posted
Punctuated bursts in human male demography inferred from 1,244 worldwide Y-chromosome sequences - G David Poznik(April 2016)
---- Haplogroup expansions
To investigate punctuated bursts within the phylogeny and estimate growth rates, we modeled haplogroup growth as a rapid phase followed by a moderate-rate phase and applied this model to lineages showing rapid expansions
First, in the Americas, we observed expansion of Q1a-M3 (Supplementary Figs. 14e and 17) at ~15 kya, the time of the initial colonization of the hemisphere21. This correspondence, based on one of the most thoroughly examined dates in human prehistory, attests to the suitability of the calibration we have chosen. Second, in sub-Saharan Africa, two independent E1b-M180 lineages expanded ~5 kya (Supplementary Fig. 14a), in a period before the numerical and geographical expansions of Bantu speakers, in whom E1b-M180 now predominates22. The presence of these lineages in non-Bantu speakers (for example, Yoruba and Esan) indicates an expansion predating the Bantu migrations,
perhaps triggered by the development of ironworking23. Third, in Western Europe, related lineages within R1b-L11 expanded ~4.8–5.9 kya (Supplementary Fig. 14e), most markedly around 4.8 and 5.5 kya. The earlier of these times, 5.5 kya, is associated with the origin of the Bronze Age Yamnaya culture. The Yamnaya have been linked by aDNA evidence to a massive migration from the Eurasian Steppe, which may have replaced much of the previous European population24,25; however, the six Yamnaya with informative genotypes did not bear lineages descending from or ancestral to R1b-L11, so a Y-chromosome connection has not been established. The later time, 4.8 kya, coincides with the origins of the Corded Ware (Battle Axe) culture in Eastern Europe and the Bell–Beaker culture in Western Europe26. Potential correspondences between genetics and archeology in South and East Asia have not been investigated as extensively. In South Asia, we detected eight lineage expansions dating to ~4.0–7.3 kya and involving haplogroups H1-M52, L-M11, and R1a-Z93 (Supplementary
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
1. As I said many times. Modern European male line did NOT come from the Yamanya Steppes of Asia
2. As I said many times. The Bantu expansion never occurred.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
xyyman: "2. As I said many times. The Bantu expansion never occurred"
'an expansion predating the Bantu migrations' per article.
The term 'migration' would suffice, in reference to Bantu's own oral history, their migration to Lake Malawi and finding it occupied by Aka Fula Pygmies.
- - -
Note: Aka name found in Pygmies in both Congo and Andamans. Eg. Greater Andaman Aka Bea, Aka Jeru, etc.
posted
I assume you have some higher education and do critical thinking?
" 'an expansion predating the Bantu migrations' per article. "
They are saying the genetics do NOT match the oral history or the **theorized** bantu expansion.
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Looking at Fig.2 Confirmation that the West European R1B-L11 and SSA-E1b1b is relatively young. R1b-L11 being about 5000yo. AE was in existence long BEFORE Western European males were even born. Lol!. E1b1a is 5-10kyo compared to e1b1b-M35 which is 25kyo. As I said many times Berbers are much older Africans than SSAians. Obviously a TMRC of 10000y pre-dates the bantu expansion. That is why the author is speculative. Using words like "likely" and "may". Because the genetic data do NOT match the supposeded "Bantu Expansion" Theory. In fact the only branch that aligns with the Bantu Expansion is the M2-Z5994 which is miniscule compared to most SSAians. Learn to read the charts people. aDNA is the sure-fire way to prove anything.
Also QUOTE: ===We examined 20 nodes of the tree whose branching patterns were well fit by this model. These nodes were drawn from eight haplogroups and included at least one lineage from each of the five continental regions surveyed (Fig. 4). As the haplogroup expansions we report are among the most extreme yet observed in humans, we think it more likely than not that such events correspond to historical processes that have also left archaeological footprints. Therefore, in what follows, we propose links between genetic and historical or archaeological data. We caution that, especially in light of as yet imperfect calibration, these connections remain unproven. But they are testable, for example, using aDNA. First, in the Americas, we observed expansion of Q1a-M3 (Supplementary Figs. 14e and 17) at ~15 kya, the time of the initial colonization of the hemisphere21. This correspondence, based on one of the most thoroughly examined dates in human prehistory, attests to the suitability of the calibration we have chosen. Second, in sub-Saharan Africa, two independent E1b-M180 lineages expanded ~5 kya (Supplementary Fig. 14a), in a period BEFORE the numerical and geographical expansions of Bantu speakers, in whom E1b-M180 now predominates22. The presence of these lineages in non-Bantu speakers (for example, Yoruba and Esan) indicates an expansion===
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
The author "read about" the supposed Bantu Expansion and he is trying to make his data fit popular belief. The data show that E-M2 is widespeard throughout SSA from the East Coast to the West Coast, look at his dataset. That explains the shape of the E-M2 plot starting 10-11000ya!!! Long before the Bantu Expansion(sic). Lol! The only branch of E-M2 that is that young is M2-Z5994 which is a small slice of SSAians. Which started yes, even beofre the Bantu Expansion lol!
Question - Which SSAian population carry M2-Z5994? Tic! Tic! Toc!
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
So......to summarize. As I said many times. The SSAian E-M2 is young and much younger than Berbers. So visualizing ancient Africans as modern Africans(SSA) is a misconception. Caucasians have always been and indigenous to Africa. Certain "features" may be relatively young and new. But "black" skin is ancient!!!!! Similarly the modern European male L11 is even younger.
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Another interesting speculation by the author is WHY both R1b-L11 and E1b1a-M2 and an Asian lineage(?) became so dominant in such a short time. They are speculation that it may be a cultural phenomenon. Ie selective breathing. They stop short of saying extermination. They can't prove that.
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
It is important that readers understand that this is all speculation. Remember the author says the results are " human male demography inferred ".
Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: So......to summarize. As I said many times. The SSAian E-M2 is young and much younger than Berbers. So visualizing ancient Africans as modern Africans(SSA) is a misconception. Caucasians have always been and indigenous to Africa. Certain "features" may be relatively young and new. But "black" skin is ancient!!!!! Similarly the modern European male L11 is even younger.
That is preposterous.
Posts: 117 | From: Earth | Registered: Feb 2014
| IP: Logged |
"Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming "
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oh! Before you reply. It is good etiquette to READ the paper and UNDERSTAND it before you reply or you will be ignored.
If you know something I don't I am open to you insight. Carry-on or shut up and take notes.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
2. As I said many times. The Bantu expansion never occurred.
Tell us what really happened with the Bantu
Is Bantu an ethic-group or a linguistic phylum?
Linguistic phylum. [/QB]
Yep,
Posts: 22244 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
And so baNtu Expansion is rapid spread of language and some cultural elements (ethnicity).
By biology there're some genomic markers not shared between SE Afr baNtu and more northerly baNtu.
Still, it's true, an aggregate of baNtu speakers' genomes allow identifying them distinguished from lingualphylistic non-Bantu kin who speak orher Niger-Congo-Kordofanian languages.
Also, markers of today's S Afrs were found in the Amarna lineage royal mummies. Does that make for a mid-Holocene Sahara origin of that gene set?
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
OK we got the genetics out the way. Now, as far as linguistics. I understand their is no such thing as a Bantu language. anyone? Data?
I know Dr Winters and others have stated there is no such thing as a Bantu Language. This is not my forte. anyone?
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
My Kikuyu and Amazulu friends agree they respectively speak a Bantu lect.
KiSwahili is a Bantu language family lingua franca in common use from Kenya to Moçambique and westward.
Dr Winters contributed to the Bantu- phile African Mwalimu magazine.
I would expect conscious Black Americans to know of Bantu's Swahili branch at least. It was the chosen African language of the Liberation Movement and it was tried to be added to secondary school curriculum among the usual language courses Spanish French etc.
It survives today only as the fading memory of Kwanza with its Ngubo Saba (Seven Principles).
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
ooookkkay! I understand Afro-asiatic is spoken from Yemen to Morocco. point? Source? "Friends" speaking similar word forms do not make them the same.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
It is not my place to convince you may remain ignorant or go research. Start with S Lwanga-Lunyiigo 1988.
The African Student Association of my alma mater included people from each of the baNtu countries. They recognize themselves as baNtu.
The peoples of Africa who speak it know Bantu. The word is from the root NTU meaning people. It is found across all individual ethnic groups Bantu languages.
What African people or language do you know?
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
Come Sage. You have to be smarter than that. Think outside the status quo. All you told me is that Bantu related words are spoken from East to West Coast. Do YOU know enough about language structure to determine the source of the Bantu language....if there is really one?
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
I just told you about kiSwahili and its importance to far away Black America and you still continue buffoonery about is there a Bantu language
I don't have time for an ideologue who hasn't researched the topic so cannot speak intelligently on it and who's main concern is just 'proving' himself right.
Until you put in the research I will ignore further opined lip.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
fair enough. I don't know enough about languages. So I will shut up.
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Please Primo, please put in some research. You will be rewarded to see what expanded, language and certain elements of culture way much more so than migrating people.
quote: We still don't know where iron metallurgy started in Africa. But its technique managed to expand from neighbour to neighbour, without massive migrations of people.
S. Lwanga-Lunyiigo (Uganda), co-author of chapter 6 of volume III of the General History of Africa (Unesco 1990), showed his opinion in these terms (pp. 186-187):
'Supporting my conclusions on archaeological proof, I have recently come up with the hypothesis that the Bantu language populations occupied since ancient times a large band of territory going from the Great Lakes region of East Africa to the Atlantic shore of Zaire, and that their supposed migration from West Africa to central, eastern and southern Africa never took place.'
The known facts indicate that people of negroid features occupied sub-Saharan Africa since the middle of the stone age and the populations of Bantu speakers came from this negroid lines. It is possible that the Bantu languages developed thanks to interaction with primitive black collectives, borrowing heavily from each other and that culminated in the appearance of new Bantu languages based off of various linguistic almagamations. This does not eliminate though the genetic factor that demonstrates the unique origin of the populations connected linguistically, but underlines that the genetic factor put forth by the linguists to explain the origin or origins of the Bantu is not in any way exclusive.
The archaeological traces show the presence in sub-Saharan Africa of several settlements of primitive blacks in many areas... In west Africa, the most ancient proof of the black presence come from Iwo Eleru in western Nigeria, where a 'proto-black' skull was exhumed, dating back to the 10th millenium (-9250) BC.
I agree with this reasoning. It is corroborated further by the linguistic considerations of F. van Noten and Th. Obenga, as described above.
quote:Word Origin and History for Bantu Expand 1862, applied to south African language group in the 1850s by German linguist Wilhelm Heinrich Immanuel Bleek (1827-1875), from native Ba-ntu "mankind," from ba-, plural prefix, + ntu "a man, person." Bantustan in a South African context is from 1949.
quote: Bleek’s intellectual importance extends beyond his pioneering interests in Darwin’s theory of evolution and its application to the indigenous peoples in southern Africa. He was also responsible for setting up a system of classification based on language but one which intersected closely with race. This system of classification was based on clear distinctions between Bantu, Hottentot and Bushmen linguistic types and proposed that the study of these primitive languages was of universal importance in so far as they held the key to the understanding of the historical evolution of the three major branches of language spoken worldwide.
[...]
Bleek elaborated his system of classification during the 1860s and early 1870s. He characterised both “Hottentot” and “Bantu”, a term he coined, as sex-denoting languages, but suggested that they were clearly structurally distinct in so far as “Bantu” languages were prefix-pronominal and “Hottentot” languages were suffix-pronominal. In other words, the pronouns in the “Bantu” languages are borrowed from derivative prefixes to the nouns, whilst the pronouns in the “Hottentot” languages are borrowed from the derivative suffixes to the nouns.29 It was on the basis of these structural features that Bleek regarded these languages as “primary forms” of two of the world’s major philological branches, accounting for three-fifths of the languages known on earth: “Kafir, as giving us the key to the great mass of kindred Negro (Prefix-pronominal) languages which fill almost the whole of South Africa and extend at least as far to the north-west as Sierra Leone; and the Hottentot, as exhibiting the most primitive form known of that large tribe of [Suffix-pronominal] languages which is distinguished by its Sex-denoting qualities, which fills North Africa, Europe and part of Asia, which includes the languages of the most highly cultivated
[...]
The connections Bleek established between the Bantu languages of southern Africa and those elsewhere in Africa are, as far as I am aware, relatively uncontroversial. Bleek’s hypothesis that the “Hottentot” language was a primary form of North African and Indo-European languages was more speculative and is seen by Dubow as an early expression of the pervasive Hamitic myth of African origins. Bleek had formulated his theories about the North African origins of “Hottentot” languages well before arriving in South Africa. Thornton indicates that his doctoral study compared the gender systems of “Kafir”, Herero, Sechuana and Nama with Berber, Galla, Coptic and Ancient Egyptian in order to substantiate claims that the Nama (“Hottentot”) language was related to North African languages.31
The peculiar characteristics which distinguish the Hottentots and Bushmen from the other South African nations, are such as range them with the nations of Northern Africa and Western Asia, as the Egyptians, the Semitic tribes and their widespread North African relations (e.g. the Tuarick, Galla &c) and probably also the Indo-European or Arian nations. ... Since the Hottentots ... have in general retained, most faithfully, the primitive and original state of their race, in customs, manners, language &c, a study of their peculiarities must be regarded as eminently important, nay, indispensible for attaining a knowledge of the pre-historical condition and unrecorded history of their kindred nations; and as these comprise, in many cases, some of the most advanced and civilised nations, should we not be entitled to infer that such researches, if once properly made, will prove of great interest for the history of mankind in general?
[...]
Bleek’s active involvement in an anthropometric project initiated by Thomas Huxley, one of Britain’s leading anthropologists and proponents of evolution also provides evidence of his scientific racism and undermines the romantic image of Bleek presented by San scholarship. This aspect of Bleek’s research has been documented in Michael Godby’s exciting article in the Miscast edition, which provides a more balanced and critical perspective on Bleek.37
A few interesting notes, you probably will embrace:
Bleek’s writings that we see the beginnings of the shift towards the structures of thought that informed the intellectual racism in modern South Africa: its evolutionary assumptions and ideas of rigidly demarcated stages of human development, physical as well as cultural.
It also attempts to begin to provide a bridge between my own work on racial ideology in the first half of the nineteenth century and Saul Dubow’s detailed study of scientific racism in South Africa in the early twentieth century.
He explicitly expressed an interest in exploring the links between the language of the Bushman and the communication of primates and emphasised such links in his private correspondence and evolutionary study On the Origin of Language. It is arguably in Bleek’s writings that we see the beginnings of the shift towards the structures of thought that informed the intellectual racism in modern South Africa: its evolutionary assumptions and ideas of rigidly demarcated stages of human development, physical as well as cultural.
ANTHROPOLOGY, RACE AND EVOLUTION: RETHINKING THE LEGACY OF WILHELM BLEEK
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
1) Mboli compares 6 languages in their entirety for the reconstruction of the N-E language family: i.e., Middle-Egyptian (M-E), Coptic, Sango, Zande, Hausa, and Somali.
2) When comparing features, he sticks with these 6 languages throughout the first half of the book. If he compares a paradigm in M-E and Coptic, he compares the SAME paradigm in Sango, Zande, Hausa and Somali for a complete analysis.
3) These are the paradigms examined in the texts for these 6 languages:
posted
Mboli presents a number of proto-Negro- Egyptian(PNE) terms in his book and proto-terms generally. When describing a proto-term you add an /*/ to indicate that it represents the proto-form of a word.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: Do you think possible an African Origin of Proto-Indo-European (PIE) even though its actual birth place would be elsewhere ? The French linguist Andre Martinet had attempted to reconstruct a very early state of the PIE and found typically African consonants such as labiovelar kp and prenasalised mp. On the other hand, applying vert rigorously the comparative method to some African languages, I'm surprised to find in the reconstructed vocabulary some words very similar to PIE ones. So are you aware of other works in that direction worldwide ? Here below are a few PIE roots of negro-egyptian origin:
1) PIE *h2ent- "front", "before", "against" (hittite hanti, latin ante, greek anti). This root has no etymology in PIE itself, but taking into account the negro-egyptian root *xun-t(w)i "nose" fully explains its origin: middle egyptian xnt "nose" "front"; sango hon "nose", "front", "end"; zande hun-se "nose", hausa hanci "nose", etc.
2) PIE *demh2- "home" (latin domus "home", greek demos "department". This root is related to négro-egyptian *dIm-xI "house" (middle egyptian dmi "house", zandé dimo idem).
3) PIE *h2er "to plough" (latin arare, greek aroun idem). This root derives from negro-egyptian *xir "to work" (middle egyptian iri "to work", sango le idem).
As the PIE forms are close to middle egyptian ones, it is clear that the negro-egyptian dialects entered Europe through south-west Asia, that is why Hittite forms (including personal pronouns) are so close to middle egyptian's (I shown this extensively in my book) and this is why there is some common forms with proto-semitic.
--Jean-Claude Mboli
Mboli wants the PNE to agree with Proto-Indo-European (PIE) terms. As a result in Mboli’s reconstructions of proto-terms he usually adds /h, w /to his reconstructions, just like they are found in PIE.
In African languages aspiration or non-aspiration of plosives usually gives a word a variety of meanings. Westerman and Ward, in Practical Phonetics for Students of African Languages, recommends that they be written as digraphs, ph,th,kh. In African languages aspiration is used to give words different meanings
Swahili
Unaspirated…………………………………………………………………………………………………..Aspirated Tembo ‘palm wine’ ………………………………………………………………………………thembo ‘elephant’ Paa ‘roof of a house’…………………………………………………………………………………..phaa ‘gazelle’ Kaa ‘coal’………………………………………………………………………………………………………khaa ‘crab’
The reconstructions of Mboli for cattle, lamb, ram and horse are below. In these reconstructions Mboli introduces the fricative or aspirated element represented by /ph/ to his reconstruction of PNE to indicate articulation of the consonant.
The addition of /h, w/ was unnecessary because the African forms of the words cattle, horse and etc., do not need aspitation. Let’s look at the term for cattle, cow.
Much of the evidence relating to this pastoral way of life comes from the discovery of cattle bones at excavated sites in the Sahara dated between 7000-2000 BC, and the rock drawings of cattle (McIntosh &McIntosh 1981). In the western Sahara, sites such as Erg In-Sakane region, and the Taoudenni basin of northern Mali, attest to cattle husbandry between 6000 and 5000 BP. The ovicaprid husbandry on the other hand began in this area between 5000 to 3000 BP. Cattle pastoral people began to settle Dar Tichitt and Karkarichinkat between 5000 to 3500 BP. The term for cattle,cow in the various African languages show much correspondence. Below we will compare the term for cow from various African languages:
CATTLE/ COW Egyptian ng, nag Wolof nag Peul/Fulfulde nag Angas ning Ankwe ning Susu ninge Nuer yang Baguirmi m-ang, mang Gbea m-angu, mangu Sar(a) m-ang, mang Serere nak Mande nika Burma nak Jarawa i-nak Kagoro nyak Kaje nyak Burak nyek Kagoma nyak Bobo nyanga Kono-Vai nige So.W. Mande ninke Sembla nigi Congo-Benue *i-nak Duala nyaka Mpongwe nyare Fang nyar Kwa nare Azer(Azayr) na Soninke na Gourmantche nua, nue Senufo nu Ewe nyi Niellim nya Boua (Bwa) nya Tarok ina Iregwe nya Dadiya nee Amo na Baya nday Bobofing nya-nga Gera ndiya Koro indak Hausa nagge Dravidian Languages Tamil naku Tulu naku
The correspondence between African terms for cattle support the archaeological evidence for the early domestication of cattle in the Proto-Sahara (Winters 1985). This view is supported by the similarity in the terms for cow/cattle by speakers of the Mande, Niger-Congo, Chadic, and Afro Asiatic Supersets.
The oldest written evidence from Africa comes from the Egyptian language. The Egyptian terms for cattle/ cow were ng and nag . In other African languages we find either the consonant n-, before the consonant g/k , e.g., n/v______(v)g/k ;or the nasal consonant n- , before the vowels -i,-y , and -a , e.g., n+i+a = nia , or n+y+a = nya .
This evidence of cognition in African terms for cattle/cow shows considerable correspondence in consonants and vowels within roots. Table 1.
Table 2. Correspondence within Vowels Niger-Congo Nilotic Mande Chadic Egyptian -i/-y -i/-y -i/-y -y a/u a a/u a/u a
The linguistic evidence supports the view that the Paleo-African term for cattle/cow was *n'n , *n'g /n'k , and *nia . This data also makes it clear that /g/ and /k/ were interchangeable consonants long before the separation of the speakers of Negro-Egyptian into distinct African cultural and linguistic groups.
This review of the linguistic evidence for cow/cattle in African languages does not support Mboli’s proto-term for cattle: • • *h.hm cattle (Egyptian) • *ƞwkeƞwe, cattle (Bantu ngome)
These words are from Mboli page 591.
The linguistic evidence for African terms for cattle make it clear the Proto-NE term would not be aspirated.
It appears that Mboli constructed this term with aspiration to make it analogous to PIE terms for cattle. It appears to me that Mboli’s reconstructions of Proto-NE terms were made to agree with PIE and therefore do not reflect reliable reconstructions of PNE.
.
>>>>>>>
Mboli does not present an accurate description of Negro-Egyptian. The aim of his work is to make Negro-Egyptian agree with Proto-Indo-European vocabulary items. A good example is Mboli's reconstruction of the Negro-Egyptian term for horse.
Most researchers believe that the horse was introduced to Africa/Egypt by the Hysos after 1700BC. This is an interesting date, and far to late for the introduction of the horse given the archaeological evidence for horses at Maadi and the Sahel-Sahara zone.
In this region we find many horses depicted in the rock art. Some researchers have dated the rock art to after 1000 BC,based on the association of the camel with horses in the rock art.
Although the horse and camel are depicted in the rcok art of Nubia, the Sahel-Sahara and Upper Egypt they are considered to be related to the Graeco-Roman period . This date is far to late for the camel and horse to be used for domesticated purposes. During the Old Kingdom camel hair cord was used by the Egyptians .
Moreover camel figurines are found in Gerzean (3500 BC) and archaic Egyptian context .
In the Sahelian-Saharan rock art the horse frequently depicted. The horse is often associated with being rode by the personages depicted in the rock art . In the same area we find engravings of men capturing horses probably to be rode or harnessed to a chariot . There are numerous pictures of blacks riding in chariots. Some researchers have dated this art to 600 BC. This date is probably far to late given the fact that the horse is attested too early in the archaeological history of Saharan Africa as discussed above.
At Buhen, one of the major fortresses of Nubia, which served as the headquarters of the Egyptian Viceroy of Kush a skeleton of a horse was found lying on the pavement of a Middle Kingdom rampart (W.B. Emery, A master-work of Egyptian military architecture 3900 years ago" Illustrated London News, 12 September, pp.250-251). This was only 25 years after the Hysos had conquered Egypt.The Kushites appear to have rode the horses on horseback instead of a chariot.
This suggest that the Kushites had been riding horses for an extended period of time for them to be able to attack Buhen on horseback. This supports supports the early habit of Africans riding horses as depicted in the rock art.This tradition was continued throughout the history of Kush.
The Kushites and upper Egyptians were great horsemen, whereas the Lower Egyptians usually rode the chariot, the Kushite calvary of the Twenty-Fifth Dynasty usually rode on horseback (W.A. Fairservis, The ancient kingdoms of the Nile (London,1962) p.129).
The Nubians and Upper Egyptians were great horsemen whereas the Lower Egyptians usually rode the chariot, the Nubian warriors of the Twenty-Fifth Dynasty rode on horseback . The appearance of the horse laying on a Buhen rampart may indicate it was used by Kushite warriors attacking Buhen. No matter what the use of the horse was, the linguistic evidence makes it clear that the horse was part of Saharan culture before the advent of the Indo-Europeans.
Below we compare the Malinke(M.)-Bambara (B.), Nubia (N), Wolof (W.) Hausa, Tamil (Ta), Malayam (Mal) Somali (Som.) Kanarese (Ka.) Telugu (Tel.) Kordofan Nubian (KN) languages. The African languages belong either to the Niger–Congo Family or the Cushitic Family of languages.
Horse M. wolu, Bam. b’lu, wolo, N. unde Ta. Iyuli, Brahui hulli
Other Dravidian-African terms for horse: Mande wolu Bam. B’lu, wolo Mande bara ‘grey horse’, Hausa baraba ‘swift horse’ Wolof fas Somali fara-ka Egyptian nefer Serere pis Tamil , Mal. Pari Tamil payyeru, Fulani puucu Mande bari Ge’ez faras Galla or Oromo farda, ferda Ka. Karte Tamil kartai Hausa doki Tel. gadide Kanuri Nile koś Hausa godiya
The linguistic evidenc indicates that *par- / * far-., was probably the proto-Negro-Egpyptian term for horse not Mboli’s so-called M-E *hi-kĭphuř-u . For Mboli to claim that the proto- ME term for horse was *hi-kĭphuř-u for horse, when nefer was the Egyptian term for horse demonstrates how Mboli was trying to make Negro-Egyptian conform to Proto-Indo-European.
.
1. Granted, the base of the new PIE terms relating to a agro-pastoral and mining lifestyle for the Indo-European (IE) speakers are probably the result of IE people making African terms confrom to IE languages, the majority of proto-African terms will usually be CVC or CVCV in structure, not CCVC which is a characteristic of IE languages.
I will admit that I misread *h2gʰʷno- ou *h3gʰʷno-, as Negro-Egyptian, when they are really Proto-Indo-European (PIE). But I will not retract my contention that Mboli is trying to make African proto-words agree with PIE culture terms.
Mboli spends most of his time trying to make Proto-African/Negro-Egyptian terms agree with PIE constructions for the same word. A good example is the alledged proto-term 'cattle,cow': *ŋʷ-keŋʷe, which he says “corresponds to the Bantu word nguni "cattle," for which the Amazulu and kin are named (the nguni tribes)”. In historical linguistics and the reconstruction of proto-terms we apply the rule of Occam's Razor , the preference for simplicity in the scientific method of constructing proto-languages. If we apply Occam’s Razor to Mboli’s reconstruction of the proto-term *ŋʷ-keŋʷe « cattle », we find that it does not truly reflect the probable Proto-Bantu word for ‘cattle,cow’. Below are terms for ‘cow,cattle’.
In eyeballing the Bantu word for ‘cow,cattle’ notice they are CVC(C)V in structure. The initial nasal consonant is followed by vowel consonant and vowel again: CVC. Thus we have ŋ+omb+ e/a/ó=*ŋomb-
In the Bantu languages we often find an initial nasal consonant / ŋ /. This syllabic nasal consonant in Bantu languages is usually attached to human and animal animate classes. This means that the actual root word for ‘cow,cattle’ in the Bantu languages is *-omb -( + e/a/ó). Even though Mboli recognizes that / ŋ- / is the nasal affix, in his reconstruction of *ŋʷ-keŋʷe, this word has nothing to do with either nguni , and definitely not ngombe. In fact the addition of element /keŋʷe/ to / ŋ / is not supported by the words nguni , or ngombe. If you apply the rule of Occam's Razor, any researcher would see that the proto-Bantu term for ‘cattle,cow’ was / *ŋ-omb-/ (VCCV in structure) not *ŋʷ-keŋʷe. It is this need for Mboli, to find correspondence(s) between Proto-African terms and PIE that make me suspect the reliability and validity of his research.
Mboli should not care about making his reconstructions of proto-Negro-Egyptian conform to PIE. They should be made pursuant to African sound laws.
2
Another case of Mboli trying to make Negro-Egyptian conform to Proto-Indo-European terms is his reconstruction of the term for ‘ram’. Mboli claims that the PIE term for "lamb" *h2gʰʷno- ou *h3gʰʷno-, is also easily explained starting from Negro-Egyptian *(w.)xiŋʷ ‘ram’ .
The Paleo-African hunters quickly learned the habits of wild sheep and goats. As a result of this hunting experience and the shock of the short arid period after 8500 BC, Paleo-Africans began to domesticate goat/sheep to insure a reliable source of food. By 6000 BP the inhabitants of Tadrart Acacus were reliant on sheep and goats (Barich 1985).
The first domesticated goats came from North Africa. This was the screw horn goat common to Algeria, where it may have been deposited in Neolithic times. We certainly see goat/sheep domestication moving eastward: Tadrart Acacus (Camps 1974), Tassili-n-Ajjer , Mali (McIntosh & McIntosh 1988), Niger (Roset 1983) and the Sudan. Barker (1989) has argued that sheep and goats increased in importance over cattle because of their adaptation to desiccation.
The linguistic evidence indicates that ovicaprids were domesticated before the Proto-Saharan people migrated out of the Sahara into the Nile Valley, Europe and Asia. As a result we have proto-terms for sheep going back to Proto-Saharan times.
.
.
. The Egyptian terms for sheep,ram are ø zr #, or ø sr # . In the terms for sheep we find either the consonant /s/ or /z/ before the consonant /r/, e.g., s>øa/e/i#________r. This corresponds to many other African terms for sheep, ram:
Language….Sheep, Ram Egyptian sr, zr Wolof xar Coptic sro Bisa sir Kouy siri Lebir sir Amo zara Bobofing se-ge,sege Toma seree Malinke sara Busa sa Bambara sarha,saga Koro isor Boko sa Bir sir Azer sege 'goat' Diola sarha
There is phonological contrast between s =/= z. We find both ø sr # and ø zr # for sheep. Here we have s>z/V_______(V)r. The proto- Niger-Congo term for ram,sheep was probably *sär / *zär.
As a result, I can not explain how Mboli was able to reconstruct the Negro-Egyptian term *(w.)xiŋʷ ‘ram’. The vocabulary items above make it evident that there was no aspirated /ŋʷ/ in Egyptian sr and Coptic sro terms for ‘ram’. It appears to me that Mboli said the NE term for ‘ram’ was *(w.)xiŋʷ to make it conform to PIE *h2gʰʷno- , or *h3gʰʷno-. The interesting fact about the antiquity of the term for ‘ram’ among NE speakers is the fact the same term appears in Dravidian and Sumerian. .
. It is interesting to note that the Bantu probably did not domesticate sheep goats as early as the Egyptians, Mande and Atlantic speakers. The Bantu term for ram,sheep was -buzi and -budi> mbuzi and mbudi.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I have a couple questions if you get the chance?
Assuming Mboli used IE words in prefixes because he was trying to apply the same methods that were used to create the IE families how much of it do you think he got wrong?
What do you think of Simi-Bantu?
Posts: 1254 | From: howdy | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic