we presume that the new arrivals reached the African continent at about the same localities as those who preceded them, that is to say, on the east coast and about as high up as the Comoros Islands, we are led to think that they found the best lands already occupied by the first immigrants. Thus, the newcomers found themselves constrained to push farther towards the north and towards the west and to settle among the Negrillos, remaining there in possession of the soil, demanding a hospitality of them which probably was not refused: hence the tradition, reported above, of the Negrillos being regarded by the Negroes of Sudan and of Guinea as the real masters of the land. They chose their domicile by preference in the uncovered regions, well watered and easily cultivated, situated between the Equator and the Sahara, absorbing the few Bantu elements which were already settled there or pushing them back towards the Northeast (Kurdufan) or towards the northwest (Cameroon, Gulf of Benin, Ivory Coast, Grain Coast, Rivieres du Sud, Gambia and Casamance), where today we still find, here and there, languages, such as certain dialects of Kurdufan, for example the Diola of Gambia and Casamance, which are closely related to the Bantu type.
This second wave must have mixed with the Negrillos much more so than did the first Negro immigrants and little by little become assimilated with them, at the same time that they perfected the technical processes of the natives and of the Bantu, developing agriculture, introducing a rudiment of cattle and poultry raising, domesticating the guinea-fowl, importing or generalising the practice of making fire and its utilisation for the cooking of food, inventing the working of iron and the making of pottery. Their languages must have possessed the same system of classifying names as those of the Bantu but proceeding by means of suffixes instead of employing prefixes. From the linguistic point of view as well as from the anthropological, both the Negro and the Negrillo elements, in all places where they became fused, very certainly reacted upon one another in variable proportions, accordingly varying as one or the other predominated. Of these unequal fusions were probably born the often profound differences that we note today between the various populations of Guinea and a part of Sudan, such as the differences between their languages.
It is also highly probable that the Negro invaders who had advanced the farthest towards the north found themselves in contact with the primitive natives of the white Mediterranean race who were, from the central Sahara onwards, in the countries which later became Egypt and Libya, the contemporaries of the Negrillos of the southern Sahara and of the rest of Africa. This contact could not have taken place, or above all be prolonged, without resulting in mixtures and unions between the prehistoric whites of North Africa and the Negro immigrants succeeding the Negrillos or already partly mixed with them. It is very probable that to these far-off unions, to these very ancient mixtures, it is necessary to seek in greater part for the origins of those peoples or divisions of peoples, sometimes called Negroid, who are met with in an almost continuous line along the southern limit of the present desert zone and sometimes even farther to the north, from the Red Sea to the Atlantic Ocean, and who appear to us sometimes as populations of the white race strongly crossed with Negro blood (Bishari, Somali, Galla, Danakil, Sidama, etc.), sometimes as populations of the black race more or less mixed with white blood (Masai, Nuba, Tubu, Kanuri, Hausa, Songhoy, Sarakolle, Tukulors, Wolofs), the traces of hybridisation revealing themselves in the anatomical or physiological aspect, sometimes in the intellectual aptitudes, sometimes in the language, or in all three elements at once. It is even possible that the elements of the white race which incontestably manifest themselves among certain Fulani families indicate by this circumstance an appreciable part of their origin. It is also possible that to the same cause must be attributed the very ancient traces of Negro blood revealed as much among the Egyptians of the epoch of the Pharaohs as among the modern Abyssinians and among many Berber and Arabo-Berber tribes, independently of the hybrids produced subsequently by unions with Negro slaves.
Statue (Sokoto), c. 400 BCE.
Terracotta, height: 74 cm.
Kathrin and Andreas Lindner Collection.
The conical shape of this terracotta implies that it may have once been used as a cover for a funeral urn. The heavy eyelids constitute one of the archetypes of the terracottas found north of Nigeria in the Sokoto region.
To sum up, in remaining within the limits of our study, this is more or less how one may suppose that the peopling of Sub-Saharan Africa took place, at least in its broad lines. To the south of the Equator, the Negroes of the first wave of invasion settled almost everywhere, conserving in their midst islets of Negrillos who remained almost pure, and remaining themselves almost free from all crossing with the Negrillos as well as with the Negroes of the second invasion and with the autochthonous whites of the north: these are the Negroes of the type called Bantu. To the north of the Equator, in the southern part of Sudan and along the Gulf of Guinea, the Negroes of the second migration, more or less mixed with the Negrillos and with the most advanced elements of the Bantu, have constituted the extremely varied type that we call the Negroes of Guinea. Farther to the north again, Negroes coming equally from the second wave of invasion, by mixing with the Negrillos and with the autochthonous Mediterranean race, formed the type, also highly varied, which we designate as Sudanese. In many regions the passage from one of these three primordial types to the other takes place by gradations which are often imperceptible, giving birth to a great number of intermediate types which are very difficult to define.
Many facts corroborate the hypothesis which tends to relate the first formation of the Sudanese populations known as Negroid to an epoch far more remote than that which is generally assigned to it and to attribute to the prehistoric peoples who preceded the Egyptians, the Libyan Berbers and the Semites in North Africa, the influence which has often been accorded to these latter. It does not follow that the role of the Egyptians, the Libyan Berbers, and the Semites has been of no consequence in the definitive constitution of certain Negroid peoples labeled, the one as Chamites or Hamites, the other as Sudanese. But if this role cannot be denied in the development of the civilisation of such peoples, or in a certain measure regarding the evolution of their languages, it seems very likely that it has been much less important, from the physiological point of view, than the role played by the most ancient populations of whom, after all, it must be remembered, we know almost nothing except that they already existed before the epoch of the first Egyptian dynasty.
In general we have a tendency to place much too near to us facts whose date we ignore and to put into periods with whose history we are approximately familiar, events which generally have preceded these periods by many centuries or even by many thousands of years and which, moreover, have required several centuries or even several millennia for their integral development. This tendency may be remarked in many authors who deal with the formation of countries or peoples, and it is necessary to react against such an unfortunate habit.
It seems indeed that the Sahara has not always been the desert that it is today, but its drying up probably occurred no more quickly than the transformation into dry land of the ancient sea which extended where now the Isle of France is found. We should not forget that the limits assigned by Herodotus to the arable portion of Libya about five centuries BCE were sensibly the same as those which we observe today in Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Tripolitania, and in Cyrenaica. In the same way, the little that the Egyptian monuments reveal to us of the Negro populations of Africa tends to establish that these were nearly in the same condition and that they occupied nearly the same territories six thousand years ago as today. In reality, the formation of the Negro and Negroid peoples must have been accomplished in its broad lines at the time of Sesostris and perhaps even still earlier.
Changes have assuredly intervened since then. Groups have been built up, others have become dissociated. Portions of them have moved from one point to another, and conquests and migrations have taken place, which have caused the disappearance of ancient tribes and the birth of new ones. States have appeared and crumbled away. In a word, Negro Africa has lived like all other parts of the human world. But without any doubt, it had already arrived at adulthood long before the epoch of the first historic document that has come down to us.
On
