posted
In a map accompanying his article Western African Languages in Historical Perspective, Kay Williamson sees proto-Tamazight (the first "Berber" language)
1. originating in the Gharb Darfur region of Sudan 8kya 2. spreading from there to _a. the Dongola Reach/3rd cataract Tmhhw and to _b. the Air-Hoggar region 3. before proto-North Tamazight developed 4. and went to _a. the Maghreb and then eastward to __* Rebu/Libou and 5. proto-Zenaga left Air/Adrar des Ifores for _a. the Tagant (southern Mauritania).
================================ SIDEBAR NOTE:this isn't the map from the article but Taureg corresponds to Air-Hoggar Air/Adrar regions, Atlas/Zenati/Nefusi corresponds to the Maghreb, Siwi roughly corresponds to Rebu/Libou, and Zenaga corresponds to the Tagant.
=================================
In light of this and the current discussions on Imazighen and going back to the "Berber" vs Black dichotomy, it seems that attributing Berber only to the people of the northern littoral at the expense of northern Saharans, and others between the Sahara and the Atlas, is an historical falsehood until we enter times of "post-Roman Africa" and maybe even after the Islamic invasions.
Spread of language family speakers is based on archaeology (the industrial tool kits, food "production," etc.), the language family proto-lexicon (vocabulary that appears widely across divergent branches of the family indicating great age of first use), and regional climate over the millenia.
From this type of material is derived what seems to be dates and regions of habitation of proto-Tamazight, proto-NiloSaharan, and proto-MandeCongo speakers in Western Africa.
Neolithic and early historic "Berber" finds, 250 or more miles south of the Mediterranean, could well have been left by black or coloured peoples who spoke "Berber" before it reached the Maghreb. In other words the Leukaethiopes Melanogaetuli Nigritae Western Ethiopians (Hesperii) Pharusii Icthyophagi Aethiopes etc., and their modern descendents still there in the same vast "Saharan" area are just as much "Berber" as anybody else, and if Williamson (based on Behrens) is right, even more so as they are remnants of the proto-North Tamazight speakers or so at least the Haritin donating to genetic tests seem to infer.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote: Spread of language family speakers is based on archaeology (the industrial tool kits, food "production," etc.), the language family proto-lexicon (vocabulary that appears widely across divergent branches of the family indicating great age of first use), and regional climate over the millenia.
From this type of material is derived what seems to be dates and regions of habitation of proto-Tamazight, proto-NiloSaharan, and proto-MandeCongo speakers in Western Africa.
Given your knowledge of the Tmazight and awareness of the evidence supporting their origin in Africa, instead of coming to Africa first as part of the Peoples of the Sea Invasion and later supplemented by the Vamdals, please answer the following questions:
What tool kit is associated with the Berbers?
What archaeological assemblages are associated with these Proto-Tamazight?
What dates do archaeologists give the cultural items you claim are associated with these Proto-Tamazight?
What items in the Proto-lexicon of Tamazight is of Berber origin and not an Egyptian, Germanic, Latin or Semitic loan word into Berber?
Also if the Tamazight have such a long cultural history why do they use a Latin calendar to record their chronology?
Please respond
.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:What tool kit is associated with the Berbers?
According to the Historian Christopher Ehret the most probable origin of the Berbers is the Capsian culture, which entered North Africa, probably from the African coast of the Red Sea about 8000 BC.
The same archeology pattern occurs west of Egypt where domestic animals and later grains were adopted after 8000 BC. From this archeology it has been argued that pre food producing Capsian peoples spoke languages ancestral to Berber and or Chadic placing proto Afrisan prior to 10,000 kya. Furthermore, there is evidence for early Holocene independant development of cattle domestication in the Eastern Sahara.
A critical reading of genetic data supports hypothesis of populations moving FROM THE HORN towards the Nile Basin, Northward to the Nile Valley, NorthWest Africa, the Levant, AND THE AGEAN - Chrisopher Ehret, science magazine, 2004.
"For one, the northerly Afroasiatic languages (Semitic, Berber, Egyptian) appear together to form just one sub-branch of the family, and if relied upon to the exclusion of the other, deeper, branchings of the family, give a misleading picture of overall Afroasiatic reconstruction.
In addition, Afroasiatic is a family of much greater time depth than even most of its students realize; its first divergences trace back probably at least 15,000 years ago, not just 8,000 or 9,000 as many believe.
This last point imparts a final general lesson for historical linguists: the historical comparative method, in fact, works very well farther back in time than scholars have generally allowed, provided the family in question contains a sufficiently large number of languages from which evidence can still be obtained." - Professor Christopher Ehret - The Lessons of Deep-Time Historical-Comparative Reconstruction in Afroasiatic" (
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
In addition, Afroasiatic is a family of much greater time depth than even most of its students realize; its first divergences trace back probably at least 15,000 years ago, not just 8,000 or 9,000 as many believe.
This last point imparts a final general lesson for historical linguists: the historical comparative method, in fact, works very well farther back in time than scholars have generally allowed, provided the family in question contains a sufficiently large number of languages from which evidence can still be obtained." - Professor Christopher Ehret - The Lessons of Deep-Time Historical-Comparative Reconstruction in Afroasiatic"
This is conjecture. As Ehret notes in the quote no other linguist supports the idea you can identify languages spoken 15000 years ago, except the Nostratic linguists whoes idea have failed to be supported .
.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:As Ehret notes in the quote no other linguist supports the idea you can identify languages spoken 15000 years ago
That's not what he said.
I found it interesting as well, how Mr. Winters interpreted Ehret's statment pertaining to Afrasan "divergences" going back to "at least" 15,000 years ago. LOL.
Posts: 1947 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The Berbers are Africans the belong to Africa the language is East African Rasol has shown this and what he has posted stands unrefuted. Berbers are African not european I think Clyde should read this:
"Africa contains populations whose members have a range of external phenotypes. This variation has usually been described in terms of "race" (Caucasoids, Pygmoids, Congoids, Khosianoids). But Y-Chromosome clade defined by the PN2 transition (PN2/M35 and PN2/M2) shatters the boundaries of phenotypically defined races and true breeding populations across great geographical expanse. African peoples with a rang of skin colors, hair forms and physiognomies have substantial percentages of males whose Y Chromsomes form closely related clades with each other, but not with others who are phenotypically similar." http://www.nature.com/cgi-taf/DynaPage.taf?file=/ng/journal/v36/n11s/full/ng1455.html&filetype=pdf
I will repeat Berbers are African
Peace
Posts: 9651 | From: Reace and Love City. | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^So true. Whereas Iranians and Indians, regardless of how black they look do NOT share any lineages from the PN2 clade, despite what some may say. Posts: 26285 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
First I'd appreciate the respect of capitalizing my ethnic geonomen, thank you. Second please only reply here to the language aspect and relating disciplines supporting this thread's subject header. I don't want the topic distracted and obfuscated by tangential matter. I will broach a new topic to cover the remainder of the queries below.
Now for your reply:
The real question is which if any modern linguists have you actually studied in regard to Tamazight/Berber language?
A corollary to that would be what current archeaologists, anthropologists (physical, cultural, genetic, etc.) historians, etc., specializing in North Africa, the Sahara/Sahel, and Amazigh people have you read?
It seems that outside of Diop, whose opinions on Berbers are colored by the ethnopolitical friction between Senegal and Mauritania, Berber studies are outside the fields of knowledge you specialize in.
A detailed answer to your questions is in Roger Blench Types of language spread and their archaeological correlates: the example of Berber Origini, XXIII: 169-190 (2001)
Who were the people the HAW NBW associated with upon arrival in Cyrenaica and Sirte? How many centuries were the two in association before hatching the invasions of KM.t? Did Kmtyw artists depict any of various people of the invading coalition and under what single name or various names?
Why did the Vandals come to the five provinces of Roman ruled North Africa? What relationships did they have with the people they found already there? How long did they rule the North African littoral and how far inland was their influence (if any influence they had)?
What went on in North Africa between the arrival of the Sea People and the Vandals? Were any institutions formed by or any cultural contributions coming from the indigenees of North Africa? What, if any, polities did they constitute?
Why do any people with long cultural continuities (your Mande eg.) use the Julian calendar and how does such use negate the fact of their cultural continuity?
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
Given your knowledge of the Tmazight and awareness of the evidence supporting their origin in Africa, instead of coming to Africa first as part of the Peoples of the Sea Invasion and later supplemented by the Vamdals, please answer the following questions:
What tool kit is associated with the Berbers?
What archaeological assemblages are associated with these Proto-Tamazight?
What dates do archaeologists give the cultural items you claim are associated with these Proto-Tamazight?
What items in the Proto-lexicon of Tamazight is of Berber origin and not an Egyptian, Germanic, Latin or Semitic loan word into Berber?
Also if the Tamazight have such a long cultural history why do they use a Latin calendar to record their chronology?
Please respond [/b]
.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I am waiting for your response. You claimed these elements exist in the case of the Tamazight now demonstrate to all of us the evidence.
posted 30 April, 2006 06:35 AM takruri
quote: Spread of language family speakers is based on archaeology (the industrial tool kits, food "production," etc.), the language family proto-lexicon (vocabulary that appears widely across divergent branches of the family indicating great age of first use), and regional climate over the millenia.
From this type of material is derived what seems to be dates and regions of habitation of proto-Tamazight, proto-NiloSaharan, and proto-MandeCongo speakers in Western Africa.
Given your knowledge of the Tmazight and awareness of the evidence supporting their origin in Africa, instead of coming to Africa first as part of the Peoples of the Sea Invasion and later supplemented by the Vamdals, please answer the following questions:
What tool kit is associated with the Berbers?
What archaeological assemblages are associated with these Proto-Tamazight?
What dates do archaeologists give the cultural items you claim are associated with these Proto-Tamazight?
What items in the Proto-lexicon of Tamazight is of Berber origin and not an Egyptian, Germanic, Latin or Semitic loan word into Berber?
Also if the Tamazight have such a long cultural history why do they use a Latin calendar to record their chronology?
Please respond
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
You've already summarily dismissed Rasol's presentation of it as mere speculation. Why should I extend further effort to elicit the same reflex, especially when you've never presented anything I asked from you these past weeks?
You'll appreciate it better if you have to take out your own time and effort to peruse
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: A detailed answer to your questions is in Roger Blench Types of language spread and their archaeological correlates: the example of Berber Origini, XXIII: 169-190 (2001)
on your own.
In the meantime all of what you say about Berber is on a speculative level because you obviously are totally unfamiliar with the phylum and can only parrot Diop on it and have never investigated the writings of modern linguists specializing in it or its relation to Afrisan or Macro-Cushitic.
Unlike you I'm no professional linguist but I have listed Kay Williamson, Roger Blench, and Peter Behrens but you should be able to do better by presenting a thorough systematic examination of Berber showing precisely how it's a sub-phylum of Indo-European Germanic. I, a lowly layman can only coalesce and rephrase or paraphrase the professionals. Your dispute is with them, none of whom has suggested Berber to be other than African in origin and location.
At the least you could fully present Diop's argument from his last essay on Berber.
You've already summarily dismissed Rasol's presentation of it as mere speculation. Why should I extend further effort to elicit the same reflex, especially when you've never presented anything I asked from you these past weeks?
This is untrue. I made the following claims in support of my opposition to the theory of Berber origins: 1) the fact that the languages are unintelligible, 2) the Vandals ruled North Africa for 400 years; the grammar and vocabulary of Berber languages is a hodgepodge of European and Semitic languages, with German forming the foundation of the Berber grammar.
You have not answered even one of my questions evethough you said the evidence for these elements in Berber linguistics and archaeology exist.
.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
For the second time, please extend me the courtesy of retaining the capital T in alTakruri, thank you.
I listed the authorities for my presentation, go and read.
Rasol pointed out the Capsian tool kit citing Ehret. I have written elsewhere about the succeeding NA cultures.
Rasol also pointed out domestic animal and grain archaeology and genetics both also after Ehret.
You summarily dismissed those pieces of evidence saying
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: This is conjecture.
Obviously you will refuse to credit data as valid when it lends no suport to your suppositions contradictory to current classification. Your suppositions need very weighty support as they counter the concensus of all linguists who for over 100 years have classified Berber as Afrisan.
The development of Afrisan
1530 kinship noted between Hebrew Arabic and Aramaic 1702 Ludolf notes affinity of Ethiosemitic with Mizrahh languages 1887 Muller links Egyptian Semitic Berber Cushitic and Hausa 1963 Greenberg introduces Afroasiatic to replace Hamito-Semitic name ---- Diankoff coins Afrasian a short form for Afroasiatic ---- Ehret proposed Afrasan to take Asia out of superphylum's name
I use Afrisan to inject more of the sound of AFRIca into the name Outside of the far northeast tectonic extension of Africa now known as the Mid-East, this language family is spoken nowhere in Asia out side of religious introduction.
Let's not get this twisted. You're the linguist and I'm the layman. You need to support your proposition with much more than the scanty and easily refutable examples you've given so far. Djehuti effortlessly shot down your plural ending hypothesis (which you got from Diop).
You've ignored the thread IMAZIGHEN: indigenees or invaders TAMAZGHA: cultural history to 1000 CE whose line of questioning in answer to your qestions show you know little of North African ethnology and cultural history. Your idea that Vandals ruled NA for 400 years is preposterous. Why do you intentionally mislead the unwitting who trust in you with such disinformation? And what's more, doing your homework for you, the Vandals didn't enter the coast of NA until 428 CE and you're proposing that Berber grammar is Germanic. Did they communicated by handsigns for the 2000 years they are known in history before the Vandals (who never so much as set foot beyond the coast from Tangier to Tripoli)?
It's for reasons like that that I'm developing an immunity to entertaining your thoughts. The errors are so egregious on minor points that I don't want to spend the time analysing the major points anymore, especially when your lexicon examples violate the very basic of Swadesh groupings.
In short, unlike Obenga, you've demonsrated absolutely nothing of even the slightest linguistic validity that counters standard classification of Berber as Afrisan. The burden of proof rests heavily on you as your opinion is a monority of one. Even in a tie, which is far from you, the champ keeps the belt.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^The northern coastal Berber-speakers get that outlook every now and then; from ideas about how they happen to be "non-indigenous" Africans, but remnants of European invaders from some undisclosed time in antiquity, to their languages being "non-African" in origin. Obviously, all this has to do with their external appearances...
“The supra-Atlas mountains and coastal northern Africans are viewed here as perhaps being more, but not only, related to southern Europeans, primarily by gene flow. Given that Berber languages are not creoles, which, if they were, might indicate massive European contact, it may be well to view the gene flow as having occurred steadily over a long time…”
"Northern modern Berber-speakers are frequently notably "European," in phenotype but even they have tropical African "marker" gene frequencies greater than those found in southern Europeans. "Blacks" have long lived in northern Africa (see review in Keita 1990)..." - Keita, 1993.
Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: IMAZIGHEN: indigenees or invaders TAMAZGHA: cultural history to 1000 CE whose line of questioning in answer to your qestions show you know little of North African ethnology and cultural history. Your idea that Vandals ruled NA for 400 years is preposterous. Why do you intentionally mislead the unwitting who trust in you with such disinformation? And what's more, doing your homework for you, the Vandals didn't enter the coast of NA until 428 CE and you're proposing that Berber grammar is Germanic. Did they communicated by handsigns for the 2000 years they are known in history before the Vandals (who never so much as set foot beyond the coast from Tangier to Tripoli)?
I am citing Diop when I propose the 400 year rule of North Africa by the Berbers. Diop has proven that the Berbers probably spoke a language taken to Africa by the Vandals.
The original North African people probably spoke a semitic language similar to Punic. Some of these earlier North Africans mixed with the Vandals and thus we have the Berber (not including Taureg speakers) speaking population in North Africa.Since Blacks have long lived in North Africa according to Keita, it is only natural that the Berbers would have high frequency tropical African gene markers, than Southern Europeans, since it is obvious that over the past 1500 years there has been considerable mixing between Black Africans and the Berbers.
I believe you are making a mistake when you suggest that the Berbers are the original inhabitants of North Africa when we know that the original North Africans spoke Punic, while the Garamante/Garamande and other people in the Fezzan spoke a Mande language.
.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
I don't care who you claim to reference and I can see why you avoid the thread made to discuss the ethnocultural history of Tamazgha.
1) You know nothing about the Vandals in NA and continue to lie about them ruling for 400 years there.
2) For the 3rd time you refuse to produce any actual quote from Diop with any, less lone proper, citation. Do you let your students get away with that?
3) Punic (Phoenician/Canaanitic/Hebrew) wasn't spoken in NA until ~900 BCE and then only in the Syro-Lebanese colonies.
4) Skin colour has no bearing to language (and we already know and have written about the NA specific types of blacks -- the parents of Tamazght speech.
5) You have no proof accepted by any linguists that Garamantes spoke your ubiquitous "Mande."
This is a faith or a belief system you're promoting. We're looking for history. History that can stand up in the halls of academia not warm fuzzies for the preacher's choir. We all deserve accuracy and validity that's recognized by universal standards not a substandard, inferior, Jim Crow, second class version that's -- well -- "good enough for the coloreds."
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
In addition to the points alTakruri rightfully raises, you seem to be reading Keita wrongly, in that Keita doesn't see "Berbers" as a "race", no does he imply that "Blacks" and "Berbers" are some sort of separate entity. Moreover, you fail to realize that aside from Tauregs, E3b1b lineages are found in highest frequencies in northwestern coastal Berbers than any other group. These are naturally among the "tropical" African lineages that Keita is referring to. These are the predominant Berber paternal lineages, to be followed by J lineages [not nearly the frequency of the tropical African counterparts], likely the product of Phoenician and Islamic era. It is in the maternal lineages, that one finds significant west European markers in northwestern coastal Berbers. Thus, in this case, it easy to see the Afrasan orientation of the Berber languages, with males keeping their languages while coupling with females in the nearby regions - in the case of the coastal Berbers - taking in females transported from southwestern Europe [special attention has been paid towards female "slaves" brought in from Europe]. This also explains how the Berber languages as Keita makes a note of, are "NOT CREOLES" and not related to European languages, despite the noted contacts.
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
altakruri
quote: IMAZIGHEN: indigenees or invaders TAMAZGHA: cultural history to 1000 CE whose line of questioning in answer to your qestions show you know little of North African ethnology and cultural history. Your idea that Vandals ruled NA for 400 years is preposterous. Why do you intentionally mislead the unwitting who trust in you with such disinformation? And what's more, doing your homework for you, the Vandals didn't enter the coast of NA until 428 CE and you're proposing that Berber grammar is Germanic. Did they communicated by handsigns for the 2000 years they are known in history before the Vandals (who never so much as set foot beyond the coast from Tangier to Tripoli)?
I am citing Diop when I propose the 400 year rule of North Africa by the Berbers. Diop has proven that the Berbers probably spoke a language taken to Africa by the Vandals.
The original North African people probably spoke a semitic language similar to Punic. Some of these earlier North Africans mixed with the Vandals and thus we have the Berber (not including Taureg speakers) speaking population in North Africa.Since Blacks have long lived in North Africa according to Keita, it is only natural that the Berbers would have high frequency tropical African gene markers, than Southern Europeans, since it is obvious that over the past 1500 years there has been considerable mixing between Black Africans and the Berbers.
I believe you are making a mistake when you suggest that the Berbers are the original inhabitants of North Africa when we know that the original North Africans spoke Punic, while the Garamante/Garamande and other people in the Fezzan spoke a Mande language.
posted
Although Mr. Winters hasn't always been one of my most admired posters due to his somewhat offbeat theories, I cannot disregard his assertion, lack of evidence notwithstanding, that Berber language and people have been impacted by the Vandals. Perhaps he is a bit overzealous in his statements about the extent of the impact but it makes perfectly good sense in the light of the fact that it is known that the Vandals and other German tribes, after quitting Europe maintained areas of control in North Africa adjacent to Spain. It also seems to be a good explaination of why there is so much "European" matrilineal DNA to be found in North Africans alongside the prevalent "african" patrilineal DNA. Without getting into a lot of pseudo racial nonsense about what they may have looked like, it appears that what we may have here is a mix of Afrasan peoples, along with Mande speaking Garamantes, that was later infused with a Germanic strain. His data my seem shaky but his theory in this case is sound.
Posts: 167 | From: usa | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
You agree that less than 100,000 (men women and children included) 5th century CE Vandals, who disappeared due to their refusal to socially mingle with the locals, provided the grammatical base for a language already in existance for at least some 2000 years by then?
Is that right?
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
alTakruri first of all I am not trying to be negative in writing your name in small letters from looking at the other post the names are usually in small letters.
alTakruri
quote:
You agree that less than 100,000 (men women and children included) 5th century CE Vandals, who disappeared due to their refusal to socially mingle with the locals, provided the grammatical base for a language already in existance for at least some 2000 years by then?
Again, you are claiming that the Berber speakers are indiginees to North Africa. You make it clear that these people are not a race.
But as I said in earlier posts this theory is speculation. If the Berber speakers were the original Libyco-Berbers we would be able to read the most ancient inscriptions in Berber languages and Taureg, but this is not so.
Secondly the other inscriptions from North Africa are in Punic an aspect of Semitic. Don't you think that if Ehret was right about the Berber speakers exisiting in North Africa before the Vandal invasion we would see evidence of their presence in the inscriptions archaeologists have found in North Africa?
As a result, the fact that the Berbers:
1) speak a language that is "mutually unintelligible" between dialects,
2) made up of vocabulary of numerous European languages,
3) possesses large semitic vocabulary,
4) evidence Germanic grammatical influence,
5)can not be used to read the ancient Libyco-Berber inscriptions written by the original North Africans
Proves that the Berber speakers could not be descendants of the original North Africans.
The only explanation to account for the presence of these people in North Africa is Diop's identification of the Vandals as the ancestors of many Berber speakers.
The Berbers, given the evidence can not be descendants of the original North African Blacks . They are probably derived from the Sea Peoples and Vandals, who mixed with the original Blacks who formerly lived in North Africa.
.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^Uh.. no and it's quite simple. Takruri and the others are right and you are WRONG as is often the case Winters.
quote:Djehuti posted:
quote:Clyde Winters:
The Berber languages as pointed out by numerous authors is full of vocabulary from other languages. Many Berbers may be descendants of the Vandels (Germanic) speaking people who ruled North Africa and Spain for 400 years. Commenting on this reality Diop in The African Origin of Civilization noted that: “Careful search reveals that German feminine nouns end in t and st. Should we consider that Berbers were influenced by Germans or the referse? This hypothesis could not be rejected a priori, for German tribes in the fifth century overran North Africa vi Spain, and established an empire that they ruled for 400 years….Furthermore, the plural of 50 percent of Berber nouns is formed by adding en, as is the case with feminine nouns in German, while 40 percent form their plural in a, like neuter nouns in Latin.
Apparently for all his 'knowledge' on linguistics, Winters must have forgotten that feminine nouns and names in Afrasian languages also end in a vowel followed by a 't'!!
For example, Egyptian female names like Aset (Isis), Maat, Nofret, Merit etc.
Semitic female names like Benet --meaning daughter, Anat, Astoret etc.
Even Cushitic names like the common Somali name 'Asha' was most likely derived from Ashait.
Ironically, this coincidental similarity to German was one of the "evidences" used by past Eurocentric scholars in their attempt to place the origins of Afroasiatic outside of Africa, and is no doubt still being used by Nostraticists!!
LMFO Apparently Winters has bought their nonsense as well!
So much for "Germanic" linguistic influence. Posts: 26285 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
The Berbers, given the evidence can not be descendants of the original North African Blacks . They are probably derived from the Sea Peoples and Vandals, who mixed with the original Blacks who formerly lived in North Africa.
That last statement is a little contradictory, Clyde.
alTakruri, I am not sure about the exact numbers of Vandals, and Goths that crossed over but it is reasonable that if they successfully imposed their hegemony over these peoples already inhabiting the area that they left traces of their language however little that maybe. Secondly if it was a military conquest you can gaurantee that they left behind some DNA because military conquests always, always involve rape, and sexual subservience of the women of the conquered population.
Posts: 167 | From: usa | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
Please minimally familiarize yourself with the proposed subject matter by reading materials that will allow you to explore any of the questions I ask there. This will clear up many of the misconceptions and generalizations you assume about the Vandals (no Goths involved) transient virtually archaeological traceless interlude in only the coastal region of North Africa.
I guarantee you it will be an eye opener.
It will assure we deal with facts instead of how we feel it should be.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
The Berbers, given the evidence can not be descendants of the original North African Blacks . They are probably derived from the Sea Peoples and Vandals, who mixed with the original Blacks who formerly lived in North Africa.
quote: Kifaru That last statement is a little contradictory, Clyde.
It is clear that some of the Sea People were of European background. The five Sea Peoples are named: the Shardana, Teresh, Lukka, Shekelesh and Ekwesh, and are collectively referred to as "northerners coming from all lands".
If some of the Northerners were Europeans and the Vandals were Europeans would this not explain the introduction of Euopeans into North Africa? Europeans who would later mate with the Black North Africans to become a foundation of the Berber speaking people.
quote:The Berbers, given the evidence can not be descendants of the original North African Blacks . They are probably derived from the Sea Peoples and Vandals, who mixed with the original Blacks who formerly lived in North Africa.
This statement is semantically circuitous - how can you define African Berbers as - mixed with - Africans but not -descendant from - Africans?
At any rate, modern science disagrees:
Most men living in the area surronding Carthage before the Phoenicians arrived should probably have carried variations of the M96 (haplogroup E), which is the aboriginal type in North Africa and West Africa.”
“They (Phoenicians) left only a small impact in North Africa…..No more that 20% of the men we sampled had Y Chromsomes that originated in the Middle East. [haplotype J] [b]Most carried the aboriginal North African M96 pattern.[Haplotype E including E3a and E3b]” - Spencer Wells, Harvard population genetics.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
That's been done already and you summarily dismiss the answers as conjecture and speculation and in the meantime fail to produce a thorough sytematic demonstration of Berber as Germainic using sound linguistic methodology. Obenga did list several elements of the linguistic discipline when separating his "Berber" from his "Negro-Egyptienne." Thus Obenga's classification merits and indeed receives serious consideration from the academic community. Your opinion however, remains to even be a hypothesis since its not even outlined less lone detailed.
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: Why don't you start it off by answering the questions I have proposed.
.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
The Berbers, given the evidence can not be descendants of the original North African Blacks . They are probably derived from the Sea Peoples and Vandals, who mixed with the original Blacks who formerly lived in North Africa.
That last statement is a little contradictory, Clyde.
alTakruri, I am not sure about the exact numbers of Vandals, and Goths that crossed over but it is reasonable that if they successfully imposed their hegemony over these peoples already inhabiting the area that they left traces of their language however little that maybe. Secondly if it was a military conquest you can gaurantee that they left behind some DNA because military conquests always, always involve rape, and sexual subservience of the women of the conquered population.
Correct. Germanics are overwhelmingly of paleolithic European male lineage - clades R1b and I.
Berber are overwhelmingly of Neolithic paternal ancestry via Pn2 linages- this includes black, brown and white - east and west, north and south berber.
This is because most Berber males come from East Africa in the Neolithic.
It's the female lineages that vary from overwhemlingly African to overwhemingly European -and which most help to explain the physical diversity of Berber speakers, thus:
The majority of the maternal ancestors of the Berbers must have come from Europe and the Near East since the Neolithic.” - JC Rando.
Mitochondrial DNA analysis of Northwest African populations reveals genetic exchanges with European, Near-Eastern, and sub-Saharan populations
`"NO populations within North African samples analyzed here have a substantial Paloelithic contribution." - B. Arredi.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote: This statement is semantically circuitous - how can you define African Berbers as - mixed with - Africans but not -descendant from - Africans?
Easy Berbers are descendent from Europeans who mixed with Black North Africans after they invaded North Africa.
Is it not a fact that the Berber people differentiate themselves from the Haritin who are considered to be descendants of the original Black inhabitants of North Africa. And is it not a fact that the "white" Berbers differentiate themselves from the Taureg?
.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote: That's been done already and you summarily dismiss the answers as conjecture and speculation and in the meantime fail to produce a thorough sytematic demonstration of Berber as Germainic using sound linguistic methodology.
You have not answered one of my questions with specific examples.
It has not been done you mention Ehret, but fail to produce specific lexical items and archaeological assemblanges that link the Berbers to ancient Africans.
For example I claim that the Dravidians are related to C-Group Africans. I support this claim by saying they used the same style red-and-black pottery. I also show how this pottery style originated in Nubia and spread all the way to China. This is an example of an archaeological assemblange that links the Dravidian people to their African brothers.
I am waiting for you to present solid evidence of a connection between the Berbers and earlier African groups; and lexical items from Berber languages that relate to Egyptian, that are not of Semitic or Egyptian origin.
.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
If some of the Northerners were Europeans and the Vandals were Europeans would this not explain the introduction of Euopeans into North Africa? Europeans who would later mate with the Black North Africans to become a foundation of the Berber speaking people.
You make it sound like the "aborginal" folks of North Africa were these Europeans you speak of. I would like to see this demonstrated in the paternal lineages of the coastal Berber speaking groups, which as time and again, has been pointed out, predominantly carry "tropical" African male lineages, followed by "Near Eastern" (specifically southwest Asian") J markers.
"Thus, although Moroccan Y lineages were interpreted as having a predominantly Upper Paleolithic origin in East Africa (Bosch et al, 2001), according to our TMRCA estimates , NO populations within North African samples analyzed here have a substantial Paloelithic contribution." - Arredi et al., 2004.
Let us see these "European" markers, that are supposed to be indicative of Europeans who preceded the aborginal African in the north African regions.
Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: Let us see these "European" markers, that are supposed to be indicative of Europeans who preceded the aborginal African in the north African regions.
I never said the Europeans lived in Africa before the Blacks. I said that these Europeans entered North Africa with the Sea Peoples, and the Vandals. These Europeans became the two root groups for the BerBer speaking people.
.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: Supercar
quote: Let us see these "European" markers, that are supposed to be indicative of Europeans who preceded the aborginal African in the north African regions.
I never said the Europeans lived in Africa before the Blacks. I said that these Europeans entered North Africa with the Sea Peoples, and the Vandals. These Europeans became the two root groups for the BerBer speaking people.
In any case, it doesn't matter when these "Europeans" came into the region. The European contribution to the North African gene pool has been demonstrated in the "maternal" sides. Where is your parternal "indicators' of these Europeans, who supposedly mixed with the aborginal North African?
Soon, you'll see what is faulty with your attempt to "Europeanize" indigenous Berber languages.
Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Easy Berbers are descendent from Europeans who mixed with Black North Africans after they invaded North Africa.
Define the distinction between "descendant from", and "mixed with."
Why not "descendant from" Africans and mixed with Europeans?
Or descendant from both, or mixed with both?
What distinguishes descendant from and mixed with - in your view?
And given that Berber are and African people speaking and African language and you admit they have African ancestry - where is the logic in defining them as "Europeans" (???)
Are you attempting to define people according to and ideology of 'where they belong' "racially" in your view?
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
It seems to be that Clyde is implying, if not saying outright, that though the "Europeans" were not "aborginal" to the region, these were the original "Berber" speakers, who then mixed with the aboriginal populations. Yet...
Doesn't provide linguistic evidence.
Doesn't provide genetic evidence to the extent that these so-called European "Berber" speakers would "impose" their languages [which shows no indication of being Creoles] on the aboriginal Africans, and yet see fit to just donate their females to the aboriginal North Africans, while not intermingling with the locals themselves. What is up with that?
-------------------- Truth - a liar penetrating device! Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
The Berber languages as pointed out by numerous authors is full of vocabulary from other languages. Many Berbers may be descendants of the Vandels (Germanic) speaking people who ruled North Africa and Spain for 400 years.
Commenting on this reality Diop in The African Origin of Civilization noted that: “Careful search reveals that German feminine nouns end in t and st . Should we consider that Berbers were influenced by Germans or the referse? This hypothesis could not be rejected a priori, for German tribes in the fifth century overran North Africa vi Spain, and established an empire that they ruled for 400 years….Furthermore, the plural of 50 percent of Berber nouns is formed by adding en, as is the case with feminine nouns in German, while 40 percent form their plural in a , like neuter nouns in Latin. Since we know the Vandals conquered the country from the Romans, why should we not be more inclined to seek explanations for the Berbers in the direction, both linguistically and in physical appearance: blond hair, blue eyes, etc? But no! Disregarding all these facts, historians decree that there was no Vandal influence and that it would be impossible to attribute anything in Barbary to their occupation” (p.69).
The influence of European languages on the Berber languages and grammar indicate that the Berbers are probably of European, especially Vandal origin.
quote:Apparently for all his 'knowledge' on linguistics, Winters must have forgotten that feminine nouns and names in Afrasian languages also end in a vowel followed by a 't'!!
For example, Egyptian female names like Aset (Isis), Maat, Nofret, Merit etc.
Semitic female names like Benet --meaning daughter, Anat, Astoret etc.
Even Cushitic names like the common Somali name 'Asha' was most likely derived from Ashait.
Ironically, this coincidental similarity to German was one of the "evidences" used by past Eurocentric scholars in their attempt to place the origins of Afroasiatic outside of Africa, and is no doubt still being used by Nostraticists!!
LMFO Apparently Winters has bought their nonsense as well!
Posts: 26285 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
The influence of European languages on the Berber languages and grammar indicate that the Berbers are probably of European, especially Vandal origin.
These elements asked, go hand in hand [together], NOT separately...AND they remain unaddressed, and we all know why:
It seems to be that Clyde is implying, if not saying outright, that though the "Europeans" were not "aborginal" to the region, these were the original "Berber" speakers, who then mixed with the aboriginal populations. Yet...
Doesn't provide linguistic evidence. [including time frames of origin or construction, etc]
Doesn't provide genetic evidence to the extent that these so-called European "Berber" speakers would "impose" their languages [which shows no indication of being Creoles] on the aboriginal Africans, and yet see fit to just donate their females to the aboriginal North Africans, while not intermingling with the locals themselves. What is up with that? [where are the lineages of "European" males vs the predominant tropical African male lineages]
Ps- "Wishful thinking" isn't given precedence over "Scholarship". We need to see more of the latter, with respect to presentation of material!
Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
Traces of language is a far far cry from being a language's grammatical base.
....(no Goths involved) transient virtually archaeological traceless interlude in only the coastal region of North Africa.
Like I said the extent of the language impact which Mr Winters assets is where we differs. As far as the Goths we can agree to disagree however I offer this:
Traces of language is a far far cry from being a language's grammatical base.
Agreed. Anything short of establishing the origins of the said "Berber" Languages, is immaterial. I have up to this point, seen 'zip' that supports the notion that the original "Berber" speakers were Europeans [Vandals or what have you], as opposed to indigenous Africans.
Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Wrong era and wrong people. In this statement
quote: "And he is a Quti, a Goth," replies Abdoul Kader, referring to the Christians who drove the Muslims out of the Iberian peninsula in 1492.
he's talking about his colleague Diadié Haïdara who is a Jew. It's thought that Qati is a contraction of Qehati one of the Levitical clans of Jews. Ali b. Ziyad al-Qati was one of the Sepharade Jews soon to be expelled from Spain in 1492. He left 25 years before the expulsion. His far descendent, Diadié Haïdara, is one of the sgnitaries of the Manifesto of the Jews of Timbuktu.
quote: 3) Punic (Phoenician/Canaanitic/Hebrew) wasn't spoken in NA until ~900 BCE and then only in the Syro-Lebanese colonies.
You don't know what you are talking about. If Punic was only spoken in Syro-Lebanon, what language did the Punic General Hannibal speak during his lifetime (c 247-182 BC).
.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
When will you pay attention to detail? Can't you see that 247-182 BCE is some 600 years after the Syro-Lebanese colony of Qart Hhadasht was established and K*na`ani was introduced to Tamazgha via all their outposts there.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
At least for the Olmecs, you've actually made an "effort" to build a linguistic relationship, but your claims about the non-African origins of Berbers, no material has been produced whatsover. A language which relates to an ancestor whose elements can be traced back to "at least" 15,000 years ago on the continent, is some how supposed to be the product of some extra-territorial folks of the late historic period of about 5th century AD.
Ps...
quote:Clyde Winters:
If the Berber speakers were the original Libyco-Berbers we would be able to read the most ancient inscriptions in Berber languages and Taureg, but this is not so.
Shouldn't you at the least be calling "Libyco-Berber" some other term, when considering a distinction between the "Berber speakers" and the said "orginal" groups?!
Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Granted I should not use the term Libyco-Berber for the ancient writing of North Africa. I only use it so that people will know what inscriptions I am talking about, since this is the established name for this writing.
Granted I should not use the term Libyco-Berber for the ancient writing of North Africa. I only use it so that people will know what inscriptions I am talking about, since this is the established name for this writing.
...and why is that? Also, I wonder how Euro-scholars from early reactionary Euro-scholars, who were bent on separating portions of North Africa from inner Africa, to contemporary ones, could have all missed this "obvious" link between "Berber" Languages and the Vandals or European "Berber" speakers.
Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
and why is that? Also, I wonder how Euro-scholars from early reactionary Euro-scholars, who were bent on separating portions of North Africa from inner Africa, to contemporary ones, could have all missed this "obvious" link between "Berber" Languages and the Vandals or European "Berber" speakers.
They did not miss the link.
This is easy to explain, Europeans early used the Berbers as examples of the ancient "whites" that lived in North Africa, in their Eurocentric effort to make the Egyptians "brown skinned whites".
Having a population of ancient "white" Africans, i.e., the Berbers helped perpetuate the myth that North Africa was always inhabited by whites and the only Black North Africans were the Haritin the former slaves of the superior Berber people. This is typified by Fontanes who wrote: " In Egypt the Berber type is too mixed. According to this theory, the African Berber from the west, the brown Libyan, settled in the valley of the new Nile; but almost immediately, or shortly afterwards , an invasion of Europeans hybridized the North African Libyan. This Libyan mixed-blood "with white skin and blue eyes" may have modified the early Egyptians. By his European blood , this Egyptian could be related to the Indo-European race and to the Aryan. "(Anta Diop, The African Origin of Civilization: Myth or Reality, (1974)p.64).
Diop believes that the Berbers got their name from African people because they were not native to Africa. Diop wrote: "Moreover, the root Bar, in Wolof, means to speak rapidly, and Bar-Bar would designate a people that speaks an unknown language, therefore a foreign people" (p.55). He adds that "As a result of this hypothesis [Berbers found Egyptian civilization), efforts have been made to relate the Berber and Egyptian languages by claiming that the Berber is the descendant of the Libyan. But Berber is a strange tongue that can be related to all kinds of languages" (p.68).
posted
What you haven't shown, is any Euro-scholar from any era, claiming that "Berber" languages are "European" languages, much less "European" in origin; I already know about the antiquated reactionary use of "caucasoid".
As for any early [pre-genetics] "misconception" about coastal Berbers not being "indigenous" Africans, on the account of their external physical appearances, genetics and linguistics have torn it apart.
Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Apparently Winters has bought their nonsense as well! ![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic