Christopher Ehret | |
---|---|
Born | 27 July 1941 |
Nationality | American |
Occupation | Historian |
Academic background | |
Alma mater | Northwestern University |
Academic work | |
Institutions | University of California,Los Angeles |
Main interests | Afroasiatic languages,Nilo-Saharan languages,historical linguistics |
Notable works | Reconstructing Proto-Afroasiatic (Proto-Afrasian) (2005) |
Christopher Ehret (born 27 July 1941),who currently holds the position of Distinguished Research Professor at UCLA,is an American scholar of African history and African historical linguistics particularly known for his efforts to correlate linguistic taxonomy and reconstruction with the archeological record. He has published many works,including Reconstructing Proto-Afrasian (1995) and Ancient Africa (2023). He has written around seventy scholarly articles on a wide range of historical,linguistic,and anthropological subjects. These works include monographic articles on Bantu subclassification;on internal reconstruction in Semitic;on the reconstruction of proto-Cushitic and proto-Eastern Cushitic;and,with Mohamed Nuuh Ali,on the classification of the Somali languages.
He has also contributed to a number of encyclopedias on African topics and on world history,such as Volume III of UNESCO General History of Africa book series for which he wrote a chapter on the East African interior. [1]
Ehret's historical books emphasize early African history. In An African Classical Age (1998) he argues for a conception of the period from 1000 BC to 400 AD in East Africa as a "classical age" during which a variety of major technologies and social structures first took shape. His Civilizations of Africa:A History to 1800 (2002),brings together the whole of African history from the close of the last ice age down to the end of the eighteenth century. With the archaeologist Merrick Posnansky,he also edited The Archaeological and Linguistic Reconstruction of African History (1982),at that time a state-of-the-field survey of the correlation of linguistic and archaeological findings in the different major regions of the continent.
In reviewing An African Classical Age for the Annuals of the American Academy,Ronald Atkinson calls it "not easy or light reading",but concludes that "the result is a remarkably rich,evocative social and cultural history…”and that it "will itself become a classic and shape future scholarship in early African history for many years to come". [2] The late Kennell Jackson of Stanford,writing in The Historian,says that "by the book’s midpoint,the immensity of his synthesis becomes apparent,as well as Ehret’s achievement as a historical conceptualizer. He repeatedly challenges formulaic ideas about causality,linearity as a model of change,and the cultural factors affecting innovation…. Ehret has written a fabulous African history book,furthering a genre far from the seemingly ubiquitous slavery studies and trendy colonial social history". [3] Peter Robertshaw in the Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute,offers a more measured conclusion:"Ehret has produced a remarkably coherent and detailed history which should spur further research". [4]
The historian Esperanza Brizuela-Garcia, [5] in her review of The Civilizations of Africa for the African Studies Review,calls this book "challenging and innovative" for presenting "the early history of Africa within the context of wide historical processes such as the development of agriculture,the emergence of metalwork,and the evolution of trade…. It gives these themes a thorough and masterful treatment…. By looking at broad themes of the history of human experience,Ehret is able to explain what makes Africa unique and what makes it comparable to other continents". She concludes:"The most important achievement of Ehret’s book is that finally the early history of the continent is taken seriously and is presented in detail and form that do justice to its complexity and depth. One hopes that Christopher Ehret has initiated a new trend in the writing of African history textbooks,one that challenges previously accepted chronologies and ideas and presents us with an interpretation that connects social,economic,political,and cultural history".
Scott MacEachern's review of the same book for the Journal of Africa History adds an archaeologist's perspective:"The book is well written and comprehensive and abundantly illustrates the richness and complexity of African societies over many thousands of years. More discussion of methodologies and data compatibility,and a more complete reference list,would have been useful. It will make a fine introductory text for courses in African history,especially if supplemented by books and papers that reflect other research methods and their results". [6]
Ehret's linguistic tome,Reconstructing Proto-Afroasiatic (Proto-Afrasian):Vowels,Tone,Consonants,and Vocabulary (1995),is the subject of a detailed review article in Afrika und Übersee by the distinguished scholar of Afroasiatic languages,Ekkehard Wolff. Wolff writes:"Ehrets opus magnum ist ein Parforce-Ritt durch schwierigstes Terrain,bei dem sich der Reiter auch an die steilsten Hindernissen überraschend gut in Sattel hält und an nur einer einzigen Hürde nach Meinung des Rez. scheitert (…Tonalität). Es ist ein nahezu unmöglisches,ein sehr mutiges und ein möglicherweise epochales Buch". ("Ehret’s opus magnum is a steeplechase ride through the most difficult terrain,in which the rider stays in the saddle astonishingly well even at the steepest obstacles and,in the opinion of the reviewer,crashes at only a single hurdle (…tone). It is a nearly impossible,a very courageous,and a possibly epochal book".) After an extensive and thorough critical commentary on the contents of the book,Wolff concludes:"Ehret hat nichts weniger versucht als einen zukünftigen "Klassiker" zu schreiben....” [7] ("Ehret has sought to write nothing less than a future classic.")
This particular book appeared in the same year as another comparative work on the same language family,Vladimir Orel and Olga Stolbova's Hamito-Semitic Etymological Dictionary:Materials for a Reconstruction. Two reviewers have given comparative assessments of the two books,John Greppin in the Times Literary Supplement,1 November 1996,and Robert Ratcliffe in a paper,"Afroasiatic Comparative Lexica:Implications for Long (and Medium) Range Language Comparison". Greppin writes a strongly positive review;Ratcliffe takes a more negative stance toward both books. [8]
Ehret's 2001 book,A Historical-Comparative Reconstruction of Nilo-Saharan,has had a mixed reception. Václav Blažek,in a review article originally prepared for Afrikanische Arbeitspapiere,presents additional data,most of which,in his words,"confirm Ehret’s cognate sets". He continues,"The weakest point in the…monograph consists in semantics. Ehret’s approach is rather benevolent …. But in any case,in the present time Ehret’s work signifies big progress". [9] The sociologist and linguist Gerard Philippson in his review in the Journal of African Languages and Linguistics,also raises questions on some of the semantic connections,and he has doubts about the environments of certain sound changes proposed in the book. He has issues as well with Ehret's use of evidence from the Central Sudanic branch of the Nilo-Saharan family,but he finds his arguments relating to the Eastern Sahelian (Eastern Sudanic) branch convincing and "solid". He avers in conclusion:"Même les chercheurs s'opposant àcette reconstruction disposeront,en tous cas,d'une somme de matériaux,clairement présentés dans l'ensemble,sur lesquels ils pourront s'appuyer pour mettre en cause ou rebâtir l'ensemble proposé. Il s'agit de toutes façons d'un travail qui ne saurait être ignoré." ("Even the researchers who are opposed to this reconstruction will have,in any case,an amount of material,clearly presented throughout,which they can rely on to either challenge or rebuild what is proposed. As a whole,it constitutes a work which cannot be ignored".) [10] Roger Blench,a development anthropologist,published a critical comparison of Ehret's and M. L. Bender's comparative work on the Nilo-Saharan family in Africa und Übersee in 2000—from its date,seemingly written before the book came out. It may be based,in part,on a preliminary manuscript by Ehret from the early 1990s.
In recent years Ehret has carried his work in several new directions. One of these has been the history and evolution of early human kinship systems. A second interest has been to apply the methods of historical reconstruction from linguistic evidence to issues in anthropological theory and in world history. He has also collaborated with geneticists in seeking to correlate linguistic with genetic findings (e.g.,Sarah A. Tishkoff,Floyd A. Reed,F. R. Friedlaender,Christopher Ehret,Alessia Ranciaro,et al.,"The Genetic Structure and History of Africans and African Americans",Science 324,22 May 2009) and in developing mathematical tools for dating linguistic history (e.g.,Andrew Kitchen,Christopher Ehret,Shiferew Assefa,and Connie Mulligan,"Bayesian phylogenetic analysis of Semitic languages identifies an Early Bronze Age origin of Semitic in the Near East," Proceedings of the Royal Society B:Biological Sciences,July 2009).
The Afroasiatic languages,also known as Hamito-Semitic or Semito-Hamitic,are a language family of about 400 languages spoken predominantly in West Asia,North Africa,the Horn of Africa,and parts of the Sahara and Sahel. Over 500 million people are native speakers of an Afroasiatic language,constituting the fourth-largest language family after Indo-European,Sino-Tibetan,and Niger–Congo. Most linguists divide the family into six branches:Berber,Chadic,Cushitic,Egyptian,Semitic,and Omotic. The vast majority of Afroasiatic languages are considered indigenous to the African continent,including all those not belonging to the Semitic branch.
The Chadic languages form a branch of the Afroasiatic language family. They are spoken in parts of the Sahel. They include 196 languages spoken across northern Nigeria,southern Niger,southern Chad,and northern Cameroon. By far the most widely spoken Chadic language is Hausa,a lingua franca of much of inland Eastern West Africa,particularly Niger and the northern half of Nigeria. Hausa,along with Mafa and Karai Karai,are the only three Chadic languages with more than 1 million speakers.
The Cushitic languages are a branch of the Afroasiatic language family. They are spoken primarily in the Horn of Africa,with minorities speaking Cushitic languages to the north in Egypt and Sudan,and to the south in Kenya and Tanzania. As of 2012,the Cushitic languages with over one million speakers were Oromo,Somali,Beja,Afar,Hadiyya,Kambaata,and Sidama.
The Nilo-Saharan languages are a proposed family of around 210 African languages spoken by somewhere around 70 million speakers,mainly in the upper parts of the Chari and Nile rivers,including historic Nubia,north of where the two tributaries of the Nile meet. The languages extend through 17 nations in the northern half of Africa:from Algeria to Benin in the west;from Libya to the Democratic Republic of the Congo in the centre;and from Egypt to Tanzania in the east.
The number of languages natively spoken in Africa is variously estimated at between 1,250 and 2,100,and by some counts at over 3,000. Nigeria alone has over 500 languages,one of the greatest concentrations of linguistic diversity in the world. The languages of Africa belong to many distinct language families,among which the largest are:
The Omotic languages are a group of languages spoken in southwestern Ethiopia,in the Omo River region and southeastern Sudan in Blue Nile State. The Geʽez script is used to write some of the Omotic languages,the Latin script for some others. They are fairly agglutinative and have complex tonal systems. The languages have around 7.9 million speakers. The group is generally classified as belonging to the Afroasiatic language family,but this is disputed by some linguists.
Ongota is a moribund language of southwest Ethiopia. UNESCO reported in 2012 that out of a total ethnic population of 115,only 12 elderly native speakers remained,the rest of their small village on the west bank of the Weito River having adopted the Tsamai language instead. The default word order is subject–object–verb. The classification of the language is obscure.
The Kuliak languages,also called the Rub languages,are a group of languages spoken by small relict communities in the mountainous Karamoja region of northeastern Uganda.
Lowland East Cushitic is a group of roughly two dozen diverse languages of the Cushitic branch of the Afro-Asiatic family. Its largest representatives are Oromo and Somali.
The South Cushitic or Rift languages of Tanzania are a branch of the Cushitic languages. The most numerous is Iraqw,with one million speakers. Scholars believe that these languages were spoken by Southern Cushitic agro-pastoralists from Ethiopia,who began migrating southward into the Great Rift Valley in the third millennium BC.
The Maa languages are a group of closely related Eastern Nilotic languages spoken in parts of Kenya and Tanzania by more than a million speakers. They are subdivided into North and South Maa. The Maa languages are related to the Lotuko languages spoken in South Sudan.
In early 20th century classification of African languages,Sudanic was a generic term for languages spoken in the Sahel belt,from Ethiopia in the east to Senegal in the west.
The Modern South Arabian languages (MSALs),also known as Eastern South Semitic languages,are a group of endangered languages spoken by small populations inhabiting the Arabian Peninsula,in Yemen and Oman,and Socotra Island. Together with the Ethiosemitic and Sayhadic languages,the Western branch,they form the South Semitic sub-branch of the Afroasiatic language family's Semitic branch.
Proto-Afroasiatic (PAA),also known as Proto-Hamito-Semitic,Proto-Semito-Hamitic,and Proto-Afrasian,is the reconstructed proto-language from which all modern Afroasiatic languages are descended. Though estimations vary widely,it is believed by scholars to have been spoken as a single language around 12,000 to 18,000 years ago,that is,between 16,000 and 10,000 BC. Although no consensus exists as to the location of the Afroasiatic homeland,the putative homeland of Proto-Afroasiatic speakers,the majority of scholars agree that it was located within a region of Northeast Africa.
Harold Crane Fleming was an American anthropologist and historical linguist specializing in the cultures and languages of the Horn of Africa. As an adherent of the Four Field School of American anthropology,he stressed the integration of physical anthropology,linguistics,archaeology,and cultural anthropology in solving anthropological problems.
The Aroid or Ari-Banna languages possibly belong to the Afro-Asiatic family and are spoken in Ethiopia.
Proto-Berber or Proto-Libyan is the reconstructed proto-language from which the modern Berber languages descend. Proto-Berber was an Afroasiatic language,and thus its descendant Berber languages are cousins to the Egyptian language,Cushitic languages,Semitic languages,Chadic languages,and the Omotic languages.
The Proto-Afroasiatic homeland is the hypothetical place where speakers of the Proto-Afroasiatic language lived in a single linguistic community,or complex of communities,before this original language dispersed geographically and divided into separate distinct languages. Afroasiatic languages are today mostly distributed in parts of Africa,and Western Asia.
Human habitation in the North African region began over one million years ago. Remains of Homo erectus during the Middle Pleistocene period,has been found in North Africa. The Berbers,who generally antedate by many millennia the Phoenicians and the establishment of Carthage,are understood to have arisen out of social events shaped by the confluence of several earlier peoples,i.e.,the Capsian culture,events which eventually constituted their ethnogenesis. Thereafter Berbers lived as an independent people in North Africa,including the Tunisian region.
Proto-Cushitic is the reconstructed proto-language common ancestor of the Cushitic language family. Its words and roots are not directly attested in any written works,but have been reconstructed through the comparative method,which finds regular similarities between languages not explained by coincidence or word-borrowing,and extrapolates ancient forms from these similarities.
{{cite journal}}
: Missing or empty |title=
(help){{cite journal}}
: Missing or empty |title=
(help){{cite journal}}
: Missing or empty |title=
(help){{cite journal}}
: Missing or empty |title=
(help)