...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Deshret
»
OT: Settling the issues on "Ethio-Sabean" connections, "Habashat", and the related
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Yom: [QB] Supercar, for future reference, ESA is [b]Epigraphic South Arabian[/b] (also known as MSA, Monumental South Arabian). [QUOTE]Originally posted by Supercar: This isn't good enough, in light of your claim about Sabeans not having a "genetic impact" on the locals.[/QUOTE]Well, I don't know about J haplotypes, so I can't answer that question. [QUOTE]Where did you suppose the "proto-Sinaitic" alphabets were found, that I posted, concerning the most recent find in Upper Egypt?[/QUOTE]From just the name of the script, it was first found in the Sinai, but I don't remember you posting any recent finds from Upper Egypt. This is tangential to the discussion, however. [QUOTE]It was a red-herring when you brought it up, after I had told you that your claim of "direct" link, as per my understanding then of your claim, of those alphabets to early Ethiopic/Sabean script. I 'remain' in agreement, about its irrelevancy, unless you can indicate how so.[/QUOTE]Yes, it is irrelevant; the discussion came about because of a request for an intermediary but which I interpreted as a request for an example of a more southerly script in Egypt. I don't maintain that Sabaean or Ge'ez came directly from Proto-Sinaitic or a related script. [QUOTE]Well, apparently they are ultimately connected, since it is from an off-shoot of "proto-Sinaitic" [which referred to as "proto-Canaanite" in the Levant], that the south Semitic script diverged. [/QUOTE]Agreed (not the equivalence of proto-Canaanite and proto-Sinaitic, but that's a different argument [and a futile semantic one at that] for a different thread). [QUOTE]Have already seen it, and responded according. What you are referring to as "Ge'ez" graffiti, is what S. Munro-Hay pointed out as: [i]An inscription from Abba Pantelewon near Aksum, written in the [b]Epigraphic South Arabian script[/b] and [b]mentioning the kingdom of D`MT[/b]; it is dedicated to the [b]deity Dhat-Ba`adan.[/b] It has been photographed upside down Photo BIEA.[/i] - S. Munro-Hay [/QUOTE]Where does it say that this is the graffiti found by A.J. Drewes and published in [i]Inscriptions de l’Ethiopie antique[/i] (1962)? [QUOTE]Then why talk of the "proto-Sinaitic" characters found in upper Egypt, suggesting a common origin but independent development for Ethiopic and Sabean script, without pointing the intermediary scripts in the said ancient complexes.[/QUOTE]Apparently the reference of proto-Sinaitic is from a misunderstanding as noted above. Either way, there aren't even known intermediaries between ESA and proto-Sinaitic, so we can't make any determinations. If the inscriptions found by A.J. Drewes are indeed in ESA script but Ge'ez language rather than both Ge'ez script and language(i.e. if the earliest forms of Ge'ez aren't contemporary or nearly comtemporary with SA), then Ge'ez almost certainly derived from Sabaean (as I believe it probably did right now), but absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. [QUOTE]Apparently not all; just as an example: [i]The monuments are dated from the [b]5th century BC[/b] by study of the letter-forms used on them (palaeography), and seem to appear in Ethiopia at about the same time as they do in South Arabia (nb. the reservations about the dating expressed by Fattovich 1989). [/i] - Munro Hay ...and I can just as easily quote a number of "encyclopedic" sources, that'll attribute the earliest "inscriptions', NOT the polity "D'MT", found in the said pre-Aksumite complex date back to about 5th-6th century B.C. So, the question remains, from what archeological source, are you assessing the timeframe for "D'MT"?[/QUOTE]Unfortunately, Alexander Sima (as well as Stuart Munro-Hay) has passed away recently, so I can't email him as to his sources, but the Literature he cites at the end of the article is as follows: Francis Anfray, Les anciens Éthiopiens. Siècles d'histoire, Paris 1990, 60f.; Gianfrancesco Lusini "A proposito delle iscrizioni sudarabiche d'Etiopia," Studi epigrafici e linguistici 17, 200, 95-113, here 99f.; David W. Phillopson, Ancient Ethiopia. Aksum: its antecdents and Successors, London 1998, 45-8. [QUOTE]Why should I address this, when I posted a link, pertaining to your question of where I heard the notion of Minean script dating to about 8th century B.C. What has that claim to do with "South Arabian Chronology"?[/QUOTE]You don't have to address it, but it's critical to the debate. As stated by Munro-Hay, "the precise nature of the contacts between the two areas, their range in commercial, linguistic or cultural terms, and their chronology, is still a major question." So, a discussion of the chronology (as you have asked of me of D`mt, which I wish I could provide more info for) would be helpful. [QUOTE]Then, why do you keep trying to make excuses that it could have developed independently from some "south Semitic script"? Case in point...unless I am reading wrong, what you are terming ESA [spell the word in full, for my understanding]:[/QUOTE]Epigraphic South Arabian = ESA. Its independent development is a possibility until it's cleared up what exactly is meant by "Ge'ez graffiti." [QUOTE]The point that Daniels is trying to make, is that Ethiopic script was influenced, if not derived, from Sabean. Do you agree with this or not? Period.[/QUOTE]As I said above, it probably was, but the date of the first inscription using the Ge'ez alphabet needs to be determined to say so definitively. As you can see by the citations I gave regarding interdentals above, however, the existence of these interdentals during the early period of D`mt means that ESA need not have been a South Arabian creation based on language but could have been a shared alphabet inherited from an even earlier, yet not found, South Semitic successor, as ESA certainly didn't derive [i]directly[/i] from Proto-Sinaitic. [QUOTE]Again, I am not entirely sure what you mean by the abbreviation "ESA", but yes, Munro-Hay was referring to two languages, one in "pure" Sabean, and another, in some nameless, presumably local Ethiopian language. What I was trying to get you to see, although futilely, is that the term "pure" implicates the script [the medium of the inscriptions]; meaning two languages have been discerned, but both appear to have been written in [i]Sabean[/i] alphabets/scripts.[/QUOTE]Obviously both were written in ESA. I have never denied that. The "pure" Sabaean (it's Sab[b]a[/b]ean by the way, from the root shin-bet-alif; Sabeans or Sabians are a different people from the Qur'an spelled with a Tsadey) referred to by Stuart Munro-Hay is clearly referring to the language, not inscriptions, though. The D`mt inscriptions were all written in a form of Epigraphic South Arabian as far as I can tell, though. Note that the name of the script is properly ESA as it was used also by the Himyarites, Qatabans, and Minaeans, all of whom probably had their own variations (I'm aware of a few for some of the letters, though I don't know to which civilization the variant belongs). [QUOTE]Like I said, you were not paying attention, and chose to hear, only what you wanted to hear, which is why we are even having this discussion. And yes, in order for you to take home what is being said, I have to refer to "Sabean influences", which is what you've been basically trying to deny.[/QUOTE]I'm not denying that there were any Sabaean influences, but they have always been overemphasized and exaggerated by past (and still some contemporary) historians. Moreover, these influences are not even necessarily Sabaean in origin. Connections and cultural exchanges between Ethiopia and Yemen have existed long before the Sabaeans. Some of the so-called influences (e.g. stone-working, agriculture, the plough) were certainly extant in Ethiopia before Sabaean influences, and other influences, like certain god-cults (e.g. Dhat Ba`adan or Dhat Himyam) weren't very long-lasting. [QUOTE]How so? My stance remains that, the idea of Sabean colonialists has neither been proven nor disproven.[/QUOTE]Until evidence is shown to the contrary, should not a civilization be assumed to be the result of indigenous peoples? [QUOTE][i]It appears that there were undoubtedly some South Arabian immigrants in Ethiopia in the mid-first millenium BC, but there is (unless the interpretation of Michels is accepted) [b]no sure indication that they were politically dominant.[/b]The sites chosen by them may be related to their relative ease of access to the Red Sea coast. Arthur Irvine (1977) and others have regarded [b]sympathetically [/b]the [b]suggestion that the inscriptions which testify to Sabaean presence in Ethiopia may have been set up by colonists[/b] around the time of the Sabaean ruler Karibil Watar in the late fourth century BC; but the dating is very uncertain, as noted above. [b]They may have been military or trading colonists, living in some sort of **symbiosis** with the local Ethiopian population, perhaps under a species of treaty-status.[/b][/i] - S. Munro-Hay From what I gather from the above, you have to be specific when you use the term "colonialists", because it would appear, it is not ruled out [above] that these potential "colonialists" could have been "traders" or "military" personnel [perhaps with their families] stationed there for some mutual benefit with the locals, with perhaps the ruling elites being of local background. Again, highly speculative, in any case; there are certainly no indicators that earlier potential immigrants from south Arabia, back in the "mid-first millenium BC," were politically dominant - as mentioned.[/QUOTE]"Colonialists" as in founders of a new civilization. The above quotation does not support the idea of colonists (though he notes it is still supported by Michels). [QUOTE]Well, for the second time, my question was based on your claim: [i]Explain to me exactly how a cultural complex [b]originating from Ethiopia[/b] **extant** on [b]both sides of the Red Sea[/b] is evidence of a Sabaean presence in Ethiopia.[/i] Tell its bad writing on your part, or is the above suggesting an Ethiopian origin for the Sabean complex?[/QUOTE]The Tihama complex is Ethiopian in origin. It is not the same as the Sabaean complex as far as I know, though I'm sure there was exchange between the two complexes due to their geographic proximity (the Tihama is right next to the kingdom of Saba'). [QUOTE]Okay. I in fact posted this, and...?[/QUOTE]The affirm that Sabaean presence was short-lived and limited to certain localities, though the D`mt civilization was widespread. [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
Contact Us
|
EgyptSearch!
(c) 2015 EgyptSearch.com
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3