Using primarily linguistic evidence, and taking into account recent archaeology at sites such as Hierakonpolis/Nekhen, as well as the symbolic meaning of objects such as sceptres and headrests in Ancient Egyptian and contemporary African cultures, this paper traces the geographical location and movements of early peoples in and around the Nile Valley. It is possible from this overview of the data to conclude that the limited conceptual vocabulary shared by the ancestors of contemporary Chadic-speakers (therefore also contemporary Cushitic-speakers), contemporary Nilotic-speakers and Ancient Egyptian-speakers suggests that the earliest speakers of the Egyptian language could be located to the south of Upper Egypt or, earlier, in the Sahara. The marked grammatical and lexicographic affinities of Ancient Egyptian with Chadic are well-known, and consistent Nilotic cultural, religious and political patterns are detectable in the formation of the first Egyptian kingships. The question these data raise is the articulation between the languages and the cultural patterns of this pool of ancient African societies from which emerged Predynastic Egypt.
Thank Myra. This deserved its own thread in my opinion due to the meticulous methods and detailed model used to trace the African foundations of Km't. This passage from the conclusion is particularly instructive about the population movements that ultimately lead to the 1rst dynasty at Abydos:
"It is possible from this overview of the data to conclude that the limited conceptual vocabulary shared by the ancestors of contemporary Chadic-speakers (therefore also contemporary Cushitic-speakers), contemporary Nilotic-speakers and Ancient Egyptian-speakers suggests that the earliest speakers of the Egyptian language could be located to the south of Upper Egypt (Diakonoff 1998) or, earlier, in the Sahara (Wendorf 2004), where Takács (1999, 47) suggests their ‘long co-existence’ can be found. In addition, it is consistent with this view to suggest that the northern border of their homeland was further than the Wadi Howar proposed by Blench (1999, 2001), which is actually its southern border. Neither Chadics nor Cushitics existed at this time, but their ancestors lived in a homeland further north than the peripheral countries that they inhabited thereafter, to the south-west, in a Niger-Congo environment, and to the south-east, in a Nilo-Saharan environment, where they interacted and innovated in terms of language. From this perspective, the Upper Egyptian cultures were an ancient North East African ‘periphery at the crossroads’, as suggested by Dahl and Hjort-af-Ornas of the Beja (Dahl and Hjort-af-Ornas 2006). The most likely scenario could be this: some of these Saharo-Nubian populations spread southwards to Wadi Howar, Ennedi and Darfur; some stayed in the actual oases where they joined the inhabitants; and others moved towards the Nile, directed by two geographic obstacles, the western Great Sand Sea and the southern Rock Belt. Their slow perambulations led them from the area of Sprinkle Mountain (Gebel Uweinat) to the east – Bir Sahara, Nabta Playa, Gebel Ramlah, and Nekhen/Hierakonpolis (Upper Egypt), and to the north-east by way of Dakhla Oasis to Abydos (Middle Egypt)."--Anselin (2009)
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
I what way can we be certain those languages are contemporary to ancient Egyptian? Is there anything written to establish the connection? I can only imagine them to be possibly contemporary in that Egypt may have also influenced them and not the other way around. Unless of course you have written evidence?
Posted by Sundjata (Member # 13096) on :
^Look up the term "Glottochronology".
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
quote:Originally posted by Sundjata: ^Look up the term "Glottochronology".
I'll maybe think about it tomorrow. I'm outta here for tonite.
Posted by L' (Member # 18238) on :
Good article
Did you see that? She said: "maybe"- so there is a chance she won't do it, which means she'll repeat the same BS, which proves she's a troll. This is the third time you've asked her to look up the word, so I wouldn't count on her starting now.
Posted by Whatbox (Member # 10819) on :
^The maybe thing (among other things like their latest art thread) just shows you the actual merit / credit the person has in terms of commenting on subjects like this.
Anyway, don't Beja and Darfuians have the highest percentages of ancestral E-M78?
Posted by Sundjata (Member # 13096) on :
^According to Hassan et al (2008) but Tillmar (2009) found up to 77% in a Somali sample. I immediately recalled Hassan as well though due to his speculations of B-M60 and their implications for the peopling of early Egypt by Nilotics. The evidence is so damn strong.
Linguistics suggests - They came from the south Genetic modeling suggests - they came from the south skeletal morphology suggests - they came from the south Archaeology suggests - they came from the south ethnohistoric memory suggests - they came from the south
Conclusion - Egyptian civilization came from the south.
^Yea, I think I'm done arguing with these flat out deniers. It's getting more apparent to me that this isn't worth arguing over anymore as it isn't controversial (unless there's some contrived attempt to make it appear so). Convergence of evidence is how scientists draw conclusions, while Eurocentrists cover eyes and ears like the three "see no evil, hear no evil" monkeys.
Posted by Whatbox (Member # 10819) on :
You can't ignore the principle of wills -- if it is yours to analyze the data and theirs to sniff feces ... ?
quote:Originally posted by Sundjata: ^According to Hassan et al (2008) but Tillmar (2009) found up to 77% in a Somali sample.
It kinda makes me out of curiousity wonder what else these three are made up of.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by A Simpleton: I'll maybe think about it tomorrow. I'm outta here for tonite.
Translation: You got me there! Of course if I really do look it up, I'm too stupid to understand it so I likely won't bother.
LMAO
Anyway, many linguists including Ehret have pointed out how Afrasian and Nilotic have been coexisting with each other for a long while and in large area from the Sahara to the Horn. How can one pinpoint what exact vicinity the culmination of the two led to the development of pharonic culture? What about the Khartoum Mesolithic?
Posted by cassiterides (Member # 18409) on :
Someone linked me here, however i don't do genetics, i only study classical literature.
I have no idea what any of that means.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
Arabic is Semitic. Even thimble head's hero Ehret admits that the Semitic languages have their origins in the Middle East.
Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
cassiterides It's not about genetics it's about culture and language archeology, please read.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
Here's a map to help the thimble head conceptualize the prominance of the Arabic language.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
Even ancient Egyptian is considered to be basically a Semitic language.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
You are that much unschooled about Egypt. Egyptic is a standalone phylum within the so-called "Afro-Asiatic" family.
Posted by Sundjata (Member # 13096) on :
quote:Originally posted by cassiterides: Someone linked me here, however i don't do genetics, i only study classical literature.
Which is the most useless thing you can specialize in that deals with this question.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ Actually it is quite useful since the very Classical Literature he claims expertise in proves him WRONG! LOL
Hey Castrated, take a look at your own thread! Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer:
quote:Originally posted by A Simpleton: Even ancient Egyptian is considered to be basically a Semitic language.
You are that much unschooled about Egypt. Egyptic is a standalone phylum within the so-called "Afro-Asiatic" family.
Correct. Egyptic is considered a subfamily of its own in Afrisian and NOT part of Semitic. In fact decades ago when the Afrasian was divided strictly into 2 categories--Hamitic (African) and Semitic, Egyptian language was classified as Hamitic!
quote:Originally posted by A Simpleton: Here's a map to help the thimble head conceptualize the prominance of the Arabic language.
Okay. And what exactly is your point? Arabic is the most widespread Semitic language yet by the very map you cite there are more speakers in AFRICA than there are in Arabia, which proves the point I made on another thread that the majority of Afrasian speakers are still Africans and that includes Semitic speakers both Ethio-Semitic AND Arabic!
quote: Arabic is Semitic. Even thimble head's hero Ehret admits that the Semitic languages have their origins in the Middle East.
Yes the Semitic languages developed in the so-called "Middle-East" by AFRICAN immigrants. How else could it have developed if Semitic is a subphylum of Afrasian and Afrasian originated in AFRICA. By the way, what does any of this have to do with the development of Egyptian culture??
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
^ Like I said before, the majority of North Africans aren't even considered black. And the fact that there is a huge number of Arabic speakers within North Africa is a testament to their dominance both in ancient and modern times.
If the Semitic languages have their roots based in the Middle East, and the majority of speakers are in North Africa as you say, then? Go figure thimble head.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by A Simpleton: Like I said before, the majority of North Africans aren't even considered black...
By whom?? As I've shown you in another thread, the vast majority of North African groups ARE black from rural Egyptians especially Sa'idi of Upper Egypt, to most Berber groups like the Siwa of Egypt, the Nafusa of Libya, the Djerba of Tunisia, the Tamashek (Tuareg) and (some) Kabyle of Algeria, the Chlueh of Morocco, and the Haratin of the Western Saharan. There are even some Nilo-Saharan speakers who still live in the Sahara like the Teda and Tubu. All these peoples speak Arabic as well as their own tongues. Yes the majority of North African people who aren't considered 'black' are the so-called 'Arabs' and Berbers who live in coastal areas; however it's funny that when these same people especially the coastal Berbers travel to Europe despite their light complexions get called "n*ggers" and "monkeys". If you see their features, it is obvious why!
quote:And the fact that there is a huge number of Arabic speakers within North Africa is a testament to their dominance both in ancient and modern times.
Ancient North Africa is NOT modern North Africa. The big difference is that the latter is more mixed with non-African peoples and with significant non-African cultural influence, yet as I stated that does not eliminate their black ancestry as evident to how they're viewed by your European brethren.
quote:If the Semitic languages have their roots based in the Middle East, and the majority of speakers are in North Africa as you say, then? Go figure thimble head.
There is nothing to figure out, peabrains! Arabic is a predominant language in North Africa because it was INTRODUCED there by Arab-Islamic conquerors and immigrants, you dumbass! There are more English and Spanish speakers outside of Europe also but that doesn't mean they don't originate in Europe, you stupid twit!! LOL Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: There are more English and Spanish speakers outside of Europe also but that doesn't mean they don't originate in Europe, you stupid twit!! LOL [/QB]
Thank you very much for reinforcing my point dimwit. I don't think you have realized that you have turned around and kicked yourself in the nuts yet again.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ And exactly what point is that??! You are the one who brought up Arabic language being more widely spoken in Africa even though it originated in Arabia! LOL
Do you have any idea how retarded you look??
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
The closest simple-minded will ever get to a "North African" is on a computer screen. Self-professed Harvard-graduated personalities can't even correctly place Libya on a map; that should tell you how much ignorant "westerners" can be about Africa.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ LOL Unfortunately true, and Simpleton is by no means any college graduate by far! Her ignorance is only surpassed by her stupidity. Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
It is true that I am not a college graduate yet. But your own statement reminds me that the first college graduates, had teachers that weren't college graduates.
And also that a college degree isn't necessarily a cure-all for stupidity, as evidenced here on this forum.lol
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ Indeed, as evident in this forum by screw-loose nutjobs like YOU! LOL
Now how about you address the facts pointed out or at least make an attempt to make sense. LOL Posted by lamin (Member # 5777) on :
quote:Arabic is Semitic. Even thimble head's hero Ehret admits that the Semitic languages have their origins in the Middle East.
.
Didn't Ehret claim that the linguistic roots of "Semitic"[ and why the heck is fairytale Shem so important to get a whole language group named after him?]are in Ethiopia given its greatest linguistic diversity there.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ He did before but his mind was changed by the recent Bayesian phylogenetic computer model that came out. You can look here. Historically it seems the greatest diversity of Semitic languages was in Southwest Asia though the sub-branches of Semitic that hold the greatest diversity lies in southern Arabia and Ethiopia. Ehret's belief is that such diversity in Ethiopia is due to some sort of founder effect in linguistic terms, yet this fails to explain certain inconsistencies like Ethio-Semitic's very divergent features or the Gurage language of Ethiopia being divergent from other Ethio-Semitic languages.
^al Takuri and I had a discussion about this. I don't believe there's any evidence that Ehret ever "changed his mind", unless of course lamin is privy to some information that I am not. It seems that he's always held the position that Semitic languages emerged only after Proto-Semitic differentiated in the Near East. It isn't like it matters anyway, Semitic being the youngest branch and all.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ Yes, but I was under the impression that he originally believed proto-Semitic to differentiate first in Africa before it entered the 'Near East'.
Either way, I don't know what this has to do with the topic of this thread. And still waiting for the Simpleton to desperately try to refute it.
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)