Outside of Egypt, Eritrea holds the most archeological finds - Over 80,000 and still counting, in fact, it is believed Eritrea will surpass Egypt this decade. http://allafrica.com/stories/200812220904.html
The Beja/Arab Kingdoms - Eritrea
Dahlak Kingdom that rivaled the Ottoman Empire - Eritrea
Medri-Bahri, a Democratic Kingdom from 13th century to 18th century, where the people of Medri-Bahri voted for a Bahri-Negassi (Sea King) - Eritrea
Abraham Hannibal was Eritrean and his great grandson Alexander Pushkin always stressed his African identity.
Eritrea is no doubt the most historically marginalized nation in Africa.
Posts: 13 | Registered: Jan 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote: Outside of ancient Egypt, does Eritrea represent Africa's 2nd greatest past?
...not to mention even gloss over Kush. At any rate, re: the above -- why would that be, and what is to be gained from it?
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by nomorelies: ^^ Thanks for the info. Never knew much about Eritrea/Tigray.
No problem bro
BTW: Tigray is not a country and it's just a location in Northern Ethiopia. The history of Eritrea and that of Tigray has been a very bloody one - part 2 of the video and 3 touch up on it a bit.
Posts: 13 | Registered: Jan 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote: Outside of ancient Egypt, does Eritrea represent Africa's 2nd greatest past?
...not to mention even gloss over Kush. At any rate, re: the above -- why would that be, and what is to be gained from it?
Nothing much, just to grab attention and keep it relevant with Ancient Egypt, since this is an Egyptian forum.
Posts: 13 | Registered: Jan 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by nomorelies: ^^ Thanks for the info. Never knew much about Eritrea/Tigray.
No problem bro
BTW: Tigray is not a country and it's just a location in Northern Ethiopia. The history of Eritrea and that of Tigray has been a very bloody one - part 2 of the video and 3 touch up on it a bit.
Yes I know Tigray is not a country according to the current border lines, but it does represent an area of distinct peoples.
Posts: 100 | Registered: Jan 2009
| IP: Logged |
Could it have included Eritrea? Yes. Could it have been confined to Eritrea? Not necessarily. Could it have even been confined to the African Horn? Not necessarily. Notwithstanding strong clues here and there, the precise extent and location of Pwnt remains to be resolved.
quote: Aksumite Empire - Eritrea
Is this not as much a part of history of Ethiopians as it is Eritreans?
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
Outside of Egypt, Eritrea holds the most archeological finds - Over 80,000 and still counting, in fact, it is believed Eritrea will surpass Egypt this decade. http://allafrica.com/stories/200812220904.html
The Beja/Arab Kingdoms - Eritrea
Dahlak Kingdom that rivaled the Ottoman Empire - Eritrea
Medri-Bahri, a Democratic Kingdom from 13th century to 18th century, where the people of Medri-Bahri voted for a Bahri-Negassi (Sea King) - Eritrea
Abraham Hannibal was Eritrean and his great grandson Alexander Pushkin always stressed his African identity.
Eritrea is no doubt the most historically marginalized nation in Africa.
Agreed that Eritrea may be very overlooked. You have a lot go good links. I learned a few things. But are you sure when you say the "Dahlak Kingdom rivaled the Ottoman Empire?" The Dahalak area is a series of little islands off Eritrea. According to one website:
The Dahlak Archipelago is an island group located in the Red Sea near Massawa, Eritrea. It consists of two large and 124 small islands. The pearl fisheries as they were known to the Romans, still produce a few pearls. Only four of the islands are permanently inhabited, of which Dahlak Kebir is the largest and most populated. The islands are a home for diverse marine life and sea-birds, and attract some tourists. An archipelago is a landform which consists of a chain or cluster of islands. ... Location of the Red Sea The Red Sea is an inlet of the Indian Ocean between Africa and Asia. ... Massawa in the 19th century Massawa or Mitsiwa (15° 36′ 33″ N 39° 26′ 43″ E) is a port on the Red Sea coast of Eritrea. ... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dahlak_Archipelago
And you say this sparsely popualated island area rivaled the Ottoman Empire that over centuries spanned various parts of Asia, Africa and Europe? How does Dahlak compare? Just looking for clarification.
Also on the oldest settlement in Africa, I wonder about that too. I know the link is from the BBC as they reported it, but I thought the Nile Valley and some African sites were older. The BBC places their "oldest" site at 3000 BC, but other scholarship indicates the Badarians of the Nile Valley were around earlier, complete with tombs, houses and agriculture. Is the BBC report off as to the "earliest" settlement in Africa? Scratch head... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BadarianPosts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Indeed, the BBC folks would have to elaborate what is meant by "oldest settlement", as it has been noted here before, with regards to the Homo Erectus...
Now, from the remote shores of Budrinna on Lake Fezzan in Libya, and Melka Konture on the banks of the River Awash in Ethiopia, a series of stunning discoveries are set to challenge the originality of the Neolithic Revolution. After 39 years of surveys and excavations, Professor Helmut Ziegert of Hamburg University presents his results as a world exclusive in Minerva (pp. 8-9). In both African locations he has discovered huts and sedentary village life dating between an astonishing 400,000 and 200,000 Before Present - if correct, literally a quantum leap in our understanding of man's evolution. - Jerome M. Eisenberg, Ph.D. and Dr Sean Kingsley
-------------------- The Complete Picture of the Past tells Us what Not to Repeat Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
I think most recent research especially that of Beninese Slavicist Dieudonné Gnammankou concluded that Abraham Hannibal was not from "Ethiopia" proper, this word being a reference to Africa as a whole at the time. He claims that Hannibal was more likely from North Cameroon (Kotoko). I still have to make a personal research about it to get a personal opinion on it though.
Still about Eritrean heritage, French Africanist Claude Rilly claims that the Nara (formerly called Barya) of modern Eritrea are most likely the ascendants of of the people who created the C-Group culture.
Posts: 307 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
From my recollection, the C-Group didn't leave behind a discrete scripture that has been yet recovered; what could Claude Rilly be adjudging this from? I know that he's proclaimed to have discerned the relationship of Kushites with the Nilo-Saharan phylum from appellatives and certain nouns in Kemetic text, as well as compilation of Meroitic terms.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by nomorelies: ^^ Thanks for the info. Never knew much about Eritrea/Tigray.
No problem bro
BTW: Tigray is not a country and it's just a location in Northern Ethiopia. The history of Eritrea and that of Tigray has been a very bloody one - part 2 of the video and 3 touch up on it a bit.
Yes I know Tigray is not a country according to the current border lines, but it does represent an area of distinct peoples.
Those "distinct" people are not really a unit as you seem to want to believe in and a quick conversation with an Eritrean will illustrate to you this. They may share many culture attributes and linguistic similarities, like many neighboring ethnic groups, but their is a clear distinct difference historically, politically and as to whom they claim are their forefathers.
The Biher-Tigrinya of Eritrea, do not view the Tigray people, under any circumstances, to be the same ethnic group as them. The Biher-Tigrinya come from Medri-Bahri, which was a long time rival of Tigray. THe people of Medri-Bahri had a democratic Kingdom and elected their king to power, while in Tigray, they had "rightful kings" who used mythical stories to claim royal rights...if that didn't work, they did what most kings typically get their power - by the sword.
These border lines between the Biher-Tigrinya and Tigray have been around since the rise of Medri-Bahri [Land of the Sea] in the 13th century AD.
Posts: 13 | Registered: Jan 2009
| IP: Logged |
Outside of Egypt, Eritrea holds the most archeological finds - Over 80,000 and still counting, in fact, it is believed Eritrea will surpass Egypt this decade. http://allafrica.com/stories/200812220904.html
The Beja/Arab Kingdoms - Eritrea
Dahlak Kingdom that rivaled the Ottoman Empire - Eritrea
Medri-Bahri, a Democratic Kingdom from 13th century to 18th century, where the people of Medri-Bahri voted for a Bahri-Negassi (Sea King) - Eritrea
Abraham Hannibal was Eritrean and his great grandson Alexander Pushkin always stressed his African identity.
Eritrea is no doubt the most historically marginalized nation in Africa.
Agreed that Eritrea may be very overlooked. You have a lot go good links. I learned a few things. But are you sure when you say the "Dahlak Kingdom rivaled the Ottoman Empire?" The Dahalak area is a series of little islands off Eritrea. According to one website:
The Dahlak Archipelago is an island group located in the Red Sea near Massawa, Eritrea. It consists of two large and 124 small islands. The pearl fisheries as they were known to the Romans, still produce a few pearls. Only four of the islands are permanently inhabited, of which Dahlak Kebir is the largest and most populated. The islands are a home for diverse marine life and sea-birds, and attract some tourists. An archipelago is a landform which consists of a chain or cluster of islands. ... Location of the Red Sea The Red Sea is an inlet of the Indian Ocean between Africa and Asia. ... Massawa in the 19th century Massawa or Mitsiwa (15° 36′ 33″ N 39° 26′ 43″ E) is a port on the Red Sea coast of Eritrea. ... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dahlak_Archipelago
And you say this sparsely popualated island area rivaled the Ottoman Empire that over centuries spanned various parts of Asia, Africa and Europe? How does Dahlak compare? Just looking for clarification.
Also on the oldest settlement in Africa, I wonder about that too. I know the link is from the BBC as they reported it, but I thought the Nile Valley and some African sites were older. The BBC places their "oldest" site at 3000 BC, but other scholarship indicates the Badarians of the Nile Valley were around earlier, complete with tombs, houses and agriculture. Is the BBC report off as to the "earliest" settlement in Africa? Scratch head... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Badarian
No offense but Wikipedia is a terrible source. If you could grab a better source, I'd be more than happy to look into it.
Also, the Dahlak Sultanate state in Eritrea had a powerful navy - They rivaled the Ottomans in the Red Sea only, more specifically, the Eritrean and Yemeni Red Sea waters. They by no means were a match to what the Ottomans had done or could do. However, the Ottomans suffered many defeats at the hands of the Dahlak naval war machine. The Dahalk citizens were very wealthy and held political influence on some parts of Eritrea and Yemen. The ottomans only conquered the Dahlak Islands in the 19th century, well after their decline [actually, both had declined by then].
Here's a quick read on them. BTW, the people of Dahlak kebir are Yemeni Muslims who don't speak Arabic - They instead, speak a Semitic language called Dahlik, which resembles Eritrea's Tigre and Tigrinya languages, suggesting close contacts with the Eritrean mainland people for centuries.
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: Few items that jump out to me...
quote:Originally posted by Kassala771:
Land of Punt - [most likely] Eritrea
Could it have included Eritrea? Yes. Could it have been confined to Eritrea? Not necessarily. Could it have even been confined to the African Horn? Not necessarily. Notwithstanding strong clues here and there, the precise extent and location of Pwnt remains to be resolved.
Eritrea and Eastern Sudan together are the most likely of places for two simple reasons:
1,
quote:We also here of the children of the chiefs of Punt that were raised at the Egyptian court alongside the children of Kush (Nubia) and Irem. Therefore, it has been assumed that Punt was not so far away, and most modern scholars place it perhaps on Africa's East Coast perhaps only just south of Egypt. Furthermore, modern attempts to classify flora and fauna suggests that Punt may have been located in the southern Sudan or the Eritrean region http://www.touregypt.net/featurestories/punt.htm
2 - Eritrea and Eastern Sudan show a good amount of archeological evidence of ancient Egyptian finds - Also, when Kush Invaded AE and almost destroyed Ancient Egypt, they also did so with the help of Punt and Beja fighters. All this suggests that punt was most likely closer to Ancient Egypt than people first thought.
quote: Aksumite Empire - Eritrea
Is this not as much a part of history of Ethiopians as it is Eritreans?
Well who are the Ethiopians? The majority of Ethiopians have very little or nothing to do with this empire. Aksumite empire was mostly confined to Eritrea and northern Tigray.
quote:Archeology shows the Axumite area as "A vertical rectangle about 300 Km long and 160 Km wide, included approximately between 13 and 17 degree of latitude north and 38 and 40 degree of longitude east. It extends from the region of Rora-Laba in the north and Mount Algai in the South, from Adulis on the coast to Tekkeze in the west. The map of the sites shows the Axumite area had a greater extension than that of the previous period" (F. Anfray, Les Anciens Ethiopiens, Paris 1990, p.114).
No dought, it is Ethiopian history as well but it's origins and it's influence has impacted the Eritrean and Tigrayan people more than others. I mean why stop at Ethiopia? Why not Somalia, Sudan and Yemen - they too once had the Aksumites on their soil, although it came through conquest, surely they have a claim to it right? What if Ethiopia's border in the future includes Uganda, Rwanda and kenya, will they claim this history as being theirs too?
That's why I didn't add Kush and most Eritreans don't either - Not because it didn't take place on Eritrean soil as well as Sudan, but because it has very little to do with Eritreans.
Posts: 13 | Registered: Jan 2009
| IP: Logged |
'Ethiopians' here is as in contemporary state of Ethiopia, of which until recently, Eritrea was a part of.
quote:
The majority of Ethiopians have very little or nothing to do with this empire. Aksumite empire was mostly confined to Eritrea and northern Tigray.
quote:Archeology shows the Axumite area as "A vertical rectangle about 300 Km long and 160 Km wide, included approximately between 13 and 17 degree of latitude north and 38 and 40 degree of longitude east. It extends from the region of Rora-Laba in the north and Mount Algai in the South, from Adulis on the coast to Tekkeze in the west. The map of the sites shows the Axumite area had a greater extension than that of the previous period" (F. Anfray, Les Anciens Ethiopiens, Paris 1990, p.114).
No dought, it is Ethiopian history as well but it's origins and it's influence has impacted the Eritrean and Tigrayan people more than others. I mean why stop at Ethiopia? Why not Somalia, Sudan and Yemen - they too once had the Aksumites on their soil, although it came through conquest, surely they have a claim to it right? What if Ethiopia's border in the future includes Uganda, Rwanda and kenya, will they claim this history as being theirs too?
Because the state that proceeded Aksum, presumably as an outgrowth of royalty from therein, and included that Aksumite administrative stronghold and therefore Eritrea, was the sate of Ethiopia. It didn't include Yemen, Somalia, Kenya, Rwanda or Uganda; but it did include Eritrea.
quote: That's why I didn't add Kush and most Eritreans don't either - Not because it didn't take place on Eritrean soil as well as Sudan, but because it has very little to do with Eritreans.
Kush is located in what is now part of Sudan. Indeed, including Kush as an Eritrean complex would be illogical.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Please call me MIDOGBE: Hello Kassala771,
I think most recent research especially that of Beninese Slavicist Dieudonné Gnammankou concluded that Abraham Hannibal was not from "Ethiopia" proper, this word being a reference to Africa as a whole at the time. He claims that Hannibal was more likely from North Cameroon (Kotoko). I still have to make a personal research about it to get a personal opinion on it though.
Still about Eritrean heritage, French Africanist Claude Rilly claims that the Nara (formerly called Barya) of modern Eritrea are most likely the ascendants of of the people who created the C-Group culture.
Well, the Russian Federation and the Eritrean government believe Abraham Hannibal is of Eritrean in origin. The Russian government believes it so much that they're building a museum in Asmara, Eritrea and a life-size bronze statue of Alexander Pushkin in the Eritrean capital. Construction will be completed in early May of 2009
model statue to be built of pushkin in Asmara
I don't think I have to post sources stating he is of Eritrean in Origin for anyone can google that quick and find dozens. In fact, most historians agree he is of Eritrean in origin do to the following facts listed below.
It's pretty hard for any other country, outside of Eritrea to claim Abraham Hannibal.
For starters, you need a town or a village called Logon or similar to it- Eritrea has 7, with the village of Lagwen in Eritrea being his birth place.
Then, you need this village or town to be located by a sea, since Abraham was taken by sea. Again, Eritrea faces the Red Sea.
Then you need to have the Ottoman empire on your soil at the exact date of his abduction. As anyone knows, the Ottoman empire were in firm control of the Eritrean coast and off and on over the in lands for 300+ years.
Then to top all this off, you need a port that was known to export salves. As soon as slaves are mentioned, most scholars think of west Africa but in reality, the port city of Massawa, which was under the direct control of the Ottomans for 320 years was known to have exported lots of slaves into India and Arab countries.
Then the name Abraham - this is a Hebrew name. Christians typically adopted this name, while Muslims use Ibrahim. unlike other parts of Africa who claim Abraham, Islam and Christianity came to Eritrea very early. Therefore, how likely is it for a Cameroon country to claim Abraham when that name was not common till Christianity came to their region during colonial era?
Anyways, the leading historian on this subject right now is an Eritrean. This professor has amazing information on him. He has traveled to each location that claims Abraham and visited all the places Abraham was sent to - he has amazing information and pictures of Abraham and his descendants.
'Ethiopians' here is as in contemporary state of Ethiopia, of which until recently, Eritrea was a part of.
quote:
The majority of Ethiopians have very little or nothing to do with this empire. Aksumite empire was mostly confined to Eritrea and northern Tigray.
quote:Archeology shows the Axumite area as "A vertical rectangle about 300 Km long and 160 Km wide, included approximately between 13 and 17 degree of latitude north and 38 and 40 degree of longitude east. It extends from the region of Rora-Laba in the north and Mount Algai in the South, from Adulis on the coast to Tekkeze in the west. The map of the sites shows the Axumite area had a greater extension than that of the previous period" (F. Anfray, Les Anciens Ethiopiens, Paris 1990, p.114).
No dought, it is Ethiopian history as well but it's origins and it's influence has impacted the Eritrean and Tigrayan people more than others. I mean why stop at Ethiopia? Why not Somalia, Sudan and Yemen - they too once had the Aksumites on their soil, although it came through conquest, surely they have a claim to it right? What if Ethiopia's border in the future includes Uganda, Rwanda and kenya, will they claim this history as being theirs too?
Because the state that proceeded Aksum, presumably as an outgrowth of royalty from therein, and included that Aksumite administrative stronghold and therefore Eritrea, was the sate of Ethiopia. It didn't include Yemen, Somalia, Kenya, Rwanda or Uganda; but it did include Eritrea.
I'm confused now, Eritrea is Ethiopia, despite no kingdom in Eritrea, past or present ever being called Ethiopian? To top it off, the very word Ethiopia predates any historical significance this region can muster. So I fail to see how you can label the different kingdoms of Eritrea as being Ethiopian, instead of calling them by their names or by the modern Eritrean name for convenience? The only time Eritrea was under the Ethiopian name was when the US/UN sponsored a federation that didn't take the Eritrean people's wishes or desires into consideration - This of course gave the green light for Ethiopia to annex Eritrea that sparked Africa's longest and one of the bloodiest modern warfares that started in 1961 and concluded in 1991.
I think you're under the illusion of Ethiopia being a country for thousands of years, when the reality is, Ethiopia is a modern nation built on back door colonial treaties and expansionism, you know like all of Africa, including most countries on Earth. To even suggest Ethiopia is older than 125 years old is pretty out there my friend.
Posts: 13 | Registered: Jan 2009
| IP: Logged |
I'm confused now, Eritrea is Ethiopia, despite no kingdom in Eritrea, past or present ever being called Ethiopian?
The Kingdom of Aksum wasn't called Eritrea, or was it? If so, using that logic, it might well also cease being part of Eritrean history.
quote: To top it off, the very word Ethiopia predates any historical significance this region can muster. So I fail to see how you can label the different kingdoms of Eritrea as being Ethiopian
Well, you fail to see it, because the said claim doesn't exist. What was said, is this:
Is this not as much a part of history of Ethiopians as it is Eritreans?
See the difference between "whatever it is you fail to see", and what the above actually says?
quote: , instead of calling them by their names or by the modern Eritrean name for convenience?
You were not joking, when you said that you are confused, were you?
quote:
I think you're under the illusion of Ethiopia being a country for thousands of years
And what gave you that idea? I thought you said that you were the one who is confused, and now you're implying that I'm the one.
quote: , when the reality is, Ethiopia is a modern nation built on back door colonial treaties and expansionism, you know like all of Africa, including most countries on Earth. To even suggest Ethiopia is older than 125 years old is pretty out there my friend.
Then you must be out there, because everything relayed in that post, is your's alone.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
No offense but Wikipedia is a terrible source. If you could grab a better source, I'd be more than happy to look into it.
Also, the Dahlak Sultanate state in Eritrea had a powerful navy - They rivaled the Ottomans in the Red Sea only, more specifically, the Eritrean and Yemeni Red Sea waters. They by no means were a match to what the Ottomans had done or could do. However, the Ottomans suffered many defeats at the hands of the Dahlak naval war machine. The Dahalk citizens were very wealthy and held political influence on some parts of Eritrea and Yemen. The ottomans only conquered the Dahlak Islands in the 19th century, well after their decline [actually, both had declined by then].
Here's a quick read on them. BTW, the people of Dahlak kebir are Yemeni Muslims who don't speak Arabic - They instead, speak a Semitic language called Dahlik, which resembles Eritrea's Tigre and Tigrinya languages, suggesting close contacts with the Eritrean mainland people for centuries.
OK but what you are saying here is a lot different from the claim that the "Dahlak Kingdom rivaled the Ottoman Empire." Perhaps you mean fought the Ottomans. But even then I still see little history as to a Dahalak Navy beating off the Ottomans. Do you have a better source for this claim? The web link you give says little about the Ottomans and the Dahalak navy. The Dahalak area appears more relevant in association with Ethiopia, for various Arab groups used it as a base to fight off the Ethiopians and control Red Sea trade. I see little reference to Eritreans. Its mostly Arabs involved.
Are you saying maybe that native Eritreans combined with the Arabs to fend off the Ethiopians and others?
Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
I'm confused now, Eritrea is Ethiopia, despite no kingdom in Eritrea, past or present ever being called Ethiopian?
The Kingdom of Aksum wasn't called Eritrea, or was it? If so, using that logic, it might well also cease being part of Eritrean history.
quote: To top it off, the very word Ethiopia predates any historical significance this region can muster. So I fail to see how you can label the different kingdoms of Eritrea as being Ethiopian
Well, you fail to see it, because the said claim doesn't exist. What was said, is this:
Is this not as much a part of history of Ethiopians as it is Eritreans?
See the difference between "whatever it is you fail to see", and what the above actually says?
quote: , instead of calling them by their names or by the modern Eritrean name for convenience?
You were not joking, when you said that you are confused, were you?
quote:
I think you're under the illusion of Ethiopia being a country for thousands of years
And what gave you that idea? I thought you said that you were the one who is confused, and now you're implying that I'm the one.
quote: , when the reality is, Ethiopia is a modern nation built on back door colonial treaties and expansionism, you know like all of Africa, including most countries on Earth. To even suggest Ethiopia is older than 125 years old is pretty out there my friend.
Then you must be out there, because everything relayed in that post, is your's alone.
I think you're arguing for argument sake. You're bringing zero substance to the table. Eritrean history is marginalized is largely the topic, despite it predating anything that part of Africa has to offer. For a small area as Eritrea is, one can not over look at how it dwarfs Ethiopia in archeological historical finds.
Posts: 13 | Registered: Jan 2009
| IP: Logged |
No offense but Wikipedia is a terrible source. If you could grab a better source, I'd be more than happy to look into it.
Also, the Dahlak Sultanate state in Eritrea had a powerful navy - They rivaled the Ottomans in the Red Sea only, more specifically, the Eritrean and Yemeni Red Sea waters. They by no means were a match to what the Ottomans had done or could do. However, the Ottomans suffered many defeats at the hands of the Dahlak naval war machine. The Dahalk citizens were very wealthy and held political influence on some parts of Eritrea and Yemen. The ottomans only conquered the Dahlak Islands in the 19th century, well after their decline [actually, both had declined by then].
Here's a quick read on them. BTW, the people of Dahlak kebir are Yemeni Muslims who don't speak Arabic - They instead, speak a Semitic language called Dahlik, which resembles Eritrea's Tigre and Tigrinya languages, suggesting close contacts with the Eritrean mainland people for centuries.
OK but what you are saying here is a lot different from the claim that the "Dahlak Kingdom rivaled the Ottoman Empire." Perhaps you mean fought the Ottomans. But even then I still see little history as to a Dahalak Navy beating off the Ottomans. Do you have a better source for this claim? The web link you give says little about the Ottomans and the Dahalak navy. The Dahalak area appears more relevant in association with Ethiopia, for various Arab groups used it as a base to fight off the Ethiopians and control Red Sea trade. I see little reference to Eritreans. Its mostly Arabs involved.
Are you saying maybe that native Eritreans combined with the Arabs to fend off the Ethiopians and others? [/QB][/QUOTE]
Again, there was no political state called Ethiopia in the 8th century or any such thing as an Ethiopian state till the 20th century. What you call Ethiopia, was nothing more than the Solomonic Dynasty of the Amharas. There were many different rivaling kingdoms in present day Ethiopia at that time. To collectively bunch them up as "Ethiopian" is wishful thinking at best. I know you're just taking what a book has to say at face value but to even suggest that an entity called Ethiopia was present during that time is a waste of time to even think about, let alone bring up as an argument.
The ottoman battle source is hard to come by. Besides that, the Ottomans lost a few battles in the horn of Africa, so I don't understand how you can have a hard time believing Ottomans loosing to the Dahalk Sultanate state. But I understand, all things need to be sourced and I agree with you on that aspect 100%. I have a video by a professor that states this but it's in a language you wont understand.
Here's their language though. This source probably proves the people of Dahlak, all though being Yemen in origin, most likely had extensive contact with the people of Eritrea. Their language is the biggest evidence, since it was once a dialect of Tigre, an Eritrean Semitic language.
Then I must be following the theme that you started yourself, as my replies address *your* posts.
quote: You're bringing zero substance to the table.
Oh yeah, what "substance" have you brought to the table, other than bragging about Eritrea supposedly representing "Africa's 2nd greatest past", and accusing me of things that don't exist?
quote: Eritrean history is marginalized is largely the topic, despite it predating anything that part of Africa has to offer.
What does "predating anything that part of Africa has to offer" entail?
quote: For a small area as Eritrea is, one can not over look at how it dwarfs Ethiopia in archeological historical finds.
You are trying to transpose a historical complex into a state of a fairly modern design yourself. While in some cases this may be possible to do so to some degree, it is not necessarily always that straight forward; do you know the political borders of say, Aksum? If so, was this limited to just the territory of Eritrea? Please demonstrate.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
Then I must be following the theme that you started yourself, as my replies address *your* posts.
quote: You're bringing zero substance to the table.
Oh yeah, what "substance" have you brought to the table, other than bragging about Eritrea supposedly representing "Africa's 2nd greatest past", and accusing me of things that don't exist?
quote: Eritrean history is marginalized is largely the topic, despite it predating anything that part of Africa has to offer.
What does "predating anything that part of Africa has to offer" entail?
quote: For a small area as Eritrea is, one can not over look at how it dwarfs Ethiopia in archeological historical finds.
You are trying to transpose a historical complex into a state of a fairly modern design yourself. While in some cases this may be possible to do so to some degree, it is not necessarily always that straight forward; do you know the political borders of say, Aksum? If so, was this limited to just the territory of Eritrea? Please demonstrate.
I already gave the archeological borders of the Aksumite empire. It has more to do with Eritrea than it does with Ethiopia because of Ethiopia's vast size. Also, Aksumite empire arose largely from city-states in Eritrea and northern Tigray.
I never said Eritrea's borders are different. I clearly mentioned LIKE EVERY AFRICAN NATION, Ethiopia's borders are based on backdoor colonial treaties....So how can you say i'm excluding Eritrea? What you tried to say, or from what I gather is, Eritrea is part of Ethiopia, despite Eritrea predating Ethiopia or the very word Ethiopia itself predating any civilization in Ethiopia. Eritrea is a modern nation-state, the same way with Ethiopia.
Everything else, from my title, to every tiny little thing, you just love to argue over. I have substance because I posted sources. The other guy on here has substance because he posted sources. YOU? you just argue and want substance shoved to you for common sense.
Posts: 13 | Registered: Jan 2009
| IP: Logged |
You are trying to transpose a historical complex into a state of a fairly modern design yourself. While in some cases this may be possible to do so to some degree, it is not necessarily always that straight forward; do you know the political borders of say, Aksum? If so, was this limited to just the territory of Eritrea? Please demonstrate.
I already gave the archeological borders of the Aksumite empire.
You know, at first I thought it might be a matter of willful ignorance, but I think there really is a language barrier issue here. I asked for you to demonstrate the political borders of Aksum, and if it lay squarely and solely in the territory of what is now the modern nation of Eritrea, and you speak of "archaeological" borders?
quote:
It has more to do with Eritrea than it does with Ethiopia because of Ethiopia's vast size. Also, Aksumite empire arose largely from city-states in Eritrea and northern Tigray.
More here and there is immaterial. Btw, where is northern Tigray; is it a nation of its own or it's part of another?
quote:
I never said Eritrea's borders are different.
And nobody else said anything to that end. You spend your entire time either chasing your accusations and other self-made up nonsense that *don't exist*, while either misunderstanding and/or avoiding what's actually said.
Case in point:
I clearly mentioned LIKE EVERY AFRICAN NATION, Ethiopia's borders are based on backdoor colonial treaties....So how can you say i'm excluding Eritrea?
Who said anything about "excluding Eritrea" other than yourself; and where?
quote: What you tried to say, or from what I gather is, Eritrea is part of Ethiopia
Where? How about citing what I actually said for once, instead of telling us "what you gather" or what I "tried" to say; I don't "try" to say things, I just come and say them as I see them.
quote: despite Eritrea predating Ethiopia or the very word Ethiopia itself predating any civilization in Ethiopia.
Eritrea is a modern state which predates the state of Ethiopia (aka Abyssinia) ; according to what primary historical source?
quote: Eritrea is a modern nation-state, the same way with Ethiopia.
Exactly, and hence, your double standards as noted.
quote: Everything else, from my title, to every tiny little thing, you just love to argue over.
Your title is just plain ridiculous, but I took your word for it that you did it as "an attention grabber", and so I left it at that. Kid, you say I love to argue, but all can see that my responses only come in the way of yours. You spend your time making frivolous accusation while avoiding real posts, and you say others love to argue? Is that some kind of a twisted Eritrean mentality? BTW, in your neck of the woods, ever heard of first asking questions about things you don't understand, before misunderstanding and unnecessarily forging claims?
quote: I have substance because I posted sources.
That speak of Aksum, which many of us have visited at some point or another at any rate? Just about anyone can do that, just post links here and there, but what's the point?
quote: The other guy on here has substance because he posted sources. YOU? you just argue and want substance shoved to you for common sense.
Listen, kid; who am I arguing with? News flash; it's a two way street. But the question is: How did we get here? Was it not your ignorant ass that misunderstood, or rather misinterpreted me, and instead of admitting error, you go onto argue like the little kid you are? So whose the moaning kid here, wonder boy?
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Kassala771: Well, the Russian Federation and the Eritrean government believe Abraham Hannibal is of Eritrean in origin. The Russian government believes it so much that they're building a museum in Asmara, Eritrea and a life-size bronze statue of Alexander Pushkin in the Eritrean capital. Construction will be completed in early May of 2009
I don't think I have to post sources stating he is of Eritrean in Origin for anyone can google that quick and find dozens. In fact, most historians agree he is of Eritrean in origin do to the following facts listed below.
I think the discussion will definitely sound better if we leave out arguments relying on public authority. I still believe, however, that you are underestimating scholarly Russian acceptance of Gnammankou's theory.
quote:It's pretty hard for any other country, outside of Eritrea to claim Abraham Hannibal. For starters, you need a town or a village called Logon or similar to it- Eritrea has 7, with the village of Lagwen in Eritrea being his birth place.
Gnammankou stressed the fact that attention should only be given to Hanibal's direct quote, that only mentions a birthplace of the L-G-N type. Hence, one would have to stick to toponyms of this very type, not those that are "similar", such as toponyms lacking a "n", etc. From what I get (tell me if I am wrong), most towns studied in Eritrea don't have a "n", only "Lagwen" having it.
Still, I'm having a hard time believing Gnammankou's claim that Cameroon's Logone is the only city in Africa with such a consonantic structure, since toponyms are the most likely words to show fortuitous similarities to other when their etymology isn't mentioned.
Never made a research about its history, but the first example coming to mind would be that of the coastal city of Legon in Ghana, the place where the best West African University is located.
Tourneux, while believing Hanibal's L-G-N has only anything to do with Logone-Birni, and not another L-G-N, Logone-Gana a minor city in the same area.
About "Lagwen", I can't seriously pronounce on it because I don't have access to the information about the story your pal get in there, but you have to understand me when I feel this stuff sounds almost too perfect to be true.
quote:Then, you need this village or town to be located by a sea, since Abraham was taken by sea. Again, Eritrea faces the Red Sea.
According to Gnammankou, the Logone River in Northern Cameroon is navigable.
quote:Then you need to have the Ottoman empire on your soil at the exact date of his abduction. As anyone knows, the Ottoman empire were in firm control of the Eritrean coast and off and on over the in lands for 300+ years.
Then to top all this off, you need a port that was known to export salves. As soon as slaves are mentioned, most scholars think of west Africa but in reality, the port city of Massawa, which was under the direct control of the Ottomans for 320 years was known to have exported lots of slaves into India and Arab countries.
Apparently, at the time of Hanibal's abduction, the state of Logone Birni was a tributary state to the Bagirmi Empire that was in direct trade with the Ottoman Empire. Plus, many of the Black Children in the Sultan's court were from Chad Lake area.
quote:Then the name Abraham - this is a Hebrew name. Christians typically adopted this name, while Muslims use Ibrahim. unlike other parts of Africa who claim Abraham, Islam and Christianity came to Eritrea very early. Therefore, how likely is it for a Cameroon country to claim Abraham when that name was not common till Christianity came to their region during colonial era?
Apparently, some traveller named H.Barth reported that the name of the ruler in Logone at this time was "Brouha", that was, according to Tourneux, probably pronounced "bughuro" or "boghoro", this word doesn't correspond to a King contemporary to Hanibal. Still, I have it from Gnammankou that the name Ibrahim was given to him when he came to Turkey.
Posts: 307 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
Looking at the number of villages that start with the letter "L", it would not be surprising if all the villages in Africa that start with the letter "L" claim to be the origin of Abraham's birthplace. How did the letter "L" became the first candidate? The main source of the story is Abraham Hannibal himself. In a letter addressed to Czarina Elizabeth in 1742, Abraham mentioned that he was born in a place called Lagone in Africa. He also mentioned that he was the son of a local ruler, hence the source of the idea that Abraham was the son of a ruler or was a prince. The last part could be an exaggeration on the part of Hannibal since he was petitioning Empress Elizabeth in the same letter for the rank of the nobility. The notion that Abraham Hannibal was the direct descendant of the Carthaginian general, Hannibal, was first advocated by Abraham's son-in-law, Adam Rotkirkh. Abraham, it must be noted, did not add Hannibal to his name before he went to France. Rotkirkh is also believed to be the source of the"Abyssinian birth" of Abraham.
Abyssinia is the former name of Ethiopia. With the "Abyssinian birth" theory the area of Mereb which borders Eritrea (Ethiopia directly ruled Eritrea from 1962 to 1991) was the main candidate as the birthplace of Abraham. Hugh Barnes and Frances Somers Cocks both visited potential villages that would have qualified as the birthplace of Abraham. None of the people who had ever written or searched for the birthplace of Abraham ever visited a village called Lagwen, which is located 12 kms. outside of Asmara(the capital of Eritrea). That means all the researchers had been searching in the wrong area. None of the places (Logo, Logo Sarda, Logone..) that were visited by the aforementioned authors or the previous authors claimed that Abraham was from there. Even Logone-Birini was not aware of its "famous son" until researchers came and start asking them about Abraham and Pushkin. Unlike all the other potential villages, Lagwen, on the other hand, has an oral history and written genealogy of Abraham Hannibal. According to the oral tradition of Lagwen, Abraham was abducted from a small hill called Gobo Una Mariam. Lagwen's claim should be studied thoroughly.
Turkish Rule
Abraham was taken from Africa and then taken to Turkey. Hugh Barnes pretty much has covered Abraham's life from the time he left Turkey up to his death in Russia. How did Abraham get to Turkey? What was the relationship between the countries who claim Abraham's birth as their own and Turkey? Again, Eritrea is a much better candidate than Cameroon for the following reasons.
1.Parts of Eritrea (especially Massawa and the coastal areas) were under the direct rule of Turkey for centuries. Turkey's incursion into highland Eritrea is also known (Lagwen is located in the highlands of Eritrea). One might hear the term "Gez'at Turki" (the rule of Turkey) in Eritrea. This is in reference to an authoritarian and brutal domination that Eritrea went through under the rule of Turkey.
2. Geography. Eritrea which is located in the Horn of Africa on the Red Sea coast is much closer to Turkey than Logone-Birini's which is located south of Lake Chad in West Africa.
3. Abraham was taken by ship to Turkey. Massawa, a major port in Eritrea, was under the direct rule of Turkey. Massawa was a major port for exporting slaves and other commodities to the rest of the world. Most of the slaves taken through Massawa were taken to the Middle East and India. (Note: There are a group of people in India known as Habishis who had been in India for four centuries who claim the area of the Horn of Africa as their homeland).
Finally, I highly recommend that people read Hugh Barnes' Gannibal : The Moor of Petersburg for detailed life of Abraham P. Hannibal. There are several important findings in Barnes' book. The first is the information of the newly found book written by Abraham Hannibal entitled Geometry and Fortification and an unpublished book entitled Artificial Fireworks. The second important information concerns Abraham's life in France. Abraham knew leaders of the French Enlightenment. According to Barnes, Montesquieu even praised Abraham as the "dark star of Russia's enlightenment". Third is the fact that Abraham's role in using fireworks to investigate the military potential of rocketry is highly significant. Barnes in his book quotes works by Simon Werret entitled Projecting Modernity: A Social History of Rocketry, which argues that (H) Gannibal's work on the 'secret howitzer' paved the way for the development of the first military rockets by the British inventor Sir William Congreve in the early nineteen century. And much more.
quote:Originally posted by Please call me MIDOGBE:
quote:Originally posted by Kassala771: Well, the Russian Federation and the Eritrean government believe Abraham Hannibal is of Eritrean in origin. The Russian government believes it so much that they're building a museum in Asmara, Eritrea and a life-size bronze statue of Alexander Pushkin in the Eritrean capital. Construction will be completed in early May of 2009
I don't think I have to post sources stating he is of Eritrean in Origin for anyone can google that quick and find dozens. In fact, most historians agree he is of Eritrean in origin do to the following facts listed below.
I think the discussion will definitely sound better if we leave out arguments relying on public authority. I still believe, however, that you are underestimating scholarly Russian acceptance of Gnammankou's theory.
quote:It's pretty hard for any other country, outside of Eritrea to claim Abraham Hannibal. For starters, you need a town or a village called Logon or similar to it- Eritrea has 7, with the village of Lagwen in Eritrea being his birth place.
Gnammankou stressed the fact that attention should only be given to Hanibal's direct quote, that only mentions a birthplace of the L-G-N type. Hence, one would have to stick to toponyms of this very type, not those that are "similar", such as toponyms lacking a "n", etc. From what I get (tell me if I am wrong), most towns studied in Eritrea don't have a "n", only "Lagwen" having it.
Still, I'm having a hard time believing Gnammankou's claim that Cameroon's Logone is the only city in Africa with such a consonantic structure, since toponyms are the most likely words to show fortuitous similarities to other when their etymology isn't mentioned.
Never made a research about its history, but the first example coming to mind would be that of the coastal city of Legon in Ghana, the place where the best West African University is located.
Tourneux, while believing Hanibal's L-G-N has only anything to do with Logone-Birni, and not another L-G-N, Logone-Gana a minor city in the same area.
About "Lagwen", I can't seriously pronounce on it because I don't have access to the information about the story your pal get in there, but you have to understand me when I feel this stuff sounds almost too perfect to be true.
quote:Then, you need this village or town to be located by a sea, since Abraham was taken by sea. Again, Eritrea faces the Red Sea.
According to Gnammankou, the Logone River in Northern Cameroon is navigable.
quote:Then you need to have the Ottoman empire on your soil at the exact date of his abduction. As anyone knows, the Ottoman empire were in firm control of the Eritrean coast and off and on over the in lands for 300+ years.
Then to top all this off, you need a port that was known to export salves. As soon as slaves are mentioned, most scholars think of west Africa but in reality, the port city of Massawa, which was under the direct control of the Ottomans for 320 years was known to have exported lots of slaves into India and Arab countries.
Apparently, at the time of Hanibal's abduction, the state of Logone Birni was a tributary state to the Bagirmi Empire that was in direct trade with the Ottoman Empire. Plus, many of the Black Children in the Sultan's court were from Chad Lake area.
quote:Then the name Abraham - this is a Hebrew name. Christians typically adopted this name, while Muslims use Ibrahim. unlike other parts of Africa who claim Abraham, Islam and Christianity came to Eritrea very early. Therefore, how likely is it for a Cameroon country to claim Abraham when that name was not common till Christianity came to their region during colonial era?
Apparently, some traveller named H.Barth reported that the name of the ruler in Logone at this time was "Brouha", that was, according to Tourneux, probably pronounced "bughuro" or "boghoro", this word doesn't correspond to a King contemporary to Hanibal. Still, I have it from Gnammankou that the name Ibrahim was given to him when he came to Turkey.
Yes, the Ottoman-Turks converted Abraham to Islam and dubbed him Ibrahim. That's what the general agreed theory is.
you said,
"About "Lagwen", I can't seriously pronounce on it because I don't have access to the information about the story your pal get in there, but you have to understand me when I feel this stuff sounds almost too perfect to be true."
We agree he's African. That feeling is a fact. What we disagree is on his birthplace. Most historians, including the Russian Government (this is a fact, not a feeling), say he is from Eritrea. Therefore, it's up to you to showcase the other view with hard facts and not hunches. No hard feelings, that's just the reality I choose to want to live in.
Here's a map of Africa
Lagwen, Eritrea is about 12 to 20 miles away from the Red Sea.
The place you're advocating looks to me from about 250 - 350 miles away from the Sea. Given that you said a river flows throw it that can carry it to sea but again, you have to ask yourself, how likely were the Ottomans to come in, win a small battle, take the boy and escape
Lagwen, Eritrea is not too far away from Turkey, where Abraham was taken. Logone looks like the journey is a bit further.
Again, the Ottomans were clearly in Eritrea for over 300 years. They completely built what's now considered the old town part of Massawa. The village you're advocating can't possibly say the Ottomans were in their territory with out involving some 3rd party such as the Bagirmi Empire. Now then you have to explain why would the Bagirmi invade that part of the World and start a conflict? You have to also explain why would they sell their captured slaves to the Ottomans, who were the Super power of their time and can get their own slaves for free?
Ignore the modern Ships and some other objects but largely, that's how Massawa probably would have looked like while Abraham was being taken away to Turkey.
What caught my attention is you said many of the slaves of the Sultan came from Chad...I would love to see that source...that's probably a great point if you can source it.
Posts: 13 | Registered: Jan 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Modern Day eritrea is not The Eritrea u claim Kassala because Eritrea consist of 9 tribes and the earliest to come are the Rashaida from Saudi and there is no way that the other tribes have any thing to do with this Aksum kingdom or this Bahri kingdom those two kingdoms are confined to people who speak Tigrinia. The other Tribes of both Eritrea and Sudan all had different groups and None of them ever called themselves Eritrean or the people of Bahri Negash
Posts: 69 | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic