posted
Okay I noticed people saying that on many different sites I go on. When people hear about EgyptSearch they always associate it with it being a Afrocentric haven full of Afrocentric's who make up lies and are unreasonable. I know this is most certainly not true. There are many intelligent posters on this site, some smarter than the people who claimed this site is full of Afrocentric's.
But I am just curious...I wanted to get to the bottom of this. How did EgyptSearch get associated with Afrocentrism? I on the other hand find many of the posters on here to not be Afrocentric(besides that one poster you all know who I'm talking about) and to be highly educated and reasonable.
Is it because people on this site destroy all Eurocentrics that enter and they dub this site a Afrocentric haven? Is it that Eurocentric myths get crushed on here? That is what I think. I think Eurocentrics have gone through many defeats on this site(trust me I've seen them) that they retreat, get mad and then label this site as an Afrocentric Haven to take away this sites credibility and the posters credibility on here.
What are you guys thoughts. This has been circling my head for the longest.
Posts: 1135 | From: Top secret | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
If you ask around to the members only me and Clyde Winters are admitted Afrocentrics.
Others are Blackcentric, Truthcentrics, Eurocentrics, Black Eurocentrcs(Mike) , Centrics (plain), Anti-Centrics, Off Centrics and Fakecentrics stll others are in the closet about it
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Personally I don't see anything wrong with being considered an Afro-centrists. I say so because 97% of the people who attempt to make this "a bad word" have NEVER studied any Afrocentric literature to know what that even means. First and foremost, it is a literary critique to find the location of the author in time and space. It has been proven scientifically that objectivity is fantasy (see the Double Slit Experiment) and many of the non-scholars on this board seems to believe that somehow "objectivity" is attainable.
When one is talking about African social phenomena, the only accurate way one can describe such phenomena is by the African people themselves. There is no way around it. To discuss African history, culture and philosophy, one must be centered in the reality of the African. This has been the mistake of practically all Eurocentric researchers: trying to explain African social phenomena from the perspective of Europeans and pass it off as truth.
People who study Africa, and aren't African-Centered will never gain the insight to produce useful information and get at the heart of the culture. This is the difference between Jan Vansina discussing oral traditions in Africa, versus Amadou Hampate Ba ("The Living Tradition," UNESCO). Anyone who has read anything of Ba's knows there in inside information that no outsiders would be prevy of because they don't live the culture. This is what upset scholars attempting to tackle Dogon history and culture and couldn't get anywhere that Griaule could because he was initiated into the culture which they didn't want to do. He was African-Centered and his detractors were not.
You don't have to be "Black" to be African-Centered. The book _Race and Identity in the Nile Valley: Ancient and Modern Perspectives(2004)_ is edited by Carolyn Fluehr-Lobban and Kharyssa Rhodes, two women Afrocentrists who are 'White'. They use primary sources and let the culture speak for itself without interjecting White cultural bias.
I challenge any person who is not Afrocentric to be able to extract information about African culture better than someone who lives the African reality. You can't do it.
Posts: 853 | From: Houston | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: If you ask around to the members only me and Clyde Winters are admitted Afrocentrics.
Others are Blackcentric, Truthcentrics, Eurocentrics, Black Eurocentrcs(Mike) , Centrics (plain), Anti-Centrics, Off Centrics and Fakecentrics stll others are in the closet about it
I see..
Posts: 1135 | From: Top secret | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Don't listen to lyinass. She is a closeted Eurocentric disguised as an Afrocentric, though her closet door is wide open in that what she posts betrays what she really is despite her black woman faced avatar.
quote:Originally posted by Son of Ra: Okay I noticed people saying that on many different sites I go on. When people hear about EgyptSearch they always associate it with it being a Afrocentric haven full of Afrocentric's who make up lies and are unreasonable. I know this is most certainly not true. There are many intelligent posters on this site, some smarter than the people who claimed this site is full of Afrocentric's.
But I am just curious...I wanted to get to the bottom of this. How did EgyptSearch get associated with Afrocentrism? I on the other hand find many of the posters on here to not be Afrocentric(besides that one poster you all know who I'm talking about) and to be highly educated and reasonable.
Is it because people on this site destroy all Eurocentrics that enter and they dub this site a Afrocentric haven? Is it that Eurocentric myths get crushed on here? That is what I think. I think Eurocentrics have gone through many defeats on this site(trust me I've seen them) that they retreat, get mad and then label this site as an Afrocentric Haven to take away this sites credibility and the posters credibility on here.
What are you guys thoughts. This has been circling my head for the longest.
You pretty much answered your own question.
Egyptsearch at least the 'Ancient Egypt and Egyptology' section when it first started out was a simple forum on just that. However once scholarly folks began exposing the TRUTH about ancient Egypt's BLACK African identity and refuting (destroying) the lie of a 'Caucasian' Egypt, the Euronuts began to assault the forum. The moderators then had to divide the section into separate 'Egyptology' and 'Ancient Egypt' sections with the latter serving unfortunately as a refuge or more like ghetto for race-loons (both Afro and Euro). And yes the word 'Afrocentric' tends to get thrown around like a bad word used to discredit the facts. But it's no secret Egypt is IN Africa. You'll have to call [white] scholars like Christopher Ehret, Graham Conner, and even Egyptologists like Kent Weeks, Donald Redford, and Arab Egyptologist Ahmed Saleh 'Afrocentric' as well. The evidence is out there and we here at Egyptsearch just present it. This is why the Eurocentric nuts hate us.
The lyinass is being truthful about one thing. There is a diversity of views. Some folks here are sensibly Afrocentric, others like Clyde Winters and Mike are irrationally Afrocentric, while others are openly Eurocentric nuts like Faheembonkers, and then the closeted Euronuts like lyinass herself. Truthcentric is a white poster and I like him am just 'truthcentric'. I have no bias in favor of or against Africa but just tell it like it is.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ Don't listen to lyinass. She is a closeted Eurocentric disguised as an Afrocentric, though her closet door is wide open in that what she posts betrays what she really is despite her black woman faced avatar. [QUOTE] LOL...
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Djehuti: [QB] You pretty much answered your own question.
Egyptsearch at least the 'Ancient Egypt and Egyptology' section when it first started out was a simple forum on just that. However once scholarly folks began exposing the TRUTH about ancient Egypt's BLACK African identity and refuting (destroying) the lie of a 'Caucasian' Egypt, the Euronuts began to assault the forum. The moderators then had to divide the section into separate 'Egyptology' and 'Ancient Egypt' section with the latter serving unfortunately as a refuge or more like ghetto for race-loons (both Afro and Euro). And yes the word 'Afrocentric' tends to get thrown around like a bad word used to discredit the facts. But it's no secret Egypt is IN Africa. You'll have to call [white] scholars like Christopher Ehret, Graham Conner, and even Egyptologists like Kent Weeks, Donald Redford, and Arab Egyptologist Ahmed Saleh. The evidence is out there and we here at Egyptsearch just present it. This is why the Eurocentric nuts hate us.
The lyinass is being truthful about one thing. There is a diversity of views. Some folks here are sensibly Afrocentric, others like Clyde Winters and Mike are irrationally Afrocentric, while others are openly Eurocentric nuts like Faheembonkers, and then the closeted Euronuts like lyinass herself. Truthcentric is a white poster and I like him am just 'truthcentric'. I have no bias in favor of or against Africa but just tell it like it is.
Very interesting post! I sent you a PM, someone on another site called you a 'afrocentric' or 'afronazi' and even called you a Clyde Winter sidekikck...I can give you the link. That's one of the reasons why I made this thread. I definitely know you're not a 'afronazi', so I was curious.
Also many people on biodiversity site dub this site Afrocentric. They shouldn't be talking because those same people who call this site Afrocentric are Eurocentrics themselves.
Posts: 1135 | From: Top secret | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Son of Ra: Very interesting post! I sent you a PM, someone on another site called you a 'afrocentric' or 'afronazi' and even called you a Clyde Winter sidekikck...I can give you the link. That's one of the reasons why I made this thread. I definitely know you're not a 'afronazi', so I was curious.
LMAO That's funny, because Clyde Winters calls me a Euronut and attacks me all the time for dismissing his ridiculous views! That's the problem with being sensible and rational-- you get attacked by nuts on both sides of the aisle if you know what I mean.
quote:Also many people on biodiversity site dub this site Afrocentric. They shouldn't be talking because those same people who call this site Afrocentric are Eurocentrics themselves.
Really I don't give a fart what folks on bioperversity think. That website was somewhat decent years ago when it first started and I used to lurk there. I mean sure you had race-obsessed loons but at least there were sensible folks who were interested in valid studies on world populations and their genetic diversity. Unfortunately that website quickly degenerated into a 'race' site barely above the level of Stormfront. Which is why I hardly go there save a few threads where relevant info is posted.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Son of Ra: Very interesting post! I sent you a PM, someone on another site called you a 'afrocentric' or 'afronazi' and even called you a Clyde Winter sidekikck...I can give you the link. That's one of the reasons why I made this thread. I definitely know you're not a 'afronazi', so I was curious.
LMAO That's funny, because Clyde Winters calls me a Euronut and attacks me all the time for dismissing his ridiculous views! That's the problem with being sensible and rational-- you get attacked by nuts on both sides of the aisle if you know what I mean.
quote:Also many people on biodiversity site dub this site Afrocentric. They shouldn't be talking because those same people who call this site Afrocentric are Eurocentrics themselves.
Really I don't give a fart what folks on bioperversity think. That website was somewhat decent years ago when it first started and I used to lurk there. I mean sure you had race-obsessed loons but at least there were sensible folks who were interested in valid studies on world populations and their genetic diversity. Unfortunately that website quickly degenerated into a 'race' site barely above the level of Stormfront. Which is why I hardly go there save a few threads where relevant info is posted.
Yeah bro I agree with you on Biodiversity. Any person who is arguing against Eurocentrism is dubbed a Afrocentric no matter what. That site is basically just one big tribal war. There are good posters like Lol_Race, Beyoku(he goes on this site),Doctoris Scientia, Mister G and ethioboy.
Posts: 1135 | From: Top secret | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ancient Egypt was in Africa. You can't be Afrocentrist when you claim it was created by Africans. Only people who wants to take Ancient Egypt out of Africa have an agenda.
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
When one is talking about African social phenomena, the only accurate way one can describe such phenomena is by the African people themselves. There is no way around it. To discuss African history, culture and philosophy, one must be centered in the reality of the African. This has been the mistake of practically all Eurocentric researchers: trying to explain African social phenomena from the perspective of Europeans and pass it off as truth.
People who study Africa, and aren't African-Centered will never gain the insight to produce useful information and get at the heart of the culture.
I challenge any person who is not Afrocentric to be able to extract information about African culture better than someone who lives the African reality. You can't do it.
^ This.
As for biodiversity. Its not that close to stormfront...then again I wouldnt know too much and I usually only post on the African related subjects. For the most part I visit that site and this site almost always based on the distribution of knowledge. Here is the thing about Eurocentrists though, I dont even mind all of them. SOme of them deep down know what the deal is and they just carry that facade fit in with their buddies. Also some of them while Eurocentric are willing to see info exactly for what it is....unfortunately behind closed doors.
SO when I post, some eurocentric readers are actually interested in seeing the info. I will give you a perfect example : Rahotep101. The user that comes here once and a while. Has a youtube profile. Knows exactly whats going on behind closed doors but puts on the front for his fellow Euros. All one needs to do is send some of these folks a private message.....thats when the REAL discussion starts and that is when these clowns will accept defeat.
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate: Ancient Egypt was in Africa. You can't be Afrocentrist when you claim it was created by Africans. Only people who wants to take Ancient Egypt out of Africa have an agenda.
posted
Cranial/anthropometric and dental studies on ancient egyptians have refuted Afrocentrism (Cuvier, 1817; Morton, 1844; Owen, 1875; Giuffrida-Ruggeri, 1915; Pearson and Davin, 1924; Stoessiger, 1927; Batrawi; 1925; Morant, 1935; Engelbach, 1943; Falkenburger, 1950; Derry, 1956; Dart, 1959; Wiercinski, 1965; Strouhal, 1971; Wiercinski, 1973; Froment, 1992, Brace et al, 1993; Howells, 1995; Irish, 1998).
"We examined radiographs of 12 Egyptian royal mummies obtained by two of the authors (W.R. and J.E.H.) and never before published... These people were Caucasian." (Braunstein et al., 1988)
This is why Afrocentrics today shift the debate to genetics, they lost the former argument in regards to craniometry.
Posts: 873 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate: [QB] Ancient Egypt was in Africa. You can't be Afrocentrist when you claim it was created by Africans.
Straw man. This isn't Afrocentrism.
"No one disputes that Egypt is in Africa, or that its civilization had elements in common with sub-Saharan Africa, particularly in religion. However, the claim that all Egyptians, or even all the pharaohs, were black, is not valid. Most scholars believe that Egyptians in antiquity looked pretty much as they look today, with a gradation of darker shades toward the Sudan. Evidence for the racial composition of Egypt comes from a variety of sources. Berry et al. (1967)*, using a “measure of divergence” based on 30 nonmetrical skeletal variants, found that there were significant differences between negroid populations (Ashanti, Sudan), Mediterranean populations (Palestine), and all ancient Egyptian samples. They also found a remarkable degree of constancy in the population of Egypt over a period of 5,000 years. Recent multivariate analysis of crania (Keita, 1990) showed a pattern common to both northern Late Dynastic Egypt and the Maghreb (North Africa west of Egypt) in which both tropical African and European phenotypes, as well as intermediate patterns, were present. (*Berry AC, Berry FLJ, and Ucko PJ (1967) "Genetical change in ancient Egypt". Man. 2. pp. 551-568)" - "Melanin, afrocentricity, and pseudoscience", Bernard R. Ortiz De Montellano. (1993). American Journal of Physical Anthropology, Volume 36, 17, pp. 33–58
Posts: 873 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Typical Euronut strawman nonsense. You admit that Egypt is similar to Sub-Saharans only culturally and religiously but not racially. So what is your assertion?-- that the superior Caucasians happened to adopt the culture and religion of the inferior Negroids?? LOL Any study that uses loaded and debunked racial terms like 'Caucasian' and 'Negroid' are unreliable. You realize that virtually all studies show the Egyptians to have the closest affinities to northern Sudanese which is why northern Sudanese are also labeled as 'Caucasian' and then so are various peoples in the Horn and Sahel. Face it, their whole classification of 'Caucasian' based on narrow nasal index and orthognathy etc. is b.s.
Behold your Caucasian Egyptian royals!
You lose, fool! Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
EgyptSearchforums is a neutral Egyptian history forum with neutral members, Afrocentric members, Eurocentric members, Artist members, Stylist members, news members, entertainment members, political members, gay member etc.
The fact is Ancient Egypt and Kush were black African civilization with black people, a black culture, black religion, black ideology, black symbol etc.Telling the truth is not Afrocentrism but real history. For exemple saying Scandinavia was a white civilization is not Eurocentrism this is the fact.
posted
^ Unfortunately because Egypt was probably the most advanced civilization in the ancient world with so many 'wonders', for folks to admit that it was created by blacks is a paradox to their racist views that blacks are inferior.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Indeed Egyptsearch is a haven for Afrocentrics, and closet Afrocentrics (let's keep it real) A couple of Eurocentrics are thrown in an affrimative action basis
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Face it, their whole classification of 'Caucasian' based on narrow nasal index and orthognathy etc. is b.s.
I don't think it's even based on that since most in northern sudan have a broad nasel index and a few with those in the middle.
Has for the horn, some have these features.The eurocentric racist label these regions Caucasian because it's they that have an agenda,period.
They will label any region or culture and it's people Caucasian or mixed race if it suits thier sick purpose. They did with the songhai,the mande etc.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ Unfortunately because Egypt was probably the most advanced civilization in the ancient world with so many 'wonders', for folks to admit that it was created by blacks is a paradox to their racist views that blacks are inferior.
It's not that,trust me since in end they will view rome or greece has more advanced then pharaonic egypt,ask them.
Since nubia started out more advanced then egypt since it was a older civilzation and later became more advanced again then egypt i wonder why they do not try to claim nubia?oh wait some of these wackos do,but it's still much harder then egypt for varied reason.
There are other african civilizations that were more advanced then egypt that they try to claim like axum and others has well.
They try harder with egypt more so then any other clear african civilization because of egypt's more direct influence in europe and because of what the modern population in egypt today looks like,so they feel they could get away with it more. Keep in mind too there was as sizable white population in the late period even when it still was a minority and some of art in some of the periods seem to play a factor too.
All these factors come into play for thier thoughts.
Posts: 2560 | From: Somewhere | Registered: May 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: Indeed Egyptsearch is a haven for Afrocentrics, and closet Afrocentrics (let's keep it real) A couple of Eurocentrics are thrown in an affrimative action basis
LOL...
Posts: 1135 | From: Top secret | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
I read in some websites when they mention the mande or people that region were mixed race or dark Caucasian.
If you go to enough websites believe me crap like this will pop up,that's why i try not to go to any website.I remember a thread awhile ago and these sickos label the mansa kings Caucasian.That thread is somewhere in this forum. Djehuti remember's it.
Crap like this come on storm front and other has well.There is even a book by a egyptian and the author views all civilizations in africa has Caucasian.
The history is good in the book but he had the other stuff wrong like i mention. There are some stuff wrong has well,but you get the point.
Posts: 2560 | From: Somewhere | Registered: May 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
The new theory is that so called Caucasians originated in Africa rather than the Caucus
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Here is the book,if you read it you know what i mean. HE LABELS blacks of africa Caucasian or mixed race that had a civilization,so it does not matter the nose index,head shape or skin tone,or hair type.
Exiled Egyptians: The Heart of Africa Author Moustafa Gadalla
Moustafa Gadalla is an Egyptian American independent Egyptologist, who was born in cairo, Egypt in 1944. he holds a bachelor of Science degree in civil engineering from Cairo University.
From his early childhood,Gadalla pursued his Ancient Egyptian roots with passion, through continuous study and research. Since 1990,he has dedicated and concentrated all his time to researching and writing.
Gadalla is the author of thirteen internationally acclaimed books about the various aspects of the Ancient Egyptian history and civilization and its impact worldwide. His books are alos found in seven other living languages.
Gadalla is the chairman of the Tehuti research foundation -- an international, US based, non-profit organization dedidacted to Ancient Egyptian studies.Gadalla is also the founder and Dean of the on-line Egyptian Mystical Universisty for public education of the Egyptian deep knowledge and wisdom.
Posts: 2560 | From: Somewhere | Registered: May 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Firewall: I read in some websites when they mention the mande or people that region were mixed race or dark Caucasian.
If you go to enough websites believe me crap like this will pop up,that's why i try not to go to any website.I remember a thread awhile ago and these sickos label the mansa kings Caucasian.That thread is somewhere in this forum. Djehuti remember's it.
Crap like this come on storm front and other has well.There is even a book by a egyptian and the author views all civilizations in africa has Caucasian.
The history is good in the book but he had the other stuff wrong like i mention.
People seriously think these people are mixed or Caucasian???
That is Simply the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. They most likely want to claim West African empires like the Mali or Shonghai.
And I seen that thread of somebody trying to claim Mansa Musa being Arab or something like that. That character was using a fake edited Mansa Musa image of him being light skinned and was trying to claim he was Arab.
Posts: 1135 | From: Top secret | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Firewall: Here is the book,if you read it you know what i mean. HE LABELS blacks of africa Caucasian or mixed race that had a civilization,so it does not matter the nose index,head shape or skin tone,or hair type.
Exiled Egyptians: The Heart of Africa Author Moustafa Gadalla
Moustafa Gadalla is an Egyptian American independent Egyptologist, who was born in cairo, Egypt in 1944. he holds a bachelor of Science degree in civil engineering from Cairo University.
From his early childhood,Gadalla pursued his Ancient Egyptian roots with passion, through continuous study and research. Since 1990,he has dedicated and concentrated all his time to researching and writing.
Gadalla is the author of thirteen internationally acclaimed books about the various aspects of the Ancient Egyptian history and civilization and its impact worldwide. His books are alos found in seven other living languages.
Gadalla is the chairman of the Tehuti research foundation -- an international, US based, non-profit organization dedidacted to Ancient Egyptian studies.Gadalla is also the founder and Dean of the on-line Egyptian Mystical Universisty for public education of the Egyptian deep knowledge and wisdom.
quote:Originally posted by Firewall: Here is the book,if you read it you know what i mean. HE LABELS blacks of africa Caucasian or mixed race that had a civilization,so it does not matter the nose index,head shape or skin tone,or hair type.
Exiled Egyptians: The Heart of Africa Author Moustafa Gadalla
Moustafa Gadalla is an Egyptian American independent Egyptologist, who was born in cairo, Egypt in 1944. he holds a bachelor of Science degree in civil engineering from Cairo University.
From his early childhood,Gadalla pursued his Ancient Egyptian roots with passion, through continuous study and research. Since 1990,he has dedicated and concentrated all his time to researching and writing.
Gadalla is the author of thirteen internationally acclaimed books about the various aspects of the Ancient Egyptian history and civilization and its impact worldwide. His books are alos found in seven other living languages.
Gadalla is the chairman of the Tehuti research foundation -- an international, US based, non-profit organization dedidacted to Ancient Egyptian studies.Gadalla is also the founder and Dean of the on-line Egyptian Mystical Universisty for public education of the Egyptian deep knowledge and wisdom.
some recent DNA analysis suggests that modern Copts have the closest affinity to the ancient Egyptians as well as other Africans
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Here that website,there others but this was one of the more recent ones i remember with it's non-sense and crap. Warning, hold your nose.
Howstuffworks.com
This is page 2 of the website,other pages inside the link below.
General African History
Sub-Saharan Africa to 1500
Early records of Africa south of the Sahara desert, often referred to as Black Africa, are extremely scanty. It is known, however, that as early as 900 B.C. an advanced agricultural civilization called the Nok culture arose in northern Nigeria.
Another civilization had emerged about 1800 B.C. south of Egypt in a region later known as Nubia, which the Egyptians valued for its gold. From time to time Egypt invaded Nubia, and finally about 1500 B.C. conquered it and made it a province. Kingdom of Kush
Sometime after 1000 B.C., a Nubian people called the Kushites broke away from Egyptian rule and established an independent kingdom. The Kushites became so powerful that they were able to conquer Egypt in the eighth century B.C. A century later, invading Assyrians drove the Kushites back into their homeland in northern Nubia. Later Kush was centered in central Nubia around the city of Meroe. The original Kushites were Caucasian. However, Meroe was in a region of dark-skinned peoples, and the Kushites soon intermarried with this population.
Kush became one of the most powerful kingdoms south of the Sahara. The Kushites are believed to be the first people of sub-Saharan Africa to make practical use of iron, having possibly learned ironworking from the Assyrians. The region was rich in iron ore, and iron became important to the kingdom's prosperity. Many historians believe that knowledge of ironworking was carried by the Kushites to central and west Africa. During the third century A.D., powerful nomadic peoples began migrating into Kush, gravely weakening the kingdom's control over its own territory.
Meanwhile, about 100 A.D., there had arisen to the southeast of Nubia in what is now Ethiopia a kingdom called Aksum (or Axum). It was founded by Semites from southern Arabia, who intermarried with the native Ethiopians to form a new civilization. Aksum flourished as a result of trade that passed through the kingdom and soon surpassed Kush as a power. In the fourth century A.D., an Aksumite invasion destroyed the declining Kushite kingdom.
The Kingdom of AksumThe Kingdom of Aksum was a powerful ancient kingdom in East Africa. It occupied lands that are now Eritrea, northern Ethiopia, and parts of Sudan and Djibouti. By the middle of the A.D. 300's, Aksum had gained control of the land and sea routes from Africa to Europe and Asia. Present-day boundaries are shown as gray lines. The Christian Kingdoms
Kush was succeeded by three less advanced kingdoms—Nobatia in northern Nubia, Makuria in central Nubia, and Alwa in southern Nubia. In the sixth century, missionaries converted the kingdoms to Christianity. In the seventh century, Makuria absorbed Nobatia. Makuria was also known as Dongola, after its capital.
The growth of Islam in the eighth century left the Christian kingdoms surrounded by hostile Muslim powers. Makuria managed to maintain its Christian identity until the 14th century, and Alwa survived until the early 16th century, when it was destroyed and replaced by the Muslim Sennar kingdom.
Meanwhile, Aksum had adopted Christianity in the fourth century. Muslim pressure after the eighth century forced the Aksumites to fall back into the Ethiopian highlands. From there a new empire arose in the 12th century ruled by the Zagwe dynasty. It was succeeded in the 13th century by an Ethiopian empire centered in Amhara.
In the later Middle Ages, European contact with Ethiopia began. Hearing of the isolated Christian country from Ethiopian pilgrims in the Holy Land, the Dominicans sent representatives to Ethiopia in the early 14th century. Strong military and diplomatic ties with Portugal were established in the 15th and 16th centuries. Central and West Sudanic Kingdoms
From ancient times, the western part of the Sudan (the grassland belt south of the Sahara) engaged in trade with North Africa. The central Sudan also had contact with the north and, in addition, traded with Egypt and Nubia. At first goods were transported by donkey or horse, but after the camel was introduced into the Sahara from Egypt early in the Christian Era, the camel caravan became the means of transport.
The principal trade commodities were salt from North Africa and gold from the western Sudan. Much of the gold came from coastal areas farther south and was accumulated in Sudanese cities before its shipment across the desert. Later, ivory and slaves from the western and central Sudan were traded for metal tools, cotton goods, and horses.
Strong and extensive kingdoms grew up around the great sub-Saharan trading centers. The populations of these kingdoms were predominantly black, with some Caucasian mixture. Most of the urban people were, or later became, Muslims. Many of the country people remained animistic in religious belief. Most of the kingdoms were urban in character, with complex political organization. They had well-trained cavalry units, which in time of war were supplemented by mass armies of conscripts.
Among the earliest of the western kingdoms was Ghana, lying between the Senegal and Niger rivers. Ghana was founded in the 5th or 6th century A.D. In the 9th century, Kanem was founded around Lake Chad in the central Sudan. To the west and south of Kanem, in what is now northern Nigeria, the Hausa city-states arose in the 11th century. These included Kano, Gobir, and Katsina.
The Berbers of the Sahara, who controlled the Saharan trade routes, gradually penetrated the sub-Saharan grasslands. In the 11th century, a group of Berbers (the Almoravid Muslims) conquered Ghana. Although Ghana recovered its independence, it never regained commercial dominance and had broken up into a number of petty states by the early 13th century.
With the fall of Ghana, the Mali kingdom emerged as the leading power in the western Sudan. Its inhabitants, the Mandingo people, were converted to Islam in the 14th century. The Mali empire encompassed a vast area from the Atlantic coast east to Timbuktu, a Berber trading city on the Niger that became a center of Muslim scholarship. At times Mali had possession of Gao, a trading city of the Songhai people east of Timbuktu.
Mali went into decline in the late 14th century. In 1375 the Songhai threw off Mali domination, and began pressuring the empire from the east. From the north the Tuareg (a Berber people) seized cities, including Timbuktu, and from the south the Mossi made raids on Mali. The empire was gradually reduced to a small state, and Gao became the center of a rapidly growing Song-hai empire that by 1500 controlled the western Sudan. (
Songhai Empire about 1500.Songhai Empire about 1500. This map shows the Songhai Empire in West Africa at the height of its power. During the reign of Emperor Askia Muhammad, the empire extended from the Atlantic coast to what is now central Nigeria and included parts of what are now Burkina Faso, Gambia, Guinea, Mali, Mauritania, Niger, and Senegal. The Songhai controlled important trade routes that made the empire the richest in West Africa.
Meanwhile, in the central Sudan, Kanem had emerged as a powerful state, the Kanem-Bornu empire. It became noted for its large standing army—cavalry and infantry uniformed in quilted armor and chain mail. Kanem-Bornu grew prosperous from the export of slaves to the north and east. The empire continued to expand after 1500. (
In the 15th century, the Portuguese began exploration of the Atlantic coast. They colonized the Cape Verde Islands in the 1460's and established trading contacts with the western Sudanic kingdoms. Guinea
About the beginning of the Christian Era Asiatic food plants, including the banana and the yam, were introduced into Africa. Suitable for tropical culture, they became the basis of a forest civilization. As the population of the Sudan swelled, various peoples at the southern edge moved down the rivers toward the coast, taking with them Sudanic political and social patterns.
Since the Arabs who traded with the Sudanic kingdoms did not travel as far as Guinea, records for this area are extremely scarce. Some of the early kingdoms, such as Bono and Banda along the Volta River and Yoruba and Benin along the lower Niger, were probably founded about the 13th century and were located first at the northern edge of the forest. By some 200 years later they were within the forest.
Active trade was carried on with the Sudan, kingdoms west of the Volta dealing mainly with Ghana and Mali and those to the east with the Hausa states and Kanem-Bornu. Guinea's major exports were gold, kola nuts, and ivory. Imports were salt, copper, horses, and cattle. Cloth and beads, in common use throughout Guinea, were both imported and exported. There is no record of a Guinea slave trade before the Europeans came to the coast, although the Sudan had then been supplying slaves to North Africa for several centuries. The forest kingdoms became more powerful after the beginning of the European slave trade, for which the indigenous rulers provided slaves.
The Portuguese reached the Senegal River in 1445 and the island of Fernando Po in 1472. Their trading station of Elmina, on the Gold Coast, was founded in 1482. A port for Benin in the west delta of the Niger was opened in 1486.
Africa in the 1400s.Africa in the 1400s. Many highly organized states existed in Africa long before the European colonial period. This map shows the main states and trade routes of the 1400's. Islamic states were in northern Africa, along the Niger River, and along the east coast of Africa. West African states were located near the Gulf of Guinea. Bantu states were in areas that are now part of Nigeria and Cameroon in western Africa, Congo (Kinshasa) and Angola in central Africa, and Mozambique and Zimbabwe in southeastern Africa. A Christian state was located in what is now Ethiopia. The Bantu States
Only fragmentary knowledge exists of the early history of the Bantu-speaking peoples, who occupy most of Africa south of a line from Cameroon to southern Ethiopia. On linguistic evidence it appears that they originated in the area of modern Cameroon and migrated eastward and southward. Apparently a great population expansion and dispersal occurred around the beginning of the Christian era.
The great Kongo kingdom at the mouth of the Congo River came to power about 1400. The Portuguese discovered this river and made coastal explorations in 1482–86. In 1491 Portuguese missionaries and craftsmen arrived in Kongo and began creating a Christian kingdom, based on the capital of San Salvador. It declined during the late 17th and 18th centuries.
Northwest of Lake Victoria, Bantu-speaking peoples established a strong kingdom called Bunyoro (or Kitara) during the 14th century. It ruled what is now Uganda. In the 16th century the kingdom of Buganda began to vie with Bunyoro for control of the region, and by the early 19th century it was the dominant power. Further south there were a number of smaller kingdoms—Ankole, Burundi, and Rwanda.
Centered in the upper Zambezi Valley was the Shona (or Rozwi) confederation. In the 11th century the Shona built a city called Zimbabwe to serve as their capital. During the 15th and 16th centuries, Zimbabwe was the capital of the Mutapa Empire (named after the Shona leader, Mutapa), which covered all of the present-day countries of Zimbabwe and Mozambique. Its prosperity was based on the export of gold to the east. The empire went into decline in the 16th century and eventually Zimbabwe was abandoned. The Eastern Coast
From very early times Arab sailors visited the upper east coast of Africa to trade iron implements for ivory. From Africa came also palm oil, rhinoceros horn, and frankincense. The Arabs transported this merchandise to the Mediterranean countries by way of the Red Sea and to Arabia, Persia, and India across the Indian Ocean. The Chinese were also involved in this early trade. (Axum, an Ethiopian kingdom built on this trade, was discussed earlier in this section, under the subtitle Sub-Saharan Africa to 1500: Kingdom of Kush.)
There is no mention of slave trade in the early records of the east coast. As the Bantu population expanded eastward, however, black slaves became an item of trade throughout the Indian Ocean area. Indonesians, who had colonized Madagascar, dominated the trade routes from the 8th century to the 12th.
In about the eighth century, Muslims began to found settlements along the coast. Some of these were communities of Arabian refugees from religious conflicts within the Islamic world. Others were trade settlements established by Persian and Arab merchants. Malindi, Mombasa, Kilwa, Mozambique, and Sofala—the major gold port for Zimbabwe—were among important coastal cities. In the 13th century Arab seafarers gained control of the Indian Ocean, and east Africa was absorbed into the Islamic world.
posted
Now for the western sudan,they either saying that population is mostly black with some Caucasians living there or the population is black with some Caucasian admixture.
Now if it's the first that's true,if it's the second they are wrong,just like with kush and the kushites and axum.
Posts: 2560 | From: Somewhere | Registered: May 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Firewall: Now for the western sudan,they either saying that population is mostly black with some Caucasians living there or the population is black with some Caucasian admixture.
Now if it's the first that's true,if it's the second they are wrong,just like with kush and the kushites and axum.
I assume you mean
first = population is mostly black with some Caucasians living there
second = population is black with some Caucasian admixture
These statements are not inconsistent. two ethnicities are living at a location some of them mix with each other others don't both statements could be true at the same time.
The second statement does not clarify if having some Caucasian admixture applies to all in the popualtion or some in the population
Ceratinly there are some who are not part cave beast
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
The second for some could mean the population is black with some Caucasian admixture,meaning some would think all had Caucasian admixture.
Some could read that way,so it's not that clear.You could assume they mean the latter too since they got kush and axum wrong.
I don't take chances on websites that could get axum and kush wrong and anything else they have in there.
Posts: 2560 | From: Somewhere | Registered: May 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Firewall: The second for some could mean the population is black with some Caucasian admixture,meaning some would think all had Caucasian admixture.
Some could read that way,so it's not that clear.You could assume they mean the latter too since they got kush and axum wrong.
you're right it's not perectly clear
here's some DNATribes analysis of modern African poualtions of the regions:
posted
That's for modern sudan,not early sudan or ethiopia,and the horn and i was talking about western and central sudan in the middle ages,not east africa,so there was no need to change the subject.
Posts: 2560 | From: Somewhere | Registered: May 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't know if that's correct above,so others could answer that here. Here is the one i rely on.
Early sudan,ethiopia,early east africa is a different story by the way.
This is for modern sudan.
Now this is paternal only.
Sample Nubians taken(Nile Valley) Nubians (Agriculturists; n=39; Nilo-Saharan, Eastern Sudanic) 3/39 = 7.7% B-M60 - Nilotic 3/39 = 7.7% E1b1b-M215(xE1b1b1a-M7.8. North East Africa 5/39 = 12.8% E1b1b1a1-V12(xE1b1b1a1b-V32) North East Africa 1/39 = 2.6% E1b1b1a1b-V32 North East Africa 4/39 = 10.3% F-M89(xH1-M52, I-M170, J-12f2, K-M9) Western Asia 2/39 = 5.1% I-M170 - Near East 16/39 = 41.0% J-12f2(xJ2-M172) - Arabic 1/39 = 2.6% J2-M172 -Arabic 4/39 = 10.3% R1b1-P25 - Chadic
Nuba Hill Nubians and others.(Central sudan) (Nilo-Saharan, Eastern Sudanic) 46 % A3b2-M13 - Nilotic 14.2% B-M60 - Nilotic 14.2% E1b1b-M215(xE1b1b1a-M7.8. - North East Africa 25 % E1b1b1a1-V12(xE1b1b1a1b-V32) North East Africa
Beja (Pastoralists; n=42; Afro-Asiatic, Cushitic?) 2/42 = 4.8% A3b2-M13 - Nilotic 7/42 = 16.7% E1b1b-M215(xE1b1b1a-M7.8. - North East Africa 2/42 = 4.8% E1b1b1a1-V12(xE1b1b1a1b-V32) North East Africa 13/42 = 31.0% E1b1b1a1b-V32 -North East Africa 15/42 = 35.7% J-12f2(xJ2-M172) Arabic 1/42 = 2.4% J2-M172 -Arabic 2/42 = 4.8% R1b1-P25 - Chadic
Arabs/Gaalien (Agriculturists; n=50; Afro-Asiatic, Semitic) 3/50 = 6.0% A3b2-M13 - Nilotic 3/50 = 6.0% E1b1b1a1-V12(xE1b1b1a1b-V32) North East Africa 3/50 = 6.0% E1b1b1a1b-V32 North East Africa 3/50 = 6.0% E1b1b1a3-V22 North East Africa 5/50 = 10.0% F-M89(xH1-M52, I-M 170, J-12f2, K-M9)Western Asia 2/50 = 4.0% I-M170 Near East 18/50 = 36.0% J-12f2(xJ2-M172) Arabic 2/50 = 4.0% J2-M172 Arabic 3/50 = 6.0% K-M9(xL-M11, O-M175, P-M74) Southwestern Asia 1/50 = 2.0% R1-M173(xR1b1-P25) Chadic 7/50 = 14.0% R1b1-P25 - Chadic
Arabs/Meseria (Nomadic Pastoralists; n=28; Afro-Asiatic, Semitic) 1/28 = 3.6% E1b1b1a1-V12(xE1b1b1a1b-V32) North East Africa 3/28 = 10.7% E1b1b1a1b-V32 North East Africa 3/28 = 10.7% F-M89(xH1-M52, I-M170, J-12f2, K-M9) Western Asia 2/28 = 7.1% I-M170 - South West Asia 12/28 = 42.9% J-12f2(xJ2-M172) Arabic 7/28 = 25.0% R1b1-P25 - Chadic
Arabs/Arakien (Agriculturists; n=24; Afro-Asiatic, Semitic) 2/24 = 8.3% E1b1b1a1-V12(xE1b1b1a1b-V32) - North East Africa 1/24 = 4.2% E1b1b1a1b-V32 North East Africa 1/24 = 4.2% E1b1b1a3-V22 North East Africa 2/24 = 8.3% F-M89(xH1-M52, I-M170, J-12f2, K-M9) West Asia 16/24 = 66.7% J-12f2(xJ2-M172) Arabic 2/24 = 8.3% R1b1-P25 Chadic
Sudanese Arab total: 3/102 = 2.9% A3b2-M13 - Nilotic 6/102 = 5.9% E1b1b1a1-V12(xE1b1b1a1b-V32) - North East Africa 7/102 = 6.9% E1b1b1a1b-V32 - North East Africa 4/102 = 3.9% E1b1b1a3-V22 - North East Africa 10/102 = 9.8% F-M89(xH1-M52, I-M170, J-12f2, K-M9) West Asia 4/102 = 3.9% I-M170 South West Asia 46/102 = 45.1% J-12f2(xJ2-M172) Arabic 2/102 = 2.0% J2-M172 - Arabic 3/102 = 2.9% K-M9(xL-M11, O-M175, P-M74) - South west Asia 1/102 = 1.0% R1-M173(xR1b1-P25) - Chadic 16/102 = 15.7% R1b1-P25 - Chadic
Masalit (Agriculturists; n=32; Nilo-Saharan, Maban) 6/32 = 18.8% A3b2-M13 - Nilotic 1/32 = 3.1% B-M60 - Nilotic 1/32 = 3.1% E1b1b1a-M78(xE1b1b1a1-V12, E1b1b1a2-V13, E1b1b1a3-V22, E1b1b1a4-V65) - North East Africa 17/32 = 53.1% E1b1b1a1b-V32 - North East Africa 5/32 = 15.6% E1b1b1a3-V22 - North East Africa 2/32 = 6.3% J-12f2(xJ2-M172) Arabic
Fur (Agriculturists; n=32; Nilo-Saharan, Fur) 10/32 = 31.3% A3b2-M13 - Nilotic 1/32 = 3.1% B-M60 - Nilotic 13/32 = 40.6% E1b1b1a1b-V32 - North East Africa 6/32 = 18.8% E1b1b1a3-V22 - North East Africa 2/32 = 6.3% J-12f2(xJ2-M172) - Arabic
Copts (Agriculturists; n=33; Afro-Asiatic, Ancient Egyptian > Semitic) 5/33 = 15.2% B-M60 - Nilotic 2/33 = 6.1% E1b1b-M215(xE1b1b1a-M7.8. - North East Africa 5/33 = 15.2% E1b1b1a1-V12(xE1b1b1a1b-V32) North East Africa 13/33 = 39.4% J-12f2(xJ2-M172) Arabic 2/33 = 6.1% J2-M172 - Arabic 1/33 = 3.0% K-M9(xL-M11, O-M175, P-M74) - South West Asia 5/33 = 15.2% R1b1-P25 -- Chadic
Sudanese (Pastoralist/AgriPastoralist Nilotes (Dinka, Nuer, Shilluk) Nilo-Saharan, Eastern Sudanic) A3B2 (28/53 = 52.8%), - Nilotic B(16/53 = 30.2%), -Nilotic E1b1b1a1 (V12+V22 +32)- 9/53 = 17.0%. - North East Africa
quote:Originally posted by Doctoris Scientia: Haplogroup J in itself is most likely African. J* peaks in territories near in or around Africa.
J2-M172 is African ... J (Y-DNA), more than likely originated in East Africa also.
J1 moved into Yemen, While J2 spread from Egypt into the Levant
J1 were Nomads similar to the Beja and Tigre, While J2 were farmers in affiliation to Nile Valley populations.
Areas like Socotra (a few miles outside off of Somalia) still have the highest % of J*.
Both J1 and J2 have African origins... J*(xJ1, J2) is the oldest form of J ever found, it was found in and near Africa.
70% J* in Socotra (Cerny) 7.7% J* in Oman (Di Giacomo)
According to the most recent studies, most of the "Eurasian" tagged haplogroups developed either in Africa or originated among populations who spanned between both "Southwest Asia" and Africa.
Posts: 2560 | From: Somewhere | Registered: May 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
Genetics A Y-chromosome study by Wood et al. (2005) tested various populations in Africa for paternal lineages, including 26 Maasai and 9 Luo from Kenya and 9 Alur from the Democratic Republic of Congo. The signature Nilotic paternal marker Haplogroup A3b2 was observed in 27% of the Maasai, 22% of the Alur, and 11% of the Luo. Haplogroup B, another characteristically Nilotic paternal marker according to Gomes et al. (2010), was found in 22% of Wood et al.'s Luo samples and 8% of the studied Maasai. The E1b1b haplogroup was also observed in 50% of the Maasai, which is indicative of substantial gene flow into this population from Cushitic males. In addition, 67% of the Alur samples possessed the Sub-Saharan E2 haplogroup.
Another study by Hassan et al. (2008) analysed the Y-DNA of populations in the Sudan region, with various local Nilotic groups included for comparison. The researchers found the signature Nilotic A and B clades to be the most common paternal lineages amongst the Nilo-Saharan speakers, except those inhabiting western Sudan, where an appreciable North African influence was noted. Haplogroup A was observed amongst 62% of Dinka, 53.3% of Shilluk, 46.4% of Nuba, 33.3% of Nuer, 31.3% of Fur and 18.8% of Masalit. Haplogroup B was found in 50% of Nuer, 26.7% of Shilluk, 23% of Dinka, 14.3% of Nuba, 3.1% of Fur and 3.1% of Masalit. The E1b1b clade was also observed in 71.9% of the Masalit, 59.4% of the Fur, 39.3% of the Nuba, 20% of the Shilluk, 16.7% of the Nuer, and 15% of the Dinka. Hassan et al. attributed the atypically high frequencies of the haplogroup in the Masalit to either a recent population bottleneck that likely altered the community's original haplogroup diversity or to geographical proximity to E1b1b's place of origin in North Africa, where the researchers suggest that the clade "might have been brought to Sudan from[...] after the progressive desertification of the Sahara around 6,000–8,000 years ago". Henn et al. (2008) similarly observed Afro-Asiatic influence in the Nilotic Datog of northern Tanzania, 43% of whom carried the M293 sub-clade of E1b1b.
mtDNA Unlike their paternal DNA 543, the maternal lineages of Nilotes in general show low-to-negligible amounts of Afro-Asiatic and other extraneous influences. An mtDNA study by Castri et al. (2008) examined the maternal ancestry of various Nilotic populations in Kenya, with Turkana, Samburu, Maasai and Luo individuals sampled. Almost all of the tested Nilotes belonged to various Sub-Saharan macro-haplogroup L sub-clades, including L0, L2, L3, L4 and L5. Low levels of maternal gene flow from North Africa and the Horn of Africa were also observed in a few groups, mainly via the presence of mtDNA haplogroup M and haplogroup I lineages in about 12.5% of the Maasai and 7% of the Samburu samples, respectively.
Autosomal DNA The autosomal DNA of Nilotic peoples has been examined in a comprehensive study by Tishkoff et al. (2009) on the genetic affiliations of various populations in Africa. According to the researchers, Nilotes generally form their own Sub-Saharan genetic cluster. The authors also found that certain Nilotic populations in the eastern Great Lakes region, such as the Maasai, showed some additional Afro-Asiatic affinities due to repeated assimilation of Cushitic-speaking peoples over the past 5000 or so years.
Posts: 2560 | From: Somewhere | Registered: May 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Firewall: I read in some websites when they mention the mande or people that region were mixed race or dark Caucasian.
If you go to enough websites believe me crap like this will pop up,that's why i try not to go to any website.I remember a thread awhile ago and these sickos label the mansa kings Caucasian.That thread is somewhere in this forum. Djehuti remember's it.
Crap like this come on storm front and other has well.There is even a book by a egyptian and the author views all civilizations in africa has Caucasian.
The history is good in the book but he had the other stuff wrong like i mention.
People seriously think these people are mixed or Caucasian???
That is Simply the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. They most likely want to claim West African empires like the Mali or Shonghai.
And I seen that thread of somebody trying to claim Mansa Musa being Arab or something like that. That character was using a fake edited Mansa Musa image of him being light skinned and was trying to claim he was Arab.
Trust me, there has been a consorted effort among scholars and academicians in the West, particularly in the 18th and 19th centuries to claim every advanced culture in the world as the work of 'Caucasians'. It started in the 18th century with the rise of European colonialism and was a way to excuse European dominance in the globe i.e. the very birth of racism itself-- the excuse that the 'European race' is superior. If you don't believe me I suggest you do research on racism in modern science and historiography. When I first found out about ancient Egypt's black identity back in high school and did more research into the subject of racism in history and science, I was shocked just how pervasive it was. Look up 'Hamitic race' as an example of this nonsense. Even the genocide in Rwanda has its roots in the crap the Belgian colonists peddled! And it wasn't just Africans or blacks who are victims of this. I myself am Asian and I was also floored to find studies that describe civilizations in Asia being the result of early 'Caucasians'. There are old papers that describe my ancient Filipino ancestors as 'Mediterranean Caucsoids'!! LOL I'm telling you, Western academia was wrought in and marred by racist beliefs. Even though much of this racialism was debunked it still survives in some remnant form even in science with certain genetic studies attached with racial implications. Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Firewall: I read in some websites when they mention the mande or people that region were mixed race or dark Caucasian.
If you go to enough websites believe me crap like this will pop up,that's why i try not to go to any website.I remember a thread awhile ago and these sickos label the mansa kings Caucasian.That thread is somewhere in this forum. Djehuti remember's it.
Crap like this come on storm front and other has well.There is even a book by a egyptian and the author views all civilizations in africa has Caucasian.
The history is good in the book but he had the other stuff wrong like i mention.
People seriously think these people are mixed or Caucasian???
That is Simply the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. They most likely want to claim West African empires like the Mali or Shonghai.
And I seen that thread of somebody trying to claim Mansa Musa being Arab or something like that. That character was using a fake edited Mansa Musa image of him being light skinned and was trying to claim he was Arab.
Trust me, there has been a consorted effort among scholars and academicians in the West, particularly in the 18th and 19th centuries to claim every advanced culture in the world as the work of 'Caucasians'. It started in the 18th century with the rise of European colonialism and was a way to excuse European dominance in the globe i.e. the very birth of racism itself-- the excuse that the 'European race' is superior. If you don't believe me I suggest you do research on racism in modern science and historiography. When I first found out about ancient Egypt's black identity back in high school and did more research into the subject of racism in history and science, I was shocked just how pervasive it was. Look up 'Hamitic race' as an example of this nonsense. Even the genocide in Rwanda has its roots in the crap the Belgian colonists peddled! And it wasn't just Africans or blacks who are victims of this. I myself am Asian and I was also floored to find studies that describe civilizations in Asia being the result of early 'Caucasians'. There are old papers that describe my ancient Filipino ancestors as 'Mediterranean Caucsoids'!! LOL I'm telling you, Western academia was wrought in and marred by racist beliefs. Even though much of this racialism was debunked it still survives in some remnant form even in science with certain genetic studies attached with racial implications.
Yeah I believe you. I heard of the hamitic race thing which in a way fueled the Rwandan genocide. The hamitic race was suppose to be a sub race of the larger Caucasoid race. Very silly indeed. And lol at ancient Filipino's being Caucasoid.
Posts: 1135 | From: Top secret | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
I loathe how people assume that just because I identify ancient Egyptians as Black African people that I'm some kind of anti-science fringe wacko on par with creationists or UFO cultists. It saddens me that so-called "skeptical" or "rationalist" liberal types have shown the same hostility towards my opinions as any blatant white supremacists. I am still not sure why. I guess they believe that if any argument goes against what they perceive to be the "mainstream" scientific or historical consensus, it's pseudo-scientific woo.
I notice that armchair historians such as the posters on most history forums tend to be the most hostile and obstinate. Most lay people, white or black, appear more open-minded in my experience. Unfortunately the latter camp don't have much of an investment in history to begin with.
posted
Its usually the people who barely know anything about Ancient Egypt or Africa in general who dismiss Ancient Egypt being native African.
Posts: 1135 | From: Top secret | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Actually I think it depends on the individual. There are some people who have vested interest in denying the black identity of Egyptians. And by interest I mean emotional ones based on white supremacy or simply a psychological paradigm based on years of Eurocentric indoctrination.
quote:Originally posted by Truthcentric: I loathe how people assume that just because I identify ancient Egyptians as Black African people that I'm some kind of anti-science fringe wacko on par with creationists or UFO cultists. It saddens me that so-called "skeptical" or "rationalist" liberal types have shown the same hostility towards my opinions as any blatant white supremacists. I am still not sure why. I guess they believe that if any argument goes against what they perceive to be the "mainstream" scientific or historical consensus, it's pseudo-scientific woo.
Your experience seems funny if not sad considering that the black identity of of the Egyptians is rooted in valid science that for all purposes is "mainstream" in academia yet not made known to the general public. I'm curious, have you ever presented any of the hundreds of studies we post here to these 'liberal' skeptics??
quote:I notice that armchair historians such as the posters on most history forums tend to be the most hostile and obstinate. Most lay people, white or black, appear more open-minded in my experience. Unfortunately the latter camp don't have much of an investment in history to begin with.
Again, I think it depends on those individuals who don't have emotional vested interests. But you're right that a sensible layperson once presented with the evidence can see for him or herself. It's just the wackos with the psychological-emotional problems based on their views of 'race' who are in denial.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: I'm curious, have you ever presented any of the hundreds of studies we post here to these 'liberal' skeptics??
I'll be honest: not really. I tend to post only the small handful that I believe get the point across the best. Perhaps bringing forth more literature would have helped me.
Posts: 7069 | From: Fallbrook, CA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Djehuti: [QB] ^ Actually I think it depends on the individual. There are some people who have vested interest in denying the black identity of Egyptians. And by interest I mean emotional ones based on white supremacy or simply a psychological paradigm based on years of Eurocentric indoctrination. [QB][QUOTE]
I know that, but what I really meant is the regular average person who barely knows nothing about history. Like what Truthcentric stated. Like they have a bias that Africans can't do anything, because they been fed Eurocentric myths. I already know Eurocentrics deny AE being AFrican, but I am talking about average people and its a lot of them, not only Eurocentrics. Differences is those people CAN be educated, but Eurocentrics can't.
Posts: 1135 | From: Top secret | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged |
Your experience seems funny if not sad considering that the black identity of of the Egyptians is rooted in valid science that for all purposes is "mainstream" in academia yet not made known to the general public. I'm curious, have you ever presented any of the hundreds of studies we post here to these 'liberal' skeptics?? [QB][QUOTE]
I noticed this too...I was actually thinking about making a thread on this. Ancient Egypt is WELL KNOWN in academia, but NOT to the general public. I always wanted to know why...
Posts: 1135 | From: Top secret | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
I was curious what was said about this series called the bible on the history channel to check some comments,and of course views are over the place has well from who were the egyptians to who were the hebrews.
It's tells the story very good.It's interesting in that show they made some of angels black and samson,but the egyptians were still played mostly by non- blacks. There was even a asian angel.
Some folks still have not got any recent news ABOUT ANCIENT EGYPTIANS AND DNA RECENT TESTING and if some did,they would ignore it and will not care because to a certain mindset egyptians were not black,and of course they would be wrong.
I was wondering if anybody here been watching it?
The Bible (I) (2013– ) TV Mini-Series - Drama This is a 10-hour, five-part, mini-series. It will tell some of the best-known stories from the most popular book in human history, from Noah's Ark and the Exodus to Daniel in the Lion's Den to the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: "white identity" or "black identitiy" are not a scientific terms
True.
But who said such terms were "scientific" to begin with?! LOL The lyinass is just playing games as usual. She knows the terms themselves are not scientific as indigenous Europeans are not truly 'white' in skin color anymore than indigenous Africans are truly black in skin color and that such terms are cultural. But it still won't change the FACT that ancient Egyptians by our cultural definitions would still be called BLACK!
What else would you call these people?
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^^^I know the Ancient Egyptians were obviously black. But in science they don't use terms such as Black or White. I also rarely use terms such as Black or White just to be 'safe'. That's all.
Posts: 1135 | From: Top secret | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged |
Topic Closed
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
That's funny, because Clyde Winters calls me a Euronut and attacks me all the time for dismissing his ridiculous views! That's the problem with being sensible and rational-- you get attacked by nuts on both sides of the aisle if you know what I mean. ![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic