...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Egyptology
»
Joseph Graves on Ancient Egypt and Afrocentrism
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova: [QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by beyoku: [qb] @ Zarahan - I think you missed the point of my writing. :rolleyes: It was prefixed with this: [QUOTE] I will put into perspective how pitiful the discussions like this are: [/QUOTE]The contact with scholars in this instance was fictitious and hypothetical. I was stressing the interesting findings of Ancient European Genetic diversity and how stupid it would be correspond with professionals ignoring EVERYTHING that is interesting about the findings while concentrating on weaseling scholars into saying they were "white." It would be a waste of time and brain cells. But now that you laugh at it I will take a step further. I would set you up with the question but I will just come out and make the statement 'matter of fact': OBVIOUSLY you are laughing at the idea of them being "White" while having the ancestral genetic variant of Brown skin. Would this mean they are "Black"? IF so what USEFULNESS is there in using the term black when it applies to European remains, with a European culture, speaking a European language, with uni-parentalals and autosomal genetic diversity that originated in or is most dominant in Europe? [/qb][/QUOTE]It it was fictitious that you should be more clear. No one is here to read your mind. And why would you need any such "fictitious" scenario? There are a number of "biodiversity" types doing precisely that- asking scholars to say such and such ancients were white. They may not duplicate the exact approach of tropicals, but they are doing similar things. Madilda herself some years ago I recall referenced her correspondence along those lines. And I am not laughing at the idea of them being white while having brown skin. *roll eyes**. Dusky Italians with nut brown skin are still recognized as "white" in Euro race constructs. Who doesn't know this? The idea of writing scholars and trying to get them to endorse a "white Egypt" or whatever desired ancient "Caucasoid of the month." in the light of data debunking such, is what is laughable. As for spending time on well-worn 1990s debates when there is so much other interesting info that can be asked- sure, I have no problem with that. If I was writing Kemp I would not waste the relatively short window of opportunity these academics allow with certain social construct matters, and semantics which will can go around and around in circles. In certain cases, where scholars have put out recent articles involving weak social construct claims then it is appropriate to write to them as seek clarification. In other cases where they put out more technical claims that tie into social constructs, it is also appropriate to seek clarification as well. Hence the Yurco admission on the "racial" Book Of Gates discussed on various threads. Yurco admitted certain things were shaky, because someone put together a reasonable query with reasonable supporting data, to challenge him. Such queries are old news- here's one from a decade ago. http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=15;t=000051 And here's Truthcentric writing to Ehret about something Madilda claimed. After receiving the reply, he concluded that Madilda was lying. Was his effort "pitiful" in cross-checking Madilda's claim? Or do you hold such opinions selectively, depending on if a buddy is involved? http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=006733 [i]"First of all, Mathilda is not a credible source. She has been known to outright lie when it suits her. For instance, to back up an opinion of hers that Afroasiatic is of Eurasian rather than African origin, she's claimed, without citing a source, that proto-Afroasiatic contains words for Eurasian animals like camels and horses. However, when I corresponded with an actual linguist (Christopher Ehert) who is an expert in Afroasiatic, he told me that those words for Eurasian animals do not exist in any valid reconstruction of proto-Afroasiatic! I must conclude that Mathilda was pulling those words out of her ass."[/i] ============================================================================= It must also be remembered that issues such as population affinities in NE Africa are very much alive both among academia and among laymen. Keita for example has an abiding interest in such things- he has not abandoned such concerns in the field as "out of date." Here is what he has to say circa 2015: ============================================================================= [i]"The Fula, variously called Fulani, Fulbe, Pula, Peul, have sometimes been seen as an “anomaly” in tropical West Africa, due to the physiognomy and skin color of the most distinctive subgroups, which on average have been noted to usually be different than the West African stereotype. Many have narrow noses and faces and “copper” colored skin. Fulani communities can be found in the Sahel belt from Senegal to Sudan, with southern extensions into the Cameroons. In a recent report the “origin” of the Fulani is said to be “unknown” with “tradition” relating them to “Hiksos and Nubians”, and their language is said to be related to Berber, an Afrosiatic family (Rosa et al. 2004). However, current research places the group’s “homeland” in West Africa (Keita et al. 2010, McIntosh and Scheinfeldt 2012), and the Fulani language in the Niger-Congo family (Ruhlen 1991). The Hyksos (‘Hiksos’) invaded Egypt from the Near East in about 1800 BC and likely were Semitic speakers. They were defeated and eventually returned to Asia. There is no evidence that they reached western Africa or penetrated into the populations of the Sahara or Sahel, and there is nothing about the Fulani that would seem to be primary evidence that indicates a specific Hyksos origin. The Nubians, who live in southern Egypt and Sudan, speak languages in the Nilo-Saharan family, and while there are populations that speak languages in this family far to the west of the Nile Valley there is nothing specifically Nubian that would make for convincing evidence that the Fulani have a specific Nubian origin. In short neither Hyksos nor Nubians can be shown to have likely been the ancestral group at the root of the historical origins of the Fulani. In terms of historiography these accounts are not justified. The Balanta are another example, a population having some mtDNA signatures that are unexpected in the Senegambia. Specifically they have haplogroups that are called “Eurasian.” .. Also current research suggests that the ‘kushites’ of the Nile Valley are believed to have spoken a language from the Nilo-Saharan family. Furthermore, the Balanta do not speak a Bantu language, and this family is not thought to date to the Pleistocene, but rather be of late mid-Holocene date at the earliest. The Niger Congo (or Niger Kordofanian family) does have a branch in the Sudan—Kordofanian, but it is not linguistically close to the Balanta. Current research does not speak of ‘camitic’ invasions, and it is not certain to which ‘invasions’ the authors refer. ‘Camitic” is a synonym for Hamitic, a term no longer in common usage in modern African studies because the theories associated with it have been proven wrong..." "The primary issue concerns the “peopling” of Nile valley, and how this happened. This means examining data that can plumb different time depths. The evidence can come from archaeology, various texts, in addition to the biological data. Is the north-south description of variants valid for all markers? Is it possible that the model positing the interaction of idealised discrete groups is false, and that a model that postulates more populations more as processes is more accurate? Archaeological data support the post-glacial re-peopling of the eastern Sahara after the long late pleistocene hiatus (Wendorf and Schild 1980, 2001), probably from multiple directions. "[/i] --Keita 2015. HISTORY AND GENETICS IN AFRICA: A NEED FOR BETTER COOPERATION BETWEEN THE TEAMS ============================================================================= ^Keita also addresses " “back migrations to Africa” (he puts the phrase in quotes)" among other things, and demonstrates that these issues are far from "dead." Quite the contrary. The key is asking enough specific questions to make the interaction with these scholars productive, and having value in turn to provide to said scholars like additional references and summaries. Some like Keita actually welcome that- and have called for such publicly. We have no real disagreement on getting as much value as possible out of correspondence with the various scholars. Sure- value added is good. And Morpheus is fine tuning his queries all the time to do so, and like Truthcentric, he will no doubt glean enough information to debunk assorted "biodiversity" claimants, as indeed he is now doing. [/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