All bantus came from cameroon, egypt origin is a myth. Cultures are very different:
Kisiis & Kurias don’t have ageset/age group systems
Compared to luyhas and other bantus, farming was not that important for kisiis, it was an activity left for women and children, men used to herd cattle, hunt or raid
Linguistically, Kisii/Kuria/Suba is quite different from Luyha
Genetically, luyhas and kisiis are very differnt. In fact a luyha is much closer to a Luo than they are to a Kisii. For example, sickle cell gene is prevalent amongst luyhas (and luos) but kisiis don’t have it which means they can’t settle near large water bodies and swamps where malaria will wipe them out, Kisiis have to live in highlands
Compared to luyhas, Kisiis don’t have elaborate funeral rites, in fact it is only with christianity that Kisiis started burying the dead, in the past, if you die you were thrown in the forest or river and people move on with their lives, no time to waste when Maasais are contantly trying to attack you
Again Luyhas and Kisiis cannot be placed in the same category of western bantus, they have different cultures, their languages are not mutually intelligible and they have different migration origins
A kisii who goes to north western tanzania can hear what they’re saying and even communicate with them, tribes such as Zanaki. Same cannot be said for a Kisii going to uganda.
Kisiis tried to migrate to uganda in the past, they were heading to mount elgon where they believed they would get the most fertile land. Hostilities with luyhas meant they couldn’t get a foothold there. Maybe some kisiis made it to south east uganda but most kisiis started moving southwards, first to lake victoria around kisumu where they clashed with Nandis, then to kabianga then to present day settlements. Maragolis and Kisiis were one tribe, but instead of migrating back southwards, maragolis chose to remain in present-day vihiga and adopt luyha as their language
You have not understood the fallacy. Let me explain it this way.
I claim that I saw a flying pig. You say that’s BS.
I insist that flying pigs exist and demand that you provide evidence to prove that they don’t exist.
It’s upon me to prove that flying pigs exist, not upon you to prove that they don’t. If I can’t prove it, I have lost the argument.
That is the simplest way I can explain the burden of proof fallacy.
Do you get it now?
I can’t disprove “eye witness testimony” contained in the bible, but I don’t have to.
Most supposedly historical events and events relating to the natural world as contained in the bible can readily be shown to be false. The creation, the exodus, the flood, etc.
The books of the bible have been carefully selected to present a consistent story. For example, between the 1st and the 3rd centuries approximately, many gospels existed, not just the 4 that made it into the bible.
There is no need to disprove the obvious. Pigs don’t fly and people also don’t rise from the dead.
This is why your argument is dead on arrival.
What exist beyond “the sky”? heaven? hell? That would be the thinking of a person living 500 years ago. Today we know a lot about the origins of the earth, the solar system, and the universe as a whole. There are no more gaps for gods and devils to occupy.
So, I can’t be labelled using a tag that is based on gods and devils. Those are no better than fairy tales.
I am what everyone living in this age of information should be. A freethinker. A freethinker is a person who forms their own opinions and beliefs based on logic, reason, and empirical experience, rather than accepting dogma, authority, tradition, or religious revelation.
Okay! So as a free thinker, what is your take on the universe and life? Where or from whom it what did the universe originate? And where did life, specifically humans as a species, come from?
Can you kindly look for another example? The one you gave is not only irrelevant to the topic but also very unreliable.
Jesus resurrected and He was seen, and this was not a private or isolated testimony, it was witnessed by a multitude of eyewitnesses (more than 20), including individuals who had never seen Him during His ministry and were once His fiercest opponents such as Paul of Tarsus, who later authored a significant portion of the New Testament.
Your example, by contrast, is fundamentally flawed. It describes an event witnessed by you alone. That is not evidence it is, at best, a personal experience that cannot be verified, and at worst, an hallucination. It lacks any form of independent corroboration, including supporting eyewitness testimony.
Elder, I already gave you a brief free lesson on law, but it seems you either ignored it or failed to grasp it. In law, there are four primary types of evidence, one of which is testimonial evidence.
However, not all testimony is automatically valid. For it to be admissible, it must satisfy two essential criteria:
Speaking of Kissi:
Can you give evidence of their movement:
Peer reviewed documents?
Also please give a link of Luhya/Kisii dna… I am interested.
Luhya as a tribe is a recent thing. So saying Maragoli adopted Luhya as their language is very interesting
Kisiis who live in nyamira and kipsigiis in bomet are basically the same people, too much fighting and raiding each others women and children at the sotik border led to a lot of confusion that is why nowadays intermarriage in that area is banned because you might think you are marrying someone from a different tribe but turns out they are of the same clan. However, kisiis from other areas are more bantu and less nilotic, especially the clans around bosongo. Siria Maasais are half-kisii half maasais, usually a result of maasai men raids on kisii villages. That is why kisiis started circumcising their women, so that maasai would take them as wives instead of killing them. Later on kisii men also adopted circumcision so that they could become maasais and take part in raiding other tribes. During drought, some of the maasais would cross over into the kisii side, same as the ones in laikipia that would cross over to kikuyu side. So that’s why once in a while you will find someone with a kisii name but they look nilotic, or in narok, you’ll find maasais that look bantu
Yes I know luyhia is a recent thing arising from a group of different but similar tribes that had the same name for sitting under tree. Have you ever wondered why maragolis never try to fit in with rest of luyhas. Why is it that when Masinde Muliro was uniting the rest of the western kenyan tribes, same as Moi was doing with kalenjins, only maragolis refused to join. Why is it that maragolis refused to be part of Abaluyha Football club and instead formed their own. Or why young men in western are warned that the women they should avoid are maragolis for having hard hearts and being proud. That is because maragolis are not part of luyhas migration-wise, they were once the same tribe as kisiis but kisiis continued first towards kisumu, where they got sick because of malaria (they do not have sickle cell which protects against malaria) and they were constantly attacked by nandis. By the way, this thing of a tribe separating into two tribes is not new, nandis and kipsigis used to be one tribe called chemalel but when maasais migrated from ethiopia they dominated rift valley and split chemalel into nandis and kipsigis. Now in kisumu, the kisiis who remained there are now part of what’s called the Sidho clan amongst the luos. Luanda Magere was actually the legend of a kisii guy called Mogire who fought the nandi. Sidhos got absorbed by luos and actually helped luos dominate the cherengany plains, the rest of kisiis then continued their migration southwards to present day. I got my information mostly from old british colonial reports, most kisii historians are useless because they genuinely believe kisiis came from egypt/misri which is a myth. And luo historians are also full of bullshit making up stories of great wars, luos dominated by assimilation and trade not fighting
Link of these reports? DNA profiles of Kisiis and Luhyas online show sharing traits to 89% of each. Omusaja Omosacha Musaja, Musacha ..very similar tensing of Luhya( some sub tribes), Kisii, and several East Ugandan languages. With Luhya, it’s easy to find common names in UGanda and Kenya because we are in both places. But with Kisii/Kuria, tend to name kids based on nouns ( mostly animals) and places. Every once in a while you find a name there that has no relation to anything. Carefully research places in Uganda, you will find those names there. Which means, the Kisii/Kuria once resided there.
I think that your points are for very recent history 150 years or less. But cultures change very fast. Literally luhya could have been feeding their dead to animals, colonized western Kenya and picked the habits of Luos they found there, for example.
Okay @Simiyu22 and @Dennis_Morgan I’ll provide basic introductory evidence for now which will serve as a starting point.
Let me rephrase my main argument, there is no such thing as western bantus in kenya, instead we have mt. elgon bantus i.e. most of the luyha subtribes, and we have mara bantus which consists of kisiis, kurias, suba and maragolis.
Now before I move on, I’d like to acknowledge the argument you Simiyu gave that DNA profiles of kisiis and luyhas tend to be similar for the simple reason that all great lakes bantus share the same origin and overall ancestry, but I’d love for it to be broken down by subtribe because some luyha subtribes are mara bantus and will cluster closer to kisiis compared to other luhya subtribes. I will also slightly concede that culture is always in flux so the culture kisiis have, let’s say 100 years ago, might not be the same culture they had 300-400 ago and maybe their older culture is much closer to that of the core luhyas than their pre-colonial culture.
There was some kind of contact between Kisiis and luhyas the question is was that contact due to both luhyas and kisiis sharing the same migration routes i.e. from uganda or them sharing different migration routes and arriving at the same place at mt. elgon.
With all that being said, the most precise evidence we have that luyhas and kisiis should be categorized differently is linguistic evidence. While we might share some words and even some names, kisii language is placed under an entire different bantu subgroup, Logooli-Kuria E40 subgroup alongside Zaaki, Ikoma, Suba, Simbiti, Ngurimi and some Luyha varieties like Luguli and Maragoli. The mothertongue the bulk of luyhas such as Bukusu speak is placed under the linguistic subgroup of Masaba Luyha. Here is the link where you can see how Bantu languages are categorized. Also go through this wikipedia page for Gusii where you’ll see that Kisii language differs a lot from Luyha and even Kikuyu and other Kenyan bantu languages in tense usage and the way Kisiis use tense is much closer to tanzanian bantu languages like Rangi and Mbugwa. There is also this link on gusii language that is a great starting point. For more research on how Kisiis have a closer connection to north western tanzania especially migration-wise, check out research from Chistopher Ehret and David Schoenbrun who have been highlighted in the wikipedia page.
@Simiyu22@Dennis_Morgan what makes categorization hard is that there are luhya subtribes that originated from Mara region of tanzania but there are also clans within Kisii that came from Uganda and migrated together with Luhyas, for example, most of the clans in north and south mugirango in Kisii came from Uganda and Kisiis let them settle there because it provided a buffer from Maasais and Luos to the main clans, so that the main clans (Bonchari, Bobasi, Bomachoge, Kitutu) could focus on fighting and raiding the kipsigis. So as much as I’d like to say Kisiis and Luyhas are separate groups, it’s also important to acknowledge that there’s been mixing and if Luo migration had not separated the two groups, there would have been even more mixing to the point where outsiders could not tell them apart
Something everyone has observed is how the pitch of an approaching vehicle increases gradually, then decreases as the vehicle moves away from you. This is the Doppler Effect. Waves stretch and squash with motion. Obvious, no arguments.
Well, someone observed that the light coming from galaxies far away from us is red-shifted (stretched). This is exactly the same as a vehicle moving away from you. These galaxies are moving away from us, and the amount of red-shift tells us how fast the galaxies are moving. If you run the model backwards (approx 13.8 billion years), you come to a time (I’m using the word time loosely here because space-time is a continuum) when the universe was in a hot and dense state. It must have expanded from this state and continues to expand today. This is basically the big bang theory.
So where did the hot, dense universe come from you might ask. We can’t know for sure, but you can’t go ahead and say God did it. However, Lawrence Krauss (you can search his stuff on youtube) and others have shown that a universe from nothing (no space, time or matter) is not only possible, at a very small scale, particles “appear” and “disappear” all the time. This is normal in the quantum world. Another gap that god has been kicked out of.
With regard to life, at it’s simplest level, it is just self-replicating chemistry. The origin of life is no longer a big question because amino acids (building blockes of proteins) have been observed to form naturally from basic chemicals and a source of energy, simple self replicating RNA (precursor of DNA) molecules and simple cells have been made in the lab.
Homo sapiens dates back to about 300,000 years ago in Africa. We seem special, but that’s because today there is only one human species on earth. It out-competed the others. There was a time when there were multiple human species on earth at the same time (Neanderthals, Denisovans, Homo naledi, Homo floresiensis and even older species like Homo erectus). We share a common ancestor with them. Further back in time, we share a common ancestor with chimpanzees and bonobos (98% genetic similarity with us), and gorillas (about 96%). A chimp is more similar to a human being than to a gorilla. Let that sink in.
You might think that your’e very different from a chimp, but it shares each and every bone in your body (only some adapted to slightly different shapes) and even more interestingly, it shares each and every chemical in your brain.
Evolution by non-random natural selection fully explains the origin of the human species. The fossil record is now solidly backed up by genetics.
Elder, you still insist on using the bible as your source of evidence, so this line of argument will never work.
Here’s a simple one. Show me one person (not two, just one) who has risen from the dead. Not a coma. Death. There is no separate “soul or spirit” that can exit from the body and come back to reanimate it. Death is death, it is the end. Your sense of being conscious and aware is not separate from your body and will not outlive it. It is just an emergent property of the activity in your brain. Brain activity stops, consciousness ends.
There are two historical sources of evidence - both valid and admissible in any court of law unless you can proven otherwise, that support the resurrection of Jesus:
Eyewitness testimony.
Physical evidence.
Therefore, when you claim that I am relying only on the Bible as my source of evidence, the statement is not only illogical but also rather laughable, because the evidence is twofold, yet your biased mind is only fixated on one.
Consider an example that almost mirrors this situation. Suppose that today a dozen Luos in Bondo claimed that Raila Odinga had resurrected and that they personally saw him with their own physical eyes. What do you think would Kenyans and the authorities do?
