Ethiopians & Indians have had with boats in the Indian Ocean they both use to take prisoners of war indians to Ethiopia and ethiopians to India do u know of the long history of trade between these people as well as the Ethiopians with the Chinese & Southern Arabia.
You are right Ethiopians have had very intimate relations with Indians. In fact the Ethiopians ruled much of India. These Ethiopians were called Naga. It was the Naga who created Sanskrit.
A reading of ancient Dravidian literature which dates back to 500 BC, gives us considerable information on the Naga. In Indian tradition the Naga won central India from the Villavar (bowmen) and Minavar (fishermen). The Naga were great seamen who ruled much of India, Sri Lanka and Burma. To the Aryans they described as half man and snake. The Tamil knew them as warlike people who used the bow and noose.
The earliest mention of the Naga, appear in the Ramayana , they are also mentioned in the Mahabharata. In the Mahabharata we discover that the Naga had the capital city in the Dekkan, and other cities spread between thhe Jumna and Ganges as early as 1300 BC. The Dravidian classic, the Chilappathikaran made it clear that the first great kingdom of India was Naganadu.
The Naga probably came from Kush-Punt/Ethiopia. The Puntites were the greatest sailors of the ancient world. In the Egyptian inscriptions there is mention of the Puntite ports of Outculit, Hamesu and Tekaru, which corresponds to Adulis, Hamasen and Tigre.
In Sumerian text, it is claimed that the Puntites traded with the people of the Indus Valley or Dilmun. According to S.N. Kramer in The Sumerians, part of Punt was probably called Meluhha, and Dilmun was probably the ancient name of the Indus Valley. (Today some scholars maintain that Oman, where we find no ancient cities was Dilmun and the Indus Valley may have been Meluhha).
Ancient Ethiopian traditions support the rule of Puntites or Ethiopians of India. In the Kebra Nagast, we find mention of the Arwe kings who ruled India. The founder of the dynasty was Za Besi Angabo. This dynasty according to the Kebra Nagast began around 1370 BC. These rulers of India and Ethiopia were called Nagas. The Kebra Nagast claims that " Queen Makeda "had servants and merchants; they traded for her at sea and on land in the Indies and Aswan". It also says that her son Ebna Hakim or Menelik I, made a campaign in the Indian Sea; the king of India made gifts and donations and prostrated himself before him". It is also said that Menalik ruled an empire that extended from the rivers of Egypt (Blue Nile) to the west and from the south Shoa to eastern India", according to the Kebra Nagast. The Kebra Nagast identification of an eastern Indian empre ruled by the Naga, corresponds to the Naga colonies in the Dekkan, and on the East coast between the Kaviri and Vaigai rivers.
The presence of Meluhhaites/ Puntites in India may expain the Greek tradition of Kusites ruling India up to the Ganges. It would also explain the Aryan traditions of Mlechchas ( Sanskrit name for some of the non-Aryan people) as one of the aboriginal groups of India. Many scholars associate the name Mlechchas with Meluhha.
The major Naga tribes were the Maravar, Eyinar, Oliyar, Oviyar, Aru-Valur and Parathavar. The Nagas resisted the invansion of the Cholas . In the Kalittokai IV,1-5, the Naga are described as being "of strong limbs and hardy frames and fierce looking tigers wearing long and curled locks of hair." The Naga kings of Sri Lanka are mentioned in the: Mahawanso, and are said to have later become Dravidians, as testified to by the names of these people: Naganathan, Nagaratnam, Nagaraja and etc.
The major gift of the Naga to India was the writing system: Nagari. Nagari is the name for the Sanskrit script. Over a hundred years ago Sir William Jones, pointed out that the ancient Ethiopic and Sanskrit writing are one and the same.
William Jones, explained that the Ethiopian origin of Sanskrit was supported by the fact that both writing systems the writing went from left to right and the vowels were annexed to the consonants. Today Eurocentric scholars teach that the Indians taught writing to the Ethiopians, yet the name Nagari for Sanskrit betrays the Ethiopia origin of this form of writing. Moreover, it is interesting to note that Sanskrit vowels: a,aa,',I,u,e,o, virama etc., are in the same order as Geez.
The Ethiopian script has influenced many other writing systems. Y.M. Kobishnor, in the Unesco History of Africa, maintains that Ethiopic was used as the model for Armenian writing, as was many of the Transcaucasian scripts. Dravidian literature indicate that the Naga may have introduced worship of Kali, the Serpent, Murugan and the Sun or Krishna. It is interesting to note that a god called Murugan is worshipped by many people in East Africa.
It is interesting that Krishna, who was associated with the Sun, means Black, this is analogous to the meaning of Khons of the Kushites. Homer, described Hercules asfollows: "Black he stood as night his bow uncased, his arrow string for flight". This mention of arrows identifies the Kushites as warriors who used the bow, a common weapon of the Kushites and the Naga. Kumarinadu
The Naga or Ethiopians were defeated by Dravidian speaking people from Kumarinadu. Kamarinadu is suppose to have formerly existed as a large Island in the India ocean which connected India with East Africa. This landmass is mentioned in the Silappadikaram, which said that Kamarinadu was made up of seven nadus or regions. The Dravidian scholars Adiyarkunallar and Nachinaar wrote about the ancient principalities of Tamilaham, which existed on Kamarinadu.
Kumarinadu was ruled by the Pandyans/Pandians at Madurai before it sunk beneath the sea. The greatest king of Kumarinadu was Sengoon. According to Dravidian scholars the Pandyans worshipped the goddess Kumari Amman. This Amman, probably corresponds to the ancient god Amon of the Kushites. The Kalittokai 104, makes it clear that after the Pandyans were forced to migrate off their Island home into South India, "to compensate for the area lost to the great waves of the sea, King Pandia without tiresome moved to the other countries and won them. Removing the emblems of tiger (Cholas) and bow (Cheras) he, in their place inscribed his reputed emblem fish (Pandia's) and valiantly made his enemies bow to him".
posted
Er...I seriously doubt this. If I remember correctly, naga means something like "elephant," and some have connected Ge'ez nagé, meaning elephant (short a, not long, modern pronounciation would be negé.), pl. nagéyat, to Sanskrit naga, but I doubt this as well, as Elephants still exist in some locales in Ethiopia and in the past some ancient authors noted that even along the (desert) coast they could be hunted (there was a species of Elephant different from the African elephant existing in Nubia back then, and I presume this is the same one that existed in Aksum, because it was domesticated, which is difficult to do with African elephants).
-------------------- "Oh the sons of Ethiopia; observe with care; the country called Ethiopia is, first, your mother; second, your throne; third, your wife; fourth, your child; fifth, your grave." - Ras Alula Aba Nega. Posts: 1024 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
Er...I seriously doubt this. If I remember correctly, naga means something like "elephant," and some have connected Ge'ez nagé, meaning elephant (short a, not long, modern pronounciation would be negé.), pl. nagéyat, to Sanskrit naga, but I doubt this as well, as Elephants still exist in some locales in Ethiopia and in the past some ancient authors noted that even along the (desert) coast they could be hunted (there was a species of Elephant different from the African elephant existing in Nubia back then, and I presume this is the same one that existed in Aksum, because it was domesticated, which is difficult to do with African elephants).
This may be true. But Naga/Nagash was also the title 'King' for the ancient Semitic speaking people of modern Ethiopia who lived in Arwe, and ancient kingdom in Punt. In addition, the ability of the Ethiopians as sailors, is supported by the title bahr nagash, "ruler of the maritime province" or Eritrea.
According to Ethiopian traditions the first empire was founded by Za Besi Angabo, of the Arwe line which ruled Ethiopia for 350 years. This dynasty began in 1370 B.C. The traditions of this dynasty are recorded in the Kebra Nagast , or "Glory of Kings". (Doresse 1971)
The greatest and most famous of the rulers of Arwe was the Queen of Sheba, known as Makeda of Tigre, and Bilkis to her subjects in South Arabia. (Windsor 1969, p.38-39)
Za Sebado, was the grandfather of Makeda, he ruled Ethiopia from 1076-1026 B.C., his wife was named Cares. Makeda was born in 1020 B.C., and ascended the throne in 1005 B.C., she ruled Ethiopia and South Arabia until 955 B.C. During her rule she visited King Solomon of the Jews. Here Makeda was impregnated by Solomon.
Makeda had a son. He was named Ebna Hakim, from his descendants Hebrewism came to Ethiopia.
Queen Makeda had a residence near Axum, but the main capital of Arwe was located along the southern end of the African shores of the Red Sea in a district called Azab, Asabe or Saba, which meant in the Tigrinya language of the time "the southern lands".
The name Sheba , was a variation of the name Saba or a specific designation. (Doresse 1971)
When Ebna Hakim took the throne, his mother had already established colonies in Arabia and India. Hakim took the name of Menelik I in 955 B.C. At Axum, Menelik established his capital. The first city of Axum was at Dar'o Addit Kilte.
Menelik I, ruled an empire extending from the Blue Nile to Eastern India. He later, according to tradition, made the empire much larger. After Menelik the people of Arwe worshipped either Hebrewism or the serpent Arwe.
The most important King of Arwe ,after Menelik was King Geder of the city of Nouh, or Sabo, a suburb of Axum. The Kings of Arwe controlled the gold of the Fezoli region of Ethiopia, as revealed by archaeological excavation in the Kerem district in the North and the Edola area in the southern Ethiopia.
Their gold fields in Meroitic Kush, and Sofala in Mozambique produced considerable amounts of gold.
The civilizations of modern Ethiopia are characterized by the practice of agriculture via irrigation and terracing. Ethiopians had a knowledge of wheat and barley long before 1000 B.C. Soft wheat cultivation was concentrated around the centers of Axum, Harar and Addis Ababa.
The farmers of Arwe used the plough and the hoe or digging stick to prepare their fields for cultivation. From here the plough was taken to South Arabia.
The Puntites have had many religions. Before Christianity and Hebrewism their religion consisted of several gods. The people worshipped the serpent Arwe.
The other gods were good and evil. These gods evolved into a series of distinctly Puntite gods including: Sin, the moon god (he was called Amuqah in Aowa);Ashtar, the planet Venus; Nuru, the Shinning One; Bahr, the sea god; Medr, the earth god; and Mahram , the god of war. The god Mahram was often identified with the planet Mars.
Due to trade relations of Punt with other lands Puntites originally probably used the Proto-Saharan script to keep proper records. Over time this writing system was modified, to form an alphabetic system.
The first writing created by the Puntites was Sabaean. The earliest inscriptions written in this script were found at Haoulti , Ethiopia. These inscriptions are over 3000 years old. The Ethiopians also took writing to South Arabia and later India. Both Thamudic and Ethiopic scripts are derived from the Sabaean writing. (Drewes 1962; Doresse 1971)
The Indian Ethiopians called Naga, made one important improvement over the Ethiopic alphabetic scripts. This improvement was the addition of vowels to the alphabet.
Enough is Enough, do not belittle the INTELLECTUAL FIELD OF AFROCENTRISM by making stupid claims that the N-word means god, that is a LIE and all those who claim so know this just like ancient Nubia or JaNubia(Arabic word for southerner) was a Ancient civilization. The B.S. must stop Kush and Ethiopia is acceptable Nubia is Not acceptable. Ntr is not the N-word, this idea is down right wrong, shame on you people who parrot these LIES to unsuspecting students of Afrikan history SHAME on YOU. race and history website needs to remove this LIE. I will write the author of this site to remove such a stupid LIE.
Enough is Enough, do not belittle the INTELLECTUAL FIELD OF AFROCENTRISM by making stupid claims that the N-word means god, that is a LIE and all those who claim so know this just like ancient Nubia or JaNubia(Arabic word for southerner) was a Ancient civilization. The B.S. must stop Kush and Ethiopia is acceptable Nubia is Not acceptable. Ntr is not the N-word, this idea is down right wrong, shame on you people who parrot these LIES to unsuspecting students of Afrikan history SHAME on YOU. race and history website needs to remove this LIE. I will write the author of this site to remove such a stupid LIE.
I support you 100%.
.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mr. Clyde Winters u are on a roll my brother u are right about the Naga this is actually a ancient order amongst the Sadu the ones who hold the axe they are the Naga. Mr.Winters please dont mind Yom he is saying Naga means elephant actually he keeps using Amharic to explain the roots of most of the Geez words he is making a big mistake u cant explain old Geez using Amharic u have to use Tigrinia or Tigre and in Geez elephant is not Naga. The real meaning of Naga is King Ruler Kingdom in Tigre. Mr. Clyde Winters the swastika is a very big thing amongst the ethiopians and Indians i wonder if u have any information on this because those are the two countries i know that actually use the swastika at all. Mr. Clyde Winters even the Bible says that some guy was ruling from Ethiopia to India there are so much similarities between India & Ethiopia the style of dress and culture as well as similar looks i have mistaken many Ethiopians to be from India.
-------------------- Hikuptah Al-Masri Posts: 526 | From: Aswan Egypt | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Hikuptah: Mr. Clyde Winters u are on a roll my brother u are right about the Naga this is actually a ancient order amongst the Sadu the ones who hold the axe they are the Naga. Mr.Winters please dont mind Yom he is saying Naga means elephant actually he keeps using Amharic to explain the roots of most of the Geez words he is making a big mistake u cant explain old Geez using Amharic u have to use Tigrinia or Tigre and in Geez elephant is not Naga. The real meaning of Naga is King Ruler Kingdom in Tigre. Mr. Clyde Winters the swastika is a very big thing amongst the ethiopians and Indians i wonder if u have any information on this because those are the two countries i know that actually use the swastika at all. Mr. Clyde Winters even the Bible says that some guy was ruling from Ethiopia to India there are so much similarities between India & Ethiopia the style of dress and culture as well as similar looks i have mistaken many Ethiopians to be from India.
I agree, I do believe in ancient roots or influences from Africa in India.
Posts: 1219 | From: North Carolina, USA | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
Mr. Clyde Winters the swastika is a very big thing amongst the ethiopians and Indians i wonder if u have any information on this because those are the two countries i know that actually use the swastika at all. Mr. Clyde Winters even the Bible says that some guy was ruling from Ethiopia to India there are so much similarities between India & Ethiopia the style of dress and culture as well as similar looks i have mistaken many Ethiopians to be from India.
The swastika sign is part of the corpus of Harappan or Indus Valley signs. The swastika is read KaaKaa "deliverance, protection, safe keeping". This sign is number 210, in my grammar and vacabulary of the Harappan/Indus Valley language found at the following site:
posted
Clyde winters did u know that the swastika has the same meaning in Ethiopia it is for protection safe keeping and good luck. Clyde winters how large was the Ethiopian Empire did it really stretch from Nubia all the way threw Modern Day Ethiopia to India. Nubia and Ethiopia are a little to close too eachother for them not to have contacts.
-------------------- Hikuptah Al-Masri Posts: 526 | From: Aswan Egypt | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
Clyde winters how large was the Ethiopian Empire did it really stretch from Nubia all the way threw Modern Day Ethiopia to India. Nubia and Ethiopia are a little to close too eachother for them not to have contacts.
I don't believe that the Ethiopians ruled an Empire from Nubia to Ethiopia at the same time. It appears that it was not until Ezana, that the Axumites took over the Meroitic empire. It was during the Arwe empire that the Ethiopians ruled India.
.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Hikuptah: Mr. Clyde Winters u are on a roll my brother u are right about the Naga this is actually a ancient order amongst the Sadu the ones who hold the axe they are the Naga. Mr.Winters please dont mind Yom he is saying Naga means elephant actually he keeps using Amharic to explain the roots of most of the Geez words he is making a big mistake u cant explain old Geez using Amharic u have to use Tigrinia or Tigre and in Geez elephant is not Naga. The real meaning of Naga is King Ruler Kingdom in Tigre. Mr. Clyde Winters the swastika is a very big thing amongst the ethiopians and Indians i wonder if u have any information on this because those are the two countries i know that actually use the swastika at all. Mr. Clyde Winters even the Bible says that some guy was ruling from Ethiopia to India there are so much similarities between India & Ethiopia the style of dress and culture as well as similar looks i have mistaken many Ethiopians to be from India.
I'm not using Amharic, and Tigre and Tigrinya are useless here as well. Elephant in Amharic is zihon, while in Tigrinya is is ḥarmaz. In Ge'ez, however, it is nagé, plural nagéyat. "Naga" does not mean king in Tigrinya. The word is "Nagash," which is the Ge'ez word for it (the modern Ge'ez and Amharic is Nigus). The lack of the "sh" or "s" is important. There's no mechanism for the addition of the letter "shin" at the end of a word, so you can't claim the root is just naga. (and to be accurate, the word in Tigrinya is negash, in Ge'ez it was nagāsh. Very few Ethiopians are confused for Indians and then only for southerners.
Posts: 1024 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yom, you are wasting your time since Clyde is a hardcore pseudo-linguist.
He would have you believe that the word Nagash [Ethiopian], Naga [Indian], and even Negro [Latin] are derived from the same root! LMAO
By the way, ancient Hindu belief has always held the homeland of the Nagas or Nagaland to be in the Eastern regions of India, which contradicts Clydes theory of Nagas having African (Western) origins. Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mr. Winters is not the only person claiming a link between Ethiopia & India actually there are many indian scholars who claim the same as well. So u would have to prove Mr.Winters Wrong but he is the lingustic and he has had alot of experience with languages. For instance no one claims that Diop was crazy when he showed the similarities between Wolof & Ancient Kemetic languages everything that Clyde has talked about does not suprise me i have heard it before. U must understand in this field the impossible becomes possible.
-------------------- Hikuptah Al-Masri Posts: 526 | From: Aswan Egypt | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote: Clyde winters did u know that the swastika has the same meaning in Ethiopia it is for protection safe keeping and good luck. Clyde winters how large was the Ethiopian Empire did it really stretch from Nubia all the way threw Modern Day Ethiopia to India. Nubia and Ethiopia are a little to close too eachother for them not to have contacts.
Hi
Supercar was kind enough to provide me with a citation to an article by Fattowich that indicate that the Tihama ceramics are related to the C-Group and Kerma this suggest intimate relations between these groups.
Given the evidence you were right in seeing a close relationship between Nubia and Ethiopia.
quote:Djehuti writes: By the way, ancient Hindu belief has always held the homeland of the Nagas or Nagaland to be in the Eastern regions of India,
Another pseudo-linguist technique: selective use of oral myths., which are asserted as factual, until they oppose THE THEORY. Then they are ignored. Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
Thanks for the information by WIlliam Jones. I didn't know that some scholars considered Sanskrit and Geez to be similar languages. However, I did hear that there is a debate going on that Geez was the FIRST language of the earth! Mr. Winters, or anybody on this forum, have you heard anything about this? An Ethiopian brotha told this to me. I have been searching, but I can't find what I'm looking for. If ya'll could send some info "this way" I would appreciate it. Shukran(Arabic for "thanks").
Posts: 826 | From: U.S.A. | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^Exactly what are the similarities between Sanskrit and Ge'ez?? Last time I checked, Sanskrit is Indo-European while Ge'ez is Afrasian.
And pray-tell where is the evidence that Ge'ez is "the oldest language on Earth"???
More and more psuedo-scholarship turns this place into la-la land. *sigh* Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
SHUT UP! Seriously man, you don't know what the heck your talking about. The theory of Geez being the oldest Semitic language, as told to me by a brother from Ethiopia, is a debate going in Germany. I think it is debated in the theological realm. They are saying the Geez may have been the language of the world before the language dispersion from the Tower of Babel. I don't got my books with me, but I did have a book that mentioned this. However, I haven't found alot of stuff on it on the internet. Hence, I was looking for more information. That is why I'm telling you to shut up. This debate has nothing to do with your "psuedo-scholarship" accusations(which accusations are full of biasis rather than founded upon truth). Do your research. SHOOT, help me out! Help me to find more information. As you discover that this is a legitimate debate in the academic realm, you might be sorry for stating your ignorant comment. Salaam
Posts: 826 | From: U.S.A. | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Israel i have heard the same thing as well. I was told about this from a Ethiopian Lingustic and scholar who speaks 16 languages he even claims to speak Demotic & Meroitic script he makes alot of claims for instance he says that the Ethiopian script has helped develop many of the other scripts like Aramaic Arabic & Hebrew he even goes so far as to say the English took there alphabets from the Ethiopic he even says that a few German scholars have agreed with him he gives alot of references as well.
-------------------- Hikuptah Al-Masri Posts: 526 | From: Aswan Egypt | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Israel: The theory of Geez being the oldest Semitic language,
That's quite possible, but note, Semitic and Berber are the youngest Afrasan langauges. Kemetic [ancient egyptian], Cushitic, Omotic and Chadic are older. Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
Shukran(thanks). For real, this is real stuff were talking bout. I don't got time for games. If something ain't true, I ain't wit it. But if you got possibilities of proof, and you got alot of scholars discussing the issue, you shouldn't just cast stuff off. That is what I was mad about. This is a legitimate debate in the academic world, and he accuses me of following "psuedo-scholarship"- ". Man, come on!........
Anyway,
Yes, Hikuptah, thank you for mentioning the German scholars, because that is what I heard from my Ethiopian friend. Apparently, in Germany, they have a solid "Ethiopian Studies" Department in some of the schools. This is where the debate is taking place(so I have heard). Hikuptah, if you could help me and this forum find some stuff in English about this debate, by all means brotha, supply it(again it may only be in German, but lets go for it!)! Salaam
Posts: 826 | From: U.S.A. | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
SHUT UP! Seriously man, you don't know what the heck your talking about. The theory of Geez being the oldest Semitic language, as told to me by a brother from Ethiopia, is a debate going in Germany. I think it is debated in the theological realm. They are saying the Geez may have been the language of the world before the language dispersion from the Tower of Babel. I don't got my books with me, but I did have a book that mentioned this. However, I haven't found alot of stuff on it on the internet. Hence, I was looking for more information. That is why I'm telling you to shut up. This debate has nothing to do with your "psuedo-scholarship" accusations(which accusations are full of biasis rather than founded upon truth). Do your research. SHOOT, help me out! Help me to find more information. As you discover that this is a legitimate debate in the academic realm, you might be sorry for stating your ignorant comment. Salaam
I'm Ethiopian, and I can tell you that that theory is pure bull, or you have misheard/misinterpreted him. The theory's not that Ge'ez is the oldest language, but that Proto-Semitic originated in Ethiopia. In any case, if it did, Ge'ez would not have been the first language to come from Proto-Semitic but a proto-Ethiosemitic and then a proto-Ge'ez. For Ge'ez to be the oldest, you would have to assume that it remained unchanged for over 3000 years but then underwent very identifiable changes for 1000 years, which is ridiculous.
If it's theological, then it's probably just arguing from the bible, in which case they'll probably ignore all the pertinent information gathered by Semiticists. Now, your last comment confuses me. The Academic realm, while not excluding the theological realm (there are academic theologists), is distinct. There may be a theological debate on whether or not the first language is Ge'ez, but Semiticists (i.e. the pertinent Academics in this discussion) are certainly not having this debate
Posts: 1024 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
First and foremost, just because your Ethiopian doesn't mean that your correct. Ey man, I DID NOT INVENT THIS ISSUE, I SIMPLY HEARD/READ ABOUT IT! I never claimed that it is true, but I said that there is a debate about it. And the fact is that it could be true...........I mean, shoot man, help me find some articles on the issue! Then, after you have read the facts, then you can make an educated reply. See, right now, you reject the info outright. Lets try to find some of this stuff and see what the scholars are saying........
In terms of theological and academic, don't you know that back in the Middle Ages, theology was considered the "Queen of the Sciences"? Did you know that in order to get a PhD in Theology at a school in Germany, you have to get a PhD in Philosophy first! Yeah, cause philosophy was considered "natural", whereas theology was considred to be the realm of "revelation", hence theology is higher up on the academic scale.......This is going on today, and not just during the Middle Ages.........
I said all that just for your information Yom. The fact is that there are still plenty of schools who study theology. Theology is just one subject, as is Anthropology, History, Math, English, Communication, Journalism, etc. So these ideas about the Geez language, I THINK(I'm not sure), are being argued in the theological academic circles. But lets search this stuff out and see what we find. If it is bullcrap, then I am sure that the fallacity of the theory will be evident. Salaam
Posts: 826 | From: U.S.A. | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
For some reason, I couldn't edit, so I make another post. My friend Yom, there is NO DISTINCTION between people in the academic realm. You have theologians and philsophers, scientists, and arts. At the end of the day, they are all within the sphere of academics. Why would you think that they are seperate. As I said in the above post, in the Middle Ages, theology was the "Queen of the Sciences". Nobody will deny this. So don't seperate between theologians and others. The fact is that teachers in the field of theology are often very knowledgable and fluent in many Semitic languages such as : Hebrew, Aramaic, Canaanite languages, etc. Shoot man, you should read some of the 20th century translated works from different religion, i.e. Buddism, Islam, Gilgamesh(Babylonian myths and religion), etc. Alot of that stuff was translated by "Rev. ____". So you are incorrect to assert that theology is different from other academic fields. Salaam
Posts: 826 | From: U.S.A. | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
forgive me for getting upset. Nothing personal. Imma be looking for some of this info. You can look too, and then debate the truth or fallacy of the theory. Salaam
Posts: 826 | From: U.S.A. | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^Indeed, Rasol all of these deluded fools do is runaway and hide from the FACTS that shatter their fantasy world. The vast majority of linguists agree that Dravidian is NOT an African language yet they chose to go by what a few pseudos (including Clyde) say. Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Israel: [QUOTE]Originally posted by Israel: [QB] Jehuti,
SHUT UP! Seriously man, you don't know what the heck your talking about. The theory of Geez being the oldest Semitic language,...
Oh! I never disagreed that Ge'ez was one of the oldest Semitic languages, but in your previous post you merely said that it was the oldest language in Africa period. So you can understand my skepticism in that claim
quote:forgive me for getting upset. Nothing personal. Imma be looking for some of this info. You can look too, and then debate the truth or fallacy of the theory. Salaam
There is nothing to debate because plain and simple such a theory is FALSE.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Lazar: Q. Er, Yom and Er, rasol -- you are both certified expert linguists, correct?
A. No.
It's hard to find an actual discussion on this, so why don't you explain to me why J.D. Fage rejects this outright?1
His points about the difference between "black" and "African" are not surprisingly almost the same as those made by Djehuti.
Posts: 1024 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
Like I said, if you have proof of your claim, by all means present it. But since you are ignorant of the debate, and since you apparently have no desire to investigate it, perhaps it is better to keep your mouth closed........
Posts: 826 | From: U.S.A. | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Israel: [QB] For some reason, I couldn't edit, so I make another post. My friend Yom, there is NO DISTINCTION between people in the academic realm. You have theologians and philsophers, scientists, and arts. At the end of the day, they are all within the sphere of academics. Why would you think that they are seperate.
Maybe because their specializations are in different fields and therefore qualifies them as knowledgable in that field but not necessarily others. I certainly know that I wouldn't trust a Chemist to carve a statue of me; nor would I entrust an artist with finding a stronger form of steel. Theologians certainly know plenty of biblical history and information about such religious texts, but not necessarily all the linguistic arguments for the age of certain languages and the construction of proto-Semitic.
quote:As I said in the above post, in the Middle Ages, theology was the "Queen of the Sciences". Nobody will deny this. So don't seperate between theologians and others.
You would also get burned at the stake for saying anything that the heads of the "queen of the Sciences" disagreed with (think Galileo - and that wasn't even the Middle Ages anymore!)
quote:The fact is that teachers in the field of theology are often very knowledgable and fluent in many Semitic languages such as : Hebrew, Aramaic, Canaanite languages, etc. Shoot man, you should read some of the 20th century translated works from different religion, i.e. Buddism, Islam, Gilgamesh(Babylonian myths and religion), etc. Alot of that stuff was translated by "Rev. ____". So you are incorrect to assert that theology is different from other academic fields. Salaam
Oh, no. I'm certainly not saying that no theologians are versed in these languages; a great number are due to their relevancy. A number are also well-versed in the linguistics involved in finding out the earliest language. However, none of these theologians believe that Ge'ez is the oldest language. If it were even at all a discussed view, it would certainly get more than 7 hits on Google for "Ge'ez" and "oldest language." The only thing I could find regarding this in Jstor was a 1936 article on how "Ethiopian" was the oldest language (with incorrect claims like Amharic being closer to proto-Semitic than Hebrew). Please, you are making the claim of a debate, so it's you who has to provide evidence of existence, not the others who have to provide evidence of absence (which is very difficult to do, whereas the opposite is simple).
Posts: 1024 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
^^Indeed, Rasol all of these deluded fools do is runaway and hide from the FACTS that shatter their fantasy world. The vast majority of linguists agree that Dravidian is NOT an African language yet they chose to go by what a few pseudos (including Clyde) say.
Since there are so many linguists that support your view, please cite articles presenting linguistic examples that disconfirm the research of Homburger in relation to a Dravidian connection with African languages.
.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
^^Indeed, Rasol all of these deluded fools do is runaway and hide from the FACTS that shatter their fantasy world. The vast majority of linguists agree that Dravidian is NOT an African language yet they chose to go by what a few pseudos (including Clyde) say.
Since there are so many linguists that support your view, please cite articles presenting linguistic examples that disconfirm the research of Homburger in relation to a Dravidian connection with African languages.
.
As rasol says, when making a claim, it is the claimant who has to provide evidence for the claim, not the skeptic that has to provide evidence that the claim is false. A hypothesis is assumed false until proven true and not the other way around. Let me anyway quote my response above, which you seem to have missed.
quote:Originally posted by Yom:
quote:Originally posted by Lazar: Q. Er, Yom and Er, rasol -- you are both certified expert linguists, correct?
A. No.
It's hard to find an actual discussion on this, so why don't you explain to me why J.D. Fage rejects this outright?1
His points about the difference between "black" and "African" are not surprisingly almost the same as those made by Djehuti.
I think it's telling how hard it was to find that article, considering how unexpected a find of relation would be. I know you'll claim racism unwillingness to accept, but that claim is too subject to evidence. Until you provide evidence that they are racist, then it must assumed that that claim is false.
Posts: 1024 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oh, yeah, and here's an interesting fact that you seem to get around constantly without mentioning how:
How are you proving the relationship between "black languages" and Dravidian languages when there's no such thing as "black languages?"
Please cite a scholarly source (relatively recent - not necessarily as recent as the 1990s or '80s) that claims that "black languages" can indeed be identified linguistically, and not simply ascribing a name to a group of unrelated language families simply based on the color of the skin and geographic location of its speakers. Last I heard, Afro-Asiatic, Khoisan, Niger-Congo, and Nilo-Saharan were all unrelated language families, despite the fact that they're all predominantly spoken by blacks (with maybe the exception of AA, due to the spread of Arabic).
Please cite a scholarly source (peer-reviewed, since the claim is so out-there) claiming that the above 4 language families are in fact, branches of a larger one, or in some other way related not due to language contact. Keep in mind that even "inclusive" Nostratic proponents don't include Khoisan, Niger-Congo, or Nilo-Saharan (some include AA, but not all - it's usually just IE, Altaic, and Uralic).
-------------------- "Oh the sons of Ethiopia; observe with care; the country called Ethiopia is, first, your mother; second, your throne; third, your wife; fourth, your child; fifth, your grave." - Ras Alula Aba Nega. Posts: 1024 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
How are you proving the relationship between "black languages" and Dravidian languages when there's no such thing as "black languages?"
Theophile Obenga rejects Greenberg's clasification of African languages. After comparing the languages of Africa, Th. Obenga classified African languages into what he called Negro-African languages or "black African languages.
.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
How are you proving the relationship between "black languages" and Dravidian languages when there's no such thing as "black languages?"
Theophile Obenga rejects Greenberg's clasification of African languages. After comparing the languages of Africa, Th. Obenga classified African languages into what he called Negro-African languages or "black African languages.
.
Was it peer-reviewed?
Posts: 1024 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
How are you proving the relationship between "black languages" and Dravidian languages when there's no such thing as "black languages?"
Theophile Obenga rejects Greenberg's clasification of African languages. After comparing the languages of Africa, Th. Obenga classified African languages into what he called Negro-African languages or "black African languages.
.
This is true, but Obenga, like Diop was working against the paradigm that assocatited Egyptian with Semitic and Berber and Semitic and Berber with whites.
So....he qualified or outright opposed the inclusion of those langauges into his Negro African language group.
However the Afrisan language group, including Semitic is now more generally understood to be African in origin, as are the Berber and Berber languages of course, so the ideological strategy applied by Obenga is no longer necessaray.
Anyway this a distraction from your inability to prove that Dravidian is and African language.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
Yes. Th. Obenga discusses the evidence of "Black African Languages in : Th. Obenga, "The genetic linguistic relationship between Egyptian (ancient Egyptian and Coptic) and modern Negro-African languages. In The Peopling of ancient Egypt and the Deciphering of the Meroitic Script. The General History of Africa Studies Documents 1, (Paris: UNESCO,1978) pp.65-71.
.
.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
Yes. Th. Obenga discusses the evidence of "Black African Languages in : Th. Obenga, "The genetic linguistic relationship between Egyptian (ancient Egyptian and Coptic) and modern Negro-African languages. In The Peopling of ancient Egypt and the Deciphering of the Meroitic Script. The General History of Africa Studies Documents 1, (Paris: UNESCO,1978) pp.65-71.
.
.
Are rasol's comments true? Does it reject Semitic and Berber as "Negro languages?"
Posts: 1024 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
Impressionable minds can be gullible minds as well.
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic