PDA

View Full Version : No Bantus or Niger-Congo In Cameroon



Ramond
05-14-2020, 05:09 PM
This is a ground breaking study for African genetics;



Nature (2020)

Our knowledge of ancient human population structure in sub-Saharan Africa, particularly prior to the advent of food production, remains limited. Here we report genome-wide DNA data from four children—two of whom were buried approximately 8,000 years ago and two 3,000 years ago—from Shum Laka (Cameroon), one of the earliest known archaeological sites....However, the genome-wide ancestry profiles of all four individuals are most similar to those of present-day hunter-gatherers from western Central Africa, which implies that populations in western Cameroon today—as well as speakers of Bantu languages from across the continent—are not descended substantially from the population represented by these four people.

As far away as 6,000 BC and recently as 1,000 BC the area that is hypothesized to be the homeland of the Bantu Migration, is somehow void of any genetic resemblance towards Bantus. Not one sample! Now while more work is obviously needed in this region of Africa, this study could impact how we perceive the Bantu migration. The Bantu migration is a theory first pushed by Joseph Greenberg, but the area of Cameroon is not recognized by any Bantu ethnic group as their "homeland".

Brwn_trd
05-14-2020, 11:17 PM
It's fair to also point out that these populations are connected to bantu peoples and other west Africans. After all 64% of their genome was from the same branch as west Africans. In fact, they are the first ancient population with a definitive connection to west Africans.

37603

This population is the first with a strong connection to west Africans. IMHO, this signifies we now have better evidence of the general vicinity of west African populations. It sounds like a tautology, but they were somewhere west. We are starting to have evidence hinting to this. My guess of their location is further west. One population (Niger-Congo A) out far west towards the atlantic, and another (Bantu) in a more central west African position. And possibly more northern as well. West Africa is a real mystery. This paper was invaluable.

Piquerobi
05-14-2020, 11:48 PM
It will be interesting if they manage to test many more samples and to reveal what happened as studies on Europe, the Americas and some other places have.

Megalophias
05-15-2020, 05:00 AM
As far away as 6,000 BC and recently as 1,000 BC the area that is hypothesized to be the homeland of the Bantu Migration, is somehow void of any genetic resemblance towards Bantus. Not one sample! Now while more work is obviously needed in this region of Africa, this study could impact how we perceive the Bantu migration. The Bantu migration is a theory first pushed by Joseph Greenberg, but the area of Cameroon is not recognized by any Bantu ethnic group as their "homeland".

There was a thread for this study when it first came out: Shum Laka Ancient DNA paper released! (https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?19479-Shum-Laka-Ancient-DNA-paper-released!) Though most of the discussion ended up being about Taforalt. Bantu migration theory is much older than Greenberg- though IIRC he was one the one who proposed that their homeland was in Western Cameroon.

Ramond
05-15-2020, 09:03 AM
We are starting to have evidence hinting to this. My guess of their location is further west.

From an archaeological perspective that may be unlikely. McIntosh and McIntosh (1986) has indicated that there were few inhabitable sites in West Africa during the Saharan Holocene period (10,000 BC - 3,500 BC). The same researchers also indicated that the Niger-Delta (which has some of the highest concentration of NC speakers) was subsequently sparsely populated during these periods.

While there is an indication of a deep ancestral connection between NC speakers and the SL samples, they're still obviously too distinct to imply that there was any sort of smooth transition into the contemporary population in the region.


And possibly more northern as well.

North or possibly East seems more plausible IMHO with this data. Does anyone know where the oldest results of the M2 lineage have been found if not West Africa?

dr.sparco
05-15-2020, 08:21 PM
This is a ground breaking study for African genetics;



Nature (2020)

Our knowledge of ancient human population structure in sub-Saharan Africa, particularly prior to the advent of food production, remains limited. Here we report genome-wide DNA data from four children—two of whom were buried approximately 8,000 years ago and two 3,000 years ago—from Shum Laka (Cameroon), one of the earliest known archaeological sites....However, the genome-wide ancestry profiles of all four individuals are most similar to those of present-day hunter-gatherers from western Central Africa, which implies that populations in western Cameroon today—as well as speakers of Bantu languages from across the continent—are not descended substantially from the population represented by these four people.

As far away as 6,000 BC and recently as 1,000 BC the area that is hypothesized to be the homeland of the Bantu Migration, is somehow void of any genetic resemblance towards Bantus. Not one sample! Now while more work is obviously needed in this region of Africa, this study could impact how we perceive the Bantu migration. The Bantu migration is a theory first pushed by Joseph Greenberg, but the area of Cameroon is not recognized by any Bantu ethnic group as their "homeland".

I think you should read the Shum Laka paper with caution. You cannot conclude from this study that no Bantus were simultaneously living with these tested people in Cameroon.

So if the Bantus or Niger-Congo speaking people were not native to Cameroon, which region in Africa is in your point of view, the homeland of the Bantus?

Ramond
05-16-2020, 02:59 AM
I think you should read the Shum Laka paper with caution. You cannot conclude from this study

The bold is where you slipped. I did not conclude anything from this study. In fact in the opening post I even stated that more work certainly needs to be done on early West Africa.


that no Bantus were simultaneously living with these tested people in Cameroon.

That in itself is an assumption.


So if the Bantus or Niger-Congo speaking people were not native to Cameroon, which region in Africa is in your point of view, the homeland of the Bantus?

Are you asking that from what linguistic evidence implies or genetic evidence? If it's the latter than I've already asked the question here. Where is the earliest dating for the M2 lineage that tends to define Niger-Congo speaking populations? From the data that we have it's certainly not in Cameroon. Do you know? This;

http://images.slideplayer.com/42/11440307/slides/slide_5.jpg

is why these finding could have enormous impact on how view African history is viewed. We have to remember the Bantu Migration from Cameroon is a completely European construct. There is no correlation with African nor European historians as to how Bantu's and Niger-Congo speakers in general came into the areas that they now inhabit. Essentially this theory was imposed on Africa and Africans. This isn't the first study that neutralizes the Bantu migration from Cameroon theory btw.

ThaYamamoto
05-16-2020, 03:24 AM
The bold is where you slipped. I did not conclude anything from this study. In fact in the opening post I even stated that more work certainly needs to be done on early West Africa.



That in itself is an assumption.



Are you asking that from what linguistic evidence implies or genetic evidence? If it's the latter than I've already asked the question here. Where is the earliest dating for the M2 lineage that tends to define Niger-Congo speaking populations? From the data that we have it's certainly not in Cameroon. Do you know?

Its prolly an ANA clade..only time will tell.

Ramond
05-16-2020, 03:25 AM
Its prolly an ANA clade..only time will tell.

Exactly!

Brwn_trd
05-16-2020, 05:44 PM
I think you should read the Shum Laka paper with caution. You cannot conclude from this study that no Bantus were simultaneously living with these tested people in Cameroon.

So if the Bantus or Niger-Congo speaking people were not native to Cameroon, which region in Africa is in your point of view, the homeland of the Bantus?

I concur, It's possible that we had two populations in this region and we have only sampled one of them. Certainly absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, especially when only a single location has been sampled.

dr.sparco
05-16-2020, 07:54 PM
The bold is where you slipped. I did not conclude anything from this study. In fact in the opening post I even stated that more work certainly needs to be done on early West Africa.

................


is why these finding could have enormous impact on how view African history is viewed. We have to remember the Bantu Migration from Cameroon is a completely European construct. There is no correlation with African nor European historians as to how Bantu's and Niger-Congo speakers in general came into the areas that they now inhabit. Essentially this theory was imposed on Africa and Africans. This isn't the first study that neutralizes the Bantu migration from Cameroon theory btw.


Okay. Going by the linguistic evidence where did the Bantus orginated from? Keep in mind that there is no language without its native speakers.

Futhermore, do you know any tale of the origin of Bantus that is recounted in traditional stories?

Ramond
05-16-2020, 09:23 PM
Okay. Going by the linguistic evidence where did the Bantus orginated from?

Well some linguistic evidence suggest that homeland of Niger-Congo speaking populations as whole was somewhere in the Sudan or the Great Lakes Region. The existence of Kordofanian in Sudan is strong evidence of this as well;

Wm. E. Welmers. 1971 "Niger-Congo, Mande" in T.A. Sebeok, et al. eds. Linguistics in sub-Saharan Africa (Current Trends in Linguistics, 7), pp. 113-140 The Hague: Mouton

P 119-120. By way of conclusion to this general overview of the Mande languages, a a bit of judicious speculation about Mande origins and migrations may not be out of order. It has already been stated that the Mande languages clearly represent the earliest offshoot from the parent Niger-Congo stock—not counting Kordofanian, which Greenberg considers parallel to all of the Niger-Congo, forming a Niger-Kordofanian macrofamily. An original Niger-Congo homeland in the general vicinity of the upper Nile valley is probably as good a hypothesis as any. From such a homeland, a westward Mande migration may have begun well over 5000 years ago. Perhaps the earliest division within this group resulted in the isolation of what is now represented only by Bobo-fing. Somewhat later— perhaps 3500 to 4500 years ago, and possibly from a new homeland around northern Dahomey [now Benin]— the ancestors of the present Northern-western Mande peoples began pushing farther west, ultimately reaching their present homeland in the grasslands and forests of West Africa. This was followed by a gradual spread of the Southern-Eastern division, culminating perhaps 2000 years ago in the separation of its to branches and the ultimate movement of Southern Mande peoples southeast and westward until Mano and Kpelle, long separated, became once more contiguous.

This reconstruction of Mande prehistory receives striking support from a most unexpected source— dogs. Back in the presumed Niger-Congo homeland—the southern Sudan and northern Uganda of modern times— is found the unique barkless, worried-looking, fleet Basenji, who also appears on ancient Egyptian monuments with the typical bee that compensates for his natural silence. Among the Kpelle and Loma people of Liberia, a breed of dogs is found which is so closely identical to the Basenji that it now recognized as the ‘Liberian Basenji’. In all of the Sudan belt of Africa from the Nile Valley to the Liberian forest, the dogs are somewhat similar in appearance, but very obviously mongrelized. It would appear that the Mande peoples originally took their Basenji dogs with them in their westward migration. At that time, the present Sahara desert was capable of sustaining a substantial population, and was presumably the homeland of the Nilo-Saharan peoples. The early Mande moment thus may have been through uninhabited land, and their dogs were spared any cross-breeding. The farthest westward Mande movement—that of the Southwestern group—was virtually complete before contact with dogs of other breeds. With the gradual drying of the Sahara and the southward movement of the Nilo-Saharan peoples, the remaining Mande peoples, as well as later waves of Niger-Congo migration made contact with other people and other dogs. The present canine population of the Liberian forests thus reflects the very early departure of the Mande peoples from their original homeland, and the subsequent early movement of the Southwestern group towards its present location, without contacting substantial number of unrelated people or dogs."

https://i.pinimg.com/236x/0f/9b/4c/0f9b4ccdef222879a804c51c69f3276b--black-and-white-adorable-animals.jpg
https://ancientegyptianfacts.com/AncientEgyptianPictures/Ancient-Egyptian-Dogs-1.jpg


Futhermore, do you know any tale of the origin of Bantus that is recounted in traditional stories?

As far as oral traditions are concerned.

https://www.thepatriot.co.zw/old_posts/tracing-the-shona-back-to-the-great-lakes/

The Shona of Zimbabwe trace their origins to the Great Lakes region.

From https://www.zulu.org.za/destinations/zululand/information/zulu-history-the-history-of-the-zulu-nation-M56980

Zulu Ancestors
In the Great Lakes region of sub-equatorial Central-to-East Africa lived black races collectively labelled by early European anthropologists as 'Bantu' - a term derived from the Zulu collective noun for 'people', but used in certain scholarly circles to differentiate black languages from the click-tongues of Bushmen to the south.

[I]Among these so-called Bantu were the Zulu ancestors - the Nguni people. Named after the charismatic figure who in a previous epoch had led a migration from Egypt to the Great Lakes via the Red Sea corridor and Ethiopia, this new home of the Nguni is the mystical Embo of Zulu storytellers to the present day. Both pastoralists and rudimentary agriculturalists, Nguni wealth was measured in cattle - a tradition that continues throughout the modern Zulu Kingdom. There was however, no central authority at that time...nor was there even a clan called Zulu among those who constituted the Nguni people.

The Zulu trace theirs to Egypt, and eventually the Great Lakes as well. Bantu linguist like Theophile Obenga (who participated in UNESCO 1974) agrees with an Eastern to Northeast African origin of Bantu and Niger-Congo in general. Though he does not recognize "Niger-Congo", and instead joins together Niger-Congo, Nilo Saharan, and non Berber or Semitic Afro-Asiatic languages to call it "Negro Egyptian".

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/u440/Treday90/ano3n7_zpsyjvjae4w.png

His students have expanded on, and or tweaked his model;

http://www.asarimhotep.com/images/stories/10008393_10201531091614427_357859812_n.jpg

What Obenga argues is radically different from what Greenberg has asserted regarding the Cameroonian Bantu origin/dispersal point. The thing is however, with this new study Greenberg's theory is simply not looking good at all. Again there are more studies (not aDNA however) that completely defile this Cameroonian theory. To the contrary Obenga's theory of an Eastern-Northeastern origin has gained some legs, with some recent genetic research (Hawass 2013; Keita & Gourdine 2018). Not to mention that the numerous indigenous oral traditions have never acknowledged a Cameroonian origin or West Africa in general. Not to mention that just about all remains in those regions of West Africa early on have been noted to be for the most part....Pygmies. How can Niger-Congo speakers "evolve" from Pygmies, and in such a short period of time? Not to mention that the M2 lineage itself came from the East.

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/u440/Treday90/i1jj9y_zpsxnik0rxh.jpg

The question needs to asked when did it. Some scholars (C. Ehret) have postulated that this mass migration from East to West Africa occurred over 12,000 BC (in line with the Cameroonian migration), but this study is simply not supporting that assertion.

Megalophias
05-16-2020, 09:33 PM
Oldest solid E-M2 I can think of is Deloraine IA from Kenya, about 1100 years old. But there's no ancient DNA from West Africa at all, is there?

Ramond
05-16-2020, 09:59 PM
Oldest solid E-M2 I can think of is Deloraine IA from Kenya, about 1100 years old. But there's no ancient DNA from West Africa at all, is there?

I found something a little older (about 1,200 - 1,100 BC) in Egypt;

We amplified 16 Y chromosomal, short tandem repeats (AmpF\STR Yfiler PCR amplification kit; Applied Biosystems).........Genetic kinship analyses revealed identical haplotypes in both mummies (table 1⇓); using the Whit Athey’s haplogroup predictor, we determined the Y chromosomal haplogroup E1b1a

https://www.bmj.com/content/345/bmj.e8268

S.O.Y. Keita gave this explanation a while back;

The Distribution of E-M2 and it clades in Central and Southern Africa has usually been explained by the ‘‘Bantu migrations" (which occurred 3000-2500 B.C), in which agriculture and iron technologies spread from the Bantu's homeland located in the Benue complex i.e. Nigeria/Cameroon’’ But their presence in the Nile Valley and in other Non-Bantu speakers Can Not be explained in this way. E-M2 distribution is probably explained by their presence in the populations of the “Early Holocene Sahara”, Who went on to people the Nile Valley in The mid-Holocene era (12,000 B.P.) according to Hassan (1988). Keita and Boyce; Boyce, A. J. (Anthony J.) (2005). "Genetics, Egypt, and History: Interpreting Geographical Patterns of Y Chromosome Variation".

From what Keita is saying, if the M2 lineage did not immediately go into Western Africa from it's East African Origin then it must have lingered around in the fertile Sahara. For it to be present in ancient samples in Egypt, then this migration must have included people with the M2 marker;


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3w1x8nVD4xs&feature=youtu.be&t=187

drobbah
05-16-2020, 10:53 PM
The Zulu trace theirs to Egypt, and eventually the Great Lakes as well. Bantu linguist like Theophile Obenga (who participated in UNESCO 1974) agrees with an Eastern to Northeast African origin of Bantu and Niger-Congo in general. Though he does not recognize "Niger-Congo", and instead joins together Niger-Congo, Nilo Saharan, and non Berber or Semitic Afro-Asiatic languages to call it "Negro Egyptian".

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/u440/Treday90/ano3n7_zpsyjvjae4w.png

His students have expanded on, and or tweaked his model;

http://www.asarimhotep.com/images/stories/10008393_10201531091614427_357859812_n.jpg
Do these afro-centrics 'scholars' have any proof to back their claims, I would assume they have loads of evidence to dismantle the Afro-Asiatic linguistic family in favor of this label?

Ramond
05-16-2020, 11:07 PM
Do these afro-centrics 'scholars' have any proof to back their claims, I would assume they have loads of evidence to dismantle the Afro-Asiatic linguistic family in favor of this label?

Does Diop's list suffice as proof. It's been around since the 70's-80's. If not why?


Linguistic Unity With Southern and Western Africa
In a detailed study of languages, Diop clearly demonstrates that Ancient Egyptian, modern Coptic of Egypt and Walaf of West Africa are related, with the latter two having their origin in the former.

"Pharaonic Egyptian - Wolof; (Wolof meaning)


Aku - Aku : foreigners (Creole descendants of European traders and African wives)


anu - K.enou : pillar


atef - ate : a crown of Osiris, judge of the soul (to judge)


ba - bei : the ram-god (goat)


ben ben - ben ben : overflow, flood


bon - bon : evil


bu - bu : place


bu bon - bu bon : evil place


bu nafret - bu rafet : good place


da - da : child


Djoob - Djob : a surname


fero - fari : king


itef - itef : father


kau - kaou : elevated, above (heaven)


kem -khem : black (burnt, burnt black)


kemat - kematef : end of a period, completion, limit


khekh - khekh : to fight, to wage war, war


kher - ker : country (house)


lebou - Lebou : those at the stream, Lebou/fishermen Senegal


maat - mat : justice


mer - maar : love (passionate love)


mun - won : buttocks


nag - nag : bull (cattle)


nak - nak : ox, bull (cow)


NDam - NDam : throne


neb - ndab : float


nen - nen : place where nothing is done (nothingness)


nit - nit : citizen


Ntr - Twr : protecting god, totem


nwt - nit : fire of heaven (evening light)


o.k. - wah keh : correct, right


onef - onef : he (past tense)


ones - ones : she (past tense)

I've seen several other comparative "list" like this of other Niger-Congo speakers. The big question is, how does this obvious relationship exist, if Niger-Congo is not related to ancient Egyptian because it is an "Afro-Asiatic language"?

While not "mainstream" there are quite a number of books and or references by different scholars. Many of which are Africans, and mostly Bantu. Obviously the most prominent linguist is Theophile Obenga, who to my knowledge is still a professor at some African university. Here Obenga addresses the controversies of the subject.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vBJed7x_caw

Here he breaks down the Egyptian hieroglyphs via his "Negro-Egyptian"


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_-qF23u2oAY

Him and Ehret did have a debate back in the 1990's in which "Negro-Egyptian" was put on trial, and it apparently held it's own.

This guy who goes by "Ausar Imhotep" (an author) who just did a two part interview with S.O.Y. Keita a few weeks back did a pretty lengthy video the other day that touched on that particular subject. He examined a host of linguists, and examined how they broke down the language families.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L9rZyJs0kHw

drobbah
05-16-2020, 11:19 PM
This isn't evidence, I wanted to see papers or perhaps books not youtube videos. I'll be honest, Egypt obsessed afro-centrists give black africans a bad reputation. They make it seem as if we suffer an inferiorty complex and aren't proud of our own heritage. A thread discussing the origins of NC linguistic family has turned into an Egyptian orientated discussion. It's ridiculous !

dr.sparco
05-16-2020, 11:20 PM
Well some linguistic evidence suggest that homeland of Niger-Congo speaking populations as whole was somewhere in the Sudan or the Great Lakes Region. The existence of Kordofanian in Sudan is strong evidence of this as well............................






As far as oral traditions are concerned.

https://www.thepatriot.co.zw/old_posts/tracing-the-shona-back-to-the-great-lakes/

The Shona of Zimbabwe trace their origins to the Great Lakes region.

From https://www.zulu.org.za/destinations/zululand/information/zulu-history-the-history-of-the-zulu-nation-M56980

Zulu Ancestors
In the Great Lakes region of sub-equatorial Central-to-East Africa lived black races collectively labelled by early European anthropologists as 'Bantu' - a term derived from the Zulu collective noun for 'people', but used in certain scholarly circles to differentiate black languages from the click-tongues of Bushmen to the south.

Among these so-called Bantu were the Zulu ancestors - the Nguni people. Named after the charismatic figure who in a previous epoch had led a migration from Egypt to the Great Lakes via the Red Sea corridor and Ethiopia, this new home of the Nguni is the mystical Embo of Zulu storytellers to the present day. Both pastoralists and rudimentary agriculturalists, Nguni wealth was measured in cattle - a tradition that continues throughout the modern Zulu Kingdom. There was however, no central authority at that time...nor was there even a clan called Zulu among those who constituted the Nguni people.

The Zulu trace theirs to Egypt, and eventually the Great Lakes as well. Bantu linguist like Theophile Obenga (who participated in UNESCO 1974) agrees with an Eastern to Northeast African origin of Bantu and Niger-Congo in general. Though he does not recognize "Niger-Congo", and instead joins together Niger-Congo, Nilo Saharan, and non Berber or Semitic Afro-Asiatic languages to call it "Negro Egyptian".

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/u440/Treday90/ano3n7_zpsyjvjae4w.png

His students have expanded on, and or tweaked his model;

http://www.asarimhotep.com/images/stories/10008393_10201531091614427_357859812_n.jpg

What Obenga argues is radically different from what Greenberg has asserted regarding the Cameroonian Bantu origin/dispersal point. The thing is however, with this new study Greenberg's theory is simply not looking good at all. Again there are more studies (not aDNA however) that completely defile this Cameroonian theory. To the contrary Obenga's theory of an Eastern-Northeastern origin has gained some legs, with some recent genetic research (Hawass 2013; Keita & Gourdine 2018). Not to mention that the numerous indigenous oral traditions have never acknowledged a Cameroonian origin or West Africa in general. Not to mention that just about all remains in those regions of West Africa early on have been noted to be for the most part....Pygmies. How can Niger-Congo speakers "evolve" from Pygmies, and in such a short period of time? Not to mention that the M2 lineage itself came from the East.

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/u440/Treday90/i1jj9y_zpsxnik0rxh.jpg

The question needs to asked when did it. Some scholars (C. Ehret) have postulated that this mass migration from East to West Africa occurred over 12,000 BC (in line with the Cameroonian migration), but this study is simply not supporting that assertion.

Thanks for your explaination. I will definitely make some researches on the origin of the Niger- Congo language. Bantu people being native to Sudan sounds interesting. When going by this linguistic evidence Niger-Congo-language Speakers would be "proper", indigenous East Africans instead of West African migrants. That would blow the established theory about the Bantu expansion away.

ThaYamamoto
05-17-2020, 12:10 AM
Well some linguistic evidence suggest that homeland of Niger-Congo speaking populations as whole was somewhere in the Sudan or the Great Lakes Region. The existence of Kordofanian in Sudan is strong evidence of this as well;

[I]Wm. E. Welmers. 1971 "Niger-Congo, Mande" in T.A. Sebeok, et al. eds. Linguistics in sub-Saharan Africa (Current Trends in Linguistics, 7), pp. 113-140 The Hague: Mouton



This would be all well and proper if automsomal studies haven't conclusively proven a migrations from the Nigerian/Cameroonian hinterland, using ALDER to estimate admixture dates. In terms of the origin of NC people, yeah that's open to as much speculation as any cuz there's no ancient WA samples yet...but a Bantu migration is highly likely. Bantu Zone S speakers obviously trace their ancestry to the Great Lakes, its where they dispersed from (Eastern Stream). That's why there's so many cognates between for example, Great Lakes Luganda and South African Zulu.The Western stream via Gabon and Angola makes its way through Namibia and Bostwana and reunites at some point with the Eastern one, post draught i.e. 1000 odd years bp. Linguistics is hindered by its own idea of self-sufficiency, like philosophy of reason ignoring its limitations of experience i.e. Kantian. Population genomics has steam rolled it, is steamrolling it as we speak, but there needs to be much more dialogue between linguists and pop. genomicists for sure. Like I said, an original Eastern source for NC, sure why not, but to conclude a Bantu expansion didn't occur? Unlikely.

Ramond
05-17-2020, 12:57 AM
This isn't evidence, I wanted to see papers or perhaps books not youtube videos

Well for one you didn't specify anything. You instead made a condescending remark. Let's learn how to be specific ;)

The "youtube videos" were lectures from college professors and authors of linguistic books themselves (Ausar Imhotep). The latter video goes down a list of sources throughout the tenure. I'm not going to waste my time gathering pictures and exerts from books, when you're simply going to chalk it all up as "Afrocentric". Something tells me that no matter what evidence is provided to you in support of those stances, you won't have anything to refute them like you want to. Perhaps you're going to point to the fact that Western scholars do not acknowledge those sets of facts, but you certainly won't have anything to refute what Obenga or any of his students (hence the "theory" has yet to be debunked, and is being built upon) have published.

Ramond
05-17-2020, 01:10 AM
This would be all well and proper if automsomal studies haven't conclusively proven a migrations from the Nigerian/Cameroonian hinterland, using ALDER to estimate admixture dates.

These studies certainly point to that Cameroonian origin being debunked;


The Bantu expansion revisited: a new analysis of Y chromosome 1 variation in Central 2 Western Africa
Valeria Montano, Okorie Anyaele, David Comas5 2

This is consistent with previous regional studies on Y chromosome diversity carried out in sub-Saharan Africa or in
other continents which** failed** to detect a robust correlation between genetic and linguistic
distances
In this way, we were able to detect some noteworthy differences within and among Bantu-speaking populations, mostly due
to haplogroups E1b1a7a (U174), E1b1a8a (U209), and E1b1a8a1 (U290), which contribute to their high level of inter-population differentiation and to the presence of distinct regional patterns of genetic variation. All these findings CONTRADICT the current VIEW of Bantu speakers as a homogeneous group of populations whose gene pools are mostly if not exclusively the result of a relatively recent population expansion”

and

A genomic analysis identifies a novel component in the genetic structure of sub-Saharan African populations - Martin Sikora 2011


"Studies of large sets of single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) data have proven to be a powerful tool in the analysis of the genetic structure of human populations. In this work, we analyze genotyping data for 2841 SNPs in 12 sub-Saharan African populations, including a previously unsampled region of southeastern Africa (Mozambique). We show that robust results in a world-wide perspective can be obtained when analyzing only 1000 SNPs. Our main results both confirm the results of previous studies, and show new and interesting features in sub-Saharan African genetic complexity. There is a strong differentiation of Nilo-Saharans, much BEYOND what would be expected by geography. Hunter-gatherer populations (Khoisan and Pygmies) show a clear distinctiveness with very intrinsic Pygmy (and not only Khoisan) genetic features. Populations of the West Africa present an unexpected similarity among them, possibly the result of a population expansion. Finally, we find a strong differentiation of the southeastern Bantu population from Mozambique, which suggests an assimilation of a pre-Bantu substrate by Bantu speakers in the region.


The third PC allows us to discriminate between western/central (Mandenka, Yoruba), eastern (Maasai, Luhya), and southeastern populations (Mozambique), IRRESPECTIVELY OF LANGUAGE FAMILY. This is the PC that is mostly correlated with geography (Figure 2c), and the fact that it is the third RATHER THAN THE FIRST COMPONENT, as would be expected if isolation by distance was the predominant force shaping genetic diversity,16 implies that directional population movements (such as the Bantu expansion) and barriers to gene flow (such as that between food producers and hunter gatherers) are more relevant than geographic distance to understand the genetic landscape of sub-Saharan Africa. The distinction between west and southeast Africa is also shown with K4; at K5, the Niger-Congo speaking Luhya are separated from the rest. The new component that appears at KĽ6 is restricted to African Americans and Biaka Pygmies, and is the last component that can be attributed to specific populations.


but not Pygmies). Among Niger-Congo populations, geography is the main factor explaining the genetic differences, with a remarkable similarity among western populations (Yorubas and Mandenka), which could reflect a burst in the expansion to the west, related to iron technology and Niger-Congo languages. (ii) The southeastern Bantu from Mozambique are remarkably differentiated from the western Niger-Congo speaking populations, such as the Mandenka and the Yoruba, and also differentiated from geographically closer Eastern Bantu samples, such as Luhya. These results suggest that the Bantu expansion of languages, which started 5000 years ago at the present day border region of Nigeria and Cameroon, and was probably related to the spread of agriculture and the emergence of iron technology,17–19 WAS NOT A DEMOGRAPHIC HOMOGENEOUS MIGRATION WITH POPULATION REPLACEMENT IN THE SOUTHERNMOST PART OF THE CONTINENT, but acquired more divergence, likely because of the integration of pre-Bantu people. The complexity of the expansion of Bantu languages to the south (with an eastern and a western route20), might have produced differential degrees of assimilation of previous populations of hunter gatherers. This assimilation has been detected through uniparental markers because of the genetic comparison of nowadays hunter gatherers (Pygmies and Khoisan) with Bantu speaker agriculturalists.2,21–24 Nonetheless, the singularity of the southeastern population of Mozambique (poorly related to present Khoisan) could be attributed to a complete assimilate on of ancient genetically differentiated populations (presently unknown) by Bantu speakers in southeastern Africa, without leaving any pre-Bantu population in the area to compare with"

So what does this mean?

There were no other Africans in Southern Africa besides the Khoisan to mix with, and that realtions between the Mozambique Bantu's and Khoisan has been found to be "poor". There was no phantom African population (see the map of Southern African populations/language families below)


https://exploringafrica.matrix.msu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Major-Languages-of-Southern-Africa.jpg

for them to mix with to be differentiated. This means that their genetic differentiation from other Niger-Congo speakers was long in place, but they with the other Bantu's were supposed to come from a "common West African origin". The Cameroonian origin for the Bantu has been destroyed on so many fronts. The archaeological evidence from McIntosh & McIntosh 1981 & 1986 even confirms that Cameroon and vicinity was uninhabitable swamp land until around 2,000 B.C. The area was obviously found to be sparsely populated. This new Cameroonian aDNA belonging to Pygmies may potentially break it's back completely.

Ramond
05-17-2020, 01:16 AM
When going by this linguistic evidence Niger-Congo-language Speakers would be "proper", indigenous East Africans instead of West African migrants. That would blow the established theory about the Bantu expansion away.

Yep! That's what the evidence points to to me.

sum1
05-17-2020, 02:05 AM
We really need a dedicated moderator for the African section.

Ramond
05-17-2020, 02:23 AM
We really need a dedicated moderator for the African section.

So what do you think about the OP?

Megalophias
05-17-2020, 03:44 AM
I found something a little older (about 1,200 - 1,100 BC) in Egypt;

We amplified 16 Y chromosomal, short tandem repeats (AmpF\STR Yfiler PCR amplification kit; Applied Biosystems).........Genetic kinship analyses revealed identical haplotypes in both mummies (table 1⇓); using the Whit Athey’s haplogroup predictor, we determined the Y chromosomal haplogroup E1b1a
Yeah, I know about that one, but it's only a prediction from STRs; that's why I said the earliest solid case of E-M2.

For the rest of it, the Shum Laka results do throw a lot of cold water on the idea of Bantu languages developing in the Grassfields region since 6000 years ago or whatever. It doesn't necessarily prevent Cameroon being the Bantu homeland later on, though, or somewhere else in the general vicinity. We look forward impatiently to more ancient DNA from Africa.

ThaYamamoto
05-17-2020, 03:54 AM
These studies certainly point to that Cameroonian origin being debunked;

[CENTER]The Bantu expansion revisited: a new analysis of Y chromosome 1 variation in Central 2 Western Africa
Valeria Montano, Okorie Anyaele, David Comas5 2


Aite so I could spend time drawing up a proper response, with the corresponding figures and data, but what would be the point when first you circumvented my first point regarding linguistics - you seem to think language families and parallels between sub-groups are related to cognates and Swadesh lists, that is completely incorrect, linguists adjudge things based on grammar first and foremost and the forms verbs take based in primary nouns, for the most part. Two, the Mozambique paper you posted is from 2011, Semo et al (2020) studied Mozambique pops contrasted with the rest of Africa and there is minor differentiation between them and other NC populations, unless you think Admixture is a buncha colours - up until K6 they are no different to Bantu's, Semi-Bantu's etc, before they differentiate based on shared allelles and founder effects. Three, you suggest that Khoisan were the only population in Southern Africa, not true - you have the Malawi populations from Skoglund, who incidentally according to Busby, are suggested to have admixed with the Eastern Bantu stream before expanding from a Malawian epicenter. The Skoglund paper also had some other important considerations i.e. EA Pastoralists in Southern Africa forming a cline. Three, the crux of your position is based on the fact the Shum Laka paper (which isn't brand new, its been discussed ad nauseum) found the samples to be ancestral to Pygmies - the paper actually finds that the individuals are harbor West-African ancestry + Pygmy, instead of their modern counter parts who are in fact Bantu+Pygmy i.e. Aka. The paper also revealed both Ghost modern and Ghost archaic ancestry in modern West African populations, the significance of which can't be overstated. Like another poster said, the absence of samples does not mean an absence of evidence. A West-Central origin for the Bantu or 'West-Africa B' has in no way been demolished, but I agree that perhaps Cameroon/Nigeria border isn't the Bantu urheimat, more likely further West i.e. Bight of Benin westwards. Also without South-East Nigerian populations like the Effik, Enjagham, Ijaw and Eko and other Cross-River folk, the relationship between populations Cameroon onward and Nigeria west-ward can't be fully explored.

Niger-Congo having far more ancient roots in the East is a real possibility imo, but the idea of the Bantu expansion not occurring or that NC Bantu pops are not of relatively recent West-African descent - very unlikely. The bombastic statement "This new Cameroonian aDNA belonging to Pygmies may potentially break it's back completely" is ridiculous if you mean to posit that the Bantu did not originate around the vicinity of the Niger-Delta or Gulf of Guinea.

Ramond
05-17-2020, 03:59 AM
Yeah, I know about that one, but it's only a prediction from STRs; that's why I said the earliest solid case of E-M2.

Why would researchers reference, and even further validate information that is not "solid"?

“Results that are likely reliable are from studies that analyzed short tandem repeats (STRs) from Amarna royal mummies5 (1,300 BC), and of Ramesses III (1,200 BC)6; Ramesses III had the Y chromosome haplogroup E1b1a, an old African lineage7. Our analysis of STRs from Amarna and Ramesside royal mummies with popAffiliator18 based on the same published data5,6 indicates a 41.7% to 93.9% probability of SSA affinities (see Table 1); most of the individuals had a greater probability of affiliation with “SSA” which is not the only way to be “African”- a point worth repeating.”

FROM: -Gourdine JP, Keita SOY, Gourdine JL, Anselin A, 2018. Ancient Egyptian Genomes from northern Egypt

There's not doubt or precaution being used by these researchers here. I'd say that it's solid.


For the rest of it, the Shum Laka results do throw a lot of cold water on the idea of Bantu languages developing in the Grassfields region since 6000 years ago or whatever. It doesn't necessarily prevent Cameroon being the Bantu homeland later on, though, or somewhere else in the general vicinity. We look forward impatiently to more ancient DNA from Africa.

Agreed!

Ramond
05-17-2020, 05:45 AM
you seem to think language families and parallels between sub-groups are related to cognates and Swadesh lists, that is completely incorrect, linguists adjudge things based on grammar first and foremost and the forms verbs take based in primary nouns, for the most part.

Mboli who is one of Obenga's prodigies actually uses the comparative method, not Swadesh. The comparative method is the "gold standard (https://books.google.com/books?id=hakwDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA109&lpg=PA109&dq=Swadesh+lists+comparative+method&source=bl&ots=LN0xc0yZq2&sig=ACfU3U1X1c1pN3DFCNwxP-RQZcG1rlyPQw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiltKjbjbrpAhWVJ80KHbbXBdsQ6AEwA3oECAoQA Q#v=onepage&q=Swadesh%20lists%20comparative%20method&f=false)" of these types of analysis. Greenberg who you seem to be defending uses the "mass comparison" method. This method has brought him great issues with other linguist that has left many issues "unresolved (https://books.google.com/books?id=hakwDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA109&lpg=PA109&dq=Swadesh+lists+comparative+method&source=bl&ots=LN0xc0yZq2&sig=ACfU3U1X1c1pN3DFCNwxP-RQZcG1rlyPQw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiltKjbjbrpAhWVJ80KHbbXBdsQ6AEwA3oECAoQA Q#v=onepage&q=Swadesh%20lists%20comparative%20method&f=false)".



"A Conversation with Jean-Claude Mboli

Jean-Claude Mboli is an electrical engineer and also a historical comparative linguist who has done some pioneering work in the reorganization and validation of the Negro-Egyptian language phylum first conceived of by Dr. Theophile Obenga (1993). We will learn more about Mr. Mboli and discuss his latest work titled _Origine des langues africaines (2010)_ (written in French)."

"The Comparative Method in African Linguistics: A Path to the Negro-Egyptian Language Family"

In part 2 of our series on Egypt in its African Context and the Negro-Egyptian language phylum, we have as our special guest, again, Mr. Jean-Claude Mboli (author of Origine des langues africanes) as he goes through the steps of the comparative method in anthropological linguistics in an effort to inform the lay public on how to demonstrate the relationship between ancient ciKam (Egyptian) and modern African languages, as well as its position within the Negro-Egyptian language phylum. This will be a hands on discourse, so have your pen and paper ready.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a6NV9Sb6aAM&feature=youtu.be

here again is what Mboli proposes.

https://www.asarimhotep.com/images/stories/10008393_10201531091614427_357859812_n.jpg

Also if you actually watched (rather than scuffing it off as "Hotepism") the video by Ausar Imhotep (or read his book) then you would see that he actually goes step by step demonstrating the validity of the comparative method. He does this while also moving past "Negro Egyptian" going straight into Sumerian, which he also argues through the same method has Bantu origin (call it what you want, but the data is the data). Start the video around 20 minutes in;



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L9rZyJs0kHw&feature=emb_title

Now if you're up to it, Ausar Imhotep does weekly videos. He is highly interactive with members of a mutual forum. If you'd like I can reach out to him, and you all can have a discussion about this. He's been a guess on Sa Neter TV (if you even know what that is...probably don't). There are a quite a few linguist "Bantu centric" scholars on those platforms actually. If you're that astute in linguistics, and want to put that "Afrocentrism" to rest, then just let me know "homie" I'll see what I can do to arrange that discussion. ;)


Two, the Mozambique paper you posted is from 2011, Semo et al (2020) studied Mozambique pops contrasted with the rest of Africa and there is minor differentiation between them and other NC populations

It's still a noted distinction that has not been explained with admixture of any pre Bantu group(s) that were in that region. I didn't see you comment on "The Bantu Expansion Revisited" study that verified that the high differentiation among Bantu speakers is simply not indicative of a relatively recent homogeneous origins for the Bantus.


unless you think Admixture is a buncha colours

Do yo (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pbSCWgZQf_g) thang mane! I'm a CPA by the way... what do you do?


- up until K6 they are no different to Bantu's, Semi-Bantu's etc, before they differentiate based on shared allelles and founder effects.

Care to elaborate on that?


Three, you suggest that Khoisan were the only population in Southern Africa, not true, - you have the Malawi populations from Skoglund,

So what are you saying that those Mozambique Bantu's have a "Eurasian" affinity? Isn't that essentially the card tha Skoglund was trying to play?


Three, the crux of your position is based on the fact the Shum Laka paper (which isn't brand new, its been discussed ad nauseum) found the samples to be ancestral to Pygmies - the paper actually finds that the individuals are harbor West-African ancestry +Pygmy, instead of their modern counter parts who are in fact Bantu+Pygmy i.e. Aka.

Those are deep ancestral connections that likely arose in other regions of Africa (probably closer towards the Great Lakes region). Those connections do not suggest in any a smooth transition into the contemporary populations of West Africa.


The paper also revealed both Ghost modern and Ghost archaic ancestry in modern West African populations, the significance of which can't be overstated. Like another poster said, the absence of samples does not mean an absence of evidence.

So upon reaching West Africa, then the NC's possibly absorbed that "ghost population" perhaps?


A West-Central origin for the Bantu or 'West-Africa B' has in no way been demolished

Wait (https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DZPMC43VwAAimfW?format=jpg&name=small)...But with their (NC) predominant paternal marker (M2 lineage) coming from East Africa, splitting from it's PN2 clade brother M-35 in..East Africa, (unless M-35 was in West Africa too?) West/Central origins of Bantu's never had legs in the first place. Doesn't that only make sense?


Niger-Congo having far more ancient roots in the East is a real possibility imo

Ya know I would definitely think so....

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/u440/Treday90/i1jj9y_zpsxnik0rxh.jpg

Just like it's PN2 clade brother

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/65/E1b1bRoute.png


The bombastic statement "This new Cameroonian aDNA belonging to Pygmies may potentially break it's back completely" is ridiculous if you mean to posit that the Bantu did not originate around the vicinity of the Niger-Delta or Gulf of Guinea.

You do know that this is not "my conjecture" right? I didn't pull this out of thin air. In fact some people much more credentialed than me (and you) had called this decades ago.

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/u440/Treday90/jrqln4_zpsjc0tdfoz.png

How did he know that these were Pygmies in West and Central Africa 40-50 years before this NEW 2020 analysis? He must have been a psychic , because there was no other evidence to indicate that. We had to wait for this 2020 paper to verify this (https://i.pinimg.com/236x/cc/13/11/cc1311169241010897346f218c459b3a.jpg).

drobbah
05-17-2020, 01:14 PM
Well for one you didn't specify anything. You instead made a condescending remark. Let's learn how to be specific ;)

The "youtube videos" were lectures from college professors and authors of linguistic books themselves (Ausar Imhotep). The latter video goes down a list of sources throughout the tenure. I'm not going to waste my time gathering pictures and exerts from books, when you're simply going to chalk it all up as "Afrocentric". Something tells me that no matter what evidence is provided to you in support of those stances, you won't have anything to refute them like you want to. Perhaps you're going to point to the fact that Western scholars do not acknowledge those sets of facts, but you certainly won't have anything to refute what Obenga or any of his students (hence the "theory" has yet to be debunked, and is being built upon) have published.

The moment you posted that tree with the Somali language being related to Congolese and other African languages had proven to me that you and the men you follow have an extremely dense ideological bias (Hoteps) .Only in the mind of Hoteps is the Somali language closer to Sango (a congolese creole) than to Semitic or Berber languages.





If you have an inferiority complex towards non Africans, don't put that on other people who analyze facts that do not suit their Eurocentrism or wannabe Eurocentrism.
Youtube videos and quotes from men who gave themselves Anient Egyptian names aren't facts.From here on out, I'm just going to ignore your long posts and suggest the other posters on this forum should do the same.

Ramond
05-17-2020, 05:09 PM
The moment you posted that tree with the Somali language being related to Congolese and other African languages had proven to me. that you and the men you follow have an extremely dense ideological bias (Hoteps).

These are your feelings. I called it earlier that you would not have anything to actually refute the data and arguments that Mboli nor Ausar Imhotep have presented. If you had linguistic credentials to debate these "Hoteps" (one is actually a continental African, which kind of throws a monkey wrench in the hotep characterization of "desperate" African Americans not proud of "their" history so they claim Egypt) then I would extend the invitation to you to possibly debate these people You don't have Mboli's credentials however, nor anything comparative.



Only in the mind of Hoteps is the Somali language closer to Sango (a congolese creole) than to Semitic or Berber languages.

No the three hour lecture, by Mboli and Ausar Imhotep this strengthened by their step by step breakdown of the genetic relationships of these languages. The fact that you judged this information before actually analyzing it is all the proof that emotionalism is the only force behind your instant rejection of these relationships. Vanessa Davis (Egyptologist - PHD) is being interviewed by Ausar next week. Why would a credentialed Egyptologist entertain a "Hotep" platform, but you with no credentials are too good to be receptive to their data? S.O.Y. Keita just did an interview with Ausar;


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lejh0k3sA4c

We know for sure that his credentials are superior to your own as well. Somehow he was able to get passed that and have hour plus long interviews with a "Hotep", but somehow you with no credentials are above that. That's why I call your response emotionalism.


Youtube videos and quotes

Interviews and college lectures with reputed Dr's and PHD's on "youtube videos" is what you probably meant to say.


from men who gave themselves Anient Egyptian names aren't facts.

"OMG (https://media.giphy.com/media/TgOYjtgKpS9jAytUlh/giphy.gif) the audacity" :rolleyes:. More emotionalism. Where are the Somali scholars? Do they have anything to say? Are there any Somali scholars on this subject? What works do they have about their people and history?


From here on out, I'm just going to ignore your long posts and suggest the other posters on this forum should do the same.

Oh let me go cry. Do you honestly think that I think highly enough of your emotional mindset to have my feelings hurt, because you don't want to talk me? I don't put stock into emotionalism, which is all that I have seen from you.

drobbah
05-17-2020, 07:06 PM
"OMG (https://media.giphy.com/media/TgOYjtgKpS9jAytUlh/giphy.gif) the audacity" :rolleyes:. More emotionalism. Where are the Somali scholars? Do they have anything to say? Are there any Somali scholars on this subject? What works do they have about their people and history?




Yes there are Somali historians,academic scholars and even a female archaelogist who has just released her first book (https://www.amazon.com/Divine-Fertility-Transformation-Archaeology-Publications-ebook/dp/B07Z6R6R5X) if you are interested in learning a bit about pre-Islamic NW Somalia (Somaliland) and the ancient beliefs my people held.

Ramond
05-17-2020, 07:16 PM
Yes there are Somali historians,academic scholars and even a female archaelogist

That's kind of a small list compared to the "West African"/diaspora folks putting out work, but that's nice. Do they have anything to say about the Somali language, and it's relationship to other African languages? Oh thanks for responding by the way.

drobbah
05-17-2020, 07:20 PM
That's kind of a small list compared to the "West African"/diaspora folks putting out work, but that's nice. Do they have anything to say about the Somali language, and it's relationship to other African languages? Oh thanks for responding by the way.

I only responded because you decided to slander Somalis unprovoked.I have nothing but love for all Africans regardless of region nor have I said anything negative about West African academics or scholars, just you and the men who gave themselves Egyptian names.This is my last response, have a good day brother!

Ramond
05-17-2020, 07:26 PM
I only responded because you decided to slander Somalis unprovoked.

More emotionalism. I asked some simple questions.


I have nothing but love for all Africans regardless of region

Meh.


nor have I said anything negative about West African academics or scholars, just you and the men who gave themselves Egyptian names.

So I asked where are the Somali scholars who have their own counter research as your emotionalism seemed to suggest. You still haven't shown us any. Perhaps Somalis find the research strictly from Europeans to be more comforting, which why they don't bother to do their own in dept homework unlike the more "SSA" Africans. It may be the mindset associated with that "Eurasian affinity" and what not.


This is my last response, have a good day brother!

You must be referencing the PN2 clade.

passenger
05-17-2020, 08:07 PM
I only responded because you decided to slander Somalis unprovoked.I have nothing but love for all Africans regardless of region nor have I said anything negative about West African academics or scholars, just you and the men who gave themselves Egyptian names.This is my last response, have a good day brother!

I feel you. This guy seems to be stuck in a 1970s Afrocentric, Panafricanist time-warp that most mainstream African scholars have moved on from. If he appreciates African scholarship so much he might do well to read someone more with the times, like Achille Mbembe, rather than Diop and his dated acolytes.

dr.sparco
05-17-2020, 10:27 PM
I found something a little older (about 1,200 - 1,100 BC) in Egypt;

We amplified 16 Y chromosomal, short tandem repeats (AmpF\STR Yfiler PCR amplification kit; Applied Biosystems).........Genetic kinship analyses revealed identical haplotypes in both mummies (table 1⇓); using the Whit Athey’s haplogroup predictor, we determined the Y chromosomal haplogroup E1b1a

https://www.bmj.com/content/345/bmj.e8268

S.O.Y. Keita gave this explanation a while back;

The Distribution of E-M2 and it clades in Central and Southern Africa has usually been explained by the ‘‘Bantu migrations" (which occurred 3000-2500 B.C), in which agriculture and iron technologies spread from the Bantu's homeland located in the Benue complex i.e. Nigeria/Cameroon’’ But their presence in the Nile Valley and in other Non-Bantu speakers Can Not be explained in this way. E-M2 distribution is probably explained by their presence in the populations of the “Early Holocene Sahara”, Who went on to people the Nile Valley in The mid-Holocene era (12,000 B.P.) according to Hassan (1988). Keita and Boyce; Boyce, A. J. (Anthony J.) (2005). "Genetics, Egypt, and History: Interpreting Geographical Patterns of Y Chromosome Variation".

From what Keita is saying, if the M2 lineage did not immediately go into Western Africa from it's East African Origin then it must have lingered around in the fertile Sahara. For it to be present in ancient samples in Egypt, then this migration must have included people with the M2 marker;


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3w1x8nVD4xs&feature=youtu.be&t=187

Apart from genetic or linguistic evidence, is there any solid evidence like archaeological ones which suggests that Bantus/Niger-Congo speakers have historical or cultural ties to ancient Egypt? I‘ve never read anything from prominent Egyptologists, absolute luminary on their field, that point to that. On the contrary. I'm a bit familiar with Diop and Keita unlike Obenga which I never heard of him. As far as I know both Diop and Keita are controversial scholars.

Ramond
05-17-2020, 11:04 PM
This guy seems to be stuck in a 1970s Afrocentric, Panafricanist time-warp

How do you come to that conclusion when Mboli's work in updating Negro-Egyptian was first published in 2010?


that most mainstream African scholars have moved on from.

There is context behind that that's probably a little too strong for your taste , and I don't want me thread deviate into that.


If he appreciates African scholarship so much he might do well to read someone more with the times, like Achille Mbembe, rather than Diop and his dated acolytes.

Some of his views particularly on how contemporary Europeans came to are dated. The OP however, has helped to vindicate perhaps his most passionate one;


https://hosting.photobucket.com/images/u440/Treday90/Diop_Twa.png

see



Nature (2020)

Our knowledge of ancient human population structure in sub-Saharan Africa, particularly prior to the advent of food production, remains limited. Here we report genome-wide DNA data from four children—two of whom were buried approximately 8,000 years ago and two 3,000 years ago—from Shum Laka (Cameroon), one of the earliest known archaeological sites....However, the genome-wide ancestry profiles of all four individuals are most similar to those of present-day hunter-gatherers from western Central Africa, which implies that populations in western Cameroon today—as well as speakers of Bantu languages from across the continent—are not descended substantially from the population represented by these four people.

So some people are "surprised" by these results. That is despite the fact that Dr. C.A. Diop called this close to half a century ago! Notice how he also insist that Niger-Congo speakers came onto them from the East. Who is really going to be surprised when genetics begins to catch up with this? There is nothing new under the sun.

Ramond
05-18-2020, 12:18 AM
Apart from genetic or linguistic evidence, is there any solid evidence like archaeological ones which suggests that Bantus/Niger-Congo speakers have historical or cultural ties to ancient Egypt?

That was according to Dr. C.A. Diop perhaps the most convincing evidence. These graphics came from a guy on Facebook and IG who I've recently added.

https://scontent-atl3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/p960x960/93679852_3081225375261385_4853659420707520512_o.jp g?_nc_cat=109&_nc_sid=9e2e56&_nc_ohc=M9es9C0t3AAAX8uC_U0&_nc_ht=scontent-atl3-1.xx&_nc_tp=6&oh=06a0a339399c712cc34c5270bb6da78c&oe=5EDDDC79
https://scontent-atl3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/93597102_3064700190247237_3230783724148752384_n.jp g?_nc_cat=101&_nc_sid=110474&_nc_ohc=X02miePlqqYAX-dKfe7&_nc_ht=scontent-atl3-1.xx&oh=ced48c21952fd30b14c965253a94925a&oe=5EE92BA2
https://scontent-atl3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/p960x960/78271469_2755334884517104_8988598915318153216_o.jp g?_nc_cat=108&_nc_sid=2d5d41&_nc_ohc=eT5AVQyG5nMAX-9ITFr&_nc_ht=scontent-atl3-1.xx&_nc_tp=6&oh=4ffa04a68bf66e6f973c05e5aef799c4&oe=5ED9762A
https://scontent-atl3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/s960x960/95425118_3100069353376987_8593519691396284416_o.jp g?_nc_cat=110&_nc_sid=2d5d41&_nc_ohc=73FODeBzDwgAX-q9ShK&_nc_ht=scontent-atl3-1.xx&_nc_tp=7&oh=0a3a72f8e552eb598f58532e4a15dd34&oe=5EDAF6C5
https://scontent-atl3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/p960x960/95930566_3107712012612721_8883097407378685952_o.jp g?_nc_cat=107&_nc_sid=9e2e56&_nc_ohc=iOYv1RG6K3MAX8QyKoc&_nc_ht=scontent-atl3-1.xx&_nc_tp=6&oh=c796e92948005dd26785c4c3745f5100&oe=5EE8EF0E
https://scontent-atl3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/p960x960/46391127_2114286185288647_4859706189199441920_o.jp g?_nc_cat=110&_nc_sid=2d5d41&_nc_ohc=vbgPLBLkLUsAX8jl5n8&_nc_ht=scontent-atl3-1.xx&_nc_tp=6&oh=64942b47adb2faa793553b35e9e75b48&oe=5ED87760
https://scontent-atl3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/p960x960/95865083_3107712215946034_6845843648353927168_o.jp g?_nc_cat=103&_nc_sid=9e2e56&_nc_ohc=_my_ynBqVVkAX-GliHN&_nc_ht=scontent-atl3-1.xx&_nc_tp=6&oh=7565cd38a3b7195157d1c1bb23175273&oe=5EE7BD3C
https://scontent-atl3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/p960x960/94518698_3088948161155773_4038719299328671744_o.jp g?_nc_cat=108&_nc_sid=2d5d41&_nc_ohc=ldTb94RxK00AX9IiQZN&_nc_ht=scontent-atl3-1.xx&_nc_tp=6&oh=57d9fedf765301f5cabdae55d16521fe&oe=5EE6C27D
https://scontent-atl3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/s960x960/94112369_3076572605726662_3968679618365358080_o.jp g?_nc_cat=107&_nc_sid=2d5d41&_nc_ohc=4h31nNSZR80AX-mkH6H&_nc_ht=scontent-atl3-1.xx&_nc_tp=7&oh=45acb50b638ee8f48a3188353eb05242&oe=5EE594E7
https://scontent-atl3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/p960x960/94032775_3068742133176376_6461556053749268480_o.jp g?_nc_cat=109&_nc_sid=2d5d41&_nc_ohc=s0s26d_vnrYAX9EulHp&_nc_ht=scontent-atl3-1.xx&_nc_tp=6&oh=637561634943f90ab5fa28fb5a42c04b&oe=5EE73126
https://scontent-atl3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/81728566_2858943884156203_8875458279761772544_n.jp g?_nc_cat=107&_nc_sid=2d5d41&_nc_ohc=u4FXPyyRaMUAX-llU9r&_nc_ht=scontent-atl3-1.xx&oh=95d225f4e7b06fed3ba1635273493f97&oe=5ED74788
https://scontent-atl3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/98944827_3136919033025352_5518131573393719296_n.jp g?_nc_cat=100&_nc_sid=110474&_nc_ohc=N42aFOlsAxsAX9tF1Rk&_nc_ht=scontent-atl3-1.xx&oh=027e02605c58147338bbea08f520cfeb&oe=5EE7A0CC
https://scontent-atl3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/p960x960/97045150_3129639323753323_3773476236685213696_o.jp g?_nc_cat=109&_nc_sid=9e2e56&_nc_ohc=7vjoADjWbkAAX-gfSws&_nc_ht=scontent-atl3-1.xx&_nc_tp=6&oh=eace16617b335fdbcd2057b4f7a564b7&oe=5EE810EB
https://scontent-atl3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/93418438_3062198873830702_1157007105132068864_n.jp g?_nc_cat=105&_nc_sid=110474&_nc_ohc=ZSnonbNHezwAX9RFMR2&_nc_ht=scontent-atl3-1.xx&oh=2e7f24fb644bab55663226d58578f41d&oe=5EE70835
https://scontent-atl3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/p960x960/36628352_1920981381285796_6597569924187553792_o.jp g?_nc_cat=111&_nc_sid=8024bb&_nc_ohc=Xm0W4yPxOcMAX_j3G6d&_nc_ht=scontent-atl3-1.xx&_nc_tp=6&oh=a5669da557ade2f5a9730bc062a9ef19&oe=5ED9DBFF
https://scontent-atl3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/p960x960/94571865_3097691233614799_1694140568482873344_o.jp g?_nc_cat=107&_nc_sid=9e2e56&_nc_ohc=vwrKB9PXYsIAX_u4M_Y&_nc_ht=scontent-atl3-1.xx&_nc_tp=6&oh=353123edabad1cbd7faee46f216e23b3&oe=5EE6269E
https://scontent-atl3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/p960x960/95097824_3097691103614812_8767220645726519296_o.jp g?_nc_cat=107&_nc_sid=9e2e56&_nc_ohc=nmgix47siyEAX85v9Yb&_nc_ht=scontent-atl3-1.xx&_nc_tp=6&oh=6195212c5d8b0f22b0157717f817b753&oe=5EE89FDE

http://solarey.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/egyptian-bird-man.jpg

Yoruba oral tradition confirms a migration from Egypt

https://66.media.tumblr.com/606edc837c74d7a51fe40204f01a9a95/tumblr_pg1onveYEM1r9mz5f_540.jpg

Obvious African traditional practices came from Egypt like Voodoo.


https://newafrikan77.files.wordpress.com/2017/03/img_4810.jpg

"Palm Oil Offerings

Palm Oil/Epó Epo is Palm oil. It is derived from the fruit of the oil palms, primarily the African oil palm. Palm oil is not the same thing as palm kernal oil. Palm kernal oil is derived from the kernal of the same fruit and it is not the same color as palm oil because it does not have a high beat-carotene content like palm oil.

Palm oil is commonly used for spiritual purposes. To understand the nature of palm oil, one can simply observe its qualities. For instance, if one were to touch the surface of palm oil they could feel that it has a very smooth texture. This smooth texture is one of the key uses for palm oil in spiritual work. When offered to an energy or orisha that one is working with it is offered to assist with smoothing the road ahead, or smoothing transitions so that the road ahead is void of obstacles or unforeseen challenges that could arise.

Palm oil also had a red color which represents virility and swift action. Offering palm oil will assist with making one’s affirmed prayers to manifest much sooner than later. Palm oil is a common staple in a spirit worker’s medicine bag and is often used as offerings to most Lwa like Ogu/Ogou orisha including Esu and Ogun however it is not recommended to offer palm oil to Obatala.

ANCIENT EGYPTIAN MAGIC & RITUAL
__
Ancient Egyptian magic was part of religious and medical practices, as well as forms of personal voodoo. But before we get into details, we need to first define what we mean by magic."


I‘ve never read anything from prominent Egyptologists, absolute luminary on their field, that point to that.

Here is some context (https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13534640701267123?journalCode=tpar20) to this entire "dilemma" about ancient Egypt.


On the contrary. I'm a bit familiar with Diop and Keita unlike Obenga which I never heard of him. As far as I know both Diop and Keita are controversial scholars.

The National Geographic consulted with Keita on the Bio-Cultural origins of ancient Egypt. I don't think that a conservative publication like Nat Geo would consult a "controversial" figure on such a matter, and with him being the sole bio-geneticist at that.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V1T7Tu2v2Ic

C.A. Diop and Obenga turned heads back in 1974 UNESCO. It's been said that they proved that ancient Egypt was "black" in every category from biological research, linguistics, to the cultural comparison above (there are countless more btw) to sea a of white and some Arab researchers there. The only response that the other researchers had besides an absurd outburst from a modern "Egyptian" Arab was that "they came well prepared". Despite no evidence provided to the contrary they concluded that ancient Egypt was "mixed", not black but mixed (despite no evidence of another traditionally defined "racial" element). This obviously encouraged the "Afrocentric movement" of that era held strong until the mid to late 90's, and has made a resurgence since 2010.

passenger
05-18-2020, 01:12 AM
How do you come to that conclusion when Mboli's work in updating Negro-Egyptian was first published in 2010?



There is context behind that that's probably a little too strong for your taste , and I don't want me thread deviate into that.



Some of his views particularly on how contemporary Europeans came to are dated. The OP however, has helped to vindicate perhaps his most passionate one;


https://hosting.photobucket.com/images/u440/Treday90/Diop_Twa.png

see



Nature (2020)

Our knowledge of ancient human population structure in sub-Saharan Africa, particularly prior to the advent of food production, remains limited. Here we report genome-wide DNA data from four children—two of whom were buried approximately 8,000 years ago and two 3,000 years ago—from Shum Laka (Cameroon), one of the earliest known archaeological sites....However, the genome-wide ancestry profiles of all four individuals are most similar to those of present-day hunter-gatherers from western Central Africa, which implies that populations in western Cameroon today—as well as speakers of Bantu languages from across the continent—are not descended substantially from the population represented by these four people.

So some people are "surprised" by these results. That is despite the fact that Dr. C.A. Diop called this close to half a century ago! Notice how he also insist that Niger-Congo speakers came onto them from the East. Who is really going to be surprised when genetics begins to catch up with this? There is nothing new under the sun.

The fact that more people have recently built upon a faulty, ideologically driven theoretical edifice in no way contributes to the validity of the premise.

If you haven't, I strongly recommend that you read O'Connor and Reid's Ancient Egypt in Africa. Judging from some of your comments, you may dismiss it offhand as a product of "Western" scholarship, but it's really quite a lucid overview of some of the more promising routes to explore connections between Ancient Egypt and other parts of the continent, as well as the many ideologically driven fallacies produced by both eurocentric and afrocentric scholarship.

JerryS.
05-18-2020, 01:25 AM
what does the DNA say about this? I read something some time ago that the Egyptian pharaohs and over half of the [white] men in the UK or England share similar DNA.

ThaYamamoto
05-18-2020, 01:28 AM
Can I ask you Ramond, if you have any cultural link to the continent, or are you diaspora? You seem to know much 'about Africa' but little 'of Africa'. As both a NC speaker and conversational in a Nilotic language as well as an Afro-Asiatic one, cognates are aplenty but have little grounding in establishing a familial link. Grammar is the essence of comparative linguistics, I'm sure you know? Looking forward to your surely lengthy response!

Ramond
05-18-2020, 01:49 AM
what does the DNA say about this?

DNA evidence has been posted on pages two and three of this thread.


I read something some time ago that the Egyptian pharaohs and over half of the [white] men in the UK or England share similar DNA.

Here's a good write up on that misunderstanding;


"Unfortunately, people seem to have a very pernicious habit of making grand, sweeping claims about the ancient Egyptians’ supposed “race” based on extremely limited genetic evidence...

To give an especially ludicrous example of how genetic evidence has been distorted and misused, in August 2011, a Swiss personal genomics company called iGENEA claimed—supposedly based on an extremely small portion of Tutankhamun’s Y-chromosome DNA that was allegedly shown on screen in a Discovery Channel documentary—that Tutankhamun belonged to certain haplogroups that they claimed include more than half of all men in western Europe.

iGENEA’s already dubious claims became even more distorted and exaggerated in the press. The National Post ran an article with the headline “King Tut DNA more European than Egyptian.” The Daily Mail ran an article with the headline “We’ve got the same mummy! Up to 70% of British men are ‘related’ to the Egyptian Pharaoh Tutankhamun.”

Soon ordinary people who read these headlines were saying that a study had proven that the ancient Egyptians were ethnically western Europeans. The problem is that there wasn’t even a real genetic study at all; the whole story was born from a single genetics company claiming something about one pharaoh’s DNA based on what they thought was a portion of that pharaoh’s Y-chromosomal DNA that had been inadvertently shown on screen in a Discovery Channel documentary.

In fact, the actual researchers who had extracted and decoded Tutankhamun’s DNA denounced iGENEA’s conclusions, saying that the company had acted irresponsibly and unscientifically and that they had misinterpreted the data that had been shown on the screen in the Discovery Channel documentary. Carsten Putsch, one of the geneticists involved in the original project, told LiveScience that iGENEA’s conclusions were “simply impossible.”"

This claim has pumped the heads of so many Europeans, who suddenly (or maybe always) had the urge to claim ancient Egyptian kangz were most closely related to contemporary "Western European".

Ramond
05-18-2020, 01:52 AM
The fact that more people have recently built upon a faulty, ideologically driven theoretical edifice in no way contributes to the validity of the premise.

That is false. You nor anyone for that matter has provided refutation of Obenga's Negro-Egyptian, nor his student's work.


If you haven't, I strongly recommend that you read O'Connor and Reid's Ancient Egypt in Africa. Judging from some of your comments, you may dismiss it offhand as a product of "Western" scholarship, but it's really quite a lucid overview of some of the more promising routes to explore connections between Ancient Egypt and other parts of the continent, as well as the many ideologically driven fallacies produced by both eurocentric and afrocentric scholarship.

I'm familiar with that book, but thanks for the reference.

passenger
05-18-2020, 04:15 AM
That is false. You nor anyone for that matter has provided refutation of Obenga's Negro-Egyptian, nor his student's work.



I'm familiar with that book, but thanks for the reference.

I didn't think it was our job to refute Obenga's ideas, since supposedly that wasn't the topic of this thread, though to be honest I'm not sure what the point was to begin with. In the reference I posted, should you take the time to read it, you'll find MacDonald's article where, contemplating Diop's work, he entertains the notion that Afroasiatic speakers (coming from the Southeast, in his account) likely displaced speakers of an unknown language from the putative "Niger-Saharan macrophylum" (encompassing Niger-Congo and Nilo-Saharan languages) who previously inhabited the Nile Valley, yet MacDonald discounts the possibility of any genetic relationship between Afroasiatic and Niger-Congo beyond similarities arising from direct language contact in overlap zones, and sees no influence of Nilo-Saharan or Niger-Congo languages on Egyptian, and likely little to no influence going in the other direction (i.e. any Afroasiatic influence on the former is much more likely to be from contact with Berber or Chadic branches of Afroasiatic). I don't know anybody in the academic world, outside the Panafricanist inspired fringes, who takes the notion of a unified African language family seriously.

Ramond
05-18-2020, 05:56 AM
I didn't think it was our job to refute Obenga's ideas, since supposedly that wasn't the topic of this thread

Some folks responded to my referencing of Obenga's work with an emotional plea for me to disregard it. You were one of them. You don't have anything to warrant me or any of my peers to disregard "Negro-Egyptian". That being the case you simply don't need to speak on it, because you don't know anything about it. You only know the work of Western scholars, and seem to resort to logical fallacies (appeal to authority) in a vein refutation.


In the reference I posted, should you take the time to read it, you'll find MacDonald's article where, contemplating Diop's work, he entertains the notion that Afroasiatic speakers


Ole Mc'Donald's critique of Diop and Obenga is soured milk. His main points of critique come from a place of resentfulness at the fact that he has to admit that these Africans who were so assertive in the face of overt Eurocentrism were absolutely correct in their main points. These African scholars forced the mainstream to acknowledge Egypt's African origins. He's airing out his sour grapes. Just like how when Jack Johnson (the first black Heavy World Champion) beat Jefferies, and one angry white New York newspaper journalist told black people (during the time of public lynchings) not to see his victory as one for the black race (crazy (https://media.giphy.com/media/3HAYjfk9hasigrDVJRK/giphy.gif)).

It's that same type of insanity in MacDonald's book. He like all Eurocentrics hate the Pan African Egypt/diffusionist model that Diop asserts, because they invested so much of their energy since the 1820's trying to deAfricanize Egypt and subsequently dehumanize black people. Not much has changed in the last 200 years sadly. You have to insane if you expect for any informed African individual to care about them pouting when they have been doing nothing, but lying. There are entire studies about how much Eurocentrics lied about this subject.

None the less here are some soft reasons why he can be dismissed. This is not my own critique of the MacDonald, but just a subtle way of showing how easily that fake "liberal" trash can be discarded.


”Notice how the heavyweight mainstreamers above in the European academy
have come around to what Diop, van-Sertima and others have been saying
for years.. But they still use subtle distortions...

In the article "CHeikh Anta DIop and Egypt in Africa" Kevin MacDonald attempts to deconstruct Diop's work but emphasizing connections between Dynastic Egypt and the rest of Africa or "the African interior" while minimizing pr dodging the most important core of Diop's work. But McDonald's argument involves building up several strawman aspects:

1) Diop did not place heavy emphasis on "Inner Africa" and visible links with Dynastic Egypt. The lack of trade caravans or pyramid buildings flowing from Egypt to say Senegal is MARGINAL to Diop's overall work. Diop showed a DEEP AFRICAN CULTURAL SUBSTRATUM that extended from the Nle Valley across a vast belt of adjacent territories into the Sahara, East Africa and touching West Africa via the Sahara. Other scholars in the same book (O'connor, Wengrow etc) show just such deep linkages. Diop doesn't need Egyptian temples or boats around the Gulf of Guinea in West Africa to validate various aspects of his position. They already have been validated.

2) Why is "inner Africa" some sort of litmus test as to Diop, van Sertima or the concept of a deep African cultural sub-stratum in the Nile Valley? Few European scholars are going insinuating that since ancient Greek temples or language do not appear in ancient Sweden or Britain then that means Sweden or Britain are not part of European civilization or culture. They are ignorant of the what is actually out, as evident by what I posted on page 4 of this thread.

3) Why does "compelling cultural or material contact" with "Inner Africa" lying "beyond Nubia" serve as some sort of validator of Diop or "Afrocentric" work? What's wrong with areas NEAR to Egypt showing the deep-rooted African cultural patterns and commonalities? Since when is "beyond Nubia" a point of validation? How come the same litmus test is seldom applied to say European peoples like Greeks to validate common patterns based on the Mediterranean basin in agriculture, culture, material artifacts and so on? The ancient Greeks had the greatest impact in areas comparatively CLOSE TO Greece- North Africa, Anatolia, Italy and the Balkans. Unlike the more land-based Egyptians, their islands were more sea-based and thus it was natural for them to use the broad seafaring belt of the Mediterranean to facilitate that influence. Even so, the bulk of their ancient impact was in that general Medit zone. Few people are going around saying that the Greeks should show temples in ancient France to "prove" they are European, or that the ancient peoples of Gaul should likewise be huddling around such temples as "proof" they also are European.

4) MacDonald purports to be "critiquing" Diop but in fact he avoids the central underpinning of Diop's approach- the African character of the ancient Egyptians. Macdonald dodges this to focus on a tangent- links between dynastic Egypt and "inner" Africa as if that encompasses some sort of "litmus test" of Diop's work.

5) Numerous African areas near to Egypt and sharing culture material and population with Egypt- the Sahara, etc are also "SUB-SAHARAN" OR lie within the tropical zone. Indeed, almost one-sixth of Egypt lies within the tropical zone which for all practical purposes extends even further north (Thompson 1997- Applied Climatology). The peoples therein are tropical Africans, or came from "sub-Saharan Africa in the early era. Trying to play some sort of "geographic apartheid" game where lack of pyramids in Ghana is insinuated to conjure a vast segregation of the Nile Valley from "interior Africa" is a dubious ploy. The Sahara was always a moving target- and donated people and culture to vast swathes of the continent including West Africa.

And yes, pyramids do appear in "sub-Saharan" Africa in the greater Meroe complex - including Naqa and Musawwarat es Sufra part of a cultural region extending into Egypt from the Sudan over the centuries. The move of the desert southwards over decades has obscured the fact that numerous so-called "sub-Saharan" peoples were once well represented far to the north. They do not suddenly become "Eurasian" because the desert continues to move south at various cycles or speeds.”


Again that is a soft response to his main points not my own.


likely displaced speakers of an unknown language from the putative "Niger-Saharan macrophylum" (encompassing Niger-Congo and Nilo-Saharan languages) who previously inhabited the Nile Valley, yet MacDonald discounts the possibility of any genetic relationship between Afroasiatic and Niger-Congo beyond similarities arising from direct language contact in overlap zones, and sees no influence of Nilo-Saharan or Niger-Congo languages on Egyptian

This conjecture from 20 years ago, has been nullified when Mboli has since reconstructed Negro-Egyptian....

http://www.asarimhotep.com/images/stories/random/migration_branch_bere.jpg

Afro-Asiatic has never been reconstructed (nor NC, NS, nor Khoisan), and this along with other reasons is why Obenga has long called "Afro-Asiatic" a Western myth meant to push silly ideology. Mboli built on NE by giving the same criticism and essentially dismantling the other African language families.

Here excerpt from Language Classification: History and Method (2008) by Campbell and Poser:


https://img.photobucket.com/albums/u440/Treday90/Afro%20Asiatic%20fake_zpsiwjlvlig.png


I don't know anybody in the academic world, outside the Panafricanist inspired fringes, who takes the notion of a unified African language family seriously.

That is called a logical fallacy. It in no way discredits them for that reason....

Espoir
05-18-2020, 07:42 AM
Let’s remember that some E-M2 are indigenous to North Africa. They are a consequence of desertification of the last green Sahara. link here. (https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13059-018-1393-5#Fig3)
I would confidently assume that these pharaoh carrying E-M2 have nothing to do with Bantu or West Africans.

Ramond
05-18-2020, 08:26 AM
Let’s remember that some E-M2 are indigenous to North Africa.

That is incorrect.

"The topology and geographic distribution (Additional file 2: Figures S3 and S4) of both A3-M13 and E-M2 suggest that these lineages were brought to the Sahara from the southern regions, while E-M78 and R-V88 seem to have followed the opposite route."

This comes form the very link that you just sent me.

here (https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13059-018-1393-5#Fig3)


I would confidently assume that these pharaoh carrying E-M2 have nothing to do with Bantu or West Africans.

I can confidently guess that you are incorrect on your assumption again...

Espoir
05-18-2020, 09:58 AM
That is incorrect.


"The topology and geographic distribution (Additional file 2: Figures S3 and S4) of both A3-M13 and E-M2 suggest that these lineages were brought to the Sahara from the southern regions, while E-M78 and R-V88 seem to have followed the opposite route."
That doesn’t make them any less North African. Hope you understand these specific lineages are only found in North Africa. SSA has its own E-M2 subclades.


This comes form the very link that you just sent me.

here (https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13059-018-1393-5#Fig3)



I can confidently guess that you are incorrect on your assumption again...
Ok

passenger
05-18-2020, 03:22 PM
Some folks responded to my referencing of Obenga's work with an emotional plea for me to disregard it. You were one of them. You don't have anything to warrant me or any of my peers to disregard "Negro-Egyptian". That being the case you simply don't need to speak on it, because you don't know anything about it. You only know the work of Western scholars, and seem to resort to logical fallacies (appeal to authority) in a vein refutation.

You seem to be the most emotionally invested in this argument. I am a historian, with a B.A. and an M.A. in African History from Western institutions (which, by the way also host African scholars - it's not an "either/or" situation), but I am not an expert in African linguistics, so I can only rely on the most commonly accepted models. You'll forgive me for not wanting to undermine the epistemological authority of "Western" academia on the basis of charges of eurocentrism. I have absolutely no personal agenda in terms of supporting or not supporting a unified African language family, except that it has not yet gained any traction. As you rightly point out, the fact that a model is not (yet) accepted by mainstream academia does not necessarily invalidate it. However, as I have neither the necessary background or interest to engage directly with the linguistic studies, I will defer to my academic peers for the time being.

It makes no difference to me whether or not the currently accepted models for African language families prove to be valid, or whether there ultimately proves to be some underlying "super-family" of African languages. What does bother me is people who, not being experts in the field, take as their point of departure the ideological mission to prove - in some sort of pissing contest of civilizational superiority - that there must be some Pan-African supercivilization, ultimately linguistically, genetically or otherwise culturally united, with Ancient Egypt as its ultimate expression, and who automatically disqualify competing theories (i.e. the vast majority of published literature on the subject) as the product of some Western master plan to rob Africa of its civilizational greatness. This obsession with proving African unity and tying it to Egypt does not do any favors to Africa - the most culturally diverse continent on the planet. The richness of Yoruba culture (just to take an example) does not depend on it being tied to the richness of Ancient Aksum or Great Zimbabwe or Ancient Egypt.

Go ahead and post one of your overly lengthy responses, undoubtedly accusing me this time of creating a straw-man argument and denying any ideological bias on your part. I'll bow out of this discussion because I have nothing more to say. African linguistics and genetics are not my fields, so I cannot discuss those topics in their individual right, and I also refuse to do so within the context of a discussion whose basis is to use a superficial reading of those fields as auxiliary supports to an ideologically-driven unified Africa theory.

ThaYamamoto
05-18-2020, 04:21 PM
.....................

Ramond
05-18-2020, 06:15 PM
You seem to be the most emotionally invested in this argument.

How? It is because I told you not to speak (and specifically attempt to denounce) on something that you are not familiar with?


I am a historian, with a B.A. and an M.A. in African History from Western institutions (which, by the way also host African scholars - it's not an "either/or" situation), but I am not an expert in African linguistics

Congratulations! During the African history segment of the semester I ran my Western Civ. professor out of the class room when he tried to assert that Egypt was a product of the Near East. It was not through constant classroom disruption either, but he promised members of the course time between break or right after class to openly discuss any discrepancies in the lesson plan with prior notice via email. I gave him a small taste of recreational knowledge, and he didn't want that work lol.


You'll forgive me for not wanting to undermine the epistemological authority of "Western" academia on the basis of charges of eurocentrism.

You must not be familiar with the fact that much of Western academia is based on the notion of white supremacy. The imprint of white supremacy in Western academia can be seen in the claim by the West that no other group of people except for white Europeans had the technological and mental capacity (which all came from the African Moors ironically) to conduct a transatlantic or Pacific voyage to the Americas. The Native Americans therefore must have crossed the bearing straight's temporary land bridge. The fact that tumbles that claim over is the finding of Luzia (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7JEAMzJDyZs&feature=emb_title), a "Negroid" type from the Pacific islands being the first type of American. In the case of Africa coming into the continent, and imposing on the people a theory called the Bantu migration from Cameroon, which essentially was put in place to imply or blatantly make the claim that Africans in this sub-region have always been in the place that they first came into contact with them. The goal of this theory was to support the white supremacist lie these "Sub Saharan" (Eurocentrics alone completely made that racial euphemism up) Africans were stationary, and confined to this sub region. This along with so many other Eurocentric lies have been weaponized with the ultimate goal to deny the Africanity of the greatest civilization in World history. Black skinned Africans were the first people to circumnavigate the globe, but you won't hear that very common sense fact in any mainstream history book. Despite the fact that black Africans were in every corner of the Earth before non black people existed, you have non black people who will call us "Afrocentric" for asserting that blacks were on "their land" (pause) first (a proven fact). You certainly cannot assert that those pre-existing blacks had brought a culture into whatever region of Earth either without a huge pout from non blacks. In the last 200 years White supremacy has dominated the minds of not only white people, but people all over the World who now aspire to be white (even some pitch Africans).


I have absolutely no personal agenda in terms of supporting or not supporting a unified African language family, except that it has not yet gained any traction.

I don't know about that. In this thread you appear to be the vanguard for an old Western racially based paradigm. NE has been gaining traction since it's inception. The difference between Obenga's NE and "mainstream" linguistic theories, is that one is pushed with the vast resources of Western Academia. It doesn't invalidate NE, simply because it has not yet had to exposure to that other theories have had.


What does bother me is people who, not being experts in the field, take as their point of departure the ideological mission to prove - in some sort of pissing contest of civilizational superiority

Who is not an "expert" in their fields?

Dr. Diop?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FYk8cm_aREA

Professor Obenga?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BtQIpJM9s38&list=PLxKO10Cd0wLeeLbJqVk2YSvZfLgMlkbgP&index=3

Mboli?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rhl7kBMpDFA&t=7s

Who are you referring to? It cannot be me for simply relaying the information from these African scholars on African history. Does it also need to be pointed out to some people that all of these scholars claiming ancient Egypt as Pan African are themselves Africans, not African Americans?


- that there must be some Pan-African supercivilization, ultimately linguistically, genetically or otherwise culturally united, with Ancient Egypt as its ultimate expression, and who automatically disqualify competing theories (i.e. the vast majority of published literature on the subject) as the product of some Western master plan to rob Africa of its civilizational greatness.

Context is your enemy here sir....

https://www.tandfonline.com/na101/home/literatum/publisher/tandf/journals/content/tpar20/2007/tpar20.v013.i02/13534640701267123/production/13534640701267123.fp.png_v03
https://s15.postimg.cc/3r8tog9cr/hume_KEY.jpg
https://s15.postimg.cc/3nf0873vf/hume10.jpg
https://s15.postimg.cc/iw4xm72rf/hume6.jpg
https://s15.postimg.cc/bsx26s7ob/hume9.jpg

You tried to speak in a condescending way that's reminiscent of the old "the man" is out to get blacks notion (as though (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCyYSQLAEFk) they weren't). You speak as though white supremacy has not been the backbone of Western academia, since the 1800's. Western academia is so committed to maintaining notions of white supremacy that in the 1900's white scholars came together to call a skeleton forged by them with monkey bones the oldest human remains on Earth found "in Europe", for the sake of denying that humanity originate in Africa. This is called the Piltdown man tragedy.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IiJQN8gjFAs&feature=emb_title

From that point forward why on Earth would any black person with dignity take what Western academia says at face value? You all got caught red handed falsifying and weaponizing your "sciences" for the sake of promoting white supremacy. Western academia has absolutely been the "boogey man" out to defame black history for the purposes of justifying the World's most profitable industry at the time (cotton) which was fueled by the free labor of enslaved Africans, and white supremacy. The purpose of Western institutions investing so much of their resources into these lies about black African "Sub Saharan achievement" (say that phrase with an aristocratic slave holding Virginian or British ascent) was to justify the dehumanization of black Africans for their own wicked gluttony. After the end of American slavery, then many Western nobles began to try to use those same lies to justify their Eugenic views that they now center around IQ. The irony is that the Eugenic minded folk to this day completely disregard the widely known, and very recent "humble origins (https://img.photobucket.com/albums/u440/Treday90/1zlb3er_zpsbuxtv0l1.jpg)" of "Caucasians". Case and point you cannot have this discussion while trying to avoid the factor white supremacy in the camp that you are defending.


This obsession with proving African unity and tying it to Egypt does not do any favors to Africa - the most culturally diverse continent on the planet. The richness of Yoruba culture (just to take an example) does not depend on it being tied to the richness of Ancient Aksum or Great Zimbabwe or Ancient Egypt.

You're really missing the point here. Diop and several other contemporary and successive scholars have went above and beyond in their proof in their assertion that Egypt was a Pan African civilization. The Ancient Egyptian language was essentially a Lingua Franca, used as median of communication between the "culturally" and genetically diverse black Africans who comprised the civilization. The Afro-Asiatic nonsense is nothing more than Western academia's vein attempt to keep the Hamitic Hypothesis alive, in the assertion that only the "Cushitic-like" Africans had something to do with ancient Northeast African civilizations. That's why Obenga called the category "ideological" nonsense. When the West collectively matures enough to accept that they've acting juvenile in maintaining said lies then perhaps there can be some true progression in overall knowledge of these ancient sites.

That being said, the ancient Greeks, Diop and other scholars (and many many many African oral traditions) asserts that there were migrations from ancient Egypt, following the invasion of Kemet ("the black land") by Asiatic Persians;


"personal library and his own direct knowledge of the Ashantis, wrote An Essay on the Superstitions, Customs, and Arts, Common to the Ancient Egyptians, Abyssinians, and Ashantees, in which he argued that Egyptian civilization was diffused via Ethiopia to the West Coast of Africa." -Black Skin, White Skulls: The Nineteenth Century Debate over the Racial Identity of the Ancient Egyptians

https://scontent-atl3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/p960x960/69369132_2582402921810302_8353599493937037312_o.jp g?_nc_cat=108&_nc_sid=2d5d41&_nc_ohc=TyZBSovqBYQAX_HjsCi&_nc_ht=scontent-atl3-1.xx&_nc_tp=6&oh=9ccc23ccb18ca8de8ed28d9f9133ee86&oe=5ED9A46B
https://scontent-atl3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/p960x960/83168652_2858944320822826_1598551063378526208_o.jp g?_nc_cat=103&_nc_sid=2d5d41&_nc_ohc=FLNl0N98Om0AX96xMDj&_nc_ht=scontent-atl3-1.xx&_nc_tp=6&oh=f13f7eb9e263e4919024b2c8ea219b32&oe=5ECA86DC


Now you talk about these ancient "Sub Saharan" civilization that we should be proud of (and we are), and that we should for no given reason ignore ancient Egypt. It must have never occurred to you that "Sub Saharan Africa" was the genesis that followed the Asiatic - European destruction of ancient Egypt.


https://img.photobucket.com/albums/u440/Treday90/wvx10n_zpsyvxg5yex.jpg
https://img.photobucket.com/albums/u440/Treday90/eg1jbm_zpsataqfizd.gif

The book "Destruction of Black Civilization" discusses in length the refugee migrations from Egypt and Nubia into and throughout inner Africa, following these non African invasions. That book may be a bit too spicy for your stomach however.


Go ahead and post one of your overly lengthy responses, undoubtedly accusing me this time of creating a straw-man argument and denying any ideological bias on your part.

Oh no no no no...Don't try to cop out now! You wanted the smoke, and got some of it. There is plenty more where that came from.

JerryS.
05-18-2020, 06:18 PM
.....................

I understand you not wanting to hurt anyone's feelings, but I read what you wrote and believed it to be well thought out. I can see how it could translate in part to other ethnic diaspora groups, particularly those of mass exodus from Europe that came to America a little over 100 years ago... Thank you.

Brandon S. Pilcher
05-18-2020, 07:36 PM
Now you talk about these ancient "Sub Saharan" civilization that we should be proud of (and we are), and that we should for no given reason ignore ancient Egypt. It must have never occurred to you that "Sub Saharan Africa" was the genesis that followed the Asiatic - European destruction of ancient Egypt.


https://img.photobucket.com/albums/u440/Treday90/wvx10n_zpsyvxg5yex.jpg
https://img.photobucket.com/albums/u440/Treday90/eg1jbm_zpsataqfizd.gif

The book "Destruction of Black Civilization" discusses in length the refugee migrations from Egypt and Nubia into and throughout inner Africa, following these non African invasions. That book may be a bit too spicy for your stomach however.
I do see ancient Egypt as a fundamentally native African civilization, which would make me arguably "Afrocentric". Yet I can't agree with your narrative that most Africans across the continent are ultimately descended from pharaonic Egyptian refugees. That's at least as improbable as claiming everyone in Europe is descended from classical Greeks or imperial Romans. IMO, it's more likely that any cultural overlap between ancient Egypt and all the different sub-Saharan cultures can be attributed to a) influences flowing up and down the Nile corridor and b) different African populations coming into contact with one another in the Sahara during its wetter "grassland" phases.

Where in the book you cite is the evidence that most Africans today are descended from pharaonic Egyptians? Moreover, how do you square that with all the evidence that extant African populations are the most genetically diverse in the whole world? They're much more diverse than we would expect if their ancestors all dispersed from one small corner of Africa within the last 3,000 years.

passenger
05-18-2020, 07:49 PM
A reading of Tunde Adeleke's The Case against Afrocentrism would be useful here.

Ramond
05-18-2020, 08:16 PM
That doesn’t make them any less North African.

??? So it originated in "Sub Saharan Africa", and was only brought into the Sahara during the fertile period (according to your source). Despite that it's still "North African" according to you, and that is despite it being the most dominant paternal marker in "Sub Saharan Africa".

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/u440/Treday90/23r9tt5_zpscdxxxagq.jpg

Not sure about that one.


SSA has its own E-M2 subclades.

That's geographic semantics. "Sub Saharan Africa" defines the M2 lineage.

Ramond
05-18-2020, 08:37 PM
I do see ancient Egypt as a fundamentally native African civilization, which would make me arguably "Afrocentric".

That does not make you an "Afrocentric".


Yet I can't agree with your narrative that most Africans across the continent are ultimately descended from pharaonic Egyptian refugees.

That is a weak strawman argument.


That's at least as improbable as claiming everyone in Europe is descended from classical Greeks or imperial Romans. IMO, it's more likely that any cultural overlap between ancient Egypt and all the different sub-Saharan cultures can be attributed to a) influences flowing up and down the Nile corridor and b) different African populations coming into contact with one another in the Sahara during its wetter "grassland" phases.

That is a possibility. There is however no evidence of Ausarian/Osiris being worshiped in the ancient Sahara. Those cultural traditions are specific characteristic of Nile Valley civilization from the information that we have at hand.

https://www.touregypt.net/images/stories/crooksandflails10.jpg
Ausar's Crock and Flail

https://historum.com/proxy.php?image=https%3A%2F%2Fs-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com%2Foriginals%2F1b%2F91%2Fa7%2F1b91a7 b301355c6937618e36a15e8ed7.jpg&hash=42c1564e36ce9b6c435f774885d82f4b
The Nok's "Seated Dignitaries" Crock on his arm

https://historum.com/proxy.php?image=https%3A%2F%2Foi1067.photobucket.c om%2Falbums%2Fu440%2FTreday90%2FKemet%2520Yoruba_z ps9yue8pig.jpg&hash=43fe55033a36c8d66a4d1e074a94e285

We're not talking about general agricultural practices that could have dispersed in all directions from the Sahara. We are talking about cultural phenomenons that are only observed in Nile Valley civilization (Nubia was the first, and the cradle of the "blacks" according to C. Williams and even for what it's worth the Bible) also apparent throughout "Sub Saharan Africa".


Where in the book you cite is the evidence that most Africans today are descended from pharaonic Egyptians?


That is a strawman. The constant resorting to logical fallacies never fails, with some crowds. They cannot refute the actual argument given so you have to build up some BS to attribute to me or my sources.


Moreover, how do you square that with all the evidence that extant African populations are the most genetically diverse in the whole world? They're much more diverse than we would expect if their ancestors all dispersed from one small corner of Africa within the last 3,000 years.

What does that have to do with anything? Didn't S.O.Y. Keita already preach on Nat Geo that ancient Northeast Africa where Egypt was wholly borne out of was a genetically and physically diverse place? Sub Saharan Africa is the most genetically diverse region on Earth also, despite all of it's native inhabitants being black Africans. Therefore what are you trying to say?

Ramond
05-18-2020, 08:41 PM
A reading of Tunde Adeleke's The Case against Afrocentrism would be useful here.

Never seen it recommended in any of my circles, so I'm good. It may make you feel good however..

Question if you don't mind me asking. You seem to be somewhat familiar with C.A. Diop's work. What do you think about his chapter in which he discusses the conflict between the white Sea Peoples, and Ramses III's black African army?

passenger
05-18-2020, 08:51 PM
Never seen it recommended in any of my circles, so I'm good. It may make you feel good however..

Lol. Of course it wouldn't be recommended within any of your circles. It deconstructs the history of Afrocentric discourses, particularly among African Americans, explaining the deeply problematic underpinnings of an ideology that seeks to reclaim Africa's place in history by replicating a mirror image of the very 19th and 20th century eurocentrism it seeks to refute - not unlike Kwame Anthony Appiah argued earlier (and was of course disowned by Afrocentrists). Among other things, it delves into the reasons why Egyptocentric mythology emerged in Black supremacist circles. But I'm sure you only appreciate African or diasporan authors that reaffirm your worldview and dismiss the rest as mentally colonized traitors.

Brandon S. Pilcher
05-18-2020, 09:00 PM
That is a weak strawman argument.
So what am I supposed to think when you say that "'sub Saharan Africa' was the genesis that followed the Asiatic/European destruction of ancient Egypt" and post graphics like the following?
https://img.photobucket.com/albums/u440/Treday90/wvx10n_zpsyvxg5yex.jpg
Because that does make it sound like you're proposing ancient Egypt to be ancestral to most Africans.

Ramond
05-18-2020, 09:05 PM
Lol. Of course it wouldn't be recommended within any of your circles. It deconstructs the history of Afrocentric discourses, particularly among African Americans, explaining the deeply problematic underpinnings of an ideology that seeks to reclaim Africa's place in history by replicating a mirror image of the very 19th and 20th century eurocentrism it seeks to refute - not unlike Kwame Anthony Appiah argued earlier (and was of course disowned by Afrocentrists). Among other things, it delves into the reasons why Egyptocentric mythology emerged in Black supremacist circles. But I'm sure you only appreciate African or diasporan authors that reaffirm your worldview and dismiss the rest as mentally colonized traitors.

Sounds familiar;

https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51fokMpsM6L._SX331_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg

I love this "Afrocentric"'s critique of that book;




"Howe does not know what his talking about. Afrocentrism is a social science, based on the Ancient Model of history.

Howe fails to fulfill the anxious expectations of many readers of his book who had hoped his work would be balanced and situated on the evidence. Howe see the study of ancient Afrocentric historical themes as a tradition of dissent rather than a field of study with its own tradition of normal science.

Howe without supporting evidence devalues ancient Afrocentric historical education. Moreover, the most exasperating aspect of his writing is that it uses Bernal's Black Athena, as an Afrocentric history text, and then proceeds to use criticism of this work to "disconfirm" the Afrocentric ancient history discipline.

In the africalogical social sciences, researchers look at the history and society of African people from an African centered or Afrocentric perspective. The Afrocentrist connects Africans in America and elsewhere to thousands of years of history and civilization.

There are three problems with Howe’s book. These problems are 1) the failure to discuss the research of Afrocentric scholars critically; 2) presenting the Afrocentric study of ancient history as a recent development ; and 3) the major reason proffered for their attacks on Afrocentrism is that the “academy” rejects the discipline.

Howe fails to proffer and outline the major Afrocentric ancient history text. Afrocentric scholars make hundreds of detailed archaeological, historical and linguistic claims, which have not been systematically refuted or discussed by the author. The fact that Howe ignore the historical research of the Afrocentric makes it clear hos work is a book of fiction.

Howe admits that his book was written to defend the modern research university from dissenting voices to “establishment” claims of American intellectuals. The real objective of the books is not a search for a “true” vision of history, or a review of the evidence presented by Afrocentrists supporting their historical claims.

Howe acknowledges the long history of Afrocentric research and provides his readers with a series of negative comments made by critics of Chiek Anta Diop without any concern with checking their accuracy. Then in the next breathe Howe explains that much of the work of Afrocentric scholars like Chiek Anta Diop, cross so many disciplines that he is unable to expertly assess the Afrocentric initiatives/propositions of ancient Afrocentric history. And as a result, he cannot grasp the impressive synthesis of scholarship found in the work of Afrocentric scholars.


This admission negates Howe’s basic premise that Afrocentric research is “untrustworthy”, his lack of expertise in the cross-disciplinary procedures of the Afrocentric scholars makes it clear that he is unable to expertly assess and evaluate the initiatives/propositions of ancient Afrocentric history. Consequently, he cannot grasp the impressive synthesis of scholarship found in the works of Afrocentric scholars.

Howe claims that Afrocentric history is reverse-racism because Afrocentric researchers have used the classical, historical , anthropological and linguistic literature to illustrate the African/Black origin of many of the River Valley and Grecian civilizations (p.48). Yet he fails to provide crucial examples of the falsification of sources by Afrocentric scholars to illegitimately support their Afrocentric claims. This makes the claims of Howe irrelevant and groundless.

Howe’s interpretations of Afrocentric researchers are contradictory and confusing. For example, on the one hand he claims that Dubois’ book the The Negro , “overall, his account avoided the sensationalism and special pleading, being a solid reflection of the state of knowledge at that time” (p.52), and therefore acceptable to the “academy”, yet in general DuBois’ work is romantic.

How can a work be both factual and “romantic”. Clearly, Howe’s opinion about DuBois’ work is based more on his personal bias rather than evidence.

Howe asks us to reject Afrocentric research based on “authority”, the idea that if members of the establishment reject this proposition everyone should reject it.

He makes a number of claims about the inadequacy of the ancient Afrocentric historical memory, but he does not provide critical analysis of the historical claims he disputes. For example, Howe claims that Diop failed to prove his connections between West Africa and Egypt eventhough, Diop provides a 200-page lexicon of cognate Wolof-Egyptian terms.

Howe wrote that:”The basic flaw [ of Parente genetique ]is that in order to trace the history of Languages, to identify shared roots, patterns of evolution and divergence, it is entirely inadequate simply to list similar-sounding or possibly related terms
in different languages“ (p.178).

http://www.ankhonline.com/cad_parente_genet_couv.gif

This would seem to be a reasonable analysis of one of Diop’s major works. But anyone who has actually read Parente genetique de l’egyptien pharanique et des langues negro-africaines, knows that Diop spent the first 200 plus pages of this book discussing in detail the grammatical and structural affinities of Egyptian and African languages. The failure of Howe to discuss this fact leads one to assume that he purposely avoids mentioning this fact so as to imply that Diop was an incompetent scholar.

A major component of Eurocentrism is the notion of African-American intellectual inferiority. As a result, European scholars can write and research the history of any people on earth. Afro-Americans and Africans on the otherhand, are believed to lack the intellectual capacity to research, let alone write ancient and world history.

Due to the alleged intellectual inferiority of Africans it is believed that they are unsuited to write ancient history, international affairs, or archaeology. This may result from several factors especially racial bias and social position. These factors are important ,because of the fact that formerly persons writing ancient history themes usually came from well-to-do or middle-class families that could provide them with the capital to undertake research activities abroad. This belief has ghettoized many African American scholars and authors , to writing only about slavery, the slave trade and/or the cycle of poverty typified by life in the urban centers of the United States.

Little has changed in the past 100 years, Howe asserts that Afro-Americans should reframe from writing about ancient history because “their ideas, like cultural nationalism in general, quite simply have nothing at all to say about the most central problem facing Afro-Americans: the conditions of economic marginality, insecurity and underprivileged under which most of them exist” (p.14). It is obvious from this statement that establishment historians wish to constrain the intellectual inquiry of Afro-American scholars.

Howe’s major contribution to the study of ancient Afrocentrism is criticism of Diop’s use of dated references in many of his works. But this criticism is nebulas because nowhere in Afrocentrism does Howe disconfirm the sources used by Chiek Anta Diop. The failure to disconfirm the research of Chiek Anta Diop and the other Afrocentric scholars mentioned in his book makes Howe's book Afrocentrism deeply flawed.

In conclusion, the basic function of Howe's work is to silence heterodox voices in the writing of history, without any argument or hypothesis testing. Science relies on observation and hypothesis testing, not rational thought alone. Howe's use of logic solely, to deny the Afrocentric ancient historical memory is unacceptable because the personality, tradition, values and habitual methods of thinking of Eurocentrists and their lackeys can taint the expectations of these historians."

I'm holding up a big black fist with a kufi on for this "Afrocentric" scholar who shut down that Eurocentric mess.

Ramond
05-18-2020, 09:09 PM
So what am I supposed to think when you say that "'sub Saharan Africa' was the genesis that followed the Asiatic/European destruction of ancient Egypt" and post graphics like the following?

It's a blanket statement to say "most". I would only use "most" when it comes to ancient Nubia, which was the original civilization and the one of the main dispersal points around the Meroetic period.


Because that does make it sound like you're proposing ancient Egypt to be ancestral to most Africans.

You're just not that informed on the context of this argument. If you need clarity then say so.

passenger
05-18-2020, 09:20 PM
The "Ancient Model of History"? Seriously? :rolleyes: And once again you're replying to my posts using book reviews of books that I didn't even mention, and by Afrocentrists no less. I said it before, but now I'm really done with this self-indulgent blather.

Ramond
05-18-2020, 09:41 PM
The "Ancient Model of History"? Seriously? :rolleyes: And once again you're replying to my posts using book reviews of books that I didn't even mention, and by Afrocentrists no less. I said it before, but now I'm really done with this self-indulgent blather.

All of those anti “Afrocentric” books have the same weak talking points. Even the “reverse racism”/“Black supremacist” nonsense is the essentially the same. You’ve seen one critic you’ve seen them all. That response definitely applied. You were better off citing Mary Lefkowitz.

Espoir
05-18-2020, 10:11 PM
??? So it originated in "Sub Saharan Africa", and was only brought into the Sahara during the fertile period (according to your source). Despite that it's still "North African" according to you, and that is despite it being the most dominant paternal marker in "Sub Saharan Africa".

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/u440/Treday90/23r9tt5_zpscdxxxagq.jpg

Not sure about that one.



That's geographic semantics. "Sub Saharan Africa" defines the M2 lineage.

I think you have an issue understanding me.
Let me quote the study.

However, we found clues as to the role of the last Green Sahara considering the phylogeography of the E-M2 sub-clades in northern Africa. The coalescence age of the lineages harbouring northern and sub-Saharan chromosomes predates the onset of the arid conditions, falling between 11.03 kya (coalescence age of E-Page66) and 4.49 kya (the time estimate of the most recent clade harbouring a relevant proportion of northern African samples, i.e. E-V5280), during the last Green Sahara. After this time frame, we observed clades restricted to the north or to the south of the Sahara. In this context, although the large majority of the geographically restricted lineages come from sub-Saharan regions, we also found two northern African-specific clades, namely E-V5001and E-V4990 . E-V5001 has only been found in Egypt, is one of the sister clades within the E-M4727 multifurcation and coalesced at 3.88 kya. E-V4990 is a Moroccan clade dated to < 4.49 kya (the time estimate of the upstream node). Interestingly, it is the terminal branch of a nested topology, which divides western Africa from Morocco.

Hope you learn something from here. Next time you see E-M2 in North Africa, look for a specific subclade to know for sure if it is SSA or North African.

Jammies
05-18-2020, 10:33 PM
So what am I supposed to think when you say that "'sub Saharan Africa' was the genesis that followed the Asiatic/European destruction of ancient Egypt" and post graphics like the following?

Because that does make it sound like you're proposing ancient Egypt to be ancestral to most Africans.

If this is not what he is proposing (ie. a straw man), then OP, what are you proposing?

ThaYamamoto
05-18-2020, 11:10 PM
I understand you not wanting to hurt anyone's feelings, but I read what you wrote and believed it to be well thought out. I can see how it could translate in part to other ethnic diaspora groups, particularly those of mass exodus from Europe that came to America a little over 100 years ago... Thank you.

Thanks..I just felt like it was irresponsible in a way. And yeah, I didn't want to hurt any feelings...truly I feel very strongly for the diaspora and those who, once in the West, cling to Afrocentric ideals..I understand where it comes from, a place of pain - also I don't really like to share how much of the colonial observations were true - there is enough discrimination already without providing information for people to make things even worse. Ultimately, time will tell all, and most importantly, time heals all wounds. Appreciate you though. Unfortunately I didn't write a draft so its gone forever lol.

Ramond
06-09-2020, 05:16 AM
Hope you learn something from here. Next time you see E-M2 in North Africa, look for a specific subclade to know for sure if it is SSA or North African.

There must have been a slight misunderstanding. You never mentioned anything about "subclades" you stated the whole of "E-M2".

Espoir - "Let’s remember that some E-M2 are indigenous to North Africa."


link (https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?20298-No-Bantus-or-Niger-Congo-In-Cameroon&p=667334&viewfull=1#post667334)

The source that you presented directly refuted your own claim. No mentioning of subclades is shown in your initial claims.

Espoir
06-12-2020, 10:52 PM
There must have been a slight misunderstanding. You never mentioned anything about "subclades" you stated the whole of "E-M2".

Espoir - "Let’s remember that some E-M2 are indigenous to North Africa."


link (https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?20298-No-Bantus-or-Niger-Congo-In-Cameroon&p=667334&viewfull=1#post667334)

The source that you presented directly refuted your own claim. No mentioning of subclades is shown in your initial claims.
Ok! I should have said some E-M2 subclades for u to understand . And I’m glad we settle on that.

Brwn_trd
06-14-2020, 06:30 PM
The history of bantu peoples prior to the iron age is shrouded in mystery. They seemingly appear out of nowhere with a fully developed cultural toolkit. This shows we are missing a lot of information to connect the dots. Indications are that this was a small isolated population in west africa prior to the rapid expansion that reshaped the genetic character of the rest of the continent. Linguistic and genetic evidence points to origins in the vicinity of of the river systems of Guinea and Mali. The Shum Laka specimens present the closest related population in prehistory. Further investigation is required to shed light on our history. Haplogroups like EM2 are like surnames, they are not really informative on their own.

In the absence of direct genetic evidence, ancient DNA from populations with admixture might shed light on the contact regions of said populations. We can definitely put them in west africa due to admixture in Iberomaurusian and Shum Laka. It is true that there might have been population replacement in west africa much like in central africa, and much of the bantu world. But this is speculation in the absence of evidence, and currently there is very little evidence from west africa. Not enough to even speculate...

ThaYamamoto
06-14-2020, 07:08 PM
The history of bantu peoples prior to the iron age is shrouded in mystery. They seemingly appear out of nowhere with a fully developed cultural toolkit. This shows we are missing a lot of information to connect the dots. Indications are that this was a small isolated population in west africa prior to the rapid expansion that reshaped the genetic character of the rest of the continent. Linguistic and genetic evidence points to origins in the vicinity of of the river systems of Guinea and Mali. The Shum Laka specimens present the closest related population in prehistory. Further investigation is required to shed light on our history. Haplogroups like EM2 are like surnames, they are not really informative on their own.

In the absence of direct genetic evidence, ancient DNA from populations with admixture might shed light on the contact regions of said populations. We can definitely put them in west africa due to admixture in Iberomaurusian and Shum Laka. It is true that there might have been population replacement in west africa much like in central africa, and much of the bantu world. But this is speculation in the absence of evidence, and currently there is very little evidence from west africa. Not enough to even speculate...

Yeah they really do come outta no where...hotep ish aside the connection with narrow Bantu and Afro-Asiatic is crazy. How do you know of a more west-ward origin i.e. Guinea/Mali? Doesn't seem to be much of a genetic foot print left there but population replacement has and does occur. I thought they probably originate somewhere west of Nigeria or maybe from the Nok culture...we really need to see the genetics of modern Ijaw people, something about it being such an early divergent isolate of Niger-Congo spoken only in the south-south of Nigeria needs more investigation, the Bantu left in Nigeria aka the Jarawan, and Bantoid folks in the extreme South-East e.g. Calabar, Ekoid/Enjagham.