quote:Doug M wrote: North Africa is the home of various peoples who never called themselves Berber. Berber is a name applied to them by people from outside Africa. Likewise terms like Sudan, Maghreb and Moor are also non African terms that came to be in common usage by the time Morocco sacked Timbuktu.
Berbers don't call themselves Berbers even today, they have always called themselves "Amazigh" since time immemorial.
Posts: 1554 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by akoben: Does Zanji mean "black"?
Originally it meant people from the Azania coast (SE Africa), later it came to mean everyone who had features as people from the Azania coast.
South African Zulu's want to change the nations name from "South Africa" to "Azania".
That's the point you ******* idiot whether historically or contemporary, they are what we would call today black. Black people/African phenotype aren't monolithic. In other words, both "regional ethnicities", Habesh and Zanji, are referring to black people. Unless you're going to argue Ethiopians back then were Caucasoid Hamites... Posts: 4165 | From: jamaica | Registered: May 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Give it up DougM. You were wrong is assessing my use of Sudan. Just admit you lack the historical background to say anything other than the blunder of a statement that you did. The rest is inane.
Like I said Sudan is what the literai of Songhai themselves used as a name for their region and the Moroccans never used it for their region.
If you had bothered to read the link of ancient writers on northern Africa you might not so heartily assert that "Maure" is foreign.
Give it up. There's more I could correct but there's not that much time in the world.
quote:Originally posted by akoben: Does Zanji mean "black"?
Originally it meant people from the Azania coast (SE Africa), later it came to mean everyone who had features as people from the Azania coast.
South African Zulu's want to change the nations name from "South Africa" to "Azania".
That's the point you ******* idiot whether historically or contemporary, they are what we would call today black. Black people/African phenotype aren't monolithic. In other words, both "regional ethnicities", Habesh and Zanji, are referring to black people. Unless you're going to argue Ethiopians back then were Caucasoid Hamites...
No you fool, a Zanji was a Zanji that's it.
When Ibn sina wrote: "The Zanji are people who are by their very nature slaves.”
Or when Nasir al-Din Tusi remarks " the Zanj differ from animals only in that their two hands are lifted above the ground,” and continues “Many have observed that the ape is more teachable and more intelligent than the Zanj.”
And when Ibn khaldun wrote: "As for the Zanji, they are people of black color, flat noses, kinky hair, and little understanding or intelligence, of all humans they are closest to animals"
They were all reffering to a particular set of people, not africa as a whole. But idiots like you and European translaters take the term "Zanji" as if it meant "black", and then you use it as "black" as used by you today by including all different types of people and then later draw a conclusion that is far from reality.
posted
Never said the word referred to Africa as a whole or that it translated into "black". Read my post again with less emotional baggage. And those Somali girls you posted [posted 26 January, 2009 12:31 PM] could pass for Jamaican and American blacks, so too the ones below. They are all black. That's my point. You disagree but like I said its you're problem. Good night Yonis. Posts: 4165 | From: jamaica | Registered: May 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Give it up DougM. You were wrong is assessing my use of Sudan. Just admit you lack the historical background to say anything other than the blunder of a statement that you did. The rest is inane.
Like I said Sudan is what the literai of Songhai themselves used as a name for their region and the Moroccans never used it for their region.
If you had bothered to read the link of ancient writers on northern Africa you might not so heartily assert that "Maure" is foreign.
Give it up. There's more I could correct but there's not that much time in the world.
Actually like I said, I wasn't talking about SUDANIC Africa. That is the point.
I was talking about the part of Africa NOT called Bilad Es Sud as you aptly put it and talking about the trace of black African identity among those present and active prior to the 16th century from the remaining works in Arabic from that time period, precisely because of the obvious presence of so many non black types, especially in the latter parts of that time period. I was talking about whether or not the black African presence was purposely being downplayed or obscured by Arabic authors of the time.
Everything else in our little discussion is simply you pointing out things that may or may not be accurate and definitely do not detract from or add anything substantial to my line of inquiry. However, on one point I will digress, for if Maure is not a Roman term from where did it originate and what was its meaning?
And likewise, the ancestors of the Berbers originate in the lands now known as Sudan in North Eastern Africa, but of course I know you know that.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
So I don't expect to find any Almoravid documents that say "us BLACK FOLKS is the ****" or "we are medium brown and not jet black like the bilad es sud" or "we are creamy white like milk". Such attributes are things that come through analysis of various works and various references in various contexts, along with archaeological and anthropological evidence.
However, we do have accounts of how others saw them, illustrative and written...
^The four Moorish princes.
And Yusuf ibn Tashfin, leader of the Almoravid forces, was "a brown man with wooly hair", according to the Arab chronicler Al-Fasi. (per DeCosta)
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
I would expect that most of the documentation that still exists from those early periods are probably in private collections scattered across North Africa and into Timbuktu as well as possibly in private collections elsewhere as well, even in Spain.
Not surprisingly I have seen images of Africans who still wear the fillet around their heads like some of those old images of Moors (and old images of Egyptians art too), unfortunately I cant find any contemporary ones at the moment.
quote:Originally posted by Yonis2: Him being slave has nothing to do with anything in terms of his ethnicity. During the 6th century AD almost everyone traded slaves, his parents might have done something bad and were exiled as slaves . Slaves came from everywhere at that time, back and forth, with the caravans of the bedouins, Jews ,Zoroastrians, Byzantine Christians, pagans, Turks, defetead clans/tribes etc. were all traded. It was only in latter times when Zanji slaves were in excess supply in all over muslim world in particular the last 900 years that the term "Abed" became synonymous with tropical africans. Not during Bilal's and the Prophets time.
Bilal was a black slave in Bilal's time Yonis. Therefore the significance. The point being that some Islamic sources will say that blackness and slavery do not stop one from being great within Islam, hence the example of Bilal.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Once again I ask you to follow the link I gave and read the ancient who reports on the 'Maure' nomen and you'll find part of the answer there. It's a pearl of research and its yours but for the price of the search.
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: ... on one point I will digress, for if Maure is not a Roman term from where did it originate and what was its meaning?
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
By his name, al~Fasi -- meaning 'of Fez,' I suspect he was more likey an Arabized Berber rather than Arab. And let's look at Yusuf ibn Tashifin ibn Ibrahim banu Turghut al~Lamtuni's physical description by the hands of ibn al~Athir, ibn Khallikan and ibn Abi Zar.
"He had a brownish complexion and medium height. He was thin, had a straggly beard, soft voice, black eyes, aquiline nose, hair which came down to the top of the ears, eyebrows which joined together, frizzy hair"
I like to think this cartographic work shows him.
BTW Yusuf ibn Tashifin completed the founding of Murakush (Marrakesh) finishing the work began by Abu Bakr ibn Umar.
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: And Yusuf ibn Tashfin, leader of the Almoravid forces, was "a brown man with wooly hair", according to the Arab chronicler Al-Fasi. (per DeCosta)
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ are you two dumbos saying a "brown man" should not be considered a black man?
Posts: 4165 | From: jamaica | Registered: May 2008
| IP: Logged |
^ are you two dumbos saying a "brown man" should not be considered a black man?
Is your dumb jackass ass that pitifully dumb to read that from my post? Go ahead; enlighten us how you came to that conclusion.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yes using terms such as Moor as an attempt to understand the biological history and characteristics of any population is obviously doomed to failure, especially considering a span of time covering over 1000 years. Not only do such terms change, in some cases quite often, but so do the social and biological contexts that they are used in, which undermine any attempt to provide continuity of biological identity with such terms alone.
I am sure that this is the point being made by Keita.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
...but the original term, and whom it was applied to, will never change.
-------------------- The Complete Picture of the Past tells Us what Not to Repeat Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
Your mistake here is that you are confusing the terminology "Zanji" with "Black", Medievel Arabs never used the term black as reference to a particular unrelated group of people who share similar exterior characteristics like people do in modern world.
Well the documentatuion already presented clearly shows that the medieval Arabs referred to blacks both in Iraq and to blacks on the East Coast as "Zanj." We have the documentation by medieval Arab writers like Jahiz and modern historians like Ali Mazuri and Bernard Lewis. Do you have any docmentation on your side proving that when the Arabs said "Zanj" that they were referring to say, white people or Turks, and not blacks?
So when you say that some later arabs talked ill about "blacks" so to counter the good things earlier arabs said about Ethiopians, is just redicoulas and completly nonsense.
Since these never had a simplistic notion of "blacks" like in modern times, A Zanji was simply a Zanji and an Ethiopian was simply an Ethiopian, comments in reference to one of these group does not include or affect the other, these are two seperate and independent entities. As soon you Learn that then everyhing will ge more clear, i promise.
Maybe, but the only problem is that you have produced no credible documentation to back up your assertion that when the Arabs said "Zanj" that they were NOT referring to black people in various places, whether it be in Iraq, or various regions of East Africa. I get your point that the term "zanj" may not have applied to EVERY SINGLE black African. The Arabs may have recognized other dark skinned peoples such as the Ethiopians by other names. But in using the term "Zanj" where they referring to Indians? Turks? The Wiki article 'Zanj" has several footnotes to credible publications that show the term Zanj as used by numerous Arab writers, did not apply to a single tribe, but to black Africans over a wide area. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zanj
BTW last week I saw a program concerning GAZA and this palestinian phsychologist who was followed by a documentary team visited alot of houses for some therapy. Later he come to a house where this obviously south-east african derived young male 25-30 years lived. And guess what this individual presents himself as? Yes, "ABED", I couldn't believe it, he was like "Welcome, come in doctor, this is my wife Fozia my mother Hilma and I am Abed" It's not like he didn't understand what "abed" means since arabic is the only language he knows, it just didn't bother him having a name like "abed" he even seemed proud. That's Zanji right there for you, i kind of understand these islamic middle-age writers and their sentiments regarding to Zanji.
Well, your example given of a Zanji is essentially saying that such people are black, as evidenced by your statement that the young man in question was "obviously a south-east african derived male" 25-30, and his name "Abed" is a further play on the notion of a black skin color. So he was obviously African by your own observation, and you call him a Zanji. Are you saying that the medieval Arab writers didn't see such people as black people, and that the term "Zanj" applied to others like Turks, or Indians or Europeans?
Posts: 73 | From: Bolville | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged |
^ are you two dumbos saying a "brown man" should not be considered a black man?
Is your dumb jackass ass that pitifully dumb to read that from my post? Go ahead; enlighten us how you came to that conclusion.
Answer the question or go **** yourself. The choice is yours.
It's official, jackass; a new alternative name for you from this point on, will be "goFuckYourself", LOL. The only words in your vocabulary and your only answer to just about anything. You are the idiot who got the idea that you gibber about, from my post, and you ask me to explain why you are an idiot that way? No, goFuckyourself, I don't know why you were born an idiot that way. There's an ancient Egyptian proverb: Know theself!
You are an idiot; I'm not, and so, I cannot tell you why you are such a literacy-retardant idiot.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: Bilal was a black slave in Bilal's time Yonis. Therefore the significance. The point being that some Islamic sources will say that blackness and slavery do not stop one from being great within Islam, hence the example of Bilal.
Yes, despite continual racist attacks and insults, Bilal's name is considered a great one, and he stood up for himself when Muhammed died also, refusing to deliver the call to prayer for any but the Prophet, until near the very end. Muslim writers clearly record that Bilal had to endure racism from his Arab brethren. Universal teachings of brotherhood however, may have helped to temper this.
Some Muslims objected to the dark-skinned Ethiopian leading the call to prayer "But some Muslims could not bear to accept Bilal as a rightful Muezzin because he was black- skinned, and when they heard him call they even prayed that they could die, so as not to have to hear the Ethiopian's voice (Azan) ever again. [Tabaqat Ibn Sa‘ad, vol. III:1, p. 166; Abu Na'im, op. cit., vol. 1, p. 148; Ibn Hajar, op. cit., vol. 1, p. 336.]
Common insults suggest that dark-skin was viewed unfavorably by the Arabs. "It is reported after a disagreement between Abu Dharr and Bilal, Abu Dharr in an attempt to insult said, "You son of a black woman." Sharr later apologized to the Ethiopian for the insult. [(Bukhari, “Iman,” 22)].
Bilal stands up for himelf after Muhamed's death. The new regime exiles him to Syria.
It is written in Kamil Baha'i that Bilal did not say adhan or iqamah for Abu Bakr,[81] and did not pay allegiance to Abu Bakr as a caliph. Shaykh Abu Ja'far al-Tusi has narrated in lkhtiyar al-Rijal a report that Bilal refused to pay allegiance to Abu Bakr; and 'Umar caught hold of his dress made of hide and said, "Is this the reward of Abu Bakr; he emancipated you and you are now refusing to pay allegiance to him?".
Bilal said, "If Abu Bakr had emancipated me for the pleasure of Allah, then let him leave me alone for Allah; and if he had emancipated me for his service, then I am ready to render him the services required. But I am not going to pay allegiance to a person whom the Messenger of God had not appointed as his caliph." 'Umar then dealt harshly with him and said, "You should not remain here among us." That is why after the Prophet's death, Bilal could not remain in Medina; and migrated to Syria." [Shustari, Nurullah, Majalisu'1-Mu'minin (Tehran, 1268 AH) p. 54; and also see Ibn Sa'd, op. cit., vol. III:1, p. 169.]
In another incident al-Harith ibn Hisham expresses shock and amazement that the honour of calling the adhan should have been conferred upon Bilal, a black Abyssinian. [Tabaqat Ibn Sa‘ad, vol.3, p.233 and Furugh Abadiyat, vol.1, p.277]
Others objected to the negro as the caller to prayer because of a deficit in pronouncing the certain Arabic letters. Some people suggested that this honour should be given to someone else, because Bilal could not pronounce the Arabic letter 'shin' or SH properly. Nevertheless he continued his responsibilities receiving the honor of making the call to prayer from the Ka'ba. [Edatu Daee, p. 21, Al Mahjulbayza, Vol. 2, p. 31.]
A hypocrite sneered at the adhan of Bilal, for he was unable to pronounce the letter sheen, and he pronounced it seen. He would say: Ashed anna la ilaha illa Allah. Bilal went to Allah’s Apostle, may Allah bless him and his family, and told him about the sneering of the people at him. Allah’s Apostle, may Allah bless him and his family, became displeased and said: “Indeed the 'seen' of Bilal is 'sheen' with Allah.” (Majjma' al-Bayyan, vol. 7, p. 305.)
In another incident Arab delegates came to see the Prophet and scorned to sit with the Ethiopian and those with him. They urged that the negro and others depart until the delegates business had been conducted. The Prophet brushed aside their urgings.
“O Allah’s Apostle, put these [people- Bilal and the others] aside, that we may be alone with you. The Arabs delegates come to you, and feel shame when they see us sitting with these (people). When we go away, then you sit with them.” [Majjma' al-Bayyan, vol. 7, p. 305.]
Various insults also by Abu-Bakr towards Bilal and his friends drew the Prophet's rebuke. Abu-bakr later apologized to Bilal and his friends. [Summary of History of Damascus, Vol. 5, p. 261.]
Upon his final triumph in Mecca, Muhammed ordered Bilâl to make the adhaan on the rooftop of the Kab'ah. Hearing his voice, some made contemptuous remarks towards the negro. Muhammed who was not present at the time, then appeared however to repeat their conversation word for word. The doubters converted upon witnessing this evidence of the Prophet's wide-ranging powers.
After the conquest of Makka. Bilal al-Habashi stood on the Ka'ba's roof and called the people to prayer (adhan). Several Qurayshi leaders. namely. Abu Sufyan. 'Attab ibn Asid. and Harith ibn Hisham. were sitting together near the Ka'ba. 'Attab said: "My father is fortunate not to witness this moment." Harith asked contemptuously: "Could not Muhammad find someone other than this black crow to be the mu'azzin?" Abu Sufyan did not comment. saying: "I am afraid that he will come to know whatever I say. and so will say nothing. Even if no one informs him. the rocks of this Batha (i.e.. Makka) will do so." Shortly thereafter. God's Messenger came to them and repeated their conversation word for word. At that very moment 'Attab and Harith embraced Islam. [Ibn Hajar. al-Matalib al-'Aliya. 4366; Ibn Hisham. Sira. 2:413.]
Posts: 73 | From: Bolville | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged |
Your mistake here is that you are confusing the terminology "Zanji" with "Black", Medievel Arabs never used the term black as reference to a particular unrelated group of people who share similar exterior characteristics like people do in modern world.
Well the documentatuion already presented clearly shows that the medieval Arabs referred to blacks both in Iraq and to blacks on the East Coast as "Zanj." We have the documentation by medieval Arab writers like Jahiz and modern historians like Ali Mazuri and Bernard Lewis. Do you have any docmentation on your side proving that when the Arabs said "Zanj" that they were referring to say, white people or Turks, and not blacks?
So when you say that some later arabs talked ill about "blacks" so to counter the good things earlier arabs said about Ethiopians, is just redicoulas and completly nonsense.
Since these never had a simplistic notion of "blacks" like in modern times, A Zanji was simply a Zanji and an Ethiopian was simply an Ethiopian, comments in reference to one of these group does not include or affect the other, these are two seperate and independent entities. As soon you Learn that then everyhing will ge more clear, i promise.
Maybe, but the only problem is that you have produced no credible documentation to back up your assertion that when the Arabs said "Zanj" that they were NOT referring to black people in various places, whether it be in Iraq, or various regions of East Africa. I get your point that the term "zanj" may not have applied to EVERY SINGLE black African. The Arabs may have recognized other dark skinned peoples such as the Ethiopians by other names. But in using the term "Zanj" where they referring to Indians? Turks? The Wiki article 'Zanj" has several footnotes to credible publications that show the term Zanj as used by numerous Arab writers, did not apply to a single tribe, but to black Africans over a wide area. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zanj
BTW last week I saw a program concerning GAZA and this palestinian phsychologist who was followed by a documentary team visited alot of houses for some therapy. Later he come to a house where this obviously south-east african derived young male 25-30 years lived. And guess what this individual presents himself as? Yes, "ABED", I couldn't believe it, he was like "Welcome, come in doctor, this is my wife Fozia my mother Hilma and I am Abed" It's not like he didn't understand what "abed" means since arabic is the only language he knows, it just didn't bother him having a name like "abed" he even seemed proud. That's Zanji right there for you, i kind of understand these islamic middle-age writers and their sentiments regarding to Zanji.
Well, your example given of a Zanji is essentially saying that such people are black, as evidenced by your statement that the young man in question was "obviously a south-east african derived male" 25-30, and his name "Abed" is a further play on the notion of a black skin color. So he was obviously African by your own observation, and you call him a Zanji. Are you saying that the medieval Arab writers didn't see such people as black people, and that the term "Zanj" applied to others like Turks, or Indians or Europeans?
carambolas, I'm not sure if you have gotten the full weight of what Yonis is getting at. He is not denying that 'Zanji' was referenced towards certain people who were black or that they were Africans, but he is trying to draw a line on which 'black people' these happen to be. In fact, he seems to be rejecting the very idea you yourself put out there, when you said: did not apply to a single tribe, but to black Africans over a wide area.
...which may give the impression that "Zanji" was not restricted to a confined group of 'black' east African groups, whom from Yonis' standpoint, would not have included Ethiopians and Somalis, but more likely, folks of Bantu-speaking origin. He provides an example of this, by pointing to Ethiopians, as being Africans who were not amongst these people referred to as "Zanji", an undertaking which you yourself have taken notice, as you profess above.
In that last bit, vis-a-vis his example centered on the individual whom he says took pride in calling himself "Abed", he was essentially relating how the said guy was conforming to Arabic stereotypes of the "Zanji" and presumably "black slaves" [which were/are centered on such typecasting as the supposed "innate low or inferior intellect" of these folks], by accepting and calling himself by an Arabic pejorative which generally alludes to a slave, in particular "black slave". That word is "Abed". Essentially, Yonis is trying to clear up right off the bat, any possible "misunderstanding" which in any way implicates east Africans like his fellow Somalis being amongst the "Zanji".
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Abd in Arabic means servant and many Muslims have names with this term as part of it. Abdallah means servant of Allah and in many Islamic circles that is the epitome of Islam, to be a servant of Allah.
Abed as meaning slave is simply a word that shares a common derivation with Abd. However, like I said before, there were slaves from all populations in Islam. Blacks were not the only slaves and actually the Turks and Eastern Europeans probably outnumbered the blacks at some point. You had Turkic slaves, European slaves, African slaves, Persian slaves, Indian slaves, Chinese slaves, South Asian slaves and so on in Islam and many times these people were enslaved BY THEIR OWN KIND.
But still, whether Zanj refers to Ethiopians in particular does not change the fact that Bilal was a black Ethiopian slave and that is an important part of his story. But that is no different than the story of MANY leaders within the Islamic world who were either the children of slave women in the harem or slaves themselves who got promoted to high positions. That is why abd in Islam meaning servant has such an important place in the understanding of Islam. Therefore, it does not necessarily mean that someone calling themselves Abed is slandering themselves or demeaning themselves at all. Slaves become rulers and important people and servitude is often touted as an honor. But at the same token all servants were not considered equal, as some servants were treated far differently than others. And many slaves weren't slaves in the sense we understand it, as opposed to being contract workers or mercenaries. Either way Islam has a long tradition of propaganda reinforcing slavery and servitude both as a sign of submission to Islam and piety as well as a slander against various populations. Theoretically, all Muslims are servants to God, including the leaders as defenders of the faithful (servants to the people) and keepers of the word or law , but historically in practice it never really worked out that way.
It was this propaganda and inherent system of forced submission to the rules of various elites that caused so many factions and infighting in Islam, along with the fact that the Harem was often a breeding ground of conspiracies and mistrust which destabilized many dynasties and never fostered any sense of unity among various clans.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
How much of the disdain shown to those of Habesh is due to the fact that Abyssian colonized Arabia. That colonization ended the very year Muhammed was born.
Not doubting colour bias or preferences because in the Arabia of the time it did exist against both the extremely light and the extremely dark, but do I detect something arising from colour combined with national origin in the case of Bilal.
No pattern of distorting history has been presented in this thread. What we have here is incidents of colour bias. What would be instructional is the Antar cycle for insights on colour and ethnic attitudes in the century before the birth of Islam during the Habshi occupation.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
Your mistake here is that you are confusing the terminology "Zanji" with "Black", Medievel Arabs never used the term black as reference to a particular unrelated group of people who share similar exterior characteristics like people do in modern world.
Well the documentatuion already presented clearly shows that the medieval Arabs referred to blacks both in Iraq and to blacks on the East Coast as "Zanj." We have the documentation by medieval Arab writers like Jahiz and modern historians like Ali Mazuri and Bernard Lewis. Do you have any docmentation on your side proving that when the Arabs said "Zanj" that they were referring to say, white people or Turks, and not blacks?
So when you say that some later arabs talked ill about "blacks" so to counter the good things earlier arabs said about Ethiopians, is just redicoulas and completly nonsense.
Since these never had a simplistic notion of "blacks" like in modern times, A Zanji was simply a Zanji and an Ethiopian was simply an Ethiopian, comments in reference to one of these group does not include or affect the other, these are two seperate and independent entities. As soon you Learn that then everyhing will ge more clear, i promise.
Maybe, but the only problem is that you have produced no credible documentation to back up your assertion that when the Arabs said "Zanj" that they were NOT referring to black people in various places, whether it be in Iraq, or various regions of East Africa. I get your point that the term "zanj" may not have applied to EVERY SINGLE black African. The Arabs may have recognized other dark skinned peoples such as the Ethiopians by other names. But in using the term "Zanj" where they referring to Indians? Turks? The Wiki article 'Zanj" has several footnotes to credible publications that show the term Zanj as used by numerous Arab writers, did not apply to a single tribe, but to black Africans over a wide area. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zanj
BTW last week I saw a program concerning GAZA and this palestinian phsychologist who was followed by a documentary team visited alot of houses for some therapy. Later he come to a house where this obviously south-east african derived young male 25-30 years lived. And guess what this individual presents himself as? Yes, "ABED", I couldn't believe it, he was like "Welcome, come in doctor, this is my wife Fozia my mother Hilma and I am Abed" It's not like he didn't understand what "abed" means since arabic is the only language he knows, it just didn't bother him having a name like "abed" he even seemed proud. That's Zanji right there for you, i kind of understand these islamic middle-age writers and their sentiments regarding to Zanji.
Well, your example given of a Zanji is essentially saying that such people are black, as evidenced by your statement that the young man in question was "obviously a south-east african derived male" 25-30, and his name "Abed" is a further play on the notion of a black skin color. So he was obviously African by your own observation, and you call him a Zanji. Are you saying that the medieval Arab writers didn't see such people as black people, and that the term "Zanj" applied to others like Turks, or Indians or Europeans?
carambolas, I'm not sure if you have gotten the full weight of what Yonis is getting at. He is not denying that 'Zanji' was referenced towards certain people who were black or that they were Africans, but he is trying to draw a line on which 'black people' these happen to be. In fact, he seems to be rejecting the very idea you yourself put out there, when you said: did not apply to a single tribe, but to black Africans over a wide area.
...which may give the impression that "Zanji" was not restricted to a confined group of 'black' east African groups, whom from Yonis' standpoint, would not have included Ethiopians and Somalis, but more likely, folks of Bantu-speaking origin. He provides an example of this, by pointing to Ethiopians, as being Africans who were not amongst these people referred to as "Zanji", an undertaking which you yourself have taken notice, as you profess above.
In that last bit, vis-a-vis his example centered on the individual whom he says took pride in calling himself "Abed", he was essentially relating how the said guy was conforming to Arabic stereotypes of the "Zanji" and presumably "black slaves" [which were/are centered on such typecasting as the supposed "innate low or inferior intellect" of these folks], by accepting and calling himself by an Arabic pejorative which generally alludes to a slave, in particular "black slave". That word is "Abed". Essentially, Yonis is trying to clear up right off the bat, any possible "misunderstanding" which in any way implicates east Africans like his fellow Somalis being amongst the "Zanji".
Thank you very much!
I wish more people at this forum had the same level of understanding as you. I don't know if they do this on purpose, but either way it's very annoying to engage in a normal conversation with such type of individuals.
Posts: 1554 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
^ are you two dumbos saying a "brown man" should not be considered a black man?
Is your dumb jackass ass that pitifully dumb to read that from my post? Go ahead; enlighten us how you came to that conclusion.
Answer the question or go **** yourself. The choice is yours.
It's official, jackass; a new alternative name for you from this point on, will be "goFuckYourself", LOL. The only words in your vocabulary and your only answer to just about anything. You are the idiot who got the idea that you gibber about, from my post, and you ask me to explain why you are an idiot that way? No, goFuckyourself, I don't know why you were born an idiot that way. There's an ancient Egyptian proverb: Know theself!
You are an idiot; I'm not, and so, I cannot tell you why you are such a literacy-retardant idiot.
Why do you always choose to go **** yourself Ausarianstein? You do this every time. You could have just answered my question. Instead you chose to pleasure yourself. Always. How sad. lol
Posts: 4165 | From: jamaica | Registered: May 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm curious whether anyone other than Yonis knows that answer to my question:
quote:Originally posted by Yonis: he was like "Welcome, come in doctor, this is my wife Fozia my mother Hilma and I am Abed"
Isn't Abed an Arabic name and doesn't it share etymological commonality with arabic names like Abdulluh?
Clarification for our resident hater: I'm not necissarily bringing this up in opposition to Uncle Ruckus sentiment.
quote:That's Zanji right there for you, i kind of understand these islamic middle-age writers and their sentiments regarding to Zanji.
I would say this is TMI, but considering who it was that said it it's not like anyone was oblivious in the first place.
We've seen the antics before.
Interestingly, while most Darood Somalians believe their tribal (clan or whatever) patriarch was an Arab Yemeni fleeing Yemen, others seem to believe he was either a Somali or a "black" Yemeni (whatever that means) but I have not met many to ask.
One person on a forum (claiming to be Somali) thinks the tribe Darood are descended from slaves from Arabia. But then again his (warlord's) posts remind me of those agent provacateurs Horemheb and Habari/AfricaI so maybe he was just instigating other Soomalis.
quote:Originally posted by Supercar: In fact, he seems to be rejecting the very idea you yourself put out there, when you said: did not apply to a single tribe, but to black Africans over a wide area.
I don't think carambolas gets it either, but the thing is, he posts a picture of Somalians or whatever and says they would not have been Zanji in comparison to the girls in his other picture.
Which is fine, but if looks are subjective and they are capable of identifying "anyone who looks like a Zanj" to be .. Zanj doesn't it make it more than a tribe?
This would mean the Arabs like everyone else weren't color blind and did notice characteristics in people. Zanj probably eventually evolved to mean anyone of Zanj looks because South East Africa is further away from Arabs than North Eastern Africa, therefore more succeptible to generalizations.
Posts: 5555 | From: Tha 5th Dimension. | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
A "Zanji" academic and writer, for whom "anti-Zanj" sentiment that may be directed at them is "understood" by Arab ass-lickers who would probably also have "understood" instead of deliberately dis-obeyed on the plantations and whose descendants would probably still be in such a predicament today.
Posts: 5555 | From: Tha 5th Dimension. | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Alive wrote: Isn't Abed an Arabic name and doesn't it share etymological commonality with arabic names like Abdulluh?
Yes, you're correct.
But it needs to have a sufix in able to make sense. Abdullah="slave of Allah" or Abdulrahman= "Slave of the most mercyful"
You could even call someone "Abdi" as an abbreviation for Abdullahi(very common.) But "Abed" on it self in levant litterally means slave, and if a person goes and presents himself as "abed" in palestine (which has today taken the form as a pejorative name, like "nigger") then he is either crazy or sees himself as a slave, but other people their don't mind or question such a person because that's the stereotype on such features since many centuries back.
Posts: 1554 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
LOL at the Somali roach. Look man you're a lowly Somali. Live with it. The west Asians have been buying and selling your sorry ass people for centuries. Even in this day and age your people occupy the lowest rungs of their society.
I know what you're feeling right about now Yonis.
Caaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrrrrrre for some khaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat???
carambolas, I'm not sure if you have gotten the full weight of what Yonis is getting at. He is not denying that 'Zanji' was referenced towards certain people who were black or that they were Africans, but he is trying to draw a line on which 'black people' these happen to be. In fact, he seems to be rejecting the very idea you yourself put out there, when you said: did not apply to a single tribe, but to black Africans over a wide area.
...which may give the impression that "Zanji" was not restricted to a confined group of 'black' east African groups, whom from Yonis' standpoint, would not have included Ethiopians and Somalis, but more likely, folks of Bantu-speaking origin. He provides an example of this, by pointing to Ethiopians, as being Africans who were not amongst these people referred to as "Zanji", an undertaking which you yourself have taken notice, as you profess above.
In that last bit, vis-a-vis his example centered on the individual whom he says took pride in calling himself "Abed", he was essentially relating how the said guy was conforming to Arabic stereotypes of the "Zanji" and presumably "black slaves" [which were/are centered on such typecasting as the supposed "innate low or inferior intellect" of these folks], by accepting and calling himself by an Arabic pejorative which generally alludes to a slave, in particular "black slave". That word is "Abed". Essentially, Yonis is trying to clear up right off the bat, any possible "misunderstanding" which in any way implicates east Africans like his fellow Somalis being amongst the "Zanji".
Well what you say adds clarification. But his original comment about "confusing the term Zanji with black" made it seem like he was denying that the term Zanj- as used by the Arab writers referred to blacks over a wide area in East Africa- stretching from parts of Somalia to Tanzania, or even into parts of Mozambique according to 10th century Arab historian Abu al-Hasan. This range would include several different tribes. I have no problem with the Arabs drawing clear distinction between Ethiopians, Egyptians etc and other dark skinned peoples further south known as "Zanj." That is accurate.
Posts: 73 | From: Bolville | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Lord Sauron wrote: ------------------------------- Every 3rd and 5th Somalian dude I meet is called Abdi. It is indeed a "very common" name among Somalians. -------------------------------
And why wouldn't it be. The skinny saps were being bought and sold by the Absynnians, "west" Asians, and Europeans to the highest bidder.
Posts: 3085 | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Yonis2: Thank you very much!
I wish more people at this forum had the same level of understanding as you. I don't know if they do this on purpose, but either way it's very annoying to engage in a normal conversation with such type of individuals.
Ain't no hassle on either side here. I was only looking for clarification, especially when you said I was endorsing the view that "some later arabs talked ill about "blacks" so to counter the good things earlier arabs said about Ethiopians." I did no such thing, but rather the opposite. This is normal give and take - correcting misunderstanding - as I did with your inaccurate claim about my statements. Ain't no big thing.
Posts: 73 | From: Bolville | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yonis wrote: -------------------------------- You could even call someone "Abdi" as an abbreviation for Abdullahi(very common.) But "Abed" on it self in levant litterally means slave, and if a person goes and presents himself as "abed" in palestine (which has today taken the form as a pejorative name, like "nigger") then he is either crazy or sees himself as a slave, but other people their don't mind or question such a person because that's the stereotype on such features since many centuries back. --------------------------------
Like there's something special about Somali features. I guess that's why the citizens of every country that you losers relocate to kick your asses and ridicule you.
quote:argyle104 wrote: And why wouldn't it be. The skinny saps were being bought and sold by the Absynnians, "west" Asians, and Europeans to the highest bidder.
Very funny, in a sad way though!
Please show me a European, Arab or Abyssinian (btw the latter being not much different from somalis) have sold Somalis to the highest bidder?
Quotes and links would be appreciated thanks.
Posts: 1554 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Getting back on topic- distortions of Arab historians about Africans- how have said historians distorted the history of the Somali peoples?
Posts: 73 | From: Bolville | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: How much of the disdain shown to those of Habesh is due to the fact that Abyssian colonized Arabia. That colonization ended the very year Muhammed was born.
Not doubting colour bias or preferences because in the Arabia of the time it did exist against both the extremely light and the extremely dark, but do I detect something arising from colour combined with national origin in the case of Bilal.
No pattern of distorting history has been presented in this thread. What we have here is incidents of colour bias. What would be instructional is the Antar cycle for insights on colour and ethnic attitudes in the century before the birth of Islam during the Habshi occupation.
The Antar epics are likely a very important source of information on the wars between the Northern Arabs and the Southern Arabs in the years leading up to the development of Islam. And I am sure that some of the color bias comes from this period as well. And of course the Southern Arabs probably would historically have been closer to their North East African cousins than the Northern Arabs. Including the later occupation of Southern Yemen by people from Ethiopia.
And color bias probably do lead to historical distortion in various Arabic texts and documents, but to show this you need to actually have those texts and documents.
But in a larger sense the distortion of African history in general, from a modern perspective, would be more one of omission and ignorance. Where the stories, history and propaganda of African subjugation and enslavement get more play than the history of African people who did great things in the Islamic world. Either that or all the great figures in the Islamic world are presented as white Arabs, which again plays on ignorance.
It is more tantamount to Africans being in a deep hole unaware of the full historical scope and depth of the African historical epic, only viewing one patch of the sky at at time or only viewing that epic through a small peephole unaware of the larger scope and context of the full story. That is one of the reasons Malcom X was so transformed when he traveled to Mecca.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by carambolas: Getting back on topic- distortions of Arab historians about Africans- how have said historians distorted the history of the Somali peoples?
They haven't distorted anything. Somalis as a people are very young, somalis as an ethnicity was small at the begining and only entered the southern somali peninsula some thousand years ago migrating nomads from northern somali coast. All people in Northeast africa, be they Somali, Afar, Agew, Harari, Amhara, Oromo, Tigray or Beja were known collectivally as Habesh by the Medeavil peninsula arabs. Southern somalia people (who didn't speak somali language back then)like in Moqdishu and Brava region were known and described as "Barber," by arabs but they were ofcourse made of many ethnicities (Tuni, Ajuran, Abgal, Persian, Yemeni, Swhahili) who today all speak the somali language due to assimilation.
Posts: 1554 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
Like somebody is going to believe anything that a poverty strikien Somali with self-esteem issues says. LOL!
Posts: 3085 | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
I've given links time and time again. Anyone whose been here has seen how you run or howl in denial even after the facts have been shown.
It was funny to see you run away when it was shown how the Indians were using Somalis as slaves. LOL LOL Double LOL
Posts: 3085 | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic