posted
African design is based on Fractal Geometry and is very mathematical. The only other place on planet Earth that is so Fractal based is South India.
The Slave trade to the Americas was part of a world wide enterprise and people from East India are included as the ancestors of some African Americans.
Posts: 1115 | From: GOD Bless the USA | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged |
Fractal geometry has emerged as one of the most exciting frontiers in the fusion between mathematics and information technology. Fractals can be seen in many of the swirling patterns produced by computer graphics, and have become an important new tool for modeling in biology, geology, and other natural sciences. While fractal geometry can take us into the far reaches of high tech science, its patterns are surprisingly common in traditional African designs, and some of its basic concepts are fundamental to African knowledge systems.
African Fractals introduces readers to fractal geometry and explores the ways it is expressed in African cultures. Drawing on interviews with African designers, artists, and scientists, Ron Eglash investigates fractals in African architecture, traditional hairstyling, textiles, sculpture, painting, carving, metalwork, religion, games, quantitative techniques, and symbolic systems. He also examines the political and social implications of the existence of African fractal geometry. Both clear and complex, this book makes a unique contribution to the study of mathematics, African culture, anthropology, and aesthetic design.
The Coptic crosses of Ethiopia exhibit iteration and other aspects of African Fractal desgin.
Posts: 1115 | From: GOD Bless the USA | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged |
Egyptian Pyramids, Mayan Pyramid Temples, Babylonian Ziggurats (Shikara in Sanskrit) and Hindu temples—all look like a cone. The design and structure are same. Hindus were the originators. Hindus taught the world that God lives in a high place-sacred mountain MERU. The Greeks changed the name to Mount Olympus. Hindus are the only race in the world continuing temple buildings in the same way and worshipping God in it. All others made them as museums. We took this concept of ‘sacred mountain’ to Cambodia and built the largest temple complex in the world Angkor Wat and Borobudur in Indonesia. We used the temple for Gods, where as others used them for God like kings.
Scholars around the world knew the connection between India and Egypt from 1400 BC. That was the time Mittanni King Dasaratha wrote ten letters (it is available in all the encyclopaedias as Amarna letters) after marrying his daughter to Egyptian king Amhenotep (Sramana Dev). Tushratta/ Dasaratha was a king who ruled Syria (now a Muslim country), but his name and his forefather names are in Sanskrit. To confirm they are Indian Hindus we have an inscription giving the Vedic Gods Mitra, Varuna, Indra and Nasatya (Asvini Devas) in an agreement with the Hittites and a horse manual with Sanskrit numbers.
(Though all these things were in encyclopaedias from 1930s, the ruling British were very careful not to teach this or about South East Asian Hindu Empire to Indian History students. All these excavations were done by non British scholars! British were very successful in sowing the poisonous seeds of divisive Aryan Dravidian Invasion theory which is not in Sangam Tamil or Sanskrit literature. They carefully hid facts like Tamils worshipped Indra, Varuna, Vishnu, Skanda and Durga which was found in the oldest Tamil book Tolkappiam).
Bible which was put to writing around 945 BC (Hutchinson Encyclopaedia) also gave Sanskrit words for imports from India such as karpasa (cotton),Tuke (Siki for peacock or Suka for parrots), Kapi (monkey)etc.
But many of us do not know that the first king of Egypt was Manu, the law giver. But they were not Dasaratha of Valmiki Ramayana or Manu of Manu Dharma Sastra. Many of us do not know that the Egyptian builders used the Sanskrit word Sutra for measurements during building Egyptian Pyramids. Sulba Sutras are Vedic manuals giving measurements for Yaga Kundas (fire pits for sacrificial fire ceremonies). It contains Pythagorean Theorem and other Vedic mathematics. Sutra means thread/plumb line,also book of formulas.
Arta Dama, a Mittanni king, married his daughter to Egyptian king Tuthmose IV and the daughter of Sutharna was married to Amenhotep III (1390 BC). Another daughter was married to his son Akhenaten. He was the most revolutionary king who established ONE GOD for the Egyptians. His name in Sanskrit means Eka Aten (One Aten is God). He worshiped Surya (sun).
Egyptian kings’ sun worship looks exactly like Brahmins doing Sandhyavandhana. Brahmins do it thrice a day facing sun. Egyptian kings worship the sun in the same way.
Manu=Nara Meru
In my earlier posts I have established that the big conflict between Krishna/Arjuna pair and the Nagas under the leadership of Maya Dhanava just before 3100 BC resulted in a mass exodus of Nagas to South America and Central America. After Krishna’s burning of Naga lands (Kandava vana) in the Gangetic plains, there were continuous clashes. It was followed by the mass execution of Nagas (Sarpa Yagna) to avenge the assassination of King Parikshit by the Nagas. A Naga hid himself in the fruit basket and killed King Parikshit.
(Please read my post ARE MAYANS INDIAN NAGAS?)
Around 3100 BC another dynasty started their rule in Egypt. Since they were Hindus, they named the first king Manu (Manes). His other name was Narmer i.e. Nara Meru, a pure Sanskrit word meaning Mountain among the Kings. Meru was the holiest and highest mountain in Hindu Mythology. Any high point was named Meru. We have different Merus around the world. Pameru (Pamir Plateau), KuMeru (Kumari in the South of India). Su Meru (Sumerians) of the Middle East. The word Khmer of Cambodia may be related to Kumari/Ku Meru. I will write about it separately. North and South Poles were also called Merus in Hindu Mythologies (Puranas).
Menes was given a legendary date 3100 BC by the Greeks because Indian Kaliyuga Calendar begins in 3102 BC. Mayans also followed this Kali Yuga Calendar. (Full details are in my posts)
Menes (Manu) was praised the first Law Giver of Egypt by the Greek Historian Diodorous Siculus. Egyptians were just like Indian Hindus. They believed kings were half God, half man. Indian words for kings and palaces are synonymous with Gods and Temples. Diodorous links Heracles (Hercules) with Egypt and India. Hercules was one of the 12 ancient Gods of Egypt and he cleared India of wild animals, says Diodorous.
Narmer palette shows his picture as a strict man punishing the wrong ones.
( In Tamil Khon means King and God, Koil means Palace and temple, In Sanskrit Deva is used for Lord and the King). Khon became Khan in other languages like Kesari/lion gave a new word Caesar. Tele in the Ancient Middle East means temple, which is the corrupted form of Sanskrit word STHALA. Tamils changed it to Thali=temple)
Egyptian kings called themselves children of Surya/sun. This corresponds with the Surya Vamsa of Hindu scriptures. Like Indian Hindu kings, Egyptian kings had two names : 1. Name given at birth 2. Coronation name or Abisheka Nama.
Nile River (Sanskrit word)
River Nile is known as Blue Nile because of its BLUE colour. It is a Sanskrit word NILA meaning blue. If I find only one Sanskrit word from among 1000 place names in Egypt, scholars will laugh at me. But almost all ancient Egyptian names are Sanskrit names. ( Full list is available with me. Just a few examples: Heliopolis= Suryapura, Thebes=Devas, Zawyet el Aryan=Arya of ?, Saqqara= Chakra, Dashuf= Dasyu or Dasa, Asyut=Achyuta, Hierakonpolis=Swarnapura, Amra, Amarna= Amara, Dishashasa=Disa, El Badari= Badri (nath), Beni Hasan=Vani dasan, Naj el der=Naga….?). Please note that Greek words are also in many place names.
Ramses=Rama Seshan?
Ramses is a title for at least seventeen kings in Egypt. Kanchi Paramacharya Swamiji has mentioned this is the name of Rama, Hero of Ramayana, in his 1932 Chennai lectures.
(Please read my post Madagascar- INDIA LINK VIA INDONESIA for full details.
Naga on their heads
Many of the kings have Naga ( Naga gave birth to English word Snake=S+Naka) on their heads. There is no Hindu God without snake on their bodies. But Egyptian Kings look exactly like Lord Shiva of Hindu mythology. Another word for snake is Uraga=Uraes of Egypt.
Belief in Rebirth
The reason for building Pyramids was their belief in after life and rebirth. All the oriental religions (Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism and Sikhism) believe in after life and Rebirth. Semitic religions (Judaism, Christianity and Islam) don’t believe in it. This shows very clear connection with the Hindus of India. In Indian mythology we have Nimi (see the Puranas) saving his body like the Egyptians.
(Continued in second part…………….)
Posts: 1115 | From: GOD Bless the USA | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I believe them, Indians were the most advanced civilization mathmatically par none and they were already doing modern algebra, advanced algebra, trigonometry, decimals and multi-step equations, quadratic and cubic formula's, positive and negative numbers and irrational numbers and using PIE BEFORE ANYONE ELSE ON EARTH! They were the only civilization to have reached calculas level mathmatics during the medieval era....
Even the Phoenicians show clues that they were Indians from the southern part of India; the Phoenicians wrote their knowledge and traditions on palm leafs (an Indian thing), and a Phoenician queen committed sati, and they used purple dyes for their clothing which only Ancient Indians were doing in the ancient period; and they introduced vowels to the western world and the rest of the world and only Ancient Indian languages were utilizing vowel syntax for their words in the ancient world.
Indians in the form of Phoenicians, Mittanni's, Hyksos, Kassites (yes they were Indians from India) were actually traveling and going in all direction across the eurasian continent and even more, traveling various oceans using the most advanced ancient sea-faring vessels of the ancient world which carried 300-700 people max and utilizing compass technology BEFORE the Ancient Chinese for navigation to South East Asia and the Middle East and Africa.....
So the chances of Ancient India dispersing, helping build structures like the Pyramids etc, and spreading knowledge as in the Phoenicians etc etc is very probably....
Posts: 1558 | From: US | Registered: Sep 2015
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Red, White, and Blue + Christian: African design is based on Fractal Geometry and is very mathematical. The only other place on planet Earth that is so Fractal based is South India.
The Slave trade to the Americas was part of a world wide enterprise and people from East India are included as the ancestors of some African Americans.
What are you implying?
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Red, White, and Blue + Christian: African design is based on Fractal Geometry and is very mathematical. The only other place on planet Earth that is so Fractal based is South India.
The Slave trade to the Americas was part of a world wide enterprise and people from East India are included as the ancestors of some African Americans.
I discuss the history of the East Indian slaves in the following video:
posted
Dr. Winters you are not the only one concerned about the early history of the USA who is on the Internet. Others are researching the very same topics from different angles. DNA test results are explaining hidden histories that I never knew about.
What you are doing is actually writing articles and publishing them. Others are doing the research and spreading their knowledge in different ways.
Posts: 1115 | From: GOD Bless the USA | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:The Slave trade to the Americas was part of a world wide enterprise and people from East India are included as the ancestors of some African Americans.
No historical evidence of such. The furthest East for the Slave Trade was Madagascar where a very few were taken. But purely on the basis of costs--human and monetary--almost 100% of the enslaved hailed from West Africa from Senegal down to Angola. A few may have come from Morocco and south of Angola, though.
Ancient Egypt was the world's first technical civilization and antedated all other civilizations. It was independent and did not borrow anything from elsewhere. Its mathematical knowledge was purely independently derived. Cheikh Anta Diop spells this out clearly in Civilization and Barbarism.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:The Slave trade to the Americas was part of a world wide enterprise and people from East India are included as the ancestors of some African Americans.
No historical evidence of such. The furthest East for the Slave Trade was Madagascar where a very few were taken. But purely on the basis of costs--human and monetary--almost 100% of the enslaved hailed from West Africa from Senegal down to Angola. A few may have come from Morocco and south of Angola, though.
Ancient Egypt was the world's first technical civilization and antedated all other civilizations. It was independent and did not borrow anything from elsewhere. Its mathematical knowledge was purely independently derived. Cheikh Anta Diop spells this out clearly in Civilization and Barbarism.
You don't know what you're talking about. There were East Indian slaves in America. Read the paper here
Moreover, the Dravidians of South India came from the Proto-Sahara so both groups got their mathematics from the same source.
Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Your usual broken record statements that belie rationally acquired empirical evidence. There are still flat-earth theorists and others of that ilk floating around. They write papers too.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Lamin said "No historical evidence of such. The furthest East for the Slave Trade was Madagascar where a very few were taken. But purely on the basis of costs--human and monetary--almost 100% of the enslaved hailed from West Africa from Senegal down to Angola. A few may have come from Morocco and south of Angola, though. "
Dr. Winters is not the only looking into these facts. There are many more researchers looking into these same issues. There is a lot of historical proof. The Spanish/Portuguese Empire was worldwide and many came into what would become the USA as slaves from different cultures.
Moreover, there are African Americans with all kinds of interesting DNA results. Some say African Americans have these Average results: blah, blah, blah.
Average results mean nothing because people receive their own individual results. Another aspect to the DNA test results is that other groups have mixed with African Americans since slavery time and race mixing is increasing.
I always say however that these DNA test results are like a "Paper Bag Test" and can divide African Americans if we are not careful.
Posts: 1115 | From: GOD Bless the USA | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged |
The seeds of what was to become modern America were planted on May 13, 1607, when British colonists arrived at an island that they would come to call Jamestown in what is now Virginia.
This first permanent English settlement in the New World would eventually become “the rightful birthing ground of America”; its soil sprinkled with the blood of Native Americans, European settlers, and their African slaves.
To this racial mix we must now include people from the Indian subcontinent.
That’s because, while preparations are underway for a grand commemoration of Jamestown’s 400th anniversary in May-June 2007, we have uncovered compelling evidence of the presence of people from the Indian subcontinent going as far back as 375 years in Virginia: people identified in American court documents of the time as “East Indians,” “East India Indians,” or “Asiatic Indians.”
As these South Asians melded into the population, they would be identified variously as “Mullato,” “Negro,” and “colored” in the ethnic cauldron that was evolving in America, thus losing much of their racial distinctiveness with each passing generation, merging into the African-American community, largely unaware of their Indian roots.
My research into this early American history suggests that people from South Asia were transported as indentured servants or slaves— first by trading vessels belonging to the Dutch, French, and English; later, by captains of American vessels.
There is considerable evidence to suggest that “lascars” or seamen were recruited from Indian ports by European trading ships, and, on reaching Europe, succumbed to the promises of agents who enlisted indentured workers for the New World. Or else they were taken as servants by East India Company officials who amassed their fortunes in India, and subsequently returned home to England and thence to their newly established colony in America, where they took their servants with them as a sign of their wealth and status as “nabobs.”
The First “East Indians” in America?
A 2003 study prepared by Martha W. McCartney, a project historian for the National Park Service’s Jamestown Archaeological Assessment reveals that Captain George Menefie, who was assigned 1,200 acres of land in Jamestown in 1624 and used “Tony, an East Indian,” as a headright. This is further confirmed in a 2006 report from the Colonial Williamsburg Foundation, which identifies Menefie as a wealthy English merchant who arrived in Virginia in 1622, and obtained legal right to the land by paying passage for 24 immigrants, including an Indian.
Henry Louis Gates Jr. and NEHGS Researcher Meaghan Siekman, Kyle Hurst
(The Root) — Genealogical DNA testing can yield very surprising results, as The Root's deputy editor just found out.
"My mother, who is Creole from Louisiana and identifies as black, had her DNA tested recently. The test results came back as positive for a region in India. She was very shocked and confused, because she had never heard of Indian ancestors and can't trace any to Asia on her family tree. Is this a false positive?" —Lauren Williams
Probably not. Several reasons could explain why DNA results for a female Creole from Louisiana would show traces of ancestry from a region in India.
The testing company that your mother used, DNA Tribes, measures a person's genetic profile across his or her genome, excluding the sex chromosomes, focusing upon 15 genetic markers. As the company says, "Values from all 15 markers are used to compute high-resolution population and world region matches" between you and geographic populations.
In your mother's case, her "Native Population Match" results indicate that her DNA is most common in India. Indeed, in the company's "Upper Caste (Andhra Pradesh, India)" population, she has a 70.42 Match Likelihood Index Score.
What does this mean? It means that your mom's DNA profile is most common among these people, of all the people in the world; in fact, it is 70.42 times as common in this group of people in India as in the rest of the world! In another chart among your mom's results, her "Global Population Match Results" — her "closest genetic relatives today and peoples whose blend of geographical ancestry" is most similar to her own — again, belong to the Upper Caste, Andhra Pradesh, India population.
However, these tests measure your mom's deep ancestral origins, not necessarily "recent social or cultural affiliation with a particular ethnicity," as the DNA Tribes website puts it. These results illustrate how human populations evolved, over the last 500 years, as well as over thousands of years, as recorded in your mother's genome. Fascinating, isn't it?
You see, people have ranged far and wide since leaving the cradle of humanity in Africa, so a population migration in the distant past could account for an unexpected DNA testing result today. Ancient peoples with genetic similarities whose descendants now live in India may have settled in the areas in which your mother's ancestors were known to have lived. According to Migration Information Source, "In ancient times, Indian traders established bases around the Indian and the Pacific Oceans, especially in East Africa and Western and Southeast Asia."
Being Creole suggests the possibility of some European ancestry as well. Long-ago migrations from the East into Europe could have resulted in your familial link to India (or a closely related population).
However, the migration in question may have been more modern. Migration Information Source also described the 19th-century tendency for the European colonial powers to send people from India as indentured laborers to a variety of locations including "Guyana, Trinidad, Natal (South Africa), Suriname, and Fiji … Suriname, Trinidad and Tobago, Fiji, and Mauritius … Guyana and East Africa … Guadeloupe, Martinique, and La Reunion … Natal (South Africa)." It could very well be that one of your mother's ancestors came in contact with someone with Indian ancestry while living outside of Louisiana — or perhaps the contact occurred when that person emigrated to Louisiana.
Further research of her family tree could uncover the nature of the connection that led to her test results.
Henry Louis Gates Jr. is the Alphonse Fletcher University Professor and the director of the W.E.B. Du Bois Institute for African and African-American Research at Harvard University. He is also editor-in-chief of The Root. Follow him on Twitter.
Send your questions about tracing your own roots to TracingYourRoots@theroot.com.
This answer was provided in consultation with Kyle Hurst, a researcher from the New England Historic Genealogical Society. Founded in 1845, NEHGS is the country's leading nonprofit resource for family history research. Its website, AmericanAncestors.org, contains more than 300 million searchable records for research in New England, New York and beyond. With the leading experts in the field, NEHGS staff can provide assistance and guidance for questions in most research areas. They can also be hired to conduct research on your family. Learn more today.
Posts: 1115 | From: GOD Bless the USA | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged |
About Bengali Harlem and the Lost Histories of South Asian America
In the final years of the nineteenth century, small groups of Muslim peddlers arrived at Ellis Island every summer, bags heavy with embroidered silks from their home villages in Bengal. The American demand for “Oriental goods” took these migrants on a curious path, from New Jersey’s beach boardwalks into the heart of the segregated South. Two decades later, hundreds of Indian Muslim seamen began jumping ship in New York and Baltimore, escaping the engine rooms of British steamers to find less brutal work onshore. As factory owners sought their labor and anti-Asian immigration laws closed in around them, these men built clandestine networks that stretched from the northeastern waterfront across the industrial Midwest.
The stories of these early working-class migrants vividly contrast with our typical understanding of immigration. Vivek Bald’s meticulous reconstruction reveals a lost history of South Asian sojourning and life-making in the United States. At a time when Asian immigrants were vilified and criminalized, Bengali Muslims quietly became part of some of America’s most iconic neighborhoods of color, from Tremé in New Orleans to Detroit’s Black Bottom, from West Baltimore to Harlem. Many started families with Creole, Puerto Rican, and African American women.
As steel and auto workers in the Midwest, as traders in the South, and as halal hot dog vendors on 125th Street, these immigrants created lives as remarkable as they are unknown. Their stories of ingenuity and intermixture challenge assumptions about assimilation and reveal cross-racial affinities beneath the surface of early twentieth-century America.
BengaliHarlem.com
Posts: 1115 | From: GOD Bless the USA | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Red, White, and Blue + Christian: Lamin said "No historical evidence of such. The furthest East for the Slave Trade was Madagascar where a very few were taken. But purely on the basis of costs--human and monetary--almost 100% of the enslaved hailed from West Africa from Senegal down to Angola. A few may have come from Morocco and south of Angola, though. "
Dr. Winters is not the only looking into these facts. There are many more researchers looking into these same issues. There is a lot of historical proof. The Spanish/Portuguese Empire was worldwide and many came into what would become the USA as slaves from different cultures.
Moreover, there are African Americans with all kinds of interesting DNA results. Some say African Americans have these Average results: blah, blah, blah.
Average results mean nothing because people receive their own individual results. Another aspect to the DNA test results is that other groups have mixed with African Americans since slavery time and race mixing is increasing.
I always say however that these DNA test results are like a "Paper Bag Test" and can divide African Americans if we are not careful.
Afro-Americans are divided because they don't know their history, not DNA tests. They fail to understand that we are the product of Blacks from Eurasia, Africa and the Americas. Until we accept the diverse origins of Afro-Americans we will remain in a state of disunity.
There were many East Indian slaves sold in the United States. Researchers fail to understand that American slave traders had to gather their slaves outside of areas controlled by the British. That is why they got slaves from South India, and East Africa often not counted in slave sales.
A great example of the failure of official documents to record the import of slaves from South India is the American East African Slave Trade. American slave voyages into the Indian Ocean to get slaves are not always recorded in these estimates. As a result, the official estimates of slaves sold in the United States and their place of origin, are too low as evident in the trade in slaves from Madagascar and Mozambique.
American slave traders collected slaves in East Africa and Madagascar and sold them throughout the United States. They took slaves from Madagascar and East Africa because the British Royal African Company monopolized the West African slave trade.
In 1680 the first Madagasy slaves and slaves from up the Mozambique Channel were sold in New England. According Mannix and Cowley, Governor Bradstreet of the State of Masschusetts in 1680 observed that the Malagasy slaves were “betwit forty or fifty Negroes, mostly women and children” (p.65).
The Royal African Company (RAC) was upset about the trade in Malagasy and Mozambique slaves. Mannix and Cowley , report that in 1683 the RAC claimed that as many as 900 slaves were transported to the United States every two months (p.243). In 1721, the RAC began to import slaves from Madagascar and Mozambique.
Using the figures of the RAC for 1683 (6x900) of 5400 slaves sold in the United States by American slave traders, we can conservatively estimate that between 1683-1721, for example, around 205,000 slaves entered the United States just from Madagascar and Mozambique.
Emory claims only 50,000 slaves were taken to the U.S., between 1680-1725, when the actual number was 205,000 from Madagascar and Mozambique alone. This shows that the Emory count is bs.
This trade in Malagasy slaves did not end after the RAC began importing slaves from Southeast Africa, according to Mannix and Cowley Madagacy slaves were still coming into the United States as late as 1806 (p.244).
The RAC did not begin taking slaves from Southeast Africa until 1721, this was 30 years after American slavers had been transporting 5000 slaves a year from the region.
We will never know the exact estimates for slaves from East Africa and India .But what we do know is that the Emory figures for the United States are far too low.
.
Reference:
Mannix D.P., & Cowley,M. 1962. Black Cargoes; History of the Atlantic Slave Trade 1518-1865. The Viking Press, New York.
Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Red, White, and Blue + Christian:
Bengali Harlem
About Bengali Harlem and the Lost Histories of South Asian America
In the final years of the nineteenth century, small groups of Muslim peddlers arrived at Ellis Island every summer, bags heavy with embroidered silks from their home villages in Bengal. The American demand for “Oriental goods” took these migrants on a curious path, from New Jersey’s beach boardwalks into the heart of the segregated South. Two decades later, hundreds of Indian Muslim seamen began jumping ship in New York and Baltimore, escaping the engine rooms of British steamers to find less brutal work onshore. As factory owners sought their labor and anti-Asian immigration laws closed in around them, these men built clandestine networks that stretched from the northeastern waterfront across the industrial Midwest.
The stories of these early working-class migrants vividly contrast with our typical understanding of immigration. Vivek Bald’s meticulous reconstruction reveals a lost history of South Asian sojourning and life-making in the United States. At a time when Asian immigrants were vilified and criminalized, Bengali Muslims quietly became part of some of America’s most iconic neighborhoods of color, from Tremé in New Orleans to Detroit’s Black Bottom, from West Baltimore to Harlem. Many started families with Creole, Puerto Rican, and African American women.
As steel and auto workers in the Midwest, as traders in the South, and as halal hot dog vendors on 125th Street, these immigrants created lives as remarkable as they are unknown. Their stories of ingenuity and intermixture challenge assumptions about assimilation and reveal cross-racial affinities beneath the surface of early twentieth-century America.
BengaliHarlem.com
Great post. Many people fail to understand that up to the Open Housing Act of the 1960's, most East Asians were forced to live in Afro-American communities.
Due to desire to "increase" the white presence in the United States, East Indians are today recognized as "whites". LoL.
posted
[quoteGreat post. Many people fail to understand that up to the Open Housing Act of the 1960's, most East Asians were forced to live in Afro-American communities.
Due to desire to "increase" the white presence in the United States, East Indians are today recognized as "whites". LoL.[quote]
The L-MtDNA haplogroup--the female haplogroup--would give a better picture of the origins of the AA population. According to research more than 95% of AA females are of L-Mt-DNA haplogroup.
posted
Lamin, There is a lot of race mixing with the younger population. So, all these figures are changing.
Dr. Winters, the British were not the only ones who brought slaves into what would become the US. The Dutch, French and Spanish brought people here too. The truth is very complicated.
Plus, people were brought into the USA from the Caribbean and South America.
Posts: 1115 | From: GOD Bless the USA | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged |
Kamala Harris will be the first Indian American U.S. senator and California's first black senator
Kamala Harris' win Tuesday night will make her the first Indian American to serve in the U.S. Senate.
She will also be just the second black woman to serve in the U.S. Senate, and the first black senator from California.
Harris’ race and ethnicity were never a focal point of the contest, which she was projected to win handily. Many people focused more on the possibility that California might have elected the first Latina to the Senate if Rep. Loretta Sanchez (D-Orange) had won.
Harris’ mother, Dr. Shyamala Harris, emigrated from India. Her father, Donald Harris, emigrated from Jamaica.
According to the U.S. Senate’s website, just nine black Americans have ever served in the Senate. Democrat Carol Moseley Braun of Illinois became the first black woman to serve in the body in 1993.
A handful of Indian Americans have served in the U.S. House, including California’s Dalip Singh Saund from 1957 to 1963 and current Rep. Ami Bera (D-Elk Grove), who was first elected in 2012.
quote:Originally posted by Red, White, and Blue + Christian: Lamin, There is a lot of race mixing with the younger population. So, all these figures are changing.
Dr. Winters, the British were not the only ones who brought slaves into what would become the US. The Dutch, French and Spanish brought people here too. The truth is very complicated.
Plus, people were brought into the USA from the Caribbean and South America.
True. But once the British took control of New York ,in colonial times the trade in slaves was dominated by Britain and United States slavers.
Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by lamin: [quoteGreat post. Many people fail to understand that up to the Open Housing Act of the 1960's, most East Asians were forced to live in Afro-American communities.
Due to desire to "increase" the white presence in the United States, East Indians are today recognized as "whites". LoL.[quote]
The L-MtDNA haplogroup--the female haplogroup--would give a better picture of the origins of the AA population. According to research more than 95% of AA females are of L-Mt-DNA haplogroup.
LmtDNA can not tell us much about the DNA of Afro-Americans because the authors of the article make it clear they excluded haplogroups M and N among AAs was excluded in the admixture models because it is assumed that they are Eurasian in origin. This makes the study invalid because as we know now many West Africans carry haplogroups M and N. As a result they should have been considered as relics of the AAs African origins.
Structure and Admixture programs can not reliably report AA histories because of the major protocols in these programs that proport to illustrate the AA individuals' (N) inferred ancestral shared ancestry (K) based on the idea that Africans and Europeans lived in isolated communities up to 1492. A simple perusal of European history would have proven the fallacy of this assumption in relation to the 700 year rule of much of Iberia and parts of Germany and France by the Moors. Add, to this the settlement of Europe by other African groups beginning 44kya
Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Clyde, For whatever reason you are forcing an issue that no person with normal eyesight would believe. "Red Indian", "Redskins", "Redman" are terms that the European settlers routinely used to describe the Native Americans. There is no evidence that they used these terms to refer to the Africans on the American plantations.
The vast majority(90%)of blacks/Africans in the U.S. lived on restrictive plantations before 1865. For the Native Americans almost 100% lived in their own areas or reservations.
For such large numbers there would obviously be exceptions but the general picture is that for the European settlers, blacks on the plantations and Native Americans were always seen as racially distinct.
Even the Native Americans were aware of that fact with their "Buffalo Soldiers" appellation for the U.S. Army blacks that fought against them in the so-called Indian Wars.
The blacks were distinguishable for their African hair--tightly curled and kinky".Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by lamin: Clyde, "Red Indian", "Redskins", "Redman" are terms that the European settlers routinely used to describe the Native Americans.
. Damn you're Stupid!
(Don't you get tired of hearing that)?
If so, stop talking out of your Ass you ignoramus!
quote:Originally posted by lamin: Clyde, For whatever reason you are forcing an issue that no person with normal eyesight would believe. "Red Indian", "Redskins", "Redman" are terms that the European settlers routinely used to describe the Native Americans. There is no evidence that they used these terms to refer to the Africans on the American plantations.
The vast majority(90%)of blacks/Africans in the U.S. lived on restrictive plantations before 1865. For the Native Americans almost 100% lived in their own areas or reservations.
For such large numbers there would obviously be exceptions but the general picture is that for the European settlers, blacks on the plantations and Native Americans were always seen as racially distinct.
Even the Native Americans were aware of that fact with their "Buffalo Soldiers" appellation for the U.S. Army blacks that fought against them in the so-called Indian Wars.
The blacks were distinguishable for their African hair--tightly curled and kinky".
.
You don't know what you're talking about. You are only talking about the Apache and other Southwestern Indian tribes. The Eastern and Midwestern Native Americans were mainly Negroes or Africans. There was no one type of Native Americans.
. The Albinos teach that it was Indians who did the SCALPING, but they don't tell you that it was THEM who taught it to the Indians, and the Indians were only returning the FAVOR!
Scalping had been known in Europe, according to accounts, as far back as ancient Greece. More often, though, the European manner of execution involved beheading. Enemies captured in battle - or people accused of political crimes - might have their heads chopped off by victorious warriors or civil authorities.
In some places and times in European history, leaders in power offered to pay "bounties" (cash payments) to put down popular uprisings. In Ireland, for instance, the occupying English once paid bounties for the heads of their enemies brought to them.
Europeans brought this cruel custom of paying for killings to the American frontier. Here they were willing to pay for just the scalp, instead of the whole head. The first documented instance in the American colonies of paying bounties for native scalps is credited to Governor Kieft of New Netherlands.
By 1703, the Massachusetts Bay Colony was offering $60 for each native scalp. And in 1756, Pennsylvania Governor Morris, in his Declaration of War against the Lenni Lenape (Delaware) people, offered "130 Pieces of Eight [a type of coin], for the Scalp of Every Male Indian > Enemy, above the Age of > Twelve Years, " and "50 Pieces of Eight for the Scalp of Every Indian Woman, produced as evidence of their being killed."
Massachusetts by that time was offering a bounty of 40 pounds (again, a unit of currency) for a male Indian scalp, and 20 pounds for scalps of females or of children under 12 years old. Albinos tell of the "Blood Thirsty" Indians, but in fact, it was the "Blood Thirsty" Albinos!
BOSCAWEN, N.H. Monument depicting Colonial heroine Hannah Dustin, In her left hand she holds a fistful of human scalps.
The inscription underneath tells of her 1697 capture in an Indian raid, and how she slew her captors as they slept -12 women and children. Later she returned for their scalps, having remembered they could fetch a bounty. (There are many statues of Dustin, this is the only one showing the scalps. The others are typical Albino lie statues).
.
So where did the terms "Redman or Redskin" come from?
Historian Professor Roxanne Dunbar-Ortiz states that the American settlers were paid bounties for killing Indians, and they gave a name to the mutilated and bloody corpses they left in the wake of their scalp hunts: REDSKINS!
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
Lamin, you are in West Africa and let me explain some things to you. This is going to be a little rough.
You showed a photo of people in Latrina and said this what the Black people look like. Yes and No. Louisiana is famouse for its Creole population and those Creoles were less likely to be caught uo in Katrina.
What I am saying is that we have a de facto color class system in Black America amd race mixing makes it worse. Today, 25% of the young African American men who marry officially, marry out. Their biracial kids won't have mtDNA L. We have a Biracial, Mulatto Elite, light skinned elite that is running Black America from behind the scenes and in front of the camera. It has really always been that way.
The richest BM are more likely to marry out and we are getting a de facto color class system again.
The Free People of Color that exixted during the days slavery existed tended to be mixed.
Most of the AfricanAmerican leaders tended to be mixed. This is the hidden secret you are not getting.
Posts: 1115 | From: GOD Bless the USA | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged |
Reality is...ironically the best African American women who have Master's dreegrees plus are marrying and reproducing less than others.
Moreover, youmay have heard that America is becoming Non-White more and more. But, the Hispanic and Asian populations are driving this change. The Black birthrate is steady.
African Americans have real problems and the murder rate in some cities is too high. Some Blacks have money, but there is also a lot of poverty. The worrying over paying rent or mortgage is more important than worrying about what happened in 1700 or what is happening in Gabon.
The African Americans on Egyptsearch and like websites are a special rare breed.
Let’s take a look at what the various census instructions to enumerators and census forms said about Indians.
1790 – “Omitting Indians not taxed, distinguishing free persons, including those bound to service, from all others.” Indians living “wild,” generally meaning plains Indians in the west, or on reservations were not taxed, but those who were enumerated were recorded in the “all other free” column on the census form.
1800 – Indians living off of reservations and not “wild” would have been recorded in the “all other free persons” column on the census form. Options were free white, slave and “all other free persons.”
1810 – Indians living off of reservations would have been recorded in the “all others” column on the census form. Options were free white, slave and “all other.”
1820 – Indians living off of reservations would have been recorded in the “free colored persons” categories. Other options were free whites, slaves and “all others except Indians not taxed.”
1830 – Indians living off of reservations and not “wild” would have been recorded in the “free colored persons” category. Other options were free whites and slaves.
1840 – Essentially the same as 1830 with the exception that an additional column labeled “pensioners for revolutionary or military services” with a blank for the pensioner’s name to be included and applies to all individuals.
1850 – 1850 is the first census in which every individual in the household was enumerated. In prior years, only the name of the head of household was recorded and other household members were recorded by age grouping by category. In 1850, the instructions say that Indians not taxed (meaning on reservations) were not to be enumerated and the categories for race were white, black, mulatto. So if your ancestor looked “dark” and was an Indian, chances are they were recorded as M for mulatto. There was no “Indian” category until 1860.
1860 – Indians not taxed were not enumerated. However, the categories differed a bit this year. “The families of Indians who have renounced tribal rule, and who under State or Territorial laws exercise the rights of citizens, are to be enumerated. In all such cases write “Ind.” opposite their names, in column 6, under heading ‘Color.’”
There is a census in Indian Territory, but Indians are not included.
1870 – Instructions said, “”Indians not taxed’ are not to be enumerated on schedule 1. Indians out of their tribal relations, and exercising the rights of citizens under State or Territorial laws, will be included. In all cases write “Ind.” in the column for “Color.” Although no provision is made for the enumeration of “Indians not taxed,” it is highly desirable, for statistical purposes, that the number of such persons not living upon reservations should be known. Assistant marshals are therefore requested, where such persons are found within their subdivisions, to make a separate memorandum of names, with sex and age, and embody the same in a special report to the census office.”
The form gave these race options: Color – White (W), black (B), mulatto (M), Chinese (C), Indian (I).
There was no census of Indian people in Indian Territory. However, this National Archives article discusses Indians in the census between 1860 and 1880 and states that in 1870 half-breed people who had assimilated and adopted white ways were to be recorded as white.
1880 – Instructions said, “It is the prime object of the enumeration to obtain the name, and the requisite particulars as to personal description, of every person in the United States, of whatever age, sex, color, race, or condition, with this single exception, viz.: that “Indians not taxed” shall be omitted from the enumeration.
By the phrase “Indians not taxed” is meant Indians living on reservations under the care of Government agents, or roaming individually, or in bands, over settled tracts of country.
Indians, not in tribal relations, whether full-bloods or half-breeds, who are found mingled with the white population, residing in white families, engaged as servants or laborers, or living in huts or wigwams on the outskirts of towns or settlements are to be regarded as a part of the ordinary population of the country for the constitutional purpose of the apportionment of Representatives among the States, and are to be embraced in the enumeration.”
However, the 1880 instructions for “color” are not specific as to how to record Indians or those of mixed heritage. “Color.-It must not be assumed that, where nothing is written in this column, “white” is to be understood. The column is always to be filled. Be particularly careful in reporting the class mulatto. The word is here generic, and includes quadroons, octoroons, and all persons having any perceptible trace of African blood. Important scientific results depend upon the correct determination of this class in schedules 1 and 5.”
The form gave these options: Color – White, W; black, B; Mulatto, Mu; Chinese, C; Indian, I.
Beginning in 1885, special Indian Census were taken on reservations. This continued until 1940.
1890 – The 1890 census was destroyed, but here are the instructions: “Whether white, black, mulatto. quadroon, octoroon, Chinese, Japanese, or Indian.-Write white, black, mulatto, quadroon, octoroon, Chinese, Japanese, or Indian, according to the color or race of the person enumerated. Be particularly careful to distinguish between blacks, mulattos, quadroons, and octoroons. The word “black” should be used to describe those persons who have three-fourths or more black blood; “mulatto,” those persons who have from three-eighths to five-eighths black blood; “quadroon,” those persons who have one-fourth black blood; and “octoroon,” those persons who have one-eighth or any trace of black blood.”
1900 – In 1900, the instructions become less specific: Although they don’t say so here, we know that Indians on reservations are still not consistently enumerated.
“Column 5. Color or race.-Write “W” for white; “B” for black (negro or of negro descent); “Ch” for Chinese; “JP” for Japanese, and “In” for Indian, as the case may be.”
The census bureau says that beginning in 1900, Indians on reservations were also enumerated in the general census, but I have not found this to always be the case. I do find them consistently by 1930.
A special Indian census form with separate instructions was included, although these are often only recorded at the end of the county census roll and sometimes not indexed when indexing occurred. These were supposed to be for people both on reservations and off who considered themselves to be Indian. These are particularly valuable records.
1910 instructions: “Color or race.-Write “W” for white; “B” for black; “Mu” for mulatto; “Ch” for Chinese; “Jp” for Japanese; “In” for Indian. For all persons not falling within one of these classes, write “Ot” (for other), and write on the left-hand margin of the schedule the race of the person so indicated.”
Again a special Indian census form and instructions were included.
1920 instructions: “Color or race.-Write “W” for white, “B” for black; “Mu” for mulatto; “In” for Indian; “Ch” for Chinese; “Jp” for Japanese; “Fil” for Filipino; “Hin” for Hindu; “Kor” for Korean. for all persons not falling within one of these classes, write “Ot” (for other), and write on the left-hand margin of the schedule the race of the person so indicated.”
Things changed dramatically between 1920 and 1930 for Indians. In 1924, Indians were made American citizens. Before 1924, Indians who lived on reservations were considered to be citizens of their tribe and not American citizens. This harkens back to the 1830s lawsuits about sovereign tribal rights.
Before the 1930 census, Indians living on reservations were not always enumerated on the general census. There were special Indian census schedules taken, but not on the decade marks like the regular census, and not as detailed, generally lists of families with ages. But in 1930, all Indians were included in the census, and the instructions became much more robust as well. Some Indians were included in the 1900-1920 census schedules, but not all, although according to the instructions, they were all supposed to be included. Mixed race people and Indians living off of the reservation were included. Indians living on reservations are the people missing from the census prior to 1930. Fortunately for genealogists, if your ancestor was living on a reservation in the 1900s, you likely know about it.
1930 instructions:
“150. Column 12. Color or race.-Write “W” for white, “B” for black; “Mus” for mulatto; “In” for Indian; “Ch” for Chinese; “Jp” for Japanese; “Fil” for Filipino; “Hin” for Hindu; “Kor” for Korean. For a person of any other race, write the race in full.
“151. Negroes.-A person of mixed white and Negro blood should be returned as a Negro, no matter how small the percentage of Negro blood. Both black and mulatto persons are to be returned as Negroes, without distinction. A person of mixed Indian and Negro blood should be returned a Negro, unless the Indian blood predominates and the status as an Indian is generally accepted in the community.
152. Indians.-A person of mixed white and Indian blood should be returned as Indian, except where the percentage of Indian blood is very small, or where he is regarded as a white person by those in the community where he lives. (See par. 151 for mixed Indian and Negro.)
153. For a person reported as Indian in column 12, report is to be made in column 19 as to whether “full blood” or “mixed blood,” and in column 20 the name of the tribe is to be reported. For Indians, columns 19 and 20 are thus to be used to indicate the degree of Indian blood and the tribe, instead of the birthplace of father and mother.
154. Mexicans.-Practically all Mexican laborers are of a racial mixture difficult to classify, though usually well recognized in the localities where they are found. In order to obtain separate figures for this racial group, it has been decided that all person born in Mexico, or having parents born in Mexico, who are not definitely white, Negro, Indian, Chinese, or Japanese, should be returned as Mexican (“Mex”).
155. Other mixed races.-Any mixture of white and nonwhite should be reported according to the nonwhite parent. Mixtures of colored races should be reported according to the race of the father, except Negro-Indian (see par. 151).”
In the “place of birth” section, we find these instructions for Indians:
“174a. For the Indian population, which is practically all of native parentage, these columns are to be used for a different purpose. In column 19 is to be entered, in place of the country of birth of the father, the degree of Indian blood, as, “full blood” or “mixed blood.” In column 20 is to be entered, in place of the country of birth of the mother, the tribe to which the Indian belongs.’
1940 – The 1940 census is the last census that has been released, and the instructions that year were:
“453. Column 10. Color or Race.-Write “W” for white; “Neg” for Negro; “In” for Indian; “Chi” for Chinese; “Jp” for Japanese; “Fil” for Filipino; “Hi” for Hindu; and “Kor” for Korean. For a person of any other race, write the race in full.
454. Mexicans.-Mexicans are to be regarded as white unless definitely of Indian or other nonwhite race.
455. Negroes.-A person of mixed white and Negro blood should be returned as Negro, no matter how small a percentage of Negro blood. Both black and mulatto persons are to be returned as Negroes, without distinction. A person of mixed Indian and Negro blood should be returned as a Negro, unless the Indian blood very definitely predominates and he is universally accepted in the community as an Indian.
456. Indians.-A person of mixed white and Indian blood should be returned as an Indian, if enrolled on an Indian agency or reservation roll, or if not so enrolled, if the proportion of Indian blood is one-fourth or more, or if the person is regarded as an Indian in the community where he lives.
457. Mixed Races.-Any mixture of white and nonwhite should be reported according to the nonwhite parent. Mixtures of nonwhite races should be reported according to the race of the father, except that Negro-Indian should be reported as Negro.”
In addition, the “mother tongue” recorded was to be the tribal language.
1950 – Although the 1950 census has not been released, the categories are quite interesting and the 1950 census should help genealogists who are attempting to sort through their family history. This census took into consideration special mixed communities. The instructions for “Race” are as follows.
“114. Item 9. Determining and entering race.-Write “W” for white; “Neg” for Negro; “Ind” for American Indian; “Chi” for Chinese; “Jap” for Japanese; “Fil” for Filipino. For a person of any other race, write the race in full. Assume that the race of related persons living in the household is the same as the race of your respondent, unless you learn otherwise. For unrelated persons (employees, hired hands, lodgers, etc.) you must ask the race, because knowledge of the housewife’s race (for example) tells nothing f the maid’s race.
115. Mexicans.-Report “white” (W) for Mexicans unless they are definitely of Indian or other nonwhite race.
116. Negroes.-Report “Negro” (Neg) for Negroes and for persons of mixed white and Negro parentage. A person of mixed Indian and Negro blood should be returned as a Negro, unless the Indian blood very definitely predominates and he is accepted in the community as an Indian. (Note, however, the exceptions described in par. l18 below.)
117. American Indians.-Report “American Indian” (Ind) for persons of mixed white and Indian blood if enrolled on an Indian Agency or Reservation roll; if not so enrolled, they should still be reported as Indian if the proportion of Indian blood is one-fourth or more, or if they are regarded as Indians in the community where they live. (See par. 116 for persons of mixed Indian and Negro blood and also exceptions noted in par. 118.) In those counties where there are many Indians living outside of reservations, special care should be taken to obtain accurate answers to item 9.
118. Special communities.-Report persons of mixed white, Negro, and Indian ancestry living in certain communities in the Eastern United States in terms of the name by which they are locally known.
The communities in question are of long standing and are locally recognized by special names, such as ‘”Croatian,” “Jackson White,” “We-sort,” etc. Persons of mixed Indian and Negro ancestry and mulattoes not living in such communities should be returned as “Negro” (see par. 116). When in doubt, describe the situation in a footnote.
119. Mixed parentage.-Report race of nonwhite parent for persons of mixed white and nonwhite races. Mixtures of nonwhite races should be reported according to the race of the father. (Note, however, exceptions detailed in pars. 116 and 118 above.)
120. India.-Persons originating in India should be reported as ‘Asiatic Indians.’”
The 1960 census is unremarkable and includes Indian as a category with no specific instructions.
Then came 1970 and the census changed dramatically. People were asked about their race and race was no longer recorded based on the interpretation of the census taker. For Indian, there was a blank beside the category with the word “tribe” that was to be filled in. As of the 2010 census, this tribal question remains on the forms.
Between 1980 and 2000, the Native American population inthe US increased 110%. Now clearly, this was not a matter of actual population growth, but the difference between what the previous census takers saw and the self-identification of individuals. There seems to be quite a chasm between perception and identity.
How to identify an Indian or an Indian mixed race person, especially one not living on a reservation, seems to have been a problem that has plagued census takers and therefore the government, and now genealogists, since the beginning of the census records more than 200 years ago.
You can read more about how the statistics about and individual perception of race in American has changed due to census changes here.
Posts: 1115 | From: GOD Bless the USA | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
You can never show lamin he is wrong because he already knows this.
Due to Indian slavery in North America, the Black Native American (BNA) population was absorbed by the larger SSA slave population. Over time, people forgot there had been Black Native Americans and Mongoloid Native Americans. In fact, the BNA heritage and land rights were stolen by the government, as all Blacks in America, no matter their ancestry were assigned the status of former African slave.
Gilio- Whitaker (2015) wrote that : “As the Indian slave trade gave way to the African slave trade by the late 1700’s (by then over 300 years old) Native American women began to intermarry with imported Africans, producing mixed-race offspring whose native identities became obscured through time. In the colonial project to eliminate the landscape of Indians, these mixed-race people simply became known as "colored" people through bureaucratic erasure in public records.
In some cases such as in Virginia, even when people were designated as Indians on birth or death certificates or other public records, their records were changed to reflect “colored.” Census takers, determining a person’s race by their looks, often recorded mixed-race people as simply black, not Indian. The result is that today there is a population of people of Native American heritage and identity (particularly in the Northeast) who are not recognized by society at large, sharing similar circumstances with the Freedmen of the Cherokee and other Five Civilized Tribes.
Due to the demand for more slave labor, the Americans began to import Sub-Saharan African (SSA) slaves from Africa into the United States. Thousands of SSA males ran away from the plantations to Indian Territory where they founded many maroon societies or lived on tribal lands (Katz, 2011) .
There were Black Native American tribes in Canada. During the Atlantic Slave trade many SSA slaves were deposited in Canada.These runaway slaves held extensive land holdings in Florida and in Nova Scotia, near Halifax during the American slave period (Chambers, 1891).
In North America, there were so many SSAs among the Iroquois and other Northeastern American tribes that in 1726, 1764 and 1765, the governor of Colonial New York exacted a promise from the Delaware, Huron and Iroquois’ Confederation, to return runaway slaves (Katz, 2011).
Although (Native American) NA nations gave this promise to the governor no slaves were ever returned. There are reports of numerous marriages between NA females and SSA males. Intermarriage between NA and SSA populations between British Columbia and New England was especially high. Massachusetts was a major center of NA and SSA intermixture.
Many SSA slave males married NA females because the offspring became free (Chambers, 1891). As early as 1763, in places like Martha’s Vineyard, Tilburg, Chilmack and Chappaquiddick, Massachusetts almost one-fourth of the NA were married to SSA males (Chambers, 1891). For example, in the 1790 U.S. Census it was reported that 6001 “persons other than white” 400 were SSA, and 2000 were mixed NA and SSA (Chambers,1891).
There were also intermarriage between NA and SSA populations in the southern United States (Katz, 2011). In 1526, African slaves fled their Spanish masters and settled in South Carolina Black Indian Territory.
The first SSA slaves were sold to the English colonist in 1620 (Chambers, 1891). In 1622, NA overran the Jamestown Virginia colony killing all the whites, and integrating the African slaves into NA communities (Katz, 2011). As a result, it was recognized that many free born Blacks on the Chesapeake Peninsula were of Black Native American (BNA), mongoloid NA and SSA origin in 1700 (Chambers, 1891; Katz, 2011).
The largest settlement of SSA in the South was in Florida. Here there was 50 miles of farmland , cattle and etc., owned by Maroons. The SSA in Florida freely mixed with the Creek and Seminoles. It was estimated by a certain Mr. Munroe in 1887 that more than half of the NA and SSA populations in Florida was mixed (Chambers, 1891). Other SSA were married to NA females belonging to the Cherokee, Choctaw, and Creek nations.
In addition to intermarriage among NA and SSA populations in the Northeastern and Southern USA, there was considerable intermarriage among NA and SSA in the Midwest. In Minnesota, for example, in 1819 at the mouth of the St. Louis River, there were SSA living in Ojibwa villages (Chambers, 1891).
The P clade probably originated in Africa because 1) whites rarely mated with Native Americans before the Great Trek to Oklahoma, 2) R-M173 and the subclades V88 and R-M269 has its highest frequencies across Africa ; and 3) R-V88 is older than R-M269. Researchers have found that the TMRCA of V88 was 9200-5600 kya (Cruciani et al., 2010). Eurasians carry the M269 (R1b1b2) mutation. The subclades of R1b1b2 include Rh1b1b2g (U106) (TMRCA 8.3kya) and R1b1b2h (U152) (TMRCA 7.4kya). The most recent common ancestor for R1b1b2 in Europe is probably 8kya (Balaresque et al., 2010). Y-Chromosome R1b1b2 has high frequencies in England, France, Italy and Germany (Balaresque et al., 2010). Clearly, R-V88 is older than R-M269. Some of the Malian settlers probably introduced R-M173 into North America. Ancient Mali was a Confederation it was made up of many different tribes. Settling even half the 25-80,000 Malians who sail to America in 1310 on the mainland would have had a tremendous effect on the genetic and population land scape of the Americas. It appears that Black and mongoloid Native Americans often lived side by side. They also belonged to the same Confederations. Due to the Native American slave trade many Black Native Americans owners in the West Indies other Native American were forced to work on plantations or sold into slave. Using a system of divide and rule the whites were able to get the Indians capture each other and sale their captives as slave. Since the ancestors of the Black Native Americans had originated in Africa they began to be identified as slave-Indian, freeman and finally “Colored”. And then as a result of bureaucratic erasure in the public records, the former black Native Americans simply became identified as “Colored”, like the former Sub-Saharan slaves, instead of Native Americans.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
Stupid fool, 99% + of African don't have that type of hair. That man you posted is not indigenous to Africa. He may be living there or born there, but that does not prove anything.
Indians in Africa, Lebanese, Arabs Europeans have been in Africa for centuries, but they are not from the population cline "Homo Sapiens Africanus".
Stupid fool, you don't post a picture of 8 foot tall Chinese man as representative of the height of Chinese men.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by lamin: Stupid fool, 99% + of African don't have that type of hair. That man you posted is not indigenous to Africa. He may be living there or born there, but that does not prove anything.
Indians in Africa, Lebanese, Arabs Europeans have been in Africa for centuries, but they are not from the population cline "Homo Sapiens Africanus".
Stupid fool, you don't post a picture of 8 foot tall Chinese man as representative of the height of Chinese men.
. Ha,ha,ha,ha:
"Homo Sapiens Africanus".
Told you all that this fool was an Albino fronting Black!
Of course there is no such a thing as "Homo Sapiens Africanus".
THIS IS WHERE THE FOOL GOT IT. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Typological Model
During the 19th and early 20th centuries, anthropologists and biologists naively divided all people into distinct geographical groups on the basis of what they saw as the regular occurrence together of selected traits. They were using the typological model click this icon to hear the preceding term pronounced which has the same basis as the commonly used categories of race today. This approach focuses on a small number of traits that are readily observable from a distance such as skin color, hair form, body build, and stature. Inherent in the typological model is the notion that there have been "pure" unmixed races in the past. The roots of this model for classifying people go back at least to the 18th century Swedish naturalist, Carolus Linnaeus. He proposed the existence of four biological subspecies or races of humans corresponding to geographic regions:
Homo sapiens Eoropeus albescens ("white" people from Europe)
Homo sapiens Africanus negreus ("black" people from Africa)
Homo sapiens Asiaticus fucus ("dark" people from Asia)
Homo sapiens Americanus rubescens ("red" people from the Americas)
The typological model is based on what is now known to be a false assumption concerning the nature of human variation--that is that we can be unambiguously assigned to a "race" on the basis of selected anatomical traits. In fact, when we look at specific individuals, we often run into difficulty trying to categorize them. For example, on the basis of skin color, we might put them into one "race" and on the basis of nose shape, body form, or blood type, they might go into others.
Even if we base the classification on a single characteristic, the typological model fails because most biological traits are continuous variables. That is to say, there is a progressive range of variation that our preconceptions sometimes prevent us from seeing. The typological model causes us to lump people together into arbitrarily assigned categories. For instance, we tend to classify people as being slender, medium build, or fat despite the fact that there is a continuum of body weight and size among humans. The same is true of skin color and other commonly used "racial" characteristics.
The typological model usually leads us to wrongly assume that the people within any "race" are genetically and anatomically more alike than they are like people from other "races." This all depends on the traits that are being compared. For instance, many Americans believe that people of African descent have broad noses. In fact, both the widest and the narrowest noses are found among the people of that continent. Recent research comparing human DNA sequences from around the world has shown that 90% of human genetic variation exists within what we have previously assumed to be more or less separate "races" and only 10% between them. In other words, "racial" groups are far from being homogenous.
posted
lamin - I have proven your stupidity and lying nature too many times to count. I tire of it, stop being such a lying Albino Ass - try truth for a change.
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic