posted
^cuz they're cool pics. And who gives a danm if this or that will never be "accepted" according to a random "Texan" online?
Seriously those in search of truth usually peripherally care about others accepting and foremost care about finding the truth.
Like in the case of the world being round for europeans, or in the case of evolution for american whites.
Posts: 5555 | From: Tha 5th Dimension. | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot: Clearly their were no black African civilizations in north Africa during the historical period.
Even according to your deranged racial schema such a statement would stand in direct contradiction of Kush/Meroe in Sudan, notwithstanding civilizations whom you make this claim about in the negative like ancient Egypt (this issue has been dealt with ad nauseam and it's extremely silly that some still hold onto their petty denials), or early "Lybians" like those who spawned the "Black mummy" culture, the Tehenu and later Garamantes. Your idea of "Black African" is dumb and restrictive and no one is using your criteria. All you are good for is your flailing rants, one line denials, and constant whining.
Posts: 4021 | From: Bay Area, CA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot: The Libyans were in North Africa for centuries before the Phoenicans. Namphamo was a semite, Clearly their were no black African civilizations in north Africa during the historical period. I suppose if you want do as Doug likes to do and go back 100,000 years you might find one. Here is the bottom line guys. The idea of a black african seeded Europe during the historical period is never going to be accepted as fact. You can believe this stuff if you wish, worship door knobs or anything else you wish but it is not going to happen.
Doug, why do you continue to post modern pictures in the middle of a conversation about ancient times?
Which is simply the non historical ranting of someone who desperately wants everyone to believe the lies of European histrionics.
Here is a list of the North African black civilizations in the historic period:
All of these are documented as being black African civilizations in or around North Africa at the time. Hence, again you are exposed as a phony historian who has no knowledge of history and pretends to be a historian and represent the views of historians.
Why don't you actually present the views of some historians instead of pretending to be one and whining when your fake fantasies are exposed?
Things introduced by the Moors/Islamic armies to Europe from Africa, the Levant and Asia:
Planned cities Soap Perfume Furniture Botany Mathematics Poetry Textiles Tile Horse Breeds Shoe making Lamps Drainage and irrigation Windmill Waterwheel Books Universities Castles Holy Warriors Arms and Armor Heraldry
All of which are documented by mainstream scholarship.
Again, you simply are no scholar and cannot claim to represent scholars.
Posts: 8896 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot: The Libyans were in North Africa for centuries before the Phoenicans. Namphamo was a semite, Clearly their were no black African civilizations in north Africa during the historical period...
But the Libyans, especially the Tehenu of Egyptian accounts were black Africans! And technically the indigenous peoples of Carthage were not Libyans but Tunisian peoples such as the Numidians. The Roman mosaiacs I posted are examples of such people. And even in Libya proper there existed the civilization of Garama whom the Romans nicknamed Negritai! So obviously your notion of a non-black North Africa is a fantasy pure and simple.
quote:I suppose if you want do as Doug likes to do and go back 100,000 years you might find one.
LOL No need to go a hundred thousand years back to the Paleolithic to find black Africans in well Africa specifically the northern regions. They remained there long after even up to historical times and even European authors documented this. Sorry if you deny all this.
quote:Here is the bottom line guys. The idea of a black african seeded Europe during the historical period is never going to be accepted as fact. You can believe this stuff if you wish, worship door knobs or anything else you wish but it is not going to happen.
Sorry professor, but that the European Renaissance and enlightment was spurred on in the so-called 'Dark Ages' by black African Muslims in Iberia is a well documented FACT. That black Africans from millennia earlier during the Neolithic brought about cultural revolution to Europe is also a fact that is only beginning to be established throughout academia.
quote:Doug, why do you continue to post modern pictures in the middle of a conversation about ancient times?
Why is it you have no valid answers for the pictures I posted of ancient Tunisians let alone answers for Doug when he actually posted pictures of Moors for the time period in question??!
Posts: 26260 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Abstract_Faith: ^cuz they're cool pics. And who gives a danm if this or that will never be "accepted" according to a random "Texan" online?
Seriously those in search of truth usually peripherally care about others accepting and foremost care about finding the truth.
Like in the case of the world being round for europeans, or in the case of evolution for american whites.
Actually what the nutty professor fails to realize is that it HAS been accepted already by mainstream academia as pretty much everything presented in this forum comes from mainstream academia! Why has academia accepted it? Because it's TRUE and logically factual plain and simple. It's die-hard racists like AP that have a very difficult time accepting truth and logic.. they always have.
quote:Originally posted by Sundjata: Even according to your deranged racial schema such a statement would stand in direct contradiction of Kush/Meroe in Sudan, notwithstanding civilizations whom you make this claim about in the negative like ancient Egypt (this issue has been dealt with ad nauseam and it's extremely silly that some still hold onto their petty denials), or early "Lybians" like those who spawned the "Black mummy" culture, the Tehenu and later Garamantes. Your idea of "Black African" is dumb and restrictive and no one is using your criteria. All you are good for is your flailing rants, one line denials, and constant whining.
LOL You are correct! The kooky professor fails to realize that his 'black' Nubia is also a North African civilization! Nevermind all the other stuff about Libyans that he obviously has no clue about.
Posts: 26260 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Rate Member posted 20 February, 2009 04:22 PM -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ancient Greece: From Prehistoric to Hellenistic Times (Yale Nota Bene) (Hardcover) by Thomas R. Martin (Author)
quote:Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot: Ancient Greece: From Prehistoric to Hellenistic Times (Yale Nota Bene) (Hardcover) by Thomas R. Martin (Author)
What exactly are you trying to convey here; is there a page from the book you would specifically like to reference, and towards what?
Please clarify......
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mindover, What I am conveying is education. You seem to be interested in the subject so I offer a stellar work from which you can study and learn. Anyone truly interested in Ancient Greece has read this book among others.
Posts: 2069 | From: Texas | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
How can you convey something that you don't practice yourself? Why don't you pick up a book and read it instead of looking at it? You have no understanding or concept of history as can be seen in the absolutely absurd claims you keep trying to make.
What does Greece have to do with the Moors, which is the topic of this thread? If you cannot grasp the difference between Greece and Moorish/Islamic Spain then you obviously are only furthering the proof of your absolute non historical background.
Posts: 8896 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
You are affraid of the Martin book Doug, you know that and I do as well. You have no interest or skill in history. Lets call it what it is, it is all about blackness, and nothing else. If they banned race from this board you would be long gone. Now if you are interested in ancint Europe, as you claim you are you'll read books on the sunject. Don't do this dance with me Doug. You have not read this book, the El Cid book I posted or a single work pertaining to the Reconquista. You haven't read them because you are not interested in history. You are interested in spinning half truths and myths off the afrocentric sites on the internet. My question is why do you talk about a subject you have never read about. Did you read the Cahill book on Greece I posted last year? Have you read a single Michael Grant book? I think you are a fraud Doug and never having read these books proves that.
Posts: 2069 | From: Texas | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot: Mindover, What I am conveying is education. You seem to be interested in the subject so I offer a stellar work from which you can study and learn. Anyone truly interested in Ancient Greece has read this book among others.
See, there is a difference; I know all about ancient Greece, and if I didn't, I can read many books on said matters and become informed immediately.
The real thing in question is the population from a biological standpoint, and see, your historians have absolutely no credibility on said matters regarding genetic and anthropological references; understand?
African cattle genetic sequences have been in southern Europe for over 6000 years ago, and still present in same places..
African human genetic lineages, in southern Europe from over 6000 years ago, and still present in same places..
Archaeological evidence;
quote: Prehistoric contacts over the Straits of Gibraltar indicated by genetic analysis of Iberian Bronze Age cattle
Previously, the appearance of the Late Atlantic Neolithic culture had been placed at a significantly later date than the Egyptian culture, and this chronology and the cultural similarity were interpreted as implying that Egypt was the original source (14). However, more accurate radiocarbon dates obtained from Late Atlantic Neolithic culture sites subsequently redated the origin of this culture to being approximately the same as that of the predynastic Badarian Egyptian culture (15), leading to the hypothesis that these two cultures might derive from a common area, perhaps through pastoral groups living in the Sahara. The culture linked to the Late Atlantic Neolithic period is known to have been dedicated almost exclusively to cattle breeding, secondarily complemented by sheep and goat breeding (14), suggesting that an investigation of the origin of Iberian cattle may offer further insight into early Iberian–African cultural contacts.
anthropological evidence, all proves Africans were in Europe over 6000 years ago and modern inhabitants also prove this by carrying said African markers.
quote: "Against this background of disease, movement and pedomorphic reduction of body size one can identify Negroid traits of nose and prognathism appearing in Natufian latest hunters (McCown, 1939) and **in Anatolian** and Macedonian first farmers , probably from Nubia via the unknown predecesors of the Badarians and Tasians....". - J. L. Angel
Deny it all you want, but these facts will not change.
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Neolithic Greeks were from the Balkans. Read the entire body of work on the subject. You are, in my view, affraid of the Martin book for all of the obvious reasons.
Posts: 2069 | From: Texas | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot: Neolithic Greeks were from the Balkans.
Sub-Saharan affinities were among the Neolithic populations of the "Near Easterners" (Natufians) who spread the Neolithic culture into Europe.
Sub-Saharan affinities were also found in the Balkans , **from where the alpha derivatives appear to have spread elsewhere westward**
quote: "Against this background of disease, movement and pedomorphic reduction of body size one can identify Negroid traits of nose and prognathism appearing in Natufian latest hunters (McCown, 1939) and **in Anatolian** and Macedonian first farmers , probably from Nubia via the unknown predecesors of the Badarians and Tasians....". - J. L. Angel
Deny it all you want, but these facts will not change.
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot: Neolithic Greeks were from the Balkans.
Take note history teacher, of African genetic markers in the Balkans.
quote:“The presence of E-M78* Y chromosomes in the Balkans (two Albanians) , previously described virtually only in northeast Africa, upper Nile, gives rise to the question of what the original source of the E-M78 may have been. Correlations between human-occupation sites and radiocarbon-dated climatic fluctuations in the eastern Sahara and Nile Valley during the Holocene provide a framework for interpreting the main southeast European centric distribution of E-V13. A recent archaeological study reveals that during a desiccation period in North Africa, while the eastern Sahara was depopulated, a refugium existed on the border of present-day Sudan and Egypt, near Lake Nubia, until the onset of a humid phase around 8500 BC (radiocarbon-calibrated date). The rapid arrival of wet conditions during this Early Holocene period provided an impetus for population movement into habitat that was quickly settled afterwards. Hg E-M78* representatives, although rare overall, still occur in Egypt, which is a hub for the distribution of the various geographically localized M78-related sub-clades. The northward-moving rainfall belts during this period could have also spurred a rapid migration of Mesolithic foragers northwards in Africa, the Levant and ultimately onwards to Asia Minor and Europe, where they each eventually differentiated their regionally distinctive branches.” [/qb]
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot: I'll believe the classical scholars over you.
You do understand that the classical historians you reference do not have any say on genetic and anthropological matters; right?
If you know this, then why do you outright and ignorantly deny these genetic and anthropological references, from reputable scientists who spend hard time coming to their conclusions?
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mindover, Work from other discplines makes it's way into history as it is substantiated. If the info you mention were valid they would include it. If you are as academic as you claim to be you understand that. My problem with your position is that you seem to want to make huge leaps though centuries of time without historical information to connect your points. As a historian I have to have more data than you are giving me for that reason. I suspect this is why classical scholars do not represent this point of view in their work. Historical era Greeks simply were not black, period. There is not a scrap of evidence to prove that. A genetic marker that 75% of the population does not have does not make the case.
Posts: 2069 | From: Texas | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot: Mindover, Work from other discplines makes it's way into history as it is substantiated. If the info you mention were valid they would include it. If you are as academic as you claim to be you understand that.
Science makes new discoveries daily, and every historian, might not be directly aware of such data, if you are indeed a teacher you should know this.
Like I said, your book reference speaks upon Greece from a historical standpoint, and not genetic nor anthropological.
quote:Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot: My problem with your position is that you seem to want to make huge leaps though centuries of time without historical information to connect your points.
The problem is that you're simply a biased individual, and for Americas sake hopefully you're not really a teacher.
The genetic fact that...
African cattle genetic sequences have been in southern Europe for over 6000 years ago, and still present in same places..
African human genetic lineages, in southern Europe from over 6000 years ago, and still present in same places..
Is noteworthy to any unbiased scholar trying to understand history and population movements in the ancient past.
quote:Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot: Historical era Greeks simply were not black, period. There is not a scrap of evidence to prove that. A genetic marker that 75% of the population does not have does not make the case.
I'm not saying Greeks were black, what I am saying, and genetically and anthropologically data is also saying as well, is that Greece received influence from Africa, from over 6000 years ago, and these genetic influences are still highly prevalent to this day in Greece.
It's really no wonder as to why the only places in ancient Europe that advanced are these mentioned areas in southern Europe, that ultimately received genetic influence, and still show this African and near Eastern influence genetically still to this day.
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
You keep using the argument that Greece advanced and the north did not, which is not entirely true, and yet you fail to show us how these african markers in a quarter of the population contributed to that advance. This is what I mean by making huge leaps.
Posts: 2069 | From: Texas | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot: You keep using the argument that Greece advanced and the north did not, which is not entirely true,
Not using this "argument", this is basic fact,
Please elaborate if otherwise....?
quote:Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot: and yet you fail to show us how these african markers in a quarter of the population contributed to that advance. This is what I mean by making huge leaps.
What are you; slow?
These African genetic markers prevalent in these areas in high frequencies in this day and age, is testimony of the African presence in Greece for thousands of years.
It's really no wonder as to why the only places in ancient Europe that advanced are these mentioned areas in southern Europe, that ultimately received genetic influence, and still show this African and near Eastern influence genetically still to this day.
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
You still failed to show me a single example of how these markers contributed to the advance of Greece . Lets cut the personal insults, im not impressed with that.
quote:Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot: You still failed to show me a single example of how these markers contributed to the advance of Greece .
Perhaps you've heard of the Neolithic revolution; being that you are a scholar?
Well, these Neolithic revolution advances for one, brought the technology of agriculture and pastoralism to the hunter gatherer Europeans over 6000 years ago.
This is what Africans originally brought to Europe, and Africans and their progeny have lived there ever since, hence any Greek advancement was amongst a multicultural society which had obvious outside influence from Africa and the so called near east.
quote:Originally posted by MindoverMatter718: [QUOTE]Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot: [qb] You keep using the argument that Greece advanced and the north did not, which is not entirely true,
Not using this "argument", this is basic fact,
Please elaborate if otherwise....?
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Nice try but not correct, here is why. By the time of the indo european invasion of Greece in 1900 BC the discovery of agriculture was thousands of years in the past. Secondly, you have no proof there was a bi racial society, no discovery hs ever shown that. The problem is that the greatness of Greece is a product of the indo european invasion not neolithic farmers. Britain had neolithic farmers as well but they did not evolve into what Greece became. Eastern Europe and he black sea area had neolithic farmers , Spain had neolithic farmers, Turkey etc but none became what Greece became. You have arrived at a conclusion that cannot be supported. For all of these reasons you will not, in my view, see your arguments become part of the development of what we call Greek civilization.
Posts: 2069 | From: Texas | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot: Secondly, you have no proof there was a bi racial society, no discovery hs ever shown that.
Wow, you're are ignorant. African and near eastern genetic markers have been found in Greece from over 6000 years ago, and are still prevalent to this day same genetic markers same population.
This confirms from over 6000 years ago, Greece was a European, African, and Near eastern society, hence multicultural.
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
The greatness of Greece stems from the indo european invasion.
We know almost nothing about the Neolithic communities in Greece, much less whether blacks and whites lived together in harmony or even if blacks were there at all. Genetic markers do not show anything about what the society was like, Even so, I'm not interested in that. I'll even give you the point for now. What is important, and what you cannot deal with is greek civilization. You cannot tie it to african influence and have not offered a SINGLE meaningful example.
FARMING, that everyone had and had for thousands of years is not an answer.
I still want an example.
I think you are a young black man who has bought into the myths that are taught on this board on a regular basis.
Posts: 2069 | From: Texas | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot: We know almost nothing about the Neolithic communities in Greece, much less whether blacks and whites lived together in harmony or even if blacks were there at all.
We actually know a lot more than you think, or perhaps like to admit.
For example, these African and near easterner genetic markers are found in Greece from over 6,000 years ago, and are still prevalent to this day.
Do tell how your opinion refutes genetic science; can you?
quote:Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot: FARMING, that everyone had and had for thousands of years is not an answer.
Actually no, everyone did not have farming, especially not Europeans.
posted
How predictable. When faced with insurmountable evidence, the professor again resorts to off-topic red-herring issues such as Greece. The topic of this thread is about Moors! if you want to talk about Greece's population origins, go here! But for the record (pun intended) the African genetic influence on the Greek population dates to Neolithic times well before writing was invented so of course the Classical authors wrote nothing about it since they likely didn't know such a thing at all. However there are references in some of their founding myths about African colonists such as the myth of Danaus of Argos.
Now, getting back to the topic. You still have not been able to refute anything about the Moors being black, let alone that blacks predominated North Africa as natives and created civilizations such as Kemet (Egypt) Garama in Libya etc. So keep drinking that Texan swig.
Posts: 26260 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mindover, You do understand that 25% of the population having the genetic marker does not mean the population is 25% black african. I could have an african genetic marker from 200 years ago and be 1% black. Whatever population there was absorbed into the dominant culture and within 8 generations nothing was left but the marker. All of Sally Hemmings white ancestors have black genetic markers but the are at this point fully white. EVERYONE DID HAVE FARMING, including Europeans. Agriculture spread rapidly once it started and it was all over the globe centuries before the arrival of the Indo Europeans. You offer no proof to back up your contention.
Posts: 2069 | From: Texas | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot: Mindover, You do understand that 25% of the population having the genetic marker does not mean the population is 25% black african. I could have an african genetic marker from 200 years ago and be 1% black. Whatever population there was absorbed into the dominant culture and within 8 generations nothing was left but the marker. All of Sally Hemmings white ancestors have black genetic markers but the are at this point fully white. EVERYONE DID HAVE FARMING, including Europeans. Agriculture spread rapidly once it started and it was all over the globe centuries before the arrival of the Indo Europeans. You offer no proof to back up your contention.
Yes, but there is a difference between one person having an African marker and half of the population in southern Greece carrying african marker (that is today, not in ancient times), even developing their own seperate cluster, don't you think?
BTw it's not a coincidence that the closest nation of Europe to Africa and levant received greatest influence during the most early times. Only a fool with agenda would deny this. The Greek alphabet itself is phoenician derived adopted from Sinaitic which derived from Egyptian Hieratic. Can't believe someone is even attempting to argue against such obvious facts. Indo-European origin my ass, it's all Afrasian urban origin.
Posts: 1554 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
The Turkish corridor between Greece and Mesopotamia was a constant source of influences on Greece from the east, both in the Neolithic straight through the Hellenistic period.
Posts: 8896 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
American Patriot, ancient Greece was nothing more than the combination of ancient Turkish, Mesopotamian, Babylonian, Persian and Egyptian cultural practices that were refined and built on by the natives of Greece. Out of that combination came a new culture called Hellenistic Greece, but the foundation of this culture comes not from Greece but elsewhere.
Posts: 8896 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The culture Doug, was established by the Indo European immigrants who entered Greece in mass around 2000 BC. Doug, before 1700 the majority of the people living in Texas were apache, commanche and caddo Indians. That culture was overwhelmed by the massive anglo american migration. That is an EXACT analogy to this situation. You guys are simply out in koolaide land with this argument. It is just a very very feeble racist attempt to hijack a culture africans had nothing to do with. This is message board academics. These ideas may be alive here on Egyptsearch but they are dead as a hammer in mainstream academics.
Posts: 2069 | From: Texas | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: How predictable. When faced with insurmountable evidence, the professor again resorts to off-topic red-herring issues such as Greece. The topic of this thread is about Moors!
Of which you know very little, as evidenced by your "non black Saracens".
Posts: 4165 | From: jamaica | Registered: May 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot: The culture Doug, was established by the Indo European immigrants who entered Greece in mass around 2000 BC. Doug, before 1700 the majority of the people living in Texas were apache, commanche and caddo Indians. That culture was overwhelmed by the massive anglo american migration. That is an EXACT analogy to this situation. You guys are simply out in koolaide land with this argument. It is just a very very feeble racist attempt to hijack a culture africans had nothing to do with. This is message board academics. These ideas may be alive here on Egyptsearch but they are dead as a hammer in mainstream academics.
There is no such thing as an indoEuropean people dunce. IndoEuropean is a language not a people and not a culture. The culture that entered Greece in 2000 B.C. was derived from the cultures of ancient Turkey, Mesopotamia, the Central Asian steppes and Northern India/Pakistan. This is basically a flow of culture and technology from Asia more so than Europe into Greece. The Central Asian steppes were a powerful force in the history of Greece and Eastern Europe, from the Hunnic invasions, to the Turkic invasions, to the Mongol sack of Babylon and so forth. On top of this flow of culture and technology from Asia came the influences from Africa. That is the basis of the development of ancient Greece in 2000 B.C.
Posts: 8896 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
did not say that, go back an reread. Reading comprehension is a good thing. You are in over your head in this conversation akoben, run along.
Posts: 2069 | From: Texas | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Doug, I am not going to continue to have a conversation with someone who denies there was an indo european invasion of greece. Take this garble and exchange your ideas with someone else.
Posts: 2069 | From: Texas | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^You don't heed information as if to remain willfully ignorant. There was no "Indo-European" invasion per se because "Indo-European" doesn't describe any particular set of people, it describes a languages family. A dominant theory suggests its origins in Anatolia (Asia) and thus, rendering the said term a misnomer as it doesn't entail "European people". It's been pointed out before as well that more than half the words in ancient Greek were not accounted for in the Indo-European language, which even Palaima confirms in a critique of Martin Bernal, writing "The lexicon of ancient Greek is noteworthy for the large proportion of potentially non-Indo-European words (60 per cent or more)". The earliest Greeks themselves described a "non-Greek" presence already settled in Macedonia and it's curious how Macedonians according to Arnaiz-Villena, share in substantial frequencies African genes most common to Ethiopians and others below the Sahara.
^I just think that it's closed minded, lame and stubborn to suggest that you have all of the answers and nothing else should/can be considered contrary to your conclusions based on ridiculous appeals to authority. You keep re-emphasizing pathetically how "real historians" won't accept such views, "mainstream scholarship" rejects such ideas, I mean, c'mon now, you seem childish. You keep asking people to take historiography, well you obviously need a few more courses in critical thinking.
"An appeal to authority or argument by authority is a type of argument in logic. It bases the truth value of an assertion on the authority, knowledge, expertise, or position of the source asserting it. It is also known as argument from authority, argumentum ad verecundiam (Latin: argument to respect) or ipse dixit (Latin: he himself said it).
It is one method of obtaining propositional knowledge, but a fallacy in regard to syllogistic logic, because the validity of a syllogism is independent of the qualities of the source putting it forward. The converse case is an ad hominem attack: to imply that a claim is false because the asserter lacks authority or is otherwise objectionable in some way."
^^Look.. Start offering some substance in your replies instead of making up accusations and claims about hypotheticals (what this person would think of your view or what would happen if you said that at this conference), it's silly! Stop pre-occupying your self with imaginary mainstream scholars and systematically refute the evidence being advanced. That's all I ask. If you can't do that, why not just ignore the people on this forum, since you think they're all quacks anyways and won't even give them the humane respect of offering up a thoughtful rebuttal.
Posts: 4021 | From: Bay Area, CA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
sundjata, What you have here is people making arguments that are so absurd that you cannot get involved in the usual give and take of factal discussion. First, they hve to give me some information that can be refuted or supported.
What do you say to a person that wants to take a genetic marker 8000 years ago and wants to morph it into the creation of western civilization? I have asked over and over for more examples and do not get them. Doug's posts border on incoherence much of the time. When you deny the indo European invasion of Greece you have just fallen off the cliff. At that point the conversation is over.
Posts: 2069 | From: Texas | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Captain America asking for respect from a racist white. This just sums up the integrationist Negros and their misguided philosophy.
Posts: 4165 | From: jamaica | Registered: May 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: How predictable. When faced with insurmountable evidence, the professor again resorts to off-topic red-herring issues such as Greece. The topic of this thread is about Moors! if you want to talk about Greece's population origins, go here! But for the record (pun intended) the African genetic influence on the Greek population dates to Neolithic times well before writing was invented so of course the Classical authors wrote nothing about it since they likely didn't know such a thing at all. However there are references in some of their founding myths about African colonists such as the myth of Danaus of Argos.
Now, getting back to the topic. You still have not been able to refute anything about the Moors being black, let alone that blacks predominated North Africa as natives and created civilizations such as Kemet (Egypt) Garama in Libya etc. So keep drinking that Texan swig.
Posts: 26260 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Malcolm X was NOT a Saracen at least in the original meaning, idiot! LOL
Saracen was a term used by Europeans in the Middle Ages for Fatimids at first, then later for all who professed the religion of Islam...
The Fatimids were the Syrian 'Arab' dynasties that ruled North Africa. Hence, Europeans distinguished the (black) Moors from the non-black or lighter-skinned Saracen.
Moving on...
Posts: 26260 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Who said anything about original meaning Mary? Malcolm was a Black Muslim warrior, hence a Saracen.
And did I not show your illiterate ass that the term was not restricted to one group of people? Oh well, at least this way everyone sees how your stubborn Eurocentrism mirrors Patriot's.
quote:Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot: sundjata, What you have here is people making arguments that are so absurd that you cannot get involved in the usual give and take of factal discussion. First, they hve to give me some information that can be refuted or supported.
What do you say to a person that wants to take a genetic marker 8000 years ago and wants to morph it into the creation of western civilization? I have asked over and over for more examples and do not get them. Doug's posts border on incoherence much of the time. When you deny the indo European invasion of Greece you have just fallen off the cliff. At that point the conversation is over.
IndoEuropean is a language. Not only are you a failure at history, you are a failure at genetics and you are a flunk of linguistics. Language does not identify a people or culture. The term IndoEuropean reflects the fact that Europeans and Asians have a common ancestral root in the aboriginal populations of South Asia. It is from that root that Asians and Europeans originate both physically and linguistically. Therefore, calling the people who invaded Greece IndoEuropean does not refute the fact that Greece has continuously been influenced by the people of Asia and Africa right up until the conquest of modern Greece by the Ottoman Turks. Learn geography and stop pretending to know what you are talking about. IndoEuropean languages originate in Northern India and the Central Asian steppes. That is Asia, not Europe. The languages and cultures of Mesopotamia and Turkey are derived from various Asiatic populations who migrated into the region in waves, on top of an older aboriginal populations, mixing a IndoEuropean languages with Afroasiatic/Semitic languages that already existed.
So stop whining and actually pick up a book for a change.
And since you like appealing to authority, why not post one scholar who doubts that IndoEuropean is a linguistic term?
Posts: 8896 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
Proto-Indo-Europeans Language · Religion · Society
Urheimat hypotheses Adamic · Anatolian · Armenian Indian · Kurgan · Paleolithic
Indo-European studies
Indo-Europeans are speakers of Indo-European languages. The term may apply to:
The Proto-Indo-Europeans (speakers of the Proto-Indo-European language) Bronze Age (third to second millennia BC) speakers of Indo-European languages that had not yet split into the attested sub-families, viz. early Centum and Satem dialects (speakers of languages predating Proto-Indo-Iranian, Proto-Greek, Proto-Celtic, Proto-Italic, Proto-Germanic, Proto-Balto-Slavic etc.) The term "Indo-Europeans" does not usually refer to speakers of various Indo-European languages in historical times: linguists usually refer to such people specifically as Anatolians, Tocharians, Aryans (Iranians, Indo-Aryans), Greeks, Celts, Italic peoples, Germanic peoples, Baltic peoples, Slavic peoples, Armenians, Albanians (or subdivisions of these groups).
Note that in any event the classification "Indo-European" addresses matters of language, which do not necessarily correlate with divisions of ethnicity or even of specific culture.
This disambiguation page lists articles associated with the same title. If an internal link led you here, you may wish to change the link to point directly to the intended article.
Retrieved from "http://indo-european.eu/wiki/index.php/Indo-European_people" Categories: Indo-European | Disambiguation
Page Discussion View source History Personal toolsLog in / create account Login with OpenID Navigation Main Page Community portal Current events Recent changes Random page Help Indo-European Search Toolbox What links here Related changes Upload file Special pages Printable version Permanent link Cite this page
This page was last modified on 26 January 2007, at 13:16. This page has been accessed 459 times. European language portal is part of GNU Free Documentation License 1.2. Copyright Information About Indo-European Languages Disclaimers MediaWiki Skin IndoEuropean Powered by the Indo-European Language Association Design by Indo-European
Posts: 2069 | From: Texas | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Actually it is patriot and YOU who are the bad jokes of this forum as well as assopen.
Speaking of which...
quote:assopen farted: Who said anything about original meaning Mary? Malcolm was a Black Muslim warrior, hence a Saracen.
Yes it's shocking how stupid you are as well as stubborn. But those are typical traits of an ass. You asked who said anything about original meaning? And it obviously was I. Original meaning of Saracen was for the non-black Arab-Syrian Muslims of North Africa, as opposed to Moors who were the black native Muslims of North Africa.
quote:And did I not show your illiterate ass that the term was not restricted to one group of people? Oh well, at least this way everyone sees how your stubborn Eurocentrism mirrors Patriot's.
LMAO As usual you have shown me nothing except how incredibly dumb as well as illiterate YOU are! Your dumb ass has apparently forgotten that the term 'Moor' also is not restricted to one group of people today either. Both 'Saracen' and 'Moor' have been corrupted in usage to mean any Muslim of North Africa. This still does not change the original meaning and etymologies of both words dummy! And exactly what Eurocentrism do I have that you speak of?? This is rich coming from YOU, a European and one who vehemently denies Europeans (your people) having ancient African ancestry from the Neolithic-- why just like American Patriot!! So please don't project YOUR guilt on to me.
posted
Well, seeing that you rave a poster who thinks posting perverted images is a intelligent form of debate... what do you expect. I wouldn't even engage someone like that unless you like more perverted replies.
Anyway,
Some examples more examples of North African diversity:
Libyan Nalut Spring festival Moorish (Tuareg) and other Libyan types:
posted
Not to mention that the strong influence of black African rhythms and syncopation on the Northern African musical tradition. This tradition has many elements that can be considered "foundational" to the modern pop music genre. And as well, with the strong spirituality of the Gnawa tradition, you have the African spiritual roots of what is also seen in the African American spiritual basis of jazz, blues, gospel, R&B, house and rap.
Look at this gnawa performance and note the similarities to break dancing. Some Berber musical styles with heavy use of drums, echo the later beats of rap as well as are early echoes of later drum and bass and other forms. But again, the root of all of this goes back to the musical traditions of black Africa, fused with the other cultural traditions from outside Africa.
A group of black healer musicians of Morocco who are well-known for their purification ceremonies, their abilities to treat psychic disorders and other maladies, just by using sheer, magnificent spiritual power of the Gnawa music and rhythms.
Dar Gnawa, perform on many official and national celebrations as on international festivals, representing the Gnawa Culture worldwide.
This is what a PHD in African studies is supposed to be teaching, but of course since being co-opted you don't get this kind of stuff.
Posts: 8896 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic