quote:Originally posted by BlessedbyHorus: We already KNOW that Berbers origins lie and Africa and again we KNOW the native population of Carthage were African.
Can we PLEASE keep thread about Hannibal? I don't know how this thread got about certain Berber groups.
posted
The issue of Hannibal’s ethnicity and what he looked like are no doubt vital to many but remain contentious matters even to scholars. Let me try to explain why in the following several points.
First, we have no certain contemporary image from his own time to show us what he looked like. The primary source closest to his time is the Greek historian Polybius who lived almost a century later, and he gives no verbal description. No other ancient sources that have survived do either. We do have the curious information that he was possibly prone to disguising himself at times. There may be a few silver coins from the Punic culture in Spain, most likely minted around the mid-to-late 3rd century bce in what soon became known as Carthago Nova (now Cartagena), but these coin images are arguable because they may depict his father, Hamilcar, or other relatives instead. After Hannibal’s life, the Romans likely recalled every silver Punic coin they could find—including any that might have shown Hannibal—and melted them down to make new Roman coins with their own images. So we are left with mostly modern interpretations from long after the Roman Empire.
Second, regarding his DNA, as far as we know, we have no skeleton, fragmentary bones, or physical traces of him, so establishing his ethnicity would be mostly speculative. From what we think we know about his family ancestry, however, his Barcid family (if that’s even the right name) has been generally understood as descending from Phoenician aristocracy. If still the same relative ethnic or DNA group, which is also very difficult to prove since so many different peoples have moved into the region since, including peoples from Arabian homelands, his original ancestry would be located in what is modern Lebanon today. As far as we know, little to no Africanization—if that is an acceptable term—happened there in that region before or during his era. So attempting to say much about his original ancestry from Phoenicia is very difficult. On the other hand, since the Phoenicians arrived and then later settled in what is now Tunisia relatively early, possibly beginning around almost 1,000 years before Hannibal, it is very possible his family had intermixed in DNA with peoples then living in North Africa. But this too seems quite distant from any potential Nilotic DNA stream including via the “superhighway” of the Nile River. The distance between the Nile and Tunis is almost four times as far as the distance between the Nile and Tyre, but that may not be as important as our lack of knowledge about any potential spreading of African DNA overland across North Africa at that time, which is again possible but not known. The barrier of the Sahara would otherwise make any such ancient DNA distribution from south to north difficult but not impossible. New studies suggest that around Hannibal’s time there was likely more trans-Saharan travel via Garamantian oases [i.e., oases controlled by the Garamantes, a Berber people], so we shouldn’t deny any possible Africanization of the region of Carthage.
If Africanization was part of Hannibal’s heritage, I and other scholars would be most interested in seeing the evidence, as we should always be ready to learn and change our perceptions when needed. If our human ancestry derives originally from Africa, it was so long ago, possibly hundreds of thousands of years in the past, who can realistically say what that original DNA was like and what people looked like then? We still must have much more hard science conducted for years into the future to even come close to understanding that prehistory. I must add just as a personal note that my own father had some African ancestry because it appears in our DNA even if it may not show in external phenotypes. Sadly, “race” has too often been a divisive political term.
Ultimately, this is a difficult question that may be even more difficult to answer simply because of lack of information. History is an imperfect record and the further back we go, all too often the less evidence survives. For now, that seems true of Hannibal’s ethnicity..
NGC Ancients: Carthaginians Borrowed Sicilian Coin Designs
Posted on 10/16/2012
Collectors are especially fond of these Carthaginian war coins, which are generically termed “Siculo-Punic.”
The western Mediterranean was populated by many different peoples in ancient times: Phoenicians, Greeks, Etruscans, and Romans just to name a few. Over the course of time these peoples’ interests clashed, resulting in wars, usually over land rights and commercial conflicts.
The Romans and the Carthaginians were two of the most powerful forces in the region, and in the 3rd and 2nd Centuries B.C., they engaged in three successive conflicts known as the Punic Wars. But long before those, the Carthaginians were at odds with the Greeks, who had colonized some of the same regions desired by the Carthaginians, principally the island of Sicily.
The Carthaginians originated in Phoenicia and were of Punic heritage. Centuries before either the Greeks or the Romans migrated west, the Punic people founded a network of coastal cities that in early times were little more than trade hubs. These Phoenicians were extraordinary sailors, and had a keen interest in commerce. These skills combined to allow the settlers in Carthage to build an enviable, commercial empire.
Three centuries of warfare between the Greeks and the Carthaginians who competed for supremacy in Sicily had many profound effects, not the least of which was a most attractive and varied series of coins.
Collectors are especially fond of these Carthaginian war coins, which are generically termed “Siculo-Punic.” They feature a combination of Sicilian Greek and Punic elements, and bear Punic inscriptions which are still a bit mysterious. The best of these coins were struck from dies cut by the best (presumably) Greek artists that the Carthaginians could afford to hire.
The most influential prototypes for early Siculo-Punic coins were silver tetradrachms of Syracuse. These issues were struck by Carthaginians in the late 5th and throughout the 4th centuries B.C. at Panormus, Thermai, and a third, unidentified Sicilian mint.
The designs of these Carthaginian copies are faithful, but their style is sometimes stiff and approximating, which suggests the engraver was Punic rather than Greek. A few dies from the series at Panormus, however, were of a fluid, “Greek,” style.
Except for the final series, the Arethusa head adopted from the coinage of Syracuse was favored by the Carthaginians. Indeed, they combined this type with designs depicting two important Carthaginian symbols: that of the horse and the palm tree.
The reverses of the early issues either show a horse standing or in action, with a palm tree in the background. The style on most of these coins is fantastic. The horse is usually shown in profile to the right or the left, but sometimes the head is shown slightly facing the viewer. The horse is calmly standing or is depicted prancing, trotting, leaping, or performing a trick. There can be no doubt that the artists had a deep understanding of horses, for the nuances of form and movement are clearly rendered. Understandably, these are among the most expensive coins in the Siculo-Punic series.
Later, the horse-and-palm reverse was transformed to show only the head and neck of the horse with a comparatively small palm tree in the field behind. Here the die cutters’ love of the horse is still evident, for the composition is precise and the details often are amazing.
On these coins – the last of the Siculo-Punic tetradrachms – the new obverse type is the head of young Heracles wearing the scalp of the Nemean lion, which must have been borrowed from the silver tetradrachms of the Macedonian King Alexander III “the Great” (r. 336-323 B.C.).
It is somewhat odd that the Heracles obverse was adopted, since the coins of the Macedonian Kingdom became the main currency in Greece, Egypt, the Holy Land, and Asia Minor. They did not flow west of Greece in great quantities. Indeed, the Corinthian stater was the main Greek coin that was exported westward.
Clearly, the broad trade networks of Carthaginian merchants must have been responsible. They readily traded with Greeks, Egyptians, and peoples of their Phoenician homeland; and in all of these places, Alexander’s coinage had been the “standard” for more than a generation before this final Siculo-Punic series began in about 300 B.C. Furthermore, when the Punic people saw the head of Heracles, they no doubt saw it as a mirror image of their own mythological hero, Melqart.
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
So this idiot never read Bertholon (sp) or any other researchers on the physical remains of high class Carthaginians nor compared Carthage culture to contemporaneous Sidon and Tyre.
Hooboy!
This guy knows not ethnicity from phenotype. We know Hannibal's ethnic group (Poeni). Its his hair, colour, and facial features that're unknowns.
Even worse, Hunt's ignorance dates the ssuccessful Hss OoA events to hundreds of thousands years ago.
So sad. See why college rejects encyclopedia references?
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: . . . As far as we know, little to no Africanization—if that is an acceptable term—happened there in that region before or during his era.
. . . .
If Africanization was part of Hannibal’s heritage, I and other scholars would be most interested in seeing the evidence, ...
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
quote:Originally posted by .Charlie Bass.:
In the Punic burial grounds, negroid remains were not rare and there were black auxiliaries in the Carthaginian army who were certainly not Nilotics. Furthermore, if we are to believe Diodorus(XX, 57.5), a lieutenant of Agathocles in northern Tuninisa at the close of the fourth century before our era overcame a people who skin was similar to the Ethiopian'. There is much evidence of the presence of 'Ethiopians' on the southern borders of Africa Minor. Throughout the classical period, mention is also made of peoples belonging to intermediate races, the Melano-Getules, or Leuco-Ethiopians in particular in Ptolemy.
General History of Africa: Ancient civilizations of Africa By G. Mokhtar, Unesco. International Scientific Committee for the Drafting of a General History of Africa p. 427
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
quote:Originally posted by zarahan:
Keita in his important 1990, Studies of ancient crania in Norther Africa notes:
"Pittard (1924) notes with surprise the race of the remains found in the Sarcophagus of the Priestess of’ Tanit in Carthage, noting them to be Negroid (see also Bertholon and Chantre, 1913)."
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Originally posted by Evergreen 11 June, 2009 09:13 PM :
quote:Originally posted by Evergreen: THE PRESENCE OF AFRICAN INDIVIDUALS IN PUNIC POPULATIONS FROM THE ISLAND OF IBIZA (SPAIN): CONTRIBUTIONS FROM PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY
Nicholas Márquez-Grant*
ABSTRACT: The origin of the Punic population of Ibiza has been a much debated issue, not only in the field of anthropology, but in archaeology as well. The establishment of rural settlements and the apparent demographic growth throughout the island, especially from the 4th century BC onwards, has been mainly recognised as the result of a colonization process involving a large-scale immigration of people. The material culture from this period seems to indicate that the probable origin of these immigrants was the area of the Central Mediterranean, especially Carthage. This paper compares measurements from Ibizan skulls dating from between the sixth and second centuries BC with craniometric data from modern American populations by employing the forensic discriminant functions of the FORDISC 2.0 (Ousley and Jantz, 1996) computer program. In spite of the method’s limitations, the results seem to suggest the presence of several individuals of North African and sub-Saharan ancestry in Punic Ibiza.
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
A little more on word association. What comes to mind when one reads or hears the word Mediterranean?
Greece? Italy? Maybe Monaco and Spain?
Well the shorelines of Syria, Lebanon, Palestine, Israel, Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, Algeria, and the north of Morocco are all Mediterranean too.
Hence when reading of Mediterraneans in Africa the image that comes to mind should not be of a Greek or Italian phenotype especially when dealing with ancient and pre-historic eras.
I'd also like to add that when the quoted writer implies sub-Saharans (though admitting problems associated with Fordisc) again we're facing those ingrained ideas and imaginary boundaries for the presence of certain phenotypes.
From pre-history to at least the 4th century of our era, Graeco-Latin writers noted blacks, some of whom they called Ethiopian, in the region south of the Atlas and north of the Sahara.
Strabo even mentions them displacing littoral populations.
quote:"that Ethiopians overran Libya as far as Dyris [the Atlas Mountains] and that some of them stayed in Dyris, while others occupied a great part of the sea-board."
Geography 1.2.26
Yet all we ever hear of is blacks being pushed southward.
So when Márquez-Grant says that some individuals are sub-Saharan its a denial of indigenous supra-Saharans unless they fit the stilted mold of perceived "Berber" and Mediterranean phenotypes. It's a denial of the autochtonous blacks of northernmost Africa.
When the Sahara began its last drying phase all the blacks in it didn't move either south or east, some moved to the north and some moved to the west.
quote:Originally posted by Evergreen 11 June, 2009 09:32 PM: [qb] THE PRESENCE OF AFRICAN INDIVIDUALS IN PUNIC POPULATIONS FROM THE ISLAND OF IBIZA (SPAIN): CONTRIBUTIONS FROM PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY
Nicholas Márquez-Grant*
ABSTRACT: The origin of the Punic population of Ibiza has been a much debated issue, not only in the field of anthropology, but in archaeology as well. The establishment of rural settlements and the apparent demographic growth throughout the island, especially from the 4th century BC onwards, has been mainly recognised as the result of a colonization process involving a large-scale immigration of people. The material culture from this period seems to indicate that the probable origin of these immigrants was the area of the Central Mediterranean, especially Carthage. This paper compares measurements from Ibizan skulls dating from between the sixth and second centuries BC with craniometric data from modern American populations by employing the forensic discriminant functions of the FORDISC 2.0 (Ousley and Jantz, 1996) computer program. In spite of the method’s limitations, the results seem to suggest the presence of several individuals of North African and sub-Saharan ancestry in Punic Ibiza.
By the time Arab writers began jotting down their observations, the only organized black group left in the Sahara was the Tebu (Teda), who lived in the fortress-like Tibesti Mountains. In the interval did all the other Ethiopians migrate south? People under pressure often move, sometimes across large stretches, but a vast movement of peoples from one side of the Sahara to the other in a relatively short period of time would have been a death march rather than a migration. Some suggestion has been made that the Berbers adopted the camel as an unstoppable fighting machine and used it to dislodge the Ethiopians from [End Page 476] their North African homeland. If so, why didn’t the Ethiopians adopt the camel as well? Probably because the camel was not an unstoppable fighting machine, not nearly as effective as the horse, which continued to be the mount of choice in battle. 42 And underlying this thesis is the assumption of some kind of awful ancient race war in which the white tribes ganged up against the black tribes and expelled or exterminated them. No evidence exists to support any such assumption. The most likely scenario is the simplest. The Ethiopian tribes were absorbed by the Berber tribes, or they became oasis dwellers known today as the Haratin, or both. Perhaps Ibn Hawqal’s strange report of the Banu Tanamak, who
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Uninformed presumptions: "why didn’t the Ethiopians adopt the camel as well?"
??? Note the black camelier in the desert
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
Abraham Cresques Atlas of charts
Description: ... Africa : a Berber on a camel , King Black Mussa Melly sitting on a throne, a Black guiding a camel, the king of Organa , a sovereign Nubia Prester John ) , the Sultan of Egypt sitting cross-legged ( solda of babillonia )
.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: Uninformed presumptions: "why didn’t the Ethiopians adopt the camel as well?"
??? Note the black camelier in the desert
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
Abraham Cresques Atlas of charts
Description: ... Africa : a Berber on a camel , King Black Mussa Melly sitting on a throne, a Black guiding a camel, the king of Organa , a sovereign Nubia Prester John ) , the Sultan of Egypt sitting cross-legged ( solda of babillonia )
.
we're supposed to regard this as accurate?
And the king of Organa dressed in blue was the ruler of a place in Senegal? One can determine the ethnicty of this camel driver?
who's this from the same map?
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Therefore if one wants to highlight leaders in the region that had been described as having African ancestry, instead of Hannibal, the following: Syphax, Masinissia and Jugurtha, the Numidians or Lusius Quietus
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Oh no (thrpwing both hands in the air above my head) not this same **** all over again and again, no memorance less lone progress, just feigned knowledge from data miners ignorance who can take her ass here http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=008792;p=1 where I summarily whooped it not so long ago.
Your own sources, from whom you apparently retained no lesson, only identifies a nameless Berber as the camel rider, Organa as Kanem-Bornu, and the nude camelier is a Tubu.
So stop with your silly games. I'm not reliving the past with you but will entertain serious enqueries from any of the newly registered members.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
Up to the present, it has been found impracticable to keep open the road that leads to the country of the Garamantes, as the robber bands of that people have filled up the wells with sand, which wells do not require to be digged to any great depth, if you but have knowledge of the locality. --Pliny
quote: The Garamantes hunt the Ethiopian hole-men, or troglodytes, in four-horse chariots, for these troglodytes are exceedingly swift of foot—more so than any people of whom we have any information. They eat snakes and lizards and other reptiles and speak a language like no other, but squeak like bats.
--Herodotus
So if "Ethiopian" as per the old usage is to mean non-berber type Africans looking like so called Sub Saharan Africans then the Garamantes were not of this type.
But Herodotus describes "Ethiopians" as being in this Libya region in Libyan caves. But the Egyptians seems not to have recorded them. Were they migrants to the region or indigenous? There's no information
This raises the question if the Garamantes were not (old defintion) "Aethiopian"
then why were they not ""Aethiopian" ?
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Mauri reserved for south of Sahara folk? Your reference is more presumptive and ignorant than even you.
you're right about this Mauri corresponds with berber speakers of the Morocco region, the quote s incorrect
However the main point is that this term Mauri or other terms describing Africans were not applied to Hannibal by the Classical writers -unlike Numidian leaders in the region Numidians, sometimes described as the same people as Mauri in old Mauretania, now part of Morocco
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Ninny, why would a Carthaginian be called a Mauretanian, Numidian, or any other nationality? You need to read Zarahan's presentation on the 4 "races" in Carthage per Diodorus 1st century BCE.
And to keep the record straight Numidia was mostly eastern Algeria though the term was loosely thrown around for Maghrebi nomads and for any unfriendlies to Roman eyes.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
I apologize for the name calling even though you intended to get under my skin.
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
A reminder:
Western Æthiopians were not the only and exclusive blacks of the Maghreb and NW Africa. Most likely Æthiopian referred to a latitude of origin in addition to a group's overall complexion.
posted
I was thinking this exactly, also we have physical remains of Africans in Punic Colonies as far North as Ibiza, so intermarriage was discouraged??
quote:Originally posted by BlessedbyHorus: We already KNOW that Berbers origins lie and Africa and again we KNOW the native population of Carthage were African.
Can we PLEASE keep thread about Hannibal? I don't know how this thread got about certain Berber groups.
Because there is this online debate about Hannibal's army. And whether or not Hannibal himself was a Berber or actually Phoenician. Which in both instances would not make a lot of difference, I think.
As we all know, Hannibal was at war with the Roman army. The Garamantes have a special place in this history.
quote:"The Phoenician port of Lpgy was founded at the beginning of the 1st millennium BC and first populated by the Garamantes. The city, which was part of the domain of Carthage, passed under the ephemeral control of Massinissa, King of Numidia. The Romans, who had quartered a garrison there during the war against Jugurtha, integrated it, in 46 BC, into the province of Africa while at the same time allowing it a certain measure of autonomy."
quote:"• 27 B.C.–14 A.D.The principate of Augustus is established. Rome is transformed into a city of marble. The Roman frontiers are expanded and semiconquered territories reinforced. Augustus reconciles with Parthia (22–19 B.C.), and his campaign against Garamantes in Africa is successful (19 B.C.). Many social and religious reforms are enacted. Gaul and its frontiers are organized (15–13 B.C.). The imperial mint at Lugdunum is founded (15–14 B.C.)."
quote: The Carthaginian general Hannibal (247-182 BCE) was one of the greatest military leaders in history. His most famous campaign took place during the Second Punic War (218-202), when he caught the Romans off guard by crossing the Alps.
Description: Melqart (Heracles) on a coin of Hannibal Date :ca. 220 CE–ca. 202 CE Creator Unidentified (photo from www) Linked: Hannibal Barca, Lake Trasimene (217 BCE) Categories: Punic Tags: Coin, Deity
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
If still the same relative ethnic or DNA group, which is also very difficult to prove since so many different peoples have moved into the region since, including peoples from Arabian homelands, his original ancestry would be located in what is modern Lebanon today. --Patrick Hunt, Encyclopedia Britannica
Therefore if one wants to highlight leaders in the region that had been described as having African ancestry, instead of Hannibal, the following: Syphax, Masinissia and Jugurtha, the Numidians or Lusius Quietus
:I
"The Mauretanii live in stuffy huts both in winter and in summer and at every other time, never removing from them either because of snow or the heat of the sun or any other discomfort whatever due to nature. And they sleep on the ground, the prosperous among them, if it should so happen, spreading a fleece under themselves. Moreover, it is not customary among them to change their clothing with the seasons, but they wear a thick cloak and a rough shirt at all times. And they have neither bread nor wine nor any other good thing, but they take grain, either wheat or barley, and, without boiling it or grinding it to flour or barley-meal, they eat it in a manner not a whit different from that of animals. . . .A certain Mauretanian woman had managed somehow to crush a little grain, and making of it a very tiny cake, threw it into the hot ashes on the hearth. For thus it is the custom among the Mauretanii to bake their loaves. . . . ... . . . . since the time when the Mauretanii wrested Aurasium from the Vandals, not a single enemy had until now ever come there or so much as caused the barbarians to be afraid that they would come, but even the populous city of Tamougadis [Timgad], situated against the mountain on the east at the beginning of the plain, was emptied of its population by the Mauretanii and razed to the ground, in order that the enemy should not only not be able to camp there, but should not even have the city as an excuse for coming near the mountains. And the Mauretanii of that place held also the land to the west of Aurasium, a tract both extensive and fertile. And beyond these dwelt other nations of the Mauretanii, who were ruled by Ortaïas, who had come, as was stated above, as an ally of Solomon and the Romans. And I have heard this man say that beyond the country which he ruled there was no habitation of men, but desert land extending to a great distance, and that beyond that there are men, not black-skinned like the Mauretanii, but very white in body and fair-haired." Accounts of Ancient Mauretania, c. 430 BCE- 550 CE From Herodotus, Strabo, and Procopius of Caesarea
Posts: 574 | From: Guinee | Registered: Jul 2014
| IP: Logged |
Procopius of Caesarea: History of the Wars, c. 550 CE Books III.xxv.3-9; IV.vi.10-14, vii.3, xi.16-20, xiii.26-29
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
The idea that Hannibal was black comes from J.A. Rogers who said the Phoenicians were Negroid, the same amateur historian who wrote a book on there being five Negro U.S. presidents.
So the standard by which these five U.S, presidents were black can also be applied to the Phoenicians
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
LyingAss Liarness then why did Italian producers and directors of movies make Hannibal black?
quote: Originally posted by the lioness: So the standard by which these five U.S, presidents were black can also be applied to the Phoenicians
That at least a segment of the Phoenicians would have matched Rogers' description isn't some sort of desperate sleight of hand one drop argument as you're making it out to be. You made that up.
^Look how long people go in circles even though a good source was posted on page 1. Why does this happen so often on this site? Especially lioness with her selective, and sometimes poorly informed sources. There seems to be very little building on top of available resources.
Again, data on Carthaginian skeletal remains so, hopefully, there won't be another attempt down the road to downplay the presence of Sub-Saharan Africans there:
Quote: Punic Carthage, North Africa (Sarcophagus 5). FORDISC classification: BM (black male, US)
Punic Carthage, North Africa (Sarcophagus 7). FORDISC classification: BM (black male, US)
Punic Carthage, North Africa (Sarcophagus 14). FORDISC classification: BM (black male, US)
posted
So how is Rodgers anymore of a "amateur" historian than the guy you posted who was clearly talking out his Arse calling the Mauritani Sub Saharan and claiming that so called black Africans were some sort of rare never before seen anamoly in Carthage and her colonies and even Rome, how is that not Amateur but Rodgers is?
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
The idea that Hannibal was black comes from J.A. Rogers who said the Phoenicians were Negroid, the same amateur historian who wrote a book on there being five Negro U.S. presidents.
So the standard by which these five U.S, presidents were black can also be applied to the Phoenicians
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-: [QB] So how is Rodgers anymore of a "amateur" historian than the guy you posted who was clearly talking out his Arse calling the Mauritani Sub Saharan and claiming that so called black Africans were some sort of rare never before seen anamoly in Carthage and her colonies and even Rome, how is that not Amateur but Rodgers is?
True, they both made errors
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote: Originally posted by the lioness: So the standard by which these five U.S, presidents were black can also be applied to the Phoenicians
That at least a segment of the Phoenicians would have matched Rogers' description isn't some sort of desperate sleight of hand one drop argument as you're making it out to be. You made that up.
when you say "Phoenicians" do you mean nationality?
analogous to saying there are millions of Americans of African descent?
The term ‘Phoenician’ may here refer to both individuals from the Eastern Mediterranean, the origin of the Phoenician civilisation; and individuals that regardless of geographical or ancestral origin, lived and/or worked and were integrated in the Phoenician culture.
notes 5, Márquez-Grant, 2005
____________________________
The presence of african individuals in punic populations from the Island of Ibiza (Spain): contributions from physical anthropology Nicholas Márquez-Grant, 2005
excerpts
This present work differs from other human skeletal studies on Punic Ibiza in that it considers an individual skeleton as a single sample, rather than using a population mean composed by a group of skeletons.
The palaeontological site of Es Pouàs in the northern part of Ibiza, seems to sug- gest human presence at least as early as the 5th or 6th millennium BC (Alcover et al., 1994: 237; Costa, 2000; Costa and Benito, 2000; Costa and Guerrero, 2001). Nicholas Márquez-Grant
Island colonization The early colonization of the Balearic Islands is still uncertain, but a review of the available evidence (Calvo et al., 2002: 182-183) reveals human presence before 3000 BC, and agriculture and herding becoming established between 2300 and 2100 BC.
These remains come from the megalithic burial site of Ca Na Costa (Fernández et al., 1988) dated to circa 2000 BC (Costa and Guerrero, 2001: 35). In Ibiza, the earliest human skeletal evidence was found at the site of Can Sergent, dated to around 720 BC and 550 BC (Costa and Benito, 2000; Costa, 2000: 351). At least five individuals were interred here: three male, one female and one infant (González and Lalueza, 2000).
Phoenician colonization4 The Phoenician colonization can be considered as the roots of the Carthaginian culture (Tarradell, 1955: 66). The Phoenicians were people from the Eastern Mediterranean, and more specifically, the area of present day Lebanon.
In the 6th century BC the Phoenicians lost control over their colonies in the west- ern Mediterranean (Aubet, 1995). This created a separation between the eastern and west- ern Mediterranean. In the West and Central areas, Carthage took economic and political control over previous Phoenician colonies such as Ibiza. This phase is known today as the Punic or Carthaginian period.
The Punic (Carthaginian) period6 The influence of Carthage on Ibiza was marked by deep transformations in the social, economic, political, ideological and religious spheres. These changes included an apparent demographic growth,
note 6 The definition of ‘Phoenician’, ‘Punic’ and ‘Carthaginian’ is complex in itself (see Moscati, 1988). Tarradell and Font (1975: 245) indicate that ‘Phoenician’ meant ‘oriental’, from Phoenicia; while ‘Punic’ was the name given by the Romans to the Carthaginians. The word ‘Phoenician’ is used here to refer to those establish- ments directly founded by those individuals coming from the eastern Mediterranean, and up to the 6th century BC. After this date the word ‘Punic’ will be used to refer to those areas in the Central and Western Mediterranean under the influence of Carthage. Finally, ‘Carthaginian’ will be used to refer to what is or derives from the city of Carthage (in present day Tunisia), including culture, products and people.
Rural settlements were occupied probably by small human groups, possibly families or blood related individuals as well as freemen (Benito et al. 2000: 307). Servants may also have been present (see Fernández and Fuentes, 1983; Gómez, 2000: 357). Any small indigenous human communities that may have been present since the Bronze Age would have been absorbed into the Punic identity of these rural inhabitants (Benito et al., 2000: 307).
Diodorus Siculus (Book V. 16), writing in the 1st century BC, stated that Ibiza con- sisted of people from a variety of nationalities. Considering other Punic enclaves, human skeletal remains from Carthage, in North Africa, seem to indicate that there is no clear eth- nic unity (Charles-Picard and Charles-Picard, 1958: 129), while epitaphs reveal the possi- ble presence of individuals of Cypriotic and Phoenician origins (Benichou-Safar, 1982: 184). According to historical sources, the spreading of Punic settlements in western Sardinia since the 4th century BC is associated with peasant and slave immigration from North Africa (van Dommelen, 1997: 313, citing Bondì, 1987: 181). In antiquity, slaves were obtained from areas in the Mediterranean as well as northern Europe (Thompson, 2003: 3-4). In ancient Greece and Rome, some members of society came from sub- Saharan Africa (see Snowden, 1970). In later periods, between the 5th and 8th centuries AD, the Iberian Peninsula and the Balearic Islands also received merchants from the Eastern and Central Mediterranean (García, 1972).
8 A DNA study on the living Ibizan population also shows an association with North Africa (Picornell et al., 1996). As with other types of evidence using present day materials, the North African influence may not nec- essarily come from Punic times, but from other contexts such as the Medieval period.
The present work aims to clarify this debate by examining what remains of the peo- ple themselves: their skeletons.
The samples are small, the cemeteries cover a rela- tively wide chronological age, not all individuals of society may have been buried in the population, and only the more complete skulls were selected.
most of the skulls employed here come from hypogea underground tombs). It may be that these indi- viduals are of a different social and economic status (see Tarradell and Font, 1975: 52; Fernández, 1986: 160; Marí and Hachuel, 1990), as well as ancestral origin than the indi- viduals buried in simple fossae. These differences in social status, culture and/or ancestry may also have been present between individuals from inhumation tombs versus cremated skeletons, which were also present in Punic times (see Gómez, 1985; Reverte, 1986).
FORDISC 2.0 (Ousley and Jantz, 1996) was created for forensic applications in the USA. The programme has two reference databases: the Forensic Data Bank (present day crania, forensic and modern cases) and the Howells database (Howells 1973, 1989). The Forensic Data Bank groups individuals into ‘American Blacks’, ‘American Whites’, ‘American Indians’, ‘Japanese’, ‘Chinese’, ‘Vietnamese’ and ‘Hispanic’.
Only two of its categories were used, determined by the nature of the research and the geographical and chronological background of Ibiza: ‘American Blacks’ with a reference sample of 150 males and 125 females, and ‘American Whites’ with 271 males and 195 females (Ousley and Jantz, 1996). Therefore, the study assumed that each skull belonged to either group.
__________________________
^^^ major flaw in the database, no MIddle Eastern or Southern Europeans. It can't be taken seriously. Why do such comparisons and then leave out both the modern population of the regions and the neighboring populations as well as the Lebanese population whom these Ibizans derive ? Neither are African Americans, mainly of West African descent the Africans in close proximity to the Phoenician colonies in Africa.
-lioness
continuing: ________________________
quote:
Having suggested the likely presence of individuals of Sub-Saharan ancestry from Ibizan skulls, identified by reasonable probabilities and typicalities (in skulls with both values above 60%), there are a number of skulls (e.g. PM01/UE59, CM-3, CNE-2) with high probabilities, both ‘White’ and ‘Black’ but with low typicalities. What may these results suggest? It does seems that a result such as ‘White female’ and a high probability, will indicate that it is not ‘male’ and not ‘Black’ (Luís Cabo, pers. comm.). However, if the typicality is low there might be a considerable chance that it is not a ‘Black female’ (Luís Cabo, pers. comm.). It is true that by providing only a choice between ‘White’ (European Caucasoid ancestry) and ‘Black’ (sub-Saharan ancestry), the computer programme might force skulls of North Africa or Eastern Mediterranean ancestry into the category ‘Black’.
The limited sample size in this work does not really portray the initial wave of immigrants into the Punic period. These may have come from one or many geographical locations. Therefore, the results can only suggest, at present, that individuals with African characteristics were present in the Punic rural and urban populations.
Does this mean Africans were in Phoenician Ibiza? Yes - but they have no idea which Africans. What was their role/s and what percentage of the population were they? Were they primarily mercenaries, slaves or integrated broadly into the Punic population? -unknown
Pierre Zalloua is one of the leading geneticists in the Middle East. As well as working to reveal the underlying genetic factors of diseases such as diabetes and coronary artery disease, he is the principal investigator for the Genographic Project in the Middle East and North Africa.
Using this technique, Zalloua's team discovered that the Phoenician signature is still carried by 6% of males in populations around the Mediterranean and remains in 30% of males in the area where the Phoenician civilization existed.
Identifying Genetic Traces of Historical Expansions: Phoenician Footprints in the Mediterranean
Pierre A. Zalloua,1,2,13 Daniel E. Platt,3,13 Mirvat El Sibai,1 Jade Khalife,1 Nadine Makhoul,1 Marc Haber,1 Yali Xue,4 Hassan Izaabel,5 Elena Bosch,6 Susan M. Adams,7 Eduardo Arroyo,8 Ana María López-Parra,8 Mercedes Aler,9 Antònia Picornell,10 Misericordia Ramon,10 Mark A. Jobling,7 David Comas,6 Jaume Bertranpetit,6 R. Spencer Wells,11 Chris Tyler-Smith,4,∗ and The Genographic Consortium12
Abstract The Phoenicians were the dominant traders in the Mediterranean Sea two thousand to three thousand years ago and expanded from their homeland in the Levant to establish colonies and trading posts throughout the Mediterranean, but then they disappeared from history. We wished to identify their male genetic traces in modern populations. Therefore, we chose Phoenician-influenced sites on the basis of well-documented historical records and collected new Y-chromosomal data from 1330 men from six such sites, as well as comparative data from the literature. We then developed an analytical strategy to distinguish between lineages specifically associated with the Phoenicians and those spread by geographically similar but historically distinct events, such as the Neolithic, Greek, and Jewish expansions. This involved comparing historically documented Phoenician sites with neighboring non-Phoenician sites for the identification of weak but systematic signatures shared by the Phoenician sites that could not readily be explained by chance or by other expansions. From these comparisons, we found that haplogroup J2, in general, and six Y-STR haplotypes, in particular, exhibited a Phoenician signature that contributed > 6% to the modern Phoenician-influenced populations examined. Our methodology can be applied to any historically documented expansion in which contact and noncontact sites can be identified.
A European Mitochondrial Haplotype Identified in Ancient Phoenician Remains from Carthage, North Africa
Elizabeth A. Matisoo-Smith , Anna L. Gosling, James Boocock, Olga Kardailsky, Yara Kurumilian, Sihem Roudesli-Chebbi, Leila Badre, Jean-Paul Morel, Leïla Ladjimi Sebaï, Pierre A. Zalloua Published: May 25, 2016
Abstract
While Phoenician culture and trade networks had a significant impact on Western civilizations, we know little about the Phoenicians themselves. In 1994, a Punic burial crypt was discovered on Byrsa Hill, near the entry to the National Museum of Carthage in Tunisia. Inside this crypt were the remains of a young man along with a range of burial goods, all dating to the late 6th century BCE. Here we describe the complete mitochondrial genome recovered from the Young Man of Byrsa and identify that he carried a rare European haplogroup, likely linking his maternal ancestry to Phoenician influenced locations somewhere on the North Mediterranean coast, the islands of the Mediterranean or the Iberian Peninsula. This result not only provides the first direct ancient DNA evidence of a Phoenician individual but the earliest evidence of a European mitochondrial haplogroup, U5b2c1, in North Africa.
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Procopius of Caesarea: History of the Wars, c. 550 CE Books III.xxv.3-9; IV.vi.10-14, vii.3, xi.16-20, xiii.26-29
Forest for the trees. The point is he explicitly states the Mauretanii of NW Africa are black skinned compared to the white skinned people who lived further beyond them.
Posts: 574 | From: Guinee | Registered: Jul 2014
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Punos_Rey: The point is he explicitly states the Mauretanii of NW Africa are black skinned compared to the white skinned people who lived further beyond them.
which white skinned people?
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Lioness said the Phoenicians are only negroid if one uses the one drop rule standard. Let's look at the facts:
Márquez-Grant: FORDISC, are prehistoric to medieval Spanish, 20th century Granada, modern Ibizan, Neolithic Alicante samples Euro-American over Afro-American?
FORDISC: chuuuch.
Márquez-Grant: FORDISC, are these Carthaginians and this Phoenician Euro-American over Afro-American?
posted
Just hold the L, lioness. FORDISC was 'asked' if the Phoenician and the Carthaginian samples are consistent with Euro-Americans like all the tested Spanish sample are. This is FORDISC's answer:
You notice how the people, like the author the lioness posted, who bemoan and belittle the idea of "black" people in Carthage they never address the actual evidence...just mention some fictional Busts made after Hannibals death, when the actual evidence says different..
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote: THE PRESENCE OF AFRICAN INDIVIDUALS IN PUNIC POPULATIONS FROM THE ISLAND OF IBIZA (SPAIN): CONTRIBUTIONS FROM PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY Nicholas Márquez-Grant*
Three of these skulls were classified as ‘Black’, likely proving the presence of individuals in the Ibizan populations with sub-Saharan ancestry.
Said that 3 out of 24 people (12.5%) in this Phoenician samples were black.
Assuming skeletons can be measured for blackness and that these three individuals were black. Who were these blacks?
so were the Carthaginians black?
was Hannibal black?
Is America black?
we have the FORDISC, let's answer these basic questions
____________________________________
Some people in Phoenician Ibiza were black. I find it unremarkable
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: Said that 3 out of 24 people (12.5%) in this Phoenician samples were black.
Learn how to read. They looked at a subset of the 24 individuals with so-called "convincing" results and out of this subset, 3 happened to have a 'black' classification, while 4 had a 'white' classification.
And to be clear, I'm not talking about the Ibizan Punic sample right now. They just add another layer of unnecessarily complexity so people can speculate why they were there and whether the Sub-Saharan-looking inidviduals arrived as slaves. I saw your quote about alleged Sub-Saharan slaves in Sardinia earlier, so I'm not playing that game with you. The Ibizan Punic sample may also have local Islander and mainland European contributions, allowing you to conveniently beef up the European component among the original Carthaginians.
For now, I'm sticking to the North African Carthaginian samples (i.e. Sarcophagus 5, 7, 14 and the other North African Carthaginian samples studied by Bertholon and Chantre, 1913).
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-: You notice how the people, like the author the lioness posted, who bemoan and belittle the idea of "black" people in Carthage they never address the actual evidence...just mention some fictional Busts made after Hannibals death, when the actual evidence says different..
Yep. And as we already know:
In light of Lioness' comments re: the "US Black" classifications simply being a reflection of Carthaginians being eastern Mediterraneans (as opposed to the presence of actual people from SSA), here is some more data.
quote:The Lachish series is found to plot nearest the Maghreb and “E” series, both of whose centroids plot nearer the Romano-British groups than any of the other series; the D2 value between these series is significant as previously noted. Examination of the classi- fication results (when Lachish is run as an unknown) shows that the “E” series receives the plurality, with the Maghreb series re- ceiving a very small percentage. The results seem to indicate that the morphometric pat- terns of crania in the Lachish series show a great range of variation with many crania classifying into Egyptian and Nubian series, even when Lachisch is available as a choice. This suggests that the Lachish series might contain crania from these areas. Historically it is known that Egypt had long been in contact with this area, as noted earlier. . . . The notable classification of Lachisch crania into the northern Egyptian, but not Maghreb, series suggests that it is not help- ful to stereotypically generalize about mor- phometrics of people in “North Africa.” This Maghreb series is actually quite morpho- metrically heterogeneous (Keita, 1983).
—Keita 1988
Significance? Aside from the fact that some crania in the Lachish sample reproduce Márquez-Grant's "African American" FORDISC classification of the Phoenician (showing the Phoenician with high prob & low typ "US Black" classification is not an anomaly), the Maghrebi sample used here is a pooled Chalcolithic Algerian and Carthaginian sample. Both constituent samples are morphometrically close before showing ties with other samples in the Mediterranean Basin (Keita 1990) which calls into question lioness' attempt to paint Carthaginians as transplants from the Levant.
Moreover, few Lachish individuals classified in the Maghrebi sample while the late dynastic Egyptian sample was congruent with many. Which is interesting in light of lioness claim that the results should be read as that the Carthaginians are 'simply' eastern Mediterraneans.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: Said that 3 out of 24 people (12.5%) in this Phoenician samples were black.
Learn how to read. They looked at a subset of the 24 individuals with so-called "convincing" results and out of this subset, 3 happened to have a 'black' classification, while 4 had a 'white' classification.
And to be clear, I'm not talking about the Ibizan sample right now. They just add another layer of unnecessarily complexity so people can speculate why they were there and whether they arrived as slaves. I saw your quote about Sub-Saharan slaves in Sardinia earlier, so I'm not playing that game with you. The Ibizan sample may also have local Europeans and immigrants from mainland Europe, allowing you to conveniently beef up the European component among the original Carthaginians.
I'm sticking to the North African Carthaginian samples (i.e. Sarcophagus 5, 7, 14 and the other North African Carthaginian samples studied by Bertholon and Chantre, 1913).
They have 24 skulls and are comparing those skulls not to Middle Eastern or South Europeans, the two populations most relevant, Instead they used "white Americans" (primarily German, Irish and English) and instead of a North African population they used "Black Americans" who are primarily West African.
So what's the point of this to get into American racial politics? They should be waiting for a better program data base before doing assessments like this,
Anyway they found only on individual "racially pure" enough to categorized racially, a white woman. Three other persons almost were pure enough to be American Blacks but they didn't quite meet the criteria.
It's a dumb study. The location is South Europe the source population is Middle Eastern. Those people should not have "white Americans" and "Black Americans" as their yardstick. I really hate this black and white simpleminded Americacentric type of analysis
As I said. They found three skulls in Ibiza they feel were almost "black" , unremarkable. One can go to a random cemetery in America and do the same thing
And these 3 tell us who the Phoenicians were? Come on son
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
You have no idea how these studies work. In fact, you haven't even read the paper. You're just quote-mining and protesting without proving that your objections hold water.
Take this for instance:
quote:Originally posted by lioness,: So what's the point of this to get into American racial politics? They should be waiting for a better program data base before doing assessments like this,
Prove that "better samples" would provide more credible results. You obviously haven't seen what happens when you subject populations to FORDISC's full panel of comparative samples and you get oddball results that require shitloads of interpretation like Pacific Islander and East Asian. More = not better in this case.
quote:Originally posted by lioness,: It's a dumb study. The location is South Europe the source population is Middle Eastern. Those people should not have "white Americans" and "Black Americans" as their yardstick.
US Americans are even better comparative samples than Middle Eastern samples, because the populations you would have to sample in the eastern Mediterranean already include hybrid phenotypes. Carthaginians potentially clustering with these samples would therefore partially reflect this and would not prove that no SSA and hybrid individuals were present among the Carthaginians.
For instance:
quote:The present report deals with reconstructing the facial shapes of ancient inhabitants of Israel based on their cranial remains. The skulls of a male from the Hellenistic period and a female from the Roman period have been reconstructed. ... From an anthropometric point of view, the two skulls studied here definitely belong to the same sample from the Hellenistic, Roman, and Byzantine populations of Israel as well as from Jews from Prague. Based on its facial reconstruction, the male skull may belong to the large Mediterranean group that inhabited this area from historic to modern times. The female skull also exhibits all the Mediterranean features but, in addition, probably some equatorial (African) mixture manifested by the shape of the reconstructed nose and the facial prognatism.
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: [QB] You have no idea how these studies work. In fact, you haven't even read the paper. You're just quote-mining and protesting without proving that your objections hold water.
I read the article more than once, stop bullshitting Above is verbiage. there is no argument there. "what you say doesn't hold water" - don't waste everybody's time with this blowing wind, you accuse me of quote mining when my whole last post was written by me, go figure I'm not Gish Ibore
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: Take this for instance:
quote:Originally posted by lioness,: So what's the point of this to get into American racial politics? They should be waiting for a better program data base before doing assessments like this,
Prove that "better samples" would provide more credible results. You obviously haven't seen what happens when you subject populations to FORDISC's full panel of comparative samples and you get oddball results that require shitloads of interpretation like Pacific Islander and East Asian. More = not better in this case.
US Americans are even better comparative samples than Middle Eastern samples, because the populations you would have to sample in the eastern Mediterranean already include mulatto phenotypes.
Stop your typical straw man attempts. I did not say full panel of "subject populations to FORDISC's "full panel" of comparative samples"
I said subject to the more RELEVANT populations, Southern European and Middle Eastern and North African NOT less relevant Japanese, etc
Even the author admits to these limitations
Now you are bringing up "mulatto phenotypes" and it reveals you are on the same level as Mike, you just have a layer technical lingo on top, the simplistic black/white, either/or paradigm, as if these are separate "races"and that everything else is a "mulatto" between them and you are always more into craniometrics oriented than genetics. You have the old racialist mindset in new clothes
Guess what? The intermediates are taking over and doing away with both blacks and white. You're on your way out buddy
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mulatto phenotypes, hybrid phenotypes, who cares. I'm not submitting some sort of dissertation. I'm posting on Egyptsearch.
quote:The present report deals with reconstructing the facial shapes of ancient inhabitants of Israel based on their cranial remains. The skulls of a male from the Hellenistic period and a female from the Roman period have been reconstructed. ... From an anthropometric point of view, the two skulls studied here definitely belong to the same sample from the Hellenistic, Roman, and Byzantine populations of Israel as well as from Jews from Prague. Based on its facial reconstruction, the male skull may belong to the large Mediterranean group that inhabited this area from historic to modern times. The female skull also exhibits all the Mediterranean features but, in addition, probably some equatorial (African) mixture manifested by the shape of the reconstructed nose and the facial prognatism.
quote:The MBII samples studied here then represent an intrusive group, and their characteristics suggest that they originated from a damper and/or more temperate climate than that of Israel.
You think population genetics will provide more cover for you to obscure, protest and introduce doubt? You're really mistaken if you think you can escape my point of the North African influences in Israel and beyond by playing some sort of hit and run whack-a-mole game with me.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
[/QB
Printer-friendly view of this topic