posted
I have been reading this forum for quite some time now and have seen some people talk about the relationship between AE and EA in the past and present day Egyptians. Do you guys now if there is a good book that I could refer to concerning East Africa and Ancient Egypt. And briefly can you guys explain to me how the ancient Egyptians are related to modern day East Africans. And when did egyptologist came to the conclusion that there was a connection between AE and EA. Thanks in advance.
Posts: 1 | From: Canada | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Linguistically - because the Kemetic language is a part of language family that originated in the the Sudan/horn region of east Africa.
Genetically - because the primary male lineages of the Upper Nile Valley are of East African origin.
Archeologically - because precursors to Nile Valley culture go back to the Mesolithic sites of Sudan and the sahara.
Anthropologically - because the early nile valley remains show tropical adaptations even though "Egypt" is not in the tropics.
"Historically" - because the written record of the Kemetians states that they originate from inner Africa, denoted as Ta Khent, Ta Neter and Punt. The first lands, lands of the ancestors, land of the Gods.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ancient Egyptians were at basic, a complex 'mixture' of Saharan groups, lower and upper Nile [encompassing East Africa south of Egypt] groups. Can't be overemphasized. These indigenous groups were in various periods joined by immigrants; first from "SW Asia" and then much later, from southern Europe.
Excerpts posted ad nauseam, but seemingly never understood for whatever reason:
"Later, stimulated by mid-Holocene droughts, migration from the Sahara contributed population to the Nile Valley (Hassan 1988, Kobusiewicz 1992, Wendorf and Schild 1980, 2001); the predynastic of upper Egypt and later Neolithic in lower Egypt show clear Saharan affinities. A striking increase e of pastoralists’ hearths are found in the Nile valley dating to between 5000-4000 BCE (Hassan 1988). Saharan Nilo-Saharan speakers may have been initial domesticators of African cattle found in the Sahara (see Ehret 2000, Wendorf et. Al. 1987). Hence there was a Saharan “Neolithic” with evidence for domesticated cattle before they appear in the Nile valley (Wendorf et al. 2001). If modern data can be used, there is no reason to think that the peoples drawn into the Sahara in the earlier periods were likely to have been biologically or linguistically uniform.
…A dynamic diachronic interaction consisting of the fusion, fissioning, and perhaps “extinction” of populations, with a decrease in overall numbers as the environment eroded, can easily be envisioned in the heterogenous landscape of the eastern Saharan expanse, with its oases and Wadis, that formed a reticulated pattern of habitats. This fragile and changing region with the Nile Valley in the early to mid-Holocene can be further envisioned as holding a population whose subdivisions maintained some distinctiveness, but did exchange genes. Groups would have been distributed in settlements based on resources, but likely had contacts based on artifact variation (Wendorf and Schild 2001). Similar pottery can be found over extensive areas. Transhumance between the Nile valley and the Sahara would have provided east-west contact, even before the later migration largely emptied parts of the eastern Sahara.
Early speakers of Nilo-Saharan and Afroasiatic apparently interacted based on the evidence of loan words (Ehret, personal communication). Nilo-Saharan’s current range is roughly congruent with the so-called Saharo-Sudanese or Aqualithic culture associated with the less arid period (Wendorf and Schild 1980), and therefore cannot be seen as intrusive. Its speakers are found from the Nile to the Niger rivers in the Sahara and Sahel, and south into Kenya. The eastern Sahara was likely a micro--evolutionary processor and pump of populations, who may have developed various specific sociocultural (and linguistic) identities, but were genealogically “mixed” in terms of origins.
These identities may have further crystallized on the Nile, or fused with those of resident populations that were already differentiated. The genetic profile of the Nile Valley via the fusion of the Saharans and the indigenous peoples were likely established in the main long before the Middle Kingdom…
…Hoffman (1982) noted cattle burials in Hierakonpolis, the most important of predynastic upper Egyptian cities in the later predynastic. This custom might reflect Nubian cultural impact, a common cultural background, or the presence of Nubians.
There was some cultural and economic bases for all levels of social intercourse, as well as geographical proximity. There was some shared iconography in the kingdoms that emerged in Nubia and upper Egypt around 3300 BCE (Williams 1986). Although disputed, there is evidence that Nubia may have even militarily engaged upper Egypt before Dynasty I, and contributed leadership in the unification of Egypt (Williams 1986). The point of reviewing these data is to illustrate that evidence suggests a basis for social interaction, and gene exchange..."
quote:Originally posted by Supercar: Ancient Egyptians were at basic, a complex 'mixture' of Saharan groups, lower and upper Nile [encompassing East Africa south of Egypt] groups. Can't be overemphasized. These indigenous groups were in various periods joined by immigrants; first from "SW Asia" and then much later, from southern Europe.
Excerpts posted ad nauseam, but seemingly never understood for whatever reason:
"Later, stimulated by mid-Holocene droughts, migration from the Sahara contributed population to the Nile Valley (Hassan 1988, Kobusiewicz 1992, Wendorf and Schild 1980, 2001); the predynastic of upper Egypt and later Neolithic in lower Egypt show clear Saharan affinities. A striking increase e of pastoralists’ hearths are found in the Nile valley dating to between 5000-4000 BCE (Hassan 1988). Saharan Nilo-Saharan speakers may have been initial domesticators of African cattle found in the Sahara (see Ehret 2000, Wendorf et. Al. 1987). Hence there was a Saharan “Neolithic” with evidence for domesticated cattle before they appear in the Nile valley (Wendorf et al. 2001). If modern data can be used, there is no reason to think that the peoples drawn into the Sahara in the earlier periods were likely to have been biologically or linguistically uniform.
…A dynamic diachronic interaction consisting of the fusion, fissioning, and perhaps “extinction” of populations, with a decrease in overall numbers as the environment eroded, can easily be envisioned in the heterogenous landscape of the eastern Saharan expanse, with its oases and Wadis, that formed a reticulated pattern of habitats. This fragile and changing region with the Nile Valley in the early to mid-Holocene can be further envisioned as holding a population whose subdivisions maintained some distinctiveness, but did exchange genes. Groups would have been distributed in settlements based on resources, but likely had contacts based on artifact variation (Wendorf and Schild 2001). Similar pottery can be found over extensive areas. Transhumance between the Nile valley and the Sahara would have provided east-west contact, even before the later migration largely emptied parts of the eastern Sahara.
Early speakers of Nilo-Saharan and Afroasiatic apparently interacted based on the evidence of loan words (Ehret, personal communication). Nilo-Saharan’s current range is roughly congruent with the so-called Saharo-Sudanese or Aqualithic culture associated with the less arid period (Wendorf and Schild 1980), and therefore cannot be seen as intrusive. Its speakers are found from the Nile to the Niger rivers in the Sahara and Sahel, and south into Kenya. The eastern Sahara was likely a micro--evolutionary processor and pump of populations, who may have developed various specific sociocultural (and linguistic) identities, but were genealogically “mixed” in terms of origins.
These identities may have further crystallized on the Nile, or fused with those of resident populations that were already differentiated. The genetic profile of the Nile Valley via the fusion of the Saharans and the indigenous peoples were likely established in the main long before the Middle Kingdom…
…Hoffman (1982) noted cattle burials in Hierakonpolis, the most important of predynastic upper Egyptian cities in the later predynastic. This custom might reflect Nubian cultural impact, a common cultural background, or the presence of Nubians.
There was some cultural and economic bases for all levels of social intercourse, as well as geographical proximity. There was some shared iconography in the kingdoms that emerged in Nubia and upper Egypt around 3300 BCE (Williams 1986). Although disputed, there is evidence that Nubia may have even militarily engaged upper Egypt before Dynasty I, and contributed leadership in the unification of Egypt (Williams 1986). The point of reviewing these data is to illustrate that evidence suggests a basis for social interaction, and gene exchange..."
supercar babe, you're always there to provide the studies in five seconds, thank you . Anyways, speaking of cattle pastoralist saharan groups, among whom the old kingdom cattle beliefs originated, what language do you think they spoke? Afro-asiatic originated in east africa, so what language family did the saharans speak?
Posts: 447 | From: Somewhere son... | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
Anyways, speaking of cattle pastoralist saharan groups, among whom the old kingdom cattle beliefs originated, what language do you think they spoke? Afro-asiatic originated in east africa, so what language family did the saharans speak?
On the first question, I don't have specifics on that, but it is well known that cattle rearing likely originates there [cattle anthropology & genetics, and pottery indicators], i.e. in the Sahara. As for the second question, this is just what I was referring to earlier about "alertness" to the contents of the citation; I believe this was already answered in the citation that you replied to. Just to pick out some pieces:
"If modern data can be used, there is no reason to think that the peoples drawn into the Sahara in the earlier periods were likely to have been **biologically or linguistically uniform.**
...Early speakers of Nilo-Saharan and Afroasiatic apparently interacted **based on the evidence of loan words** (Ehret, personal communication). Nilo-Saharan’s current range is roughly congruent with the so-called Saharo-Sudanese or Aqualithic culture associated with the less arid period (Wendorf and Schild 1980), and **therefore cannot be seen as intrusive**. Its speakers are found from the Nile to the Niger rivers in the Sahara and Sahel, and south into Kenya. The eastern Sahara was likely a micro--evolutionary processor and pump of populations, who may have developed various specific sociocultural (and linguistic) identities, but **were genealogically “mixed” in terms of origins.**"
Even today, both Afrasan and Nilo-Saharan groups reside in Egypt.
Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^The early Saharans were very likely a mixture of "proto-Nilo-Saharan" and "proto-Afrasan" speakers.
Moving onto other information:
“There is evidence from Bir Kiseiba and Nabta in south east Egypt that societies adopted domesticated animals (particularly cattle) at a very early stage, using pottery and other elements that are often associated with the adoption of a fully agricultural lifestyle.
The Faiyum was certainly occupied during similar time periods to these, but in spite of similarities in the lithic assemblage, the Faiyum Neolithic groups had no pottery, cultivated plants, and the society does not appear to have favoured cattle over any other breed. In addition, in the Faiyum extensive use was made of natural resources, and the animal domesticates appear to have had a different origin. This may be accounted for by substantially different environmental conditions, but may also have other explanations. Dating is consistent with a possible southeast origin for the Faiyum groups and suggest that “the Fayyum sites and those at Bir Kiseiba and Nabta were occupied in some of the same period, but the earlier dates from the Bir-Kiseiba-Nabta region raise the possibility that the earliest occupants of the Fayyum came from the same cultural traditions” (Wenke et al 1989, p.37).”
.5.3.4 An African Origin for Neolithic Agriculture “It is possible that both Desert and Faiyum sites with early domesticates could have emerged from further south, in Africa. Pre-agricultural use of pottery and apparent domestication of cattle are known from early times at a number of site. In addition, recent genome studies into cattle origins have suggested that African cattle may well have been indigenous and that they did not derive from the Near East.
Similarly, on the basis of a) presence of actual cattle in Predynastic Egypt and representations in Saharan rock art and b) the absence of cattle in the Near Eastern Fertile Crescent prior to the 5th Millennium BC, Hassan (1972) suggests that cattle herding evolved first in Egypt and North Africa. Confirmed more recently by Wendorf and Schild work in Nabta Playa where cattle remains and early pottery date to before 6000bc.
Faiyum lithics also offer comparisons with African examples – the most similar are probably Aterian, and there is nothing closely similar in the Levant.” - Info courtesy of Andie Byrnes
-------------------- Truth - a liar penetrating device! Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
. Anyways, speaking of cattle pastoralist saharan groups, among whom the old kingdom cattle beliefs originated, what language do you think they spoke? Afro-asiatic originated in east africa, so what language family did the saharans speak?
Printer-friendly view of this topic