...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Deshret
»
CLYDE,EASTER ISLAND SETSWANA AFFINITIES?
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Clyde Winters: [QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Mike111: [qb] [QUOTE]Originally posted by kikuyu22: [qb] [QUOTE] [/QUOTE]Please keep in mind that L.M. Leteane is an African, their interests (history wise) are different than ours. Exactly,what do you mean mike111? [/qb][/QUOTE]My experience here, is that Africans tend to be literally "Afrocentric" as relates to history. Seeing all Blacks as "Recent" African expatriates. And "Certain" Blacks as authentically African. (I have called them (Africans) many derogatory names in the past, with good reason. Just too much KING in them). In this case Leteane imagines that it was Bantus who crossed the Seas and established themselves on Easter Island - because of language. Just as the Albino people tell us that it was Bantus who migrated "SOUTH" throughout central and southern Africa - because of language. Sorry Clyde and all linguist, language affiliation tells us nothing but who came into contact. Though it "SUGGESTS" who was dominant, it does NOT necessarily say that. It certainly says nothing about who the various people were before contact, and it says nothing about the quality of that contact. As an example that I should not have to give: All of us speak English - need I say more? [/qb][/QUOTE]Linguistics tells us not only who spoke the language, but the fact that a particular group was dominant implies that that group probably led to the cultural developments in the area. Comparative linguistics suggest that when their is a genetic relationship between languages the speakers of these languages share a common origin. Granted a language, does not tell us who the population was that spoke the language. This information comes from the archaeological, skeletal and especially craniometric data. Right now, the evidence indicates that the first people of China were negroid. The second group were Classical Mongoloids i.e., small mongoloid people like the Indonesians, Vietnamese and etc. The final group to enter China were the contemporary Chinese people who belonged to the Hua tribes. As a result, when you add up the epigraphic evidence, plus the craniometric and skeletal evidence, along with the cultural and archaeological evidence we discover that the Shang and Xia people were of Dravidian and Mande descent. The fact they lived in the North, and the Black Yi tyribes dominanted the South indicate that this group probably did not expand into the Pacific. In you are interested you may want to read the following articles I have written on the Black presence in China, beginning with my book . [IMG]http://olmec98.net/asia.jpg[/IMG] . See the following articles http://www.academia.edu/8455539/Linguistic_Evidence_for_the_Dravidian_Influence_on_Trade_and_Animal_Domestication_in_Central_and_East_Asia http://www.academia.edu/3036840/Blacks_in_China http://www.academia.edu/3036799/THE_FAR_EASTERN_ORIGIN_OF_THE_DRAVIDIANS http://www.academia.edu/3036830/Re_First_Chinese_Were_Black http://www.academia.edu/8491369/Blacks_in_Ancient_China http://www.academia.edu/8505733/Chinas_First_African_Black_Civilization_Xia_Erlitou http://www.academia.edu/1805516/The_Dravidian-Harappan_Colonization_of_Central_Asia http://www.academia.edu/340945/A_Note_on_the_Unity_of_Black_Civilizations_In_Africa_IndoChina_and_China [/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