SomaliNet Forums

Meyle,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afro-Asiatic_languages

Date of Afroasiatic

"The earliest written evidence of an Afroasiatic language is an Ancient Egyptian inscription of c. 3400 BC (5,400 years ago).[12] Symbols on Gerzean pottery resembling Egyptian hieroglyphs date back to c. 4000 BC, suggesting a still earlier possible date. This gives us a minimum date for the age of Afroasiatic. However, Ancient Egyptian is highly divergent from Proto-Afroasiatic (Trombetti 1905: 1–2), and considerable time must have elapsed in between them. Estimates of the date at which the Proto-Afroasiatic language was spoken vary widely. They fall within a range between approximately 7500 BC (9,500 years ago) and approximately 16,000 BC (18,000 years ago). According to Igor M. Diakonoff (1988: 33n), Proto-Afroasiatic was spoken c. 10,000 BC. According to Christopher Ehret (2002: 35–36), Proto-Afroasiatic was spoken c. 11,000 BC at the latest and possibly as early as c. 16,000 BC. These dates are older than dates associated with most other proto-languages.


The term Afroasiatic Urheimat (Urheimat meaning "original homeland" in German) refers to the 'hypothetical' place where Proto-Afroasiatic speakers lived in a single linguistic community, or complex of communities, before this original language dispersed geographically and divided into distinct languages. Afroasiatic languages are today primarily spoken in the Middle East, North Africa, the Horn of Africa, and parts of the Sahel. Their distribution seems to have been influenced by the Saharan pump operating over the last 10,000 years.

There is no agreement on when and where this Urheimat existed, though the language is generally believed to have originated somewhere in the area between the Eastern Sahara and the Horn of Africa, including Egypt, Ethiopia and Sudan.[13][14][15][16][17]"

----------------------------------------

The Berber map of E1b1b suggests to me that the afroasiatic Urheimat was actually the Sahara, or the area from Somalia to Morocco including the Sahara. My theory is that the creation of the separate languages began as the Sahara dried up and smaller groups moved to the periphery and became isolated. It seems to me the sheer age of the art and archaeology at Tasilli and other sites in the central Sahara supports this.

The urheimat is most likely the Horn of Africa or North East Africa and most linguists including Christopher Ehret believe that the urheimat was HOA/North East Africa. It's only Militarev who believe that the urheimat is in the Levant but his approach to Afro-Asiatic languages have always had a Semitic bias, nonetheless we can all agree that the E1b1b has great affinity to Afro-Asiatic languages.

I think many changes took place in the Sahara. Just look at Ancient Egyptian, the language spoken during the Early Dynastic period and the Old Kingdom was more or less an offshoot of proto Afro-Asiatic while the language spoken during the New Kingdom approximately 2000 years later was quite different. I think the same happened to Berber languages.

The Semitic languages descend from Afroasiatic, and not the reverse. E1b1b does seem to orient to the east, just as R1b1a seems to orient west. But they do share mtDNA and the Chadic languages are believed to have developed in the eastern Sahara. North Africa is genetically more similar than one might think, and by "north" I mean Somalia to Morocco, Including all of the Sahara. It seems there should be one uhrheimat for Afroasiatic and others for E1b1b, J1c3 and R1b1a. Now get this: "In contrast to the evidence from paternally inherited Y DNA, a recent study has shown that a branch of mitochondrial haplogroup L3 links the maternal ancestry of Chadic speakers from the Sahel with Cushitic speakers from East Africa.[21]"

East meets West through the Sahara.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afroasiatic_Urheimat

"Evidence from population genetics
Further information: Archaeogenetics of the Near East and Genetic history of North Africa
For a basic introduction to population genetics, see Population genetics.
Frequency of haplogroup E1b1b in select Afro-Asiatic speakers [15][16] Language (Region where historically spoken) Frequency
Cushitic 32–81%
Egyptian languages 36–60%
Berber languages 40–91%
Semitic languages 7–29%
Omotic languages >50%

The most commonly cited genetic marker in recent decades has been the Y chromosome, which is passed from father to son along paternal lines in un-mixed form, and therefore gives a relatively clear definition of one human line of descent from common ancestors.

Several branches of humanity's Y DNA family tree have been proposed as having an association with the spread of Afroasiatic languages.

1. Haplogroup E1b1b is thought to have originated in East Africa. In general, Afroasiatic speaking populations have relatively high frequencies of this haplogroup, with the notable exception of Chadic speaking populations. Christopher Ehret and Shomarka Keita have suggested that the geography of the E1b1b lineage coincides with the distribution of Afroasiatic languages.[17]

2. Haplogroup J1c3 (Y-DNA), formally known as "J1e", is actually a more common paternal lineage than E1b1b in most Semitic speaking populations, but this is associated with Middle Eastern origins and has apparently been spread from there after the original dispersion of Afroasiatic.[18]
Frequency of Sub-Haplogroup R1b1a in select Afro-Asiatic speakers[19] Chadic languages 28.6-95.5%
Berber languages 0-26.9%
Semitic languages 0-40%

3. Haplogroup R1b1a (R-V88), and specifically its sub-clade R-V69, has a very strong relationship with Chadic speaking populations, who unlike other Afroasiatic speakers have low frequencies of Haplogroup E1b1b. This was announced in 2010 by Cruciani et al.[20] The majority of R-V88 was found in northern and central Africa, in Chadic speaking populations. It is less common in neighbouring populations. The authors also found evidence of high concentration in Western Egypt and evidence that the closest related types of R1b are found in the Middle East, and to a lesser extent southern Europe. They proposed that an Eastern Saharan origin for Chadic R1b would agree with linguistic theories such as those of Christopher Ehret, that Chadic and Berber form a related group within Afroasiatic, which originated in the area of the Sahara.[20]

In contrast to the evidence from paternally inherited Y DNA, a recent study has shown that a branch of mitochondrial haplogroup L3 links the maternal ancestry of Chadic speakers from the Sahel with Cushitic speakers from East Africa.[21]

Other mitochondrial lineages that are associated with Afroasiatic include mitochondrial haplogroups M1 and haplogroup U6. Gonzalez et al. 2007 suggest that Afroasiatic speakers may have dispersed from East Africa carrying the subclades M1a and U6a1.[2"

Chadic as in speakers of the hausa language of Northern Nigeria?
What about the Fula people who have a very High frequency of haplogroup R
but do not speak a afroasiatic language

Language does not directly equate to genetics, because it is a learned thing. For instance most modern French people are descended from the ancient Celts, but today speak a language descended from Latin, their conquerors.

Yeah but celts and romans were both R1b which corresponds with the indo-European theory.

Lol and I could've sworn you once said irish and somalis had common ancestry in upper Egypt or something.

I think you misunderstood my statement. Alexander Militarev, a Russian linguist, specialized in Semitics has a different approach when it comes to the Afro-Asiatic language group and his way of dealing with the languages within that group is marked by his Semitic bias and that's not strange given the fact that his theory revolves around the Levant/Middle East and he believes that all Afro-Asiatic languages originated there.


R-V88 is very interesting because it's believed that proto Chadic speakers carrying R1b migrated from the Levant, settling in an area around Lake Chad, however this migration is believed to have taken place a thousand years or two thousand years after the first migration by proto Afro-Asiatic speakers which makes me believe that the language and haplogroup do not correspond because R1b originated in western Asia, V88 is just a subclade specific to the Lake Chad Basin indicating that the mutation took place in that area, however if the Urheimat is in the Horn/North East Africa, most likely the case, the high percentage of E1b1b in the Urheimat would mean that R1b carriers in the Levant shifted to proto Chadic


Or was it proto Afro-Asiatic that was adopted by some of these R1b carriers. Proto Chadic just being the end result?


The theory about the Sahara being the Urheimat is also interesting.

Im so sure that was Ajuuraan empire who had the biggest fleetnin Afeica and held the Portugese for 20 years off bay even chasing them away from Mombasa and other African cities. Somalis were strong then and exteemely oeganised

LiquidHYDROGEN wrote:Yeah but celts and romans were both R1b which corresponds with the indo-European theory.

Lol and I could've sworn you once said irish and somalis had common ancestry in upper Egypt or something.

According to Irish myth, their ancestors stayed in Egypt for a time, but I can't vouch for how accurate that is

James Dahl wrote:According to Irish myth, their ancestors stayed in Egypt for a time, but I can't vouch for how accurate that is

Who else besides Somalis and the Irish have claimed ancient Egyptians as their ancestors?

Arabman wrote:

James Dahl wrote:According to Irish myth, their ancestors stayed in Egypt for a time, but I can't vouch for how accurate that is

Who else besides Somalis and the Irish have claimed ancient Egyptians as their ancestors?

Claiming ancient people who make no sense as ancestors has a long and proud tradition. The ancient Romans and Britons both claimed to be descended from Trojan War refugees. The Polish like to believe they are descended from the ancient Sarmatians (There is even a word for this belief, Sarmatism). The Albanians believe themselves to be the descendants of the Illyrians.

The Irish myth also has a name, in it they are the Milesians, the descendants of the followers of a guy from Spain named Míl Espáine who conquered Ireland from the "Firbolgs" and established the Irish nation. According to this mythos, the Irish started out like everyone else near mount Ararat after the Flood and travelled south to Egypt where the ancestor of the Irish named Nel married Scota (which is supposedly the origin of the name Scottish) who is the daughter of the Phaoroah. They leave Egypt along with the Israelites and keep going north to Scythia, where this pseudo-history starts at least following actual history a little bit: They "wander the earth for 440 years". The story then picks up where this branch of the Gauls ends up part of the Gallic conquest of Spain. They board ships and sail north to conquer Ireland. This all actually happened, the Celts did indeed have their origins in eastern Anatolia and did indeed move north to Scythia, invade Europe, invade Spain and then invade Britain. The bit before that (the tower of Babel, them in Egypt, etc) is mostly to try and make the migration from Scythia match up with the Biblical Genesis story.

Homer Simpso wrote:Im so sure that was Ajuuraan empire who had the biggest fleet in Africa and held the Portugese for 20 years off bay even chasing them away from Mombasa and other African cities. Somalis were strong then and extremely organised

They did a huge expedition with the Turks where they took out the Portuguese from the whole of East-Africa but then they came back with reinforcement form India and got their regions back + sacked Baraawe with intention to the same to Mogadishu but aborted after hearing they would face annihilation.

Mind you these times the Portuguese were the superpower of the world. The good times when our people were a vital part of the world economy feared superpower of Africa and built their own navy ships

Bermooda wrote:

Homer Simpso wrote:Im so sure that was Ajuuraan empire who had the biggest fleet in Africa and held the Portugese for 20 years off bay even chasing them away from Mombasa and other African cities. Somalis were strong then and extremely organised

They did a huge expedition with the Turks where they took out the Portuguese from the whole of East-Africa but then they came back with reinforcement form India and got their regions back + sacked Baraawe with intention to the same to Mogadishu but aborted after hearing they would face annihilation.

Mind you these times the Portuguese were the superpower of the world. The good times when our people were a vital part of the world economy feared superpower of Africa and built their own navy ships

Now Hawiya are eating eachother.

Liquid, to your pleasure, the Ajuuraan owned what you call dhegcas slaves like Persians, Arabs, Turks

Must be the ancestors of these people you call cadcads.