posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by osirion:
Pre-Aksumite contact with the Sabean culture is way overexaggerated. It was primarily religious in nature and not a major revolutionary social event. Aksum was built by indigenous Ethiopians!

---

Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Yom:

Wrong, "Habashat" is an Ethiopian name referring to all of the Ethiopian tribes. It was first found in a Sabaean inscription talking about the king of Aksum, referring to him as the King of "the tribes of Habashat" and has only ever been used to describe peoples in Ethiopia, not in South Arabia. Besides, the Sabaean invasion theory has long been discredited. When did the Greeks in your view? Did the Greeks die out before 300 AD then? I can show you another image of the inscription showing both languages and alphabets used if you need.

Here's one:



You can see the title "King of Kings" on the fourth line of the Greek text" (Basileus Basileon - Greek alphabet - BACIΛEYC BACIΛEωN)

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Supercar:

"Ethiopian" in Greek, meant "burnt face", is that what "Habasha" means? Yes, the Habasha were natives of Aksum, but that doesn't mean that the Sabeans didn't migrate into the region in the early phases of the Aksumite complex, an indigenous cultural complex of the region.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Yom:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Supercar:
"Ethiopian" in Greek, meant "burnt face", is that what "Habasha" means?

---

Habesha or HBSHT is just a name assigned to the collective of tribes of Ethiopia. That Ezana equates the two indicates that Ethiopia has been used for the state the developed into modern Ethiopia by its inhabitants since at least the early to mid 4th century AD.

quote:

---

Yes, the Habasha were natives of Aksum, but that doesn't mean that the Sabeans didn't migrate into the region in the early phases of the Aksumite complex, an indigenous cultural complex of the region.

---

If you want to use technical logic, then one does not necessarily follow from the other, but that the term is only used to refer (in Sabaean texts as well) to Ethiopians and kings of Ethiopia indicates that the tribe is Ethiopian, though it does not necessarily mean that it didn't descend from Yemenis earlier. However, the Sabaean migration has been discredited as I stated earlier. The proto-Aksumite culture is ca. 5th/4th c. BC-1st c. BC/AD and shows few connections to South Arabia, especially when compared to D`mt. The Sabaean migration was supposed to have happened ca. 5th c. BC, however, yet this is when the D`mt culture is ending (8th c. BC-5th c. BC, primarily 8th-7th c. BC). Either way, connections between Ethiopia and Yemen need not be from a migration from either coast to the other, as cultural connections are known from much earlier, such as the Tihama cultural complex dating to the mid-2nd-1st millenium BC (which may have been primarily Africna in origin - see Martin Richards, et al 2003).

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Supercar:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Yom:
Habesha or HBSHT is just a name assigned to the collective of tribes of Ethiopia. That Ezana equates the two indicates that Ethiopia has been used for the state the developed into modern Ethiopia by its inhabitants since at least the early to mid 4th century AD.

---

This doesn't answer the question posed.

quote:

---

Yom:
If you want to use technical logic, then one does not necessarily follow from the other, but that the term is only used to refer (in Sabaean texts as well) to Ethiopians and kings of Ethiopia indicates that the tribe is Ethiopian, though it does not necessarily mean that it didn't descend from Yemenis earlier.

---

Who said anything of the kind, to justify this response?

quote:

---

Yom:
However, the Sabaean migration has been discredited as I stated earlier.

---

Nope. Sabean migration into the region has NOT been discredited. You need to rethink that position.

quote:

---

Yom:
The proto-Aksumite culture is ca. 5th/4th c. BC-1st c. BC/AD and shows few connections to South Arabia, especially when compared to D`mt. The Sabaean migration was supposed to have happened ca. 5th c. BC, however, yet this is when the D`mt culture is ending (8th c. BC-5th c. BC, primarily 8th-7th c. BC).

---

Apparently, the Sabeans had been in the region by the time the D'mt elites came into being, as evidenced by scripts found on relics from that period.

quote:

---

Yom:
Either way, connections between Ethiopia and Yemen need not be from a migration from either coast to the other, as cultural connections are known from much earlier, such as the Tihama cultural complex dating to the mid-2nd-1st millenium BC (which may have been primarily Africna in origin - see Martin Richards, et al 2003).

---

I guess you will by now, have noticed the contradictions in your earlier claim of Sabean migration being 'discredited' and this one - right? Did Sabeans influence Ethiopian natives culturally in some ways, during their presence in the region? Yes.
Can they be considered to be responsible for the Aksum cultural complex? No. The culture that developed, was indigenous in character, though not without any outside influences, which is hardly unique to the Aksumite complex. The likes of Fattovich and Munro Hay make good cases on this.

---

Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Yom:

quote:

---

Supercar:
This doesn't answer the question posed.

---

Sure it does. You asked what it means, and I told you that it's simply a name. It doesn't have a meaning. Possible cognates to the h-b-š root exist, though. I don't remember what they are, however.

quote:

---

Who said anything of the kind, to justify this response?

---

It stemmed from a bit of a mis-read from your response.

quote:

---

Nope. Sabean migration into the region has NOT been discredited. You need to rethink that position.

---

Sorry, I wasn't clear. What I meant was that substantial Sabaean migration (i.e. enough to change the population or found Aksum) has been discredited, which it has. See Stuart-Munro Hay's Aksum (which I'm sure you have, as I've seen it posted here before), where he notes that Sabaean migration was limited to a few localities and lasted only a few decades or a century before disappearing.

quote:

---

Apparently, the Sabeans had been in the region by the time the D'mt elites came into being, as evidenced by scripts found on relics from that period.

---

I don't think the scripts prove anything of the sort. Proto-Ge'ez (language) scripts in the Sabaean alphabet with just as old a pedigree as the Sabaean ones have been found. It shows simply that the same script was used, which isn't surprising considering their proximity. In fact, given Ethiopia's proximity to Egypt and the known cultural contacts between Egypt and certain cultural complexes in Western Eritrea & N. Ethiopia (see Fattovich's work, it should be easy to google), it would seem more likely to me that the alphabet would have been transmitted directly from Egypt to the Horn and South Arabia in the form of a South Semitic alphabet.

I do believe that some of the inscriptions of the time period are also in Sabaean language, but, again, that doesn't mean that the D`mt civilization was founded by Sabaeans, just as the common Greek inscriptions of Aksum (coins were only in Greek, even the bronze and silver ones for more domestic use, for a long time) doesn't mean that the civilization was founded by Sabaeans. Further, since Ge'ez is now known not to be a descendent of Sabaean, the actual use of Sabaean as a primary language is unlikely.

quote:

---

I guess you will by now, have noticed the contradictions in your earlier claim of Sabean migration being 'discredited' and this one - right? Did Sabeans influence Ethiopian natives culturally in some ways, during their presence in the region? Yes.

---

In case you misread, if you re-read what I wrote, it said that the Tihama cultural complex was African (i.e. N. Ethiopian and Eritrean) in origin (I inserted the probably because I only cited one source claiming that). I don't deny that any migration has taken place, though.

quote:

---

Can they be considered to be responsible for the Aksum cultural complex? No. The culture that developed, was indigenous in character, though not without any outside influences, which is hardly unique to the Aksumite complex. The likes of Fattovich and Munro Hay make good cases on this.

---

Then here we do not disagree.

---

Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                   

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
Here is an even better place for your debate Yom and Super!

---

Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Supercar:

quote:

---

Yom:
Sure it does. You asked what it means, and I told you that it's simply a name. It doesn't have a meaning. Possible cognates to the h-b-š root exist, though. I don't remember what they are, however.

---

I am assuming you are a capable reader, and as such, can you keep a straight face, and insist that the non-answer above, answers this:

"Ethiopian" in Greek, meant "burnt face", is that what "Habasha" means?

^It is precise and concise; it doesn't say what does "Habasha" mean? Got it.

quote:

---

Yom:

Sorry, I wasn't clear. What I meant was that substantial Sabaean migration (i.e. enough to change the population or found Aksum) has been discredited, which it has.

---

And who would have proposed a population replacement?

quote:

---

Yom:
See Stuart-Munro Hay's Aksum (which I'm sure you have, as I've seen it posted here before), where he notes that Sabaean migration was limited to a few localities and lasted only a few decades or a century before disappearing.

---

This is what was stated as per Munro Hay:

"The sites chosen by them may be related to their relative ease of access to the Red Sea coast. Arthur Irvine (1977) and others have regarded sympathetically the suggestion that the inscriptions which testify to Sabaean presence in Ethiopia may have been set up by colonists around the time of the Sabaean ruler Karibil Watar in the late fourth century BC; but the dating is very uncertain, as noted above. They may have been military or trading colonists, living in some sort of symbiosis with the local Ethiopian population, perhaps under a species of treaty-status....

It seems that the pre-Aksumite society on the Tigray plateau, centred in the Aksum/Yeha region but extending from Tekondo in the north to Enderta in the south (Schneider 1973: 389), had achieved state level, and that the major entity came to be called D`MT (Di`amat, Damot?), as appears in the regal title `mukarrib of Da`mot and Saba'. The name may survive in the Aksumite titulature as Tiamo/Tsiyamo (Ch. 7: 5). Its rulers, kings and mukarribs, by including the name Saba in their titles, appear to have expressly claimed control over the resident Sabaeans in their country; actual Sabaean presence is assumed at Matara, Yeha and Hawelti-Melazo according to present information (Schneider 1973: 388)." - Stuart Munro-Hay

quote:

---

Yom:

I don't think the scripts prove anything of the sort. Proto-Ge'ez (language) scripts in the Sabaean alphabet with just as old a pedigree as the Sabaean ones have been found.

---

More from Munro Hay:

"The Sabaeans in Ethiopia appear, from the use of certain place-names like Marib in their inscriptions, to have kept in contact with their own country, and indeed the purpose of their presence may well have been to maintain and develop links across the sea to the profit of South Arabia's trading network.

Naturally, such an arrangement would have worked also to the benefit of the indigenous Ethiopian rulers, who employed the titles mukarrib and mlkn at first, and nagashi (najashi) or negus later; no pre-Aksumite najashi or negus is known.


The inscriptions dating from this period in Ethiopia are apparently written in two languages, pure Sabaean and another language with certain aspects found later in Ge`ez (Schneider 1976). All the royal inscriptions are in this second, presumably Ethiopian, language. A number of different tribes and families seem to be mentioned by the inscriptions of this period, but there is no evidence to show whether any of these groups lasted into the Aksumite period.

Only the word YG`DYN, man of Yeg`az, might hint that the Ge`ez or Agazyan tribe was established so early, though the particular inscription which mentions it is written in the South Arabian rather than the Ethiopian language (Schneider 1961). Some of the other apparently tribal names also occur in both groups of inscriptions. The usual way of referring to someone in the inscriptions is `N. of the family N. of the tribe N.', possibly also reflected later by the Aksumite `Bisi'-title; `king N. man of the tribe/clan (?) N.' (Ch. 7: 5).


It seems that these `inscriptional' Sabaeans did not remain more than a century or so — or perhaps even only a few decades — as a separate and identifiable people. Possibly their presence was connected to a contemporary efflorescence of Saba on the other side of the Red Sea. Their influence was only in a limited geographical area, affecting the autochthonous population in that area to a greater or lesser degree. Such influences as did remain after their departure or assimilation fused with the local cultural background, and contributed to the ensemble of traits which constituted Ethiopian civilisation in the rest of the pre-Aksumite period.

Indeed, it may be that the Sabaeans were able to establish themselves in Ethiopia in the first place because both their civilisation and that of mid-1st millenium Ethiopia already had something in common; it has been suggested that earlier migrations or contacts might have taken place, leaving a kind of cultural sympathy between the two areas which allowed the later contact to flourish easily. The precise nature of the contacts between the two areas, their range in commercial, linguistic or cultural terms, and their chronology, is still a major question, and discussion of this fascinating problem continues (Marrassini 1985; Avanzini 1987; Pirenne 1987; Isaac and Felder 1988).

Jacqueline Pirenne's most recent (1987) proposal results in a radically different view of the Ethiopian/South Arabian contacts. Weighing up the evidence from all sides, particularly aspects of material culture and linguistic/palaeographic information, she suggests that "il est donc vraisemblable que l'expansion ne s'est pas faite du Yémen vers l'Ethiopie, mais bien en sens inverse: de l'Ethiopie vers le Yémen". According to this theory, one group of Sabaeans would have left north Arabia (where they were then established) for Ethiopia in about the eighth or seventh century BC under pressure from the Assyrians; they then continued on into south Arabia. A second wave of emigrants, in the sixth and fifth century, would reign over the kingdom of Da'amat (D`MT), and would have been accompanied by Hebrews fleeing after Nebuchadnezzar's capture of Jerusalem; an explanation for the later Ethiopian traditions with their Jewish and Biblical flavour, and for the Falashas or black Jews of Ethiopia.

On that note, we come to....

"Aksumite origins are still uncertain, but a strong South Arabian (Sabaean) influence in architecture, religion, and cultural features can be detected in the pre-Aksumite period from about the fifth century BC, and it is clear that contacts across the Red Sea were at one time very close (Ch. 4: 1).

A kingdom called D`MT (perhaps to be read Da`mot or Di`amat) is attested in Ethiopian inscriptions at this early date, and, though the period between this and the development of Aksum around the beginning of the Christian era is an Ethiopian `Dark Age' for us at present, it may be surmised that the D`MT monarchy and its successors, and other Ethiopian chiefdoms, continued something of the same *`Ethio-Sabaean'* civilisation until eventually subordinated by Aksum." - S. Munro-Hay

There you have it: *`Ethio-Sabaean'* civilisation until eventually subordinated by Aksum."

Also posted earlier in:
http://phpbb-host.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=725&mforum=thenile

Ps - of course, the aforementioned is not suggesting a South Arabian origin for the said complex, but speaking in terms of potential 'commonality' between them, and in other cases, cultural exchanges, as in the examples provided. The Sabean immigrants, whom Munro-Hay referred to as "inscriptional Sabeans", didn't appear to have maintained a lengthy presence as a "separate identifiable" people; thus if they did stay beyond the time estimations of what the archeological indicators suggest [according to Munro-Hay, no more than a century or so at best], then it is they who had eventually assimilated into the local populace, which could be facilitated by adopting the cultures of the locals, so as to blend in culturally.

quote:

---

Yom:
It shows simply that the same script was used, which isn't surprising considering their proximity. In fact, given Ethiopia's proximity to Egypt and the known cultural contacts between Egypt and certain cultural complexes in Western Eritrea & N. Ethiopia (see Fattovich's work, it should be easy to google), it would seem more likely to me that the alphabet would have been transmitted directly from Egypt to the Horn and South Arabia in the form of a South Semitic alphabet.

---

Firstly, no such alphabet has been found to have been developed in Egypt, at least not in a direct sense. Secondly, the Arabian script was found to have been in use before its use in the African Horn. Thirdly, the Sabeans had been to the region; hence, that they could have taken their script along with them, comes as no surprise.

quote:

---

Yom:
I do believe that some of the inscriptions of the time period are also in Sabaean language, but, again, that doesn't mean that the D`mt civilization was founded by Sabaeans, just as the common Greek inscriptions of Aksum (coins were only in Greek, even the bronze and silver ones for more domestic use, for a long time) doesn't mean that the civilization was founded by Sabaeans. Further, since Ge'ez is now known not to be a descendent of Sabaean, the actual use of Sabaean as a primary language is unlikely.

---

If Munro-Hay's notes are anything to go by, it would appear that the DMT elites were likely native Ethiopians, as opposed to Sabean rulers.

"Ge'ez" itself is Ethiopian, NOT south Arabian, but the script with which it was subsequently communicated, show obvious south Arabian influences.

quote:

---

Yom:
In case you misread, if you re-read what I wrote, it said that the Tihama cultural complex was African (i.e. N. Ethiopian and Eritrean) in origin (I inserted the probably because I only cited one source claiming that).

---

That would make the two of us, who must have 'mis-read' your writing, because you said:

Either way, connections between Ethiopia and Yemen need not be from a migration from either coast to the other, as cultural connections are known from much earlier, such as the Tihama cultural complex dating to the mid-2nd-1st millenium BC (which may have been primarily Africna in origin - see Martin Richards, et al 2003).

Clearly that statement, contradicts your earlier statement that Sabean migration had been discredited!

quote:

---

Yom:
I don't deny that any migration has taken place, though.

---

Of course you can't deny it; the evidence against such a denial is overwhelming. There has apparently been no population replacement at any point of bidirectional migration across the Red Sea, but you don't have evidence to conclude that there was no significant migration from South Arabia in the pre-Aksumite period.

---

Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Yom:

quote:

---

Supercar:
I am assuming you are a capable reader, and as such, can you keep a straight face, and insist that the non-answer above, answers this:

"Ethiopian" in Greek, meant "burnt face", is that what "Habasha" means?

^It is precise and concise; it doesn't say what does "Habasha" mean? Got it.

---

Need I be so blunt (and please be more polite in your response)? Here is your answer: "no."

Long answer: I don't remember exactly what the h-b-š root referred to, but I believed it involved trade, and in Arabic had something to do with gathering of troops, or the like. Don't quote me on the former, but I think I'm right on the latter.

quote:

---

Super:And who would have proposed a population replacement?

---

No one here, but many past scholars. I wasn't countering a population replacement, anyway, but a major genetic impact (i.e. that Ethiopians are highly miscegenated).

See Stuart-Munro Hay's Aksum (which I'm sure you have, as I've seen it posted here before), where he notes that Sabaean migration was limited to a few localities and lasted only a few decades or a century before disappearing.

quote:

---

Supercar:

Apparently, the Sabeans had been in the region by the time the D'mt elites came into being, as evidenced by scripts found on relics from that period.

---

I don't think the scripts prove anything of the sort. Proto-Ge'ez (language) scripts in the Sabaean alphabet with just as old a pedigree as the Sabaean ones have been found.

quote:

---

More from Munro Hay:

"The Sabaeans in Ethiopia appear, from the use of certain place-names like Marib in their inscriptions, to have kept in contact with their own country, and indeed the purpose of their presence may well have been to maintain and develop links across the sea to the profit of South Arabia's trading network.

---

**Cut out a lot of quotations**

quote:

---

There you have it: *`Ethio-Sabaean' civilisation until eventually subordinated by Aksum."

---

It should be noted, however, that Ethio-Sabaean is a term used because of the script and certain cultural affinities and not because it was an Ethiopian civilization founded by Sabaeans (not that you're suggesting that, but to clear any confusion for others). The traditional dating of the Sabaean migration and D`mt dates still do not fit, however, and a lot of archaeological and chronological work still has to be done before a clear picture emerges.

quote:

---

Super:
Also posted earlier in:
http://phpbb-host.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=725&mforum=thenile

Ps - of course, the aforementioned is not suggesting a South Arabian origin for the said complex, but speaking in terms of potential 'commonality' between them, and in other cases, cultural exchanges, as in the examples provided. The Sabean immigrants, whom Munro-Hay referred to as "inscriptional Sabeans", didn't appear to have maintained a lengthy presence as a "separate identifiable" people; thus if they did stay beyond the time estimations of what the archeological indicators suggest [according to Munro-Hay, no more than a century or so at best], then it is they who had eventually assimilated into the local populace, which could be facilitated by adopting the cultures of the locals, so as to blend in culturally.

---

No arguments here.

quote:

---

Super:Firstly, no such alphabet has been found to have been developed in Egypt, at least not in a direct sense. Secondly, the Arabian script was found to have been in use before its use in the African Horn. Thirdly, the Sabeans had been to the region; hence, that they could have taken their script along with them, comes as no surprise.

---

What about the Wadi el-Hol script in Middle Egypt? There have only been two scripts of such an ancient pedigree found in Egypt thus far, so you can't rule out that the Alphabet spread South concurrent to its northern spread, especially with sea contacts, since the Red sea has always been an international tradeway. When's the earliest use in South Arabia, and when's the earliest use in Ethiopia? I'm sure that ESA is attested to 700 BC in Ethiopia (e.g. D`mt), and Ge'ez graffiti (in a South Semitic script, presumably Epigraphic South Arabian, though I'm not sure) exists around or before that time period. Again, the whole period is still very hazy.

If Munro-Hay's notes are anything to go by, it would appear that the DMT elites were likely native Ethiopians, as opposed to Sabean rulers.

"Ge'ez" itself is Ethiopian, NOT south Arabian, but the script with which it was subsequently communicated, show obvious south Arabian influences.

quote:

---

Sure, but I still think very little is known about South Semitic scripts in the 2nd millenium BC, making determinations difficult.

---

Either way, connections between Ethiopia and Yemen need not be from a migration from either coast to the other, as cultural connections are known from much earlier, such as the Tihama cultural complex dating to the mid-2nd-1st millenium BC (which may have been primarily Africna in origin - see Martin Richards, et al 2003).

quote:

---

Clearly that statement, contradicts your earlier statement that Sabean migration had been discredited!

---

As I said above, by Sabaean migration I didn't mean any migration, but the traditional hypothesis of a Sabaean migration in which a superior Sabaean colonist force takes control of N. Ethiopia and marks the beginning of civilization there. I still don't see how a statement about a cultural complex existing in both Ethiopia and Yemen that is African in origin indicates the existence of a Sabaean migration (ignoring the degree to which it existed for now), though.

quote:

---

Yom:
I don't deny that any migration has taken place, though.[QUOTE]Of course you can't deny it; the evidence against such a denial is overwhelming. There has apparently been no population replacement at any point of bidirectional migration across the Red Sea, but you don't have evidence to conclude that there was no significant migration from South Arabia in the pre-Aksumite period. [/QB]

---

What do you define as significant?

---

Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                   

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hikuptah:
If Nubia and Kemet were the same people why cant the Sabean and Ethiopians be the same people. For instance Sabeans means Seb which every ethiopian calls themselves Sab=Human Sabeans=Humans this is in the ethiopian language. I dont know if this is of any importance but i dont see the Southern Arabian script being used by anyone in Arabia at all it is only used by the Eritreans & Ethiopians & Somalia for a little while so it could not of been of Yemeni origins. There is to much proof showing Ethiopians Ruleing Yemen and Arabia even Arabs dont contest to this but there is NO i mean NO Evidence of Any type of control by the Southern Arabians of Ethiopia.

---

Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                   

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hikuptah:
Ok i understand Supercar so what is your point was there a major migration of Sabeans into Ethiopia and did they bring there script with them or was it already there and did they the sabeans come to ethiopia as foriegners or did they come as Ethiopians returning back. Well there has been many major works relating to this issue and many people have come up with the idea that the Sabeans were ethiopians and the migration went from Ethiopia into Yemen and they the ethiopians brought there writings to Yemen.

---

Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hikuptah:
Rasol from your Genetics part of this what is exactly u are saying about the DNA of ethiopians Berbers Yemenis.

---

Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged |