“Moor - in English usage, a Moroccan or, formerly, a member of the Muslim population of Spain, of mixed Arab, Spanish, and Berber origins, who created the Arab Andalusian civilization and subsequently settled as refugees in North Africa between the 11th and 17th centuries. By extension (corresponding to the Spanish moro), the term occasionally denotes any Muslim in general, as in the case of the Moors of Sri Lanka (Ceylon) or of the Philippines.
The word derives from the Latin Mauri, first used by the Romans to denote the inhabitants of the Roman province of Mauretania, comprising the western portion of modern Algeria and the northeastern portion of modern Morocco. Modern Mauritanians are also sometimes referred to as Moors (as with the French maure); the Islamic Republic of Mauritania, however, lies in the large Saharan area between Morocco and the republics of Senegal and Mali.”
- "Moor" Encyclopædia Britannica from Encyclopædia Britannica Online.
When the Arab armies swept across Northern Africa in the 7th Century AD, they found in the north-western corner of that continent the Berbers, an ancient grouping of part White origin (indeed, to this day, red hair is not unknown amongst the Berbers).
The Berbers were converted to Islam after a sharp struggle at the beginning of the 8th Century.
“Then Berbers and Arabs then joined in invading and conquering Spain, as a mixed race sprang up called the Moors.”
any one here in a similar situation ...
Posts: 4597 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
Moor \Moor\, n. [F. More, Maure, L. Maurus a Moor, a Mauritanian, an inhabitant of Mauritania, Gr. ?; cf. ? black, dark. Cf. Morris a dance, Morocco.] 1. One of a mixed race inhabiting Morocco, Algeria, Tunis, and Tripoli, chiefly along the coast and in towns.
2. (Hist.) Any individual of the swarthy races of Africa or Asia which have adopted the Mohammedan religion. ``In Spanish history the terms Moors, Saracens, and Arabs are synonymous.'' --Internat. Cyc.
Many of the modern definitions of Moor OMIT the fact that there was a LARGE Islamic civilization centered at Timbuktu which ALSO was part of the Islamic population in Spain. Therefore, many of these DARK people were also referred to as "Moors" because of their DARK skin. Therefore, Moors were NOT limited just to the COAST of North Africa.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
well m not sure about certain issues my back ground is so messed im of indian origen but of arab decent ....moors were mentioned cus i ve got spanish cousins who re muslim and live in cordoba ,canu help me in sum way thanx
Posts: 4597 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
There was never such thing as a moorish race, what united them was the religion, so anyone was a moor who fought for islam from the south in spain, however the majority of the moors were the berbers of marrocco.
Posts: 1420 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The term Moor comes from the Greek term Mauros which during Greco-Roman times described indigenous North-western African people. Of course the term meant ''dark-skinned''
In later periods during the invasion of the Arabs into Northern Africa it became associated with soliders in the Arab armies. The soliders were generally Imazigh[Berbers] that fought in the Arab armies. Europeans later applied this to the Muslims who occupied Al-Andulas during the Medieval times.
Posts: 8675 | From: Tukuler al~Takruri as Ardo since OCT2014 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Of course many of the Islamic people who entered Spain were Berbers. HOWEVER, lets us not forget that a LARGE part of Africa subsequent to the invasion of Spain became ISLAMIC along with the coastal areas. As a RESULT of this intrusion of Islam into the HEART of Africa, there would have been MANY BLACK African moors in Spain. It is mind boggling how many people forget that this period is the SAME PERIOD as that of Mali and Timbuktu which are BLACK African Islamic centers from the SAME period as the Moors in Spain.
In fact, for a LONG TIME, Moor has been used as a synonym for BLACK, by EUROPEANS THEMSELVES. It is not ME making this up, but look at OTHELLO and you will see this. So trying to say that Moor has NO connection to the BLACK African muslims from places like Mauritania is RIDICULOUS.
Also, let us not forget that MANY of the indigenous BLACK Africans who were in North Africa were also part of the original campaigns into Spain. Many MOROCCANS at the time were DARK skin Berbers. For a long time in Europe, Moor was synonymous with a BLACK person. It is only recently that people have begun to try and differentiate between DARKER skinned Moors and lighter skinned ones. Some were dark some werent, but it is NOTABLE that many people in Europe who are identified as MOORS from this period are indeed BLACK PEOPLE. You see it in European art, literature AND history.
quote: Continuing on to the southern end of Piazza Navona we find the Fontana del Moro, designed by Giacomo della Porto and erected in 1575. The fountain has statues of four Tritons and the basin is made of special antique rose marble. In 1654, Bernini carved the central figure, a muscular Triton riding a dolphin, that resembles a "Moor". Thus, the fountain is called the Fountain of the Moor. During a restoration in 1874, the original sculptures were moved to the Villa Borghese and substitute copies were made and are still on the fountain.
A famous fountain with a BLACK figure in the center.
Also, you should not forget that Morrocco in the 1800s had a MUCH LARGER population of BLACK AFRICANS than today. There are MANY books from this period which show in pictures and ART the fact that Morrocco had a LARGE BLACK AFRICAN population(who were not slaves). Therefore, to assume that because many Moors came from Morrocco, that they were automatically lighter skinned, is FALSE. Just like the fact that OMITTING the fact that Moor is also related to the nation of Mauritania, ALSO is a distortion. You must also remember that this period is JUST BEFORE the onslaught of European colonial incursions into Africa for slaves and MANY African Kingdoms were destroyed, just as many were destroyed by the Islamic Arabs before them. All of this has taken place within the last few hundred years or so. Therefore, it is hard today to get an accurate picture of the people involved in the ORIGINAL invasions of Islamized Africans into Spain.
quote: The Roman Term "Maur" described the native inhabitants of North Africa west of modern Tunisia. Ancient to modern authors, as well as portraits, show them with a varity of features, just as the modern population contains. This was contrasted with other peoples described as "Aethiopes", or "Ethiopians,who lived further south, and Egyptians, or "Aegyptus". As described above, they composed a variety of peoples in this region who probably had origins in the Sahara when it desiccated in the late Holocene period. Whether they were light skinned and blond hair, dark skinned, or somewhere in between, DR. Keita has noted that this diversity was indigenous to the North African region, and not the result of foreign settlement (Phoenicians, Greeks, Romans, Arabs).
If you want to see some black Moors, look at the Mauritanian picture thread and you will see some. Also look at those of Mali as well and you will see some too. All of these people were part of what was the Moorish empire in that part of Africa.
I am not trying to diminish the fact of Berbers (which can come in MANY complexions) being part of the Moorish invasion. What I am saying is that much of this history ignores the fact that there were LARGE black African Islamic Kingdoms during the period of Moorish occupation in Spain and that some periods of Moorish Spain saw more than a fair share of BLACK African Moorish rulers.
The painting "The Moorish Chief" by Eduard Charlemont is a classic example of the European image of the Moor and a good example of many people in Morrocco in the 18th century. A large reason for the LACK of any large black African community in Morrocco today has to do with Slavery.
posted
Moor is a slippery term in the extra African world and Moorish identity varies through time. At the origin of our word Moor is the Greek word mauros an adjective meaning dark applied as a Latin noun, Maurus, denoting the people of the Roman province Mauritania consisting of what is now the north parts of Morocco & western Algeria. One century before the Islamic conquest of the Maghreb, Procopius' History 3.13.29 reports:
quote: And I have heard this man say that beyond the country which he ruled there was no habitation of men, but desert land extending to a great distance, and that beyond that there are men, not black-skinned like the Mauretanii, but very white in body and fair-haired.
So the first Moors so named by the Greeks and Romans were North African Imazighen, aka "Berbers," notably darker than the north Mediterraneans and certain other Imazighen.
Not long after the above quote was written, Arabs and Arabized "middle easterners" and Iranians professing Islam overcame Amazigh resistance last led by queen Dahya alKahina of the Aures in eastern Algeria. Though technically part of Numidia rather than Mauritania, all these Imazighen adopting Islam and under Arab orders invading and successfully conquering what is now southern Spain came to be called Moros. 150 years later ibn Qutayba wrote down Wahb ibn Nunabbih's opinion:
quote: Kush and Cana`an's descendants are the various races of blacks:
Nubians
Zanj
Qaran
Zaghawa
Ethiopians
Copts and
Berbers.
Maur started out as a north Mediterranean concept of a specific North African region's people, but after the birth of al Andalus ("Vandal Land"), aka "Muslim Spain," the term Moor came to generally mean African Muslim in the European languages. Though the Black-a-Moor is the Moor that mostly captures western imagination there were also Tawny Moors and White Moors. Their ascent in Europe survives in surnames of their European descendents: Moore, Blackmoor, Tanimer, Whitmore, etc.
The term Black-a-Moor is a contraction of the phrase "Black as a Moor." The dominant image of a Moor as literally black, though they were a variety of complexions, is because of two Andalusian dynasties that arose in what is now the modern nations of Mauretania and Western Sahara. They were the al Murabitun and al Muwahhidun which included large numbers of what are now Senegalese who are among the blackest skinned people on earth. Many of the Zenaga al Mulathimun were themselves very dark.
The legacy of the Roman age Mauritanii and the Moros of al Andalus live on in the names of Morocco and Mauretania. To Africans, the Amazigh people of those countries are the Moors and not the Gnawa people of the Sahel and Savanna. In particular the Mauritanians are the Maurs divided into Beydan white Maurs and Haratin black Maurs. Though some Fulani and Wolof have Mauritanian citizenship that stretches back to pre-Almoravid days, they are not Maurs nor do they seek to call themselves Maurs.
Many of the inhabitants of the original old Mauretania were pushed south by the Arabs in turn pushing the Bafur southward. Yemini Arabs penetrated to Mauritania a thousand years ago and eventually became the ruling class among the Beydani which also included Zenaga. The peculiar Hasaniya dialect of Arabic is theirs but these Yeminis are by no means the origin of the Maurs, in fact being the last people and the only Arabs to acquire the name Moor which properly belongs to the northwest Africans.
The Gnawa or western Sudanese are not Moors. The Gnawa attribute the collapse of the Songhai empire to a Moorish invasion from Morocco. The descendents of the Moroccan army in Songhai, which included Spaniards and I think Scotts in their invasion corps as well as genuine Moors, are known as the Arma. Excluding Mauritanians, I don't think any ethnic group located below the Sahara between the Atlantic and Lake Chad other than the Arma call themselves Moors. Its the Euros who indiscriminately threw their word Moor around to the point that even Indians and Filipinos were called Moors.
This is why Moor is such a slippery term because its definition and application to anyone, except the Mauritanians and Arma, is an externally imposed identity and will vary through time and according to the country of the observer using the word Moor.
posted
^^Great info on the history of 'Moors' as well as Northwest Africa in general, Al Takruri.
It should also be pointed out that these Yemeni Arabs, although a small minority had quite an impact upon the surrounding natives especially bearing the religion of Al-Islam. Which is why some but NOT all the natives in that area of Africa including some Imazighen peoples like Tuareg of like to claim Yemeni ancestry even though they don't. As has been discussed before.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
SO IM INTERESTED TO SEE IF THERE I SNEW DEVELOPMENTS IN IT FROM THE LAST THREADS THAT WERE DONE ,IHAVE A VERY BIG PROBLEM TRYING TO TRACE MY ROOTS WHICHIS UNBELEIVABLY HARD ,IM HPF INDIAN AFRICAN ARAB DECENT AND i got a little of italian in me has well but mostly that from my mums side but very distans they have irish italian in them ..so where wud i strt its along hard struggle to find where u actually come from but iknow the moors were mentioned by my father but another one before he died was he mentioned they emigrated to new zealand has well is this true ,,,canu find out for me ..im on a course to try and trace my ancestory thanx ..
Posts: 4597 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
Who are the Bafur? Also, are you saying that the Kingdoms of Songhai, Mali and Dahomey were not part of the Moorish Empire?
Also, this Malaysian Muslim says that the al Murabitun and al Muwahhidun sects of Islam were AGAINST learning and science and are the CAUSE of the downfall of TEACHING in Islam.
quote: SPEECH BY THE HON TUN DR MAHATHIR BIN MOHAMAD AT THE CONFERMENT OF THE HONORARY DOCTORATE IN KNOWLEDGE SCIENCE BY THE MALAYSIAN MULTIMEDIA UNIVERSITY AT MALAYSIA MULTIMEDIA UNIVERSITY, MALACCA ON SUNDAY, 25 JULY 2004 ..... 11. Then there are the great civilizations of China and India from where much new knowledge was discovered and developed. Even the Southeast Asian civilizations of Cambodia and Java were the results of knowledge and a complex Hindu culture.
12. It is clear that knowledge is the determinant of human civilizations. Our civilization today began with the European quest of knowledge from the Muslim Arabs and other Muslim races. During the great days of the Muslim civilization, scholars from Europe, mainly the Christian clergy made serious efforts to learn the heritage of knowledge of the Muslim scholars. Later the Europeans re-conquered Spain and gained access to the libraries of the Muslims. The knowledge in the books stored there was assiduously translated, learnt and developed.
13. With this knowledge the Europeans emerged from the Dark Ages during which time they attributed everything they could not understand to the supernatural, to evil spirits, to black magic etc. Now they were set to link their observations to reality and to depend on reason and their senses rather than to the supernatural. It set into motion the studies which demanded material proof and logic, of whatever was found around them. They called the application of proof acceptable to the senses and to logic philosophy at first. But gradually this discipline came to be known as science, a branch of knowledge which required physical and material evidence as proof of the reality of things.
14. This new demand that all knowledge must be proven by the senses of sight, smell, sound, feel and taste clashed with the beliefs which maintained that everything was created that way by God or some supernatural power. To appear to believe otherwise was heresy. And scientists came under supervision and were persecuted, were put to death frequently by burning at the stakes as witches for heresy.
15. But before this happened to the Christian scientists, it had already happened to the Muslim scientists. Towards the middle period of the Muslim occupation of Spain, the weak Muslim states resulting from the break up of the 250 years of dynasty of Abdul Rahman of Al Andalus, had to seek help from their Muslim Berbers in North Africa to fight off the attacks by the Spanish Christians.
16. These North African Muslims had come under the rule of the Al Morabid (Al Murabitun) and the Al Mohads (Al Muwahidun), Muslim sects which rejected all learning except that about the religion. Upon the establishment of their rule in Spain they discouraged the acquisition of knowledge other than that specifically about religion. After the coming of the Almorabids and Almohad, there were practically no more Muslim scientists, physicians and scholars.
17. It may be thought that these Berber Muslims were motivated by a desire to purify Islamic teachings. But their discouragement of learning was more political than religious. Not being learned in the sciences and other knowledge they were afraid that those learned in these subjects would gain influence and power and so undermine the rule of the religiously knowledgeable.
18. Whereas in Europe the scientists gradually gained respectability and with the help of the monarchy managed the separation of the church from the state, in the Muslim world, the religiously learned succeeded in ending non-religious studies and ensured the permanency of the power of the religiously trained.
19. And so we see a divergence in the development of the European civilization and the Muslim civilization. The European embraced the sciences and became ever more rich and powerful, while the Muslim civilization went into decline. To explain this decline and to persuade the Muslims to endure their oppression by the Europeans, the Muslim scholars declared that the world is not for the Muslims because heaven will be their abode in the afterlife. Since afterlife is more permanent while sojourn in their world is temporary, they must consider themselves more fortunate than their oppressors who lead a better life only in this world. There is therefore little need to seek success and a good life in this world. The fact that Islam, according to the Quran enjoins upon Muslims to seek a good life in this world and in the afterlife, is deliberately ignored. The religious scholars insist that Muslims should only seek a good life in the akhirat by performing certain rituals which will confer merit to the individual in the afterlife.
20. The result is the increasing gap between the Muslim civilization and that of the Europeans. Such was the decline of the Muslim civilization that at one stage almost all Muslim territories were occupied and colonized by the Europeans. And all this is due to the decline in the knowledge among the Muslims and the burgeoning of knowledge, especially scientific knowledge among the Europeans.
21. One again, we see the influence of knowledge in human society. The colonial territories, Muslim and non-Muslim which have regained political independence are still dependent on the knowledge of their former European colonial masters. And because they are not pioneering new knowledge on their own, they are likely to remain under European hegemony.
22. It is not entirely due to their intellectual malaise and indiscipline that they are unable to catch up and outstrip the Europeans. Many of the non-Europeans, Asians in particular have migrated and are actually living in ethnic-European countries and contributing to the body of new knowledge there.
23. The reason they are not contributing to new knowledge in their own countries is because often their own countries are still hostile to new knowledge or are not equipped with the necessary facilities, such as sophisticated scientific laboratories, where they can do their research and develop their ideas on new knowledge.
24. And so when the age of knowledge science dawned upon the earth, most of the knowledge originates from the ethnic European civilization. The industrial age has not faded but it has become enhanced by knowledge science, which makes almost the entire store of knowledge worldwide more easily available to scientists and layman alike.
25. This enhanced availability of knowledge has been made possible by the scientific knowledge of the behavior of the electrical charges which can turn on and off tiny switches in circuits printed on even tinier pieces of silicon. Today a large number of switches can be engraved on a chip no bigger than a full stop on an ordinary printed page. Commands can be sent from sensors to the switches in the chip and it can work out the answers or execute an order such as turning on a full-size electric switch or start a complex process of calculations, recall and recovery of stored information, and even answer questions and solve problems. This means that the application of information for any particular purpose can be speeded up.
26. All these can be achieved merely by pressing buttons and touching screens. The average person can literally become a genius through the mastery of very simple procedures.
27. What this means is that the level of intelligence of everyone can be so heightened that the disparities between them can be reduced.
28. Whereas the Europeans had a head start in the Industrial Age, knowledge science with the accompanying information technology which is available to everyone now, offers the opportunity for everyone in the world to start together. The whole world can now develop almost at the same time. No one needs to be left behind. All that is needed is the effort to avail ourselves of the information technology and knowledge science which are literally at our finger tips.
29. The new knowledge age is for everyone. A new world civilization can be created. Those who are behind in terms of industrial technology can now leap frog and catch up with those ahead of them by acquiring the latest in information technology and knowledge science.
30. There would still be some who just cannot afford the hardware and the software. A richer and more caring world should be able to provide them with the means. If this is done we will see greater uniformity in the new world civilization.
31. However we have to accept reality. And the reality is that there will be furious competition between various parts of the world, particularly between Asia and Europe. Those who have always applied science and technology to fashion weapons which will kill efficiently will now have knowledge science to upgrade or to invent newer weapons which will kill even more efficiently. And their victims too will apply knowledge science, perhaps crudely, in order to get back at their oppressors. The world is not going to be a more peaceful place because of knowledge science. But those who ignore this new science will certainly be dominated and oppressed.
32. It is the duty of those who wish to remain free to acquire the knowledge and the science so as to be able to defend themselves. Ladies and Gentlemen,
33. I would like once again to thank the Multimedia University for conferring on me the Honorary Doctorate in Knowledge Science. I hope I deserve this honor.
Other than than, where can I find more information on these groups? It seems that much Moorish history is, as you said, confused and jumbled up, depending on who you get your information from.
Tuareg and the Arab confusion: The page above on the almoravids states:
quote: Almoravides (In Arabic المرابطون al-Murabitun, sing. مرابط Murabit), was a Berber dynasty from the Sahara that flourished over a wide area of Africa and Europe during the 11th century.
Under this dynasty the Moorish empire was extended over Morocco, Mauritania, Gibraltar, Tlemcen (in modern Algeria) and a great part of what is now Senegal and Mali in the south, and Spain and Portugal in the north. The name is derived from the Arabic Murabit, variously translated as religious ascetic or warrior monk.
In several aspects, the Murabits can be considered the Islamic equivalents of the Christian world's Knights Templar. Beginnings The most powerful of the invading tribes was the Lamtuna ("veiled men") from the upper Niger River, whose best-known representatives now are the Tuareg. They had been converted to Islam in the early times of the Arab conquest, but their knowledge of Islam did not go much beyond the formula of the shahada creed---"there is no god but God, and Muhammad is the apostle of God,"--and they were ignorant of the traditions of Shariah, or Islamic law. [Quote]
If you follow the link on Lamtuna it says: [Quote] The Lamtuna are a Berber nomadic tribe of the Sahrawi people of Western Sahara. They claim descent from Himyar, one of the South Arabian eponyms. Genetic evidence suggests they may be descended from Arab invaders.
Again, following the Himyar link reveals:
quote: The Lamtuna are a Berber nomadic tribe of the Sahrawi people of Western Sahara. They claim descent from Himyar, one of the South Arabian eponyms. Genetic evidence suggests they may be descended from Arab invaders.
quote: Little is known of the origins of the indigenous population of the Maghrib, the Berbers, except that they have always been a composite people. After the 8th century ce, a process of Arabization affected the bulk of the Berbers, while the Arab-Islamic culture and population absorbed local elements as well. Under the unifying framework of Islam, on the one hand, and as a result of the Arab settlement, on the other, a fusion took place that resulted in a new ethnocultural entity all over the Maghrib. In addition, Berber tribes sometimes claimed Arab descent in order to enhance their prestige. For example, the Berber nomadic tribe of the western Sahara, the Lamtuna, claimed descent from one of the South Arabian eponyms, Himyar. One of the chiefs of this Berber tribe, Lamtuna, is sometimes referred to as Saharawi, meaning “one of the nomads” or “one who comes from the Sahara” (Ibn al-Athir 1898, p. 462; Ibn Khallikan 1972, pp. 113, 128–129; Lewicki 1986). In Arabic sources, however, the name Saharawi is seldom used and does not seem to refer to a specific genealogical group. In light of these historical data, it is not surprising to find, among the Berbers and contemporary Saharawis of northern Africa, Y chromosomes that may have been introduced by recurrent waves of invaders from the Arabian Peninsula.
But at the same token the same website at about.com says that the tuaregs are:
quote: Tuareg or Touareg (both: twä'rĕg) , Berbers of the Sahara, numbering c.2 million. They have preserved their ancient alphabet, which is related to that used by ancient Libyans. The Tuaregs traditionally maintained a feudal system consisting of a small number of noble families, a large majority of vassals, and a lower class of black non-Tuareg serfs, who performed the agricultural tasks. The upper classes, organized in tribes, convoyed caravans and, until subdued by France, were feared as raiders. The fiercely independent Tuareg resented European hegemony in Africa, and they long resisted conquest. Tuareg men go veiled, while the women are unveiled. Women enjoy respect and freedom, and descent and inheritance are through the female line. Though nominally Muslim, the people still retain many pre-Islamic rites and customs. The traditional way of life for the Tuaregs (e.g., raiding neighboring tribes, leading caravans, and exacting taxes from trans-Sahara travelers) has changed. Since the 1970s droughts and famines have forced many Tuaregs from their desert homes into urban areas; many have become farmers. In the 1990s political tensions caused further relocation. Groups of Tuaregs have fought for autonomy from Niger and Mali, but cease-fires were signed in both nations in the mid-1990s.
Seems to me that the Tuaregs are being lumped in with the Saharawi ARBITRARILLY, possibly because of being considered as part of the Berber group. This probably causes the confusion. However, it should be understood that the Tuareg maintain an OLD INDIGENOUS tradition, including a script tracing back to ancient Libya and are LOOSELY associated with Islam. Therefore, it would be hard to claim that ARABS are responsible for the ENTIRE population of the Sahara, ancient or modern . There may have been Arab blood in North Africa, but MOST Saharans are derived from INDIGENOUS African people.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yusuf ibn Tashfinn was described by Ali ibn Abd allah in Roudh el-Kartas as “Brown [in] color, middle height, thin, little beard, soft voice, black eyes, straight nose, lock of Muhammad falling on top of his ear, eye brow joined, wooly hair”
I would consider him the most fascinating leader of the latter dynasties.
Posts: 318 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
All the Tuareg Kels trace back to Lemtuna and Tin Hanan. Both these are matriarchs of the various Kels. BTW, the word Toureg are a derogatory term used by Arabs to means ''those without god''. Touregs call themselves Kel Tamelsheq.
I am guessing you got that article about the Lamtuna from Wikipedia. One of the main reason I don't trust Wikipedia all the time and can lead people to inaccurate information such as the following about the kel Tamelsheq people.
Most modern Kel Tamelsheq are not very fervent about Islam,for you can find many pre-islamic pratices amongst them.
The Sanhaja were a mixture of various Imazighen people that might have included some Kels of the Kel tamelsheq.
The person who claimed a Yemen or even Caanite desent for the Imazghen was Ibn Khaldun. These writings of Ibn Khaldun on the Imazghen people have been shown to be inaccurate.
Posts: 8675 | From: Tukuler al~Takruri as Ardo since OCT2014 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
The Bafur were the original inhabitants of what would become Mauritania whom the Imazighen first encountered on arriving there.
Songhai and Mali can both be classed together as Sahelian/Savanna kingdoms/empires. Dahomey was a forest kingdom culturally distinct from the former, i.e., it wasn't in the "camel system."
However neither of the three ever were a component of any "Moorish Empire" nor were their citizens known to themselves as Moors.
For West Africans, only the Moroccans (their Ruma army that campaigned against Songhai and the Arma descendents of that army settled along the Niger), Saharawis, and Mauritanians were Moors.
Nowadays only Hasaniya Mauritanians (beydani and haratini) and the Arma Maliens are Maurs or Moors.
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: Al Takruri:
Who are the Bafur? Also, are you saying that the Kingdoms of Songhai, Mali and Dahomey were not part of the Moorish Empire?
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm currently separated from my library but always will recommend UNESCO's General History of Africa as a still excellent reference after nearly two decades since its publication. Hopefully another forum member will post up to date and specific resources for you. In the meantime here's a little something on al muWahhidun and Andalusian academia.
quote: The Almohad period in al-Andalus was characterized by cultural fluorescence ...
`Abd al-Mu'min's successor, Abu Ya`qub Yusuf, was a highly cultivated man who amassed a large library and patronized the arts and intellectual endeavors. In was in his court that the philosopher, Ibn Tufayl, found patronage. It was Ibn Tufayl who introduced the famed Aristotelian philosopher Ibn Rushd, known to medieval Europe as Averroes, to the Almohad court. And it was under the Almohads that the famous Jewish philosopher Musa ibn Maymun, or Maimonides, began his career. Mysticism also flourished in this period which produced one of the most famous Sufis of all time, Ibn al-`Arabi. Architectural projects were also undertaken. Many Andalusi cities had walls built during the latter half of the twelfth century and which can still be seen today. Three distinctive minarets constructed during this period also survive: the Giralda of Seville, The Tour Hassan in Rabat and the Koutoubiyya in Marrakesh.
I must add that Maymun left Andalusia as a child, had a low opinion of Berberiscos -- whether Muslim or Jew -- as very religious but highly superstitious, and attained his scholarly fame in Egypt.
The above mentioned Koutoubiya in Marrakesh was a great library and bookshop, the first book bazaar in western history.
quote: ... the crucial role of these two powers from Morocco can be seen if one thinks of all the eminent names who lived in the realm of Islam under Almoravid and Almohad rule, such as the herbalist Al-Ghafiqi (d.1165) wrote Kitab al-Adwiyat al-Mufradah (the Book of Simple Drugs) and Ibn al-Baytar (1197-1248), of Malaga, the author of the largest pharmacological encyclopedia that has survived to our time; the traveler Ibn Jubair (Ibn Jubayr); Ibn Rushd (1126-1192); the astronomer Jabr Ibn Aflah (d.1145) and so many more, who would have been lost to Islamic civilization had Spain been lost prior to the Almoravids, and their successors, the Almohads.
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: Also, this Malaysian Muslim says that the al Murabitun and al Muwahhidun sects of Islam were AGAINST learning and science and are the CAUSE of the downfall of TEACHING in Islam.
quote:
16. These North African Muslims had come under the rule of the Al Morabid (Al Murabitun) and the Al Mohads (Al Muwahidun), Muslim sects which rejected all learning except that about the religion. Upon the establishment of their rule in Spain they discouraged the acquisition of knowledge other than that specifically about religion. After the coming of the Almorabids and Almohad, there were practically no more Muslim scientists, physicians and scholars.
Other than than, where can I find more information on these groups? It seems that much Moorish history is, as you said, confused and jumbled up, depending on who you get your information from.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I look at it from the perspective of sedentary vs nomadic culture. When the first Arabs began to establish cities, they developed accoridng to that tradition of scholarship and learning. Their nomadic cousins and those opposed to staying in one place (the soldiers) went on jihad to secure allies in Africa (Berber/Taureg/etc) and Asia proper (Central Asians). The term Moorish history is a European perspective but we know people with dark skins (Moros) came from many cultures and were not a homogenous group per their (Europeans) outlook/perspective.
At any time, Moors were either Arab, Berber, Taureg, Syrian, Turk, Persian because of their influence and power structure dynamics.
Posts: 1290 | From: usa | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Again, thanks for all the info al Takruri. It has been most enlightening.
But again I should point out the effects of Arabization and how some but not all Imazighen make claims to an Arab, specifically Yemeni ancestor based on the small yet significant presence of Yemenis in the area.
Also Takruri, you recently stated that the Bafur were the original inhabitants of Mauritania but you said in your initial post, "Many of the inhabitants of the original old Mauretania were pushed south by the Arabs in turn pushing the Bafur southward." This sounds like the original inhabitants of Mauretania were a different people living north of the Bafur whom they pushed further south. So which is it?...
And who were the Gnawa??..
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by yazid904: I look at it from the perspective of sedentary vs nomadic culture. When the first Arabs began to establish cities, they developed accoridng to that tradition of scholarship and learning. Their nomadic cousins and those opposed to staying in one place (the soldiers) went on jihad to secure allies in Africa (Berber/Taureg/etc) and Asia proper (Central Asians)...
Perhaps one could look at it that way.
quote:...The term Moorish history is a European perspective but we know people with dark skins (Moros) came from many cultures and were not a homogenous group per their (Europeans) outlook/perspective.
At any time, Moors were either Arab, Berber, Taureg, Syrian, Turk, Persian because of their influence and power structure dynamics.
If you read all the info, you would know that originally 'Moor' was applied to those "dark-skinned" (black) indigenous peoples of Northwest Africa. Their fair-skinned counterparts-- Arab, Syrian, Turk, Persian etc. were called Saracen.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Notice one letter distinguishes the one from the other.
Maur e tania - ancient NW Africa at what today is Morocco and western Algeria.
Maur i tania - modern nation state of West Africa and a member of the Maghreb Union.
quote: The legacy of the Roman age Maur[e]tanii and the Moros of al Andalus live on in the names of Morocco and Maur[i]tania. . . . . Many of the inhabitants of the original old Mauretania were pushed south by the Arabs in turn pushing the Bafur southward. . . . . ... some Fulani and Wolof have Mauritanian citizenship that stretches back to pre-Almoravid days, ... . . . . Yemini Arabs penetrated to Mauritania a thousand years ago and eventually became the ruling class
So yes the original Mauretanians (who were the Maurs or Maures of the ancients) did live north of the Bafur who lived in what today is Mauritania. Among others, the Imraguen are thought to be descendents of the Bafur which is a generic term.
Hopefully this all falls into place now, and sorry for any earlier typos adding to the confusion.
Gnawa is basically a term Imazighen use to distinguish themselves from the Africans who originated south of them that didn't originally share in their language and culture.
Technically, to the best of my recall, Gnawa is actually a word from the Bambara. There are a few alternate proposals for the etymology such as it first being applied to old Ghana, etc.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Also Takruri, you recently stated that the Bafur were the original inhabitants of Mauritania but you said in your initial post, "Many of the inhabitants of the original old Mauretania were pushed south by the Arabs in turn pushing the Bafur southward." This sounds like the original inhabitants of Mauretania were a different people living north of the Bafur whom they pushed further south. So which is it?...
And who were the Gnawa??..
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
Do you recall the group who were known as The Veiled Ones? (said to be blue/black)!! The were a group of Moros who formed a very 'religious' brotherhood in Spain and their presence was said to be imposing to the Spanish populace! may be from Senegambia? Mauretania? but I do not know their tribal affiliation
Posts: 1290 | From: usa | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^If they were called "The Veiled Ones" then it is most likely they were of the Kel Tamelsheq (Tuareg) whose men today veil their faces.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Notice one letter distinguishes the one from the other.
Maur e tania - ancient NW Africa at what today is Morocco and western Algeria.
Maur i tania - modern nation state of West Africa and a member of the Maghreb Union.
The legacy of the Roman age Maur[e]tanii and the Moros of al Andalus live on in the names of Morocco and Maur[i]tania. . . . . Many of the inhabitants of the original old Mauretania were pushed south by the Arabs in turn pushing the Bafur southward. . . . . ... some Fulani and Wolof have Mauritanian citizenship that stretches back to pre-Almoravid days, ... . . . . Yemini Arabs penetrated to Mauritania a thousand years ago and eventually became the ruling class
So yes the original Mauretanians (who were the Maurs or Maures of the ancients) did live north of the Bafur who lived in what today is Mauritania. Among others, the Imraguen are thought to be descendents of the Bafur which is a generic term.
Hopefully this all falls into place now, and sorry for any earlier typos adding to the confusion.
Gnawa is basically a term Imazighen use to distinguish themselves from the Africans who originated south of them that didn't originally share in their language and culture.
Technically, to the best of my recall, Gnawa is actually a word from the Bambara. There are a few alternate proposals for the etymology such as it first being applied to old Ghana, etc.
Thanks again, Takruri. But now I ask, who are the Imraguen? And other than being the original inhabitants of Mauritania, what else is known of the Bafur?? I ask because Imraguen sounds Berber. Are the Imraguen Berber speakers? Were the Bafur Berber speakers or did they speak an Afrasian language at all??
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
The "Veiled Ones" you speak of were the Mulathimun (wearers of the litham/veil) aka the Sanhaja al~Murabitun dynasty, not the chronologically later "Tuareg" called Kel Tagelmust of the Kel Tamasheq.
A lot of this really requires some kicking around and about in northern African cultural history in between the end of Roman/Byzantine eras and the early Islamic era.
A folk's tribal geneaology, though couched in lineage terms, doesn't necessarily correspond to modern/Euro/American ideas of biological genetic kinship relation. And I might add, with absolutely no apology, nor does it need to fit in the foreign detribalized western scientific straight jacket which is this forum's modus operendi.
All "TuaregS" don't have a single origin. Many clans in the Sahara came together to form those people we call "Tuareg." Some who moved south from Tunisia/Tripolitania took on a kel identity. Some from what's now the Morocco/Western Sahara southside of the Atlas and south of the Atlas went into the Sahara taking on a kel identity. Even those of the Hawwara who went Saharan rather than Egyptian or Maghribi made a kel identity for themselves.
To remain in sync with the passing of time, the "Tuareg" weren't the only or earliest veil wearers in the Sahara.
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Many of the Zenagaal Mulathimun were themselves very dark.
If one of the great divisions of Imazighen were the Sanhaja, then in turn one segment of Sanhaja were those who lived in the Sahara and wore the veil. The veil/litham/gelmus was a sign of distinction and identity for the al~Murabitun and no one in Almorabid dynasty Spain dare wear the veil if they in fact weren't of al~Murabitun.
All the following Saharan folk were Sanhaja and muLaththamun or veil-wearers:[list] [*]Anbiya [*]Djuddala [*]Kakdam [*]Lamtuna [*]Lamta [*]Masufa [*]Targa [*]Tizki [*]Wurika
The veil was a fashionable necessity of post Roman/Byzantine era Saharan Sanhaja that became a uniform accessory of early Islamic era al~Murabitun far from the desert up in what would become Spain to finally be retained en vogue in our current era by the Kel Tagelmoust.
Ah, but did early metal age Saharans also wear the veil? Rock art and seemingly fanciful Greco-Roman accounts do indicate that very likely they did.
The Veiled Ones who were the Blue Men probably got that moniker from the indigo dye of ther garments. RedCow can fill us in on the indigo industry of West Africa and its transplanting in the USA southlands.
quote:Originally posted by yazid904: al Takruri,
Do you recall the group who were known as The Veiled Ones? (said to be blue/black)!! The were a group of Moros who formed a very 'religious' brotherhood in Spain and their presence was said to be imposing to the Spanish populace! may be from Senegambia? Mauretania? but I do not know their tribal affiliation
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
From information on this site, it seems tie dye originated amongst Africans.
I would also like to know how old the tradition of clothing in this part of Africa is (Southern Morrocco to Senegal).
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Nice on target shot Yazid!
The "Veiled Ones" you speak of were the Mulathimun (wearers of the litham/veil) aka the Sanhaja al~Murabitun dynasty, not the chronologically later "Tuareg" called Kel Tagelmust of the Kel Tamasheq.
A lot of this really requires some kicking around and about in northern African cultural history in between the end of Roman/Byzantine eras and the early Islamic era.
A folk's tribal geneaology, though couched in lineage terms, doesn't necessarily correspond to modern/Euro/American ideas of biological genetic kinship relation. And I might add, with absolutely no apology, nor does it need to fit in the foreign detribalized western scientific straight jacket which is this forum's modus operendi.
All "TuaregS" don't have a single origin. Many clans in the Sahara came together to form those people we call "Tuareg." Some who moved south from Tunisia/Tripolitania took on a kel identity. Some from what's now the Morocco/Western Sahara southside of the Atlas and south of the Atlas went into the Sahara taking on a kel identity. Even those of the Hawwara who went Saharan rather than Egyptian or Maghribi made a kel identity for themselves.
To remain in sync with the passing of time, the "Tuareg" weren't the only or earliest veil wearers in the Sahara.
^Thanks for the info. I keep forgetting that the Tuareg are not a single homogenous group. The fact that they were nomadic as well as the genetic evidence which especially shows varied maternal lineages should be proof enough of that. So I guess the Tuareg of the Sahara can be compared to I guess 'Arabs' of Arabia who consisted of different peoples that all adopted the Arab name then.
So who, if possible, can be identified as the 'origina' Tuareg?
quote:If one of the great divisions of Imazighen were the Sanhaja, then in turn one segment of Sanhaja were those who lived in the Sahara and wore the veil. The veil/litham/gelmus was a sign of distinction and identity for the al~Murabitun and no one in Almorabid dynasty Spain dare wear the veil if they in fact weren't of al~Murabitun.
All the following Saharan folk were Sanhaja and muLaththamun or veil-wearers:
Anbiya
Djuddala
Kakdam
Lamtuna
Lamta
Masufa
Targa
Tizki
Wurika
The veil was a fashionable necessity of post Roman/Byzantine era Saharan Sanhaja that became a uniform accessory of early Islamic era al~Murabitun far from the desert up in what would become Spain to finally be retained en vogue in our current era by the Kel Tagelmoust.
Ah, but did early metal age Saharans also wear the veil? Rock art and seemingly fanciful Greco-Roman accounts do indicate that very likely they did.
The Veiled Ones who were the Blue Men probably got that moniker from the indigo dye of ther garments. RedCow can fill us in on the indigo industry of West Africa and its transplanting in the USA southlands.
So exactly how old is the tradition of Saharan men wearing the veil? Are there really Greco-Roman accounts of them, if so can you provide any? By the way, that rock painting example looks rather vague to me. Are there any more clear examples of possible veils being worn?
Also, can you answer this previous question:
quote:Djehuti asked: ...who are the Imraguen? And other than being the original inhabitants of Mauritania, what else is known of the Bafur?? I ask because Imraguen sounds Berber. Are the Imraguen Berber speakers? Were the Bafur Berber speakers or did they speak an Afrasian language at all??
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I must thank you for additions to this discussion, the ones that have caused me to sit up and revisit some old ideas with fresh insights.
I spent some time today rereading Diop's Precolonial Black Africa and instead of posting my own take, intend to post some quotes him back in 1960 that still hold true and are very instructive. Should I open a new thread for them?
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: [QB] Again, thanks for all the info al Takruri. It has been most enlightening.
But again I should point out the effects of Arabization and how some but not all Imazighen make claims to an Arab, specifically Yemeni ancestor based on the small yet significant presence of Yemenis in the area.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Once again, my current assignment has me separated from my library save a few boxes of books none of which have the volumes on Mauritania and Mali.
Imraguen are thought to be one people who are a remnant of the generic category Bafur. Imraguen are Atlantic coastals today and probably were always Imazighen. The Mauritanian government tendsto assign them a "living fossil" position in that their lands are protected and the people themselves aren't goaded in any direction or the other. Imraguen stand outside the Maur social system. These things, and their affinity with dolphins, is about I can recall and hope I did recall them correctly.
The Soninke founders of Ghana, who may as well have been the dominant ethny of the civilizations of the Dhar Tichitt region, were probably one of the Bafur components.
Arabic records mention Bafur as "blacks who profess Judaism." So the vanquished Mauritanian Jewish Kingdoms may've been partially peopled by one component of Bafur. Once incorporated into al~Murabitun armies they were granted Sabbath rest from their military obligations.
I think I agree more with Dalby who proposes a northern wider area of linguistic affiliation more than with those linquist who adhere to linguistic genetic phylogeny. It looks to me like the Bafur first employed a more Mande-like language that with time acquired Afrasan and Atlantic (another Niger-Congo language family) languages. Then as each component people dispersed west, southwest, and south, the languages became more firmly distinct.
But what can I say of any surety about the peoples inhabiting what would become southern Mauritania and adjacent Mali over a 3100 year time period of between 2000 BCE and 1200 CE when those Bafur left us no historical records of their own in any language?
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Thanks again, Takruri. But now I ask, who are the Imraguen? And other than being the original inhabitants of Mauritania, what else is known of the Bafur?? I ask because Imraguen sounds Berber. Are the Imraguen Berber speakers? Were the Bafur Berber speakers or did they speak an Afrasian language at all??
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't know, the concept of "original Tuareg" seems inapplicable to the reality of what attracts various Kel Tagelmust or Kel Tamasheq together into a geo-social aggregate sharing an overlapping ethnicity that borders on nationality. Still I'd like to hear your view as to who was first. Arabs invented the Tuareg, I think the desert Anabiya were the first Mulathimun Sanhaja that they wrote about.
Greco-Latin accounts mention Saharan humans with eyes in their chests or similar such approximations as heard from their supra-Saharan informants. You can get a book on Tassili N'Ajjer rock art for the given and for finding other examples of veiled desert dwellers for yourself.
Rock art is hard to concretely date. The age of paintings of veiled men depends on their style. There's no definitive agreement on stop start dates of overlap dates for the main styles of Tassili N'Ajjer rock art.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Thanks for the info. I keep forgetting that the Tuareg are not a single homogenous group. The fact that they were nomadic as well as the genetic evidence which especially shows varied maternal lineages should be proof enough of that. So I guess the Tuareg of the Sahara can be compared to I guess 'Arabs' of Arabia who consisted of different peoples that all adopted the Arab name then.
So who, if possible, can be identified as the 'original' Tuareg?
So exactly how old is the tradition of Saharan men wearing the veil? Are there really Greco-Roman accounts of them, if so can you provide any? By the way, that rock painting example looks rather vague to me. Are there any more clear examples of possible veils being worn?
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Once again, my current assignment has me separated from my library save a few boxes of books none of which have the volumes on Mauritania and Mali.
Do you mind me asking what kind of work you do?
quote:Imraguen are thought to be one people who are a remnant of the generic category Bafur. Imraguen are Atlantic coastals today and probably were always Imazighen. The Mauritanian government tends to assign them a "living fossil" position in that their lands are protected and the people themselves aren't goaded in any direction or the other. Imraguen stand outside the Maur social system. These things, and their affinity with dolphins, is about I can recall and hope I did recall them correctly.
So I take it the Imraguen are Berber speakers. I believe I may have heard of them. I do remember hearing about a coastal West African people who have the dolphin as their totem.
quote:The Soninke founders of Ghana, who may as well have been the dominant ethny of the civilizations of the Dhar Tichitt region, were probably one of the Bafur components.
Arabic records mention Bafur as "blacks who profess Judaism." So the vanquished Mauritanian Jewish Kingdoms may've been partially peopled by one component of Bafur. Once incorporated into al~Murabitun armies they were granted Sabbath rest from their military obligations.
I have known of the existence of Judaism in Northwest Africa, but I didn't know how widespread or prevalent it was. I was under the impression that it was confined mainly to the northern coasts. So Judaism made it as far south as Mauritania, and there were actual Jewish Kingdoms in that area as there were in Ethiopia.
So who was Dahia al-Kahina then? All I know is that she was a Jewish North African leader of a Berber resistance group against the Arabs. Was she black? All the depictions of her from Western sources show her as a "caucasian" or white Berber.
quote:I think I agree more with Dalby who proposes a northern wider area of linguistic affiliation more than with those linquist who adhere to linguistic genetic phylogeny. It looks to me like the Bafur first employed a more Mande-like language that with time acquired Afrasan and Atlantic (another Niger-Congo language family) languages. Then as each component people dispersed west, southwest, and south, the languages became more firmly distinct.
So this would explain why certain Berber languages in the area have Niger-Congo affinities and vice-versa-- why certain Niger-Congo languages like Wolof in Senegal have Afrasian affinities!
quote:But what can I say of any surety about the peoples inhabiting what would become southern Mauritania and adjacent Mali over a 3100 year time period of between 2000 BCE and 1200 CE when those Bafur left us no historical records of their own in any language?
True. Which is why as interested as I am in the early history of Northwest Africa, it also difficult to piece together. In Northeast Africa, especially the Nile Valley, there is an abundance of historical records however vague they may be at sometimes. But the mystique of Northwest Africa is what peaks my curiosity and interest in that region.
quote: I don't know. The concept of "original Tuareg" seems inapplicable to the reality of what attracts various Kel Tagelmust or Kel Tamasheq together into a geo-social aggregate sharing an overlapping ethnicity that borders on nationality. Still I'd like to hear your view as to who was first. Arabs invented the Tuareg, I think the desert Anabiya were the first Mulathimun Sanhaja that they wrote about.
Well I don't have a clue as to who to posit as being the first or 'original' Tagelmust. Although I believe Wally offered one hypothesis about how the early Libyans whom the Egyptians called Tjemehu could possibly be the original Tagelmust. According to Wally, the Mdu Neter etymology of Tjeme is 'shining' or 'dazzling' and is usually used to describe things like faience which is usually blue.
quote:Greco-Latin accounts mention Saharan humans with eyes in their chests or similar such approximations as heard from their supra-Saharan informants. You can get a book on Tassili N'Ajjer rock art for the given and for finding other examples of veiled desert dwellers for yourself.
Yeah well Greco-Latin accounts also described one-eyed, dog-faced, and one-legged peoples in Sudan. There is sure to be a grain of truth in some Greco-Latin accounts but it remains to be seen in these particular ones.
quote:Rock art is hard to concretely date. The age of paintings of veiled men depends on their style. There's no definitive agreement on stop start dates of overlap dates for the main styles of Tassili N'Ajjer rock art.
I agree that dating of rock art can be difficult at times, and some artwork has things that are recently added by locals today. But I will try to find books on the topic.
Thanks again, Al Takruri. Your insights are as always appreciated.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Mamnoonah. Thank you. With DNA we see outliers of those who belong to the group (share DNA), those who intermarry into the paternal or maternal side (with their corresponding DNA complex) and those who by language and proximity (location) may share the side by side allied relationship but be separate from the main group.
Posts: 1290 | From: usa | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
we are confused by the different names given to different people around the world. Let's remember that the country borders we have now did not exist before, so someone called somali or maroccan does not exist. What exists is the ethnical group one belongs to. And people are creating more division and clans which is getting more complicated. because we have people who look the same and act very similar but are said to be from different countries. It is like if we would divide somalia in 5 different countries and 100 years later trying to find why they are so similar. same thing happened around the world. we have people who have moved from one part of africa to another while they look the same as the people from the other side. there is no such thing as someone looking west african or east african. because we have people in west africa who look exactly like ethiopian or are light skinned or look mixed race while we have people in east africa who look like a Yoruba nigerian for example. The fulani people are the most myseterious people in the world and thousands of books have been written about them and how they even reached Europe before many Africans did. Europeans have found so many theories about their origins from india, Phoenicians (because of their typical indigo blue clothing), judeo-syrians, jews, moors,..... since the fulanis/tuaregs come into so many different names and they are the known nomadic group of africa they must have been the moors even the way they dress etc... they often ride on their horses and have turbans like the moors. A clan of the Fulani known as the yarlabe the Bah clan (read 'Peuls' by Monenembo) were just like Moors and even feared by the Fulanis/tuaregs themeslves. they rode on horses like The Moors and had a reputation of being violent and warriors. They wore turbans, rode on horses, had light red or brown eyes, they burnt villages and many of them were killed and people tried to extinguish/exterminate them. That is why we don't hear about them today. the remaining yarlabe clan is today part of fulani.
quote:Originally posted by tuaregwodabe: The fulani people are the most myseterious people in the world and thousands of books have been written about them and how they even reached Europe before many Africans did...
This guy is obviously a Fulani circle jerker propagandanist. His only intention is to glorify the Fulani people and paint them as white as possible LOL Posts: 3423 | From: the jungle - when y'all stop playing games, call me. | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Fulani is not white. I am guessing you are some kind of black ethnic group like mandingo or yoruba looking. Fulanis do experience jealousy from a lot of Africans. Since you are not Fulani YOU DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THEM OBVIOUSLY. You should at least read some books about them before saying anything. They were the majority in Egypt. Fulani is a common name for fellata, beja, fulah, tukuleur.... and so on.
quote:Originally posted by tuaregwodabe: Fulani is not white. I am guessing you are some kind of black ethnic group like mandingo or yoruba looking. Fulanis do experience jealousy from a lot of Africans. Since you are not Fulani YOU DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THEM OBVIOUSLY. You should at least read some books about them before saying anything. They were the majority in Egypt. Fulani is a common name for fellata, beja, fulah, tukuleur.... and so on.
I can't stop laughing at you. My best friend is Hausa/Fulani (mix). I'm not jealous; I'm just annoyed at your stupid postings.
Posts: 3423 | From: the jungle - when y'all stop playing games, call me. | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
The Moors, at least the ones that lived in Spain, had the following ethnic composition:
(1) Most of them were Native Spaniards. (2) The upper classes were Arabs, usually from the Middle East from places like Bagdad, Syria or Egypt. (3) The foreign people was mainly Berber. And Berbers are caucasoids.
Black subsaharian people were quite a few in Spain, and they represented less of the 1% of the Moors' foreign population, and were mainly slave and servants. Although they produce a big impact in peoples that have never saw Blacks before, so there are reports of theirs precency in literature.
Actually, the first wave of invaders of Spain was pure Berber. Only in the 12th century there is a report of a Subsaharian army of Almoravides that briefly took the control of certain Muslim kingdoms in Spain and it was opposed by both Muslims and Christian Spaniards. That was the beginning of the reconquist of Spain, because Europeans understood at that time they were at risk, and they knew they will be invaded either by Black Africans or by Turks, so it was the time to get rid of the Moors and they did.
1. How do you define a 'caucasoid'' What exactly makes a caucasoid a caucasoid and how does it apply to the Berbers?
2. Where do you get your figures that sub-Saharans were %1 od the total population of Moorish territories? Did they have census of who was sub-Saharan as opposed to who were not?
3. Almoravids and Almohads both were pure Berbers that came from the Sahara and Anti-Atlas.
Posts: 8675 | From: Tukuler al~Takruri as Ardo since OCT2014 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
dear auser salaams to you dear brother , when me threaded this i was wanting to know where im orinated from ,ive of indian arab decent indians who migrated to africa ,im have indian has well has slight italian in me but of arab blood has well but ive had my cousins mention moors but i have recently found that the moors did excist once in india but im researching to no avail ,my arab decent has black in its veins , im just curious to where my state or others are in same predicamnet to know of there ancestory , beingim of indian im of memon sect . w/s sandra saira (saiba) i wud be grateful brother for some imput ...
and my features have mixed complex of indian arab black with them my mum calls me a throw back ,even though she is of english and irish decent she has none of my charecteristics ,..
Posts: 4597 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
> A couple problems with your assertions: > > 1. How do you define a 'caucasoid'' What > exactly makes a caucasoid a caucasoid and how > does it apply to the Berbers?
North Africans, in particular Berbers, were considered the same "kind of people" by the Spaniards. A person that looks like the soccer player ZIDANE, for example, does not call the attention in Spain. A Subsaharian African does call the attention very much.
> 2. Where do you get your figures that sub- > Saharans were %1 od the total population of > Moorish territories? Did they have census of > who was sub-Saharan as opposed to who were > not?
Although there were not racial census at those times, the references in literature to subsaharians are always described as something extraordinary; not the standard thing, sort of speak. Arabs, Syrians and Berbers were so numerous they did not called the attention of writers.
>3. Almoravids and Almohads both were pure >Berbers that came from the Sahara and Anti->Atlas.
Yes, but they were the first that brought a subsaharian army, drums included, to Spain. And that was the last drop that initiated the reconquest of Spain by the Christians.
quote:Originally posted by kawashkar: > A couple problems with your assertions: > > 1. How do you define a 'caucasoid'' What > exactly makes a caucasoid a caucasoid and how > does it apply to the Berbers?
North Africans, in particular Berbers, were considered the same "kind of people" by the Spaniards. A person that looks like the soccer player ZIDANE, for example, does not call the attention in Spain. A Subsaharian African does call the attention very much.
> 2. Where do you get your figures that sub- > Saharans were %1 od the total population of > Moorish territories? Did they have census of > who was sub-Saharan as opposed to who were > not?
Although there were not racial census at those times, the references in literature to subsaharians are always described as something extraordinary; not the standard thing, sort of speak. Arabs, Syrians and Berbers were so numerous they did not called the attention of writers.
>3. Almoravids and Almohads both were pure >Berbers that came from the Sahara and Anti->Atlas.
Yes, but they were the first that brought a subsaharian army, drums included, to Spain. And that was the last drop that initiated the reconquest of Spain by the Christians.
KAWASHKAR
Your facts are wrong. First off, the confusion comes about with the definition of Berber. Modern Berber is often times listed as a MIXTURE of various FOREIGN entities with the indigenous African peoples. ALL Berbers do NOT have the same mixtures and do NOT all look the same. The coastal Berbers are sometimes identified based on the ties that they have to the foreigners that they have come to mix with. For example, you chan have Franco-Berber, Arab-Berber and so on. But at the same time, some like to OMIT these ethnic variations of Berber and just call them all just plain Berber. Secondly, there were, up until the last few hundred years, MANY black Africans who lived in North Africa and came to be lumped under the term "berber" when the Arabs FIRST invaded. Therefore, Berber is a BROAD category that has NO meaning as far as ACTUAL ethnicity. HOWEVER, MOOR from its USE in Europe has ALWAYS meant black person. It is only RECENTLY that Europeans and others have started trying to make a more GENERAL definition of Moor to include ANY Medeival muslim in Spain. Othello the Moor is NOT about a Muslim, it is about a BLACK man, period. And this was WRITTEN in the ERA close to when the MOORS ruled Spain. Showing how Europeans identified MOOR with black. And this is not the ONLY example of it. There are MANY historical figures in Europe who are labelled as MOORS even though they have NOTHING to do with Islam. Moor is originally based on the term for North Africans given by Romans, Maures or Mauros, both of which mean black and became the name for the country Mauritania, which did indeed have one of the DARKEST populations of Africans in Africa. Note that NOW Mauritania is identified as ARAB, not even BERBER, even though MOST of the country is BLACK African.
Many in North Africa try to "claim" Berber identity in order to LEGITIMIZE their place in North Africa. This is because the MUSLIM invasions of North Africa have caused WIDESPREAD disruptions of people and populations. Islamic armies DESTROYED those they crossed, INCLUDING the ORIGINAL Berbers, and subsequently began converting and enslaving many others. Add to the mix the many European slaves bought to North Africa as well as the Jewish expatriates from Spain and Portugal and you have a MIX of ethnicity that probably has LITTLE to do with the ORIGINAL Black African population of North Africa. There WAS no Morrocco until it was founded by Africans and then TAKEN over by Arabs.
Many of the Northern African countries today claim to be Arab, some DIRECTLY descended from Mohammed and have NOTHING to do with Africa or Africans, Berber or otherwise. THEREFORE, do not be so quick to lump all Berbers together or to automatically assume that Berbers are NOT dark Africans or assume that THOSE spreading islam into the rest of Africa from the North are Berbers. Most of these people are being spurred on by Arabs. Africans may have adopted Islam as a means of survival, but that does NOT change the fact that Islam in North AFrica is a form of ARAB colonialism.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
> Your facts are wrong. First off, the confusion >comes about with the definition of Berber.
I BELIEVE THAT YOURS FACTS ARE THE ONE WRONG.
>Modern Berber is often times listed as a >MIXTURE of various FOREIGN entities with the >indigenous African peoples.
WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY "INDIGENOUS"? THERE STARTS THE PROBLEMS. BERBERS ARE VERY ANCIENT AND THEY HAVE ADMIXTURE WITH PHOENICIANS AND ROMANS SINCE THOUSANDS OF YEARS AGO.
>ALL Berbers do NOT have the same mixtures and >do NOT all look the same. The coastal Berbers >are sometimes identified based on the ties that >they have to the foreigners that they have come >to mix with. For example, you chan have Franco->Berber, Arab-Berber and so on. But at the same >time, some like to OMIT these ethnic variations >of Berber and just call them all just plain >Berber. Secondly, there were, up until the last >few hundred years, MANY black Africans who >lived in North Africa and came to be lumped >under the term "berber" when the Arabs FIRST >invaded.
SOME BLACKS HAVE COME TO NORTH AFRICA ALL THE TIME, AND ALSO SOME WHITES HAVE GONE THERE. BUT YOU DREAM IF YOU BELIEVE THE ORIGINAL BERBERS WERE NUBIANS OR BANTU WEST AFRICANS. THE "CAUCASIAN" PEOPLE OF NORTH AFRICA IS VERY ANCIENT AND NO REVISIONISM WILL CHANGE THAT.
>HOWEVER, MOOR from its USE in Europe has ALWAYS >meant black person.
THAT'S ABSOLUTE IGNORANCY. MOOR HAS ALWAYS MEAN IN SPAIN M-U-S-L-I-M, AND ONLY MUSLIM. THAT'S WHAT ALL PEOPLE KNOWS IN THERE. MAHOMMED WAS A MOOR, AND ANY FOLLOWER OF ALLAH IS A MOOR. NOTHING MORE THAN THAT.
>It is only RECENTLY that Europeans and others >have started trying to make a more GENERAL >definition of Moor to include ANY Medeival >muslim in Spain.
IS ONLY RECENTLY THAT AFROCENTRISM HAS CONVERTED THE MOORS IN BLACK SUBSAHARIAN AFRICANS.
>Othello the Moor is NOT about a Muslim, it is >about a BLACK man, period.
SHAKESPEAKE WAS AN IGNORANT. HE WAS BRIT AFTER ALL. PERIOD AND MORE PERIOD.
>And this was WRITTEN in the ERA close to when >the MOORS ruled Spain. Showing how Europeans >identified MOOR with black.
NO BLACK AFRICAN EVER RULED SPAIN. READ THE RECORDS. THE LAST "MOOR" OF SPAIN WAS BLOND BLUE EYED. LOL
>And this is not the ONLY example of it. There >are MANY historical figures in Europe who are >labelled as MOORS even though they have NOTHING >to do with Islam.
THAT'S TRUE FOR NORTHERN EUROPE BUT NOT FOR SPAIN.
>Moor is originally based on the term for North >Africans given by Romans, Maures or Mauros, >both of which mean black and became the name >for the country Mauritania, which did indeed >have one of the DARKEST populations of Africans >in Africa.
ANOTHER BIG AFROCENTRIC DRIVEN MISTAKE. MAURITANIA OF TODAY IS NOT THE MAURITANIA OF HISTORICAL TIMES. ANCIENT MAURITANIA WAS THE MAGREB.
TODAY'S MAURITANIA WAS INVADED BY THE MOORS AND CONTROLLED BY THEM, LIKE MOST OF THE NORTHERN PART OF SUBSAHARIAN AFRICA THAT WAS CONTROLLED BY THE NORTH AFRICANS.
>Note that NOW Mauritania is identified as ARAB, >not even BERBER, even though MOST of the >country is BLACK African.
THEY ARE MUSLIM. BUT THOSE PEOPLE ARE NOT THE HISTORICAL MOORS.
>Many in North Africa try to "claim" Berber >identity in order to LEGITIMIZE their place in >North Africa. This is because the MUSLIM >invasions of North Africa have caused >WIDESPREAD disruptions of people and >populations. Islamic armies DESTROYED those >they crossed, INCLUDING the ORIGINAL Berbers, >and subsequently began converting and enslaving >many others. Add to the mix the many European >slaves bought to North Africa as well as the >Jewish expatriates from Spain and Portugal and >you have a MIX of ethnicity that probably has >LITTLE to do with the ORIGINAL Black African >population of North Africa.
WRONG ONCE AGAIN. THAT'S WHAT AFROCENTRISM PRETENDS. NORTHERN AFRICA WAS ALWAYS A PLACE THAT RECEIVED MEDITERRANEAN IMMIGRANTS: SEMITES, PHOENICIANS, JEWS, ARABS, GREEKS, ROMANS, IBERIANS. AND ALSO IT WAS A REGION THAT SEND PEOPLES TO NORTHERN EUROPE.
ONLY RECENTLY BLACK AFRICANS ARE GOING IN MASS UP NORTH.
>There WAS no Morrocco until it was founded by >Africans and then TAKEN over by Arabs.
WHICH "AFRICANS"? NORTH AFRICAN OR SUBSAHARIANS?
>Many of the Northern African countries today >claim to be Arab, some DIRECTLY descended from >Mohammed and have NOTHING to do with Africa or >Africans, Berber or otherwise. THEREFORE, do >not be so quick to lump all Berbers together or >to automatically assume that Berbers are NOT >dark Africans or assume that THOSE spreading >islam into the rest of Africa from the North >are Berbers.
YES, BUT YOU QUICKLY LUMP TOGETHER NORTH AFRICANS WITH BLACK SUBSAHARIANS. EH? HAVE YOU ASK THEM IF THEY WANT TO BE IN THE CLUB?
>Most of these people are being spurred on by >Arabs. Africans may have adopted Islam as a >means of survival, but that does NOT change the >fact that Islam in North AFrica is a form of >ARAB colonialism.
YES, BUT PEOPLE HAS THE RIGHT TO CHOOSE WHAT THEY ARE. THE MOORS ARE THE PEOPLE OF THE MAGREB SINCE HISTORICAL TIMES. THEY ARE NOT THE PEOPLE OF MAURITANIA (DON'T BE SILLY).
THE MOORS ARE NOT PART OF THE HISTORY OF BLACK PEOPLE BUT THEY HAVE ITS OWN HISTORY.
posted
So where do the terms "blackamoor" and "tawnymoor" come from, if not from Europeans describing Africans resident in Europe--especially Spain, Portugal, Italy and Britain from the 8th century onwards.
And in the Spanish language the term "moreno"("like a Moor") invariably refers to someone darker than the olive coloured Iberians(Spanish and Portguese).
And how do we explain the fact that Cubans( Cuba was once a Spanish settlement colony) refer to their popular "[white]rice and [black] beans as "moros y(and) cristos". The meaning is obvious: the Moors of Spain were black and the indigenous Spaniards were "white Chritians".
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:oes it apply to the Berbers? > A couple problems with your assertions: > A couple problems with your assertions: > Ausar responded > 1. How do you define a 'caucasoid'' What > exactly makes a caucasoid a caucasoid and how > does it apply to the Berbers?
Kawashkar said: North Africans, in particular Berbers, were considered the same "kind of people" by the Spaniards. A person that looks like the soccer player ZIDANE, for example, does not call the North Africans, in particular Berbers, were considered the same "kind of people" by the Spaniards. A person that looks like the soccer player ZIDANE, for example, does not call the attention in Spain. A Subsaharian African does call the attention very much.
Ausar responds: The physical apperance of one French Algerian soccer player is a non-sequitir. I asked you to define ''caucasoid'' and from what criteria of ''caucasoid'' do Berber speakers fit such a label? What evidence do you have that ties Spainards in with Berber speaking people?
quote:Although there were not racial census at those times, the references in literature to Although there were not racial census at those times, the references in literature to subsaharians are always described as something extraordinary; not the standard thing, sort of speak. Arabs, Syrians and Berbers were so numerous they did not called the attention of Although there were not racial census at those times, the references in literature to subsaharians are always described as something extraordinary; not the standard thing, sort of speak. Arabs, Syrians and Berbers were so numerous they did not called the attention of writers.
Ausar responds:
Could you please cite examples. Which literature are you referencing? Arabic literature or Spainard literature? What specifically do such writers use to differentiate Berbers,Arabs, or sub-Saharans?
KAWASHKAR said:
quote:Yes, but they were the first that brought a subsaharian army, drums included, to Spain. And Yes, but they were the first that brought a subsaharian army, drums included, to Spain. And that was the last drop that initiated the reconquest of Spain by the Christians
Ausar responds:
This is not true. Ever since the conquest of Spain some Western Africans groups were part of both the Arabic and Berber forces.
Posts: 8675 | From: Tukuler al~Takruri as Ardo since OCT2014 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY "INDIGENOUS"? THERE STARTS THE PROBLEMS. BERBERS ARE VERYANCIENT AND THEY HAVE ADMIXTURE WITH PHOENICIANS AND ROMANS SINCE THOUSANDS OF YEARS AGO
Ausar responds: The question is wheather the modern Berber speaking population matches the original inhabitants of North-western Africa.
kawashkar said:
quote:SOME BLACKS HAVE COME TO NORTH AFRICA ALL THE TIME, AND ALSO SOME WHITES HAVE GONE THERE BUT YOU DREAM IF YOU BELIEVE THE ORIGINAL BERBERS WERE NUBIANS OR BANTU WEST AFRICANS. THE "CAUCASIAN" PEOPLE OF NORTH AFRICA IS VERY ANCIENT AND NO REVISIONISM WILL CHANGE THAT
Ausar responds: This is incorrect. North-western Africa has always had indigenous ''black'' populations that had affinities with Africans further south. During the Neolithic the Sahara desert did not exist and within the Sahara were people biologically related to most Western African people. Even today you have the Haratin poeple that are indigenous to Southern Morocco.
Know you have yet to define your terms:
1. How do you define ''caucasoid'' and from what criteria is used to determine if the Berber speaking poeple are such? 2. Who were the original Berber speaking people? On what basis can we say the modern Berber speaking people are pristine examples of the original populations of North-western Africa?
kawashkar said:
quote:FOLLOWER OF ALLAH IS A MOOR. NOTHING MORE THAN THAT. THAT'S ABSOLUTE IGNORANCY. MOOR HAS ALWAYS MEAN IN SPAIN M-U-S-L-I-M, AND ONLY MUSLIM. THAT'S WHAT ALL PEOPLE KNOWS IN THERE. MAHOMMED WAS A MOOR, AND ANY AT'S ABSOLUTE IGNORANCY. MOOR HAS ALWAYS MEAN IN SPAIN M-U-S-L-I-M, AND ONLY
Ausar responds: The problem with this is the fact the term Moor was not first used in Spain but actually by both the Greeks and Romans. The term Mauros meant people with ''dark skin''.
kawashkar said:
quote:SUBSAHARIAN AFRICANS.IS ONLY RECENTLY THAT AFROCENTRISM HAS CONVERTED THE MOORS IN BLACK ONLY RECENTLY THAT AFROCENTRISM HAS CONVERTED THE MOORS IN BLACK
Ausar responds: See again the etymology of the term Moor as stated in previous quote
kawashkar said:
quote:LOLNO BLACK AFRICAN EVER RULED SPAIN. READ THE RECORDS. THE LAST "MOOR" OF SPAIN AFRICAN EVER RULED SPAIN. READ THE RECORDS. THE LAST "MOOR" OF SPAINWAS BLOND BLUE EYED. LOL
Ausar responds: Could you please cite a reference for this claim?
kawashkar said:
quote:THAT'S TRUE FOR NORTHERN EUROPE BUT NOT FOR SPAIN
In Italy many black figures such as St. Benedict the Moor as called as such.
kawashkar said:
quote:NOTHER BIG AFROCENTRIC DRIVEN MISTAKE. MAURITANIA OF TODAY IS NOT THE ANOTHER BIG AFROCENTRIC DRIVEN MISTAKE. MAURITANIA OF TODAY IS NOT THE MAURITANIA OF HISTORICAL TIMES. ANCIENT MAURITANIA WAS THE MAGREB.
TODAY'S MAURITANIA WAS INVADED BY THE MOORS AND CONTROLLED BY THEM, LIKE MOST OF THE NORTHERN PART OF SUBSAHARIAN AFRICA THAT WAS CONTROLLED BY THE NORTH TODAY'S MAURITANIA WAS INVADED BY THE MOORS AND CONTROLLED BY THEM, LIKE MOST OF THE NORTHERN PART OF SUBSAHARIAN AFRICA THAT WAS CONTROLLED BY THE NORTH AFRICANS
Ausar responds: Yes, the ancient Mauretania was around parts of today's Northern Africa but the term Mauros used by the Greeks still means dark skinned. The Greeks thought the people in Mauretania were darker than them.
Modern Mauritania was invaded both by Northern Africans and by Yemeni Arabs.
kawashkar said:
quote:THEY ARE MUSLIM. BUT THOSE PEOPLE ARE NOT THE HISTORICAL MOORS
Who were the historical Moors? Did they have an exact name to go by? You contridicted yourself saying that Moor only applies to Muslim.
kawashkar said:
quote:WRONG ONCE AGAIN. THAT'S WHAT AFROCENTRISM PRETENDS. NORTHERN AFRICA WAS ALWAYS A PLACE THAT RECEIVED MEDITERRANEAN IMMIGRANTS: SEMITES, PHOENICIANS JEWS, ARABS, GREEKS, ROMANS, IBERIANS. AND ALSO IT WAS A REGION THAT SEND PEOPLES TO NORTHERN EUROPE.
True, but was the population density greater than the original inhabitants of Northern Africa? Would such groups leave a large enough impact before 700 A.D. We also know that during the Medieval period into the early 1900's millions of white slaves went into Northern Africa. Add to this Converted Christian Spainards that went back into Northern Africa and settled down.
The rest of your post is just rhetoric not validated with any documentation.
Posts: 8675 | From: Tukuler al~Takruri as Ardo since OCT2014 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:SOME BLACKS HAVE COME TO NORTH AFRICA ALL THE TIME
Of course we've corrected the above brand of nonsense many times before on ES, and will many times again no doubt.
But for the record:
The original population of all of AFrica was certainly melanoderm, ie - Black.
The white people of Europe are the product of depigmentation that occured largely in Europe during the ICE ages between the Upper Paleolithic and the Mesolithic.
White skin is maladaptive in Africa.
There is no proof that any population ever developed depigmented skin within Africa.
As for the Berber - Berber is and African language group - it is not a homogeneous ethnic group, a race, or a skin color.
The Berber languages likely originated in East Africa.
Berber are diverse physically because their ancestry varies greatly.
The darker complected Berber tend to be predominently to overwhelmingly of African ancestry.
However the depigmented Berber tend to be predominently Eurasian and even Western European on the maternal side.
Of course, there are no Berber in Europe, and Berber languages are utterly unrelated to the predominently Latin languages of Southern Europe.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
However the depigmented Berber tend to be predominently Eurasian and even Western European on the maternal side.
True, that the level of "depigmentation" found in coastal west Afrasan ("Berber") speakers can be attributed to gene flow from the Iberian peninsula and southwest Asia (Levant); but even these "depigmented" coastal west Afrasan speakers are predominantly African from a patrilineage standpoint:
Per Bosch et co., we have the following...
H50 found in one Moroccan "Arab", and H104 found in one southern Moroccan "west-Afrasan/"Berber"" speaker, three Moroccan "Arab" speakers, and one north-central Moroccan "west-Afrasan" speaker.
Bosch et al. go onto conclude that:
So far, our analyses have allowed a clear dissection of almost all NW African and Iberian paternal lineages into several components with distinct historical origins. In this way, the historical origins of the NW African Y-chromosome pool may be summarized as follows: **75% NW African Upper Paleolithic (H35, H36, and H38), 13% Neolithic (H58 and H71), 4% historic European gene flow (group IX, H50, H52), and 8% recent sub-Saharan African (H22 and H28). In contrast, the origins of the Iberian Y-chromosome pool may be summarized as follows: 5% recent NW African, 78% Upper Paleolithic and later local derivatives (group IX), and 10% Neolithic (H58, H71). No haplotype assumed to have originated in sub-Saharan Africa was found in our Iberian sample. It should be noted that H58 and H71 are not the only haplotypes present in the Middle East and that the Neolithic wave of advance could have brought other lineages to Iberia and NW Africa. However, the homogeneity of STR haplotypes within the most ancient biallelic haplotypes in each region indicates a single origin during the past, with possible minor reintroductions, with the Neolithic expansion, from the Middle East. Thus, Neolithic contributions may be slightly underestimated.
^^Whereby Hg E is denoted by the following:
H35=E3b-M78, H38=E3b-M81, and H36=E3b-M35; H22=E3a-M2, and H28=E1-M33
Hg J denoted by the following:
H58=J2*-M172
Hg F denoted by the following:
H71=F*-M89
Hg I denoted by the following:
H50=I1b2-M26, and H52=I*-M170.
Hg R denoted by the following:
H104=R*-M173
Thus note that the "4%" "historic", NOT pre-historic, European contribution quite likely from the Iberian peninsula, is a combination of I lineage (.6%), which was found in only one Moroccan "Arab" speaking individual AND R lineages (2.8%) found in five Moroccan individauls; three of them "Arab" speakers, and two of them "west-Afrasan" speakers. On the other hand, the sampled "Berber"/West Afrasan speakers were predominantly of the E3b patrilineal background, with tropical African origins.
Hence, generally speaking, it is safe to say that...
"Northern modern Berber-speakers are frequently notably "European," in phenotype but even they have tropical African "marker" gene frequencies than those found in southern Europeans. "Blacks" have long lived in northern Africa (see review in Keita 1990)." - Keita.
Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by lamin: So where do the terms "blackamoor" and "tawnymoor" come from, if not from Europeans describing Africans resident in Europe--especially Spain, Portugal, Italy and Britain from the 8th century onwards.
The term "Blackamoor" does not exist in Spanish or Portuguese. Moors or Moro means "hated Muslim" of any kind.
quote: And in the Spanish language the term "moreno"("like a Moor") invariably refers to someone darker than the olive coloured Iberians(Spanish and Portguese).
Moreno means Brunette. Most Moors weren't Blond. Moreno sometimes is applied to Black people in an euphemistic way, so not to offend the subject. But the word does not mean black skinned but black haired.
quote: And how do we explain the fact that Cubans( Cuba was once a Spanish settlement colony) refer to their popular "[white]rice and [black] beans as "moros y(and) cristos". The meaning is obvious: the Moors of Spain were black and the indigenous Spaniards were "white Chritians".
"Whites" in Spanish mean European. Many Spanish have the same complexion than North African Berbers.
The Moor stereotype of Black was part of a hate campain of Christians against Muslims.
quote: 1. How do you define a 'caucasoid'' What > exactly makes a caucasoid a caucasoid and how > does it apply to the Berbers?
Impossible. If you things in a broader sense all humans belong to the same race. Now, Berbers look like Southern Europeans with some "admixture". What exist between Germany and Ghana is a "cline". A gradient of phenotypes that goes between German blonds to dark skinned Subsaharian Africans.
The point is. Where do you make the cut? In Gibraltar or in the Sahara desert? As the matter of fact the change in complexion is more abrupt crossing the Sahara than crossing the Gibraltar strait.
quote: The physical apperance of one French Algerian soccer player is a non-sequitir. I asked you to define ''caucasoid'' and from what criteria of ''caucasoid'' do Berber speakers fit such a label? What evidence do you have that ties Spainards in with Berber speaking people?
The point is quite clear. Spaniards, Portugueses, Italians and Southern French have a high degree of admixture with North Africans. So, it does not matter how you define "Caucasian". The fact is they belong to a population that is closely related between themselves rather than with both Northern Europeans or Subsaharian Africans.
See the distances in the map and you will figure it out. North Africa is right besides Spain, Italy and France, and a lot closser than Ghana or Russia.
quote: Could you please cite examples. Which literature are you referencing? Arabic literature or Spainard literature? What specifically do such writers use to differentiate Berbers,Arabs, or sub-Saharans?
Spanish classical literature. In there the descriptions of Moors are quite amazing. Most of them are brown but many rulers are blond. Actually Moors have a fascination with slav women so they were usually the favorites. King Alphonse X the wise, for instance, once describe with a lot of surprise a Black general of the Moors armies. That was not something common to see. In classicals like Mio Cid you can see how Moors and Christians were the same people, plus some upper classes comming mainly from the Middle east and a low class Moor minority comming from North Afric.
quote:
quote:Yes, but they were the first that brought a subsaharian army, drums included, to Spain. And Yes, but they were the first that brought a subsaharian army, drums included, to Spain. And that was the last drop that initiated the reconquest of Spain by the Christians
Ausar responds:
This is not true. Ever since the conquest of Spain some Western Africans groups were part of both the Arabic and Berber forces.
That's is really true. It is written in the Mio Cid. The XII Century classic. The first invaders of the 7th Century were Berbers and Arabs, but in the 12th Century the new fanatic muslims, who at those times had invaded Subsaharian Africa, brough for the first time an army formed by Subsaharians whose drums spread terror in the civil population. That was one of the causes the Christian knight got serious with the reconquest. And you can see that was the beginning of the end of Al-Andalus.
posted
1. The term "Moor" generally refered to one who professed Islam, and usually a conqueror Those who ruled) 1from 711-1492.
2. There were varying identities associated with the word Moor. Some were good and some were bad. Rodrigo Diaz de Vivar was like a brother to the Moors (he was in their employ!) and he was called El Cid because of his noble and brave countenance. At some point, he broke ranks and was a Christian saviour. There were groups of mozarabes, Christians who due to where they lived or their allegiances, dressed in the ways of Arabs (generic description) and adired the desired peoples, wherever they were from.
3. The concept of a low class Moor is a modern one because Moors, when they were in control in the earlier era/period, were the conquerors and they had their choice in land, women and rituals.
4. To say Moors who were African were 1% is a dubious claim. Berbers are African. The distinction is whether we are refering to African as ethnicty or specifically African who are black (relating to color, as in sub-Saharan). The European verison of Islam is very different from the actual experience. Moors were either Syrian, Berber, native born Spaniard of biracial heritage, Sub-Saharan i.e.Lamtuna and others. Ther is even mention of a few Moors who were specifically mentioned as being sub-Saharan by description. I will have to track down the narrative describing this person.
Way of dress would affect how one would be called. Many mozarabes were probebly seen as Moors based on how they dressed just like in todays society with the terror threat, many Latinos/Hispanics may be mistaken for Arabs because of the apparent simialrity of skin colour when compared to an Anglo-Saxon one. All things are relative
Posts: 1290 | From: usa | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: 1. How do you define a 'caucasoid'' What > exactly makes a caucasoid a caucasoid and how > does it apply to the Berbers?
Impossible. If you things in a broader sense all humans belong to the same race. Now, Berbers look like Southern Europeans with some "admixture". What exist between Germany and Ghana is a "cline". A gradient of phenotypes that goes between German blonds to dark skinned Subsaharian Africans.
The point is. Where do you make the cut? In Gibraltar or in the Sahara desert? As the matter of fact the change in complexion is more abrupt crossing the Sahara than crossing the Gibraltar strait.
quote: The physical apperance of one French Algerian soccer player is a non-sequitir. I asked you to define ''caucasoid'' and from what criteria of ''caucasoid'' do Berber speakers fit such a label? What evidence do you have that ties Spainards in with Berber speaking people?
The point is quite clear. Spaniards, Portugueses, Italians and Southern French have a high degree of admixture with North Africans. So, it does not matter how you define "Caucasian". The fact is they belong to a population that is closely related between themselves rather than with both Northern Europeans or Subsaharian Africans.
See the distances in the map and you will figure it out. North Africa is right besides Spain, Italy and France, and a lot closser than Ghana or Russia.
quote: Could you please cite examples. Which literature are you referencing? Arabic literature or Spainard literature? What specifically do such writers use to differentiate Berbers,Arabs, or sub-Saharans?
Spanish classical literature. In there the descriptions of Moors are quite amazing. Most of them are brown but many rulers are blond. Actually Moors have a fascination with slav women so they were usually the favorites. King Alphonse X the wise, for instance, once describe with a lot of surprise a Black general of the Moors armies. That was not something common to see. In classicals like Mio Cid you can see how Moors and Christians were the same people, plus some upper classes comming mainly from the Middle east and a low class Moor minority comming from North Afric.
quote:
quote:Yes, but they were the first that brought a subsaharian army, drums included, to Spain. And Yes, but they were the first that brought a subsaharian army, drums included, to Spain. And that was the last drop that initiated the reconquest of Spain by the Christians
Ausar responds:
This is not true. Ever since the conquest of Spain some Western Africans groups were part of both the Arabic and Berber forces.
That's is really true. It is written in the Mio Cid. The XII Century classic. The first invaders of the 7th Century were Berbers and Arabs, but in the 12th Century the new fanatic muslims, who at those times had invaded Subsaharian Africa, brough for the first time an army formed by Subsaharians whose drums spread terror in the civil population. That was one of the causes the Christian knight got serious with the reconquest. And you can see that was the beginning of the end of Al-Andalus.
KAWASHKAR
Kawashkar, you are really blowing this out of proportion. There are very distinct issues here, but you are lumping everything together as one issue.
1. Who were the Berbers ethnically upto and including the Islamic era in North Africa.
2. What Black African populations existed in North Africa outside this "Berber" group.
3. How many Black Africans (Berber or otherwise) participated in the initial incursion into Spain and subsequent incursions.
4. How many Black Africans were part of the Islamic Armies sweeping across North Africa from Arabia.
5. How much do modern coastal Berber populations who show close affinity to Europeans have with other Berber populations elsewhere in the Sahara as well as ANCIENT North African populations from PRIOR to the Islamic and other invasions.
The story of the Arab/Muslim invasion of North Africa is long and complex, MAINLY because of the disruption of the NATIVE populations of North Africa. There is no doubt that there were light skinned populations of Berbers who lived along the coast. HOWEVER, that does NOT mean that all North Africans at this time were LIGHT skinned. Populations in the Sahara to the south were NOT necessarily the same as those lighter skinned populations to the north. With the incursions of the Arab/Muslims, more light skinned Berbers, along with lighter skinned Arabs as well as black Africans went to the south and began converting and enslaving other Africans.
The problem here is that you try and act as if ALL Africans in the Sahel are the SAME, whether called Berber or Arab or anything else. In fact you have black African Sudanese calling themselves Arab. Therefore, labels like Berber, Arab and Muslim are USELESS in this regard.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic