...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Egyptology
»
The Levant an Extension of Africa/Sons of Ham
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by BlessedbyHorus: [QB] [b]Part 2: Levant an extension of Africa? And were the Ancient Canaanite's black?[/b] Like I said I've always held the view that at least Southern Canaan(Levent) was an extension of African until at least the period of the Romans and Christianity. To me the Levant was an extension of Northeast Africa going as far back to the Neolithic with the Natufians. This is just my personal opinion. Though the Levant is just a hopscotch away from Africa. :yeshrug: Not only that , but Southern Canaan(Levant) is ACTUALLY apart of Africa if you like at their tectonic plates. So where does Africa really end? [IMG]http://www.opinionbug.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/arab20plate20tectonic20setting1.jpg[/IMG] The Levant was always a crossroad, but from the studies I read it seems the migrations were mostly coming from Africa and into the Middle East. The most known were the Natufians. Who were said to spread the AA language, but also spread agriculture to the middle east and Europe. The Natufians basically were one of the earliest colonizers of the area. African culture pre-dominated the area, even for the pre-dynastic culure of Egypt. [QUOTE]"Approximately 14 kya, climatic changes associated with the end of the Last Glacial Maximum resulted in regions around the world becoming more favorable to human exploitation. [b]Northern Africa is one such region, and ~13 kya, novel technologies (“Natufian”) thought to be the immediate precursor to agricultural technologies emerged and were associated with semisedentary subsistence and population expansions in northeastern Africa[/b] (35). Moreover, [b]before the emergence of the Natufian styled artifacts[/b], the archaeological record includes two artifact styles, the “Geometric Kebaran” and the “Mushabian” associated with Middle Eastern and Northern African populations, respectively (35).[b]The archaeological evidence suggests the peoples using these assemblages interacted for well over 1,000 years, and linguistic evidence suggests that the peoples using these assemblages may have spoken some form of proto-Afroasiatic[/b] (35, 36). Although the origins of the Afroasiatic language family remain contentious, [b]linguistic data generally support a model in which the Afroasiatic language family arose in Northern Africa >10 kya [/b](36). Moreover, analyses of the Cushitic branch of the Afroasiatic language family suggest that proto-Cushitic arose and diversified at least 7 kya, and this likely took place in Ethiopia . [b]Intriguingly, the origin and diversification of proto-Afroasiatic is consistent with the spread of intensive plant collection in the archaeological record[/b], [b]and some interpret this pattern to represent a model in which proto-Afroasiatic speakers developed the novel subsistence technology resulting in the expansion and spread of their Afroasiatic descendants in the region[/b] (37).[b] Some examples of the relevant linguistic data include reconstructed Chadic root words for “porridge” and “sorghum” and the Cushitic root words for “grain” and “wheat”[/b] (37). [b]Because these and other root words are present in many of the Chadic and Cushitic languages, it is assumed that they were present in the proto-Chadic and proto-Cushitic languages and therefore must be as old as those proto-languages[/b] (37). [b] The genetic data appear to be consistent with the archaeological and linguistic data indicative of extensive population interactions between North African and Middle Eastern populations.[/b] A recent NRY study explores the distribution of haplogroups in a sample of African, Middle Eastern, and European males (38). Whereas a subclade of haplogroup E (M35) appears to have arisen in eastern Africa over 20 kya and subsequently spread to the Middle East and Europe, haplogroup J (M267) appears to have arisen in the Middle East over 20 kya and subsequently spread into northern Africa (38). [b]A recent study of genomewide autosomal microsatellite markers reports that Middle Eastern and African samples share the highest number of alleles that are also absent in other non-African samples, consistent with bidirectional gene flow[/b](1). In addition, a recent study of domestic goat mtDNA and NRY variation reports similar findings as well as evidence of trade along the Strait of Gibraltar (39). [b]The combined archaeological, linguistic, and genetic data, therefore, suggest bidirectional migration of peoples between northern Africa and the Levant for at least the past ~14 ky.[/b]" [/QUOTE]Source: http://www.pnas.org/content/107/Supplement_2/8931.full ^^^From what I read from above proto-Semitic most likely originated in the Levant among the Natufians during the period of the bronze age. So the early Semitic speakers could have just been migrating Africans. [QUOTE]Many human craniofacial dimensions are largely of neutral adaptive significance, and an analysis of their variation can serve as an indication of the extent to which any given population is genetically related to or differs from any other. When 24 craniofacial measurements of a series of human populations are used to generate neighbor-joining dendrograms, it is no surprise that all modern European groups, ranging all of the way from Scandinavia to eastern Europe and throughout the Mediterranean to the Middle East, show that they are closely related to each other. [b]The surprise is that the Neolithic peoples of Europe and their Bronze Age successors are not closely related to the modern inhabitants[/b], although the prehistoric/modern ties are somewhat more apparent in southern Europe. I[b]t is a further surprise that the Epipalaeolithic Natufian of Israel from whom the Neolithic realm was assumed to arise has a clear link to Sub-Saharan Africa. [/b]Basques and Canary Islanders are clearly associated with modern Europeans. When canonical variates are plotted, neither sample ties in with Cro-Magnon as was once suggested. The data treated here support the idea that the Neolithic moved out of the Near East into the circum-Mediterranean areas and Europe by a process of demic diffusion but that subsequently the in situ residents of those areas, derived from the Late Pleistocene inhabitants, absorbed both the agricultural life way and the people who had brought it.[/QUOTE] http://www.pnas.org/content/103/1/242.short Cranio wise the Natufians cluster with Niger-Congo like people: [IMG]http://tinypic.com/eg3539.jpg[/IMG] I am aware that this is well before the Ancient Canaanites and Phoenicians, but again African culture pre-dominated the area. These are the people who made up part of the later Phoenicians long before there was a Phoenicia. And before the colonization of the area by the Egyptians. But lets talk about the Ancient Canaanites and Phoenicians themselves. With the Phoenicians I get the sense because southern Canaan was so heavily influenced by North East Africans, since at least the Neolithic, the Phoenicians were maybe a distant branch of Africans.. This makes sense because Ta-Seti established relations with Byblos even before the unification of Egypt. Egypt would come to have an overwhelming cultural and economic influence over Byblos. And one must note that Southern Canaan was Egypt's oldest colony. Now I am aware that there were Ancient Canaanites who did not look black, but white(keeping it real), but after doing some research around the web, I found that the white looking Canaanites/Syrians were differentiated from the majority black looking Canaanites by the Greeks. IIRC Canaan and Syria received large immigrants north from the Caucasus. The Greeks called the new non-black Syrians "Leucosyrian" meanng white and the black ones "Melanosyrians" meaning burnt. It's interesting because the Phoenicians ere said to belong to the 'black' - Melanosyrian branch along with many other Southern Canannites. Lets see how the Greeks and others themselves described the two: [QUOTE]Leucosyri, to [b]distinguish them from the people from beyond Taurus[/b], which bear also the name of Syrians, but who, compared to the cistauric populations, are to have the dye browned by the heat of the sun, while those do not have it, [b]difference which gave place to the denomination of Leucosyri.[/b][/QUOTE]Strabo Geography 12:3: [QUOTE].. the populations of the one and other Cappadoce, Cappadoce Taurique and Cappadoce Pontique, even nowadays, are often called Leucosyri or Syrian white[b], by opposition apparently to other Syrians known as Melanosyri or Black Syrians[/b], who can be only the Syrians established across Taurus, and, when I say Taurus, I give to this name his greater extension, I prolong the chain until Amanus.[Antioch]." [/QUOTE]Strabo Geography 16:1:2 [QUOTE]The Cha'ab Arabs, the present possessors of the more southern parts of Babylonia, [b]are nearly black; and the "black Syrians," of whom Strabo speaks, seem intended to represent the Babylonians.[/b][/QUOTE]George Rawlinson The Seven Great Monarchies Of The Ancient Eastern World, Vol 4 [QUOTE]Sayce has identified the Hittites with the "White Syrians" of Strabo as contrasted with "the [b]Black Syrians[/b] or Semitic Aramaeans, east of the Amanus"[/QUOTE]Henry George Tomkins Remarks on Mr. Flinders Petrie's Collection of Ethnographic Types from the Monuments of Egypt The Journal of the Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland, Vol. 18. [QUOTE]LEUCOSYRI, the ancient name of the Syrians inhabiting [b]Cappadocia[/b], by which they were distinguished from th[b]e more southern Syrians, who were of a darker complexion. [/b] (Herod. i.72, vii.72; Strabo, xvi. p.737; Pliny, H.N. vi.3; Eustath. ad Dionys. 772,970.) [/QUOTE]A Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geography, Volume II, Pages 171-172 Now lets look at how some of these "Melanosyrians" of southern Levant/Canaan were depicted: [IMG]http://oi62.tinypic.com/33dl1ls.jpg[/IMG] [i]Face of a Canaanite man (fragment) from Beth Shan Painting on a jar (about 1300 BCE)[/i] [IMG]http://oi61.tinypic.com/15grntg.jpg[/IMG] [i]A supply ship. On deck, the captain is haranguing a crew of Canaanites. Painted wood, 12th Dynasty (2000-1785 BCE), Middle Kingdom, Egypt. [/i] [IMG]http://www.lessingimages.com/w2/080501/08050163.jpg[/IMG] [i]Canaanite God Reshef[/i] More... [IMG]http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3286/2942221359_2699b5ccc9.jpg[/IMG] [IMG]http://i58.tinypic.com/34j2d7b.jpg[/IMG] [i]A Phoenician bust in the Egyptian style(from the Louvre)[/i] So one could conclude that the Canaan was inhabited by blacks and it had a close relationship with Northeast Africa, though there were later migration from non-blacks to the area. Just my opinion. As for the Phoenicians, this thread really wasn't about them, but the area they are from but if one was to take in account of Canaanites being Ham's descendants and Phoenicians being descendants of Canaanites, then shouldn't one conclude that the Phoenicians may have been black? Part 3 in next post... [/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