TayserMahiri:


got myself a ban from welcoming you + ur new moniker. The spam bot got to be the only thing in NL dumber than Nowenuse

TayserMahiri:


Chicken Wing

kikuyu1:


Yes,the original Nubians were black. Its also true the history we parrot is faulty:its a colonial historiography deliberately designed to marginalise our global role. Here are a few other Bantus who've no history of a Congo migration:
-Merus came from Egypt,one version states Meroe in N Sudan and passed through Ethiopia.
https://owlcation.com/social-sciences/Kikuyu-Other-myths-of-Origin

-Bagandas also have some Ethiopian.
http://www.buganda.or.ug/index.php/our-history/the-past/origin-of-buganda
Tbh,this may be just one migration as Buganda was inhabited from at least 200 ad.

-the Sotho came from NE Africa,possibly Ethiopia.

Man originated here but imo,many of these Bantus were returning here from the ME via Ethiopia,which seems to have been a Bantu dispersal point! At any rate a much more believable population funnel than the Ituri Forest.

The ME was home to all blacks including,Bantus and Kushites.


http://en.lisapoyakama.org/the-first-inhabitants-of-asia-were-black/

The fearsome Assyrians were the Fulani of today.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/40467180?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

Guys,this Congo migration story belongs in the dustbin along with the 'White Egyptian' garbage!

TayserMahiri:


Sudanese Nubians (blackest folks in black Africa) were the Pharaohs of the 25 th Dynasty of Egypt after invading and conquering from their southern Kush Empire. This explains a lot why people want Kush tied to their his-story. What I have never understood is why Somalis fight to death to claim Kush as their empire when it is so obvious it was a Nubian empire. This was Kush in 700 BC

TayserMahiri:


Chicken Wing

mtisTheQubit:

hard for some folks to believe that the Nubians (who were black ) at one time were once pharaohs

TayserMahiri:


Sudanese Nubians (blackest folks in black Africa) were the Pharaohs of the 25 th Dynasty of Egypt after invading and conquering from their southern Kush Empire. This explains a lot why people want Kush tied to their his-story. What I have never understood is why Somalis fight to death to claim Kush as their empire when it is so obvious it was a Nubian empire. This was Kush in 700 BC

TayserMahiri:


Sudanese Nubians (blackest folks in black Africa) were the Pharaohs of the 25 th Dynasty of Egypt after invading and conquering from their southern Kush Empire. This explains a lot why people want Kush tied to their his-story. What I have never understood is why Somalis fight to death to claim Kush as their empire when it is so obvious it was a Nubian empire. This was Kush in 700 BC

mtisTheQubit:

pole sana ...so i had noted muafrika had become a Nobody so i tried becoming one but guess what once you deactivate your account you cant reverse the process so had to have a new account...

kikuyu2:


Because in their minds Kush obviously applies ONLY TO THEM! Explaining to them it referred to also the Bantus of the empire is beyond their mental capacity.

Hati13:

Hi brother, how are you?

After researching deep I also feel why Somali and other so called Cushitic claim Kushitic state. Kush/Cush and Ethiopian are different name used in the Bible and other ancient texts to describe Nubian and other north Sudanese. I think most of them claim it because they aren’t aware of the truth so I don’t blame them (some know the truth but intentionally claim it).

" The tallest, most beautiful and long-lived of the human races"

"the most just of men; the favourites of the gods". The annals of all the great early nations of Asia Minor are full of them. The Mosaic records allude to them frequently; but while they are described as the most powerful , the most just, and the most beautiful of the human race, they are constantly spoken of as black, and there seems to be no other conclusion to be drawn, than that remote period of history the leading race of the western world was the black race."

"Can the Cushite change his skin?".

Hati13:

Also hard for some ppl to believe that Nubians were the biblical and Greek/Roman literatures Ethiopians.

mtisTheQubit:

hard for some folks to believe that the Nubians (who were black ) at one time were once pharaohs

TayserMahiri:





You have a point. Bantus might as well have been as far north as Egypt then descended south. Among the Swazis, their Migration myth is that they came from the Embu area of Kenya. So if we can work up that displacement you can see that the Bantus that are currently northest like the ones in Kenya and UG might have been way farther up. Actually Im utterly convinced at least the Bantus in Kenya came from regions upper north with many reasons. However, what you need to understand is that so long as you are investigating Bantu migration, deserts were very unlikely migratory routes. Bantus werent made for that. So the idea of Bantus having crossed over to Asia via the Sahara (which was still dry back 3000 yrs ago), then crossing back again via the same desert to start the trek south is asking abit too much from farmers. Only a few Bantus are known to survive in the desert, in the Kalahari, the Tswana, Kgalagadi and Herero. And this was a subsequent adaptation, not the de facto setting. The only Bantus who could have crossed did so earlier before the Sahara dried up and that can explain a lot of the lexical similarities with Chinese and other peoples in Asia.

rvp2018:
There are no bantus in supra sahar[/b]a..and if bantus were ever in the north..there would be enough evidence left over including pockets of bantus in here and there.The were two great dividers in Africa..the sahara desert and the tse tse fly belt..both meant bantus as farmers couldnt cross to supra sahara and cattle herding north couldnt cross the tse tse fly belt to sub-sahara except in few places in TZ where likes of Hereros $ few nilotes & cushites cross the belts & found some pastures free from tsetsefly

[b]Other sources report that the following Bantu people, the Luhya, Baganda, Nyarwanda, Rundi of Burindi, Kikuyu, and the Zulu all claim a southerly migration from Egypt. Moreover there are many groups of Bantu speakers from Tanzania, Mozambique, Congo, Zambia, Malawi, South Africa, who testify a southerly migration from Egypt. There are even groups of people from West Africa who migrated from Egypt into their present day location.

Apart from the oral traditions provided by Bantu elders, the evidence is also based on linguistic, historical, scientific and cultural studies done by Cheikh Anta Diop.

DNA test of a group of mummies from the Amarna Egyptian Pharaohs matched the genetic profiles of the population of the Great Lakes region

Both Cagnolo and Routledge gave the impression that the Gichandi was a vestige of a period when some form of writing was in use......Hieroglyphic numerals for 3, 4, 6, and 8 and Equivalent Kikuyu........ the Kikuyu morphemes that represent the numerals three, four, six and eight, a similar pattern can be observed.....All forms of letters and numbers are called ndemwa - from the word tema, to cut. For them to be referred to as ‘those that have been cut,’ the Kikuyu were probably were privy to writings that had been incised on stone as was common during the 18th dynasty of Ancient Egypt

rvp2018:
Kikuyu, you engage in hopeless pseudo history and science something that may excite conspiracy theorist like you .Certainly the world has changed the last 60 billion years of existence and definitely all humans are related.That bantus were in up north and left without any traces is laughable.Maybe youre talking pre bantus.The days when lake chad was huge and habitable and neighbouring Nubia $ related. Otherwise Bantus I am talking about dispersed either from Cameroon..or less convincing theory Congo Kisangani area..clearing forested areas with iron tools and mainly planting yams $ bananas..all way the down to zulus and up north as far as Kenya merus and as far west as Nigeria

rvp2018:
There are no bantus in supra sahara..and if bantus were ever in the north..there would be enough evidence left over including pockets of bantus in here and there.The were two great dividers in Africa..the sahara desert and the tse tse fly belt..both meant bantus as farmers couldnt cross to supra sahara and cattle herding north couldnt cross the tse tse fly belt to sub-sahara except in few places in TZ where likes of Hereros $ few nilotes & cushites cross the belts & found some pastures free from tsetsefly

rvp2018:
Kikuyu, you engage in hopeless pseudo history and science something that may excite conspiracy theorist like you .Certainly the world has changed the last 60 billion years of existence and definitely all humans are related.That bantus were in up north and left without any traces is laughable.Maybe youre talking pre bantus.The days when lake chad was huge and habitable and neighbouring Nubia $ related. Otherwise Bantus I am talking about dispersed either from Cameroon..or less convincing theory Congo Kisangani area..clearing forested areas with iron tools and mainly planting yams $ bananas..all way the down to zulus and up north as far as Kenya merus and as far west as Nigeria

TayserMahiri:


Its not that straightforward. Do you know the name Bantu appears in ancient Egyptian hieroglyphics? You'll find that virtually all Bantu speakers have an oral tradition that asserts they migrated from the North. You'd be insane to imagine that all Bantu peoples conspired to provide one consistent fake story to fool the world.

This site can give some insight, including that Nilotic Kalenjins were a military clan of Egypt

http://www.forumbiodiversity.com/showthread.php?t=40739

Here, Bantu in Egyptian hieroglyphic script.

http://www.kaa-umati.co.uk/Bantu%20in%20Ancient%20Egypt.htm

Ultimately, one is to use their mental faculties to deduce what is believable and what is not. For me, the Niger - Congo origin hypothesis is likely correct but strictly as far as 'origin' goes. Beyond that, it limits the possibilities that the migration took an elliptical route from the central point. Obviously as some Watus were cutting through the dense forests eastwards and southwards, which btw took a very very long time, others were using easier routes in a north-easterly direction, helped by the holocene and the fact that the Sahara was not so extreme to the south by then as now. Thats how humans operate. People are rarely ever unanimous. Some groups would easily head straight north-east to the halfway point of the Nile River, whose name is recorded as Iteru in Ancient Egyptian language (very Bantoid sounding). The Nile itself used to pass through Libya at some point before it was pirated by a river that is now the northern Nile, which is what we know today. It used to curve westwards to Libya but its not exactly clear when it was fully swallowed and 'straightened'. So, the idea that all Bantus moved east-southwards ignores a lot of factors and over considers others like the impact of the Sahara, and that those folks were also in competition and rivalry over resources, and they were multiplying insanely fast. So, all moving in one direction is not so plausible. More plausible is to expect some radiation from the central point, with exception of DIRECT north, due, of course, to the Sahara. Do you know its actually possible that most of the first groups moved east and north east, avoiding the insanely dense impenetrable forest and then redistributed to their current locations from the north east and east? i.e southwards and westwards. Thats what all of the oral traditions suggest. And as I told you, its not likely that all Bantu peoples decided to fool the world by creating one unanimous fake story from Kenya all the way to South africa and central and west africa. That would have to be the most extensive lie ever conjured, requiring a lot of logistics and cooperation.

TayserMahiri:


Well, the world is not that old my dude. Even the universe itself.

rvp2018:
One word for you.We are in 21st century where genetics have been mapped.Quit relying on oral stories

TayserMahiri:


There is a lot of genetic analysis of Egyptian mummies and Kings showing direct links. Do some reading.

rvp2018:
One word for you.We are in 21st century where genetics have been mapped.[/b]Quit relying on oral stories.Africa was divided by Sahara which stretches across africa and tse tse fly belt.Bantus couldnt move north without adopting pastoralism and Northern Africa could not cross the tse tse fly belt with their cattle.There is little evidence bantus ever were north or were cattle keepers..their lactose intolerance is dead give away.Sahara and tse tse fly belt divide Africa in nearly everything..culture, language, genetics

TayserMahiri:


im fyn brother

Yeah its true cushitic groups had a link to the empire, and the Kush empire was based in present day Sudan, Egypt, Ethio possibly even extending to Northern Kenya, and on some accounts all the way beyond the Peninsula into Arabia. But it was not their (Cushites) empire. It was Nubian empire. Most of those non-Nubians couldnt have made good warriors with their skinniness. Well, assuming they were still skinny back then. As warriors, the ancient Nubians were famous for their skill and precision with the bow and arrow. Herodotus described the people of Kush as follows in a book:



and before Herodotus, Homer, in even more flattering language, described them as



That is as black, strong and tall as it gets. Really! In fact one Jeremiah in the Bible wondered



Obviously the very dark skin bothered him. The only other people who could fit that description are Oromos and its likely Kush was an extension or even a result of Oromo civilization, or vice versa, that the Kush empire of the Nubians had extended to Oromo lands. The name Cushite used here was in reference to the empire Kush, not the modern day Cushitic ethno-lingo.

This link has a somewhat good description of Kush: http://www.abarim-publications.com/Meaning/Cush.html#.W65VHXszbIU

What people dont get is the fundamental difference between the ethno-linguistic label Cushite vs the Geographical Kushite Empire. The empire encompassed many peoples including very many (cushite) tribes like the Oromos, Afars, the Beja, Somalis and Bantus, etc but it was still a Nubian empire. That one should be drilled into the heads of people trying to raid other people's history in a bid to cleanse their modern day woes. You know who these people are. You never hear Nubians, the real owners of Kush empire parroting their rich history but people who were remotely attached to it dont get sleep. To put it in another way, Somalis claim Kush as their empire in much the same way Black Americans can claim USA as their empire. We all know they at some point are part of it but its not really their empire as far as originators go.

rvp2018:
So they went north and disappeared into mummies.Well there is no denying that proto-bantus, proto-nilotes and proto-cushites are related..they definitely were one people who possibly split up in Chad..

TayserMahiri:


Very true.

http://www.abarim-publications.com/Meaning/Cush.html#.W65VHXszbIU

Hati13:

Proto-Bantu, proto-Nilote and proto-Cushite weren’t one ppl.

Proto-Bantu were part of Niger-Congo. The latter originated in West Africa.

Proto-Niolte were part of Nilo-Saharan. The latter originated in Sudan or central Africa.

Proto-Cushite were part of Afroasiatic. The latter originated in Ethiopia.

gallivant:

rvp2018:
Youre describing the nilotes, cushites and bantus using linguistic grouping..not proto or pre..who are most definitely related both genetically and linguistically...say compared to Asians or Europeans.All of them carry halogroup A and B of the y chromosomes.The bantu or nilotic or cushitic or semitic language are also closely related.The most convincing theory point to Chad when it wasnt a desert as homeland of the combined ancestor of nilotes, cushites, semites and bantus..as Chad became a desert they dispersed with bantu moving south $ west..nilotes to sudan..cushites further east and semites north.The khoisan are NOT related with Africans but more linked to Asians.The relationship is hierarchical.The same way proto oromos and proto somalis were one people before they became oromo $ somalis.Humans were once localised before spreading into races, tribes and such.