Saturday, June 23, 2018

Dr. Clyde Winters On-Line Course Course Catalog









201. Blacks in Europe Before the the Europeans .In this course we will discuss the historical, linguistic and anthropological evidence which relates to
the presence of Blacks in Europe; and the coming of the Indo-Europeans. Special mention will be made of the 1) migration routes the Blacks took to
enter Europe;2) the presence of
Blacks in ancient European myths; and 3) the African origin of the Greek gods.

202. Africa and India. In this course we will discuss the relationship between Africans and Dravidians in relation to their common origin, genetic linguistic unity, and the reasons behind their outward differences in physical features.





203. History of Blacks in Asia In this course we will explore the rise of Black empires in ancient China , especially their role in the founding of the Xia and First Shang Empire. This course will also explore the
rise of the Kushite nations of China , their decline and the migration of these Black Chinese onto the Pacific Islands,India, Southeast Asia and Japan.

204. Afrocentric Historiagraphy
This course will be concerned with examining the major
Afrocentric scholors of the 20th century and their
 methods of research. The scholars discussed in this
course include DuBois, Chacellor Williams,D.D. Houston,G.W.
Parker, Diop,Th. Obenga and others. of the world.
                                 
205. Introduction to Afrocentric History
This course will emphasize theoretical and practical aspects ancient Afrocentric history . This is a lecture discussion course intended to acquaint students with the broad contours of the ancient historical experiences of blacks in Africa (Egypt and Kush), Mesopotamia, China, Greece and the Americas; and nurture skilled teaching in this area.

206. Introduction to African Comparative Linguistics
This course will examine the comparative linguistic method in relation to African and Dravidian languages. In this course you will learn the' basic comparative linguistic method , while discovering aspects of Afro -Indo linguistics and the relationship between African and Egyptian languages.
208. The Decipherment of the Indus Vallev writing
In this course the student will dis-cover the Dravidian origin of this script. Students 'will learn the
'basic grammar of the Indus Valley
writing and method of decipherment. By the end of the course students will be able to read the various Indus Valley seals, and understand aspects of the Harappan religion.

207. Decipherment of the Manding And Olmec Scripts. In this course the student will learn how to decipher the Manding script. The Manding script was used to write Minoan Linear A,the Libyco-Berber inscriptions of the Western Sahara and the Olmec writing of ancient America. This course will provide the student with knowledge of the grammar and script of the Manding writing systems. The student will also obtain a basic dictionary of the script and methods of reading the symbols.



208. Blacks in Ancient America.  This survey course deals with the origins of the various Black population in the Americas. We will discuss the various ancient Black Civilizations in Mexico, North and South America.

Application On-Line Course

Are you interested in knowing more about the origin of Black/African people and their ancient history? If the answer is YES, you may be interested in taking an Afrocentric course at home. The Afrocentric study course is designed to help people become aware of the Afrocentric historical and linguistic experience.
These Distance courses will make students aware of the pluridisplinary approach to Afrocentric studies used by C.A. Diop and J.A. Rogers.

The Afrocentric independent studies courses can be taken at any time during the year. Each course last between 6 and 15 weeks depending on the amount of readings necessary for understanding specific historical experiences.

This Afrocentric studies program is not a part of any University. These courses are offered on a private basis by Dr. Clyde Winters. NO Grades will be given.

The sole purpose of this learning program is to teach aspects of Afrocentric studies to the interested public. Work completed in this program of study can not be transferred toward a university degree. But you can earn a Certificate of Participation.

The student will be provided with 1) selected articles and readings associated with the course; 2) lectures will be provided via e-mail. Students will be responsible for purchasing the text used in the course. Other Reading material for each course will be supplied via electronically.

The student will complete a mid-term and final Questionnaire to determine his/her comprehension of the course matter. This questionnaire will be re -turned to the instructor via email. Student will email the instructor

The instructor will reply to such to the questions via email. Satisfactory completion of the 6th or 9th week comprehensive questionnaire leads to the award of the Certificate of Participation. If you are a teacher you can be awarded C.P.D.U.s that can be used toward State Recertification.


The aims of these courses are to increase the student's appreciation of Afrocentric historical themes; they cannot improve, enhance. or add to the skills and abilities of the individual relative to occupational responsibilities or career opportunities .





TUITION AND FEES

In this course the student will pay application fee: $25.00

Tuition: $460.00 per course due within two week after notification of acceptance in program. Payment will be done through Paypal.

This includes a  Nonrefundable material fee of $100.00 to pay for required readings and text.




Tuition Refund Schedule
Student who desires to withdraw from a course will send the instructor an email requesting withdrawal from the course. A student who is given approval to withdraw will follow the following Refund Schedule:
Opening Day: $360
2nd-3rd week of school $260.00
4th week of school  $150.00
After 5th week of school no refund

Circle or check the course(s) in which you
will register.


201(  )    202 (  )    203 (    )    204 (     )

205 (     )  206 (   )   207  (      )  208 (       )

email address___________________________

 You may take only two (2) courses each Quarter.


Uthman dan Fodio Institute

Complete application on following page. Return this page and the next to complete the application process. Make all money orders or certified checks payable to Clyde Winters. You can also pay via Paypal.

Non Refundable: $25 Application fee must accompany this application.




Monday, June 18, 2018

The Olmec Language is not Mixe-Zoque



Justenson and Kaufman (1985) popularized the idea that the Olmec spoke a Mixe-Zoque language.  This is false the Olmec spoke Malinke-Bambara, a Mande language spoken in West Africa today.
There are four problems with  Justenson and Kaufman decipherments of  Epi-Olmec: 1) there is no clear evidence of Zoque speakers in Olmec areas 3200  years ago, 2) there is no such thing as a "pre-Proto-Soquean/Zoquean language,  3)there is an absence of a Zoque substratum in the Mayan languages , and 4) the lexical items associated with Justenson and Kaufman’s decipherment can not be used to read the all the Epi-Olmec inscriptions.






   First of all ,Justenson and Kaufman in their 1997 article claim that they read the  Epi-Olmec inscriptions using "pre-Proto-Zoquean". This is impossible ,a "Pre-Proto" language refers to the internal reconstruction of vowel patterns, not entire words. Linguists can reconstruct a pre-proto language , but this language is only related to internal developments within the target language.
           Secondly, Justenson and Kaufman base their claim of a Zoque origin for the  Olmec language on the presence of a few Zoque speakers around mount Tuxtla.
Justeson and Kaufman maintain that the Olmec people spoke a Otomanguean language. The Otomanguean family include Zapotec, Mixtec and Otomi  to name a few. The hypothesis that the Olmec spoke an Otomanguean language is not supported by the contemporary spatial distribution of the languages spoken in the  Tabasco/Veracruz area.
      As mentioned earlier Thomas Lee in R.J. Sharer and D. C. Grove (Eds.), Regional Perspectives on the  Olmecs, New York: Cambridge University Press (1989, 223) noted that  "...closely Mixe, Zoque and Popoluca languages are spoken in numerous villages in a mixed manner having little or no apparent semblance of linguistic or spatial unity. The general assumption made by the few investigators who have considered the situation, is that the modern linguistic pattern is a result of the disruption of an Old homogeneous language group by more powerful neighbors or invaders...."
        If this linguistic evidence is correct, many of the languages in the Otomanguean family are spoken by people who may have only recently settled in the Olmec heartland, and may not reflect the people that invented the culture we call Olmecs today.
     In a recent article in  by S.D. Houston and M.D. Coe, asked the question “Has Isthmian writing been deciphered”, in the journal Mexicon .In this article Houston and Coe attempted to use Justenson and Kaufman’s Epi-Olmec vocabulary to  read the inscriptions on the Teo Mask and found that they were not helpful at all. They note that  “The text does not provide much assurance that Justeson and Kaufman are on the mark….Would not persuasive decipherment have led, as did Michael Ventris’ brilliant work on  Linear B or Tatiana Proskouriakoff’s on Maya, to compelling references to the context at hand , in this case a mask, or to its owner?”( Houston & Coe, 2003, p.159).
  The Justenson and Kaufman hypothesis is not supported by the evidence for the origin of the Mayan term for writing. The Mayan term for writing is not related to Zoque.
Soren Wichmann (2018a,2018b) has spent much of his time researching the Mixe-Zoque languages, confirming Justenson and Kaufman’s hypothesis that the Mixe-Zoque speakers were Olmecs, and the Olmec originated on the Pacific coast, where he situates speakers of Proto-Mixe-Zoque (Wichmann, 2018b).
     Wichmann (2018b) speculates that there were multiple Mixe and Zoque languages spoken in Chiapas between 1800-1600BC. He suggest that the speakers of Mixe-Zoque probably belonged to the Mokaya, Bara or Ocos cultures.
    There are several problems with Wichmann’s theory. First, there is no archaeological evidence linking the Mokaya, Bara and Ocos cultures on the Gulf Coast where the Olmec civilization began. Secondly, the Olmec appear 600-400 years after the decline of these cultures. Thirdly, the Olmec spoke Malinke-Bambara, which is a substratum language of the Mayan and Mixe-Zoque language families.
   Mayan tradition make it clear that they got writing from another Meso-American group. Landa noted that the Yucatec Maya claimed that they got writing from a group of foreigners called Tutul Xiu from Nonoulco (Tozzer, 1941). Xiu is not the name for the Zoque. But Xi, is the name for the Olmec people.


   Brown has suggested that the Mayan term c'ib' diffused from the Cholan and Yucatecan Maya to the other Mayan speakers. This term is  not derived from Mixe-Zoque. If the Maya had got writing from the Mixe-Zoque, the term for writing would be found in a Mixe-Zoque language.
             The fact that there is no evidence that 1)the Zoque were in the ancient Olmec land  3200 years ago, 2)there is no Zoque substrate language in Mayan,  3) you can not read the Epi-Olmec inscriptions using the  Justenson and Kaufman method, an 4) there is no such thing as "pre-Proto-Zoque" falsifies Justenson and Kaufman hypothesis.
    Brown has suggested that the Mayan term c'ib' diffused from the Cholan and Yucatecan Maya to the other Mayan speakers. This term is probably not derived from Mixe-Zoque. If the Maya had got writing from the Mixe-Zoque, the term for writing would Probably be found in a Mixe-Zoque language. The research indicates that no word for writing exist in this language.
There are a number of Malinke-Bambara loans in Mixe. The Mixe discussed in this section is Qaxacan, and include words ITom Mazatec, Chinantec, Mixtec and Chatino.
        The Mixe has surprising Malinke-Bambara loans. These loans presented in the Figure , include parts of the body, nouns for wind, house night and village, agricultural terms ( land of cultivation, maize, tomato) plus political terms such as lord, village and king.


     
       As among the Mayans, the Mixe like the Malinke-Bambara prefix their pronouns.  Mixe:
 n' 'me,
 m 'you;
yi, y 'he, she, it, the' n' amido:y "I ask" 
 y pe tp "he will sweep it'

       In Malinke-Bambara we would have a ba " his mother"; a be so " he is at horne', = 'she, he, it'.
Among the Malinke-Bambara loans in Mixe, there was full correspondence between the /t/,/m/  and /k/ in both languages. In other cases there was constrast between:


p             f


p             b


sh           s


t              d


c              s


n             m


c              t


The constrast between the Mixe /c/  and Malinke-Bambara /t/  is most interesting because we have also observed this same pattern in the Mayan languages. It also interesting to note that many Malinke-Bambara loans in Mixe that begin with the /s/ consonant have been nativized by changing this /s/,  just as the Yucatec speakers had done for their Olmec loans beginning with .
       It is interesting to note that the Mixe loan po' 'wind', is derived from Malinke¬Bambara fo/ po 'wind'. This is surprising because we find that in Mixe some words  with an initial /f/ are pronounced with a /p/  sound, e.g., pishka d 'highest dignitary', a  Nahuatl loan word.
       The Olmec appear to have played an importatnt role in introducing agriculture to the Mixe. This is obvious not only in the large number of loans for plants in Mixe, but also the term they use for cultivation.
     The Mixe make it clear that cultivation takes place on the humid bottom land they call ta : k kam . This Mixe word can not be explained in Mixe-Zoque. But when we look at this word from the perspective of the Olmec language we find that it comes from three Malinke-Bambara words ta ka ga 'this is the place of cultivation': ta 'place' , ka 'to be' ga 'terrain of cultivation, act of planting, to plant' . The loans in Mixe make it clear that they were probably hunter-gatherers when the  Olmec (Malinke-Bambara) speaking people carne to Qaxaca in search of minerals to make their giant heads and jade for their many artifacts.
     The Mixe appear to have used the loan ko 'head of something' , to construct many words in Mixe. For example:

Mixe                                        Bambara
 ko ca'ny 'chief snake'              kun-sa   'head snake'
kocu   'of the night'                    ku su      'head night'
kodung   'mayor                         ku(n)dugu 'head of land, chief

       The Mixe term for calendar priest or kushi is probably also a loan from Olmec. The Olmec (Malinke-Bambara) term for 'time' is sinye and san means 'year, sky'. This suggest that the Mixe term kushi 'calendar priest, head priest', may come from the combination of Olmec ko 'head' and sinye 'time' or ko-sinye 'head time (keeper)'.
       The Mixe nativization of ko-sinye > kushi , would not be too surprising, since the Mixe, if they were originally hunter-gatherers would have had no need for a person to record the seasons" a calendar priest', until they began the domestication of the crops  introduced to Qaxaca by the Olmec people when they settled the region to exploit the rich mineral deposits found in this part of Mexico.
        Finally, the widespread adoption of Olmec/ Malinke-Bambara lexical and grammatical features in the Mayan, Mixe and Otomi languages indicate a close relationship among the speakers of these languages in Pre-Classic Mexico. The shared diffused grammatical, lexical and phonological features discussed in this paper are probably the result from an extended period of bilingualism in ancient Mexico involving  the Malinke-Bambara speaking Olmecs, and their Otomi, Mayan and Mixe neigbors.
The Olmecs came from Africa. There is no evidence that the Olmec existed in Mexico before 1200-1100 BC.
The archaeological evidence suggest that the Olmec "miraculously appear on American soil". Some researchers claim that I am wrongly ruling out an “indigenous revolution” for the origin of the Olmec civilization. This is their opinion—the archaeological evidence, not I, suggest that the founders of the Olmec civilization were not “indigenous” people.
In the Olmec World: Ritual and Rulership (1995), (ed.) by Carolyn Tate, on page 65, we find the following statement”Olmec culture as far as we know seems to have no antecedents; no material models remain for its monumental constructions and sculptures and the ritual acts captured in small objects”.
M. Coe, writing in Regional Perspective on the Olmecs (1989), (ed.) by Sharer and Grove, observed that “ on the contrary, the evidence although negative, is that the Olmec style of art, and Olmec engineering ability suddenly appeared full fledged from about 1200 BC”.
Mary E. Pye, writing in Olmec Archaeology in Mesoamerica (2000), (ed.) by J.E. Cark and M.E. Pye,makes it clear after a discussion of the pre-Olmec civilizations of the Mokaya tradition, that these cultures contributed nothing to the rise of the Olmec culture. Pye wrote “The Mokaya appear to have gradually come under Olmec influence during Cherla times and to have adopted Olmec ways. We use the term olmecization to describe the processes whereby independent groups tried to become Olmecs, or to become like the Olmecs” (p.234). Pye makes it clear that it was around 1200 BC that Olmec civilization rose in Mesoamerica. She continues “Much of the current debate about the Olmecs concerns the traditional mother culture view. For us this is still a primary issue. Our data from the Pacific coast show that the mother culture idea is still viable in terms of cultural practices. The early Olmecs created the first civilization in Mesoamerica; they had no peers, only contemporaries” (pp.245-46).
Richard A. Diehl The Olmecs:America’s first civilization (2005), wrote “ The identity of these first Olmecs remains a mystery. Some scholars believe they were Mokaya migrants from the Pacific coast of Chiapas who brought improved maize strains and incipient social stratification with them. Others propose that Olmec culture evolved among the local indigenous populations without significant external stimulus. I prefer the latter position, but freely admit that we lack sufficient information on the period before 1500 BC to resolve the issue” (p.25).
Pool , in Olmec Archaeology and early MesoAmerica (2007), argues that continuity exist between the Olmec and pre-Olmec cultures in Mexico “[even]though Coe now appears to favor an autochthonous origin for Olmec culture (Diehl & Coe 1995:150), he long held that the Olmec traits appeared at San Lorenzo rather suddenly during the Chicharras phase (ca 1450-1408 BC) (Coe 1970a:25,32; Coe and Diehl 1980a:150)”. Pool admits (p.95), that “this conclusion contrasts markedly with that of the excavators of San Lorenzo, who reported dramatic change in ceramic type and argued on this basis for a foreign incursion of Olmecs into Olman (Coe and Diehl 1980a, p.150).”
The evidence presented by these authors make it clear that the Olmec introduced a unique culture to Mesoamerica that was adopted by the Mesoamericans. As these statements make it clear that was no continuity between pre-Olmec cultures and the Olmec culture.


The Olmec came from Saharan Africa. They spoke a Mande language. Evidence of this connection comes from the fact:

1)      both groups used jade (Amazonite) to make their tools. Amazonite was used in Saharan Africa. It was found at many sites in the ancient Sahara by archaeologists from the University of Chicago led by Soreno See: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2515196/pdf/pone.0002995.pdf   .They made adzes and pendants to name a few items in amazonite.
2) both groups made large stone heads. Here is an African head dating back to the same period.
3) The Mande came to Mexico in boats from the Sahara down the ancient Niger River that formerly emptied in the Sahara or they could have made their way to the Atlantic Ocean down the Senegal River.
 4) The Olmec writing points back to a Mande origin in Africa.
5) Olmec skeletons that are African.
6) Similar white, and red-and-black pottery.
7)The Mande speaking Olmec  introduced of the 13 month 20 day calendar.
8) Mayan adoption of the Mande term for writing.
9)Mande religious and culture terms adopted by Mayan people.
       The fact that 1) there is no archaeological evidence that the Zoque were in the ancient Olmec land on the Atlantic Gulf 3200 years ago, 2)there is no Zoque substrate language in Mayan, 3) there was no migration of Mokaya or Bara culture bearers from Chiapas to the Gulf, and 4) there is no such thing as "pre-Proto-Zoque" this falsifies Justenson, Kaufman and Wichmann hypotheses. The Olmec did not speak Mixe-Zoque. 


Reference:

Brown, C. (1991). Hieroglyphic literacy in ancient Mayaland: Inferences from the
linguistic data". Current Anthropology, 32 (4), 489-495.
Campbell,Lyle.(1977). Quichean linguistic prehistory .Berkeley : University of
California Press. University of California publications in linguistics. v. 81
Delafosse, M. (1899). Vai leur langue et leur systeme d'ecriture", L' Anthropologie
,10, .
Delafosse, M. (1955). *La Langue Mandingue et ses Dialectes (Malinke, Bambara,
Dioula). Vol I. Intro. Grammaire, Lexique Francais-Mandingue). Paris: Librarie
Orientaliste Paul Geuthner.
Grosjean, F. (1982). Life with two languages. London: Harvard university Press.
Hau, K. (1973). "Pre Islamic writing in West Africa, Bulletin de l'Institut
Fondamental Afrique Noire (IFAN), t.35, Ser. B no. 1, 1- 45.
Hau, K. (1978). African Writing in the New World, Bull. de l'IFAN,t.40 ser.B no.l,
(1978) pp.28 48.
Hammond, N. (1996). Inside the black box: defining Maya polity". In (Ed.) T. Patrick
Culbert, Classic Maya Political History (p.254). New York:Cambridge University Press.
Hock,H. & Joseph, B.D. (1996). Language history, language change and language
relationships. New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
     Houston, S.D. and Coe, M.D. (2003). Has Isthmian been deciphered? Mexicon, 25, pp.151-161.
      Justeson,S., William, N.M., Campbell, L, Kaufman, T.S., The Foreign impact on Lowland Mayan languages and Script. Middle American Research Institute, Publication 53. New Orleans: Tulane University, 1985.
     Kaufman, T. (1976). Archaeological and linguistic correlations in Mayaland and
associated areas of Meso-America. World Archaeology, 8, lOI-1I8.
     Romaine,S. (1995). Bilingualism. Oxford:  Blackwell.
     Scotton,C.M. & Okeju,J (1973). Neighbors and lexical borrowings. Language. 49, 871-889.
Sharer,RJ (1996). Diversity and Continuity in Maya civilization: Quirigua as a
case study", in (Ed.) T. Patrick Culbert, Classic Maya Political History, (p.187). New  York: Cambridge University Press.
     Swadesh, M. (1953). The Language of the Archaeological Haustecs.
     Swadesh,M. Alvarez, C. and Bastarrachea, JR (1970). "Diccionario de Elementos del Maya Yucatec Colonial. Mexico: Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico Centro de Estudios Mayas.
     Tedlock,Dennis.(1996). Popol Vuh. New York: A Touchstone Book.
     Warkentin,V. & Scott, R. (1980). Gramatica Ch'ol. (Sene de Gramaticas de lenguas de Mexico, 3. Mexico: Instituto Linguistico de Verano.
      Weinreich,U. (1968). Languages in contact. The Hague: Mouton.
Wichmann, S. (2018a).A Mixe-Zoquean word of loan in Mayan murals of the Late Preclassic of San Bartolo , https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=es&u=http://www.mesoweb.com/es/articulos/wichmann/Prestamo.pdf&prev=search
Wichman,S. (2018b). Possible linguistic and archaeological correlations involving the Olmec. https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=es&u=https://www.rsuh.ru/upload/main/knor/binary/Olmecs.pdf&prev=search
      Winters, Clyde. (1979). Manding writing in the New World Part 1. Journal of  African Civilization. 1 (1 ), 81 -97.
     Winters, Clyde.(1980). Appendix B: The Jade Celts ITom La Venta". In Unexpected Faces in Ancient Americ~ by A. von Wuthenau (pp.235 237). 2nd Edition, Mexico.
     Winters, Clyde. (1977). The influence of the Mande scripts on American ancient writing systems", Bull. de I'IFAN, t.39, Ser.B no.2, 405431.
      Winters, Clyde. (1983). The Ancient Manding Script". In, Blacks in Science Ancient and Modern (ed) by Ivan Van Sertima (pp.208 214), New Brunswick, Transaction Books.
     Winters, Clyde. (1986). The Migration routes of the Proto Mande", The Mankind Quarterly, 27(1), 77-98.
       Winters, Clyde. (2005a). Decipherment of the Olmec Language.  Retrieved 08/19/05 at: http://olmec98.net/Rtolmec2.htm
        Winters, Clyde. (2005b). The Evidence of African Migration to New World and Olmec Religion. Retrieved 08/19/05 at: http://olmec98.net/nama2.htm
      Winters, Clyde.(2005c). The Olmec Kings. Retrieved 08/19/05 at: http://olmec98.net/olmeckings.htm
       Winters, Clyde. (2005d). Bilingual Mayan Olmec Text. Retrieved 08/19/05 at: http://olmec98.net/biling.htm
     Wulsin, (1940). Papers of the Peabody Museum of American Arcaheology and Ethnology, 19(1). Peabody Museum, Boston.





Sunday, May 20, 2018

Review: The genetic prehistory of the Greater Caucasus,

The genetic prehistory of the Greater Caucasus, by Chuan-Chao Wang, Sabine Reinhold Reinhold, Alexey Kalmykov, Antje Wissgott, Guido Brandt, Choongwon Jeong, Olivia Cheronet, Matthew Ferry, Eadaoin Harney, Denise KeatingSwapan Mallick, Nadin Rohland, Kristin Stewardson, Anatoly R. Kantorovich, Vladimir E. Maslov, Vladimira G. Petrenko, Vladimir R. Erlikh, Biaslan C. Atabiev, Rabadan G. Magomedov, Philipp L. Kohl, Kurt W. Alt, Sandra L. Pichler, Claudia Gerling, Harald Meller, Benik Vardanyan, Larisa Yeganyan, Alexey D. Rezepkin, Dirk Mariaschk, Natalia Y. Berezina, Julia Gresky, Katharina Fuchs, Corina Knipper, Stephan Schiffels, Elena Balanovska, Oleg Balanovsky, Iain Mathieson, Thomas Higham, Yakov B. Berezin, Alexandra P. Buzhilova, Viktor Trifonov, Ron Pinhasi, Andrej B. Belinskiy, David Reich, Svend Hansen, Johannes KrauseWolfgang Haak,   https://www.biorxiv.org/content/early/2018/05/16/322347


This article, The genetic prehistory of the Greater Caucasus,, claims that the Steppe people carried Y-Chromosome R,R1a,Rl1b. These clades along with the Caucasus clades were all carried by the Kushites who settled these areas and expanded across Europe herding cattle and cultivating millet See: Article. These Kushites originally lived in Anatolia and the Levant. They introduced the Bell Beaker culture to Europe. The earliest evidence for Bell Beaker culture and Kushites comes from Africa.

DNA tests can accurately differentiate between individuals. But as noted by this article."To answer a specific question about individual ancestry, you need to supplement your mtDNA or Y chromosome genetic information with reliable historical records."See: Article

This is why when you take a DNA test you get percentages showing the various connections you have with  different regions. Eurocentrists love to cite population genetics data to "refute" this or that claim but this is smoke and mirrors. See Article


This  article explains why Eurocentrists make many claims about a so called Eurasian back migration to Africa, but they never support this claim with archaeological evidence. They can't support this claim because the Bell Beaker people were Kushites from Africa See web site. The Kushites did not speak Indo-European languages

It is interesting to note that all the papers published on the so-called Anatolian "Indo-Europeans", including the article being discussed in this post are written by the same authors, including Iain Mathieson,David Reich, Svend Hansen, Johannes Krause, and Wolfgang Haak, the only people missing are Lazaridis and Olalde. Moreover, in most cases the researchers are associated with David Reich and the Department of Archaeogenetics, Max-Planck Institute for the Science of Human History, Kahlaische Strasse 10, D-07745 Jena, Germany .


Upon reading these articles on the Early Hunter-Gatherers  of Europe, and Early European Farmers you see that the references cited in the articles are written by the same people Iain Mathieson, David Reich, Wolfgang Haak , Lazaridis and Olalde or the researchers is from the Max-Planck Institute. There is nothing wrong with this . This is what researchers do they cite prior work to illustrate how the research is expanding.

But, readers ignore this fact. And act as if some new discovery has been made, when the articles are a rehash of earlier publications by these same authors. For example in this paper the authors cite their earlier research : 


19. Haak W, et al. Massive migration from the steppe was a source for Indo-European languages in Europe. Nature 522, 207-211 (2015).

23. Lazaridis I, et al. Genomic insights into the origin of farming in the ancient Near East. Nature 536, 419-424 (2016).

24. Mathieson I, et al. The genomic history of southeastern Europe. Nature,(2018). 

26. Lazaridis I, et al. Ancient human genomes suggest three ancestral populations for present-day Europeans. Nature 513, 409-413 (2014).

27. Mathieson I, et al. Genome-wide patterns of selection in 230 ancient Eurasians. Nature 528, 499-503 (2015). 

35. Olalde I, et al. The Beaker phenomenon and the genomic transformation of northwest Europe. Nature, (2018).

42. Olalde I, et al. Derived immune and ancestral pigmentation alleles in a 7,000-
963 year-old Mesolithic European. Nature 507, 225-228 (2014). 


47. Moorjani P, Sankararaman S, Fu Q, Przeworski M, Patterson N, Reich D. A genetic method for dating ancient genomes provides a direct estimate of human generation interval in the last 45,000 years. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 113, 5652-5657 (2016). 

66. Rohland N, Harney E, Mallick S, Nordenfelt S, Reich D. Partial uracil-DNA glycosylase treatment for screening of ancient DNA. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 370, 20130624 (2015). 

It is worth noting that these authors can cite their on own research in the articles that they write and publish--but when I cite my earlier research , and other Afrocentrist authors some readers act as if I have committed a crime. 

It appears that it is okay for Eurocentrists to cite their own research in their articles about the first Europeans who were in reality Black/Sub-Saharan Africans--not Indo-European. Readers accept as valid research by a Computer specialist such as Lazaridis; but other researchers, including myself who are non-geneticists is ignored. It appears that many people accept the promotion of "White Supremacist" ideas about the settlement of Europe by established researchers when they are not supported by archaeological, linguistic and other research. Shame on you. 



Monday, April 30, 2018

THE STRUCTURE OF AFRICALOGICAL SOCIAL SCIENCE REVOLUTIONS:THE CASE OF ANCIENT AFROCENTRIC HISTORICAL STUDIES


Abstract

In this paper we examine the structure of the africalogical ancient history scientific methods, paradigms and heroes. We also explain and discuss the major empirical generalizations associated with the africalogical study of ancient history and the "Ancient Model" and how they predicted the immense role Africans played in not only in ancient Egypt, Mesopotamia and Greece, but also the rise of civilization in ancient China and the Americas.


The structure of africalogical social science revolution :The case of ancient afrocentric historical studies 

The African -American is a product of his cultural and historical experience in the United States and the legacy of his African heritage. This cultural and historical dichotomy has greatly influenced the africalogical study of early history.
Due to the African heritage of African Americans, scholars from this group have used africalogy to study their history for almost two hundred years. Africalogy is the "afrocentric study of phenomena, events, ideas and personalities related to Africa" (Asante, 1990, 4). The "africalogical enterprise" include any geographical region where Africans exist today or formerly inhabited in ancient times.
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.
The Afrocentric study of early history (ASEH) is a mature science . Ancient afrocentric historical studies is a human science which seeks to explain historical, social and cultural experiences of Black\African people in ancient times.
The role of mature Afrocentric human\social science research is to detail the "Ancient Model" of history (Winters, 1994; Bernal, 1987, 1991). It is the "Ancient Model" of history which provides the essential directions and map-making of the africalogical study of early history. Kuhn (1996) noted that:
"Normal science consists in the actualization of that promise, an actualization achieved by extending the knowledge of those facts that the paradigm displays as particularly revealing, by increasing the extent of the match between those facts and the paradigm's predictions, and by further articulation of the paradigm itself "(p.24).
The "Ancient Model" of history practiced by Afrocentric researchers of history is based on the classical literature and the Old Testament. The classical scholars: Herodutus, Homer and Strabo made it clear that Egypt and civilizations in Europe and Asia were founded by Black\African people.
Herodutus made it clear from his comparison of the black Colchis and Egyptians that both of these peoples were ethnically Black Africans (Rawlinson, 1928, 88). Herodutus also made it clear that the Egyptians founded colonies in Greece (Rawlinson, 1928).
Strabo in his Geography (Book 1, Chap.3, par.10), inspite of his chauvisim maintained that "Egyptians settled Ethiopia and Colchis". In addition, Diodorus of Sicily wrote that:
The Ethiopians say that the Egyptians are one of their colonies which was brought in[to] Egypt by Osiris. They even allege that this country was originally under water.... (Diop, 1974, 1-2).
In addition to the works of Homer, Diodorus and Herodutus, other classical writers made it clear that the Egyptians (Graves, 1980, 27-30) and Libyans (Graves, 1980, 31-35, 44-45) settled Greece and parts of the Aegean.
The Old Testament literature also implied that the early civilizations of the world were all founded by Black\Africans. In the Book of Genesis (x, 6-16) we discover that Black people, the children of Ham, founded civilization in Egypt, Kush, Phoenicia, and Mesopotamia.
As a result of the "Ancient Model" developed by the classical and Biblical writers we find that Blacks were early civilizers of the world. The paradigm or empirical generalization for the "Ancient Model" of ancient history stated simply is: 1) Egypt, Ethiopia, Greece and Mesopotamia was first inhabited and civilized by Blacks\Africans in early times.
Moreover, the archaeological evidence makes it clear that the ancient people of Egypt, Greece and Mesopotamia possessed a highly developed science. They also possessed writing: Libyco-Berber (or the Manding writing), Proto-Sumerian/ Proto-Elamite writing, Egyptian hieroglyphics and demotic, and the cuneiform writing of the Sumerians, Elamites and Akkadians/Babylonians (Winters, 1985a).
This model of history was normal social science until the beginning of the Atlantic Slave trade. During the Atlantic Slave trade, Africans were sold into bondage in Europe and of Americas. To justify this inhuman, vile and mean trade in human beings European philosophers in the 18th century created and "Aryan Model" of history to explain their domination of the Amerindians , and African slaves in the Western Hemisphere.
The "Aryan Model" of history, contrary to the "Ancient Model" of the classical and Biblical writers, maintains that Greek civilization was founded by Indo-European speaking Greeks, and that each ancient civilization was founded autonomously by the people who presently live in modern Asia, Europe and Egypt.
A "typical" example of the proponents the "Aryan Model" is David Hume. The Scottish philosopher David Hume (1875) attempted to prove the inferiority of African Americans, and Blacks in general in 1753, when he observed that there was a "lack of learning among them" (Vol. 1, 252). In other words, the alleged "universal illiteracy" among African slaves was evidence of their inferiority. In addition, Hume cited other alleged deficits of Blacks including 1) the absence of kingdoms among them; 2) the lack of literacy; 3) the dark complexion evidenced inferiority; and 4) the Blacks\Africans possessed no arts, no science and no letters (Hume, 1875).
Hume (1875) and later European philosophers abandoned the "Ancient Model" of history and created the "Aryan Model" due to their European centeredness. this Eurocentric view of history, culture and society placed Europe and Europeans at the center of social and cultural universal.
At the base of Eurocentricism is the doctrine of white supremacy. This ideological foundation aims to thwart the African-Americans search for manhood and self-assertion, when ever they encounter intensified prejudice by white Americans.
A major component of Eurocentricism is the notion of African-American intellectual inferiority. As a result, European scholars can write and research the history of any people on earth. African-Americans on the otherhand, are believed to lack the intellectual capacity to conduct research, let alone write 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 on these topics usually came from well-to-do families that could provide them with the capital to undertake research activities abroad. This belief by many researchers 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.
In the 19th century, many African American freemen knew how to read and write. They were also expert in Latin and Greek, and were intimately familiar with the classical and Old Testament literature. These African American scholars, contrary to many contemporary scholars began to conduct their own research and revive the "Ancient Model" of history in the 19th century and founded the africalogical study of ancient history (ASAH).
Philosophical Basis for the
Africalogical study of ancient history
There are four philosophical schools associated with the afrocentric study of ancient history: perennialist, essentialist, existentialist, and progressivist. The taxonomic system we use to classify the various afrocentric philosophical positions and related values affecting afrocentrism are modeled on philo-sophical developments associated with education.
We can use taxonomies of educational philosophies to discuss any proposed afrocentric curriculum because both education and philosophy are "cultural experiences". Moreover, because afrocentrism seeks to explain and delineate the story of African people, it clearly is a field of study which encompasses all aspects of the culture of Black and African people (Asante, 1990, 1991; Winters, 1994).
The perennialist afrocentrists study the great works. The adherents of this school include Martin Delaney (1978), Cornish and Russwurm (1827), Frederick Douglas (1966), and Edward Blyden (1869). These Afrocentrists see knowledge as truth, which is eternal.
The essentialist afrocentric school emphasize in their writing data that is well established through scientific research. Afrocentrists of this philosophical school include W. E. B. DuBois (1965, 1970), John Jackson (1974), C.A. Winters (1985, 1989, 1991, 1994) and Leo Hansberry (1981). They believe that as new research is published, it should be analyzed to discover how it relates to the ancient history of African and Black people to enrich our understanding of the past.
The existentialist afrocentrists believe that africalogical studies should thrive to teach African people to know more about themselves so we can have a better world. The afrocentric existentialists include J.A. Rogers, Anta Diop (1974, 1991), G.M. James (1954), Marcus Garvey (1966) and A.A. Schomburg (1979).
Dr. Winters has written extensively on the ancient history of the African diaspora. He has numerous sites on the web were explains the ancient history of African people. His major work is Afrocentrism: Myth or Science
. In Afrocentrism: Myth or Science Dr. Winters provides a detailed discussion of how to study Afrocentrism and provides an intimate and detailed study of the ancient Black civilizations outside Africa in Europe, Asia and the Americas.
The final afrocentric philosophical school is the progressivist. The afrocentric school of progressivism believes that we should have knowledge of the process and futuristic focus on afrocentric studies. The major exponent of this frame of reference is Molefi K. Asante (1991).
In regards to the afrocentric view that the Egyptians were Black Africans we must look to the afrocentric perennialists. The perennialists founded the afrocentric ancient history curriculum. The perennialist school is associated with Frederick Douglas (1966) and Martin Delaney (1978). These Afrocentrists writing in the 19th century placed the great works of the past center stage in the formulation of their afrocentric ancient history knowledge base.
The perennialists postulated that you should use the Bible and the writings of the classical scholars who recognized the "Ancient Model" of history (i.e., Blacks played a major role in ancient history) in deciding on what to teach people about the ancient history of African Americans. The Old Testament provides annals of the ancient Empires of Africa and Mesopotamia.
In the Old Testament the Blacks are recognized as the sons of Ham. According to the Old Testament narrative found in the Book of Genesis (10:6), the children of Ham, are alleged to be the founders of all the ancient civilizations including Kush (the Ta Seti, and C-Group cultures of Nubia and the Sudan; the Sumerians of Mesopotamia and the Elamites of Iran), Mizraim (the founder of the Egyptians), Phut (the civilizations of ancient Ethiopia/ South Arabia), and Canaan (the early Canaanites and Hatians of ancient Palestine). The Old Testament narrative and the classical literature was important to the perennialists because it already recognized the division of Black people of Africa into two groups: the Semitic (Canaan and Phut) speakers and Black African (Egypt, Sumer and Elam) speakers (Winters 1985, 1989, 1991).
                                              Africalogical Paradigms of ancient history
As a result of the "Ancient Model" scientific efforts of africalogical ancient history researchers of the diverse philosophical schools discussed above is organized around two theoretical or empirical generalizations\paradigms. An empirical generalization is 'an isolated proposition summarizing observed uniformities of relationships between two or more variables" (Merton, 1957, 95), a "scientific law" is "a statement of invariance derivable from a theory" (Merton, 1957, 96).
The two paradigms associated with ASAH developed by the perennialist afrocentric scholars are:
(1) Black\African people are the children of Ham;
(2) Blacks founded the first civilizations in Asia
(Sumer, Babylon and Elam), Africa (Egypt, Ethiopia
and Libya\ North Africa) and Europe (Greece and
Crete).
The normal scientific research in africalogical ancient historical studies is directed toward the articulation of those phenomena and theories supplied by the ASAH to deduce new paradigms.
Due to the foundation of africalogical ancient research by the afrocentric perennialists, ASAH research is paradigm based. As a result, africalogical ancient historical fact-gathering, that is the historical, linguistic and anthropological data through which afrocentric scientists inform their colleagues ( and the public at large) is based on these paradigms.
The theoretical paradigms of the ASAH provide africalogical researchers with the criterion for choosing the problems and solutions to social science phenomena including:
(1) the design of research phenomena;
(2) the maps or areas of research; and
(3) the interpretation of research results.
The paradigms for ASAH predicted four hypothesis that were unknown at the time the "Ancient Model" of history was developed, to guide the development of scientific knowledge for the africalogical study of early history. These propositions based on the "Ancient Model" are:
(1) If Blacks founded civilization in Asia and Africa
, they may have influenced civilization in the Americas.
(2) If Blacks founded civilization in West Asia, Africa and
Europe, archaeological data will support their earlier
presence in these regions of the world.
(3) If Blacks founded the first civilizations, they also
invented writing and other elements of social and
scientific technology.
(4) If Blacks founded civilization they probably founded
civilization throughout Asia and Europe.
Given the two empirical paradigms and four predicted hypothesis related to the "Ancient Model", africalogical ancient history research should increase the precision of the application of afrocentric research methods and scope of research in this area so as to answer three questions in the mature afrocentric social science. Research in the afrocentric social sciences seeks to answer three classes of questions based on the ASAH paradigms:
(1) the determination of significant ASAH facts;
(2) the match of ASAH facts with theory; and
(3) the articulation of ASAH theory.
The normative function of the ASAH paradigms provides the afrocentric ancient history researchers with shared paradigms, or points of view that help define how s/he will research ancient history. These paradigms insure that africalogical researchers use the "Ancient Model" of research, as opposed to the "Aryan Model" of research to illuminate the early history of Black/African people.
The Africalogical ancient history paradigms developed by Delany (1978), Douglas (1966), Edward Blyden (1869) and Cornish and Russwurm (1827) form the theoretical base for ASAH research. In normal afrocentric social science research new paradigms have to 1) be related to the older theories; and 2) they must be compatible with already established rules for research modeled by the afrocentric perennialists.
The study of Africans in ancient America has been fruitful. Dr. Leo Wiener, in Africa and the Discovery of America was the first to recognize that the ancient civilizations of Mexico had been incluenced by Africans. He was especially sure that the Mande speaking people influenced the religion and civilization of the Aztec and Maya people; and that the writing on the Tuxtla statuette was written in the Mande writing system.
Later Ivan van Sertima wrote an important book which highlighted the influence of Africans in Mexico. In They Came before Columbus, van Sertima discussed the African influence on the Olmec civilization, and the discovery of America by Abubakari, a ruler of the Mali empire in the 1300's A.D.
Atlantis in Mexico: The Mande Discovery of America

Dr. Clyde Winters has written extensively on the African origins of the Olmec. He deciphered the Olmec language and since then he has published numerous websites where he discussed the Olmec Kings and their civilization. The most important work of Dr. Winters is Atlantis in Mexico, in this book Dr. Winters provides a detailed account of the migration of the Mande speaking people from Africa to the Americas. He explains that they called themselves Xi (Shi) or Si people and provides an informative discussion of the Mexican traditions regarding the expansion of the Olmec from the Gulf Coast, to the Pacific coast of Mexico.
  • Atlantis in Mexico will provide any researchers with a wealth of knowledge to understand the African origin of the Olmec. And the contributions of the Xi to the civilizations of Mexico.

  • Verification in Ancient Africalogical Research
    Afrocentric social scientists use confirmation to verify the africalogical paradigm rather than falsification. Confirmatory knowledge is based on generalizing as a result of observation. Whereas confirmation is based on observation of observable facts, the aim of falsification is the rejection of an established theory.
    The afrocentric scientific community seeks to obtain from their research one of three outcomes 1) confirmed (or corroborated) predictions based on the ASAH paradigm; 2) mixed outcomes, or 3) disconfirmed predictions based on the "Ancient Model".
    New paradigms resulting from africalogical ancient history research must have internal and external validity. Internal validity is the logical relationship between "facts" and reality, while external validity needs "empirical studies" or test to support any hypothesis.
    After the end of slavery in the United States, the africalogical scientific community began to conduct research to support the work done by the perennialists. The heroes in the founding of the africalogical ancient social science were usually professionally trained at Eastern Universities such as Harvard and Yale. Although, afrocentric researchers received training at prestigious Universities their research was usually conducted outside of the "established" academy.
    Vehicles for Dissemination of Research
    Afrocentric researchers of the ASAH have presented the evidence to follow afrocentric science and the public in various ways. As mentioned earlier, afrocentric researchers have rarely been professionally affiliated with institutions of higher learning. As a result, the Dissemination of africalogical research has usually been presented in a public forum.
    Newspapers and magazines have been the major media africalogical researchers use to inform the public and their colleagues about the ancient history of African Americans. In the 19th century the Freedom Journal, and religious publications like the Methodist Quarterly Review, published articles on africalogical ancient history.
    In the early 20th century as more African Americans became literate, we see the founding of numerous organizations that brought afrocentric scientists together to discuss and teach ancient history from an afrocentric perspective including the Universal Negro Improvement Association (UNIA) founded by Marcus Garvey; and the Hamitic League of the World.
    The UNIA's Negro World, edited by William Ferres, published many afrocentric articles. During its lengthy period of publication many afrocentric social scientists wrote for this popular African American newspaper including Carter G. Woodson, J.A. Rogers and George W. Parker.
    Some afrocentric articles were also published in the Journal of Negro History (JNH). Carter G. Woodson founded not only JNH, but also the Negro History Bulletin, and Associated Publishers.
    Up until World War II, many African American newspapers carried stories about Blacks in ancient times. Some of the popular African American dailies which published afrocentric articles during this period were the Chicago Daily Defender, and Amsterdam News.
    In the 1970's we see a number of publications that included africalogical material among the articles they published. These seminal publications for archaelogical research in the 1970's include the Black WorldThe Black ScholarJournal of Black Studies (San Francisco State University), Journal of African CivilizationReturn to the Source (Chicago), and the black books bulletin (Chicago).
    Scholarly Language of the Afrocentric
    Scientific Community
    To study ancient afrocentric studies the africalogical researcher has had to become skilled in understanding and reading non-English languages. DuBois (1970) noted that:
    The time has not yet come for a complete history of the
    Negro peoples. Archaeological research in Africa has
    just begun, and many sources of information in Arabian,
    Portuguese, and other tongues are not fully at our
    command....(p.3).
    For the heroes of africalogical research such as Delany, Blyden, DuBois, Parker, Perry and Williams, a knowledge of Latin and \or Greek were a requirement for normal scientific study of the classical and Old Testament literature which served as the basis for the creation of the theoretical paradigms associated with ASAH.
    In addition to possessing a reading knowledge of these Eurocentric classical languages for Western thought, africalogical researchers have also had to have a knowledge of modern European languages. This has been necessary because of the fact that much of the research supporting the ASAH paradigms has usually been published in French and German. One of the reasons that many of the contemporary africalogical researchers interested in early history use outdated references in their work, is due to their ignorance of French and German.
    Proficiency in a language other than English, helped africalogical researchers conduct the normal africalogical social science. It was DuBois' (1965, 1970) and Hansberry's knowledge of German that allowed these afrocentrists to conduct research into the role of Blacks in Egypt and Ethiopia. J.A. Rogers mastered many languages including French and German to prove that Blacks inhabited almost every continent on the globe. Dr. C. A. Winters (1977,1981\1982, 1985, 1991, 1994) had to learn Arabic, Chinese, Malinke, Portuguese, Otomi, Mayan, Swahili, Tamil and Tokharian (Kushana) to conduct his africalogical studies of Blacks in Asia and the Americas.
    In the 1960's due to the rise of independence in the east African country of Tanzania, Swahili became a language used by africalogical scientists. Swahili terms were used to explain and define the phenomena associated with africalogy. This is one of the reasons that the terms used in the Kwanza ceremonies practiced by blacks are Swahili lexical items (Coleman, 1971).
    Swahili is still among africalogical researchers but today Egyptian is recognized as the classical language for africalogical research (Wimby, 1980). Diop (1974,1991) popularized the idea that Egyptian should be used as the classical language for the study of ancient africalogical language and historical studies. As a result, most of the africalogical researchers today concentrate on Egypt and use Egyptian terms to explain the culture and Proto-African language of Africa people (Carruthers, 1977,1980).

    The Africalogical Textbooks
    The foundation of any mature science is its articulation in an authoritive text (Kuhn, 1996, 136). The africalogical textbooks published by Hopkins (1905), Perry (1893) and Williams (1883) provided the vocabulary themes for further afrocentric social science research.
    The pedagogy for ancient africalogical research was well established by the end of the 19th century by African American researchers well versed in the classical languages and knowledge of Greek and Latin. Cornish and Russwurm (1827) in the Freedom Journal, were the first African Americans to discuss and explain the "Ancient Model" of history. These afrocentric social scientists used the classics to prove that the Blacks founded civilization in Egypt, Ethiopia, Babylon and Ninevah. Cornish and Russwurm (1827) made it clear that archaeological research supported the classical, or "Ancient Model" of history.
    Edward Blyden (1869) also used classical sources to discuss the ancient history of African people. In his work he not only discussed the evidence for Blacks in West Asia and Egypt, he also discussed the role of Blacks in ancient America (Blyden, 1869, 78).
    By 1883, africalogical researchers began to publish book on African American history. W. Williams (1883) wrote the first textbook on African American history. In the History of the Negro Race in America, Dr. Williams provided the schema for all future africalogical history text.
    Dr. Williams (1883) confirmed the classical traditions for Blacks founding civilization in both Africa (Egypt, Ethiopia) and West Asia. In addition, to confirming the "Ancient Model" of history, Dr. Williams (1883) also mentioned the presence of Blacks in Indo-China and the Malay Peninsula.
    A decade later R.L. Perry (1893) also presented evidence to confirm the classical traditions of Blacks founding Egypt, Greece and the Mesopotamian civilization. He also provided empirical evidence for the role of Blacks in Phoenicia, thus increasing the scope of the ASAH paradigms.
    Pauline E. Hopkins (1905) added further articulation of the ASAH paradigms of the application of these paradigms in understanding the role of Blacks in West Asia and Africa. Hopkins (1905) provided further confirmation of the role of Blacks in Southeast Asia, and expanded the scope of africalogical research to China (1905).
    This review of the 19th century africalogical social scientific research indicate confirmation of the "Ancient Model" for the early history of Blacks. We also see a movement away from self-published africalogical research, and publication of research, and the publication of research articles on afrocentric themes, to the publication of textbooks.
    It was in these books that the paradigms associated with the "Ancient Model" and ASAH were confirmed, and given reliability by empirical research. It was these texts which provided the pedagogic vehicles for the perpetuation of the africalogical normal social science.
    The afrocentric textbooks of Hopkins (1905), Perry (1893) and Williams (1883) proved the reliability and validity of the ASAH paradigms. The discussion in these text of contemporary scientific research findings proving the existence of ancient civilizations in Egypt, Nubia-Sudan (Kush), Mesopotamia, Palestine and North Africa lent congruency to the classical literature which pointed to the existence of these civilizations and these African origins ( i.e., the children of Ham= Khem =Kush?).
    Dr. Winters in Afrocentrism: Myth or Science , , Has been able to update the literature regarding African civilizations in Asia, Europe and the Americas. This text provides the blueprint necessary for students to understand why the Afrocentric model of history continues to find support from the archaeological, linguistic and anthropological fields of study.
    The authors of the africalogical textbooks reported the latest archaeological and anthropological findings. The archaeological findings reported in these textbooks added precision to their analysis of the classical and Old Testament literature. This along with the discovery of artifacts on the ancient sites depicting Black\African people proved that the classical and Old Testament literature, as opposed to the "Aryan Model", objectively identified the Black\African role in ancient history. And finally, these textbooks confirmed that any examination of references in the classical literature to Blacks in Egypt, Kush, Mesopotamia and Greece\Crete exhibited constancy to the evidence recovered from archaeological excavations in the Middle East and the Aegean. They in turn disconfirmed the "Aryan Model", which proved to be a falsification of the authentic history of Blacks in early times.
    The creation of africalogical textbooks provided us with a number of facts revealing the nature of the afrocentric ancient history paradigms. They include a discussion of:
    1) the artifacts depicting Blacks found at ancient sites
    recovered through archaeological excavation;
    2) the confirmation of the validity of the classical and Old
    Testament references to Blacks as founders of civilization in Africa and Asia;
    3) the presence of isolated pockets of Blacks existing outside Africa; and
    4) that the contemporary Arab people in modern Egypt are
    not the descendants of the ancient Egyptians.
    The early africalogical textbooks also outlined the africalogical themes research should endeavor to study. A result, of the data collected by the africalogical ancient history research pioneers led to the development of three facts by the end of the 19th century, which needed to be solved by the afrocentric paradigms:
    (1) What is the exact relationship of ancient Egypt, to Blacks in other parts of Africa;
    (2) How and when did Blacks settle America, Asia and Europe;
    (3) What are the contributions of the Blacks to the rise, and cultural expression ancient Black\African civilizations;
    (4) Did Africans settle parts of America in ancient times.
    These paradigms provided the foundation for africalogical research in the 20th century.
                 Afrocentric Social Science Revolutions
                               that Changed the Africalogical World View
    Considerable progress has been made in the africalogical research of ancient history (DuBois, 1965, 1970; Diop, 1974,1991; Winters 1981\1982, 1991, 1994), classical studies (Parker, 1917, 1918) and the role of Blacks in ancient Indo-China and China (Winters, 1985) over the past 90 years. Marcus Garvey (1966) and DuBois (1965,1970) had a tremendous influence in the study of ancient Black history.
    Marcus Garvey with the founding of the UNIA attracted many africalogical researchers to his organization. Some of these researchers wrote articles for the Negro World newspaper. These scholars formed the foundation for the africalogical scientific community including C.G Woodson, J. A. Rogers, William Ferris, Gerge W. Parker and Arthur A. Schomberg.
    In addition to members of the UNIA playing a prominent role in the precision of prediction of the africalogical paradigm we find that afrocentric researchers belonging to the Hamitic League of the World (HLW), also contributed greatly to the enhancement of the "Ancient Model" and the ASAH paradigms at the turn of the 20th century. John Albert Williams founded the HLW. Two its most prominent members include G. W. Parker (1917,1918) and A.A. Schomberg (1925).
    G.W. Parker greatly expanded the ASAH paradigm for classical study by providing a focused study of the role of blacks in Greece. Parker (1917) identified these ancient Afro-Greeks as Pelasgians. He also used linguistics to illustrate that the names of many Greek heroes betrayed there African, not Indo-European origin. In addition, Parker gave us the most detailed discussion of Blacks in India up to his time (Parker, 1918).
    The second major confirmation for the "Ancient Model" of history was made by DuBois (1965,1970). In the Negro published in 1915, DuBois explained the African presence in Egypt and ancient Kush and a comprehensive analysis of the West African empires.
    W.E.B. DuBois (1924) also firmly placed the presence of Blacks in America as a legitimate research area for africalogical researchers. In The Gift of Black Folks, discussed the Black presence in ancient America, including European references to Pre-Columbian Blacks, and the influence of Africans on the Amerindian religions (DuBois,1924). The confirmation of this paradigm was made by ( Clegg, 1975; Lawrence, 1962; Thompson, 1975; Winters, 1981\1982)
    In The World and Africa, DuBois (1965) provides a full explanation of the role of Blacks in the early world. He explains the history of Blacks in China and India (pp.176-200); Blacks in Europe(the Pre-Indo-European Greeks and during the Dark Age of Greece), and Asia Minor (pp. 115-127), and the Egyptian foundation of Grecian thought (pp. 125-126).
    The major revolution in the ASAH was the research of Diop (1974, 1991). Diop, a Senegalese expert on Egyptian and African history made important contributions to the ASAH paradigms, including:
    1) clarification of the African role in Egypt;
    2) proved positively that the West African people formerly
    lived in close proximity to the Egyptians who were in many cases their ancestors;
    3) made Mdu Neter the Egyptian language the classical language for ancient africalogical research; and
    4) developed the genetic model as the major paradigm in
    in the ASAH (Diop, 1991).
    In general Diop (1974, 1991) caused an africalogical social scientific revolution because he was able to prove that Egypt was the archetypical civilization for many West Africans. This was an important discovery because almost all of the slaves that were sold in the United States had originally came from West Africa. Verification of the Egyptian origin of West Africans provided African Americans with relationship to the ancient Egyptians.
    History of Blacks in America from Pre-History to 1877: A Common Core State Standards History 
    Moreover, Diop's use of linguistics, and anthropological evidence to confirm the African origin of Egypt eliminated the need for africalogical researchers to use the classical writers to prove the African origin of Egypt (Diop, 1977, 1978, 1981, 1986, 1987, 1988). This finding by Diop has led africalogical researchers to seek a better understanding of African philosophy through an interpretation of Egyptian philosophy. Moreover, africalogical researchers have also began the reconstruction of the Paleo-African language used by Blacks in prehistoric times (Anselin, 1982, 1982b, 1989; Winters, 1994) so that we will know more about the culture and civilization of the Proto-Africans.
    Egyptian Language: The Mountains of the Moon , Niger-Congo Speakers and the Origin of Egypt
    The last major confirmation of the ASAH paradigms was made by Clyde Ahmad Winters (1977, 1979, 1981, 1983a, 1983c, 1983d, 1984,1985) when he expanded our understanding of the role of Blacks\Africans in Indo-China, India and China; and the ancient literacy of Blacks (1979, 1983d, 1985c, 1986b). Using linguistic, anthropological and historical evidence, he proved that the earliest cultures of China and Indo-China were founded by Blacks from West Africa and modern Ethiopia (Winters, 1979, 1983d, 1985c, 1986b).
    The Ancient Blacks of China  The Ancient Black Civilizations of Asia 

    Winters also made it clear that the earliest Japanese were Blacks and that Japanese is related to African languages (Winters, 1979, 1981, 1983a, 1983c, 1984). In addition he was able to prove that the founders of Xia and Shang were of African and Dravidian origin (1983c,1985c).
    Using the findings of Wiener in regards to the writing of the Olmecs Winters discovered that the Blacks from West Africa left numerous inscriptions written in the Manding language (Winters, 1977, 1979, 1983a, 1985b) . Winters later discovered that due to the cognition between the Mande writing and ancient scripts used by the Minoans and Indus Valley he could read the Indus Valley Writing and the Linear A inscriptions (1985b).
    This africalogical research by Winters (1981/1982, 1983b, 1983d, 1989a, 1991, 1994) made it clear that the first civilizations in Indo-China and China were founded by Blacks. He has also proved the lie to Hume's (1875) claim that Blacks have "No literacy" and "No letters".

    Conclusion
    In conclusion, the africalogical study of ancient history is an empirical area of social science research founded by africalogical perennialists in the 19th century. This review of the structure of scientific revolutions in the africalogical study of ancient history has illustrated how afrocentric researchers took the theoretical paradigms of the "Ancient Model" and through verifiable research were transformed into new observations and related new africalogical ancient history paradigms. For example, the evidence of Blacks in West Asia, led to the generalization that blacks may have also inhabited early China and Japan. These hypothesis formulated in the 19th century (Hopkins, 1905; Perry, 1893), were confirmed in the 2oth century (Winters, 1980, 1981c,1983c,1985c).
    The structure of africalogical social science over the past 100 years, signifies that afrocentric researchers have used the "Ancient Model" of history to deduce new paradigms supporting the African origin of ancient civilizations around the world. These new paradigms have proved to be compatible with the "Ancient Model" that the africalogical perennialists used to make their first study of the ancient history of African Americans. Moreover, the ability of Diop (1991) and Parker (1917) to expand our knowledge of the Blacks in ancient Crete and Greece are clear indications of how scientific novelty in africalogical research often emerge simultaneously from different areas.
    REFERENCES
    Anselin, A. (1982). Le mythe d' Europe. Paris: Editions Anthropos.
    _______.(1982b). "Zeus, Ethiopien Minos Tamoul", Carbet Revue
    Martinique de Sciences Humaines,no. 2:31-50.
    _______.(1989). "Le Lecon Dravidienne",Carbet Revue Martinique
    de Sciences Humaines, no.9:7-58.
    Asante,M.A. (July-August, 1996). "Ancient Truths", Emerge , 66-70.
    Asante,M.K. (1990) Kemet,Afrocentricity,and Knowledge. Trenton
    ,NJ:Africa World Press.
    _________ (1991). "The Afrocentric idea in Education",Journal
    of Negro Education,60(2):170-180.
    __________.(December 1991/January 1992). "Afrocentric Curri-
    culum".Educational Leadership, pp.28-31.
    Bernal, M. (1996, Spring). The Afrocentric interpretation of history: Bernal replies to Lefkowitz. Journal of Blacks in Higher Education, 86-95.
    Bernal,M. (1987). Black Athena. New York: Free Association Press. Volume 1.
    ________. (1991). Black Athena. New York: Free Association Press. Volume 2.
    Blyden, E.W. ( January, 1869). The Negro in ancient history.
    Methodist Quarterly Review, 71-93.
    Blyden, E.W. (1887). Christianity, Islam and the Negro Race. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
    _____________. (1890). The African Problem and the method for
    its solution. Washington, D.C.: Gibson Brothers.
    _______________.(1905). West Africa before Europe. London:
    C.M. Phillips.
    Clegg, L.H. (1975). Who were the first Americans? The Black
    Scholar, 7(1), 32-41.
    Coleman, B.E. (1971). A history of Swahili, The Black Scholar,
    2 (6), 13-25.
    Cornish, S. & Russwurm, J.B. (1827). European colonies in America, Freedom Journal, 1.
    Carruthers, J. (1977). Writing for Eternity, black book bulletin,
    5 (2), 32-35.
    Carruthers, J. (1980). Reflections on the history of afrocentric
    worldview, black book bulletin, 7(1), 4-13, 25.
    Delany, M.R. (1978). The origin of races and color. Baltimore, M.D.: Black Classic Press.
    Diop,C.A. (1974). The African Origin of Civilization. (ed. & Trans) by Mercer Cook, Westport:Lawrence Hill & Company.
    _________.(1977). Parente genetique de l'Egyptien Pharaonique et
    des Languaes Negro-Africaines. Dakar: IFAN ,Les Nouvelles
    Editions Africaines.
    __________.(1978) The Cultural Unity of Black Africa. Chicago: Third World Press.
    __________. (1981). A Methodology for the study of migration.
    UNESCO (Ed.), African Ethnonyms and Toponyms, (pp.87-110).
    Paris: UNESCO.
    ___________.(1986). "Formation of the Berber Branch". In Libya
    Antiqua. (ed.) by Unesco,(Paris: UNESCO) pp.69-73.
    ____________.(1987). Precolonial Black Africa. (trans. ) by
    Harold Salemson, Westport: Lawrence Hill & Company.
    ____________.(1988). Nouvelles recherches sur l'Egyptien ancient
    et les langues Negro-Africaines Modernes. Paris: Presence
    Africaine.
    _____________(1991). Civilization or Barbarism: An Authentic Anthropology. (trans.) by Yaa-Lengi Meema Ngemi and (ed.) by
    H.J. Salemson and Marjoliiw de Jager, Westport:Lawrence
    Hill and Company.
    Douglas, F. (1966). The claims of the Negro ethnologically considered. In H. Brotz (Ed.), Negro social and political
    thought (pp. 226-244). New York: Basic Books, Inc., Pub.
    DuBois, W.E.B. (1924). The Gift of Black Folks. Boston.
    DuBois, W.E.B. (1970). The Negro. New York: Oxford University
    Press.
    DuBois, W.E.B. (1965). The world and Africa. New York :
    International Publishers Co., Inc.
    Ferris, W.H. (1913). The African abroad. 2 vols. New Haven,CT
    :Tuttle, Morehouse and Taylor.
    Garvey, M. (1966). Who and What is a Negro. In H. Brotz (Ed.), Negro social and political thought (pp. 560-562).New York: Basic Books, Inc. Publishers.
    Graves, Robert. (1980). The Greek Myths. Middlesex:Peguin Books
    Ltd. 2 volumes.
    Hansberry, L.H. (1981). Africa and Africans: As seen by classical
    writers (Vol. 2). Washington, D.C.: Howard University Press.
    Hopkins, P.E. (1905). A Primer of Facts pertaining to the early greatness of the african race and the possibility of restoration by its descendants-with epilogue. Cambridge: P.E. Hopkins & Com.
    Hume, D. (1875). Essays: Moral political and literary. T.H. Green
    and T.H. Grose. 2 Vols. London.
    Jackson, J. (1974). Introduction to African civilization.
    Secaucus, N.J.: Citadel Press.
    James, G.M. (1954). Stolen legacy. New York: Philosophical Library.
    Kuhn, T.S. (1996). The structure of scientific revolution.
    Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    Lacouperie, Terrien de. (1891). The black heads of Babylonia and ancient China, The Babylonian and Oriental Record5 (11), 233-246.
    Lawrence, H.G. (1962). African explorers of the New World,
    The Crisis, 321-332.
    Merton, R.K. (1957). Social theory aand social structure.
    Glencoe, Ill. : The Free Press.
    Moitt,B. (1989). "Chiekh Anta Diop and the African Diaspora:
    Historical Continuity and Socio-Cultural Symbolism".
    Presence Africaine, no. 149-150:347-360.
    Parker,G.W. (1917) . "The African Origin of Grecian Civilization
    ".Journal of Negro History, 2(3):334-344.
    ___________. (1981). The Children of the Sun. Baltimore,Md.:
    Black Classic Press.
    Perry, R.L. (1893). The Cushite. Brooklyn: The Literary Union.
    Rawlinson, George. (1928).The History of Herodutus. New York
    : Tudor.
    Schomburg, A.A. (March, 1925).The Negro digs up his past.
    Survey Graphic, 670-672.
    Schomburg, A.A. (1979). Racial integrity. Baltimore, M.D.:
    Black Classic Press.
    Thompson, Jr. A.A. (1975). Pre-Columbian [African] presence
    in the Western Hemisphere,Negro History Bulletin, 38 (7), 452-456.
    Williams, G.W. (1869). History of the Negro Race in America. New York: G.P. Putnam.
    Wimby, D. (1980). The Greco-Roman Tradition concerning Ethiopia and Egypt, black books bulletin, 7(1), 14-19, 25.
    Winters, C.A. (1977). The influence of the Mande scripts on ancient American writing systems", Bulletin l'de IFAN, T39, serie B, no. 2 (1977), pp.941-967.
    Winters, C.A. (1979). Manding Scripts in the New World", Journal of African Civilizations, l(1), 80-97.
    Winters,C.A. (December 1981/ January 1982). Mexico's Black Heritage. The Black Collegian, 76-84.
    Winters, C.A. (1983a). "The Ancient Manding Script". In Blacks
    in Science:Ancient and Modern. (ed.) by Ivan van Sertima, (New Brunswick: Transaction Books) pp.208-215.
    __________. (1983b). "Les Fondateurs de la Grece venaient d'Afrique en passant par la Crete". Afrique Histoire (Dakar), no.8:13-18.
    _________. (1983c) "Famous Black Greeks Important in the development of Greek Culture". Return to the Source,2(1):8.
    ________.(1983d). "Blacks in Ancient China, Part 1, The Founders
    of Xia and Shang", Journal of Black Studies 1 (2), 8-13.
    ________. (1984a). "Blacks in Europe before the Europeans".
    Return to the Source, 3(1):26-33.
    Winters, C.A. (1984b). Blacks in Ancient America, Colorlines, 3(2), 27-28.
    Winters, C.A. (1984c). Africans found first American Civilization , African Monitor, l , pp.16-18.
    _________.(1985a). "The Indus Valley Writing and related
    Scripts of the 3rd Millennium BC". India Past and
    Present, 2(1):13-19.
    __________. (1985b). "The Proto-Culture of the Dravidians,
    Manding and Sumerians". Tamil Civilization,3(1):1-9.
    __________. (1985c). "The Far Eastern Origin of the Tamils",
    Journal of Tamil Studies , no.27, pp.65-92.
    __________.(1986). The Migration Routes of the Proto-Mande.
    The Mankind Quarterly,27 (1), 77-96.
    _________.(1986b). Dravidian Settlements in Ancient Polynesia.
    India Past and Present3 (2), 225-241.
    __________. (1988). "Common African and Dravidian Place Name
    Elements". South Asian Anthropologist, 9(1):33-36.
    __________. (1989a). "Tamil, Sumerian, Manding and the Genetic
    Model". International Journal of Dravidian Linguistics,18(1):98-127.
    __________. (1989b). "Review of Dr. Asko Parpola's 'The Coming of the Aryans'",International Journal of Dravidian Linguistics, 18(2):98-127.
    __________. (1990). "The Dravido-Harappan Colonization of Central Asia". Central Asiatic Journal, 34(1/2):120-144.
    ___________. (1991). "The Proto-Sahara". The Dravidian Encyclopaedia, (Trivandrum: International School of Dravidian Linguistics) pp.553-556. Volume l.
    ----------.(1994). Afrocentrism: A valid frame of reference, Journal of Black Studies25 (2), 170-190.
    _________.(1994b). The Dravidian and African laguages, International Journal of Dravidian Linguistics23 (1), 34-52.
    Woodson, C.G. & Wesley, C.H. (1972). The Negro in Our History. Washington, D.C. Associated Publisher.