quote:Originally posted by Elite Diasporan: @Capra
HERE IS The passage from the book that I am talking about!!!!!!
quote:Brother Lt.Col. E. L. de Cordes, who was in South Africa for three years, informed the writer that in one of the Ruins" there is a "stone-chamber," with a vast quantity of Papyri, covered with old Egyptian hieroglyphics. A Boer hunter discovered this, and a large quantity was used to light a fire with, and yet still a larger quantity remained there now.
Albert Churchward, The Signs and Symbols of Primordial Man, 2nd Edition, UK. George Allen & Co., 1913, p.75.
^^^Please not that I am citing from the DIRECT source and not the book I read itself. In the book, the author quoted this from the ORIGINAL source. So all in all I am citing the ORIGINAL source instead of the book I read.
What are you guys thoughts on this? I NEED to hear you guy's opinion. Why hasn't this hardly been talked about?
Is anyone ELSE going to address this?
I'm guessing the site Located in zimbabwe Its just another great lakes connection.
posted
^^^Yeah its known its in Great Zimbabwe. I'm wondering how the Egyptian Papyri got there?
Posts: 1891 | From: NY | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
posted
There are many layers to this, Obviously there were many ruins or chambers.
Quote: "Brother Lt.Col. E. L. de Cordes, who was in South Africa for three years, informed the writer that in ***one*** of the Ruins" there is a "stone-chamber," with a vast quantity of Papyri, covered with old Egyptian hieroglyphics."
-------------------- 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
^^^Nice pointing that out. Man we need more damn archaeologist... Being a scholar is nice and all but...
Posts: 1891 | From: NY | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
posted
Read a few excerpts online. Just bought the book. Thanks for the lead.
The signs and symbols of primordial man :4bthe evolution of religious doctrines from the eschatology of the ancient Egyptians
Wow! Reading the excerpts it is puzzling why Europeans lay claim to AE. Delusional people.
-------------------- 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 |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: Read a few excerpts online. Just bought the book. Thanks for the lead.
The signs and symbols of primordial man :4bthe evolution of religious doctrines from the eschatology of the ancient Egyptians
Wow! Reading the excerpts it is puzzling why Europeans lay claim to AE. Delusional people.
DAMN! I know we had our differences in the past but you REALLY about dat life I must admit. You actually bought the book...
Posts: 1891 | From: NY | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Andromeda2025: @lioness
"bantu expansion" as a simplistic euronut pseudo scientific african model on the indigenious people of Africa was High Key Racist. Since these "theories" where developed during the colonial period by German linguist Mienhoff as a way of classification as a mean/method to aid the subjugation, exploitation, theft, robbery and rape. Fast forward to modern times and the scramble for Africa continues with neo colonization 6.0.. enter the DNA games.
where nowadays most sub-Saharan Africans are speakers of Bantu languages. Given that the expansion did not follow a single continuous migration route, but rather, that it involved at least two major dispersals with different expansion centers (one in the west and one in the east) (Oslisly 1995), different geographical constraints, and at different times, it is not surprising that differences in the genetic composition of the different Bantu areas have been found, especially in terms of the degree of assimilation of hunter-gatherer populations (Thomas et al. 2000; Pereira et al. 2001, 2002; Salas et al. 2002; Plaza et al. 2004; Beleza et al. 2005).
. Moreover, recent, groundbreaking work on Kainji languages (Blench & McGill 2012) suggests that the entire picture of Proto-Benue-Congo will change significantly (making it look less “Bantu”) once those diverse and typologically fascinating languages have been subject to more detailed comparative work.
By contrast, some linguists have sought to combine Greenberg's four African families into larger units. In particular, Edgar Gregersen (1972) proposed joining Niger–Congo and Nilo-Saharan into a larger family, which he termed Kongo-Saharan. Roger Blench (1995) suggests Niger–Congo is a subfamily of Nilo-Saharan.
Gotta admit the Benue talk has been interesting me. How come I never knew about this. So they are saying Benue could be its own family unique from Bantu?
Posts: 1891 | From: NY | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Elite Diasporan: @Capra
HERE IS The passage from the book that I am talking about!!!!!!
quote:Brother Lt.Col. E. L. de Cordes, who was in South Africa for three years, informed the writer that in one of the Ruins" there is a "stone-chamber," with a vast quantity of Papyri, covered with old Egyptian hieroglyphics. A Boer hunter discovered this, and a large quantity was used to light a fire with, and yet still a larger quantity remained there now.
Albert Churchward, The Signs and Symbols of Primordial Man, 2nd Edition, UK. George Allen & Co., 1913, p.75.
^^^Please not that I am citing from the DIRECT source and not the book I read itself. In the book, the author quoted this from the ORIGINAL source. So all in all I am citing the ORIGINAL source instead of the book I read.
What are you guys thoughts on this? I NEED to hear you guy's opinion. Why hasn't this hardly been talked about?
Is anyone ELSE going to address this?
It hasn't been talked about more because there is no physical evidence of it
and, although Leitenant-Colonel E. L. de Cordes existed no one has found any writing by him or other reference to him pertaining to this subject
Posts: 42920 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: The bantu migration ( bantu expansion) began about 1000 BC
xyyman acts like anybody who talks about it is talking about bantus as if that means it's a multi-regional theory where bantus evolved in West Africa independently of other Africans
Of course it doesn't mean that. People who say there was a bantu migration also would tell you that bantus came from the south or east before they arrived in West Africa
He acts like "no, they came from East Africa" as if that would be a contradiction to the theory. But it's not a contradiction. It is merely Pre-expansion-era demography, yes what the authors here call trans-Sahelian migration that occurred before it
That map has the "bantu expansion" going straight through the Congo basin in what is now the DRC.
The map is not supposed to be that specific as to be literally going through the congo basin, it's general direction
The beginning shows pre-bantu expansion people migrating from East Africa to West in a Trans-Sahelian migration Later, from West Africa around 1000 BC bantu speaking people enlarged in population and went into Central and South Africa
Posts: 42920 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Andromeda2025: @lioness
"bantu expansion" as a simplistic euronut pseudo scientific african model on the indigenious people of Africa was High Key Racist. Since these "theories" where developed during the colonial period by German linguist Mienhoff as a way of classification as a mean/method to aid the subjugation, exploitation, theft, robbery and rape. Fast forward to modern times and the scramble for Africa continues with neo colonization 6.0.. enter the DNA games.
where nowadays most sub-Saharan Africans are speakers of Bantu languages. Given that the expansion did not follow a single continuous migration route, but rather, that it involved at least two major dispersals with different expansion centers (one in the west and one in the east) (Oslisly 1995), different geographical constraints, and at different times, it is not surprising that differences in the genetic composition of the different Bantu areas have been found, especially in terms of the degree of assimilation of hunter-gatherer populations (Thomas et al. 2000; Pereira et al. 2001, 2002; Salas et al. 2002; Plaza et al. 2004; Beleza et al. 2005).
. Moreover, recent, groundbreaking work on Kainji languages (Blench & McGill 2012) suggests that the entire picture of Proto-Benue-Congo will change significantly (making it look less “Bantu”) once those diverse and typologically fascinating languages have been subject to more detailed comparative work.
By contrast, some linguists have sought to combine Greenberg's four African families into larger units. In particular, Edgar Gregersen (1972) proposed joining Niger–Congo and Nilo-Saharan into a larger family, which he termed Kongo-Saharan. Roger Blench (1995) suggests Niger–Congo is a subfamily of Nilo-Saharan.
Gotta admit the Benue talk has been interesting me. How come I never knew about this. So they are saying Benue could be its own family unique from Bantu?
Cross River languages being unique from Bantu would put a wrench into the Bantu Expansion theory, and makes things complicated and Euro's never want complicated socio/genetic/anthro/archeo/ answers especially from "sub-sarahan" Eastern Bantu is different from Western Bantu for sure even old racist Meinhoff picked up on some Afro Asiatic( hamitic) influences in South Eastern Bantu.
As an aside, Man from Bioko Island of the Cameroon, from the Bubi (Bantu) Tribe talks about his DNA Ancestry results. He came up 25% Malian. Interesting.
posted
BMC Evol Biol. 2010; 10: 92. Published online 2010 Mar 31. doi: 10.1186/1471-2148-10-92 PMCID: PMC2867817
Little genetic differentiation as assessed by uniparental markers in the presence of substantial language variation in peoples of the Cross River region of Nigeria
Krishna R Veeramah,1,2 Bruce A Connell,3 Naser Ansari Pour,4 Adam Powell,5 Christopher A Plaster,4 David Zeitlyn,6 Nancy R Mendell,7 Michael E Weale,8 Neil Bradman,4 and Mark G Thomas5,9,10
Conclusion
In this study we have been able to elucidate that languages and peoples can move independent of each other within the Cross River region of Nigeria, a finding that will be of considerable interest to linguists working on aspects of language contact. A major reason we have been able to gain insight at such a fine geographic scale is the quality of the dataset assembled. There has, unfortunately, been a tendency when examining African genetic diversity to utilise datasets of small size with samples of undeclared origin and relationships. The practice of assembling dense DNA sample sets of known and detailed provenance, as previously called for by anthropologists and linguists [32], will be the most vital aspect when conducting studies to answer the many complex questions likely to be encountered in the course of unravelling demographic histories of geographically restricted African ethnicities.
Abstract Background
The Cross River region in Nigeria is an extremely diverse area linguistically with over 60 distinct languages still spoken today. It is also a region of great historical importance, being a) adjacent to the likely homeland from which Bantu-speaking people migrated across most of sub-Saharan Africa 3000-5000 years ago and b) the location of Calabar, one of the largest centres during the Atlantic slave trade. Over 1000 DNA samples from 24 clans representing speakers of the six most prominent languages in the region were collected and typed for Y-chromosome (SNPs and microsatellites) and mtDNA markers (Hypervariable Segment 1) in order to examine whether there has been substantial gene flow between groups speaking different languages in the region. In addition the Cross River region was analysed in the context of a larger geographical scale by comparison to bordering Igbo speaking groups as well as neighbouring Cameroon populations and more distant Ghanaian communities.
Results
The Cross River region was shown to be extremely homogenous for both Y-chromosome and mtDNA markers with language spoken having no noticeable effect on the genetic structure of the region, consistent with estimates of inter-language gene flow of 10% per generation based on sociological data. However the groups in the region could clearly be differentiated from others in Cameroon and Ghana (and to a lesser extent Igbo populations). Significant correlations between genetic distance and both geographic and linguistic distance were observed at this larger scale.
Conclusions
Previous studies have found significant correlations between genetic variation and language in Africa over large geographic distances, often across language families. However the broad sampling strategies of these datasets have limited their utility for understanding the relationship within language families. This is the first study to show that at very fine geographic/linguistic scales language differences can be maintained in the presence of substantial gene flow over an extended period of time and demonstrates the value of dense sampling strategies and having DNA of known and detailed provenance, a practice that is generally rare when investigating sub-Saharan African demographic processes using genetic data.
Posts: 42920 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
60 distinct languages. "likely origin" in other words... that is the theory but they can't really confirm.
Posts: 165 | From: Miami Beach, Florida | Registered: Jun 2017
| IP: Logged |
posted
I have "differences" with everyone. Don't take it personal. I come at anyone who post nonsense. I am partial only to Dr Winters.
quote:Originally posted by Elite Diasporan:
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: Read a few excerpts online. Just bought the book. Thanks for the lead.
The signs and symbols of primordial man :4bthe evolution of religious doctrines from the eschatology of the ancient Egyptians
Wow! Reading the excerpts it is puzzling why Europeans lay claim to AE. Delusional people.
DAMN! I know we had our differences in the past but you REALLY about dat life I must admit. You actually bought the book...
-------------------- 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 |
Niger Kordofan languages spoken in the Sudan is just a Branch of Bantu. European linguists don't wanna admit it because it will screw up their made up theory of Bantus migrating from Nigeria/Cameroon. Nuba tribes of Sudan. The Nuba are not one tribe but many tribes with substrings. Some speaking a Niger Congo Bantu (Niger Kordofan) Bantu languages, others speaking Nilosaharan languages. Also sickle swords and throwing knives similar to those found in Central Africa and Congo are also found all over North Sudan Kordofan State.
Fulani/Woodabe languages and other Volta Atlantic's languages are closer to Bantu than both Volta Niger and East Benue Congo languages. They know this but they won't publish it, because they will have to explain how did Bantu speakers end up in North West Africa and Senegambia.
Most Bantus are Agriculturalists, but select few are pastrolists like Kuria tribe of Kenya and Tanzania, Nyankole,Hima,Tutsi of Uganda,Rwanda and Burundi. Ngoni tribes of Tanzania, Zimbabwe and south Africa.
3000 yrs ago the whole of Eastern Nigeria, Cameroon, Congo and Central Africa was covered with thick tropical rainforest. Now tell me, what were a bunch of iron age pastrolists and Farmers doing in a heavy forested area 3000 yrs ago?. Isn't it absurd. Yes pygmies is understandable but Bantus? Also there is no evidence of Agriculture in those regions that date back more than 3kya. Which crop can you grow in a forest without sunlight?. Most of the populations living in West Africa and Sahel today either migrated from North/green Sahara or North East Africa Nile valley.
I forgot to reply to this. Is there even evidence to suggest that the Niger-Congo Nuba languages are remotely similar to Bantu?
Posts: 1891 | From: NY | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
posted
OKay credit goes to al~Takruri. IF there was a Bantu expansion from the Sudan then I now agree with beyoku that it was not mutually exclusive. Especially according to this paper.
quote:The southeastern Bantu from Mozambique are remarkably differentiated from the western Niger-Congo speaking populations, such as the Mandenka and the Yoruba, and also differentiated from geographically closer Eastern Bantu samples, such as Luhya. These results suggest that the Bantu expansion of languages, which started ~5000 years ago at the present day border region of Nigeria and Cameroon, and was probably related to the spread of agriculture and the emergence of iron technology, 17, 18, 19 was not a demographic homogeneous migration with population replacement in the southernmost part of the continent, but acquired more divergence, likely because of the integration of pre-Bantu people. The complexity of the expansion of Bantu languages to the south (with an eastern and a western route 20), might have produced differential degrees of assimilation of previous populations of hunter gatherers. This assimilation has been detected through uniparental markers because of the genetic comparison of nowadays hunter gatherers (Pygmies and Khoisan) with Bantu speaker agriculturalists. 2, 21, 22, 23, 24 Nonetheless, the singularity of the southeastern population of Mozambique (poorly related to present Khoisan) could be attributed to a complete assimilation of ancient genetically differentiated populations (presently unknown) by Bantu speakers in southeastern Africa, without leaving any pre-Bantu population in the area to compare with.
Pre-Bantu in Southern Africa. That is the YELLOW. The data is consistent.
The Bantus are the Nilo-Saharan's/Neolithics who migrated South and West.
Skoglund has identified that ancient population. This is not rocket science
quote:Originally posted by Elite Diasporan: [Q] OKay credit goes to al~Takruri. IF there was a Bantu expansion from the Sudan then I now agree with beyoku that it was not mutually exclusive. Especially according to this paper.
quote:The southeastern Bantu from Mozambique are remarkably differentiated from the western Niger-Congo speaking populations, such as the Mandenka and the Yoruba, and also differentiated from geographically closer Eastern Bantu samples, such as Luhya. These results suggest that the Bantu expansion of languages, which started ~5000 years ago at the present day border region of Nigeria and Cameroon, and was probably related to the spread of agriculture and the emergence of iron technology, 17, 18, 19 was not a demographic homogeneous migration with population replacement in the southernmost part of the continent, but acquired more divergence, likely because of the integration of pre-Bantu people. The complexity of the expansion of Bantu languages to the south (with an eastern and a western route 20), might have produced differential degrees of assimilation of previous populations of hunter gatherers. This assimilation has been detected through uniparental markers because of the genetic comparison of nowadays hunter gatherers (Pygmies and Khoisan) with Bantu speaker agriculturalists. 2, 21, 22, 23, 24 Nonetheless, the singularity of the southeastern population of Mozambique (poorly related to present Khoisan) could be attributed to a complete assimilation of ancient genetically differentiated populations (presently unknown) by Bantu speakers in southeastern Africa, without leaving any pre-Bantu population in the area to compare with.
-------------------- 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
What is wrong with you people ! !! You seem to forget Rameses III and Man E carried E-M2. SUDAN HAS EM2. What do you mean NOT found north of Kenya.
quote:Originally posted by capra: Iwo Eleru-type people being in the forest zone of West Africa in the Palaeolithic does not prevent other people being in West Africa in the Palaeolithic. Even if the primary ancestors of modern West Africans only arrived in the Holocene, that leaves many thousands of years for them to become established before the emigration of ancestral Bantu. So, as usual, your argument is nonsense.
The evidence is obvious. Bantu have West African haplogroups and autosomal components, which are rarely found north of Kenya. (As for E-M2, it is scarcely to be found in Sudan or the Horn of Africa, while the most divergent known branches are in Atlantic West Africa.) They don't have autochthonous East African ancestry (except of course to a small degree in East Africa). West African ancestry is completely absent in ancient samples from East and South Africa that are more than a couple thousand years old. But we *do* find high levels of distinctive East African ancestry associated with, e.g., Nilotic speakers.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Elite Diasporan: The southeastern Bantu from Mozambique are remarkably differentiated from the western Niger-Congo speaking populations, such as the Mandenka and the Yoruba, and also differentiated from geographically closer Eastern Bantu samples, such as Luhya. These results suggest that the Bantu expansion of languages, which started ~5000 years ago at the present day border region of Nigeria and Cameroon, and was probably related to the spread of agriculture and the emergence of iron technology was not a demographic homogeneous migration with population replacement in the southernmost part of the continent, but acquired more divergence, likely because of the integration of pre-Bantu people....
Genome-wide SNP analysis of Southern African populations provides new insights into the dispersal of Bantu-speaking groups
"The expansion of Bantu-speaking agropastoralist populations had a great impact on the genetic, linguistic, and cultural variation of sub-Saharan Africa. It is generally accepted that Bantu languages originated in an area around the present border between Cameroon and Nigeria approximately 5,000 years ago, from where they spread South and East becoming the largest African linguistic branch. The demic consequences of this event are reflected in the relatively high genetic homogeneity observed across most of sub-Saharan Africa populations. In this work, we explored genome-wide single nucleotide polymorphism data from 28 populations to characterize the genetic components present in sub-Saharan African populations. Combining novel data from four Southern African populations with previously published results, we reject the hypothesis that the “non-Bantu” genetic component reported in South-Eastern Africa (Mozambique) reflects extensive gene flow between incoming agriculturalist and resident hunter-gatherer communities. We alternatively suggest that this novel component is the result of demographic dynamics associated with the Bantu dispersal."
With the new samples from Malawi I guess it will be possible to do a better test of this, assuming that Mozambique was not something completely different.
Posts: 660 | From: Canada | Registered: Mar 2017
| IP: Logged |
posted
Damn. Those ADMIXTURE maps are going right in the vault. Don't know how I missed Gonzales-Santos et al 2015.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
I put up most of the Skoglund article in a new thread as a reference It is an important article with more to say than just the chopped an screwed little snippets that are heavily spun and taken out of context and marked up.
See this? >>>
.
^^ this is the original version
.
quote: Originally posed by xyyman
Skoglund has identified that ancient population. This is not rocket science
^^ this is a version created by xyyman. I don't know why you allow this misrepresentation, He is using the article title and making no idication of which marks and type are his and which parts are Skoglund. You would never get away wit that at a university. That is poor scholarship and plagiarism
Posts: 42920 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: BMC Evol Biol. 2010; 10: 92. Published online 2010 Mar 31. doi: 10.1186/1471-2148-10-92 PMCID: PMC2867817
Little genetic differentiation as assessed by uniparental markers in the presence of substantial language variation in peoples of the Cross River region of Nigeria
Krishna R Veeramah,1,2 Bruce A Connell,3 Naser Ansari Pour,4 Adam Powell,5 Christopher A Plaster,4 David Zeitlyn,6 Nancy R Mendell,7 Michael E Weale,8 Neil Bradman,4 and Mark G Thomas5,9,10
Conclusion
In this study we have been able to elucidate that languages and peoples can move independent of each other within the Cross River region of Nigeria, a finding that will be of considerable interest to linguists working on aspects of language contact. A major reason we have been able to gain insight at such a fine geographic scale is the quality of the dataset assembled. There has, unfortunately, been a tendency when examining African genetic diversity to utilise datasets of small size with samples of undeclared origin and relationships. The practice of assembling dense DNA sample sets of known and detailed provenance, as previously called for by anthropologists and linguists [32], will be the most vital aspect when conducting studies to answer the many complex questions likely to be encountered in the course of unravelling demographic histories of geographically restricted African ethnicities.
Abstract Background
The Cross River region in Nigeria is an extremely diverse area linguistically with over 60 distinct languages still spoken today. It is also a region of great historical importance, being a) adjacent to the likely homeland from which Bantu-speaking people migrated across most of sub-Saharan Africa 3000-5000 years ago and b) the location of Calabar, one of the largest centres during the Atlantic slave trade. Over 1000 DNA samples from 24 clans representing speakers of the six most prominent languages in the region were collected and typed for Y-chromosome (SNPs and microsatellites) and mtDNA markers (Hypervariable Segment 1) in order to examine whether there has been substantial gene flow between groups speaking different languages in the region. In addition the Cross River region was analysed in the context of a larger geographical scale by comparison to bordering Igbo speaking groups as well as neighbouring Cameroon populations and more distant Ghanaian communities.
Results
The Cross River region was shown to be extremely homogenous for both Y-chromosome and mtDNA markers with language spoken having no noticeable effect on the genetic structure of the region, consistent with estimates of inter-language gene flow of 10% per generation based on sociological data. However the groups in the region could clearly be differentiated from others in Cameroon and Ghana (and to a lesser extent Igbo populations). Significant correlations between genetic distance and both geographic and linguistic distance were observed at this larger scale.
Conclusions
Previous studies have found significant correlations between genetic variation and language in Africa over large geographic distances, often across language families. However the broad sampling strategies of these datasets have limited their utility for understanding the relationship within language families. This is the first study to show that at very fine geographic/linguistic scales language differences can be maintained in the presence of substantial gene flow over an extended period of time and demonstrates the value of dense sampling strategies and having DNA of known and detailed provenance, a practice that is generally rare when investigating sub-Saharan African demographic processes using genetic data.
“Africa is most genetically diverse continent, DNA study shows”
posted
First off. I am well educated and know how to cite references properly but this is not a University paper I am writing. Added, most readers on here do not read the complete articles. I always quote the Study/paper!!! You can usually tell my "mock-up" if you go to the original.
OCD?
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: I put up most of the Skoglund article in a new thread as a reference It is an important article with more to say than just the chopped an screwed little snippets that are heavily spun and taken out of context and marked up.
See this? >>>
.
^^ this is the original version
.
quote: Originally posed by xyyman
Skoglund has identified that ancient population. This is not rocket science
^^ this is a version created by xyyman. I don't know why you allow this misrepresentation, He is using the article title and making no idication of which marks and type are his and which parts are Skoglund. You would never get away wit that at a university. That is poor scholarship and plagiarism
-------------------- 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
This was addressed in my thread on ESR. I will pull the excerpts later. Nevertheless. Skoglund just added fuel to the fire essentially confirming the substantial difference between "Bantus" from the West and East below the Sahara of Africa. In my chart on ESR the Luyha although classified as "Bantu" carry ancestry of BOTH East and West in addition to "European" ancestry. This is a clear indication that the LWK (HAPMAP) is the most likely source of many populations INSIDE and OUTSIDE Africa. Henn stated based upon her research the Luyha are ancestral to Maghrebians. Yes, LWK are ancestral to Europeans. Keeping in mind LWK is used as a proxy in HAPMAP. LWK may not be the best representation.
quote:Originally posted by Elite Diasporan: @Xyyman what do you have to say for Capra's post?
-------------------- 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
From ESR 2014. And No Skoglund(2017) paper was not publish until recently.
"Lioness at ES challenge me on this question, My initially reaction was, no, it did not occur but I decided to dig deeper on what really is the “Bantu Expansion”.
Typical of my MO I look at the topic strictly from a genetic point of view, first. Which is, is there a clear genetic gradient from the supposedly Bantu homeland along through the Bantu dispersal route? Or is there a separation of Eastern Bantu’s and Western Bantu’s and to my surprise not only is the Eastern Bantu older than the Western Bantu’s but the Bantu expansion may have originated along the Nile and NOT in West Africa as is the popular belief. I am open to any criticism to my observation.
So far the Linguistics and the genetics seem to isolate the Bantu origin IN Eastern Africa. Maybe someone will hit me up on the archeological and anthropological evidence of the Bantu expansion starting in Western Africa then spreading South and East.
So far I am getting conflicting answers. They are discussed below. I will start off with DNATribes statement made recently that ancestral Bantu population existed in Yemen PRIOR to the Neolithic(ie EEF). Then we have Kivilsid (Gates of Tears paper), Mozambique and Yeminese have closer haplotype matches than Yemen and Ethiopians. When hg-M and hg-N is thrown in the mix the data is skewed giving the appearance that Yemen and Horners have closer genetic affinity.
Looking at this paper it hit me like a lightening bolt – that Mozambique Bantus are older than the occupation of Africans IN West Africa.
So is the Bantu migration a movement of people of technology? Bantus in South Eastern Africa are older than Bantus in West Africa.'
-------------------- 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
Man, I am so good I surprise myself. HE! HE! HE!
Looking at my postings on ESR on the Bantu Expansion I just hit my now that Skoglund 2017 have been published.(It is important to revisit old papers as new ones are released). Sikora had already identified an pre-Bantu ancient substrate IN SouthEast Africa. Now Skoglund used Tanzania/Malawi and Sikora used Mozambique. For those who are Geographically challenged. Malawi/Mozambique/Botswana share borders essentially. Essentially Sikora et al proposed West Africans are from East Africa and are Nilo-Saharans. But Sikora did not identify an pre-Bantu population in West Africa. That was outside the scope of the study.
-------------------- 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 |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: This was addressed in my thread on ESR. I will pull the excerpts later. Nevertheless. Skoglund just added fuel to the fire essentially confirming the substantial difference between "Bantus" from the West and East below the Sahara of Africa. In my chart on ESR the Luyha although classified as "Bantu" carry ancestry of BOTH East and West in addition to "European" ancestry. This is a clear indication that the LWK (HAPMAP) is the most likely source of many populations INSIDE and OUTSIDE Africa. Henn stated based upon her research the Luyha are ancestral to Maghrebians. Yes, LWK are ancestral to Europeans. Keeping in mind LWK is used as a proxy in HAPMAP. LWK may not be the best representation.
1. The Luhya ARE a Bantu people(or at least the speak the language). And if they carry ancestry of both East and West Bantu speakers then wouldn't that somehow make them intermediate?
2. Can you show me specifically where the Luhya carry this "European ancestry?"
Posts: 1891 | From: NY | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
posted
??. Can you read Admixture/Cluster Charts? LWK in all studies including "Europeans" show LWK carrying European ancestry. I will dig up a few. Capra, ElMaestro may be quicker than me. Swenet and others also.
But I will hit you 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 |
posted
This is a clear example when I say, some people don't understand and what they are looking at. This is not the best example but all Africans carry European ancestry. What do you think the light blue is in the below Cluster Chart. Siiigh!! No wonder we keep going in circles. And this was posted in THIS thread already. You don't have to look far brother. I will get more. Some Charts, depending on SNP , show LWK having an relatively high frequency of "European" Ancestry. In fact Hazda/Sandawe carry a very high frequency of European/Eurasian ancestry also also. Skoglund 2017 shows Pygmies carry "European' ancestry. Look at the chart and read the paper
-------------------- 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 light blue is : Great Britain, Italy, Iberians, Finland and Scandinavian related. The light blue is consistent (flat line) across all African which means it was NOT recent and has an ancient connection. Maybe prior to OOA. SMH
-------------------- 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
BTW- to add to Gonzalez-Santos response. There was indeed an ancient pre-Bantu population in that area. Remember GPS(Das et al?) put the African related/Makrani not to the expected East African slaves but a Botswana population that has absolute no connection to India or slavery. Botswana's neighbor Malawi and Mozambique.
-------------------- 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 |
Wow! Reading the excerpts it is puzzling why Europeans lay claim to AE. Delusional people.
Man you have trouble seeing the simple.
The Europeans you are talking about are racist. Its hard to sell their ideologies when these faces are properly melinated. Posts: 1254 | From: howdy | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged |
posted
Originally posted by Clyde Winters: [QUOTE]L2 could not have originated in West Africa. The present West Africans only recently migrated into the area from Nubia and the Sahara
I agree with you here Clyde.Yes it is true West Africans recently migrated into the area from Nubia and the Sahara.That explains where Yoruba of West Africa Luhya of Kenya separated.Now the Luhya is clear from their oral history they migrated from Egypt,even western scholars agree that the Luhya migrated from North africa https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luhya_people Actually in Ancient KUSH (Kerma) is where the Luhya of Kenya separated from their West African cousins the Yoruba.Similarities can be found in Luhya diet,which is very similar to Yoruba(mrende and fufu),both Luhya names and Yoruba names start with 'O'.also similar clan names.The Luhya call their Leopard god 'INGWE', the Yoruba of West Africa call their Leopard god 'IGWE'.The Luhya and ugandan bantu dance styles are very similar to West African dance styles.Both Luhyas and Yoruba,share rare genes e.g Y haplogroups E1b1a1a1f1a1d , E1b1a1a1g1a2 and E1b1a1a1f1a1 . .Recently I was arguing with an Algerian dude on youtube who claimed bantus came from Congo and Cameroon forest,this is what I told him. quote: +TAHIA DZAIR Bantus migrated from Cameroon?? Lol.DUMBASS..Do you know 3000 years ago,the Congo tropical forest covered the WHOLE of Cameroon,Congo and central African republic?Most bantu speakers are agriculturalists and livestock farmers. Bantus and southern nilotes(sirikwa),practiced very ancient and advanced form of irrigation similar to those practiced in ancient Egypt,Libya and Kush.QUESTION TO YOU DUMBASS.What were agriculturalists doing in a heavy forested Cameroon region 3000 yrs ago?And why would they migrate from there? Wouldn't it have been easier to just cut down the trees and gain more farmland?Dumbass,only PYGMIES lived in Cameroon forest and central african forest 3000 yrs ago.archeology doesn't support your bantu migration from Cameroon theory,there is no evidence of agriculture 3000 yrs ago in Cameroon.Unless you are trying to say niger-congo bantu speakers descended from pygmies? But genetics and anthropology will not support you because most pygmies belong to Y haplogroup B,while bantus belong to Y haplogroup E..also bantus traditionally practiced mixed farming while pygmies are traditionally hunters and gatherers.The bantu migration is credited with introducing IRON tools and weapons to central and southern Africa.Now we all know that use of iron tools and weaponry entered Africa via Egypt,during the Hyksos(black canaanites) migration to Egypt and thus replacing bronze age period in africa.Question??Are you trying to say that niger-congo bantu speakers discovered Iron tools by themselves while they were 'inside' Cameroon forest?
Posts: 306 | From: Kenya | Registered: Dec 2013
| IP: Logged |
The Bantu people could not have passed through the vast African equatorial rain forest because they are Farmers, both livestock herders and agriculturalists. Their crops and animals would not have survived the dense dark equatorial rain forest. For livestock to survived they must be passed through grassland plains. The Bantu Sanga cattle breeds cannot survive inside rainforests. Besides most Bantus have taboos about forest lands. They considered Forests to be land of the spirits. The idea that the Bantu migrated through the thick dense equatorial rain forest into southern Africa 3000yrs ago is absurd and lame excuse to discredit the oral history of Bantu people themselves which says that they migrated from south ancient Egypt and Libya 3000yrs ago right after the Persian invasion of Egypt. They used two migration routes, others migrated south west towards Chad basin into West, others south East towards Kush(Sudan) then into great lakes and south central Africa after Kerma Kush was destroyed by Afro-asiatic Axumites. Every Bantu tribe oral history suggests they migrated from North. Not West.Also these European linguists try to separate Niger-Kordofan language group from Bantu because they seek to avoid the question how did the Bantu came to Sudan. Also it is a fact that Fulani language is a branch of Bantu.But now they have separated it from Bantu because they cannot explain how the Sahelian Fulani,Fulbe,peul and woodabe came to speak a Bantu language. The ancient North West Libyan tribes(Libu/Lebou,Wolof,Serer) migrated West along Maghrebi Mediterranean coast towards Morocco then south towards Mauritania and Mali.The North East Libyan tribes(Bantu) e.g Garamantians( Tutsi,Hima,Ankole) groups with their Ankole-Watusi cattle which is the cattle of garamantians according to Greek historian Herodotus and also the ADYRMACHIDAE ( Nguni people: Zulu,Swazi,Ndebele,Xhosa) who practiced the custom of reed dance where a king selects a beautiful virgin for a wife every year. the same custom Herodotus explained the Libyan tribe(Adyrmachidae) practised. The central Libyan tribes(Fulani) migrated south west towards Chad and sahel.Southern Libyan tribes(Nilotic) Nuer migrated south East to Join their western Dinka cousins in Kush but others remained in south Libya. Bantu Tribes from southern Egypt migrated south towards Kerma Kush. Afterwards further south towards great lakes region and south central Africa. Bantu migration happened first ,then followed closely with Nilotic migration.
Three waves of Bantu migration, 1st wave (after Hyksos expulsion from Egypt)the rebels migrated towards Libya and others towards Kush. 2nd wave (after Persian invasion of south Egypt), 3rd Wave (after Axum invasion of Kush and destruction of Kerma).
Two waves of Nilotic migration. 1st wave (Persian invasion of North Egypt) Pushed Egyptian Nilotic military clans towards North east Sudan and North west Ethiopia. 2nd wave Nilotic migration (Axumite invasion of Kush,wawat) This pushed Nilotic Ethiopians south towards south west Ethiopia,Omo Valley and great lakes region.
In my opinion Nile valley civilizations were populated by Bantus and Nilotes.But due to Bantu and Nilotic migration it is now occupied by Arabs.
Posts: 306 | From: Kenya | Registered: Dec 2013
| IP: Logged |
posted
Fulani is NOT a branch of Bantu. You can barely even compare the two. Fulani has no characteristics that Bantu languages have to even say its a branch. The rest of your post is all over the place especially with Garamantians being Tutsi. Lets stay on topic please. Next?
Posts: 1891 | From: NY | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Elite Diasporan: Fulani is NOT a branch of Bantu. You can barely even compare the two. Fulani has no characteristics that Bantu languages have to even say its a branch. The rest of your post is all over the place especially with Garamantians being Tutsi. Lets stay on topic please. Next?
The Fulani language has an extensive noun class system like Bantu languages. so actually it should be classed as one
quote:Originally posted by Elite Diasporan: Fulani is NOT a branch of Bantu. You can barely even compare the two. Fulani has no characteristics that Bantu languages have to even say its a branch. The rest of your post is all over the place especially with Garamantians being Tutsi. Lets stay on topic please. Next?
The Fulani language has an extensive noun class system like Bantu languages. so actually it should be classed as one
That's a silly reason why. If anything Fulani has more similarities with Wolof than it does Bantu.
Posts: 1891 | From: NY | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Elite Diasporan: Fulani is NOT a branch of Bantu. You can barely even compare the two. Fulani has no characteristics that Bantu languages have to even say its a branch. The rest of your post is all over the place especially with Garamantians being Tutsi. Lets stay on topic please. Next?
How have I gone off topic? or is it because you see yourself a superior scholar than I which explains your dismissive attitude? The Atlantic or Senegalo-Guinean languages have given linguists problems ever since they were first recorded. "Their present distribution, their interrelationships with one another and with other West African languages and the origin of their most salient grammatical features are still subjects of speculation" (Bendor-Samuel 81). The major languages of this group include Fula (with several million speakers scattered across Africa), Wolof (with nearly two million speakers in Senegambia), The Diola cluster (nearly 400,000 speakers mainly in the Casamance province of Senegal), Serer (600,000 speakers near Kaolak in Senegal), and Temne (over 600,000 speakers in Sierra Leone) (Bendor Samuel 81). One of the major "conundrums" about Atlantic languages has to do with the often very Bantu-like class systems which they share with other West African languages. These similarities have earned them the name "semi-Bantu" or "Bantoid." Early scholars thought that these similarities were due in large part to borrowing but more recent study shows that this is due to a class system (Bendor-Samuel 83). Other scholars such as Greenberg (1965.) were tempted to classify Fulani as Bantu.
Posts: 306 | From: Kenya | Registered: Dec 2013
| IP: Logged |
posted
This topic is strictly about possible Bantu migration from Sudan. Not silly ass Garamantes being Tutsis, Bantu tribes in Libya or Fulani being Bantu. The similarities can EASILY be duo to both being under Niger-Congo and nothing more. So can we please get back to possibly migration from Sudan?
Posts: 1891 | From: NY | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Elite Diasporan: Fulani is NOT a branch of Bantu. You can barely even compare the two. Fulani has no characteristics that Bantu languages have to even say its a branch. The rest of your post is all over the place especially with Garamantians being Tutsi. Lets stay on topic please. Next?
The Fulani language has an extensive noun class system like Bantu languages. so actually it should be classed as one
That's a silly reason why. If anything Fulani has more similarities with Wolof than it does Bantu.
Cheikh Anta Diop says that Wolof is a Semi-Bantu language
posted
Diop was the same person that argued Berber was European. No offense to him.
Can we please get off the Fulanis and everything not related? Geez everytime we have discussions on this topic people come out with outlandish claims.
Posts: 1891 | From: NY | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Elite Diasporan: [QUOTE]Originally posted by the questioner: [qb] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Elite Diasporan: [qb] The rest of your post is all over the place especially with Garamantians being Tutsi. Lets stay on topic please. Next?
The reason I linked Garamanteans to the Tutsi,Hima and Ankole is because of a clue Herodotus left us about them.
Herodotus histories quote: 183. From Augila at a distance again of ten days' journey there is another hill of salt and spring of water and a great number of fruit-bearing date-palms, as there are also in the other places: and men dwell here who are called the Garmantians, a very great nation, who carry earth to lay over the salt and then sow crops. From this point is the shortest way to the Lotophagoi, for from these it is a journey of thirty days to the country of the Garmantians. Among them also are produced the cattle which feed backwards; and they feed backwards for this reason, because they have their horns bent down forwards, and therefore they walk backwards as they feed; for forwards they cannot go, because the horns run into the ground in front of them; but in nothing else do they differ from other cattle except in this and in the thickness and firmness to the touch [164] of their hide.
No other ethnicity in Africa and the entire world posses this Kind of Cattle Herodotus described belonging to Garamantians except the Tutsi,Hima and Ankole. That cattle today is known as Ankole Watusi cattle or egyptian longhorn also nicknamed 'Cattle of the pharaohs'. All Sanga cattle breeds are Egyptian long horns also.But Ankole Watusi is a special variety traditionally a preserve of Kings.
Egyptians also documented a people with the same customs as the Tutsi on their wall paintings.
---
Images of ancient egyptian women dancers in Kheruef's tomb at Luxor.' Showing a dance similar to Rwandese female dance of Mushayayo.
Posts: 306 | From: Kenya | Registered: Dec 2013
| IP: Logged |
Picture comparisons are a weak argument. We don't even know what the dances even represents for the Ancient Egyptians. As for the Garamantes many scholars have noted that they have more in common with Tuaregs and Toubou people of Libya. As for the Herodotus quote we don't even know if its the cattle you're referring to. More importantly Tuaregs carry the script used by the Garamantes where as Tutsi do not. Garamantes spoke a Berber language most likely whereas Tutsi did not. Then we have this...
Libya: Deep Into The Roots Of The Libyan Tuareg: A Genetic Survey Of Their Paternal Heritage Claudio Ottoni, et al 2011
quote:Recent genetic studies of the Tuareg have begun to uncover the origin of this semi-nomadic northwest African people and their relationship with African populations. For centuries they were caravan traders plying the trade routes between the Mediterranean coast and south-Saharan Africa. Their origin most likely coincides with the fall of the Garamantes who inhabited the Fezzan (Libya) between the 1st millennium BC and the 5th century AD. In this study we report novel data on the Y-chromosome variation in the Libyan Tuareg from Al Awaynat and Tahala, two villages in Fezzan, whose maternal genetic pool was previously characterized. High-resolution investigation of 37 Y-chromosome STR loci and analysis of 35 bi-allelic markers in 47 individuals revealed a predominant northwest African component (E-M81, haplogroup E1b1b1b) which likely originated in the second half of the Holocene in the same ancestral population that contributed to the maternal pool of the Libyan Tuareg. A significant paternal contribution from south-Saharan Africa (E-U175, haplogroup E1b1a8) was also detected, which may likely be due to recent secondary introduction, possibly through slavery practices or fusion between different tribal groups. The difference in haplogroup composition between the villages of Al Awaynat and Tahala suggests that founder effects and drift played a significant role in shaping the genetic pool of the Libyan Tuareg.
This is why no one takes people on the African side seriously(which I include myself apart of). We have to be extra and make ridiculous claims about the Fulanis being Bantu, the Garamantes being Bantu, eye-balling anthropology between dances, saying Berber is European, talking about European ancestry in Luhya, saying Wolof is Bantu, talking about Bantu being a European word, calling any and EVERYTHING Bantu, and other EXTRA nonsense. When instead you can use other and more simple evidences to make a good argument.
Okay... Lets say Bantus did migrant from the Sudan.
The connection is said to be real according to linguistics. BOOM... So we don't need none of this extra shit with the Fulanis or Garamantes. The "Bantu" similarities could have been due to the Green Sahara. People who would have been ancestor to modern Bantus could have migrated EAST into southwest Egypt or Western/Central Sudan where they COULD have influenced the Egyptian language. These people could have been proto-Niger Kordofanian speakers. who inhabited this area And one can argue that Eastern Bantu people descend from these people(if this theory is true).
ELIMU you were on a roll with the early part of your post until you went downhill with the nonsense I mentioned. Moving on, Capra states that E-M2 is not found north of Kenya. Xyyman brought up Ramses III being E1b1a(which is a better case than what you were saying), some people argue that he wasn't and there is more evidence that he was E1b1b. That's another story... HOWEVER.... According to this study there is seemly a lot of L2d lineages in the Sudan. L2d which some say is "West African like."
Anyways these people would have not been "Bantu" yet but again the ancestors of them. Like I said the first part of your post was GOOD with debating against migrating through the forest. Your argument about Hyksos and Persians having an influence is also a good argument. Me, if this did happen, those ancestors of Eastern Bantus would have just migrated up(since the Nile travels up) the Nile into the Great Lakes and then expanded further into Southern Africa. Could this explain the similarities between Ugandan traditions and Nile valley???
See how simple and straight to the point my argument was? I did not NEED to Bantuize every and any African group to prove my point nor do eye-balling.
Posts: 1891 | From: NY | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
3000 yrs ago the whole of Eastern Nigeria, Cameroon, Congo and Central Africa was covered with thick tropical rainforest. Now tell me, what were a bunch of iron age pastrolists and Farmers doing in a heavy forested area 3000 yrs ago?. Isn't it absurd. Yes pygmies is understandable but Bantus? Also there is no evidence of Agriculture in those regions that date back more than 3kya. Which crop can you grow in a forest without sunlight?. Most of the populations living in West Africa and Sahel today either migrated from North/green Sahara or North East Africa Nile valley. __________________
Elimu,
What do you think Amerindians living in the dense Amazon forest in South America do eat? Do they have crops? Yes! They have crops of Cassava, corn, dozen of different types of potatoes, and a diversity of hundred of different fruits.
People living in dense forests, cut just enough trees to plant crops such as corn. Roots, which are the main source of carbohydrate among Amerindians and Africans grown naturally between trees in dense forests.
Now, I am wondering who made the Monolith circle in Senegal and Gambia, as well pottery and iron tools, in third century B.C ???. It is about 2300 years old.
Actually, I think it is older than that, but, you know, Europeans and Americans archaeologists always decrease the age of ancient monuments found in Africa. If those monoliths, pottery and iron tools were found in Europe, I am sure, they would increased the age to ten thousand years or more...
-------------------- ---lnnnnn* Posts: 198 | From: USA | Registered: Aug 2014
| IP: Logged |
Berbers are Africans. Both anthropologically and genetically. In fact E1b1b is an older African linage compared to E1b1a found in 80% of SSA. Meaning berber leneage have existed in Africa long before the classical SSA E1b1a.
I am not into linguistics but I understand AA is older than Niger-Kordafian?
quote:Originally posted by the questioner:
quote:Originally posted by Elite Diasporan: Diop was the same person that argued Berber was European. No offense to him.
Can we please get off the Fulanis and everything not related? Geez everytime we have discussions on this topic people come out with outlandish claims.
Berbers have a large percentage of European DNA. so technically he's right
-------------------- 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
@ elite are you sure that the white berbers diop is talking about are the ones seen on TV?
Posts: 1123 | From: New York | Registered: Feb 2016
| IP: Logged |
Topic Closed
Printer-friendly view of this topic