
Sunday, 5th July 2009
We are all Africans
I am swinging on the hammock. From my perfect vantage point on the top-most part of the roof terrace, I can close my eyes and feel the summer around me.
Don't you just love summer evenings? Don't you think the month of July in Malta is the best of the year?
As the pleasant, flirting breeze is gently swaying, I look about me, suspended, surrounded by flat roof tops; I can even make out the sea far away. I can hear the neighbours chattering away on their doorsteps, the soft billowing of the festa flags on their masts and the ice-cream van as it trawls the streets with its nostalgic music.
In front of me, the enormous Paola Church spires dwarf the slender minarette of the Islamic mosque farther on.
"All the differences we see in each other, they are all so minor," someone once said. It's a quote which keeps coming to mind but I can't remember who or where I came across it.
I have retired to the hammock in the pinkish-blue hues of dusk, to read. And reflect. Because finally we have the facts that should change our attitude to racism:
"We are all African", says The Economist.
Scientifically, we have a new understanding that should end our prejudice against Africans. The article is about 'The Genographic Project.'
This project was launched in April 2005 by the National Geographic Society and IBM. It is a five-year genetic anthropological study that aims to map historical human migration patterns by collecting and analysing DNA samples from hundreds of thousands of people from around the world. In short, the project traces mankind's journey out of Africa.
It is headed by the thirty-something American geneticist Spencer Wells (as an aside - but somehow it's important - he's not some dowdy intellectual in a white lab coat; he is Indiana Jones in Harrison Ford's heyday). Wells reveals how developments in the cutting-edge science of population genetics have made it possible to create a family tree for the whole of humanity.
And so our history is written in our genes: we are all Africans. We all originated in Africa. But then this should be no news, it's just confirming again what Darwin said all along. It's what our innermost psyche already knew.
Some years ago I travelled to Olduvai Gorge, commonly referred to as 'The Cradle of Mankind' because of its prehistoric importance. It is a steep-sided ravine in the Great Rift Valley which stretches along eastern Africa. Here, nothing moves in the heat of the day - not even the Oldupaai wild plant, which has given the name to the gorge. Not even the dust moves.
Yet, there is something sacred about this place where human evolution sparked off. I can't exactly put my finger on it. How do I explain it? Perhaps it's the sense of ancient space. The sense that somehow, deep down you feel you're finally home.
And now we have genetic proof: Adam would probably have looked like a San Bushman of the Kalihari. And as a result, today the African continent bursts with rich genetic inheritance.
Africans are more diverse than the rest of humanity put together because they are drawn from the pool of humans who did not leave the continent, whereas every single non-African is descended from a small band of humans who crossed the Red Sea on rafts.
I'd like to know how Norman Lowell and his band of xenophobic followers feel about this. Actually I don't. I'm not interested in their ignorant arguments. But I wish the people who commented about Ahmed Bugri, the Ghanaian-Maltese interviewed in The Sunday Times, who has lived on the island for 18 years, would catch up on their Genographic Project reading.
Prejudices are abounding. Still, if some people can't grasp the concept that someone not born on the islands can become a citizen of Malta, I wonder what they will make of the honest truth that they are really Africans.
The summer evening has turned to night. I spot a shooting star. I think I'll make a wish: for all of us to accept the origins of our roots, and respect the brotherhood to which we all belong.







RSS
Comments
While I will not go into the merits of whether we all originated from Africa or not, this is a moot point as far as I am concerned. The crux of the matter is that traditionally, man has fought to gain territory from other clans to expand his own tribe. Therefore, this has nothing to do with race as we think of it. Why, here in Malta the courts are full of litigants fighting over boundary walls and other territorial matters and we are all Maltese. So this race/Africa thing is a red herring.
An aspect more important than race is culture. A different culture that believes and thinks differently cannot be easily assimilated as one will invariable overpower the other, particularly if one culture does not adhere to the same mores and values and is more aggressive.
Why, history is replete with civilizations that have been invaded, overtaken and destroyed.
"Kristina Chetcuti is only advocating human solidarity - which is a quality we should all aspire to."
In that case you should both put your money where your mouth is and return to your ancestral homeland, Africa, to help your brothers and sisters in their natural habitat.
The Genographic project which you mention, started in 2005, concluded that Homo sapiens appeared in Africa 200,000 years ago and started migrating from the African continent 60,000 years ago. How do you therefore explain Homo erectus skulls dating back 1.50 - 1.75 million years have been very recently uncovered in Georgia and Spain? These studies are relying on chance finds of human remains and can never be conclusive or exclusive. You are manipulating data.
Even if it were true that the human race started evolving in Africa, it is obvious that once out of Africa, humans evolved very differently. Dr. James Watson, the co-winner of the Nobel Prize for discovering the structure of DNA and the man most responsible for the monumental Human Genome Project, cannot by any stretch of the imagination be considered an ignorant man. However, I shall not repeat what he stated because it will be censored as it is politically incorrect, even though scientifically it might be correct.
I would rather base my beliefs on scientific facts than chance archeological diggings. Who knows what might be dug up tomorrow?