maar , and the pronouns ef, es, and sen are
discussed by the following authors.
T. Obenga, "Le "Chamito-semitique" n'existe pas", <ANKH,
1 (1992), pp.51-58.
A. Anselin, Pour une morphologie elementaire du negro-
africain". <>
C.A. Diop, <Parente genetique de l'egyptien pharaonique et
des langues negro-africaines. Inititions et etudes africaines,
No.32, IFAN-NEA, 1977
C.A. Diop,
les langues negro-Africanes modernes. Presence Africaine, 1988.
The Egyptian and Wolof languages also share similar kinship
terms.
Egyptian Wolof
sen brother sen
snt sister san
sa son sa Baol (son of the Baol)
itf father itef
i3yt 'old female' yaay mother
wtw 'oldest son' watw 'given succesor
st spouce set
maga 'veteran' mag 'aged person'
The Wolof and Egyptians also share institutional terms.
Egyptian Wolof
p3 wr 'the grand' bwr 'the king'
bw-wr 'that which is grand' bwr 'the king'
ndm 'the throne' ndam 'the glory'
dm 'to be grand' damw 'glorified'
pera^a 'Pharoah' fari 'supreme king'
niwt citizen nit
pe capital, King's capital pey
m3't justice mat
There are also cognate Egyptian and Black African terms in other
languages. For example, there are many cognate Egyptian and Bantu terms.
Egyptian Mbochi
kkw darkness koko
ktt to work, cultivate kye
ska numerous, many saa, saka
s man si
sh lake, pond saa
ii to come, arrive yaa
km black kama
ba 'soul' ba 'possessing spirit'
mm 'to remain, to be firm' masna "solidly established'
Afrocentric linguists do not accept the Afrasian or Afro-Asiatic
hypothesis. These linguist believe that Egyptian is a Black African
language. These linguist recognize that the Egyptians ruled
Palestine for thousands of years. As a result, they claim that
many Egyptian loan words in Hebrew and Arabic, may be the result
of Egyptian loan words borrowed by the Cananites, Hebrews and etc.
during this period of Egyptian colonialism.---
[This message has been edited by Wally (edited 28 May 2004).]
quote:
Originally posted by Kem-Au:
Remember I can't read AE, so I'm not sure what certain glyphs mean on their own. The only point is that the burnt stick glyph is present in many of the words the have KM in them like KMT and kemmau, as you can see in the link I posted. It is right out of Budge's text.What does the burnt stick mean? I don't know. I know that AE's used determinants in their writing to help the reader determine the meaning of a word, so the burnt stick may be one of those and not actually represent a sound.
Ive tried to find a refernce to Budge but can not on the net anyone have a link.
The Burnt stick as you call it Kem, is refered to as the tail of a Ccrocodile in Gardners list, that is not what i was refering to as a stick.. And all other resources I have looked at also list it as an animal part, (Crocodile tail) So I think this is were we our communication is breaking down. There is a glyph which is that of a stick, that is under the other glyph which I call the crocodile tail (I6),
These two are siad according to Wally and some other sources to represent Burnt to black or burnt stick. This is what I believed you were refering to as meaning KM.
Can someone direct me to Budges list or post his description of the Gardner equvelent of I6 or J6 which are the same glyph. This will clear it up for me.
Kem if you follow this link you will see Gardner does not list the glyph as a burnt stick. See I6.
http://www.arcom.com.au/~vincent/signlistF-M.htm
Ozzy
Wolof in Senegal has more than 5 dialects which include BAOL, CAYOR, DYOLOF (DJOLOF, JOLOF), LEBOU (LEBU), JANDER. Each has their own regional differences, and influences from French and Netherlands (Dutch) Languages.
Wolof in Gambia is marginally different. So those words may exist in the one or more of the Senegal dialects but are not consistent with all Dialects of spoken Wolof. In this case the words can not be considered genological to the Wolof language if they are used.
Please note Wally, “The Wolof language is predominantly an urban language” A fact sited by the Senegal government themselves! and there is no reason why an intellectual (Who would more likely speak French) would have a greater grasp of the Wolof language than a farmer. In fact it would most likely be the opposite.
The U.S. Peace Corps Dictionary is used as a teaching resource and is approved by the Senegal Government
I have not received a response from Senegal. Ministry of education Mr. M. Moustapha SOURANG whom I emailed regarding the Senegal national approved dictionary and words not included in dictionaries I have access to. No response so far. If anyone else feels the need the address is below. http://www.education.gouv.sn
Lastly, Wolofonline.com who Wally recommended as a reference, has just advised me to use the Us. Peace Corps Dictionary. And was not able to give me any explanation as the any of the other words Wally has used.
I have also not been able to find any reference apart from the Dutch influence for the word Maar, even in Diops work, which I admit I have limited resources with, but I can only find him referring to “Mar” which I have given a translation for already. If someone has some resources I can read were the word Maar is used by diop, I would appreciate it. So far I have found no organization which will support neither Wally’s posts, nor any of the words which do not have representations in the dictionaries I have access to?
Just a note: Even in Diops presentation to the UNESCO, he compared the word Mar, he did not use Maar.
Again I am willing to be proven incorrect if resources can be provided.
PS: The Australian national Archives retains a large librery of writen and film works of native Wolof speakers, and no reference to Khem could be found.
Ozzy
[This message has been edited by Ozzy (edited 28 May 2004).]
quote:
Originally posted by Ozzy:
Ive tried to find a refernce to Budge but can not on the net anyone have a link.The Burnt stick as you call it Kem, is refered to as the tail of a Ccrocodile in Gardners list, that is not what i was refering to as a stick.. And all other resources I have looked at also list it as an animal part, (Crocodile tail) So I think this is were we our communication is breaking down. There is a glyph which is that of a stick, that is under the other glyph which I call the crocodile tail (I6),
These two are siad according to Wally and some other sources to represent Burnt to black or burnt stick. This is what I believed you were refering to as meaning KM.
Can someone direct me to Budges list or post his description of the Gardner equvelent of I6 or J6 which are the same glyph. This will clear it up for me.
Kem if you follow this link you will see Gardner does not list the glyph as a burnt stick. See I6.
http://www.arcom.com.au/~vincent/signlistF-M.htmOzzy
The glyph I was referring to is definitely not the crocodile tail. In the images from Budges book, the words Kami, Kamm, Kam-t, Kammau all begin with the burnt stick as the first symbol if reading from left to right. That croc tail is a different glyph.
If you would like to find this text, it is taken directly from Budge's AE dictionary.
http://www.geocities.com/jerod_motley/kam.html
quote:
Originally posted by Kem-Au:
The glyph I was referring to is definitely not the crocodile tail. In the images from Budges book, the words Kami, Kamm, Kam-t, Kammau all begin with the burnt stick as the first symbol if reading from left to right. That croc tail is a different glyph.If you would like to find this text, it is taken directly from Budge's AE dictionary.
http://www.geocities.com/jerod_motley/kam.html
Ok Kem, I have double checked to make sure I was correct. The first symble on the left of the Kam word in the link you have posted is "I6" from Gardiners list, the section "I" is of reptiles,amphibiouse animals and parts of, etc.
The glyph which you call a burnt stick is listed in the Garnier list as "I6" a crocodile or reptile tail, not a stick of any kind. I have been told that no other lists are widely used, so there is no list containing the first glyph on the left of the kam words you have posted which refer to the glyph as a stick.
This is why i was confused as to what you were saying.
I have seen, although only on Wallys site a glyph combonation of the "I6" and a stick or twig simble called "M3" (Gardiners list) which he states means "burnt to Black". This is the stick I assumed you were talking about as that is the only representation of a stick included with the "I6" glyph.
See wallys page for this glyph.
If you have another reference which list this glyph as a stick can you direct me to it please.
Ozzy
Secondly, this guy Ozzy claims to not work for some secret government agency, but put a great deal of time and effort into calling several government agencies in an attempt to try to discredit the great work of Cheik Anta Diop. I took the time to read this lengthy paper before responding, only to come the the conclusion that in all his attempts to discredit Anta Diop, Russell Shuh did nothing but lend further credence to Diop's work, by proving himself how closely the Wolof and Egyptian language IS related. (this has been done to Anta Diop before). However he did do an excellent job at discrediting the work of Carl Meinhof by showing how racially motivated his work was.
Next in regards to KMT-kemet meaning black people or land of blacks, has already been determnined by all Egyptologist, no need to call every African Government for that. Its how they have used racism and word play, to try to undermine how the Egyptians viewed themselves. These so-called Egyptologist would lead you to believe, that the Egyptians called themselves such, because of the Black color of their soil. Now keep in mind, the soil was only black along the nile, however the entire country was called Kemet, when we all know the color of the soil in 85% of Egypt is sandy desert. Why not just call yourselves "desert people" or "river people". Interesting to note, almost every racist writer that has deciphered the Egyptian hieroglyphics almost always fail to note, that immediately following the symbols for black (a burnt log) are the symbols of man and woman, which indicate people, hence "black people", or immediately following kemet, are the symbol for city or town, hence "black town, or city of blacks", never, ever, is the symbol for "land" which means "ta" succeeded by the word Kemet, so how they can infer that the Egyptians are referring to the color of their soil "land" literally, in what is meant by KMT-kemet.
see:
http://www.tehutionline.com/newpage9.htm
for more evidence of this blatant racism.
Further the name Egypt itself is derived from the Greek word Agyptos, which meant "land of burnt faces" or " land of faces burnt by the sun"
So if you take it from the Ancient Egyptians themselves or the Ancient Greeks (who are the first "outsiders" to record the history of the Egyptians, either way you come up with, lets say it in unison, "BLACK FOLKS". lol.
Now back to my future husband Wally :-),
you keep on educating them, I have your back
;-)
I am an Egyptian myself and I agree that most people in Upper Egypt would be considered ''black'';while people in Lower Egypt was more heotrgenous. Truth is that you don't need to translate the word Km to mean black skin to show that black people live in ancient Egypt. Just go to modern Upper Egypt and view assorted Aswani or Luxor Egyptians to see this is apparent.
By the way,Aegyptos does not mean burnt feet or face. Aegyptos comes from the word Hikuptah meaning a pyramid complex in Men-Nefer.
The diversity you see from North to south in Egypt has always existed and goes into deep antiquity.
It is firm established by the Egyptology community that the African elmenent was apparent since pre-dyanstic times manifestated in the Badarian,Naqada,and Faiyum cultures. From these populations combined with the northern populations of Merimede,Omari,Maadi and others formed the Dyanstic Egyptians.
The first three dyansties came from deep within southern Egypt;while the dyansties of V,VI,and VII came from northern Egypt. Despite having northern Egyptian origins many of these people had close relatives and intermarried with southern Egyptians.
Secondly I have taken the time to read the lengthy article, and have come to the consclusion that in all his attempts to disprove Cheika Anta Diop, this guy has actually made Diop's work more credible.Not supprisingly this type of thing has been done to the great work of Diop before. The only thing that any logic minded reader can conclude after reading this article is that the Wolof language does in fact relate to the Egyptian language, and furthermore, as this Author has so eagerly proven, the Wolof language relates to the English language as well. All this author did was prove that the Wolof language relates to other languages as well, he did absolutely NOTHING to show that IT DID NOT relate to the Egyptian language. A poorly written critique, in that it did not show what it was set out to do, and that was to prove that the Wolof language did not relate to the English language.
Last but not least, this guy Ozzy claims that he is not part of some secret government agency, yet he puts a great deal of effort in trying to disconnect Egypt from its "blackness" by contacting "all these governmental agencies in Africa". Ozzy, how many African languages do you speak, I mean honestly did you hire a translator to "speak" to all the different African entities, no let me guess, every government agency you talked with had an English speaking translator answering for them, and this English speaking translator, was also fluent in the other several hundred languages spoken in that particular country. Please give it a break, you're making a complete fool of yourself.
As far as the word Kemet meaning "black", you can look in any English Encyclopedia, why call around Africa. Whats at issue is not whether the word means black, that has already been determined by the hieroglyphic of "burning charcoal", which signifies black. But the controversy lies in were they referring to the color of their soil, or the color of their skin? Most non racist Egyptologist agree, that they are referring to the color of their skin. As always superceded by the hieroglyph for KMT-kemet, is the hieroglyph for "people" which is a man and a woman, or the hieroglyph for the word city, or town, which together means black city, or town of blacks, or black people. Never do you see the hieroglyph symbol for soil, which is denoted by the symbol for land. so without being racially biased in can be inferred that the Egyptians called themselves "black people" or "city of blacks". Even when the Ancient Greeks entered the continent of Africa, they called the entire continent "Aithiops" which meant "Land of Burnt Faces" or "land of Black people", do you honestly think the Greeks were not aware that Egypt was on the continent of Africa??????
Since we all know that over 85% of the soil in Egypt is actually red dessert and NOT black soil, whenever the Egyptians described their soil, they allways used the hieroglyph that symbolized dessert, and hence the name "Deshret", is always preceded by the symbol for land, as in soil. And not the word or symbol for black.
Further Aegyptus" derives from "ht-ka-ptah", which the Egyptians later called themselves, which mean "temple for Ptah", the Egyptians made their ancestor dieties. And Ptah was one of their first gods, and he is almost always depicted as "jet black in skin color, in comparison to their brown skin color", in this sense they are letting you know they descended from the jet black people of Nubia, where the same god is worshipped.
quote:
Originally posted by ausar:
This debate on the ethnicity of the ancient Egyptians is rather trite. Is there nothing else about Egypt that fasinates you besides what their ethnic compostion was.
I am an Egyptian myself and I agree that most people in Upper Egypt would be considered ''black'';while people in Lower Egypt was more heotrgenous. Truth is that you don't need to translate the word Km to mean black skin to show that black people live in ancient Egypt. Just go to modern Upper Egypt and view assorted Aswani or Luxor Egyptians to see this is apparent.
By the way,Aegyptos does not mean burnt feet or face. Aegyptos comes from the word Hikuptah meaning a pyramid complex in Men-Nefer.
The diversity you see from North to south in Egypt has always existed and goes into deep antiquity.It is firm established by the Egyptology community that the African elmenent was apparent since pre-dyanstic times manifestated in the Badarian,Naqada,and Faiyum cultures. From these populations combined with the northern populations of Merimede,Omari,Maadi and others formed the Dyanstic Egyptians.
The first three dyansties came from deep within southern Egypt;while the dyansties of V,VI,and VII came from northern Egypt. Despite having northern Egyptian origins many of these people had close relatives and intermarried with southern Egyptians.
Thanks Ausar, at least someone here knows something about AE and not just worship people blindly. I have never criticized Diop's work, but he did make some flaws as in calling Phoenicians and Carthaginians Negroes, saying mores were not black(some were, some were not) and calling southern Indians Negroes. His information of the diversity of indigenous Africans, however, is on point.
quote:
Originally posted by homeylu:
First I would like to say that I have no idea who Wally is or what he even looks like, but over the course of reading his work I think I have fallen in love with him,(or maybe just his passion :-)j/k). Please email me Wally at bidwhatuhave@yahoo.com.
LOL, his passion has been cutting and pasting Diop's work and Diop worship. Have you even read some of Diop's work for yourself? Not all of what he said was wrong, but there were some things he said back then that have been proven to be wrong today.
quote:
Originally posted by S.Mohammad:
I have never criticized Diop's work, but he did make some flaws as in calling Phoenicians and Carthaginians Negroes, saying mores were not black(some were, some were not) and calling southern Indians Negroes.
Thought Writes:
Phoencicians were certainly a semetic people, with perhaps an African elite elemement. Carthanginians were heterogenous with man "Negroes", I don't know if this makes them a "Negroe" people or not, but certainly many white racialists today would consider Brazil a "Negroe" nation. Some current Southern Indians and ancient inhabitants of Sumer and Mohenjo Darro/Harrapa were Australoid. Some Sumerians were semitic as well, and as they abstract I posted indicates the original semites may have been African.
quote:
Originally posted by S.Mohammad:
I have never criticized Diop's work, but he did make some flaws as in calling Phoenicians and Carthaginians Negroes, saying mores were not black(some were, some were not) and calling southern Indians Negroes.
Thought Writes:
Phoencicians were certainly a semetic people, with perhaps an African elite elemement. Carthanginians were heterogenous with man "Negroes", I don't know if this makes them a "Negroe" people or not, but certainly many white racialists today would consider Brazil a "Negroe" nation. Some current Southern Indians and ancient inhabitants of Sumer and Mohenjo Darro/Harrapa were Australoid. Modern Australoids in Australia are called "Blacks". It is a subjective thing. Some Sumerians were semitic as well, and as they abstract I posted indicates the original semites may have been African.
quote:
Originally posted by Thought2:
Thought Writes:Phoencicians were certainly a semetic people, with perhaps an African elite elemement. Carthanginians were heterogenous with man "Negroes", I don't know if this makes them a "Negroe" people or not, but certainly many white racialists today would consider Brazil a "Negroe" nation. Some current Southern Indians and ancient inhabitants of Sumer and Mohenjo Darro/Harrapa were Australoid. Some Sumerians were semitic as well, and as they abstract I posted indicates the original semites may have been African.
i don't know for sure if the Phoenicians had an "Negro" elite element, but they were distinct for the most part from blacks, neither were they white also.
Australoids are 2blacjk" as in black skinned but possess enough skeletal differences to be grouped as a separate race. To a certain point it is all subjective, but there is a clear difference between black Africans and australoids. With black Africans and Melenesians its very difficult and in fact impossible at time to distinguish the two.
Diop was truly an icon at a time when African history was very distorted and I would be a fool to the highest degree to call his work total trash, but he made some mistakes, mistakes very minor not major. Most of what he did paved the way for people like Keita, who have a much more clearer understanding of the diversity of African people.
Most of Charles Darwins work, has been proven wrong today. Some of Sigmund Freud's work has been proven wrong today. Some of Albert Einstein's work has been proven wrong today. I dont see your point.
Yes I do have a couple of Cheikh Anta Diop's books in my library collection. I have been a long admirer for being a pioneer in a sense of challenging White Supremacy, (that's still apparent, according to some of these posts) and exploring Egypt extensively from a Black African perspective.
Like many of us, Anta Diop grew tired of the concept that the "white man" came to Africa to "civilize" us barbaric blacks, and that historically blacks have made no contributions to society. Many Egyptologist before him were inbred even if self-consciously with a racist ideology of white supremacy, and that the "white man" even in Ancient times went to far away lands to "civilize" the barbaric races of blacks. When the fact is, even if you leave the controversial EGYPT out of the equation, there was no other civilization on earth during that period that mirrored the Egyptian civilization like that of the Nubians. Only recently in the 20th century has Archaeologists began excavating those sites that have long been ignored. And these recent discoveries challenged by Anta Diop himself, have proven that the Nubian culture (particularly the A-group0 superceded Egypt in technology by 200 years. There is no other country on earth that have the number of pyramids built in Nubia, and new evidence has shown that it is very possible that the First Dynasty in Egypt was started by or at least influenced by its Nubian neighbors.
I commend Anta Diop for showing that even in antiquity Blacks were makng contributions to the world. It really annoys me, this white superiority complex that lives in this deep denial that no other race but themselves ventured off their continent to explore the world. I will not exclude Arab caucasians, as they too have oppressed Blacks, not just Europeans. They would all like us to believe, that all these outsiders came to Africa to make contibutions to society, yet with te exception of slavery, blacks were confined to the continent of Africa, we didnt have the common sense to go out of Africa to explore the rest of the world. When evertime scientist discover a negroid type skull in other parts of the world, its quickly diminished as having been a slave, and not a true negroid explorer. Even with the controversial dicussions here on Egypt, I have not read a post by one single black person that discredits the contributions whites made to Egyptian, so why is it that every single time an argument is made on behalf of a black contribution to Egyptian society, everyone goes out of their way, including "CALLING GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES-HOW ABSURD" to try to discredit the contributions of Blacks. If thats not racist, I dont know what is.
quote:
Originally posted by S.Mohammad:
Diop was truly an icon at a time when African history was very distorted and I would be a fool to the highest degree to call his work total trash, but he made some mistakes, mistakes very minor not major. Most of what he did paved the way for people like Keita, who have a much more clearer understanding of the diversity of African people.
Thought Writes:
I agree and no one has a right to try and label someone who respectfully probes Diops work as a Eurocentrist. Diop was a forerunner in this field and indeed paved the way, but he was not infallable.
On the Phonecians you should read some of the material from the "People of Gezer". I will attempt to locate this an post it.
quote:
Originally posted by Thought2:
Thought Writes:I agree and no one has a right to try and label someone who respectfully probes Diops work as a Eurocentrist. Diop was a forerunner in this field and indeed paved the way, but he was not infallable.
On the Phonecians you should read some of the material from the "People of Gezer". I will attempt to locate this an post it.
I agree and if you find that info please post it. I admit I'm mostly ignorant to knowledge about Phoenicians.
quote:
Originally posted by homeylu:
originally posted by S. Mohammed
[b] Have you even read some of Diop's work for yourself? Not all of what he said was wrong, but there were some things he said back then that have been proven to be wrong today.Most of Charles Darwins work, has been proven wrong today. Some of Sigmund Freud's work has been proven wrong today. Some of Albert Einstein's work has been proven wrong today. I dont see your point.
Yes I do have a couple of Cheikh Anta Diop's books in my library collection. I have been a long admirer for being a pioneer in a sense of challenging White Supremacy, (that's still apparent, according to some of these posts) and exploring Egypt extensively from a Black African perspective.
Like many of us, Anta Diop grew tired of the concept that the "white man" came to Africa to "civilize" us barbaric blacks, and that historically blacks have made no contributions to society. Many Egyptologist before him were inbred even if self-consciously with a racist ideology of white supremacy, and that the "white man" even in Ancient times went to far away lands to "civilize" the barbaric races of blacks. When the fact is, even if you leave the controversial EGYPT out of the equation, there was no other civilization on earth during that period that mirrored the Egyptian civilization like that of the Nubians. Only recently in the 20th century has Archaeologists began excavating those sites that have long been ignored. And these recent discoveries challenged by Anta Diop himself, have proven that the Nubian culture (particularly the A-group0 superceded Egypt in technology by 200 years. There is no other country on earth that have the number of pyramids built in Nubia, and new evidence has shown that it is very possible that the First Dynasty in Egypt was started by or at least influenced by its Nubian neighbors.
I commend Anta Diop for showing that even in antiquity Blacks were makng contributions to the world. It really annoys me, this white superiority complex that lives in this deep denial that no other race but themselves ventured off their continent to explore the world. I will not exclude Arab caucasians, as they too have oppressed Blacks, not just Europeans. They would all like us to believe, that all these outsiders came to Africa to make contibutions to society, yet with te exception of slavery, blacks were confined to the continent of Africa, we didnt have the common sense to go out of Africa to explore the rest of the world. When evertime scientist discover a negroid type skull in other parts of the world, its quickly diminished as having been a slave, and not a true negroid explorer. Even with the controversial dicussions here on Egypt, I have not read a post by one single black person that discredits the contributions whites made to Egyptian, so why is it that every single time an argument is made on behalf of a black contribution to Egyptian society, everyone goes out of their way, including "CALLING GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES-HOW ABSURD" to try to discredit the contributions of Blacks. If thats not racist, I dont know what is.[/B]
I agree with everything you said, especially about the Arab involvement with the slave trade, plus the involvement of native Africans themselves. I am of both Hausa and Kanuri descent,my people were guilty of it, though they had no knowledge of what was happening with those they sold, but since I was born in America(Brooklyn NY) I identify as African-American.
I've always envied Africans that can trace what tribe they came from. Unfortunately its not the case with most of us misplaced African Americans.
quote:
Originally posted by homeylu:
originally posted by S. Mohammad
[b] I am of both Hausa and Kanuri descentI've always envied Africans that can trace what tribe they came from. Unfortunately its not the case with most of us misplaced African Americans.[/B]
Thought Writes;
Many of us derive from African NATIONS as well as tribes. But genetics will offer insight into this.
In this regard I took Wallys advice and asked a Wolof speaker. In fact I asked many. For your peace of mind I contacted these "Agencies" in French, and English as im sure you know I do not speak Wolof. And I spoke to the Wolof speaker here in Tenerife in Spanish. Im a bit miffed at the suggestion by Wally that the opinion of a non intelectual Wolof speaker regarding simple Wolof words can be disregarded, I was told to ask a Wolof speaker, so I did!
As S.Mohammad has pointed out none of this detracts from the word Diop has done, but it does bring to question many of the examples given here.
Two of these I contacted were references given on this thread by Wally as support for his argument, both failed to support his argument, as have so far all other resources I have made an attempt to contact.
So far no resources have been presented to support Wallys posts. I find that needs to be questioned.
I am still also trying to find an original reference to (I6) of gardners list as burnt wood. No one has given reference to this either. I think when this is given such meaning it should be backed by presenting the origins for this defenition. I have found it in Gardners list as I6, a tail of a reptile or crocodile, I can not find any other reference, again if Budge has his own list and lists it as a burnt stick please post! I have asked this before with no responce. In this case this also has to be questioned!
Ozzy.
quote:
Originally posted by Ozzy:
Ok Kem, I have double checked to make sure I was correct. The first symble on the left of the Kam word in the link you have posted is "I6" from Gardiners list, the section "I" is of reptiles,amphibiouse animals and parts of, etc.The glyph which you call a burnt stick is listed in the Garnier list as "I6" a crocodile or reptile tail, not a stick of any kind. I have been told that no other lists are widely used, so there is no list containing the first glyph on the left of the kam words you have posted which refer to the glyph as a stick.
This is why i was confused as to what you were saying.
I have seen, although only on Wallys site a glyph combonation of the "I6" and a stick or twig simble called "M3" (Gardiners list) which he states means "burnt to Black". This is the stick I assumed you were talking about as that is the only representation of a stick included with the "I6" glyph.
See wallys page for this glyph.
If you have another reference which list this glyph as a stick can you direct me to it please.
Ozzy
Ozzy, I did some checking to see what was going on and I see the source of the confusion. The image that I posted from Budge's text was indeed the same glyph you mentioned from Gardiner's text. Budge's rendition looked very different, that's why I thought we were discussing different glyphs.
Just to give you some background on my exposure to the glyph in question, I read somewhere (don't ask me where because this was some time ago), that the glyph for the word KMT included a burnt stick. So I looked in a book that I had called "Egyptian Hieroglyphics, How to read and Write Them", by Stephane Rossini. The glyph I saw was this:
Here's the link if the img doesn't show up: http://www.geocities.com/jerod_motley/
(For some reason Yahoo isn't showing the img. Here's a new link.)
Seeing this glyph confirmed to me that the KMT did indeed include the burnt stick, as did many other KM words. Now it seems that Gardiner interprets this glyph as a croc tail. I hope he has some evidence for that claim, because it sure doesn't look like a tail.
I have not seen the glyph as drawn by AE's, only in texts. And while the Gardiner and Rossini version look the same, none of the three versions look like tails to me, but maybe I'm just blinded. Anyway, I'm curious to know what glyph you were referring to as the burnt stick, because I may have been wrong about which glyph was the burnt stick all along?
[This message has been edited by Kem-Au (edited 31 May 2004).]
I do not however know at this stage what the source for this quote is. Ill let you know.
Ozzy
As I said before this guys article did not do much at all to discredit Anta Diop, all he did was prove that the Wolog language is related to other languages as well. Diop never asserted that the Wolof language is "directly" derived from AE, but he did show how closely they were related, and this has yet to be discredited by anyone.
Take for example the English language, which is derived from the Germanic tribes anglo-saxon, that conquered England. When England was conquered by the Normans, many words of French/latin origin entered into the vocabulary. And Latin was the language spoken by the clergy of England, there were 3 different language spoken in England at one period. Until the 12th century, English became "standardized" and all these languages combined to make up the language we use today.
With this said, I can take an English word, with French origins, but this does not discredit the Germanic origins of other words.
So why would the the Fulu origins of Wolof words discredit the AE origins of others.
Like Wally said, I would lend more credibility to a speaker of Wolof, such as Diop himself, than I would to this Author, who is an outsider trying to dicipher a language that is foreign to him.
What this author may not understand, is that just like english, spanish, and chinese, there may be different dialects of the Wolof.
quote:
Originally posted by homeylu:
Ozzy how petty of you and "your followers" to try to discredit the great work of Anta Diop with just one word "kemet".As I said before this guys article did not do much at all to discredit Anta Diop, all he did was prove that the Wolog language is related to other languages as well. Diop never asserted that the Wolof language is "directly" derived from AE, but he did show how closely they were related, and this has yet to be discredited by anyone.
Take for example the English language, which is derived from the Germanic tribes anglo-saxon, that conquered England. When England was conquered by the Normans, many words of French/latin origin entered into the vocabulary. And Latin was the language spoken by the clergy of England, there were 3 different language spoken in England at one period. Until the 12th century, English became "standardized" and all these languages combined to make up the language we use today.
With this said, I can take an English word, with French origins, but this does not discredit the Germanic origins of other words.
So why would the the Fulu origins of Wolof words discredit the AE origins of others.
Like Wally said, I would lend more credibility to a speaker of Wolof, such as Diop himself, than I would to this Author, who is an outsider trying to dicipher a language that is foreign to him.
What this author may not understand, is that just like english, spanish, and chinese, there may be different dialects of the Wolof.
I understand, but Wolof is not a dialect of AE. I am in no way trying to discredit Diop, and as I've said he paved the way for people like Keita and at least opened the eyes of many about the true origins of AE culture and their racial make up. That does not mean he is without his flaws. I only pointed out the linguistic flaw and I have done my own research into Wolof words and AE words and the two are not related. because the two are not closely related does not in anyway sever Egypt from Africa, thats what you and Wally fail to understand. By showing the closer relationship between AE and Chadic languages I'm simply solidfying that the AE language is indeed African, therefore blindly accepting everything that Diop said is not needed. If you think Chadic languages are less African than Wolof, you have issues, look on a map or do some research as to who constitute Chadic speakers you will find they are among the blackest people on earth. I speak Hausa, which is a Chadic language. I think this whole argument over whether Diop was right or wrong is irrelevant because whether he was right or wrong AE is still an African language. The fact that it has a close relationship with Cushitic and chadic languages and even a very, very, distant one with Wolof confirms its an African language.
"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)"
I'm tired of rep
eating myself, THIS GUY DID NOT PROVE THAT THE WOLOF LANGUAGE WAS NOT RELATED TO THE AE.
This "measly" article is no where near, and I repeat, NO WHERE NEAR, the extensive work done by Cheikh Anta Diop. PERIOD!
The following quote from Insight Guides is on my website:
"According to the late Cheikh Anta Diop, the great
Senegalese historian and anthropologist, the main groups of
people in Senegambia have their origins in Ancient Egypt. To
support his theory, Diop draws on a number of disciplines from
archaeology to linguistics, and a variety of sources from
African oral traditions to the writings of Greeks and Arabs."
Insight Guides: The Gambia and Senegal, 1996 APA
Publications (HK) Ltd, Houghton Mifflin Company
Also as Diop points out in the General History of Africa
the construct of kem is:
(also on my website)
-- The Egyptians depicted a piece of burning charcoal for
the word black. It is the strongest word for black in the
language. It literally means "burnt black'" as it also does
in contemporary Wolof. Some may want to quibble by calling
it a fire stick, so what's the "Kemical" result of a burnt stick?
Correct charcoal. In other instances the word was written
with crocodile scales. Both instances, a strong term for
black wouldn't you say?
Hausa belongs to the same language grouping as Oromo,
Ancient Egyptian, Beja, etc.
No one denies that. Diop's work is crucial in redefining
African languages (decolonizing). It's that simple.
[This message has been edited by Wally (edited 01 June 2004).]
He used this same method to show the relationship to AE languanges and "Asian" languages.
However, I HAVE YET TO READ A REVIEW THAT CRITICIZES THE "ASIAN" COMPARISON."
And ask yourselves, how can you criticize ONLY the African component of his work, without showing "prejudice".
Last, but most importantly, let the readers of this post, go directly to page 12 of this article, and read what the author himself has noted " The Wolof language is REALLY genetically related to FULA", then lets take the reader to the Encyclopedia, and see what the FULA language is genetically related to, and we find....we find that the Fula are:
1.Fula are settled in Bornu, Bagirmi, Wadai and the upper Nile Valley
2.Originally herdsmen in the western and central Sudan
3.they are a mixture of Berber and Negro
4.In the district of Senegal known as Fuladugu or Fula Land, where the purest types of the race are found, the people are of a reddish brown or light chestnut color, with oval faces, ringlety or even smooth hair, never woolly, straight and even aquiline noses, delicately shaped lips and regular features quite differentiating them from the Negro type. (sounds like a discription of an Egyptian, does it not).
and this is the part, that will really get you....
5.The Fula language has as yet found no place in any African linguistic family. In its rudiments it is akin to the Hamito-Semitic group
So in conclusion, if as this author has shown, the Wolof language "really" descended from the Fula language, and the Fula language "really" descended from the Hamito-Semitic language, we can easily assume that the Wolof language, finally descended from the Hamito-Semtic languange.
And just so everyone is on the same page, the AE language was guess what? thats right "Hamito-Semitic"
reference http://75.1911encyclopedia.org/F/FU/FULA.htm
1.
quote:
Originally posted by homeylu:
Furthermore, Diop used what is called a "comparative method" to show the relationship between African languages and Egyptian languages.He used this same method to show the relationship to AE languanges and "Asian" languages.
However, I HAVE YET TO READ A REVIEW THAT CRITICIZES THE "ASIAN" COMPARISON."
And ask yourselves, how can you criticize ONLY the African component of his work, without showing "prejudice".
[b] Last, but most importantly, let the readers of this post, go directly to page 12 of this article, and read what the author himself has noted " The Wolof language is REALLY genetically related to FULA", then lets take the reader to the Encyclopedia, and see what the FULA language is genetically related to, and we find....we find that the Fula are:
1.Fula are settled in Bornu, Bagirmi, Wadai and the upper Nile Valley
2.Originally herdsmen in the western and central Sudan
3.they are a mixture of Berber and Negro
4.In the district of Senegal known as Fuladugu or Fula Land, where the purest types of the race are found, the people are of a reddish brown or light chestnut color, with oval faces, ringlety or even smooth hair, never woolly, straight and even aquiline noses, delicately shaped lips and regular features quite differentiating them from the Negro type. (sounds like a discription of an Egyptian, does it not).and this is the part, that will really get you....
5.The Fula language has as yet found no place in any African linguistic family. In its rudiments it is akin to the Hamito-Semitic group
So in conclusion, if as this author has shown, the Wolof language "really" descended from the Fula language, and the Fula language "really" descended from the Hamito-Semitic language, we can easily assume that the Wolof language, finally descended from the Hamito-Semtic languange.
And just so everyone is on the same page, the AE language was guess what? thats right "Hamito-Semitic"
reference http://75.1911encyclopedia.org/F/FU/FULA.htm
1.[/B]
Total rubbish you just posted without even knowing what you're even talking about. Now lets start. Fula is not an Hamitic language. That reference you posted on the Fula was exactly the kind of rubbish Diop was refuting. It was largely based on Karl Meinhoff's long debunked Hamitic theory. The classification of Fula as Hamitic by Meinhoff had nothing to do with languages. It had more to do with the physical appearance of the Fula, who are black and not half Berber. I'm a Hausa and part of the ruling class in Kano and Katsina are composed of Hausa-Fulani. Did you know that Tutsis were said to also speak an Hamitic language? You understand very little. So called "hamties" and hamitic speaking people were suppose to be Caucasoids,ie, white people with black skin. Look at who is considered as Hamites here, it might shick you:
Hamites
Related: People
African people of caucasoid descent who occupy the Horn of Africa (chiefly Somalia and Ethiopia), the western Sahara, and parts of Algeria and Tunisia. They are believed to be the original settlers of N Africa. The Hamitic cradleland is generally agreed to be in Asia—perhaps S Arabia or possibly an area farther east. The Hamites entered Africa in a long succession of migrations, of which the earliest may have been as far back as the end of the pluvial period. They are commonly divided into two great branches, Eastern and Northern. The Eastern Hamites comprise the ancient and modern Egyptians, the Beja, the Berberines, the Oromo , the Somali, the Danakil, and most Ethiopians. The Northern Hamites include the Berbers of Cyrenaica, Tripolitania, Tunisia, and Algeria; the Berbers of Morocco; the Tuareg and Tibu of the Sahara; the Fulbe of the Western Sudan; and the extinct Guanche of the Canary Islands.
http://www.encyclopedia.com/html/H/Hamites.asp
Thats the biggest piece of garbage there, Ethiopians, ancient and modern Egyptians(the same people you#re trying to prove as black using Diop's work), Oromo, Beja, and Fula are caucasoids? Its a shame that you post such nonsense, reghardless whether it was inentional or not. Needless to say, Diop believe none of those people to be caucasoids.
Secondly, Wolof did not descend from Fula(Fulfide); they are both grouped under the West Atlantic Branch under the Niger-Congo language family. Neither is a descendant of Hamitic languages and Diop himself did not believe in some Hamitic theory. Might I mind you that your source was taken from an encyclopedia, a 1911 edition encyclopedia. Even your sorce clearly debunks you. Read this from your "source":
The question of the ethnic affinities of the Fula has given rise to an enormous amount of speculation, but the most reasonable theory is that they are a mixture of Berber and Negro. This is now the most generally accepted theory. [u]Certainly there is no reason to connect them with the ancient Egyptians[/u].
Yes, thats from your 1911 outdated debunked source. You might ask why am I so furious about this, well the reason is simple. I have some Fula ancestry and that same 1911 source of yours calls my people, the Hausa:
They are undoubtedly nigritic, though in places with a strong crossing of Fula and Arab blood. Morally and intellectually they are, however, far superior to the typical Negro.
What kind of rubbish is this, but this is where you got your info from. We have no significant, if any, Arab blood. The same with Fulas.
Now lets look at some up to date sources.
Primarily Muslim people, numbering about 18 million, found in many parts of West Africa, from Lake Chad west to the Atlantic coast.
Their language is Fula, an Atlantic language of the Niger-Congo family. Originally they were herders, but interaction with other groups produced marked cultural changes. In the 1790s the Fulani priest Usman dan Fodio led a holy war (jihad) that created a large empire. Its decay in the 19th century aided the establishment of British rule over northern Nigeria. Many Fulani of northern Nigeria have adopted the Hausa language and culture and established themselves as an urban aristocracy
[URL=http://concise.britannica.com/ebc/article?eu=390349[/URL]
As to alleged Berber mixture, no genetic study to date has found any "Berber" mixture in the Fulani, so please don't post outdated rubbish mongrelizing my people.
The work of Joseph Greenberg debunked the so-called hamitic classification of the Fula language, did you know that?
You put your foot in your mouth this time.
[This message has been edited by S.Mohammad (edited 01 June 2004).]
Ozzy
Fulani belong to Niger-Congo languages and not Afro-Asiatic linguistic branches. Most linguist agree Nilo-Saharan and Niger-Congo were actually connected at one time but branched off. Niger-Congo and Nilo-Saharan are so similar to each other which probabaly means modern Western Africans had their origins somewhere within the Southern and Central Sahara. Fulani people definatley desend from the Saharans because a cattle ritual they preform is exactly identical to that of the rock paintings in Tassil Najjer.
The rest is pusedo-racial garbage from the 19th and 20th century to explain diffusion of elements and high culture throughout Africa . Did you know that even Seligman,the originater of the Hamitic myth,believed that bantus were Hamitic people? What foolishness that people want to keep these myths alive in 2004.
quote:
Originally posted by Ozzy:
S.Mohammad, do you know anything of the origin of the Ibo language?. Not sure if that is how it is spelt, but i was talking to a friend that said it was his native language. He was not aware of its origins.Ozzy
The Ibo language is grouped under the Kwa branch of Niger-Congo languages
Kwa Branch
Yoruba : Ibo : Ewe : Twi : Fanti : Ga
Adangme : Fon : Edo : Urhobo : Idoma
Nupe : Agni : Baule : Kru : Grebo : Bassa
http://website.lineone.net/~krysstal/nigercongo.html
quote:
Originally posted by ausar:Fulani belong to Niger-Congo languages and not Afro-Asiatic linguistic branches. Most linguist agree Nilo-Saharan and Niger-Congo were actually connected at one time but branched off. Niger-Congo and Nilo-Saharan are so similar to each other which probabaly means modern Western Africans had their origins somewhere within the Southern and Central Sahara. Fulani people definatley desend from the Saharans because a cattle ritual they preform is exactly identical to that of the rock paintings in Tassil Najjer.
The rest is pusedo-racial garbage from the 19th and 20th century to explain diffusion of elements and high culture throughout Africa . Did you know that even Seligman,the originater of the Hamitic myth,believed that bantus were Hamitic people? What foolishness that people want to keep these myths alive in 2004.
To true, it seems those who wish to squash it are those who give it life. Again much of this would still be mainstreem if it were not questioned, lets keep on questioning!
Ozzy
quote:
Originally posted by S.Mohammad:
The Ibo language is grouped under the Kwa branch of Niger-Congo languagesKwa Branch
Yoruba : Ibo : Ewe : Twi : Fanti : Ga
Adangme : Fon : Edo : Urhobo : Idoma
Nupe : Agni : Baule : Kru : Grebo : Bassa
http://website.lineone.net/~krysstal/nigercongo.html
Thanks, that gives me a starting point, I told him I would find him some history. He can not read nor write. He is also the one who found the Wolof speaker.
Thk again
Ozzy
In the 1790s the Fulani priest Usman dan Fodio led a holy war (jihad) that created a large empire And of course, foolish of me to believe the jihad was originally an Arab concept.
Needless to say, Diop believe none of those people to be caucasoids., but he did believe them to be Hamitic, this is written in "African Origins of Civilization" when using Biblical references he showed that the Cushites, Hamites, and Caananites, were all the same race..black...which is why he theorized that the Phoenician/Colchians were black.
So in your blind rage, while attacking me, dont assume that I share the anthropological view of painting this "Hamitic" black race -white- thru superficial concepts like nasal indices. You have seen in other post, and dont pretend to be ignorant of the fact, that I've shown how absurd it is to categorize this "black race" as caucasian.
And whether you would admit it or not, the islamic religion of most West Africans, did have Arab influence. Period.
Now about that foot in the mouth...
Thanks to you,(I knew there was a higher more spiritual reason for me entering this forum :-)) I can began a long awaited journey of tracing my root. I found this website, and I'm beyond excited!!!! The $300 investment is worth it to me, as my whole family, ad generations after can benefit from it.
http://www.africanancestry.com/
quote:
Originally posted by homeylu:
Originally posted by S. Mohammed
[b]Now lets look at some up to date sources.
Primarily Muslim people...
Forgive my ignorance, now I realize that Islam started from Africans, not Arabs,,,,my bad.In the 1790s the Fulani priest Usman dan Fodio led a holy war (jihad) that created a large empire And of course, foolish of me to believe the jihad was originally an Arab concept.
Needless to say, Diop believe none of those people to be caucasoids., but he did believe them to be Hamitic, this is written in "African Origins of Civilization" when using Biblical references he showed that the Cushites, Hamites, and Caananites, were all the same race..black...which is why he theorized that the Phoenician/Colchians were black.
So in your blind rage, while attacking me, dont assume that I share the anthropological view of painting this "Hamitic" black race -white- thru superficial concepts like nasal indices. You have seen in other post, and dont pretend to be ignorant of the fact, that I've shown how absurd it is to categorize this "black race" as caucasian.
And whether you would admit it or not, the islamic religion of most West Africans, did have Arab influence. Period.
[/B]
You are ignorant, very ignorant. No one said Islam started among Africans or that the concept of jihad originated among Africans. If you knew anything about Islamic history you would see that it didn't so quit knocking lame strawmen.
And once again, Phoenicians were not black people and it is useless and senseless to use the line of Ham to prove blackness just as it is useless to use the line of Shem to prove non-blackness. Not all those characterized as Hamites(Phoenicians) speak so-called Hamitic languages. What makes one a Hamite or Semite is language, not a Biblical story. Whatever the Bible story stories say linguistically it doesn't add up to a Hamitic language family or race. Diop simply believed Hamite/Hamitic to be synonymous with black/Negro, not a distinct ethno-linguistic group. The Table of Nations is just what it is, a table of Nations, not races. We now know today that the Table of Nations does not always specifically correlate to races.
Islam in West Africa is heavily influenced by traditional African religions and very few, if any Arabs ever came into west Africa. Therefore any "Arab" influence thats there is minimal, period. Its more Islamic influence than Arab.
I encourage you to do some self research instead of blindly accepting anything as fact, be it Afrocentric or Eurocentric.
quote:
Originally posted by homeylu:
Originally posted by S. Mohammed
[b]Secondly, Wolof did not descend from Fula
This was written on page 12 of this "prized" article you talk about so much, it did NOT originate from me, but from your "prized" author...and I quote "The Wolof language REALLY is genetically related to the FULA language"Now about that foot in the mouth...[/B]
Yes, you did put your foot in your mouth, for on page 12 of that pdf I posted it says Fula and Wolof are genetically related, it didn't say that Wolof descends from Fula. genetically related in this sense means they linguistically descend from a common proto-language.
However, page 6 did say this
There is no point in pursing further examples. The outline in the preceding paragraph typifies the methodology of the entire book, and Greenberg (1966) has thoroughly refuted Meinhof’s treatment of Fula (pp. 24-27), Masai (pp. 90-95), and Nama (pp. 67-72) showing that these languages are not Hamitic, but rather are obvious members of the West Atlantic, Nilo-Saharan, and Khoisan families respectively.
One can only conclude that Meinhof approached the Hamitic enterprise with a
preconception about what kind of people would speak Hamitic languages—in particular,
Caucasian looking, war-like cattle herders. Some languages spoken by people lacking
these racial and cultural traits have features so similar to those in recognized “Hamitic” languages that Meinhof could not ignore them. This includes Hausa, whose speakers, despite being black agriculturalists, managed a place in the Hamitic ranks. (A likely aid to Hausa’s achieving Hamitic status was the fact that most Hausa speakers live in large, well-organized states whose rulers are of Fula descent.) On the other hand, the Fula, the
Masai, and the Nama were obvious candidates for Hamititude because of their pastoral
cultures, and indeed, Meinhof managed to discover Hamitic traits in their languages
never noticed before or since!
Enough said, fula is not a Hamitic language.
quote:
Originally posted by ausar:
The pastorial Hamitic myth has also been broken since cattle domestication has been proven to be indigenous to Africa by African. No pastorial people ever invaded African bringing superior civlization since it also shown pastorlism was developed in Africa before agritculture.
Thats what I'm trying to tell homeylu, that there is no sense trying to prove blackness using sources which tried to categorically deny blackness. I really don't understand why homeylu and wally are so insistent on Wolof as opposed to Chadic, Cushitic, Omotic, and even some Nilo-Saharan tongues, being more related to AE. Its not like the latter four being more related negates the Africaness of AE, they simply emphasize its Africaness even more. Moreover as the pdf I posted said, Diop excluded these languages when he did his mass comparison. Had he included them, he no doubt would have found they have a closer relationship to AE than Wolof.
The paper also mentioned some had affinity with modern fellahin? Do they mean Fellahin in modern Palestine or in Egypt? Are they refering to the Delta Fellahin or the Middle Egyptian Fellahin?
anicent and modern Fellahin never get taller than 6'0. Average heights are typically around 5'6-5'7. If this is reffering to the Fellahin in Egypt.
emphasis repeated from Homeylu [i]...and I quote "The Wolof language REALLY is [u]genetically [/u] related to the FULA language"
Basis for S. Mohammed's argument "Yes, you did put your foot in your mouth, for on page 12 of that pdf I posted it says Fula and Wolof are [u]genetically[/u] related"
Nothing else needs to be said, LMAO
You remind me of a typical Diop critic, in that you have diminished your argument to petty name calling "you're ignorant", negative passion, and useless argument to prove nothing.
In fact after reading all the posts, I may be the ONLY person besides yourself to even take the time to read this -WEAK ARTICLE!!
Notice my insult was directed at the article, and not you, yet you take it so personally....How petty.
I dont even pretend to be versed in ANY African Language. I simply rely on more reliable sources like Cheikh Anta Diop, whose research goes beyond a "petty" article.
*sticking my tongue out at s. Mohammad
*blowing a kiss at Wally
quote:
Originally posted by homeylu:
Originaly posted by s. Mohammed
[b]Originally posted by homeylu:
Originally posted by S. Mohammed
[b]Secondly, Wolof did not descend from Fula
This was written on page 12 of this "prized" article you talk about so much, it did NOT originate from me, but from your "prized" author...and I quote "The Wolof language REALLY is genetically related to the FULA language"emphasis repeated from Homeylu [i]...and I quote "The Wolof language REALLY is [u]genetically [/u] related to the FULA language"
Basis for S. Mohammed's argument "Yes, you did put your foot in your mouth, for on page 12 of that pdf I posted it says Fula and Wolof are [u]genetically[/u] related"
Nothing else needs to be said, LMAO
You remind me of a typical Diop critic, in that you have diminished your argument to petty name calling "you're ignorant", negative passion, and useless argument to prove nothing.
In fact after reading all the posts, I may be the ONLY person besides yourself to even take the time to read this -WEAK ARTICLE!!
Notice my insult was directed at the article, and not you, yet you take it so personally....How petty.[/B]
You're criticizong me about being a critic of Diop and the only pewrson you can quote is Diop. Although I was wrong for calling you ignorant, you're making accusations against my people for God's sake. the concept of jihad didn't start among my people. Not to mention, you dig up a citation from an outdated 1911 encyclopedia which that pdf article I posted debunks as proof to its weakness? The fact is that that citation you used comes from a debunk pseudo-science, so you have not proven that article I posted as weak, you only made your agrument look weaker. You didn't try to prove any weakness, you simply screwed up by posting that article from 1911.
As I've said and I'll say again Diop's work is not rubbish, but he was not above making errors and he made many, but they were minor. His linguistic argument is weak for Wolof is distantly related to AE, very distantly related, and Chadic and other Afrasian languages are closer. I can quote from more than one source which means my vision isn't limited to one source for a final answer. Remember Diop didn't include those Afrasian languages spoken by black Africans in his comparison, he only included Wolof, his own language. This article looks at both wolof and one Afrasian language, Chadic which is more balanced. Its author isn't even very critical of Diop. In fact he states that Diop was sincere in what he was doing, its just Diop's methods didn't prove a close relationship when viewed against Chadic.
quote:
Originally posted by homeylu:
And for the record, my argument is not whether the language of Fula has hamitic origins or not, I simply, inserted a quote from an Encyclopedia, to point out the "WEAKNESSES" in this article.I dont even pretend to be versed in ANY African Language. I simply rely on more reliable sources like Cheikh Anta Diop, whose research goes beyond a "petty" article.
How did a debunked article from 1911 prove the weaknesses in the article I posted when the pseudo-science being used in 1911 has been long debunk, a point which that article I posted emphasizes?
Bottom line, unless you have evidence you have proven nothing. And not everything Diop says is infallible. Phoenicians are not black, and neither is everyone listed in the Bible under hams geneaology is black and Wolof is not closely related to AE.
quote:
Originally posted by homeylu:
I pray that I can trace my roots to the "Wolof" tribe, so I can feel more "genetically" related to Anta Diop (my hero) LOL*sticking my tongue out at s. Mohammad
*blowing a kiss at Wally
You're a headache to debate, but nonetheless civilized and sportmanslike. I have many things to educate you about Africa. You have a good heart to want to correct African history, you just need to know how to reference journals and books to broaden your scope and knowledge. Peer-reviwed journals and books will help you, just seek them out. I seem rude only because I've spent endless bandwidth debunking pseudo-science about Africa and nothing gets me more heated than that stupid Hamitic nonsense because it is still quietly influential among todays scholars.
[This message has been edited by S.Mohammad (edited 02 June 2004).]
quote:
Originally posted by homeylu:
I pray that I can trace my roots to the "Wolof" tribe, so I can feel more "genetically" related to Anta Diop (my hero) LOL*sticking my tongue out at s. Mohammad
*blowing a kiss at Wally
if you trace back to Wolof, I would be probably closely related to you also but not as close as Diop. The Wolof hasd some excellent kingdoms too, like Waalo for example. Read about it at this link
http://www.4reference.net/encyclopedias/wikipedia/Waalo.html
It was highly stratified.(Smiling)
[This message has been edited by S.Mohammad (edited 02 June 2004).]
[This message has been edited by S.Mohammad (edited 02 June 2004).]
BTW, Diop is my primary source, but not my only source of Afrocentrism. I also read the works of Clyde Winters, Yosef Ben-Jochannan, Chancellor Williams, and John G. Jackson, just to name a few.
And I so happened to run across Wally's website and was very impressed by his work.
While I truly embrace my African Ancestor, I have a passion for Blacks everywhere that have been oppressed and still are being oppressed by White supremacy. I try to find a spiritual connection to the aborigines of Austrailia, and the Dalits of India, and the Blacks of South Africa, as well as the African Americans, have all been subjected to white supremacy, and I find our common denominator is our skin color, and not our hair teture.
I was only kidding about the Wolof connection, as I will embrace whatever Afican Ancestry is mine.
Nevertheless, I've never said that Diop was flawless, but as you pointed out, his flaws are so miniscule, no need in lending too much credence to his critics.
quote:
Originally posted by ausar:
I read the paper,Thought,and I think you might be slighty exagerating the find of the remains.
Thought Writes:
Ausar, I posted a link to a paper, what is it that I exagerated about? Please elaborate or retract the statment!
quote:
Originally posted by S.Mohammad:
Thats what I'm trying to tell homeylu, that there is no sense trying to prove blackness using sources which tried to categorically deny blackness. I really don't understand why homeylu and wally are so insistent on Wolof as opposed to Chadic, Cushitic, Omotic, and even some Nilo-Saharan tongues, being more related to AE. Its not like the latter four being more related negates the Africaness of AE, they simply emphasize its Africaness even more. Moreover as the pdf I posted said, Diop excluded these languages when he did his mass comparison. Had he included them, he no doubt would have found they have a closer relationship to AE than Wolof.
You misunderstand. We use Wolof as well as Yoruba to reconfirm the need to redefine African languages and how they relate to each other. There has not yet appeared a Hausa scholar to my knowledge who has done the type of research that Cheikh Anta Diop and J. Olumide Lucas has done on this subject. These languages aren't "superior" to or closer to Pharaonic Egyptian. You must remember that one of Professor Diop's earliest writings was "The Origin of the Wolof Language and Race." And you, yourself a Hausa speaker has not added a single comparative study between Hausa and Pharaonic Egyptian. Let's get on it man!
And another problem that I have with some posts here is a seeming desire to throw out the baby with the bathwater - the word Hamitic. The etymology of this word is African, it refers to African people. There is no need to discard this word or put it in quotes, simply because Europeans expropriated it in order to further the myth of a "White Egypt." We should simply reclaim it and give it a proper scientific status. There are Hamitic speaking peoples you know--Beja; Hausa; Oromo; Ancient Egyptians; etc.
Slavery in America was even justified by so-called White Christians by using this so-called Hamitic curse against Black Africans.
Why is it that until the invention of Egyptology (discovery of great works of descendants of Ham) did Ham suddenly become the Biblical Ancestor to white races or the so-called Meditteranean races.
From a Biblical standpoint, Ham had four sons, Cush, Mizraim, Phut, and Canaan
Cush-Nubia
Mizraim-Egypt
Phut-Libya
Canaan-Phoenicians
What these subscribers of phenotype concept need to understand that of all the people in the world, it has been scientifically proven that black Africans carry a greater number of alleles - genetic variations of the same gene(s) in their DNA as compared to Europeans and others. Thus, it is not surprising that there are much wider physical varieties among blacks. Thats why its not uncommon to find blacks all over the world with straight hair, wooly hair, blonde hair, red hair, aqueline noses, broad noses, thin lips, thick lips....the list goes on. Although I'm not 100% positive, there may also be more languages spoken in Africa than any other parts of the world. Which is why I cant understand why these "phenotype" belevers find it difficult to absorb, that white people are nothing but a product of recessive black genes-albinos.(LMAO)...I know this is gonna get some people started.
quote:
Originally posted by ausar:
The pastorial Hamitic myth has also been broken since cattle domestication has been proven to be indigenous to Africa by African. No pastorial people ever invaded African bringing superior civlization since it also shown pastorlism was developed in Africa before agritculture.
This can be show geneticaly also regarding Cattle domestication also. Recent reseach shows that the once though introduced cattle from India actaulay diverged from the domesticated cattle of Africa many many thousands of years before domestication, hence no connection and local domestication.
Ozzy
quote:
Originally posted by homeylu:
I agree with you Wally. When Diop uses the word "Hamitic" he is referring to the ancient historians (the Bible writers) use of the word to describe the Black Races. Only during the 18th century, the height of racism, did this terminology change to include white races. These white scholars would like for us to believe that not only were they Japhethites, they were also Shemites, AND Hamites. I mean give me a freaking break. Not to mention this terminology didnt change until they began studying Egypt.Slavery in America was even justified by so-called White Christians by using this so-called Hamitic curse against Black Africans.
Why is it that until the invention of Egyptology (discovery of great works of descendants of Ham) did Ham suddenly become the Biblical Ancestor to white races or the so-called Meditteranean races.
From a Biblical standpoint, Ham had four sons, Cush, Mizraim, Phut, and Canaan
Cush-Nubia
Mizraim-Egypt
Phut-Libya
Canaan-PhoeniciansWhat these subscribers of phenotype concept need to understand that of all the people in the world, it has been scientifically proven that black Africans carry a greater number of alleles - genetic variations of the same gene(s) in their DNA as compared to Europeans and others. Thus, it is not surprising that there are much wider physical varieties among blacks. Thats why its not uncommon to find blacks all over the world with straight hair, wooly hair, blonde hair, red hair, aqueline noses, broad noses, thin lips, thick lips....the list goes on. Although I'm not 100% positive, there may also be more languages spoken in Africa than any other parts of the world. Which is why I cant understand why these "phenotype" belevers find it difficult to absorb, that white people are nothing but a product of recessive black genes-albinos.(LMAO)...I know this is gonna get some people started.
LOL not started! Stoped! You display your limited understanding of gentics, and the relationship of world populations, if you did have an understanding you would be aware of how funny your statements are.
Ozzy
quote:
Originally posted by ausar:
Read my entire statements please. I pointed out where you exagerated the result.
Thought Writes:
But where did I write anything that contradicts what you stated. Please post what I said and how it was incorrect or retract your statement.
quote:
Originally posted by S.Mohammad:
Thats what I'm trying to tell homeylu, that there is no sense trying to prove blackness using sources which tried to categorically deny blackness. I really don't understand why homeylu and wally are so insistent on Wolof as opposed to Chadic, Cushitic, Omotic, and even some Nilo-Saharan tongues, being more related to AE. Its not like the latter four being more related negates the Africaness of AE, they simply emphasize its Africaness even more. Moreover as the pdf I posted said, Diop excluded these languages when he did his mass comparison. Had he included them, he no doubt would have found they have a closer relationship to AE than Wolof.
Exactly, it does not get sipmler than that. I dont get why you guys (Wally and homeylu) consider any of this an atack on Egypt in Africa. If you have read anything on this site you will know most all of us support an African Egypt. And it seems when it comes down to it, it is just this that concerns you!
Ozzy
When I find his dissertation on this subject I might post it for you to read.
quote:
Originally posted by Wally:
You misunderstand. We use Wolof as well as Yoruba to reconfirm the need to redefine African languages and how they relate to each other. There has not yet appeared a Hausa scholar to my knowledge who has done the type of research that Cheikh Anta Diop and J. Olumide Lucas has done on this subject. These languages aren't "superior" to or closer to Pharaonic Egyptian. You must remember that one of Professor Diop's earliest writings was "The Origin of the Wolof Language and Race." And you, yourself a Hausa speaker has not added a single comparative study between Hausa and Pharaonic Egyptian. Let's get on it man!And another problem that I have with some posts here is a seeming desire to throw out the baby with the bathwater - the word Hamitic. The etymology of this word is African, it refers to African people. There is no need to discard this word or put it in quotes, simply because Europeans expropriated it in order to further the myth of a "White Egypt." We should simply reclaim it and give it a proper scientific status. There are Hamitic speaking peoples you know--Beja; Hausa; Oromo; Ancient Egyptians; etc.
No, there are NO any Hamitic speaking people because all those languiages termed as "Hamitic" do not for one genetic union as it does for Semitic where you can see a close relationship.
My point has never been to say that Chadic languages are superior to Wolof, I said genetically they are closer to AE than Wolof and this has been proven by more than one scholar. Chadic might even be the link between Afrasian and Niger-Congo languages because Chadic languages are tonal unlike the other Afrasian languages. You need to do some research on languáges yourself instead of saying "Diop said, Diop said,".
As for that term hamitic, it has nothing to do with a race of people Phoenicians and Libyans were not black people originally who became whitter through mass immigration, even Shomarka Keita and JL Angel will not say this. Early north African remains from coastal Africans(Proto-Mediterraneans, Mideans) are distinct from both tropical Africans and Europeans, though showing a slight cline towards the latter. This is a fact, the same with Phoenicians, they were not "Negroes" who became whiter. This is pseudo-science of the extreme Afrocentrist type. Post some skeletal or genetic studies to confirm this. The table of nations was just what it was, a table of Nations, not a division of races. The whole concept of black people being Hamites was started by whites,ie, the curse of Ham, to enslave blacks. The table of Nations does nothing as far as proving who's black, they didn't see race as we do today.
I just posted a comparative between chadic and AE vs that of Wolof and AE and Chadic was found closer. Instead of blindly worshipping Diop, reference some journals and studies on linguistics. If you want to challenge me on linguistics, you will be the one who will lose, for I can quote more than just one person, unlike you.
quote:
Originally posted by homeylu:
I agree with you Wally. When Diop uses the word "Hamitic" he is referring to the ancient historians (the Bible writers) use of the word to describe the Black Races. Only during the 18th century, the height of racism, did this terminology change to include white races. These white scholars would like for us to believe that not only were they Japhethites, they were also Shemites, AND Hamites. I mean give me a freaking break. Not to mention this terminology didnt change until they began studying Egypt.Slavery in America was even justified by so-called White Christians by using this so-called Hamitic curse against Black Africans.
Why is it that until the invention of Egyptology (discovery of great works of descendants of Ham) did Ham suddenly become the Biblical Ancestor to white races or the so-called Meditteranean races.
From a Biblical standpoint, Ham had four sons, Cush, Mizraim, Phut, and Canaan
Cush-Nubia
Mizraim-Egypt
Phut-Libya
Canaan-PhoeniciansWhat these subscribers of phenotype concept need to understand that of all the people in the world, it has been scientifically proven that black Africans carry a greater number of alleles - genetic variations of the same gene(s) in their DNA as compared to Europeans and others. Thus, it is not surprising that there are much wider physical varieties among blacks. Thats why its not uncommon to find blacks all over the world with straight hair, wooly hair, blonde hair, red hair, aqueline noses, broad noses, thin lips, thick lips....the list goes on. Although I'm not 100% positive, there may also be more languages spoken in Africa than any other parts of the world. Which is why I cant understand why these "phenotype" belevers find it difficult to absorb, that white people are nothing but a product of recessive black genes-albinos.(LMAO)...I know this is gonna get some people started.
What you fail to realize is that that Table of Nations corresponds to Nations not races. The original purpose of calling blacks hamites was to justify enslaving them so it was never good in the first place, it just got worse when they changed its meaning to denote dark-white people. The first reference of hamites with blacks came from a Jewish rabbi, long after Biblical times. The Bible calls people by place names, not Hamites and Semites to denote race, ie, Canaanites, Jebusites, Amorites, Edomites,etc. None of those names denotes race. You guys(you and wally) are buying into the racist pseudo-science that was intended to enslave black people. Furthermore, why should blacks be restricted to the line of ham? You're both shortsighted.
quote:
Originally posted by S.Mohammad:
As for that term hamitic, it has nothing to do with a race of people Phoenicians and Libyans were not black people originally who became whitter through mass immigration, even Shomarka Keita and JL Angel will not say this.
Thought Writes:
That would depend on the geographic location and time one is refering to. Early bronze age Canaan was colonized by Egyptians. In addition, Afro-Asiatic spread to Mesopatamia in some fashion. I would assume that this language was spread by people, not via the internet.
quote:
Originally posted by S.Mohammad:
Early north African remains from coastal Africans(Proto-Mediterraneans, Mideans) are distinct from both tropical Africans and Europeans, though showing a slight cline towards the latter.
Sight Writes:
Please refer me to your source on this?
quote:
Originally posted by S.Mohammad:
This is a fact, the same with Phoenicians, they were not "Negroes" who became whiter.
Sight Writes:
The whole concept of the Phoenicians period is psuedo-science. There were no people known as Phoenician during the Bronze Age.
Actually you might not know but the big debate was started by Bartlowme Lascas vs. another Spainard philsopher who argued that Barbarians were natural slaves using Aristotle.
quote:
Originally posted by ausar:
By the way,it was Caanan who was cursed and not the other desendants of Ham. Last time I checked the Caananites were Semetic speaking people not traditionally known to have been black.
Thought Writes:
Did anyone read my post NOMADISM??????
quote:
Thought Writes:Did anyone read my post NOMADISM??????
Yes,and a very well documented post on Proto-Semetic languages. However,we are reffering to the Caanites which are not related to the Proto-Semetic speakers at all.
quote:
Originally posted by ausar:
Yes,and a very well documented post on Proto-Semetic languages. However,we are reffering to the Caanites which are not related to the Proto-Semetic speakers at all.
Thought Writes:
Who were the Canaanites related to? Were they related to different people at different times and in different parts of Canaan? How did semitic spread to Mesopatamia? What language did the Canaanites speak if not Semitic?
To Said Mohammed:
I have to disagree with the Libyans because two different Libyan ethnic groups were depicted in Kemetian bas-reliefs. You had the Tehennu and Tamahou. The Tehennu and Tamahou were phenotypically different than each other and the latter begins to replace the former. I will agree with you,however,that Costal type Africans were as you described them to be. I believe you are refering to the Metcha Al Arbi,Oranian,Capsians,and Iberian-Marousian.
I have read verying opinions of these types of people ranging from they were Boskop-capoid to Afro-Mediterranean to Cro-magnoid. I don't know Keita opinion on these types except he sees Magrebian series as intermediates.
My recomendation would be to read Michael Brett and Elizabeth Fortess book ''The Berbers'' Later on I might post some excerpts from the book.
For the most part,the Sahara was mostly tropical African up untill around 2500 B.C. Read the texts from M.C. Chamla on remains in this region. We also have rock art from Central and Southern Sahara which show cultural affinities with so-called ''Inner Africans''.
quote:
Originally posted by Thought2:
Sight Writes:Please refer me to your source on this?
If you read Keita's abstract of early North African holocene remains he says that early North Africans were diverse, but that they differ from inhabitants of Upper egypt, read:
<i>Historical sources and archaeological data predict significant population variability in mid-Holocene northern Africa. Multivariate analyses of crania demonstrate wide variation but also <b>suggest an indigenous craniometric pattern common to both late dynastic northern Egypt and the coastal Maghreb region.</b> Both tropical African and European metric phenotypes, as well intermediate patterns, are found in mid-Holocene Maghreb sites</i>
Am J Phys Anthropol. 1990 Sep;83(1):35-48.
Studies of ancient crania from northern Africa.
Keita SO.
To Keita "tropical Africans" includes peoples of the Horn of Africa also. Here he clearly said multivariate ananlysis suggest a craniometric pattern common to Late dynastic NORTHERN EGYPT and the coastal maghreb region. That right there clearly differenitaed them from Upper Egyptians whose affinities were/are closer to tropical Africans. Clearly were are dealing with two disnct populations. Keita made the same distinction, read:
<i>Studies of crania from southern predynastic Egypt, from the formative period(4000-3100 B.C.), show them usually to be more similar to the crania of ancient Nubians, Kushites, Saharans, or modern groups from the Horn of Africa than to those of dynastic northern Egyptians or ancient or modern southern Europeans...</i>
The Geographical Origins and Population Relationships of Early Ancient Egyptians
S.O.Y. Keita, Department of Biological Anthropology, Oxford University
Here he even says dynastic Northern egyptians differ from Southern ones again. Come on now Thought, I'm not trying to whitewash anybody or anything, These people in the north were still distinct from Europeans.
quote:
Originally posted by Thought2:
Sight Writes:The whole concept of the Phoenicians period is psuedo-science. There were no people known as Phoenician during the Bronze Age.
Of course they never called themselves Phoenicians, butz there was a federation of peoples living in the Eastern Mediterranean(Tyre, Sidon, etc) who were a seafaring people whom today we call Phoenicians.
quote:
Originally posted by ausar:
To Said Mohammed:
I have to disagree with the Libyans because two different Libyan ethnic groups were depicted in Kemetian bas-reliefs. You had the Tehennu and Tamahou. The Tehennu and Tamahou were phenotypically different than each other and the latter begins to replace the former. I will agree with you,however,that Costal type Africans were as you described them to be. I believe you are refering to the Metcha Al Arbi,Oranian,Capsians,and Iberian-Marousian.
I have read verying opinions of these types of people ranging from they were Boskop-capoid to Afro-Mediterranean to Cro-magnoid. I don't know Keita opinion on these types except he sees Magrebian series as intermediates.My recomendation would be to read Michael Brett and Elizabeth Fortess book ''The Berbers'' Later on I might post some excerpts from the book.
For the most part,the Sahara was mostly tropical African up untill around 2500 B.C. Read the texts from M.C. Chamla on remains in this region. We also have rock art from Central and Southern Sahara which show cultural affinities with so-called ''Inner Africans''.
When I said Libyans, in this sense I was referring to the coastals, not the Saharans, who were Negroid. Furthermore, I don't know if homeylu is aware of it, but Phut can also be Punt, which is located in the Horn of Africa.
Obvious you have done no research on Mitochondrial DNA, which traced the ancestry of all homo sapiens to Black Africans, long before the 160,000 year old skull was even found. So all of the "worlds" populations can be traced back to Africa, because as I stated before, African genes are the MOST divergent. Africans have more dominant genes, and the Europeans are the most recessive.I think its you that have the limited understanding.
The Ethiopians were also a Semitic speaking people, who traditionally are know to by Black. As I noted before you all place too much emphasis on phenotypes, that you fail to internalize, that several tribes have been discovered through out Africa,that are Jews like, the Abayudaya in Uganda, the Lemba in Zimbabwe, the Beta Israel in Ethiopia, just to name a few. In fact a DNA sample was done on the Lemba and they had this particular Y chromosomal type that appears to be a signature of Jewish ancestry.
So here again we have the more reliable "genotype" placing Blacks in the land of Canaan.
And I do recall a particular passage in the Bible with regards to the Semites entering the land of Cannaan "Let our daughter marry their daughters, and our sons, their sons".
quote:
Originally posted by homeylu:
Originally posted by Ozzy:
[b]LOL not started! Stoped! You display your limited understanding of gentics, and the relationship of world populationsObvious you have done no research on Mitochondrial DNA, which traced the ancestry of all homo sapiens to Black Africans, long before the 160,000 year old skull was even found. So all of the "worlds" populations can be traced back to Africa, because as I stated before, African genes are the MOST divergent. Africans have more dominant genes, and the Europeans are the most recessive.I think its you that have the limited understanding.[/B]
LOL, and you have no underestanding of genetics at all. Genotype refers to genes and phenotype is what we see. Genes cannot be "Negroid", "caucasoid", "white" or "black." At the time the mitochondrial Eve was living, there were no human races that corresponded to what we call Negroid and caucasoid, I suggest you consult some anthrolopogical journals before stating this.
Africans have more dominant genes, and the Europeans are the most recessive.
Now you're sounding like Leonard Jeffries 
, you have to do better than that to make an argument.
The ancients writers were showing how certain races, ruled certain Nations. And again it was Canaan that was cursed, not Ham.
It was not uncommon in Ancient times to use religion, i.e. this land was promised to be by God, to conquer another nation.
Now according to some scholars, if Shem meant "dusky" and Japheth meant "fair" or so he like(from the hebrew word "yapheh" o, more or less "fair skinned"), then Ham must have meant "black" since its supported by the evidence of Hebrew and Arabic, in which the word chamam means "to be hot" and "to be black".
When one Kingdom conquers another, the language of the conqueror typically dominates. So its feasible to explain how Canaanite came to speak a Semitic tongue.
quote:
Originally posted by homeylu:
Originally posted by Ausar
[b]By the way,it was Caanan who was cursed and not the other desendants of Ham. Last time I checked the Caananites were Semetic speaking people not traditionally known to have been blackThe Ethiopians were also a Semitic speaking people, who traditionally are know to by Black. As I noted before you all place too much emphasis on phenotypes, that you fail to internalize, that several tribes have been discovered through out Africa,that are Jews like, the Abayudaya in Uganda, the Lemba in Zimbabwe, the Beta Israel in Ethiopia, just to name a few. In fact a DNA sample was done on the Lemba and they had this particular Y chromosomal type that appears to be a signature of Jewish ancestry.
So here again we have the more reliable "genotype" placing Blacks in the land of Canaan.
And I do recall a particular passage in the Bible with regards to the Semites entering the land of Cannaan "Let our daughter marry their daughters, and our sons, their sons".[/B]
You are all wrong. Not all Ethiopians are Semitic speaking or at least are originally Semitic speaking. The Oromoia or Oromo, who make up the majority of the population in Ethiopia are Cushitic speaking peoples. Might I mind you that Elam is also mentioned in the Table of Nations under Shem's line yet Elamite the language is NOT a Semitic language. Another thing to remember is that the Ethiopia the ancients refer to are not the same Ethiopians we talk about today. Ethiopia=Nubia to the ancients, and Nubian's are Nilo-Saharan speaking, not Semitic speakers.
quote:
As I noted before you all place too much emphasis on phenotypes, that you fail to internalize, that several tribes have been discovered through out Africa,that are Jews like, the Abayudaya in Uganda, the Lemba in Zimbabwe, the Beta Israel in Ethiopia, just to name a few. In fact a DNA sample was done on the Lemba and they had this particular Y chromosomal type that appears to be a signature of Jewish ancestry.
The Beta Israel are nearly pure African and acquired their religion or should I say are Jews, without any foreign admixture. The lemba apparaently do share that Y-chromosone that is charactersitic of the priestly caste(Levite) by that gene is not considered as African according to phylogeography, and the Lemba are Bantu speakers, not Semitic speakers. The Abayudaya of uganda has no genetic study outlining their genes, so the genetic evidence does not support you. A Jew is a person who's religion is Judaism, not a race of people.
You haven't proven anything, just blowing hot air as usual. 
quote:
Originally posted by homeylu:
Originally posted by S. Mohammed
[b]What you fail to realize is that that Table of Nations corresponds to Nations not racesThe ancients writers were showing how certain races, ruled certain Nations. And again it was Canaan that was cursed, not Ham.
It was not uncommon in Ancient times to use religion, i.e. this land was promised to be by God, to conquer another nation.
When one Kingdom conquers another, the language of the conqueror typically dominates. So its feasible to explain how Canaanite came to speak a Semitic tongue.[/B]
Absolute rubbish, even in the Bible the Jews were told not to mix with the daughters of Canaan, read for yourself. And no, the ancients were not showing races. Will you please show direct evidence that this is the case.
quote:
Now according to some scholars, if Shem meant "dusky" and Japheth meant "fair" or so he like(from the hebrew word "yapheh" o, more or less "fair skinned"), then Ham must have meant "black" since its supported by the evidence of Hebrew and Arabic, in which the word chamam means "to be hot" and "to be black".
Please post a reference that supports this. What scholars said these things? there is no reason to think that the Table of Nations corresponds to races. Using your "black genes are dominant logic" since Ham was black, Shem and Japeth were also black, so those terms don't mean anything, do they? whether you know it or not you're rehahsing the same thing the racists said.
Keep it up, you're refuting yourself more and more. 
quote:
Originally posted by S.Mohammad:
Please post a reference that supports this. What scholars said these things? there is no reason to think that the Table of Nations corresponds to races. Using your "black genes are dominant logic" since Ham was black, Shem and Japeth were also black, so those terms don't mean anything, do they? whether you know it or not you're rehahsing the same thing the racists said.Keep it up, you're refuting yourself more and more.
------------------
quote:
Originally posted by homeylu:
Originally posted by Ozzy:
[b]LOL not started! Stoped! You display your limited understanding of gentics, and the relationship of world populationsObvious you have done no research on Mitochondrial DNA, which traced the ancestry of all homo sapiens to Black Africans, long before the 160,000 year old skull was even found. So all of the "worlds" populations can be traced back to Africa, because as I stated before, African genes are the MOST divergent. Africans have more dominant genes, and the Europeans are the most recessive.I think its you that have the limited understanding.[/B]
When you show you have a knowledge of genetics perhaps people would be inclined to see you have some credibility
------------------
[img]http://www.humnet.ucla.edu/humnet/aflang/Hausa/Images/logo.gif[/img]
(I hope you realize how ridiculous you sound at times).
Originally posted by S. Mohammed
A Jew is a person who's religion is Judaism, not a race of people
The Lemba are a "black race" whose religion is "Judaism." No one said, all blacks are jews or all jews were black.
Again, nothing else needs to be said.
Originally posted by S. Mohammed
Absolute rubbish, even in the Bible the Jews were told not to mix with the daughters of Canaan, read for yourself
These black jews and white jews wouldnt have the same genetic make-up if they didnt have a common ancestor.
The Jews were told not mix with the Canaan unless they became circumsised. Gen:34:16
And Esau the twin brother of Jacob married a Canaan. Gen:36:2
NOW READ FOR YOURSELF
Originally posted by S. Mohammed:
What scholars said these things?
The Scholars that wrote the Hebrew Bible, now pick up a Hebrew dictionary and define the races of Noah's 3 sons yourself.
Originally posted by S. Mohammed:
Using your "black genes are dominant logic" since Ham was black, Shem and Japeth were also black
Since Blacks have more divergent genetics, the can give birth to offsprings ranging from Black,Brown,to White(albino), therefore Noah must have been Black, to give birth to 3 different races of sons. History has never shown a white perso to give birth to a black person, however blacks give birth to Albino's quite often.
Originally posted by S. Mohammed
When you show you have a knowledge of genetics perhaps people would be inclined to see you have some credibility
While I dont claim to be a biologist/physicist I think its common knowledge in the scientific community, that the first humans were black/negros. For further references, just type "out of africa theory" into any search engine.
But since I'm such a sweet young lady, I'll post a few links for you:
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2003-06/uoc--1fs061003.php
http://dsc.discovery.com/news/briefs/20020225/eve.html
http://www.actionbioscience.org/evolution/johanson.html
quote:
Obvious you have done no research on Mitochondrial DNA, which traced the ancestry of all homo sapiens to Black Africans, long before the 160,000 year old skull was even found
I hate to burst people's bubble but the first hominid on this planet we have no idea what race nor what this hominid might have looked at. You know hominids are not fully developed human beings,and so claiming this is so does not mean anything.
Many migrations came out of Africa,and depending if you believe in assorted theories thee is always conjecture. Everything from the Aquatic ape hypothesis down to multi-ragional theory that favors our development seperately in different continents.
The oldest people on the globe are the Khoisan who are probabaly the ancestors of us all. Khoisan and Twa people[pgmys]are every body's distant ancestor.
Mtdna passes alongside the female line and passed upon offpsring through the mother and can be tested on any individual.
quote:
So all of the "worlds" populations can be traced back to Africa, because as I stated before, African genes are the MOST divergent. Africans have more dominant genes, and the Europeans are the most recessive.I think its you that have the limited understanding.
You are correct that some traits of a person is recessive,but these recessive traits might show up in later generation if both the of the parents recombines. You can see this example with African Americans who give birth to ''white'' children. Since most likley both the parent has recessive traits sometimes many show up in the offpsring in later generation.
In a previous post you made some statements about allele and Africans having the most. Not entirely true since many allele are private amung different ethnic groups and some are shared. The modern day Egyptians have private allele that are shared by no other groups and also allele that are shared with continental Africans.
You might want to reread Greogor Mendel's experiment done with the peaplant.
quote:
s I noted before you all place too much emphasis on phenotypes, that you fail to internalize, that several tribes have been discovered through out Africa,
How many are these tribes atuhenic? What you might not know is that lots of ''white'' missionaries created myths about Hebrews being in Africa to steal African history. You fall right into those diffusionist lies when you create myths like these. Perhaps,some hebrew tribes exist throughout Africa,but they never influced much of the local culture. This is why I laugh each time I hear the Black hebrew Israelites talk about tribes in Western Africa .
What they never bother to mention is the Akan in Ghana have stories of coimng from the east except from the modern region of Kintampo where the oldest agirtculture in Western Africa started.
Many Africans have been known to fabricate geneologies to connect themselves to Arabs or Islam. Racist European scholars played into this nonsense.
quote:
,that are Jews like, the Abayudaya in Uganda
They're converts!!!
quote:
the Lemba in Zimbabwe
What you might know about the Lemba is many claim to come form Yemeni Jews who migrated into inner Africa. How ironic that white supremist are usuing these false claims about the Lemba to deconstruct hard work to prove the Shona people built great Zimababwee. You are feeding right into this nonsense.
quote:
the Lemba in Zimbabwe, the Beta Israel in Ethiopia, just to name a few. In fact a DNA sample was done on the Lemba and they had this particular Y chromosomal type that appears to be a signature of Jewish ancestry.
This only means that Yemani males migrated to inner Africa intermarried into the local Bantu population. You are not seriously going to tell me the original Hebrews looked like Lemba people? How would you explain the Sephardim and other Jews in India or China? Funny how all these local Jews look no different from the local populations.
You know in Hellenistic Egypt Jews were all over Egypt including southern regions like Aswan and Luxor.
This might be why you find the pressence of certain halpotypes in southern Egyptian populations. Some Jews also exist in Sudan called the Mahdi I believe.
quote:
Originally posted by S.Mohammad:
What you fail to realize is that that Table of Nations corresponds to Nations not races. The original purpose of calling blacks hamites was to justify enslaving them so it was never good in the first place, it just got worse when they changed its meaning to denote dark-white people. The first reference of hamites with blacks came from a Jewish rabbi, long after Biblical times. The Bible calls people by place names, not Hamites and Semites to denote race, ie, Canaanites, Jebusites, Amorites, Edomites,etc. None of those names denotes race. You guys(you and wally) are buying into the racist pseudo-science that was intended to enslave black people. Furthermore, why should blacks be restricted to the line of ham? You're both shortsighted.
Vagina -- Kat (Egyptian) Cott li (Wolof)
Katt bi (vulgar Wolof term for having sex)
Top of Head -- Top (Egyptian) Bop (Wolof)
Ref: Egyptian - EWB
Wolof - http://www.bcconline.org/wolof/Language/Vocab.htm
P.S. You should take note of the statement at the heading of this website - keeping in mind the furore both you and Ozzy raised over the Wolof words "kem" and "khem" --
"Not all of the Wolof words are known by all Wolof speakers. Some words are known by few Wolof speakers."
[This message has been edited by Wally (edited 03 June 2004).]
[This message has been edited by Wally (edited 03 June 2004).]
With regard to In a previous post you made some statements about allele and Africans having the most
Just read this link: http://129.128.91.75/de/genetics/70gen-other.html
Nothing's worst than taking 1 example to try to disprove someone.
"Duffy is controlled by two co-dominant alleles, Fya and Fyb; as well as Fy, a third allele, very rare in Caucasians but common in Blacks. There are four red cell phenotypes..Most Caucasians (~49%) inherit both Fya and Fyb and type as Fy(a+b+). Most Blacks (68% in USA; higher in African countries) inherit two Fy genes and type as Fy(a-b-)."
Note emphasis on Blacks (as in USA) compared to "higher" in Africans, which one could only conclude to mean "BLACK AFRICANS".
Originally quoted by Ausar:
This only means that Yemani males migrated to inner Africa intermarried into the local Bantu population
Where is the scientific evidence to support this, since it has clearly been proven that the priestly Buba clan has the Kohen haplotype in a higher percentage than Ashkenazi priests do. Furthermore, the non-Buba Lemba have the highest percentage of the Kohen haplotype outside of the priestly caste, among populations tested to date - higher than Ashkenazim and Sephardim added together!
"The researchers found that Lemba men carried a DNA signature on their Y chromosome that is believed unique to the relatively small number of Jews known as the Cohanim, who trace their ancestry to the priests of the ancient Jewish Temple and, ultimately, to Aaron, brother of Moses"
Reference:A. B. Spurdle and T. Jenkins. "The Origins of the Lemba 'Black Jews' of Southern Africa: Evidence from p12F2 and Other Y-Chromosome Markers." American Journal of Human Genetics 59 (1996): 1126-1133.
Here you come up with some arbitrary story of some Jew travelling thru Africa to intermarry with the Lemba. How fartfetched is that!
I know, you're only trying to "remove" Black Africans from the land of Cannaan, yet you contradict yourself with the earlier statement about the Ethiopian Jews. Probably so that you can "theorize" Queen of Seba, travelled there to marry Solomon.
I dont follow any racist scholar when I place "blacks" in the land of Canaan, regardless of what stereotypes have arisen. I think its people that try to completely remove blacks from this area, is only doing so, to remove any connection of blacks with Phoenicians.
Other references: Remember 10% of the Lemba tested of Cohen Jews, and only 3% for the Jews actually LIVING in Israel. http://www.familytreedna.com/faqjg.html#q5.3
The most comprehensible argument would be that the Lemba are simply one of the "Lost Tribes" of Israel. Anything else will need to be supported by more than "fantasy".
One the subject of Wolof, are you maintaining that basic words like colors are not widely used by all Wolof speakers. Any resource will tell you that the main Wolof speakers are Rural, and urban speakers are the ones who are influenced by other languages lick French and Dutch. If they were more complexed words which did not influence the daily life of and the average Wolof speaker, it would be worth considering but as they are the basis of the language then the suggestion is absurd.
The explanation, although I still have not found anything closer than Keen! Representing burning or black, is that there are a number of dialects of Wolof, but only those words which are consistent among the majority of dialects can be considered to represent the whole Wolof language and be genetically related to any other language. This does not however decrease the possibility of contact and an influence by another languages like Egyptian. A position I have not disputed. Khem does not seem to be one of these words, nor Maar.
Quote: Language study on Wolof:
“As Senegal becomes an increasingly bilingual country, WolofFrench, the languages are also used together in common discourse. It would be unusual for a young urbanite with some education to speak only Wolof or French. Pure Wolof comes across as kawkaw or "hick," while pure French earns one the derogatory epithet of "cheepcheep," a word which describes the breathy and birdlike way that French people speak (according to certain Senegalese) and, by extension, implies that the speaker is francophile. For young people in Dakar, and especially young men, the use of a mixture of Wolof and French is considered expected and unavoidable (Swigart).”
Quote Wally: “The Table of Nations is merely a reproduction of the Ancient Egyptian Mural of the Races, the Egyptian system of identifying racial groups”.
On this subject, this has been misrepresented for way to long.
The so called mural, of races is part of The Book of Gates which is the principal guidebook to the netherworld found in the 19th and part of the 20th Dynasty tombs of the New Kingdom,
Although it makes its first appearance with the last king of the 18th Dynasty.
The purpose of the Book of Gates was meant to allow the dead pharaoh to navigate his way along the netherworld route together with the sun god, so that his resurrection could be effected.
It emphases gates with guardian deities who's names must be known in order to pass them.
This is actually a very old tradition dating to at least the Book of the Two Ways in the Coffin Texts, where there are seven gates with three keepers at each.
The “mural of races” makes its appearance in the the book of gates at the fourth division fifth hour.
“Hour Five is one of the most complex hours within the composition. In the upper registers, the gods are portrayed with a surveying cord, because the deceased are allotted space (in the form of fields) within this hour. The deceased are also allotted time, and hence the gods also carry the body of a serpent and the hieroglyphs meaning "lifetime" in the lower register. In order to accomplish this, the Apophis fiend, known as "the Retreater, must once again be battled and fettered. Behind Apophis we notice the ba-souls of the blessed dead and at the beginning of the lower register are found the four "races" of mankind, including Egyptians, Asiatics, Nubians and Libyans. Each race is represented by four individual figures, who are “assured” existence in the afterlife. They are placed in the care of Horus and Sakhmet. It should be noted that the Great Hymn of Akhenaten, Aten is said to care even for foreign people, and hence, they are sheltered in the realm of the dead, according to the Book of Gates.”
It is important to remember that these “race” representatives are those who are along with Egyptians “Assured” existence in the After word, and accepted as equals. Hardly a racist philosophy! And hardly representative of your translations and associations to red devils!
The single representation you have on your site is from Ramesses III and is the only representation which is not consistent with all the others, but is touted as the true representation of this relief.
Ohh and by the way bcconline also recommend the same dictionaries I have used. Do you have a resource that does not support my references?
Ozzy
Do you not understand that the Bantu migration in Cameroon occured about 800 B.C. and people did not actually get to their location untill about 10 AD or later.
The Yemani hypothesis is not as far fetched as trying to connect the Amharan to the Queen of Sheba. The Kebra Nagast was profaganda started by the Zagwe dyansty to legitmize their ties to Judahism.
You ripped the allele article from me and Ozzy's discussion. Still you said previously that Africans had the most allele diversity which is not true since all people have private and common allele that are even shared between races.
Some negriod remains were found in early Palestine under the natufians,but this does not mean the Caanite or ultimatley the Phonecians were black people. Phonecians themselves were a combination of Sea people and indigenous Caanites.
It's quite this simple.
Wally is getting his perception from Carleton S. Coon who called the murals the first authenic anthropological analysis. We of course know that Coon was wrong on many things including this observation. The murals were wrongly called the Murals of races by Karl Lepsisus when he found the tomb.
See the following from Gay Robbins:
[......The choice of the single red-brown color to represent The
Egyptian man,rather than a more realistic range of shades ,should
also considered within a wider symbolic scheme that included the
representations of foreginers. The foreigne men to the north and west
of Egypt were depicted by yellow skin[similar to that odf traditional
Egyptian women]; men to the south of Egypt were given black skin.
Although undoubtedly some Egyptians' skin pigmentation differed
little from that of Egypt's neighboors,in the Egyptian worldview
foreigners had to be distinguished . Thus Egyptian men had to be
marked by a common skin color that contrasted with the images of non-
Egyptian men. That the Egyptian women shared their skin color with
some foreign men scarcely mattered,since the Egyptian male is primary
and formed the reference point in these two color scemes---
contrasting in one with non-Egyptian males and in the other with
Egyptian females. Within the scheme of Egyptian/non-Egyptian skin
color,black was not desirable for ordinary humans ,because it marked
out figures as foreign ,as enemies of Egypt,and ultimatley as
represenatives of chaos;black thereby contrasted with its positive
meaning elsewhere. This example helps demostrate the importance of
context for reading color symbolism.........]
[......Thus,the gender distinctionencoded for human figures was
transferred at times to the divie world. The symbolisminherant in the
skin colors used for some deities and royal figures sugest that the
colors given to human skin---although initiallyseeming to be
naturalistic -----might also be symbolic. Male and female skin colors
were probabaly not uniform among the entire population of Egypt,with
pigmentation being darker in the south[closer to sub-sahara Africans]
and lighter in the north[closer to Mediterranean Near Easteners] A
woman from the south would probabaly have had darker skin than a man
from the North. Thus,the colorations used for skin tones in the art
must have been schematic [or symbolic] rather than realistic;the
clear gender distinction encoded in that scheme may have been based
on elite ideals relating to male and female roles,in which women's
responsibilities kept them indoors,so that they spent less time in
the sun than men.Nevertheless, the signifcance of the two colors may
be even deeper,making some as yet unknown but fundamental difference
between men and women in Egyptian worldview............]
The Ancient God Speak by Donald Redford
A Guide to Egyptian Religion
Page 57-61 Color Symbolism
Did you know that if you type "Mural of Races/Egypt" in MSN Search, Yahoo Search, or Google Search, your site is in "first" standing.
Just thought you should know :-)
quote:
Originally posted by homeylu:
BTW Wally your website on the "Mural of Races" is quite impressive, you cant imagine how times I've posted that link whenever the question to how the Egyptians view themselves come up. I first saw it in "Civilization or Barbarism" by C.A. Diop.Did you know that if you type "Mural of Races/Egypt" in MSN Search, Yahoo Search, or Google Search, your site is in "first" standing.
Just thought you should know :-)
LOL its like posting a picture of Dustin Hofman in drag as Tootsy, saying thats his self perception and true image. The only time he dressed in Drag!
The Ramesses III depiction of the "Mural of races" truely shows the Egyptians (A group) as identical to the (C group) nubians (other africans) but it is in fact the only one that represents the image this way out of at last nine depictions known through the 19th dynasty. Six of which can be seen in the Vally of kings.
Further all other depictions of Egyptians in the Ramesses III tomb are consistant to oneanother but different to these four figures. The only ones in a group of thousands over hundreds of years. Again an example of selective imagery to support an argument.
I have no doubt it was not done by accident, and hopfully one day we will know why, but I do know it was not the one instance that the Egyptians decided to show the world who they truely were after decieving them for milenia.
Does anyone know in more detail of Ramesses and his families origins.
Ozzy
It is not proof of their perception of race, thier phylosyphy of race nor their personal perception. In fact it is a rare depiction.
Ausar, can you email me I would like to ask for you comments on the low level of Yap++ in the Khoisan, and your thoughts of its origins and relationship between groups in Africa. I can only find two released papers on the Yap++ are you aware of any more recent?
Ozzy
[This message has been edited by Ozzy (edited 03 June 2004).]
[This message has been edited by Ozzy (edited 03 June 2004).]
As soon as you explain why the Sephardic/Ashkanazi Jews look like other whites from Eastern/Western Europe and even some Arabs.
Originally posted by Ausar
You ripped the allele article from me and Ozzy's discussion
Arrogant of you to think that you and Ozzy are the only authorities on this subject. Did you two have the same links I posted, if so it was purely coincidental, as I havent read a single post by either of you on the subject.
Some negriod remains were found in early Palestine under the natufians,but this does not mean the Caanite or ultimatley the Phonecians were black people
And it doesnt mean they were not either.
Phonecians themselves were a combination of Sea people and indigenous Caanites.
Is "Sea People" one of the new "phenotypes" of race categories.
Sounds like the same argument in calling the Egyptians "mediterranean"
*scratching my head*
The logic of some people 
I believe there was a new study done upon Nigerian people using Yap+.
Isn't your email addy,.com,I won't say the rest,wouldnt want you to get any "hate" mail LMAO.
I can't understand how anyone could hate you. While I personally dont agree with you on some things, I haven't seen anything you posted that would cause someone to hate you. And then again I haven't read every single thing you posted either.
[This message has been edited by ausar (edited 03 June 2004).]
[This message has been edited by ausar (edited 03 June 2004).]
You're just repeating the useless argument of S. Mohammed, since I never claimed Judaism was a race.
All I did was provide evidence of a Black Race that is genetically related to Moses/Aaron. And provided scientific evidence that proved the priests of this ethnic group had a higher percentage of the "Cohen" gene than the Sephardic and Ashkenazi priesthood combined.
The thing that gets me in your arguments is your tendency to keep Black Africans confined to the Borders of Africa,(south/central Africa more specifically) but wont do the same for other races, although you may not be concious of it.
It is not unreasonable to recognize the fact that the "Bene Israel" of India, can trace routes, from Israel to Spain finally inhabiting India. But the only logical way to explain the genetic heritage of the Lemba, is some "outsider", had to come all the way thru the continent of Africa, passing all these other Africans along the route, to interbreed with the Lemba, when the logical response would have been they are one the 10 lost tribes of Israel.
Reference:
"Several Lemba males were tested for the Cohanim modal haplotype in a recent study. Results indicate that ~50% of the male Lemba leaders contain the Cohen gene. This is a striking discovery since only ~10% of the general male Jewish population carry this Cohen haplotype."
http://www.creationists.org/patrickyoung/article10.html
quote:
All I did was provide evidence of a Black Race that is genetically related to Moses/Aaron. And provided scientific evidence that proved the priests of this ethnic group had a higher percentage of the "Cohen" gene than the Sephardic and Ashkenazi priesthood combined
Let me add a little fuel to the fire by saying that Aaron's grandson carried the priestly line and was named Phineas which in Egyptian means ''the Nubian''. Most likley I believe this might add some legitmacy to the argument. Let's also note that Akenaten had a Aten priest and trasuer named Pa-Neshsi as well. Quite a coinsedence,huh?
So perhaps the progenator of the priestly line was black but does that mean the people who migrated to the land of the Lemba were the same ''black'' people.
My very own observation is that the so-called Hebrews were not from Mesopotamia but from Egypt and were cast out into the desert. All the biblical chracters are really Egyptian in origin and that includes Yeshusa Ben yusef as well.
See the following:
Phineas
(1) The grandson of Aaron who violently defended the covenant; he was granted the "covenant of priesthood" by which the line of Aaron was given the privelege of the priestly office forever. See Numbers 25:10-13 and Chapter 4. (2) Another Phineas was the son of Eli, the high priest at Shiloh during the time of Samuel. See Hophni.
http://www.hope.edu/academic/religion/bandstra/RTOT/GLOSSARY/P.HTM
at is a single sound in Egypto-Coptic and Arabic,
and the words derive either from Arabic or Egypto-Coptic. A number of
names also are from Egyptian derivation, including Susan, from shesnu,
"lotus flower", the Jewish name Phineas, from Pa-nehsy "The Nubian",
and of course Moses, from msw, "born of". That name incidently is found
in the New Kingdom, Dynasty written simply msw, Mose, in Egyptian
documents. So, it is not necessary to postulate that Moses' name was
originally compounded with a divine name in from of it. Another name
Gardiner long ago noted is Humphrey, found as Onnofrio in Italian,
and Onnophrio in Greek, and of course in Egyptian, Wenn-nefer, a title
of Osiris. Then there is Isadora, from Isis-di-eres, and Isabella from
Isis-nfrt. There the bella is translated from nfrt "beautiful". So
again names beginning with Isa, are derived from names starting with Isis.
Most sincerely,
Frank J.Yurco
University of Chicago
--
Frank Joseph Yurco fjyurco@midway.uchicago.edu
Panehsy
18th Dynasty
Panehsy was the chief priest at Amarna who brought with him to the city a stele of Amenhetep III and Queen Tiy to set up in a domestic shrine. His house lay in the Main City well back from the Royal Road in Amarna and he was one of the favored few with a large tomb in the northern group. http://www.touregypt.net/who/panehsy.htm
quote:
The thing that gets me in your arguments is your tendency to keep Black Africans confined to the Borders of Africa,(south/central Africa more specifically) but wont do the same for other races, although you may not be concious of it.
Not true if you read some of my previous post I admitted that Southern Yemen has always had a high black population. However,you want to link just about everybody with a ''black'' phenotype despite their being descrete differences in cranial-facial and even genetics. Where exactly do we draw the line?
I just go by what I have read in various peer-reviwed journals and not by wishful thinking.
quote:
It is not unreasonable to recognize the fact that the "Bene Israel" of India, can trace routes, from Israel to Spain finally inhabiting India. But the only logical way to explain the genetic heritage of the Lemba, is some "outsider", had to come all the way thru the continent of Africa, passing all these other Africans along the route, to interbreed with the Lemba, when the logical response would have been they are one the 10 lost tribes of Israel.
Notice once again that the Bene Israel look no different from East Indian people. How would you explain nearly all the Jews look no different than the surrounding population other than most took local wives and that the migration was mostly males. Have you not heard of Babylonian Captivity and the Disapora?
The Lemba themselves say they are foreginers and not indigenous.
I also admit to the divergence and diversity of indigenous black Africans in penotype. You will never catch me aruging the proposed Hamitic Hypothesis that you so deperatley cling to.
quote:
Reference:
"Several Lemba males were tested for the Cohanim modal haplotype in a recent study. Results indicate that ~50% of the male Lemba leaders contain the Cohen gene. This is a striking discovery since only ~10% of the general male Jewish population carry this Cohen haplotype." http://www.creationists.org/patrickyoung/article10.html
Read these studies don't exactly say what you think they do.
1: Developing World Bioeth. 2003 Dec;3(2):128-32. Related Articles, Links
Yearning for the long lost home: the Lemba and Jewish narrative of genetic return.
Zoloth L.
Center for Genetic Medicine, Northwestern University, Feinberg School of Medicine, Suite 624, 750 North Lake Shore Drive, Chicago, IL 60611, USA. lzoloth@northwestern.edu
This commentary examines the relationship between genetics and Jewish identity. It focuses especially on the use of Y-chromosome testing to map the genealogies of the Lemba in southern Africa.
PMID: 14768644 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
: Developing World Bioeth. 2003 Dec;3(2):112-8. Related Articles, Links
Constructing black Jews: genetic tests and the Lemba--the 'black Jews' of South Africa.
Parfitt T.
Department of the Near and Middle East, School of Oriental and Africa Studies, Russell Square, London WC1H 0XG, UK. tp@soas.ac.uk
This commentary examines the use of Y-chromosome testing to reconstruct a genetic ancestry for the Lemba, a group in southern Africa that has long considered itself Jewish. The commentary looks especially at the reasons why this project drew such attention from the mainstream media.
PMID: 14768642 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
: Developing World Bioeth. 2003 Dec;3(2):109-11. Related Articles, Links
Case study: the Lemba.
Johnston J.
The Hastings Center, 21 Malcolm Gordon Road, Garrison, New York 10524, USA. johnstonj@thehastingscenter.org
The attempts of scholars and scientists to unravel the mystery of the ancestral origins of the Lemba are summarised, focusing on Tudor Parfitt's book, Journey to the Vanished City, and a study by an international group of genetic and social scientists. The impact of this research on identity questions is raised.
PMID: 14768641 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=14768641
1: Am J Hum Genet. 2000 Oct;67(4):926-35. Epub 2000 Aug 28. Related Articles, Links
[Click here to read]
Consistent long-range linkage disequilibrium generated by admixture in a Bantu-Semitic hybrid population.
Wilson JF, Goldstein DB.
Department of Biology, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Both the optimal marker density for genome scans in case-control association studies and the appropriate study design for the testing of candidate genes depend on the genomic pattern of linkage disequilibrium (LD). In this study, we provide the first conclusive demonstration that the diverse demographic histories of human populations have produced dramatic differences in genomewide patterns of LD. Using a panel of 66 markers spanning the X chromosome, we show that, in the Lemba, a Bantu-Semitic hybrid population, markers </= approximately 21 cM apart have a significantly greater tendency to show LD than do unlinked markers. In three populations with less evidence of admixture, however, excess LD disappears >2 cM. Moreover, analysis of Bantu and Ashkenazi populations as putative parental populations of the Lemba shows a significant relationship between allele-frequency differentials and the LD observed in the Lemba, which demonstrates that much of the excess LD is due to admixture. Our results suggest that demographic history has such a profound effect on LD that it will not be possible to predict patterns a priori but that it will be necessary to empirically evaluate the patterns in all populations of interest.
PMID: 10961910 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
1: Am J Hum Genet. 2000 Feb;66(2):674-86. Related Articles, Links
[Click here to read]
Y chromosomes traveling south: the cohen modal haplotype and the origins of the Lemba--the "Black Jews of Southern Africa".
Thomas MG, Parfitt T, Weiss DA, Skorecki K, Wilson JF, le Roux M, Bradman N, Goldstein DB.
The Center for Genetic Anthropology, Departments of Biology and Anthropology, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
The Lemba are a traditionally endogamous group speaking a variety of Bantu languages who live in a number of locations in southern Africa. They claim descent from Jews who came to Africa from "Sena." "Sena" is variously identified by them as Sanaa in Yemen, Judea, Egypt, or Ethiopia. A previous study using Y-chromosome markers suggested both a Bantu and a Semitic contribution to the Lemba gene pool, a suggestion that is not inconsistent with Lemba oral tradition. To provide a more detailed picture of the Lemba paternal genetic heritage, we analyzed 399 Y chromosomes for six microsatellites and six biallelic markers in six populations (Lemba, Bantu, Yemeni-Hadramaut, Yemeni-Sena, Sephardic Jews, and Ashkenazic Jews). The high resolution afforded by the markers shows that Lemba Y chromosomes are clearly divided into Semitic and Bantu clades. Interestingly, one of the Lemba clans carries, at a very high frequency, a particular Y-chromosome type termed the "Cohen modal haplotype," which is known to be characteristic of the paternally inherited Jewish priesthood and is thought, more generally, to be a potential signature haplotype of Judaic origin. The Bantu Y-chromosome samples are predominantly (>80%) YAP+ and include a modal haplotype at high frequency. Assuming a rapid expansion of the eastern Bantu, we used variation in microsatellite alleles in YAP+ sY81-G Bantu Y chromosomes to calculate a rough date, 3,000-5,000 years before the present, for the start of their expansion.
PMID: 10677325 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=10677325
1: Am J Hum Genet. 1996 Nov;59(5):1126-33. Related Articles, Links
The origins of the Lemba "Black Jews" of southern Africa: evidence from p12F2 and other Y-chromosome markers.
Spurdle AB, Jenkins T.
Department of Human Genetics, School of Pathology, The South African Institute for Medical Research and University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg.
The Lemba are a southern African Bantu-speaking population claiming Jewish ancestry. Allele frequencies at four different Y-specific polymorphic loci, as well as extended-haplotype frequencies that included data from several loci, were analyzed in an attempt to establish the genetic affinities and origins of the Lemba. The results suggest that > or = 50% of the Lemba Y chromosomes are Semitic in origin, approximately 40% are Negroid, and the ancestry of the remainder cannot be resolved. These Y-specific genetic findings are consistent with Lemba oral tradition, and analysis of the history of Jewish people and their association with Africa indicates that the historical facts are not incompatible with theories concerning the origin of the Lemba.
PMID: 8900243 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=8900243
quote:
Originally posted by homeylu:
Originally posted by Ausar
[b]Can you explain why the Lemba Jews look like Central and Southern African?As soon as you explain why the Sephardic/Ashkanazi Jews look like other whites from Eastern/Western Europe and even some Arabs.
Ashkenazis have a higher percentage of European ancestry, thats why they look "white", Sephardim look much closer to to proto-Midean people. If you read history correctly you would know that Israel received a mass influx of Jews of European ancestry after WW2.
quote:
Is "Sea People" one of the new "phenotypes" of race categories.Sounds like the same argument in calling the Egyptians "mediterranean"
Have you looked up who the Sea Peoples are? Very ignorant of you to make assumptions about things you do not know.
What would the other forum be about? I would post there if you tell me more about it.
But if you go to the beginning of this Forum
"Ancient Egypt and Egyptology" and click on the hyperlink to your name (where it says moderated by) anyone could get your email address.
just so you'll know where I got it from.
And by connecting the Lemba to Moses/Aaron is also southern Africans to Egypt.
With regard to the language aspect of the orginal post, I will quote from Sigmund Freud's Book "Moses and Montheism". In this books Freud successfully connects Moses to Akenaton/monotheism-an Egyptian original concept.
Using only his name "Moses" as we know it today, Freud show how the Hebrew meaning of his name "Mosche" simply means "drawer out", in that he drew the Hebrew People out of Egypt, and there is no evidence suggesting he was "drawn out" of water.
That the original name "Mose" is simply an Egyptian name meaning "child". Examples given were Amen-mose(Amon has given a child), Ptah-mose (Ptah has given a child), and that the name "Mose" is not uncommon on Egyptian text. And that the final "s" was given by the Greek tanslantion of the Old Testament.
Wallace (as usual) did an excellent job on his website posting the Egyptian text "The Book of the Great Awakening" in it shows how the commandments of the Hebrew Bible, also had Egyptian origins.
http://www.geocities.com/wally_mo/moses2.html
Excellent work Wallace!
And as for your argument about the Table of Nations being only about nations, here's another Biblical quote:
Gen:10:20 "These are the sons of Ham, after their families,after their tongues, in their countries, and in their nations"
And most intelligent people that read the bible know that Ham was not cursed, only Canaan. And no where in the Bible did it say all the "descendants" of Canaan should also be cursed.
So everyone recognizes the Hamitic myth for what it is,---a myth.
quote:
Originally posted by homeylu:
You are correct in asserting that this topic is related to Egypt. My purpose was showing that the people of Canaan were but colonies of former Egyptians,(that eventually mixed with sons of Shem) since Canaan was a son of Ham.
But you are wrong. The people of Canaan were not from colonies of Egyptians who mixed with Semites. If you read the Bible, Egyptians didn't come from Canaanites. Mizraim is the brother of Canaan, and Mizraim is Egypt. Thus Canaanites were not Semiticized Egyptians. Read this:
1 Now these are {the records of} the generations of Shem, Ham, and Japheth, the sons of Noah; and sons were born to them after the flood. 2 The sons of Japheth {were} Gomer and Magog and Madai and Javan and Tubal and Meshech and Tiras. 3 The sons of Gomer {were} Ashkenaz and Riphath and Togarmah. 4 The sons of Javan {were} Elishah and Tarshish, Kittim and Dodanim. 5 From these the coastlands of the nations were separated into their lands, every one according to his language, according to their families, into their nations.
6 The sons of Ham {were} Cush and Mizraim and Put and Canaan. 7 The sons of Cush {were} Seba and Havilah and Sabtah and Raamah and Sabteca; and the sons of Raamah {were} Sheba and Dedan. 8 Now Cush became the father of Nimrod; he became a mighty one on the earth. 9 He was a mighty hunter before the LORD; therefore it is said, "Like Nimrod a mighty hunter before the LORD." 10 The beginning of his kingdom was Babel and Erech and Accad and Calneh, in the land of Shinar. 11 From that land he went forth into Assyria, and built Nineveh and Rehoboth-Ir and Calah, 12 and Resen between Nineveh and Calah; that is the great city. 13 Mizraim became the father of Ludim R237 and Anamim and Lehabim and Naphtuhim 14 and Pathrusim and Casluhim (from which came the Philistines) and Caphtorim.
15 Canaan became the father of Sidon, his firstborn, and Heth 16 and the Jebusite and the Amorite and the Girgashite 17 and the Hivite and the Arkite and the Sinite 18 and the Arvadite and the Zemarite and the Hamathite; and afterward the families of the Canaanite were spread abroad. 19 The territory of the Canaanite extended from Sidon as you go toward Gerar, as far as Gaza; as you go toward Sodom and Gomorrah and Admah and Zeboiim, as far as Lasha. 20 These are the sons of Ham, according to their families, according to their languages, by their lands, by their nations.
Thus your theory is debunked. Look at Canaan's sons all of the names correspond to areas along the Eastern Mediterranean, not Africa. Sidon, Sodom, Gomorrah, and Gaza are along the Eastern Mediterranean. The Jebusites are also mentioned. They were inhabitants of the land the Israelites would eventually occupy, read the Bible. Another point to notice that I did not highlight was one of Gomer's son's, Ashkenaz. Ashkenaz is synonymous with the modern day Ashkenazi Jews, who are a Semitic speaking Middle Eastern people with RECENT European admixture. Ashkenazis are Semitic peoples, not Japethtites. Accad is also mentioned, but not under Shem. Accadians were Semitic speaking peoples. LÖook at nimrod, Cush's son. Look at the names of the places that his territory spread to, Assyria, and Nineveh, can you prove that assyrians were black or had a heavy amount of blacks therer or better yet, that they were Hamitic speakers? They were also a Semitic speaking people.
I told you the table Nations correspond to Nations, not races.
Once again you debunk yourself without even knowing it.
quote:
Originally posted by homeylu:
You are correct in asserting that this topic is related to Egypt. My purpose was showing that the people of Canaan were but colonies of former Egyptians,(that eventually mixed with sons of Shem) since Canaan was a son of Ham.
But you are wrong. The people of Canaan were not from colonies of Egyptians who mixed with Semites. If you read the Bible, Egyptians didn't come from Canaanites. Mizraim is the brother of Canaan, and Mizraim is Egypt. Thus Canaanites were not Semiticized Egyptians. Read this:
1 Now these are {the records of} the generations of Shem, Ham, and Japheth, the sons of Noah; and sons were born to them after the flood. 2 The sons of Japheth {were} Gomer and Magog and Madai and Javan and Tubal and Meshech and Tiras. 3 The sons of Gomer {were} Ashkenaz and Riphath and Togarmah. 4 The sons of Javan {were} Elishah and Tarshish, Kittim and Dodanim. 5 From these the coastlands of the nations were separated into their lands, every one according to his language, according to their families, into their nations.
6 The sons of Ham {were} Cush and Mizraim and Put and Canaan. 7 The sons of Cush {were} Seba and Havilah and Sabtah and Raamah and Sabteca; and the sons of Raamah {were} Sheba and Dedan. 8 Now Cush became the father of Nimrod; he became a mighty one on the earth. 9 He was a mighty hunter before the LORD; therefore it is said, "Like Nimrod a mighty hunter before the LORD." 10 The beginning of his kingdom was Babel and Erech and Accad and Calneh, in the land of Shinar. 11 From that land he went forth into Assyria, and built Nineveh and Rehoboth-Ir and Calah, 12 and Resen between Nineveh and Calah; that is the great city. 13 Mizraim became the father of Ludim R237 and Anamim and Lehabim and Naphtuhim 14 and Pathrusim and Casluhim (from which came the Philistines) and Caphtorim.
15 Canaan became the father of Sidon, his firstborn, and Heth 16 and the Jebusite and the Amorite and the Girgashite 17 and the Hivite and the Arkite and the Sinite 18 and the Arvadite and the Zemarite and the Hamathite; and afterward the families of the Canaanite were spread abroad. 19 The territory of the Canaanite extended from Sidon as you go toward Gerar, as far as Gaza; as you go toward Sodom and Gomorrah and Admah and Zeboiim, as far as Lasha. 20 These are the sons of Ham, according to their families, according to their languages, by their lands, by their nations.
Thus your theory is debunked. Look at Canaan's sons all of the names correspond to areas along the Eastern Mediterranean, not Africa. Sidon, Sodom, Gomorrah, and Gaza are along the Eastern Mediterranean. The Jebusites are also mentioned. They were inhabitants of the land the Israelites would eventually occupy, read the Bible. Another point to notice that I did not highlight was one of Gomer's son's, Ashkenaz. Ashkenaz is synonymous with the modern day Ashkenazi Jews, who are a Semitic speaking Middle Eastern people with RECENT European admixture. Ashkenazis are Semitic peoples, not Japethtites. Accad is also mentioned, but not under Shem. Accadians were Semitic speaking peoples. LÖook at nimrod, Cush's son. Look at the names of the places that his territory spread to, Assyria, and Nineveh, can you prove that assyrians were black or had a heavy amount of blacks therer or better yet, that they were Hamitic speakers? They were also a Semitic speaking people.
I told you the table Nations correspond to Nations, not races.
Once again you debunk yourself without even knowing it.
quote:
Originally posted by ausar:
What you might know about the Lemba is many claim to come form Yemeni Jews who migrated into inner Africa.
Thought Writes:
It would be interesting to compare the Lemba with Ethiopians in that Aksum ruled Yemen and there are connections between the prot-Swahili and Aksum
Ozzy
quote:
Originally posted by ausar:
Some negriod remains were found in early Palestine under the natufians,but this does not mean the Caanite or ultimatley the Phonecians were black people. Phonecians themselves were a combination of Sea people and indigenous Caanites.
Thought Writes:
Indigenous Canaanites were descendents of Semetic and Egyptian (Blacks) colonists during the early bronze age. The Hyksos merged and mixed with Egyptians during their stay in Egypt. It is of interest that the 14th Dynasty Hyksos king was named Nehsi.
quote:
Originally posted by homeylu:It is not unreasonable to recognize the fact that the "Bene Israel" of India, can trace routes, from Israel to Spain finally inhabiting India.
[/B]
Can you direct me to you sources for this claim please.
Ozzy
quote:
Originally posted by homeylu:
As soon as you explain why the Sephardic/Ashkanazi Jews look like other whites from Eastern/Western Europe and even some Arabs.
Touche!!!
quote:
Originally posted by homeylu:
Sounds like the same argument in calling the Egyptians "mediterranean"
Touche, touche!!!!
quote:
Originally posted by S.Mohammad:
I think all of these discussions we're having now are deviating from Egypt, if I create a forum to discuss these other issues would anyone be interested in posting in it?
Yep!!!
quote:
Originally posted by ausar:
Shepardic look no different from other Palestineans.
Thought Writes:
Do all Palestinians look the same? Are there Palestinians with "African" affinities?
quote:
Originally posted by ausar:
So perhaps the progenator of the priestly line was black but does that mean the people who migrated to the land of the Lemba were the same ''black'' people.
My very own observation is that the so-called Hebrews were not from Mesopotamia but from Egypt and were cast out into the desert.
Thought Writes:
The Lemba could be descendents of Yemeni Jews who were of Aksumite origin.
If the so-called Hebrews were cast out of Egypt, did they have ANY Egyptian ancestry? If so is it not possible that some would have "Negorid" phenotypes?
quote:
Originally posted by Thought2:
Thought Writes:It would be interesting to compare the Lemba with Ethiopians in that Aksum ruled Yemen and there are connections between the prot-Swahili and Aksum
The same genetic study on the Lemba said Ethiopian Jews are less mixed than Lemba. Ethiopian Jews(Beni Israel) are essentially continental African with little foreign admixture. Read here:
It is worth noting that the frequency of group VI chromosomes in the Ethiopian Jews (just one chromosome out of 22) is similar to that reported for the p12f2 chromosomes in the Oromo from Ethiopia (4%) and is considerably lower than the frequency reported for the Amhara of the same region (33%), for whom a strong Middle Eastern genetic component has been reported (Semino et al. 2002). These data, together with those reported elsewhere (Ritte et al. 1993a, 1993b; Hammer et al. 2000) suggest that the Ethiopian Jews acquired their religion without substantial genetic admixture from Middle Eastern peoples and that they can be considered an ethnic group with essentially a continental African genetic composition
Am. J. Hum. Genet., 70:1197-1214, 2002
A Back Migration from Asia to Sub-Saharan Africa Is Supported by High-Resolution Analysis of Human Y-Chromosome Haplotypes
See what I mean now Thought? The Oromo and Beni Israel are essentially African with no substantial admixture from Middle Eastern peoples. I wonder what homeylu is thinking about the Ethiopian Jews now since they lack the Y-Chromosone found in the Lemba and are Cushitic speakers. The Lemba could have mixed with the Aksumites(Amhara, Tigreans) who are still genetically African with substantial Middle Eastern mixture.
quote:
Originally posted by S.Mohammad:
Sephardim look much closer to to proto-Midean people
Thought Writes:
References please?
quote:
Originally posted by S.Mohammad:
Have you looked up who the Sea Peoples are? Very ignorant of you to make assumptions about things you do not know.
Thought Writes:
The real question is not their Hurrain/Hittite origin, but did they extract other lineages on the way OUT of Africa/Egypt.
quote:
Originally posted by S.Mohammad:
I think all of these discussions we're having now are deviating from Egypt, if I create a forum to discuss these other issues would anyone be interested in posting in it?
Thought Writes:
I have ALLREADY created a thread on the proto-Semetic speakers. See "NOMADISM" thread.
quote:
Originally posted by Thought2:
Touche!!!
This can easily be explained. The Middle Easterners who look the "whitest" are Syrians and Lebanese. Most but not all, look like Europeans. Palestinians don't all look the same but most are dark. The best way to explain this is that there is not clear cut-off of what is white or nonwhite. Israelis received a huge influx of post WWII refugees so you have to remember that some Jews will look European and claim Ashkhenazi or Sepheradim though in reality they are not.
Palestinians have only 15% sub-Saharan MTDNA and no sub-Saharan paternal DNA.
quote:
Originally posted by ausar:
Wally is getting his perception from Carleton S. Coon who called the murals the first authenic anthropological analysis. We of course know that Coon was wrong on many things including this observation. The murals were wrongly called the Murals of races by Karl Lepsisus when he found the tomb.
b)This social science-ethnography--is the earliest example that I am aware of.
c) I am also aware of the fact that on the other murals - the one with the Egyptian social rankins that consist of a)Egyptians-"Reddish brown" b)Other Africans (black) c)Semites (yellow) and d)Europeans (white)--
Seems like an ethnographic document to me.
quote:
Originally posted by homeylu:
You are correct in asserting that this topic is related to Egypt. My purpose was showing that the people of Canaan were but colonies of former Egyptians...
Thought Writes:
This seems to be the case based on current archaeology.
quote:
Originally posted by Thought2:
Thought Writes:References please?
The closest you will see to proto-Mderan people are those very dark southern Arabs of Oman and Yemen and Nabatean Bedouin of Jordan. They look very dark and disnticnt from both sub-Saharans and Europeans. Most anthropologists will not recognize a Proto-Midean people; they're often called "Orientalid", like the Usama bin Laden type people.
quote:
Originally posted by S.Mohammad:
The same genetic study on the Lemba said Ethiopian Jews are less mixed than Lemba.
See what I mean now Thought?
Thought Writes:
I do see what you mean, but how do you factor in the fact that Aksum was a kingdom of two-shores. Have there been genetic studies on the Aksumite remnants in Yemen. Ausar has posted elsewhere on Black Arab tribes in Yemen.
quote:
Originally posted by homeylu:
BTW Wally your website on the "Mural of Races" is quite impressive, you cant imagine how times I've posted that link whenever the question to how the Egyptians view themselves come up. I first saw it in "Civilization or Barbarism" by C.A. Diop.Did you know that if you type "Mural of Races/Egypt" in MSN Search, Yahoo Search, or Google Search, your site is in "first" standing.
Just thought you should know :-)
Yes, and thank you so much.
quote:
Originally posted by Thought2:
Thought Writes:This seems to be the case based on current archaeology.
No, you are wrong. The Phoenician Canaanites already had settlements along the eastern Mediterranean before Egytian conquest, so there is no evidence that Canaanites descended from Egyptian colonists.
quote:
Originally posted by S.Mohammad:
Palestinians have only 15% sub-Saharan MTDNA and no sub-Saharan paternal DNA.
Thought Writes:
What was the sample size? How many bedouin (the truly relevent group) were sampled?
was made possible by a Nuffield Foundation, Social Science Award,
administered by the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine.
I wish to thank my colleagues working on European Union Avicenne
Initiative Projects for their advice and support, in particular Salah
Al Zaroo and Gillian Hundt. My husband Abudi Kibwana Sizi assisted
during two visits to the Palestine. In the Nagab and Gaza many people
helped to put me in touch with colleagues, neighbours and friends of
African descent. They include Ibrahim Abu Jaffar, Adnan El Sanne,
Fatme Kassim, and Shahada Ebbweini.
Last but not least, I wish to thank all the people of African descent
who talked with me in Jeruslaem, Gaza and the Nagab. They are not
named so that their privacy can be maintained.
INTRODUCTION
This report summarises the findings of a project has addressed a
neglected and sensitive area of research about the history of
Palestine. The history of the region has been turbulent and has
involved the settlement of peoples from Asia, Africa and Europe.
Since the establishment of Israel in 1948, Palestinians have had
little time or inclination to study their origins prior to settlement
in Palestine. Indeed, such studies could be counter-productive as
they might pander to Israeli views that Palestinians are migrants to
the region. In recent years, much international attention has focused
on the Ethiopian Jews and their position within Israeli society.
However, although peoples of African origin other than the Ethiopian
Jews have been in Palestine for far longer, there are virtually no
accounts of how they arrived in the region or their position and role
within Middle Eastern society.
Interviews with black (sumr) Palestinians were conducted in Gaza, the
Nagab and Jerusalem between September 1995 and January 1998. Contact,
through introductions, was sought and people were interviewed
informally in their homes in either English or Arabic. At the start
of the project the 'peace process' under the Oslo Accords was in its
early stages and many Palestinians were optimistic. However, as the
political situation worsened it became more difficult to talk to
people about the highly sensitive and political issues of ethnic
origin, the legacy of slavery and their current status as Palestinian
or Israeli citizens.
This study was made possible by the kind co-operation of Palestinians
living in Jerusalem, Gaza and the Nagab. People of African descent
told me what they knew of their parents and grandparents and their
lives in Palestine. Some older people I spoke to Jerusalem had been
born in Africa, while others in the Nagab and Gaza told me what they
knew of how their ancestors came to Palestine. For many other people
the link with Africa had been lost and all but forgotten. In London I
searched libraries for historical accounts of the links between
Africa and Palestine. I did not find much. This shortage of
historical documentation makes the accounts of the people I spoke to
all the more important.
EARLY CONTACT BETWEEN AFRICA AND ARABIA
Palestine lies at the crossroads of Africa, Asia and Europe. For
thousands of years spices have passed along trade routes through
Palestine. Ambergris and frankincense were brought from Somalia and
Ethiopia. As well as trade, war, colonisation and pilgrimage all
ensured that the peoples and cultures of north-eastern Africa and
Arabia mingled.
In the seventh century there were Africans living in Arabia, and
Mohammed's trusted companion, Bilal was an Ethiopian freed slave.
Many, but not all, the Africans in Arabia were slaves. It is often
forgotten that there were slaves from many parts of the world in the
Middle East. For example Circassian people from the Asia Minor to the
north were prized as slaves. Black male slaves were often soldiers or
government administrators and some achieved high rank. Black women
worked as household slaves or were the concubines of wealthy high
status men. The children born to concubines were not slaves, and some
with fathers of high rank became leaders.
With the spread of Islam and the conversion of Africans in Africa,
more and more black people participated in the Haj. However there
were also migrations from Araba to Africa and later back to Arabia to
perform the Haj. The Palestinian historian Arif El-Arif reports that
some people trace the historical roots of contemporary Africans in
Jerusalem back to Arabia:
'The origins of the African community go back to pure Arabic roots.
The majority of the members are derived from the Arab Muslim tribe
called Al Salamat. This tribe was living in Jeddah, Hijaz (now in
Saudi Arabia), and then migrated to Chad and Sudan and other African
countries. However, members of the tribe kept up contact with Hijaz,
especially Mecca and Medina for the Haj, and after the pilgrimage
they went to Jerusalem to continue their worship in al Aqsa mosque,
the place of the nocturnal journey of the prophet Mohammed to the
Seven Heavens. So some of these visitors loved Jerusalem and stayed
in it.' (Arif el-Arif, address given in Jerusalem in 1971)
GUARDIANS OAFRICANS ASF THE HOLY PLACES
European writers and travellers tell a different story and report
that slaves of African origin guarded the Haram As-Sharif in
Jerusalem. According to these accounts Africans were deployed by
Mamluke and then Ottoman rulers to guard the holy places of Islam.
Similar guards also existed in Mecca and Medina. Although they were
slaves, they were respected, trusted and sometimes quite powerful.
The following information on the history of African Palestinians in
Jerusalem is taken from their own account entitled 'The Palestinian
Africans in Jerusalem: Between their Miserable Reality and Hopes for
the Future'.
The Africans living in Jerusalem are proud of their historic role as
guardians of the Islamic holy places since the time of the Mamluk in
the thirteenth century. They occupy the Mamluk buildings on either
side of Al'a Ad-Deen Street leading to Al Aqsa mosque. On one side
are the Al'a Ad-Deen Busari buildings, completed in 1267 and named
after the Mamluke founder of the quarter. On the other side are the
Al Mansouri buildings which were completed in 1282. Originally the
two Ribat were hostels for pilgrims worshipping at Al Asqa Mosque.
During the Ottoman period the Ribats were occupied by Africans who
worked as guards of the mosque and waqf properties. Because of their
honesty these Africans held keys to the gates of the mosque and were
responsible for preventing non-Muslims from entering the mosque area.
Towards the end of the Ottoman era the Ribats were converted into
prisons: Ribat Ad-Deen bacame Habs Ad -Dam, while Ribat Mansouri
became Habs Ar-Ribat. This situation continued until 1914.
After the British took over Palestine in 1918 the prisons were closed
and responsibility for the buildings was returned to the waqf
authorities who used the buildings for temporary housing for the
poor, including Africans. When Imam Hussein, Al Mufti, who led the
struggle against the British and Jews until 1948, took charge of the
waqf in Jerusalem he rented the two Ribats to the Africans at a
nominal rate. Some of the Africans continued their traditions and
worked as bodyguards to the Mufti himself. The descendants of the
Africans still live in the two Ribat, today.
In 1971 the care of the tomb of the founder of the quarter, Al'a Ad-
Deen Al Busari, restored by the African community, was entrusted to
them in a ceremony led by the ex-mayor of Jerusalem and historian,
Arif el-Arif. In his speech he stated that:
'Members of the African community were devoted guards of Al Aqsa
mosque. The African community is steadfast in Jerusalem and they did
not leave even in crisis situations.'
CONTEMPORAY AFRICANS IN JERUSALEM
During interviews with members of the African community in Jerusalem
I learnt of the recent history of Palestinians of African origin.
Their written account, mentioned above, 'The African Palestinians in
Jerusalem', provided more details.
Most contemporary members of the African community came to Jerusalem
as pilgrims and workers under the British Mandate of Palestine (1917-
1948). They came mostly from Senegal, Chad, Nigeria and Sudan. They
regard themselves as Palestinian and played an active role in the
Intifada. Some of the Africans arrived as part of the Egyptian
led 'Salvation Army' which aimed to liberate the Palestinian areas
held by Jews in 1948. After the defeat of that army and its retreat
to Egypt many Africans returned to their original countries, while
others preferred to stay in Palestine.
El Haj Jeddeh, who was born in Chad but traces his family origins to
Jeddah in the Hijaz, is the Mukhtar of the African community and some
other Arabs living in the vicinity. He has served under the British,
the Jordanians and now the Israelis. In addition, he also takes care
of the tomb of Al'a Ad-Deen Busari and acts as a spiritual leader to
his community.
Men who came from Africa to Jerusalem during this century married
local women, many of whom were of African descent themselves. Ties
with Jericho, where many black Palestinians live, are particularly
strong. Others married Palestinian women who have no ties with Africa.
In their account of their history 'The Palestinian Africans in
Jerusalem' they explain how when Israel occupied the West Bank many
Africans were forced to become refugees in surrounding countries'
leading to a 25% reduction of the numbers of African Palestinians
living in Jerusalem. African Palestinians were particularly active
during the Intifada and many confrontations with Israeli troops took
place. One day the Israelis arrested all males aged between 10 and 45
years and insulted them telling them 'you are Africans, you have
nothing to do with Palestine'.
MEMORIES OF SLAVERY IN BEDOUIN SOCIETY
Although Africans have been in Palestine for centuries, most people
know little about this migration. For centuries, under the Ottoman
Empire and before, slaves were brought from Africa. Some older people
today remember stories told by their parents or grandparents of how
they came to be in Palestine. Therefore it is possible to discover
something of the later history of slavery. Several people mentioned
that they had heard that there was a big slave market in Egypt and
one 'white' Bedouin told me that his grandfather had been a slave
trader who travelled regularly to Egypt. Most people with any idea of
where their ancestors came from mention Sudan or Ethiopia. Sometimes
they know the name of the town. Indeed, it is probable that many
Africans came from these countries as they are near to Palestine.
However, one woman I spoke to pointed out that 'we just say Sudan
because we do not know and because the name means 'place of black
people. It could just as easily have been Congo!' According to
history books, slave traders and owners used to make a distinction
between Ethiopians (Habash) and other Africans such as the Zanj from
the East African Coast. In their racist way of thinking, they
considered the Ethiopians to be superior to the other Africans.
In Gaza I spoke to people of Bedouin origin who had been living in
the Nagab prior to 1948. In the Nagab I spoke with Bedouin of African
descent who had stayed in the area after 1948. In Gaza, I also
encountered black people of the Al Rubayn ashira who were settled
Bedouin living around the area of Jaffa, before being driven from
their villages as refugees in 1948. They said that they were
unconnected to the Nagab Bedouin. Their name derived from Nabi
Rubooyn who thousands of years ago used a well near their home area.
These people of Bedouin origin currently resident in Gaza and the
Nagab recall being told by their elders how children were kidnapped
or bought in slave markets and brought, sometimes carried in the
camel saddle-bags, to live with important Bedouin families. This
occurred in the late nineteenth century and early twentieth century.
The children were often the only Africans living with the family.
They looked after animals, grew wheat and barley and performed
household tasks. People told me that the Bedouin did not use the
girls as concubines, although in the West Bank they did 'marry'
female slaves. Only big wealthy families owned and traded in slaves.
Black people were scattered throughout Palestine living with white
families who 'owned' them. However, some families needed slaves to
help in self- defence when they were weak in number. It is possible
that within the twentieth century adults were also brought from
Africa and sold as slaves. One elderly man reported that in his youth
he had come across African men who were strong, bore tribal scars on
their faces and spoke little Arabic.
One 'white' Bedouin man told me that slaves used to be branded like
animals, but that there were no papers concerning ownership or
origins. In the family unit, there were sometimes also other slaves
who were white, or low status dependants, such as hamran. But one man
told me that a white slave would never have answered to a black slave.
Some African children were educated along with the other, free,
children of the family. Once the children grew up their masters
arranged for them to be married. They never married white people,
even if they were also slaves. As there were not many Africans
around, marriage often meant that girls moved away from the master's
family. People also reported that, upon becoming adults, slaves could
choose to take their chances with freedom or to remain attached to a
family who would arrange marriage. This probably only occurred
towards the end of the institution of slavery, during the British
period, when it had already begun to fade away.
In the Nagab the Bedouin had a three tier social and political
system. Sheikhs were drawn from the Samran, the original Bedouin.
Attached to them as clients were the Hamran, families who were
originally felaheen, but required protection and/or land from Samran
families. The Abed, the slaves, were on the bottom tier and did not
have the same rights or status as free people.
Slaves did not count in blood feuds between families. Several people
told me that if a black man killed a white man, the death of that
black man would not count. Payment (sulha) could be made in money or
by the giving of a slave of a certain height. If a black man kills a
white, the family of the deceased may kill the 'owners' of the black
man. Recently, in Rahat in the Nagab, a black boy eloped with a white
girl. They were discovered and the girl killed by her family.
However, the boy survived and subsequently married a black girl.
Under the old system slaves could not sit in the shig at the same
level as their masters. In some places this is still observed, with
the role of the black people being to serve tea and coffee to the
white people. One man told me that there were some shig that he would
not go to because they would ask him who he 'belonged to'. But in
other shig this no longer happens and black and whites sit happily
together. In one shig in Gaza, the black sheikh presides, while white
people take responsibility for serving tea and coffee.
CHANGES BEFORE AND AFTER 1948
Slavery appears to have been an active institution under Ottoman
rule. The British Mandate of Palestine was established in 1917.
Slaves were not given release papers and there appears that the
British made little formal effort to end the system of slavery in
Palestine. Rather, as economic and social conditions changed, the
institution faded away in some areas, but still operated other areas
until the 1950s.
The groups of black people living in the Nagab and as refugees in
Gaza today are the descendants of slaves of the Bedouin. As the
peoples of Gaza and the Nagab have only been separated by frequently
closed borders since 1948 (when Israel was established and the
majority of the Nagab Bedouin became refugees in Gaza and Jordan),
the various communities retain kin ties.
Prior to 1948 a political and social system of tribal affiliation
operated in the Nagab. There were four gabail: the Gdarat, the
Azazme, the Turabeen and the Dlam. Of these, the Tarabeen probably
had the most black slaves. Each Gabila was sub-divided in ashira or
hamula, and these were, in turn, divided into extended families
('ayla). Within each 'ayla were individual families (asira).
Jama'an Abu Jurmi, of the Tarabeen, was a powerful black Sheikh to
whom all black people could turn. However, during the war of 1948 the
hamula of Abu Jurmi was dispersed and is now in Sinai, or possibly
Jordan or Gaza.
Many black people in the Nagab are now affiliated to the Abu Bilal.
There is some confusion amongst many Bedouin as to the origins of the
Abu Bilal: some people say that the Israelis invented the Abu Bilal
to represent all black Bedouin, and named the hamula after Bilal, the
Ethiopian companion of the Prophet Mohammed, because he was black.
However, the son of the current Sheikh of the Abu Bilal tells a
different story. Five or six generations ago a child, Bilal, was
stolen from Africa and taken to Sinai. The boy became a slave of the
family who purchased him, and although his own family found him and
asked him to come home, he was used to his new life and refused. He
married and had descendants, and up to now, the Abu Bilal have land
in Sinai. However, the descendants moved to the Nagab.
Bilal's grandson, Sulemain was very clever and a natural leader.
During and after the war of 1948 he was appointed as a Sheikh by the
Israelis and negotiated with the Israeli Military Authority and many
poor people, both black and white, asked him to speak on their
behalf. This was a time when all Bedouin had to be affiliated with a
Sheikh in order to get rations and travel permits. After 1950
Sheikhs, such as Sulemian, were formally appointed by the Israelis.
In 1952, when a census was carried out, many black people registered
as Abu Bilal, despite the fact that they had been attached to other
families.
For example, one elderly man told me how he took the opportunity of
registering as a member of Abu Bilal as a means of disassociating
himself from the descendants of his grandfather's masters who had
anyway lost their land. He explained: 'Sulemain Abu Bilal was a very
clever and strong man, although he could not read and write. Many
went to join him. Before 1948 Abu Bilal was a family. Bilal was a
slave living in Sinai.' The elderly man told me that he and his
family had lived a nomadic existence in the West Bank with the Abu
Bilal for about 10 years. That way of life ended with the war of 1967.
In some areas slavery as a way of life appears to have continued into
the 1950s. One black (sumr) man who came to Palestine as a migrant
worker from Egypt and was caught up in the war of 1948 recalls life
for black people attached to the Al Huzail. He had been working in
the orchards near Rishon with black people of the Abu Barakat. When
war broke out they fled back to their home area of the Al Huzail
where Rahat has now been constructed. When the Egyptian man arrived
there he found black people growing wheat for Al Huzail. They were
given food and, if they requested it for a special purpose, money.
Slaves and masters lived separately in black tents. There was no
intermarriage and no concubinage. The Egyptian man slept in the
Sheikh's shig and worked as a shepherd, but received no wages. The
Sheikh arranged his marriage to a white girl from Gaza. However,
after 1952 under the Israelis, when the census was taken, slavery as
an institution faded away.
After 1948 the most of the Nagab Bedouin lost their land and those
who had not left the area to become refugees in Gaza and Jordan, were
confined to a small military zone around Beersheba. Many Bedouin,
including black families appear to have moved around working in the
orchards to the north around Rishon, Rehovot and 'Atir or labouring
or herding animals in the West Bank. One family, now resident in
Rahat told me that they had moved nine times between 1956 and 1958.
After the 1967 war it became much harder to move around.
In the late 1960s the Israelis started developing planned settlements
to house the Nagab Bedouin. Currently, about half the Nagab Bedouin
live in these towns, while the other half have resisted moving and
remain in shanty settlements or in emcampments. Many black families
moved into the planned towns, the biggest of which is Rahat. Of about
30,000 people who live in Rahat, about a third are black (sumr) and
are concentrated in three areas of the town. Many, but not all, of
these families are registered as Abu Bilal.
MARRIAGE
Everybody I spoke to stressed that they had been told that in the
past marriage between black and white slaves was not permitted. In
addition, there seemed to be no evidence that slave owners took black
women as concubines. Rather black slaves were married to other black
slaves belonging to other families. Nevertheless, not all blacks were
slaves and most people of African origin living in Palestine have
some white ancestry. Family histories reveal intermarriage for
several generations, at least, between people of African origin and
other Palestinians.
In the twentieth century, particularly after 1948, there were
changes. Black men of slave descent married white women from fellahen
backgrounds from the West Bank, Gaza or Galilee, but never Bedouin
women. Rarely a white Bedouin man might marry a black Bedouin woman.
Hence, most people who are considered black are of mixed descent. The
male line is all-important in reckoning descent. I met one man of
black African appearance in Gaza. His family had come from the Nagab
after 1948. However, he claimed that technically he was white,
because his father's father had been white. Conversely, I met a man
of white appearance in Rahat, who was black because his father was
black, although his mother was white.
Black Bedouin also continued to marry other black Bedouin, usually
within the ashira, thereby conforming to the cultural preference in
Arab society to marry relatives. One man told me that cousin marriage
is becoming more common among black Bedouin. However, after 1956 it
became relatively easy for black Nagab Bedouin men to arrange
marriages with white fellahen women. One result was that left some
women without husbands. Therefore black Bedouin have recently started
marrying between ashira, for example between Abu Rqaiq and Abu Bilal.
Although the African Palestinians of Jeruslaem are a separate
community from the black Bedouin, some intermarriage occurs. For
example, one of the wives of a man of I met in Jerusalem was from a
family of Nagab Bedouin originally from Beersheba, but now living in
a refugee camp in Bethlehem.
However, many of the Jerusalem community have intermarried with
families from Jericho, some of whom are clearly of African origin,
although few people seem to know when or how Africans came to
Jericho. Several people told me that Jericho suited black people
because the weather was hot!
THE STATUS AND IDENTITY OF PALESTINIANS OF AFRICAN DESCENT
As the Bedouin of African descent have been geographically dispersed
and caught up as individuals and families in the enormous political
changes affecting the region, there has been little opportunity to
develop a sense of identity as Africans. Some are Israeli or
Jordanian citizens while others are registered as Palestinian
refugees and hold UNRWA papers. Others were dispersed to Lebanon and
Tunisia and have achieved military rank in the PLO. Many families are
dispersed and may not be able to meet often separated as they are by
frequently closed borders.
Living within such a complex political and daily reality, where
ethnic identity and citizenship are so important it is hardly
surprising that most black people do not have a developed sense of
being of African descent. Those still living in the Nagab spoke of a
changing sense of identity from being Bedouin to being Arab and /or
Palestinian. Although they were also Israeli citizens, many said that
there was little room for them within the Jewish state.
Many Palestinians of African descent are poor and disadvantaged, even
compared with other Palestinians. However, some black people (Sumr)
have achieved leadership roles. The roles of Al Hajj Jeddeh in
Jeruslaem and the Sheikh of the Abu Bilal have already been
discussed. In Gaza I also encountered, several people of African/
Nagab Bedouin or Al Rubayn descent who were prominent local leaders.
For example, one elderly Bedouin Sheikh hears cases and settles
disputes for both black and white people from his shig in Zuwaida.
His wife hears cases concerning women. Until closures made movement
difficult, the Sheikh returned to Tel Sabaa in the Nagab to hear
cases. He said that his family had played an important role in
dispute settlement since the days of the British. His work is
recognised by the Palestinian Authority and since 1995 he has been
registered under the Bedouin Association. Another black local leader,
I was told about but did not meet, is the Mukhtar who lives in the
Yaramouk area of Gaza who settles disputes within the Al Rubayn
community. In addition, many black Palestinians of Bedouin origin, in
Gaza and in Jordan, continue the military tradition of people of
African descent serving in the armed forces and police.
Over and beyond citizenship and rights, many black people associated
with the Bedouin talked about the strong affinity and sense of common
roots they felt with black people they encountered or saw on
television. Indeed, in the Nagab and Gaza it is common for all black
men to refer to each other as khali, or my mother's brother. One
woman explained that the term khal indicated respect and affection.
If somebody was referred as 'am (father's brother) it was a sign that
the speaker wanted something because there were obligations between
these categories of kin that did not exist between maternal uncle and
nephew. The term is used to address all black people and is
recognition of shared ancestry and common roots. People told me that
the term is used in relation to the Black Hebrews, who migrated from
the USA to live in Dimona as a Jewish group. However, 'khali' would
not be used to address Ethiopian Jews, who, although clearly African,
were more closely associated with the state of Israel.
Black people in the Nagab, Gaza and Jerusalem refer to themselves as
the sumr. This is stark contrast to many other Palestinians who
persist in referring to all black people as abed, a term that is
synonmous with 'slaves'. In addition, some older black people still
use the term 'abed' as a means of self referral, while younger people
avoid the term. Indeed, many younger people know little or nothing of
their history. One young woman upon hearing from her grandmother
tales of slavery was shocked and asked for reassurance that such
things only happened centuries ago.
Although some white Palestinians claim that 'abed' is not an abusive
name and that any connotations with slavery have been lost, others
are embarrassed to even hear the word mentioned. Clearly the issue of
the origins, identity and terminology used to describe people of
African origin is a highly sensitive one. When I spoke to some white
Palestinians they denied that black people were ever slaves in the
region, and said that rather they had been soldiers of the Ottoman
Empire. When I pointed out that this was not the case, one man almost
whispered to me 'we never talk about it'. Yet, white Palestinians by
persisting in calling people of African origin 'abed, perpetuate
discrimination.
The African Palestinians living in Jerusalem told me that they would
fight with anybody who referred to them as 'abed'. They added that
this does not often happen as their place within Palestinian society
and their role in the struggle is generally acknowledged by the
citizens of Jerusalem. They also clearly identify themselves as
African and Palestinian. However, they have different problems in
establishing their identity, particularly when applying for travel
documents. Unlike other Palestinians in the West Bank, the Jordanian
government does not recognise the African Palestinians as Jordanian
citizens. They cannot obtain Palestinian passports because they live
in Jerusalem which is excluded from the Oslo Agreement. As a result,
the majority of Africans living in Jerusalem have no passports, and
the only option for overseas travel is to obtain Israeli documents.
The majority refuse this option.
DISSEMINATION OF FINDINGS
It is hoped that this document will be of interest to individuals and
community groups in the Nagab, Gaza and Jerusalem that it will
engender a strengthened sense of identity and community so that they
will be encouraged to renew and strengthen contacts between
themselves.
If anybody wishes to correct or add to any of the contents of this
document please write to:
Dr Susan Beckerleg
Health Promotion Research Unit
London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine
Keppel Street
E mail : s.beckerleg@lshtm.ac.uk http://members.tripod.com/~yajaffar/african.html
Ala al-Din Street
Running East off al-Wad by an Ottoman fountain, Ala al-Din Street (also known as Bab al-Naazir Street, Inspector?s Gate Street, Bab al-Habs Street or Prison Gate Street) leads to the Bab al-Naazir (Inspector?s Gate) entrance of al-Haram.
The street has been dubbed ?the African Quarter? and is home to a close-knit black community of ?Afro-Palestinians? (a term used by members of the community themselves) who are descended from African Muslims who came to Jerusalem on pilgrimage when it was under British and Jordanian rule. Many of them live in the building on the right, Ribat al-Mansuri, whose two finely decorated windows belong to a large and recently restored main hall.
The monumental entrance arch of distinctive red and cream stone opens into a large and impressive vaulted porch - the inscription states that it was built in 1282 by Sultan al-Mansur. Opposite, Ribat Ala al-Din al-Basir is one of the earliest Mamluk buildings in Jerusalem. Founded in 1267 as a pilgrims? hospice, it has an arched gateway with stone benches (mastabas) on either side.
The cells around the inner courtyard were put to less religious use when the ribats were used as prisons by the Turks (al-Mansuri for those condemned to a sentence, al-Basir for those condemned to death) - a function they served until 1914, giving the street one of its alternative names, Bab al-Habs Street (Prison Gate Street). On the right of the courtyard is al-Basir?s burial chamber.
The building to the left of Bab al-Naazir itself, its columned entrance surmounted with ornate blue and green tiles, was constructed under British rule and houses the administrative centre of the Supreme Muslim Council, which looks after the affairs of the Islamic community in the West Bank and Gaza and controls access to the vaults under Temple Mount (such as Solomon?s Stables).
Note: None of the entrances to Temple Mount (al-Haram al-Sharif) from streets on the east side of al-Wad Road (Ala al-Din Street, Tariq Bab al-Hadid, and Souq al-Qattanin) can be used by non-Muslims, who must enter from Bab al-Magharba by the Western Wall.
http://www.vvtel.com/vvtravels/israel-is/007_guides/02_cities/jerusalem/travel-ND-M-din.html
quote:
Originally posted by S.Mohammad:
No, you are wrong. The Phoenician Canaanites already had settlements along the eastern Mediterranean before Egytian conquest, so there is no evidence that Canaanites descended from Egyptian colonists.
http://www.asor.org/AM/fridayabs03.html
Eli Yannai, Israel Antiquities Authority
The Excavations at Tel Lod and their Contribution to Understanding Egyptian Presence in the Land of Israel at the End of Early Bronze IB
Tel Lod is located in the middle of the coastal plain ca. 8 kilometers east of Tel Jaffa. Excavations revealed a large settlement dating to Early Bronze I-III. Finds included hundreds of imported Egyptian vessels, as well as imitations made in Lod and the south of the country. Six sherds from imported vessels had incised serakhs of Narmer, while another bore the serakh of Ka. These discoveries indicate that during the reign of Narmer (parallel to Naqada III B-C in Egypt) the community at Lod displayed Egyptian cultural characteristics and may have included a colony of Egyptian immigrants. The finds also indicate that Egyptian presence, well known from the south of the country, extended northwards to the Yarkon Basin. Although no Egyptian settlements have been found to date north of the Yarkon Basin, several tombs at excavated sites have revealed sporadic Egyptian finds. Thus, the colony at Lod was probably not part of a network of Egyptian settlements along the "Via Maris," but as testified to by the discovery of an Egyptian jar off 'Atlit and the establishment of several settlements along the coast, it was probably part of an Egyptian command complex whose purpose was to provide support for Egyptian maritime trade to the Syrian-Lebanese coast, especially Byblos. Lod may have also been an agricultural and commercial support for the (Egyptian?) port at Jaffa, while Egyptian settlements in the south of the country provided agricultural and commercial support to the (Egyptian?) ports at Gaza, Ashkelon, etc.
quote:
Originally posted by Thought2:
Thought Writes:I do see what you mean, but how do you factor in the fact that Aksum was a kingdom of two-shores. Have there been genetic studies on the Aksumite remnants in Yemen. Ausar has posted elsewhere on Black Arab tribes in Yemen.
There is proof of black ancestry in Yemen, but not among Yemeni Jews. The black ancestry is normally attributed to the Arab slave trade and to me this theory is not entirely true, for people do forget that Ethiopia actually conquered and rules southern Arabia. Al-Jahiz and the Peripulus to mention people in Arabia who seemed to be alligned with east Africans. Read this:
Ammianus Marcellinus: The Roman History, Book XIV.iv.1-7. , c. 380 CE
Book XIV.4: At this time also the Saracens, a race whom it is never desirable to have either for friends or enemies, ranging up and down the country, if ever they found anything, plundered it in a moment, like rapacious hawks who, if from on high they behold any prey, carry it off with a rapid swoop, or, if they fail in their attempt, do not tarry. And although, in recounting the career of the Prince Marcus, and once or twice subsequently, I remember having discussed the manners of this people, nevertheless I will now briefly enumerate a few more particulars concerning them.
Among these tribes, whose primary origin is derived from the cataracts of the Nile and the borders of the Blemmyae, all the men are warriors of equal rank; half naked, clad in colored cloaks down to the waist, overrunning different countries, with the aid of swift and active horses and speedy camels, alike in times of peace and war. Nor does any member of their tribe ever take plow in hand or cultivate a tree, or seek food by the tillage of the land; but they are perpetually wandering over various and extensive districts, having no home, no fixed abode or laws; nor can they endure to remain long in the same climate, no one district or country pleasing them for a continuance.
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/ancient/arabia1.html
And look at this quote:
Here is a description of the Mahra:
The language is derived from the language of the Sabaeans, Minaeans and Himyarites. The
Mahra with other Southern Arabian peoples seem aligned to the Hamitic race of north-east Africa.
The Mahra are believed to be descended from the Habasha, who colonised Ethiopia in the first millennium BC (WT p. 198). Many Bait Kathir understand the Mahri language. The Qarra and Mahra have almost beardless faces, fuzzy hair and dark pigmentation (WP171). This contrasts to the northern Arabs who are Semitic Caucasian.
http://www.globalconnections.co.uk/pdfs/MAHRAArabs.pdf
In the case of the Mahra, I believe them not to be descendants of Africans but the original peoples of southern Arabia. Their language was spoken BEFORE Arabic was spoken and they still speak it today, those who have not been Arabized. The Mahra are one of those dark proto-Midean people I was talking about earlier.
quote:
Originally posted by S.Mohammad:
There is proof of black ancestry in Yemen, but not among Yemeni Jews.
Thought Writes:
As far as I am aware the Aksumites married into the Jewish families of Yemen.
quote:
Originally posted by Thought2:
Thought Writes:What was the sample size? How many bedouin (the truly relevent group) were sampled?
I don't know, but I will post the studies. I don't think they tested many bedouin, buit that would be good, since most bedouin do not mix.
quote:
Originally posted by Thought2:
Thought Writes:As far as I am aware the Aksumites married into the Jewish families of Yemen.
That may be true, but a DNA study found no sub-Saharan ancestry in those sampled. I don't know how large the sample size was.
quote:
Originally posted by Thought2:
http://www.asor.org/AM/fridayabs03.htmlEli Yannai, Israel Antiquities Authority
The Excavations at Tel Lod and their Contribution to Understanding Egyptian Presence in the Land of Israel at the End of Early Bronze IB
Tel Lod is located in the middle of the coastal plain ca. 8 kilometers east of Tel Jaffa. Excavations revealed a large settlement <A TITLE="Click for more information about dating" STYLE="text-decoration: none; border-bottom: medium solid green;" HREF="http://search.targetwords.com/u.search?x=5977|1| || |dating|AA1VDw">dating</A> to Early Bronze I-III. Finds included hundreds of imported Egyptian vessels, as well as imitations made in Lod and the south of the country. Six sherds from imported vessels had incised serakhs of Narmer, while another bore the serakh of Ka. These discoveries indicate that during the reign of Narmer (parallel to Naqada III B-C in Egypt) the community at Lod displayed Egyptian cultural characteristics and may have included a colony of Egyptian immigrants. The finds also indicate that Egyptian presence, well known from the south of the country, extended northwards to the Yarkon Basin. Although no Egyptian settlements have been found to date north of the Yarkon Basin, several tombs at excavated sites have revealed sporadic Egyptian finds. Thus, the colony at Lod was probably not part of a network of Egyptian settlements along the "Via Maris," but as testified to by the discovery of an Egyptian jar off 'Atlit and the establishment of several settlements along the coast, it was probably part of an Egyptian command complex whose purpose was to provide support for Egyptian maritime trade to the Syrian-Lebanese coast, especially Byblos. Lod may have also been an agricultural and commercial support for the (Egyptian?) port at Jaffa, while Egyptian settlements in the south of the country provided agricultural and commercial support to the (Egyptian?) ports at Gaza, Ashkelon, etc.
The reason why there are some tribes with a Eastern African phenotype in Southern Yemen is because of the Proto-Semetic speakers from Eastern Africa.
[This message has been edited by ausar (edited 04 June 2004).]
Originally posted by S. Mohammed
The same genetic study on the Lemba said Ethiopian Jews are less mixed than Lemba. Ethiopian Jews(Beni Israel)
I see why Wally says you're confused, the Ethiopian Jews are "Beth Israel" the "Beni Israel" are in India.
Originally posted by S. Mohammed
Another point to notice that I did not highlight was one of Gomer's son's, Ashkenaz. Ashkenaz is synonymous with the modern day Ashkenazi Jews
Is American synonomous with Ancient/Native Americans.You're foolish is you honestly think that a name can't be adopted.
1.I suggest you read "The 13th tribe" when Arthur Koestler a Jew himself, assert that the Ashkenazi Jews are descendant of the Khazaar Empire (Eastern Europeans) that converted to Judaism in the beginning of the century 740 A.D. (After Death, mind you).
2.Professor of Mediaeval Jewish History at Tel Aviv University, A. N. Poliak. His book Khazaria (in Hebrew) was published in 1944 writes:
"a new approach, both to the problem of the relations between the Khazar Jewry and other Jewish communities, and to the question of how far we can go in regarding this [Khazar] Jewry as the nucleus of the large Jewish settlement in EasternEurope. … The descendants of this settlement — those who stayed where they were, those who emigrated to the United States and to other countries, and those who went to Israel — constitute now the large majority of world Jewry. "
Fact: The large majority of surviving Jews in the world is of Eastern European — and thus perhaps mainly of Khazar — origin.
3.Yakubi, a ninth-century Arab historian, traces the origin of the Khazars back to Japheth, third son of Noah.
Now lets deal with scientific evidence, and not "passion"
The "Cohen gene" which is a signature mark in determining you direct heritage to the lineage of Moses/Aaron results show the following:
1.(Beni Israel)Indian Jews- more than 50% carry the gene.
2. Lemba (Buba)- 50% carry the gene
3. Western Sephardic Jews- 10% carry the gene
4. Western Ashkenazi Jews-only 3% carry the gene.
So based on these findings along it appears that the Africans(Jews) and the Indians(Jews) have more claim to this "Promise Land" than the white ones.
Here I was prepared to read some authentic scientific evidence, and your entire article is based on mere "heresy" from local residents.
Still clinging to that -blacks only left Africa as slaves argument.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you direct me to you sources for this claim please.
Ozzy[/b]
There are Jews that were expelled from Spain and settled in India I dont recall exactly where I got this information from, but thats beside the point. The point was that white Jews have been travelling from far away lands for centuries, why is it not logical for the Black Jews in South Africa to have done the same. Why should we believe some "foreigner" came there to mate with them, as Ausar has asserted.
Don't miss the points!!
I wonder how much Native American Indian DNA, most Americans have. Have we forgotten about the "LOST" tribes of Israel.
By contrast the average African American has close to 18% European admixture 99.9% of it being paternal DNA, but we sure as hell dont want to acknowledge our "White rapist" grandfathers!
"A modified version of the author's thesis, this book briefly presents the models of relations between Early Bronze Age I (Canaan) and Naqada IIcd-III (Egypt). Cataloguing the finds and interpreting the latest archaeological data, the author provides fascinating information about Dynasty 0 Pharaohs, who established Egyptian colony in Canaan 3300 B.C. A recommended book for the interested reader."
quote:
Originally posted by homeylu:
Originally posted by S. Mohammad
Look at the names of the places that his territory spread to, Assyria, and Nineveh, can you prove that assyrians were black or had a heavy amount of blacks therer or better yet, that they were Hamitic speakers?
Diop has made claims that Arabs are nothing but a mix of Blacks and Whites.
Assyrians were not Arabs and Arabs are not a mix of blacks and whites. Genetic studies do not prove this and if Diop said this he was wrong, very wrong.
[quote)Originally posted by S. Mohammed
The same genetic study on the Lemba said Ethiopian Jews are less mixed than Lemba. Ethiopian Jews(Beni Israel)
I see why Wally says you're confused, the Ethiopian Jews are "Beth Israel" the "Beni Israel" are in India.[/quote]
Irregardless of the name, Ethiopian Jews are essentially pure African without the Cohen and without any substantial foreign mixture. My point proven.
quote:
Originally posted by S. Mohammed
Another point to notice that I did not highlight was one of Gomer's son's, Ashkenaz. Ashkenaz is synonymous with the modern day Ashkenazi Jews
Is American synonomous with Ancient/Native Americans.You're foolish is you honestly think that a name can't be adopted.
Are you telling me its a coincidence? Ashkhenaz is mentioned in Japeth, not Shem's line. If you think its merely conincidence, are Cushites and modern day Nubians not the same? Cush is taken to be Nubians(Cushites).
quote:
Originally posted by homeylu:
Originally posted by S. Mohammad
[b]Palestinians have only 15% sub-Saharan MTDNA and no sub-Saharan paternal DNAI wonder how much Native American Indian DNA, most Americans have. Have we forgotten about the "LOST" tribes of Israel.
By contrast the average African American has close to 18% European admixture 99.9% of it being paternal DNA, but we sure as hell dont want to acknowledge our "White rapist" grandfathers![/B]
What does that to do with the relatively low amount of sub-Saharan ancestry in Palestinians? Autosomally, Palestinians are 7.5-8% sub-Saharan.
quote:
Originally posted by homeylu:
Originally posted by Ozzy
[b]Originally posted by homeylu:
It is not unreasonable to recognize the fact that the "Bene Israel" of India, can trace routes, from Israel to Spain finally inhabiting India.[/B]
Unless you post evidence you just arguing a strawman. You know what happens when one assumes right?
Then simply make the point without quoting what you can not back.
Ozzy.
Originally posted by S. Mohammad
What does that to do with the relatively low amount of sub-Saharan ancestry in Palestinians same thing the modern Americans that "migrated" to this country have a relatively "low" amount of Native American DNA. Hence substantial massive migration to a geographical location can "replace" the traces of the previously inhabitants.
I'm sure if they did a DNA study of modern white South Africans, you would find "relatively low" amounts of Sub-saharran ancestry.
Originally posted by Ozzy
Then simply make the point without quoting what you can not back
The point was that white Jews have been travelling from far away lands for centuries, why is it not logical for the Black Jews in South Africa to have done the same.
POINT MADE
One word: Excellent!!
Originally posted by Homeylu
When one Kingdom conquers another, the language of the conqueror typically dominates. So its feasible to explain how Canaanite came to speak a Semitic tongue.
They all forget that we are talking about "ANCIENT TIMES"
The lower the DNA, the "earlier" the time frame of this "common" ancestry.
Which is why using genetics, scientist can trace "every" population to Sub-sahara Africa from 200,000 years ago to the present.
History tells us that if not for the migrations of Black people out of Africa, first to the East - then North across the planet, all peoples today would still be Black. Can we trace the global racial hierarchy, with light-skinned at the top, to the first African groups that migrated out of Africa into the Asiatic/Middle East and Arab worlds, to China and on to Europe, losing their pigmentation along the way.
Has it not already been proven that even today, Black Sub-saharan Africans can "still" give birth to Albino offspring.
And that 2 albino are much more likely to give birth to other albinos.
While albinism is described as hypopigmentation, has scientific evidence ever shown a reverse condition called hyperpigmentation that only affect a few "patches" of the skin.
Why has scientist proven that the Khoisan people that appeared in Sub-sahara Africa 10,000 years ago and who do not have the so-called "negroid" features ,show the largest genetic diversity in MtDNA of all human populations, which indicates that they are one of the oldest extant human communities. Y chromosome data also indicates that they are close to the root of the human ancestral tree.
Does it not prove the Sub-saharan Africans carry the DNA to produce a wide range of physical features. Has history of science ever shown the Khoisan to migrate from "Europe" or "Asia" to come to occupy Southern Africa 10,000 years ago- highly unlikely.
Bottomline, sub-saharan Africans carry the genetic traits to produce all the features we see across the globe.
quote:
Originally posted by homeylu:
Originally posted by Thought
[b]the author provides fascinating information about Dynasty 0 Pharaohs, who established Egyptian colony in Canaan 3300 B.C.One word: Excellent!!
They all forget that we are talking about "ANCIENT TIMES"The lower the DNA, the "earlier" the time frame of this "common" ancestry.
Which is why using genetics, scientist can trace "every" population to Sub-sahara Africa from 200,000 years ago to the present.
History tells us that if not for the migrations of Black people out of Africa, first to the East - then North across the planet, all peoples today would still be Black. Can we trace the global racial hierarchy, with light-skinned at the top, to the first African groups that migrated out of Africa into the Asiatic/Middle East and Arab worlds, to China and on to Europe, losing their pigmentation along the way.
Has it not already been proven that even today, Black Sub-saharan Africans can "still" give birth to Albino offspring.
And that 2 albino are much more likely to give birth to other albinos.While albinism is described as hypopigmentation, has scientific evidence ever shown a reverse condition called hyperpigmentation that only affect a few "patches" of the skin.
Why has scientist proven that the Khoisan people that appeared in Sub-sahara Africa 10,000 years ago and who do not have the so-called "negroid" features ,show the largest genetic diversity in MtDNA of all human populations, which indicates that they are one of the oldest extant human communities. Y chromosome data also indicates that they are close to the root of the human ancestral tree.
Does it not prove the Sub-saharan Africans carry the DNA to produce a wide range of physical features. Has history of science ever shown the Khoisan to migrate from "Europe" or "Asia" to come to occupy Southern Africa 10,000 years ago- highly unlikely.
Bottomline, sub-saharan Africans carry the genetic traits to produce all the features we see across the globe.
[/B]
I found an old messageboard of a friend of mine we can post on to continue this discussion
http://www.network54.com/Forum/275887
The colors are similar to this board. Instead of creating another message board I just salvaged one. The forum owner lurks here on occassion.
You and I can continue our discussion there.
Originally posted by Homeylu
When one Kingdom conquers another, the language of the conqueror typically dominates. So its feasible to explain how Canaanite came to speak a Semitic tongue.
This is not true always. The Fula conquered my people the Hausa, but the Fula adopted our language, not the other way around.
About that link that Thought posted, it doesn't prove that Canaanites are descendants of Egyptian colonists, for Egyptians did not establish the towns of Byblos, Sidon, and Tyre, the principle Phoenician(Canaanite) towns. It said Egyptians established colonies there to take advantage or the trade with these cities. In any case such a colonization probably did not involve a large migration of people and any Egyptian colonists would have ben absorbed into the population.
quote:
Originally posted by S.Mohammad:
About that link that Thought posted, it doesn't prove that Canaanites are descendants of Egyptian colonists, for Egyptians did not establish the towns of Byblos, Sidon, and Tyre, the principle Phoenician(Canaanite) towns. It said Egyptians established colonies there to take advantage or the trade with these cities. In any case such a colonization probably did not involve a large migration of people and any Egyptian colonists would have ben absorbed into the population.
Thought Writes:
I have provided my evidence on the period in question. Now I eagerly await ANY scientific data from you on this matter?
"It is possible to say that the objective evidence does NOT deny an hypothesis of biological HETEROGENEITY in some general sense at Lacish, which specific historical and archaeological data unequivocably predict. It is suggested that the Egypto-Nubian prescence is supported."
quote:
Originally posted by Thought2:
Thought Writes:I have provided my evidence on the period in question. Now I eagerly await ANY scientific data from you on this matter?
I'm not denying that egytians had colonies along side the canaanites, I'm saying that in itself does not prove that Canaanites descend from Egyptians, Canaanites the people. We know for example that Phoenicians settled and founded Carthage the city but that does NOT make Carthagnians descendants of Phoenicians. Carthaginians were mostly native North Africans. can you see the point that I'm making? before the Egyptians founded their colonies, Canaanites were already settle along the coast.
quote:
Originally posted by S.Mohammad:
before the Egyptians founded their colonies, Canaanites were already settle along the coast.
Thought Writes:
Well, in that the Egyptians first colonized Canaan during the pre-dynastic stage the original Canaanites would pre-date this period, correct? Are you suggesting that between the Natufian period and the Egyptian Colonies during the pre-dynastic phase some Indo-European group conquered the region, or do you see the Canaanites descending from the Natufian type?
quote:
Originally posted by Thought2:
Thought Writes:Well, in that the Egyptians first colonized Canaan during the pre-dynastic stage the original Canaanites would pre-date this period, correct? Are you suggesting that between the Natufian period and the Egyptian Colonies during the pre-dynastic phase some Indo-European group conquered the region, or do you see the Canaanites descending from the Natufian type?
The Natufian type, not Indo-Europeans. The people looked like those very dark Bedouin types
quote:
Originally posted by S.Mohammad:
The Natufian type, not Indo-Europeans. The people looked like those very dark Bedouin types
Thought Writes:
And your saying these folks were non-African in origin?
quote:
Originally posted by Thought2:
Thought Writes:And your saying these folks were non-African in origin?
I would say the people of this region were dark skinned akin to the types found in southern Arabia, dark Bedouin types. They're probably closer to the Natufian type, but were distinct from both tropical Africans and Europeans. if you look at modern Bedouin you will see what I'm talking about and Bedouin almost never mix.
quote:
Originally posted by Thought2:
An Analysis of Crania from Tell-Duweir uding Multiple Discriminant Functions
SOY Kieta
American Journal of Physical Anthropology
75:375-390 (1988)"It is possible to say that the objective evidence does NOT deny an hypothesis of biological HETEROGENEITY in some general sense at Lacish, which specific historical and archaeological data unequivocably predict. It is suggested that the Egypto-Nubian prescence is supported."
Well Lachish was a principal city of Judah and Egyptians in the 18th and 19th dynasty ruled this area, so I would not be surprised to find crania remains of an Egypto-Nubian type.