posted
Here's all the analysis we need to know about the origins of African-Americans, from one of the twentieth century's greatest African scholars, Dr. WEB DuBois:
quote: "Soon...the American (slave) trade developed. A strong, unchecked demand for brute labor in the West Indies and on the continent of America grew until it culminated in the eighteenth century, when Negro slaves were crossing the Atlantic at the rate of fifty to one hundred thousand a year. This called for slave raiding on a scale that drew upon every part of Africa-- upon the west coast, the western and Egyptian Sudan, the valley of the Congo, Abyssinia, the lake regions, the east coast, and Madagascar. Not simply the degraded and weaker types of Negroes were seized, but the strong Bantu, the Mandingo and Songhay, the Nubian and Nile Negroes, the Fula, and even the Asiatic Malay, were represented in the raids...
Reason for the 'west-coast' origin emphasis.
quote: The natural desire to avoid a painful subject has led historians to gloss over the details of the slave trade and leave the impression that it was a local west-coast phenomenon and confined to a few years. It was, on the contrary, continent wide and centuries long and an economic, social, and political catastrophe probably unparalleled in human history..."
(Quotes are from "The Negro" by WEB DuBois, University of Pennsylvania Press (c) 2001, pp149;154-5)
As in everything, even the brutality of slavery, there are both positive as well as negative results. One of the positive results of the African slave trade to the United States, was that it created the first contemporary Pan-African ethnic group; a group formed by the amalgamation of practically all African ethnic groups, with a common language and culture and separated only by class distinctions.
African Americans clearly rejected the caste system based upon skin color which was adopted in Haiti and Jamaica, and imposed in Apartheid South Africa, Brazil, and (as anyone who has been reading this forum knows) more subtly in modern Egypt, the Sudan, and northern Africa.
This African-American ideology and practice is a valuable contribution by African-Americans towards the new African renaissance, for it is empirically instructive...
Posts: 3344 | From: Berkeley | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Then how come the genes analyzed on AA's shows predominatly west/central/and south east origin, if now people were raided throughout the whole of African continent for the new world?
Posts: 1420 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Yonis: Then how come the genes analyzed on AA's shows predominatly west/central/and south east origin, if now people were raided throughout the whole of African continent for the new world?
This is because most researchers use an available sample when conducting research. As a result they may have not encountered these individuals in their research ; or they may have encountered members of these populations and found them as outliners and failed to discuss them in their final research reports.
posted
So are you saying that AAs with non-West African ancestry don't give blood samples (or that these people are rejected as outliers in every single case)?
Posts: 1024 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Yonis: Then how come the genes analyzed on AA's shows predominatly west/central/and south east origin, if now people were raided throughout the whole of African continent for the new world?
I am an African-American and my genes have never been analyzed, nor have those of the countless African-Americans that I know and have known. Is this based upon some sort of a fields poll??
You, like most confused individuals, seem to want to put Africans into neat little rigid compartments as if Africans are not a mobile group of peoples, rather than accept the historical reality that western Africans have moved to the east; eastern Africans have moved both westward and southward. The Ancient Egyptians originated, like most Africans, in the regions of the Great Lakes; how did they end up so far north? The Batutsi of Rwanda and Burundi did not always inhabit those territories. When the Europeans began to settle in the area of south Africa, the Bantu migrations were still pushing southwards... Your approach to African history, ethnicites, and migrations is too simplistic.
If I were engaged in a paternity suit and I wanted to determine whether or not the child was mine, I would demand a DNA test. But, there is NO DNA test that can tell me the extent and the individuality of all of my African ancestors:
Prior to DNA, blood tests were a less reliable indicator of parantage, but useful. Blood tests also showed that West Africans and Upper Egyptians had the same blood types; but neither blood tests nor DNA can tell me, or anyone else the various peoples that came together to generate me!
If I were to trace my ancestry to "Kunta Kente" in the region that is now withing the country of Senegal, I would not be so naive as to believe that he is my "Adam" but merely only one of them; I hope this is not over your head...
Posts: 3344 | From: Berkeley | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Yom: So are you saying that AAs with non-West African ancestry don't give blood samples (or that these people are rejected as outliers in every single case)?
I don't know the answer to this question. I was just discssing one of the major problems with genetics research discussed by researchers in the discipline.
Donnelly and Tavare (1995) commenting on the practice of using available samples in Y chromosome and mtDNA research observed that: “In practice, genetic data are typically obtained from convenience samples rather than proper random samples. There is obvious danger that such data may contain individuals who share relatively too much ancestry on the relevant timescales. The extent to which application of coalescent (or traditional) methods to such convenience samples may be misleading remains an open, and potentially serious question”(P. Donnelly & S. Tavare, Coalescents and genealogical structure under neutrality. Annual Review of Genetics, 29, 401-421, p.418). This makes it clear that we can not reliably accept dates assigned to population movements because of the inherent problems associated with inferring genetic demographic history.
quote:Originally posted by Yom: So are you saying that AAs with non-West African ancestry don't give blood samples (or that these people are rejected as outliers in every single case)?
This is a silly question as there is practically NO African-American alive today who has not at least one West African ancestor! Why is this such a difficult thing to understand??
Posts: 3344 | From: Berkeley | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Yonis: Then how come the genes analyzed on AA's shows predominatly west/central/and south east origin, if now people were raided throughout the whole of African continent for the new world?
I am an African-American and my genes have never been analyzed, nor have those of the countless African-Americans that I know and have known. Is this based upon some sort of a fields poll??
You, like most confused individuals, seem to want to put Africans into neat little rigid compartments as if Africans are not a mobile group of peoples, rather than accept the historical reality that western Africans have moved to the east; eastern Africans have moved both westward and southward. The Ancient Egyptians originated, like most Africans, in the regions of the Great Lakes; how did they end up so far north? The Batutsi of Rwanda and Burundi did not always inhabit those territories. When the Europeans began to settle in the area of south Africa, the Bantu migrations were still pushing southwards... Your approach to African history, ethnicites, and migrations is too simplistic.
If I were engaged in a paternity suit and I wanted to determine whether or not the child was mine, I would demand a DNA test. But, there is NO DNA test that can tell me the extent and the individuality of all of my African ancestors:
Prior to DNA, blood tests were a less reliable indicator of parantage, but useful. Blood tests also showed that West Africans and Upper Egyptians had the same blood types; but neither blood tests nor DNA can tell me, or anyone else the various peoples that came together to generate me!
If I were to trace my ancestry to "Kunta Kente" in the region that is now withing the country of Senegal, I would not be so naive as to believe that he is my "Adam" but merely only one of them; I hope this is not over your head...
Majority of African Americans have not taken dna test ... I can never understand how they can come up with these numbers ... and say that 28% of African American have European dna when only 10% of European Americans had slaves and even less raped their slaves ... and even less had babies ... lol ...
What they are doing is gathering African Americans who carry european features (if theres a such thing) and doing these test ...
who knows?
Posts: 951 | From: where rules end and freedom begins | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Yonis: Then how come the genes analyzed on AA's shows predominatly west/central/and south east origin, if now people were raided throughout the whole of African continent for the new world?
I am an African-American and my genes have never been analyzed, nor have those of the countless African-Americans that I know and have known. Is this based upon some sort of a fields poll??
You, like most confused individuals, seem to want to put Africans into neat little rigid compartments as if Africans are not a mobile group of peoples, rather than accept the historical reality that western Africans have moved to the east; eastern Africans have moved both westward and southward. The Ancient Egyptians originated, like most Africans, in the regions of the Great Lakes; how did they end up so far north? The Batutsi of Rwanda and Burundi did not always inhabit those territories. When the Europeans began to settle in the area of south Africa, the Bantu migrations were still pushing southwards... Your approach to African history, ethnicites, and migrations is too simplistic.
If I were engaged in a paternity suit and I wanted to determine whether or not the child was mine, I would demand a DNA test. But, there is NO DNA test that can tell me the extent and the individuality of all of my African ancestors:
Prior to DNA, blood tests were a less reliable indicator of parantage, but useful. Blood tests also showed that West Africans and Upper Egyptians had the same blood types; but neither blood tests nor DNA can tell me, or anyone else the various peoples that came together to generate me!
If I were to trace my ancestry to "Kunta Kente" in the region that is now withing the country of Senegal, I would not be so naive as to believe that he is my "Adam" but merely only one of them; I hope this is not over your head...
Majority of African Americans have not taken dna test ... I can never understand how they can come up with these numbers ... and say that 28% of African American have European dna when only 10% of European Americans had slaves and even less raped their slaves ... and even less had babies ... lol ...
What they are doing is gathering African Americans who care european features (if theres a such thing) and doing these test ...
Who knows?
I know! It's b...s..., masquerading as science. It all defies common sense and a common knowledge of history. For this 'science' to even be remotely useful in determining ancestry would require that every person on earth be part of a DNA mapping database...it's all B.S.
Posts: 3344 | From: Berkeley | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Wally: African Americans clearly rejected the caste system based upon skin color which was adopted in Haiti and Jamaica, and imposed in Apartheid South Africa, Brazil, and (as anyone who has been reading this forum knows) more subtly in modern Egypt, the Sudan, and northern Africa.
On the contrary I think it was European americans who rejected the system as opposed to African Americans as they were the authers of the "one-drop" rule of race. I also think that if you wanted to you could find many places in the U.S. where blacks of a lighter skin colour were the elite and tried to preserve their light skin as a marker of their eliteness.
Posts: 167 | From: usa | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Wally you need to provide more evidence that slaves were raided throughout the whole of the African continent for the new world, since this is something new to most people. W.e.b. Dubois wrote that book long time ago thus it's outdated and obsolete. Do you have any fresh material that can support this? I think people might find this quite interesting.
Posts: 1420 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
What we are seeing is that West Africa was the main area of slaves bound for the Americas. At that time, pastoralism and nomadism accounted for other than West Africa/Southern Africa imprints (DNA) in that people captured in war between tribes often took the women as their own! So an Ibo or Yoruba who through raids, captured Fulo/a, Hausa will show the mtDNA (maternal) as part of lineage, OR, im many cases, on return from a raid, the Europeans who captured them, took the victor and the captive to the ship to be taken to another location! In the cases of Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Turkey, Persia, East Africa was the preferred location of slaves! keeping in mind that Turkey was the default leader of Islam as a result of the defeat of the Arab tribes over the last 300 years!
Posts: 1290 | From: usa | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I amongst some African American who do have mixed heritage accept that and live with it comfortably . It is no secret that I'm African American with a strong Native American presence and if I had the link to that discussion I would post it. I am one of those AA's who would fall under European because of my Native American heritage and how they classify European ... Tho my forefathers on that side of the family HATE AND HATED EUROPEANS!
Never the less, I don't understand how someone could grab a small number of AA's and tell them that their population of 41 million is 28% European. Secondly, what form of European are they talking about? Are they talking about their so called European definition of themeselves or are they talking about the Black European lol....
My understanding of the slave trade is that the Eastern Africans made it to the West Coast from the Arab/Islamic slave trade from East Africa to North Africa. From north Africa downward is where the African traveled in search for their freedom.
African Americans are a combination of many Africans. We are comprised of West, Central, North, South and East coast Africans. That is how it goes. I love my West African heritage but as someone on this forum pointed out ... African Americans will have a hard time finding their actual village because AA's are mixed with many villages from Africa.
Its not self-hatred, it called getting to the truth behind lies. In a world where information is controlled by Eurocentrics, it is imperative to re-examine every subject; that includes the actual populations from which AA's come from. Maybe this is not the forum to make this exploration, yet you would be a fool if you believe that the a strong percentage of the Ancient Egyptian population, after their defeat, didn't escape and find their ways to South, North, Central, other parts of the East and West Coast Africa.
Self-hatred, naw ... West Coast African have always held the knowledge, but never used it to destroy nature, but co-lived with it in peace and unity. The Yoruba's is the sister/brother teaching to that of the Egyptian ... The Dogon's have their understanding and I'm more then confident that the Peul, Olof, Ba-ntu (Neteru), South African Khoisan's and many other cultures prior to Islamic invasions had the knowledge and traditions of higher understandings.
The Valley of Kings recorded their knowledge, visage, and other things, on great stones and statues. West Africans were an oral traditionalist society and that doesn't make them any less knowledgeable in any respect. They were loyal to the ideal of Oral traditions. So please don't think for one moment that we favor East Africa over West Africa, its just that the East African carved their knowledge in stones and we have access to that information; information of the ancients unlike that of West Africa. Yet that is starting to change all over Africa with finding like this:
70,000 year old snake worship ... Egyptians wore snakes on their crowns ... Interesting isn't it.
In conclusion: Egypt has ancient information an we are all here to learn it with some of us AA's having some ancient connection to it. Yet, that doesn't mean we hate or disown West Africa as an attempt of self hatred!
Peace!~
[ 18. April 2007, 02:01 PM: Message edited by: Horus_Den_1 ]
Posts: 951 | From: where rules end and freedom begins | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Wally: African Americans clearly rejected the caste system based upon skin color which was adopted in Haiti and Jamaica, and imposed in Apartheid South Africa, Brazil, and (as anyone who has been reading this forum knows) more subtly in modern Egypt, the Sudan, and northern Africa.
On the contrary I think it was European americans who rejected the system as opposed to African Americans as they were the authers of the "one-drop" rule of race. I also think that if you wanted to you could find many places in the U.S. where blacks of a lighter skin colour were the elite and tried to preserve their light skin as a marker of their eliteness.
Have to disagree ... It was the Europeans that tried to divide us and keep us conquered ... Why would they want to unite us ... which is something that could hurt them in the long run?
Posts: 951 | From: where rules end and freedom begins | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
kaba un hru, ignore vidadavida, she/he always makes stupid and quite infantile statements, it's not the first time.
Posts: 1420 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
USA Euros had no use for the gradation system used in the Caribbean and Luso-Hispanic America. Due to the population ratio and wide expanse of their sovereign territory, they needed no buffer between themselves and a non-existant bulk black population.
Thus their invention of one drop social negroes.
quote:Originally posted by KaBa Un Hru:
quote:Originally posted by kifaru:
quote:Originally posted by Wally: African Americans clearly rejected the caste system based upon skin color which was adopted in Haiti and Jamaica, and imposed in Apartheid South Africa, Brazil, and (as anyone who has been reading this forum knows) more subtly in modern Egypt, the Sudan, and northern Africa.
On the contrary I think it was European americans who rejected the system as opposed to African Americans as they were the authers of the "one-drop" rule of race. I also think that if you wanted to you could find many places in the U.S. where blacks of a lighter skin colour were the elite and tried to preserve their light skin as a marker of their eliteness.
Have to disagree ... It was the Europeans that tried to divide us and keep us conquered ... Why would they want to unite us ... which is something that could hurt them in the long run?
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
Infintesimally few Africans were directly enslaved by Euros. It's a myth that Euros roamed unfettered throughout the Atlantic shores of Africa raiding as they pleased.
Africans made big business from the triangular trade. Euros were often made to wait for weeks on end, spending resource on food, drink, lodging, and entertainment while a deal for slaves was brokered.
quote:Originally posted by yazid904: ... OR, im many cases, on return from a raid, the Europeans who captured them, took the victor and the captive to the ship to be taken to another location!
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Kifaru is correct.
USA Euros had no use for the gradation system used in the Caribbean and Luso-Hispanic America. Due to the population ratio and wide expanse of their sovereign territory, they needed no buffer between themselves and a non-existant bulk black population.
Thus their invention of one drop social negroes.
quote:Originally posted by KaBa Un Hru:
quote:Originally posted by kifaru:
quote:Originally posted by Wally: African Americans clearly rejected the caste system based upon skin color which was adopted in Haiti and Jamaica, and imposed in Apartheid South Africa, Brazil, and (as anyone who has been reading this forum knows) more subtly in modern Egypt, the Sudan, and northern Africa.
On the contrary I think it was European americans who rejected the system as opposed to African Americans as they were the authers of the "one-drop" rule of race. I also think that if you wanted to you could find many places in the U.S. where blacks of a lighter skin colour were the elite and tried to preserve their light skin as a marker of their eliteness.
Have to disagree ... It was the Europeans that tried to divide us and keep us conquered ... Why would they want to unite us ... which is something that could hurt them in the long run?
Misread the post ... yet I don't know about the eliteness talk ... then again Spike Lee's movie "School Daze" say a lot.
Peace!~
Posts: 951 | From: where rules end and freedom begins | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Yonis: Wally you need to provide more evidence that slaves were raided throughout the whole of the African continent for the new world, since this is something new to most people. W.e.b. Dubois wrote that book long time ago thus it's outdated and obsolete. Do you have any fresh material that can support this? I think people might find this quite interesting.
This is the most obtuse of arguments; The statements I quoted from Dr. Dubois explains it clearly the process of the enslavement of Africans and in the second quote he explains why this information may be 'new' to 'most' people.
The most obtuse of your statements is that "Dubois wrote that book long time ago thus it's outdated and obsolete"; this is a straw man argument. Facts or correct information never become outdated or obsolete; whether it is written in 1870 or 2007 - Africans were enslaved...It's that simple, but many use this 'argument' of 'outdated' to disparage information that they personally disagree with; it's merely a dodge.
While there's plenty of other material that corroborates Dubois (did you think he made all of this up?) it's not necessary to provide to most who are following this topic; but for those who need extra help there's plenty of material available on the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade; Colonialism; Imperialism; Slavery. There's the library, the internet, book stores...
Posts: 3344 | From: Berkeley | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Stop giving the white man his god complex.
Infintesimally few Africans were directly enslaved by Euros. It's a myth that Euros roamed unfettered throughout the Atlantic shores of Africa raiding as they pleased.
Africans made big business from the triangular trade. Euros were often made to wait for weeks on end, spending resource on food, drink, lodging, and entertainment while a deal for slaves was brokered.
Here's another excellent analysis of the African slave trade that many may find 'new.' And it's written by an author in the year 2007! Posts: 3344 | From: Berkeley | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
also, the trade in humans was set up pretty much in the same way that the exploitation of Africa's mineral resources were; all roads constructed by the colonialists led directly to the ports to facilitate the exportation of minerals and resources from deep within the African interior...
Posts: 3344 | From: Berkeley | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Why doesn't it surprise me that I couldn't GOOGLE the below information though it was posted only 60 days ago?
Reposting the 14 February, 2007 06:57 PM entry to the OT: In Light of Black History Month... thread. ================================================
What follows is a mostly, though not completely, accurate essay. Bracketed words and hi-liting are my editing. Otherwise it appears as originally presented on www.netnoir.com in 1997.
quote: THE AFRICAN SLAVE TRADE The First Slav[ing] Expeditions to [West] Africa by Anthony A. Lee
Kidnapping [people] from the African coast was part of European practice even before Portuguese ships had explored the coast of the continent or discovered a new route to India. One of the first expeditions to the Senegal River, led by the Portuguese in 1444, brutally seized the black residents of several off-shore islands near the river and carried them off to be sold as slaves. Other expeditions from Europe about this time did more or less the same.
But it was not long before African armies became aware of the new dangers, and Portuguese ships began to meet their match. For example, in 1446, two years later, a ship commanded by Nuno Tristão attempted to land in the Senegal region. It was attacked by African fighters in canoes, and the crew of the ship was wiped out. And in 1447, a Danish raider commanding a Portuguese ship was killed, along with most of his crew, when local African boats attacked.
Of course, this fact of history makes the Atlantic slave trade a bit more problematic, from a moral perspective. It is not simply a question of black and white. Slavery was well known in [many] African societies, as much as it was a fact of life everywhere else in the world during those times.
As soon as Diogo Gomes' diplomatic expedition to West Africa had succeeded, the export of slaves began to number in the thousands. During the bloody course, perhaps 10 or 15 million Africans had been delivered as slaves to the New World, and perhaps just as many more had died in the process. These [people] were captured in Africa by Africans, shipped to the African coast by Africans, and only then sold to European traders in trade ships to begin the dreaded Middle Passage to America. African kings and rulers were active and willing participants in the slave trade, which made them rich[er], and which could not have existed without their full cooperation and support.
Indeed, when African kingdoms decided to stop trading in slaves -- for their own reasons -- there was no way for European nations to force them to continue. The earliest example of this is the Kingdom of Benin on the West African coast (in what is now Nigeria) In the 1520's this state began to restrict the sale of slaves, finally cutting it off entirely by about 1550. This was probably not done for moral reasons, however. Records from this period show that the kingdom was becoming wealthi[er] from the export of cloth and pepper. Although it is only a guess, we can imagine that slaves were needed within Benin itself to produce these valuable products which could bring more wealth to the king than the sale of human beings.
As uncomfortable as this aspect of black history may be, it at least explodes the myth of a "dark," helpless and ignorant African continent that was always at the mercy of European greed. Nothing could be further from the truth. The more we learn about African history, going back even to the middle ages, the more we learn that Africans were full and active participants in the world -- on both sides of the Atlantic.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
It is extremely important to note that when we talk about the beginnings of slavery, all concepts of "Countries", as defined by European made invisible lines must disappear. In doing so, it becomes clear to anyone using their commonsense that a tribe located in one region today is part of a much larger tribe in the 1500's before the Great BlackGenoCaust took shape.
Posts: 179 | From: United States | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged |
This is a subject that has always interested me because it deals with a personal topic. Where "we" come from.
I myself attempted to contact Dr. Rick Kittles on the issue of AA ancestry outside of West Africa (especially the Nile Valley/Horn-East African region). He did not reply but I did get a response from Dr. Shomarka Keita. This is what he said:
Subject: Re: The African diversity of African-American ancestry and connections to Nile Valley Civilization
To: *Mansa Musa* <Email Address Witheld>
Good morning,
Please go to Pubmed Entrez, and search African Americans. The biological heterogeneity of which we spoke refers the historical infomation that places Afro North and South American origins in the Senegambia region, the Akan peoples regions, the west Cenral African regons (Bantu speakers), southeastern Africa (see the Braziian data) and some Madagascar. If you look at the Gwen Midlo Hall's book on ethnicities in America you will see the evidence of different sources.
I know of NO study or historical datat that shows that folk were brought from Ethiopia/Somalia/Kenya or northern Africa (including the Nile Vallley) to the US. There is no evidence that I know about that says that the Enslaved Africans of the trans-Atlantic trade came from the Nile Valley or Horn of Africa.
IT is true that some of the mtDNA results done by ancestry businesses have been coming up with some unexpected results--this does not mean necessarily that these folk came straight from a particular region. It may speak to certain variations actually having either come back into Africa a long time ago, or having originated there in the first place.
It was not the answer I wanted but that is what he wrote.
Certainly Dubois view of AA's being Pan-African people in the sense of being of multiethnic ancestry is accurate but I have not encountered evidence that the subjects of the middle passage had as widespread of origins as he implied. I would have thought that Africans coming from these parts of Africa was, while miniscule, atleast traceable to some degree but evidence for the claim that African-American ancestry has complete continental variance remains elusive.
Posts: 1203 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mansa Musa: Hello everyone.
This is a subject that has always interested me because it deals with a personal topic. Where "we" come from.
I myself attempted to contact Dr. Rick Kittles on the issue of AA ancestry outside of West Africa (especially the Nile Valley/Horn-East African region). He did not reply but I did get a response from Dr. Shomarka Keita. This is what he said:
quote:Good morning,
Please go to Pubmed Entrez, and search African Americans. The biological heterogeneity of which we spoke refers the historical infomation that places Afro North and South American origins in the Senegambia region, the Akan peoples regions, the west Cenral African regons (Bantu speakers), southeastern Africa (see the Braziian data) and some Madagascar. If you look at the Gwen Midlo Hall's book on ethnicities in America you will see the evidence of different sources.
I know of NO study or historical datat that shows that folk were brought from Ethiopia/Somalia/Kenya or northern Africa (including the Nile Vallley) to the US. There is no evidence that I know about that says that the Enslaved Africans of the trans-Atlantic trade came from the Nile Valley or Horn of Africa.
IT is true that some of the mtDNA results done by ancestry businesses have been coming up with some unexpected results--this does not mean necessarily that these folk came straight from a particular region. It may speak to certain variations actually having either come back into Africa a long time ago, or having originated there in the first place.
It was not the answer I wanted but that is what he wrote.
Certainly Dubois view of AA's being Pan-African people in the sense of being of multiethnic ancestry is accurate but I have not encountered evidence that the subjects of the middle passage had as widespread of origins as he implied. I would have thought that Africans coming from these parts of Africa was, while miniscule, atleast traceable to some degree but evidence for the claim that African-American ancestry has complete continental variance remains elusive.
How did you get Keita's e-mail address?
Posts: 7069 | From: Fallbrook, CA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Why doesn't it surprise me that I couldn't GOOGLE the below information though it was posted only 60 days ago?
What do you have against GOOGLE, you complain a lot of time about GOOGLE...why is that?
Posts: 919 | From: AFRICA | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tyrannosaurus: How did you get Keita's e-mail address?
Through stealth and finesse.
Thank you. Can you please provide his address for me? I want to have a discussion with him about Egyptians and Nubians (I am still debating Matt at Empires Aeon, and I think the word of an actual physical anthropologist would certainly be a major tide-turner).
Posts: 7069 | From: Fallbrook, CA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tyrannosaurus: Thank you. Can you please provide his address for me? I want to have a discussion with him about Egyptians and Nubians (I am still debating Matt at Empires Aeon, and I think the word of an actual physical anthropologist would certainly be a major tide-turner).
I edited some email address info into the quote a little while ago which includes his email. Posts: 1203 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Wally: Africans were enslaved...It's that simple , but many use this 'argument' of 'outdated' to disparage information that they personally disagree with; it's merely a dodge.
You're full of sh!t! The sad thing is that you don't even realize how you make more damage than favour, it's basically all about feeding your pathetic ego, no sense of sacrifice at all! My message to you is get lost, you have provide nothing worth pondering, you actually disgust me.
Posts: 1420 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Yonis: Wally you need to provide more evidence that slaves were raided throughout the whole of the African continent for the new world, since this is something new to most people. W.e.b. Dubois wrote that book long time ago thus it's outdated and obsolete. Do you have any fresh material that can support this? I think people might find this quite interesting.
Provided in the link posted by Kemson, "from the Cape of Good Hope to the Cape of Delgado, including Madagascar). The slave trade had the greatest impact upon central and western African. According to James Rawley, West Africa supplied 3/5ths of the slaves for exportation between 1701-1810. Half of the slaves were exported to South America, 42% to the Caribbean Islands, 7% to British North America, and 2% to Central America."
Slave were taken from Madagascar. If you know geograhy, Madagascar is an island on the east side of Africa. So Africans were taken from the east side of Africa also. However, most were taken from West and Central Africa.
Posts: 342 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mansa Musa: Hello everyone.
This is a subject that has always interested me because it deals with a personal topic. Where "we" come from.
I myself attempted to contact Dr. Rick Kittles on the issue of AA ancestry outside of West Africa (especially the Nile Valley/Horn-East African region). He did not reply but I did get a response from Dr. Shomarka Keita. This is what he said:
Subject: Re: The African diversity of African-American ancestry and connections to Nile Valley Civilization
To: *Mansa Musa* <Email Address Witheld>
Good morning,
Please go to Pubmed Entrez, and search African Americans. The biological heterogeneity of which we spoke refers the historical infomation that places Afro North and South American origins in the Senegambia region, the Akan peoples regions, the west Cenral African regons (Bantu speakers), southeastern Africa (see the Braziian data) and some Madagascar. If you look at the Gwen Midlo Hall's book on ethnicities in America you will see the evidence of different sources.
I know of NO study or historical datat that shows that folk were brought from Ethiopia/Somalia/Kenya or northern Africa (including the Nile Vallley) to the US. .
IT is true that some of the mtDNA results done by ancestry businesses have been coming up with some unexpected results-- this does not mean necessarily that these folk came straight from a particular region . It may speak to certain variations actually having either come back into Africa a long time ago, or having originated there in the first place.
It was not the answer I wanted but that is what he wrote.
Certainly Dubois view of AA's being Pan-African people in the sense of being of multiethnic ancestry is accurate but I have not encountered evidence that the subjects of the middle passage had as widespread of origins as he implied. I would have thought that Africans coming from these parts of Africa was, while miniscule, atleast traceable to some degree but evidence for the claim that African-American ancestry has complete continental variance remains elusive .
posted
You all have provided some good and some interesting links on the topic. On one of the links, provided by Kemson, there's an interesting sidebar advertisement that reads:
quote: Trace Your African Roots Benin? Sudan? Nigeria? Discover Your Genetic Heritage $199
This is a good example of another topic I posted "Beware the DNA-Roots fraud!"
And as Kemson wrote:
quote: It is extremely important to note that when we talk about the beginnings of slavery, all concepts of "Countries", as defined by European made invisible lines must disappear. In doing so, it becomes clear to anyone using their commonsense that a tribe located in one region today is part of a much larger tribe in the 1500's...
More importantly we should also remember;
quote: One must accept the historical reality that African peoples have always been a mobile group, constantly moving from one region to another; western Africans, most of whom originated from the east and central Africa, have also moved back to the east; eastern Africans have moved both westward and southward. The Ancient Egyptians originated, like most Africans, in the regions of the Great Lakes; how did they end up so far north? The Batutsi of Rwanda and Burundi did not always inhabit those territories. When the Europeans began to settle in the area of south Africa, the Bantu migrations were still pushing southwards...
a) If you have one Wolof ancestor (and some of the links have indicated its likelihood) , that Wolof's ancestry can be traced back to the Nile valley, which means so is yours; (also a Yoruba ancestor, also a...)
b) The Bantu migrations, which included the Zulu, does not mean that these migrations were en masse, either at the start or the 'finish', and there are always fragments of these migrating peoples who settle along the path of migration: this makes non-sense of this Gates guy who says "there wasn't one Zulu" enslaved and brought to America. (bourgeois b...s...) ...and...
quote: Evergreen Writes: The complete genetic history of AA will remain a mystery until: 1) Statistically significant AA and African samples are taken 2) Broad samples from African regions such as Sudan, Chad, Niger, southern Libya, southern Algeria and western Sudan are obtained 3) The phylogeny of the y-chromosome lineage E3a is complete
quote:Here's all the analysis we need to know about the origins of African-Americans, from one of the twentieth century's greatest African scholars, Dr. WEB DuBois:
Note: Dr. DuBois works are never outdated in fact his book The Soul of Black Folks is a classic For Ever.
Peace to the Late Dr. DuBois
Posts: 567 | From: USA | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Warning: Be careful of "Find your Ancestry in Africa" claims. Ask questions and do some research on the company of choice then go from there.
Posts: 179 | From: United States | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
The majority of African-Americans ancestors were taken from the gold-coast, Benin, Ghana, Burkina Faso, Côte d'Ivoire, Togo, Nigeria etc. And some few from central-africa and Mozambique.
Posts: 1420 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^^correct don't forget the congo and niger. The nile valley nonsense actually does more harm than good.
Posts: 271 | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
I read a while back that a large number of the captives bound for North America were taken from the Congo area.
And a substantial number were taken from the Senegal-Gambia area. Goree Island(Senegal) and James Island and Georgetown Island--both on the Gambia River--provide historical evidence by their holding cells--which I have actually seen.
This brings me to the question of the power relationships between European shipper and those who provided the captives. The relationship--like that between most African governments and the West today--was extremely unequal.
The captives--mainly war captives[see the log books of slavers such as Theo Conaut and others. Conaut was a slaver for 20 years on the West coast of Africa and his log book was published as A Slaver's Log. Many of the captives were also kidnapees as the autobiographies of captives who were liberated tell us. Some of the well-known ones are Ajai Crowther, Suleiman Ben Job(Diop), Mahoma Baquaqua(kidnapped from Hausaland then shipped to Brazil)and Oludah Equiano--were bartered for pittances hence the vast profit margins of the slavers and the planters who purchased them.
Note that the actual acquisition of the captives was carried out by middle-men many of whom were of Afro-Portugese extraction--The Portugese had been on the West coast of Africa for some 50 years before the actual Trans-Atlantic trade began-- which gave them the basis for connections on both sides.
Point is that those "chiefs" and kings who engaged in the Trade were illiterate and ignorant of the extent and economic significance of the role they were playing. Yet there those like King Affonso of the Congo who lamented the fact that despite importunations to the King of Portugal to stop the trade the kidnappings continued full steam ahead.
Thus in sum, the Atlantic trade was not between equals by a long shot. It was an unequal trade between unequals--along the lines of the unequal relationship between "do-as-you-are-told" African governments and the Euro-American governments--all laden with the very effective weaponry of the IMF, World Bank, the UN Security Council, etc.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
One might note too that the people who are now called West Africans have only been in the West Africa region for at most 3,000 years. There have been migrations Westward and Southward in relatively recent times. The recent so-called Bantu expansion from West-Central Africa to Southern Africa testifies to this.
For those who are sceptical of the existence of these trans-Africa movements the evidence is provided by the haplotype profiles of Africa's populations.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Lamin: One might note too that the people who are now called West Africans have only been in the West Africa region for at most 3,000 years. There have been migrations Westward and Southward in relatively recent times. The recent so-called Bantu expansion from West-Central Africa to Southern Africa testifies to this.
So where did the West Africans migrate from 3000 years ago? Didn't the bantu expansion start from West Africa or Cameroon to be precise?
Posts: 1420 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Lamin: One might note too that the people who are now called West Africans have only been in the West Africa region for at most 3,000 years. There have been migrations Westward and Southward in relatively recent times. The recent so-called Bantu expansion from West-Central Africa to Southern Africa testifies to this.
So where did the West Africans migrate from 3000 years ago? Didn't the bantu expansion start from West Africa or Cameroon to be precise?
The Bantu expansion has nothing to do with West Africans above the Congo. Thw West Atlantic speakers and Mande for example originated in the Saharan highlands and were associated with the C-Group people.
Wm. Welmers (1971) has postulated an original homeland for the Niger-Congo Superset in the general vicinity of the Upper Nile. Ehret and Posnansky (1982) has suggested that the Mande diverged from the Kwa around 5000-4000 BC Dr. Welmers (1971) has hypothesized that around 3000 BC the Mande languages separated into Northern and Southeastern branches.
In the Sahelian zone there was a short wet phase during the Holocene (c. 7500-4400 BC), which led to the formation of large lakes and marshes in Mauritania, the Niger massifs and Chad. The Inland Niger Delta was unoccupied. In other parts of the Niger area the wet phase existed in the eight/seventh and fourth/third millennia BC (McIntosh & McIntosh 1986:417).
There were few habitable sites in West Africa during the Holocene wet phase. McIntosh and McIntosh (1986) have illustrated that the only human occupation of the Sahara during this period were the Saharan massifs along wadis. By the 8th millennium BC Saharan-Sudanese pottery was used in the Air (Roset 1983). Ceramics of this style have also been found at sites in the Hoggar (McIntosh & McIntosh 1983b:230). Dotted wavy-line pottery has also been discovered in the Libyan Sahara (Barich 1985).
The inhabitants of the Fezzan were roundhead blacks (Jelinek 1985:273).
The cultural characteristics of the Fezzanese were analogous to C-Group culture items and people of Nubia (Quellec 1985; Jelinek 1985). The C-Group people occupied the Sudan and Fezzan regions between 3700-1300 BC (Close 1988).
C-Group King
These early Paleo-Africans of Libya were called the Temehu by the Egyptians (Behrens 1984:30). Ethnically the Temehu had the same physical features of black African people (Quellec 1985; Jelinek 1985; Diop 1984:72).
Red-and-Black Pottery
These C-Group people used a common black-and-red ware. B.B. Lal (1963) of the Indian Expedition in the Campaign to Save the Monuments of Nubia proved that the Dravidian people probably originally lived in middle Africa before they settled South India.
The Proto-Mande speakers in the Saharan highlands were probably one of the numerous C-Group tribes settled in this area (1986b).
If we accept this hypothesis the C-Group people would represent a collection of ethnic groups that later became the Supersets we now find in the fragmentation belt, such as the Niger-Congo speakers Greenberg (1970) believes early domesticated ovicaprids. The origin of the Mande among the sedentary pastoral C-Group ethnic groups supports the linguistic data indicating an early Mande domestication of cattle.
In summary people presently living above Congo came from Nubia and the Fezzan.
posted
What evidence do you have of this? Depots, like El Mina, were leased from the ruling African power.
Often enough it was rented simultaneously to opposing European interests who then had no choice but to fight each other for actual possession and use as the African power broker refused to designate either claimant as the sole benefactor.
Do you know what happened between the time a slaving vessel sought docking permission and disembarked for American shores? Have you any idea how long it took?
Stop making Africans appear to be hopeless and hapless in the face of your white gods from Europe who always have and always can outwit outmaneouvre outthink and otherwise outdo and always be more intelligent and always have the upperhand over Africans who must always be their inferior no matter what.
Stop this appeal to European superiority and victim mentality and try to uncover accounts of the slaving period in Africa not slanted to white supremacists ideals.
There's no excuse for it. Slave trading was big profitable business for both the Euro buyers and the African sellers. The apologies issued by two of the biggest African profit reapers give lie to any assertion that Euros overpowered them into supply slaves or that lancados or other Afropeans numerically dominated the African end of the trade.
Even a book as old as Basil Davidson's Black Mother reveals the facts of the African power brokers of the slave trade.
And what about enslaved Africans who made it out of slavery only to repatriate and then themselves procure slaves?
The African is not a passive object in this matter. The African was an active and key player.
quote:Originally posted by lamin:
This brings me to the question of the power relationships between European shipper and those who provided the captives. The relationship--like that between most African governments and the West today--was extremely unequal.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote: The vast majority of slaves taken out of Africa were sold by African rulers, traders and a military aristocracy who all grew wealthy from the business.
. . . .
Tinubu square, commercial centre of today's Lagos and home to Nigeria's Central Bank, is named after a major nineteenth century slave trader. Madam Tinubu was born in Egbaland and rose from rags to riches by trading in slaves , salt and tobacco in Badagry. She later became one of Nigeria's pioneering nationalists.
When Britain abolished the slave trade in 1807 it not only had to contend with opposition from white slavers but also from African rulers who had become accustomed to wealth gained from selling slaves or from taxes collected on slaves passed through their domain. African slave- trading classes were greatly distressed by the news that legislators sitting in parliament in London had decided to end their source of livelihood.
. . . .
Reverend Samuel Johnson wrote of the subjugation of neighbouring Yoruba kingdoms by Ibadan war- chiefs in the 1850s: "Slave-raiding now became a trade to many who would get rich speedily."
From: Tunde Obadina director of Africa Business Information Services Slave trade: a root of contemporary African Crisis http://www.afbis.com/analysis/slave.htm
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic