who the hell is talking to you??????? But if you insist on being just as foolish as Supercar, then by all means, carry on.........
Djehuti is right on, you are a clown; you are here to presumably entertain us, not to be taken seriously. But be wary, even clown antics start to get old at some point. Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
ya'll fools, i.e. Super anc Jehuti, since foolishness is your modus operandi, then by all means, carry on...... .
Posts: 826 | From: U.S.A. | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Why am I trying to argue with guys who don't want to reason????????????? I don't know, but here is one last try......
Again Super, this spat started when I asked you a simple and direct question: HAVE YOU EVER READ BEKERIE'S BOOK? That was the question. What does my opinion about Daniel's matter in regards to this question? I simply asked if you ever read Bekerie's book. You never answered that question. Assuming that you haven't, all I was saying is that you ought to read Bekerie.........
Now, now: was that so hard? Again, for the upteenth time, I have provided a critique of Bekerie and his rebuttal: why don't you take some time and read it. I am speaking to Supercar, but I am also responding to the person that had nothing at all to do with this conversation who is adding his "two cents that equal nothing"(like that, two cents that equal nothing....i.e Jehuti).
Yeah Jehuti, I gave you a jab about your "2 cents equalling nothing".......lol. And you are free to throw back a slick comment at me. Honestly, it is fun. I can verbally jab at whoever all day. But that is not what I am about. I am here to learn. So, take some time, and go back through my posts on this thread, and you will see the rebuttal concerning Bekerie's book. Go and check it out and "add to your minus two cent subtraction" Jehuti..........lol.
Again, I am here to learn. Super, you responded with pride and arrogance at my question. Question people is what I do. The greatest philosophers questioned EVERYTHING! So I questioned your sources. Yet you responded with arrogance. I wasn't saying you ain't sharp, cause you are on your knowledge with some of this stuff. But I questioned you, and you responded in a way that made me respond the same way. So Super, I am willing to be cool and drop this, not cause I can't stand my ground, cause I can, most definitely. I can go toe to toe in verbal sparring, but I am not here for that. So I'll tell you what: go and read the rebuttal, and tell me what you think Super, cause that is all I wanted to know. Just know for time to time I may challenge your opinion. Instead of taking it somewhat personal, or with arrogance, feel where I am coming from.........
You are free to explain your side of the story Super...........Let me just say that I just came from a forum that was chaotic because people couldn't get along, so I am humbling myself for the sake of peace. I like the fact that this forum has more order and hardly no chaos(compared to other forums anyway). So this is my invitation to a truce. I hope you take it, for all of our sakes.......Salaam
Posts: 826 | From: U.S.A. | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Israel: Why am I trying to argue with guys who don't want to reason????????????? I don't know, but here is one last try......
I suggest you 'carefully' review this thread, and realize that you standout as a sore thumb, with regards to who isn't reasoning; just look in the mirror.
quote:Israel:
Again Super, this spat started when I asked you a simple and direct question: HAVE YOU EVER READ BEKERIE'S BOOK? That was the question.
I'll refer you to go back and read the same answer I provided you, when you first asked this "question".
quote:Israel:
What does my opinion about Daniel's matter in regards to this question? I simply asked if you ever read Bekerie's book. You never answered that question. Assuming that you haven't, all I was saying is that you ought to read Bekerie.........
You "simply" asked this question, by "simply" making unsubstantiated claims that Mr. Daniels' assessment was "biased". I then "simply" asked you to refute it, only to have you "simply" refuse to do so. Why is that?
quote:Israel:
Now, now: was that so hard? Again, for the upteenth time, I have provided a critique of Bekerie and his rebuttal: why don't you take some time and read it.
For the "upteenth" time, your "critique" is no substitute for an actual objective "linguistic" rebuttal.
quote:Israel:
And you are free to throw back a slick comment at me. Honestly, it is fun.
It's funny you should say that, considering that all trolls we have dealt with, find it "fun" disrupting intellectual discourse.
quote:Israel: I can verbally jab at whoever all day. But that is not what I am about.
I have no reason to doubt that you are highly capable of doing so; it is after all, your hallmark.
quote:Israel: I am here to learn.
Are you sure?
quote:Israel:
So, take some time, and go back through my posts on this thread, and you will see the rebuttal concerning Bekerie's book.
Hate to disappoint you buddy, but it appears to be a figment of your imagination that you've provided a rebuttal to Mr. Daniels' linguistic assessment.
quote:Israel:
Again, I am here to learn. Super, you responded with pride and arrogance at my question. Question people is what I do.
Now what you must do, is get into the habit of providing answers.
quote:Israel:
The greatest philosophers questioned EVERYTHING! So I questioned your sources.
...without providing objective substantion to the contrary; doesn't work that way buddy.
quote:Israel:
Yet you responded with arrogance. I wasn't saying you ain't sharp, cause you are on your knowledge with some of this stuff. But I questioned you, and you responded in a way that made me respond the same way.
Arrogance begets arrogance; I hope you know what I mean.
quote:Israel:
So Super, I am willing to be cool and drop this, not cause I can't stand my ground, cause I can, most definitely. I can go toe to toe in verbal sparring, but I am not here for that.
I pull no punches either, be wary.
quote:Israel: So I'll tell you what: go and read the rebuttal, and tell me what you think Super, cause that is all I wanted to know.
Here's my piece of advice: come up with more answers, including pending ones, and less distraction.
quote:Israel:
Just know for time to time I may challenge your opinion. Instead of taking it somewhat personal, or with arrogance, feel where I am coming from.........
Just to not hurt your feelings any more than it already is, would it help you, if I said you "challenged" me, in any meaningful way?
quote:Israel:
You are free to explain your side of the story Super...........
You better believe it; I don't ask anyone for my freedom; it is already mine to exploit.
quote:Israel:
Let me just say that I just came from a forum that was chaotic because people couldn't get along, so I am humbling myself for the sake of peace. I like the fact that this forum has more order and hardly no chaos(compared to other forums anyway).
...and now you want to turn it into the format of the "other" forums you fled from?
quote:Israel: So this is my invitation to a truce. I hope you take it, for all of our sakes.......Salaam
I agree, your conduct will be the judge of how you'll be treated from here out. It's all on you; if it is "peace" you want, then enforce it, don't discourge it. Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
You are accusing me of being a troll: whatever man. My whole point is that I personally feel that Daniels is biased. I read much of Bekerie, and THE WAY IN WHICH DANIELS spoke concerning Bekerie's book(cause I also read his Daniel's critique), as though he had NO RESPECT FOR BEKERIE, is what makes me say he is biased.
Anyway Super,
Your a waste man. Honesly, you truly have more in common with trolls than I ever would. Trolls are the type of people that post pages and pages of comments, scrutinizing every single comment that people make. That is exactly what you do. So to me, you truly have troll characteristics............ .
Like I said, I TRIED to reason with you, but whatever. You said, "your conduct will be the judge of how you'll be treated from here out. It's all on you".
You ever heard of the saying, "It takes two to tangle"? You need to realize that just as I need to make a change, so do you. If you don't realize that, then hey, forget the peace. I really don't care. Like I said, if you want peace, we can have it. But if you want to act foolish, then by all means, carry on....... .
See, trolls are people who don't like to compromise. That sir is yourself. I tried to compromise, and you give snide remarks. So fine, carry on with your foolishness. Just stay out of my way and I'll stay out of yours.
You said, "Israel:
You are free to explain your side of the story Super...........
You better believe it; I don't ask anyone for my freedom; it is already mine to exploit.
So you "exploit" your freedom? Whatever Super. By my statment I was saying that you can express yourself and I would respect it. But you haven't, you just spew venom. Who the heck would say, "I exploit my freedom"? Yes, everyone takes "advantage(i.e. exploits)" of their freedom, but the WAY(GET IT: THE WAY!) in which you said it is venomous. Not worth my time.
So anyway, I'm done. You win troll.....opps I mean Super.......... . Anyway, stay out of my way, and I'll stay outta yours. Say your last piece cause I won't respond, much less read it. If it was worth reading, I would. But since your snide comments are worthless, then they are not worth respecting in terms of reading.
Posts: 826 | From: U.S.A. | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
I am sorry this happened. I didn't know that people could be so sensitive for me asking a question.
I already stated that I am new to this field of study. If Super or anybody want to debate about the exegesis of Koine Greek writings, all types of religious histories, etc., that stuff is my area. This field of Ethiopian studies is important becaue in studying Christianity, it is often taught from the Western point of view. Trust me, I know. Buy Justo Gonzalez's book called, "The History of Christinity". It is a good book, but it doesn't speak on the Christianity much about non-Western Christianity, esecially not Ethiopian. Hence, I have decided on my own to study this subject.
Hence, I am not claiming to be an expert. However, it is obvious that Bekerie's book was gonna create controversy, even if he was 100% correct in his thesis. My thing is that I start with the Afrocentric books cause I dont' want these Eurocentric books to contaminate my mind concerning the truth. I am not sayihg Afrocentric stuff is the whole truth, but it certainly exposes the biases among prejudiced and/or biased Eurocentric scholars. Concerning the depths of the Geez or Sabean, I don't know those languages......YET! Trust me, I will! Arabic and Hebrew, which I have already studied, are good introductions to these other languages.
Based on the little bit I studied, I just wanted to challenge Super to acutually read Bekerie's book SINCE HE READ DANIEL'S critique of Bekerie. Tell me, what is wrong with that? Bekerie had alot in his book that was valid(in my opinion). All I was saying is that Super shouldn't promote to authoratative status someone's critique of another's book. That was ALL I was trying to say. Salaam
Posts: 826 | From: U.S.A. | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Can we please return to the original purpose of the thread instead of bickering and fighting over nothing?
-------------------- "Oh the sons of Ethiopia; observe with care; the country called Ethiopia is, first, your mother; second, your throne; third, your wife; fourth, your child; fifth, your grave." - Ras Alula Aba Nega. Posts: 1024 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
^Sure thing, since NOTHING was exactly what Israel had in the first place. Posts: 26252 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Yom: Can we please return to the original purpose of the thread instead of bickering and fighting over nothing?
Try telling this to Israel [ as I did earlier, but it turned out to be futile], the culprit of disrupting the flow of the discourse.
If the moderator cares, I suggest that this topic be closed; those who wish to engage in circular arguments, can do so, by creating their own thread; unless somebody has anything new to bring to the table, with regards to the 'initial' discussion at hand, then please do so. Short of this, there is nothing to discuss, and the topic may well be closed.
Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
We still wait for you to validate your claims about a book you haven't even read entirely, and answer Supercar's questions.
I doubt we'd see any of that soon, but if you want to continue your ad hominem attacks on me, if that makes you feel better then so be it. Posts: 26252 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
I apologize to the rest of the forum about this. This ain't my style. So I'll be cool with everybody else. Hopefully, in the future, me and these guys here(i.e. Super and Jehuti) will get along. Salaam
Posts: 826 | From: U.S.A. | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
This is for those who seek to understand a critique of Bekerie's book, and his REBUTTAL to the argument. I personally think that the critique was excellent. Zerbe makes it clear that Bekerie doesn't necessarily have direct proof concerning the connection between AE and Ethiopia. Nonetheless, in my opinion, Bekerie's suggestion of a connection is significant. Also significant is that David Zerbe mentioned that the South Arabian "genesis" of Ethiopia is an HYPOTHESIS! Check it out.....
Ayele Bekerie, Ethiopic, An African Writing System
(Trenton, NJ: The Red Sea Press, 1997. Pp. 176, $18.95 paperback)
Reviewed by David S. Zerbe
As the title of the book suggests, this study examines the origins and history of the system of writing called Ethiopic, from which the first language in Ethiopia formed was Ge'ez , today the liturgical writing system of the Ethiopian Orthodox Church. This fact, however, is never articulated in the text. Nor is there a discussion as to how other offshoots of the Ethiopic system of writing were established, such as Tigre, Tittering, or Amharic, and these are but two of the deficiencies in this text. The introduction establishes the conceptual framework of the study.
The conceptual framework is based on "locational theory." Ayele Bekerie postulates that the roots of the writing system of Ethiopic, as a system of knowledge, is an endogenous creation. What is theorized by Bekerie is that there is an endogenous flavor regarding causality between the Ethiopic writing system and Ethiopian civilization itself, i.e. that both are indigenous to Africa, and that the Ethiopic writing system is an effect of the establishment of an indigenous Ethiopian civilization, indigenous to Africa and not from South Arabia. Ayele Bekerie in fact refutes the South Arabia historiographic paradigm, which hypothesizes that the roots of Ethiopic as a writing system are contained in the Sabaean civilization's writing system, which emanated in South Arabia from the area of what today comprises the state of Yemen, and according to some historians was transplanted through commercial activity across the Red Sea to what is today the Eritrean coast and Ethiopian hiqhlands.
From this theoretical model, Ayele Bekerie commences with the first of a four chapter text. He attempts to examine Ethiopian historiography in the context of Egypt and the Arabian Peninsula. Bekerie argues that the genesis of Ethiopian civilization itself is not of Semitic origin, that this is in fact a synthesis of 19th century Eurocentric historiography, which still remains in place today. The argument continues that Ethiopian civilization is a result of the migration of the Puntite peoples of Upper Egypt southward, and is therefore indigenous to Africa.
Besides secondary source information which shows commercial relations to have existed between Egypt and the "land of Punt" from 2743 BCE, there is no primary-source data, no linkage to the claim of Puntites establishing themselves in what is today Ethiopia, and no mention that Puntite and Sabaean civilizations could have coexisted in the highlands of what is today Ethiopia. Further, he does not establish that the Puntite peoples are the original inhabitants of Ethiopia and, if assumed the Puntites are the original inhabitants of the Ethiopian highlands, Bekerie does not effectively argue that Ethiopic as a writing system had its origins with the Puntites. It is commonly held to be the case in the historiography of the Horn of Africa that the Puntites today are the ancestors of peoples from the Isaak clan in what is now the de facto state of Somaliland.
Regarding Egypt, Bekerie also attempts to link the writing systems of Ethiopic and ancient Egypt, but cannot explain why there is a system of hieroglyphics in Egypt and not in Ethiopia, and consequently he fails to establish a solid link between the Ethiopic and ancient Egyptian writing systems. There is only cursory mention of the relationship between Coptic and Ge'ez scriptures. Even without any evidence or with scant evidence, Ayele Bekerie is bent on arguing that Ethiopic is not of Semitic origin, but of African origin, but does come to the conclusion in the second chapter that the origins of Ethiopic and of Ethiopian civilization itself are to date still indeterminable.
Ayele Bekerie moves forward and discusses in some detail the principles of Ethiopic as a writing system. He establishes this discussion on the premise that the writing system of Ethiopic is actually a philosophy, because the ideographical iconography of the Ethiopic alphabet is conducive in generating knowledge, such as beliefs and concepts. Though he does not address the relationship between linguistics and the philosophical knowledge directly, he establishes that The Ethiopic Book of Henok, written in the BC era in Ge'ez, is not only a religious text but a philosophical one as well.
Throughout chapters three and four, Ayele Bekerie demonstrates the significance of Ethiopic as a writing system through Abyssinian literature, such as the Book of Enoch, and the legendary epic tale Kebra Nagast. This book was written in the time of Amda-Tsion in the 14th century, but this pertinent information is not included in the text. This tale of Solomon and Sheba helped lead to the consolidation of the Solomonic dynasty in Ethiopia until 1974 by claiming that Menelik I was the son of the two, thereby directly relating Ethiopia to King Solomon. The literary and historiographic magnitude of this on the system of personal rule in Ethiopia is neglected. It does show, however, that the Ethiopic writing system in the form of Ge'ez has produced a number of culturally significant works.
Ayele Bekerie concludes the text with the convincing argument that Ethiopic, whether the roots are indigenous to the Puntites and spread to the Ethiopian highlands, or whether Ethiopic as a writing system originated from South Arabia in the BC era and became extinct there, is an African writing system by virtue of the fact that Ge'ez, Amharic, Tigrinya, and Tigre directly correlate with the Ethiopic writing system. To end the tome, the author poses questions for his next work, many of which are not addressed here, such as the relationship between a writing system and a philosophical system of knowledge, why and how 19th century archaeologists discovered evidence linking Ethiopic to Semitic origins in South Arabia, or the process of extinction and resurrection of writing systems.
The text entitled Ethiopic decisively demonstrates that there is a great literary tradition in Ethiopia, and as such the third and fourth chapters carry the strongest arguments of the study. Paradoxically perhaps, the greatest strength of Ayele Bekerie's argument is also its greatest weakness, other than clinging to the notion that Ethiopic is not Semitic in origin. Though thoroughly demonstrating that through Ethiopic there has been a rich cultural, literary, and religious tradition among the languages associated with Ge'ez, such as Tigre, Tigrinya, and Amharic, this is only true among the Christian highlanders of Tigrinyan, Tigrean, and Amhara ethnicities.
Implicit in Ayele Bekerie's study of Ethiopic is the historiographic misconception that the Ethiopic writing system itself is representative of all Ethiopians, which is a fundamental weakness in the argument, for the Oromo, Somali, Afar, Gojjame, and even the Maji linguistics are not of Ethiopic origin. They are of Cushitic, Nilo-Saharan, and Omotic linguistic origin, respectively. As such, they do not conform to this linguistic and cultural model, for the aforementioned ethnic groups combined comprise over 50% of present-day Ethiopia's population. As such, the Ethiopic writing system, a system imposed on the predominantly Muslim Somali and Oromo peoples through the system of imperialist Amhara personal rule from the 19th century, has ended with the EPRDF government in Ethiopia, from 1991 to the present. Ethiopic, even if not Semitic in origin, certainly is not of Cushitic, Omotic, or Nilo-Saharan origin.
Prof. David Zerbe is a graduate of Central Connecticut State University and the American University at Cairo.
Thank you for inviting me to send you a rejoinder to the review of my book by David S. Zerbe.
First of all, I commend Mr. Zerbe for taking his time to review the book. The review seems to concentrate on paradigmatic issues that are addressed from the perspective of the old school. According to this school, the origin of the Ethiopian civilization, its writing system, its classical language are presumed to have external origin. True to the old school, the reviewer continued to divide the Ethiopian people by identifying the Ethiopic writing system with the "Semitic" people of the northern part of Ethiopia, thereby continuing to pursue a racist divisive theory, between the so-called Semitic and Hamitic peoples of the Horn of Africa.
Contrary to the claim that "imperial Amhara's imposition" of their language and FIDEL writing system (a modified and expanded Ethiopic writing system developed for Amharic) on non-Amharas, the people of the south, just to cite one example, chose Amharic after 1991, as their official language together with FIDEL. In other words, Amharic is no longer the imperial language; it is a language the majority of the Ethiopian people opted to have as their official language. Besides the diverse ethnolinguistic groups in Ethiopia, they do have constitutional rights to use their languages as major modes of communication and commerce in their geo-cultural regions.
It seems to me that apart from presenting a general description of the format of the text as well as some critical and valuable comments, the review does not thoroughly interrogate the "history and principles" of the Ethiopic writing system, which is the central defining theme of the book. This point became apparent to me when Mr. Zerbe referred to the Ethiopic writing system as an "alphabet." The Ethiopic is not an alphabet; it is a syllabic writing system. As a matter of fact, I suggested a term "syllography" in order to reflect the syllabic feature of the system. I wonder how such a critical distinction ended up being overlooked by the reviewer.
In Chapter 1 on "The Arabian Peninsula in Ethiopian Historiography," I clearly stated my positions:
"The most critical question that must be raised is: What is the logic of beginning a history of a people from a source other than their own? Are Ethiopians incapable of making their own history? A history of a people that begins with an external source is quite problematic. It would not be the history of the Ethiopian people, but the history of South Arabians in Ethiopia. A history of a people cannot begin from outside or by outsiders. History records the material and spiritual cultures of all peoples. All people make history. All people are of history." (p.38)
This is the principle that I followed throughout the text. The purpose of my study was to investigate the historical data regarding the Ethiopic writing system, primarily from within and to present an interpretation of the history, fully cognizant of the languages, the cultures, and experiences of the people of Ethiopia.
In one of his critical comments, Mr. Zerbe wrote: ". . . Ethiopian civilization is a result of the migration of the Puntite peoples of Upper Egypt southward, and is therefore indigenous to Africa." The "migration of the Puntite peoples of Upper Egypt" was not my idea. I see migration, in the African context, with its varying and vast ecological zones as multidirectional and the initial migration was probably from the south to Upper and Lower Egypt.
Punt is a term the Ancient Egyptians reportedly used for the people of the south. The coastal region of northeast Africa, roughly between today's Red Sea port of Suwakin in the north, and the Cape of Guardafui in the southeast, was known to the ancient Egyptians as the land of the Punt, the land of spices, incense, and deities. "The Puntites were regarded by the Egyptians as having the same origin as the Egyptian themselves. The physical characteristics of the Punts from the wall-picture of Deir el-Bahri, based on studies made, differ little from the Egyptians' physical attributes. Zayed (1990) attempted to limit the geographical locale of Punts to Somaliland; he cited the similarity of the term BARCHI or headdress both in Somali and ancient Egyptian language. Zayed perhaps did not know that round seats with three legs are also called BARCHUMA in the Amharic and Oromo languages of Ethiopia." (p. 53)
At least from the time of the V Dynasty, there was a reference to the Land of the Punt. "In the XVIII Dynasty, Pharaoh Hatshepsut sent Nehasi to Punt with five ships. He was accepted by the Punt king Perehu. All Godly fragrant woods of God's land was presented by the Queen to Amon." (p.53) The Godly fragrant woods, such as incense woods are found on the highlands of Ethiopia. In other words, the land of Punt cannot be restricted to the "Isaak clan" in Somaliland.
Regarding the question of pictographic writing systems, Mr. Zerbe was quick to point out my "failure to establish a solid link between the Ethiopic and Ancient Egyptian writing systems." While it is true that comparable pictographic writing system to Egyptian hieroglyphics are not yet found in Ethiopia, the Ethiopic writing system definitely displays pictographic and ideographic properties. (Please see the part on the "Description and Analysis of the Major Properties of the System, pp. 82-96, particularly Table 13 on p. 85.)
According to Mr. Zerbe, the epic tale of KEBRA NAGAST (THE GLORY OF KINGS) "was written in the time of Amda-Tsion [1312- 1342A.D.] in the 14th century." King Amde-Tsion was not the "restorer' of the Solomonic line of rule. Saint Takla Haymanot in the reign of Yekuno Amlak (1268-1283) is recognized in Ethiopian history with gratitude and reverence as the "restorer of the Solomonic line of rule," with its capital moving out of Aksum to Shoa, in the central part of present day Ethiopia.
It is important to note here that Ethiopians as sovereign and free people had cultural and economic relations with various peoples and states of the ancient as well as medieval world, including the Israelites, Romans, Syrians, Egyptians, Nubians, and Yemenites. These relations partly involved significant cultural exchanges and adoptions. The mythology of the Queen of Sheba and King Solomon should be seen in the context of cultural exchanges.
In his concluding paragraph, Mr. Zerbe wrote: "Implicit in Ayele Bekerie's study of Ethiopic is the historiographic misconception that the Ethiopic writing system itself is representative of all Ethiopians, which is a fundamental weakness in the argument, for the Oromo, Somali, Afar, GOJJAME, and even the Maji linguistics are not of Ethiopic origin." (Emphasis added.) First of all, as it is stated at the outset, Ethiopic refers to the Ge'ez writing system. The book is not about Fidel or the Amharic writing system. Fidel and Amharic language are now widely used by choice among the peoples of southern Ethiopia, whose indigenous languages include "Cushitic, Nilo-Saharan, and Omotic linguistic groupings!!"
The Oromos have opted to use Latin script for Orominya and the script is widely used in the Oromo region. As I stated in the book, the Oromo language could have found a sounder script in the Ethiopic system for the system has already addressed the question of explosive and implosive sounds that are found in most Ethiopian languages, including Orominya and Amarinya (pp.94-96).
As to the Gojjames, I am not sure if Mr. Zerbe has the information right. Gojjam is one of the most important centers of Ge'ez and Amharic literary traditions and scholarship. Gojjam is also home to the Agaus, one of the most ancient peoples of Ethiopia. The Agau language is believed to be older than Ge'ez and yet it contributed quite significantly to the development of both Ge'ez and Amharic languages. A quick glance of Table 21 (Major Centers of Quine [Poetry]) would have prevented the hasty and wrongful generalization.
To conclude: The Ethiopic writing system's elaborate and complex knowledge properties, such as philosophy, linguistics, and aesthetics, which are indigenous only in Ethiopia, and the arduous processes associated with the creation and perfection of a writing system, make the external hypothesis very difficult to accept. Moreover, the system is truly self-sustaining and autonomous production. All the components of the knowledge were produced within the country -from goat skins to inks to ideas. Finally, Ethiopic is of African origin.
Professor Ayele Bekerie is in the African Studies Program at Cornell University
Some exceprts. First, Rodolfo Fattovich, who believes that D`mt was ruled by an Ethio-Sabaean mixed upper class ala the Swahili (which doesn't actually seem to be the case for the Swahili, see here (Nile Valley)).
FATTOVICH, Prof. Rodolfo
The Pre-Aksumite Period in Northern Ethiopia and Eritrea Reconsidered
The culture history of Tigray (northern Ethiopia) and Eritrea during the 1st millennium BC was characterized by a strong South Arabian (mainly Sabaean) influence, due to intense contacts between the opposite shores of the southern Red Sea. The result was the emergence of an early state modeled on the Sabaean one in the region. In this paper some new considerations about the dynamics of these contacts, the origins and development of the >Ethio-Sabaean= state, and the relationship of this state with the later Kingdom of Aksum (late 1st millennium BC-1st millennium AD) will be presented in the light of recent fieldwork in Yemen, Eritrea and Tigray.
At present, we can distinguish three phases of development of these contacts: 1) progressive inclusion of the Eritrea plateau in the South Arabian area of influence in the late 3rd-early 1st millennia BC; 2) rise of a pre-Aksumite state in Eritrea, and progressive inclusion of Tigray into this state in the mid-1st millennium BC; 3) collapse of the pre-Aksumite state and rise of the Kingdom of Aksum in Tigray in the late 1st millennium BC.
The emergence of the Afro-Arabian interchange circuit (2nd-early 1st millennia BC)
The northern Horn of Africa was included into a network of exchanges and contacts with Southern Arabia since the 3rd millennium BC. Potsherds similar to Bronze Age ones in South Arabia occur in assemblages of the Gash Group (ca 2700-1400 BC) in the Gash Delta (Kassala). In the mid-2nd millennium BC, a new pattern of interregional contacts and exchanges emerged along the coastal regions of the southern Red Sea, in Eritrea and Arabia (Tihama Cultural Complex). The main sites of this complex (Adulis in the Eritrean Sahel, Sihi in the Saudi Tihama, Wadi Urq= in the Yemeni Tihama, and Subr near Aden) share enough pottery features to be considered regional variants of one cultural complex. In the late 2nd-early 1st millennia BC the eastern plateau in central Eritrea was included in the area of influence of the Tihama complex, as some ceramics from the lower strata at Matara (Akkele Guzay) and Yeha (Tigray) are comparable to those from Subr. The range of contacts of the Ona Group A (late 2nd-early 1st millennia BC) in the Hamasien plateau (Eritrea) cannot be established on the available evidence. Similarities in pottery style may point to contacts with Nubia, eastern Sudan, and perhaps southern Arabia.
The >Ethio-Sabaean State= (ca. 700-400 BC)
Rock inscriptions at the edge of the plateau in Qohaito suggest that South Arabs (maybe traders) penetrated into the plateau beginning in the 9th century BC. The dynamics of this penetration are still unclear. Most likely, individuals or small groups settled on the plateau and mixed with the local people, originating an Afro-Arabian elite in conformity with the later Swahili model in East Africa. The Ona people of Hamasien and northern Akkele Guzzay may have had a relevant role in this process as the Ona pottery formed a consistent component of the pre-Aksumite ceramics. In the 7th century BC the Afro-Arabian complex society (-ties) in Eritrea were included in the area of influence of the Sabaean state, and a new state arose on the plateau. Sabaean cultural features were adopted by the local elite in conformity with the same model of cultural contact we can observe in the Nubian Kingdom of Kush. The present evidence points to an expansion of the so-called >Ethio-Sabaean= state along a straight and narrow transect from Qohaito in Eritrea to the Takkazze river in Tigray, and this expansion was probably marked by the foundation of ceremonial centers such as Kaskase and Yeha
The collapse of the >Ethio-Sabaean= state and the rise of Aksum
Archaeological and epigraphic evidence suggest that the >Ethio-Sabaean= state collapsed in Tigray in the 4th-3rd centuries BC, although most likely an Afro-Arabian urban (state?) society survived in the Akkele Guzzay. At this time, a new polity emerged at Aksum in central Tigray (Proto-Aksumite Period). The Proto-Aksumite polity distinguished itself from the former Ethio-Sabaean one, focusing ideologically on platforms with stele and pit-graves for the funerary cult of the elite rather than on monumental cult temples of the gods. The remains of a monumental building, constructed in a technique reminiscent of Ethio-Sabaean architecture at Ona Nagast may suggest that some symbols of the earlier state were maintained in Proto-Aksumite times. At present, the Proto-Aksumite culture can be ascribed to an indigenous tradition of Tigray, maybe related to the cultural traditions of the western lowlands. Actually, the style and symbolism of the funerary stelae suggest a possible link with the late prehistoric cultures in the Eritrean-Sudanese lowlands. Finally, in the early 1st millennium BC the Aksumite kingdom progressively expanded to the east and included Eritrea and Yemen into the area of political control of Aksum.
Further reading
Fattovich, R. (1977) >Pre-Aksumite Civilization of Ethiopia: a Provisional Review=, Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 7, 73-78.
__________ (1980) Materiali per lo studio della ceramica preaksumita etiopica, Napoli: Istituto Universitario Orientale.
__________ (1990a) >The Peopling of the Northern Ethiopian-Sudanese Borderland between 7000 and 1000 BP: a preliminary model=, Nubica 1/3, 3-45.
__________ (1990b) >Remarks on the Pre-Aksumite Period in Northern Etiopia=, Journal of Ethiopian Studies 23, 1-33.
_________ (1992) Lineamenti di storia dell'archeologia dell'Etiopia e Somalia, Napoli: Istituto Universitario Orientale.
__________ (1996a) >Punt: the archaeological perspective=, Beiträge zur Sudanforschung 6, 15-29.
__________ (1996b) >The I.U.O. and B.U. Excavations at Bieta Giyorgis (Aksum) in Tigray (Northern Ethiopia)=, Journal of Ethiopian Studies 30/1, 1-29 (with K. A. Bard).
__________ (1997a) >The Peopling of the Tigrean Plateau in ancient and Medieval Times (ca. 4000 B.C. - A.D. 1500): Evidence and State of Art=, The Environmental History and Human Ecology of Northern Ethiopia in the Late Holocene (Bard, K. A., ed.), 81-105, Napoli.
__________ (1997b) >The contacts between Southern Arabia and the Horn of Africa in late prehistoric and early historical times: a view from Africa=, Profumi d'Arabia (Avanzini, A., ed.), 273-86, Roma.
__________ (1997c) >Archaeology and historical dynamics: The case of Bieta Giyorgis (Aksum), Ethiopia=, Annali dell=Istituto Universitario Orientale di Napoli 57 (published 1999), 48-79.
__________ (2000a) >The Environmental History of Tigray (Northern Ethiopia) during the Holocene: a Preliminary Outline=, The African Archaeological Review 17/2, 65-86 (with K. A. Bard, M. Coltorti, M. C. Di Blasi, F. Dramis).
_________ (2000b) The Archaeological Area of Aksum: A Preliminary Assessment, Napoli: Istituto Universitario Orientale (co-author with K.A. Bard, L. Petrassi and V. Pisano).
_________ (2000c) Aksum and the Habashat: State and Ethnicity in Ancient Northern Ethiopia and Eritrea, W.P. No 238, Boston University, African Studies Center, Boston.
__________ (2001a) >The Proto-Aksumite Period: An Outline=, Annales d=Ethiopie 17, 3-24 (with K. A. Bard).
__________ (2001b) >Some Remarks on the Process of State Formation in Egypt and Ethiopia=, Africa and Africans in Antiquity (Yamauchi, E., ed.), 276-90 (with K. A. Bard), East Lansing.
Note that his idea that this was a gradual incorporation of more and more of the inland areas of Tigray doesn't seem to be the case. For one, the existence of Yeha as an early capital (in Western Tigray, the farthest area from the coast, yet the center of Ethiopian civilization pre-1st millenium AD), which was included in the "Tihama Cultural Complex." I'll follow this post with some studies on early Western Tigray and early contacts with South Arabia.
-------------------- "Oh the sons of Ethiopia; observe with care; the country called Ethiopia is, first, your mother; second, your throne; third, your wife; fourth, your child; fifth, your grave." - Ras Alula Aba Nega. Posts: 1024 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Skipping Western Tigray for now since the studies are not that interesting (showing the existence of early cultures contemporary with the others described, but little research done so far), here's a very intersting study on early (pre-1st millenium BC) interactions between N. Ethiopia/Eritrea and Yemen (specifically Tihama). Note that the exact nature of the relationship between the Tihama and Saba' is not yet understood.
EALL, Dr. Edward J.
Contact across the Red Sea (between Arabia and Africa) in the 2nd millennium BC: circumstantial evidence from the archaeological site of al-Midamman, Tihama coast of Yemen, and Dahlak Kabir Island, Eritrea
Based on excavations along the Red Sea coast of Yemen, this paper explores the possibility that people had the ability to cross the sea in the 3rd - 2nd millennia BC. It is inconceivable that fishermen living along the Red Sea coast did not know about the seasonality of the winds. Whether others had both the will and the skill to make journeys into deep waters, is an entirely different matter. While the material record for al-Midamman is unique, circumstantial evidence points to connections between Yemen and the Horn of Africa. It is hypothesised that this **did not involve the mass movement of people, with their cultural baggage complete**. But it is suggested that **people on both sides of the Red Sea may have had a common ancestry, and their cultural expressions emerge from that common background.**
The earliest cultural record from al-Midamman is an ephemeral presence defined by the surface recovery of stone projectile points and scrapers belonging to a Neolithic culture, say, from before 4000 BC. The first substantial and monumental phase of the site starts in the 3rd millennium BC. It involved the setting up of **giant stone markers**. Certain slender pillars were once set up with infants buried beneath them, yet without grave goods; an isolated stone marked the grave of an adult male. Hypothetically, these burials pre-date the setting up of giant stones, an act dated roughly to 2400-1800 BC by the cache of copper-alloy tools and a core of obsidian found buried beneath one of the megaliths.
All of the stone used had to be imported from at least 50 km away. A later phase of the activity involved recycling the stone. Yet there is no evidence that this was a destructive act. Rather, it appears to suggest reverence for the past. The most impressive use of the stone was to create monumental buildings. Two rectilinear structures were built with foundations and walls of stone, and partition walls of mudbrick. A third stone building is likely slightly more recent in date, and may be an open-air shrine enclosure. Shallowly carved decorations date earlier than the 8th century BC.
Re-used stone was also employed in a cemetery. The pottery grave goods consist of whole vessels, of a kind known from the domestic settlement. This ephemeral settlement has furnished a rich record of pottery, obsidian, grind stones, and masses of fish bone. A commonality of artifact in all of the settings is, in fact, the most remarkable of the recent discoveries. Grind stones, for instance, were found in the context of the megaliths as well as in the domestic settlement, and set deliberately onto burnt stone, perhaps as field markers. Gold beads have been recovered from both the stone enclosure and the site of the standing stones.
The idea of different phases of the occupation has always been present in the eyes of the excavators. The idea of newcomers supplanting the old ways has always been a possibility. **The most recent work has demonstrated this to be untenable.** Finding only the same kind of pottery in both the domestic, the funerary and commemorative areas implies that the same people were involved throughout the site's life. Yet clearly their cultural habits did evolve.
Despite the fact that the inhabitants appear to have been obsessed with stone, there are no inscriptions carved in stone; no sacrificial offering trays of stone; no stone incense burners; no three dimensional sculptures of either animals or humans, in stone. All of these would be appropriate for a culture linked to Sabaean realm in its broad sense. But there are no statue-menhirs either, which would have made a plausible link to the people Zarins sees as reflecting a Bronze Age elite on the plateau.
From al-Midamman there is one bull's head in relief from a pottery vessel; two human figurines in pottery; incense burners of pottery; and an example of alphabetic letters scratched into a pottery vessel. But pottery items are very rare within the corpus of finds, representing four out of 4000 recorded (and diagnostic) fragments. As for the pottery itself, it is far superior to anything from classic South Arabia. Though hand-built, it is well produced from good quality clay. It is often burnished and decorated with punctate designs that call to mind Fattovich's Afro-Arabian cultural complex theories regarding the punctate incised pottery from Kassala in the Gash delta of southeastern Sudan. And upper Nile-area specialists will no doubt think of so-called wavy-line punctate pottery associated with the C-Group people. Yet, the one striking absence, which cannot be overlooked, is that Kassala does not have the same kind of obsidian record as al-Midamman where there is a clearly definable assemblage of obsidian microliths. It arrives **fully developed** as a lithic tradition, and it does not evolve out of the Arabian bi-facial tradition. Numerous *antecedents* can be found in East Africa. Our expedition has also observed obsidian of exactly the same technological tradition on the island of Dahlak Kabir, offshore from the Eritrean mainland. Other circumstantial evidence also points to possible links between the island and the coast of Yemen. In the Islamic cemetery of the 11th and 12th centuries, one tombstone is carved from a pillar of basalt that is foreign to the island and is likely recovered from a Bronze Age context.
I hasten to argue that we may not find a single, common template into which all of these cultures fit. We are not looking at a systematic expansion, with a socially cohesive, even politically based, organization. So different expressions may have been adopted by different groups, as they came into contact with others. At least four obstacles need to be removed before the Afro-Arabian connection becomes plausible. Our best analogy for the copper-alloy tools is drawn from Syria. I would counter here by saying that our knowledge of the copper-bronze industry from both Yemen and the Horn of Africa is so poor that the absence of parallels for our tools may not be significant.
The second problem is that we find obsidian with the same technology as from al-Midamman, both in the Wadi al-Jubah, in the interior of Yemen, and in the Hadramawt, and on Dahlak Kabir island. But in the last example we have found no related pottery. From Sabir, al-Hamid, and al-Kashawba there is generically similar pottery but no obsidian. Perhaps we may explain this as a difference of time. At al-Midamman there seem to have been both obsidian and pottery in use at all times.
Another difficulty is that we have scratched stone decorations that can be parallelled in the Jawf. Conveniently, Audouin has suggested that these carvings in the Jawf could easily be dated to the late 2nd millennium BC rather than the early 1st millennium BC as previously suggested. What is the connection between our two areas? None, if we look at political realities.
My current hypothesis is that during the late 3rd millennium BC, in response to a drying climate, people were on the move. Some settled on Dahlak island. The people who settled in al-Midamman **crossed the Red Sea and settled in the Tihama** where they found a window of opportunity for life as result of the **massive flooding that was emanating from the highlands**, from a landscape out of control. When checks and balances were put in place in the highlands, as part of the landscape stabilisation for which Yemen became synonymous, the people at the coast were forced to move on. Groups may have found their way into the Jawf, and the Hadramawt. They retained some of their specific lithic technology, but generally otherwise became integrated with the rest of the South Arabian populations.
Further reading
Keall, E. J. (2000) >Changing Settlement along the Red Sea Coast of Yemen in the Bronze Age=, First International Congress on the Archaeology of the Ancient Near East (Rome May 18-23, 1998), Proceedings, (Matthiae, P., Enea, A., Peyronel, L. and Pinnock, F., eds), 719-31, Rome.
Giumlia-Mair, A., Keall, E. J., Shugar, A. and Stock, S. (2002) >Investigation of a Copper-based Hoard from the Megalithic Site of al-Midamman, Yemen: an Interdisciplinary Approach=, Journal of Archaeological Science 29, 195-209.
Very interesting stuff, though parts are difficult to interpret.
-------------------- "Oh the sons of Ethiopia; observe with care; the country called Ethiopia is, first, your mother; second, your throne; third, your wife; fourth, your child; fifth, your grave." - Ras Alula Aba Nega. Posts: 1024 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
by Alessandra Giumlia-Mair, Edward Keall, and Susan Stock, and Aaron Shugar.
An excerpt:
5. Ancient texts and possible connections with other civilizations Several maritime trading centres on the other side of the Arabian Peninsula, on the coast of the Persian Gulf, are mentioned in cuneiform texts dated 2340–1750 BC between Sargon and Hammurabi): these are Dilmun (Bahrein), Magan (Oman?) and Melukhkha (possibly Makrān in Pakistan). These centres seem to have been independent from the Sumerian and Accadic civilizations, but economically in contact with Iran and India [25]. At the end of the 3rd millennium the influence of Accadic Mesopotamia apparently spread to the Arabic coast: Lukhkhisˇsˇan, king of Elam, was defeated by Sargon and later the capital of Elam, Awan:An Shan, was destroyed by Manishtushu (2274–2260 BC), son of Sargon, who on this occasion also subjugated the ‘king of Magan’. This suggests of course that in this period ‘Magan’ was subordinated by Elam. Fattovich [26] dates the megalith stones ordered in circles or in lines in the South of Yemen to the 2nd millennium BC ‘‘and possibly earlier’’. He connects the Yemeni megaliths with the dolmens in the area of Harar and postulates the existence of contacts between the Arabian and the African populations as early as the 3rd millinnium BC. He mentions the existence of paintings and incisions on the stones in the Hidjaz desert, very similar to those found in the Ogaden, as a proof that the African populations were able to cross the Red Sea very early (as confirmed by a wiltonian industry in the Dahlak islands). His hypothesis is that they regularly traded in incense and myrrh between the Mediterranean and both sides of the Red Sea, where these plants were to be found. He supposes the existence of three trade routes. One was the maritime route down the western coast of the Red Sea, but there should also be a land route down the Nile valley and a second one along the western Arabic Peninsula. This trade seems to have lasted for a long period: late texts – the lists of Tuthmes III – mention the Gnb-tjw, which are identified as the inhabitants of Quataban in Yemen. Other texts of the same period mention the import of incense from Syro-Palestinian areas, which Fattovich believes to be Yemen [26]. The ancient texts and Fattovich’s theories seem to suggest that eastern Arabia gravitated towards Mesopotamia, while the western coast shared its culture and economy with the eastern coast of Africa. The results of the metallurgical researches seem to point in the same direction.
-------------------- "Oh the sons of Ethiopia; observe with care; the country called Ethiopia is, first, your mother; second, your throne; third, your wife; fourth, your child; fifth, your grave." - Ras Alula Aba Nega. Posts: 1024 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by nur: May i ask what the axumites looked like appearance wise? To what extent do they resemble the habesha population?
I've never seen a picture of actual axumites. Are there even any available?
There's no question about the ethnic makeup of the Aksumites, nor of the majority of those living in the time of D`mt. There aren't any surviving painted depictions of the Aksumites, but there are some small statues and faces of rulers on coins (and one sketch by Cosmas Indicopleustes).
Look here on the top right corner for an image of Aksumites. The whole body is darkened, except for the face.
Here are a couple images of Aksumite rulers.
Endubis Silver Coin (ca. 270 - first ruler to mint coins)
Aphilas Gold Coin (late 3rd early, 4th c.)
Ousanas Gold Coin (predecessor and possibly father to Ezana)
Ezana Gold Coin (ca. 330-360)
Ezana Silver Coin
And here's a D`mt statue of a woman recovered at Hawulti, Tigray (one of the places where there was actual Sabaean presence). Note the curly hair.
Who may be the same person as the Refesh (actually unvocalized, smaller figure) below, found in close proximity to the statue.
posted
^^The statue above bears somewhat of an appearance to certain Sabaean statuary I've seen in a book about Southern Arabian history an in particular the Queen of Sheba.
Posts: 26252 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
-------------------- "Oh the sons of Ethiopia; observe with care; the country called Ethiopia is, first, your mother; second, your throne; third, your wife; fourth, your child; fifth, your grave." - Ras Alula Aba Nega. Posts: 1024 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Here is some interesting information that I found Yom. It is an Islamic source speaking about the Sabeans. Got it from a book called, "Islam Revealed" by Dr. Anis Shorrosh.
On pg. 159, he says, "Ancient historians like Abi Isa the Moroccan tell that Sabeans were the first religious people whose language was Syriac. Even Adam spoke that language. Seba was said to be the same Seba, son of Cush, son of Ham, son of Noah.........". Salaam
Posts: 826 | From: U.S.A. | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Israel: Here is some interesting information that I found Yom. It is an Islamic source speaking about the Sabeans. Got it from a book called, "Islam Revealed" by Dr. Anis Shorrosh.
On pg. 159, he says, "Ancient historians like Abi Isa the Moroccan tell that Sabeans were the first religious people whose language was Syriac. Even Adam spoke that language. Seba was said to be the same Seba, son of Cush, son of Ham, son of Noah.........". Salaam
Yeah, but those writings were from the Muslim Era, probably after Sabaeans were long dead, since it was a Morrocan scholar. The Sabaeans didn't speak Syriac but rather "Sabaean" or "Sabaic," a South Semitic language (a minority group it in the North-west Semitic branch).
Posts: 1024 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
I am quite aware that the Sabeans didn't speak "Syriac", but it is interesting to read Arab and/or Muslim scholars who know the history of their Arabian culture. The more I study, the more I know that Arabian civilization had a strong Kushite foundation. Hence, IF(notice I said "IF") the Sabeans had an influence in Ethiopia, it is ok in my opinion because the Sabeans were still Kushite(at the very least in their origin). If anything, the ancestors of the Sabeans came from Ethiopia! Salaam
Posts: 826 | From: U.S.A. | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
i just wanted to say that some of u add together ethiopia and eretria . i know that they used to be one country but can ull differ between etiopia and eriteria just like ull differ between djiboti from somalia . thanks
Posts: 216 | From: london | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged |
I am quite aware that the Sabeans didn't speak "Syriac", but it is interesting to read Arab and/or Muslim scholars who know the history of their Arabian culture.
Arabs have mainly been a nomadic people. What Arabian culture? Are you sure Arabs have a great history? Most of the things associated with "Arabian" culture was really the creation of the Iranians and the Africans in Spain.
.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by salah: i just wanted to say that some of u add together ethiopia and eretria . i know that they used to be one country but can ull differ between etiopia and eriteria just like ull differ between djiboti from somalia . thanks
I'm not exactly sure what you mean. Are you asking if you can differentiate between the two physically? No, if you're talking about the majority of the population (you can differentiate Rasha'ida Arabs in Eritrea from Ethiopians, and western borderland and Southwestern Ethiopians from Eritreans, but not the rest). I'm not sure where you get the idea that Djiboutians look different from Somalis, though. You can differentiate through clothing and hairstyle an Afar from a Somali, but not a Somali Djiboutian from a Somali Somalilander or Somali Somalian.
Posts: 1024 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by nur: Which of the semetic speakers show most cushitic influence?
genetic and linguistic wise.
As for genetic wise, there is no genetic marker associated with Cushitic speakers. Overall, Cushitic speaking peoples share the same markers associated with other East Africans or Africans in general.
As far as linguitic influence, I'd say the Amhara because their language reflects many features of the Central Cushitic Agau people, but it could be that it was the other way around-- that the Amhara were originally Agau peoples who adopted Semitic language.
It's hard to tell because it seems that both Cushitic and Semitic speakers have been cohabiting in the Northern Ethiopian areas for a long while.
Posts: 26252 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by nur: Which of the semetic speakers show most cushitic influence?
genetic and linguistic wise.
As for genetic wise, there is no genetic marker associated with Cushitic speakers. Overall, Cushitic speaking peoples share the same markers associated with other East Africans or Africans in general.
True.
quote:As far as linguitic influence, I'd say the Amhara because their language reflects many features of the Central Cushitic Agau people, but it could be that it was the other way around-- that the Amhara were originally Agau peoples who adopted Semitic language.
Cushitic features are found most among the Gurages, especially among the more southern groups; there exists to a degree a dialect continuum between the different languages, with Soddo (northernmost) having the least Cushitic influence and closest to the Amharic-Argobba group and Harari. Originally, there seems to have been a continuum between Harari and Soddo as well as between Harari and Amharic/Argobba, as evidenced by al-`Umari's statement that Ifat (in between Adal and Shewa) spoke "Habashi."
Genetically, I've seen studies that say that Gurages and people from Tigray are closely related (though the claim that Gurages came from Tigray is known to be false and a much earlier date for Ethnogenesis is believed to be true). However, these studies were based on the presence or lack of "Caucasoid" genes, so I'm not sure if the data can be believed, but it may indicate a higher percentage of J lineages or the like.
quote:It's hard to tell because it seems that both Cushitic and Semitic speakers have been cohabiting in the Northern Ethiopian areas for a long while.
For millenia, at least. The first reference to the Agaw are by the (3rd century?) Monumentum Adulitanum as a territory conquered by the (unnamed) king. It later shows up in an inscription by King Ezana (ca. 330-70), one of whose provinces was called "Athagaus" (in Greek), possibly from *`Ad Agaw. "`Ad" meaning "son of" or "derived from," cf. many Tigre villages in Eritrea with "`Ad" like `Ad Tekelezan, or many Tigray/Tigrinya villages with "`Addi" (geminated "d" so the "i" is grammatically necessary) meaning "village." The name pops up as a province again under Kaleb, where it is called
Posts: 1024 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
I am quite aware that the Sabeans didn't speak "Syriac", but it is interesting to read Arab and/or Muslim scholars who know the history of their Arabian culture.
Arabs have mainly been a nomadic people. What Arabian culture? Are you sure Arabs have a great history? Most of the things associated with "Arabian" culture was really the creation of the Iranians and the Africans in Spain.
.
I hear you Doc.....lol. I hear you. It is true that the Arabs drew upon all the different cultures that they had taken over to produce the great "Islamic civilization" of the past. They used Greek, Persian, Jewish, Indian, etc., theories of knowledge, religious thought, etc., translated it all into Arabic, and then Arabic became the living repository of the cultural thought and legacy of the ancient world. Very true Dr. Winters.
However, what I was trying to say is that the foundation of Arabian culture(and civilization) is African. It starts with Saba being the son of Kush, know what I mean? Salaam
Posts: 826 | From: U.S.A. | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
However, what I was trying to say is that the foundation of Arabian culture(and civilization) is African. It starts with Saba being the son of Kush, know what I mean? Salaam
Thanks for the clarification.
.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Yom: Cushitic features are found most among the Gurages, especially among the more southern groups; there exists to a degree a dialect continuum between the different languages, with Soddo (northernmost) having the least Cushitic influence and closest to the Amharic-Argobba group and Harari. Originally, there seems to have been a continuum between Harari and Soddo as well as between Harari and Amharic/Argobba, as evidenced by al-`Umari's statement that Ifat (in between Adal and Shewa) spoke "Habashi."[/qqb]
So what is the northernmost group with Cushitic influence and vice-versa-- what is the southernmost group with Semitic influence?
quote:[qb]Genetically, I've seen studies that say that Gurages and people from Tigray are closely related (though the claim that Gurages came from Tigray is known to be false and a much earlier date for Ethnogenesis is believed to be true). However, these studies were based on the presence or lack of "Caucasoid" genes, so I'm not sure if the data can be believed, but it may indicate a higher percentage of J lineages or the like.
Yes, I too would be careful of studies that label lineages "caucasoid". They may be referring to J lineages but you never know. Remember, even E3b was once labeled "caucasoid" on account that it was found outside of Africa.
quote:For millenia, at least. The first reference to the Agaw are by the (3rd century?) Monumentum Adulitanum as a territory conquered by the (unnamed) king. It later shows up in an inscription by King Ezana (ca. 330-70), one of whose provinces was called "Athagaus" (in Greek), possibly from *`Ad Agaw. "`Ad" meaning "son of" or "derived from," cf. many Tigre villages in Eritrea with "`Ad" like `Ad Tekelezan, or many Tigray/Tigrinya villages with "`Addi" (geminated "d" so the "i" is grammatically necessary) meaning "village." The name pops up as a province again under Kaleb, where it is called
So are you saying that names with the word 'Ad' or 'Addi' are all or Cushitic derivation?
Posts: 26252 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: So what is the northernmost group with Cushitic influence and vice-versa-- what is the southernmost group with Semitic influence?
Well, it depends on whether or not you count the Beja as Cushitic or an independent branch, and if you mean "Agaw" by Cushitic, or if you really want to include all Cushitic groups. The Tigre of Eritrea have influenced the Beja in Sudan and Eritrea (some Beja groups speak only Tigre), but some influence the other way has probably happened. If you're talking about Agaw groups, the Bilen live in northern Eritrea in Keren, but they are not thought to be native to that area. Their own traditions state that they migrated to that area from Lasta (or was it Wag?) in modern day Amhara Region Ethiopia (former province Wello; the districts are around where Lalibela is in North central Ethiopia). I believe other evidence bears this out for a migration date of the 14th century, but I'm not certain.
The southern-most groups with Cushitic influence would be the southernmost Gurage groups, but I'm not sure which one of those it would be. Soddo and Silt'e are the most widely spoken Gurage languages (each around 1 million speakers), but Silt'e speakers have now separated themselves from the Gurage and regard themselves as independent because they are Muslim. Soddo speakers are farther north (but still south of Addis Abeba), while Silt'e speakers are relatively south but also to the east (along with Soddo, possibly why both have less Cushitic influence than the western groups). The Haddiya people just south of the Gurage have mixed a lot with them too, so they have some Semitic linguistic influence as well. In more historical times, groups farther south have also had Semitic-speaking inhabitants usually as a rulling class; e.g. there is a group called the Amaro or Amaaro, (from "Amhara") which indicated that they were Christians, probably with some Semitic origin, but the name "Amhara" was used simply because they were Christians and not because of their language (of course some of the original members would have spoken Amharic). The rulers of Welayta were Tigray-based (in the north of Ethiopia) from the 16th century also, and "Amaaro" groups (Christianized Keffas but probably with some original Semitic speakers) lived in Keffa as well.
See this map (pdf) for some idea as to the distribution of the Gurage languages and the areas of SW Ethiopia I'm talking about.
quote:Yes, I too would be careful of studies that label lineages "caucasoid". They may be referring to J lineages but you never know. Remember, even E3b was once labeled "caucasoid" on account that it was found outside of Africa.
True, but if they are talking about closeness to the Tigray-Tigrinya, then they may indeed be talking about J, which may have some significance.
quote:So are you saying that names with the word 'Ad' or 'Addi' are all or Cushitic derivation?
Not at all. "`Ad" is a Ge`ez word ("`Addi" being its Tigrinya continuation), but the name of the Agaw province would have been designated in Ge`ez, not in an Agaw language.
Posts: 1024 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^Ironically, other than the Bantus, the Habeshas themselves were sold into the Arab slave trade!
Posts: 26252 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Here is one source. These slaves were called 'Habshi' or Abasi by Indians.
Posts: 26252 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Here is one source. These slaves were called 'Habshi' or Abasi by Indians.
I think it was reffering to the general ethiopian popualtion, and not necessarily the actual habeshas. Also that source wasn't very informative.
If it really were habeshas that were sold to slavery, i at least want clarification as to which ethnic groups.
edit: A list of ethnic groups of the general population of the horn sold to slavery would be better if possible.
Is it impossible to provide such due to the time period it happened? If so, you guys can forget about it.
Posts: 214 | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Some were Oromo but there were ethnic Habeshas-- Amharas and Tigre who were sold as slaves.
Just as the Somalis in here.
I believe only Muslims were protected from Arab slavery.
Some were Semitic speakers that were enslaved, but generally it was the southwestern populations and western Nilotic borderlands, and in later (19th c.) years, sometimes also Oromos. "Habashi" (Indian "Habshi/Siddi") was sometimes used as a general term for all Africans by Arabs similar to the term "Ethiopia" as used by the Greeks.
Muslims weren't protected from slavery, however. Every time there was a revolt in a Muslim province or vassal kingdom, when it was put down much of the countryside would be ravaged and much of the population enslaved (e.g. the revolts of Hadiya, Ifat, and Adal in 1332).
Technically slavery was prohibited by the church, especially if the slave was Christian. I believe that Zar'a Ya`iqob (a very pious Emperor) further decreed against owning Christian slaves, but some obviously existed aside from Ahmed Gragn's invasion in 1527 (which I would guess would be the main source for Christian slaves). There is evidence of some medieval monks owning slaves (though not often), nevertheless.
According to Richard Pankhurst (in Ethiopian Borderlands, pp.432), the majority of slaves were Nilotic in origin and the trade had existed since Aksumite times (probably even before).
Posts: 1024 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
-------------------- "Oh the sons of Ethiopia; observe with care; the country called Ethiopia is, first, your mother; second, your throne; third, your wife; fourth, your child; fifth, your grave." - Ras Alula Aba Nega. Posts: 1024 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thanks to all participants herein, who have turned this thread into quite an informative one; looking forward to remaining on top of up-to-date info, as it pertains to the topic of the thread.
Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Comparison of genetic and linguistic phylogenetic reconstructions as a means of investigating the evolution of the Semitic language family.
A. Kitchen et al.
Inference of the history of the Semitic language family has long been controversial. In order to address this problem, we have taken an interdisciplinary approach in which genetic and linguistic evolutionary relationships are compared through independent phylogenetic reconstructions of genetic and lexical data.
Our phylogenetic analyses of genetic data (mitochondrial control region DNA sequence from three Semitic-speaking populations) demonstrates that Ethiopic Semitic populations are basal relative to non-African Semitic-speakers. While greater antiquity of African populations relative to non-Africans is not surprising, genetic diversity has never been explicitly compared between African and non-African Semitic-speakers. This result suggests that if Ethiopian Semitic did originate in Arabia, it may have been introduced to Ethiopia in the absence of significant gene flow from a less diverse and evolutionary younger non-African population.
Concurrent analysis of lexical data (Bender’s modification of Swadesh’ 100-word lists for 15 Ethio-Semitic populations) using phylogenetic techniques borrowed from evolutionary systematics allows us to contrast population history, gene-flow and linguistic evolution within Semitic populations. Applying maximum parsimony and distance phylogenetic reconstruction methods to our lexical dataset, and comparing the resulting lexical and genetic phylogenies, we test alternative hypotheses of Ethio-Semitic language evolution. Our results largely support Bender's original classificatory scheme of Ethio-Semitic languages. Comparative analyses of genetic and linguistic phylogenetic reconstructions of Semitic-speaking populations should help resolve questions concerning the genetic and geographic origin of the language family.
Posts: 2595 | From: Vicksburg | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
Our phylogenetic analyses of genetic data (mitochondrial control region DNA sequence from three Semitic-speaking populations) demonstrates that Ethiopic Semitic populations are basal relative to non-African Semitic-speakers. While greater antiquity of African populations relative to non-Africans is not surprising, genetic diversity has never been explicitly compared between African and non-African Semitic-speakers. This result suggests that if Ethiopian Semitic did originate in Arabia, it may have been introduced to Ethiopia in the absence of significant gene flow from a less diverse and evolutionary younger non-African population.
Implications seem to be concordant with the Neolithic or early Holocene spread of proto-Afrasan from North East Africa into the Levant, and perhaps from multiple dispersion points along the Red sea [Steven Brandt] at some points in time.
Ps:
...the cautious interpretation of the evidence on ancestral Afro-Asiatic indicates that it was spoken by non-food producers, and emerged in Africa in the Horn or southeastern Sahara (Bender,1975; Blench, 1993; Diakonoff, 1981, 1998;Ehret, 1984, 1995; Fleming, 1974, pers. com-mun.; Greenberg, 1966, 1973; Newman, pers.commun.; Nichols, 1997). - Keita.
Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
. Anyway, stay out of my way, and I'll stay outta yours. Say your last piece cause I won't respond, much less read it. If it was worth reading, I would. But since your snide comments are worthless, then they are not worth respecting in terms of reading.
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic