The first Indo-European speakers were the Hittites. They entered Anatolia and conquered the non-IE speaking people.
I am beginning to believe that after the Hittites defeated the Hatti and Kaska and other peoples belonging to the Hurrian and Mitanni kingdoms,these people were uprooted and forced into Iran. The lost of Anatolia to the Hittites, probably forced
these people to become nomads.
In Iran they probably formed a significant portion of the Proto-Aryapopulation. Here they may have met Indo-Iranian speaking people,who may have practiced a hunter-gatherer existence, that adopted aspects of their culture , especially the religion and use of Mitanni religious terms and chariot culture.
Joining forces with the Mitannian-Hurrian exiles they probably attacked Dravidian and Austronesian speaking people who probably lived in walled cities. The Austronesian and Dravidian people probably came in intimate contact during the Xia and Shang periods of China.
I have to reject the Afghanistan origin for the Indo-Iranian speaking people because the cultures there in ancient times show no affinity to Indo-European civilization.
Given the Austronesian and Dravidian elements in Sanskrit and etc.,I would have to date the expansion of the Indo-Aryan people sometime after 800 BC, across Iran,India down into Afghanistan, since the Austronesia people probably did not begin to enter India until after the fall of the Anyang Shang Dynasty sometime after 1000 BC. This would explain why you declare that "the Vedic and Avestan mantras are not carbon copies of each other", they may have had a similar genesis, but they were nativised by different groups of Indic and Iranian speakers after the settlement of nomadic Hurrian and Mitanni people in Iran.
Tuesday, July 13, 2010
Thoughts on the Aryan Invasion of India 1
The Tamil speakers have had a tremendous influence on World history because this group spread into Europe, India, Central Asia on into China and Japan. It appears that the first waves of Dravidian speakers (especially Tamil) went to Asia in search of metals which they exported back to Middle Africa.
The Tamil history is interesting because while one group separated from the main body in the Indus Valley to settle much of South India, another group migrated into China and founded the Shang Dynasty. These Tamil speakers were forced out of China, through Yunnan, across Southeast Asia and through Tibet back into India. This explains the influence of Dravidian (Tamil) on so many languages in Europe and Asia, including the Islands of the Pacific and Indian Oceans.
Once you recognize the history of the Tamil in Anatolia, as represented by the Kassites, and the fact that the Hattic, Hurrian and Kaska people also belonged the C-Group (or Kushite) people who left Nubia in search of metals after 3500 BC explains why Dravidian languages are at the base of Sanskrit and the Pakrits. Although the original "Aryans" spoke languages related to the Dravidian group when they entered India they came to settle new lands in where the majority of the population lived in city-states instead of an Empire with a central administration.
The Hattic, Kaska and Kassite people desperate for land because the Hittites, the first Indo-European speakers had forced them from Anatolia sent these nationalities eastward in search of new lands. Under the Elamites and original Persians these nomadic people were unable to establish themselves in Iran, except among the hunter-gather groups which may have been composed of the Proto-Indo-Iranian speakers.The Anatolians probably intermarried with Iranian speakers and probably adopted many Elamite/Old Persian terms, and like the Elamite/ Old Persians used the term Arya to denote their Anatolian heritage as rulers and elits.
Consequently, when the Aryans (Kassite, Hurrian, Hattic,and Iranians) probably entered India and found much of the authority situated in city-states (walled villages) the Aryans (Kassites, Hattic, Hurrian and Iranian speakers) were able to concentrate their forces and easily overthrow the Dravidian City-States and thus conqueror the North. The nomadic nature of these Aryans and led to their lost of the polish and sofhistication they manifested when they were the rulers of Anatolia.
As a result, there were probably numerous attempts of the Vedic people to return to Anatolia and recapture their heritage. But over time Europeans and Gutians took control of the region and they were forced make India the center of their culture and civilization.
If this is an accurate account of the origin and spread of the Indo-Iranian people to India, it would appear that the Indo-Iranian people would have remained a significant minority in India if not for the fact the India they entered was made up of City-States , instead of an Empire with a centralized polity and military.
The Tamil history is interesting because while one group separated from the main body in the Indus Valley to settle much of South India, another group migrated into China and founded the Shang Dynasty. These Tamil speakers were forced out of China, through Yunnan, across Southeast Asia and through Tibet back into India. This explains the influence of Dravidian (Tamil) on so many languages in Europe and Asia, including the Islands of the Pacific and Indian Oceans.
Once you recognize the history of the Tamil in Anatolia, as represented by the Kassites, and the fact that the Hattic, Hurrian and Kaska people also belonged the C-Group (or Kushite) people who left Nubia in search of metals after 3500 BC explains why Dravidian languages are at the base of Sanskrit and the Pakrits. Although the original "Aryans" spoke languages related to the Dravidian group when they entered India they came to settle new lands in where the majority of the population lived in city-states instead of an Empire with a central administration.
The Hattic, Kaska and Kassite people desperate for land because the Hittites, the first Indo-European speakers had forced them from Anatolia sent these nationalities eastward in search of new lands. Under the Elamites and original Persians these nomadic people were unable to establish themselves in Iran, except among the hunter-gather groups which may have been composed of the Proto-Indo-Iranian speakers.The Anatolians probably intermarried with Iranian speakers and probably adopted many Elamite/Old Persian terms, and like the Elamite/ Old Persians used the term Arya to denote their Anatolian heritage as rulers and elits.
Consequently, when the Aryans (Kassite, Hurrian, Hattic,and Iranians) probably entered India and found much of the authority situated in city-states (walled villages) the Aryans (Kassites, Hattic, Hurrian and Iranian speakers) were able to concentrate their forces and easily overthrow the Dravidian City-States and thus conqueror the North. The nomadic nature of these Aryans and led to their lost of the polish and sofhistication they manifested when they were the rulers of Anatolia.
As a result, there were probably numerous attempts of the Vedic people to return to Anatolia and recapture their heritage. But over time Europeans and Gutians took control of the region and they were forced make India the center of their culture and civilization.
If this is an accurate account of the origin and spread of the Indo-Iranian people to India, it would appear that the Indo-Iranian people would have remained a significant minority in India if not for the fact the India they entered was made up of City-States , instead of an Empire with a centralized polity and military.
Thoughts on the Aryan Invasion of India 2
The BRW tradition originated in Nubia and spread first to the
Indus Valley and thence to India. The earliest occurrence of BRW in
South Asia, occurs on the Kathiwad peninsula, parallel ware has been
found at the lowest levels of Harappa and Lothal dating to 2400 B.C.
(Rao 1972) Dr. Nayar (1977). has shown that the Harappan BRW has
affinities to predynastic Egyptian and West Asian BRW dating to the
same period. Rao (1972) has established the unitary nature of the BRW industry from Nubia to India.
The Harappans were masters of hydraulic engineering.These
Dravidians were a riverine people that practiced irrigation
agriculture. They had both the shaduf and windmills.
The Indus region is an area of uncertain rains because it is
located on the fringes of the monsoon (Fairservis 1987, p.47).
Settlers in the Indus Valley had to suffer frequent droughts and
floods. Severe droughts frequently occurred in the Indus Valley so the
people dug wells to insure for themselves a safe supply of water. J.M.
Kenoyer, in Ancient cities of the Indus Valley Civilization (Oxford
University Press ,1998) maintains that a combination of extensive
flooding and shifti ng rivers destroyed the agricultural foundations of
the Indus Valley and led to many Dravidians migrating out of the
Harappan cities.
To compensate for the adverse ecological conditions, the Harappans settled sites along the Indus river (Fairservis 1987, p.48).
The Dravido-Harappans occupied over 1,000 sites in the riverine
Indus Valley environments where they had soil and water reserves. The Harappan sites are spread from the Indus Valley to Ai Kharnoum in northeastern Afghanistan and southward into India. In Baluchistan and Afghanistan Dravidian languages are still spoken today. Other Harappan sites have been found scattered in the regions adjacent to the Arabian sea, the Derajat, Kashmir and the Doab.
The Harappans were organized into chiefdoms, averaging between two and five acres (Fairservis 1987). The Harappans were
sedentary-pastoral people organized into various corporations such as sailor-fishermen, smiths, merchants and farmers. The Harappans also possessed the social technology of writing seals.
The Harappan sites are small and occupy only a few acres with
little depth. This suggests that the Dravidian speaking colonists
settled the Indus Valley over a period of a few decades (Fairservis
1987,p.46). Fairservis (1987,p.47) has shown that the site of
Mohenjodaro was occupied for around 200 years.
The Indo-Aryan speaking people became strong in India after 1000 B.C. The Aryans made the Dravidians and other native Indian people into slaves like the Munda. They organized a caste system based on race.
The highest caste was based on the priesthood or Brahman, after him came the rajanya or warriors and aristocracy caste and then the
craftsmen or Varsya caste, and lastly the Sudra caste, called pariah.
The Sudra represented the first Black population that lived in India
before the coming of the Indo-Aryans.
In the early Indian writings the aristocracy an d warrior caste
was referred too as rajanya. After the kshatriya conquered the
Indo-Aryans, the warrior class was called Kshatriya. The Brahmanic civilization lasted from the 3rd to the 4th centuries B.C. During this period the Laws of Manu were written. The Laws of Manu became India's first civil and political code.
There were two Indo-Aryan migrations into India. The first waves
of Indo-Aryans arrived the Indo-Iranian borderlands when ecological
conditions had improved. These Indo-Aryans began to settle areas
formerly occupied by Dravidian-speaking Harappans.
As the Aryans moved southward other Dravidian-speaking groups living in isolated villages in the Punjab and Haryana, probably allowed
Indo-Aryan tribal groups to settle in their respected urban centers.
This would explain the association of BRW with PGW in the Punjab
dating between 1000-1300 B.C.( Singh 1982, p.xli). It would also
explain the mention of the highly developed civilization of the
non-Indo-Aryan speakers in the Rg Veda.
The second and major wave of Indo-Aryans probably entered northern India around 1000-800 B.C. This would explain why almost all the dependable PGW dates cluster around 800-350 B.C.(Agrawal & Kusumgar 1974, p.132).
By the advent of the second Indo-Aryan migration the Dravidians
were weakened by drought and famine and they were easily defeated and pushed out of the Gajarat. The PGW folk appears to have pushed the Dravidians into the Dekkan.
Due to the early Dravidian presence in Northern India there is a
Dravidian substratum in Indo-Aryan. There are Dravidian loan words in the Rg Veda, even though Aryan recorders of this work were situated in the Punjab, which was occupied around this time by the BRW using Dravidians.
Emeneau and Burrow (1962) have found 500 Dravidian loan words in Sanskrit. The Dravidian loans in Indo-Aryan are expected to reach 750. Indo-Aryan illustrates widespread structural borrowing from
Dravidian in addition to the lexical loans. For example, Kuiper
(1967) has noted the increasing frequency of Dravidian type retroflex
consonants in Indo-Aryan. Southward (1977) has also recorded the
Dravidian structural features borrowed by the Indo-Aryans.
A new hypothesis about Indo-Aryan has been advanced by Dr. K.
Loganathan (Loga). Dr. Loganathan has presented convincing evidence that Sanskrit is really a form of Tamil, which is the base of this writing system. He has also shown a close relationship between Vedic and Sumerian, by way of Tamil.
Indus Valley and thence to India. The earliest occurrence of BRW in
South Asia, occurs on the Kathiwad peninsula, parallel ware has been
found at the lowest levels of Harappa and Lothal dating to 2400 B.C.
(Rao 1972) Dr. Nayar (1977). has shown that the Harappan BRW has
affinities to predynastic Egyptian and West Asian BRW dating to the
same period. Rao (1972) has established the unitary nature of the BRW industry from Nubia to India.
The Harappans were masters of hydraulic engineering.These
Dravidians were a riverine people that practiced irrigation
agriculture. They had both the shaduf and windmills.
The Indus region is an area of uncertain rains because it is
located on the fringes of the monsoon (Fairservis 1987, p.47).
Settlers in the Indus Valley had to suffer frequent droughts and
floods. Severe droughts frequently occurred in the Indus Valley so the
people dug wells to insure for themselves a safe supply of water. J.M.
Kenoyer, in Ancient cities of the Indus Valley Civilization (Oxford
University Press ,1998) maintains that a combination of extensive
flooding and shifti ng rivers destroyed the agricultural foundations of
the Indus Valley and led to many Dravidians migrating out of the
Harappan cities.
To compensate for the adverse ecological conditions, the Harappans settled sites along the Indus river (Fairservis 1987, p.48).
The Dravido-Harappans occupied over 1,000 sites in the riverine
Indus Valley environments where they had soil and water reserves. The Harappan sites are spread from the Indus Valley to Ai Kharnoum in northeastern Afghanistan and southward into India. In Baluchistan and Afghanistan Dravidian languages are still spoken today. Other Harappan sites have been found scattered in the regions adjacent to the Arabian sea, the Derajat, Kashmir and the Doab.
The Harappans were organized into chiefdoms, averaging between two and five acres (Fairservis 1987). The Harappans were
sedentary-pastoral people organized into various corporations such as sailor-fishermen, smiths, merchants and farmers. The Harappans also possessed the social technology of writing seals.
The Harappan sites are small and occupy only a few acres with
little depth. This suggests that the Dravidian speaking colonists
settled the Indus Valley over a period of a few decades (Fairservis
1987,p.46). Fairservis (1987,p.47) has shown that the site of
Mohenjodaro was occupied for around 200 years.
The Indo-Aryan speaking people became strong in India after 1000 B.C. The Aryans made the Dravidians and other native Indian people into slaves like the Munda. They organized a caste system based on race.
The highest caste was based on the priesthood or Brahman, after him came the rajanya or warriors and aristocracy caste and then the
craftsmen or Varsya caste, and lastly the Sudra caste, called pariah.
The Sudra represented the first Black population that lived in India
before the coming of the Indo-Aryans.
In the early Indian writings the aristocracy an d warrior caste
was referred too as rajanya. After the kshatriya conquered the
Indo-Aryans, the warrior class was called Kshatriya. The Brahmanic civilization lasted from the 3rd to the 4th centuries B.C. During this period the Laws of Manu were written. The Laws of Manu became India's first civil and political code.
There were two Indo-Aryan migrations into India. The first waves
of Indo-Aryans arrived the Indo-Iranian borderlands when ecological
conditions had improved. These Indo-Aryans began to settle areas
formerly occupied by Dravidian-speaking Harappans.
As the Aryans moved southward other Dravidian-speaking groups living in isolated villages in the Punjab and Haryana, probably allowed
Indo-Aryan tribal groups to settle in their respected urban centers.
This would explain the association of BRW with PGW in the Punjab
dating between 1000-1300 B.C.( Singh 1982, p.xli). It would also
explain the mention of the highly developed civilization of the
non-Indo-Aryan speakers in the Rg Veda.
The second and major wave of Indo-Aryans probably entered northern India around 1000-800 B.C. This would explain why almost all the dependable PGW dates cluster around 800-350 B.C.(Agrawal & Kusumgar 1974, p.132).
By the advent of the second Indo-Aryan migration the Dravidians
were weakened by drought and famine and they were easily defeated and pushed out of the Gajarat. The PGW folk appears to have pushed the Dravidians into the Dekkan.
Due to the early Dravidian presence in Northern India there is a
Dravidian substratum in Indo-Aryan. There are Dravidian loan words in the Rg Veda, even though Aryan recorders of this work were situated in the Punjab, which was occupied around this time by the BRW using Dravidians.
Emeneau and Burrow (1962) have found 500 Dravidian loan words in Sanskrit. The Dravidian loans in Indo-Aryan are expected to reach 750. Indo-Aryan illustrates widespread structural borrowing from
Dravidian in addition to the lexical loans. For example, Kuiper
(1967) has noted the increasing frequency of Dravidian type retroflex
consonants in Indo-Aryan. Southward (1977) has also recorded the
Dravidian structural features borrowed by the Indo-Aryans.
A new hypothesis about Indo-Aryan has been advanced by Dr. K.
Loganathan (Loga). Dr. Loganathan has presented convincing evidence that Sanskrit is really a form of Tamil, which is the base of this writing system. He has also shown a close relationship between Vedic and Sumerian, by way of Tamil.
Dravidian Substratum in Indo-Aryan Languages
Due to early Dravidian settlement in Northern India there is a Dravidian substratum in Indo Aryan. There are Dravidian loans in the Rg Veda, even though Aryan recorders of this work were situated in the Punjab which occupied around this time by the BRW Dravidians.
There are islands of Dravidian speakers in Afghanistan, Iran and Pakistan. There are over 300,000 Brahui speakers in Qualat, Hairpur and Hyderabad districts of Pakistan. There are an additional 40,000 Brahui in Emeneau and Burrow (1962) found 500 Dravidian loan words in Sanskrit. In addition, Indo-Aryan illustrates a widespread structural borrowing from Dravidian in addition to 700 lexical loans (Kuiper 1967; Southward 1977; Winters 1989).
Iran and several thousand along the southern border of Russia and Yugoslavia. (ISDL 1983:227)
Emeneau and Burrow (1962) have found 500 Dravidian loan words in Sanskrit. the number of Dravidian loans in Indo Aryan is expected to reach 750.
There are numerous examples of Indo Aryan structural borrowings from Dravidian. For example, the Bengali and Oriya plural suffix ra is analogous to the Tamil plural suffix ar. Both of these suffixes are restricted to names of intelligent beings. (Chatterji 1970:173) Oriya borrowed the gura plural suffix from the Dravidians. (Mahapatra 1983:67) The syntax of the Indo Aryan languages is ambivalent because of the Dravidian influence on these languages. As a result, they represent both SOV and SVO traits.
There are islands of Dravidian speakers in Afghanistan, Iran and Pakistan. There are over 300,000 Brahui speakers in Qualat, Hairpur and Hyderabad districts of Pakistan. There are an additional 40,000 Brahui in Emeneau and Burrow (1962) found 500 Dravidian loan words in Sanskrit. In addition, Indo-Aryan illustrates a widespread structural borrowing from Dravidian in addition to 700 lexical loans (Kuiper 1967; Southward 1977; Winters 1989).
Iran and several thousand along the southern border of Russia and Yugoslavia. (ISDL 1983:227)
Emeneau and Burrow (1962) have found 500 Dravidian loan words in Sanskrit. the number of Dravidian loans in Indo Aryan is expected to reach 750.
There are numerous examples of Indo Aryan structural borrowings from Dravidian. For example, the Bengali and Oriya plural suffix ra is analogous to the Tamil plural suffix ar. Both of these suffixes are restricted to names of intelligent beings. (Chatterji 1970:173) Oriya borrowed the gura plural suffix from the Dravidians. (Mahapatra 1983:67) The syntax of the Indo Aryan languages is ambivalent because of the Dravidian influence on these languages. As a result, they represent both SOV and SVO traits.
Friday, June 11, 2010
A Short History of African and Classical Mongoloid People
I accept the fact there were ancient Blacks in Asia. These Blacks were the Australian type people who mainly live in Australia and the Hill regions of Oceania.
The coastal Melanesians on the otherhand, are descendants of recent Africans who settled the area after being forced from Asia. The Polynesians/Filipinos and etc., who are known as the original Mongoloid people and called Classical Mongoloid in the literature probably originated in Anatolia or Mesopotamia.
The Australians are the original settlers of Asia (around 60kybp), and may represent members of the first out of Africa migrants. I never refer to these people as Africans, although I do recognize them as Blacks.
The Anu or Black pygmies probably represent the second African migration of homo sapien sapiens out of Africa. I would class these people with the CroMagnon/Grimaldi group who entered Iberia after 34kybp. Remnants of this great people were found on every continent when Europeans first explored the world.
The Bushman(/Proto-Bantu) type may represent the Natufians who began to migrate out of Africa after 20,000 and settled in the Levant which was first settled by Cro Magnon people who early replaced the Neanderthal folk. The Natufians would represent the fourth African migration into Eurasia.
By the time the Bushmen entered Eurasia the Classical mongoloid people who are the ancestors of the Indonesians/Vietnamese/Filipinos and etc. were probably already settled in Anatolia. The classical mongoloids probably constructed Catal Huyuk. The close relationship between Sumerian and the AustroAsiatic languages suggest that the classical Mongoloid people may have also inhabited Mesopotamia by the time the Sumerians entered the area.
It appears to have been a natural catastrophe which caused the classical mongoloids to migrate eastward. We know this because many of the former sites of the Classical mongoloids in Anatolia were occupied by the Kushites (Kaska) people after 2500 BC.
By 1200 BC the clasical mongoloids had become well established in India. Around this time they conquered the Dravidian people who founded the first Shang empire, and set up a new Shang Empire at Anyang.
By 1000 BC the Hau/Han tribes came down from the mountains and pushed the classical mongoloids southward into Yunnan and eventually Southeast Asia. The Han began to make the Yueh and li min people their slaves. The Han often used the Qiang (another Black tribe) as sacrifice victims.
The Han killed off as many Black tribes as they could. The only thing that saved the pygmies in East Asia, was the fact that they moved into the mountains in areas they could easily defend from Han attacks.
This movement of Han and classical mongoloid people southward forced the Kushite/African (Qiang, li min and other African) tribes onto the Pacific Islands. It is these Africans who represent the coastal Melanesians.
The Sumerians, Elamites, Xia (of China), Harappans of the Indus Valley and coastal Melanoids are the Proto-Saharan people known in History as the Kushites.These people originated in the Highland regions of Middle Africa, and began to occupy the former trade centers of the Anu in Eurasia and the Americas. It is for this reason that we find West African placenames in the Pacific and India.
Given the origin of the classical mongoloids in Anatolia, and the Han Chinese somewhere in North China or Central Asia,the Southeast Asians are not descendants of the first African migration to Eurasia. This is why the Chinese and Classical mongoloid people share few if any genes with the Australians. The Classical mongoloids share genes mainly with the coastal Melanesians who are of African origin, but few genes with the Chinese of East Asia.
.
The coastal Melanesians on the otherhand, are descendants of recent Africans who settled the area after being forced from Asia. The Polynesians/Filipinos and etc., who are known as the original Mongoloid people and called Classical Mongoloid in the literature probably originated in Anatolia or Mesopotamia.
The Australians are the original settlers of Asia (around 60kybp), and may represent members of the first out of Africa migrants. I never refer to these people as Africans, although I do recognize them as Blacks.
The Anu or Black pygmies probably represent the second African migration of homo sapien sapiens out of Africa. I would class these people with the CroMagnon/Grimaldi group who entered Iberia after 34kybp. Remnants of this great people were found on every continent when Europeans first explored the world.
The Bushman(/Proto-Bantu) type may represent the Natufians who began to migrate out of Africa after 20,000 and settled in the Levant which was first settled by Cro Magnon people who early replaced the Neanderthal folk. The Natufians would represent the fourth African migration into Eurasia.
By the time the Bushmen entered Eurasia the Classical mongoloid people who are the ancestors of the Indonesians/Vietnamese/Filipinos and etc. were probably already settled in Anatolia. The classical mongoloids probably constructed Catal Huyuk. The close relationship between Sumerian and the AustroAsiatic languages suggest that the classical Mongoloid people may have also inhabited Mesopotamia by the time the Sumerians entered the area.
It appears to have been a natural catastrophe which caused the classical mongoloids to migrate eastward. We know this because many of the former sites of the Classical mongoloids in Anatolia were occupied by the Kushites (Kaska) people after 2500 BC.
By 1200 BC the clasical mongoloids had become well established in India. Around this time they conquered the Dravidian people who founded the first Shang empire, and set up a new Shang Empire at Anyang.
By 1000 BC the Hau/Han tribes came down from the mountains and pushed the classical mongoloids southward into Yunnan and eventually Southeast Asia. The Han began to make the Yueh and li min people their slaves. The Han often used the Qiang (another Black tribe) as sacrifice victims.
The Han killed off as many Black tribes as they could. The only thing that saved the pygmies in East Asia, was the fact that they moved into the mountains in areas they could easily defend from Han attacks.
This movement of Han and classical mongoloid people southward forced the Kushite/African (Qiang, li min and other African) tribes onto the Pacific Islands. It is these Africans who represent the coastal Melanesians.
The Sumerians, Elamites, Xia (of China), Harappans of the Indus Valley and coastal Melanoids are the Proto-Saharan people known in History as the Kushites.These people originated in the Highland regions of Middle Africa, and began to occupy the former trade centers of the Anu in Eurasia and the Americas. It is for this reason that we find West African placenames in the Pacific and India.
Given the origin of the classical mongoloids in Anatolia, and the Han Chinese somewhere in North China or Central Asia,the Southeast Asians are not descendants of the first African migration to Eurasia. This is why the Chinese and Classical mongoloid people share few if any genes with the Australians. The Classical mongoloids share genes mainly with the coastal Melanesians who are of African origin, but few genes with the Chinese of East Asia.
.
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
Beja and Meroitic
There is increasing evidence that the Beja may provide a key to fully understanding the Meroitic language.
Some years ago I deciphered the Kharamadoye inscription. Today Beja repeat this message from their ancestors with pride as an indication to the long history of the Beja people. At Buzzle.com
http://www.buzzle.com/articles/freedom-for-dirar-ahmed-dirar-independence-for-sudans-beja-blemmyes.html
They note:
…… Hrmdoye ne qor ene ariteñ lne mdes ne mni-t kene
mk lebne ye re qe-ne q yi-t hl-ne y es bo he-ne q r lebne tro.
S-ne ariteñ net er ek li s-ne d-b li lh ne q r kene qor ene mnpte.
This was heard already before 1670 years at a moment the Blemmyan King Kharamadoye drove his compatriots to a point of national statehood at the northern area of the then ailing Meroitic kingdom in what is today's Sudanese North and Egyptian South. Using Meroitic scripture, the scribes of Kharamadoye immortalized down to our times an inscription on walls of the Mandulis temple at Talmis (modern Kalabsha). The beginning of the inscription reads in a plausible English translation as follows:
Kharamadoye the monarch and chief of the living Ariteñ, the great son and patron of Amani, you (who) revitalizes (man). The lord's voyage of discovery indeed gives the creation of Good. Act (now Amani) he travels to support good. Make a good welfare swell (for) the offering of the Chief, (he) desires indeed the restoration of eminence. The patron of good Ariteñ bows in reverence (before Amani) to evoke exalted nourishment (for) the patrons to leave a grand and exalted legacy to behold good. Oh Amani make indeed (a) revitalization (of) the monarch (and) commander of Great Napata…..”
When I first saw this claim that the Beja, represented the Blemmyan people of the Meroitic and Egyptian inscriptions I thought it might be hollow indeed. But after comparing Meroitic to Beja, the claim has considerable merit.
To test the hypothesis that the Beja language was related to meroitic, I compared Meroitic and Beja. The Beja material comes from Klaus and Charlotte Wedekind and Abuzeinab Musa, Beja Pedagogical Grammar (http://www.afrikanistik-online.de/archiv/2008/1283/beja_pedagogical_grammar_final_links_numbered.pdf ) ,
What I found from this cursory examination was most interesting. I will need to gather more vocabulary items from Beja, but I did find a number of matches:
Meroitic ……English……….. Beja
i ‘arrive at this point’ ………… bi ‘went’
t ‘he, she’ ……………………..ta ‘she’
ya ‘go’………………………….yak ‘start’
rit ‘look’……………………….rhitaa ‘you saw’
an(a) plural suffix……………..aan ‘these’
d(d) ‘say’………………………di(y) ‘say’
lb ‘energy, dynamic…………liwa ‘burn’
ken ‘to realize’……………….kana ‘to know’
bk ‘ripen’……………………..bishakwa ‘to be ripe’
The vocabulary items are interesting, but since they come from a grammar book there was not enough to provide an extensive comparison.
Meroitic and Beja share many grammatical features. For example, the pronouns are usually suffixed to verbs e.g., Beja ti bi ‘she went’, Meroitic t-i ‘he goes’. In Beja, adi is used to indicate complete action Taman adi ‘I ate it completely’, Meroitic –a, serves the same purpose akin ne a ‘he has become completely learned’. In both languages the adverb is placed behind the noun Beja takii-da ‘small man’, Meroitic pt ‘praise’: pt es ‘manifest praise’. In Beja the future tense is form by ndi, Tami a ndi “I will eat’, Meroitic –n, s-ne yo-n Aman ‘The patron will bow in reverence to Aman’.
Kalabsha Temple
This makes it clear to me that Beja may be related to Meroitic and that the Beja represent the Blemmy nation of Old.
Sunday, April 11, 2010
The Ancient Minoans: Keftiu were Mande Speakers
Every since Arthur Evans discovered the Hieroglyphic and Linear A writing of Crete there has been a search for the authors of this writing.
Some Grecian traditions indicate that Libyans (called Garamante) formerly lived on Crete. This suggest that some of the Eteocretans may have spoken one of the ancient languages of Libya.
A major group from Libya that settled Crete were the Garamante. Robert Graves in (Vol.1, pp.33-35) maintains that the Garamante who originally lived in the Fezzan fused with the inhabitants of the Upper Niger region of West Africa.
This theory is interesting because the chariot routes from the Fezzan terminated at the Niger river. In addition, the Cretan term for king "Minos", agrees with the MandeManding word for ruler "Mansa". Both these terms share consonantal agreement : M N S.
The name Garamante, illustrates affinity to Mande morphology and grammar. The Mande language is a member of the Niger-Congo group of languages. The name for the Manding tribe called "Mande", means Ma 'mother, and nde 'children', can be interpreted as "Children of Ma", or "Mothers children " (descent among this group is matrilineal) . The word Garamante,can be broken down into Malinke-Bambara into the following monosyllabic words Ga 'hearth', arid, hot'; Mante/Mande , the name of the Mande speaking tribes. This means that the term: Garamante, can be interpreted as "Mande of the Arid lands" or "Arid lands of the children of Ma". This last term is quite interesting because by the time the Greeks and Romans learned about the Garamante, the Fezzan was becoming increasingly arid.
Keftiu
The Egyptians called the Cretans Keftiu. There is agreement between the Keftiu names recorded by Egyptian scribes (T.E. Peet, "The Egyptian writing board BM5647 bearing Keftiu names". In , (ed.) by S Casson (Oxford, 1927, 90-99)), and Manding names.
Keftiu
The root kef-, in Keftiu, probably is Ke'be, the name of a Manding clan , plus the locative suffix {i-} used to give the affirmative sense, plus the plural suffix for names {u-}, and the {-te} suffixial element used to denote place names, nationalities and to form words.
On the Egyptian writing board there are eight Keftiu names. These names agree with Manding names:
Keftiu....... Manding
sh h.r........ Sye
Nsy ..........Nsye
'ksh .........Nkyi
Pnrt Pe,..... Beni (name for twins)
'dm ..........Demba
Rs............. Rsa
This analogy between Keftiu and Manding names is startling.
In conclusion, the evidence of similarity between Keftiu names and names from the Manding languages appear to support Graves view that the Eteocretans, who early settled Crete may have spoken a language similar to the Mande people who live near the Niger. Conseqently, there is every possibility that the Linear A script used by the Keftiu, which is analogous to the Libyco Berber writing used by the Proto-Mande .This is further support to Cambell-Dunn' s hypothesis that the Minoans spoke a Niger-Congo language.
Some Grecian traditions indicate that Libyans (called Garamante) formerly lived on Crete. This suggest that some of the Eteocretans may have spoken one of the ancient languages of Libya.
A major group from Libya that settled Crete were the Garamante. Robert Graves in (Vol.1, pp.33-35) maintains that the Garamante who originally lived in the Fezzan fused with the inhabitants of the Upper Niger region of West Africa.
This theory is interesting because the chariot routes from the Fezzan terminated at the Niger river. In addition, the Cretan term for king "Minos", agrees with the MandeManding word for ruler "Mansa". Both these terms share consonantal agreement : M N S.
The name Garamante, illustrates affinity to Mande morphology and grammar. The Mande language is a member of the Niger-Congo group of languages. The name for the Manding tribe called "Mande", means Ma 'mother, and nde 'children', can be interpreted as "Children of Ma", or "Mothers children " (descent among this group is matrilineal) . The word Garamante,can be broken down into Malinke-Bambara into the following monosyllabic words Ga 'hearth', arid, hot'; Mante/Mande , the name of the Mande speaking tribes. This means that the term: Garamante, can be interpreted as "Mande of the Arid lands" or "Arid lands of the children of Ma". This last term is quite interesting because by the time the Greeks and Romans learned about the Garamante, the Fezzan was becoming increasingly arid.
Keftiu
The Egyptians called the Cretans Keftiu. There is agreement between the Keftiu names recorded by Egyptian scribes (T.E. Peet, "The Egyptian writing board BM5647 bearing Keftiu names". In , (ed.) by S Casson (Oxford, 1927, 90-99)), and Manding names.
Keftiu
The root kef-, in Keftiu, probably is Ke'be, the name of a Manding clan , plus the locative suffix {i-} used to give the affirmative sense, plus the plural suffix for names {u-}, and the {-te} suffixial element used to denote place names, nationalities and to form words.
On the Egyptian writing board there are eight Keftiu names. These names agree with Manding names:
Keftiu....... Manding
sh h.r........ Sye
Nsy ..........Nsye
'ksh .........Nkyi
Pnrt Pe,..... Beni (name for twins)
'dm ..........Demba
Rs............. Rsa
This analogy between Keftiu and Manding names is startling.
In conclusion, the evidence of similarity between Keftiu names and names from the Manding languages appear to support Graves view that the Eteocretans, who early settled Crete may have spoken a language similar to the Mande people who live near the Niger. Conseqently, there is every possibility that the Linear A script used by the Keftiu, which is analogous to the Libyco Berber writing used by the Proto-Mande .This is further support to Cambell-Dunn' s hypothesis that the Minoans spoke a Niger-Congo language.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)