Its entirely in French, unfortunately for those who don't understand French. Maybe al-Takruri can do a better job at translating some of the text in this work, but here are some of the anthropometric and genetic plots from the work:
Anthropometric
Genetic
Notice the anthropometrics of the Sahelian populations
Posts: 2595 | From: Vicksburg | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
The notion that Tuaregs were once "Caucasoid Medits" who became blacker is refuted with this:
"Les Bella, en effet, ont presque toujours la peau très foncée et ne sauraient donc compter, dans leur immense majorité, des ascendants blancs. Mais beaucoup de leurs maîtres touaregs sont eux-mêmes noirs et c'est ce brassage (( noir-noir qui pourrait rendre compte de la différenciation des Bella. Les anciens auteurs considéraient les Touaregs come un groupe de Berbères méditerranéens u racialement purs ') au départ, et plus ou moins métissés, soit avec les Arabes (les Iregeynaten), soit, lors de leur progression vers le sud, avec des Négro-africains, et d'autant plus mélangés qu'ils sont de condition inférieure. 11 est difficile de prouver ce point de vue, même si on remplace la notion de pureté raciale par la simple endogamie.
Posts: 2595 | From: Vicksburg | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Africa will be able to translate it, if he wishes to. Pax maybe another candidate, but he doesn't frequently post here as Africa does.
Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by X-Ras: The notion that Tuaregs were once "Caucasoid Medits" who became blacker is refuted with this:
"Les Bella, en effet, ont presque toujours la peau très foncée et ne sauraient donc compter, dans leur immense majorité, des ascendants blancs. Mais beaucoup de leurs maîtres touaregs sont eux-mêmes noirs et c'est ce brassage (( noir-noir qui pourrait rendre compte de la différenciation des Bella. Les anciens auteurs considéraient les Touaregs come un groupe de Berbères méditerranéens u racialement purs ') au départ, et plus ou moins métissés, soit avec les Arabes (les Iregeynaten), soit, lors de leur progression vers le sud, avec des Négro-africains, et d'autant plus mélangés qu'ils sont de condition inférieure. 11 est difficile de prouver ce point de vue, même si on remplace la notion de pureté raciale par la simple endogamie.
English:
“Bella, indeed, almost always have the very dark skin and could not thus count, in their immense majority, of the ascending white. But much of their Masters Tuaregs are themselves black and it is this mixing ((black-black which could account for the differentiation of Bella. The former authors racialement considered the Tuaregs come a group of Berber Mediterranean U pure ') at the beginning, and more or less métissés, either with the Arabs (Iregeynaten), or, at the time of their progression towards the south, with Négro-African, and all the more mixed since they are of lower condition. It is difficult to prove this point of view, even if one replaces the concept of racial purity by the simple endogamy."
The chart makes a point that these people are closely related to the Arabs, not Black Africans.
This chart only proves what the Berbers claimed themselves: they came from Arabia originally a point made clear by Diop.
Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ more nonsense from you, repeating bad arguments long ago refuted. how tiresome you've become.....
quote:Ausar wrote: In northern Sudan you have also people who claim false pedigrees but some are infact Arabic or at least mixed with Arabs. Some Arab groups in Sudan like the Ja'liyin and Baggara are Arabized. Ja'aliyin are Arabized Nubians and Baggara are Arabized Nilotic people.
The same goes with areas like Morocco and Algeria. The arab population in Libya is actually very high because of the Beni Hilal and beni Sulaiym invasion. This occured around the 1100's and drove the Berbers either to the mountains or further south. The tuareg people claim they originate in this region and so do most Berbers in Mauritania.
^ To imply that all Berber claim they come from Arabia is a lie.
In fact, there is little evidence the pre-Islamic NorthWest and West Africa had any knowledge of Arabia.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Genetically Tauregs have overwhelmingly the very African lineages that *cannot be found* in Dravidians. In fact, every known Berber population has predominently male E3b, E3a and/or B lineages which are all native African
Berber differ greatly in their female lineages, but even here, none are primarily descendant from Arabian females.
Taureg are most closely related to the Beja, Oromo, Somali, and Ethiopians.
Unlike Dravidians, who are not African, and do *not* have African lineages.
^ So, go write another geneticist and whine about another theory of yours that has been exploded.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
Can't help but notice the high frequency of non-E3b lineages of E lineages amongst Tuaregs in this study.
The "Arabs" in the fig below [intro notes], does this include "North African" Arabs or just Arabian peninsula/"Southwest Asian" Arabs? If only it was in English.
Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: The Bella, in reality, almost always are quite dark skinned, even though the vast majority have white ancestors.
However a lot of their Tuareg masters are themselves black. It's the mixture ((black - black which distinguishes the Bella. The old authors considered the Tuareg as a group of Mediterranean Berbers or racially pure) in the beginning, and more or less mixed, either with darker Arabs (Iregeynaten) or further on in their travels south, mixed with Black Africans, and other mixtures which were of a lesser nature.
It's difficult to prove that point of view even if one replaces the notion of racial purity with simple endogamy.
The above is an actual translation (not a SysTran word plug-in attempt simulating French into English.
I suspect the parenthesis are perhaps misplaced, and I arbitrarily broke it into three paragraphs.
quote:Originally posted by X-Ras: The notion that Tuaregs were once "Caucasoid Medits" who became blacker is refuted with this:
"Les Bella, en effet, ont presque toujours la peau très foncée et ne sauraient donc compter, dans leur immense majorité, des ascendants blancs. Mais beaucoup de leurs maîtres touaregs sont eux-mêmes noirs et c'est ce brassage (( noir-noir qui pourrait rendre compte de la différenciation des Bella. Les anciens auteurs considéraient les Touaregs come un groupe de Berbères méditerranéens u racialement purs ') au départ, et plus ou moins métissés, soit avec les Arabes (les Iregeynaten), soit, lors de leur progression vers le sud, avec des Négro-africains, et d'autant plus mélangés qu'ils sont de condition inférieure. 11 est difficile de prouver ce point de vue, même si on remplace la notion de pureté raciale par la simple endogamie.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
If the translation above is any indicator, has it occurred to the authors that what they perceive as 'white ancestors' comes from intermixing with coastal "Berber" speaking groups? At any rate, an English version would be quite useful, if one is to read the entire study (including the maps above), and glean the specific contexts utilized therein. The Tuaregs and other Sahelian "Berber" speaking groups should most definitely cluster close to sub-Saharan groups in west Africa than any other "Berber" speaking groups. They should cluster closer to sub-Saharan Africans than they do to Eurasians. This is why I'm curious about the "Arabs" mentioned in the map, which I suspect from some of the names mentioned, are largely "Arabized" North Africans.
-------------------- Truth - a liar penetrating device! Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yes, in a northwest African context (as in continental Africa in general) "Arab" can mean anything from an actual Arabian peninsula Arabian to anyone whose mother tongue is Arabic and everything in between. In these studies (be they ethnology or anthropology) one need be wary of expecting "Arab" to mean the classic "sheikh of Araby" stereotypical kind of individual.
And indeed, looking at the supplied genetic graph, all the plotted Arab populations are African populations. I see no peninsular nor Syrian sample.
If we can believe Dana Reynolds:
quote:The original indigenous Berbers were the North African ancestors of the present day dark-brown peoples of the Sahara and the Sahel, mainly those called Fulani, Tuareg, Zenagha of Southern Morocco, Kunta and Tebbu of the Sahel countries, as well as other dark-brown arabs now living in Mauretania and throughout the Sahel, including the Trarza of Mauretania and Senegal, the Mogharba as well as dozens of other Sudanese tribes, the Chaamba of Chad and Algeria
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
^Maybe this is old info, but apparently Dana Reynold doesn't seem to be aware that Fulani aren't considered "Berber"/northwest Afrasan speakers; rather they are characterized as part of the Atlantic branch of the Niger-Congo superfamily.
Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ She knows that. But Berber was not originally defined based on language. The Beja are also called "Berber" in some old texts. Fulani are not Berbers - but they are original North Africans.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
The original indigenous Berbers were the North African ancestors of the present day dark-brown peoples of the Sahara and the Sahel, mainly those called Fulani, Tuareg, Zenagha of Southern Morocco, Kunta and Tebbu of the Sahel countries,...
If she knew what I had just stated, then she should know better than to say what she stated above.
Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ I just answered that question. She is not using the linguistic definition of Berber.
She is refering to people historically known as Berbers. And historically - many of these people *do not* speak Berber langauges.
I think you should read some of the scholars in full, before leaping to conclusions based on abstracts.
The quote actually comes from Ivan Sertima's Golden Age of the Moors. Have you read it?
In full: According to Dana Reynolds, the original Black Berbers, who were called Moors, were the North African ancestors of the present day dark-brown and dark-black peoples of the Sahara and the Sahel, mainly those called Fulani, Tuareg, Zenagha of Southern Morocco, Kunta and Tebbu of the Sahel countries as well as other black Arabs now living in Mauretania and throughout the Sahel, they include Trarza of Mauretania and Senegal, the Mogharba as well as dozens of other Sudanese tribes, the Chaamba of Chad and Algeria. Apart from her very detailed study of the origins and affiliations of the various tribes, she points out that the Africans involved in the Moorish occupation of Iberia did not just build remarkable things in Europe but also in their native lands. They founded and constructed many industrious and prosperous towns all over the north of Africa and as far south as Timbuktu. The ruins of their many castles can be seen as much in Northern Africa as in Andalusia.
Note Sertima includes 'dozens of Sudanese tribes'.
He is obviously not saying they speak Berber langauge, but if you want to suggest that Sertima doesn't know this....go right ahead.
Again, I suggest.....slow your roll. Listen before you leap.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
^ I just answered that question. She is not using the linguistic definition of Berber.
You just don't seem to get it, do you? Even so, who calls any group 'today' "Berbers", aside from the linguistic affiliation?
quote: She is refering to people historically known as Berbers. And historically - many of these people *do not* speak Berber langauges.
That still doesn't make her statement accurate, or right.
quote: I think you should read some of the scholars in full, before leaping to conclusions based on abstracts.
I think you should read my statements carefully, before rashly jumping to conclusions. If you had, you'd have noticed that I'm wary that this sort of outmoded 'blanket'/indiscriminate' application of the term would have only been made by any scholar in their right mind, either before the term "Berber" became only utilized in a linguistic sense/context,OR when they are quoting or citing ancient accounts/texts utilizing the term.
quote: The quote actually comes from Ivan Sertima's Golden Age of the Moors. Have you read it?
In full: According to Dana Reynolds, the original Black Berbers, who were called Moors, were the North African ancestors of the present day dark-brown and dark-black peoples of the Sahara and the Sahel, mainly those called Fulani, Tuareg, Zenagha of Southern Morocco, Kunta and Tebbu of the Sahel countries as well as other black Arabs now living in Mauretania and throughout the Sahel, they include Trarza of Mauretania and Senegal, the Mogharba as well as dozens of other Sudanese tribes, the Chaamba of Chad and Algeria. Apart from her very detailed study of the origins and affiliations of the various tribes, she points out that the Africans involved in the Moorish occupation of Iberia did not just build remarkable things in Europe but also in their native lands. They founded and constructed many industrious and prosperous towns all over the north of Africa and as far south as Timbuktu. The ruins of their many castles can be seen as much in Northern Africa as in Andalusia.
Needless to say that this "blanket" application of "Berbers", is not only outmoded, but also inaccurately makes it seem that all the said groups stem from the same recent ancestors. Goes back to the point I just made. Even so, the author professes that the blanket term "Moors" was applied; does this mean that "Moors" and "Berbers" were used concurrently in reference to "North Africans" by the ancients?...because he must only be placing these terms in the outmoded historic contexts they were placed in, as a scholar who is well aware of the modern "linguistic-only" context of the term "Berber".
quote: Note Sertima includes 'dozens of Sudanese tribes'.
He is obviously not saying they speak Berber langauge, but if you want to suggest that Sertima doesn't know this....go right ahead.
What he knows, is irrelevant to what I stated above.
quote: Again, I suggest.....slow your roll. Listen before you leap.
It looks like the one who needs to head that advice is but yourself. See the posts above.
Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ I saw it, and i'm saddened by the rock headed folly on display.
This will be my last reply on this subject, which is one more than you deserve...
quote:Supercar writes: You just don't seem to get it, do you? Even so, who calls any group 'today' "Berbers", aside from the linguistic affiliation?
^ Non sequitur, since they are discussing the history of people called Berbers...not 'who calls any group Berber today'. Berber is today a linguistic group, but it has not been so for most of it's history. This is the context of Dr. Van Sertima's intelligent discourse. Not his fault that you are too lazy to read it, and so miss the point.
He doesn't need you to tell him that the Fulani speak a Niger-Congo language, silly. That's besides the point.
You seem to be on some imaginery 'debate' pitting Dr. Van Sertima against Dr. Obvious, namely you...who once again didn't even bother to read the article he's ranting about.
Here's what matters....
quote:rasol: Have you read it?
quote:supercar: No I haven't.
^ You'd rather rant than read, and that's where we differ. Rant on, my friend, but don't waste my time.....this conversation is over. Come back when you've read what you're ranting about, and we can have a real discussion.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
^ I saw it, and i'm saddened by the rock headed folly on display.
I saw your post, and I wasn't amused by what a profoundly illiterate retard you are.
quote:r-asshole:
This will be my last reply on this subject, which is one more than you deserve...
quote:Supercar writes: You just don't seem to get it, do you? Even so, who calls any group 'today' "Berbers", aside from the linguistic affiliation?
^
Non sequitur, since they are discussing the history of people called Berbers...not 'who calls any group Berber today'.
Retard, which "Berbers" are "they" discussing; according to which historic texts referencing that term?
quote:r-asshole:
Berber is today a linguistic group, but it has not been so for most of it's history. This is the context of Dr. Van Sertima's intelligent discourse. Not his fault that you are too lazy to read it, and so miss the point.
Jackass, tell me why haven't you answered this:
the author professes that the blanket term "Moors" was applied; does this mean that "Moors" and "Berbers" were used concurrently in reference to "North Africans" by the ancients?
^^Name the "specific" historic texts that cite "Berbers" and "Moors" as a reference to North Africans concurrently, and interchangeably, and how they applied to the mentioned groups? Tell us who these specific historic authors are, and the specific timeframes they made the texts in question? Let's find out how much you learn from Van Sertima, whom you just so happened to inject into the discussion.
quote:r-asshole:
He doesn't need you to tell him that the Fulani speak a Niger-Congo language, silly. That's besides the point.
Well punk, you wouldn't see a 'point' if it ran over you; you've already been told that the indiscriminate use of "Berber" [aside from its up-to-date context of linguistic affiliation] in this day and age is not only irresponsible, but that its application as done in the citation, is distorted even when placed in a historical context.
quote: You seem to be on some imaginery 'debate' pitting Dr. Van Sertima against Dr. Obvious, namely you...who once again didn't even bother to read the article he's ranting about.
r-asshole, having not bothered to 'carefully' read my post that you are ranting about, I believe you are the one who injected Van Sertima into a discussion wherein I never even mentioned the guy, and now like the desperate hypocrite that you are, proclaiming that I'm the one pitting myself against the man. What crack-ass you are. LOL.
quote:r-asshole:
Here's what matters....
quote:rasol: Have you read it?
quote:supercar: No I haven't.
^
So this is the desperateness you're reduced to, r-asshole?
...copying & pasting stuff from completely different discussions, from completely different timeframes, not to mention the completely different contexts; You must really think that there is another person out there as immensely dense as yourself to fall for this lame stunt.
quote: You'd rather rant than read, and that's where we differ. Rant on, my friend, but don't waste my time.....this conversation is over. Come back when you've read what you're ranting about, and we can have real discussion
And here's my advice: Come back when you are able to distinguish your ass from your head, answer the questions as asked [instead of dodging them again], after having 'carefully' read my post. Go!
Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Even the bedouins around the Sinai and parts of Egypt are often Arabized Beja or contain groups of non-Arabian peninsula origin. When analyzing these groups its important to break them down into which bedouin group instead of grouping them all together as a whole.
The Tuareg are a collective people that form many groups or Kels that require the same precise analyization.
The French have a weird sense of whiteness vs. blackness and would probably think that most Carribean Hispanic groups like Puerto Ricans are ''white'' because they are very light brown or often have whites amongst them. Maghrebians[including Tuaregs] were called ''white'' in Francophone literature despite most being a very light brown complexion. Of course there are many ''white'' skinned Maghrebians but the majority are just a lighter brownish color. The ironic sociological factor is that no Maghrebian regardless of their color is afforded any privilage in French society.
The theory of Tuaregs becoming darker because of intermingling with sub-Saharan Africans or Arabs seems inplausible to me. Most high caste Tuaregs would not mix with enslaved populations bvecause of the strict matrilineal sucession. The Tuaregs mixing with Arabs is definately out of the question considering that Tuaregs put up fierce resistance against the Arabs. Only one Tuareg Kel has mixed with Arabs.
Posts: 8675 | From: Tukuler al~Takruri as Ardo since OCT2014 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by ausar: Even the bedouins around the Sinai and parts of Egypt are often Arabized Beja or contain groups of non-Arabian peninsula origin. When analyzing these groups its important to break them down into which bedouin group instead of grouping them all together as a whole.
The Tuareg are a collective people that form many groups or Kels that require the same precise analyization.
The French have a weird sense of whiteness vs. blackness and would probably think that most Carribean Hispanic groups like Puerto Ricans are ''white'' because they are very light brown or often have whites amongst them. Maghrebians[including Tuaregs] were called ''white'' in Francophone literature despite most being a very light brown complexion. Of course there are many ''white'' skinned Maghrebians but the majority are just a lighter brownish color. The ironic sociological factor is that no Maghrebian regardless of their color is afforded any privilage in French society.
The theory of Tuaregs becoming darker because of intermingling with sub-Saharan Africans or Arabs seems inplausible to me. Most high caste Tuaregs would not mix with enslaved populations bvecause of the strict matrilineal sucession. The Tuaregs mixing with Arabs is definately out of the question considering that Tuaregs put up fierce resistance against the Arabs. Only one Tuareg Kel has mixed with Arabs.
There seems to be very little evidence that Berber speakers in general look to "Yemen" as a home of origin, and what little there is 'sussed' due to the Islamic bragging rights factor.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
^ lol. It's not serious. We've all seen SuperCar's juvenile tantrums before. No one cares.
You bet it's not serious, so much so that you put yourself on some imaginary 'moral' pedastal, when it is clear for all to see that 'juvenile tantrums' you are referring to, was initiated by none other than yourself. Not a single name calling in my responses to you prior to the last, which was obviously a way to communicate down to you as the 'juvenile' with 'tantrums' that you were [and still are]. Apparently, you cared enough to show another of those 'juvenile tantrums' even in this very post that I'm quoting you on, while coming up quite short on answers [actually no answers] to what you were requested to produce.
Ps - Those outstanding requests to yet be answered:
Produce 'historic' reference on the 'berber', by specifically 'whom', with respect to 'specifically' whom, and it had better be in application to all the said groups mentioned in the so-called extract.
Produce the 'historic' reference that these same groups were referred to as 'Moors' concurrently with the term 'Berber'.
Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, I'd say, some Sahelians in general look to the Yemen for pedigree. The most famous non-Amazigh example would be Dia al~Yemen in the Songhai kingdom/empire founder mythos (Za dynasty c. 690 CE).
And yes, Islam has everything to do with it. Yet and still, we must recognize the idea of patrilineal ancestry, and the droves of Yeminis who did indeed flock to Africa (though, of course, doing so much too late to be responsible for any polity other than that of what's today Mauritania).
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I agree, key point is that "Arbabian" lineages are surprisingly low, even among the fair-skinned Magrebian Berber....much less among the darker Berber of inner Africa.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yeah, weren't that many to start with, and what few there actually were apparently their genes drifted away or never made it through to the bottle's neck.
quote:The French have a weird sense of whiteness vs. blackness and would probably think that most Carribean Hispanic groups like Puerto Ricans are ''white'' because they are very light brown or often have whites amongst them. Maghrebians[including Tuaregs] were called ''white'' in Francophone literature despite most being a very light brown complexion. Of course there are many ''white'' skinned Maghrebians but the majority are just a lighter brownish color. The ironic sociological factor is that no Maghrebian regardless of their color is afforded any privilage in French society.
^ lol. It's not serious. We've all seen SuperCar's juvenile tantrums before. No one cares.
You bet it's not serious, so much so that you put yourself on some imaginary 'moral' pedastal, when it is clear for all to see that 'juvenile tantrums' you are referring to, was initiated by none other than yourself. Not a single name calling in my responses to you prior to the last, which was obviously a way to communicate down to you as the 'juvenile' with 'tantrums' that you were [and still are]. Apparently, you cared enough to show another of those 'juvenile tantrums' even in this very post that I'm quoting you on, while coming up quite short on answers [actually no answers] to what you were requested to produce.
Ps - Those outstanding requests to yet be answered:
Produce 'historic' reference on the 'berber', by specifically 'whom', with respect to 'specifically' whom, and it had better be in application to all the said groups mentioned in the so-called extract.
Produce the 'historic' reference that these same groups were referred to as 'Moors' concurrently with the term 'Berber'.
A sure good thing that you are well aware that you don't have the spine to address these 'seemingly' casual questions; it is obviously easy to simply parrot other people without having a clue about what you are parroting. Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think the first thing people need to be aware of when referring to "Berbers" is that it is the French who first came to call the Kabyles and other fair-skinned peoples by the term Berber. That usage is very recent. Previous to that Arabicized Muslims and Islamicized Africans referred only to Tuareg and related tribes as the "Berberi". Romans and Byzantines generally referred to these tribes as Maures or Mauresioi. Corippus, Procopius, Polemon, Platus, Claudian in his de Bello Gildonico, Juvenal all describe the early "Berbers" as black, Ethiopians, dark red as the Indi.
The Periplus of the Eritraean Sea near the time of Christ refers to the people of the area now generally referred to as Somalia as the country of the Berbers. Berber was a not an infrequent place name among the Cushitic speakers and it is evidently related to the name for watering places, and was probably etymologically related to the Cushitic and Berber word for the phallus, warrior and young males in general.
Procopius (6th century) referred to all of the ancient so called "Berber" rulers of the Massyles (direct ancestors of the modern Messalama of Libya and Sudan). Masasyles (modern Shilha,Chluh), Gaitules (Joddala modern pastoral Fulani) as Maures and says the Maures "were black unlike the Vandals". Corippus similarly refers to the more than one to the black color of the Maures. The name Gildo, the ruler of the Maures of Roman North Africa comes from the Tuarek word Gallidi-ma or Aguellid. The name of the ruler Tekfarinas means son of the Afaren and Ifuren the name of the Tuarek clans which later Muslims came to call Beni Yafren or Ifren (anciently called Afar and Pharusii). Claudian said his mixing of Roman women with Gildo's tribesmen made "Ethiopian hybrids" affright the cradles.
Thus confusing modern Berbers or rather Berber speakers - a polyglot of peoples who consist of different colors and cultures, with the ancient speakers of Berber has done nothing but cause confusion as to the origins of the Tuarek and the original populations of North Africa - both dark and fair-skinned.
When Sultan Mohamed Bello in a Bornu manuscript Infak al Masuri written around the late 1700s or early 1800s refers to Berbers as "a remnant of the Beriberi living between the Zinj and Habesh", he is obviously not referring to Kabyles, Shawia and other very fair skinned Berber-speakers whose palm prints, blood types and pottery shows they are likely biological descendants of ancient Greeks and other Euro-Mediterraneans. This doesn't preclude the fact that they also have Afro-Asiatic or Berber genes as well.
However, it was the ancestors of the Tuarek who conquered these North African coastal areas and brought the so called Berber dialect of Tamashek - meaning simply belonging to the Imoshagh or Amazek). The Mezikes who were known to Byzantine writers as "Ethiopians" were one ancestral group of the Tuarek also known as Megabari and Makhuritae in Nubia until late. The word seems to be a compound word comprised of their ancient sun and fire god Mash and the sak or zag signifying encampment around the hearth. Richmond Palmer and others, long before the discovery of a genetic connection to the Bedja or Bediyat(ancient Madjayu)or Beja had classified Tuarek customs as Beja customs.
Previous to the camel-owning Tuarek in North Africa who as Ethio-Arabians probably settled in Egypt and North Africa from the Gulf of Elah with the (Hyksos invasions of the mid-snd millenium B.C.) were the Fulani, Fellata or Peuls also known as Futa-be (Woodabe). Those still located in refugee camps in Niger and other parts of the Sahel are the spitting image of the peoples pictured in the ancient tomb paintings of the Lebou-Tenennu as shown in books of Nina Davies.
Many still have the same exact brown coloring, physiognomy, hairstyles with braids and side curl and acquiline profiles aside, while the authors and photographers of the Fulani in the book NOMADS OF THE NIGER, show that even the Fulani dress and tatoos are still the same as was worn by the Tehenu people over 3000 years ago. The many cultural connections of the Fulani with these ancient Libyans had already been spoken of by Oric Bates who did not even have access to many of the archeological references we have today on ancient North Africa.
The fact that Fulani today speak a language related more to West African Niger-Congo groups means little and has to do with them living longer amongst other Africans in the area of Takrur, etc. A fact is, early explorers knew the Fulani to be speakers of two dialects - one of which was different enough to have been considered of an origin external to Africa. Another fact is Muslim writers definitely considered the Fulani of Goddala ancestry and thus they are likely the Gaitules mentioned by Juvenal, Procopius and other early writers 1500 to 2000 years ago as being "black" and for Josephus descendants of Kush.
Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by qoucela: I think the first thing people need to be aware of when referring to "Berbers" is that it is the French who first came to call the Kabyles and other fair-skinned peoples by the term Berber. That usage is very recent. Previous to that Arabicized Muslims and Islamicized Africans referred only to Tuareg and related tribes as the "Berberi".
^ This is precisely correct, and this is what Van Sertima was relating by way of Dana Reynolds, which AlTakruri 1st posted.
Champollion for example, refers to the Beja of Egypt and Sudan, as Berberi.
You are, all 4 of you...correct. Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Thus confusing modern Berbers or rather Berber speakers - a polyglot of peoples who consist of different colors and cultures, with the ancient speakers of Berber has done nothing but cause confusion as to the origins of the Tuarek and the original populations of North Africa - both dark and fair-skinned.
quote:Previous to the camel-owning Tuarek in North Africa who as Ethio-Arabians probably settled in Egypt and North Africa from the Gulf of Elah with the (Hyksos invasions of the mid-snd millenium B.C.) were the Fulani, Fellata or Peuls also known as Futa-be (Woodabe). Those still located in refugee camps in Niger and other parts of the Sahel are the spitting image of the peoples pictured in the ancient tomb paintings of the Lebou-Tenennu as shown in books of Nina Davies.
Many still have the same exact brown coloring, physiognomy, hairstyles with braids and side curl and acquiline profiles aside, while the authors and photographers of the Fulani in the book NOMADS OF THE NIGER, show that even the Fulani dress and tatoos are still the same as was worn by the Tehenu people over 3000 years ago.
Here is where you go astray, although understandably.
Based upon genetics - Taureg are overwhelmingly Native African, and possibly East African in origin.
Based upon genetics, Fulani are overwhelmingly West African, and have no substantial East African component.
It's the Taureg, The Siwa and possibly the Beja who are related to the Tehenu, not the Fulani.
Bearing in mind that the subject of this thread is genetics, please see the following...
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
^ The genetic distance between the Taureg and the Beja [135] is close enough that Cavelli Sforze theorizes a common East African origin within the last 5000 years, for them.
Taureg lineages vary greatly but in some genetic study they show as having as much as 30% E3b [east african], 30% native E1 and E2 [sahelian/west african], and 30% E3a [west african. They have very little in the way of a Arabian component usually less than 10%, so they definitely do not originate in Arabia.
In contrast, the Fulani, in some studies have as much as 100% E3a...they are one of the few groups ever studied in the history of genetics to ever yield such mono-topic paternal lineage.
No groups of Fulani have been shown to be significantly E3b - East African, and in genetic distance - Fulani are virtually indistinguishable from other West Africans, in comparison with East Africans from whom they are quite distant.
Look at the relationship in the graph above between West Africans, on the one hand, and Taureg and Beja, as well as other East Africans on the other. [dist. ave 500].
Based on the accumlation of genetic, archeological and linguistic evidence, Fulani originate in the Sahara - from no further east than Algeria.
Taureg originate in East Africa, possible in the horn Sudan region or the Siwa Oasis region West of the Nile.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by rasol: Taureg lineages vary greatly but in some genetic study they show as having as much as 30% E3b [east african], 30% native E1 and E2 [sahelian/west african], and 30% E3a [west african. They have very little in the way of a Arabian component usually less than 10%, so they definitely do not originate in Arabia.
In contrast, the Fulani, in some studies have as much as 100% E3a...they are one of the few groups ever studied in the history of genetics to ever yield such mono-topic paternal lineage.
No groups of Fulani have been shown to be significantly E3b - East African, and in genetic distance - Fulani are virtually indistinguishable from other West Africans, in comparison with East Africans from whom they are quite distant.
Look at the relationship in the graph above between West Africans, on the one hand, and Taureg and Beja, as well as other East Africans on the other. [dist. ave 500].
Based on the accumlation of genetic, archeological and linguistic evidence, Fulani originate in the Sahara - from no further east than Algeria.
Taureg originate in East Africa, possible in the horn Sudan region or the Siwa Oasis region West of the Nile.
Evergreen Writes:
It is necessary to do further sampling of Fulani sub-sets from various locations. In addition, we need to have further delineation of haplogroup E3a. E3a carriers were certainly present in Holocene NE Africa (Siwa Oasis), correct? However, you are correct in that the elongated morphology of Fulani was also presnet in NW Africa as well. It is a Sahel specific morphology.
Posts: 2007 | From: Washington State | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:It is necessary to do further sampling of Fulani sub-sets from various locations. In addition, we need to have further delineation of haplogroup E3a. E3a carriers were certainly present in Holocene NE Africa (Siwa Oasis), correct?
Is there E3a in Siwa? What study are you referencing here?
And, how to account for the abscense of E3b in the several Fulani studies to date?
quote:However, you are correct in that the elongated morphology of Fulani was also presnet in NW Africa as well. It is a Sahel specific morphology.
Absolutely, and this goes for the Taureg too, who have similar morphology.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by rasol: [QUOTE]Is there E3a in Siwa? What study are you referencing here?
Evergreen Writes:
Not sure, it was a actual question. Keita has noted that E3a flowed into AE from the neolithic Sahara. If this were the case, given the archaeology one would expect the range of E3a to reach Siwa, correct? What this points out is that more study is required before we can reach concensus.
quote:Originally posted by rasol: [QUOTE]And, how to account for the abscense of E3b in the several Fulani studies to date?
Evergreen Writes:
I am actually not sure that this is an accurate assumption. Are you comfortable making this assertion given the limited samples of Fulani from Niger?
Posts: 2007 | From: Washington State | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
What is problematic about discussing Tuareg, Fulani, Siwa, etc over great expanses of time is that all of these MODERN populations have multiple ANCIENT lineages with diverse geographic origins.
Posts: 2007 | From: Washington State | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
I think the first thing people need to be aware of when referring to "Berbers" is that it is the French who first came to call the Kabyles and other fair-skinned peoples by the term Berber. That usage is very recent. Previous to that Arabicized Muslims and Islamicized Africans referred only to Tuareg and related tribes as the "Berberi". Romans and Byzantines generally referred to these tribes as Maures or Mauresioi. Corippus, Procopius, Polemon, Platus, Claudian in his de Bello Gildonico, Juvenal all describe the early "Berbers" as black, Ethiopians, dark red as the Indi...
I think the first thing people need to be aware of when referring to "Berbers" is that it is the French who first came to call the Kabyles and other fair-skinned peoples by the term Berber.
From where did the French develop this term? When and at specifically whom, did the French apply? Please provide primary specific sources, if you will.
quote:
That usage is very recent.
Figures, which is why when it is used as in a citation above, one has to wonder about the validity of the application in either its historic context, or recent.
quote: Previous to that Arabicized Muslims and Islamicized Africans referred only to Tuareg and related tribes as the "Berberi".
Does this have any relation to the term "al-Barbar". What do you know about this term, where and to whom was it specifically and initially applied, and originally by whom? Who are the "Tuareg's" related tribes as you 'understand' it?
quote: Romans and Byzantines generally referred to these tribes as Maures or Mauresioi. Corippus, Procopius, Polemon, Platus, Claudian in his de Bello Gildonico, Juvenal all describe the early "Berbers" as black, Ethiopians, dark red as the Indi.
I notice you placed Berbers in quotation marks, and naturally, you are speaking of two different timeframes, for the Romans never used such a term as "Berbers". So you cannot be using the term "Berbers" within the Roman context, to refer to "black [groups], Ethiopians, dark as red as the Indians", and not be attributing it to the 'modern' construct of "Berbers", as it is used today.
quote:The Periplus of the Eritraean Sea near the time of Christ refers to the people of the area now generally referred to as Somalia as the country of the Berbers. Berber was a not an infrequent place name among the Cushitic speakers and it is evidently related to the name for watering places, and was probably etymologically related to the Cushitic and Berber word for the phallus, warrior and young males in general.
I understand the term along the lines of "Barbar" or "Barbary" was used somewhere in what is now part of Somalia in the past, a term which stuck in Somalia, but never developed to the point where "Somalis" have become associated with the term "Berber". Why do you think that is?
quote: Procopius (6th century) referred to all of the ancient so called "Berber" rulers of the Massyles (direct ancestors of the modern Messalama of Libya and Sudan).
Exactly what term did Procopius use; can you produce a citation. I also can't help but notice that you said "Massyles" are "direct ancestors of the modern Messalama of Libya and Sudan" But to which group, and located where, did Procopius initially make the said reference?
quote: Masasyles (modern Shilha,Chluh), Gaitules (Joddala modern pastoral Fulani) as Maures and says the Maures "were black unlike the Vandals". Corippus similarly refers to the more than one to the black color of the Maures.
Were all these groups also called the people of "bilad al Barbar", while being called "Maures"? Does the author specifically use the constructs that you've used for these ethnic entities, in terms of "Masayles" and "Joddala" which you've associated with certain groups. How did you derive the associations?...Through the said folks themselves or through outsiders, i.e. from the time that Procopius mentioned the aforementioned names. In which source(s) does Procopius make these observations?
quote: The name Gildo, the ruler of the Maures of Roman North Africa comes from the Tuarek word Gallidi-ma or Aguellid. The name of the ruler Tekfarinas means son of the Afaren and Ifuren the name of the Tuarek clans which later Muslims came to call Beni Yafren or Ifren (anciently called Afar and Pharusii). Claudian said his mixing of Roman women with Gildo's tribesmen made "Ethiopian hybrids" affright the cradles.
"Maures" was used by Romans, but only on coastal North Africans of the time, and if anything remotely approaching sub-Saharan Africa, it would be regions near the Sahelian portions of east Africa, like that of Kush, around the areas bordering Kush and Egypt at the time.
quote: Thus confusing modern Berbers or rather Berber speakers - a polyglot of peoples who consist of different colors and cultures, with the ancient speakers of Berber has done nothing but cause confusion as to the origins of the Tuarek and the original populations of North Africa - both dark and fair-skinned.
Which brings me back to the point about your claim of its 'recent' provenance. Where and when was the term "Berber" first attested to, and by which author? From where did this term 'develop'? To specifically which region(s) and specifically whom was it applied, and by whom? Do you think it is accidental that the term "Berber" has become associated with certain sub-Afrasan language speakers?
quote:
When Sultan Mohamed Bello in a Bornu manuscript Infak al Masuri written around the late 1700s or early 1800s refers to Berbers as "a remnant of the Beriberi living between the Zinj and Habesh", he is obviously not referring to Kabyles, Shawia and other very fair skinned Berber-speakers whose palm prints, blood types and pottery shows they are likely biological descendants of ancient Greeks and other Euro-Mediterraneans. This doesn't preclude the fact that they also have Afro-Asiatic or Berber genes as well.
Goes back to my mention of 'bilad al Barbar'. How does this author precisely reference the term; does it in any way ressemble what I just mentioned? If there is no distinction here, why do you suppose that the said author would do this, given that Arab historians generally called regions in the Sahel and sub-Saharan Africa as 'bilad al Sudan'. Did the author assume some form of bio-cultural relationship here as a justification, 'providing' that the exact same constructs where used on geographically distant locations?
quote: However, it was the ancestors of the Tuarek who conquered these North African coastal areas and brought the so called Berber dialect of Tamashek - meaning simply belonging to the Imoshagh or Amazek).
The Sanhaja "Berbers" and perhaps other related Sahelian "Berber speaking" [Tuareg groups] groups did conquer coastal Northwest Africa, from thence moved into the Iberian peninsula [in Spain], where they were referred to as "Maurs". I use the term "Berber" in its modern context, in reference to the said groups as they are now known to "Euro-schooled' outsiders of the term/construct. Guess what? It was coastal northwest Africa, which was referred to as "bilad al Barbar" by the folks from the Arab or "Arabized world" in "southwest Asia" and "north Africa", given which, it wouldn't be puzzling to figure out how the name got to Europeans, who were at the time not exactly familiar with inner-Africans. "Maures" was a term used on these North Africans by "Europeans" of the time, i.e. throughout the 'Medieval period', whereby its context changed from the earlier times of that period to the later times, after that period. During those early days when North Africans ruled in southwest Europe, it was just in reference to coastal Northwest African kingdoms, established by Sahelian "Berber" groups from within the vicinity of the region between Morocco and Mauritania.
quote:rasol
quote:Originally posted by qoucela: I think the first thing people need to be aware of when referring to "Berbers" is that it is the French who first came to call the Kabyles and other fair-skinned peoples by the term Berber. That usage is very recent. Previous to that Arabicized Muslims and Islamicized Africans referred only to Tuareg and related tribes as the "Berberi".
^ This is precisely correct, and this is what Van Sertima was relating by way of Dana Reynolds, which AlTakruri 1st posted.
Dana Reynold's according to the piece above, is referencing certain groups. Where is your evidence that the term "Berber" originally referred to all these groups, and by whom, and when? What is the precise historic time frame that this reference was made, and how did this application come to be? Please provide the full etymology of the term, the texts they were used in, the authors who used it, and on whom it was applied. Let's examine if your claim about the 'original indigenous Berbers' fits the bill, i.e. your earlier assertion in response to my post.
quote: Champollion for example, refers to the Beja of Egypt and Sudan, as Berberi.
You are, all 4 of you...correct
So is Dana/Van Sertima basing "dozens of other Sudanese tribes" on a fairly recent scholar as "Champollion" or the "ancient" context? …Or did Champollion use the same specific sources to make the claim? Please clarify, and how this puts them in the same bracket of being 'correct'. If not, please provide the exact sources and time frames that Dana/Van Sertima used to justify the manner which the term "Berber" was applied in the extract provided earlier.
If you can discuss this off-topic issue here, then I see no reason why it can't be discussed on-topic in a topic that actually addresses the issue. Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
I am actually not sure that this is an accurate assumption. Are you comfortable making this assertion given the limited samples of Fulani from Niger?
i'm comfortable with relating the existing evidence, whatever it may be.
if there are studies showing signficant e3b in fulani....i'd be very comfortable relating them, however i don't know of any.
I am familiar with distinct studies of fulani from niger, from cameroon, burkina faso and from senegal, as well as hla data from burkina faso, and sforza's autosomal data.
the general approach of these studies is to speculate on and exotic origin for the fulani, and most often relate surprise when little or no such indicators are found.
In these cases exotic is equated to: Berber, Egyptian, Arabian, and/or Majik-K'zoid.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
^ The genetic distance between the Taureg and the Beja [135] is close enough that Cavelli Sforze theorizes a common East African origin within the last 5000 years, for them.
Taureg lineages vary greatly but in some genetic study they show as having as much as 30% E3b [east african], 30% native E1 and E2 [sahelian/west african], and 30% E3a [west african. They have very little in the way of a Arabian component usually less than 10%, so they definitely do not originate in Arabia.
In contrast, the Fulani, in some studies have as much as 100% E3a...they are one of the few groups ever studied in the history of genetics to ever yield such mono-topic paternal lineage.
No groups of Fulani have been shown to be significantly E3b - East African, and in genetic distance - Fulani are virtually indistinguishable from other West Africans, in comparison with East Africans from whom they are quite distant.
Look at the relationship in the graph above between West Africans, on the one hand, and Taureg and Beja, as well as other East Africans on the other. [dist. ave 500].
Based on the accumlation of genetic, archeological and linguistic evidence, Fulani originate in the Sahara - from no further east than Algeria.
Taureg originate in East Africa, possible in the horn Sudan region or the Siwa Oasis region West of the Nile.
Mayne, I would be wary of any close genetic relationship between Beja and Tuaregs, just look at this critiwue of Cavalli-Sforza data:
"Within the Saharan/Northern African group there are two subclusters. One is comprised of a number of "national" North African populations (Moroccan, Tunisian, Libyan, Egyptian), as well as Nubian, Bedouin, Berber, and Canarian. Cavalli-Sforza et al. (1994:172) note that there are few data available on the genetic makeup of the Canarian group, and it is not clear whether they are data on modern peoples or on the extinct Guanches. The other cluster consists of a number of Northeast African populations, including the national Sudanese and a generalized Cushitic-speaking group. Within this Northeast African group, one subcluster does not conform to historical or linguistic expectations, as it associates the Algerian national population fairly closely with the Beja of eastern Sudan and somewhat more distantly with the Berber-speaking Tuareg; the latter group thus appears to be rather distinct from other Berber populations. Cavalli-Sforza et al. (pp. 17273) posit an ancient relationship between Tuareg and Beja, largely, it appears, on the basis of their shared status as pastoralists. There are no other data that I know of that indicate such a link, and in any case it does not explain the putative close relationship of modern Algerians to both groups. The researchers note that they have data on relatively few genes from this Algerian group, but it should be pointed out that such small data sets are no obstacle to the acceptance of particular genetic associations when these fit their expectationsthe Canarian case noted above is a good example. This pattern of acceptance and rejection of generally equivalent data on the basis of their concordance with expectations is common throughout The History and Geography of Human Genes and is an example of the strategy of post-hoc accommodative argument noted by Clark (1998)."
The study you got that fst distsnce chart from is full of discrepancies that have not been fully explained by Cavalli-Sforza.
Posts: 2595 | From: Vicksburg | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
^I've already pointed out the other flaws of the study having to do with what comprises the sampling "entities", when this chart was posted. I'll see if I can dig out the thread in question. That said, I wouldn't be surprised to see some close genetic linkage between "Tuareg" [West African Sahelian Tamazigh speaking] groups, and the Bedawi (Beja speakers). I thought it was interesting that according to a poster going by the "Jomo" username, having wrote to Underhill out of curiousity about which groups Underhill detected E-M81 in Sudan, that he was told that it occurred in two Beja subjects.
Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by rasol: Taureg lineages vary greatly but in some genetic study they show as having as much as 30% E3b [east african], 30% native E1 and E2 [sahelian/west african], and 30% E3a [west african. They have very little in the way of a Arabian component usually less than 10%, so they definitely do not originate in Arabia.
In contrast, the Fulani, in some studies have as much as 100% E3a...they are one of the few groups ever studied in the history of genetics to ever yield such mono-topic paternal lineage.
No groups of Fulani have been shown to be significantly E3b - East African, and in genetic distance - Fulani are virtually indistinguishable from other West Africans, in comparison with East Africans from whom they are quite distant.
Look at the relationship in the graph above between West Africans, on the one hand, and Taureg and Beja, as well as other East Africans on the other. [dist. ave 500].
Based on the accumlation of genetic, archeological and linguistic evidence, Fulani originate in the Sahara - from no further east than Algeria.
Taureg originate in East Africa, possible in the horn Sudan region or the Siwa Oasis region West of the Nile.
Evergreen Writes:
It is necessary to do further sampling of Fulani sub-sets from various locations. In addition, we need to have further delineation of haplogroup E3a. E3a carriers were certainly present in Holocene NE Africa (Siwa Oasis), correct? However, you are correct in that the elongated morphology of Fulani was also presnet in NW Africa as well. It is a Sahel specific morphology.
As far as I know about the Siwa, paternally they are E-V6 and B-M106, I'm not sure what E-DYS271 one is, maybe its E3a(?), but Siwa have it at a percentage of 6%, while having only 1% of E-M81.
Posts: 2595 | From: Vicksburg | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Supercar: ^I've already pointed out the other flaws of the study having to do with what comprises the sampling "entities", when this chart was posted. I'll see if I can dig out the thread in question. That said, I wouldn't be surprised to see some close genetic linkage between "Tuareg" [West African Sahelian Tamazigh speaking] groups, and the Bedawi (Beja speakers). I thought it was interesting that according to a poster going by the "Jomo" username, having wrote to Underhill out of curiousity about which groups Underhill detected E-M81 in Sudan, that he was told that it occurred in two Beja subjects.
I understand what you're saying, but in that same study Cavalli_Sforza et al clusters Nubians and Moroccans, Sandawe with Serer, Wolof and Peul and San with Somalis, it just doesn't add up. Check out this chart, its totally crap
As far as I know about the Siwa, paternally they are E-V6 and B-M106, I'm not sure what E-DYS271 one is, maybe its E3a(?), but Siwa have it at a percentage of 6%, while having only 1% of E-M81.
^Which study attributed those frequencies for Siwa? It must be from the "Jean-Michel Dugoujon" presentation. Nonetheless, this is what we also know about the lineages in the North eastern African corner:
If Luis et al. are anything to go by, the possible appearance of E-M81 in Northwest Africa, came about ~ 2ky:
"E3b2-M81, which is present in relatively high levels in Morocco, dispersed mainly to the west. This proposal is in acordance with a population expansion involving E3b2-M81 believed to have occurred in northwestern Africa ~ 2 KY ago. The considerably older linear expansion estimate of the Egyptian E3b2-M81 (5.4 KY ago)..." - Luis et al. 2004
As far as I know about the Siwa, paternally they are E-V6 and B-M106, I'm not sure what E-DYS271 one is, maybe its E3a(?)...
It is a locus associated with some YAP+ derived lineage(s), that much I know.
quote:Originally posted by X-Ras:
quote:Originally posted by Supercar:
^I've already pointed out the other flaws of the study having to do with what comprises the sampling "entities", when this chart was posted. I'll see if I can dig out the thread in question. That said, I wouldn't be surprised to see some close genetic linkage between "Tuareg" [West African Sahelian Tamazigh speaking] groups, and the Bedawi (Beja speakers). I thought it was interesting that according to a poster going by the "Jomo" username, having wrote to Underhill out of curiousity about which groups Underhill detected E-M81 in Sudan, that he was told that it occurred in two Beja subjects.
I understand what you're saying, but in that same study Cavalli_Sforza et al clusters Nubians and Moroccans, Sandawe with Serer, Wolof and Peul and San with Somalis, it just doesn't add up. Check out this chart, its totally crap
I understand that this is presumably derived from 'autosomal' markers, because I've never been sure of what markers were used here. Even in terms of autosomes, the idea of being able to clearly discern populations from common ancestry but which would otherwise have become geographically distant for a considerable amount of time, needs to at least be questioned.
Ps - Yeap, it appears that E3a, M2 which is associated with the sY81 site, is also known by the locus designation of "DYS271".
Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
I think the first thing people need to be aware of when referring to "Berbers" is that it is the French who first came to call the Kabyles and other fair-skinned peoples by the term Berber.
From where did the French develop this term? When and at specifically whom, did the French apply? Please provide primary specific sources, if you will.
If you can discuss this off-topic issue here, then I see no reason why it can't be discussed on-topic in a topic that actually addresses the issue. [/QB][/QUOTE]
Thank you for your response and for informing of the place where this can be discussed. Unfortunately, most of the questions you asked can not be answered thoroughly in a few paragraphs. However, I would like to state the region I am mentioning the multi-cultural origins and some written traditions of the remote origins of the original Berber-speakers or first peoples to be called Berber.
In order for one to study any population genetically, we can all agree the proper population sets and control factors would have to be present. Most studies of DNA are done on populations assumed to be biologically monolithic or unilinearly evolved, - such as the "Berbers", "Fulani" or "West Africans" "sub-saharan Africans" or "Native Americans". As "scholars" have tended to do this haphazardly, African ethnohistory is liable to get even more distorted than previously. Such has been the case with the people who have come to be classified as "Berbers". When in truth as I mentioned the peoples the French and other Europeans today call Berbers, the modern Berber speakers, include peoples of various biological ethnic and cultural origins who happen to speak similar dialects of the "Berber group.
Berbers are no more a race than peoples of India or the Middle East. In fact, as the earlier cranial and osteological studies, DNA studies have related some of them to Eurasians, others to Portuguese/Iberians and the Tuarek to Bedja and other Africans - depending on the region. Most of these genetic scholars are ignorant of the documented movement of various peoples into North Africa in ancient and modern times, such as the Iranians, Turks, Levantines and slaves from North and South of the Berber Mauri) which have contributed to the original Berber areas of habitation.
In a similar vein, Fulani or Peul speakers in he midst of West Africa should show affiliation and physiognomical similarities to peoples of the West African area they have mixed with. The same can not be said of the pastoral or so called red Fulani living further north who are obviously less mixed with "West Africans" as you call them and show close physiognomies and osteological connections to Northeast Africans or Cushitic- speakers.
In any case, if you have questions with regard to the origins of the term "Berber" as used through time please see the biography for the article by Dana Reynolds in GOLDEN AGE OF THE MOOR. I will also try to answer some of your other questions in the section of postings you have provided.
Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sorry to be so verbose, but I forgot to mention another frequently missed point. The fact that there are few people left in Arabia with DNA similar to Tuarek and Bedja says absolutely nothing of those ancient populations. The Tuarek and other tribes that left into Africa brought their names and DNA with them, those that remained have since mixed with other people.
Modern Arabian populations if we look at historical documents are descendants of Arabians who mixed with their servile people and mercenary peoples. One example are the notoriously black Banu Suleim so called "pure Arabs" from the Nejd who were mixing with their Byzantine and Spanish concubines and slaves as early as the 9th and 10th century AD according to the Iraqi author of the time al Jahiz.
-------------------- D. Reynolds-Marniche Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
I think the first thing people need to be aware of when referring to "Berbers" is that it is the French who first came to call the Kabyles and other fair-skinned peoples by the term Berber.
From where did the French develop this term? When and at specifically whom, did the French apply? Please provide primary specific sources, if you will.
....If you can discuss this off-topic issue here, then I see no reason why it can't be discussed on-topic in a topic that actually addresses the issue.
Thank you for your response and for informing of the place where this can be discussed.
All you have to do is click on the link, and answer the questions I've asked.
quote:qoucela:
Unfortunately, most of the questions you asked can not be answered thoroughly in a few paragraphs.
I can be a very patient man, providing that it is worth the wait, i.e. when answers fulfill the requests made.
quote:qoucela:
However, I would like to state the region I am mentioning the multi-cultural origins and some written traditions of the remote origins of the original Berber-speakers or first peoples to be called Berber.
Well, by the time people who have come to be the people 'originally' called "Berbers" were called so, they were already diverse. That is a non-issue.
quote:qoucela:
In order for one to study any population genetically, we can all agree the proper population sets and control factors would have to be present. Most studies of DNA are done on populations assumed to be biologically monolithic or unilinearly evolved, - such as the "Berbers", "Fulani" or "West Africans" "sub-saharan Africans" or "Native Americans".
I haven't read anything yet that suggests that this is the norm, in terms of expectations of researchers when deciding to undertake population genetics. It is usually anticipated that multiple origins are likely to be found among and between populations.
quote: As "scholars" have tended to do this haphazardly, African ethnohistory is liable to get even more distorted than previously. Such has been the case with the people who have come to be classified as "Berbers". When in truth as I mentioned the peoples the French and other Europeans today call Berbers, the modern Berber speakers, include peoples of various biological ethnic and cultural origins who happen to speak similar dialects of the "Berber group. Berbers are no more a race than peoples of India or the Middle East.
This is old news on this board, i.e. the diverse bio-cultural base of "Berbers", as we know them 'today'.
quote:qoucela:
In fact, as the earlier cranial and osteological studies, DNA studies have related some of them to Eurasians, others to Portuguese/Iberians and the Tuarek to Bedja and other Africans - depending on the region. Most of these genetic scholars are ignorant of the documented movement of various peoples into North Africa in ancient and modern times, such as the Iranians, Turks, Levantines and slaves from North and South of the Berber Mauri) which have contributed to the original Berber areas of habitation.
In a similar vein, Fulani or Peul speakers in he midst of West Africa should show affiliation and physiognomical similarities to peoples of the West African area they have mixed with. The same can not be said of the pastoral or so called red Fulani living further north who are obviously less mixed with "West Africans" as you call them and show close physiognomies and osteological connections to Northeast Africans or Cushitic- speakers.
Fulani are 'west Africans', as is even "Berber" groups, whether coastal or Sahelian. There is nothing wrong with saying that. But more importantly, what source are you basing the highlighted statement on? Please share it with those of us who are interested in knowing.
quote:qoucela:
In any case, if you have questions with regard to the origins of the term "Berber" as used through time please see the biography for the article by Dana Reynolds in GOLDEN AGE OF THE MOOR. I will also try to answer some of your other questions in the section of postings you have provided.
Have you gone through the said publication? If so, then simply answer my questions, which would be quite appreciated. The said publication [while related to the subject] has no bearings on the outstanding questions; just the answers that relevantly address the questions, as it relates to 'etymological' issues will suffice. You may do so in the link I provided. You can answer the 'genetic' issue herein though. Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by qoucela: Sorry to be so verbose, but I forgot to mention another frequently missed point. The fact that there are few people left in Arabia with DNA similar to Tuarek and Bedja says absolutely nothing of those ancient populations.
This is incorrect. The problem with what you are sayin here isn't merely that Taureg lineages are 'rare' in Arabia.
Rather the problem is that the lineages that predominate in the Taureg don't originate in Arabia to begin with.
They are native to Africa, just like the Taureg.
Are you familiar with haplogroup E, which makes up 90% plus of Taureg male lineage?
What can you tell us about it?
If you'd like us to relate information regarding this, please ask and we'll do so.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Supercar: ^I've already pointed out the other flaws of the study having to do with what comprises the sampling "entities", when this chart was posted. I'll see if I can dig out the thread in question. That said, I wouldn't be surprised to see some close genetic linkage between "Tuareg" [West African Sahelian Tamazigh speaking] groups, and the Bedawi (Beja speakers). I thought it was interesting that according to a poster going by the "Jomo" username, having wrote to Underhill out of curiousity about which groups Underhill detected E-M81 in Sudan, that he was told that it occurred in two Beja subjects.
I understand what you're saying, but in that same study Cavalli_Sforza et al clusters Nubians and Moroccans, Sandawe with Serer, Wolof and Peul and San with Somalis, it just doesn't add up. Check out this chart, its totally crap
It seems funny for me to defending Sforza, because I have much beef with him, but his charts aren't total crap, and I doubt any geneticist would dismiss his admittedly dated work so blithly.
Specifically - I believe what he kept finding in some of his autosomal studies, is ancient relationships based on older population affinities, which actually can be understood [sometimes] in terms of later information.
For example:
Nubians and Morrocans: E3b1. San with Somalis: underived E3b. Wolof and Fulani: uh, that one is self evident.
I do know that Sforza is both Eurocentrist and oft cited by Eurocentrists though, so I realise the 'tricky' nature of my position with regards to him. Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
No one knows what lineages were in Arabia in ancient times so we don't know what lineages originated in Arabia. The concept of lineage origination in genetics is not that cut and dry especially when ethnohistorical documentation is ignored. I for one consider that the people of ancient Arabia particularly of the Neolithic B Ghassulian and Chalcolithic periods of JordanPalestine were cultures of the Afro-Asiatics or Ethio-Arabians.
The Tahunian and Neolithic B was definitely linked with the Fayum- Merimde complex and thus the North African Tjehenu culture of that area. The later Pan-Grave culture of the Medjayu (Bedja) shows a strong connection to the earlier Tehama Arabian culture.
One does not have to be afraid that the Arabian connection of the Tuarek and other Afro-Asiatics denies their African affiliation or remote origins on the African continent.
The Tuarek claim of an ancestry in Arabian and Syro-Canaanite origin reverberated by Al Yaquubi and many others since that area should be taken seriously considering the many clan names of the Taureg today - including Mazuragh (Beni Mazurah, from ancient Misrata, Musuri) and Imaslagha or Laguatin(probably the ancient Amlakhu or Meluchha), Makitan (Macetae, Ketama, Uakutameni, ancient Khetim) and the use of the term Ait(Ad) preceeding their names to name just a few of dozens.
quote:Originally posted by rasol:
quote:Originally posted by qoucela: Sorry to be so verbose, but I forgot to mention another frequently missed point. The fact that there are few people left in Arabia with DNA similar to Tuarek and Bedja says absolutely nothing of those ancient populations.
This is incorrect. The problem with what you are sayin here isn't merely that Taureg lineages are 'rare' in Arabia.
Rather the problem is that the lineages that predominate in the Taureg don't originate in Arabia to begin with.
They are native to Africa, just like the Taureg.
Are you familiar with haplogroup E, which makes up 90% plus of Taureg male lineage?
What can you tell us about it?
If you'd like us to relate information regarding this, please ask and we'll do so.
Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic