The terms Dravidian and Dravidianist must be distinguished. The former is a very benign term used in the geographical sense. <b>It was originally used to denote the Brahmins of the South, the Pancha Dravidas, just as those of the North were called Pancha Gaudas. Later on, during the medieval times, this term was used to refer to all Southern people.</b>
In the mid 19th century, this term acquired a linguistic connotation when Bishop Caldwell classified the Southern languages as belonging to the Dravidian family. It was in the year 1886 AD that the upper caste non-Brahmin students of the University of Madras were told by a British governor, Mountstuart Grant-Duff that they belonged to the Dravidian race. That was when this term acquired racial connotation. The next 2 decades was spent in searching for a pedigree for this newborn race! V. Kanakasabhai Pillai proposed a Tibetan Homeland of the Dravidian race! This race was to include only the upper caste non-Brahmins and was to exclude the Brahmins, the Backwards and the Harijans.
Blended with the divisive AIT, the notions of the Dravidian race were used by E. V. Ramaswami Naicker, to further his political career by spewing hatred on the Brahmins. He often thundered that he would physically eliminate the Brahmins from Tamilnadu. He declared that the Brahmins were outsiders. To date, the Marxist historians feed such hate campaigns. So, the Dravidianists are those who usurped the term Dravidian, gave it a political and racist connotation, and used it for their hate agenda against the original Dravidians!
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->DMK lashes out at TN CM
Press Trust of India
Madurai, January 26, 2005|15:54 IST
<b>DMK has lashed out at Chief Minister Jayalalithaa for criticising Union Minister TR Baalu over writing names of places on national highway milestones in Hindi.</b>
Addressing a public meeting in Chennai on Tuesday night, DMK leader <b>MK Stalin said Jayalalithaa had no right to criticise the minister and recalled that it was Jayalalithaa who said there was no time to translate the governor's address to the house into Tamil last year.</b>
Referring to the Sankararaman murder case, he said, "there is an ulterior motive in the filing of cases against the Shankaracharya." <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The educated young Tamilians of today are way beyond these silly language squabbles. With the global economy of today, they meet people from other states and realize that just Tamil will not do them any good. This attitude was okay in the old days, but not today.
Just wait till these old farts die and the new generation of politicians come in, things should improve.
Yes. These Indian sectionalists are the biggest fools in the world. India will be destoryed if these bewakhoofs continue to believe in the AIT. The AIT was created by Europeans to split India up and it seems to be working even today because the politicians refuse to remove the false theory from the school curriculum of hudnreds of millions of students in India. The truth is that neither Aryans nor Dravidians ever existed. The term Aryan means noble in Sanskrit and the term Dravida means south in Sanskrit. These terms ahve nothing to do with race, language or skin color. They were created in the 19th century by white supremicists and bewakhoofs continue to keep the ideas of these white supremicists alive today.
http://newindpress.com/NewsItems.asp?ID=IE...l+Nadu&Topic=0&
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Third language war only rhetoric
Monday March 28 2005 00:00 IST
CHENNAI: âThe third language warâ has been declared by Tamil nationalists. Only no one seems to take them seriously.
In fact, such was the importance attached to the much vaunted event at Tiruchy, the conference of the Tamil Protection Movement (TPM) that the declaration of the war went virtually unnoticed in newspapers, both English and Tamil.
By the time Dr Ramadoss took the floor to make the announcements, that of defacing English letterings in May and courting arrest statewide in November, it was well past midnight, and the newsdesks, across the spectrum, chose not to wait for the âmomentous declaration.â
It was a well-attended convention, reports say. The movement leaders had arranged long vehicular journeys through the length and breadth of the state and public meetings at many towns during the run-up. Conference decoration, lighting were all on a grand scale. Pattali Makkal Katchi (PMK), Dalit Panthers Movement, the old war horse Nedumaranâs Tamil National Movement and a couple of other splinter groups have joined hands to float this movement. They billed the event as the launch of the third language war. The first one was in the late thirties and the second one in 1965, both against the imposition of Hindi and both of which are seen as watersheds in Tamil history. And, how does this one compare with those two seminal events?
Sessions at the conference on ancient Tamil glory did not attract more than 50-odd faithful. And, most speakers took every care possible to stress that their agitation was peaceful and not directed against anyone. They also refrained from attacking anyone as enemy of Tamils.
Even Jayalalithaa, whom they would fain to denounce as a Brahmin otherwise, they desisted from taking on.
They waxed eloquent on degradation in the Tamil way of life and regretted that Sanskrit has taken over rituals in temples and weddings, but all that they would do to counter the trend is to distribute handbills, from at a safe distance at that.
Of course, though they are all for Tamil in every walk of life, they would not demand, even indirectly, the renaming of the Sun TV, run by the ruling family of the DMK, an ally of the PMK.
Dr Ramadoss, who once revelled in the role of an ardent champion of the Tamil Tigers, withdrew into a shell once he got a footing in the NDA Government. Now that he has a full-fledged Cabinet berth, his own son occupying the slot, he is not going to do anything that could threaten all that comes out of the berth.
DPI leader Thirumavalavan could be said to be playing a tactical game by hitching his star to the Tamil nationalist bandwagon - after all Dalits are still outside the pale of Tamil society and so laying claim to the Tamil legacy could make his community more acceptable to dominant backward castes. And, Ramadoss himself has been attempting to bring together a rainbow coalition, by fits and starts. The coming together of the two would no doubt mean a significant step forward in communal harmony, especially so in the northern districts.
On the other hand, the point is not social implications, but how serious are they about their affirmations on the language front.
The hidden agenda of Ramadoss and Thirumavalavan simply seems to be to rally together their respective constituencies, quite formidable in the northern districts, and demand seats proportionate to their following. Given their perceived base, it would be easy for them to bargain hard with either the DMK or the AIADMK for a âfairâ share of seats in the next yearâs Assembly polls. Even if they choose to go it alone, at the instance of Jayalalithaa, they could spell serious trouble for the DMK-led front. Hence their tactics are unlikely to have any far-reaching impact on Tamil society as the anti-Hindi struggles of the thirties or sixties had, it is generally felt.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Dravidians are the people that came from Africa, not Tibet like someone previously mentioned. This has been proven because a couple of years back, they took someone from Tamil Nadu and compared their DNA with this East African and they almost matched perfectly. Tamil is amazingly similar to some of the African languages like Wolof, there have been many universities studies done on this, please search on google. Dravidians are the one who lived in Mohenjo-Daro and Harappa until the Aryans came from the east, of course this itself can be contested, because many people argue that the Aryan thing was a hoax by the British, so I am not going to waste my time and support that, but there are Dravidians and their language, Tamil, are more similar to Africans.. North Indians are more similar to Europeans that's why they call themselves Indo-Europeans, I think it is pathetic that some people take pride in calling themselves that..
But my indian brothers and sisters, let's not concentrate on our differences, because differences cause divisions, instead we have to look at our similarities, we were oppressed by the same people, we have been brothers and sisters for thousands of years, why now look at ourselves as different? All of us have a vested interest in the welfare of India, what affects one part of India, affects all of us. Let us instead concentrate on the problems affecting all of us like corruption and work towards that, instead of wasting our time talking about our differences.
INDIAN,
Change your user handle to name, according to India-forum rules, send email to admin with changed user handle before posting any post.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The Afrocentric Historical and Linguistic Methods.
by CLYDE A. WINTERS
Abstract
In this paper we review the authentic historical and linguistic methods traditionally employed by Afrocentrists. We learn that Africalogical research has long been researched by Afrocentric scholars; and that up until the 1930's the history of African civilizations and people was the "preserve" of Afrocentric scholars.
There are two schools of Africalogical research: the African-American school (AAS) of Afrocentric research (Dubois, 1915, 1946), and the French-speaking African and Afro-Caribbean school (FAACS) of Afrocentricity (Diop, 1974). The AAS was concerned with historical research while the FAACS has made linguistic research their domain of intellectual inquiry. A third school of Afrocentric researchers we will call pluridisciplinarians led by Anselin (1982,1993) and Winters (1985, 1989,1994) combines both historical and linguistic methods to explain the heritage of African people.
An Afrocentric view of African history is written from the perspective of the Africans themselves. This type of writing on African history is centered on the role of Blacks/Africans in Africa, and the fact that there was, and is a history of Africa.
The central element in all Afrocentric research is the fact that ancient Kemet (or Egypt) was a Black African civilization. As a result of this theoretical base, most of the arguments made by contemporary Afrocentrists including the:
(1) African origin of Egypt (Delany, 1879) and  (2) African origin of civilizations in Europe and Asia (Johnson, 1971 pp. 388-389; Dubois, 1946 p. 122)Â
These were first made over a hundred (100) years ago by members of the AAS Afrocentrist group. Eurocentric School
The major spokesman for the Eurocentric view of African history is Dinesh D'Souza (1995). Mr. D'Souza, a non-historian, linguist, etc., has made his mission in life the complete destruction of Multiculturalism, and Afrocentricism in particular, as additions to the curriculum of American schools. D'Souza (1995 p. 360) believes that "... Afrocentrism fundamentally remains a pedagogy of initiation into a new form of black consciousness and also into manhood". Given this Eurocentric view of Africalogy, D'Souza (1995) sets out to prove that slavery was not racist; that segregation was established by paternal whites to protect the former slaves; and especially that "Egypt was a multiracial society" (p. 367) dominated by white skinned Egyptians, and that the only time that Blacks/Africans ruled Egypt, was during the Nubian dynasty (p. 368).
African-American School
The AFROCENTRIC historical method was developed over a hundred years ago. African-American researchers, including R. B. Lewis, Light and Truth, collected from the Bible and the ancient and modern history, containing the universal history of the Colored and Indian race from creation of the world to the present (Boston 1844); George W. Williams, History of the Negro race in America from 1619 to 1880 ... and an Historical sketch of Africa (New York 1982) and Rufus L. Perry, The Cushite or descendants of Ham (Springfield, Mass. 1893) used these methods to present a realistic picture of the African past.
As you can see from the above titles most of these early works were based on material found in the Bible. According to the Bible, Blacks are the descendants of Ham who had four sons: Kush, Mizraim (Egypt/Kemet), Phut (Punt) and Canaan. These sons represent founders of the first world civilizations, such as Sumer, Phonecia, Arabia and Hatti. This recognition of the African origin of civilization in Africa and Mesopotamia was soon confirmed by the archaeological discovery of Sumer and Egypt (Winters, 1996a).
The AAS Afrocentrists developed a systematic group of principles for critically examining and presenting the body of source material related to the history of African people. Scholars such as W.E.B. DuBois, J.A. Rogers and Carter G. Woodson honed the AFROCENTRIC historical method to a fine edge. Woodson and DuBois employed the historical method in their careful research into the African past. And Rogers was a master of many languages which he used to gain insight into the history of African people from the numerous European sources he studied to write the multivolume series Sex and Race.
Knowledge about African people, especially their ancient history, has been hard to come by, because much of the "authentic" history of African people has often been published in non-English sources. This has meant that Afrocentric historians recognized the term document to include both written accounts about things said and done in the past, and also archaeological records. This broad interpretation of document has meant that these historians have been concerned with primary documents produced by eyewitnesses (e.g., the classicists of Greece and Rome) and also secondary sources related to archaeological research and the classical literature.
The AAS Afrocentrists have mainly been concerned with the history of African people, in Africa and the world. It was the African American scholars who dominated the field of African historiography from the nineteenth century up into the 1930's (Dubois, 1971 p. 373).
The founders of the Afrocentric schools of research have been careful to use primary sources. These sources were written by the major classical authors (Johnson 1971), Homer (DuBois, 1946; Diop 1974), Herodotus (DuBois, 1946 p. 121; Diop 1974) and Diodorus Siculus (DuBois 1946, p. 122; Diop 1974), who long ago were authenticated and are recognized as credible.
The writings of the classicists have been important in establishing a foundation for the claims of the Afrocentrists because they have temporal proximity to many important events in the history of African people (Winters, 1994,1996a). Moreover, although the documents of the classicists were often biased, they report in clear prose the African role in the rise of civilization and culture in Africa and Asia and give internal credibility to their statements about African people.
The major African American Afrocentrist, such as J.A. Rogers and W.E.B. DuBois have usually been able to read one or more foreign languages. There has been a need for learning a foreign language by members of the AAS because much of the literature dealing with African and Black civilizations has been written in French, Greek and German rather than English. Moreover, familiarity with a foreign language allows the Afrocentrist to check carefully all translations to insure that the document they use in their research have internal credibility.
Afrocentrists have traditionally been immensely concerned with contemporary archaeological finds related to African people. This emphasis on archaeological research is evident in the work of DuBois (1915, 1946), and Woodson (1936, 1949).
The major secondary sources used by the early Afrocentrists include the work of Johnston (1910), Frobenius (1913), Boas (1911), Arnold L. von Heeren and Volney. DuBois (1915, p. 147) notes that although many of these sources were used "none of these authors write from the point of view of the Negro as a man, or with anything but incidental acknowledgement of the existence or value of history".
The first trained historian-sociologist to examine the African past was Dr. W.E.B. DuBois. In 1915, Dr. DuBois published the little book called The Negro. This book served as inspiration for many later AFROCENTRIC historians. This book, as obvious from the title, was concerned with the African both at home and abroad. The Negro opened the field of AFROCENTRIC historiography. In this book DuBois collected the most recent materials on African affairs up to 1915, and presented a comprehensive whole of the different elements of African history.
In 1946, DuBois published The World and Africa. The World and Africa, was an important book in AFROCENTRIC research because in it DuBois outlined a world history on the Black races. In this book DuBois (1946, pp. ix-xi) makes it clear that he admired the work of many of his contemporaries such as J.A. Rogers and Hansberry, authors who had begun their quest to discover the African past after reading The Negro.
DuBois (1946) used up-to-date references to prove his thesis that Blacks founded civilization in Kemet (Egypt, pp. 98-100), Africa and Arabia (pp. 176-194). His discussion of the rise of Kemet and the importance of the Nubians and Thebaid group of upper Kemet in maintaining Egyptian traditions (DuBois 1946, pp. 104-108) is very well written. In addition, many scholars look to Bernal (1987, 1991) as the premier text on the falsification of Black history due to slavery and Eurocentricism, but in The World and Africa, DuBois pointed out clearly the role of European slavery and greed as the main motivating factors for the lack of truth in writing African history (DuBois, 1946 p. 80).
As a result of The Negro and The World and Africa, DuBois left a great deal of material that stimulated many Black scholars who read them, to become interested in the history of the African/Black race.
In our opinion an influential pioneer historian and anthropologist researching the African past was Joel A. Rogers. James Spady has observed that Rogers' research encompasses three major areas: (1) the antiquity of Blacks; (2) how, when and why races mix; and (3) inspirational and biographical sources of great Black men and women. Rogers' research has deeply influenced all of my own research.
Rogers made it clear that Afrocentrists must (1) visit European museums where many artifacts of Africa which were stolen are now housed; (2) learn to speak and read more than one European language, so; (3) the scholar could seek primary documents which must be reinterpreted to present the truth to the world. The greatest books written by Rogers include the best selling 100 Amazing Facts about the Negro, which gave the reader over 100 facts about the history of African people; and especially Sex and Race, a three volume series of books which discuss the world history of Blacks from ancient times to our modern age.
Another AAS historian was Drusilla D. Houston of the state of Oklahoma. Houston's major work was the book Wonderful Ethiopians of the Ancient Cushite Empire. In this book she shows that the civilizations of southern Arabia, Greece, India and Persia were founded by Africans from the Nile Valley and beyond. Houston had hoped to write another volume of this book but she died before it was completed.
The fourth most important AAS africalogist after DuBois, Houston and Rogers was Leo Hansberry. Hansberry was born in 1894, and was the first historian to teach African studies at a major University in the world. Dr. Hansberry became interested in African history after reading DuBois' The Negro. This book led Hansberry to decide to learn more about Kush and ancient Ethiopia.
In 1922, Hansberry went to Howard University in Washington, D.C., where he taught courses in African history. He never received proper support from the University, but he did influence many African-American and African scholars who studied under him. Professor Hansberry died in Chicago on November 3, 1965.
Carter G. Woodson (1936,1949) following DuBois (1915) legitimized the writing of African history. In his premier books on Africa, Woodson (1936, 1949) illuminated the civilizations of Africa, and the rich cultural heritage of African people. Woodson is also credited with founding the Journal of Negro History, which published numerous articles on ancient African history.
John J. Jackson was a self-trained anthropologist. He taught at universities on the east coast and in the midwest, including the Northeastern Illinois Center for Inner City Studies in Chicago, now called the Kemetic Institute.
Jackson's most popular book is Introduction to African Civilization. In this book Jackson used old and new sources to discuss the role of Blacks in civilizations around the world. In his book he makes it clear that Africa and her people are the founders of world civilization.
Jackson presents striking evidence that Indo-Europeans have played a major role in the destruction of African centers of civilization. He cites for example, the Roman's partial destruction of the library of Alexander, and its later total destruction by fanatical Christians in A.D. 389. Prof. Jackson also discussed how the Romans burned down the library of Carthage which contained 50,000 volumes in 146 B.C. And in Spain, Europeans destroyed the great libraries of the Moors.
By the 1960's Africalogical historical research, formerly the "preserve" of African Americans (DuBois, 1971 p. 373), was beginning to be dominated by Europeans. The only AFROCENTRIC historian to come on the scene during this period was Dr. Joseph Ben-Jochannan.
Ben-Jochannan is a historian and cultural anthropologist. His major works are Black Man on the Nile, African Origin of the Major Western Religions, and Africa: Mother of Western Civilization. In these books Ben-Jochannan provides the reader with a wealth of information on the African origin of Egypt, and the African influence on many common civilizing elements found in Western societies today.
French Speaking Afrocentrists
Most of the contemporary dynamic historians and anthropologists writing from the AFROCENTRIC perspective and making important original contributions to Africalogical research in Africa and the Caribbean speak French. These scholars were heavily influenced by the work of Diop.
The FAACS Afrocentrists have their roots in Negritude. Aime Cesaire (1956) originated the term Negritude, which is a cultural expression of "Blackness". In a poem written during World War II, Cesaire coined the phrase "African personality". It is the idea of an original and unique personality peculiar to Africans, that manifests the foundation Afrocentrism in the African diaspora where French is spoken.
Leopold Senghor of Senegal became a major proponent of Negritude. Senghor argued that the African emotional quality to life is different from the materialism of Europeans.
Leopold Senghor not only accepted the idea of an "African Personality", he also helped develop the idea of "Africanity". Africanity is a word which relates to the entire African continent's cultural heritage (Fanon, 1967; Loventhal, 1972).
Negritude has usually been described as "passive" by many social critics (Loventhal, 1972 p. 283; Fanon, 1967 p. 45). But one of the followers of this movement, Chiekh Anta Diop used the idea of "Africanity" to add a historical research component to negritude, that explained and discussed the African origin of Egyptian and Mesopotamian civilization. Diop (1974, 1981) proved the African origin of Egyptian civilization and made it a major component of negritude.
Diop established an important base of Africalogical research at the University of Senegal. Until Diop died in 1986, he was a major advocate of the continuity of African history from Egypt to the medieval African civilizations. He is one of the founders of the African Historical Science and Philosophy of history first practiced by DuBois and Rogers (Winters, 1996a). Like J.A. Rogers, Diop called for scholars to stop dabbling here and there, and become well trained, pluridisciplinary specialists.
Chiekh Anta Diop has made important contributions to linguistic theory in relation to African historiography. Diop's work illustrates that it is important for scholars to maintain a focus on the historical and linguistic factors which define the "personnalite culturelle africaine" (Diop 1991,227).
Language is the sanctum sanctorum of Diop's Afrocentric historical method. The Diopian view of historiography combines the research of linguistics, history and psychology to interpret the cultural unity of African people.
Diop has examined the history of African people using the Genetic Model. There are three components in the genetic model: 1) common physical type, 2) common cultural patterns and 3) genetically related languages (Winters 1989a). Diop over the years has brought to bear all three of these components in his illumination of Kemetic civilization (Diop 1974, 1977, 1978, 1991).
Recently, Eurocentric American scholars have alleged to write reviews of Diop's recent book (Diop 1991). Although these reviewers mention the work of Diop in their articles, they never review his work properly, because they lack the ability to understand the many disciplines that Diop has mastered (Lefkowitz 1992; Baines 1991).
In the recovery of information concerning the African past, Diop promotes semantic anthropology, comparative linguistics and the study of Onomastics (Diagne 1981). Onomastics is the science of names (Diagne 1981). Diop has studied legends, placenames and religious cult terms to discover the unity of African civilization. The main thesis of Diop is that typonymy and ethnonymy of Africa point to a common cradle for Paleo-Africans in the Nile Valley (Diop, 1978, 67).
In Precolonial Black Africa, Diop used ethnonyms to chart the migrations of African people in West Africa. And in The African Origin of Civilization, Diop used "analyses acculturaliste" or typological analysis to study the origin and spread of African cultural features from the Nile Valley to West Africa through his examination of toponyms (Diop 1974, 182-183). In the Cultural Unity of Black Africa, Diop discussed the common totems and religious terms many African ethnic groups share (Diop 1978, 124).
The linguistic research has been based on linguistic classification or taxonomy. Linguistic taxonomy is the foundation upon which comparative and historical linguistic methods are based (Ruhlen 1994). Linguistic taxonomy is necessary for the identification of language families. The determination of language families give us the material to reconstruct the proto-language of a people and discover regular sound correspondences (Hock 1988; Crawley 1992; Bynon 1978; Lord 1966; Robins 1974).
Diop is a strong supporter of the comparative linguistic method in the rediscovery of Paleo-African. The reconstruction of Paleo-African involves both reconstruction and recognition of regular sound correspondence. The goal of reconstruction is the discovery of the Proto-language of African people which leads to the recovery of Paleo-African. To reconstruct a Proto-language the linguist must look for patterns of correspondences.
Linguistic resemblances denote a historical relationship. This suggests that resemblances in fundamental vocabulary and culture terms can help one reconstruct the culture of the speakers of genetically related languages.
Linguistic Constancy
The rate at which languages change is variable. It appears that linguistic change is culture specific. Consequently, the social organization and political culture of a particular speech community can influence the speed at which languages change (Winters, 1996).
Based on the history of language change in Europe most linguists believe that the rate of change for all languages is both rapid and constant (Diagne, 1981, p. 238). The idea that all languages change rapidly is not valid for all the World's languages.
African languages change much slower than European languages (Armstrong, 1962). For example, African vocabulary items collected by Arab explorers over a thousand years ago are analogous to contemporary lexical items (Diagne, 1981, p. 239; Winters, 1996). In addition there are striking resemblances between the ancient Egyptian language and Coptic, and Pharonic Egyptian and African languages (Diagne, 1981; Diop, 1977; Obenga, 1988, 1992a, 1992b, 1993).
The political stability of African political institutions has caused languages to change very slowly in Africa (Winters 1994). Pawley and Ross (1993), Diop (1987, 1991), and Niane (1984) argue that a sedentary life style may account for the conservative nature of a language. The continuity of many African languages may result from the steady state nature of African political systems, and long standing cultural stability since neolithic times (Diop, 1991; Winters 1985,1996; Anselin 1992a, 1992b). This cultural stability has affected the speed at which African languages change (Winters, 1985, 1996).
This leads to the hypothesis that linguistic continuity exists in Africa due to the continuity or stability of African socio-political structures and cultural systems. This relative cultural stability has led African languages to change more slowly then European and Asian languages. Diop (1974) observed that:
First the evolution of languages, instead of moving everywhere at the same rate of speed seems linked to other factors; such as, the stability of social organizations or the opposite, social upheavals. Understandably in relatively stable societies man's language has changed less with the passage of time (pp. 153-154).
In Nouvelles recherches sur l'egyptien ancien et les langues Negro-Africaine Modernes, Diop wrote that:
The permanence of these forms not only, constitute today a solid base ... upon which ... [we are to re-]construct diachronic African [languages], but obliges also a radical revision of these ideas, a priori ... on the evolution of these languages in general (p. 17).
There is considerable evidence which supports the African continuity concept (Winters, 1996). Dr. Armstrong (1962) noted the linguistic continuity of African languages when he used Glottochronology to test the rate of change in Yoruba. Comparing modern Yoruba words with a list of identical terms collected 130 years ago by Koelle, Dr. Armstrong found little if any internal or external changes in the terms.
Diop's theory of linguistic constancy recognizes the social role language plays in African language change. Language being a variable phenomena has as much to do with a speaker's society as with the language itself (Labov 1965, 1972). Meillet (1926) wrote that:
Since language is a social institution it follows that linguistics is a social science, and the only variable element to which one may appeal in order to account for a linguistic change is social change, of which language variations are but the consequences (p. 17).
Thus social organization can influence the rate of change within languages.
Diop's major linguistic effort has been the classification of Black African and Egyptian languages. Up until 1977 Diop's major area of interest was morphological and phonological similarities between Egyptian and Black African languages. Diop (1977, 77-84) explains many of his sound laws for the Egyptian-Black African connection. These sound laws have been further elaborated by Anselin (1989, 1992, 1993) and Obenga (1988, 1993b).
Diop has noted that the reconstruction of Paleo-African terms can help us make inferences about African cultures going backwards in time to an impenetrable past undocumented by written records. This is semantic anthropology, a linguistic approach which seeks to discover aspects of man's culture from his language. Thusly, linguistic resemblances can help the anthropologists make precise inferences about a linguistic group's cultural elements. In Obenga (1988) the Paleo-African terms for cattle, goat, sheep, rams and the monkey were reconstructed.
Diop has contributed much to the extra-African linguistic relationship. He was a major proponent of the Dravidian -African relationship (Diop 1974, 116), and he illustrated the African substratum in Indo-European languages in relationship to cacuminal sounds and terms for social organization and culture (1974, 115). Diop (1978, 113) also recognized that in relation to Arabic words, after the suppression of the first consonant, there is often an African root. This is not surprising because Edward Blyden found evidence that the Arabic writing system was created by an African from the modern country we call Egypt.
The major student of Diop is Obenga (1974, 1978, 1995). Th. Obenga is a linguist and historian. He has done remarkable work in the reconstruction of Paleo-African and a brilliant study of the philosophical views of the Egyptians.
Formerly the major work of Obenga was L'Afrique dans l'Antiquitie. In this book Th. Obenga discussed the African origin of Egypt and the cultural and linguistic unity of Blacks world wide.
Obenga (1978a, 1978b, 1988) has shown the unity of ancient and modern African languages and the close relationship of ancient Egyptian to his own language Mbochi. And in The Peopling of ancient Egypt and the Decipherment of the Meroitic script, Obenga and Diop give a superb discussion of the reality of an African origin of Egyptian civilization.
Obenga (1978b, 1988) concentrates on two areas of linguistic research. Firstly, he has shown striking affinities between Egyptian and Mbochi. Secondly, Obenga (1988, 1993) has been concerned with the reconstruction of Paleo-African and the shared grammatical features of Egyptian and Black African languages.
In 1993, Obenga published Origine commune de l'Egyptien ancien du copte et des langues Negro Africaines modernes. This book provides a detailed discussion of the historical links between African and Egyptian languages. In Obenga (1993) African languages are divided into three Superfamilies: the Black African-Egyptian, the Berber and the Khoisan languages.
Obenga maintains that the Egyptian-Black African family is classified into the following subfamilies: Egyptian, Cushitic, Tchadian, Nilo-Saharan and the Niger-Kordofanian families. Most of these subfamilies of Egyptian-Black African were first grouped by Greenberg (1963).
Obenga (1993) in addition to providing a detailed account of the Egyptian-Black African genetic connections also provides keen insight into the so called Afro-Asiatic family of languages.
He proves that the Egyptian language is closer to African languages than the non-African languages grouped in the Afro-Asiatic family of languages. Recently, this theme was also taken up by Tounkara (1989); he explained how Diop's theory of an Egyptian-Black African language connection has more linguistic and historical support than the Afro-Asiatic hypothesis.
Gilbert Ngom (1986) has done a fine examination of the correspondence between the Bantu, Duala and the ancient Egyptian language. Ngom (1986) elaborates on the Black African-Egyptian phonology. He also makes it clear that Egyptian is closer to the Black African languages, than the Berber and Semitic languages in syntax, morphology and phonology (Ngom, 1986 pp. 48-52). Anselin (1989, 1993) provides an outstanding discussion of the affinity between the Egyptian and Black African verbal systems.
The most interesting research inspired by Diop is in the area of semantic anthropology. Using linguistic data Anselin ( 1989, 1992, 1993) and Pfouma (1987) have compared Black African and Egyptian terms to illuminate the common royal heritage and religion shared by Blacks. Winters (1985a, 1985d, 1989, 1991) also used this method to confirm the unity between the African, the Dravidian, the Elamite and the Sumerian languages.
Dr. Diop has called on Africalogical researchers to become pluridisciplinarians. A pluridisciplinary specialist is a person who is qualified to use more than one discipline, for example history, linguistics and etc., when researching the many aspects of African history and Africalogy in general. Two major Afrocentric pluridisciplinarians are Alain Anselin (1993) and Clyde Ahmad Winters (1989, 1994).
Anselin is an AFROCENTRIC pluridisciplinarian researcher. Anselin is the Director of Studies at the Laboratory of Research the A.M.E.P., at Fort-de-France Martinique. He has written three important AFROCENTRIC works: La Question Peule, Le Mythe d'Europe, Samba and numerous articles.
In Samba, Alain Anselin illustrates how the corpus of Egyptian hieroglyphics explains not only the Egyptian civilization, but also the entire world of the Paleo-Africans. In this book following Winters (1985, 1991) he makes it clear that Kemetic civilization originated in the Fertile African Crescent (Anselin, 1992 pp. 20-22). And that Black African and Kemetic civilization at its origination was unified from its foundations in the Sahara, up to its contemporary manifestations in the language and culture of Black Africans.
In La Question Peule, Anselin again moves back to his theme of unity for Egyptian, West African and Dravidian languages, political traditions and culture. The unity between Dravidian and African cultures ,was also examined by Th. Obenga (1973), Anta Diop (1974), Cheikh Tidiane N'Diaye and Winters (1980a, 1985c, 1985d, 1986c, 1991a).
Anselin (1982, p. 190) provides a detailed discussion of the "Black Ageans". There is also a fine examination of the affinities between the Agean and Dravidian civilizations (Anselin, 1982 pp. 135-149).
Another pluridisiciplinarian Afrocentrist is Clyde Ahmad Winters. He is the only African-American attempting to confirm the theories of Diop in relation to the genetic unity of the Egyptian, Black African, Elamite, Sumerian and Dravidian languages. Winters is mainly concerned with the unity of ancient old and new world Black civilizations (Winters 1985a, 1985d, 1989) and decipherment of ancient Black writing systems used by these Africans (Winters 1985b). This led Winters to learn many foreign languages including French, Tamil, Malinke/Bambara, Chinese, Arabic, Otomi and more.
Winters has used Diop's genetic model in his research which combines anthropological, linguistic and historical methods to confirm that the center for the rise of the originators of the Egyptian and Manding civilizations (1977, 1979b, 1986a, 1986f, 1983), the Magyar or Hungarian civilization (1984a, 1986e); the Dravidian civilization (1980a, 1981d, 1985c, 1985d 1986c, 1986d, 1986e, 1988a, 1989b)and the Sumerian and Elamite civilizations was the Fertile African Crescent of the highland regions of Middle/Saharan Africa (1984, 1985a, 1991, 1994). In addition he has explained how Blacks founded civilization in the Americas (Winters 1977a, 1981d, 1983b, 1986); and East and Southeast Africa (1979, 1979a, 1980b, 1981a, 1981b, 1981c, 1983c, 1983d, 1986c, 1987b).
An important finding of Winters is that the ancestors of the Dravidian and Manding speaking people appear to have left Africa at the same time around 2600 B.C. (Winters 1985c). And that these people founded civilization in Europe, Elam, India and ancient China (1991a).
Winters' (1988, 1989c, 1990, 1991a), like Diop before him has also discussed (1) the African substratum in European languages; (2) explained the conflict between African people and Indo-European speaking people; and (3) the loss of early African settlements in Europe to the contemporary European people due to natural catastrophes and wars after 1000 B.C. This research provides valuable source material for the elaboration of the African influence on European languages and the languages of East and Central Asia (Winters, 1989b, 1990, 1991b).
During the research of Winters' (1985b) it was discovered that the Proto-Saharan people used a common writing system.
Winters (1983) found that he could read the ancient inscriptions left by these people in the Sahara dating to 3000 B.C. A comparison of the Manding language and the Elamite, Sumerian and Dravidian languages confirmed their genetic unity.
The evidence of a genetic relationship between the Manding languages, which was used to decipher the earliest Proto-Saharan writings and other languages spoken by the founders of civilization in India and Mesopotamia, led to the assumption that the writing systems used by these ancient founders of civilization could be deciphered. The confirmation of Diop's theory of linguistic constancy made it possible to confirm this hypothesis and read the common signs used to write the Harappan script (Winters, 1982b, 1984b, 1984d, 1984e, 1985b, 1987, 1994, 1995a, 1995b), the Minoan script and the Olmec script (Winters, 1977a, 1977b, 1979b).
The most important finding of Winters (1984) was the cognate language of Meroitic. Using the evidence presented by the Classical sources that the Kushites ruled empires in Africa and Asia, Winters (1984, 1988, 1989) illustrated that the cognate language of Meroitic, was the Tokharian language spoken by the Kushana people of Central Asia. Using the Kushana/Tokharian language many Meroitic inscriptions have been deciphered (Winters, 1984, 1988, 1989, 1998a, 1998b, 1998c, 1998d).
Another important Afrocentrist is Molefi Asante at Temple University. Asante has been active in the field of Afrocentric studies for over twenty years. He is also founder, at Temple, of the major center of academic Afrocentrism outside of the University of Senegal when Diop was living.
In numerous articles and books Asante (1988, 1990, 1987) has laid out the foundations of Africalogical research. Much of Asante's theoretical foundations of Afrocentrism are found in his critically acclaimed book Kemet, Afrocentricity, and Knowledge. In this book Asante gives keen insight into the role of Egypt in the creation of an Africalogical humanities. He also shatters many of the long held myths perpetuated by Europeans that Africans failed to invent writing, and strong highly organized nation-states and empires.
But he does not stop here in making a case for Africalogical research. He also explains and discusses European attitudes toward race and ethnicity in the United States.
In addition to arguing persuasively for the, establishment of Afrocentrism "as a legitimate response to the human condition" (Asante, 1990, p. 5), Asante has written a fine introductory text on Egypt and other ancient African nations that can be used in Upper grades and High School. This text is called Classical Africa. In this timely book Asante explains the rise and fall of many African civilizations from ancient Egypt to the Western Sudani kingdom of Songhay.
In conclusion, africalogical research is not new it has been conducted by Afro-Americans for over 150 years. African-American Afrocentrists dominated the field of African-American and African history from the 1870's up to the 1930's (DuBois 1971).
Beginning in the 1940's "established" Euro-American writers became interested in African-American history; and in the 1960's as many African nations became independent other European scholars began to dominate the interpretation and writing of African history. These scholars began to decide on the criterions that make the "proper" research of ancient African history.
By the 1970's many Afrocentrists in French speaking Africa began to assert themselves, and write highly readable and intelligent prose on the African origin of Egypt and the genetic unity of the Black African and Egyptian languages. This group of researchers was complemented by scholars like Ben Jochannon and C.A. Winters. Today the research efforts of both the FAACS and AAS afrocentrists continue to confirm the great history of African people from a falsificationist perspective.
References
Anselin, A. (1981). Le question peule. Paris: Editions Karthala.
Anselin, A. (1982). Le mythe d'Europe. Paris: Editions Anthropos.
Anselin, A. (1989). pour une morpologie elementaire du Negro-Africain, Carbet, no. 6, pp. 98-105.
Anselin, A. (1992a). L'ibis du savoir-l'ecriture et le mythe en ancienne Egypte, ANKH, no. 1, pp. 79-88.
Anselin, A. (1992b). Samba. Guadeloupe: Editions de L'Unite de Recherche-Action Guadeloupe.
Anselin, A.(1993). Anamneses. Guadeloupe: Editions de l'UNIRAG.
Armstrong, R.G. (1962). Glottochronology and African linguistics. Journal of African History, 3(2), 283-290.
Asante, Molefi Kete. (1987). The afrocentricity idea. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Asante, Molefi Kete. (1988). Afrocentricity. Trenton: Africa World Press.
Asante, Molefi Kete. (1990). Kemet, afrocentricity, and knowledge. Trenton: Africa World Press.
Asante, Molefi Kete. (1994). Classical Africa. Maywood, N.J.: The Peoples Publishing Group, Inc.
Baines, J. (1991, August 11). Was civilization made in Africa.? The New York Times Review of Books, 12-13.
Boas, F. (1911). The mind of primitive man. New York.
Bynon, T. (1978). Historical linguistics. London: Cambridge University Press.
Cesaire, A. (1956). Cahier d'un retour au pays Natal. Paris: Presence Africaine.
Crawley, T. 1992. An Introduction to historical linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Delafosse, M. (1901). La langue Mandigue. Paris.
Delany, M.R. (1879). Principia of ethnology: Origins of races and color. Philadelphia, Penn.
Diagne, P. (1981). In J. Ki-Zerbo (Ed.), General history of Africa I: Methodology and African prehistory (233-260). London: Heinemann Educational Books Ltd.
Diop, C.A. (1974) The African origin of civilization: Myth or reality. Westport, Conn.:Lawrence Hill and Company.
Diop, C.A. (1977). Parente genetique de l'Egyptien Pharaonique et des languues Negro-Africaines. Dakar: Institut Fondamental d'Afrique Noire.
Diop, C.A. (1978). Precolonial Black Africa. Wesport, Conn.: Lawrence Hill and Company.
Diop, C.A. 1981. A methodology for the study of migrations. In African Ethnonyms and Toponyms, by UNESCO. (Unesco: Paris) 86-110.
Diop, C.A. (1991). Civilization or barbarism. Brooklyn, N.Y.: Lawrence Hill Books.
DuBois, W.E.B. (1915). The Negro. New York.
DuBois, W.E.B. (1946). The world and Africa. New York.
DuBois, W.E.B. (1971). The American Negro Intelligentsia. In Apropos of Africa (Ed.) by Adelaide Hill and Martin Kilson, (362-374) New York: Anchor Books.
Ehret, C. (1988). Language change and the material correlates of language and ethnic shift. Antiquity, 62, 564-574.
Ehret, C. & Posnansky (Eds.). (1982) The Archaeological and linguistic reconstruction of African history. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Fanon, E (1967). Black skin, white masks. New York: Grove Press.
Frobenius, L. (1913). The voice of Africa. 2 vols. New York.
Hock, H.H. (1988). Principles of historical linguistics. Amsterdam: Mouton de Gruyter.
Johnston, H.H. (1910). The Negro in the new world. New York.
Johnston, J.W. (1971). Africa at the peace table and the descendants of Africans in American democracy. In Apropos of Africa, (Ed.) by Adelaide Hill and Martin Kilson, (pp. 384-392) New York: Anchor Books.
Labov, W.(1965). The social motivation of a sound change. Word, 19, 273-309.
Labov, W. (1972). The internal evolution of linguistic roles. In Stokwell, R.P. and Macaulay, R.K.S. (Eds.) Linguistic Change and Generative Theory. (101-171 ). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Lefkowitz, M. (1992, February 10). Not out of Africa. The New Republic, 29-36.
Lord, R. (1966). Comparative linguistics. London: St. Paul's House.
Lowenthal, D. (1972). West Indian societies. New York: Oxford University.
Mbiti, J. S. 1970. African religions and philosophy. Garden City: Anchor Press.
Meillet, A. 1926. Introduction h l'etude comparatif des languages Indo-Europeennes. Paris.
Moitt, B. (1989) CHIEKH Anta Diop and the African diaspora: Historical continuity and sociocultural symbolism. Presence Africaine 149/150, 347-360.
McIntosh, S. K. & McIntosh, R. (1983). Forgotten tells of Mali. Expedition, 35-47.
Ngom, G. (1986). Rapports egypte-Afrique noire: aspects linguistiques, Presence Africaine no.137/138, pp. 25-57.
Niane, D.T.(Ed.). (1984). Introduction. General history of Africa IV (1-14). London: Heinemann Educational Books.
Obenga, T. (1973). L'Afrique dans l'antiquite-Egypte pharaonique-Afrique noire. Paris: Presence Africaine.
Obenga, T. (1978a). Africa in antiquity, Africa Quarterly, 18, no. 1, pp. 1-15.
Obenga, T. (1978b). The genetic relationship between Egyptian (ancient Egyptian and Coptic) and modern African languages. In UNESCO (Ed.), The peopling of ancient Egypt and the deciphering of the Meroitic script (65-72). Paris: UNESCO.
Obenga, T. (1988). Esquisses d'une histoire culturelle de l'Afrique par la lexicologie, Presence Africaine, no. 140, pp. 1-25.
Obenga, T (1992). Le chamito-semitique n'existe pas, ANKH, no. 1, pp. 51-58.
Obenga, T. (1993a). Origine commune de l'Egyptien Ancien du Copte et des langues Negro-Africaines Modernes. Paris: Editions L'Harmattan.
Obenga, T. Origine Commune de 1Egyptien ancien du coptes et des langues negro-africaines modernes. Paris: Editions l'Harmattan.
Olderogge, L. (1981). Migrations and ethnic and linguistic differentiations. In J. Ki-Zerbo (Ed.), General History of Africa I: Methodology and African History (271-278). Paris: UNESCO.
Pawley, A. & Ross, M. (1993). Austronesian historical linguistics and culture history. Annual Review of Anthropology, 22, 425-459.
Pfouma, O. L'abeille royale, Carbet, no.6, pp. 98-105.
Robins, R.H. (1974). General linguistics. Bloomington: Indiana State University Press.
Ruhlen, M. 1994. The origin of language. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Senghor, L.S. (1961). Negritude and African socialism, African Affairs, pp. 20-25.
Toukara, B. (1989). Problematique du comparatisme, egyptien ancien/langues africaines (wolof), Presence Africain no. 149/150, pp. 313-320.
Welmers, W. (1968). Niger Congo-Mande. In T.A. Sebeok (Ed.), Current Trends in Linguistics, 7, 113-140.
Williams, B. (1987). The A-Group Royal Cemetery at Outsell: Cemetery L. Chicago: Oriental Institute, University of Chicago Press.
Winters, C.A. (1977). The influence of the Mande scripts on ancient American Writing systems, Bulletin l'de IFAN T39, serie b, no2, (1977), pages 941-967.
Winters, C.A. (1977a) Islam in Early North and South America, Al-Ittihad).
Winters, C.A. (January 1979b). Trade between East Africa and China, Afrikan Mwalimu pp. 25-31.
Winters, C.A. (1979c). Manding Scripts in the New World, Journal of African Civilization 1, no. 1, pp. 61-97.
Winters, C.A. (1980a). The genetic unity of Dravidian and African languages and culture, Proceedings of the First International Symposium on Asian Studies (PIISAS) 1979, Hong Kong: Asian Research Service.
Winters, C.A. (1980b) A note on the unity of Black civilizations in Africa, Indo China, and China, PISAS 1979, Hong Kong: Asian Research Service.
Winters, C.A. (1981a) The unity of African and Indian agriculture, Journal of African Civilization 3, no. 1, pp. 103-110.
Winters, C.A. (1981b). Are Dravidians of African origin, P. Second ISAS, 1980, (Hong Kong: Asian Research Service) pp. 789-807.
Winters, C.A. (1981c). Further thoughts on Japanese Dravidian connection, Dravidian Language Association News 5, no. 9, pp. 1-4.
Winters, C.A. (December, 1981/January 1982a) Mexico's Black heritage, The Black Collegian, pp. 76-84.
Winters, C.A., (1982b) The Harappan script deciphered: Proto- Dravidian writing of the Indus Valley, P Third ISAS, 1981,(Hong Kong: Asian Research Service) pp. 925-936.
Winters, C.A. (1982c). Lectures in Africana: Kushite diaspora, Chicago: Uthman dan Fodio Institute.
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. 208-214.
Winters C.A. (1983b) Les fondateurs de la Grece venaient d'Afrique en passant par la Crete, Afrique Histoire no8, pp. 13-18.
Winters C.A. (1983c). Blacks in ancient China, part 1: The founders of Xia and Shang, Journal of Black Studies 1, no. 2.
Winters C.A. (1983d). Possible relationship between the Manding and Japanese, Papers in Japanese Linguistics 9, pp. 151-158.
Winters C.A. Winters. (January 1984). Magyar and Proto-Saharan relationship, Fighter (Hungarian language Newspaper) Cleveland, Ohio, p. 2.
Winters C.A.(1984a). The Indus Valley writing is Proto- Dravidian, Journal of Tamil Studies, no. 25, pp. 50-64.
Winters C.A. (Juin 1984b). A note on Tokharian and Meroitic, Meroitic Newsletter\Bulletin dInformation Meroitiques, no. 23, pages 18-21.
Winters C.A.(June 1984c) Further notes on Japanese and Tamil, International Journal of Dravidian Linguistics, 13, no. 2, pp. 347-353.
Winters C.A. (1984d). The inspiration of the Harappan Talismanic seals, Tamil Civilization 2, no.1, pp. 1-8.
Winters C.A. (1984e). The Harappan writing of the copper tablets, Journal of Indian History LXII, nos. 1-3, pp. 1-5.
Winters C.A. (1985a). The Proto-Culture of the Dravidians, Manding and Sumerians, Tamil Civilization 3, no. 1 , pp. 1-9.
Winters C.A. (1985b). The Indus Valley writing and related scripts of the 3rd millennium BC, India Past and Present 2, no.1 (1985b), pages 13-19.
Winters, C.A. (1985c). The far wastern origin of the Tamils, Journal of Tamil Studies no. 27, pp. 65-92.
Winters, C.A. (1985d). The genetic unity between the Dravidian, Elamite, Manding and Sumerian languages, Sixth ISAS, 1984,(Hong Kong: Asian Research Service) pp. 1413-1425.
Winters, C.A. (1986). The migration routes of the Proto-Mande, The Mankind Quarterly 27, no. 1, pp. 77-96.
Winters, C.A. (1986b). Blacks in ancient America, Colorlines 3, no. 2, pp. 26-27.
Winters, C.A. (1986c). Dravidian settlements in ancient Polynesia, India Past and Present 3, no. 2, pp. 225-241.
Winters, C.A. Winters. (1986d). The Dravidian origin of the mountain and water toponyms in central Asia, Journal of Central Asia 9, no. 2, pps. 144-148.
Winters, C.A. (1986e). Dravidian and Magyar/Hungarian, International Journal of Dravidian Linguistics 15, no. 2.
Winters, C.A. (1986f). The rise of Islam in the western Sahara, Topaz 2, no.1, pp. 5-15.
Winters, C.A. (1987). The Harappan script. Journal of Tamil Studies. no. 30, pp. 89-111.
Winters, C.A. (1988). The Dravidian and Manding Substratum in Tokharian, Central Asiatic Journal 32, nos. 1-2, pp. 131-141.
Winters C.A. (1986b). Common African and Dravidian place name elements, South Asian Anthropologist, 9, no. 1 pp. 33-36.
Winters C.A. (1989). Tamil, Sumerian and Manding and the genetic model, International Journal of Dravidian Linguistics, 18, no. 1.
Winters C.A. (1989b). Cheikh Anta Diop et le dechiffrement de l'ecriture meroitique, Cabet: Revue Martinique de Sciences Humaines et de Litterature 8, pp. 149-152.
Winters C.A. (1989c). Review of Dr. Asko Parpolas' the coming of the Aryans. International Journal of Dravidian Linguistics 18, no. 2, pp. 98-127.
Winters. C.A.(1990). The Dravido Harappan colonization of Central Asia, Central Asiatic Journal 34, no. 1-2, pp. 120-144.
Winters. C.A. (1991). The Proto-Sahara. The Dravidian Encyclopaedia. (Trivandrum: International School of Dravidian Linguistics) pp. 553-556. Volume 1.
Winters. C.A. (1991b). Linguistic evidence for Dravidian influence on trade and animal domestication in Central and East Asia International Journal of Dravidian Linguistics, 20, no.2, pp. 91-102.
Winters, C.A. (1994). Afrocentrism: A valid frame of references. Journal of Black Studies 25, no. 2, pp. 170-190.
Winters, C.A. (1994b). The Dravidian and African languages, International Journal of Dravidian Linguistics, 23 (1), 34-52.
Winters, C.A. (1994c). Ancient Dravidian: And introductory grammar of Harappan with vocabularies, Journal Tamil Studies no. 41, 1-21.
Winters, C.A. (1995a). Ancient Dravidian: The Harappan signs, Journal Tamil Studies. no. 42, 1-23.
Winters, C.A. (1995b). Ancient Dravidian: Harappan Grammar/Dictionary, Journal Tamil Studies, no. 43-44, 59-130.
Winters, C.A. (1996). Linguistic Continuity and African and Dravidian languages, International Journal of Dravidian Linguistics, 23 (2), 34-52.
Winters, C.A. (1996a). Foundations of the Afrocentric ancient history curriculum, The Negro Educational Review XLVII (3-4), 214-217.
Winters, C.A. (1998a). Meroitic funerary text: Temple architecture and mortuary practices, Inscription: Journal of Ancient Egypt, 1 (1), 29-33.
Winters, C.A. (1998b). Meroitic Funerary text: Stelae and funerary tables, Inscription: Journal of Ancient Egypt, 1 (2), 41-55.
Winters, C.A. (1998c). The inscriptions of Tanyidamani. forthcoming Nubica IV und Nubica V.
Winters, C.A. (1998d). The meroitic chamber inscription, forthcoming Nubica IV und Nibica V.
Winters, C.A. (n.d.). Meroitic inscriptions from Karanog. forthcoming Journal of the Society for the Study of Egyptian Antiquities.
Yurco, F. (1989). Were the ancient Egyptians Black?, Biblical Archaeological Review 15, no. 5, pages 24-29, 58.
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to: Clyde Winters, 11541 South Peoria Chicago, Illinois 60643. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-Mudy+Apr 10 2005, 09:01 PM-->QUOTE(Mudy @ Apr 10 2005, 09:01 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin--> INDIAN,
Change your user handle to name, according to India-forum rules, send email to admin with changed user handle before posting any post. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
what are user handles, brother?
/exit lurk mode/
I would like to clear up some facts before we go any further...
In 1816, Francis Ellis examined Tamil, Malayalam, Telugu, Kanada as well as Tulu, Kodagu and Malto to come to conclusion that they were all related.
In 1856, Robert Caldwell expaned this list of related languages with Kota, Toda, Gondi, Kui, Kurukh and Brahui. To this family, he first attributed the word 'Dravida' a SANSKRIT word which simply means 'Tamil'.
Thus the word Dravida came into being. Ironically, it is a Sanskrit word, used by those who are so opposed to Sanskrit.
In course of time, the theory of 'Sanskritisation' was propounded by various Indologists. Along with this theory, the case for Dravidian identity as seperate from Sanskritic or Brahmanical Hinduism was developed.
Dr.J can you email me at rhytha@gmail.com
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->what are user handles, brother? <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Change "INDIAN" your user id to name.
DRAVIDIAN MOVEMENT- WHAT IS IT?
The Europeans seeing that India has the mother of all their Languages- Sanskrit and Tamil, and Much Superior Divine contacts than the much confused Hebrews.
Portughese, first under Loyala and later by Fransis Xavier, broke each and every temple in Goa, then Inquisition was brought. "Anybody who has ANy God idols are helping Brahmins can be killed", this was Xavier wanted law. Robert DENObili, tried deception, he staying in Madurai, during Naicker Period, was required to read Tamil and Telugu but also required SANSKRIT, made a fraud Veda, called Yesur Veda, but failed miserably, and caught for fraud, left Madurai and died lonely in Chennai, and his converts remained less than 300 by all deception means.
One Colonel.Boden, who served in India for morethan 2 decades, felt bad on failure of Conversion Business, Pledged Huge Amount to OXford University for Sanskrit Scholarship, to help Missonaries.
Came RajaRamMohanrai, wel versant in Sanskrit and Persian, other than Bengali and English, Learned HEBREW, GREEK AND LATIN and found Brahmo SAmaj,
British who felt his ideals are closer to Christians and a Conversion of A Prominant Brahmin, would fetch huge returns, appointed a Learned Bishop to shaddow Rai, and convert him. RESULT, Rev. Fr. Adams was converted from Xty to Brahmos.
This created huge problems, then using the Boden's Trust, a Non-British, Non-Anglican church member Young Maxmuller was picked to translate Vedas, and ALL Indian Libraries were forced to buy his books. Monier Williams etc., are the product of this Boden Trust.
Wrong Fradulant translation by Muller, etc., was used for Aryan race theory.
By this they say Hinduism is not Indian and also the Europeans are the Aryans, who then becomes the cradle of Sanskritetc.,
Any body who calls a section of Hindus as Aryans and others as Dravidians are accepting the Missionaries fraud that Indian are not brained to make Sanskrit and Tamil and they are European imports.
Dr. Ambedkar, who was never a Hinduism supporter, wrote:
1.THe Vedas do not know any such race as the Aryan race.
2.There is no evidence in the Vedas of any invasion of India by the Aryan race and its having conquered the Dasas and Dasyus supposed to be the natives of India.
3.There is no evidience to show that the distinction between Aryans, Dasas and Dasyus was a racial distinction.
4. THe Vedas do not support the contention that the Aryas were different in colour from the Dasas and Dayus .....
" If anthropometry is a science which can be depended upon to determine the race of a people ..... then its measurements extablish that the Brahmins and the Untouchables belong to the same race. From this it follows that if the Brahmins are Aryans the Untouchables are also Aryans. If the Brahmins are Dravidians, the Untouchables are also Untouchables....
WRITINGS AND SPEECHES - EDUCATION Dept. Govt. of Mahrashtra vol -7 page 85 and 302-303.
The Casteism is increased due to the Dravidian rule.
The Dravidian Fathers want their Posting and Party Leadership to their Sons. Eg.Karunanidhi, Ramdoss etc.,
Unless We Indians understand the Mission of Church- to divide and Convert, of which Hate - Brahimins means hate Hinduism, Church comes in; Indian Civilisation and Culture would have grave problems.
Moses Salomon
Robert Caldwell and Dravidian Movement
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Robert Caldwell is the Scotish missionary who came to India and supposedly pioneered the study on Dravidian Languages, mainly tamil. Here is an effort to view his works from nationalist perspective.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->There was a continuous effort by Portugal missionarys to christianize India by using the power of state, which is termed as Goa Inquisition. Later, many clever missionaries soon found out that India cannot be converted by force because India inherently has strong Hindu way of life which assimilates all sects and cultures in India. They tried to find a way to seperate Hindus by telling the people have different roots.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Dravidian Movement: Caldwell profounded a theory that the culture and civilization of south Indian (Tamil people, per se) whom he termed as "Dravidians" is intrinsically different from North Indian. This hypothesis states that the origin of Tamil and other languages in south India is different from that of Sanskrit and other north Indian languages. It also claims that south Indians are part of a different race than north Indians. This theory lead to anti-caste movement in the starting and later to a seperatist movement by people like Ramaswamy Naiker(Periyar) who were inspired by Caldwells Ideology.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Evangelistic Efforts: For him, the the idolatry and the Sanskritic culture of the articulate Brahmins was a spiritual threat to the propagation of the Gospel, <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->b. Robert Caldwell had a strong anti-Brahmin bias which is non-existent in Tamil literature and culter.He was the first and foremost christian missionary who always believed that Brahmins are stumbling block for christian evangelization.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Linguistic Evangelism:
His efforts not only discouraged the study of sanskrit in Tamilnadu, but also drove to a cleansing of Samskrit words from Tamil vocabulary.His literary works are considered as the 'theoritical foundation for Dravidian movement' in Political, Academic and cultural perspective.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->However Caldwell and his descendants effort was a success story of anti-national movement. Many districts of Tamilnadu are now christianized to an extent of 45%. TamilNadu is getting ruled by two parties who follow this Dravidian theory with minor modifications. Tamilnadu has the maximum number of missionaries now. We can infer from history that once the percentage of Non-hindus increases in a territory it finally leads to seperatism. "Dharmantaran" leads to "Rashtrantharan" as we can see in the states like J&K and Nagaland.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Conclusion:
It is absolutely necsessary to build a Hindu consciousness among Tamilians and bring them back to Hindu fold. The schemes like "Ghar Wapasi" through which Christians who got converted by hook or crook can be reconverted back to Hinduism would help in this regard. The whole Tamil language grammar needs to be re-discovered on nationalist grounds. Tamilians should be educated with the fact that they are part of one of the greatest culture in world and they were integral part of Bharath for thousands of years. This will not only help for the suppression of seperatist movement also to bring back the Hindu revival.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
One thing to consider is that from ~ 200BC to 800AD the South was mainly Buddhist and Jain. It was the perseverance of the Alwars that revived the Sanathan Dharma and that survived the onslaught of Islam and Missionaries. The resistance to mainstream Hinduism could be due to this 'recent' non Hindu memory? And this was exploited by the others?
<!--QuoteBegin-ramana+Jan 19 2006, 09:55 AM-->QUOTE(ramana @ Jan 19 2006, 09:55 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->One thing to consider is that from ~ 200BC to 800AD the South was mainly Buddhist and Jain. It was the perseverance of the Alwars that revived the Sanathan Dharma and that survived the onslaught of Islam and Missionaries. The resistance to mainstream Hinduism could be due to this 'recent' non Hindu memory? And this was exploited by the others?
[right][snapback]45133[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Ramana,
The conversion (I am using that word for lack of a better word) of the Pallavas - Mahendra and especially his son Narasimha (Mamallan from Mamallapuram now known as Mahabalipuram) and their patronizing of Shavism (The adiyars especially Thirunavukkarasar etc) also contributed a lot to the revival of Hinduism.
I would say that the pallava patronization led to the strong presence of Shaivism in Tamil Nadu. Try Kalki's book "Sivagamiyin Sabatham" (The vow of Sivagami - a fiction+historical account of the Pallavas centred on Pulikeshi's invasion and the Pallava revenge on Vatapi- the Pulikeshi capital).
Printer Friendly Page Send this Article to a Friend
PERSPECTIVE
Is the Dravidian movement dying?
SUBRAMANIAN SWAMY
The Dravidian movement is on the verge of collapse under the weight of its inherent ideological contradictions.
S.R. RAGHUNATHAN
Jayalalithaa, Tamil Nadu Chief Minister and AIADMK general secretary, inaugurating a noon meal scheme for poor devotees, at the Kapaleeswarar temple in Chennai.
THE Dravidian movement in Tamil Nadu can be dated to begin from December 1916 when the "Non-Brahmin Manifesto" was released. In the manifesto, the Dravidian concept was anti-Brahmin specific because the patrons of the movement, the British imperialist rulers, had wanted it that way, and for good reason as I shall expound below. The manifesto was authored principally by Dr. T.M. Nair and Rao Bahadur Theogaraya Chetty. It candidly advocated the continuance of British imperialist rule because it was contended that the British alone could "hold the scales evenly between the castes and creed" of India.
The manifesto was immediately denounced as a handiwork of the British rulers with an aim to divide the freedom struggle. Dr. Annie Besant, then editor of New India, and a prominent personality in the freedom struggle, debunked the manifesto as "mischievous and unpatriotic". The non-Brahmins in the freedom struggle such as Kesava Pillay were also appalled by its blatant casteist approach and thus distanced themselves from it.
Since the Dravidian movement's focus was defined and set solely against the Brahmins, without an ideological structure for developing a pan non-Brahmin consciousness, with the movement's founding, the seeds of its demise were also planted. It has taken time, but today the decay and moral bankruptcy of the Dravidian movement is evident in the land of its birth. Its demise seems imminent.
<b>
The movement grew first with British imperialist patronage, and especially after being given a militant edge by a Congressman, Periyar E.V. Ramasamy Naicker. In 1932, the movement suffered a setback when Dr. B.R. Ambedkar rejected the British offer of separate electorates for the Scheduled Castes, and sided with Mahatma Gandhi to sign the Poona Pact.</b> By then Periyar had left the Congress and militantly advocated godlessness and atheism. He even declared Ravana a Dravidian hero. Under Periyar the Dravidian movement came close to developing an ideology that could have provided a durable basis for its survival, but even Periyar could not overcome the erroneous assumptions and basic internal contradictions on which it was founded. The Poona Pact, for example, dealt a body blow to those who had thought that the Scheduled Castes would en masse defect from Hindu society.
Until Independence in 1947, the Dravidian movement functioned as a handmaiden of the British imperialists. Just prior to the transfer of power, Periyar had pleaded with the Viceroy's representative not to leave power in Tamil Nadu, even if they departed from the rest of India. The movement, however, survived and got a boost after 1952 because of the short-sighted partisan interest of the Congress, and further in the 1960s, ironically because of an even more myopic interest of C. Rajagopalachari, the then political Dean of the Brahmins. The Congress saw the Dravidian movement as a tool to keep other national opposition parties from gathering strength, and used them as ideological storm-troopers. It never thought that the Dravidian movement could culminate in power and office and replace the Congress itself. It was Rajaji, in his personal resolve to see the Congress out of power, who put together a wide coalition under the leadership of the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK), and brought the "Dravidians" to power in the State in 1967. For 36 years thereafter without a break (except short periods of President's Rule), Tamil Nadu has been administered by the DMK and its splinter, the All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (AIADMK), with the avowed national parties playing second fiddle.
The Dravidian movement has, however, on its own run its course, and lost momentum. All that remains, in my opinion, is in form - in names of organisations such as DMK, AIADMK, Marumalarchi Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (MDMK) and so on, but not in content. The Dravidian movement had remained, from its beginning, unable to handle its ideological contradictions or recognise the seeds of its own destruction planted in it.
It was not a grassroots movement from below to articulate the aspirations of the masses. It began with well-to-do British toadies seeking commanding heights of Tamil society. The British imperialists had wanted an instrument to divide and rule in the south, and seized on the fallacious Aryan-Dravidian theory propounded by East India Company-paid historians. It was annoying to the imperialist that many Brahmins, with little wealth to sustain themselves, but with religious authority, were in the forefront of the freedom struggle. Some such as Justice Sadashiva Iyer and Subramania Bharati were following the teachings of Ramanuja to advocate against birth-specific caste system. Justice Iyer, in fact, articulated in New India (July 3-16,1916) his views six months before the release of the "Non-Brahmin Manifesto", debunking birth-based caste system. The implied suggestion of Hindu unity was subversive and dangerous in imperialist perception. Hence it needed to be nipped in the bud. That gave birth to the Dravidian movement.
In 1947, the British patrons left India and orphaned the Dravidian movement. The movement would have collapsed soon after, but the Congress soon stepped in and propped it up for narrow partisan interests. With this patronage, the Dravidian movement revived with a political agenda and entered the Legislative Assembly. Through the Tamil cinema world, it propagated its ideas to win legitimacy. With democratic politics, and consequent democratic rule, some of the attractive agenda items of the Dravidian movement got internalised, adopted, implemented and became history. Reservations in jobs and educational institutions were pioneered in Tamil Nadu. The Brahmins, being only 3 per cent of the population, lost their pre-eminence in the commanding heights of the post-Independence society based on political power. The meat of the Dravidian movement had been thus consumed by democracy.
Since the ideological basis of the movement remained contradictory, it could not amalgamate, strike deeper roots, and otherwise build on these achievements for the non-Brahmins. The movement leaders attacked everything connected with Brahmins, including Sanskrit and idol worship. But Tamil and Sanskrit being intertwined from time immemorial, it became impossible to separate them. The two languages share 40 per cent of the vocabulary. The scripts of both languages have descended from the same mother: Brahmi. The word Dravidian is, for example, a Sanskrit word. It was first used by Adi Sankara, in reply to a question by Varanasi scholar Mandana Mishra as to who he was. Sankara replied that he was a "Dravida sishu", meaning a child of where the three oceans (the Arabian sea, the Bay of Bengal, and the Indian Ocean) meet. The British-paid historians, however, made Dravida into a race. Similiarly, "Arya" in Sanskrit denoted a gentleman (in Tamil: Aiya), but these historians made Arya into a foreign race from Europe who had come racing down the Khyber Pass to defeat the Dravidians. And thus India came to be propagandised as a two-race state.
For a time, after the British left India, Indian historians continued teaching this bogus concept of India, adding grist to the Dravidian movement propaganda. Some North Indian scholars suffering from inferiority complex lapped up this concept because the theory made them first cousins of Europeans. They too contributed to the myth.
THE Dravidian movement also failed to amalgamate the Scheduled Castes. During the last two decades, the Dravidian parties have each come to be controlled by a dominant caste, all which are in conflict with the Scheduled Castes. Hence, the movement failed to develop into a pan non-Brahmin movement, and has become fragmented.
SHAJU JOHN
DMK president M. Karunanidhi.
Interestingly, the decisive impact that undermined the Dravidian movement came not from scholars of independent India, but from Hindi films and nationally broadcast cable television. Hindi films recruited Tamil starlets and made them into leading actresses of national fame. Suddenly, the north-south physical divide visibly evaporated. Dress modes and songs got homogenised.
The Doordarshan serial on the Ramayana destroyed the concept of Ravana as a Dravidian hero. Ravana was portrayed as a Brahmin scholar who had done tapas in the Kailash mountains. Rama was an Arya, since he was a gentleman, but he was a non-Brahmin (Kshatriya to be exact) and hence more Dravidian than Ravana. Nothing embarassed Periyar's followers than this re-discovery of Ramayana by the Tamil people. Such contradictions began to manifest openly, undermining the ideological basis of the Dravidian movement. The religious revival in Tamil Nadu kept apace with this, compounding the discomfiture of the movement.
Through the visual media and national integration, a national identity for Tamils has been deeply embedded in the people's minds. Today it has become fashionable for a Tamil to claim to be Indian first and a Tamil afterwards. That sentiment means a death knell for the Dravidian movement because nationalism undercuts the possibility of Tamil separatism. For the movement's revival, in the 1980s its leaders had a hope in separatism because of the growth of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE). That too has fizzled out now.
So what remains of the Dravidian movement today? It's name and attendant political power only. The springboard of anti-Brahminism has disappeared. Is it not odd that the AIADMK, which is in power today, is led by a religious Brahmin offering only lip sympathy to Periyar's commandments. The DMK leaders visit temples, and wear rudraskha malas and saffron shawls.
Although the Dravidian movement has definitely re-positioned the majority securely in Tamil society, which is an essential requirement of secular democracy, it has set back Tamil Nadu in the national political power structure. Compared to its size (more than 60 million people), the level of education (the second most educated State) and the number of Lok Sabha members (39), Tamil Nadu's national political status is marginalised, thanks to the provincial outlook of the Dravidian movement. Hence, although the movement is dying, being terminally ill, the negative positioning of the State in national affairs over the last four decades needs correction. Time has come to re-define the position of Tamil Nadu at the national level that is consistent with its size, economic potential and cultural contribution and at par with its status in Indian history. That means fostering a national outlook along with undoing the caste polarisation that the Dravidian movement has nurtured. This will require a new political dispensation. No easy task, but no societal transition ever is.
Dr. Subramanian Swamy is Janata Party president and a former Union Minister.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->One thing to consider is that from ~ 200BC to 800AD the South was mainly Buddhist and Jain. It was the perseverance of the Alwars that revived the Sanathan Dharma and that survived the onslaught of Islam and Missionaries. The resistance to mainstream Hinduism could be due to this 'recent' non Hindu memory? And this was exploited by the others?
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Are you sure that majority of South India became Buddhist or Jain?
Vast of majority of people would have been illiterate and would have been loathe to give up their Jati traditions.
The only people literate enough to read the Jain/Buddhist doctrines would have been the Brahmanas and the Rulers. So the Jain/Buddhist conversion would have been limited to these two groups.
The average man on the street probably continued to worship his own family Devatas.
|
