posted
Has there ever existed a high civilization built by North Africans that was not (a) built by blacks or (b) heavily influenced by Arabs, Phoenicians, or Romans?
Posts: 7069 | From: Fallbrook, CA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
No. There was never a high civilization built in Africa by NON BLACK, INDIGENOUS, NON FOREIGN Africans.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think that's a bold statement, you don't have to be "black" to be indigenous to africa. We all know that africa is the most diverse continent in the world. He asked about people living in north africa, like the light berbers or the lower egyptians and they are as much african as a khoisan or an amhara, but still not "black". This has already been proven genetically.
Posts: 1420 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Tyrannosaurus wrote: (b) heavily influenced by Arabs, Phoenicians, or Romans?
Who did the Romans influence? They just had their colonies there, the phoenicians are the ones who influenced romans before the romans paid them back by destroying Carthage. And also what civilization did arabs create in north africa? The only valid group you named above are the phoenicians, since Carthage wouldnt exist without them but romans and arabs only assimilated what already existed.
Posts: 1420 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Yonis: I think that's a bold statement, you don't have to be "black" to be indigenous to africa. We all know that africa is the most diverse continent in the world. He asked about people living in north africa, like the light berbers or the lower egyptians and they are as much african as a khoisan or an amhara, but still not "black". This has already been proven genetically.
No Yonis, that is YOU making an exception the rule. I made no statement that you "have" to be black to be indigenous to Africa. What I am saying is that MOST indigenous Africans in history WERE BLACK, with the amount of indigenous Africans who WERENT black being the EXCEPTION not the RULE. The rule is that MOST INDIGENOUS North African populations were BLACK in the ancient historical period that produced the Civilizations and Empires found in Northern Africa that WERENT the result of foreign contact. Those lighter skinned groups are a SUBSET of the overall diversity of Africans and MOST African diversity falls within the range of populations that would be called BLACK. Yes, some ancient north Africans were lighter complexioned, but these were also the same populations who were more open to FOREIGN admixture. The appearance of blonde haired blue eyed LIBYANS in the historic record does not represent the appearance of a NEW TYPE OF AFRICAN because these were a FOREIGN people who intermarried with the INDIGENOUS Africans. Therefore, they cannot be lumped together with INDIGENOUS AFRICAN features because those FEATURES did not originate in Africa. Dont confuse those features which are PROVEN to derive from foreign migrations with features of INDIGENOUS Africans w/o admixture. Furthermore, regardless if some Northern Africans were lighter, like some Libyans, the Egyptians CONSISTENTLY made it clear that they were not LIKE those people, foreign derived or not. Likewise, genetics does not prove appearance and the only portion of the genetic record that is pertinent to the original question is whether such populations in Lower Egypt were MOSTLY carrying INDIGENOUS AFRICAN lineages versus foreign lineages.
Again, the question is whether there was any INDIGENOUS NON BLACK Africans that built civilizations in Africa with no influence from NON Africans and the answer is no.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tyrannosaurus: Has there ever existed a high civilization built by North Africans that was not (a) built by blacks or (b) heavily influenced by Arabs, Phoenicians, or Romans?
LOL I don't think so, or at least I haven't heard of any!
All the ancient civilizations of North Africa that I heard of were Egypt, "Nubia", and the Garamante of Libya.-- all of whom were indigenous black Africans. Although there are rumors from the Greeks and others of a Libyan civilization existing before the Garamantes.
quote:Originally posted by Yonis: I think that's a bold statement, you don't have to be "black" to be indigenous to africa. We all know that africa is the most diverse continent in the world.
I wouldn't say that Africa is the most diverse in the world. Africa is predominantly black with some Arab and European elements added. What about Eurasia? You have people ranging from 'white' Europeans to so-called "mongoloid" (hate it) to black people! And one could argue that the Americas are the most diverse in the world today considering the natives plus all the other immigrants from Europe, Africa, and Asia.
quote:He asked about people living in north africa, like the light berbers or the lower egyptians and they are as much african as a khoisan or an amhara, but still not "black". This has already been proven genetically.
If you mean the 'white' Berber groups like the Kabyle I understand. Though I don't know how they can be as much African as aboriginal groups like Khoisan.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tyrannosaurus: Has there ever existed a high civilization built by North Africans that was not (a) built by blacks or (b) heavily influenced by Arabs, Phoenicians, or Romans?
Numidia and Carthage come to mind...both built by Phoenicians.
Posts: 1219 | From: North Carolina, USA | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Yonis: I think that's a bold statement, you don't have to be "black" to be indigenous to africa. We all know that africa is the most diverse continent in the world. He asked about people living in north africa, like the light berbers or the lower egyptians and they are as much african as a khoisan or an amhara, but still not "black". This has already been proven genetically.
No Yonis, that is YOU making an exception the rule. I made no statement that you "have" to be black to be indigenous to Africa. What I am saying is that MOST indigenous Africans in history WERE BLACK, with the amount of indigenous Africans who WERENT black being the EXCEPTION not the RULE. The rule is that MOST INDIGENOUS North African populations were BLACK in the ancient historical period that produced the Civilizations and Empires found in Northern Africa that WERENT the result of foreign contact. Those lighter skinned groups are a SUBSET of the overall diversity of Africans and MOST African diversity falls within the range of populations that would be called BLACK. Yes, some ancient north Africans were lighter complexioned, but these were also the same populations who were more open to FOREIGN admixture. The appearance of blonde haired blue eyed LIBYANS in the historic record does not represent the appearance of a NEW TYPE OF AFRICAN because these were a FOREIGN people who intermarried with the INDIGENOUS Africans. Therefore, they cannot be lumped together with INDIGENOUS AFRICAN features because those FEATURES did not originate in Africa. Dont confuse those features which are PROVEN to derive from foreign migrations with features of INDIGENOUS Africans w/o admixture. Furthermore, regardless if some Northern Africans were lighter, like some Libyans, the Egyptians CONSISTENTLY made it clear that they were not LIKE those people, foreign derived or not. Likewise, genetics does not prove appearance and the only portion of the genetic record that is pertinent to the original question is whether such populations in Lower Egypt were MOSTLY carrying INDIGENOUS AFRICAN lineages versus foreign lineages.
Again, the question is whether there was any INDIGENOUS NON BLACK Africans that built civilizations in Africa with no influence from NON Africans and the answer is no.
This whole post is driven by racial bias and not logic.
quote:The rule is that MOST INDIGENOUS North African populations were BLACK in the ancient historical period that produced the Civilizations and Empires found in Northern Africa that WERENT the result of foreign contact. Those lighter skinned groups are a SUBSET of the overall diversity of Africans and MOST African diversity falls within the range of populations that would be called BLACK.
Which rule? There is no rule that says most indigenous people of north africa were black. The berbers predominatly carry paternal markers that are indigenious to africa. Are you implying that female troops came in great numbers and conquered the bLACK berbers and assimilated them so they lost their blackness? How do you explain that most male berbers (including riffan and kabyle) are genetically african despite being non-black?
quote: Yes, some ancient north Africans were lighter complexioned, but these were also the same populations who were more open to FOREIGN admixture.
This is pure speculation, how could you possibly know such a thing? In any case if that's true then shouldn't the "blacks" who already outnumbered the lighter skinned be the majority since they were not open to foreign admixture?
quote:Furthermore, regardless if some Northern Africans were lighter, like some Libyans, the Egyptians CONSISTENTLY made it clear that they were not LIKE those people, foreign derived or not.
I'm not talking about the egyptians since it's obvious from their own depiction that the libyans were much lighter than them. But i'm talking about the light berbers who are majority in north africa, it seems that you're implying they are invading foreigners, which genetics plus other disciplines have proven that kind of notion to be false.
quote:Again, the question is whether there was any INDIGENOUS NON BLACK Africans that built civilizations in Africa with no influence from NON Africans and the answer is no.
Carthage was buildt by phoenicians, and they were not berbers or indigenous to the area that's today tunisia.
Posts: 1420 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Djehuti: If you mean the 'white' Berber groups like the Kabyle I understand. Though I don't know how they can be as much African as aboriginal groups like Khoisan.
Well maybe khoisan was not the best example but atleast like Amhara or Massai. I think you got my point.
Posts: 1420 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
To my knowledge and low understanding, Berber is Berber! A black monkey and a white monkey are still monkeys, they share 'monkeyness' / 'monkeyhood'!
Posts: 1290 | From: usa | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^True true, but Berber is not a species or ethic group, it is a language, meaning many DIFFERENT ethnic groups can speak similar languages. They are NOT all the same.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Yonis: I think that's a bold statement, you don't have to be "black" to be indigenous to africa. We all know that africa is the most diverse continent in the world. He asked about people living in north africa, like the light berbers or the lower egyptians and they are as much african as a khoisan or an amhara, but still not "black". This has already been proven genetically.
No Yonis, that is YOU making an exception the rule. I made no statement that you "have" to be black to be indigenous to Africa. What I am saying is that MOST indigenous Africans in history WERE BLACK, with the amount of indigenous Africans who WERENT black being the EXCEPTION not the RULE. The rule is that MOST INDIGENOUS North African populations were BLACK in the ancient historical period that produced the Civilizations and Empires found in Northern Africa that WERENT the result of foreign contact. Those lighter skinned groups are a SUBSET of the overall diversity of Africans and MOST African diversity falls within the range of populations that would be called BLACK. Yes, some ancient north Africans were lighter complexioned, but these were also the same populations who were more open to FOREIGN admixture. The appearance of blonde haired blue eyed LIBYANS in the historic record does not represent the appearance of a NEW TYPE OF AFRICAN because these were a FOREIGN people who intermarried with the INDIGENOUS Africans. Therefore, they cannot be lumped together with INDIGENOUS AFRICAN features because those FEATURES did not originate in Africa. Dont confuse those features which are PROVEN to derive from foreign migrations with features of INDIGENOUS Africans w/o admixture. Furthermore, regardless if some Northern Africans were lighter, like some Libyans, the Egyptians CONSISTENTLY made it clear that they were not LIKE those people, foreign derived or not. Likewise, genetics does not prove appearance and the only portion of the genetic record that is pertinent to the original question is whether such populations in Lower Egypt were MOSTLY carrying INDIGENOUS AFRICAN lineages versus foreign lineages.
Again, the question is whether there was any INDIGENOUS NON BLACK Africans that built civilizations in Africa with no influence from NON Africans and the answer is no.
This whole post is driven by racial bias and not logic.
quote:The rule is that MOST INDIGENOUS North African populations were BLACK in the ancient historical period that produced the Civilizations and Empires found in Northern Africa that WERENT the result of foreign contact. Those lighter skinned groups are a SUBSET of the overall diversity of Africans and MOST African diversity falls within the range of populations that would be called BLACK.
Which rule? There is no rule that says most indigenous people of north africa were black. The berbers predominatly carry paternal markers that are indigenious to africa. Are you implying that female troops came in great numbers and conquered the bLACK berbers and assimilated them so they lost their blackness? How do you explain that most male berbers (including riffan and kabyle) are genetically african despite being non-black?
The rule is BIOLOGY which determines skin color. BLACKS are INDIGENOUS to Africa because of its location along the Equator. The ORIGINAL Saharan Africans who POPULATED North Africa were TROPICALLY ADAPTED, which means their skeletons were elongated and they had DARK SKIN. THAT is the ORIGINAL North African. Coastal light skin Berbers are a FACT in modern North Africa and are descended from the original North Africans, but that does NOT mean that the ORIGINAL populations of the Sahara, which IS North Africa, were LIGHT SKINNED coastal populations. That's all. I am saying stop with the nonsense of STARTING with COASTAL Northern Africans as being REPRESENTATIVE of ALL NORTH AFRICANS, NOW or HISTORICALLY. That is NOT CORRECT. I am NOT making this into a racial issue it is a biological issue.
quote:Originally posted by Yonis:
quote: Yes, some ancient north Africans were lighter complexioned, but these were also the same populations who were more open to FOREIGN admixture.
This is pure speculation, how could you possibly know such a thing? In any case if that's true then shouldn't the "blacks" who already outnumbered the lighter skinned be the majority since they were not open to foreign admixture?
quote:Originally posted by Yonis:
quote:Furthermore, regardless if some Northern Africans were lighter, like some Libyans, the Egyptians CONSISTENTLY made it clear that they were not LIKE those people, foreign derived or not.
I'm not talking about the egyptians since it's obvious from their own depiction that the libyans were much lighter than them. But i'm talking about the light berbers who are majority in north africa, it seems that you're implying they are invading foreigners, which genetics plus other disciplines have proven that kind of notion to be false.
No. I am not implying anything. The facts are that there were dark skinned Libyans in Libya PRIOR to the arrival of the light skinned, bloned haired blue eyed types from LATER in Egyptian art. I am saying that the ORIGINAL Libyans were BLACK, as seen in the EARLIEST depictions from Egypt and therefore the LATER blonde haired, blue eyed types DO NOT represent features of INDIGENOUS Africans. You seem to be ignoring that the OLDEST references to Libyans have them depicted as DARK and therefore any LATER lighter skinned populations were due to FOREIGN admixture, ie like the Sea Peoples and other foriegners who are known to have interacted with indigenous North Africans. You seem to want to deny the history of foreign contacts with indigenous Africans along the NOrth African coast as if it does not exist or has had an impact on the population there. The ORIGINAL North Africans came in waves from the East, meaning East Africa and there were no LIGHT SKINNED people migrating from East Africa across the Sahara and into North Africa at ANY POINT in time in Africa's history and this INCLUDES the original Berber speakers. This is not speculation, as BIOLOGY dictated that these Africans were TROPICALLY ADAPTED, which means predominately DARK SKINNED.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Yonis: Which rule? There is no rule that says most indigenous people of north africa were black. The berbers predominatly carry paternal markers that are indigenious to africa. Are you implying that female troops came in great numbers and conquered the bLACK berbers and assimilated them so they lost their blackness? How do you explain that most male berbers (including riffan and kabyle) are genetically african despite being non-black?
The rule of biology explicitly shows that the populations aboriginal to any part of the continent of Africa even North Africa was what is today considered 'black'.
In fact most North Africans today are black if one is to count all Berber groups in North Africa like the Siwa, Tamashek (Tuareg), Zenaga, Mafusa, Djerba, Haratin, etc. and not just the lighter-skinned to white peoples of the coastal areas who in all are the ones who are the minority or exception to the rule and not the rule itself. As Doug has pointed out this was another false Eurocentric concept-- that the majority of Berbers were not black when in reality they are.
Most Berber speakers regardless of color (both black and white) all carry indigenous paternal lineages-- the most common one being E3b2. As we all know E3b2 derives from E3b1 which itself originated in the Horn of Africa and made its way into North Africa by the original proto-Berber speakers. Both E3b2 carriers as well as those few who carry lineages prior to the arrival of E3b2 such as E2, A, etc. were all undoubtedly 'black'. It is only in maternal lineages that Berbers vary. Most Berbers carry indigenous maternal lineages except for those coastal natives who are light-skinned or white; those people carry maternal lineages predominantly from Europe. The reason why male lineages are constant but female lineages are not is due to the genetic phenomenon called founder-effect, where by chance certain lines survive while others die out. This can be seen in Greece where male lineages of African and West Asian origin are common but female lineages from those places are almost non-existant.
quote:This is pure speculation, how could you possibly know such a thing? In any case if that's true then shouldn't the "blacks" who already outnumbered the lighter skinned be the majority since they were not open to foreign admixture?
It is not speculation but is proven by not only genetics but by archaeology and even historical documentation. And again 'blacks' are the majority. Do not be fooled by white-Berber propaganda which gives the impression that black Berbers are the ones who are the minority when it is the other way around.
quote:I'm not talking about the egyptians since it's obvious from their own depiction that the libyans were much lighter than them. But i'm talking about the light berbers who are majority in north africa, it seems that you're implying they are invading foreigners, which genetics plus other disciplines have proven that kind of notion to be false.
Already addressed above.
quote:Carthage was buildt by phoenicians, and they were not berbers or indigenous to the area that's today tunisia.
You are correct about that, and Numidia was also founded by foreigners, but that does not change the fact that there were indigenous peoples present.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
By the way, the earliest appearance of 'whites' in North Africa at least historically comes from Egyptian records of the late Middle Kingdom. Before that time, all other North Africans encountered by the Egyptians to their west were depicted in physical appearance no different from them.
The issue of 'white' Libyans was discussed in Takruri's Tenehu thread!
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Doug M: The rule is BIOLOGY which determines skin color. BLACKS are INDIGENOUS to Africa because of its location along the Equator. The ORIGINAL Saharan Africans who POPULATED North Africa were TROPICALLY ADAPTED, which means their skeletons were elongated and they had DARK SKIN. THAT is the ORIGINAL North African.
By original if you mean those who came there for 20 000 -30 000 years ago, then ofcourse they would look different than modern berbers, but the topic was about the people of antiquity not stoneage hunter-gatheres, So it's quite irrelevant. And also northern africa is well above the equator infact most of middle-east is closer to the equator than the maghreb region, unless you think they also must be black because of this then i don't see a reason why such should be applied for the berber groups who you consider as invaders.
quote:That's all. I am saying stop with the nonsense of STARTING with COASTAL Northern Africans as being REPRESENTATIVE of ALL NORTH AFRICANS, NOW or HISTORICALLY. That is NOT CORRECT. I am NOT making this into a racial issue it is a biological issue.
whoa! Wait a minute here, i've never said that "COASTAL Northern Africans as being REPRESENTATIVE of ALL NORTH AFRICANS", i know for sure they don't, it's you who claimed that all people of north africa who are not black are basically not indigenous to that area, so don't put words in my mouth.
quote:No. I am not implying anything. The facts are that there were dark skinned Libyans in Libya PRIOR to the arrival of the light skinned, bloned haired blue eyed types from LATER in Egyptian art. I am saying that the ORIGINAL Libyans were BLACK, as seen in the EARLIEST depictions from Egypt and therefore the LATER blonde haired, blue eyed types DO NOT represent features of INDIGENOUS Africans.
Well modern Lybians certainly don't have blond hair and blue eyes as representative for the population, they look no different then other berbers in northwest africa.
quote:The ORIGINAL North Africans came in waves from the East, meaning East Africa and there were no LIGHT SKINNED people migrating from East Africa across the Sahara and into North Africa at ANY POINT in time in Africa's history and this INCLUDES the original Berber speakers. This is not speculation, as BIOLOGY dictated that these Africans were TROPICALLY ADAPTED, which means predominately DARK SKINNED.
Where ever they migrated from doesn't really matter, since that was long time ago, those were like hunter-gatherer people of stong age. They have adopted to their region. You said that the people of this region who are not black are foreigners thats the point i don't agree with, how their ancestors looked 10 000 years ago is immaterial since the topic starter was asking about the time of antiquity, which you strongly denied the presence of non-black north africans or being involved in any activity that occured in that region.
Posts: 1420 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Djehuti: It is not speculation but is proven by not only genetics but by archaeology and even historical documentation. And again 'blacks' are the majority. Do not be fooled by white-Berber propaganda which gives the impression that black Berbers are the ones who are the minority when it is the other way around.
When i said speculation, i was referring to the peice where doug M claimed that only the light skinned were more prone to mix with foreigners and not the darker skinned, which is of course speculation.
And also i'm not fooled by any "white berber propaganda" i know how maghreb people look like the whole of europe is flooded by them i talk to them and see them everyday, and the overall majority are not "black", thats a fact.
This is how the average northwest african look like.
Has there ever existed a high civilization built by North Africans that was not (a) built by blacks or (b) heavily influenced by Arabs, Phoenicians, or Romans?
This question is the sort the seeks to 'divide'. Coastal Tamaizight speaking North Africans are an evolution of indigenous Africans biologically [and culturally to some extent] influenced by extra-African groups from northern Eurasia and "southwest Asia". So by posing this question, the indigenous heritage of those "lighter skin" folks who do have an African MRCA, one is disassociating those descendants from that heritage. Yes, there must have been indigenous complex cultures in north Africa; we know this, because the ancient Egyptians made note of them - the Tehenu, for example, who have nothing to do with Phoenician influenced Carthage.
quote:Originally posted by Yonis:
There is no rule that says most indigenous people of north africa were black. The berbers predominatly carry paternal markers that are indigenious to africa. Are you implying that female troops came in great numbers and conquered the bLACK berbers and assimilated them so they lost their blackness? How do you explain that most male berbers (including riffan and kabyle) are genetically african despite being non-black?
You are correct in noting that the majority of Maghrebian groups are indigenous Africans, given that they carry African MRCA lineages [notably paternal]. However, these regions are actually inhabited by a mosaic of groups who range from dark hue to the tawny. In fact, most of those 'light' skin groups, actually look more tawny as opposed to light skin type largely seen in the northernmost Eurasians; the latter sort are relatively rarer. This mix of traits, not to mention shared African MRCA and language, on the same terrain underlies gene flow as the factor. So yes, tawny Tamazight groups look the way the do in contrast to their darker Tamazight brethren, because of gene flow largely from northern Eurasia, which as genetics has shown, comes mainly from the maternal side. There is a gradient distribution of Eurasian input in Tamazight groups, although by no means uniform, whereby the more one goes southward, the less frequent northern Eurasian input becomes in Tamazight speaking groups. Sure, a portion of north Africa is supra-tropical, but still not in an environment that warrants extreme or drastic change of pigmentation [as demonstrated here before] of migrants originating from tropical Africa, which is where the ancestral Tamazight came from.
Posts: 1947 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
For conversation to progress, have to start thinking outside the box.
- It is true that white Berbers aquire depigmented skin from Eurasian admixture.
Howeve, it does not follow from this - that they can be defined as non African merely because their skin is white.
To assume otherwise is to insist that all identity be defined soley in terms of skin color.
This would actually be racist.
I offered and analogy before, but it's clear that it was not understood so I will repeat it:
The Senegalese are African.
The Senegalese speak French.
French [language] is not African.
Senegalese are Africans who aquire one of their langauges from Europe.
Berber is and African language group. It is 100% African.
By definition, it is this common African language that defines Berber.
Berber is not a skin color.
Berber is not a race.
Some Berber are very dark, some very light, some in between, doesn't matter...they are all still Berber as long as they speak a Berber language.
If white Berber are no less African, then it must also be understood that Black Berber are no less Berber.
And whether lighter skinned Berber like it or not, based upon the historical evidence of Berber origins in East Africa, the original Berber would have been dark complexioned, as are other East Africans, and the current Egyptian Berber [of Siwa].
- The term Berber itself is arbitrary to the above.
Berber is and ultimately prejorative 'greek' word - ie - Barbarian.
It's actually a somewhat offensive [to me] term.
HOWEVER, that is immaterial to the existense of a *native* North African language group, not race, not skin color...which we are defining.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Doug M: The rule is BIOLOGY which determines skin color. BLACKS are INDIGENOUS to Africa because of its location along the Equator. The ORIGINAL Saharan Africans who POPULATED North Africa were TROPICALLY ADAPTED, which means their skeletons were elongated and they had DARK SKIN. THAT is the ORIGINAL North African.
By original if you mean those who came there for 20 000 -30 000 years ago, then ofcourse they would look different than modern berbers, but the topic was about the people of antiquity not stoneage hunter-gatheres, So it's quite irrelevant. And also northern africa is well above the equator infact most of middle-east is closer to the equator than the maghreb region, unless you think they also must be black because of this then i don't see a reason why such should be applied for the berber groups who you consider as invaders.
quote:That's all. I am saying stop with the nonsense of STARTING with COASTAL Northern Africans as being REPRESENTATIVE of ALL NORTH AFRICANS, NOW or HISTORICALLY. That is NOT CORRECT. I am NOT making this into a racial issue it is a biological issue.
whoa! Wait a minute here, i've never said that "COASTAL Northern Africans as being REPRESENTATIVE of ALL NORTH AFRICANS", i know for sure they don't, it's you who claimed that all people of north africa who are not black are basically not indigenous to that area, so don't put words in my mouth.
quote:No. I am not implying anything. The facts are that there were dark skinned Libyans in Libya PRIOR to the arrival of the light skinned, bloned haired blue eyed types from LATER in Egyptian art. I am saying that the ORIGINAL Libyans were BLACK, as seen in the EARLIEST depictions from Egypt and therefore the LATER blonde haired, blue eyed types DO NOT represent features of INDIGENOUS Africans.
Well modern Lybians certainly don't have blond hair and blue eyes as representative for the population, they look no different then other berbers in northwest africa.
quote:The ORIGINAL North Africans came in waves from the East, meaning East Africa and there were no LIGHT SKINNED people migrating from East Africa across the Sahara and into North Africa at ANY POINT in time in Africa's history and this INCLUDES the original Berber speakers. This is not speculation, as BIOLOGY dictated that these Africans were TROPICALLY ADAPTED, which means predominately DARK SKINNED.
Where ever they migrated from doesn't really matter, since that was long time ago, those were like hunter-gatherer people of stong age. They have adopted to their region. You said that the people of this region who are not black are foreigners thats the point i don't agree with, how their ancestors looked 10 000 years ago is immaterial since the topic starter was asking about the time of antiquity, which you strongly denied the presence of non-black north africans or being involved in any activity that occured in that region.
Yonis, the question was not whether modern light skinned populations are indigenous Africans. The question was whether there were ancient civilizations built in Africa by NON Black INDIGENOUS, NON FOREIGN Africans WITHOUT any foreign influence and the answer is STILL NO.
You seem to be upset that BLACK AFRICANS could be a major factor behind some of Africa's greatest achievements, as if SOMEHOW that represents a SLANDER against anyone else. Actually it is a SLANDER to suggest OTHERWISE as if BLACK Africans have to be kept SEPARATE from the ACHIEVEMENTS of Africans on ANY PART of the continent.
African culture does not START on the coast of North Africa. African language did not START on the coast of North Africa. African PEOPLE did not START on the COAST of North Africa. They ALL STARTED WITHIN AFRICA among black Africans who have CONTINUALLY been connected ALL ACROSS AFRICA and the Sahara, up until recent times (last few thousand years). The last few thousand years of history CANNOT be used to JUSTIFY or DISTORT the history of Africa and Black Africans to fit a NEW REALITY because times have changed. History does not work like that. North Africa is not an ISLAND and PEOPLE separate from the REST OF AFRICA. And if they ARE SEPARATE from the rest of Africa and the rest of Africans then HOW ARE THEY AFRICANS? Northern Africans happen to be closer to Europeans because they are MORE ATTRACTED to Europe because of history and economics. And that makes perfect sense. Europe is a close neighbor and provides many opportunities for education, work and cultural enrichment. Of COURSE it would attract people who live just across the Mediterranean. There is nothing wrong with it, but to PRETEND that SUCH INTERACTION has impacted the POPULATIONS on BOTH SIDES of the pond so to speak, is just NONSENSE.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
i was just reading the other day in rough guide to egypt, "Part of the Book of Gates specifies four races of men: Egyptians, Asiatics, Negroes and Libyans (along the bottom)"
-------------------- when you see a sacred cow..milk it for all it's worth Posts: 72 | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
sorry to be stickler yonis but ive seen morroccans everyday in morroccoo and still see them in the states and its like night and day. the second pic looks more like morocco in poorer areas than the first and the first pic looks like europe because of the way they are dressed the vast majority are actually mixed. they really mixed it up in the maghreb so you will see alot of people with the face of a particular(and i say that because i have noticed that only certain groups share the same face phenotype) berber look but he will be dark brown. then you will see a person with a face like an african american but be light skin thin you can see yemeni types in the south and then you can see straight southerners(senegelese,sub-saharan) I remember seeing a big fat black dude who looked as if he had a jerry curl with a carolina blue 1980's suit on sitting on a moped talking to a woman who was blushing in his face and she looked like one of those girls in the first pic you showed. i have seen those who look fulani,southern mauretanian,african american and etc. it would be hard to say who dominates as one particular group but however you will see them all there especially in the major cities. those are the places to go if you want to check out the different phentotypes of northwest africa, however there are country places or villages that consist of one phenotype. places like casa, rabat, and marrakesh lets you see the vast differences of people when it comes to looks. but one thing for sure and my moroccan friends will admit to isi that the vast majority of them are mixed. ive seen black morrocans in the states and white ones(indistinguishable from spaniards) and the ones you showed in the pics. modern day migrations sometimes through off a persons view of what the homebase may appear to be. just like the majority of egyptians who migrate to the states and ive seen a handfull of black egyptians in the states however i would percieve that only a few blacks live in egypt due to the migrations. this reminds me of somalians when i thought that all of them came in the same face structure but i saw that there many who do not posses that stereotypical somalian look. maghrebians
-------------------- لا اله الا الله و محمد الرسول الله Posts: 495 | From: anchorage, alaska | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by krishna: i was just reading the other day in rough guide to egypt, "Part of the Book of Gates specifies four races of men: Egyptians, Asiatics, Negroes and Libyans (along the bottom)"
You are referring to this.....
It actually specifies left to right Rm.t, Aamu, Nshy, and Tamahu.
This translates to Men [above] Men, Asiatic, Southerns, and "Libyan".
The book of gates catalogues groups of people whose souls will be ressurected in the afterlife, not 'races' of men.
AlTakruri makes the sentient observation that 'European' [sea] peoples are never listed in the book of Gates, because they are seen as essentially 'souless' and thus inelligible for resurrection.
The book of Gates further denotes two families of men, or lineages.
They are, the offspring of Heru [Horus, son of
Isis and Osirus], and the children of Seketh.
Both the Rm.t and Nshy are offspring of Heru.
Both the Aaamu and Tamahu are offspring of Seketh.
The groups are further denoted by skin color differences, in both the iconography and the text.
The Rm.t and Nshy are denoted as Km.t nw.t.
The Aamu and Tamahu are denoted as Dsrh.t nwt.
Km.t nw.t is "Black Community".
Dshrt. nw.t is "Red Community".
Therefore the Book of Gates shows that ancient Nile Valley Africans considered themselves Blacks, and distinguished themselves from Asiatics whom they considered Reds.
It also shows that AE considered themselves to be of the same lineage [of Heru] as more southerly Nile Valley Africans, and distinct from Asiatic and Libyans to whom they assigned a different lineage [via Seketh].
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ And this can't be made any clearer. "Negroid" is a Eurocentric biased and intellectually bankrupt term as is all other racial terms like "caucasoid" and "mongoloid".
As such, it is a given that such a racial term or any racial term was ever used by the Egyptians.
The ironic thing is that the root word 'negro' means black, and as Rasol pointed out the name the Egyptians actually called themselves was Kememu in which the the root word 'kem' also meant black!
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Yonis: This is how the average northwest african look like.
^ Not *all* Northwest Africans look like this as there are black ones also, but what's funny is that even these light-skinned or fair-skinned ones pictured above look an awful lot like Puerto-Ricans who themselves are descended from white Spaniards and black Africans.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ It doesn't, but since most North Africans in general do not look like that since when did such a look become *average*??
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ It doesn't, but since most North Africans in general do not look like that since when did such a look become *average*??
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
So you think most Maghrebins look more like people of Senegal or Mali than those posted above?
Posts: 1420 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Damn Somalis really hate black people tisk tisk tisk.
Let me pray:
ALLAH; COULD YOU PLEASE PRETTY PLEASE GIVE YONIS STRAIGHT ARAB MAN'S HAIR, FEET, SKIN, LIPS, EYES, HANDS, BUTT AND PENIS SO THAT HE CAN LIVE A HAPPY LIFE!!!!!!!!!
AMIYN; ALLAH SUBHANAHU WATA A'LA!!!!
Posts: 336 | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Somalis are quite content with how they look like, they don't need arab "lips", "hair", "feet" or whatever you proposed, and the rest of your post is not even worth responding since i have no intention to dive down to your low level Posts: 1420 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Yonis: So you think most Maghrebins look more like people of Senegal or Mali than those posted above?
My response was not about most people of the Maghreb but about most people of North Africa in general.
Also, do you consider only the people of Senegal and Mali to be 'black'?
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Djehuti wrote: My response was not about most people of the Maghreb but about North Africa
Djehuti you knew those pics represented the people of the Maghreb and you commented them as such since you said "Not *all* Northwest Africans look like this". But now suddenly your talking about the overall north africans not looking like that, which you know isn't the same.
Posts: 1420 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Except for the obvious white woman all the folk in the pic would be recognized the world over as blacks but not the one older woman dressed in green.
Why the qualifier "black moroccans" without the opposite corollary "white moroccans?" Why are the darks mixed but the lights aren't mixed.
This idea of mixed is something very subjective and I dismiss it. Moroccans have been looking the way they do since the very first of the writings we have from the ancient authors who emphatically labeled them black in general.
quote:Originally posted by abdulkarem3: ... the vast majority are actually mixed. they really mixed it up in the maghreb so you will see alot of people with the face of a particular(and i say that because i have noticed that only certain groups share the same face phenotype) berber look but he will be dark brown. then you will see a person with a face like an african american but be light skin thin you can see yemeni types in the south and then you can see straight southerners(senegelese,sub-saharan) I remember seeing a big fat black dude who looked as if he had a jerry curl with a carolina blue 1980's suit on sitting on a moped talking to a woman who was blushing in his face and she looked like one of those girls in the first pic you showed. i have seen those who look fulani,southern mauretanian,african american and etc. it would be hard to say who dominates as one particular group but however you will see them all there especially in the major cities. those are the places to go if you want to check out the different phentotypes of northwest africa, however there are country places or villages that consist of one phenotype. places like casa, rabat, and marrakesh lets you see the vast differences of people when it comes to looks. but one thing for sure and my moroccan friends will admit to isi that the vast majority of them are mixed. ive seen black morrocans in the states and white ones(indistinguishable from spaniards) and the ones you showed in the pics. modern day migrations sometimes through off a persons view of what the homebase may appear to be. just like the majority of egyptians who migrate to the states and ive seen a handfull of black egyptians in the states however i would percieve that only a few blacks live in egypt due to the migrations. maghrebians
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:alTakruri: Except for the obvious white woman all the folk in the pic would be recognized the world over as blacks but not the one older woman dressed in green.
You should take abdulkarems pics of his average Moroccan with a pinch of salt, those are very selective pics he posted. I can assure you that the phenotype of more than 90% of Moroccans are not represented in those images, that's why i didn't even bother to respond to his post.
Posts: 1420 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The question becomes how do you define North Africa and how do you define Maghreb. The Sahara desert covers an area almost as large as the United States. That gives you an idea of how many people and how many features you cover when speaking of Maghreb or North Africa. In fact, MOST of Morocco lies NORTH of the Sahara. So whatever it is you are trying to say doesn't make sense as MANY MANY North Africans are NOT represented by individual populations in Morocco. The point is that you are trying to SQUEEZE the huge geographic area that is North Africa into a tiny sliver that can then be identified as MOSTLY light skinned, which is absolutely INCORRECT. There is nothing wrong with diversity in Africa, white black or otherwise. What IS WRONG and WHAT WE are against is when SOME PEOPLE try to ISOLATE and SEGREGATE BLACKS from THEIR OWN HOMELAND, which is LAUGHABLY RIDICULOUS.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
To me the first picture Yonis posted look alot like Riffians. The second pictures are how generally Moroccans look and typically I see those types of Moroccans when I visit France. However, I can tell you generally Algerians are the lightest of the Maghrebians. Libyans might take a second place but have more darker people in the southern areas which eschew the average.
Anyway, Maghrebians are like Hispanic people and just because many are light does not mean they have no ''black'' African ancestry. The only difference is most will typically deny their ''black'' African ancestry as opposed to Hispanic speakers. In Europe Maghrebians are economically depressed and occupy most of the jails.
Posts: 8675 | From: Tukuler al~Takruri as Ardo since OCT2014 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
what about Southern Algeria? I am surprised at Algerians being on average lighter than Libyans, considering that Algeria goes further South than even Libya.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yeah southern Algerians are typically darker but alot are probably Haratin,refugees,or Sahrawi. The southern part of Algeria also has alot fo bedouin influence. My exposure to Libyans has been very limited but from what I seen Libyans typically are darker. Libya,unlike the other Maghrebian regions, was settled heavily by Beni Hial and Beni Sulaim Arabs. These two Arab groups either mixed in with the Amazigh or drove them southward. Thus Libya has the most Arabic influence of the other Maghrebian regions.
Also despite Tunisia's close proximity to Europe they tend to be darker than most Algerians. Overall,Algeria is the lightest of the Maghrebians and the area where you find the lightest hair and eyes.
She's very light and Algerian but there are actually people in the mountain regions of Algeria that are lighter.
Algerian housing estate resident/author
This is not to say that dark skinned people donot exist in Algeria but its lower than other Maghrebian countries. You will also find relatively few that look like inner Africans.
Posts: 8675 | From: Tukuler al~Takruri as Ardo since OCT2014 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Still sounds strange to hear that darker Algerians, in the South at least, dont look like inner Africans, seeing as they share a border with Mali and Niger and have a sizable Tuareg population as well. Not to mention that Haratin ARE Berber speakers and the indigenous people. But I guess by Bedouin you are referring to Tuareg types.
posted
When I say bedouin tribes I mean the Sahrawi and other that claim bedouin. The Tuareg and Haratin are both Amazigh and the Tuareg have never claimed bedouin.
Apparently not all the people around the cost are light such as the following people from Oran,Algeria.
Famous Rai singer Khaled
Oranian children
Map of Oran Algeria
Posts: 8675 | From: Tukuler al~Takruri as Ardo since OCT2014 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Heterogeneity of [Holocene] Maghrebian cranio-morphology has been consistently noted. This very much applies to Algeria. Just as late dynastic north Egyptian "E" series showed affinity with northern Eurasian crania and tropical African crania, so has the Maghrebian.
Crania from "proto-historical Algerians" [~1500 BC] and Carthaginians [~900 - 200 BC]:
posted
Have to remember that what's today Algeria was, even in late ancient times, inhabited by the darker type of indigenous North African. The Ger/Gir river of the ancient authors was in the Algerian chotts region and not the Niger as earlier researchers imagined. The area bears the name Negrine, for whatever value that may add or be worth.
The central and southern parts of Algeria have an African phenotype with darker skin tones and hair that is not straight, tending to be wavy and fuzzy. One can examine this type in the older anthropology picture books like Secret Museum of Mankind and the like.
This type of African may be called red but in most parts of the world would readily be identified as black or mulatto while not all resembling the common type of Zambos, Mulattos, and Quadroons one finds in the Carribean and Americas.
And remember the core of "Haratin" are the indigenous oasis dwellers of the Sahara and they possess a genotype akin to certain Nile Valley populations according to some population geneticists.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:You should take abdulkarems pics of his average Moroccan with a pinch of salt, those are very selective pics he posted. I can assure you that the phenotype of more than 90% of Moroccans are not represented in those images, that's why i didn't even bother to respond to his post.
u should add humus with that also, maybe it will add flavor. of course they were selected. thats no secret just like any joe blow thats takes a pic in a foriegn country. ive been up and down the country(al-mamlikyya al-maghrebiyya) in peoples' houses asking them the touchy color questions and other things about the segments of their society. Majority of my questionaire were awnsered yes we are mixed. Alot of the society are not into lineage like the peninsular arabs so being mixed would be known via immediate relatives or lineage keepers. Ive met those who claim pure berber to arab pure to blond hair blue eye northerners. ive talked with many other visitors and alot of the city areas have this response. Morocco as compared with its continental subsaharan neighbors are not tribal but are more islamic(cosmopolitan).
the place is just diverse in phentotype. you really have to get out of the western countries and travel up and down the coast and also the interior to see for yourself. just like ausar said they are like hispanics. in actuallity they are the prototype to alot of hispanics specifically those in the carribean. (iberian-afro-arab) element. those places are diverse phenotypically.
so this whole argument about selected pics is a tail chaser because they are selected. i posted them to show that a considerable number of moroccans look like my pics also. anyway the same way you percieve moroccans, they think also of americans. ( that they are all white).
if u dont believe me then y not runoko rashidi in his visit to the place
he described it to the tee
quote:There are Black people and White people of many varieties. There are Berbers and Arabs. There are Moroccans and foreigners. There are people in traditional North African dress and western dress. In the background you hear many varieties of music along with muezzins calling the faithful to prayer. I can honestly tell you that of all of the places that I have been I have never been anywhere quite like It. Of all of the places that I have visited I have never felt so much like I have stepped back into time. Of all of the places that I have seen I have never, with the possible exception of India, felt so much like I was in another world
the final quote is an experience that alot of african americans(especially muslims) have experienced, especially myself
quote:Many of the people that we met refused to believe that I was not Moroccan and one person insisted that I must be Nigerian. Even when I showed her my US passport she would not believe that I was not Nigerian
so this majority minority squabble is selective and opinionated.
-------------------- لا اله الا الله و محمد الرسول الله Posts: 495 | From: anchorage, alaska | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
runoko rashidi so nearly 100 percent of african americans would pass as moroccan actually there are african american muslims as been eyewitnessed by native moroccans stating african americans who live in morocco and those who have moroccan wives and work abroad, so african americans are adding to the moroccan community. i quote from the past deceased king in that " our country is an arab-african-berber country "
-------------------- لا اله الا الله و محمد الرسول الله Posts: 495 | From: anchorage, alaska | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ But why are African and 'Berber' seperate even when connected with hyphens, as if Berber is not African?! Remember folks, Berber is a ethno-linguistic term, and it is agreed by all scholars that the Berber languages and cultures originated in Africa. This would be like seperating 'Bantu' from Africa and stating that South Africa is a European-African-Bantu country.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
maghrebians![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
Famous Rai singer Khaled
Oranian children
Map of Oran Algeria
Printer-friendly view of this topic