posted on Sep, 27 2008 @ 03:35 PM
reply to post by Estragon
Sumerian is actually a language isolate. There's a possibility that it is related to whatever pre-Indo-european languages may have existed along the
Persian Gulf and the Indus civilization, but at this point, there's no real way to tell.
Akkadian (Babylonian) and its relative Assyrian were both Semitic languages, was was Khemetic. However, this is where things get interesting... The
vast majority of Semitic languages are in Africa, including the oldest ones. What this tells us is that the Assyrians and Babylonians are either
migrants traveling eastward out of Egypt, or that they were a preexisting people who adopted the languages that were coming out of Egypt.
The Egyptians were most definitely African. Odds are they traveled North from somewhere in the Sudd (my money would be on the area now occupied by
Khartoum) and acquired agriculture from Sumerian traders. Their religion is heavily syncretic, reflecting original myths, borrowings from the East
(some aspects of Egyptian myth actually resemble Hinduism, with Egyptian gods being "organs" of a greater divinity) and later on, showing Greek and
Cretan influence. Their architecture is their own however, brought north along the river. There is, of course, likely influence from crete, Sumer, and
so on, but the style remained distinctly Egyptian even if trade of ideas led to improvements and slight changes.
The reason they seem to come "from nowhere" is because unlike the Romans, they didn't write everything down - and like the Triple Alliance of
Mesoamerica, each conquest or dynasty probably eradicated all records of the previous powers and re-wrote history. Especially given the Egyptian
variety of sympathetic magic.