afghan pashtun dna to be posted soon

[RevolutionThroughReason]

You do know that Ancient North Arabic is older than Southern Arabic dialect?

So whether they were Yemenis (once again not an ethincity but and nationality) and moreover nobody knows if these "so-called" Yemenis were the same as today's Yemenis or Estonians does not matter.

The point being that Yemen is where it all came from; I am not denying there are people of African genetics in Yemen, but same in Saudi Arabia as I just showed you.


By the migratory patterns of these Arab tribes, that means Arabic spread South to North not North to South.

Iraqis by in large are Arabized, not actually True Arabs meaning descended from the original stock of Arabs.

[RevolutionThroughReason]

You claim that Semetic languages originate in Southern Arabia which is wrong.

Read the most recent study.

You're mixing up Semitic with Arabic again; DMXX pointed out that you're confusing Proto Semitic and Proto-arabic; two completely distinct issues. I am saying Arabic SPECIFICALLY originated from Southern Arabia; not Semitic languages in their entireity. Please learn the difference.

[RevolutionThroughReason]

Nobody is mixing anything Scimitar. Arabs descend from those ancient Semetic peoples who lived in ancient Iraq. Therefore Southern Arabia became colonized first not the other way around. Genetic studies proof this. And DMXX is in agreement.

The genetics show that semitic people spread around the Middle East, it however doesn't say that the Population of Arabs that emerged came from the North to South. DMXX has said there is as of yet no genetic evidence regarding that issue, it is right now inconclusive from a standpoint of genetics. Arabs descending from Ancient Semitic people is not the same issue as the Place where Arabs emerged and the spread of Arabic. so you're going in a totally different direction. By mixing the term Semitic with Arab, you're deliberately obscuring the issue. So if this is an issue of grasping straws. That would be a perfect example of such.

If you'd like me to ask DMXX to explain it to you better I would be happy to.

[RevolutionThroughReason]

AL Arab just in case you didn't see DMXX's previous post.

You either are misunderstanding the information or you're doing this intentionally to obscure the the current information

http://www.pashtunforums.com/showpost.php?p=598181&postcount=336

It seems like erroneously conflating Proto-Semitic with Proto-Arabic is a common occurrence in this thread recently.

I have not made the case for Arabic originating in Iraq, but claim no alternatives as my knowledge on this topic is far more restricted than it is with Indo-European.

I will repeat once more before taking a leave of this cyclical conversation; I have addressed al-arab's questions regarding the erroneous association of Haplogroup J with Semitic speakers and stated the scientific consensus regarding the origins of both Proto-Semitic and Haplogroup J somewhere around the northern Middle-East, albeit at very different points in time.

I have found an interesting resource which does suggest Arabic-speaking settlers were relative newcomers to central and north Arabia, ultimately originating in the region between Tihama and the Hejaz, where Classical Arabic and several dialects were spoken;

http://eprints.soas.ac.uk/5814/1/Shah.pdf

Tihama is in Yemen

[RevolutionThroughReason]

So what is this study saying?

It's talking about how Protosemiitic spread and evolved into other languages with and varying ethnogenesis.


Speaking A Semitic language is much different than whether Arabic emerged in he Southwest Arabia.

again mixing two different issues. I acknowledged Arabic is semitic but it came into being in Southwest Arabia and then spread up North.

[RevolutionThroughReason]

Too bad for you that his is talking about Classical Arabic which is younger than the Ancient North Arabic spoken by Ancient Arabs/Semetic peoples in modern day Iraq, Jordan, Syria and Saudi Arabia. There goes yet another of your "theories".

He's also talking about the fact you're mixing up protosemitic and protoarabic.


Semitic people spread all over the middle east .....developed their own languages .then ONE group of those semites developed into Arabs and came up FROM the South and conquered back North, and eventually made people of Other semitic languages, YOUR ancestors lose those languages and adopt Arabic, for the most part at least. That is what we're talking about.

Is it clear now or are you confused still?

[RevolutionThroughReason]

c

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/arti...3/figure/fig2/

From the most recent genetic study about Semetic populations and Semetic langauges:

this isn't a genetic analysis; it is a linguistic one.

(a) Semitic origins
"Our analysis of the Semitic language family produced a dated phylogeny that estimates the origin of Semitic at approximately 4400–7400 YBP (figure 2). The phylogeny suggests East Semitic (represented by Akkadian in this study) corresponds to the deepest branch (although the four deepest branches have overlapping HPDs), and our log BF tests indicate that Akkadian is the appropriate root for the Semitic languages analysed here."

Again you mixing up semitic with Arab ....Arabic is a Semitic language, but it is ONE of a variety of languages that are. It does not mean that Arabs emerged in the same place as the protosemitic speakers.

PLEASE READ THE FOLLOWING TWO QUOTATIONS FROM THE GENETIC STUDY AND STOP THE NONSENSE:

"Within South Semitic, the early emergence of a South Arabian lineage between approximately 3300 and 6250 YBP (figures 1 and and2,2, node E) may reflect an Early Bronze Age expansion of Semitic from the Levant southward to the Arabian desert. This lineage was ancestral to the MSA languages, for which the more recent divergence less than 3100 YBP

It says right there that The Early emergence of SOUTH ARABIAN lineages; that implicates Yemen.

are you sure you're reading the sources you cited?

Please Scimitar. You are an intelligent man and 10-15 years older than me (20). You should be able to accept when you are wrong. I thougt in the beginning of this discussion that us Arabs came from East Africa which was wrong and I accepted this.

I read you were 28-29; how can I accept your narrative when the source you just posted indicates otherwise?

[RevolutionThroughReason]

Haha are you that desperate? Why do you not quote my whole post? Is there are reason for this? Do you remove everything I have written that does not fit into your view? You have been doing this for the entire discussion why I always quote your whole sentences.
.

I don't quote your whole posts because some of the material is either irrelevant to the discussion or is already agreed upon.

Let me break it down for you.

"Within South Semitic, the early emergence of a South Arabian lineage between approximately 3300 and 6250 YBP (figures 1 and and2,2, node E)

This part is about the possible emergence of the Founder Group that lead to the genesis of the Arabic peoples; This indicates that it occurred in Southwest Arabia or Southern Arabia, either way this indicates Yemen as the birthplace of the Arab Ethnicity.

may reflect an Early Bronze Age expansion of Semitic from the Levant southward to the Arabian desert. This lineage was ancestral to the MSA languages, for which the more recent divergence less than 3100 YBP (figures 1 and and2,2, node F) suggests that early MSA speakers probably inhabited the southern coasts and coastal hinterlands of the Arabian Peninsula (the current distribution of MSA)

This part is referring to semitic expansion; from the Levantine areas; This means EARLY semites migrated to the Arabian Peninsula; and settled. however, those people themselves were not Arabs; but their descendants after LIVING IN the Arabian peninsula evolved into Arabs. But this is not an indication that Semitic and Arabic are identical; one is a subset or subgroup of the other.


So no sir I am not ignoring any facts; in fact, you just handed me the information which corroborates my claim and actually refutes yours

See I get it fine, but I think maybe you don't understand the English language well so this is where you're confused?

[RevolutionThroughReason]

Aha, further "discussion" with you seem pointless since you ignore linguistic and genetic studies and it's evidence, Arab sources, Arab oral traditions, the fact that the first Arabic langauge was Ancient North Arabic (spoken in modern day Iraq, Jordan, Syria and Saudi Arabia, not Yemen) etc.

Arabic languages originated in northern Arabia and expanded along with Islam in the seventh century to occupy a geographical range that extends from Morocco to Iran in the present day (Kaye & Rosenhouse 1997). Our phylogenetic analysis indicated that the two studied Arabic languages (Moroccan and Ogaden) diverged approximately 400–1350 YBP (node D); that is, after the expansion of Arab populations associated with Islam. This late divergence suggests that Arabic-speaking populations maintained sufficient contact to preclude the divergence and isolation of their languages for some time, or that, in some regions such as Morocco, it was not until the last millennium that Arabic languages replaced earlier indigenous languages (Berber in this case)."

this is talking about the Expansion of Arabic at the Time of Islam. Not the actual origins of Arabic. Those same tribes had settled in North Arabia, Lakhmids and Ghassanids, but they were FROM Yemen.

Furthermore this quote is about how arabic reached Morocco primarily.

See; the problem here is you're not reading your own references correctly.


Surprise what? I never denied that Arabs were semitic; what I am saying is that the Iraqis were not originally Arabic but were Arabized, as I have always said.

You're merely hallucinating a different argument here.

[RevolutionThroughReason]

I thought we already proved this as nonsense did we not (?) when I wrote and proved that Ancient North ARABIC (NOT SEMETIC) was first spoken in modern day Iraq, Jordan, Syria and Saudi Arabia before it moved southwards and became Southern Arabic just to become Classical Arabic.

Actually the very quotes you posted are indicating that this is not the case.

The Arabic languages, or dialects, represent the largest group of extant Semitic languages (Gordon 2005). Although our analysis provided inconsistent support for Arabic as a lineage of Central Semitic (i.e. strong support for Arabic within Central Semitic from the multistate analysis

This is from the same source you referenced.


The other quote says this

suggests that early MSA speakers probably inhabited the southern coasts and coastal hinterlands of the Arabian Peninsula (the current distribution of MSA). The recurrent spread of early Semitic peoples and their languages into the steppe and desert lands of the Arabian Peninsula (first South Semitic and later Arabic; see below), combined with Biblical testimony on early Hebrew subsistence, lead us to propose that the earliest West Semitic society may have had a largely pastoralist economy particularly adapted to such conditions."

Which would indicate that Arabic emerged in Arabia first and spread to Iraq. Iraqis are thus most likely Arabized, not real Arabs

notice I am not using any of my sources; it is YOUR sources that are indicating this.

[RevolutionThroughReason]

Now you are doing it again. Not quoting the whole sentence:

c) Recent Arabic divergence

"The Arabic languages, or dialects, represent the largest group of extant Semitic languages (Gordon 2005). Although our analysis provided inconsistent support for Arabic as a lineage of Central Semitic (i.e. strong support for Arabic within Central Semitic from the multistate analysis, but no support from the binary analysis), most comparative linguistic analyses place Arabic within Central Semitic (for a review, see Faber 1997). Arabic languages originated in northern Arabia and expanded along with Islam in the seventh century to occupy a geographical range that extends from Morocco to Iran in the present day (Kaye & Rosenhouse 1997). Our phylogenetic analysis indicated that the two studied Arabic languages (Moroccan and Ogaden) diverged approximately 400–1350 YBP (node D); that is, after the expansion of Arab populations associated with Islam. This late divergence suggests that Arabic-speaking populations maintained sufficient contact to preclude the divergence and isolation of their languages for some time, or that, in some regions such as Morocco, it was not until the last millennium that Arabic languages replaced earlier indigenous languages (Berber in this case)."

Read the sentences I marked with green.

And make a quick search on Google and find out if the majority of scholars thinks Arabic is a Central-Semetic language or a Southern Semetic language (those spoken in Yemen at the time of the birth of the first spoken Arabic langauge - North Ancient Arabic spoken in modern day Iraq, Jordan, Syria and Saudi Arabia)

If you can find just one source that claims Arabic is a Southern Semetic language then I would be happy to see it.

And please do not post old and out of date (not actual anymore) studies from 1999 but recent studies as I have did.

In the report you posed in 1999 it was claimed that Arabs orginated in the Horn of Africa. I do not even believe that you believe such a nonsense do you?

But despite not always agreeing it is an interesting discussion.

I am only highlighting the part which is relevant to the discourse; You claim it as undisputed; but the sources themselves claim inconsistency.

Just read your own sources VERY carefully they are more or less saying what I am saying.

I'm not kidding here. that is why I don' have to add much because your own references are doing it for me.

[Wahe Guru]

He might say this but it does not make any sense nor is there any proof of this. The Arabs could not originate from East Africa when the Semitic peoples and first Semetic language origianted in ancient Iraq (Akkadian).

Appear? There is no mention of Yemen (yet again)

Arabs ARE Semetic of origin and speak a Semetic langauge and descends from Proto-Semetic people and use a language that originates from proto-Semetic. This is certain and is supported by genetic evidence and everything else.

When some of these people (and their descendents) started to call themselves Arabs is NOT known even among Arabs.

There is a reason why there are so much conflicting information. Some claims that Arabs are from Horn of Africa (just see the report Scimitar has used from 1999), others claim Southern Arabia and now more and more are claiming it is from ancient Mesopotamia (as the OLD Arabic sources and oral traditions also say - see my quote of the famous Arab historian Ibn Khaldun)

This theory is also supported by genetic evidence. For all I care Arabs could be from Etiophia (which I thought before I became interested in genetics) but they descend from ancient Semetic peoples living in ancient Iraq.

I doubt very much that Arabic is only 1600 years old.

How to you then explain the cities the ANCIENT Arabs build in Jordan (Petra), Syria and Iraq (Hatra) that were founded 3000 years ago?

But all this does not change the fact that Iraq is the homeland of Semetic peoples and Semetic langauges and therefore the Arabs first Semetic ancestral land was ancient Iraq not Yemen.

As proven by my figure from a RECENT genetic study (not some report from 1999 without any genetic evidence)



You can see here that Semetic peoples and languages originated in ancient Iraq before they moved southwards not the other way around. This is also supported by genetic evidence (which has no bias but simple facts) Moreover, as I and DMXX have stated on numerous occasions now, there is nothing called pure Arabs. For example Yemenis have the highest African admixture of all Arabs in the Middle East/Arabian Peninsular. We would need to find skeletons of ancient Arabs (how do you define what is ancient Arab btw?) and see if it corresponds with the current Arabs.

And once again I may state that the EXACT origin of Arabs is not known yet and a huge debate among us Arabs. But what we know is that Ancient Iraq is the ancestral homeland of the Semetic peoples not East Africa as some thought until recently (including myself)

Regarding my earlier post, where I quoted from the link (posted by Mr RevolutionThroughReason I think) which wrote Arabic (and Amharic) "emerged in the mid-fourth century C.E." - I think the writer might have been trying to say it emerged in inscriptions around that time rather than the language emerged at that time. So that's a correction and the language is far older as stated elsewhere.

Therefore Mr Al-Arab, yes, I have to now say that what you have presented seems to be what is at present the view of researchers and indeed Arabic language arose somewhere in the northern regions you mentioned and the Semitic people might also have originally formed there. Here is a link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-Semitic_language if you wish to read.

Further evidences below supporting your views on Arabic...but note it states that there was a language in Sheba (Saba) (Sabaic) related to Arabic and older than Arabic.

That same link (given by Mr RevolutionThroughReason states "....Old civilizations had arisen on the southern fringe of the Arabian peninsula, built on the profits of trade and commerce in the area, particularly the long-distance incense trade. The succession of sedentary dynasties that controlled this land of "Sheba" (or, more properly, Saba) used different forms of a language usually called now "Old South Arabian" of which the dominant dialect was probably Sabaic. Our main records of these languages comes from inscriptions rather than written documents, so our knowledge of how they first developed and later changed is necessarily sketchy. Farther to the north, a tribal, nomadic lifestyle dominated, and although we have fragmentary epigraphic records of some of the dialects these tribes used, our current knowlege about the actual linguistic situation prevailing in the area is even more incomplete than our knowledge of the South Arabian kingdoms. 5

Although echoes of the glorious past and great achievements of the Sabeans and other peoples of the south would continue to resonate in the literature of the Arab Muslim world throughout its long history, scholars of Arabic literary history have always focused their attention on the nomadic northern Arabs in their accounts of how this literature arose. The overriding reason for this is a linguistic one: the tongue used throughout the Arab world today, and known as fusha or "Standard Arabic," is the same language used by these northern Arabs, crystallized in its written form in the revelations of the Qur’an as recorded in the early 600s C.E..

Though the major southern language, Sabaic, and Arabic are closely related to one another, they are definitely separate languages, as different as modern-day English and German, and probably just as often mutually unintelligible as not. Sabaic is almost certainly the older of the two languages, being used for inscriptions as early as 600 B.C.E., while the first evidence we have of Arabic as a written language occurs 900 years later, in an inscription dating to 328 C.E. When the two languages mixed and met after the rise of Islam, however, Northern (Mudari) Arabic--backed by the religious authority of the Qur’an--supplanted its older cousin completely as a language of high culture. Sabaic survives today only in isolated pockets of territory where various dialectical versions continue on a purely spoken level. Written communication in the south is all in Mudari Arabic. The relationship between Mudari and Sabean--as well as the relationships among the other Semitic languages can be seen in the following chart : ..."

So above it states that Arabic was the language of the "northern Arabs"...


Following link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arabic_language states "Arabic is the only surviving member of the Old North Arabian dialect group, attested in Pre-Islamic Arabic inscriptions dating back to the 4th century.[4] Arabic is written with the Arabic alphabet, which is an abjad script, and is written from right-to-left"

Following link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pre-Isl...c_inscriptions states "..It seems that the Nabataean alphabet became the Arabic alphabet thus:
In the 6th and 5th centuries BC, north-Semitic tribes emigrated and founded a kingdom centered around Petra, Jordan. These people (now named Nabataeans from the name of one of the tribes, Naba?u), probably spoke a form of Arabic.
In the 2nd century AD[citation needed], the first known records of the Nabataean alphabet were written, in the Aramaic language (which was the language of communication and trade), but including some Arabic language features: the Nabataeans did not write the language which they spoke. They wrote in a form of the Aramaic alphabet..."

[evilbunny]

Well with one correction, the Ghassanids and Lakhmids had Kingdoms as Far North as Syria and Iraq, but this was long after the Assyrian Empire and more over they were not that powerful until they converted to Islam and then overran the region. They were in effect a very small minority,

I agree, Arabian culture has ancient ties with both the Near East and the Horn of Africa. However Arabia has never been a major cultural centre and prior to the advent of Islam, the region was a backwater.

Yemenis tend to have more Eastern Africans mtDNA, than Northern Arabian populations and as one might expect. The "pure" Northern Arabian Arabs are basically South Western Asians. Northern Semities, Mesopotamian and Levantine populations have little Historically do with 'Arabs'.

[RevolutionThroughReason]

I agree, Arabian culture has ancient ties with both the Near East and the Horn of Africa. However Arabia has never been a major cultural centre and prior to the advent of Islam, the region was a backwater.

Yemenis tend to have more Eastern Africans mtDNA, than Northern Arabian populations and as one might expect. The "pure" Northern Arabian Arabs are basically South Western Asians. Northern Semities, Mesopotamian and Levantine populations have little Historically do with 'Arabs'.

Well if we follow the Arab Genealogical Patterns, the Pure Arabs would be those of Yemen , since those were the original Arabic tribes.

True there exists more Eastern African mtDNA, but this could be because when the Arabs migrated Northward and Arabized populations the number of Arab actual Arabs from Yemen were fewer and thus they didn't make many genetic inroads, this happened in North Africa too.

[RevolutionThroughReason]

We know this for a certaincy (that Semetic people orginated in Northern Arabia (ancient Iraq, Levant) as seen by the recent study I have posted and everything else that indicate that. (genetics, linguistic history etc.) This is also what DMXX wrote based on genetic analysis in the beginning of the discussion (I am sure you can find that if you look at my early posts/questions to him about Semetic/Arab ancestry (at that time I thought we Arabs originated from Horn of Africa)

But again you're mixing up two Different clades, Semites are a bigger clade. Semites originating in a certain region, has nothing to do with where Arabs originated from.

You're making a Logical Fallacy known as Fallacy of Composition; it does not Logically Follow from your premise.

Here you can take a look at see which Semetic languages are related and the oldest (in this case Akkadian is the oldest spoken in the Akkadian Empire in Ancient Iraq) who is East Semetic language (now extinct) The Central-Semetic brach of languages (the one Arabic belongs to) are the nearest descendants to the Akkadian language and the second oldest branch of the Semetic languages.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/arti...3/figure/fig2/

This chart shows Akkadian while older forming a different branch completely meaning that none of the languages are rooted in Akkadian according to the graph.

Secondly the dashed lines means that they aren't sure if Arabic is central semitic for sure, they're just guessing

Here is a quote from the same link

The dashed line leading to Arabic reflects the fact that log BF tests were equivocal in the placement of Arabic, so we placed Arabic in Central Semitic based on previous linguistic studies (e.g. Hetzron 1976; Faber 1997). The topology is rooted with Akkadian, which is preferred by our log BF analyses, and follows the constraints of the standard model.

Equivocal in English means, uncertain. However even if Arabic is related to central Semitic it does not mean that Arabic did not develop in Yemen first because if you look at the same chart, it mentions Ogaden. Where is Ogaden?

Ogaden (pronounced and often spelled Ogadēn; Somali: Ogaadeen, Amharic: ኦጋዴን?) is the name of a territory comprising the southeastern portion of the Somali Regional State in Ethiopia. The inhabitants are predominantly ethnic Somali and Muslim. The title "Somali Galbeed", which means "Western Somalia," is often preferred by Somali irredentists.

So none of the information here indicates Arabic first developed in the North and went South. Rather OTHER semitic languages developed North went south and when they were South, they developed INTO Arabic which once again traveled Back North.

Yes, the original Arabic is probably not from Southern Arabia (Yemen) but from Northern Arabia (Iraq, Jordan, Syria and Saudi Arabia) as proven by the first Arabic language spoken (Ancient North Arabic spoken in modern day Iraq, Jordan, Syria and Saudi Arabia)

Not based on the information you presented; this is why Wahe Guru, DMXX and myself keep emphasizing that you make the distinction between Semitic and Arabic. Because Semitic is a BIGGER group and does not equate into Arabic. the Descendance from a Semitic language that may have come from the North does not prove that Arabic itself did become emergent in the South.

My interest is whether a distinct form (although younger) Arabic developed somewhere in Southern Arabia (Yemen). Or whether there was a earlier Arabic what we do not know of.

Well if the Lakhmids and Ghassanids are your evidence for Northern Arabic, ....and make it be known this is distinct from Northern Semitic. Then it would have to have been from the South since both those groups have been shown to originate from Yemen.

According to the sources I have posted and those you post now it does not seem to be the case at least.

According to the sources you posted it doesn't seem to be the case; but that's because in the sources you posted they're describing something different than what your argument presents.

We also know that the agriculture used in Southern Arabia (Yemen - also known as Felix Arabia in Latin) had the exact same agriculture as the one used in ancient Iraq and rest of Levant (where the first agriculture appeared). This indicate a movement from North to South.

Also we know that ancient Arabs were mostly bedouins who lived in the Arabian and Syrian Desert and both those deserts covers most of Iraq, Syria, Jordan and Saudi Arabia (where the oldest known reminds of ancient Arab culture also are found (Petra, Hatra etc.) to this very day.

Bedouinism didn't arise due to desert climate though but the early human cultures were Nomadic. Your conclusion for Arab nomadism is a narrative.

While Yemen was mostly fertile and hilly land and not covered by as much desert (in Yemen there live far less bedouins than in Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Jordan etc. to this day also)

So I am pretty sure that Arabs originated in an area between Iraq, Jordan, Syria and Hejaz, Najd (modern day Saudi Arabia) in the deserts of Arabian Desert and Syrian desert.

Semites may have, but Arabs themselves didn't.