The other thing mentioned however was that these groups had two distinct cultures. The darker ones living in the Numidian type magalia for one and dressing like the Arabs. The other ones not.
These distinct cultures in kabylia and the finding by Troll Patrol quoted below is also suggestive of why there are two distinct groups in Kabylia today. It suggests that Vandals have in fact absorbed Berbers as much as vice versa.
"Most of the Vandals went to Saldae (which is called today Béjaïa in the Kabyl land in north Algeria) where they integrated themselves with the Berbers."
We need to clarify we we say darker ones are we talking about swarty Middle Eastern looking types
like this
Or Blacks?
While you can certainly argue about the Kabyle asorbiong Vandals. What about the Chaoui?
Riffian?
Mozabites?
Isn't it easier to admit that there were light skineed Berbers from early on? Given that light phenotype is recesive, the light skinned folk must have been the majority. What do you suppose the orignal U6 carriers looked like coming out of the Near East?
Melchior - I have asked you to name which Berber tribe was fiar-in color instead you go thru all of these meanderings with dna and ignoring historical facts about where teh Vandals and Romans and slaves lived. Berber-speakers speak berber and we have already noted that they are a very heterogeneous people as far as dna is concerned and even their dialects are not understood amongst the different groups.
There were different inhabitants of the Gaunches including ones with tropical traits - the early ones, then there were phoenicians and Spaniards or Iberians, finally other late comers often described as fair and blond and having nothing to do with Phoenicians nor earlier Gaunches. By the Midieval period some Gaunches are still dark -skinned or "'The Guanches in the south of Tenerife were said to have been dark-skinned, while those in the north considerably paler" neither were probably related to the original Gaunches. You might want to view the url below to see some of my findings on the matter of Gaunches.
Naturally the mtdna of European and Eurasiatic women wherever they live dates back to the ice age.
Middle Eastern people are the ones that called Berbers black - Melchior. Thus why should anyone believe they looked "Middle Eastern" or "Near Eastern". I already said this many times but, here again is what I mean when I say darker when I speak of recent kabyle peoples, but it is probably still not as black as the Berbers were originally, because those women are obviously mixed with non-Africans too!
Kabyle
Kabyle
Kabyle horseman
Kabyle girls
Think logically Melchior - why should there be two Riff peoples, two kabyle people, two Shluh peoples that developed two different colors, one near black and one near white in the same environment and locales.
"In the southeast of Kabyle country live the Chaouia of the Aurès..."
Persians settled in the Mzab with the Berbers who were called Lam and Matmata i.e. Tuareg. Why do some of these people still claim persian descent.
Which tribe called Berber was not described as black. I wish you people would please stop the nonsense . Which
posted
"What does this have to do with Anything, Did your clown ass not say Southern Mauritania is where the Negros only managed to live?? BTW, The Berbers of Tissint are NOT Southern Morrocan. Your Racist Failed attept to dismiss the Black Berbers off as Slaves fails.
I will continue to Smack your ass with Truth."
If Truth is really on your side, then why are you so upset?? I didn't say "Southern Mauritania is where negros managed to live". Ibn Battuta said that as you progress southward somewhere in Mauritnaia is where the "land of Blacks" begins. Another article calimed that there were indigenous Blacks in Southern Morocco in the Draa valley.
I don't care whether the Black Berbers were slaves or not. I'm arguing about how long Eurasians have been in North Africa. One thing you all need to consider is that the so called continent of Africa is a made up region. The Black race does not magically end or begin at it's borders. The transition to Eurasian actually occurs within Africa as you cross the Sahara into North Africa. There have been documented records of Eurasians in North Africa since the Egyptians wrote about the Libyans etc. It is what it is.
Posts: 682 | From: East Coast | Registered: May 2011
| IP: Logged |
The other thing mentioned however was that these groups had two distinct cultures. The darker ones living in the Numidian type magalia for one and dressing like the Arabs. The other ones not.
These distinct cultures in kabylia and the finding by Troll Patrol quoted below is also suggestive of why there are two distinct groups in Kabylia today. It suggests that Vandals have in fact absorbed Berbers as much as vice versa.
"Most of the Vandals went to Saldae (which is called today Béjaïa in the Kabyl land in north Algeria) where they integrated themselves with the Berbers."
We need to clarify we we say darker ones are we talking about swarty Middle Eastern looking types
like this
Or Blacks?
While you can certainly argue about the Kabyle asorbiong Vandals. What about the Chaoui?
Shluh Berbers?
Riffian?
Mozabites?
Isn't it easier to admit that there were light skineed Berbers from early on? Given that light phenotype is recesive, the light skinned folk must have been the majority. What do you suppose the orignal U6 carriers looked like coming out of the Near East?
1). I subtracted that quote from a larger text you quote.
2). Swarty is Yiddish, and it means black.
So, actually you wrote, black or black? lol
It's a good question, what did the U6 carriers look like in the early stage. We should not forget that U6 evolved in North Africa. The question is however, how did these females got to North Africa?
Posts: 22235 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
You can tell that many of the Siwa are mixed. And I posted something on the Siwa on another thread I think, perhaps you have seen it. Anyway, let's do the math, there are onlay about 20,000 Siwa speakers compared to about 5 million Kabyle speakers? Watcha gonna do?
-------------------- In the vast pasture of life you're bound to step in some truth. Posts: 682 | From: East Coast | Registered: May 2011
| IP: Logged |
You can tell that many of the Siwa are mixed. And I posted something on the Siwa on another thread I think, perhaps you have seen it. Anyway, let's do the math, there are onlay about 20,000 Siwa speakers compared to about 5 million Kabyle speakers? Watcha gonna do?
How large was the ancient population of North Africa?
There are more people who speak English outside of England than in England itself. How come?
Then again, you see SOY Keita as a psuedo intellectual. No wonder.
Posts: 22235 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Im not upset, because Truth is on my side. The Black Berbers represent an authentic Berber branch. Your lies and spin tactics don't bother me, I will continue to slap you down with the Truth everytime.
quote:Originally posted by melchior7: There have been documented records of Eurasians in North Africa since the Egyptians wrote about the Libyans etc. It is what it is.
How the Lybians were Depicted by themselves and Egyptians
Lybians of the Egyptian/Lybian Oasis..
Dakhla:
The master of the house ..
Above the front door, travel by boat. Pilgrimage to Abydos
26th Lybian Dynasty Tomb..
The founder of the dynasty was Psammetichus I, originally a member of the Libyan royal house in Saïs (which is why the period is also called the Saite Period). Psammetichus originally ruled in Egypt with the help of Assyria and ruled over Lower Egypt with other local princes (Herodotus speaks of twelve kings). With the help of Greek and Carian mercenaries he eventually succeeded in ruling alone.
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
You can tell that many of the Siwa are mixed. And I posted something on the Siwa on another thread I think, perhaps you have seen it. Anyway, let's do the math, there are onlay about 20,000 Siwa speakers compared to about 5 million Kabyle speakers? Watcha gonna do?
What tribe do these fair-skinned Kabyle claim to belong to Melchior. Is it the black Kitama of Ibn Butlan dwelling in the Aures or the near black Sanhaja still known under there same names.
Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
The other thing mentioned however was that these groups had two distinct cultures. The darker ones living in the Numidian type magalia for one and dressing like the Arabs. The other ones not.
These distinct cultures in kabylia and the finding by Troll Patrol quoted below is also suggestive of why there are two distinct groups in Kabylia today. It suggests that Vandals have in fact absorbed Berbers as much as vice versa.
"Most of the Vandals went to Saldae (which is called today Béjaïa in the Kabyl land in north Algeria) where they integrated themselves with the Berbers."
We need to clarify we we say darker ones are we talking about swarty Middle Eastern looking types
like this
Or Blacks?
While you can certainly argue about the Kabyle asorbiong Vandals. What about the Chaoui?
Riffian?
Mozabites?
Isn't it easier to admit that there were light skineed Berbers from early on? Given that light phenotype is recesive, the light skinned folk must have been the majority. What do you suppose the orignal U6 carriers looked like coming out of the Near East?
Melchior - I have asked you to name which Berber tribe was fiar-in color instead you go thru all of these meanderings with dna and ignoring historical facts about where teh Vandals and Romans and slaves lived. Berber-speakers speak berber and we have already noted that they are a very heterogeneous people as far as dna is concerned and even their dialects are not understood amongst the different groups.
There were different inhabitants of the Gaunches including ones with tropical traits - the early ones, then there were phoenicians and Spaniards or Iberians, finally other late comers often described as fair and blond and having nothing to do with Phoenicians nor earlier Gaunches. By the Midieval period some Gaunches are still dark -skinned or "'The Guanches in the south of Tenerife were said to have been dark-skinned, while those in the north considerably paler" neither were probably related to the original Gaunches. You might want to view the url below to see some of my findings on the matter of Gaunches.
Naturally the mtdna of European and Eurasiatic women wherever they live dates back to the ice age.
Middle Eastern people are the ones that called Berbers black - Melchior. Thus why should anyone believe they looked "Middle Eastern" or "Near Eastern". I already said this many times but, here again is what I mean when I say darker when I speak of recent kabyle peoples, but it is probably still not as black as the Berbers were originally, because those women are obviously mixed with non-Africans too!
Kabyle
Kabyle
Kabyle horseman
Kabyle girls
Think logically Melchior - why should there be two Riff peoples, two kabyle people, two Shluh peoples that developed two different colors, one near black and one near white in the same environment and locales.
"In the southeast of Kabyle country live the Chaouia of the Aurès..."
Persians settled in the Mzab with the Berbers who were called Lam and Matmata i.e. Tuareg. Why do some of these people still claim persian descent.
Which tribe called Berber was not described as black. I wish you people would please stop the nonsense . Which
posted
So there are no fair-skinned people in Africa descended from European slaves, mercenaries, Syrians, Vandals, Romans, Alans, Greeks, Iranians, that settled in Kabyle and the Aures and the Moroccan Riff, although the berbers are never described as fair in color before the 16th century.
OK - you win Melchior.
-------------------- D. Reynolds-Marniche Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche: So there are no fair-skinned people in Africa descended from European slaves, mercenaries, Syrians, Vandals, Romans, Alans, Greeks, Iranians, that settled in Kabyle and the Aures and the Moroccan Riff, although the berbers are never described as fair in color before the 16th century.
OK - you win Melchior.
Syrians, Vandals, Romans, Alans, Greeks, Iranians (you forgot Phoenicians) are non-Africans that settled in North Africa many centuries prior to the 16th. So you just played yourself sweetie
Posts: 42935 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche: So there are no fair-skinned people in Africa descended from European slaves, mercenaries, Syrians, Vandals, Romans, Alans, Greeks, Iranians, that settled in Kabyle and the Aures and the Moroccan Riff, although the berbers are never described as fair in color before the 16th century.
OK - you win Melchior.
Syrians, Vandals, Romans, Alans, Greeks, Iranians (you forgot Phoenicians) are non-Africans that settled in North Africa many centuries prior to the 16th. So you just played yourself sweetie
They are non-Africans but you probably couldn't tell the difference now could you. Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
Melchior - I have asked you to name which Berber tribe was fiar-in color instead you go thru all of these meanderings with dna and ignoring historical facts about where teh Vandals and Romans and slaves lived. Berber-speakers speak berber and we have already noted that they are a very heterogeneous people as far as dna is concerned and even their dialects are not understood amongst the different groups.
I have show tribes that are fair in color. Basically the closer to the coat they are the fairer they will be and the further south the swarthier.
There were different inhabitants of the Gaunches including ones with tropical traits - the early ones, then there were phoenicians and Spaniards or Iberians, finally other late comers often described as fair and blond and having nothing to do with Phoenicians nor earlier Gaunches. By the Midieval period some Gaunches are still dark -skinned or "'The Guanches in the south of Tenerife were said to have been dark-skinned, while those in the north considerably paler" neither were probably related to the original Gaunches. You might want to view the url below to see some of my findings on the matter of Gaunches.
Here is quote from your writings on the matter.
"From what I understand the earliest Gaunches and their society are not closely related to modern Gaunches who are basically fair-skinned and related to today's North West Africans."
What modern Guanches? They are extinct. The notion of light skinned Guanche came from early discriptions, not descriptions of anyone modern.
Also:
"The idea of some ancient white or fair-skinned race of stone age Gaunches and North Africans comes from the unwarranted or misguided notion that early dolichocephalic Cro-Magnons and their descendants in Europe and North Africa were European-looking or ancestral to modern Europeans".
Nope, again it comes from old descriptions.
Naturally the mtdna of European and Eurasiatic women wherever they live dates back to the ice age.
Middle Eastern people are the ones that called Berbers black - Melchior. Thus why should anyone believe they looked "Middle Eastern" or "Near Eastern". I already said this many times but, here again is what I mean when I say darker when I speak of recent kabyle peoples, but it is probably still not as black as the Berbers were originally, because those women are obviously mixed with non-Africans too!
That some Middle Easterners described some Berber tribes as dark or Black ca not possibly settle this matter since we know Arabs and Morrs like Ibn Battuta describes others as being light skinned. We have Greeks vouching for light skinned Berbers not to mention Roman mosaics and other ancient depictions. At best we would have to agree that there were both light and dark Berbers going back at least to early history.
Do you deny that Europeans reached North Africa in prehistoric times. Yes or no? No bobbing or weaving.
Think logically Melchior - why should there be two Riff peoples, two kabyle people, two Shluh peoples that developed two different colors, one near black and one near white in the same environment and locales.
And the leave of us with the still unaswerred question which one came first. If your position is that white tribes are the result of Euroepan slavery I am still waiting for solid facts to make your case for as I have said. Most records indicate that European slaves went to the major cities. We even have eye witness accounts of escapees.
"'When we had arrived [in Cork], I made a request to Lord Inchaquoin to give me a passport for England. I took boat to Youghal and then embarked on the vessel John Filmer, which set sail with 120 passengers. `But before we had lost sight of land, we were captured by Algerine pirates, who put all the men in irons.'
...the corsairs plundered British shipping pretty much at will... So wrote the Reverend Devereux Spratt - carried off in April 1641 for several years' bondage in Algiers, while attempting a simple voyage across the Irish Sea from County Cork to England. Spratt's experience has been largely forgotten now, though it was far from unique in his day."
Slaves in Barbary fell into two broad categories. The 'public slaves' belonged to the ruling pasha, who by right of rulership could claim an eighth of all Christians captured by the corsairs, and buy all the others he wanted at reduced prices. These slaves were housed in large prisons known as baños (baths), often in wretchedly overcrowded conditions. They were mostly used to row the corsair galleys in the pursuit of loot (and more slaves) - work so strenuous that thousands died or went mad while chained to the oar.
During the winter these galeotti worked on state projects - quarrying stone, building walls or harbour facilities, felling timber and constructing new galleys. Each day they would be given perhaps two or three loaves of black bread - 'that the dogs themselves wouldn't eat' - and limited water; they received one change of clothing every year. Those who collapsed on the job from exhaustion or malnutrition were typically beaten until they got up and went back to work. The pasha also bought most female captives, some of whom were taken into his harem, where they lived out their days in captivity. The majority, however, were purchased for their ransom value; while awaiting their release, they worked in the palace as harem attendants." http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/empire_seapower/white_slaves_01.shtml
As you would expect it was the affluent pashas who would buy up most of the European females for their harems and banios. Therefore you should expect to find the descendants of these slaves in the major cities. Your scenario would have MORE European slaves being sent to Berber villages. Where is the logic in that, and where is the historical documentation??
-------------------- In the vast pasture of life you're bound to step in some truth. Posts: 682 | From: East Coast | Registered: May 2011
| IP: Logged |
Melchior - I have asked you to name which Berber tribe was fiar-in color instead you go thru all of these meanderings with dna and ignoring historical facts about where teh Vandals and Romans and slaves lived. Berber-speakers speak berber and we have already noted that they are a very heterogeneous people as far as dna is concerned and even their dialects are not understood amongst the different groups.
I have show tribes that are fair in color. Basically the closer to the coat they are the fairer they will be and the further south the swarthier.
There were different inhabitants of the Gaunches including ones with tropical traits - the early ones, then there were phoenicians and Spaniards or Iberians, finally other late comers often described as fair and blond and having nothing to do with Phoenicians nor earlier Gaunches. By the Midieval period some Gaunches are still dark -skinned or "'The Guanches in the south of Tenerife were said to have been dark-skinned, while those in the north considerably paler" neither were probably related to the original Gaunches. You might want to view the url below to see some of my findings on the matter of Gaunches.
Here is quote from your writings on the matter.
"From what I understand the earliest Gaunches and their society are not closely related to modern Gaunches who are basically fair-skinned and related to today's North West Africans."
What modern Guanches? They are extinct. The notion of light skinned Guanche came from early discriptions, not descriptions of anyone modern.
Also:
"The idea of some ancient white or fair-skinned race of stone age Gaunches and North Africans comes from the unwarranted or misguided notion that early dolichocephalic Cro-Magnons and their descendants in Europe and North Africa were European-looking or ancestral to modern Europeans".
Nope, again it comes from old descriptions.
Naturally the mtdna of European and Eurasiatic women wherever they live dates back to the ice age.
Middle Eastern people are the ones that called Berbers black - Melchior. Thus why should anyone believe they looked "Middle Eastern" or "Near Eastern". I already said this many times but, here again is what I mean when I say darker when I speak of recent kabyle peoples, but it is probably still not as black as the Berbers were originally, because those women are obviously mixed with non-Africans too!
That some Middle Easterners described some Berber tribes as dark or Black ca not possibly settle this matter since we know Arabs and Morrs like Ibn Battuta describes others as being light skinned. We have Greeks vouching for light skinned Berbers not to mention Roman mosaics and other ancient depictions. At best we would have to agree that there were both light and dark Berbers going back at least to early history.
Do you deny that Europeans reached North Africa in prehistoric times. Yes or no? No bobbing or weaving.
Think logically Melchior - why should there be two Riff peoples, two kabyle people, two Shluh peoples that developed two different colors, one near black and one near white in the same environment and locales.
And the leave of us with the still unaswerred question which one came first. If your position is that white tribes are the result of Euroepan slavery I am still waiting for solid facts to make your case for as I have said. Most records indicate that European slaves went to the major cities. We even have eye witness accounts of escapees.
"'When we had arrived [in Cork], I made a request to Lord Inchaquoin to give me a passport for England. I took boat to Youghal and then embarked on the vessel John Filmer, which set sail with 120 passengers. `But before we had lost sight of land, we were captured by Algerine pirates, who put all the men in irons.'
...the corsairs plundered British shipping pretty much at will... So wrote the Reverend Devereux Spratt - carried off in April 1641 for several years' bondage in Algiers, while attempting a simple voyage across the Irish Sea from County Cork to England. Spratt's experience has been largely forgotten now, though it was far from unique in his day."
Slaves in Barbary fell into two broad categories. The 'public slaves' belonged to the ruling pasha, who by right of rulership could claim an eighth of all Christians captured by the corsairs, and buy all the others he wanted at reduced prices. These slaves were housed in large prisons known as baños (baths), often in wretchedly overcrowded conditions. They were mostly used to row the corsair galleys in the pursuit of loot (and more slaves) - work so strenuous that thousands died or went mad while chained to the oar.
During the winter these galeotti worked on state projects - quarrying stone, building walls or harbour facilities, felling timber and constructing new galleys. Each day they would be given perhaps two or three loaves of black bread - 'that the dogs themselves wouldn't eat' - and limited water; they received one change of clothing every year. Those who collapsed on the job from exhaustion or malnutrition were typically beaten until they got up and went back to work. The pasha also bought most female captives, some of whom were taken into his harem, where they lived out their days in captivity. The majority, however, were purchased for their ransom value; while awaiting their release, they worked in the palace as harem attendants." http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/empire_seapower/white_slaves_01.shtml
As you would expect it was the affluent pashas who would buy up most of the European females for their harems and banios. Therefore you should expect to find the descendants of these slaves in the major cities. Your scenario would have MORE European slaves being sent to Berber villages. Where is the logic in that, and where is the historical documentation??
Modern inhabitants of those islands silly. You are the one calling them Gaunches - right!
NO - YOU HAVE NOT NAMED ME A SINGLE KNOWN BERBER TRIBE THAT WAS CALLED FAIR IN COLOR. I HAVE NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER THAT VANDALS, ROMANS AND EUROPEAN SLAVES OR ANY OTHER FAIR_SKINNED PEOPLE WERE EVER CALLED BERBERS BY THE BYZANTINE AND "MIDDLE EASTERN" PEOPLES.
DO YOU?!
Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
You said - "That some Middle Easterners described some Berber tribes as dark or Black ca not possibly settle this matter since we know Arabs and Morrs like Ibn Battuta describes others as being light skinned. We have Greeks vouching for light skinned Berbers not to mention Roman mosaics and other ancient depictions. At best we would have to agree that there were both light and dark Berbers going back at least to early history."
Stop putting words in their mouth - what Berber tribe was NOT DESCRIBED BLACK BY NEAR EASTERN PEOPLES BEFORE THE 16th century.
I AM WAITING?!
-------------------- D. Reynolds-Marniche Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche: So there are no fair-skinned people in Africa descended from European slaves, mercenaries, Syrians, Vandals, Romans, Alans, Greeks, Iranians, that settled in Kabyle and the Aures and the Moroccan Riff, although the berbers are never described as fair in color before the 16th century.
OK - you win Melchior.
Not yet.
The only ones that we know of that mixed in with the Kabyle were some of the Vandals into the hills of the Aures. The rest of the foreigners you mention, I would expect to find in the cities.
In case you don't know, most of the cultural Berbers that we are arguing about are folks who managed to preserve some of their orginal Idenity becasue they lived outside population centers and were not thoroughly arabized like the others.
"Today they are concentrated mainly in the Rif and the Atlas mountains (and also in the Sous plain) of Morocco, and in the Kabyle and Aures mountains as well as the Mzab and other Saharan oases of Algeria. Small communities are still found on Djerba Island and in a few mainland villages in Tunisia, in the Jebel Nafusah mountain and the Ghudamis and Ghat oases of Libya, and in the Siwa oasis in Egypt... The foreign invaders usually occupied the coastlands, so the Berbers found refuge in the inaccessible mountain and desert areas where they could continue to speak their own languages undisturbed, and live in accordance with their own customary laws" http://www.angelfire.com/az/rescon/mgcberbr.html.
And if they managed to hold out in remote areas preserving their culture, should we not expect less admixture than with those in the cities???
Yeah you know the answer.. Posts: 682 | From: East Coast | Registered: May 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
The Berbers are a Mixed people, even the Berbers you post. Further you offer no evidence of how the Siwa became Mixed. Siwa is an Oasis therefore it is an Isolation.
We originate from the North African Berber tribes known as Amazigh. We are the Siwan Berbers. Because of our geographical isolation we have remained relatively unchanged.
Their Practices which are African in Character have not changed for years..
Siwan's are warm friendly people who will say hello and let you on your way. The children are friendly and 'What is your name" will be ringing in your ears on a return to the Villa from wondering around the back streets of the town. Walk further away from the market area and you will become the focus of interest with the level of "what is your name!" increasing with every 100 m walked. They are great people and very different from the rest of Egypt. They are more african in their ways and they do not constantly hassle you for money like most other places in Egypt. Any offer of a trip to their garden or house for tea is genuine and you will be welcome as long as you like.
Their DNA links them to East Africa(Where the Berber Language originated in the first place)
The mitochondrial DNA variation of 295 Berber-speakers from Morocco (Asni, Bouhria and Figuig) and the Egyptian oasis of Siwa was evaluated by sequencing a portion of the control region (including HVS-I and part of HVS-II) and surveying haplogroup-specific coding region markers. Our findings show that the Berber mitochondrial pool is characterized by an overall high frequency of Western Eurasian haplogroups, a somehow lower frequency of sub-Saharan L lineages, and a significant (but differential) presence of North African haplogroups U6 and M1, thus occupying an intermediate position between European and sub-Saharan populations in PCA analysis. A clear and significant genetic differentiation between the Berbers from Maghreb and Egyptian Berbers was also observed. The first are related to European populations as shown by haplogroup H1 and V frequencies, whereas the latter share more affinities with East African and Nile Valley populations as indicated by the high frequency of M1 and the presence of L0a1, L3i, L4*, and L4b2 lineages. Moreover, haplogroup U6 was not observed in Siwa. We conclude that the origins and maternal diversity of Berber populations are old and complex, and these communities bear genetic characteristics resulting from various events of gene flow with surrounding and migrating populations.
Comparision of the Siwa(Isolated Berbers) and East African and Nile Valley Africans
Sudanese
Ethiopian
Egyptian
Siwans
Let the Lies stop!!
quote:Originally posted by melchior7: jari,
You can tell that many of the Siwa are mixed. And I posted something on the Siwa on another thread I think, perhaps you have seen it. Anyway, let's do the math, there are onlay about 20,000 Siwa speakers compared to about 5 million Kabyle speakers? Watcha gonna do?
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche: You said - "That some Middle Easterners described some Berber tribes as dark or Black ca not possibly settle this matter since we know Arabs and Morrs like Ibn Battuta describes others as being light skinned. We have Greeks vouching for light skinned Berbers not to mention Roman mosaics and other ancient depictions. At best we would have to agree that there were both light and dark Berbers going back at least to early history."
Stop putting words in their mouth - what Berber tribe was NOT DESCRIBED BLACK BY NEAR EASTERN PEOPLES BEFORE THE 16th century.
I AM WAITING?!
What?? Am I supposed to quote Ibn Battuta and others all over again??? What was your rebuttal again? White doesn't really mean White in Arab and Black doesn't mean Black?? Puhlease! Posts: 682 | From: East Coast | Registered: May 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche: So there are no fair-skinned people in Africa descended from European slaves, mercenaries, Syrians, Vandals, Romans, Alans, Greeks, Iranians, that settled in Kabyle and the Aures and the Moroccan Riff, although the berbers are never described as fair in color before the 16th century.
OK - you win Melchior.
Not yet.
The only ones that we know of that mixed in with the Kabyle were some of the Vandals into the hills of the Aures. The rest of the foreigners you mention, I would expect to find in the cities.
In case you don't know, most of the cultural Berbers that we are arguing about are folks who managed to preserve some of their orginal Idenity becasue they lived outside population centers and were not thoroughly arabized like the others.
"Today they are concentrated mainly in the Rif and the Atlas mountains (and also in the Sous plain) of Morocco, and in the Kabyle and Aures mountains as well as the Mzab and other Saharan oases of Algeria. Small communities are still found on Djerba Island and in a few mainland villages in Tunisia, in the Jebel Nafusah mountain and the Ghudamis and Ghat oases of Libya, and in the Siwa oasis in Egypt... The foreign invaders usually occupied the coastlands, so the Berbers found refuge in the inaccessible mountain and desert areas where they could continue to speak their own languages undisturbed, and live in accordance with their own customary laws" http://www.angelfire.com/az/rescon/mgcberbr.html.
And if they managed to hold out in remote areas preserving their culture, should we not expect less admixture than with those in the cities???
Yeah you know the answer..
Kabylia is the name for a mountainous area - what are the names of the white and Central Asian looking tribes of BERBERS mentioned in Kabylia, Melchior - BY ANYBODY.
Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche: So there are no fair-skinned people in Africa descended from European slaves, mercenaries, Syrians, Vandals, Romans, Alans, Greeks, Iranians, that settled in Kabyle and the Aures and the Moroccan Riff, although the berbers are never described as fair in color before the 16th century.
OK - you win Melchior.
Not yet.
The only ones that we know of that mixed in with the Kabyle were some of the Vandals into the hills of the Aures. The rest of the foreigners you mention, I would expect to find in the cities.
In case you don't know, most of the cultural Berbers that we are arguing about are folks who managed to preserve some of their orginal Idenity becasue they lived outside population centers and were not thoroughly arabized like the others.
"Today they are concentrated mainly in the Rif and the Atlas mountains (and also in the Sous plain) of Morocco, and in the Kabyle and Aures mountains as well as the Mzab and other Saharan oases of Algeria. Small communities are still found on Djerba Island and in a few mainland villages in Tunisia, in the Jebel Nafusah mountain and the Ghudamis and Ghat oases of Libya, and in the Siwa oasis in Egypt... The foreign invaders usually occupied the coastlands, so the Berbers found refuge in the inaccessible mountain and desert areas where they could continue to speak their own languages undisturbed, and live in accordance with their own customary laws" http://www.angelfire.com/az/rescon/mgcberbr.html.
And if they managed to hold out in remote areas preserving their culture, should we not expect less admixture than with those in the cities???
Yeah you know the answer..
Kabylia is the name for a mountainous area - what are the names of the white and Central Asian looking tribes of BERBERS mentioned in Kabylia, Melchior - BY ANYBODY.
You only quoted things i have quoted previously to show the exact opposite of what you are trying to prove. People like the Tuareg of Niger and Sahel as shown by the tribes you mentioned by Battuta were called white in Africa, and in fact in some places still are.
JUST LIKE THE SIWANS! JUST LIKE THE FULANI! JUST LIKE ME!
People like you were called the "red" man.
Thus if you are going to name a Berber tribe that was named white you need to get away from the dark-skinned Berber clans of the Tuareg.
Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
What is wrong with having Greco-Roman, Germanic, Syrian, Central Asian, Scythian, Alani, Turkish, East European, French, Celtic, Iranian, Slavic, or other European blood.
According to u nothing - so just be glad of what you are and acknowledge your heritage whether it be fair-skinned North African or European.
Because you are not going to usurp the heritage of a single one of the following Berber tribes Maghrawa, Jarawa, Kitama, Hawara, Zawagha, Goddala, Luwata, Mazike, Masmuda, Zanata, Nafuzawa Sanhaja, or any other Berber tribe described anciently as black if I can help it. I don't care how many of Eurasiatics come to speak Berber and how many genetic tests done on them.
nor are your kind going to do it with the ancient Egyptians and Arabians.
Now if you can name me a single verified Berber tribe before teh 16th century (such as the above) that was called fair in the European sense or even Near Eastern sense, I might change my mind. Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche: So there are no fair-skinned people in Africa descended from European slaves, mercenaries, Syrians, Vandals, Romans, Alans, Greeks, Iranians, that settled in Kabyle and the Aures and the Moroccan Riff, although the berbers are never described as fair in color before the 16th century.
OK - you win Melchior.
Not yet.
The only ones that we know of that mixed in with the Kabyle were some of the Vandals into the hills of the Aures. The rest of the foreigners you mention, I would expect to find in the cities.
In case you don't know, most of the cultural Berbers that we are arguing about are folks who managed to preserve some of their orginal Idenity becasue they lived outside population centers and were not thoroughly arabized like the others.
"Today they are concentrated mainly in the Rif and the Atlas mountains (and also in the Sous plain) of Morocco, and in the Kabyle and Aures mountains as well as the Mzab and other Saharan oases of Algeria. Small communities are still found on Djerba Island and in a few mainland villages in Tunisia, in the Jebel Nafusah mountain and the Ghudamis and Ghat oases of Libya, and in the Siwa oasis in Egypt... The foreign invaders usually occupied the coastlands, so the Berbers found refuge in the inaccessible mountain and desert areas where they could continue to speak their own languages undisturbed, and live in accordance with their own customary laws" http://www.angelfire.com/az/rescon/mgcberbr.html.
And if they managed to hold out in remote areas preserving their culture, should we not expect less admixture than with those in the cities???
Yeah you know the answer..
Kabylia is the name for a mountainous area - what are the names of the white and Central Asian looking tribes of BERBERS mentioned in Kabylia, Melchior - BY ANYBODY.
There you go, just completely ignored everything I wrote. Because you know that most of the slaves went to the cities and you fear that the Eurasian traits of surving Berbers tribes might be from prehistoric times. How disngenous of you. Lol. Shall we discuss their Dna instead??
Posts: 682 | From: East Coast | Registered: May 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
What is wrong with having Greco-Roman, Germanic, Syrian, Central Asian, Scythian, Alani, Turkish, East European, French, Celtic, Iranian, Slavic, or other European blood.
According to u nothing - so just be glad of what you are and acknowledge your heritage whether it be fair-skinned North African or European.
Because you are not going to usurp the heritage of a single one of the following Berber tribes Maghrawa, Jarawa, Kitama, Hawara, Zawagha, Goddala, Luwata, Mazike, Masmuda, Zanata, Nafuzawa Sanhaja, or any other Berber tribe described anciently as black if I can help it. I don't care how many of Eurasiatics come to speak
Now if you can name me a single verified Berber tribe before teh 16th century (such as the above) that was called fair in the European sense or even Near Eastern sense, I might change my mind.
Also i don't know how many times I have to tell you that I am not really that interested in the dna of Greco-Roman, Germanic, Syrian, Central Asian, Scythian, Alani, Turkish, East European, French, Celtic, Iranian, Slavic descended peoples.
MY GOD!
Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-: More Images for Dana and others seeking Truth!!
Berber
Moroccan
Algerian
These are nice pictures but they are also obvious mulatto descendants of Europeans and other non-Africans who have mixed with Berbers or black and hamitic Africans (of Afro-Asiatic ethnicity). or you could say vice versa.
That is what Berbers are today - mixed. Very unlike yesterdays Berbers and Mauri who were called blacks and Ethiopians for a reason.
Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche: What is wrong with having Greco-Roman, Germanic, Syrian, Central Asian, Scythian, Alani, Turkish, East European, French, Celtic, Iranian, Slavic, or other European blood.
According to u nothing - so just be glad of what you are and acknowledge your heritage whether it be fair-skinned North African or European.
Because you are not going to usurp the heritage of a single one of the following Berber tribes Maghrawa, Jarawa, Kitama, Hawara, Zawagha, Goddala, Luwata, Mazike, Masmuda, Zanata, Nafuzawa Sanhaja, or any other Berber tribe described anciently as black if I can help it. I don't care how many of Eurasiatics come to speak Berber and how many genetic tests done on them.
nor are your kind going to do it with the ancient Egyptians and Arabians.
Now if you can name me a single verified Berber tribe before teh 16th century (such as the above) that was called fair in the European sense or even Near Eastern sense, I might change my mind.
It's not about there being anything wrong with having mixed ancestry. I'm mixed ancestry myself.
Most of the tribes you mention live deep in the Sahara. Which means their "Blackness" can easliy be chalked up to exposure to Sub Saharans and Black slave trade. Too bad for you that they represent the minority of Berbers.
And Battuta mentioned the Bardama tribe as having very fair women.
Yeah and of course you will overlook genetic tests, they just put more dents in your desperate claims.
Here is another dent; If the Arabs viewd the Berbers as Blacks in North Africa then why is it only the area south of The Sahara refered to as Bilad al-Sudan (land of the Blacks)??? Ooops!
Posts: 682 | From: East Coast | Registered: May 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche: So there are no fair-skinned people in Africa descended from European slaves, mercenaries, Syrians, Vandals, Romans, Alans, Greeks, Iranians, that settled in Kabyle and the Aures and the Moroccan Riff, although the berbers are never described as fair in color before the 16th century.
OK - you win Melchior.
Not yet.
The only ones that we know of that mixed in with the Kabyle were some of the Vandals into the hills of the Aures. The rest of the foreigners you mention, I would expect to find in the cities.
In case you don't know, most of the cultural Berbers that we are arguing about are folks who managed to preserve some of their orginal Idenity becasue they lived outside population centers and were not thoroughly arabized like the others.
"Today they are concentrated mainly in the Rif and the Atlas mountains (and also in the Sous plain) of Morocco, and in the Kabyle and Aures mountains as well as the Mzab and other Saharan oases of Algeria. Small communities are still found on Djerba Island and in a few mainland villages in Tunisia, in the Jebel Nafusah mountain and the Ghudamis and Ghat oases of Libya, and in the Siwa oasis in Egypt... The foreign invaders usually occupied the coastlands, so the Berbers found refuge in the inaccessible mountain and desert areas where they could continue to speak their own languages undisturbed, and live in accordance with their own customary laws" http://www.angelfire.com/az/rescon/mgcberbr.html.
And if they managed to hold out in remote areas preserving their culture, should we not expect less admixture than with those in the cities???
Yeah you know the answer..
Kabylia is the name for a mountainous area - what are the names of the white and Central Asian looking tribes of BERBERS mentioned in Kabylia, Melchior - BY ANYBODY.
There you go, just completely ignored everything I wrote. Because you know that most of the slaves went to the cities and you fear that the Eurasian traits of surving Berbers tribes might be from prehistoric times. How disngenous of you. Lol. Shall we discuss their Dna instead??
Which early Berber tribe was not called black, Melchior.
Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
-------------------- In the vast pasture of life you're bound to step in some truth. Posts: 682 | From: East Coast | Registered: May 2011
| IP: Logged |
OLUMBUS, Ohio – A new study suggests that a million or more European Christians were enslaved by Muslims in North Africa between 1530 and 1780 – a far greater number than had ever been estimated before. Robert Davis
In a new book, Robert Davis, professor of history at Ohio State University, developed a unique methodology to calculate the number of white Christians who were enslaved along Africa’s Barbary Coast, arriving at much higher slave population estimates than any previous studies had found.
Most other accounts of slavery along the Barbary coast didn’t try to estimate the number of slaves, or only looked at the number of slaves in particular cities, Davis said. Most previously estimated slave counts have thus tended to be in the thousands, or at most in the tens of thousands. Davis, by contrast, has calculated that between 1 million and 1.25 million European Christians were captured and forced to work in North Africa from the 16th to 18th centuries.
Davis’s new estimates appear in the book Christian Slaves, Muslim Masters: White Slavery in the Mediterranean, the Barbary Coast, and Italy, 1500-1800 (Palgrave Macmillan). “Enslavement was a very real possibility for anyone who traveled in the Mediterranean, or who lived along the shores in places like Italy, France, Spain and Portugal, and even as far north as England and Iceland.”
“Much of what has been written gives the impression that there were not many slaves and minimizes the impact that slavery had on Europe,” Davis said. “Most accounts only look at slavery in one place, or only for a short period of time. But when you take a broader, longer view, the massive scope of this slavery and its powerful impact become clear.”
Davis said it is useful to compare this Mediterranean slavery to the Atlantic slave trade that brought black Africans to the Americas. Over the course of four centuries, the Atlantic slave trade was much larger – about 10 to 12 million black Africans were brought to the Americas. But from 1500 to 1650, when trans-Atlantic slaving was still in its infancy, more white Christian slaves were probably taken to Barbary than black African slaves to the Americas, according to Davis.
“One of the things that both the public and many scholars have tended to take as given is that slavery was always racial in nature – that only blacks have been slaves. But that is not true,” Davis said. “We cannot think of slavery as something that only white people did to black people.”
During the time period Davis studied, it was religion and ethnicity, as much as race, that determined who became slaves.
“Enslavement was a very real possibility for anyone who traveled in the Mediterranean, or who lived along the shores in places like Italy, France, Spain and Portugal, and even as far north as England and Iceland,” he said.
Pirates (called corsairs) from cities along the Barbary Coast in north Africa – cities such as Tunis and Algiers – would raid ships in the Mediterranean and Atlantic, as well as seaside villages to capture men, women and children. The impact of these attacks were devastating – France, England, and Spain each lost thousands of ships, and long stretches of the Spanish and Italian coasts were almost completely abandoned by their inhabitants. At its peak, the destruction and depopulation of some areas probably exceeded what European slavers would later inflict on the African interior.
Although hundreds of thousands of Christian slaves were taken from Mediterranean countries, Davis noted, the effects of Muslim slave raids was felt much further away: it appears, for example, that through most of the 17th century the English lost at least 400 sailors a year to the slavers.
Even Americans were not immune. For example, one American slave reported that 130 other American seamen had been enslaved by the Algerians in the Mediterranean and Atlantic just between 1785 and 1793.
Davis said the vast scope of slavery in North Africa has been ignored and minimized, in large part because it is on no one’s agenda to discuss what happened.
The enslavement of Europeans doesn’t fit the general theme of European world conquest and colonialism that is central to scholarship on the early modern era, he said. Many of the countries that were victims of slavery, such as France and Spain, would later conquer and colonize the areas of North Africa where their citizens were once held as slaves. Maybe because of this history, Western scholars have thought of the Europeans primarily as “evil colonialists” and not as the victims they sometimes were, Davis said.
Davis said another reason that Mediterranean slavery has been ignored or minimized has been that there have not been good estimates of the total number of people enslaved. People of the time – both Europeans and the Barbary Coast slave owners – did not keep detailed, trustworthy records of the number of slaves. In contrast, there are extensive records that document the number of Africans brought to the Americas as slaves.
So Davis developed a new methodology to come up with reasonable estimates of the number of slaves along the Barbary Coast. Davis found the best records available indicating how many slaves were at a particular location at a single time. He then estimated how many new slaves it would take to replace slaves as they died, escaped or were ransomed.
“The only way I could come up with hard numbers is to turn the whole problem upside down – figure out how many slaves they would have to capture to maintain a certain level,” he said. “It is not the best way to make population estimates, but it is the only way with the limited records available.”
Putting together such sources of attrition as deaths, escapes, ransomings, and conversions, Davis calculated that about one-fourth of slaves had to be replaced each year to keep the slave population stable, as it apparently was between 1580 and 1680. That meant about 8,500 new slaves had to be captured each year. Overall, this suggests nearly a million slaves would have been taken captive during this period. Using the same methodology, Davis has estimated as many as 475,000 additional slaves were taken in the previous and following centuries.
The result is that between 1530 and 1780 there were almost certainly 1 million and quite possibly as many as 1.25 million white, European Christians enslaved by the Muslims of the Barbary Coast.
Davis said his research into the treatment of these slaves suggests that, for most of them, their lives were every bit as difficult as that of slaves in America.
“As far as daily living conditions, the Mediterranean slaves certainly didn’t have it better,” he said.
While African slaves did grueling labor on sugar and cotton plantations in the Americas, European Christian slaves were often worked just as hard and as lethally – in quarries, in heavy construction, and above all rowing the corsair galleys themselves.
Davis said his findings suggest that this invisible slavery of European Christians deserves more attention from scholars.
“We have lost the sense of how large enslavement could loom for those who lived around the Mediterranean and the threat they were under,” he said. “Slaves were still slaves, whether they are black or white, and whether they suffered in America or North Africa
Im have 100% respect for this man Davis for speaking the Truth, facts that the historical academia tries to ignore. The History books should reflect this. It pisses me off when I read about Nubia or West African kingdoms they always talk about the main export was Slaves and Gold.
It also helps explain this..
^^^ Euro-Arab Mongrels of the result of slavery..
The Slavers...
Striking resemblence to this Moroccan from 1800's
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Dana, please stop appealing to racists. They are racists. Of course they are going to do everything in their power to erase, downplay, ignore and outright lie about anything that shows black people in a positive light. They been doing it for hundreds of years. People like that cannot be reasoned with through logic. They are simply trolls and should be ignored.
Posts: 8896 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Most of the tribes you mention live deep in the Coastal Areas. Which means their "whiteness" can easliy be chalked up to exposure to Europeans(Greeks, Romans, Turks, Byzantines, Vandals etc) and White European slave trade.
............
Dr Anna Leone, PhD, Durham University.
Senior Lecturer in the Department of Archaeology
-Member of the Centre for the Study of the Ancient -Mediterranean and the Near East -Member of the Durham Centre for Roman Culture -Member of the Institute of Medieval and Renaissance
"I have been working for a long time and published several articles on Roman pottery in Rome, Italy and North Africa. I have a good knowledge of all the classes of pottery that circulated in the Mediterranean from the Republican period to the 7th/8th century AD and beyond
The period in question from AD 300 to AD 700, spans more that political transitions: it sees the adoption of Christianity (during the Las Imperial period and the Byzantine times), the Vandal rule and the adoption of Arianism and the Arab/Muslim imposition."
North Africa (which is north Tunisia and eastern Algeria at the period of the vandal) became a Roman province again, from which the Vandals were expelled. "Most of the Vandals went to Saldae (which is called today Béjaïa in the Kabyl land in north Algeria) where they integrated themselves with the Berbers." Some other were put into imperial service or fled to the two Gothic kingdoms (Ostrogothic Kingdom and Visigothic kingdom), some vandal women married Byzantine soldiers settled in north Algeria and Tunisia. The choicest Vandal warriors were formed into five cavalry regiments, known as Vandali Iustiniani, and stationed on the Persian frontier. Some entered the private service of Belisarius" Bury, John Bagnell (1923), History of the Later Roman Empire, from the Death of Theodosius I to the Death of Justinian (A.D.395 to A.D. 565). Volume II
quote:Originally posted by melchior7:
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche:
Most of the tribes you mention live deep in the Sahara. Which means their "Blackness" can easliy be chalked up to exposure to Sub Saharans and Black slave trade.
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche: What is wrong with having Greco-Roman, Germanic, Syrian, Central Asian, Scythian, Alani, Turkish, East European, French, Celtic, Iranian, Slavic, or other European blood.
According to u nothing - so just be glad of what you are and acknowledge your heritage whether it be fair-skinned North African or European.
Because you are not going to usurp the heritage of a single one of the following Berber tribes Maghrawa, Jarawa, Kitama, Hawara, Zawagha, Goddala, Luwata, Mazike, Masmuda, Zanata, Nafuzawa Sanhaja, or any other Berber tribe described anciently as black if I can help it. I don't care how many of Eurasiatics come to speak Berber and how many genetic tests done on them.
nor are your kind going to do it with the ancient Egyptians and Arabians.
Now if you can name me a single verified Berber tribe before teh 16th century (such as the above) that was called fair in the European sense or even Near Eastern sense, I might change my mind.
It's not about there being anything wrong with having mixed ancestry. I'm mixed ancestry myself.
Most of the tribes you mention live deep in the Sahara. Which means their "Blackness" can easliy be chalked up to exposure to Sub Saharans and Black slave trade. Too bad for you that they represent the minority of Berbers.
And Battuta mentioned the Bardama tribe as having very fair women.
Yeah and of course you will overlook genetic tests, they just put more dents in your desperate claims.
Here is another dent; If the Arabs viewd the Berbers as Blacks in North Africa then why is it only the area south of The Sahara refered to as Bilad al-Sudan (land of the Blacks)??? Ooops!
Actually Bilad es Sudan among the Syrians refers to Central Arabia as well as parts of southern Asia in various periods, just as Bernard Lewis stated it.
That is because the name Sudan referred to Arab tribes as well as Canaanites and Berbers.
That is why people like the Maghrawa of the Zanata are called "Maghrawat es- Sudani" by Arabized persons like Idrisi.
Is this the Bilad es Sudan you are talking about Melchior - "Among the descendants of Sudan, son of Kan'an are many nations among them the Ishban (Asben), the Zanj, and many peoples that MULTIPLIED IN THE MAGHRIB about 70 of them." Akhbar al Zaman of the Syrian al Masudi
Al Dimasqi wrote a Chapter entitling it "The Fifth Century of the (th Chapter concerning the sons of Ham son of Noah (peace be upon him) namely the Copts, the Nabataeans, the Berbers and the Sudan with their numerous divisions.
The first thing he states is "The historians assert that the cause of the black complexions of the sons of Ham is that he had..." etc.
From Corpus of early Arabic Sources of West African History, Levtsion and Hopkins, p. 212.
Ibn Khaldun of Tunisia mentions this same thing.
You see Melchior - the early "Near Easterners" didn't distinguish between the blackness of a man of the Sudan and those of the Berbers because in that time they were basically indistinguishable in color, if not in features.
They didn't know people like you were going to come around later and start naming the descendants of Vandals, Romans and European slaves and mercenaries "BERBERS", and start making the descendants of Arabs and Canaanites into modern fair-skinned Syrians.
I am sorry for your loss. Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Has anyone else noticed this clown talks out of his ass.
WHERE IS YOUR PROOF WHITE SLAVES ONLY WENT TO CITIES..
From BBC
There are no records of how many men, women and children were enslaved, but it is possible to calculate roughly the number of fresh captives that would have been needed to keep populations steady and replace those slaves who died, escaped, were ransomed, or converted to Islam.
Unlike the Western Slave Trade No Documents Exist Detailing where slaves ended up...
On this basis it is thought that around 8,500 new slaves were needed annually to replenish numbers - about 850,000 captives over the century from 1580 to 1680.
A Million White Eurpean Slaves are taken to North Africa and somehow had no impact on the native Population...Get Real...SMH
quote:Originally posted by melchior7:
Because you know that most of the slaves went to the cities [/QB][/QUOTE]
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: Dana, please stop appealing to racists. They are racists. Of course they are going to do everything in their power to erase, downplay, ignore and outright lie about anything that shows black people in a positive light. They been doing it for hundreds of years. People like that cannot be reasoned with through logic. They are simply trolls and should be ignored.
Doug i really think this guy believes what he is saying otherwise I would be treating him like Lyin_ss. He may be desperate because he might be from North Africa. I know it is probably hopeless, but I was just trying to help out. But maybe you are right that he is just a troll. Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well even more than that you have to understand what racism is. It isn't concerned about facts it only cares about its ability to push its own agenda.
I mean why on earth do we need to resurrect no less than 3 old threads and create new ones to restate the same things that have been stated so many times here before. These people haven't challenged those facts. They simply ignore it because that is their agenda.
And just to be clear, it isn't that anyone here claims that were never any whites in North Africa through history. No, the opposite is true, they claim that there were never any blacks native to north Africa and therefore present throughout history which is a totally demonstrable and provable lie.
Posts: 8896 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
OLUMBUS, Ohio – A new study suggests that a million or more European Christians were enslaved by Muslims in North Africa between 1530 and 1780 – a far greater number than had ever been estimated before. Robert Davis
Yet a Million White Slaves somehow vanished into thin air without affecting the population but black slaves altered everyone under the son.
The Greeks and Romans called the Natives Mauros meaning black...
This is NOT BLACK thus not native
Result of Slavery and white Greek/Vandal invasions..
The Modern Kabyle are 40% Eurasian male and nearly 75% Eurasian female.
yet their African Y chromosome E3b originates in East Africa..(Like the Original Berbers-see the Siwa)..
890 – “The Kabyles or Kabaily of Algerian and Tunisian territories…besides tillage, work the mines contained in their mountains…They live in huts made of branches of trees and covered with clay which resemble the Magalia of the old Numidians…They are of middle stature, their complexion brown and sometimes nearly black.” Written in The Encyclopedia Britannica: Dictionary of Arts, Sciences and General Literature Henry G. Allen Company p. 261 Volume I 1890.
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: Well even more than that you have to understand what racism is. It isn't concerned about facts it only cares about its ability to push its own agenda.
I mean why on earth do we need to resurrect no less than 3 old threads and create new ones to restate the same things that have been stated so many times here before. These people haven't challenged those facts. They simply ignore it because that is their agenda.
And just to be clear, it isn't that anyone here claims that were never any whites in North Africa through history. No, the opposite is true, they claim that there were never any blacks native to north Africa and therefore present throughout history which is a totally demonstrable and provable lie.
dana started this, she is trying to say that non Africans who settled into North Africa prior to the 16th century are not real Berbers, they are fake Berbers. Naturally people react. Even Dr. Clyde Winters has a different view on this. She is the one trying to racilize Berbers saying they are 100% African only and that they are basically Fulani and Tuareg. So don't come in here like she didn't start with an agenda. The thread title uses the term "Caucasian" as if it is valid, like wise "Negroid" would also be valid in her premise and her premise is an either/or proposition, a one or the other set up. Berber is a language and culture she wants to make it into race and try to justify it because some fools on the opposite extreme, doing the exact same exclusivisizing, would not include Tuareg. It's an excusew to be reverse racist. The people are who they say they are, who speak the language and maintained the traditions.
Posts: 42935 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
What's left out is that the Vandals were crushed by the Byzantines. many of their men died and many more were expulsed and forced to serve under the Byzantines. The remainder of Vandals fled and and joined with the Berbers. Here is the rest of the story.
"Byzantine Emperor Justinian I declared war, with the stated intention of restoring Hilderic to the Vandal throne. While an expedition was en route, a large part of the Vandal army and navy was led by Tzazo, Gelimer's brother, to Sardinia to deal with a rebellion. As a result, the armies of the Eastern Empire commanded by Belisarius were able to land unopposed 10 miles (16 km) from Carthage. Gelimer quickly assembled an army,[29] and met Belisarius at the Battle of Ad Decimum; the Vandals were winning the battle until Gelimer's brother Ammatas and nephew Gibamund fell in battle. Gelimer then lost heart and fled. Belisarius quickly took Carthage while the surviving Vandals fought on.[30]
On December 15, 533, Gelimer and Belisarius clashed again at the Battle of Tricamarum, some 20 miles (32 km) from Carthage. Again, the Vandals fought well but broke, this time when Gelimer's brother Tzazo fell in battle. Belisarius quickly advanced to Hippo, second city of the Vandal Kingdom, and in 534 Gelimer surrendered to the Roman conqueror, ending the Kingdom of the Vandals.
North Africa (which is north Tunisia and eastern Algeria at the period of the vandal) became a Roman province again, from which the Vandals were expelled. Most of the Vandals went to Saldae (which is called today Béjaïa in the Kabyl land in north Algeria) where they integrated themselves with the Berbers. Some other were put into imperial service or fled to the two Gothic kingdoms (Ostrogothic Kingdom and Visigothic kingdom), some vandal women married Byzantine soldiers settled in north Algeria and Tunisia. The choicest Vandal warriors were formed into five cavalry regiments, known as Vandali Iustiniani, and stationed on the Persian frontier. Some entered the private service of Belisarius.[31] The 1913 Catholic Encyclopedia states that "Gelimer was honourably treated and received large estates in Galatia. He was also offered the rank of a patrician but had to refuse it because he was not willing to change his Arian faith".[27] In the words of historian Roger Collins: "The remaining Vandals were then shipped back to Constantinople to be absorbed into the imperial army. As a distinct ethnic unit they disappeared". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vandals
It is likely most women and children who mixed in with the Berbers. An interesting fact is while Eurasian mtDNA is dominant among the Kabyle J and U, the frequencies of European Y DNA is low.
Y-Dna haplogroups: E1b1b1b (E-M81) (47.36%), R1*(xR1a) (15.78%) (later tested as R1b3/R-M269 (now R1b1b2)[9]), J1 (15.78%), F*(xH, I,J2,K) ( 10.52% ) and E1b1b1c (E-M123) (10.52%).[10] The North African pattern of Y-chromosomal variation (including both E1b1b and J haplogroups) is largely of Neolithic origin.
MtDNA Haplogroups: H (3.65%), U* (29.03% with 17.74% U6), preHV (3.23%), preV (4.84%), V (4.84%), T* (3.23%), J* (42%), L1 (3.23%), L3e (4.84%), X (3.23%), M1 (3.23%), N (1.61%) and R (3.23%).
As is the case with most Berber populations the majorty of males are E carriers. Looking at the tale of the tape, the Vandal input which I presume is R1 and MtDNA J?..comprises only a fraction of Kabyle DNA. Hence the Vandals could not have been a majority. Additionally a dominant group would impose their language and culture on the lesser group, not the other way around.
Elementary, my dear Watson..uh Lioness.
I agree with most of this, except for the language part and probable influences.
There are a lot of Yiddish words implemented in English most aren't aware of. Yet Ashkenazi Jews make up a small portion.
Same it is with Afican Americans, and words rooted in African that are now used mainstream. AA's only make up a small portion. Yet have influenced the English language phylum.
Substratum is dynamic.
Posts: 22235 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Not trying to say what Dana was up to, but this thread was a reaction to a Rahotep thread that claimed the Berbers are a Caucasian people and were Caucasian from the get go.
The Berbers a great variety, some more European Genetically other more African Genetically, Mel7 is trying to claim the black Berbers are the result of slaves.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: Well even more than that you have to understand what racism is. It isn't concerned about facts it only cares about its ability to push its own agenda.
I mean why on earth do we need to resurrect no less than 3 old threads and create new ones to restate the same things that have been stated so many times here before. These people haven't challenged those facts. They simply ignore it because that is their agenda.
And just to be clear, it isn't that anyone here claims that were never any whites in North Africa through history. No, the opposite is true, they claim that there were never any blacks native to north Africa and therefore present throughout history which is a totally demonstrable and provable lie.
dana started this, she is trying to say that non Africans who settled into North Africa prior to the 16th century are not real Berbers, they are fake Berbers. Naturally people react. Even Dr. Clyde Winters has a different view on this. She is the one trying to racilize Berbers saying they are 100% African only and that they are basically Fulani and Tuareg. So don't come in here like she didn't start with an agenda. The thread title uses the term "Caucasian" as if it is valid, like wise "Negroid" would also be valid in her premise and her premise is an either/or proposition, a one or the other set up. Berber is a language and culture she wants to make it into race and try to justify it because some fools on the opposite extreme, doing the exact same exclusivisizing, would not include Tuareg. It's an excusew to be reverse racist. The people are who they say they are, who speak the language and maintained the traditions.
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Good on Jari and Dana for exposing the lies of this guy who thinks all Black berbers are the result of slaves.
We know for sure that the Siwa Berbers are closest to what original Berbers looked like, and the majority of them are Black. We also know that in the past an quote, that I can';t find, but has been posted countless times states that Lybia at the time had an "negroid" strain.
What also must be understood is that the White Slave trade HAD to of IMPACTED North Africa because there was over 1 million people. To think these slaves did not leave an imprint on NA is just dumb. Melchior says hes mixed so I will respect his comments, but for him to try and claim that NA was not Black like lets say the sahel regions is just plain foolishness. NA Is an outpost of Africans were people gravitated to light skin and that was preferred. We see still links to other Africans in the features of some people from Morroco, Tunisia etc.
Doug M is also right about always repeating ourselves, but sadly there maybe newbies who read these forums that don't know these things and need to have there eyes open to the truth.
This thread is informative and I hope others read and research this info.
Peace
Posts: 9651 | From: Reace and Love City. | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by melchior7: If Kabyles male DNA is mostly African and mtDNA is mostly Eurasian, then won't you admit that this was a result of Black African men and their mulatto offsprings taking white Eurasian women no?
Why do you automatically assume that the E carriers were Black? At some point I'm sure they were, coming from East Africa. But you had back migrations into North Africa coming out of the Middle East, bringing U6 at least 20,000 years ago. Just look at the depiction of Lower Egypt how many of the inhabitants were lighter than sub Saharan Africans due to mixture I'm sure.
North Africa has always been a sort of crossroads, merging into the Middle East and coming within 9 miles of Europe, across from Gibraltar.
We also have reason to believe that Europeans crossed over into Europe during the Ice Age.
"The sequencing of entire human mitochondrial DNAs belonging to haplogroup U reveals that this clade arose shortly after the out of Africa exit and rapidly radiated into numerous regionally distinct subclades. Intriguingly, the Saami of Scandinavia and the Berbers of North Africa were found to share an extremely young branch, aged merely 9,000 years. This unexpected finding not only confirms that the Franco-Cantabrian refuge area of southwestern Europe was the source of late-glacial expansions of hunter-gatherers that repopulated northern Europe after the Last Glacial Maximum but also reveals a direct maternal link between those European hunter-gatherer populations and the Berbers." http://www.cell.com/AJHG/abstract/S0002-929760734-4
So now, Hg U* came from the Saami, Northern Europe?
Problematic is, how did these females end up in North Africa, shortly after the ice age? If they came from Finland. A place historically known for hunter gathering. U6 is not overall, and only makes up 9%, except for some places in North Africa where it reaches higher amounts.
The genetics of the Saami people and their language
(Paper read by Carl O. Nordling on the 9th International Finno-Ugrian Congress, Tartu 2000.)
quote:Originally posted by melchior7: "What does this have to do with Anything, Did your clown ass not say Southern Mauritania is where the Negros only managed to live?? BTW, The Berbers of Tissint are NOT Southern Morrocan. Your Racist Failed attept to dismiss the Black Berbers off as Slaves fails.
I will continue to Smack your ass with Truth."
If Truth is really on your side, then why are you so upset?? I didn't say "Southern Mauritania is where negros managed to live". Ibn Battuta said that as you progress southward somewhere in Mauritnaia is where the "land of Blacks" begins. Another article calimed that there were indigenous Blacks in Southern Morocco in the Draa valley.
I don't care whether the Black Berbers were slaves or not. I'm arguing about how long Eurasians have been in North Africa. One thing you all need to consider is that the so called continent of Africa is a made up region. The Black race does not magically end or begin at it's borders. The transition to Eurasian actually occurs within Africa as you cross the Sahara into North Africa. There have been documented records of Eurasians in North Africa since the Egyptians wrote about the Libyans etc. It is what it is.
I needed to look it up myself, and I may take a trip soon.
It depends on how you look at "South". It's more like Southeast.
Posts: 22235 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-: I have never said this or that is a "Real Berber" I have always maintained a position by the Berbers themselves that they are a Diverse Group of Black and White peoples. Berber is a Language that originated in East Africa.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: ^^^^ in other words find a branch of the multi-ethnic Berber culture you like the looks of and say arbitrarily say these are "real Berbers" and the others are "fake"
And you think the black berbers you showed look east african?
Posts: 558 | From: forum | Registered: Jul 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by melchior7: If Kabyles male DNA is mostly African and mtDNA is mostly Eurasian, then won't you admit that this was a result of Black African men and their mulatto offsprings taking white Eurasian women no?
Why do you automatically assume that the E carriers were Black? At some point I'm sure they were, coming from East Africa. But you had back migrations into North Africa coming out of the Middle East, bringing U6 at least 20,000 years ago. Just look at the depiction of Lower Egypt how many of the inhabitants were lighter than sub Saharan Africans due to mixture I'm sure.
North Africa has always been a sort of crossroads, merging into the Middle East and coming within 9 miles of Europe, across from Gibraltar.
We also have reason to believe that Europeans crossed over into Europe during the Ice Age.
"The sequencing of entire human mitochondrial DNAs belonging to haplogroup U reveals that this clade arose shortly after the out of Africa exit and rapidly radiated into numerous regionally distinct subclades. Intriguingly, the Saami of Scandinavia and the Berbers of North Africa were found to share an extremely young branch, aged merely 9,000 years. This unexpected finding not only confirms that the Franco-Cantabrian refuge area of southwestern Europe was the source of late-glacial expansions of hunter-gatherers that repopulated northern Europe after the Last Glacial Maximum but also reveals a direct maternal link between those European hunter-gatherer populations and the Berbers." http://www.cell.com/AJHG/abstract/S0002-929760734-4
So now, Hg U* came from the Saami, Northern Europe?
Problematic is, how did these females end up in North Africa, shortly after the ice age? If they came from Finland. A place historically known for hunter gathering. U6 is not overall, and only makes up 9%, except for some places in North Africa where it reaches higher amounts.
The genetics of the Saami people and their language
(Paper read by Carl O. Nordling on the 9th International Finno-Ugrian Congress, Tartu 2000.)
i already explained that U6 is one of the oldest genetic marker of the berbers and only common to North Africans [berbers] U6 is a 30,0000 years old mutation of U which is believed to have entered North Africa via the Middle East thanks to the expansion of the Cro-Magnon. Thus, Eurasian looking people have been living in North Africa since more than 30,000 years old
quote:Originally posted by melchior7: If Kabyles male DNA is mostly African and mtDNA is mostly Eurasian, then won't you admit that this was a result of Black African men and their mulatto offsprings taking white Eurasian women no?
Why do you automatically assume that the E carriers were Black? At some point I'm sure they were, coming from East Africa. But you had back migrations into North Africa coming out of the Middle East, bringing U6 at least 20,000 years ago. Just look at the depiction of Lower Egypt how many of the inhabitants were lighter than sub Saharan Africans due to mixture I'm sure.
North Africa has always been a sort of crossroads, merging into the Middle East and coming within 9 miles of Europe, across from Gibraltar.
We also have reason to believe that Europeans crossed over into Europe during the Ice Age.
"The sequencing of entire human mitochondrial DNAs belonging to haplogroup U reveals that this clade arose shortly after the out of Africa exit and rapidly radiated into numerous regionally distinct subclades. Intriguingly, the Saami of Scandinavia and the Berbers of North Africa were found to share an extremely young branch, aged merely 9,000 years. This unexpected finding not only confirms that the Franco-Cantabrian refuge area of southwestern Europe was the source of late-glacial expansions of hunter-gatherers that repopulated northern Europe after the Last Glacial Maximum but also reveals a direct maternal link between those European hunter-gatherer populations and the Berbers." http://www.cell.com/AJHG/abstract/S0002-929760734-4
So now, Hg U* came from the Saami, Northern Europe?
Problematic is, how did these females end up in North Africa, shortly after the ice age? If they came from Finland. A place historically known for hunter gathering. U6 is not overall, and only makes up 9%, except for some places in North Africa where it reaches higher amounts.
The genetics of the Saami people and their language
(Paper read by Carl O. Nordling on the 9th International Finno-Ugrian Congress, Tartu 2000.)
i already explained that U6 is one of the oldest genetic marker of the berbers and only common to North Africans [berbers] U6 is a 30,0000 years old mutation of U which is believed to have entered North Africa via the Middle East thanks to the expansion of the Cro-Magnon. Thus, Eurasian looking people have been living in North Africa since more than 30,000 years old
1). You did not explain anything, you inserted. I asked you to show me archeological peer reviewed evidence. You did not.
2). I am not the one who posted about the Saami, it was your friend AKA alter-ego.
However, its interesting that North Africans have been taken to Northern Europe and that Vikings enslaved Saami's.
Vikings had their share in North Africa for a while, did you know that?
30.000 years ago North Africa was an extreme cold area.
Another thing I asked you was, did no one else lived in North Africa before?
Thanks in advance.
Posts: 22235 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
Topic Closed
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
. Which
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic