Africa and the Wheel

Status
Closed
Nov 2016
59
Indiana
There is a persistent myth that the wheel was never invented in Africa by black Africans. The oldest depiction of the wheel and chariot are in the ancient Sahara depicting black Africans over 10,000 years ago.





Tassili-n-Ajjer ancient Saharan rock art dating back to 8,000 B.C.E.



(which is very similar in style to ancient Pelasgian/early Greek art)

Therefore let's drop this notion from our consciousness.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Paul Hai
Nov 2016
59
Indiana
One assertion that I find absurd is that which claims that Indo-Europeans and Semites (mulattoes) invented the chariot and or somehow introduced it into ancient Egypt. Clearly the Africans of the ancient Sahara was the source of Dynastic civilizations following desertification that first appeared in Ta Seti (Nubia) and several centuries later in Kemet (renamed Egypt), and we see that this was our much more ancient invention. The only thing that those other non African groups did that was unique was use it as an instrument of war. That war tactic was utilized by Nile Valley Africans after those non African groups attempted to take over the Nile Valley civilizations for over 1,000 years before successfully doing so.
 
May 2015
1,301
Germany
Had been a while since the last Afrocentrist on this forum.

To make this quick: The oldest rock paintings in Tassili date from the Neolithic, but the chariots date to the first millenium BC and are ascribed to be Garamantians, an Afro-Asiatic people who also introduced horses, agriculture & urbanism as well as a written script into the Sahara.
 
Nov 2016
59
Indiana
]To make this quick: The oldest rock paintings in Tassili date from the Neolithic, but the chariots date to the first millenium BC
There are varying dates for the age of the appearance of the horse and chariot period prior to 2,000 B.C.E.

‘Large Wild Fauna Period’, 12,000 BP - c 6,000
BP
‘Round Head Period’, 9,500 BP - c 7,000 BP
‘Pastoral Period’ 7,200+ BP - 3,000 BP and possibly
later
‘Horse and Libyan-Warrior Period’, 3,200 BP
– c 1,000 BP

‘Camel Period’, 2,000 BP – c 1,000 BP and later

"Researchers have noted that chariots are normally drawn by horses at extended gallop (and very rarely by cattle), driven by whipwielding, unarmed charioteers; these chariots were not being used for fighting but might have been used for hunting."

On my end with the 8,000 B.C.E. date Basil Davidson appeared to indicate in his documentary that those were all from the 8,000 year time frame. None the less the Dhar Tichitt civilization depicting chariots both ox and horse drawn also exist and are shown ahead.

"The horse was also found at other sites in the Sahara. Skeletons of horses dating to between around 2000 BC, have been found ((A.Holl, Livestock husbandry, pastoralism and territoriality: The west African record, Journal of Anthropological Archaeology, 17(1998):143-165). In the Sahel-Saharan zone the first carts were driven by cattle and date between 4000 and 3000 BP between the Tichitt and Tagant region according to Joaquim Soler Subils. It is in the Tichitt region that we find many Libyco-Berber inscriptions, horses, mounted horses and of course the cattle driven carts see: J.S. Subils, Sub-Zone1: Mauritania-Western Sahara"


Article

and are ascribed to be Garamantians,
These people were of course black Africans. Do you really need biological evidence or ancient cultural references to verify this known fact?

an Afro-Asiatic people who also introduced horses, agriculture & urbanism as well as a written script into the Sahara.
Who are Afro-Asiatic people? According to premiere African linguists "Afro Asiatic" is a fake language family that was created by Westerners who do not speak a lick of African tongue. They also assert that "Afro-Asiatic" is the West attempt to keep the old Hamitic hypothesis theory in place without directly implicated race or ethnicity. Presented is the respected Theophile Obenga who made great impressions at the UNESCO Conference in 1974 with Cheikh Anta Diop with regards to the "Afro-Asiatic" language family.

1-1:55


Also what do you mean the first piece of urbanization in the ancient Sahara? After the last phases of desertification the Manding speaking branch of the "Niger Congo" language family migrated Westward from the central Sahara to establish Dhar Tichit estimated around 4,000 B.C.E.






This early West African civilization also had writing.




This civilization is the precursor to the later Wagada or "Old Ghana" civilization that the modern country is named after (even though it's located in modern day Mauritania). Presented is proof of the Mande-Tamil/Dravidian Indian linkage via their cohabitation in the ancient Sahara during it's fertile period Courtesy of Clyde Winters

"The presence of ox-carts at Dar Tichitt highlight the early use of wheeled transportation in West Africa.

This is evident in an examination of the Mande and Dravidian (Tamil) words for wheel and round. The words for wheel are Mande koli, kori, muru-fe; and Tamil kal, ari, urul , tikiri, in Kanada: gali tiguri, tigari. The term for cart in Tamil is Kal. In the Mande languages the word for round is Kuru,kulu, the word for carriage is is also Kulu and Kuru. The existence of Kal in Tamil for wheel and cart, and in the Mande languages: Koli for wheel and Kulu for carriage indicate that the original Proto-Dravido-African term for cart was probably *Kali or kuli."

The almost identical use of these words between these Southern Indian Dravidian speakers (who originated in Africa along the Nile and lived in the ancient Sahara) proves through their interactions that the use of wheeled transport had to been in Saharan/West Africa prior to the migration of Tamil/Dravidian speakers and the Manding speakers speakers from Kerma of Nubia in Africa onto into Middle East onto the Indus Valley and points further east over 5,000 years ago. This fact alone negates any implications of Indo European or Semitic populations introducing them into Africa. Not to mention that they were of completely different design.

Not to mention the fact that West African Dhar Tichitt shown above is prior to anything resembling a civilization in Europe. This is simply another black African civilization that is never talked about.
 
Last edited:
Aug 2016
247
The United States
Who are Afro-Asiatic people? According to premiere African linguists "Afro Asiatic" is a fake language family that was created by Westerners who do not speak a lick of African tongue. They also assert that "Afro-Asiatic" is the West attempt to keep the old Hamitic hypothesis theory in place without directly implicated race or ethnicity.
North Africans and Middle Easterners.

Premiere African linguists can think whatever they want, its called Afro-Asiatic because it is a language family that is situated on the border of Africa and Asia. It makes little sense to argue with the name when it is based on geography, and it will make even less sense if you will try to argue that there are no substantive connection between the people living in Egypt and the people living right next door in neighboring Saudi Arabia. As for whether or not it is a fake language family is almost irrelevant. The main language in question - Arabic - stretch from West Africa to the borders of Iran.

I'm assuming the reason you brought race into this has to do with Egypt. Coptic is old Egyptian, so if you want to dispute Afro Asiatic as a historical family, just find a way to dispute Coptic as related to Arabic or Hebrew. Otherwise, it is valid.
 
Last edited:
Nov 2016
59
Indiana
North Africans and Middle Easterners.
You are aware that you did not specify any real group of people but rather you only named a vast geographic sub region. That is probably one of the of the most racially diverse regions on Earth, and from all evidence the original "Eurasians" were black Africans who paid no mind to geographic land mass. Semitic (which originally meant semi white and semi black) peoples were not recorded in the region nor in history until 1765 BCE as the Hyksos and they never had a civilization prior to that.

Premiere African linguists can think whatever they want, its called Afro-Asiatic because it is a language family that is situated on the border of Africa and Asia.
The so called "Afro-Asiatic" language family only has one language spoken having originated outside of Africa being Semitic, and that arguably has an African/Nile Valley origin (especially in the case of the original languages spoken by East/Horn Africans who originally inhabited the adjacent Arabian Peninsula before unmelaninated skinned Indo-European Turks invaded a few hundred years ago and adopted the religion). In fact here is how African linguistic (linguist who actually speak African languages as opposed to imperialist and racialist colonialist invaders who have a motive to alter the true story of Africa and Africans) classify their languages in this manner.



Zoom In

It makes little sense to argue with the name when it is based on geography,
You appear to be asserting the contemporary Semitic North Africans and Middle Easterners have been on the continent for eons, and thus the languages that they speak have a very ancient place along with the original African languages spoken in those regions, and that simply is not the case. Again the only language in "Afro-Asiatic" that most say did not originate in Africa is Semitic (hence the whole point for "Asiatic" being added with Afro/African) does not group with African language grouping at all. It is purely "ideological" (another Western fantasy about history) with no ground in facts for Westerners to insert them into the African picture as Obenga points out in his lectures.

and it will make even less sense if you will try to argue that there are no substantive connection between the people living in Egypt and the people living right next door in neighboring Saudi Arabia.
Given what we know about more recent history why wouldn't there be?



This relatively recent date after the death of "Christ" was when the "Semitic" (Arabic) speaking Muslim populations of Saudi Arabia invaded the Middle East, Northern Africa, and then parts of southern Europe (the Moors of Spain) by way of post Dynastic Egypt (Sudanese Nubians on the other hand halted the invasion full scale). That relatively recent event is the reason why their is a "Semitic" linkage between Northern Africa and places further east, and not anything more ancient than that (which occurred in the 7th century A.D. whereas the end of Kemet was in the 6th century B.C.E.).

As for whether or not it is a fake language family is almost irrelevant. The main language in question - Arabic - stretch from West Africa to the borders of Iran.
The fact that we use "Algebra" (which is an Arab word to describe ancient Nile Valley mathematics) to label a form of mathematics throughout European languages is also remnants of that stretch in history of Arabic/Moorish domination in the region starting around the 7 century AD and no earlier than that.

I'm assuming the reason you brought race into this has to do with Egypt. Coptic is old Egyptian, so if you want to dispute Afro Asiatic as a historical family, just find a way to dispute Coptic as related to Arabic or Hebrew. Otherwise, it is valid.
All religion came as the result of ancient Nile Valley African science, and they were not formed until the tail end of the civilization.



"Religion" was formed when the land ceased to be "Kemet" or the black land and was usurped by Semites (mixed race) and invading Indo Europeans (through deceit and outright betrayal of course), and last for only a few centuries afterwards. That's part of the absurdity in anyone pointing to the Coptic Egyptians as a relic of the original Kemites.

 
Last edited:
May 2015
1,301
Germany
There are varying dates for the age of the appearance of the horse and chariot period prior to 2,000 B.C.E.

‘Large Wild Fauna Period’, 12,000 BP - c 6,000
BP
‘Round Head Period’, 9,500 BP - c 7,000 BP
‘Pastoral Period’ 7,200+ BP - 3,000 BP and possibly
later
‘Horse and Libyan-Warrior Period’, 3,200 BP
– c 1,000 BP

‘Camel Period’, 2,000 BP – c 1,000 BP and later
BP = Before Present

2000 - 3200 = -1200 = ca. 1000 BC
 
Nov 2016
59
Indiana
BP = Before Present

2000 - 3200 = -1200 = ca. 1000 BC
That's why I mentioned that there was a range, and aside from that all of the estimates for the wheeled transportation shown throughout the Sahara including the West African civilization Dhar Tichit showing that of the Ox prior to the horse date back to between 4-3,000 B.C.E. as the second source found. Not to mention the fact that the words used for these technologies are shared with Tamil speakers which proves that this was very ancient in Africa's past as those coexisting groups migrated from the continent thousands of years ago establishing other civilizations.
 
Aug 2016
247
The United States
You are aware that you did not specify any real group of people but rather you only named a vast geographic sub region.
Yes, I did. Its just as real as "Europeans" "East Asians" or "Americans." Simply because it does not conform to a desire to create a racial categorization of peoples, does not mean it is not a direct reference to peoples in an area. Most language families are based on that kind of naming schemes, with only more local language groups defining a "peopling" effect.

That is probably one of the of the most racially diverse regions on Earth, and from all evidence the original "Eurasians" were black Africans who paid no mind to geographic land mass. Semitic (which originally meant semi white and semi black) peoples were not recorded in the region nor in history until 1765 BCE as the Hyksos and they never had a civilization prior to that.
That is not what Semitic means, and I am uncertain why you are going on a tirade about race. It is out of place, and irrelevant to my point.
 
Nov 2016
59
Indiana
Yes, I did. Its just as real as "Europeans" "East Asians" or "Americans."
Once again those are the European names for geographic land masses not self identified names of the actual indigenous people. Those categorizations that Europeans imposed on various people were based on a racialized view of the World that only they had at the time.

Simply because it does not conform to a desire to create a racial categorization of peoples, does not mean it is not a direct reference to peoples in an area.
You asserted that "Afro Asiatic peoples" created the Garamante civilization. I asked you what and who are "Afro Asiatic people" and the only thing that you did was point to was a geographic land mass (North Africa and the Middle East) and that today is a hodgepodge blend of various different peoples and assert that their contemporary Semitic cultural identity that came about during the 7th century C.E. is an age of old situation in the region that accounts for all of the more ancient legacy of that region. That is simply incorrect.

language families are based on that kind of naming schemes, with only more local language groups defining a "peopling" effect.
The "Afro-Asiatic" language family (again not created by African nor people who actually speak African languages) is a Western ideological (not rooted in any facts) concept as Obenga states, and African linguist subsequently negate it's legitimacy through their own research which actually forms a complete narrative of ourstory.

That is not what Semitic means, and I am uncertain why you are going on a tirade about race. It is out of place, and irrelevant to my point.
The definition as provided by Dr. Cheikh Anta Diop.

"All Semites (Arabs and Jews)…are mixed breeds of Blacks and Whites; the Arab race cannot be conceived as anything but a mixture of Blacks and Whites; the entire Arab people, including the Prophet, are mixed with Negro blood. - C.A. Diop

Also

"Anthropologically and culturally speaking, the Semitic world was born during protohistoric times from the mixture of white-skinned and black-skinned people in Western Asia."

and

"The formation of the Semitic branch occurred between the fifth and fourth millennium (BCE). This was a genuine interbreeding between White (non-Mongoloid Cro-Magnon) and Black at the beginning of the historical era…the Negro type…inhabited the Arabian Peninsula in Neolithic times. This type...progressively crossbred with White elements [who] came from the northeast to give rise finally to the Arabian type. Not until the Sabean era, 1000 BC, was this crossbreeding completed in the south."
 
Status
Closed