Contents | Previous | Next
Date: 14 Aug 2000 00:00:00 GMT
Subject: Re: Yorubas and Egyptians
Message-ID: <20000814111148.21998.00000943@ng-cj1.aol.com>
References:
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Newsgroups: alt.religion.orisha
X-Admin: news@aol.com
Subject: Yorubas and Egyptians
>From: eballard@sas.upenn.edu (E. C. Ballard)
>Date: 8/13/00 6:44 PM EST
>Message-id:
>
>I realize you have a fascination for Egyptian culture and religion, none
>the less, most of Olumide's assertions regarding the supposed connection
>between Yoruban culture and the egyptians was based upon very weak and
>ultimately debunked linguistic evidence.
>
There is much more than linguistic evidence, which is the icing on the cake
rather than the cake itself.
>Go read a dozen or so major volumes on African linguistics printed since
>the 1930s and you will find a fair bit that disagrees with the antiquarian
>notions of Olumide. The view he espoused came out of the very European
>notion that if one encountered any worthwhile cultural activity in
>subsaharan Africa it had to have its roots in the Mediterrean area. At the
>least it had to be Egyptian. remember, at that time most viewed Egyptians
>as at the least Semi-Semetic and not really African. This was another
>attempt to credit non African origins to African culture.
The *fact* though remains whatever it is. In my approach to things, you first
face facts, and then let the chips fall where they may. The ancient Egyptians
were in any case a black African people, so a European agenda seeking to
ascribe non-Black origins to Yoruba achievements would simply have ended up
with egg on its face. I think Lucas' agenda was in any case different, since I
think he perceived very clearly that the ancient Egyptians were a black people,
evident already in the name, km.t, that they gave to themselves. which
literally means black country.
>
>The linguistics he used, are little more than the natural coincidences
>that can be found to occur between many cultures that are known to have no
>serious connections. For example, armed with a grade-school familiarity
>with Irish Gaelic and a Turkish dictionary, I can find enough coincidences
>to construct an argument that the Turks and the Irish are somehow
>linguistically related. They are not and all my assertions to the contrary
>won't make them so. Such is pretty much the level of linguistic
>sophistication that Olumide had and used.
To repeat, the linguistic evidence was corroborative.
>
>Salamaleko,
>
>Eoghan
>
Peace,
Grisso
--------------C3C589C357ECDC0B4ECFAE25--
Contents | Previous | Next
Tips for your pocket: