posted
I did leave this forum, however this is an important piece of research i am posting across the net.
If you want to learn the truth about David MacRitchie, his work and how Afrocentric liars have distorted it please read below.
Yes i own this work (original copy) - these are my copies below -
Ancient and Modern Britons was published by David MacRitchie in 1884 in two volumes (incl. 3 books). The work as the title suggests, covers the early (and more recent) history of the British people, but does so from a strong ethnological or racial basis. In recent years this work has become a major text quote-mined by Afrocentrics in attempt to support their crackpot pseudo-history that Negroids were the native inhabitants of Britain. MacRitchie's work subsequently has been much distorted to support these views, despite the fact his work, if read properly, never actually claims Negroids (Blacks) are native to Britain. This would of course not be the first time Afrocentrics distort someone else's writings (Grafton Elliot Smith comes to mind). MacRitchie's work is actually an interesting read, but this essay (in two parts) will show how Afrocentrics have distorted it.
I will briefly first though cover a background to this work.
Ancient and Modern Britons
The work was published as noted in two volumes in 1884. Today these original volumes are very rare antiquarian items, worth a high value. I was lucky enough to get an original print (both volumes) for £90 ($140) though they are definately worth a lot more. I'm not sure if they originally had dust covers, my editions do not (and my copies are slightly damaged) but i would say they are worth around £300 ($460) if in good condition, mine are probably worth just under (see photo above).
The money value of this work however is far less important than the work itself, which is priceless since it contains a lot of outdated (and hard to find) references and some very unique research on the ethnology of the ancient Britons. As for the author himself, David MacRitchie was a Scottish folklorist but was a prominent member of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland (F.S.A) and various other antiquarian, folklore or archaeological societies. He was also the author of Testimony of Tradition (1890) which was one of the key works arguing for a euhemeristic origin of fairies, as opposed to the mainstream psychological theory.
Afrocentric Modern Editions
Afrocentrics have reprinted Ancient and Modern Britons (1985, 1991). These modern Afrocentric editions you can find on Amazon, or any other mainstream book selling site. These editions should NOT be trusted! They contain quotes attributed to MacRitchie which in fact do not exist. The introduction of the 1991 edition praises David MacRitchie, asserting he believed sciences, arts etc were Negro in origin and that ''Negroes were builders, scientists, masters of ocean travel...'' Yet nowhere is this found in MacRitchie's Ancient and Modern Britons. The cover picture is also misleading, as it is not also found (nonsurprisingly) in MacRitchie's work. Do not trust Afrocentric liars, if you want this work i suggest purchasing the original.
What the work actually says...
A few points should be clarified before the contents of MacRitchie's Ancient and Modern Britons are explored in detail. Firstly, it should be acknowledged that racial typology or the taxonomical classification of races in the late 19th century were still being defined. This work was published a long times before the most renowned racial anthropologists such as Hooton, Coon, Gates and Baker. MacRitchie's work was also published fifteen years before Ripley's Races of Europe (1899) and Deniker's Races of Man (1900).
Thus MacRitchie's anthropological sources in Ancient and Modern Britons, almost entirely rest on Thomas Huxley's early racial classification (On the Geographical Distribution of the Chief Modifications of Mankind, 1870) printed in Journal of the Ethnological Society of London, Vol. ii, No. 4. According to Huxley's racial typology there are 9 races:
Huxley personally rejected the concept of a single Caucasian (Caucasoid, Europid, White) race, instead he considered there to be two forms of ''whites'', the Melanochroi (''dark whites'') synonymous in terms of later classification with the swarthy or olive skinned Mediterranean (Caucasoid) sub-race. According to Huxley the Melanochroi were the Arabs, Greeks, South Italians, Spaniards and Welshmen (amongst others) while in contrast the Xanthochroi (''fair whites'') were those of the Nordic (fair haired, depigmentated, long-skulled) phenotype: ''tall stature and have the skin almost colourless, and so delicate that the blood really shows through it. The eyes are blue or grey; the hair light, ranging from straw-colour to red or chestnut, the beard and body-hair abundant''. However it appears Huxley also considered the Alpines, or Alpine sub-race (not during his time particularly established) to be the same as the Nordic (''fair whites'') since he considered brachycelphalic Central Europeans to be also Xanthochroi (see map below at link).
In Ancient and Modern Britons, MacRitchie opens by presenting Huxley's racial model (pp.4-9). His main interest in Huxley is a statement he made concerning the origin of the Melanochroi, ''dark whites'' or the later established Mediterranean (Caucasoid) subrace:
''On the contrary, I am much disposed to think that the Melanochroi are the result of an intermixture between the Xanthochroi and the Australioids''
The Australioid (later spelled Australoid) race has been well established since the 19th century. Huxley defines their general physical appearance as follows:
''...commonly of fair stature, with well-developed torso and arms, but relatively and absolutely slender legs. The colour of the skin is some shade of chocolate-brown; and the eyes are very dark brown, or black. The hair is usually raven-black, fine and silky in texture; and it is never woolly, but usually wavy and tolerably long. The beard is sometimes well developed, as is the hair upon the body and the eyebrows. The Australians are invariably dolichocephalic... nose is broad rather than flat; the jaws are heavy, and the lips remarkably coarse and flexible. There is usually strongly marked alveolar prognathism.''
Regarding evolution there are different theories as to the origin of the Australoid race. The Out of Africa theory argues all modern Humans looked like Australoids after the first migration out of Africa, having sprung from an original Capoid (Bushmen) racial stock. The Multiregional Theory however argues in contrast that the Australoid race evolved from Pithecanthropus (Gates, 1948; Coon, 1962) through the H. Soloensis (Weidenreich, 1943, p. 276) which show a Australoid continuity of morphological traits much like the Sinanthropus-Mongoloid continuity. All athropologists agree though that the Australoid race is distinct, the Afrocentric loons however label the Australoid race as Negroid or 'Africanoid', when in actual fact Australoids have more phenotype similarities with Caucasoids:
(a) Australoids and Caucasoids have straight, wavy or curly hair. Negroid hair however is wooly. (b) Both Australoids and Caucasoids have more body and facial hair than the Negroid. (c) Australoids and Caucasoids have natural blonde populations, Negroids are only black haired. (d) Australoids and Caucasoids can have alveolar prognathism, Negroids have mandibular. (e) Australoids show morphological (esp. cranial) similarity closer to Caucasoids, than Negroids. (f) Australoids have a range of brown skin, often lighter than the darker Negroid.
For these outlined reasons some anthropologists have considered the Australoids to be none other than ''Archaic Whites'' or proto-Caucasoids (Gates, 1948; Cole, 1965). Hooton (1931, p. 512f) however considered the Australoids to be a mixed race of ''some archaic white strain'' with Negroid, the latter because of the Australoids dark complexion (although as noted it is usually a lighter brown). The overall point though is that the Australoid race is not Negroid, and excluding Hooton's minority mixed race view, anthropologists have agreed that the Australoid race is a distinct group, but sharing the closest morphological and phenotype features with Caucasoids, not Negroids (see the above list). The strongest connection between Caucasoids and Australoids is their hair according to Coon, ''their beard and body hair is distributed as in Caucasoids'' (1965, p. 12).
Now back to Huxley and MacRitchie.
In Huxley's racial typology, the Melanochroi are considered to be a product of the Australoids and Xanthochroi (''fair whites'' or Nordics/Alpines). Huxley did not believe, as later anthropologists established that there was a natural Mediterranean race, but that the ''dark whites'' (olive skinned peoples of the Mediterranean) were a product of admixture between Australoids and the ''fair whites''. This admixture theory is the backbone of MacRitchie's Ancient and Modern Britons. Note particularly that although MacRitchie was familiar with Huxley's racial typology he did not claim Negroids were the progenitors of the Melanochroi race, but instead Australoid. Afrocentric liars across the net however are claiming MacRitchie believed Negroids were the native Britons who created the Melanochroi or Meditteranid racial type of certain British populations (e.g. the Welsh) through miscegenation. According to MacRitchie the Australoids in Britain, during ''time immorial'' (earliest occupation) e.g. the Palaeolithic were ''silky or wavy haired'' (p. 5, quoting Huxley) and the first racial type to arrive.
MacRitchie makes his view clear from the opening pages of Ancient and Modern Britons that:
(a) The indigenous Britons were not Negroid, but Australoid. (b) The Melanochroi or Meditteranid appearance of many modern Britons (White British) is a product of Australoid and Nordic (or ''fair white'') admixture. (c) The native Australoids were straight (silky) or wavy haired, not wooly haired like Negroids.
Furthermore according to MacRitchie, p. 9:
''...structurally, certain of the inhabitants of Britain in former times belonged to the Australoid family. Whether their complexion was as swarthy as that of their Southern kindred remains yet to be proved''.
In other words, MacRitchie acknowleged that the Palaeolithic Australoids of Britain were probably lighter brown skinned than the Australoids of India (the Veddoids or Veddids) and the Australian Aborigines (although he never fully accepted this idea). In physical appearance therefore the indigenous inhabitants of Britain in MacRitchie's view approached the hue of an ancient egyptian (p. 5). According to MacRitchie the ancient egyptians belonged to the Australoid family, quoting Huxley: ''dark skin, the black, silky, wavy hair, the long skull...'' (Ibid). I can see how Afrocentrics have twisted all this, but its clear MacRitchie never placed a native population of Negroes in Britain. His indigenous Britons were Australoids, straight or wavy haired with closer phenotypes to Caucasoids, not wooly haired Negroids.
Posts: 2408 | From: My mother's basement | Registered: Dec 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ancient and modern Britons: a retrospect, Volume 1 By David MacRitchie
p 7-8
These proofs are craniological. "We know (says the writer of a small pamphlet on this subject)that the first inhabittants of Britain [let us say, certain tribes of ancient Britons], and more especially those of the northern parts, were craniologically of a type approaching to the Negro or to the Australian race
And as anthropology shows, Australiods are in fact far closer mophologically and in phenotype to Caucasoids, not Negroids.
So much for blacks being the ''original race'', when virtually all anthropologists agree Australoids look more Caucasoid (White) than Negroid.
Posts: 2408 | From: My mother's basement | Registered: Dec 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
cassiterides - We have long known that like Lioness, you are a degenerate liar. But for the sake of propriety, couldn't you at least try to tell lies that aren't so easily checked?
cassiterides my dear Albino, those people are not Australian. They are the people who produced you as an Albino - Dravidians.
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
''Racially, Dravidians are said to be a 'Proto- Mediterranean' branch of Caucasoid race with some admixture of proto-Australoid traits''
- Sjoberg 1971a: 13; also Basham 1979: 2.
Dravidians are basically meds with minor australoid admixture.
India was primitive until it was aryanized and the Aryan Gods of the Veda such as INDRA are blonde haired and white.
Posts: 2408 | From: My mother's basement | Registered: Dec 2010
| IP: Logged |
Indra - X 23.4 - "With him too is this rain of his that comes like herds: Indra throws drops of moisture on his yellow beard. When the sweet juice is shed he seeks the pleasant place, and stirs the worshipper as wind disturbs the wood."
Indra - 10.96.8 - "At the swift draught the Soma-drinker waxed in might, the Iron One with yellow beard and yellow hair. He, Lord of Tawny Coursers, Lord of fleet-foot Mares, will bear his Bay Steeds safely over all distress."
Posts: 2408 | From: My mother's basement | Registered: Dec 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
The University's Director of Archaeological Museums, Lindsay Allason-Jones, who has organized an exhibition of the Museum's Romano-African artefacts to coincide with Black History Month, says:'From the evidence we have here, it is clear that colour was no bar to the status an individual could achieve in the Roman Empire'...
“Africans have been present in Europe from classical times. In the 2nd and 3rd centuries Roman soldiers of African origin served in Britain, and some stayed after their military service ended. According to the historians Fryer, Edwards and Walvin, in the 9th century Viking fleets raided North Africa and Spain, captured Black people, and took them to Britain and Ireland.
From the end of the 15th century we begin to see more evidence for the presence of Black Moors in the accounts of the reign of King James IV of Scotland, and later in Elizabethan England.”
* Source "ANOTHER AFROCENTRIC" lol: The National Archives of Scotland.
"The King Provides Clothes for the Party A variety of fabrics were used to make clothing for the Moors - velvet ('wellus'), woollen kersey ('carsay') and fine Holland linen - which was decorated or fastened with buttons, rings or other ornaments ('mailyeis'). These were paid for by the treasury of King James IV. It seems that these Moors were not servants; it is more likely that they were invited guests staying at the palace. Accounts of the Lord High Treasurer of Scotland, vol. 3, p. 101 (1505)"
"The King Requests an Audience with a Black Baby This extract from the Lord High Treasurer's accounts show that in 1505/6 a payment of 28 shillings was made to 'the nuris that brocht the Moris barne to see, be the Kingis command'. The king must have known of this child to ask to see it." "The child may have been that of the 'More taubronar', the Black drummer at court. Treasury accounts also itemise accommodation for the 'wife of the taubronar and his barne'. This would suggest that the drummer was living at the palace with his family. Accounts of the Lord High Treasurer of Scotland, vol. 3, p. 182 (1505/6)"
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol: The University's Director of Archaeological Museums, Lindsay Allason-Jones, who has organized an exhibition of the Museum's Romano-African artefacts to coincide with Black History Month, says:'From the evidence we have here, it is clear that colour was no bar to the status an individual could achieve in the Roman Empire'...
“Africans have been present in Europe from classical times. In the 2nd and 3rd centuries Roman soldiers of African origin served in Britain, and some stayed after their military service ended. According to the historians Fryer, Edwards and Walvin, in the 9th century Viking fleets raided North Africa and Spain, captured Black people, and took them to Britain and Ireland.
From the end of the 15th century we begin to see more evidence for the presence of Black Moors in the accounts of the reign of King James IV of Scotland, and later in Elizabethan England.”
* Source "ANOTHER AFROCENTRIC" lol: The National Archives of Scotland.
"The King Provides Clothes for the Party A variety of fabrics were used to make clothing for the Moors - velvet ('wellus'), woollen kersey ('carsay') and fine Holland linen - which was decorated or fastened with buttons, rings or other ornaments ('mailyeis'). These were paid for by the treasury of King James IV. It seems that these Moors were not servants; it is more likely that they were invited guests staying at the palace. Accounts of the Lord High Treasurer of Scotland, vol. 3, p. 101 (1505)"
"The King Requests an Audience with a Black Baby This extract from the Lord High Treasurer's accounts show that in 1505/6 a payment of 28 shillings was made to 'the nuris that brocht the Moris barne to see, be the Kingis command'. The king must have known of this child to ask to see it." "The child may have been that of the 'More taubronar', the Black drummer at court. Treasury accounts also itemise accommodation for the 'wife of the taubronar and his barne'. This would suggest that the drummer was living at the palace with his family. Accounts of the Lord High Treasurer of Scotland, vol. 3, p. 182 (1505/6)"
Don't forget what the NAZINUTS say. when they said black in Europe they didn't mean black - moors were swarthy Middle Easterners.
Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
observer QUOTE- None of this race talk is definite. It's not an exact science and there's terrible controversy and debate on it. Different scholars say different things. So I don't think we can make any definite statements. But by appearances India does seem to have a mix of all kinds of races. India I think is like, you take all the races of the world and mix them like sugar and milk.
In human mitochondrial genetics, Haplogroup N is a human mitochondrial DNA haplogroup. An enormous haplogroup spanning many continents, the macro-haplogroup N, like its sibling M, is a descendant of haplogroup L3.
All mtDNA haplogroups found outside of Africa are descendants of either haplogroup N or its sibling haplogroup M. M and N are the signature haplogroups that define the out of Africa migration and the subsequent spread to rest of the world. The global distribution of haplogroups N and M, indicates that very likely, there was one particularly major prehistoric migration of humans out of Africa, and both N and M were part of the same colonization process. Origins
There is widespread agreement in the scientific community concerning the African ancestry of haplogroup L3 (haplogroup N's parent clade). However, whether or not the mutations which define haplogroup N itself first occurred within Asia or Africa has been a subject for ongoing discussion and study. The out of Africa hypothesis has gained generalized consensus. However, many specific questions remain unsettled. To know whether the two M and N macrohaplogroups that colonized Eurasia were already present in Africa before the exit is puzzling.
Torroni et al. 2006 state that Haplogroups M, N and R occurred somewhere between East Africa and the Persian Gulf. Also related to the origins of haplogroup N is whether ancestral haplogroups M, N and R were part of the same migration out of Africa, or whether Haplogroup N left Africa via the Northern route through the Levant, and M left Africa via Horn of Africa. This theory was suggested because haplogroup N is by far the predominant haplogroup in Western Eurasia, and haplogroup M is absent in Western Eurasia, but is predominant in India and is common in regions East of India. However, the mitochondrial DNA variation in isolated "relict" populations in southeast Asia and among Indigenous Australians supports the view there was only a single dispersal from Africa. Southeast Asian populations and Indigenous Australians all possess deep rooted clades of both haplogroups M and N. The distribution of the earliest branches within haplogroups M, N, and R across Eurasia and Oceania therefore supports a three-founder-mtDNA scenario and a single migration route out of Africa.These findings also highlight the importance of Indian subcontinent in the early genetic history of human settlement and expansion.
[edit] Asian origin hypothesis
The hypothesis of Asia as the place of origin of haplogroup N is supported by the following: # Haplogroup N is found in all parts of the world but has low frequencies in Sub-Saharan Africa. According to a number of studies, the presence of Haplogroup N in Africa is most likely the result of back migration from Eurasia. # The oldest clades of macrohaplogroup N are found in Asia and Australia.
[edit] African origin hypothesis
According to Toomas Kivisild "the lack of L3 lineages other than M and N in India and among non-African mitochondria in general suggests that the earliest migration(s) of modern humans already carried these two mtDNA ancestors, via a departure route over the Horn of Africa.
Distribution Haplogroup N is derived from the ancestral L3 haplotype that represents the 'Out of Africa' migration. Haplogroup N is the ancestral haplogroup to almost all European and Oceanian haplogroups in addition to many Asian and Amerindian ones. It is believed to have arisen at a similar time to haplogroup M. Subclades such as Haplogroup U6, are also found at moderate to low frequencies in the Northwest and East Africa, due to a back migration from Asia around 35,000 years ago.
In popular science In the book The Real Eve, Stephen Oppenheimer refers to haplogroup N as "Nasreen" as haplogroup N may have arisen near the Persian Gulf. In his popular book The Seven Daughters of Eve, Bryan Sykes named the originator of this mtDNA haplogroup "Naomi".
Ancestor L3 Descendants N1'5, N2, N9, N13, N14, N21, N22, A, I, O, R, S, X, Y, W Defining mutations 8701, 9540, 10398, 10873, 15301 __________________________________________________ Haplogroup M (mtDNA)
In human mitochondrial genetics, Haplogroup M is a human mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) haplogroup. An enormous haplogroup spanning all the continents, the macro-haplogroup M, like its sibling N, is a descendant of haplogroup L3.
All mtDNA haplogroups considered native outside of Africa are descendants of either haplogroup M or its sibling haplogroup N.[9] The geographical distributions of M and N are associated with discussions concerning out of Africa migrations and the subsequent colonization of the rest of the world. In particular it is often taken to indicate that it is very likely that there was one particularly major prehistoric migration of humans out of Africa, and that both M and N were part of this colonization process.
Origins
There is an ongoing debate concerning geographical origins of Haplogroup M and its sibling haplogroup N. Both these lineages are thought to have been the main surviving lineages involved in the out of Africa migration (or migrations) because all indigenous lineages found outside Africa belong to either haplogroup M or haplogroup N. Yet to be conclusively determined is whether the mutations that define haplogroups M and N occurred in Africa before the exit from Africa or in Asia after the exit from Africa. Determining the origins of haplogroup M is further complicated by the fact that it is found both in Africa and outside of Africa.
It is generally accepted that haplogroup M evolved shortly after the emergence of its parent clade haplogroup L3. Apart from haplogroup M and its sibling haplogroup N, the numerous other subclades of L3 are largely restricted to Africa, which suggests that L3 arose in Africa. In Africa, haplogroup M, specifically its subclade M1, has a fairly restricted distribution, being found mainly in East and North Africa at low to moderate frequencies. The limited distribution of haplogroup M in Africa and its widespread presence outside Africa, suggests that this lineage emerged very close to the time of the Out of Africa migration, either shortly before or shortly after the exit from Africa.
Haplogroup M1 Much of discussion concerning the origins of haplogroup M has been related to its subclade haplogroup M1, which is the only variant of macrohaplogroup M found in Africa.[9] Two possibilities were being considered as potential explanations for the presence of M1 in Africa:
# M was present in the ancient population which later gave rise to both M1 in Africa, and M more generally found in Eurasia.
# The presence of M1 in Africa is the result of a back-migration from Asia which occurred sometime after the Out of Africa migration.
Haplogroup M23
In 2009, two independent publications reported a rare, deep-rooted subclade of haplogroup M, referred to as M23, that is present in Madagascar.[12][13] The contemporary populations of Madagascar were formed in the last 2,000 years by the admixture of African and Southeast Asian (Austronesian) populations. M23 seems to be restricted to Madagascar as it was not detected anywhere else. M23 could have been brought to Madagascar from Asia where most deep rooted subclades of Haplogroup M are found.
Asian origin theory
According to this theory, anatomically modern humans carrying ancestral haplogroup L3 lineages were involved in the Out of Africa migration from East Africa into Asia. Somewhere in Asia, the ancestral L3 lineages gave rise to haplogroups M and N. The ancestral L3 lineages were then lost by genetic drift as they are infrequent outside Africa. The hypothesis of Asia as the place of origin of macrohaplogroup M is supported by the following:
# The highest frequencies worldwide of macrohaplogroup M are observed in Asia, specifically in India and Bangladesh, where frequencies range from 60%-80%.* # With the exception of the African specific M1, India has several M lineages that emerged directly from the root of haplogroup M.
# Only two subclades of haplogroup M, M1 and M23, are found in Africa, whereas numerous subclades are found outside Africa (with some discussion possible only about sub-clade M1, concerning which see below).
1. Specifically concerning M1
# Haplogroup M1 has a restricted geographic distribution in Africa, being found mainly in North Africans and East Africa at low or moderate frequencies. If M had originated in Africa around before the Out of Africa migration, it would be expected to have a more widespread distribution
# According to Gonzalez et al. 2007, M1 appears to have expanded relatively recently. In this study M1 had a younger coalescence age than the Asian-exclusive M lineages.
# The geographic distribution of M1 in Africa is predominantly North African/supra-equatorial[3] and is largely confined to Afro-Asiatic speakers,which is inconsistent with the Sub-Saharan distribution of sub-clades of haplogroups L3 and L2 that have similar time depths.
# One of the basal lineages of M1 lineages has been found in Northwest Africa and in the Near East but is abssent in East Africa.
# M1 is not restricted to Africa. It is relatively common in the Mediterranean, peaking in Iberia. M1 also enjoys a well-established presence in the Middle East, from the South of the Arabian Peninsula to Anatolia and from the Levant to Iran. In addition, M1 haplotypes have occasionally been observed in the Caucasus and the Trans Caucasus, and without any accompanying L lineages.[3][9] M1 has also been detected in Central Asia, seemingly reaching as far as Tibet.
# The fact that the M1 sub-clade of macrohaplogroup M has a coalescence age which overlaps with that of haplogroup U6 (a Eurasian haplogroup whose presence in Africa is due to a back-migration from West Asia) and the distribution of U6 in Africa is also restricted to the same North African and Horn African populations as M1 supports the scenario that M1 and U6 were part of the same population expansion from Asia to Africa.
African origin hypothesis According to this theory, haplogroups M and N arose from L3 in an East African population that had been isolated from other African populations. Members of this population were involved in the out Africa migration and only carried M and N lineages. With the possible exception of haplogroup M1, all other M and N clades in Africa were lost by genetic drift.
The African origin of Haplogroup M is supported by the following arguments and evidence. # L3, the parent clade of haplogroup M, is found throughout Africa, but is rare outside Africa. According to Toomas Kivisild (2003), "the lack of L3 lineages other than M and N in India and among non-African mitochondria in general suggests that the earliest migration(s) of modern humans already carried these two mtDNA ancestors, via a departure route over the Horn of Africa."
# Ancestral L3 lineages that gave rise to M and N have not been discovered outside Africa.
# Specifically concerning at least M1:
# Haplogroup M1 is largely restricted to Africa where the highest frequencies of M1 can be found in East Africa, particularly in Ethiopia. M1 is found in Europe and the Near East but at considerably lower frequencies than in Africa.
# Early studies once reported the age of haplogroup M1 to be similar to that of haplogroup M. Quintana et al. (1999) suggested that the age of the then-East African specific haplogroup M1, calculated using RFLP data (48,000±15,000), was compatible with that of the Indian-specific haplogroup M lineages (56,000±7,000).
Dispersal A number of studies have proposed that the ancestors of modern haplogroup M dispersed from Africa through the southern route across the Horn of Africa along the coastal regions of Asia onwards to New Guinea and Australia. These studies suggested that the migrations of haplogroups M and N occurred separately with haplogroup N heading northwards from East Africa to the Levant. However, the results of numerous recent studies indicate that there was only one migration out of Africa and that haplogroups M and N were part of the same migration. This is based on the analysis of a number of relict populations along the proposed beachcombing route from Africa to Australia, all of which possessed both haplogroups N and M.
A 2008 study by Abu-Amero et al., suggests that the Arabian Peninsula may have been the main route out of Africa. However as the region lacks of autochthonous clades of haplogroups M and N the authors suggest that the area has been a more recent receptor of human migrations than an ancient demographic expansion center along the southern coastal route as proposed under the single migration Out-of-Africa scenario of the African origin hypothesis.
Distribution
M is the single most common mtDNA haplogroup in Asia,and peaks in Bangladesh where it represents two thirds of the maternal lineages, and is ubiquitous in India where it has a 60% frequency.
Due to its great age, haplogroup M is an mtDNA lineage which does not correspond well to present-day ethnic groups, as it spans Siberian, Native American, East Asian, Southeast Asian, Central Asian, South Asian, Melanesian populations at a considerable frequency .
Among the descendants of M are C, D, E, G, Q, and Z, with Z and G being observed in North Eurasian populations, C and D being shared between North Eurasian and Native American populations, E being observed in Southeast Asian populations, and Q being observed in Melanesian populations. The lineages M2, M3, M4, M5, M6, M18 and M25 are exclusive to South Asia, with M2 reported to be the oldest lineage on the Indian sub-continent.
QUOTE- Dark skin, the likely ancestral (or original) skin color among modern humans (Harding et al. 2000), continues to be a strongly selected trait in equatorial regions such as Africa, India, and New Guinea (Harding 2000 p 1355).
Geneticists estimate that a relatively small group of humans left Africa about 140,000 years ago, and that the descendants of this group went on to populate the entire non-African world. Those migrants that settled in non-African equatorial regions (such as India, New Guinea, and Australia) retained most of the ancestral sequence at the MC1R locus (Harding 2000 p 1355), a gene strongly associated with determining skin color. Specifically, Harding et al. (2000 p 1355) found that the haplotype sequences for Indians and New Guineans are virtually identical to those of continental sub-Saharan Africans, except for a small number of variants at silent sites.
QUOTE- Australoid Australoid is a broad racial sub-classification of black peoples having generally dark skin and coarse hair which can be curly, straight, or kinky. Black Australoid peoples range from areas of Southeast Asia (particularly Malaysia and Melanesia), and the Indian subcontinent. The term can refer to Tamils of southern India, some Pakistanis and, as the name implies, the aboriginal peoples of Australia and New Guinea, and the aboriginal blacks of Asia, once commonly known as Negritos. Australoid peoples are also found in the Americas.
When they are compared to the other human populations, Australian Aboriginies have a deep infraglabellar notch, strong projection of the lower face, and a flat forehead. Alveolar and maxillary prognathism and dolichocephalism are common among many Australoid peoples, including those of the Indian subcontinent, characteristics which have caused them to be considered by some a subgroup of the Negroid classification of humanity. As a result, the term "Australoid" commonly is used in conjunction with "Negroid" as in "Australoid-Negroid".
QUOTE-
the African that first entered Asia, Europe, Australia, the South Pacific, and the early Americas not as slave, but as master. We now know, based on recent scientific studies of DNA, that modern humanity originated in Africa, that Black people are the world's original people, and that all modern humans can ultimately trace their ancestral roots back to Africa. If not for the primordial migrations of early African people, humanity would have remained physically Africoid, and the rest of the world outside of the African continent absent of human life.
DEFINE YOURSELF,AND DO NOT LET OTHERS DEFINE YOU.IT'S CALLED SELF DETERMINATION.
Countering Eurocentrism Rashidi rejects the claims by European anthropologists that the Negritos, Australoids, Negroids and Arabian Mediterraneans are separate ethnic groups. He claims that they are all "Africoid" or "Black". He believes European anthropologists have used "unscientific" and "invalid" methods and that their work was "racially motivated" to divide peoples whom he thinks are Africoid in race. He cites Cheikh Diop's statement on race:
A racial classification is given to a group of individuals who share a certain number of anthropological traits, which is necessary so that they not be confused with others...It is the physical appearance which counts...Now, every time these relationships are not favorable to the Western cultures, an effort is made to undermine the cultural consciousness of Africans by telling them, "We don't even know what a race is."...It is the phenotype which as given us so much difficulty throughout history, so it is this which must be considered in these relations."
Posts: 2688 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
They are not racists, they are intimidated and fearful.
It's not what happened, it's what they fear will happen.
That could be possible? Yesterday I saw a tv documentary about the trans Atlantic slavery, in it there was a history scholar. She showed classical documents, explained and talked about a place in Holland where the "Moors" were taken. She made no mistake about it, she used the word repeatedly. She said that hundreds of Moors were taken to open courts scene, for local Dutch people to see.
I don't think you will be able to understand, but at least you can watch the images. Some words will sound familiar.
The University's Director of Archaeological Museums, Lindsay Allason-Jones, who has organized an exhibition of the Museum's Romano-African artefacts to coincide with Black History Month, says:'From the evidence we have here, it is clear that colour was no bar to the status an individual could achieve in the Roman Empire'...
“Africans have been present in Europe from classical times. In the 2nd and 3rd centuries Roman soldiers of African origin served in Britain, and some stayed after their military service ended. According to the historians Fryer, Edwards and Walvin, in the 9th century Viking fleets raided North Africa and Spain, captured Black people, and took them to Britain and Ireland.
From the end of the 15th century we begin to see more evidence for the presence of Black Moors in the accounts of the reign of King James IV of Scotland, and later in Elizabethan England.”
Africans have been present in Europe from classical times. In the 2nd and 3rd centuries Roman soldiers of African origin served in Britain, and some stayed after their military service ended. According to the historians Fryer, Edwards and Walvin, in the 9th century Viking fleets raided North Africa and Spain, captured Black people, and took them to Britain and Ireland. From the end of the 15th century we begin to see more evidence for the presence of Black Moors in the accounts of the reign of King James IV of Scotland, and later in Elizabethan England.
King James IV (1473-1513) and the Black Moors of his Court
King James IV of Scotland came to the throne in 1488. He was an able and visionary monarch whose administration united and maintained order in the Scottish highlands and lowlands. He encouraged manufacturing and shipbuilding, and created a navy. James IV also renewed Scotland's alliance with France, although in 1503 he took an English wife, Margaret Tudor, daughter of Henry VII of England.
James was a popular, fun-loving king with many interests. Many Black Moors were present at his court. Some worked as servants or (possibly) slaves, but others seem to have been invited guests or musicians. We know that he courted Margaret with lute and clavichord recitals and took her out hunting and playing sports.
The King Provides Clothes for the Party Document | Transcript
After their marriage, the king's Lord High Treasurer's accounts provide numerous entries to show how much he enjoyed lively entertainment, employing foreign minstrels from Italy and elsewhere. King James was generous to all kinds of people, including Black Moors, as the following entries from the Treasurer's accounts demonstrate:
To celebrate Shrove Tuesday in 1505, several Africans including a 'taubronar' (drummer) and a choreographer were present in Edinburgh. Twelve dancers (including Italians) performed in specially made black-and-white costumes costing £13 2s 10d. Was this the origin of Morris (Moorish) dancing?
In 1504-5 the 'Moryen' taubronar was paid 28 shillings to allow his taubroun (drum) to be painted.
James bought a horse at a cost of £4 4s for this drummer, who accompanied him when he toured his northern domains.
The King Requests an Audience with a Black Baby Document | Transcript
Moor women were also mentioned in the Treasurer's accounts. It is clear that they were not servants, since they were showered with items such as gowns of satin, ribbons, slippers and gloves, paid for by the king.
Entries that refer to Moor women include:
'Blak Elene' or 'Elen More' was given five French crowns in 1512.
A 'blak madin' who attended Queen Margaret was given four-and-a-quarter ells (just over five yards) of French russet.
'Blak Margaret' was given a gown costing 48s in 1513.
'Two blak ladies' staying at the Scottish Court were presented with 10 French crowns as a New Year gift at a cost of £7.
In 1527, one item simply said ' to Helenor, the blak moir - 60 shillings' .
After James IV's death at Flodden in 1513 during the Franco-Scottish invasion of England, fewer references to Africans appear in the accounts. Interestingly, however, in 1594, during the reign of James VI, a richly attired Black Moor was paid to help pull the chariots during celebrations to mark the birth of James's eldest son, Henry Frederick. Nothing more is known about this man except that he lived in Edinburgh.
A variety of fabrics were used to make clothing for the Moors - velvet ('wellus'), woollen kersey ('carsay') and fine Holland linen - which was decorated or fastened with buttons, rings or other ornaments ('mailyeis'). These were paid for by the treasury of King James IV. It seems that these Moors were not servants; it is more likely that they were invited guests staying at the palace.
Accounts of the Lord High Treasurer of Scotland, vol. 3, p. 101 (1505)
This extract from the Lord High Treasurer's accounts show that in 1505/6 a payment of 28 shillings was made to 'the nuris that brocht the Moris barne to see, be the Kingis command'. The king must have known of this child to ask to see it.
The child may have been that of the 'More taubronar', the Black drummer at court. Treasury accounts also itemise accommodation for the 'wife of the taubronar and his barne'. This would suggest that the drummer was living at the palace with his family.
Accounts of the Lord High Treasurer of Scotland, vol. 3, p. 182 (1505/6)
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol: The University's Director of Archaeological Museums, Lindsay Allason-Jones, who has organized an exhibition of the Museum's Romano-African artefacts to coincide with Black History Month, says:'From the evidence we have here, it is clear that colour was no bar to the status an individual could achieve in the Roman Empire'...
“Africans have been present in Europe from classical times. In the 2nd and 3rd centuries Roman soldiers of African origin served in Britain, and some stayed after their military service ended. According to the historians Fryer, Edwards and Walvin, in the 9th century Viking fleets raided North Africa and Spain, captured Black people, and took them to Britain and Ireland.
From the end of the 15th century we begin to see more evidence for the presence of Black Moors in the accounts of the reign of King James IV of Scotland, and later in Elizabethan England.”
* Source "ANOTHER AFROCENTRIC" lol: The National Archives of Scotland.
"The King Provides Clothes for the Party A variety of fabrics were used to make clothing for the Moors - velvet ('wellus'), woollen kersey ('carsay') and fine Holland linen - which was decorated or fastened with buttons, rings or other ornaments ('mailyeis'). These were paid for by the treasury of King James IV. It seems that these Moors were not servants; it is more likely that they were invited guests staying at the palace. Accounts of the Lord High Treasurer of Scotland, vol. 3, p. 101 (1505)"
"The King Requests an Audience with a Black Baby This extract from the Lord High Treasurer's accounts show that in 1505/6 a payment of 28 shillings was made to 'the nuris that brocht the Moris barne to see, be the Kingis command'. The king must have known of this child to ask to see it." "The child may have been that of the 'More taubronar', the Black drummer at court. Treasury accounts also itemise accommodation for the 'wife of the taubronar and his barne'. This would suggest that the drummer was living at the palace with his family. Accounts of the Lord High Treasurer of Scotland, vol. 3, p. 182 (1505/6)"
Don't forget what the NAZINUTS say. when they said black in Europe they didn't mean black - moors were swarthy Middle Easterners.
The Black Trumpeter at Henry VIII's Tournament
This image, an extract from the 60ft-long Westminster Tournament Roll, shows six trumpeters, one of whom is Black and is almost certainly John Blanke. All the trumpeters are wearing yellow and grey, with blue purses at their waists. John Blanke is the only one wearing a brown turban latticed with yellow. He is mounted on a grey horse with a black harness.
Westminster Tournament Roll (1511) By permission of The College of Arms, London
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by kenndo: These ARE black folks,and they do not look white . [/QB]
They look closer morphologically and in phenotype to Caucasians than Negroids.
Afrocentrics however are self-hating blacks who hate their own physical features and so lump Australoids into the ''black race'' so they can claim thinner noses, straight-wavy hair, blondism and other Caucasoid racial traits.
Posts: 2408 | From: My mother's basement | Registered: Dec 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
This image, an extract from the 60ft-long Westminster Tournament Roll, shows six trumpeters, one of whom is Black and is almost certainly John Blanke. =======
Yes John Blanke aka John WHITE.
Blanke = White.
Yet isn't it you afrocentric loons who claim if someone has a black surname they are automatically negro?
So by logic John Blanke must have been white.
Posts: 2408 | From: My mother's basement | Registered: Dec 2010
| IP: Logged |
These proofs are craniological. "We know (says the writer of a small pamphlet on this subject)that the first inhabittants of Britain [let us say, certain tribes of ancient Britons], and more especially those of the northern parts, were craniologically of a type approaching to the Negro or to the Australian race
Ancient and modern Britons: a retrospect, Volume 1 By David MacRitchie
quote:Originally posted by cassiterides: This image, an extract from the 60ft-long Westminster Tournament Roll, shows six trumpeters, one of whom is Black and is almost certainly John Blanke. =======
Yes John Blanke aka John WHITE.
Blanke = White.
Yet isn't it you afrocentric loons who claim if someone has a black surname they are automatically negro?
So by logic John Blanke must have been white.
Blank (e) does not mean white. But it's white who refer to themselves as "blank (e)".
*It means without color.
But maybe you could explain why some "blacks" carry "white" surname names?
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
Note how the afrocentrics on this forum admit Caucasoids are hairy.
Now look at the Australoids.
They are a hairy race, they have far more facial and body hair than the Negro, just like the Ainu.
Other traits in common with Caucasoids -
(a) blondism (b) straight or wavy hair (c) no lower protruding jaw (as in Negroids).
Australoids also have wide noses, but not flat noses like Negroids.
Wide (non-flat) noses also appear in some Caucasoids:
Danish man:
Socrates -
Aborigne -
I'm not saying they are the same races. However the Australoid race is the closest non-Caucasoid race to the Caucasoid. A fact well documentated by anthropologists.
Also a main theory is that the Ainu (also bearded, hairy, wavy haired) are an Australoid-Caucasoid mix:
Ainu Man
--- facial hair and skin pigmentation similar to Sean Connery:
Posts: 2408 | From: My mother's basement | Registered: Dec 2010
| IP: Logged |
To point out the obvious, Aristotle was not an Arab. However its quite clear your account is a fake and you are here to parody afrocentrism. Good job.
Posts: 2408 | From: My mother's basement | Registered: Dec 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Danish man (no negroid ancestry) with wide nose:
Wide noses are not an exclusive negroid trait, In Europeans they are found among those of the Borreby sub-race, pockets exist particuarly around Britain, Germany, Denmark etc.
Socrates was not African.
Posts: 2408 | From: My mother's basement | Registered: Dec 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by cassiterides: Australiod (Veddid):
Negroid:
Both are completely different races.
And as anthropology shows, Australiods are in fact far closer mophologically and in phenotype to Caucasoids, not Negroids.
So much for blacks being the ''original race'', when virtually all anthropologists agree Australoids look more Caucasoid (White) than Negroid.
^^lol... at lame trolling.. Must be "hammer" reloaded or regurgitated with bogus labels like Veddid.. WHat next? Swedid? pathetic lamer...
Actually "anthropologists" show that people like "Australoids" cluster closer to sub-Saharan Africans ...
All these items have already been discussed on ES for years. The data is already well known. Your trolling isn't fooling anyone.
Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by cassiterides: Danish man (no negroid ancestry) with wide nose:
Wide noses are not an exclusive negroid trait, In Europeans they are found among those of the Borreby sub-race, pockets exist particuarly around Britain, Germany, Denmark etc.
Socrates was not African.
Not that I really care since you're stupid anyway, but does this mean Socrates Danish now?
Likewise not all Africans have wide noses, as you have seen numerous times already. Africans have different traits as well.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Bauval said his friends Chris Knight and Aaron Butler of England are now working on a book that who are "working on measurements that are found common to all these sites".
He was talking of megalithic sites like Nabta Playa and other remnants of a worldwide prehistoric culture dating between the 15th millenium B.C. and the 10th millenium B.C. "that has left its fingerprints all over the place. We are going to see that there is a correlation between all of these sites."
Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by cassiterides: ^ That last photo contains ARABIC writing.
To point out the obvious, Aristotle was not an Arab. However its quite clear your account is a fake and you are here to parody afrocentrism. Good job.
Can you translate the ARABIC for us, what is written in the "last photo".
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Likewise not all Africans have wide noses, as you have seen numerous times already. Africans have different traits as well.
Negroids don't have thin noses or straight hair.
I'm not sure what you mean by ''Africans''. Many different races inhabit Africa. Negroids (Blacks) however do not have thin noses.
Posts: 2408 | From: My mother's basement | Registered: Dec 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Likewise not all Africans have wide noses, as you have seen numerous times already. Africans have different traits as well.
Negroids don't have thin noses or straight hair.
I'm not sure what you mean by ''Africans''. Many different races inhabit Africa. Negroids (Blacks) however do not have thin noses.
Negro = Black in Spanish. Dumb arse.
And yes, dumb arse, blacks do have many traits including thin noses and straight hair.
As you have seen many times now. Bitchboy!
And like you speak of sub-race for a European claim. So are all Africans connected genetically in basal, that is what I mean by "Africans". Unlike Europeans who are genetically unrelated to each other.
So this makes Africans a common people with many traits. Whether you see and look at Africans as different "races" is not important.
But you are too dumb to understand any of this.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by cassiterides: [QUOTE]Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova:
This study is invalid.
Aborigines have the ''largest within-group craniofacial diversity'' (Lahr, 1996: 216).
This means anyone can link Australian Aborigines closer to anyone. I've seen studies arguing they are closer even to Eskimos.
In phenotype though Australian Aborigines are closer to Caucasoids than any other race.
''their beard and their body hair is distributed as in Caucasoids'' (Coon, 1965: 12).
The funny thing is isn't it you afrocentrics who spam threads of ''hairy white men''...
yet now you are claiming the hairy aborigines are Negroid.
For one to quote C.Coon as factual. Shows how dumb you actually are. No modern-day anthropologist takes serious what he claimed during those days. Dimwit!
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
Look how long you been gone- you've yet again found your way out your renk mother's Bermuda Triangle hole? Once again, congratulations as plenty man mek that journey, neva eva to return...you luc-ky bad....
Posts: 3446 | From: U.S. by way of JA by way of Africa | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by kenndo: These ARE black folks,and they do not look white .
They look closer morphologically and in phenotype to Caucasians than Negroids.
[/QB]
You must blind then,and you are full crap.They look like black folks,and they are black. All the NON-SENSE you have said will not change these facts.
Posts: 2688 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
The desperate reason afrocentrics need australoids to be ''black'' is because the Negroid race does not have straight hair or diversity in physical features.
Negroid:
That's what your race really looks like, not this:
Australoids are not Negroids.
Afrocentrics however will deny this fact because they are desperate for more facial features, they self hate their wooly hair, thick lips and prognathism.
Posts: 2408 | From: My mother's basement | Registered: Dec 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Cassiterides you must blind then,and you are full crap.They look like black folks,and they are black. All the NON-SENSE you have said will not change these facts.
Posts: 2688 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by kenndo: Cassiterides you must blind then,and you are full crap.They look like black folks,and they are black. All the NON-SENSE you have said will not change these facts.
Negroid:
Australoid:
Both are clearly different races, main differences:
(a) Australoids have straight-wavy hair, Negroids have wooly.
(b) Australoids have high amount of body and facial hair, Negroids don't.
(c) Australoids do not have lower jaw prognathism, Negroids however do.
(d) Australoids have blondes, Negroids do not have blonde hair.
etc.
As far as racial features are concerned, Australoids have far more in common with Caucasoids.
Posts: 2408 | From: My mother's basement | Registered: Dec 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by malibudusul: Black people has several Phenotype
Nope they don't.
Did you know black africans didn't even know what blonde or red hair was until they were colonised by Europeans?
Posts: 2408 | From: My mother's basement | Registered: Dec 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by cassiterides: ^ all self-haters.
The desperate reason afrocentrics need australoids to be ''black'' is because the Negroid race does not have straight hair or diversity in physical features.
Negroid:
That's what your race really looks like, not this:
Australoids are not Negroids.
Afrocentrics however will deny this fact because they are desperate for more facial features, they self hate their wooly hair, thick lips and prognathism.
^^^^ The above man is from Sri Lanka
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
quote:Originally posted by David MacRitchie:
These proofs are craniological. "We know (says the writer of a small pamphlet on this subject)that the first inhabittants of Britain [let us say, certain tribes of ancient Britons], and more especially those of the northern parts, were craniologically of a type approaching to the Negro or to the Australian race
Ancient and modern Britons: a retrospect, Volume 1 By David MacRitchie
quote:Originally posted by malibudusul: Black people has several Phenotype
Nope they don't.
Yes they do, and you're just DUMB!!!!
phe·no·type (fn-tp)
n.
1. a. The observable physical or biochemical characteristics of an organism, as determined by both genetic makeup and environmental influences. b. The expression of a specific trait, such as stature or blood type, based on genetic and environmental influences.
2. An individual or group of organisms exhibiting a particular phenotype. pheno·typic (-tpk), pheno·typi·cal (--kl) adj. pheno·typi·cal·ly adv.
"The two people you showed have a phenotype." And they do differ from each other. "Stupid boy".
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic