posted
The _29 (A-G) mutation is believed to be of Sub-Saharan African origin and is specially frequent in Black Americans (Gonzalez-Redondo et al., 1991). Its presence in Morocco could be explained by migration during the Almoravid dynasty (1055–1130 AD) or through the caravan routes.
GENETIC TESTING Volume 12, Number 4, 2008 Molecular Basis of b-Thalassemia in Morocco: Possible Origins of the Molecular Heterogeneity
Posts: 2595 | From: Vicksburg | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Hammer: "believd to be" "could be" "or" ??????????
another supposition. This is why you guys get your facts screwed up all the time.
Thats means either one of the two could have carried this gene to Morocco Professor Hore, from sub-Saharan Africa that is. Stupid.
Posts: 2595 | From: Vicksburg | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
No Bass, it does not prove anything at all. You can always tell a rookie. they get all excited over one piece of data and are unable to look at the exact meaning of words. In other words, it says what you want it to say.
Posts: 2036 | From: Texas | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Hammer: No Bass, it does not prove anything at all. You can always tell a rookie. they get all excited over one piece of data and are unable to look at the exact meaning of words. In other words, it says what you want it to say.
So please to us what the passage means Mr Professor, since you say it means something different from what the Bass posted. The gene is of sub-Saharan origin.
Posts: 2595 | From: Vicksburg | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
Well we have a study that states a Gene, is believed to be Sub-Saharan African origin, Yet hammer wants people to think this does not prove anything?
Very rare in studies do they come out and say something is exactly where it's from. They always leave the door open for new findings. That said if the concensus is leaning towards a certain place, they will say what they have said like in in this study.
Saying that, this is as close we will get to people coming out and stating that the Almoravids were Black Africans. So hammer what do you see in this study that is wrong?
Peace
Posts: 9651 | From: Reace and Love City. | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I've been confused about this for a long time because I have a hard time believing Leo Africanus said these things. I wish I pressed this earlier I've read things about how Leo Africanus was badly mistranslated just from mistakes and not bias but I think bias would have distorted it even more later on.
"Not Quite Venus from the Waves: The Almoravid Conquest of Ghana in the Modern Historiography of Western Africa" by Pekka Masonen
see page 3 quoting Leo Africanus is this mistranslated?
quote:Originally posted by Hammer: "believd to be" "could be" "or" ??????????
another supposition. This is why you guys get your facts screwed up all the time.
Science doesn't use absolute language, troll. Even economists understand that. I guess this lack of education deficiency plays a role.
I'll get the paper. Makes sense, though considering similar trends with sickle cell.
Samples:
quote: The population sample consisted of 80 unrelated patients selected from different regions of Morocco. The diagnosis of b-thalassemia was based on clinical presentation of thalassemic features, further supported by relevant hematological data, as well as raised HbA2 levels in heterozygous family members. Blood samples were collected from patients during their attendance for blood transfusion in six major hospitals located in the different cities of the country, namely Rabat, Casanblanca, Tangier, Larache, Al-Hoceima, and Oujda.
posted
I didn't type out the above article because I couldn't copy and paste it. Ghanah was absorbed into the Almoravid empire right? I think there might be a drive to distort this history in order to downplay the influence of these empires. For one thing its interesting how the Almoravids went to Spain and everything but they were too backwards to have any influence on the Ghanah empire. This is what Cooley, author of "Negroland of the Arabs" claimed. That alone makes all of this suspicious. I'm wondering if there are allot of mistranslations here
"The Negroland of the Arabs examined and explained" 1841
quote: "The people of Ghanah had for neighbours, on the east, a nation, which, according to historians, was called Susu; after which came another named Mali; and after that another known by the name of Kaukau ; although some people prefer a different orthography, and write this name Kagho. The last-named nation was followed by a people called Tekrur.6 The people of Ghanah declined in course of time, being overwhelmed or absorbed by the Molaththemun (or muffled people —that is, the Morabites), who, adjoining them on the north towards the Berber country, attacked them, and, taking possession of their territory, compelled them to embrace the Mohammedan religion.16' The people of Ghanah, being invaded at a later period by the Susu, a nation of Blacks in their neighbourhood, were exterminated, or mixed with other Black nations.
quote:It is stated in the foregoing extract that Ghanah merged in the empire of the Morabites, an event which may be assigned, with much probability, to the year of the Hijra 469, when the Mohammedan faith was forcibly imposed on the pagan nations of Negroland contiguous to the Western Desert.16 But the Morabites, bred up in a wild life, and under a loose patriarchal authority, cannot be supposed to have thought much of social or political organization. It is likely that they extended their dominions without propagating a form of government, and that the kingdom of Ghanah remained little changed by the loss of its independence. In the time of El Idrisi, or a little before the year of the Hijra 548, it was ruled by a descendant of Abu Taleb—that is, by a Zenagah—and this state of things continued probably half a century longer.
posted
This gets all the more interesting. So from the above Cooley claimed that the Morabites absorbed the Ghanah empire but the Morabites were too backwards to have any effect on them... But later look what happens:
"Veiled People" bellow is a translation of Morabites.
"Medieval West Africa: Views From Arab Scholars and Merchants"
The king of Zafun is stronger than the veiled people of the Maghreb and more versed in the art of kingship. The veiled people acknowledge his superiority over them, obey him and resort to him in all important matters of government. One year the king, on his way to the pilgrimage, came to the Maghreb to pay a visit to the commander of the Muslims, the veiled king of the Maghreb, of the tribe of Lamtuna. The Commander of the Muslims met him on foot, wheras the king of Zafun did not dismount for him. He was tall, of deep black complexion and veiled
page 45 From Ibn Sa'id 13th century
In the same latitude is Zafun, which belongs to pagan Sudan and whose ruler enjoys a good reputation among (other) kings of the Sudan
page 98 by Ibn Khaldun is talking about how Takedda and other cities were subject to the ruler of Mali of the "Sudan"
quote: In the year 1353, in the days of sultan Abul 'Inan [of Morocco], I went to Biskara on royal business and there encountered the ambassador of the ruler of Takedda at the residence of Yusof al-Muzani, emir of Biskara. He told me about the prosperous state of this city and the continual passage of wayfares and said: "This year there passed through out city on the way to Mali a caravan of merchants from the east containing 12,000 camels." Another [informant] has told me that this is a yearly even. his country is subject to the sultan of Mali of the Sudan as is the case at present with the rest of the desert regions known as [the land of] the veiled people
Well we have a study that states a Gene, is believed to be Sub-Saharan African origin, Yet hammer wants people to think this does not prove anything?
Very rare in studies do they come out and say something is exactly where it's from. They always leave the door open for new findings. That said if the concensus is leaning towards a certain place, they will say what they have said like in in this study.
Saying that, this is as close we will get to people coming out and stating that the Almoravids were Black Africans. So hammer what do you see in this study that is wrong?
Peace
But you see, this is a scientific study. It's results mean little if it's not copied and published in books and articles and other media. People will continue to parrot old debunked theories.
Posts: 1219 | From: North Carolina, USA | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
Well we have a study that states a Gene, is believed to be Sub-Saharan African origin, Yet hammer wants people to think this does not prove anything?
Very rare in studies do they come out and say something is exactly where it's from. They always leave the door open for new findings. That said if the concensus is leaning towards a certain place, they will say what they have said like in in this study.
Saying that, this is as close we will get to people coming out and stating that the Almoravids were Black Africans. So hammer what do you see in this study that is wrong?
Peace
But you see, this is a scientific study. It's results mean little if it's not copied and published in books and articles and other media. People will continue to parrot old debunked theories.
Correct. The problem "guide" or "self-help" books tend to delay altering radical information. That is, especially the case in a competitive market, where racial biases are supreme. White educators, in opinion (second to white hip hop heads), tend to be very racist. I mean, it's easier to look down at some partially educated "Negroid" child even when budget hits and the privatization of the education sector ensues.
Sooner or later, these reaffirmed evidence in the academia will become mainstream knowledge. That won't be stopped, but I think it's much better if we cite primary scientific literature. It's more direct and a higher level of analysis.
Posts: 1080 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ The irony is that much older evidence exists but was either ignored or somehow "explained" away by racist Westerners. But as time passes and advances in science such as the example here with genetics becomes more available, the significance of black Africans in global history cannot be ignored. And it is only ignoramuses like Hammered who continue to do so like the fool who ignores an elephant in his bedroom. Speaking of which...
quote:Originally posted by Hammered: "believed to be" "could be" "or" ??????????
another supposition. This is why you guys get your facts screwed up all the time.
I thought it was explained to you before 'professor' that in science suppositions are based on probability which is further based on evidence. The more evidence the higher the probability until a general theory is arrived. Which is more than we can say about any findings that show Egyptian or Nile Valley civilization being the product of non-Africans or some "caucasians".
But getting back to the topic, as a pop quiz for you 'professor' can you tell us who the Almoravids are? You may (or may not) recall that I explained to you who the Almoravids are numerous times in other threads bearing the title of a name under which the Almoravids and other related peoples were called. Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Its been assumed that scholars like Ibn Khaludn were prejudiced but I think its more of a case of colonialists putting their own biases into their writings. However these writers had no problem with ancient Ghana and Mali dominating northward. It is so easy to ignore the power and influence of these empires but I really hope people look into this. I've been interested for a long time on the influence of empires like ancient Ghana and Mali in the world
Its interesting they were absorbed in without being changed
quote:It is stated in the foregoing extract that Ghanah merged in the empire of the Morabites, an event which may be assigned, with much probability, to the year of the Hijra 469,.... But the Morabites, bred up in a wild life, and under a loose patriarchal authority, cannot be supposed to have thought much of social or political organization. It is likely that they extended their dominions without propagating a form of government, and that the kingdom of Ghanah remained little changed by the loss of its independence.
quote:Originally posted by markellion: This gets all the more interesting. So from the above Cooley claimed that the Morabites absorbed the Ghanah empire but the Morabites were too backwards to have any effect on them... But later look what happens:
"Veiled People" bellow is a translation of Morabites.
"Medieval West Africa: Views From Arab Scholars and Merchants"
The king of Zafun is stronger than the veiled people of the Maghreb and more versed in the art of kingship. The veiled people acknowledge his superiority over them, obey him and resort to him in all important matters of government. One year the king, on his way to the pilgrimage, came to the Maghreb to pay a visit to the commander of the Muslims, the veiled king of the Maghreb, of the tribe of Lamtuna. The Commander of the Muslims met him on foot, wheras the king of Zafun did not dismount for him. He was tall, of deep black complexion and veiled
page 45 From Ibn Sa'id 13th century
In the same latitude is Zafun, which belongs to pagan Sudan and whose ruler enjoys a good reputation among (other) kings of the Sudan
page 98 by Ibn Khaldun is talking about how Takedda and other cities were subject to the ruler of Mali of the "Sudan"
quote: In the year 1353, in the days of sultan Abul 'Inan [of Morocco], I went to Biskara on royal business and there encountered the ambassador of the ruler of Takedda at the residence of Yusof al-Muzani, emir of Biskara. He told me about the prosperous state of this city and the continual passage of wayfares and said: "This year there passed through out city on the way to Mali a caravan of merchants from the east containing 12,000 camels." Another [informant] has told me that this is a yearly even. his country is subject to the sultan of Mali of the Sudan as is the case at present with the rest of the desert regions known as [the land of] the veiled people
Markellion, can please stop posting the same quotes from the same books over and over and over again? I mean you seem to use these same few quotes as the basis of almost all your arguments lately. Why not go buy the whole books and other books on Ancient West Africa. There are tons more than that that talk about the extent and power of black Africans at the time.
But yes, there is much debate over whether the Almoravids actually conquered Ghana at all. The fact is that the wars between various African groups were more than simply wars between Northerners and Southerners. That in itself is an oversimplification and example of racial bias.
posted
This is why I'm asking for more to be researched on it epically the influence of these empires over the Muslim world and control of trade the role of these soldiers and ability to manipulate things to their own advantage.
Posts: 2642 | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
The very suspicious way that Cooley believes the Almoravids absorbed Ghana while not having effect on that nation, plus later these Almoravids seem very subordinate to nations of the "Sudan". In fact the quote about Zafun makes them look completely dependent. (However this was at a later date)
Plus the way that colonial writers portrayed the situation makes it seem they are hiding something, that there could be something deeper about the extent of "Sudanese" control and ability to manipulate things. This of course would all be tied in with trade
Posts: 2642 | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: The fact is that the wars between various African groups were more than simply wars between Northerners and Southerners. That in itself is an oversimplification and example of racial bias.
But there is something astounding here because there is almost an astounding lack of bias from the "northerners" and there are many more accounts of their extreme honesty but allot of other literature has been distorted
This is also significant keep in mind the extreme ignorance of people about the geography of most of Africa, that combined with how extraordinarily well informed these Africans were of places outside of Africa and seemed very concerned about what was going on in the world. This almost screams conspiracy
"Trans-Saharan Trade and the West African Discovery of the Mediterranean World" by Pekka Masonen
quote: The situation was perhaps similar to that in the early 19th century, when European explorers, who had penetrated the African interior in order to unveil her secrets, were amazed at how well the West Africans knew what was going on in the outside world. When Mungo Park arrived in Segu on the Niger in July 1796, being the first European in this city, he was told that the British and French were fighting in the Mediterranean. The news probably concerned the battles that took place after the treaty of Basle which was made in April 1795, when Park was in his way to Gambia. In 1824, Hugh Clapperton visited Kano, being again the first European in this city, and he was surprised by Muhammad Bello, the ruler of Sokoto caliphate, who asked him detailed questions concerning the British policy in India and the religious situation in Europe. In early 1871, Gustav Nachtigal, the famous German traveller who had left Tripoli in 1869 in order to explore Central Africa, was told in Bornu that a war had broke out between franse and nimse, meaning Frenchmen and Germans. Considering that the Franco-Prussian war began in July 1870, the news had reached Bornu very quickly.
Perhaps news of the great events in the medieval Mediterranean, like the fall of Acre in 1291 or the Turkish conquest of Constantinople in 1453, were heard in the capital of Mali as quickly. However, there are only few mentions in the contemporary Arabic sources concerning the transmission of news across the Sahara. We know, for example, that Mansa Musa of Mali sent a delagation to congratulate the Marinid Sultan Abu 'l-Hasan for the conquest of Tlemcen. Since Tlemcen had fallen to Marinids in April 1337, the news most probably arrived in Mali with the traders who had left Morocco in autumn, which was the usual season of departure for the caravans to the south. The Malian delegation was sent to Fez probably in the following summer, when the caravans returned to the north. Similarly, another Malian delegation was sent to congratulate Sultan Abu 'l-Hasan for the conquest of Constantine in 1349. The prompt action on part of the Malian rulers proves that they knew well the political geography of Northern Africa, being fully aware of the consequenses of the Marinid expansion to central Maghrib....
Similarly, it was another channel for West Africans to the outside world: in 1594 a Portuguese navigator reported that he had in Senegal met many blacks who were not only capable of speaking French but have even visited France. In was only during the age of imperialism that the encounter of West Africans with other civilisations turned definitely from controlled relationship to collision.
Author Notes: "Therefor the conquest of Walata by Takrur refers here to the northward expansion of Mali and its annexation of Walata at the middle of the thirteenth century. The victorious king of Mali encouraged the Maqqari brothers to continue their trade, and cultivated relations with the rulers of the Maghrib"
Bellow is the letter page 49:
quote:When Takrur [Mali] conquered the region of Iwalatan [Walata] and its dependencies their wealth, along with the wealth of the region, was affected, although he [the Maqqari brother who was there] had gathered men together in defense of [the town and] his property. Then he entered into relations with their king, who made him welcome and enabled him to trade in all his country, addressing him as a dear and sincere friend. Then the king began to correspond with those [members of the Maqquri family] in Tlemcen, seeking from them the accomplishment of his desires and addressing him [them] in similar terms. I have letters from him and from the kings of the Maghrib that tell of this. When they had obtained the confidence of the kings the earth became submissive to their traveling upon it. Their wealth knew no bounds and became more than could be counted, for before the people of Egypt penetrated the desert land there used to be imported to them from the Maghrib goods of inconsiderable value which were exchanged [in Mali] for a considerable price
posted
It seems that metallurgy could be used as an advantage for the "Sudanese" people. This can also explain why terms like "Sudanese" were used because they had certain skills
quote:H. Lhote, to whom one must render hommage, observed that:
1. the bellows made of pottery is original and exclusive to the Sudan
2. that the Berbers in the Sahara are not metallurgists: they mistrusted iron-working (the 'Enaden' are mostly repairmen)
3. no traces of blast furnaces have been found in the Sahara even though iron is present but the nearby peoples do not on their own know how to work iron;
4. there are numerous traces of blast furnaces in the Sudanese zone up to the 16th northern parallel [4]
5. the northern limits to finding these blast furnaces are found up to approximately the southern reaches of the BRZL linguistic family that uses a word of semitic origin for iron....
....To this debate, detailled articles by P. Huard added more elements [10]. He separates, for example, the origin of the libyan-berber of the sagaie teda [11]. He instead supports, as does V. Paques, two traditions on the introduction of metal working to Fezzan: Jews from the North brought it to Sebba, Sudanese smiths brought it to Ghat [12]. This group, he writes, 'passes for having been one of the first peoples to have worked iron in Chad..., the Zaghawa were mentioned by the Arab story tellers since the 8th century... . How did the Arab story tellers describe the Zaghawa?
- Ibn Munabbet (738) 'counts the Zaghawa as belonging to the Sudanese peoples';
- Idrisi (12th century) 'depicts them as negro camel riders who occupied the area between Fezzan and Chari, Xaouar and Darfour'.
- Ibn Khaldoun (14th century) 'includes the Zaghawa as part of the black kingdoms of the Sudan.'
posted
At least one poster here..lemmie see who could that be..Oh!! Fawal who stated in another that north Africans never admit to any connection between themselves and their souhtern neighbours here is an earlier recognizition Leo Africanus
quote:For all the negroes or black Moors are descendants of Cush,the son of Ham,who was the son of Noah.But whatever difference there is between the negroes and the twany Moor,it is a fact that they are all of the same ancestry.
Leo Africanus, A Geographical Historie Of Africa,1600.
And that's why I asked him to answer the question were did the Almorivids got their start and on what river...but no ans.
Posts: 6546 | From: japan | Registered: Feb 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Markellion, if you would do more than read little quotes from books and read the entire books and other books you would probably be able to get a better grip on what you ask. I don't really even see your point. Nobody denies that the Amoravids were from points South. What is it you are trying to get at? The Zaghawa are partly in Sudan the modern Country. I don't see your point.
Yes it is true that black Africans had considerable skill in metallurgy from West Africa. There is no doubt about that. And it is true that the Zaghawa were part of the ancient trade networks linking the Nile Valley across the Sahara to West Africa. Probably far older than the Zaghawa as ethnic reference. And certainly metallurgy was quite possibly transmitted from South to North.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:For all the negroes or black Moors are descendants of Cush,the son of Ham,who was the son of Noah.But whatever difference there is between the negroes and the twany Moor,it is a fact that they are all of the same ancestry.
Leo Africanus, A Geographical Historie Of Africa,1600.
Yes thats why I was asking about those translations of Leo Africanus earlier. I'm sure if more is looked into it some surprising things will be found. And just because one translation looks like an improvement doesn't mean it is perfectly accurate
In many ways the "Sudanese" definitely seemed to have an advantage, metallurgy, trade, even in governing remember the king of Zafun who the Almoravids looked to in all matters of government. Possibly more Sudanese traveled north than the other way around until later times in history.
My point is that there is a trend of "Sudanese" dominance
Posts: 2642 | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: Nobody denies that the Amoravids were from points South. What is it you are trying to get at?
My point wasn't that the Almoravids came from the south my point was "Sudanese" dominance and no I do not mean anything about the modern country of Sudan. "Veiled people" refers to Almoravids
If my point was simply the southern origins of the Almoravids I would not have posted this
"The king of Zafun is stronger than the veiled people of the Maghreb and more versed in the art of kingship. The veiled people acknowledge his superiority over them, obey him and resort to him in all important matters of government. One year the king, on his way to the pilgrimage, came to the Maghreb to pay a visit to the commander of the Muslims, the veiled king of the Maghreb, of the tribe of Lamtuna. The Commander of the Muslims met him on foot, wheras the king of Zafun did not dismount for him."
Posts: 2642 | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Note that this article is wrong when it says Nubian troops were not allowed to be the most elite soldiers. These soldiers were of the highest importance since before Islam. Also I have a feeling if more is looked into translations more astonishing things will be found about "Sudanese" domination (not having anything to do with modern country of Sudan). The Makurians were able to invade Egypt several times but isn't mentioned in this article but the author does admit that they were highly feared. I've also read many things regarding trade and in these terms the "Nubians" could have an advantage over the Muslim world
To say that the Sahara was a major obstacle to invasion has allot of truth to it but there were invasions from south to north and tens of thousands of camels traveled across the Sahara every year. With the supreme importance of these "Sudanese" (including Nubian) soldiers in Muslim armies and importance of "Sudanese" trade one can see how there was a great amount of influence
Edit: Remember that Islam spread amongst Africans themselves
"The Spread of Islam and the Nubian Dam" by David Ayalon
The absolutely unambiguous evidence and unanimous agree of the early Muslim sources is that the Arabs abrupt stop was caused solely and exclusively by the superb military resistance of the Christian Nubians. That is what I call the Nubian Dam. The array of those early sources includes the two most important chronicles of early Islam, al-Tabari (d. 926) and al-Yaqubi (d. 905); the two best extant books on the Muslim conquests, al-Baladhuri (d. 892( and Ibn al-A tham al-Kufi (d. 926); the most central encyclopedic work of al-Masudi (d.956); and the two best early sources dedicated specifically to Egypt, Ibn Abd al-Hakim (d. 871) and al-Kindi (961).
On page 19 he quotes Al-Masudi The people of Hijaz and Yemen and the rest of the Arabs learned archery from them (The Nubians)
Bellow on page 20:
This act carries a lot of weight for one cannot see any reason for the Arabs to praise the Nubians so highly, along with their admission of their own failure in the field of battle. At the same time it is a great tribute to the objectivity in the case of the Muslim sources, and it also enhances considerably the chances of the reliability of their accounts, at least about the Muslim expansion in other fronts, and perhaps much more beyond that. .
3. The awe and respect that the Muslims had for their Nubian adversaries are reflected in the fact that even a rather late Umayyad caliph, Umar b Abd al- Aziz (Umar II 717-720), is said to have ratified the Nubian-Muslim treaty out of fear for the safety of the Muslims (he ratified the peace treaty out of consideration for the Muslims and out of [a desire] to spare their lives)
posted
Markellion you are all over the place posting random quotes and not making a coherent point. Where is Zafun? Who originally wrote the statement and what does Zafun have to do with the Zhaghawa? You are literally simply posting a series of disjointed quotes and not making a coherent argument. Haven't you READ any of these books?
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by markellion: [QB] I didn't type out the above article because I couldn't copy and paste it. Ghanah was absorbed into the Almoravid empire right? I think there might be a drive to distort this history in order to downplay the influence of these empires. For one thing its interesting how the Almoravids went to Spain and everything but they were too backwards to have any influence on the Ghanah empire. This is what Cooley, author of "Negroland of the Arabs" claimed. That alone makes all of this suspicious. I'm wondering if there are allot of mistranslations here
"The Negroland of the Arabs examined and explained" 1841
quote: "The people of Ghanah had for neighbours, on the east, a nation, which, according to historians, was called Susu; after which came another named Mali; and after that another known by the name of Kaukau ; although some people prefer a different orthography, and write this name Kagho. The last-named nation was followed by a people called Tekrur.6 The people of Ghanah declined in course of time, being overwhelmed or absorbed by the Molaththemun (or muffled people —that is, the Morabites), who, adjoining them on the north towards the Berber country, attacked them, and, taking possession of their territory, compelled them to embrace the Mohammedan religion.16' The people of Ghanah, being invaded at a later period by the Susu, a nation of Blacks in their neighbourhood, were exterminated, or mixed with other Black nations.
quote:It is stated in the foregoing extract that Ghanah merged in the empire of the Morabites, an event which may be assigned, with much probability, to the year of the Hijra 469, when the Mohammedan faith was forcibly imposed on the pagan nations of Negroland contiguous to the Western Desert.16 But the Morabites, bred up in a wild life, and under a loose patriarchal authority, cannot be supposed to have thought much of social or political organization. It is likely that they extended their dominions without propagating a form of government, and that the kingdom of Ghanah remained little changed by the loss of its independence. In the time of El Idrisi, or a little before the year of the Hijra 548, it was ruled by a descendant of Abu Taleb—that is, by a Zenagah—and this state of things continued probably half a century longer.
Aside from guess work, do you have any concrete evidence that Ghana was ever absorbed by the Almoravids. This is the first time I'm coming across such a claim. Yes, they got into skirmishes with the Sahelian group, but absorption of Ghana into Almoravid territory? Furthermore, it has been pointed out in a number of works that Islamic conversions in Ghana took place before the arrival of the Almoravids; so, how the latter suddenly become the agents of this for the first time, is anyone's guess.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
The _29 (A-G) mutation is believed to be of Sub-Saharan African origin and is specially frequent in Black Americans (Gonzalez-Redondo et al., 1991). Its presence in Morocco could be explained by migration during the Almoravid dynasty (1055–1130 AD) or through the caravan routes.
GENETIC TESTING Volume 12, Number 4, 2008 Molecular Basis of b-Thalassemia in Morocco: Possible Origins of the Molecular Heterogeneity
Naturally, as uniparental DNA [particularly mtDNA] shows that the west Sahelian Tamasheq (Tuareg) groups have more affinity with "sub-Saharan" west Africans than they do with coastal northwestern Imazighen groups; west Saharan Imazighen groups were found to be intermediate between coastal northern Imazighen and the non-Imazighen groups of the Sahel and "sub-Saharan" west Africa.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: Markellion you are all over the place posting random quotes and not making a coherent point. Where is Zafun? Who originally wrote the statement and what does Zafun have to do with the Zhaghawa? You are literally simply posting a series of disjointed quotes and not making a coherent argument. Haven't you READ any of these books?
This dude cracks me up sometimes. I really don't think he can help himself. Every post he makes comes with a random quote about another topic lol.
Posts: 1219 | From: North Carolina, USA | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: Aside from guess work, do you have any concrete evidence that Ghana was ever absorbed by the Almoravids. This is the first time I'm coming across such a claim. Yes, they got into skirmishes with the Sahelian group, but absorption of Ghana into Almoravid territory? Furthermore, it has been pointed out in a number of works that Islamic conversions in Ghana took place before the arrival of the Almoravids; so, how the latter suddenly become the agents of this for the first time, is anyone's guess.
Will this is why I was asking about translations from writers like Ibn Khaldun and I was wondering if it actually said something else and the translation was distorted. My point has been about nations of the Sudan and their overall influence in the world
"The Negroland of the Arabs examined and explained" 1841
quote: "The people of Ghanah had for neighbours, on the east, a nation, which, according to historians, was called Susu; after which came another named Mali; and after that another known by the name of Kaukau ; although some people prefer a different orthography, and write this name Kagho. The last-named nation was followed by a people called Tekrur.6 The people of Ghanah declined in course of time, being overwhelmed or absorbed by the Molaththemun (or muffled people —that is, the Morabites), who, adjoining them on the north towards the Berber country, attacked them, and, taking possession of their territory, compelled them to embrace the Mohammedan religion.16' The people of Ghanah, being invaded at a later period by the Susu, a nation of Blacks in their neighbourhood, were exterminated, or mixed with other Black nations.
posted
I've also been wanting to show that population movements might have been heavily south to north because people like the Zaghawa and other groups traveled enlisted as soldiers. I have reason to believe Zanj travled to the "Middle East" more than the other way around at least until maybe the 18th and 19th centuries
There is a thread on African imperialism if anyone has more information "Imperial Africans"
posted
Zafun was a state near the Sahara and was later incorportated into the Mali empire. Notice the king of Zafun enjoyed good relations with other kings of the Sudan. If people didn't realize it the term "the veiled people" was refering to the people that made up the Almoravid empire and I thought it was interesting that the "Sudan" seemed to have so much influence over them. That is also why I brought up the suspicious translations about the Almoravids and the ancient Ghana empire.
I brought up metalurgy for a good reason because apparently the "Sudan" were able to use this technology to their advantage. I also brought up trade here and this of course was key to the dominance of the "Sudanese" nations from Ghana to Zanj
Edit:
Also I've found it interesting I hear about the influence of Almoravids so much but in reality later on they seemed under the influence of "Sudanese" nations
Posts: 2642 | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Respectfully though, why is it that you are posting that stuff here which is really not relevant to the topic? Those quotes by themselves aren't anything more than anecdotes. You need more than simple spamming of random quotes to make a coherent point. READ the books and come up with a coherent point and use the books and quotes as references.
I mean everyone knows that large parts of Africa were called Sudan and had great kings and warriors during the medieval period. Who is even arguing that? That isn't even the subject of the thread and you already have like 8 threads with the same set of quotes already. Is it necessary to post the same thing in every thread?
If you are going to post the quotes at least put them all together in one post as opposed to stringing them out.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
What you guys never do is offer any context to anything you post. It is like dealing with people with heads made out of solid rock.
Posts: 2036 | From: Texas | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
The influence of Sudanese empires over the Almoravids I've made that very clear.
quote:Originally posted by markellion: This is also significant keep in mind the extreme ignorance of people about the geography of most of Africa, that combined with how extraordinarily well informed these Africans were of places outside of Africa and seemed very concerned about what was going on in the world. This almost screams conspiracy
posted
I am stringing all these together its just that you don't seem to get my point. Both metallurgy and "Sudanese" soldiers are tied together becasue they were highly depended upon. Don't forget the dependance on the "Sudanese" for navigation from Spain to China. These skills gave the "Sudanes" an advantage. This dependance means ability to manipulate. The king of Mali was manipulating people
quote:Originally posted by markellion:
In many ways the "Sudanese" definitely seemed to have an advantage, metallurgy, trade, even in governing remember the king of Zafun who the Almoravids looked to in all matters of government. Possibly more Sudanese traveled north than the other way around until later times in history.
posted
King_Scorpion ------------------------------ This dude cracks me up sometimes. I really don't think he can help himself. Every post he makes comes with a random quote about another topic lol. ------------------------------
And you know what, nobody even bothers to read the garbage. All it is, is cut and paste that no one wants to take the time to investigate and confirm whether its true or not.
Its basically spam.
Posts: 3085 | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
The reason I was asking about the translations about Ghana was because Cooley apparently didn't think the Almoravids had much impact on them for some reason. On the other hand I was astonished to find the Almoravid's dependance on Zafun, a nation of the Sudan, this is the very core of what I was asking about. Were the Almoravids dependant on Ghana?
Posts: 2642 | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
And there is the phenomenon of long distance contacts and trade despite the extreme ignorance of outsiders when it came to the geography of most of Africa. It doesn't seem like enough is looked into that
Posts: 2642 | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't see what the big deal is. The Almoravids originated in the area around Senegal, The Almoravids were known to be Jet black?? How is this big news? My question would be is the Almohads who were also Berber of a darker or lighter Tribe.?? All I can find is info on the original name of the tribe...The Masmuda Tribe.
Any way... Up
Military Organisation in the Reconquista
Armies of Al-Andalus and Orders of Battle for the better known battles, . Armies of Al-Andalus Andalusian
Andalusian armies were composed of a number of elements. The proportion of these elements changed depending on the political situation, and particular armies would concentrate on some and not others.
Organisationally the army was composed of 5 groups (Heath, 1980):
Jund, hereditary regulars,
Hashid ("recruits"), volunteers recruited for a single expedition,
Mujahids or al-Murabitun, unpaid religious volunteers,
Murtaziqa, regular foreign mercenaries
Muttawia, unpaid foreign irregulars
Ethnically the army was also compose of 5 groups:
Arabs. Arab immigrants provided the basis of some early armies; the significant influxes were in 711, 712, and 741 (Heath, 1980).
Slavs (Saqlabi). European Slave troops were employed from the reign of al-Hakam I (796-822) although only became a large professional military force in the 10th century (Kennedy, 1996). Despite being called Slavs, most were recruited from Kingdom of Leon.
Berbers. Berbers mercenary/immigrants were being employed throughout the history of Al-Andalus, however, there were particular bursts of recruitment: under Abd al-Rahman II (822-852), Al-Hakam II (961-976), and the vizier Al-Mansur (976-1002) (Kennedy, 1996).
Negroes. Negro slaves and mercenaries were employed periodically - particularly as a counter-balance to either the Slavs or Berbers (Kennedy, 1996).
Andalusians. Muslims born in Al-Andalus of any extraction (native, Arab, Berber).
Abd al-Rahman I (756-788) imported 40,000 Berber mercenaries from North Africa as a counter-foil to the Arab Jund already settled in Al-Andalus. He also recruited a Black Guard of 2,000 men.
Al-Hakam I (796-822) had an army of 50,000 (Heath, 1980). it consisted mainly of Berbers and Negroes, but also included a Christrian Guard known as al-Khurs ("The Mutes") of 2,000 infantry and 3,000 cavalry.
The vizier Al-Mansur (976-1002) had a fully professional army of 60,000 (Kennedy, 1996; Heath, 1980). He particularly favored Berbers, bringing many over from North Africa. This emphasis meant the army was predominately cavalry. In c. 978 Al-Mansur disbanded the existing Caliph's Slav bodyguard of 3,750 men, but Slavs continued to form a significant proportion of the army. A small Andalusian element remained although the Andalusian elite was largely demilitarised by this time (Nicolle, 1988) .
The Caliph Muhammad II (1008-1010) was opposed by the Berber generals, and most, but not all, of the Slavs abandoned him to pursue their own political aims (Kennedy, 1996). As a result he attempted to recruit a militia from the native Cordobans which faired badly against the Berbers.
The Caliph Al-Qasim ibn Hammud (1018-1021, 1023) attempted to counterbalance the Berbers by recruiting a Negro bodyguard (Kennedy, 1996).
Taifa armies were small (Kennedy, 1996). In 1055 Seville took Algerciras with only 200 horse, and in 1069 when they took Cordoba they had an advance guard of 200 horse and a main body of 1,000. However, having called for volunteers to retake Barbastro, Al-Muqtadir of Zaragoza managed to raise an army which included 6,000 archers and 50 horsemen from Seville. Granadine garrisons may have been as low as 100 Zanata in Granada itself and 300 at Malaga. Al-Murabitun
The Al-Murabit leaders were all from the Banu Turgut of the Lamtuna tribe of the Sanhaja Berbers (Kennedy, 1996). Originally the men were from the Lamtuna tribe, these and the Guddala and Massufa (also Sanhaja) remained the mainstay of the armies throughout the period. Other groups were assimilated including the other Sanhaja tribes (Gazzula, Lamta, Banu Warith), Masmuda tribesmen of the Atlas and Zanata of northern Morocco.
The armies appear to be comprised of various groups (Kennedy, 1996): Al-Murabitun, Mercenaries, Slave soldiers, Andalusian Volunteers, Guards.
Al-Murabitun. Probabaly Berbers of the Lamtuna, Guddala and Massufa, but possibly any Sanhaja.
Mercenaries (Hashm). I suspect these are non-Al-Murabitun Berbers.
Black slave soldiers (Abid). Nicolle (1988) mentions larges numbers of black Africans and I presume these are the Abid mentioned by Kennedy (1996). Most were recruited form Senegal, and they used bamboo spears, long leather shields, bows, and massed drums. A slave soldier sparked the Cordoban rebellion in 1121, and many black slaves were in the army the Aragonese defeated in 1129.
Andalusian Volunteers (Muttawia).
Christian. The Murabitun employed Christian mercenaries and converted prisoners (Nicolle, 1988).
Guards. Ibn Tashfin formed a guard of slave soldiers - 2,000 blacks, 500 uluj, and Andalusian horsemen (Kennedy, 1996; Nicolle, 1988). Nicolle says the blacks were horsemen, but Kennedy only says the Uluj were. Nicolle also says the uluj were non-Berber including Arabs, Turks and Europeans, but Kennedy suggest they were probably of Frankish origin. .
The Murabitun used camels - later armies had 30,000 available - although as time when on they relied more on cavalry (Nicolle, 1988).
The mercenaries and slave soldiers adopted the veil in imitation of the Al-Murabitun (Kennedy, 1996).
Most Al-Murabitun fought on foot with a front rank of long spears and javelinmen behind (Kennedy, 1996; Nicolle, 1988). The commander of each unit carried a flag that was used to direct his men: stand when the banner is up and kneel when the banner is lowered. Under Ibn Tashfin and subsequently Murabitun made use of war drums (Nicolle, 1988).
From 1132 to 1144 a Catalan renegade called Reverter - the one time viscount of Barcelona - lead the elite corps of the Al-Murabitun army (Kennedy, 1996). This may have been the Uluj mentioned as part of the guards ??.
The Al-Murabitun armies could reach 20-30,000, but were usually smaller, for example, in 1058 Abu Bakr led a force of 400 horsemen, 800 camel men and 2,000 foot (Kennedy, 1996). The invasion force of 1086 had 12-20,000 men. 4,000 men were sent to the siege of Aledo. Even provincial forces were up to 5,000. In 1102 the Al-Murabitun had 17,000 horsemen in Al-Andalus: 4,000 in Seville, 1,000 in Cordoba, 1,000 in Granada, 4,000 in the Levante, and the remaining 7,000 distributed along the frontier. These figures are for horse only and it is unclear how many foot were maintained although it is worth remembering that foot considerably outnumbered horse in Al-Murabitun armies.
Although powerful in the field, the Al-Murabitun were reliant on their Andalusian allies for expertise in siege work (Kennedy, 1996). Almohads Included black slaves, Murabitun deserters, and elite Ghuzz Turkish archers (Nicolle, 1988). Almohads made even more use of war drums than the Murabitun. Almohad infantry formed similarly to the Murabitun: a front rank with long spears, a second with javelins and spears and a third of slingers.
Blacks(as well as Black Berbers along with Lighter Berbers) were used from the beginining of the invasion of Iberia.
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
The reason that "blacks" absolutely must be depicted as slaves is to get around the fact that very large numbers were traveling around the world.
quote:Originally posted by Jari-Ankhamun:
Black slave soldiers (Abid). Nicolle (1988) mentions larges numbers of black Africans and I presume these are the Abid mentioned by Kennedy (1996). Most were recruited form Senegal, and they used bamboo spears, long leather shields, bows, and massed drums. A slave soldier sparked the Cordoban rebellion in 1121, and many black slaves were in the army the Aragonese defeated in 1129.
The Arabs were very black too but there seems to be something significant about nations of the "Sudan". And there are allot more astonishing things I forgot about for one thing scholarship:
"Sudanese" scholars traveled everywhere in the Muslim world and cities like Timbuktu became centers of knowledge in the Muslim world. There is a story about someone from Hidjaz who traveled to Timbuktu not being able to keep up he traveled to Fez to find employment. All the great universities had connections with each other so indigenous knowledge from the Mandingo to the Bantu had some impact on the Muslim world
And as I've mentioned earlier "Sudanese" blacksmiths in some places had almost a monopoly on their craft and as far as China "Sudanese" navigators were essential when it came to fighting pirates and navigation ect. "Sudanese" soldiers were of the highest significance and of course control over trade
Posts: 2642 | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by markellion: The reason that "blacks" absolutely must be depicted as slaves is to get around the fact that very large numbers were traveling around the world.
quote:Originally posted by Jari-Ankhamun:
Black slave soldiers (Abid). Nicolle (1988) mentions larges numbers of black Africans and I presume these are the Abid mentioned by Kennedy (1996). Most were recruited form Senegal, and they used bamboo spears, long leather shields, bows, and massed drums. A slave soldier sparked the Cordoban rebellion in 1121, and many black slaves were in the army the Aragonese defeated in 1129.
The Arabs were very black too but there seems to be something significant about nations of the "Sudan". And there are allot more astonishing things I forgot about for one thing scholarship:
"Sudanese" scholars traveled everywhere in the Muslim world and cities like Timbuktu became centers of knowledge in the Muslim world. There is a story about someone from Hidjaz who traveled to Timbuktu not being able to keep up he traveled to Fez to find employment. All the great universities had connections with each other so indigenous knowledge from the Mandingo to the Bantu had some impact on the Muslim world
And as I've mentioned earlier "Sudanese" blacksmiths in some places had almost a monopoly on their craft and as far as China "Sudanese" navigators were essential when it came to fighting pirates and navigation ect. "Sudanese" soldiers were of the highest significance and of course control over trade
The reason why I don't like to use black which is confusing becuase there are blacks and the Arabs especially Southern Arabs are a shade lighter than many so called Blacks...but the info I posted shows that Soildiers from the South of the desert as well as the North with Berber populations was used in Moorish Spain which means that as usual the Moors were a Mix of Blacks, Berbers, and Arabs also Native Iberians and Slavs were present..
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Charlie Bass I was thinking about you and I see you posted this. If your ancestors came from the Mississipi Delta area, then you have a likelyhood of being part Tuareg. I am learking fascinating thins about this group from French books on the subject containing stuff not in English.
You should look again at Wikipedia's entry. Of Course, you know some Tuaregs are descended from Moroccan Moors.
quote:Originally posted by Jari-Ankhamun: but the info I posted shows that Soildiers from the South of the desert as well as the North with Berber populations was used in Moorish Spain which means that as usual the Moors were a Mix of Blacks, Berbers, and Arabs also Native Iberians and Slavs were present..
Yes but the article is highly problematic because while many "Sudanese" were present as slaves the article assumes that a very large number of "Sudanese" soldiers were slaves without evidence
Posts: 2642 | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Hammered: What you guys never do is offer any context to anything you post. It is like dealing with people with heads made out of solid rock.
And please show us how we never present "any context"! The context of this thread based on the title article is quite clear, at least to anyone with a sane functioning mind.
And how about you answering my prior question...
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ..pop quiz for you 'professor' can you tell us who the Almoravids are? You may (or may not) recall that I explained to you who the Almoravids are numerous times in other threads bearing the title of a name under which the Almoravids and other related peoples were called.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Jari-Ankhamun: but the info I posted shows that Soildiers from the South of the desert as well as the North with Berber populations was used in Moorish Spain which means that as usual the Moors were a Mix of Blacks, Berbers, and Arabs also Native Iberians and Slavs were present..
Yes but the article is highly problematic because while many "Sudanese" were present as slaves the article assumes that a very large number of "Sudanese" soldiers were slaves without evidence
True but Slave soldiers were different in class than the typical slave: Even a cursory glance at the history of Muslim peoples reveals the extraordinary role played by men of slave origins in the armed forces. They served both as soldiers and as officers, then often acquired preeminent roles in administration, politics, and all aspects of public affairs http://www.danielpipes.org/448/military-slaves-a-uniquely-muslim-phenomenon Im not advocating that all the blacks were slave soldiers but it was highly likely I mean why pay an Army when you can use highly traind slaves at a time when Slave soldiers were the norm in Muslim Societies. If it helps alot of the White Soldiers such as the Slavs in Al-Andalus were slave soldiers.
Muslim societies were the cream of the crop at one point in time and my personal conclusion was that it was all due mainly to the Knowledge they got from various people such as Egypt, India, Nubia, Persia and it all came together...In other words it had nothing to do with Islam itself but the scoiety that Early Islam embraced...The fact that you had to be literate to read the Koran helped.
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Besides Mercenaries were used so not all the blacks were Slaves..hell alot of Arabs, Jews, Berbers etc travelled to Ghana for trade and even to stay so why assume that the Ghana and other African did not travel to Al-Andalus as traders and to make a home?
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
Muslim societies were the cream of the crop at one point in time and my personal conclusion was that it was all due mainly to the Knowledge they got from various people such as Egypt, India, Nubia, Persia and it all came together...
Yes but the knowledge of so many other people is ignored for example Timbuktu didn't become a famous center of knowledge by simply copying the knowledge of Egypt, India, Nubia or Persia they contributed new ideas to the Musilm world. All the Muslim Universities were linked together and so Muslim scholars contributed new ideas and others like Kilwa on the Swahili Coast and cities like Kano were also places of learning in the Muslim world and would have also contributed new knowledge. And there is a great amount of evidence that the knowledge and skills of different "Sudanese" peoples were essential when it came to Muslim empires like in Spain and these same people were able to manipulate things to their own advantage, in other words these "Sudanese" had the upper hand in these relations. The indigenous knowledge of these people had an impact on the Muslim world
Posts: 2642 | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged |
Topic Closed
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic