User talk:Yom/Archive3

Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5

Wikiproject language articles

ታዲያስ ዮም Since I think you're the only other person who cares, I thought I'd mention that I'm ready to split off Tigrinya grammar and substitute a short summary for it in the main Tigrinya language article. Hope that's OK. Also I'd like to make Oromo language a key article in the project if you think that makes sense. — MikeG (talk) 02:32, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Semitic languages in Ethiopia

Although Ethiopia has quite a few Semitic languages. All of them are closely related to one another and all are in one branch of one branch of Semitic: the Ethiopic branch of South Semitic. Semitic has it greatest diversity in Asia (Middle East), with all three primary branches in Asia. If we go by the theory that the area with the greatest diversity is where the original languages were spoken then Semitic has its origins in Asia. Imperial78

Yom, Semitic as a whole is divided into branches. For example, using your argument, Indo-European's homeland would be in India, since there are more Indo-Aryan languages than all other branches of Indo-European (perhaps almost even combined). Of course the homeland of IE is not India even though India has the majority of the world's IE languages. India does not have the greatest overall IE diversity. The number of closely related languages does not point to the Urheimat. Semitic has a time depth roughly the same as Indo-European, perhaps no more than 5,000 years. Afro-Asiatic has a time depth of perhaps 10,000 years. Indo-European and Semitic have several loans from each other. There are loans both shared early on in each language family. The most primary branches of a language family are what is key, not just a sub-branch of a branch. Asia has East Semitic (Akkadian), Central Semitic, and South Semitic. Ethiopia has only the Ethiopic branch of South Semitic. Ethiopia does not have the greatest Semitic diversity overall. The conservative phonology of Ethiopic (the glottalic consonants) perhaps shows more of the isolation of Ethiopic while all the other branches of Semitic innovated. The 12 or so Gurage languages: Chaha, Selti, Muher, etc. are much closer to each other than Aramaic and Hebrew are. The branching of Central Semitic is still not resolved. Also, the Urheimat of Afro-Asiatic is far from settled. Although, the Levant all the way to as you say North Sudan are possible. Of course, those are the theories where the language family first broke up. That begs the question where were the origins of AA before it broke up... Imperial78

Whites

Can you explain your mass revert edit on Whites, without discussion of the individual items? Thanks.Yukirat 19:48, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

disambig pages

Hi there, you might be interested in these pages which describe disambig pages - what should be listed - and how to list them: WP:DAB & WP:MOSDAB. Thanks/wangi 19:14, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cool, didn't realise you were creating the article - cart before the horse I think ;) (when i checked the article didn't exist and the main topic didn't list the party either) - you do get a lot of folk adding nonsense to dabpages. Sorry for the run-around/wangi 19:38, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Egyptiankidsb-1.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Egyptiankidsb-1.jpg. The image description page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 21:06, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah. Yom, while I appreciate the addition of the photo, some informaton re source is necessary if it is to remain. Photos with questionable copyright status are routinely deleted after a specified period. deeceevoice 22:36, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I already added the fair use rationale. If you'd like, I can even get the permission of the photographer. — ዮም (Yom) | contribs • Talk 22:44, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That'd be great. Then there'd be absolutely no excuse for people like Zerida, who'd like to see it disappear, to get it deleted from the database because of copyright status questions. Thanks again for the photo. Nice. :) deeceevoice 22:52, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sabaeans

Hello there Yom. I believe you are wrong and have been misled. Ethiopians are descendants of Sabeans who migrated first to the Eritrean/ Tigray region. Here is a link to a video and information. THis is what is says "Ethiopia is the oldest independent country in Sub Saharan Africa. The earliest evidence of Ethiopian history was in around 1000BC when the Queen of Sheba visited King Solomon. * The first recorded kingdom in Ethiopia grew around Axum during the 3rd century BC. Axum was an offshoot of the Semitic Sabeam kingdoms of southern Arabia, it became the greatest ivory market in the north east." http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6832088946086225375&q=ethiopia&pr=goog-sl. You have to atleast mention this fact!

Asside from Southern Arabia, the Sabaean kings ruled some parts of the East African coast where they established the Kingdom of Abyssinia (now Eritrea). THis is from the History of Yemen, u failed to mention the Kingdom of Saba at least once in the history of Eritrea and Ethiopia, this had a large influence on what is now Ethiopia and Eritrea. It is because mainly of them that the muslims could not invade Ethiopia and Eritrea!! Reply on my email Cluckbang 13:30, 24 June 2006

I'll reply in full on your email if you'd like, but let me say something here first. The Saba myth has often been repeated, but it was not the beginning of Ethiopian civilization. Minor Sabaean migration in the 5th and 4th c. are postulated to occur (they weren't however, politically dominant, but living in some sort of military symbiosis or as traders), but they were absorbed by the already existing civilization within a few decades, or they returned to Yemen (Munro-Hay Aksum 1991). The civilization of D`mt, on the other hand, was from the 8th to 7th c. BCE, prior to any migration (which, as I said earlier, was minor). The theory you're referring to was postulated by an Italian historian named Conti Rossini, who was in general helpful in documenting Ethiopian history, but who tried to find as much foreign influence as he could do to his nationality and racism. The theory has since been disproved. — ዮም (Yom) | contribs • Talk 17:32, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See the Documentary first,

Well Yom the documentary is my source, I know its not a written source but please consider it. It was made before the coup d'etat by the Derg regime came into power. Please see the beginning, it mentions this. See it and then tell me what u think about what the narrator says about the South Arabs. Are you to say that he is wrong?? Please reply after seeing the documentary —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Cluckbang (talk • contribs) 21:07, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As I said before. I have seen the documentary. The source I provided is later and refuting the sources that your documentary uses for its claims (namely, Conti Rossini). — ዮም (Yom) | contribs • Talk 21:16, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I viewed the documentary, too. The information it provided immediately struck me as blatantly false. It's a hopelessly dated piece (from the looks of it, mid to late 1960s or early '70s) -- and one that, as in the fashion of many works by racistm white "scholars", seeks to attribute a black African empire/civilization to "Caucasian" peoples, in this case from "southern Arabia," the Sabaens.

There's no way the inaccurate and misleading assertions made in this oudated documentary are considered today by knowledgeable scholars as accurate. The film is simply way off the mark. The Ethiopians (Cushites) are, along with the Khoisan among the most ancient peoples known on the planet. They are the ancestors of all others.

To assume that the Ethiopians are descended of the Sabaean peoples is to misstate even what the (inaccurate) documentary said. What it claimed was the "Caucasian" Sabaens invaded Ethiopia and founded the empire -- pretty much saying that civilization and military adroitness came to Ethiopia from outside, from "Caucasians." Not even it asserted that the Ethiopians as a people were descendants of the Sabaeans. God, man. Did you even see the black faces and (mostly) woolly hair of the Ethiopians pictured through the film? (shaking head in utter amazement)

Further, there is no way Ethiopians are "Caucasian" or even Semitic in the sense that most people think of Arabs (and non-black Jews). Sheba's kingdom was located in Yemen (and, it is postulated, in part of Ethiopia); both always have been black African. In fact, Ashkenazi Jews to this day refer to black people (including African Americans) as "Yemenites" and "Ethiopian" was once a generic term for all black peoples.

There's all sort of misinformation out there frontin' like knowledge. Before you decide to buy something hook, line and sinker, first check the source, and then check to see if that source is up to date -- and even then, ask plenty of questions. The documentary's assertions are patently false. deeceevoice 05:22, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

South Semitic Languge

Why is that Eritreans/Ethiopians speak a language that came from South Arabian dialect? How was that possible if they never intermingled with the Sabians? You can also see the close relationship with Yemen peoples. What about the Caucasionnes of Ethiopians and Eritreans? So ur saying that the Ethiopians let the documentary narrator say that? or are u saying he did it behind their backs. I mean come on, they cant just make up a lie. The Ethiopians werent forced to make the documentary by Fascist Italy.

Here are my sources: http://www.answers.com/topic/sabaean http://www.answers.com/topic/sheba (very important source)

Sorry, but those are both mirrors of Wikipedia that have not been updated yet, not very decisive. Ge'ez is a South Semitic language, but it is not derived from Sabaean. See, e.g. Encyclopaedia Aethiopica: D-Ha. "Ge'ez," pp.732 by Stefan Weninger, or David Appleyard's "Ethiopian Semitic and South Arabian:Towards a Re-examination of a Relationship", Israel Oriental Studies 16, 1996, pp. 201-228. — ዮም (Yom) | contribs • Talk 21:35, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"The Imperial family of Ethiopia claims its origin directly from the offspring of King Solomon and the Queen of Sheba, who is named Makeda in the Ethiopian account. The Ethiopian epic history of kings, the Kebra Negast, is supposed to record the history of Makeda and her descendants. King Solomon is said in this account to have seduced the Queen, and sired a son by her, who would eventually become Menelik I, the first Emperor of Ethiopia. It is speculated that the ancient communities that evolved into the modern Ethiopian state were formed by the migration across the Red Sea of Semitic southern Arabians who intermarried with local non-Semitic peoples. Indeed, the ancient Ethiopian kingdom of Axum ruled much of Southern Arabia including Yemen until the rise of Islam in the 7th century, and both the indigenous languages of Southern Arabia and the Amharic and Tigrean languages of Ethiopia are South Semitic languages. Evidence of ancient Southern Arabian communities in modern day Ethiopia and Eritrea are widespread and include archeological artifacts and ancient Sabaean inscriptions in the old South Arabian alphabet. " This one is from this website : http://www.answers.com/topic/queen-of-sheba

Satisfied? Or do u want more sources? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Cluckbang (talk • contribs) 21:25, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You really think a claim of a myth (which is probably what it is) proves that we're all Sabaeans? There are also peoples who claim that they came from the sky, do you believe them to? Archaeology is the best way to find out what's the truth, not 12th c. myths (when the Kibre Negest was written) about what happened 2,000 years ago. — ዮም (Yom) | contribs • Talk 21:35, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Old South Arabian languages and the Ethiopic languages are both South Semitic languages but one did not come from the other. Both share a common ancestor which would be Proto-South Semitic. South Semitic is just one branch of Semitic. Imperial78

Correct. Sorry for not responding yet, Imperial78. I've been a bit busy, as you can see. — ዮም (Yom) | contribs • Talk 22:26, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So are you saying that the sources from answers.com are not evident? Thank god u cant edit information from answers.com ! I mean you seem to be very strict in that belief, and this has NOTHING to do with people falling from the sky, so please dont compare me to people who believe that they came from the sky! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Cluckbang (talk • contribs) 22:27, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I should take that back. The source of answers.com is evident: it's wikipedia! The wikipedia article has absolutely no sources however. Technically, you can edit answers.com, as when Wikipedia is edited, answers.com will be changed by proxy, though it only updates every so often. — ዮም (Yom) | contribs • Talk • E 05:32, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Does wikipedia own answers.com? It seems they just copy everything from wikipedia. lol Imperial78

MY PROOF FOR U

Let's Look Across the Red Sea, I

Ethiopia and Yemen, two historic countries on either side of the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden, have been in contact since almost the dawn of time. This is scarcely surprising. The intervening strip of sea between South Arabia and the Ethiopian Horn of Africa is at its closest little more than fifty miles wide, and is believed ten thousand years ago to have been only eleven miles wide. This narrow stretch of water could be crossed, throughout the historic period, by the simplest of vessels, including rafts, within little more than a day.

The highlands of the Yemeni and Ethiopian regions, as the archaeologist David Phillipson notes, have “much in common physically and environmentally". They form part of a wide region which, Walter Raunig observes, has “not only very close geographical, climatic, zoological and botanical connections”, but also “cultural links [which] have always been equally, at times exceptionally strong”.

The Queen of Sheba

The antiquity of Ethiopian and Yemeni history is apparent from the fact that traditions in both countries go back twelve centuries to the time of the renowned Queen of Sheba. It is not the object of this article to examine her life, or to enter into the debate as to whether she was the ruler of Ethiopia or Yemen, or whether her government, as is often suggested, extended over both lands. It is sufficient to note that traditions associated with her are common to both, and point to the existence of an at least partially shared culture, dating back to early antiquity.

The Habashat, and the Origins of Ethiopian Civilisation

An intimate relationship between Ethiopia and Yemen in ancient times has also been postulated from the fact that several place and clan names, as well as inscriptions in the South Arabian language Sabaean, are found in both countries.

The existence of shared names on either side of the Red Sea caused the Italian scholar Carlo Conti Rossini to postulate, however somewhat simplistically, that the very name of Abyssinia was of Yemeni origin. The word is generally believed to be derived from the name Habashat, used to designate a people which lived in the north of historic Ethiopia, in what are now the highlands of part of Eritrea and Tigray.

Land on both sides of the Red Sea, according to the ancient geographer Ptolemy (AD 150)

Conti Rossini assumed that the Habashat actually originated in Yemen, and later established themselves, as colonists, on the Ethiopian side of the Red Sea, where, he believed, they introduced their name. It was his belief, furthermore, that the South Arabian language, and writing, represented the origin and basis of the Ethiopian tongue and script Ge‘ez.

These suppositions were once widely accepted. The British Arabist Spencer Trimingham for example wrote, in 1952, that the Habashat, or “agriculturalist mountaineers” of Yemen, faced with population pressure, and the failure of their irrigation system, crossed the intervening sea, and, after leaving the “inhospitable coastal zone” of Ethiopia, “found a country [in the Ethiopian interior] which possessed the same climate and vegetation as their own land”. The Habashat, he claims, thereupon “assumed a predominance over all the other tribes, and its chief took the title of negus nagasti (chief of chiefs)”. As a result, “the kingdom of Habashat consolidated itself about the third century B.C., when its rule extended over the plateau region of Eritrea and northern Tigrai”.

"Settlers and Colonizers"

Elaborating on this supposed migration, Trimingham claimed that the Yemeni migrants “came as settlers and colonizers”, “brought their regional names with them”, settled in the plateau regions “most suitable for agriculture”, and “brought the fully developed civilization of the Sabaeans”. The Yemenis, he claims, “introduced the use of metals, certain domestic animals, new plants, advanced systems of irrigation and agriculture, new forms of communal organization, and the art of writing”.

Conti Rossini’s thesis, which was based largely on conjecture, was, however, subsequently undermined by the work of a number of other scholars approaching the question from different disciplines and interests. One of the first of these scholars was Joseph Greenberg, whose Studies in African Linguistic Classification, appeared in 1955. In it he argued that the Semitic languages, found on both sides of the Red Sea, were in no way unique to the region, but formed part of a very much wider Afroasiatic language family scattered over much of Africa, as far as Chad in the west.

Jacqueline Pirenne

In the following year, 1956, Jacqueline Pirenne, a scholar of early Arabian history, drastically revised South Arabian chronology. Her new dating was significant to the question of Ethiopian origins, for it indicated that Sabaean immigrants to Ethiopia did not live in Ethiopia for centuries, as Conti Rossini had postulated, but only for no more than a few decades.

Six years later, in 1962, the Dutch linguist A.J. Drewes, published his important Inscriptions ie l’Ethiopie antique. It revealed the existence in Ethiopia of Ge‘ez graffiti, and other inscriptions, which were quite as old as the South Arabian inscriptions in Ethiopia. This discovery showed that Conti Rossini had been mistaken in assuming that Sabaean inscriptions in the country represented the prototype from which Ge‘ez had later developed.

In the following decade the Italian archaeologist Rodolfo Fattovich, working in Nubia, unearthed ancient pottery virtually identical to that which had been produced in Ethiopia prior to the founding of Aksum. This evidence suggested that the early material culture of Aksum was of essentially African origin, and had thus developed entirely independently of South Arabian immigration.

Roger Schneider

This thesis was further spelt out, in the following year, by the epigraphist Roger Schneider. Emphasising the entirely unproven character of Conti Rossini’s suppositions, he pointed out for example that the people of northern Ethiopia, living as they did in a rocky environment, did not have to wait for the arrival of the Sabaeans to erect houses built of stone. He argued further that Sabaeans who came to Ethiopia “did not arrive in a cultural vacuum”, but that, on the contrary, a significant Ethiopian state, people, and language had existed well before their advent. He contended further that Sabaean settlement was restricted to a few localities, and did not impinge greatly on Northern Ethiopia as a whole.

Schneider’s final conclusion was that similarities between South Arabian and Ethiopian civilization had in fact existed long before the coming to Ethiopia of the Sabaeans.

These and other arguments in support of Ethiopian origins independent of South Arabia were subsequently supported by other scholars, among them three linguists, the Ethiopian Abraham Demoz, the American Grover Hudson, and the Englishman David Appleyard, at a Conference on Ethiopian Origins, organised by the present writer at the School of Oriental and African Studies, in June 1978.

Standing Conti Rossini on his Head

The result of such convergent investigations by scholars working in different fields was that Jacqueline Pirenne, basing herself on the area’s material culture, as well as on linguistic and paleographic data, stood Conti Rossini’s thesis on its head. She argued that migration was “not from Yemen to Ethiopia, but rather in the opposite direction: from Ethiopia to Yemen".

Whatever the direction, dating, and details of such migration, there can be no denying that northern Ethiopia and Yemen, in the half millennium or so prior to the Christian era, shared a related civilisation, or civilisations. This is evident from the at least limited use in Ethiopia of the Sabaean language and script, as found on ancient Aksumite inscriptions and coins, and an apparently identical religion. The latter centred on the worship of the sun and moon, and the local god Almaqah. The logo of the sun and moon, used at that time in Yemen, appears for example on an ancient Aksumite obelisk at Matara, as well as on virtually all pre-Christian Aksum coins, which began to be struck in the first century A.D. Reference to Almaqah is likewise to be seen on many Sabaean inscriptions on both sides of the Red Sea.

Next Week: Yemen and Early Red Sea and Gulf of Aden Trade

http://www.addistribune.com/Archives/2003/01/17-01-03/Let.htm

Err, that's one of the sources that supports my view. I quote to you the same exact article, in fact everything but what you quoted and the intro paragraphs. Below I italicize the parts of the point he disagrees with, and in bold where he shows what he believes (identical to my other sources).

Land on both sides of the Red Sea, according to the ancient geographer Ptolemy (AD 150)

Conti Rossini assumed that the Habashat actually originated in Yemen, and later established themselves, as colonists, on the Ethiopian side of the Red Sea, where, he believed, they introduced their name. It was his belief, furthermore, that the South Arabian language, and writing, represented the origin and basis of the Ethiopian tongue and script Ge‘ez.

These suppositions were once widely accepted. The British Arabist Spencer Trimingham for example wrote, in 1952, that the Habashat, or “agriculturalist mountaineers” of Yemen, faced with population pressure, and the failure of their irrigation system, crossed the intervening sea, and, after leaving the “inhospitable coastal zone” of Ethiopia, “found a country [in the Ethiopian interior] which possessed the same climate and vegetation as their own land”. The Habashat, he claims, thereupon “assumed a predominance over all the other tribes, and its chief took the title of negus nagasti (chief of chiefs)”. As a result, “the kingdom of Habashat consolidated itself about the third century B.C., when its rule extended over the plateau region of Eritrea and northern Tigrai”.

"Settlers and Colonizers"

Elaborating on this supposed migration, Trimingham claimed that the Yemeni migrants “came as settlers and colonizers”, “brought their regional names with them”, settled in the plateau regions “most suitable for agriculture”, and “brought the fully developed civilization of the Sabaeans”. The Yemenis, he claims, “introduced the use of metals, certain domestic animals, new plants, advanced systems of irrigation and agriculture, new forms of communal organization, and the art of writing”.

Conti Rossini’s thesis, which was based largely on conjecture, was, however, subsequently undermined by the work of a number of other scholars approaching the question from different disciplines and interests. One of the first of these scholars was Joseph Greenberg, whose Studies in African Linguistic Classification, appeared in 1955. In it he argued that the Semitic languages, found on both sides of the Red Sea, were in no way unique to the region, but formed part of a very much wider Afroasiatic language family scattered over much of Africa, as far as Chad in the west.

Jacqueline Pirenne

In the following year, 1956, Jacqueline Pirenne, a scholar of early Arabian history, drastically revised South Arabian chronology. Her new dating was significant to the question of Ethiopian origins, for it indicated that Sabaean immigrants to Ethiopia did not live in Ethiopia for centuries, as Conti Rossini had postulated, but only for <ur>no more than a few decades.

Six years later, in 1962, the Dutch linguist A.J. Drewes, published his important Inscriptions ie l’Ethiopie antique. It revealed the existence in Ethiopia of Ge‘ez graffiti, and other inscriptions, which were quite as old as the South Arabian inscriptions in Ethiopia. This discovery showed that Conti Rossini had been mistaken in assuming that Sabaean inscriptions in the country represented the prototype from which Ge‘ez had later developed.

In the following decade the Italian archaeologist Rodolfo Fattovich, working in Nubia, unearthed ancient pottery virtually identical to that which had been produced in Ethiopia prior to the founding of Aksum. This evidence suggested that the early material culture of Aksum was of essentially African origin, and had thus developed entirely independently of South Arabian immigration.

Roger Schneider

This thesis was further spelt out, in the following year, by the epigraphist Roger Schneider. Emphasising the entirely unproven character of Conti Rossini’s suppositions, he pointed out for example that the people of northern Ethiopia, living as they did in a rocky environment, did not have to wait for the arrival of the Sabaeans to erect houses built of stone. He argued further that Sabaeans who came to Ethiopia “did not arrive in a cultural vacuum”, but that, on the contrary, a significant Ethiopian state, people, and language had existed well before their advent. He contended further that Sabaean settlement was restricted to a few localities, and did not impinge greatly on Northern Ethiopia as a whole.

Schneider’s final conclusion was that similarities between South Arabian and Ethiopian civilization had in fact existed long before the coming to Ethiopia of the Sabaeans.

These and other arguments in support of Ethiopian origins independent of South Arabia were subsequently supported by other scholars, among them three linguists, the Ethiopian Abraham Demoz, the American Grover Hudson, and the Englishman David Appleyard, at a Conference on Ethiopian Origins, organised by the present writer at the School of Oriental and African Studies, in June 1978.

Standing Conti Rossini on his Head

The result of such convergent investigations by scholars working in different fields was that Jacqueline Pirenne, basing herself on the area’s material culture, as well as on linguistic and paleographic data, stood Conti Rossini’s thesis on its head. She argued that migration was “not from Yemen to Ethiopia, but rather in the opposite direction: from Ethiopia to Yemen".

That article is one of the articles I have seen supporting what I said in the aritcle with the Munro-Hay citation. I have no idea why you chose to pick a source that is against your views. — ዮም (Yom) | contribs • Talk 22:52, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Greatest Apologies Yom

Hello there Yom i was wondering if Ethiopians have any mix of Arab or Egyptian.... I was just curious b/c it seems that they have more caucasion than non-caucasion features. Also does the grandson of Haile Selassie have any power in Ethiopia? Is he still connected to the priest? Does he attend church ceremonies like in that documentary i told u about? Also i am very shocked that the story about the Yemenites migrating is a myth, I mean the ethiopian govt at the time the documentary accepted this? Why do u think they accepted this though. They dont know themselves? Also i read the changes you made to the article. You made a good compromise between both of us. Also what do u think of the sources from answers.com? u didnt share your opinion on those —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Cluckbang (talk • contribs) 01:16, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Here's the rundown, since I get this a lot. The reasons Ethiopians look the way they do (i.e. thin noses, relatively straighter hair than other Africans, and lighter skin) isn't because of significant foreign admixture (though of course there is some, as there are in all populations), but because most non-African populations are derived from a small group of East Africans that left Africa. Most mountain populations have some sort of adaptation to the lack of oxygen (e.g. Andean natives have blood cells that carry more oxygen and Tibetans take more breaths per minute than other groups), but Ethiopians seem to have none. The reason for this is because the adaptations in Ethiopia are that of longer noses, which are more adapted to mountain climates as well as arid deserts (even though they are lowlands, they're arid and not humid, which is what makes the difference). Wide noses are an adaptation to more tropically climates where expelling humidity is necessary, hence the short and broad passages. In arid and mountain climates, however, where moisture must be preserved and the nostrils must be protected by sand, longer passages with thinner nostrils that lock in moisture and keep out sand (smaller nostrils, as well as more hair by way of longer passages) is a benefit. Non-African populations are generally derived from a small group of East Africans, which is why they tend to have straighter, longer, and more prominent noses.

Answers.com is simply a mirror of Wikipedia.com, which means whatever the Wikipedia article says on the Queen of Sheba, answers.com says the same. The wikipedia article had no source for that section, or any part of the article, so I updated it with modern information and sources. — ዮም (Yom) | contribs • Talk 01:47, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

One more question

The Imperial family of Ethiopia claims its origin directly from the offspring of King Solomon and the Queen of Sheba, who is named Makeda in the Ethiopian account. The Ethiopian epic history of kings, the Kebra Negast, is supposed to record the history of Makeda and her descendants. King Solomon is said in this account to have seduced the Queen, and sired a son by her, who would eventually become Menelik I, the first Emperor of Ethiopia. It is speculated that the ancient communities that evolved into the modern Ethiopian state were formed by the migration across the Red Sea of Semitic southern Arabians who intermarried with local non-Semitic peoples. Indeed, the ancient Ethiopian kingdom of Axum ruled much of Southern Arabia including Yemen until the rise of Islam in the 7th century, and both the indigenous languages of Southern Arabia and the Amharic and Tigrean languages of Ethiopia are South Semitic languages. Evidence of ancient Southern Arabian communities in modern day Ethiopia and Eritrea are widespread and include archeological artifacts and ancient Sabaean inscriptions in the old South Arabian alphabet.

What do u think of this paragraph? Is it inaccurate or am i seeing it from a wrong perspective. Sorry, this is the last question. By the great job on the article

It's inaccurate only if you take its claims as truth. The Imperial family really does believe that, and that is the traditional history of Ethiopia and the belief of a significant number of Ethiopians. The genetic and historical evidence, however, simply does not support it. — ዮም (Yom) | contribs • Talk 01:53, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also from reading the history of the History of Aksum it says: It has commonly been thought to be founded by Semitic-speaking Sabaeans who crossed the Red Sea from South Arabia (modern Yemen), but some scholars contend that it was an indigenous successor of the older D’mt or Da'amot kingdom, pointing to evidence of a Semitic speaking presence at least as early as 2000 BC, as well as evidence suggesting that Sabaean immigrants remained in Ethiopia for only a few decades. Aksum began to decline in the 7th century AD, and the population was forced to go farther inland to the highlands, eventually being defeated c. 950 AD. Ethiopian tradition holds that a Jewish Queen named Yodit (Judith) or "Gudit" (a play on "Yodit" meaning "evil") defeated the kingdom and burned its churches and literature, but while there is evidence of churches being burned around this time, there is some doubt as to whether she actually existed. Another possiblity is that the Axumite power was ended by a southern pagan queen named Bani al-Hamwiyah, possibly from of the tribe al-Damutah or Damoti (Sidama). After this period, the Axumite kingdom was succeeded by the Zagwe dynasty in the eleventh century or twelfth century, although limited in size and scope. However, Yekuno Amlak, who killed the last Zagwe king and founded the modern Solomonid dynasty traced his ancestry and his right to rule from the last king of Axum, Dil Na'od.

Can you say like this, instead of saying "it was thought/ believed...."? Since "some scholars contend" means that they are not 100% sure of who is right. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Cluckbang (talk • contribs) 01:41, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've been meaning to fix that, actually. The ambiguousness there is because another editor refused to accept that the indigenous of Ethiopian civilization was fact and labeled it as a new theory, even though it was challenged beginning 50 years ago. I can note that there are a couple scholars who hold on to the old paradigm, but the evidence is overwhelmingly against them, especially because Ge'ez, the ancient Semitic language of Ethiopia is definitively not the descendent of the Sabaean language. Though it's useful to note more ambiguity in the Kingdom of Aksum article (even though the degree is still small), there's no need to go into such detail on the Eritrea article. There are many instances in history in all countries where there is ambiguity, but those must be reserved for the individual articles, as the Eritrea article would be huge if we described everything in detail. — ዮም (Yom) | contribs • Talk 01:53, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see you've got this well in hand. I'm crunching a deadline, but have enjoyed skimming your responses, learning. Will return when I have more time. Peace 2 u. :) deeceevoice 06:54, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Yom, based on the various responses here, and your responses elsewhere, it appears to me that you have the situation well in hand. But keep me posted, if you want. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 15:03, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Article Improvement Drive (WP:AID)

Thank you for your support of the Article Improvement Drive.
This week Epic of Gilgamesh was selected to be improved to featured article status.
Hope you can help…

Just a thought

Hello there Yom, I am not trying to argue with you again, but judging from your past, you seem to know alot about Ethiopian and Eritrean history. However, this is just a question, wouldnt it have been possible for many Yemenites to intermarry, and be assimilated the presnt region of Eritrea and Ethiopia, since it only takes a day to travel across the red sea on a canoe, and thus I am further asking if the theory that was made by Rossilini, who I agree was racist, kind of made sense, rather than making it a myth, since in the D'mt article you said that it was a Sabean word. Also unlike what you said, in some articles on wikipedia, they say that G'eez was developped from the South Arabian language. Also South Arabian languages exist in only three places, Eritrea, Ethiopia and Yemen, so there had to be some Sabean influence. Also this South Arabian expert that you spoke about, the woman, what more evidence does she have than the Rossilini (who was indeed racist)? That Archeologist however seems like he has got some good evidence though. Although you are right, there are still many resources, its still a debatable issue. I do however agree the compromise that you made with me by mentioning it. I thank you for that. Please read this article. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Cluckbang (talk • contribs) 23:42, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.kidusmichael.com/EthiopianChristianity.htm

I will mention that a few contemporary historians still believe the old theory, but only on the Aksum article where it is pertinent. As I said before, such detail isn't required on the main Eritrea page and if we go into that much detail on one small section like that, then there's no reason to not do so for the whole article. Now, it's not impossible for Yemenites to marry and assimilate, but that's probably not what happened. For one, the Sabaean presence is noted in only a few locations, and that presence is only noted for a few decades or a century (Munro-Hay 1991). D`mt wasn't a Sabaean word per se (I'm not sure which language it was written in), it was just written in the Sabaean alphabet. The alphabet may have indeed come from South Arabia to Ethiopia, though that's not certain either, and they both could have come from an earlier Proto-South Semitic alphabet that evolved into Sabaean and Ge'ez, or the Sabaean alphabet could be that Proto-South Semitic alphabet that evolved into later Sabaean forms in Yemen and Ge'ez in Ethiopia. Now, as to South Semitic Languages, they do exist in those three places you mentioned. South Arabian languages only exist in Yemen, however, which includes the island of Socotra. The Urheimat (homeland) of Proto-South Semitic is not known, but it must have either been Ethiopia or Yemen, without assigning any more likeliness in general to one or the other, if Ethiopia is the home of all Semitic languages, then it is more likely that they developed in Ethiopia. The woman you are talking about, Jacqueline Pirenne, has some theories varying from the mainstream in some areas, but the importance of her work is that it showed the short duration of the Sabaean migration in Ethiopia. The archaeologist, by whom I think you mean A.J. Drewes, also represents an important step in understanding what actually happened as he found Ge'ez graffiti (I believe both the alphabet in the language) from B.C. times (I believe c.500 BC?) as old as Sabaean graffiti, which discredits the notion that the Ge'ez alphabet came from Sabaean, though it is still not certain which came first or from what (see e.g. this interview with Dr. Getachew Haile). The one thing that's also very important in this, is that it's now certain that Ge'ez did not derive from Sabaean or an earlier form of it (see e.g. Encyclopaedia Aethiopica "Ge'ez" 2005 pg. 732; or David Appleyard's "Ethiopian Semitic and South Arabian:Towards a Re-examination of a Relationship", Israel Oriental Studies 16, 1996, pp. 201-228.; or any of the following: 1977. Language classification and the Semitic prehistory of Ethiopia. Folia Orientalia 18. 120-166. [Obscure]; or 1981. The Highland East Cushitic family vine. Sprache und Geschichte in Afrika 3. 94-121.; or 1994. A neglected Ethiopian contribution to Semitic and Afroasiatic reconstruction. Proceedings of the Twentieth Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, 47-56. Berkeley, CA: Berkeley Linguistics Society.) If you want more resources just ask. With regards to the link, I will read it, but you should always keep in mind that religious groups and people in Ethiopia are more likely to embrace the link with Sabaeans since they believe the Kibre Negest and the myth that the Queen of Sheba was an Ethiopia. While an Ethiopian queen of Sheba doesn't imply a Sabaean invasion, a Sabaean migration does make the connection with Sheba and therefore Israel stronger in their minds (Important in Ethiopia - see e.g. The Conquering Lion of Judah). — ዮም (Yom) | contribs • Talk • E 00:03, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also, please sign your posts with for tildes like this : ~~~~ — ዮም (Yom) | contribs • Talk • E 00:15, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

THis is the link

http://www.american.edu/ted/ice/eritrea.htm

YOm this is the link i was talking about that i lost, i forgot to give it to you. This is where i got my main theory. There are many sources from there. Please tell me what you think of it Cluckbang 24:23, 25 June 2006

These are the sources they used:

Hammer, Joshua. "Eritrea: Back From the Ruins." Newsweek. 26 Feb. 1996: 40.
Cliffe, Lionel, and Basil Davidson. The Long Struggle of Eritrea. New Jersey: The Red Sea Press, 1988: 68.

Neither of these is concerned primarily with what we're discussing. One is a Newsweek article, while the other is on the Eritrean Liberation front, so they aren't the best of sources in this debate. The sources I have given you are concerned primarily with Linguistics and whether or not Ge'ez is derived from South Arabian (and if Proto-Semitic originated in Ethiopia) and with Archaeology and ancient pre-Aksumite history. I'll be back to talk later, as I'll be busy for a little while. Please use four tildes, ~~~~, to sign your post, rather than putting brackets (meaning this: [[NAME]]) around your name, as it puts the date and a link to your username instead of the Wikipedia page called Cluckbang (i.e. what you're doing now puts a link to an article "Cluckbang" instead of your user page. — ዮም (Yom) | contribs • Talk • E 00:30, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is another link with proper sources

http://history.byu.edu/fac/hamblin/239CNEweb/239%20Notes2/30b%20Ethiopia.doc THis is the other link. Thank you for your patience so far. Ive learnt so much about the history of Ethiopia and Eritrea Cluckbang 00:36, 26 June 2006 (UTC)Cluckbang[reply]

Re: Harbai

Is Harbai the same person as Kedus Harbe? I never suspected, but inasmuch "Harbai" was Wallis-Budge's spelling, & "Kedus Harbe" is a more recent form, I'm not surprised that I made this mistake. (I can only wonder what other ghost-entries I have created by relying on several different authorities with their own idiosyncratic manners of transliterations.) -- llywrch 05:41, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be honest: I don't know, but from what I've read about the history of the Zagwe dynasty, there are a lot of contradictions & duplications in the accounts. I would feel better if Prof. Taddesse Tamrat had provided the names in Fidel -- which Budge had done -- so I could conclude this for myself. Does the Encyclopaedia Aethiopica have an article about this ruler? If so, does the description in the article fit both persons? This would indicate that I might have accidentally created a doublet here. (In that case, I'd have to backtrack thru my notes to see how I made this mistake; maybe another writer thought they were 2 different people.) -- llywrch 05:53, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think I know what happened, & how these 2 rulers were duplicated. The original list of Ethiopian rulers was taken from hostkingdom.com, & because I could not find an authoritative list of Zagwe rulers, I assumed that they were different rulers. Budge's antique transliteration (& that the only copy of his work I have access to has missing pages) prevented me from seeing my own mistake.

Unless there is a more reliable source than hostkingdom.net which lists these as separate pairs, we should merge these articles. -- llywrch 17:31, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Knights templar & Ethiopia

Why is there this bizarre need to connect the churches of Lalibela with the Knights Templar? (I know you don't know the answer, but I have to vent my puzzlement somewhere. :-) He doesn't seem to be very communicable, so while I congratulate you for assuming good faith, I feel that unless he responds to your questions he might just need to be blocked. (And I hope that doesn't need to be done -- but will if he reverts a fourth time from the same IP.) -- llywrch 23:29, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your increased involvement in edit conflicts might be a sign that you care about Wikipedia & its content. ;-) -- llywrch 04:42, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gilgamesh

Hi. I left a message on the talk page in an attempt to spur some conversation on how to phrase the first sentence. As it stands now, saying that the epic "is considered the oldest known work of literature" is a bit confusing to the reader, so perhaps a footnote is needed. If you could add some input that would be great. Thanks alot. AdamBiswanger1 16:08, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Hello there, Yom, Ive been meaning to ask you, do you truly believe in the claims the Ethiopian monarchy (Solomonoid dynasty) made to Solomon and Israel?

Cluckbang 18:23, 29 June 2006 (UTC)Cluckbang[reply]

No, I do not. It's not impossible, though. — ዮም (Yom) | contribs • Talk • E 20:08, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

New source

This is a new source to prove Sabean-Ethiopian relations. Please tell me what you think

http://archaeology.about.com/library/munrohay/blmunrohay2.htm http://www.yementimes.com/01/iss05/culture.htm http://www.arkeologi.uu.se/afr/projects/BOOK/negash.pdf Cluckbang 17:11, 30 June 2006 (UTC)Cluckbang[reply]

The Yemen times article is full of misinformation (950 AD? Ethiopian civilization starting in 500 AD? Maybe they meant BC, but still, Ethiopian civilization is older than that. Good job on finding the link by Negash, I've seen it before and it's informative on the post-Aksumite and Zagwe period. It has nothing to do with Sheba, however, as that happened (if it even did) ca.1000-950 BC, not AD. The first one is rather odd because it's written by the same person who wrote Aksum. I can't really comment on it, but no one has ever said that D`mt was founded by Sabaeans, as it predates the Sabaean migration by a few centuries. I'm not sure why he assumes that all of the 500 BC inscriptions in Sabaean (does he mean script or language?) were made by Sabaeans either, since Ethiopians used the same script... May I ask what you are trying to demonstrate with those links? — ዮም (Yom) | contribs • Talk • E 20:11, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Caucasoid

ive been meaning to ask you, in that documentary i told u about that was made in the 1960s it said that Ethiopians and Eritreans (habesha) are caucasions. Would you agree with this?

No, we're not Caucasians; we're black. We're not white-skinned and we don't have hair like whites (it's generally curly but straighter than "kinky," but not thin strands but thick, unlike white hair, e.g.). I would agree that our skulls are generally "Caucasoid," but that's putting the cart before the horse, as the skull shape evolved in Ethiopia first and then spread to other areas. It would be more accurate to call our skull shape "Ethiopid," where Ethiopid would be a "proto-Caucasoid" skull shape with some differences (e.g. still a little prognathism and dolichocephalism). Still, other skeletal areas are different, however (e.g. arm and leg width). — ዮም (Yom) | contribs • Talk • E 20:27, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Yom. By the way, when i said caucasion i meant the scientific, not the white word but thank you for the info one Ethiopid

May I ask what you are trying to demonstrate with those links?

What I am trying to demonstrate with these link is a relation with the kingdom of Saba, remember you told me to get more sources to proof my belief in the ethiopian "myth". So that is why

Moors

In Mauritania, certainly; in North Africa as a whole, no. (And certainly not at the time of Tariq ibn Ziyad!) But I see your point, and I'll try for a phrasing that includes the West African and European contributions to the Moorish "gene pool" as well. - Mustafaa 22:39, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Controversy over race of Ancient Egyptians

Careful about the 3RR rule. You don't want to be blocked. Keep up the good work, though. :) deeceevoice 08:27, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see it. I make sure never to go over it. I believe the anonymous IP has, though. He finally responded but didn't wait to discuss before reverting again, accusing me of removing images I don't like when I've only removed images irrelevant to the particular sections. — ዮም (Yom) | contribs • Talk • E 08:29, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Still, you can ask an admin to have the I.P. address blocked for edit warring. I'm supposed to be crunching a deadline. Gotta get back to work! Peace. :) deeceevoice 08:32, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm in the process. If he doesn't attempt to discuss the issue in the next few minutes, then I'll submit it. — ዮም (Yom) | contribs • Talk • E 08:35, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Yom, just happened to look in on Wikipedia a little bit ago & saw your note. First, glad to see you're back online. (I spent yesterday crating lists of woredas of Ethiopia that I'd like someone to examine & make sure they conform to WP's propsoed transliteration scheme.) Second, I took a look at the history of this article, & tried to untangle what's going on, but I'm not seeing any obvious bad-faith edits or reversions to the article. I saw the anon editor came back, but he apparently left after one edit. If you suspect he's created an account to continue his warring ways, you might want to contact William Connelly (he's the admin who placed the block the first time), & present your evidence to him. Sorry, I've got to run. -- llywrch 02:29, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

New Source

Hi there tom, according to this new source that i got from BBC, which is a very famous and accurate source for history, it says that semitic tribes came from Arabian Peninsula to make Axum? Would you disagree with them? Please tell me what you think? http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/country_profiles/1072219.stm

Note

Could you please stop leaving innappropiate messages at my talk page, thanks! Atlas151 16:52, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Learn how wikipedia works. Anyone who looks at the edit history can see that you wrote that message yourself. Stop impersonating other people. It is a bannable offense. — ዮም (Yom) | contribs • Talk • E 16:55, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT!!!! Your Name is right there, I should have you reported. Atlas151 17:01, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above user has just been blocked for 24 hours and warned. If he does it again, contact me. Sasquatch t|c 17:41, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ethiopia Geo articles

Hi Yom -- no, I don't have a bot yet, I'm just adding the pop & long./lat. info to existing articles to make the article creation process a lot simpler. But I appreciate the offer of help.

(PS -- I don't normally comment on posts from trolls or troublemakers because it only encourages them, but I must share with you that I found the incident in the section above hilarious, although in a sad & embarassing way. If a troublemaker wants to fake a post by you, he should at least make the effort of imitating how you write. Feel free to delete this paragraph after you read it.) -- llywrch 20:25, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

fr:Époque hellénistique

I'm really happy, no, enthusiast, to hear you intend to translate fr:Époque hellénistique, an article I appreciate very much and for quite a lot of time I've been thinking of how to get translated (my French is mediocre, and my English far from brilliant). That said, I'm a sort of specialist of Hellenistic history, and I think I should tell you that Hellenistic Greece is not a good destination for fr:Époque hellénistique; telling the truth, I always found sort of weird that fr:Époque hellénistique pointed to en:Hellenistic Greece; this because that English article was created to be a history of Greece between 323 BC and 146 BC, and not to include Asian and Egyptian hellenized lands. In my opinion, Hellenistic Greece should be left as it is and a new article should be created (Hellenistic Age?), while Hellenistic civilization could become a redirect to the new article.--Aldux 01:32, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Uh.. that hurts ;-) Hm, yes my written English doesn't appear to be very "near native" level.

Turning to fr:Époque hellénistique, yes, I feel that a new article titled Hellenistic period would be a great idea. As for your doubts on how to proceed with the translative, I can tell you of some possible options: 1) start immediately the new article, and add section after section through time 2) create a sandbox section at your user page, and work there till it's completed; this is how Bridesmill, an active translator of French featured articles, generally does. Considering the respectable dimensions of the French article, and the marginal link with Hellenistic Greece, I don't think it would be a good idea to keep working on the talk page where you started. Ciao, --Aldux 13:09, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]