Lesson 1
View of Africa by LEON L’AFRICAN Portuguese on 1556
INTRODUCTION
Up to now, Ancient Egyptian had been studied from a European centred perspective. After establishing a connection between the three languages engraved on the Rosette stone that is Greek, Demotic and Hieroglyphics and using his knowledge of the Coptic language, Champolion le Jeune managed to translate Hieroglyphics thanks to a blind methodology and the substitution of vowels. Egyptologists are now able to read and translate Kemetic texts but the methodology in use is still very archaic and rigid. Subsequently the true meaning of Hieroglyphics interpretation remains uncertain to the rational western school of thought. As a matter of fact, it is fundamental to adopt different methodological approach when it comes to translating Greco-Roman texts as opposed to Ancient Egyptian texts because of the different cultural meanings conveyed in these languages through the writings.
Yet, many European centred scholars such as Sir Alan
Gardener, De Buck, Champolion le Jeune, K. Sethee, A.
W. Budge Lefebvre, Sauneron, J. Leclant, Yoyotte etc. Have
significantly contributing to the study of Hieroglyphics. However, until now, the only methodology used was that of the western schools of thought, which propose a linguistic comparison between the mythical
Kamito-Semitic, Indo-European or the Semitic languages without acknowledging neither the works of the African school or the location of the Ancient Egyptian language within its African cultural setting. After L. Homburger compared Ancient Egyptian with other African
languages, Cheikh Anta Diop in collaboration with the African school, whose perspective was African-centred, contributed further elements that simplified the understanding of the Pharaonic language. Moreover, they elaborated and proposed a more methodical syntax technique for quicker learning and interpreting of Hieroglyphics. The works of Cheikh Anta Diop and his school had an important impact in Cairo in 1974 where Sauneront* showed an interest in this Afrikan -centred linguistic perspective.
Since the Napoleonian time, the European schools had been divided in the question of the contributions of Black Africa in classical Egyptology. However, as the civilization of the Pharaohs was developed on the African continent, it would have made a great deal more sense to start a study in this field by an exhaustive analysis of the languages of the people who have lived in this continent and have never left it. This matter may be justified by the fact that Egyptologists are not generally acquainted with Afrikanisms or Afrikanists with Egyptology; hence a great deal of mental effort was required in the definition of terminologies which were often influenced by prejudices Suffice it to mention the subjective choice of iconographies, the broken noses of statutes, materials destroyed or kept hidden in museums, hazardous interpretations, etc.
Nonetheless, it is true that the African school has a different frame of reference. Indeed, it establishes a cultural continuity in time and space without any epistemological rupture. In its point of view, Pharaonic culture is the departure point of African culture, thus hieroglyphics are an integral part of African languages and linguistic concepts in the same way ideograms are part of the Chinese language, the Greco-Roman linear phonetic principle of A and B is part of European languages and calligraphy is part of Hindu and Arabic. That is why Afrikanists appeared to be comfortable where Egyptologists encountered difficulties insofar as they identified some familiar cultural items, which aroused their interest in Egyptology (as opposed to the search for a glorious mythical past).
Historical linguistics has contributed to a clearer understanding of early African languages, namely the works by Théophile Obenga who studied the evolution of African languages. Synchronic linguistics examines the system of a language in a given period of time; diachronic linguistics focuses on the evolution of a language. According to Obenga, a comparative approach enabled scholars to resituate the fundamental
characteristics of early African languages through an analysis of the sounds (phonetics), the morphology of words and grammatical forms.
Ex: Ancient Egyptian bw nfr hpr m bw bin (*)
Walaf bw rafèt mel ni bu bôn
Interrogative clauses, for instance, have five different alternatives (list these alternatives) to introduce a question starting by “what?” or
“who?”(5*) in the same way there are similarities between common phonemes and concepts whose etymology is different from that of other languages to define the following words for instance, sun, house, face, night,
etc.
Precise paradigms of early African languages
can be identified insofar as, for example, in all African
languages, the etymology of the clause “How are you?” is found to be the same. The most literal translation would be “Where are you sitting?” as to live means to sit somewhere; thus, deities and God are often represented sitting down in temples, and the head of a household sitting down in his home. “To go to the face or (the head)”, literal translation for “to go forward” (the ideographic sign shows the head of an animal or of that a human being). The African syntax is made even clearer when we show the consonant skeleton (i.e. the basic structure of the words):
kef (Walaf),
kf (Kemetic),
keh (Coptic),
kuè (Duala).
Hence the following paradigm:
Verb + Subject + Object
As opposed to
1. Subject + Verb + Object
2. (In Greco-Roman and western languages).
A systematization of this principle has enabled us to translate more quickly and more accurately into contemporary African languages and hence into other languages, a common principle of omitting the articles in African languages. Sentences such as; “being you in house yours”, “being me in scribe”, “look come him”, commonly referred to as pidgin are thus shown as consistent with African syntax, including the languages of Afrikans in the Diaspora. Similarities can be therefore drawn between Kemetic and African syntax’s “; eat me figus (good nice) under sycamore”
The sequence of phonemes in a word for word early African translation into Greco-Roman languages would give an identical phraseology as in a translation from Kemetic into English ,
3. I.e. are we in house his?
4.
An. Egypt iw sn m pr f
Eypt.Anc. iw sn m pr.. f
Bantu- Douala lè (bi)so ô boa. ô
5.
Bantu-Duala “lè biso ô boa ô”º.
The conventional grammatical rules of Ancient Egyptian have been defined as follows: the active and passive voices, the duration in time (continuous and imperfective), the interruption in time (finite and perfective), the present, preterit and future tenses, the aorist, the groups of nouns, the definite articles, the plural mark (w), etc.
Based on this contention, we argue that the structure of the “« mdw nTr »” is equivalent to that of early African languages, and that they are of common “ancestry”. A number of other and supplementary conclusions may be demonstrated from the evidence of African languages in support of this major fact. As a matter of fact, in the forty-two provinces of Upper and Lower Egypt, a question of linguistic order arose concerning the choice of a language as the official means of communication or system of communication for federal purposes. Each province had a language (or dialect) and a totem (or tama) of its own. The scribes noted a modification of vowels in time and space which was not as strong with the consonants, and that some nouns had replaced symbolic images, i.e. “the back of the earth” had become “the ground”. Contemporary African languages have undergone similar transformations; furthermore, it is interesting to examine the context in which they emerged as well as their social function. Walaf, for instance, first spoken by a small number of people has been spread in an entire state, in the same way Diolla and Lingala were created for communication in trading transactions and Swahili for administrative purposes. This linguistic phenomenon allows us to understand the criteria selected for the choice of a national language. As several languages (or dialects) were spoken
in the different parts of Egypt, it became necessary to create a kind of “Lingala” or local “pidgin” as the main language.
On the orders of the Pharaoh, the scribes set consonants as the basic phonemes and pictograms as both the sign language and the symbols. Using early African languages as a frame of reference, the scribes elaborated a voiced consonant graphic system, which was to unify the whole Egyptian nation and which we have applied to several African languages. In several Bantu languages, the following terms are used to define humans:
M O T O
M O T = (human being)
M A T I
M W T O
the words above have the same consonants with different vowels.
6. If we add a pictogram representing a human being:
M T = MT + Sign of Idea = (Human being)
The same conceptual idea is conveyed and understood within a similar cultural sphere. This system can be applied to other African languages as well as African-Caribbean and African-American languages. Indeed, it must be argued that the resurrection and increased respect for and understanding of the languages created by Afrikaans kidnapped and enslaved in the Americas, the so-called pidgin languages, is a vital step in this Pan African linguistic movement. The extensive basis so in the common African language principles, and the outstanding example as in the work of the Kemetic scholars.
These lexicological sequences carry a deep-rooted cultural history shared between the people settled in the Nile Valley and the rest of the African continent and the African Diaspora.
For example :
7. Ancient Egyptian Banda (R.C.A)
8. 3a (vulture) a to get very high
ibw (tent of purification) aba place (temple) circumcision.
3d (to become corrupt) ada mould
3k (to perish) aka tiredness, disease
ikr (excellent) akra to be intelligent
Ancient Egyptian Nuer
nk (to copulate) nak to love
m. (who?) mi who?
mt, mwt. (to die) mot ritual sacrifice for the dead
Mwt (mother) mut epouse mur mother
Ancient Egyptian Mandinka
Ba Ba heart,soul be Be being , to exist
bAk bak servant baku, domestic
bin bad bono, bone, badly, misfortune
di to give di di to give
dg to hide, hide dogo, dugo, to hide, hide
dAt, dwAt, the underground world do,do, du the hole, hollow, depth etc
dwA ` (doua) morning of, duhu, daylight, day
dwA ` (endowed) to adore duwa invocation (God)
km black (coal) kami, kambi, kembu, transformation into coal
For the Caribbean’s languages we have work of Alain ANSELIN who gives us the comparison of state action, of qualification and the situation between the Old Egyptian and the Creole
Ancient Egyptian Créole
Action
Pr sS I chape
To leave scribe; the scribe leaves to leave to him
Prone nominal – prone predicate verbal pronominal verbal predicate
Pr.f I cover
To leave him (it) leaves to leave him
Prone verbal – prédicat: pronoun suffix
Identification
s sA.k pawol en bouche pas chaj
Homme fils toi parole dans la bouche pas charge
Ton fils est un homme i chef
Nominal predicate, noun phrase pronoun phrase, nominal predicate
Situation
Mk sw im st gade I adan
See it in she
Adverbial Pronoun –subject predicate
Also Dr Morgan Daphnis in his work on relationship between Africa America & Creole languages give us 11 elements points between African langue & Creole but very significant presents Egypt’s consonants to us - fossilized in the Creole and which African would have lost by the simple natural evolution of the languages.
Caribbean languages- African languages- Ancient Egyptian
Se Li (FC) garab la ( wolof) nHAt pn
Stab him/her « tree stab »
It is him/her it is a tree
Predicative Adjective
I red (EC) e bija ( EWE) iw Dsrt
“It red “ “ It red “ “It red “
It is red It is red It is red
Emphatic Elongation of Vowel
I kuwiii FC) I nyaaaa (EWE) ikr
“(S) He run” “ (s) he knows” (he) intelligent
Emphatic Repetition
I ran; I ron (EC) munge dawa dawa (Wolof) ptpt
“(s) he run run” “ (s) he run, run tread down, crush
He/ she ran and ran” He/ she tan and tan”
Grammatical say/for
Di mwen kon ha (FC)
(s) he tell me like this fe’a mini cewa (Hawsa) mdw.f.n.i
He/she tell told me tell me say
Affix
Di man dem (EC) jong o lu (Madinka)
“The man pl” slaves the pl
“The man “ the slaves
Front Focalisation
Li sel vini ( FC) Shi kad’ya zo (Hawsa) w y f
« (s) he Focal come » he focal he come
- im wan nomo biri kam (EC) he alone came
“(s) he one Focal Past come “
Topicalisation
Live la mwen ba ou a I wouj (EC) Littafin da nab a sS pn di.I n/k Dsrt.f
Book th I give you (sing) book the which I give book this give I to you red
Ka shi ja ne
You (sing) it red
Buk we a gi yu I red (EC)
“ the book that I give you (sing) it red
“ the book that I give you is red
It should be observed that a link of communication could be established between different African languages that have a common pre-dialectical source. This is made possible by using identical consonants and phonemes as a paradigm and introducing ideograms as in the rebus system for the exceptions, and the determinative clauses as in a lexicon or phonetically complement7. For instance, a Senegalese person could write Walaf in the shape of hieroglyphics which could be read and understood by a Malian, a Tanzanian or a Zairian without speaking Mandingo, Lingala, Swahili or even Hausa. This is made possible when African languages and the Pharaonic graphic system are combined. In this level one of the Classical African Studies on the Mdw Ntr, based on the methodology used in Classical Egyptology, we propose an introduction of Ancient Egyptian through the learning and the command of the signs, vocalization (according to the African school of thought), translation methodology and elementary grammar. We are using classical educational methods to begin with, and will adopt a quicker and more didactic approach as we move on in order to make the learning more enjoyable. We will establish comparisons with Afrikanisms at a later stage depending on the different modules, as the candidate becomes more familiar with the structure of Pharaonic graphics.
CHRONOLOGY
1 - --- +
5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 520 0 1000 1996 2000
|---------|---------|---------|--------|---------|----------|---------|-------|---------|
Pre Nagada Ancient. Middle New Cambyse Beginning of Roman Turkish-Arabic
Dynastic Era Kemetic Era Kemetic Era Kemetic Era Greek Common Era
+ 7000 years
---
Historical Consciousness Seven thousand years of cultural events that collective consciousness must embrace
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
The Nile is a gift of Africa to Egypt. 9, 6000 miles long, it springs up in the countries of the Great Lakes or Nyanza (Lake in Swahili), renamed “Lake Victoria” in 1858 by the British explorer John Speeke. After the rainy seasons, the lakes of the “Mountains of the Moon” (mythical name given by Ancient Egyptians to the Assembly lines of the Kilimanjaro) had such a big flow that the Nile engulfed everything in as it cut across the valley from Uganda, Ethiopia, the Sudan and Egypt. The White Nile lies in the Northern assembly lines of the Ruwenzori, highest mountain top of the African continent in Buganda and the Kilimanjaro or Mountain of the Moon (or of the Spirits?) in Kiswahili and meets the Blue Nile in Khartoum in the lake Tina, where the first human beings lived and where the skeleton of Lucy was found. The Nile cuts across Meroe, the former capital of Nubian from the first to the sixth cataract and forms a black sediment off the shores of Egypt (Kemet, the Black land) to then flow into the Mediterranean Sea further up North, as indeed Afrikaans believe that water comes from the North. After the severe drought, which hit the Sahara (when ?), its inhabitants moved towards this great lake. They joined other Afrikaans coming from up North and down South who were living on this sacred plot of land of 64 miles wide; they had to learn the mythical language of this river which was leaving its black sediment after a four month flood which the land cultivators used during their sowing period. This is how the concept of agriculture came into being invented by Osiris (WSIR), which laid the foundations for Kemetic civilization.
After his voyage around the world wsir (Hawsar or Osiris in Greek) revealed the techniques of agriculture to the peoples that were still living of hunting and gathering. wsir was killed by his brother Seth (ST) who cut him into pieces, and ISIS (AST) his wife and sister tried to put the pieces together. He went to hell to resuscitate the fortunate. This myth is intrinsically linked to the history of Egypt (11). Very soon, conflicts arose concerning the demarcation of border fields once the flood was over and the redistribution of cultivable lands became a serious issue. As a result, sovereigns asked the scribes and the scientists to create a coherent system that would enable a fairer distribution, which gave birth to Geometry.
Egyptians were organized in forty-two spt (or provinces in Roman) represented by totems (The Tama elements composing Nature, Minerals, Plants, Animals, Humane, ancestor, angel (genies,) l; god of the god.). There were “SPT” of the sparrow hawk, the
elephant, the crocodile, the white wall, thunder, pink
bay leave, the calf and the cow, etc.
When his father died wsir ) hr (Horus the avenger of his father?) inaugurated the kingdom of the Deities, This royalty was created by Ra and by him at the beginning of the world, but when he decide to retreat in the sky for his daily trip he entrust his royalty to him divine descendants Shu, Gueb, Osiris, Horus and the followers of Horus called the “sms-hr”hr wr; ny hr; iri r hr; k3hr; the king Scorpio and why to the pharaohs, who the firs is Menes which ruled Egypt represented seating on the throne
. of Egypt and inaugurating the celestial African kingdom based on the constellation of “Denderah”, as the celestial position of stars could legitimate the sovereignty of those whose totem corresponded to the current constellation.
This is how all sovereigns were chosen and succeeded each other. However there was a certain rivalry which engendered trouble in the kingdom of the Deities. Mènes (Namer?) pacified the country after several battles, and gathered Egypt under a double crown, the white and the red, the reed and the bee, Upper and Lower Egypt, a united country
whose capital became Memphis (the white).
.
·
·
·
