Ever since the Sumerian cuneiform scripts were deciphered in 1857, the
fabled “land of the civilized kings” has never failed to garner the attention,
and feed the imagination, of cult leaders, artists, adepts, mad men, linguists,
science fiction writers, and dedicated dreamers from all walks of life.
What it actually failed to
do is imbue credible Black scholars with the impregnable combination of
confidence and acumen, that would have been needed to write a respectable book that
is entirely dedicated to explaining the African origins of Sumerian
civilization. All of that changed when Hermel Hermstein, who has nearly 20
years in the study of ancient Sumer under his belt, released BlackSumer: The African Origin of Civilization in 2012. Hermstein has also
published two subsequent works in his Black Sumer series (Black Sumer: The Physical Evidence Parts 1 and 2) where he further
drives home the case for Sumer’s Kushite, and early West African origins.
For intellectual novices who’ve only dabbled in the study of ancient
Sumerian history and mythology by watching reruns of the History Channel’s Ancient
Aliens series, Hermstein’s thesis might appear to be somewhat
unfathomable. However, at one time, there actually seemed to be a consensus
among historians and archaeologists, alike, that the Sumerians originally came
from Africa.
Gudea governor of Lagash
Sir Henry Rawlinson, who was an army officer for the British East
India Company and translator of the first cuneiform scripts in the 19th
century, said that the language of the early Babylonians “was undoubtedly
Kushite or Ethiopian.” For those who may not be aware, early Babylon immediately
succeeded ancient Sumer and Akkad on the Mesopotamian timeline of city states, therefore
the two share the same cultural DNA.
Herr Eugen George, a German historian who wrote at a time when the infamous
Nazi party was still rising to prominence in government, said that “A splendid era of
black seems to have preceded all the later races… We have long had proof that a
primitive Negroid race of pigmies once lived around the Mediterranean. Blacks
were the first to plow the mud of the Nile, they were the dark-skinned curly-haired
Cushites. Blacks were masters of Sumeria and Babylonia before it became the
country of the four tongues.” There
are numerous quotes like these going as far back in time as the Middle Ages,
and Hermstein references so many of them in his books.
Unfortunately when the new age community got its grubby paws on
Sumerian mythology, countless books were written on the “mysterious origins,”
of the suddenly racially ambiguous Sumerians. Usually, when European authors
write about the “mysterious origins,” of influential people from the ancient
world, it is usually a veiled allusion to the fact that those people would have
been called “niggers” or “wetbacks” had they lived in the southern part of the
United States during the Jim Crow era.
Conquering lions walking through Babylonian Ishtar Gate
At the end of the day you can say what you like, but Hermel Hermstein
has balls. He dared to go where many brilliant scholars would have liked to go,
but decided not to for their own personal reasons. With a fourth book detailing
the African origin of ancient Sumer on the way, Hermstein took some time to
chop it up with Mind Glow media on a Saturday afternoon about his outstanding research.
During a recent telephone interview from his home in the UK, Hermstein dishes delicious
food for thought concerning the ancient Sumerians, and the proper methodology needed
to study them. Mental nourishment is being served. Come and get yourself a
plate.
Hermel, right now as it stands, I would say that you have about 600
pages worth of information showing the cultural, historical and linguistic
relationship between ancient Sumer and Africa, which is something that we have
not previously seen.
There have been a few books like “African Presence in Early Asia,”
“Ancient Future,” and “Wonderful Ethiopians of the Ancient Cushite Empire,”
which briefly addressed the African origin of ancient Sumer, but no one—as far
as I know—has dedicated three entire books to the topic. And even with that
said, you still have a fourth book on the way.
Sumer was a major world civilization—some say the oldest in the world.
Why do you think it has taken this long for a scholar to get these types of
books out to the public that explore Sumer’s African origins?
I think—and these are just my thoughts—that there are too many
uncomfortable issues that we shy away from. The saving grace with ancient Egypt
is that there is only one uncomfortable issue. The uncomfortable issue is the
hair of some of the mummies. Everything else about ancient Egypt pretty much
says “Black” so African scholars had more confidence in dealing with Egypt.
With Mesopotamia there are a lot of thorns, huge thorns, sticking up. If you
look at the art that appears in most textbooks dealing with Mesopotamia…
Yup, I know exactly what you’re getting at…
Yeah, they look like white individuals. That’s why people would rather
write articles than write a whole book, because at some point, you’re going to
have to bring up the issue of art and I had to devote two whole chapters to
that subject. I dealt with sculpture first, then after sculpture I deal with
color. Those are some of the issues I address. The other thing is most scholars
didn’t know what to do with the language.
They had no context for it. When the mainstream scholars said that the
ancient Sumerian language is not related to any known language, the Black scholars
didn’t know where to take it from there. I think that’s why no one really
wanted to write an entire book on the subject.
In my first book I introduce the basis for understanding historical
linguistics in chapter one. In chapter two I explain the underpinning of
historical linguistics as far as genetically comparing languages. I haven’t
seen anyone do that. I listen to people—and I’m not going to mention any names
because it wouldn’t be nice—but when I’ve listened to people speaking and
comparing Sumerian and African languages, they haven’t always struck me as
understanding the principles behind the comparative method, first of all.
Second of all, they don’t seem to grasp why the comparative method works.
You can read entire pages of people comparing Sumerian and African
languages, and the comparative method is not mentioned once. That’s disturbing,
and worse still are the irregularities, because sound change is not mentioned.
It would be like going to Harlem and seeing people selling books that teach people
how to drive, and because this is in our community, it is something that we
feel more involved in, more trustful of. But then when you read the book that
is supposed to be teaching people how to drive, they don’t mention anything
about gear changes.
People who drive would know that that is such a fundamental aspect of
driving, that you would have to question whether or not the people who wrote
the books actually know how to drive. That is what I have sensed in terms of
people dealing with linguistics when comparing Sumerian and African
languages. That’s why I felt that it was
particularly important to explain how you do it, before actually doing it. I
also invited people to look at the particular books that I outlined. You can
see specific kinds of examples in those books so that you know exactly what the
comparative method is. You learn about the irregularities of sound change, and
you also see sound correspondences between genetically related languages and
what they should look like.
When did you begin your research?
I started with this particular study in 1994 and I didn’t finish until
about 2010. It really showed me that just when you think you’ve got it,
something else comes along and you realize that you haven’t gotten it, and then
you have to extend your research. And
just to get a firm grasp of subjects like historical linguistics, if you’re not
at a university doing it under a systematized syllabus, it takes years and
years of study. It takes absolutely a long time and you cannot do it without
the standard texts on the subjects.
In The African Origins of Civilization, volume one, I make it clear at
the end of the third chapter, that here are the books in which you’ll find all
of your information. I had to do that
because I wanted to make it clear that there are standard texts on just about
everything. For example if you’re doing your degree there will be a module on historical
linguistics and there will be standard texts for that module of study. It may be called something else, but it will
be about historical linguistics.
You can’t do without reading those standard texts. There’s no second
way. I wanted to bring to people’s attention
the discipline of phonology and how important that it is in understanding the
genetic linguistic comparisons between languages. If you’re not going to go the university
route, you still have to make sure that you have a firm grasp of the subject.
You also have to correspond with people
who are in Universities like lecturers, PHDs and professors, to make sure that
your understanding of the basic concepts that you are going to be using to
build your work are actually correct.
What’s your professional background?
My professional background is in public relations. I used to work on the
rail, which is Britain’s inner-city transit system, doing public relations.
Now, I’m pretty much 24 hours a day involved in the Black history
struggle—writing it, selling the books. That is now my life. But my background
is in public relations on the rail. I did study, for a year, Sumerian language
at Birkbeck College, which is a part of the University of London. It was
essentially introductory Sumerian to make sure that you had a grasp of the
vocabulary, in particular, the grammar of Sumerian. That was very useful in
comparing it with the Bantu languages, which is what I did in the African
Origins of civilization.
For your future readers who may not be familiar, what is the real
significance of the University of Pennsylvania’s Sumerian Dictionary in
formulating your overall thesis?
When I started my research there wasn’t a Sumerian dictionary out there.
I went to The School of Oriental and African Studies, which is also a part of
the University of London. I went there to find out from the scholars there what
the situation is with the ancient Sumerian dictionary. I did this in 1995 and every
year I kept on finding out what the progress was. I kept on being told the same
thing, that there was an old [Catholic] priest who had decided to do a Sumerian
dictionary. He did “A,” went as far as “B” and then he died. His studies were
eventually continued, and then in 2004 the University of Pennsylvania came out
with their online Sumerian dictionary.
So in 2004, for the very first time, there was a university-backed
dictionary in the ancient Sumerian language. There hadn’t been one before. If
you think about it, that’s kind of amazing, because they deciphered this
language in the mid 19th century, and it took this long to get a
dictionary out. It’s very standardized. There were disagreements about certain
word formations before. In the past, people were using several different
sources to compare ancient Sumerian with other languages. A lot of people were
not agreeing on the meaning of certain words, or even the sound form of certain
words, but you produce contradictions in your work when you do that.
Have you received any criticism from credible scholars on the basis of
your research?
Yes, and no. For this book, I haven’t heard anything. However in 2004
I posted some messages on the message board for the University of Chicago where
they have the Oriental Institute. The linguistic comparisons were still
somewhat embryonic at that stage. The dictionary had just come out, so there
were some criticisms of what you might call “early draft.” I developed it as I
was going along and answered just about every criticism that the other
linguists who were there were coming up with for my work.
There is a strong notion among those in the new age community that the
Anunnaki were extraterrestrials from the planet Nibiru who came to this planet
in spaceships to mine gold. Do you have any thoughts on that?
Yeah, I do. This is coming from Zechariah Sitchin. Sitchin’s reading
of the tablets is not the standard agreed reading of the tablets—now that
doesn’t necessarily mean that he is wrong, automatically, because one can say
that my thesis is not the standard agreed position on Sumerian either. The
standard agreed position is that ancient Sumerian is an isolate, meaning that
it is not genetically related to any other known language. I am saying
something different. However in Sitchin’s case, he hasn’t really shown that his
interpretations are correct and that the standard interpretations are wrong. I
haven’t really seen that in the bits of his work that I’ve read, so I did not
see it as a very convincing argument.
As far as his whole notion of extraterrestrials coming to planet earth—who
knows—maybe extraterrestrials did visit earth in the past. But I haven’t seen
the evidence presented in a way in which I can say that it is the most probable
explanation. The more familiar you are with the subject, the more you realize
that there are alternative explanations for a lot of this evidence. Even his
equation of the ancient Sumerian word for “rocket” with the word for “gear,” or
“near,” I found particularly unconvincing. Some of the things that he was
saying meant “rocket,” the Sumerologists were saying were cuneiform pictures
for objects that were used every day in ancient Mesopotamia and had nothing to
do with rockets. That’s the problem with Sitchin’s work.
You make a very compelling argument in your book that the Sumerians
were the descendants of Africans who
migrated from the Niger-Congo region of West and Central Africa. Do you have
any knowledge, based on your research, that explains the cause of this migration?
I do not. However, at the back of the book there is a clue, a hint
towards why this migration may have taken place. Based on the information that
I presented in chapter five, six, and seven, what I suspected was the reason
was the drying up of the Sahelian region of West Africa, that is from Mali,
Niger, all the way to southern Sudan, Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethiopia—those countries.
That drying up lead to a migration of a particular group of people who thought
“lets go to other parts of Africa along the same latitude and see whether
things are better over there.” We know for certain that between 10-12,000 years
ago there was such a drying up. When they got to east Africa they found similar
conditions there.
There was an article that was done in 2004 by some geneticists who
postulated that there was a severe drought in East Africa that lead to the
migration of the ancestors of the Semitic speakers, from East Africa into Asia
via Arabia in order to escape the drought.
I think that it was around about this same time that the ancestors of
the Sumerians also left East Africa to go into Asia via Arabia. The only thing
is, I think they used water transport instead of land transport. In other
words, I think that they went in canoes around Arabia and up into the Persian
Gulf, and ended up at the foot of the Persian Gulf in southern Iraq in the
marshlands and made a new home for themselves there.
This area was very similar to where they came from in Chad, where
there is a very grassy environment. They had learned how to make things like
houses, baskets and mats by using reeds. That is a skill that you also find in
the marshlands of southern Iraq. So essentially, it appears to have been
drought-driven as the evidence from the time suggests.
One of my favorite chapters in book one is when you explore ancient
Sumerian religion in its Niger-Congo context. Were there any other interesting
parallels you made since publishing the first book?
I haven’t picked up on anything since then. But I will say that the
parallels that I found were typical of the kinds of things that you find among
the cultures who speak the Bantu languages in Southern Africa, East, and
Central Africa. Not only that, but the general Niger-Congo cultures. For
example there is a very strong belief in water spirits.
This belief is so strong, even among people like the Dogon. If you
know where they live, it’s a very dry place, yet they have this very strong
belief in water spirits even though they are not living anywhere near a body of
water. This theme also comes out among the ancient Sumerians.
The god who is most involved in human affairs is the god of water
[Enki]. He has a whole entourage of water spirits with him, and the origin of
Sumerian civilization is supposed to have come from this deity and his entourage
of spirits. Again, Dogon culture is intimately connected with the water
spirits. They even subscribe to the idea that these beings are half fish and
half human. This is coming from an interesting fusion of ideas that can be
found in West African religions.
Yes, Mami Wata definitely comes to mind in that regard. I recently
told my readers about an oral story about the creation of humans among the Efik
people of Nigeria involving the deities Abassi and his sister-wife Atai. In my
independent research it very much resembles the Sumerian account of Enki and
his sister-wife Ninhursag. Did you come
across this Efik myth at all in your research?
No, I have not, but I’d be very interested in reading it, because the
Efik are an interesting jigsaw piece in terms of the goal of reconstructing the
Niger-Congo.
I notice in your work that you make a very strong argument for a Pan
African, Afrocentric approach to our understanding of the cultures that shaped
ancient Sumer. Some people I’m sure who have purchased your book might look at
your name “Hermel Hermstein,” and ask themselves “is this a white man writing
from this perspective?” I don’t see any pictures of you on the internet, so I
gotta ask you, what is your race ?
I’m as African as they come. You can pull a name out of the bag. We
could start with Robert Mugabe, who is the president of Zimbabwe. I am no less
African than him. The confusion comes from the misconception that African
Americans—as well as other Diasporic Africans—have European names, while Africans have African
names. It’s not always that clear cut.
I’m sure you may have heard of the Sharpeville Massacre that happened in
South Africa in the 1970s. The first person to fall in the massacre was a man
by the name of “Hector Peterson.” I can assure you that he was not a European.
You can say that Hector Peterson is the Crispus Attucks of the Sharpeville
Massacre, so you did have Africans with European names. We’re certainly not the
majority, but where out there.
If you go to Ghana you will come across Scottish surnames and so-forth.
The reason why this is the case is because in different African cultures,
different names are important. So in African cultures in which the surname is
the most important thing, the people kept their surnames and they may have a
European first name. In some cultures, surnames are not of particular
importance. Totems were more important. People will have their African totem,
but their surname may be European which happened when people converted to
Christianity.
And to tell the truth, it would be arbitrary, because a Christian name
is really supposed to be a name out of Bible, but what happened in Africa is
the priest who converted a village to Christianity may have had the last name
“McCarthy,” so a few people out of that conversion would take on the same last name.
It was definitely a point of interest for me because one day I was
reading your book and I sensed you had a very strong desire to let the reader
know that there was a thriving Black civilization in the Middle East in ancient
times, but your tone, the way you wrote, was not indicative of what I generally
get from European authors who are inclined to tell the truth about Black history,
if you understand what I’m saying.
Yeah. I’ve often found, in my experience, that you can tell who’s
writing more by looking at what’s said, rather than by looking at the name.
It’s like when I first heard of Ivan Van Sertima, I was sure that he was
European, but he’s not. Take someone like [Cheikh Anta] Diop for example. He
was someone who was using African history to reconstruct a Pan African culture,
with a view to some kind of political movement around it. Straight away, that
would tell me that that’s an African just based on the degree to which he is
willing to go to fix the horrors of the ma’afa. That is something that the
entire Diaspora would have been able to rally around regardless of what African
culture you are from. People’s loyalties come through very clearly in their
writing.
For example if I read something that says “The ancient Egyptians were
dark skinned and today we could classify them as Black,” you will find that if
it’s a person who is European they’re going to give something away. If you read
long enough you’ll find the evidence that the person is a European.
The tone of the writing is often uncommitted, detached—which is not
necessarily a bad thing when you’re talking about credible scholarship. But the
writing lacks conviction and confidence. The author often sounds as if they’re
writing about ancient strangers as opposed to deceased distant relatives. On
the other hand, scholars who are of African descent sound more like they’re
meditating with a pen in their hands, recalling ancient ancestral memories embedded
in their DNA as they write.
Right. They might entertain something as merely a possibility. Or when
they deal with Blackness it’s like “well, let’s not confuse this person buried
in that ancient tomb with President Olusegun Obasanjo of Nigeria. That’s not quite
what we mean when we say ‘Black.’”
Between ancient Kemet (ancient Egypt) and Sumer, which would you say
is the older dynastic civilization?
I
would say Egypt is the older because we have a clear first dynasty of around
3100 B.C.E.—although there are older estimates—with contemporary records. The
first Sumerian dynasties for which we have evidence from an inscription is
around 2700 B.C.E. That was around the time of Enmebaragesi, who was king of
Kish. With that said, I would therefore have to say Egypt.
Why should people add your series of books to their personal libraries?
How do they actually stand to benefit from these books?
They’ll obtain definitive evidence of Black people in Sumer. You will
also learn that not only are they Black, because the people in New Guinea are
Black as well, but they are also something else. They were of African origin.
We can demonstrate that with probabilities using the linguistics.
You will also learn that not everything that the mainstream scholars
say is necessarily the case. By all means we should still use and master
mainstream techniques for our research and understand how they work. You will learn
that you should never look at not going to a university as an automatic barrier
standing between you and having a firm grasp of the discipline that you are
studying. You can still have a firm grasp of it, but you have to have an idea
of the standard texts in that discipline. You must read and master those texts.
You will also learn that before you understand anything you have to understand
it fully and properly. Once you’ve understood it properly, you can then
critique it.
Your methodology may be fine, but it may be misapplied to come out
with conclusions that the methodology itself doesn’t support. This is what was
done by scholars who said that Sumerian language was an isolate, when it in
fact has African relations. People will also learn the relationship between
sickle cell and civilization. I would never think that there is a relationship
between sickle cell and civilization, but apparently there is.
http://www.audiomack.com/song/sa-roc/the-time-lords
http://www.audiomack.com/song/sa-roc/the-time-lords