Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

sumerians are black

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • sumerians are black

    sumerian is the language of proto tamils they come from egypt
    sumerians are black , they trust in An the god of the sky .

    Lexical Correspondences between Sumerian and Dravidian

    DrK.Loganathan, Universiti Sains Malaysia

    (Part of the paper originally published in the Journal of of the Inst. of Asian Studies, Chennai March 1989)

    Introduction

    The last few decades have seen some important advances made in unfolding the mystery surrounding the prehistory of the Dravidian speakers in India. Evidence are accumulating to show that there are close linkages between the present day Dravidian speakers and those ancients who established remarkable civilizations in the Indus, ancient Persia and in the valleys of Tigris-Euphrates, called respectively Melluha, Elam and Sumer. The claim David W. McAlpin 91974, 1975) that the ancient Elam is cognate with Dravidian seems to be have been well received by scholars. While uncertainties still surround the decipherment of the Indus script , Walter A.Fairservis Jr.(1986) concludes, after a careful consideration of a variety of factors, that Dravidian remains the best possible candidate for the Harappan language.

    Another conjecture that further strengthens the above hypothesis comes from J.V.Kinnier Wilson(1986). He claims that the Harappans and Sumerians were in fact the same people, that the Sumerians were in fact INDO-SUMERIANS, a small group of people who probably separated from the parent stock, the Harappans, settled in Sumeria and began to develop independently.

    Now in addition to the above thesis of Indo-Sumerian, we shall propose here what can be called the thesis of Sumero-Dravidians; that sometime after the second millennium B.C. when Sumer was sacked by Hammurabi and taken over by the semitic speaking people who lived initially in Akkad, a substantial number of Sumerians came to India particularly the extreme South and today constitute the basic population of the speakers of Tamil, Malayalam, Kannada, Tulu and other S.Dravidian languages and were probably the people who established the Sangam Culture around the period 800 B.C to 300 A.D . Evidences in favour of Sumero-Dravidian thesis are accumulating.


    In 1975, we have shown the existence of remarkable lexical correspondences between Sumerian and Dravidian (particularly S.Dravidian) for more than 200 lexical items. In 1982, it was shown that a line occurring in "Lamentations over the Destruction of Ur" transliterated and translated by S.N Kramer points to the possibility of the existence of an Academy very much like the Tamil Sagkam of the historical period even in Sumeria in those ancient days. There are also many similarities in literary conventions, stylistic features, metaphors and similes which when sufficiently well documented would constitute strong evidences for the thesis we are proposing here. We should also mention here that Hannah Fane (1980) appears to subscribe to this thesis as well.

    In the present paper, we propose to furnish additional evidences for the above thesis . The linguistic, literary and cultural similarities are so striking that thesis seems to essentially sound. The problem is mainly that of documentation. Since this area of study has not still attracted the attention of many scholars, a preliminary attempt is made here with the limited resources at our disposal with the hope that it would attract the attention of the relevant authorities who would then initiate more systematic studies of this sort.



    The best-known Dravidian languages are Tamil , Telugu , Kannada and Malayalam. There are three subgroups within the Dravidian linguistic family: North Dravidian, Central Dravidian, and South Dravidian, matching for the most part the corresponding regions in the Indian subcontinent.

    Dravidian languages are spoken by more than 200 million people. They appear to be unrelated to languages of other known families like Indo-European, specifically Indo-Aryan, which is the other common language family on the Indian subcontinent. Some linguistic scholars incorporate the Dravidian languages into a larger Elamo-Dravidian language family, which includes the ancient Elamite language (Haltami) of what is now south-western Iran. Dravidian is one of the primary linguistic groups in the proposed Nostratic language system, linking almost all languages in North Africa, Europe and Western Asia into a common family with its origins in the (Fertile Crescent sometime between the last Ice Age and the emergence of proto-Indo-European 4-6 thousand years BC
    in the DEEP PAST the whole of India was essentially Dravidian and that many different ethnic groups have come and mingled with these ancient Dravidians who were probably the first stream out of Africa,, But despite all these the CULTURE or the temple-centered Agamic Hinduism remains quite the same all over India."
    Dr Loganathan

    Dravidians were associated with the ancient Sumerian civilizations of Mesopotamia and of Elam (southern Iran). Authors have pointed out ethnic, linguistic and cultural affinities between the Sumerians (Mesopotamians) and the Dravidians of South India, and concluded that both probably belonged to the same ethnic stock. HR Hall writes: The ethnic type of the Sumerians, so strongly marked in their statues and relofs was as different from those of the races which surrounded them as was their language from those of the Semites, Aryans and others; they were decidedly Indian in type. The face-type of the average Indian today is no doubt much the same as that of the Dravidian race ancestors thousands of years ago...And it is to this Dravidian ethnic type of India that the ancient Sumerian bears most resemblance, so far as we can judge from his monuments. He was very like a Southern Hindu of the Deccan (who still speaks Dravidian languages).

    Ur was the capital of the Sumerian kings. South Indian teak wood was found in the ruins of Ur of IV millennium BC.
    The word Ur ! itself is the Tamil-Malayalam equivalent signifying a town or village, which is often affixed to names of places in the South, like, Tanjavur, Perumanur, Ollur, Kadungallur etc.
    We shall quote, in this regard Will Durant, the author of The Story of Civilization. He writes: Farther South of the land was occupied by the dark-skinned, broad-nosed people whom, without knowing the origin of the word, we call Dravidians. They were already a civilized people when the Aryans broke down upon them; their adventurous merchants sailed the sea even to Sumeria and Babylon, and their cities know many refinements and luxuries.
    Seals, beads and other objects of Harappan pattern dating back to 2500 BC have been discovered in Ur, and other parts of Sumer and Mesopotamia which establish the close contact and affinity between these peoples.


  • #2
    Are they supposed to be white or whats the Point?

    Comment


    • #3
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKXjaUiUT7s Sumerian tamil links

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mTPWCxqKIqw

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TGD0X3fn8Jo

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DE1yb2wQdo

      Last edited by adian1; 03-10-2015, 06:22 PM.

      Comment


      • #4

        The link between Tamil and Sanskrit:

        http://www.heritagewiki.org/index.ph..._of_Sanskrit-1

        Comment


        • #5
          sumerians say they are sag gig ga
          sag means head , person
          gig means black
          so sag gig means black people there ' s no word play sag gig means black
          it's what say sumerian dict
          http://psd.museum.upenn.edu/epsd1/nepsd-frame.html
          sag means head , person
          http://psd.museum.upenn.edu/epsd1/nepsd-frame.html
          gig means blackhttp://psd.museum.upenn.edu/epsd1/nepsd-frame.html
          sumerians are black


          Moins ·

          Comment


          • #6
            And is being black a good or a bad thing?

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by adian1 View Post
              sumerians say they are sag gig ga
              sag means head , person
              gig means black
              so sag gig means black people there ' s no word play sag gig means black
              it's what say sumerian dict
              http://psd.museum.upenn.edu/epsd1/nepsd-frame.html
              sag means head , person
              http://psd.museum.upenn.edu/epsd1/nepsd-frame.html
              gig means blackhttp://psd.museum.upenn.edu/epsd1/nepsd-frame.html
              sumerians are black


              Moins ·

              nah they're penguins, black head

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by SeWe View Post
                Are they supposed to be white or whats the Point?
                let's discuss about it

                Comment


                • #10
                  I'm confused. So you're saying that Sri Lankans were originally Sumerians?

                  Comment


                  • #11
                    A more accurate method would to conduct simple DNA comparisons like the National Geographic Society does. But to call them Black implies they were from Sub-Saharan Africa.

                    Comment


                    • #12
                      Originally posted by Molitor View Post
                      I'm confused. So you're saying that Sri Lankans were originally Sumerians?
                      scientist agree sumerians are dravidians and austric blacks
                      eelam tamils come from elam not sumer but are affiliated with sumer
                      sumer people , elam people, aratta people, and harappa people are the same people ,
                      aratta is a colony of sumerians, harappans people come from sumerians and elam people are cousins of sumerians
                      they are all dravidians

                      Comment


                      • #13
                        Originally posted by Lavite View Post
                        A more accurate method would to conduct simple DNA comparisons like the National Geographic Society does. But to call them Black implies they were from Sub-Saharan Africa.
                        sub saharan africa doesn' t exist , black originate all in egypt and ethiopia , genes can' t tell the truth , first blacks had the same genes as euros because it's from their waves that emerge the semitics , the asianic tribes which were afro asiatics same as semitics but who speak a langage which is a mix of paleo aramaic and sumerianand who are pelasgians and caucasian people ( except georgians ) and from pelasgians emerge a tribe that later will migrate east to become arians
                        Africa is a berber term it comes from ifriquiya , ancient egyptians will never call their land africa cause it was a berber term and Libyans were ennemies of egyptians
                        berber were also atlanteans who are both ennemies of egyptians and greeks and who have conquered a part of europe
                        Last edited by adian1; 03-11-2015, 08:54 PM.

                        Comment


                        • #14
                          Originally posted by adian1 View Post
                          sub saharan africa doesn' t exist , black originate all in egypt and ethiopia , genes can' t tell the truth , first blacks had the same genes as euros because it's from their waves that emerge the semitics , the asianic tribes which were afro asiatics same as semitics but who speak a langage which is a mix of paleo aramaic and sumerianand who are pelasgians and caucasian people ( except georgians ) and from pelasgians emerge a tribe that later will migrate east to become arians
                          Sub Saharan Africa doesn't exist? Now how can so many maps and globes be wrong?

                          And genes do tell the truth, a whole lot better than trying to suggest a language connection that may or may not exist. Genes are indisputable facts not open to conjecture. Now, you can argue what that facts imply, for example why is their an absence of Neanderthal genes from samples taken from the modern population of Sub Saharan Africa, but that is about it.

                          Comment


                          • #15
                            Originally posted by adian1 View Post
                            scientist agree sumerians are dravidians and austric blacks
                            eelam tamils come from elam not sumer but are affiliated with sumer
                            sumer people , elam people, aratta people, and harappa people are the same people ,
                            aratta is a colony of sumerians, harappans people come from sumerians and elam people are cousins of sumerians
                            they are all dravidians
                            Dravidian is the language group of southern India, and the Tamils being Sri Lankan fits with that. What is an "austric black"?

                            The problem with your posts is that you're assuming the scholars can simply trace a line of people by language. You're on a forum with a diverse group of language speakers and learners and we know just how easy it is to mess up translating and studying a language. So it seems a bit a of a stretch to take what you're suggesting and consider it the only possibility. It is a theory until tested and without DNA it will remain a theory.

                            For instance of they recently found the Sumerian "Noah" (circa 4500 BCE) which might have useable DNA and the Georgian Dmanisi skulls (about 1.8 million years old but Homo erectus) so we will continue to get interesting results. If the theory you follow is correct, it will eventually be proven by archeologists.

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X