posted
Youtuber Metatron discusses how Jesus may have looked like.
From 23:33 he talks about forensic studies and what hints it can give to how people looked like in Jesus time and the area he lived in.
Other talking points are the different kinds of iconography which depicts Jesus and the cultural backgrounds of those depictions.
He also analyzes a passage in the New Testament were the resurrected Jesus is envisioned
Clothes and hair are also discussed.
Contents of the video:
-Introcuction -Confirmation Bias -Lack of Description -Early images -Deification -Black African -Hidden Hint -What Did people from first Century judea look like? -Forensic studies -Physical anthropology and skin coloration -Hair
Metatron assesses the skin color of 1th century Judaeans as a 4 on the Fitzpatrick scale (olive to moderate brown) and a range of 21-27 on the von Luschans chromatic scale.
Metatron also seems to agree with the notion mentioned in Joan Taylors book "What Did Jesus Look Like?" that the Judeans in Jesus time would have looked much like Iraqi Jews look today. It seems at least they osteologically are the closest.
Metatron assesses the skin color of 1th century Judaeans as a 4 on the Fitzpatrick scale (olive to moderate brown) and a range of 21-27 on the von Luschans chromatic scale.
I heard Metaron using this word "olive" (skinned) that people sometimes use. I don't like the term. It seems like a way of using a term like "light brown" or "medium brown". Olives come in various colors anyway.
the color most associated with olive is a muted green color Nobody has greenish skin (although some yellowish) so when you exclude the green element you have light brown, brown, dark red and black
Posts: 43371 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
I just read in an old Swedish dictionary that the word olive when concerning colors have existed here since at least 1791. In that time though it was more often used in connection with cloth and textiles instead of peoples skin tone.
According to some the color term olive more refers to olive oil than the fruit itself.
Wikipedia has this to say about olive skin
quote:Olive skin is a human skin colour spectrum. It is often associated with pigmentation in the Type III to Type IV and Type V ranges of the Fitzpatrick scale. It generally refers to moderate or lighter tan or brownish skin, and it is often described as having tan, brown, cream, greenish, yellowish, or golden undertones
People with olive skin can sometimes become paler if their sun exposure is limited. However, lighter olive skin still tans more easily than light skin does, and generally still retains notable yellow or greenish undertones.
In the beauty industry the term seems to be rather frequently used.
Another description of the skin tones of Jews in ancient times is from the Mishnah Negaim 2:1 which states:
quote:The bright spot in a German appears as dull white, and the dull white spot in an Ethiopian appears as bright white. Rabbi Ishmael says: the children of Israel (may I be atonement for them!) are like boxwood, neither black nor white but of an intermediate shade.
Here is the color of Boxwood. It can vary some, but it is usually some shade of lighter brown.
Here is a sheme over human skin colors based both on Fitzpatricks and von Luschans scales. Type IV and the range 21 to 27 are here called "moderate brown skin"
-------------------- Once an archaeologist, always an archaeologist Posts: 3036 | From: Sweden | Registered: Mar 2020
| IP: Logged |
posted
In the video Metatron also mentions Joan Taylors book What Did Jesus Look Like? from 2018. Joan Taylor is a professor of Christian origins and second temple Judaism at King's College London. In her book she uses ancient art, archaeological remains, historical texts and interviews with anthropologists to conclude that, like most people in Judea around the time, Jesus most likely had brown eyes, dark brown to black hair and olive-brown skin. He may have stood about 5-ft.-5-in. (166 cm) tall, the average man’s height at the time. She also says that the people most reminiscent of 1th century Judeans today are the Jews of Iraq
quote:.... one of the fascinating things for me was to discover that really interesting work has been done by physical anthropologists on skeletons of Jews excavated in Judea and Galilee from the first century and sometimes second century and they have really looked at the issue of ethnicity and what people correspond to ancient in terms of modern populations actually and they have said that Jews of the first century looked quite a lot like Iraqi Jews today, there's an Iraqi look about the skeletons that they have uncovered so if we're going to be thinking about Jesus ethnicity we should be looking at Iraqi Jews so I remember when I worked on the kibbutz long ago some friends of mine who were from Iraq and it's really fascinating to me to think yes they had the look of most of the Jews of first century Judea.
In this video she tells about her book and her research
Here is a sheme over human skin colors based both on Fitzpatricks and von Luschans scales. Type IV and the range 21 to 27 are here called "moderate brown skin"
[/QB]
Their actual color sampled from each photograph and a mechanically (digitally) made black and white version of the colors. The colors on the original chart at the top are inaccurate, way off as to actual color of the people in the photos, the worst example is that yellowish color for the top one
Also if we looked at the colors before seeing the people we would never say one was "white". Thus that is a race word and should be excluded from an attempt like this to measure scientifically
Which is darker than the other? Look at the black and white version (the term white and black acceptable to pose the question but do not literally pertain) We can see 1-4 are very close Look in the female column,1A and 3A in the b & w version They are so close it's not worth distinguishing. Whoever put this together is probably thinking "Hispanics are darker" and then using what may be an Hispanic woman. She looks darker in the color version but I believe it's the same thing with that man who looks pinkish, her redder tone gives the impression of darker but not be actually darker. look again at the b & W version 1A vs 3A nearly the same (maybe female 3 is a hair darker than male 3 but working with the photos here, these are the closest female/male - don't look at the color look at the b & w ) but we can see how the color tint gives an impression weighing toward darker or lighter but may be in fact to as much difference actually
There is no scientific standard for naming colors so it's arbitrary. The chart is basically shades of brown, The man on the top right has pink tones which is due to his blood showing from underneath his light pigmentation. Below him , the other man 2B is similarly light (see the b & w version) but does not have that pink tone. That pink element, due to blood not his melanin content (he does have some) makes him actually register darker in a photo (see the b & w version) then the woman to his left
If this was done more scientifically it could be done on the basis of light to dark. First take 30 photos of various light and dark skinned people form all over the world and photographed in the exact same lighting Then take the color version and put it aside for a moment. Instead make a black and white version and then organize those into a set of 6 which clearly shows light to dark (or dark to light- think about the bias) Then use that order to make the final color version. Then just number each photo, don't use any color words
You can see what happens if you start with ordering color photos, that the different tints are a distraction in determining actual light to dark level
Arbitrarily, changed the order from dark to light instead of light to dark Regardless this is a sequence organized according to the b & w which shows the actual dark to light gradation. Here, the females and males of the same or nearly the same tone are together for each number. This in my opinion is a more accurate arranging (or backwards order it doesn't matter)
Also look at 2 here, note the color. Then look at the original chart marked "dark brown skin" the color they put next to the photos. That color is to rich and saturated compared to the people here. Some people have that rich color but the people here have a little more muted in their actual brown color.
It's also biased to not have like 5 people from different parts of the world for each number which further exposes superficiality of skin tone (I added an Indian woman at the top here to correspond to the man as virtually the same)
Which skin tone did Jesus have? How did he look? It's unknown, unimportant and will probably remain that way forever
Posts: 43371 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: In the video Metatron also mentions Joan Taylors book What Did Jesus Look Like? from 2018. Joan Taylor is a professor of Christian origins and second temple Judaism at King's College London. In her book she uses ancient art, archaeological remains, historical texts and interviews with anthropologists to conclude that, like most people in Judea around the time, Jesus most likely had brown eyes, dark brown to black hair and olive-brown skin. He may have stood about 5-ft.-5-in. (166 cm) tall, the average man’s height at the time. She also says that the people most reminiscent of 1th century Judeans today are the Jews of Iraq
quote:.... one of the fascinating things for me was to discover that really interesting work has been done by physical anthropologists on skeletons of Jews excavated in Judea and Galilee from the first century and sometimes second century and they have really looked at the issue of ethnicity and what people correspond to ancient in terms of modern populations actually and they have said that Jews of the first century looked quite a lot like Iraqi Jews today, there's an Iraqi look about the skeletons that they have uncovered so if we're going to be thinking about Jesus ethnicity we should be looking at Iraqi Jews so I remember when I worked on the kibbutz long ago some friends of mine who were from Iraq and it's really fascinating to me to think yes they had the look of most of the Jews of first century Judea.
In this video she tells about her book and her research
So you have the comment here "there's an Iraqi look about the skeletons"
skeletons are not informative on hair type, skin or the fleshy parts of the face
"olive-brown skin"
there's that olive word again, no standard as to what it exactly is. You could call the background color of the book cover "olive". I would call the color gray with a slight greenish yellow tint. It doesn't correspond to any of the people on that chart above although some people, not that common, might actually be similar in color to that color. To guess Jesus was this color is highly speculative.
And why if titling a book "what did Jesus look like" is there a piece of art depicting Jesus -instead of none or multiple art pieces depicting Jesus in various ways? If you are going to title the book like than and put one depiction of him on the cover, why buy the book >> The author has shown us already on the cover what she thinks Jesus looked like and there is no reason for adding a question mark (assuming she had control over the book cover)
As for the video, her main point was more that she thinks artistic representation of Jesus do not have his clothing right, that he was probably "shabbier" looking, with a poor person's clothes rather than the white gowns and other details which she says are more like wealthy garments of the time. She seems to think Jesus should be portrayed poorer looking and also thinks longer hair to less likely than short hair
Posts: 43371 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
In Metatrons video he disagrees with her, he thinks it is possible that Jesus could have had longer hair than people in general, but it sounds more that he is guessing. We will never know since there are no actual portrait made of him during his lifetime.
The notion that the ancient skeletons have similarities with modern Iraqi Jews she got from interviews with Israeli anthropologists. One of them seems to have been Yossi Nagar, the same man who wrote about the Israeli human osteological database which is mentioned in the thread about the "Tens of Thousands of Ancient Israelite Skeletons". He seems to have a lot of experience of ancient skeletons in Israel.
About the color scales, here is von Luschans chromatic scale without photos
Perhaps one can learn more about the skin tone of the ancient Judeans from well preserved autosomal DNA, so one can do a DNA phenotyping. There are already some forensic reconstructions, but they do not really say much about the skin tone of those people.
Otherwise she also seems to have gone by artistic representations from around Jesus time.
-------------------- Once an archaeologist, always an archaeologist Posts: 3036 | From: Sweden | Registered: Mar 2020
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness And why if titling a book "what did Jesus look like" is there a piece of art depicting Jesus -instead of none or multiple art pieces depicting Jesus in various ways? If you are going to title the book like than and put one depiction of him on the cover, why buy the book >> The author has shown us already on the cover what she thinks Jesus looked like and there is no reason for adding a question mark (assuming she had control over the book cover)
I do not know how it is in this case, but many times it is the book publisher who chooses the cover. Often they choose a picture they think is selling, and not always correctly following the content or conclusions in the book. So the author is not always the one who decides which cover the book shall have.
-------------------- Once an archaeologist, always an archaeologist Posts: 3036 | From: Sweden | Registered: Mar 2020
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: In Metatrons video he disagrees with her, he thinks it is possible that Jesus could have had longer hair than people in general, but it sounds more that he is guessing. We will never know since there are no actual portrait made of him during his lifetime.
The notion that the ancient skeletons have similarities with modern Iraqi Jews she got from interviews with Israeli anthropologists. One of them seems to have been Yossi Nagar, the same man who wrote about the Israeli human osteological database which is mentioned in the thread about the "Tens of Thousands of Ancient Israelite Skeletons". He seems to have a lot of experience of ancient skeletons in Israel.
About the color scales, here is von Luschans chromatic scale without photos
Perhaps one can learn more about the skin tone of the ancient Judeans from well preserved autosomal DNA, so one can do a DNA phenotyping. There are already some forensic reconstructions, but they do not really say much about the skin tone of those people.
Otherwise she also seems to have gone by artistic representations from around Jesus time.
As we can see when converted to black and white the number order if applied to the black and white becomes inconsistent Some people have a yellowish tone but a reddish tone like the below is under represented on that chart and it's more common
There are a lot of instances in the chart of differences to small to be relevant, for instance 30-33 could all be one number There is a lot of this that could be consolidated Posts: 43371 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
(although I don't know how she knows how this military officer is not a Roman or Greek in part)
wiki, Fayum portraits:
By the Roman period, much of the "Greek" population of Faiyum was made-up of either Hellenized Egyptians or people of mixed Egyptian-Greek origins.[14] Later, in the Roman Period, many veterans of the Roman army, who, initially at least, were not Egyptian but people from disparate cultural and ethnic backgrounds, settled in the area after the completion of their service, and formed social relations and intermarried with local populations.[15]
While commonly believed to represent Greek settlers in Egypt,[16][17] the Faiyum portraits instead reflect the complex synthesis of the predominant Egyptian culture and that of the elite Greek minority in the city.[13] According to Walker, the early Ptolemaic Greek colonists married local women and adopted Egyptian religious beliefs, and by Roman times, their descendants were viewed as Egyptians by the Roman rulers, despite their own self-perception of being Greek. The dental morphology[18] of the Roman-period Faiyum mummies was also compared with that of earlier Egyptian populations, and was found to be "much more closely akin" to that of ancient Egyptians than to Greeks or other European populations.
Posts: 43371 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Here is a short presentation of Taylors book in the Swedish "Kyrkans tidning" (The Churchs newspaper) translated from Swedish
quote:New book explores Jesus' appearance
THEOLOGY | PUBLISHED: MARCH 29, 2018
Long hair, blue eyes and beard. White, foot side kaftan with wide sleeves. Researcher Joan E Taylor's new book does away with the traditional image of Jesus.
- It is important to understand his ethnicity in a world where we are extremely aware of ethnicity. Presenting Jesus as a European is simply wrong historically, where Western Europe somehow claims Jesus. But he was a Jewish man from the Middle East, he looked like a Syrian refugee, she says.
What Jesus looked like and how he dressed is a question that has not occupied much research. One explanation for that is that the Bible is silent on the matter.
- The appearance and the signals this sends out play an important role for the readers of these texts. But there is no explicit description in the Bible of Jesus, says Joan E Taylor, professor of early Christianity at King's College in London and who recently published the book What did Jesus look like?
Based on various sources – a close study of the Bible and the Gospel texts, other contemporary texts and archaeological finds – a picture could nevertheless emerge.
The silence itself is an important clue, she believes. For other biblical figures, such as John the Baptist, are described relatively extensively.
- It is strange because Jesus is described as a relative of David, and a kind of new Moses. And both of these figures, David and Moses, are remembered as exceptionally handsome, she says.
The clues led her to the conclusion that the mundane was Jesus' characteristic.
- There was nothing in Jesus' appearance - at least not in his body - that could be described as exceptional. You couldn't tell he was tall or short or had any distinctive features. And that's important, I think, because it indicates that he was probably more or less average, she says.
If a contemporary clue to his appearance is to be found, it is among Mizrahi people in, for example, present-day Iraq, says the Israeli anthropologist Yossi Nagar.
- He had a Middle Eastern appearance: Medium brown or olive skin, black hair, brown eyes. Not blonde hair and blue eyes, she says.
posted
^ Iraqi Jews also known as Babli (Babylonian) Jews are just one of the several minhagim who are said to closely resemble 1st Century Judeans. There are also Mitsrai (Egyptian) Jews, but the closest likely being Halabi Jews of Syria.
As I've expressed elsewhere, I'm suspicious of Metatron, and I recall someone saying he is a Christian, whatever..
We have descriptions from Romans as well as some artwork and of course crania of 1st century Judeans giving us an idea of how the historical Jesus may have looked like. Interestingly, the cranial morphology of 1st Century Judeans was not much different from that of Chalcolithic Jericho as shown here. As far as skin color, I think that issue was discussed too many times. Egyptians described Asiatic (including Judean) skin complexion like "honey". Judeans themselves describe themselves as neither black nor white but complexion like boxwood. And one Bible passage that describes Jesus in his angelic form the 'Elder of Days' states the following..
Revelation 1:14-16 His head and his hairs were white like wool, as white as snow; and his eyes were as a flame of fire; and his feet like unto fine brass, as if they burned in a furnace; and his voice as the sound of many waters.
By the way, our most popular images of Jesus with the long hair comes from Byzantine art and then later Vatican and Florentine art in Western Europe. Long hair was characteristic of pagan priests and other holy men of Greece and Rome which became incorporated into the these European cultures' vision of the Son of God. All depictions of 1st Century Judeans show men with short hair.
A couple of popular reconstuctions.
Posts: 26834 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I've had positive interactions with Metatron in the past, so I'm a bit reluctant to talk too much smack about him behind his back. I will admit that I'm not a fan of his whole anti-"woke" leaning, and I've seen people on r/badhistory criticize him for misrepresenting history in the name of politics (e.g. this post calling him out for exaggerating homophobia and heteronormativity in ancient Greece). So I share DJ's suspicions about his agenda, even though I'm coming at it from a different angle.
With that said, his reported claims about Jesus's probable complexion aren't too unreasonable IMO. I admit to not being a Christian or even a theist at all, but if there was a historical Jesus, an appearance within the Middle Eastern range appears most likely for him. That being said, there would have been a fair amount of diversity throughout all the Roman provinces at that time, so him and other 1st century Judaeans having some African or other non-Levantine ancestry isn't impossible either. Let's not forget the "black and comely" Shulamite woman from the Biblical Song of Songs, although IIRC that took place centuries before Jesus's time.
posted
^ Note that I haven't said anything bad about Metatron. I've watched some of his videos and I am just suspicious of him is all. I find his anti-black attitude on Egyptians and other North Africans to be strange considering that Roman accounts clearly describe them as 'black' yet he is suppose to be very knowledgeable about his Roman ancestors as he likes to brag and is fluent in Latin. As far as him being "anti-woke", that's really no issue for me and in fact I would support that sentiment IF done in the right way. I do see the complaints he makes such as the BBC black-painting Romans and feminizing the British Celts. So I get where he's coming from in that regard.
As for his Jesus claims, again he is basing this on all the evidence we have on 1st Century Judean people so no argument from me either.
Posts: 26834 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
Non-"BHI" european scholars from earlier centuries record the fact that the earliest artwork of Christ depicts him as a black man.
"Liberal Review: An Organ of the Independent Thinkers of America, Volume 3" by Mangasar Mugurditch Mangasarian, page 478 (1906) Library of the University of Michigan
Also, firsthand eyewiteness accounts written by non-"BHI" europeans record the fact that native Jews in Israel were comparable to black slaves in the American south, in regards to skin color.
"Memorials of Gilbert Haven, Bishop of the Methodist Episcopal Church" page 340 (1880) University of Michigan
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
We've been through this before. He compared them to literal, southern slaves in America. You always seem to skip over that part. Plenty of arabs over there for him to compare them to, yet he didn't mention arabs at all.
Sorry.
More non-"BHI" european scholars talking about how black native Jews are/were.
This one compared them to black ethiopians (not arabs).
"On the Classification and Geographical Distribution of the Mammalia:" by Richard owen, page 96-97 (1859) John W. Parker and Son
quote:Originally posted by Tazarah: We've been through this before. He compared them to literal, southern slaves in America. You always seem to skip over that part. Plenty of arabs over there for him to compare them to, yet he didn't mention arabs at all.
Sorry.
You highlighted some parts and excluded others like the bolded from this sentence at the beginning of the notes >>
quote: The natives of Palestine, Jews and Arabs, except the few of the former imported from Germany, are of a brown complexion, almost the color of the bright brown mulatto.
So you are the one who started with the skipping over
Bishop Haven says "almost the color the bright brown mulatto" and relates this to the natives of Palestine, Jews and Arabs. These are two different religious groups of similar biological stock genetically and in appearance
You are going to just not ignore parts of sentence you don't like, i.e "bright brown mulatto"
He goes on to describe a particular "Jewess" he saw in Bethlehem >>
quote:The most beautiful lady we saw abroad, one of the loveliest we ever looked upon, was a brown Bethlehem Jewess, who passed us at the tomb of Rachel, on her donkey, with her brown, bearded , and turbaned lord and lover walking at her side, a perfect type of the Rachel and Jacob of four thousand years before. Just such complexions may one see to-day in those who were but lately Southern slaves.
He compares this particular woman's complexion to that of a slave in the American South although does not compare other features
Going on:
quote: A very comely and attractive Bedouin, of a bright brown complexion, went up the pyramids with us, and stood under the Sphinx. When asked to come to America, he replied, " You will sell me." We had been selling multitudes of his complexion for generations. Dean Stanley describes Abraham as a Bedouin sheik. Except in the faith, he says, "In every aspect the likeness is complete between the Bedouin chief of the present day, and the Bedouin chief who came from Chaldea nearly four thousand years ago. " One of these " aspects " is complexion , and the Arab of Palestine and the Wilderness, is very like Frederick Douglass in this particular.
back to a "bright brown complexion" Bedouin woman
The Bedouin, are pastorally nomadic Arab tribes who have historically inhabited the desert regions in the Arabian Peninsula, North Africa, the Levant, and Mesopotamia (Iraq).
Haven goes on to say Dean Stanley ( an English Anglican priest and ecclesiastical historian who wrote History 'of the Jewish Church' and says Stanley describes Abraham as a "Bedouin sheik" and compares his complexion to Frederick Douglass who had formerly been a slave and whose father was European.
The same with my highlighting >>
quote: Anecdotal evidence
Anecdotal evidence is evidence based only on personal observation, collected in a casual or non-systematic manner.
When compared to other types of evidence, anecdotal evidence is generally regarded as limited in value due to a number of potential weaknesses, but may be considered within the scope of scientific method as some anecdotal evidence can be both empirical and verifiable,
The theme is at the start:
quote: The natives of Palestine, Jews and Arabs, except the few of the former imported from Germany, are of a brown complexion, almost the color of the bright brown mulatto
Highlighted above, theme, body and conclusion. The whole thing is speculative but particularly anecdotal is that the author sees a woman who he knowns nothing about, determines she is Jewish and says she has dark skin. Similarly he sees another woman he knows nothing about a Bedouin woman of "bright brown complexion". Conspicuously you leave that part out of the highlight. You would have us believe this is a scientific study. I would not highlight either of these two women he happens to take notice of. It proves nothing. If he had interviewed 40 people and asked them about their ancestry and taken note of their appearance, various traits not just skin, it would be (somewhat) closer to a scientific analysis.
He quotes another author, Dean Stanley, speculating the he thinks Abraham would have looked like a present day ( in his day, 1800s) Bedouin (Arab) sheik relating this to an American "mulatto", the great Frederick Douglass
He ends the notes on this page with the theme he started with, a description of mixed looking people and describes Jesus (a Jew) "midway between the complexions of man."... "The Asiatic is the solvent of the Caucasian and the negro, and his color is almost exactly reproduced in the mulatto of America, the amalgam of the two opposite complexions ."
So he is describing Jesus, Jews and Arabs as "Asiatic" (correct, the Levant is in Asia) and describes them as a mix of "Caucasian and the negro, and his color is almost exactly reproduced in the mulatto of America, the amalgam of the two opposite complexions."
It's all speculative remarks by Bishop Haven, Episcopal Bishop who also taught Greek and Latin about people who he saw in Bethlehem sometime around 1880 Some of what he's saying sounds, reasonable but there is no research here. What is being reiterated in this text? > Jews/Arabs being "midway", "mulatto", "bright brown" although he says one woman of unknowns background in Bethlehem who seemed to be darker, likened to an American slave in complexion. But he opens with a mixed theme and closes with it, It's the main theme.
you need to distinguish between research, where data is collected and analyzed and just opinion and anecdotal (weak) evidence
Posts: 43371 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
"Southern slaves", "black as the Ethiopian races", "negro type with black woolly hair".....
Sorry, none of those sources support your nonsensical claims or ideas. You literally typed all that for nothing as usual.
These are firsthand eyewitness accounts, some of the best evidence available in terms of what people look or looked like. The only time I've ever seen you complain about books being referenced is when they debunk your fantasies. Other than that you have no problem with them and even reference them yourself.
You need to stop being a racist, gaslighting troll...
The source you're trying so hard to skewer literally compared them to southern slaves in America. One would have to be an idiot to think that all or even the majority of southern slaves were mulattoes. One of the natives he spoke to was afraid to come to America out of fear of being sold into slavery. Yeah... that definitely sounds like an arab.
The author's opinion as to what Christ looked like is 100% irrelevant. What is relevant is how he witnessed the blackness of native Jews with his own eyes.
Lastly, a "midway" complexion is still frequently witnessed in those we would call negroes. "Negroes" are not crayon black. Of course you already know this, but you are allergic to representing information honestly when it comes to black people being something other than what you want them to be.
Posts: 2754 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
Lastly, a "midway" complexion is still frequently witnessed in those we would call negroes. "Negroes" are not crayon black. Of course you already know this, but you are allergic to representing information honestly when it comes to black people being something other than what you want them to be.
Haven never says Jews and Arabs are negroes, read. He is specifies a mulatto bright brown complexion and a darker woman he saw pass by him in Bethlehem.
Here are some Jordanian Arabs
quote:Bishop Gilbert Haven:
The natives of Palestine, Jews and Arabs, except the few of the former imported from Germany, are of a brown complexion, almost the color of the bright brown mulatto.
These Arabs are darker than even the "bright brown mulatto" Haven describes, Obama's skin tone. Native Jews and Arabs vary in skin tone. Some ancient classical writers might call the above men black complexioned, so what's the problem? Hair type or any other trait is not mentioned by Haven. The only person being gaslighted is you by yourself. I am merely reading your source and not excluding the theme of it.
last paragraph:
quote:Rev. Dr. Summers, thus confesses the wrongfulness of that famous plea for American slavery: "The descendants of Ham's fourth son, Canaan were exclusively involved in Noah's malediction; but they were not negroes, nor, so far as appears, any darker in their hue than the Jews, to whom, as Shemites, they were brought into servitude, as they were afterwards to the Greeks and Romans, the descendants of Japheth. We do not doubt that the black races of Africa, including all the negroes, descended from Cush and Phut, two of the sons of Ham, with perhaps a little intermingling from the descendants of Mizraim, another of his sons, who settled in Egypt.
Gilbert Haven
Gilbert Haven (1821 – 1880) was a bishop of the Methodist Episcopal Church, elected in 1872. He was consecrated a bishop on May 24, 1872 at the Brooklyn Academy of Music in New York. He was an early benefactor of Clark College (now Clark Atlanta University), visualizing it as a university of all the Methodist schools founded for the education of freedmen (former African American slaves).
In 1846 he graduated with honors from Wesleyan University and then taught Greek and Latin. He traveled widely, visiting the Holy Land, Africa, Mexico and Europe, and was an early proponent of equality of the sexes. He became a member of the New England Annual Conference in 1851 and served as bishop in Atlanta to a conference composed entirely of African Americans.
He believed in the absolute equality of all persons, and if they are equal in the eyes of God, he held that civil society would have to recognize their equality under law and in practice. He was absolutely opposed to the practice of any type of racial separation in churches. Due to his radical egalitarian views, shocking at the time, no Northern conference would have him as a bishop—hence, his appointment to an all black mission conference.
Among the books he wrote were The Pilgrim's Wallet (1864) on travel; National Sermons (1869), Sermons, Speeches and Letters on Slavery and its War, and Life of Father Taylor.
Posts: 43371 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
Yeah keep clinging to your failed argument in regards to that one source, and keep deflecting/ignoring the other sources that undeniably described the natives of Israel as being black or "negro" people (one of the sources literally calls them negroes with black and woolly hair).
Once again, his opinion on who the Hamites are is 100% irrelevant to what he saw and witnessed with his own eyes.
Posts: 2754 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tazarah: Yeah keep clinging to your failed argument in regards to that one source, and keep deflecting/ignoring the other sources that undeniably described the natives of Israel as being black or "negro" people (one of the sources literally calls them negroes with black and woolly hair).
Once again, his opinion on who the Hamites are is 100% irrelevant to what he saw and witnessed with his own eyes.
So your view is that in the late 1880's Jews in Palestine were negroes? This seems to be your view, that Europeans writers of 150 years ago described Jews in Palestine as negroes
Your other book quote says that trustworthy travelers said
quote: "There are some Jews still lingering in the valleys of the Jordan, having been oppressed by the successive conquerors of Syria for ages, -a low race of people, and described by trustworthy travellers as being as black as any of the Ethiopian races."
That doesn't say they were negroes and it doesn't say they were of the Ethiopian race
The author also says:
quote: with man there are classifications of races varying from thirty to the three predominant ones which Blumenbach first clearly pointed out, -the Ethiopian, the Mongolian, and the Caucasian or Indo- European.
So he is using "Ethiopian" here as synonymous with "negro". With this in mind he did not say trustworthy travellers said some of the Jews in Jordan valleys were Ethiopians he said black ( in color) like Ethiopians (or the Jordanian Bedouins I pictured)
“Black Bedouins are a minority in Arab society and considered the lowest class that there is. My ancestors were kidnapped from Africa and became slaves"
Posts: 43371 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
I'm not posting these sources to convince you of anything, just in case you were unaware. This is for future readers to see. You're still playing dumb and completely ignoring the source that says the natives of Jericho (West Bank, Israel) are/were negroes with woolly black hair.
That alone shows your pseudo interpretation of these sources is 100% incorrect and that just because they aren't called "negroes" in every source, does not mean they do not resemble "negroes" or look exactly like "negroes".
Do "white" people need to referred to as "caucasoid" or "caucasian" in a source in order for them to be classified as white?
You seem to only have a problem and get confused when it's "negroes". If I were I were posting sources about native Jews being any other race/color, I would receive no pushback from you.
Posts: 2754 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tazarah: I'm not posting these sources to convince you of anything, just in case you were unaware. This is for future readers to see. You're still playing dumb and completely ignoring the source that says the natives of Jericho (West Bank, Israel) are/were negroes with woolly black hair.
That alone shows your pseudo interpretation of these sources is 100% incorrect and that just because they aren't called "negroes" in every source, does not mean they do not resemble "negroes" or look exactly like "negroes" (and others)
Do "white" people need to referred to as "caucasoid" or "caucasian" in a source in order for them to be classified as white?
You seem to only have a problem and get confused when it's "negroes". If I were I were posting sources about native Jews being any other race/color, I would receive no pushback from you.
"black" is a vague term and in is used in different ways by different people and in different time periods. Some says it just means dark skinned others say it means negro and that negro includes hair type, facial features, skull type etc
You are posting sources using the word negro. So show us a source that that says Jews are negroes instead of some being dark ('black colored') like negroes. If you are showing books that say "negro" dozens times and also mention Jews then if you believe that these 1800s pre-state of 'Israel" authors thought Jews were negroes there should be a clear statement like "Negroes such as the Jews" or "Jews and other negroes" There should be a clear cut statement like that, not just comparison to complexion of certain individuals
There was a time period in America where he would be called a "Mulatto" Now he's called black though his mother was a European.
A man darker than Obama. Is he a black man? there is no right answer it's just opinion
The Mexican comedian George Lopez. He might be a little darker than Obama or LL Cool J. So is he black?
The term black is not consistently applied, it's a lot of opinion
"Negro" is more specific because it's used to describe more than skin
Tazarah, yes or no please Is he in your opinion black or not black ?
If you are going to use the term black you should be able to answer this. If you can't answer this I take it you want it to be vague purposely
Posts: 43371 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
Yeah let's keep pretending I didn't already post a source identifying the natives of Jericho (West Bank, Israel) as being negroes with black woolly hair. Have a nice day
Posts: 2754 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
You quote describes a Bedouin village of 30 dwellings called Ribha
quote:Originally posted by Tazarah:
quote: A miserable village of some thirty poor hovels, more resembling cowsheds than human dwellings, alone remains ; here and there a black Bedouin tent and an old watch-tower, -such is the aspect of the present Jericho. The glorious groves of palms in whose cool shade once walked the rich inhabitants of Jericho, are dead, and the plantations of the sugar- cane and indigo have disappeared. The dwellers in Ribha (the Jericho of old-in Arabic Sidr) are of the negro type; they have black woolly hair, and their countenances are deficient in intelligence .
Open slavery existed in the region of Palestine until the 20th-century. The slave trade to Ottoman Palestine officially stopped in the 1870s
Palestine was close to the Red Sea slave trade, but also to the slave ports of the Mediterranean Sea, were slaves from the Trans-Saharan slave trade were imported via Libya and Egypt.
In the last decades of open slavery in Palestine, the origin of slaves appeared to have been similar to other Ottoman provinces at the time: a small minority were Caucasians (usually Circassians), but the vast majority of the slaves were of African origin, mostly from Ethiophia (Abyssinia) and the Sudan.
. In the British report to the League of Nations for 1924, they reported that slavery existed in Transjordan but had ended in Palestine in the early 20th-century after the import of slaves had stopped.[12] According to the British, the Palestina Bedouin tribes did own African servants called Abid, but that they now had the same rights as the rest of the tribe members and should be regarded as former slaves, and that the same term should apply to the African female domestic servants of the Arab noble families
Afro-Palestinians are Palestinians of black African heritage. A minority of Afro-Palestinians, who number around 350-400, reside in an African enclave around the Bab al-Majlis,[1] in the Muslim Quarter of Jerusalem.[2][3] Some of the community dwell in other areas of Jerusalem such as Beit Hanina and A-Tur.[3]
There are also Bedouin Palestinians outside Jerusalem who have descent lines linking them to people of African origin[4] such as in the West Bank of Jericho and Gaza.
There are some Palestinian communities that trace their origins to pilgrims from Sudan and Central Africa (mainly Chad) who are said to have reached Palestine as early as the 12th century. Their initial aim was to take part in the Hajj and reach Mecca, after which they visited Jerusalem to visit the al-Aqsa Mosque.[2] Many Afro-Palestinians also hail from forefathers who came to Palestine enslaved in service to the Ottomans.
People whose ancestors came from Nigeria, Sudan, Senegal and Chad make up most of the community, and most of these came to Palestine during the British Mandate.
The Jerusalem community of Afro-Palestinians, 50 families now numbering some 350 (or 450) members, reside in two compounds outside the Ḥaram ash-Sharīf (west of the Inspector's Gate): Ribat al-Mansuri and Ribat of Aladdin (Ribat al-Baseri/Ribat Aladdin al-Bassir/Ribat Al'a ad-Deen Busari). They were built between 1267 and 1382[2] and served as ribats (hostels for visiting Muslim pilgrims) under the Mamluks. This distinctive enclave has been called Jerusalem's Little Harlem.
These have close links with similar communities in Acre and Jericho, established when Africans came to work in the Umayyad sugar industry.[14] The community in northern Jericho have often been called "the slaves of Duyuk" even in modern times. ____________________________________
World’s Oldest City Retains Lure : Biblical Jericho: Winter Oasis for the West Bank
Jericho is also home to a unique group of black Palestinians whose roots are lost in history. The most common theories are that they are descended from Nubian slaves, possibly from the time of Herod, or from a Nubian regiment left behind by the retreating Egyptian commander Ibrahim Pasha early in the 19th Century.
Posts: 43371 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
"Lioness", the wiki scholar. "Afro-palestinians" themselves claim to have been there for thousands of years and claim to be directly tied to the land.
I'm sure future readers will also notice how you repeatedly fail to link photos of these native black Jews who would resemble black slaves in america or black Ethiopians.
And that you instead choose to link photos of obama and arabs, with your childish markings on them.
The reason why you do this is obvious.
Posts: 2754 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: You are posting sources using the word negro. So show us a source that that says Jews are negroes instead of some being dark ('black colored') like negroes. If you are showing books that say "negro" dozens times and also mention Jews then if you believe that these 1800s pre-state of 'Israel" authors thought Jews were negroes there should be a clear statement like "Negroes such as the Jews" or "Jews and other negroes" There should be a clear cut statement like that, not just comparison to complexion of certain individuals
Oh damn, would you look at that:
"Russia and the Negro: Blacks in Russian History and Thought" by Allison Blakely, page 11 (1986) Howard University Press
quote:Originally posted by Tazarah: [ "Lioness", the wiki scholar. "Afro-palestinians" themselves claim to have been there for thousands of years and claim to be directly tied to the land.
I'm sure future readers will also notice how you repeatedly fail to link photos of these native black Jews who would resemble black slaves in america or black Ethiopians.
And that you instead choose to link photos of obama and arabs, with your childish markings on them.
The reason why you do this is obvious. [/QB]
I linked this twice >>
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: Yes, and let's keep pretending there is no such thing as an afro-Bedouin
He have a man named Ali Jiddah. He first says he's an African, then he says he's a deeply rooted Palestinian African. Likely he's Muslim and he never identifies in the video as an Israelite, TEOTW Ministries, a religious organization is just titling the video that way
quote: TEOTW Ministries is a teaching ministry, chosen to be a part of awakening the true Hebrew Israelites to who they are both from a biblical and historical context. TEOTW Ministries believe that the Negros are the true biblical Israelites, and that the Negro fulfills all prophecies concerning the Israelites, as well as have been authenticated through historical texts.
can we stick to non-religious sources please, likely this is clipped from some other video
Posts: 43371 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
"Likely" in other words you can't support your claim with facts. Out of his own mouth, the man says the land belongs to him and his ancestors. I.E., native inhabitant.
Must just be a coincidence that he looks exactly the same way that these sources describe the native Jews as looking huh?
I also responded with a non-religious source and it says exactly what you demanded a source should say in this instance, so I'm now waiting to see how you will deflect and/or move the goalpost.
Posts: 2754 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
I'm so used to dealing with racist idiots that this completely went over my head: I am just now realizing how completely white supremacist "the lioness" has been being with his comments in this thread.
According to his logic, the only way the black native Jews being spoken of in these sources can actually look like african-americans, is if they are called "negroes" verbatim. They absolutely NEED to be called negroes, otherwise the sources aren't talking about people with "negro" phenotypes.
Yet he's constantly posting photos of arabs and other people he wishes these sources are talking about.
ROFL!!! Thank you for once again exposing yourself, you true negro idiot.
Posts: 2754 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tazarah: "Likely" in other words you can't support your claim with facts. Out of his own mouth, the man says the land belongs to him and his ancestors. I.E., native inhabitant.
Somebody claiming land belongs to them is not a fact either, look at all the fools here in American claiming they are Aboriginal and the land belongs to them. Anybody can claim anything.
A terrorist-turned-tour guide who offers clients a somewhat different view of the city talks to Abraham Rabinovich about his work - and his past....
the View of Jerusalem he offers his clients may be unique: that of an ex-terrorist, Marxist- Leninist, Moslem-born atheist..
His business card introduces him as an alternative tour guide” in English, 'French or Hebrew...
Ali Jiddah is a resident of the “African Quarter'' of the Old City, a small enclave just west of the Temple Mount containing 70 families of sub-Saharan descent. His father, from Chad, was among a group of African Moslems .who came in 1936 on pilgrimage and remained. Because Chad was a French colony, the Reach consulate subsidized Jiddah’s tuition to the prestigious Collège des Frères a Catholic high school near Jaffa Gate. He was 17 when the Six Day War opened the gate. ,
“T began to experience life under occupation, being stopped by soldiers and told to stand against a wall with hands up"
Ali Jiddah One of the best-known Afro-Palestinians from history is Ali Jiddah, a former Palestinian resistance fighter. He is of Chadian descent; his father hailed from the Salamat tribe and settled in Palestine after making a pilgrimage there.
Ali Jiddah is best known for his involvement with the organization the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine. In response to the Israeli occupation of Jerusalem, in 1968 he planted four hand grenades on Strauss Street in Jerusalem which injured nine Israelis. Ali Jiddah was sentenced to 25 years in prison, but was released in 1985 after serving 17 years.
Following his release, Jiddah worked as a journalist before offering tours of the Old City in Jerusalem, teaching people about life in the area under Israeli occupation. Today he lives in Beit Hanina in East Jerusalem, and has two sons.
Mahmud Jiddah and his cousin Ali Jiddah both served seventeen years in Israeli jail for a 1968 bomb attack when they were members – Mahmud aged twenty, Ali aged eighteen – of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine. Both, now in their seventies, are freelance political tour guides, explaining Palestinian perspectives to visitors, and are well-known Jerusalem characters.
“I’m an Arab and I’m an African,” says Mahmud Jiddah. “At the same time, for example, my mother has two sisters, one is a villager, one is a Bedouin – so I am from the city, the village and [the desert]. I live these three things.”
“The Jiddah family and the Qaws family are both from the Salamat tribe in Chad. The first generation [who came to Jerusalem] used to speak [Hausa and other] African languages. But because our mothers are Palestinian, we – the second generation – didn’t learn these languages, only Arabic. There’s a hidden conflict between them and us. They considered themselves to be the originals, and said that we were not pure. They called us muwallad [meaning, in this context, a person with one African and one non-African parent]. With the intermarriage with the Palestinian community, little by little in fifty years’ time you won’t find a Black person here.”
______________________________________
According to Ali Jiddah, in his own words in 2022:
quote: first of all my name is Ali Mohammed. I am an Afro-Palestinian, third generation. My father is from Chad. My mother is a second generation, the father from Nigeria, my grandfather. My grandmother is a Palestinian
___________________________________________
So the "thousands of years" pertains to the side of his Palestinian mother as opposed to his African father
This is what one finds out in perusing deeper research
His a known figure in Jerusalem and has interviews and a documentary Let us know where he says he is an Israelite or admit it's made up. The claim is made my a Hebrew Israelite youtube, they go by the father and here he is saying his father is Chadian
unless you come up with some theory that all Chadians are Israelites, lol
or for that matter all Palestinians are Israelites
According to her logic, the only way the black native Jews being spoken of in these sources can actually look like african-americans, is if they are called "negroes" verbatim. They absolutely NEED to be called negroes, otherwise the sources aren't talking about people with "negro" phenotypes.
Why would one even expect Jews of the 1800s to look like African Americans?
In the past few decades "negro" is considered obsolete or offensive even but these old books you like to show are not going to be updated to the favored terms of today
"Black complexioned" is not synonymous with "looks like an African American"
You are bringing up old books and they say "negro" all over the place. Thus when the same books talk about Jews if they looked like negroes one would expect some of these 1800s books to say that Jews native to Palestine are negroes or say Jews are of the 'negro race'
> that they ARE negroes
OR that native Jews in Palestine generally look like Africans, a general statement with some research behind it, meaning systematically recording data on multiple individuals and asking each one what their ancestry is Not just describing one person who passes by in the street and without knowing anything about them noting their dark skin
there should be hundreds of writers saying this and old photos if it was the case
Jews at wedding in Yemen
- the one on the left as dark as many African Americans. Even the one on the right to some degree. Similarly two Jews, people who vary in looks, two Jews only, from a a particular place, not enough people to draw conclusions on a general population. Similarly Gilbert Haven noticing two people in the street. That's not a study. We deal with studies here
Posts: 43371 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
When did I say he claimed to be an Israelite?... that's right, never. You clueless idiot. The argument is about what his ancestors looked like. Now do us a favor and show us what his palestinian grandmother looked like since you're asserting they had different phenotypes.
Nobody is going to read all that bs -- you're still gaslighting and dodging the source that uses the exact wording you demanded in regards to negroes/Jews. Your retarded line of reasoning has just fallen flat on it's face and you've been debunked.
Racist idiot
From now on, no sources are talking about white Jewish people unless it calls them caucasoid or caucasian.
Posts: 2754 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
You're such a racist idiot that you've turned this thread into "jEwS aRe NoT nEgRoEs!!!" simply because I referenced sources showing the known black phenotype of native Jews in conrast to that of iraqi Jews, or other Jews being spoken of in this thread.
Let that sink in, you probably don't even realize how majorly you expose your own racist motives.
What a damn loser with a losing strawman argument.
Afro-palestinians only have a population of 350-400:
And the majority of them do not even live in Jericho, but in a section(s) of Jerusalem.
Yet this deceptive pseudo would have us believe the source about the natives of Jericho being negroes with woolly hair is only speaking solely of afro-palestinians.
/FAIL.
Jericho is not an "afro-palestinian" territory. Posts: 2754 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
Here's another bomb you pseudo idiot.
Jericho is located in the Jordan [river] valley.
quote: JERICHO: A city in the Jordan valley, opposite Nebo (Deut. xxxii. 49), to the west of Gilgal (Josh. iv. 19). Owing to its importance, the part of the Jordan near Jericho was called "the Jordan of Jericho" (Num. xxii. 1, Hebr.).
The writer in the source described the inhabitants of Jericho as negroes with woolly hair.
And the writer in the other source I referenced says that Jews who never left the Jordan river valley (where Jericho is) are as black as the Ethiopian races.
Posts: 2754 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: OR that native Jews in Palestine generally look like Africans, a general statement with some research behind it,
"The Scripture Gazetteer: A Geographical, Historical, and Statistical Account... Volume 1" by William Fleming, page 479 (1837) Edinburgh Printing and Publishing Company
posted
Thats secondary. Any writing that would be primary to support that statement, we would have to look at the ancient writers quotes that this 1837 writer is interpreting
and as well look at the date of whichever ancient writer is being referred to. Thus if he is mentioning Tacitus, Josephus and other writers, that is what you should be quoting
More from your source, William Fleming of the Scripture Gazaetter, 1837 >>
quote: p 479
Some say that they were Ethiopians who were compelled to change their habitations in the reign of a king called Cepheus, although it is strange that Tacitus could suppose that the Ethiopians, who are known to be blacks, could be the ancestors of the Jews, who are known to be whites. There are those, continues Tacitus, who report that the Jews were Assyrians, who, wanting a territory, obtained a part of Egypt, and soon after settled in cities of their own in the country of the Hebrews, and the districts of Syria which lay nearest to them; while others claim for them an origin more eminent, alleging that they are the people celebrated by Homer under the name of Solymi, who founded the nation, and gave the name Hierosolyma to its capital city. The former of these opinions is nearer the truth, and both of them Tacitus might have borrowed from Josephus himself, who mentions the latter notion in the Seventh Book of his Antiquities. From the above particulars, extravagant as they are, some facts can be easily adduced ; the first, that many foreigners were obliged to quit Egypt with the Israelites, and that therefore the latter were often confounded with a race with whom they had no connection ; the second, that the Israelites were often taken for Ethiopians or Cushites, who, like themselves, became the objects of hatred to the Egyptians ; and the third, that a tribe of Ethiopians was expelled from Egypt about the time of or with the Israelites. " It need scarcely be
p 374
CUSH, Ethiopians, or black, or Chus, a people or region so called from Cush, the eldest son of Ham and grandson of Noah. In the Vulgate and Septuagint, and by various interpreters, ancient and modern, Cush is very generally rendered Ethiopia. The Land of Cush was properly that district of Arabia in which the sons of Cush first settled, but it is often taken largely for a great tract of country, comprehending much more than the proper territory of the Cushites, extending east as far as the Tigris, and having for its western boundary the Nile. Josephus says that Cush was the father of the Ethiopians, who in his time were styled Cusheans, not only by themselves, but by all the inhabitants of Asia. Others conjecture that Cush located in that part of Persia still called Chusistan or Khuzistan, or the Land of Chus, whence his posterity might have passed into other countries. It appears from the Scriptures that a part of Arabia near the Red Sea was anciently named Cush ; that Cushan and Midian are frequently mentioned as dwelling together in tents ; and that in other places the Arabians are spoken of as bordering on the Cushites, who cannot therefore be viewed as the Ethiopians. Bruce informs us that the Abyssinians have a tradition, which is equally received by Jews and Christians, that immediately after the Deluge Cush passed with his family through the low country of Egypt, and proceeded to the high lands which border the mountainous district of Abyssinia, where they settled, and their descendants built the city of Axum in the days of Abraham. It is impossible to decide on a subject the most of which is mere conjecture. It appears that there were four countries named Cush in the Scriptures, and inhabited by Cushites, who by frequent removals dwelt widely separated from each other.-1 . Cush in the vicinity of the river Indus. This is said to have been the original Ethiopia in the East. Strabo says that the Ethiopians are a two fold people, who lie extended in a long tract from the rising to the setting of the sun. The Syriac version of 2 Chron. xvi. 8, reads Indians for Ethiopians, and both the Syriac and Chaldee in Isa. xi . 11 , and Zeph. iii . 10, read India for Cush.-2. There was a Cush in Assyria, west of the Caspian. St Jerome mentions that St Andrew preached the gospel to that people, whom he calls Ethiopians or Cushites.-3. Cush in Arabia Petræa, bordering on Egypt.— 4. Ethiopia, south of Egypt, in Africa, is designated by the name of Cush. The reader will find more particulars concerning the Cushites in various parts of the present work.
The author here is simultaneously saying
"it is strange that Tacitus could suppose that the Ethiopians, who are known to be blacks, could be the ancestors of the Jews, who are known to be whites."
(and referring here to ancient Jews)
but also saying
"the Israelites were often taken for Ethiopians or Cushites,"
Then he speaks elsewhere in the book about Strabo says that "the Ethiopians are a two fold people" and "the Arabians are spoken of as bordering on the Cushites, who cannot therefore be viewed as the Ethiopians."
-not exactly consistent remarks, both on page 479
He is talking about all the varying interpretation in historical writing as to exactly what is being referred to when the ancient writers referred to "Ethiopians" and "Cush" and in the bible (which could also vary according to chapter)
It's far from consistent and in reading Tacitus, Tacitus says:
The Jews are said to have been refugees from the island of Crete who settled in the remotest corner of Libya in the days when, according to the story, Saturn was driven from his throne by the aggression of Jupiter...
A few authorities hold that in the reign of Isis the surplus population of Egypt was evacuated to neighboring lands under the leadership of Hierosolymus and Judas.note Many assure us that the Jews are descended from those Ethiopians who were driven by fear and hatred to emigrate from their home country when Cepheus was king.note There are some who say that a motley collection of landless Assyriansnote occupied a part of Egypt, and then built cities of their own, inhabiting the lands of the Hebrews and the nearer parts of Syria. Others again find a famous ancestry for the Jews in the Solymi who are mentioned with respect in the epics of Homer:note this tribe is supposed have founded Jerusalem and named it after themselves...
Whatever their origin, these observances are sanctioned by their antiquity. The other practices of the Jews are sinister and revolting, and have entrenched themselves by their very wickedness.
So when we look at the actual ancient sources we see how sketchily and speculative it all is. Tacitus follows his accounting of various theories about Jewish origins by saying "Whatever their origin" .
Again, this is all sketchy speculation not research data facts and Tacitus was born 56 AD about 1,200 years after the Israelites time period, similarly Josephus born 37 AD.
quote: Scripture Gazaetter, 1837
Tacitus might have borrowed from Josephus himself, who mentions the latter notion in the Seventh Book of his Antiquities.
There is a lot of text here, see if you can find anything relevant to the above mention of Josephus and quote it
Posts: 43371 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
Fleming was pointing out how it's a known historical fact that the Jews/Israelites were often mistaken for cushites/ethiopians (black africans).
In other words, this isn't "BHI" rhetoric that Tazarah is pulling out of his ass.
His observation does not hinge on what Tacitus said (although Tacitus listed several "Ethiopian" nations that Jews were believed to descend from). Of course you deflect and move the goalpost like how I foretold you would.
His statement about modern Jews being white is irrelevant and you're now clinging to that as a crutch to save face.
I've also referenced a source that you've yet to address that says multiple ancient slave-trading civilizations classified negroes as Jews.
Every pseudo argument/request you've made has been thoroughly dealt with. Have several seats.
Posts: 2754 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
I suggest you stop embarrassing yourself and do some actual research into the term "negro" and it's usages. During the time period that these old books were written in, there were qualifications for who would or wouldn't be called a negro even if they looked exactly like a "negro".
Europeans didn't just go around calling all black people negroes simply because they were black. Even if they looked exactly like negroes and checked all the physical "negro" boxes. That's not how it worked.
"The term negro is confined to slave Africans, (the ancient Berbers) and their descendants. It does not embrace the free inhabitants of Africa, such as the Egyptians, Moors, or the negro Asiatics, such as the Lascars."
"The Negro Law of South Carolina" by John Belton O'Neall, page 5 (1848) J.G. Bowman
quote:Originally posted by Tazarah: Fleming was pointing out how it's a known historical fact that the Jews/Israelites were often mistaken for cushites/ethiopians (black africans).
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
Quote a source saying that Jews/Israelites were never known to look like "negroes" or "africans".
When's the last time you posted an actual source? All you do is wait for other people to post sources so you can twist them and make shit up.
Posts: 2754 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
posted
I quoted numerous sources on Ali Jidda's background
As for quoting a source saying that Jews/Israelites were never known to look like "negroes" or "africans".
it is a ridiculous request asking for a source on what some ancient group di not look like
It's like saying quote a source saying the ancient Celts did not look like Eskimos
> there's a source saying 50 million things that XYZ population did NOT look like ??
these books you post have numerous mention of "negroes" and mention Jews SO if your theory that Jews were negroes or resembling West Africans then you should be able to find one of these old books saying Jews are a type of negro OR "we came upon Jews of Bethlehem and their appearance was no different than that of a Senegalese or inhabitant of the Congo"
You should be able to find some writer, pre-state of Israel finding it remarkable how Jews in Palestine looked like West Africans.
Posts: 43371 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
So in other words, you're only going to type gibberish and twist the sources I've posted (or not address them at all) instead of supplying sources that back up your fantasies.
And you keep moving the goalpost like a desperate idiot. You can't even provide a source that says what you are demanding.
I also notice that you keep going back and editing your comments hours after posting them...
I rest my case
Posts: 2754 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tazarah: I suggest you stop embarrassing yourself and do some actual research into the term "negro" and it's usages. During the time period that these old books were written in, there were qualifications for who would or wouldn't be called a negro even if they looked exactly like a "negro".
Europeans didn't just go around calling all black people negroes simply because they were black. Even if they looked exactly like negroes and checked all the physical "negro" boxes. That's not how it worked.
"The term negro is confined to slave Africans, (the ancient Berbers) and their descendants. It does not embrace the free inhabitants of Africa, such as the Egyptians, Moors, or the negro Asiatics, such as the Lascars."
Lascars
"The Negro Law of South Carolina" by John Belton O'Neall, page 5 (1848) J.G. Bowman
I've seen this before. It's by John Belton O'Neall
John Belton O'Neall (1793–1863) was an American judge who served on the precursor to the South Carolina Supreme Court. He is remembered for writing the digest The Negro Law of South Carolina.
As we see at the top of the page above:
in 1848 to summarize the South Carolina laws governing slaves and free people of color, a prominent South Carolina judge, John Belton O’Neall, cited the Negro Act of 1740 :
"The Act of 1740, section I, declares all Negroes and Indians (Free Indians in amity with this Government, Negroes, mulattoes and mestizoes, who are now free excepted) to be slaves — the offspring to follow the condition of the mother; and that such slaves are chattels personal."
From its earliest days South Carolina affirmed that to be a person of color was to be a slave and the notion of a free person of color was both a legal and social contradiction in terms. Belton O’Neall stated that, “my experience as a man, and a Judge, leads me to condemn the Acts of 1820” and later restrictions imposed in 1841. “They ought to be repealed and the Act of 1800 restored. The State has nothing to fear from emancipation, regulated as that law directs it to be.” __________________
O'Neall summarized the 1740 South Carolina law when he stated:
"A slave may, by the consent of his master, acquire and hold personal property. All, thus required, is regarded in law as that of the master."
____________________________
In South Carolina, there was an exception to the law stating slaves could own property with permission of their master. Anything necessary for their work, such as a boat, or livestock raised by them, could be seized by anyone, though only if the slave took it off the plantation.
Judge John Belton O'Neall saw the law in 1848 as a cruel relic of the past, but his humanitarianism included a healthy dose of self-interest, as he thought better-treated slaves would be less apt to escape....
Belton O’Neall’s 1848 discussion confirmed that racial identity must sometimes be determined by jury when in question
_____________________________________
In judge O'Neall's ""The Negro Law of South Carolina" he makes this peculiar statement:
"the term negro is confined to slave Africans, (the ancient Berbers) and their descendants. It does not embrace the free inhabitants of Africa, such as the Egyptians, Moors, or the negro Asiatics, such as the Lascars."
Lascars _________________________________________ Lascars were probably the largest group of South Asian workers in Victorian Britain. The majority were Muslim, although there were significant Hindu (Suratis) and Catholic Goan minorities. They came principally from East Bengal (Bangladesh), particularly Chittagong and Sylhet, and were recruited from the port of Calcutta. The port of Bombay recruited seamen from along the Malabar Coast of Western India. The introduction of railways to India enabled recruitment from inland areas such as the Punjab. During the Age of Sail, many European nations employed sailors from the Indian Ocean region. These men were known as ‘lascars’, a broad term often used to describe South Asian seafarers but also applied to Arab, Burmese, Malay, Javanese and even Filipino men. Lascars are an important part of both British history and global history. Britain’s colonization of South Asia and development of shipping networks created a huge demand for lascars. Lascars worked on many different types of sailing ship during the 1700s and 1800s.
___________________________________
So Judge O'Neall In " Negro Law of South Carolina" is calling South Asians "Negro Asiatics"
"The term negro is confined to slave Africans, (the ancient Berbers) and their descendants. It does not embrace the free inhabitants of Africa, such as the Egyptians, Moors, or the negro Asiatics, such as the Lascars.
he says:
"The term negro is confined to slave Africans"... and then..
"It does not embrace the free inhabitants of Africa, such as the Egyptians, Moors, or the negro Asiatics, such as the Lascars"
So, negro applies to slave Africans but not "negro Asiatics" (make it make sense) and what is it making these Asians "Negro Asiatics" ? and what do these people with Bangladeshi and Indian names, etc, South Asian workers in Victorian Britain have to do with South Carolina laws on slaves?
quote:according to slave trader Henry Laurens, colonial South Carolina planters initially preferred to purchase Africans from the Senegambia region. Despite these preferences, more Angolans were imported to the Lowcountry in the early colonial period than any other African nationality because of trade access in that region. British slave traders did, however, attempt to appease Carolina preferences for Senegambians. Overall, by the end of the colonial period, African arrivals in Charleston primarily came from Angola (40 percent), Senegambia (19.5 percent), the Windward Coast (16.3 percent), and the Gold Coast (13.3 percent), as well as the Bight of Benin and Bight of Biafra in smaller percentages.
"The term negro is confined to slave Africans, (the ancient Berbers) and their descendants. It does not embrace the free inhabitants of Africa, such as the Egyptians, Moors, or the negro Asiatics, such as the Lascars."
^^ It is not clear what he's saying here note where the comma is after "slave Africans" and the parenthesis on "the ancient berbers" > why the parenthesis ?
so if we take one of those out like the parenthesis we get
"The term negro is confined to slave Africans, the ancient Berbers and their descendants."
This would mean slave African AND Berbers are negros yet the term negro is usually not applied to the Berbers (or even brought up as per slaves in America).
of if we take the comma out of he original statement:
"The term negro is confined to slave Africans (the ancient Berbers) and their descendants."
Then it would mean slave Africans ARE descendants of "the ancient Berbers" when the vast majority are West Africans of the Senegambia region and Angola, not Berbers who are associated with North Africa
So however you try to interpret this mention of Berber it's some nonsense. Try to find something analogous in other legal writing of the American slave era, or historical account
Typically Moorish Science adherents like to use the above quote to claim they are not "negro" slaves but instead "Moors" who are not to be slaves (and thus they have some kind of special nationality status) (that Moorish Science foolery)
So this statement from S.C. law here is basically a misinformed arbitrary application of terminology on the part of slave owner Judge O'Neall on page 1 of 50+ Negro Laws of South Carolina (read the whole thing I guess for more wacky and offensive slave laws)
(but who am I to question this "scholarly" slave era Southern Judge?)
Posts: 43371 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
Crazy (but not shocking) how "the lioness" still has not addressed the relevant source he demanded I post in regards to negroes being classified as Jews. He outright refuses to acknowledge that such a source exists, and instead types novels of bullshit in an attempt to gaslight and deflect.
Nor is he capable of supplying any sources of his own that substantiate any of his pseudo fantasies. This entire thread consists of you pretending to be an expert on sources that other people have posted, and trying to cause confusion as usual.
What else is to be expected of a racist idiot who believes black people need to be classified as "negroes" in order to have a certain phenotype.
Posts: 2754 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
posted
who but me would spend all these hours uncovering the actualities on all this stuff you are posting. After I expose what one really means I am supposed to go following behind you as you post another outdated non-fact speculation anecdotal remark derailing a thread about Jesus?
Posts: 43371 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
Damn you're really trying your hardest to ignore the source that says numerous ancient civilizations classified "negroes" as Jews aren't you?
Yes the thread is about Jesus, but other posters in here shared info about Iraqi Jews and how they are supposedly the closest to what Jesus would have looked like.
You had no problems with that and nothing to say about that and of course only start to b*tch and moan and make accusations of "derailing" when I start posting info about how Jesus's first images depict him as black, and how native Jews are/were black. Like how you always do.
Like I always say; there's an undeniable and consistent pattern of you displaying your hatred for black people and it's reached a point where you're too f*cking stupid to realize how majorly you are exposing yourself.
Posts: 2754 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
[/IMG] 
Printer-friendly view of this topic