quote:Originally posted by Punos_Rey: What studies are you reading that says there's a minimum of variation among SSAs?
I'm going to ask you one more time before I lose any remaining interest in this discussion.
What, in your own words, does a Niger-Congo speaking person look like?
by minimum I meant they do not all look like the true negro stereotype there is obviously diversity and the average niger-congo person look like the people I posted.
Let's try this again.
So you're telling me that across the entire area of the proposed Niger-Congo language family, the people in all of those countries on average look like the people in those three photographs from one country you have refused to identify.
Have you gone mad? [/QB]
Wait you think niger-congo speakers are physically as diverse as afro-americans ? You clearly haven't met many SSAs if you believe this and the crowds I posted are literally from two different countries yet either for you or me they don't look much different from each other I wonder why...
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Punos_Rey: What studies are you reading that says there's a minimum of variation among SSAs?
I'm going to ask you one more time before I lose any remaining interest in this discussion.
What, in your own words, does a Niger-Congo speaking person look like?
by minimum I meant they do not all look like the true negro stereotype there is obviously diversity and the average niger-congo person look like the people I posted.
Let's try this again.
So you're telling me that across the entire area of the proposed Niger-Congo language family, the people in all of those countries on average look like the people in those three photographs from one country you have refused to identify.
Have you gone mad?
Wait you think niger-congo speakers are physically as diverse as afro-americans ? You clearly haven't met many SSAs if you believe this and the crowds I posted are literally from three different countries yet either for you or me they don't look much different from each other I wonder why... [/QB]
Re-read my post, comprehend it, and try again.
Also quote me where I said anything about "Niger-congo speakers" in relation to African Americans.
I'll wait.
--------------------
Meet on the Level, act upon the Plumb, part on the Square. Posts: 574 | From: Guinee | Registered: Jul 2014
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Punos_Rey: Re-read my post, comprehend it, and try again.
Also quote me where I said anything about "Niger-congo speakers" in relation to African Americans.
I'll wait. [/QB]
Like I said these pictures aren't from one country only. So yes in average that's how they look in this entire area and I'm well placed to know it since we have everything here from malian to congolese meanwhile you're not used to see them on a daily basis like me.
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: If the idea that the Olmec heads were "Negroid" and therefore evidence of African origin didn't come from so-called Afrocentrics, why keep focusing on Afrocentrics as the only ones promoting the idea when they aren't? You seem to be acting like it is something that came from them when it didn't. The root of the issue is the use of European racial typologies which is where this idea of African Olmecs came from. I find it odd how you are avoiding the outrage of the whole concept of racial models that originated with Europans as part of divide and conquer but you are quick to jump on Africans using them. It is hypocritical. Europeans have spread more misinformation and pseudo science about "race" than anybody on the planet but you make it seem like this is somehow an "Afrocentric" thing or somehow that the Afrocentrics are the 'more evil' than the Europeans who raped, pillaged, conquered and robbed their way around the entire planet and created racial hierarchies everywhere they went.
I have come to adress it because they are the ones who mainly promotes these ideas TODAY. They are the ones who make those claims in books, articles, on social media. Some whites are also on that train but it is more rare today.
I have debated whites also on other social media and platforms when they spouted ideas about European Solutreens paddling to the Americas, or ancient Hebrews, or about white European ancient Peruvians, or a white Kennewick man. Also disussed with people who deny that any Native Americans were ever genocided or oppressed. So I have not only focused on Black Americans. On top of that I have protested against landtheft and exploitation in South America. I have written about such issues, raised money and tried to raise awarness about indigenous issues.
That I came in on the Black Native thing here on ES is partly because I seen some threads here which promoted such pseudo historical ideas. Even if it is just a few members who have forwarded them.
quote:Whether or not he proved the thesis doesn't change the fact that this man believed in the idea of African origins enough to build a boat similar to those used in the Nile Valley. The point is these ideas aren't from "Afrocentrics" and some of the most famous proponents aren't black people at all, including the Mexicans who discovered the heads to begin with.
I know that, but TODAY it is mainly blacks who actively promote such ideas, especially on social media, so it is why I have come to discuss those particular ideas especially with Black people. But I also challenge white people who promotes those or similar ideas.
quote:So you are still trying to exclusively express outrage for Africans having theories you find to be fringe, but don't have the same outrage for the Europeans who created those theories?
As I said I have challenged similar ideas promoted by whites, but not here on ES. I am in other fora and discussion platforms too.
I even discussed with missionaries challenging their ethnocentric and religiocentric agenda.
I am not only on ES, I am and have been active in other context too.
You just see me here on ES, you do not know about what I am doing in other contexts.
-------------------- Once an archaeologist, always an archaeologist Posts: 2684 | From: Sweden | Registered: Mar 2020
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Punos_Rey: What are the three specific countries they are from?
"That's how they look in this entire area"
What area?
And you still have yet to answer my original question in your own words.
I'm not going to play in ambiguities and vagueness.
Be specific. Thanks.
Nigeria and burkina faso and you can add this one from Togo :
The niger-congo area which represents most inhabitants of SSA. It's you who is purposely vague so that you can claim anything that looked somewhat black. Again provide a single evidence of a population that looked like the people in the pictures and who were indigenous to the mediterranean part of North Africa. Good Luck.
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
I am sure even with that small bit of diversity you're allowing for these Rif soldiers don't fit into your Minstrel Negro, I mean Niger-Congo person mold,
Nor these Moroccans
Or these Libyans:
[IMG]
I am done wasting my time. I will not continue with this game of charades.
In reference to your pictures, I asked for the country as you gave absolutely no context to any of the pictures you posted(see how I captioned each picture section instead of just throwing them up? I made no statements about the people in the pictures all looking the same.
You also still have not provided a single definition in your own words as to what Niger-Congo people look like.
You seem to be extrapolating where your personally live and stretching it over the entire portion of the continent that you're comfortable with. Amateurish at best, pathetic at worst.
--------------------
Meet on the Level, act upon the Plumb, part on the Square. Posts: 574 | From: Guinee | Registered: Jul 2014
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Punos_Rey: What are the three specific countries they are from?
"That's how they look in this entire area"
What area?
And you still have yet to answer my original question in your own words.
I'm not going to play in ambiguities and vagueness.
Be specific. Thanks.
Nigeria and burkina faso and you can add this one from Togo :
The niger-congo area which represents most inhabitants of SSA. It's you who is purposely vague so that you can claim anything that looked somewhat black. Again provide a single evidence of a population that looked like the people in the pictures and who were indigenous to the mediterranean part of North Africa. Good Luck.
I am being vague by asking you to be SPECIFIC? To enumerate the traits that make a Niger-Congo person?
So the first set of pictures was from two countries not three? Now you've added Togo.
So you chose 3 West African countries right next to each other to represent the massive region that would be covered by the Niger-Congo family.
I'm done wasting my time.
--------------------
Meet on the Level, act upon the Plumb, part on the Square. Posts: 574 | From: Guinee | Registered: Jul 2014
| IP: Logged |
I am sure even with that small bit of diversity you're allowing for these Rif soldiers don't fit into your Minstrel Negro, I mean Niger-Congo person mold,
[/URL]
Or these Libyans:
[/URL]
I am done wasting my time. I will not continue with this game of charades.
In reference to your pictures, I asked for the country as you gave absolutely no context to any of the pictures you posted(see how I captioned each picture section instead of just throwing them up? I made no statements about the people in the pictures all looking the same.
You also still have not provided a single definition in your own words as to what Niger-Congo people look like.
You seem to be extrapolating where your personally live and stretching it over the entire portion of the continent that you're comfortable with. Amateurish at best, pathetic at worst.
Why vintage pictures ? Did you struggle to find such dark looking folks among modern NAs ? should I believe arabs and white slaves came after the 1920s ? Anyway you need to provide source on the pic you post. Non-riffians moroccan soldiers participated in the riffian war against riffians. and those libyans aren't from the mediterranean part of north africa they are as expected a mix between local or even sahelian populations and mediterranean north africans. Genetically those population aren't close nor similar to SSAs.
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Punos_Rey: What are the three specific countries they are from?
"That's how they look in this entire area"
What area?
And you still have yet to answer my original question in your own words.
I'm not going to play in ambiguities and vagueness.
Be specific. Thanks.
Nigeria and burkina faso and you can add this one from Togo :
The niger-congo area which represents most inhabitants of SSA. It's you who is purposely vague so that you can claim anything that looked somewhat black. Again provide a single evidence of a population that looked like the people in the pictures and who were indigenous to the mediterranean part of North Africa. Good Luck.
I am being vague by asking you to be SPECIFIC? To enumerate the traits that make a Niger-Congo person?
So the first set of pictures was from two countries not three? Now you've added Togo.
So you chose 3 West African countries right next to each other to represent the massive region that would be covered by the Niger-Congo family.
I'm done wasting my time.
You want me to spam tons of pictures or what ? If you disagree then feel free to post crowds from all over the area and you'll see that I'm right.
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
posted
You are literally appealing to your experience that across the entire area the average person looks like that. The burden is on YOU to prove that. Three pictures from three West African countries right next to each other is nowhere near proof. I should not have to explain this to you.
And it is rich you are demanding a source for my pictures yet did not provide any sources of your own when you posted, and I had to ask you several times.
You can find the captured Rif soldiers there, I'm sure encyclopedia britannica are not in on the afrocentrist conspiracy
Edit:
Ah so now I need to post current pics of current coastal Black north Africans today to prove older indigenous Black NA populations to your satisfaction?
Your knack for moving the goalposts is extraordinary. But at least now I hope everyone can see past that sham veneer of objectivity and detachment you've tried to maintain.
--------------------
Meet on the Level, act upon the Plumb, part on the Square. Posts: 574 | From: Guinee | Registered: Jul 2014
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Punos_Rey: [QB] You are literally appealing to your experience that across the entire area the average person looks like that. The burden is on YOU to prove that. Three pictures from three West African countries right next to each other is nowhere near proof. I should not have to explain this to you.
ok then tell me how I can prove it to you since you reject the crowd pictures. What do you want ? 10 pics ? videos ?
quote:Originally posted by Punos_Rey: And it is rich you are demanding a source for my pictures yet did not provide any sources of your own when you posted, and I had to ask you several times.
You can find the captured Rif soldiers there, I'm sure encyclopedia britannica are not in on the afrocentrist conspiracy
The encyclopedia is not the original source of the pic. These are obviously not riffian prisoners their cloths don't match anything in the rif let alone their faces with one being clearly predominantly black not moroccan let alone riffian. I'm myself part riffian lol so I know how my people look.
Here vintage pictures of riffians :
These are literally our grand-fathers and great-grand fathers lol
Here modern riffians :
and it seems like you don't take tanning into account or the high contrast of those vintage pictures.
posted
Not so dispassionate and objective now, are we?
I guess none of these people are Riffians either? Maybe its all just tanning and photo tricks
I'm sure this last picture can provide at least some explanation for the modern people you posted. You know in addition to the atrocities committed by the French, among other factors too.
I'm amazed at your continued propensity to deny any admixture, mass migrations and settlements, genocides, and other historical factors in how a lot of North Africa looks now. But here you whine and complain about erasure while doing plenty of erasing yourself. I'm done arguing with you. Have a good day.
--------------------
Meet on the Level, act upon the Plumb, part on the Square. Posts: 574 | From: Guinee | Registered: Jul 2014
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ok thanks for showing how dishonest and ignorant you are. Yes riffians became white in less than a few decades lol. And the woman belongs to the same ethnic group as the man he's simply tanned unlike her who stayed inside. You clearly know nothing about riffians.
More pictures on riffians :
do you at least know where riffians live ?? Literally a few km of europe. What happened to these neolithic european farmers who brought light alleles in this area thousands of years ago ? How come their modern descendents look nothing like them ? White slavery in the middle XXth century ? ....Clearly the most ridiculous and irrational claim I've seen in a while XD My own grandfather could be on these pictures lmao
"admixture, mass migrations and settlements, genocides, and other historical factors" which one ? The millions of black slaves ? What about the ancient samples being similar to modern north africans ? How come people during the 3rd millenium BC already show a profile similar to modern north africans ?
Anyway you americans should seriously stop talking about africa as a whole because the level of ignorance I'm seeing here is just baffling. You just tried to blackwash the whitest group in Morocco lol based on pictures from the early XXth century ! I suppose my grandfather is black and I'm white for no reason XD
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
posted
In your slamming of your keyboard you haven't read anything I actually typed and that's par for the course for you. Where did I say that Riffians became white in just a few decades? Or that none of those people were from the Rif area?
And nothing I have said has even come close to the ridiculous and frankly stupid claim of yours that people from Nigeria down to South Africa all look mostly the same.
--------------------
Meet on the Level, act upon the Plumb, part on the Square. Posts: 574 | From: Guinee | Registered: Jul 2014
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Punos_Rey: In your slamming of your keyboard you haven't read anything I actually typed and that's par for the course for you. Where did I say that Riffians became white in a few decades? Or that none of those people were from the Rif area?
And nothing I have said has even come close to the ridiculous and frankly stupid claim of yours that people from Nigeria down to South Africa all look mostly the same.
I'm pretty sure If I post crowds from every niger-congo country you wouldn't be able to differentiate them. So no it's clearly not as ridiculous as someone who believes a population 30km away from europe was black in the 1930s then became white a few decades later for no apparent reasons.
Anyway you completely deviate from your initial point. So where is this evidence of a black indigenous population in mediterranean north africa ? Like I said you literally avoid all the datas that does not support your point of view. All you have is "look here this X ancient author said in his poem that moors are black".
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
posted
So you admit to basically putting words in my mouth and attacking a strawman. Got it.
I'm still waiting for an actual list of the traits that make a black person.
The goalpost shifting never ends with you eh? So whether I post ancient geographers or "vintage photos" is really besides the point. You have put your own ignorance and petulant childishness on display which has been far more useful.
--------------------
Meet on the Level, act upon the Plumb, part on the Square. Posts: 574 | From: Guinee | Registered: Jul 2014
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Punos_Rey: So you admit to basically putting words in my mouth and attacking a strawman. Got it.
I'm still waiting for an actual list of the traits that make a black person.
The goalpost shifting never ends with you eh? So whether I post ancient geographers or "vintage photos" is really besides the point. You have put your own ignorance and petulant childishness on display which has been far more useful.
I already talked about the traits of a black person : frizzy hair combined with black skin and negroid features typically found in most populations in sub-saharan africa (horners are not concerned since they have important amount of west eurasian ancestry making them different physically and clustering closer to people in the middle east and north africa).
You project your own american labels upon ancient concepts and your vintage pictures either show tanned riffians or literally non riffian people and you don't even see how ridiculous and retarded your point is lol. If my grand-father and its father are black how come I'm not black ? I'm done XD
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
posted
So lying, goalpost moving,strawmen, histrionics and ad hominem because you're too cowardly to just admit this is what your concept of a Black person boils down too.
Go sleep it off.
--------------------
Meet on the Level, act upon the Plumb, part on the Square. Posts: 574 | From: Guinee | Registered: Jul 2014
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Thousand years old cosmopolitan East African list of blacks
"And they said, 'The number of blacks is greater than the number of whites, because most of those who are counted as whites are comprised of peoples from Persia, the mountains, Khurasan, Rome, Slavia, France, and Iberia, and anything apart from them is insignificant.
But among the blacks are counted * Zanj * Ethiopians * Fezzani * Berbers * Copts * Nubians * Zaghawa * Moors
the people of * Sind * the Hindus * the Qamar * the Dabila * the IndoChinese
and those beyond them. The sea is more extensive than the land, and the islands in the sea between IndoChina and Zanzibar are full of blacks, like the * Sarandib * Kalah * Amal * Zabij and its islands up to Hindustan and IndoChina
Kabul and those coasts.
"They said, 'The Arabs come from us -- not from the whites -- because of the similarity of their colour to ours. The Hindus are more yellow in color than the Arabs, yet they are counted among the black peoples."
From the When & why did they stop being black? Says who? thread. Please accept my most humble apology for the bantering tone therein 🙏
quote:Originally posted by Ish Geber: Black people's (particularly in America) history, culture and identify was marginalized and destroyed. So in the end Black American who believe this can't be blamed. This is the part you don't get.
Ish, Antalass is just mad because the fallacy of "racial features" is busting his false claims! If features on ancient Indigenous Americans like broad noses and broad lips does not make them "negroid" then what are we to make of "caucasoid" features on Africans both North Africans and Southern Africans on the opposite pole of the continent? He is bankrupt.
Yep.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Anyway, moving a bit closer back to topic...
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Again, this is why the so-called "debate" or "battle" over the black identity of Egypt is just a microcosm of has been going on in Western academia for decades. No part of African soil is safe from the Euronut supremacists and I hope that even negrophobes like Antalas can see this.
We've all noticed some segments of the human genetics fandom being obsessed with the idea of back-migrations into Africa, even going so far as to attribute African uniparental haplogroups like Y-DNA E and mtDNA L3 to them. Of course, back-migrations did happen, but the preoccupation with them convinces me that Hamiticism remains alive and well in the genetics community.
From Bad Archaeology on Great Zimbabwe European discovery During the seventeenth century, the Portuguese has begun to dislodge the Arabs as the principal international traders on the coast of Mozambique. As they did, they began to hear stories of a king called the Monomotapa who ruled from a city called Symbăoe or Zimbăoche, some distance to the east. According to some versions of these stories, the Monomotapa’s palace was covered with plates of gold, but in 1531, Viçente Pegado, Captain of the garrison at Sofala, wrote about ruined dry-stone fortresses, a tower more than ‘twelve fathoms’ high and mines and mentioned that Symbăoe meant ‘court’ in the local language. In 1552, the Portuguese historian Joăo de Barros (1496-1570) conjectured that it was the site of Axum, a city of the Queen of Sheba. The stories were heard second-hand from Arab merchants who traded with the peoples of the interior, but the Portuguese merchants did not travel inland.
In 1871, as Europeans began to explore the interior of southern Africa, a Swabian geologist and explorer, Karl Gottlieb Mauch (1837-1875), set out to examine the semi-legendary ruins of Monomotapa that he had heard about from the writings of a German missionary named Alexander Merensky (1837-1918), published in 1867. Setting out with an acquaintance, the ivory collector George Philips, Mauch was able to persuade a local guide to take them to the ruins of Zimbabwe. The ruins were too overgrown to examine closely, although the explorers did meet an elderly local, Babareke, who told them that he was the son of the last high priest of a cult that had once sacrificed oxen in the ruins. Other than this, Mauch and Philips were unable to learn anything about the place.
Great Zimbabwe: the site The site of Great Zimbabwe lies in the broad valley of the River Mapudzi, a tributary of the River Sabi, which enters the Indian Ocean to the south of Sofala. The landscape is granite, with small hillocks and crags, which exfoliates (cracks away) from exposed rock faces as temperatures change through the year. This provides a convenient building material, used by the builders of Great Zimbabwe and nearby sites. Soapstone, found 24 km (15 miles) away, was useful for carving, while slate and quartz were also imported to the site. The ruins of Great Zimbabwe sit on top of a steep-sided hillock and cover an area of 0.65 km2 (about 0.25 square miles). The largest structure is an elliptical enclosure (sometimes called the Temple, the Elliptical Building or the Great Enclosure), with the Acropolis at the top of the hill, 550 m (600 yards) to the north; there are other ruins in the valley bottom to the north and east. As the Arab merchants had told their Portuguese rivals, the buildings were of dry stone construction, although the walls were plastered.
The controversy begins Like so many European explorers, Mauch published a book about his explorations when he returned to Germany; also, like so many Europeans encountering strange ruins, he tried to explain them in terms of known civilisations and cultures. He thought that Babareke had described a Semitic ritual and that the ruins were those of the biblical Ophir, the site of King Solomon’s fabled mines. One of the ruined buildings, he reasoned, was a copy of Solomon’s Temple, while the great oval enclosure (which he called Zimbabye) was a copy of the palace where the Queen of Sheba had stayed in Jerusalem. He believed that this meant that she had lived at Zimbabwe, built by Phoenician architects.
The inevitable looting follows Mauch’s book caused a sensation in Europe and made the ruins an attraction for treasure-hunters, keen to locate Solomon’s supposed treasures. When Cecil Rhodes (1853-1902) established Southern Rhodesia in 1889 (basically a private corporation set up to administer a huge territory at considerable profit), the ruins were part of the estate of the South African settlers Willi and Harry Posselt. Willi had tried to remove a soapstone carving from one of the ruins in 1888, but was driven off by locals. According to one version of the story, in 1889, he cut a carved soapstone bird from its pillar in return for blankets and trinkets offered to a local Chief, Mugabe, and sold it to Cecil Rhodes, while yet another version claims that he hid others, intending to return to the site to collect them later. He subsequently published an account, The Early Days of Mashonaland and a Visit to Great Zimbabwe Ruins, bemoaning the lack of treasure on the site.
Archaeological excavations at Great Zimbabwe and misinterpretations In 1891, the archaeologist James Theodore Bent (1852-1897) spent two months excavating in the ruins and was able to remove the soapstone birds, which were taken to the museum at Cape Town (they were returned to Zimbabwe in 1981). In the early years of the Southern Rhodesia colony, an Ancient Ruins Company was set up, with the express purpose of prospecting the ruins for treasure. Franchises were sold by the administrator of Mashonaland, Leander Starr Jameson (1853-1917), for forty or so sites, which yielded little more than 5 kg of gold but which destroyed their stratigraphic integrity.
Bent concluded from his excavations that the site had been built by Sabaeans, Phoenicians or another Semitic people, just as Mauch had conjectured. This was based on the presence of soapstone phalli, the shape of the conical tower and the oval shape of the Great Enclosure, which resembles a building at Ma’rib (مأرب, Yemen) identified as the harîm of Bilqîs, the Queen of Sheba. He suggested that Great Zimbabwe was identical with both the biblical Ophir and the Punt of Ancient Egyptian texts and that it had continued to flourish under Arab influence into the Middle Ages. He believed that a coin of the Roman Emperor Antoninus Pius (138-161 CE) found in a mine-shaft at Mutale (Zimbabwe, Umtali before 1982) strengthened his case. unfortunately, it seems that this is all we know about the coin.
Later explorers and archaeologists concurred with Bent’s opinion. The first was Karl (or Carl) Peters (1856-1918), the creator of German Tanganyika, who had never visited the site but who had explored ruins further east in 1899-1900. His racist attitudes (he referred to the population of Tanganyika as “sickly and useless rubbish” and believed that they should either be used by white settlers as forced labour or exterminated) clearly coloured his attitudes to who might have built the ruins.
Finally, in 1902, the new legislative council of Southern Rhodesia passed a law protecting the sites and a curator, the journalist Richard Nicklin Hall (1853-1914), was appointed to oversee Great Zimbabwe itself. Hall spent two years excavating the great enclosure, which he published in detail. He believed that he could distinguish two occupations – one sun-worshipping Semitic (perhaps Himyarite Arabs), the other medieval Arab – separated by a long period of abandonment. Hall avowedly wished to free the site “from the filth and decadence of the Kaffir occupation”, deliberately removing anything that might link the site with local African peoples and clearing some twelve feet (1.8 m) of deposits in an operation that was described by a visiting archaeologist as “reckless blundering… worse than anything I have ever seen”. As a result, Hall was dismissed from his post...
You can read the rest for yourselves.
Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Here are some excerpts from Alexander Galloway's assessment of skeletal remains from Mapungubwe (1937) that date to the time period of Great Zimbabwe:
^ Note that "Capoid"/"Boskopid" is viewed as racially distinct from "negroid". The same way North and Northeast Africans are "caucasoid" and distinct from "negroid"; however the distinctions are not in totatlity since Galloway admits many traits being held in common.
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: One can always discuss how serious of an issue it is, but obviously there are Native Americans, but also African Americans, whites and Latinos who think it is worth discussing and who write books and articles, or post on social media to refute the claims made by fringe groups who claim that the precolumbian American cultures were created by black/African people. Obviously those who adress these questions think they are important enough to spend some time on.
You are using circular arguments, arguments that have been refuted already. This is a waste of time. You don't want to get the root of the matter, which is white professors and authors started with these claims. School text books have been written by white Americans since the education system started.
They refused to acknowledge African history and African Americans history and contributions. They now are arguing over Critical Race Theory", which once again is ignoring actual and factual history. They still refuse to acknowledge actual and factual history, so some people started digging and create their own narratives.
You love to do a lot of victim blaming. And I will dissect your post, so you can see where you are wrong and suffer from a low EQ.
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: Do you know the exact number of African Americans who claims that Black peoples were in the Americas in precolumbian times? Do you know the exact numbers of African Americans that try to refute those ideas? Do you know the exact number of Native Americans who actively, on social media or in other ways try to refute those notions? I suppose you do not know. That is why you can not say that the matter is without importance. It becomes just an opinion. But if there are people that find it worthwile to adress these questions it means that it is important for them. And if some Native Americans worry about that others in different ways ty to distort their history, it is worth discussing.
I don't have to know the exact number, because there's not such thing. It has to do with understanding and knowing a people. Black communities all over USA identify as African American, which some embracing their Native American heritage. 99.9% of the time Black Americans speak of their 400 year history and Africa.
The Africana curriculum doesn't claim anything you accuse Black Americans supposedly doing.
You speak on a people you don't even know and understand.
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: Here we go with the personal insults. Not very mature behavior. You seem to get worked up about these issues. Still you seem not to be able to grasp that some Native Americans can get upset when some Black people try to distort their past or question their identity. If you have any EQ it seems very selective.
It's not an insult. It's a psychoanalysis observation. You have this strong form of cognitive dissonance.
It's immature when you keep using the same debunk circular arguments. You have no reference points, no details, but for the same refuted arguments you've already made prior.
I bet in your next post you are going to use the exact same arguments.
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: Do you not think that any Native American peoples where annihilated? So the Yahi people of California where not annihilated? How came that the last one of them, Ishi, saw the rest of his people being killed by the whites? Did he dream that? Which are their black descendants? So the Susquehannocks did not disappear? Where they black? So you think the original Pequots were black? What about the Natchez, did not the French crush them in 1731 so only 400 survived whereof most of them were sold as slaves to the West Indies (a few survivors took refuge among other peoples). Where they originally Black? Where the Beothuk in Canada black?an doubt if that painter ever saw any real Native Americans either.
Most Native Americans in the North of America have been annihilated. That the point I am making all the while. And they have been replaced mostly by 5 dollar white pretendians. That's the point here, smart-ass.
I am not thinking anything. I am asking you what they looked like. Black Americans who show these old 14th 15th 16th century images claim that they are they descants of these dark skinned Native Americans. It could be or could not be true. It's not my place to say they aren't.
Talking about California again and I quote:
quote:Los Angeles, California has a lot more Black history than most people realize. The city was founded in 1781 by a group of 44 Mexican settlers, and 26 of them were of African descent. Pío de Jesús Pico, who was of both African and American descent, was one of the first governors of the area that is now known as the city of Los Angeles. In fact, he served as the governor of Alta California twice and was even a councilman before his untimely death.
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: About Blacks claiming to be descendants of now extinct tribes: Are there any archaeological remains, or DNA evidence that any of these peoples where Black/African before they first came in contact with Europeans (and Africans)?
Lot of these people do not believe and trust these companies, and the reason is because of Americas racist systemic history.
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: Do you question the genocide of Native Americans, are you a history revisionist like those people who deny the holocaust?
I don't know if these people deny it. But how many pure Native Americans are there as of now?
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: What about it? Whites may have started it but there are blacks that uphold outdated ideas. They ought to know better. If they promote an outdated, false narrativ that was started by now dead white people, how is it not their fault still promoting such ideas? It is weird, one does not so often here claIms from African Americans that the ancient Egyptians where white, which also is an idé first promoted by white people. But the idé that precolumbian Native Americans where black was obviously more easy to digest for some African Americans.
So now it's not on whites who started these ideas? lol
See, you don't understand how the American social structure works, which includes the school curriculum and school textbooks. This is part of the integration system, which Black Americans seek validation by the dominant society.
Once you understand this you will understand why some of these people are making these claims.
It was certain whites planting these ideas in Black Americans, because the American school curriculum and history school textbooks is written by white people. And has been done so for decades.
Jungle Brothers - Acknowledge your own history (1988)
quote:[Verse 1: Afrika] My forefather was a king He wore fat gold chains and fat ruby rings Nobody believes this to be true Maybe it's because my eyes ain't blue You ain't gonna find it in your history book Come here, young blood, and take a look And dig down deep inside this hard cover Don't you know that you was bought, brother? All you read about is slavery Never 'bout the Black man's bravery You look at the pictures and all they show is African people with bones in they noses That ain't true, that's a lie You didn't get that from my lemon pie
[Verse 2: Mike G] Yeah, I cut class, I got a D 'Cause History meant nothing to me Except a definite nap That's why I often sat in the back I'd talk to girls or write a rhyme 'Cause I didn't know all times are Black man's times When I was young, my mama told me stories Of Black peoples' fight to bring us glory I used to think these were stories to put me to sleep But now I know mama's talk wasn't cheap I know Africa's for Africans And history's the blood of every woman and man
[Verse 3: Afrika & Mike G] Page one, page two, page three And still no signs of me Yeah, so I looked into the table of the contents (Uh) They wrote a little thing about us in the projects (What?) The only history we make is if we kill somebody Rape somebody, but other than that, we're nobody Speaking like a brother living in the jungle I know I was here first, but I remain humble Now it's time to rekindle the fire A tribe of young brothers with the eye of the tiger Acknowledge your own, we have a home Put on this earth to live and roam Christopher chose to explore Discovered America! Yeah, sure He thought the planet was square Traveled many places, but we already had been there We left tracks, backtracked back First civilization, you know where that was found at Looking for the true Black days of glory But you're reading history, that's his story
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: I do not know exactly who is running the Facebook group, many people on it are anonymous.
Ok. Anyone can make an account and pose as whatever.
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: Native Americans on social media that protested against the false narratives have many times become harrassed, so now several of them prefer to remain anonymous. Some has been spammed by hateful messages, others have been hanged out on social media with name and photos, some have gotten angry phone calls.
Are these actual Native Americans, or 5 dollar Indians, I mean pretendians? What did these anonymous Indians say about the 5 dollar pretendians?
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: People like the archaeologist "Navajorocks" (I must look up his real name, I forgot it) who made a couple of videos questioning or refuting the Black precolumbian Native narrative has been harrassed and his account reported.
They probably don't take him serious, because of his appearance.
I have never been harassed when I spoke up against any of these claims. And when I do I do show images of Amerindians native the South America and other reputable data.
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: I know some of the Native Americans that debate these issues by their real names. We have had e-mail contact, video chats, messenger groups and so on. But do not ask me to reveal their names here. I do not want to contribute to them being harrassed.
If so one can put this forward to the authorities. As should they report the 5 dollar Indians who steal billions each year. Problem is that the school curriculum is authoritative as well. So where does it begin and where does it end?
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: I know one woman telling about her trips to Mexico and how proud she was over her ancestors achievements. She was called a wh*re, and her Native identity was questioned by some aggressive "Wabos" or extreme "Afrocentrics" or whatever one wants to call them.
People who claim this extreme of attachment to the Americas (for thousands of years), these people are not Afrocentrics. Afrocentrism is Africana and in Africana theres not such discourse. Wabos have nothing to do with Africana and do not claim African root and origin.
So that argument makes no sense. And I suggest you no further bring this up in the future.
If one is being harassed one should inform the platform, and even can put it forward to the authorities when it's life treating.
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: I was among other groups in a group where we refuted specific claims made by the fringe people and where we searched for the origin to some of the fake or mislabeled images they often post.
I have been too, so what's your point?
quote:The pictures you show, are not made by black Americans, you already know that. They are made by Europeans whereof many never visited America. They often mixed different elements from both Africa and America (and some totally free fantasies) to create allegorical or pedagogical images often aimed at people who also never visited America.
Of course I know that it was not made by Back Americans, or any other Black people. It was a rhetorical question.
Some of the people indeed didn't travel, but others did and could have confirmed they images to be false or correct. Also, where is your evidence that these people based these images on allegories?
There's also documented text by people what they've witnessed. Percentage wise, to what degree are those images close to reality?
The quintessential question becomes, who's to blame now?
In some way I can understand why a people who have lost everything seek for correlations. Especially when they have a long history in that region.
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: Most Europeans were more acquainted with Black Africans so they often used them as a model for these pictures and paintings.
Interesting argument and very welcoming.
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: Interestingly enough the oldest European painting with what at least some experts believe are Native Americans show them as white. But one can doubt if that painter ever saw any real Native Americans either.
I haven't seen those, but I do know of these 2022 theories, where white scholars claim to be the indigenous people to the Americas.
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: ----
At this point you are just saying anything, although it makes zero sense.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Punos_Rey: So you admit to basically putting words in my mouth and attacking a strawman. Got it.
I'm still waiting for an actual list of the traits that make a black person.
The goalpost shifting never ends with you eh? So whether I post ancient geographers or "vintage photos" is really besides the point. You have put your own ignorance and petulant childishness on display which has been far more useful.
I already talked about the traits of a black person : frizzy hair combined with black skin and negroid features typically found in most populations in sub-saharan africa (horners are not concerned since they have important amount of west eurasian ancestry making them different physically and clustering closer to people in the middle east and north africa).
You project your own american labels upon ancient concepts and your vintage pictures either show tanned riffians or literally non riffian people and you don't even see how ridiculous and retarded your point is lol. If my grand-father and its father are black how come I'm not black ? I'm done XD
Ok, we get it and yes you are done.
West Africa's Sahara-Sahel Region
"The half of West Africa you don't see -the people of the Sahara-Sahel region, principally Mauritania, Senegal, Mali, and Niger."
quote: Thus, not only did Nubia have a prominent role in the origin of Ancient Egypt, it was also a key area for the origin of the entire African pastoral tradition.
~Gatto M. 2009.
The Nubian Pastoral Culture as Link between Egypt and Africa: A View from the Archaeological Record Egypt in its African Context: BAR S2204- Archaeopress. 21-29
quote: Moreover, although the Nubian and Egyptian samples formed one well-distributed group, the Egyptian samples clustered in the upper left region, while the Nubians concentrated in the lower right of the plot. One line can be drawn that would separate the closely dispersed Egyptians and Nubians. The predynastic Egyptian samples clustered together (Badari and Naqada), while Gizeh most closely groups with the Lisht sample.
~Godde K.
An Examination of Nubian and Egyptian biological distances: Support for biological diffusion or in situ development? Homo. 2009;60(5):389-404. Epub 2009 Sep 19.
quote: More recent interpretations contend that Egyptians from the south actually expanded into the northern regions during the Dynastic state unification (Hassan, 1988; Savage, 2001), and that the Predynastic populations of Upper and Lower Egypt are morphologically distinct from one another, but not sufficiently distinct to consider either non-indigenous (Zakrzewski, 2007). The Predynastic populations studied here, from Naqada and Badari, are both Upper Egyptian samples, while the Dynastic Egyptian sample (Tarkhan) is from Lower Egypt. The Dynastic Nubian sample is from Upper Nubia (Kerma). Previous analyses of cranial variation found the Badari and Early Predynastic Egyptians to be more similar to other African groups than to Mediterranean or European populations (Keita, 1990; Zakrzewski, 2002).
~AP Starling, JT Stock. (2007), Dental Indicators of Health and Stress in Early Egyptian and Nubian Agriculturalists: A Difficult Transition and Gradual Recovery. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY 134:520–528 Introduction to Research at Naqada Region
quote:“The Predynastic populations studied here, from Naqada and Badari, are both Upper Egyptian samples, while the Dynastic Egyptian sample (Tarkhan) is from Lower Egypt. The Dynastic Nubian sample is from Upper Nubia (Kerma). Previous analyses of cranial variation found the Badari and Early Predynastic Egyptians to be more similar to other African groups than to Mediterranean or European populations (Keita, 1990; Zakrzewski, 2002)
~D. Usai, S. Salvatori, T. Jakob & R. David The Al Khiday Cemetery in Central Sudan and its “Classic/Late Meroitic” Period Graves Journal of African Archaeology, Volume 12 (2), 2014, pages 183-204, DOI 10.3213/2191-5784-10254
quote: Bivariate analyses distinguish Jebel Sahaba from European and circumpolar samples, but do not tend to segregate them from recent North or sub-Saharan African samples
~T. W. Holliday* 2013 Population Affinities of the Jebel Sahaba Skeletal Sample: Limb Proportion Evidence
quote: As a result of their facial prognathism, the Badarian sample has been described as forming a morphological cluster with Nubian, Tigrean, and other southern (or "Negroid") groups
[...]
This evidence suggests that the process of state formation itself may have been mainly an indigenous process, but that it may have occurred in association with in-migration to the Abydos region of the Nile Valley. This potential in-migration may have occurred particularly during the EDyn and OK.
quote: Figure 1: Images of North African prehistoric rock and cave paintings. From (a, b) Swimmer’s Cave (Wadi Sura, southern Egypt), (c) the Ennedi massif (northeastern Chad) and (d) Zolat el Hammad, Wadi Howar (northern Sudan).
Paleoclimate and archaeological evidence tells us that, 11,000-5,000 years ago, the Earth's slow orbital 'wobble' transformed today's Sahara desert to a land covered with vegetation and lakes.
quote:"They clearly show that, despite the presence of domesticates, fish predominate in the animal bone assemblages. In this sense, there is continuity with the earlier Holocene occupation from the Fayum, starting ca. 7350 BC. Domesticated plants and animals appear first from approximately 5400 BC. The earliest possible evidence for domesticates in Egypt are the very controversial domesticated cattle from the 9th/8th millennium BC in the Nabta Playa-Bir Kiseiba area."
~Veerle Linseele et al. PLoS One. 2014; 9(10): e108517. Published online 2014 Oct 13. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0108517 PMCID: PMC4195595 New Archaeozoological Data from the Fayum “Neolithic” with a Critical Assessment of the Evidence for Early Stock Keeping in Egypt
quote:Some groups (using cemeteries E-01-2, E-03-1, E-03-2, and E-09-4) show some affiliation with sub-Saharan Africans, readable in the pottery assemblage and other grave goods, as well as some morphological features (Irish 2010; Kobusiewicz and Kabaciński 2010; Czekaj-Zastawny and Kabaciński 2015). Ethnographic data offer support by showing how radically different children are treated in various African societies (Gottlieb 2004a, b; Pawlik 2004; Kabaciński et al. 2018).
(Agnieszka Czekaj-Zastawny & Tomasz Goslar & Joel D. Irish & Jacek Kabaciński, Gebel Ramlah—a Unique Newborns’ Cemetery of the Neolithic Sahara, African Archaeological Review volume 35, pages393–405(2018))
"West Eurasian ancestry"?
quote:قالوا و كان واد عبد المصلب اعشرة السادة دلما ضخما نظر اليهم علمر بن الطفيل يطوفون كانهم جمال جون فقال؛ بهولأْ تمنع السدانه و كان عبد الله بن عباس ادام صحما ولد اب طالب اشرف الخلق و هم سود و ادم و دلم
there are black tribes among the Arabs, such as the Banu Sulaim bin Mansur, and that all the peoples settled in the Harra, besides the Banu Sulaim are black.
(Al-Jahiz (776-869): Al-Fakhar al-Sudan min al-Abyadh)
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Here is a more recent study on Iron Age Zimbabweans:
Assessment of human skeletal remains from the Penhalonga district, Zimbabwe (2020) by Maryna Steyn & Anja Meyer Abstract The Nyanga complex is situated in the Penhalonga district of Manicaland province in northern Zimbabwe. According to various archival and modern sources, six skeletons were discovered in this region in the 1930s and are supposedly curated in the Raymond A. Dart Collection of Archaeological Humans Remains at the University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg. In an attempt to locate these skeletons and associate them with the sites, archival records, skeletal and faunal analyses and radiocarbon dating were used to gain more information on the bioarchaeology of the region. Only three of the skeletons could be located in the Dart Collection, two of which could be reliably radiocarbon dated, one from the Hill of Paintings to before the beginning of the Nyanga complex, the other, from Mkondwe, to most probably contemporary with it. The latter shows evidence of dental modification similar to that seen in individuals recovered from the Monk’s Kop site, situated to the north of Zimbabwe. This study forms part of a larger attempt to bring context to skeletons housed in archaeological collections because of their value as sources of information on the past.
Discussion Of the six skeletons from the Penhalonga region mentioned in various texts, three are currently present in the Raymond A. Dart Archaeological Human Remains Collection (Table 1). As far as the three missing skeletons are concerned, it seems that one was deaccessioned; another skeleton that is mentioned in the catalogue comprises only animal bones and of the third no information could be obtained. Surprisingly, given its excellent preservation, Skeleton A293 was the oldest of the skeletons and can loosely be associated with a hill with many rock paintings. The remains were those of a 30–45 year-old female individual, radiocarbon-dated (730 ± 59 BP, cal. AD1228–1396; IT-C-1910) to just before, or to the early stages of, the Nyanga complex (AD 1300–1800). This individual could therefore be more closely related temporally to the Ziwa tradition. Soper (2013) mentions a similar burial in a rock-shelter on the northwestern slopes of Mount Ziwa. Here, the grave was said to have been dug into the Later Stone Age layers beneath, but was found in a similar burial position, i.e. semi-flexed on its right side. It is known that early farming communities associated with the Ziwa tradition utilised rock-shelters, many of which overlay much older Stone Age deposits (Manyanga and Shenjere 2012). Of the three skeletons in the collection, only A387 could be firmly associated with a pit circle. It was therefore important that a radiocarbon date was obtained for it, but unfortunately the remains were so poorly preserved that this was not possible. Skeleton A292, a (possibly female) adult, was found some distance from pit-structure M10. Based on its location Martin (1937) suggested that the grave was most probably secondary, belonging to the modern-day Manyika people. Local informants, however, denied this and Soper(2013) mentions that it seems more likely that the remains were buried during the abandonment of the homestead. The radiocarbon date obtained for A292 (380 ± 44 BP, cal. AD1458–1636; IT-C-1772) confirms its temporal association with the Nyanga complex and more specifically to the period associated with the construction of the pit-structures (AD 1500–1800). A292 showed dental modification in the form of V-shaped filing of the lower, central incisors. Unfortunately, all of the upper incisors were lost after death, so they could not be examined for possible modification. Dental modification is a practice with deep roots, occurring in Africa and many other parts of the world (e.g. Singer 1953; Pindborg1969; Halestrap 1971; Claparols 1975; Van Reenen 1978; Morris 1989; Jones 1992). These modifications take on a variety of forms and are brought about by intentional filing, chipping or removal of teeth, or sometimes even decoration with inlays (Milner and Larsen 1991). Although the meaning and purpose of modification is not always clear, it may be that it serves as personal ornamentation or demonstrates an affiliation with a specific group (e.g. Van Reenen 1986; Fitting 1989; Morris 1998). Usually, a specific pattern of modification is found in a group. For example, dental modification at Mapungubwe/K2 in the Shashe-Limpopo Confluence Area of northern South Africa was done by filing the upper central incisors to form a V-shaped gap mesially (Steyn 1994). Modifications are usually found in both sexes and they are mostly performed around the age of puberty (Van Reenen 1986; Morris 1998). Dental modification is, of course, a risky practice as it may cause the permanent loss of the tooth, especially if the pulp is exposed. The extent of the modification patterns may vary from simple filing away of mesial edges, as in the case of A292, to consider-able alterations such as the removal of most of the incisors as in the case of an Early Iron Age individual from Broederstroom, South Africa (De Villiers 1981, unpublished report; Morris 1992: WA 33 Burial 4). A similar pattern of V-shaped filing of the lower central incisors was also seen in female skeletons from Monk’s Kop, a broadly thirteenth-century site from northern Zimbabwe (Swanepoel 2015). The apparently gendered nature of this form of dental modification is similar to that seen here and should be followed up when assessing skeletons from the Zimbabwe region in future. Unfortunately, only one of the skeletons (A293) was complete enough to conduct a FORDISC craniometric analysis. This female aligned with the Teita from East Africa, which is not surprising given the area of discovery. This was followed by “Bushman”/Khoesan, with the skull being *the most different from the Dogon of West Africa.* With such a small sample, it is difficult to comment on health, diet and disease. All that can be said is that there was no evidence of dental decay, but that the considerable dental wear suggests a diet high in abrasive materials. Results of the analysis of faunal remains associated with the Penhalonga and Mkondwe sites suggest the presence of a possible dwarf cattle species similar to that found at other Nyanga sites such as Muozi (Plug et al.1997; Soper 2002). The presence of dwarf cattle species further supports the argument that these pit-structures were used to house cattle. This research was brought about by the need to better value, preserve and curate archaeological skeletons that are housed in existing collections. As is the case with many other such collections, the Dart collection houses many smaller collections of which very little are known. In a recent paper by Steyn et al.(2019) it was shown that these seemingly unimportant remains can provide significant information and that we need to do all that we can to provide context and information, especially incases such as this where there are unpublished documents that may be lost if they are not properly looked after. Future research avenues to be considered could include aDNA analysis for the two more complete skeletons in order to elucidate their population relationships better. More sophisticated craniometric analyses involving A293, probably in comparison with the Monk’s Kop and other Zimbabwean material, should also be considered. In conclusion, the Raymond A. Dart Archaeological Human Remains Collection currently holds three skeletons that can be associated with the Penhalonga region of northern Zimbabwe. Unfortunately, the only skeleton firmly associated with the pit-structures was too poorly preserved to obtain a radiocarbon date. The radiocarbon date for A292, however, places the individual in the temporal period associated with the construction of the Nyanga complex’s pit-structures, while A293 predates this period.
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: If the idea that the Olmec heads were "Negroid" and therefore evidence of African origin didn't come from so-called Afrocentrics, why keep focusing on Afrocentrics as the only ones promoting the idea when they aren't? You seem to be acting like it is something that came from them when it didn't. The root of the issue is the use of European racial typologies which is where this idea of African Olmecs came from. I find it odd how you are avoiding the outrage of the whole concept of racial models that originated with Europans as part of divide and conquer but you are quick to jump on Africans using them. It is hypocritical. Europeans have spread more misinformation and pseudo science about "race" than anybody on the planet but you make it seem like this is somehow an "Afrocentric" thing or somehow that the Afrocentrics are the 'more evil' than the Europeans who raped, pillaged, conquered and robbed their way around the entire planet and created racial hierarchies everywhere they went.
I have come to adress it because they are the ones who mainly promotes these ideas TODAY. They are the ones who make those claims in books, articles, on social media. Some whites are also on that train but it is more rare today.
I have debated whites also on other social media and platforms when they spouted ideas about European Solutreens paddling to the Americas, or ancient Hebrews, or about white European ancient Peruvians, or a white Kennewick man. Also disussed with people who deny that any Native Americans were ever genocided or oppressed. So I have not only focused on Black Americans. On top of that I have protested against landtheft and exploitation in South America. I have written about such issues, raised money and tried to raise awarness about indigenous issues.
So according to you, whites no longer spread misinformation and lies about history and anthropology? That is purely hypocritical especially in this day and age of social media where the internet is full of misinformation and half truths of all stripes, but according to you it is only black people that do it. And somehow that absolves Europeans of their history of lies and distortion? I am not saying that you have to agree anything that isn't based on fact or isn't a reasonable theory based on facts, but you are acting like this is a blacks only issue. When the fact is that Europeans created these racial models and those models are still being used by many within and without of academia in many ways. So if you are going to criticize the use of such models then you have to start with the Europeans by making this model in the first place and spreading it.
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: That I came in on the Black Native thing here on ES is partly because I seen some threads here which promoted such pseudo historical ideas. Even if it is just a few members who have forwarded them.
quote:Whether or not he proved the thesis doesn't change the fact that this man believed in the idea of African origins enough to build a boat similar to those used in the Nile Valley. The point is these ideas aren't from "Afrocentrics" and some of the most famous proponents aren't black people at all, including the Mexicans who discovered the heads to begin with.
I know that, but TODAY it is mainly blacks who actively promote such ideas, especially on social media, so it is why I have come to discuss those particular ideas especially with Black people. But I also challenge white people who promotes those or similar ideas.
Thor Heyerdahl died is what happened, but he accomplished what he set out to do which is to show it was possible to sail across the ocean in a reed raft. And there are others that have taken up where he left off, which means that plenty of Europeans and others still see this theory as a possibility. That doesn't mean evidence wont be found of African contact or that everybody outside of Afrocentrics have abandoned the idea altogether. Also, as far as serious African scholarship goes, the last person to promote this theory was Ivan Van Sertima who is also dead. Meaning that in general, the theory is still a theory but the evidence for direct African contact has not been found at least that I know of so there isn't a lot of scholarship on it any longer. It is still a theory, but to this day, it was never an Afrocentric theory, regardless of whatever anonymous Afrocentrics you claim to be promoting it. And why are you talking about anonymous internet Afrocentrics anyway? Who introduced Olmecs into this thread?
quote:So you are still trying to exclusively express outrage for Africans having theories you find to be fringe, but don't have the same outrage for the Europeans who created those theories?
As I said I have challenged similar ideas promoted by whites, but not here on ES. I am in other fora and discussion platforms too.
I even discussed with missionaries challenging their ethnocentric and religiocentric agenda.
I am not only on ES, I am and have been active in other context too.
You just see me here on ES, you do not know about what I am doing in other contexts.
Obviously it isn't only so called Afrocentrics on the internet who promote things that aren't true. To act like this is solely an issue with "Afrocentrics" is the problem and beyond that trying to lump all AAs or African scholars into the same boat is the problem.
Posts: 8890 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: So according to you, whites no longer spread misinformation and lies about history and anthropology? That is purely hypocritical especially in this day and age of social media where the internet is full of misinformation and half truths of all stripes, but according to you it is only black people that do it. And somehow that absolves Europeans of their history of lies and distortion? I am not saying that you have to agree anything that isn't based on fact or isn't a reasonable theory based on facts, but you are acting like this is a blacks only issue. When the fact is that Europeans created these racial models and those models are still being used by many within and without of academia in many ways. So if you are going to criticize the use of such models then you have to start with the Europeans by making this model in the first place and spreading it.
The myth about Black Olmecs (and other alleged black precolumbian American civilisations) is mainly spread by black people today, even if there are exceptions. Especially on social media. But of course there are misinformation from whites about many other subjects. All peoples are able to spread misinformation about different things, even if the subjects vary.
quote: Thor Heyerdahl died is what happened, but he accomplished what he set out to do which is to show it was possible to sail across the ocean in a reed raft. And there are others that have taken up where he left off, which means that plenty of Europeans and others still see this theory as a possibility. That doesn't mean evidence wont be found of African contact or that everybody outside of Afrocentrics have abandoned the idea altogether. Also, as far as serious scholarship goes, the last person to promote this theory was Ivan Van Sertima who is also dead. Meaning that in general, the theory is still a theory but the evidence for direct African contact has not been found at least that I know of so there isn't a lot of scholarship on it any longer. It is still a theory, but to this day, it was never an Afrocentric, regardless of whatever anonymous Afrocentrics you claim to be promoting it. And why are you talking about anonymous internet Afrocentrics anyway? Who introduced Olmecs into this thread?
Thor Heyerdahl did a lot of things, some things had more scientific credibility than others. Yes he died, and he belonged to a an older generation. Seems that most archaeologists, historians, linguistics and others do not support all of his ideas. Ivan van Sertima is well known and among those who work with American archaeology, anthropology and genetics (I know personally people who have worked with archaeology in the Americas for many years, one in 25 years) his ideas are not directly accepted. Already many years ago there were written articles that refuted many of his claims.
There is a lot of archaeology done, especially in Mesoamerica, and an African presence would have been discovered at least in some of the meticulous archaeological and anthropological investigations and research that is conducted there. But of course there are speculations, there will always be.
Then it of course differ which kind of speculations, and how it goes from speculation to pure fabrication like in this video. There are a lot of over the top stuff on the net and in books and articles by certain authors.
Some of the "Afrocentrics" (in the lack of better names) are maybe not so anonymous, like Clyde Winters who is well known online (also here on ES with his Mande Olmecs). And people like David Imhotep have also promoted speculations about these things. And they have a number of followers on social media, some anonymous and others not.
Social media have kept many ideas alive that otherwise few would have heard about.
But as I said not only African Americans promote pseudo history and wild speculations, such things one can see among most peoples.
-------------------- Once an archaeologist, always an archaeologist Posts: 2684 | From: Sweden | Registered: Mar 2020
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: The myth about Black Olmecs (and other alleged black precolumbian American civilisations) is mainly spread by black people today, even if there are exceptions. Especially on social media. But of course there are misinformation from whites about many other subjects. All peoples are able to spread misinformation about different things, even if the subjects vary.
They refused to acknowledge African history and African Americans history and contributions. They now are arguing over Critical Race Theory", which once again is ignoring actual and factual history. They still refuse to acknowledge actual and factual history, so some people started digging and create their own narratives.
As you yourself admitted. These Black Americans) gather this information from primary sources written by whites.
You are great at victim blaming. Blame it on the Blacks… Sounds familiar in historical American context.
They also deny the history of Black historical characters. And in 2022 we have whites arguing over "Race Theory", because they don't want to acknowledge actual (Black) American history.
You don't understand the social structure of America. You just say anything. Sounds familiar to ABOS theorists. And by that token you should know better, considering that all this information (as you reason, by your own admission) is widely available.
quote:Black History Is Missing In U.S. History Education
quote: American school curriculums need to include Black history beyond Black History Month.
A 2015 study by the National Museum of African American History and Culture and Oberg Research found that American history classes only spend an average of 8-9% of time learning Black history. State education departments must begin altering textbooks and curriculum to include Black history beyond the month of February.
And that bit of Black American history being taught now is attempted to being removed from school history textbooks as well. But …. it's the "Black Americans".
quote:It’s important, Newby-Alexander said, because African American history is often “othered” as an optional component of American history.
[…]
Critical race theory is a concept taught in law school, Newby-Alexander said, and unrelated to the African American History Education Commission.
quote: So according to you, whites no longer spread misinformation and lies about history and anthropology? That is purely hypocritical especially in this day and age of social media where the internet is full of misinformation and half truths of all stripes, but according to you it is only black people that do it. And somehow that absolves Europeans of their history of lies and distortion? I am not saying that you have to agree anything that isn't based on fact or isn't a reasonable theory based on facts, but you are acting like this is a blacks only issue. When the fact is that Europeans created these racial models and those models are still being used by many within and without of academia in many ways. So if you are going to criticize the use of such models then you have to start with the Europeans by making this model in the first place and spreading it.
The myth about Black Olmecs (and other alleged black precolumbian American civilisations) is mainly spread by black people today, even if there are exceptions. Especially on social media. But of course there are misinformation from whites about many other subjects. All peoples are able to spread misinformation about different things, even if the subjects vary.
Van Sertima was the only scholar who focused on that particular topic and that in itself makes him "rare" within African scholarship. He and Heyerdahl were alive at the same time, so to act like there were all these African scholars running around hyping up Olmecs and Africa is you simply over exaggerating in order to pretend that it is a problem unique to African scholars in having to "make up" history. No, Van Sertima followed theories started by white Europeans and the problem is exactly like I said, they haven't found enough evidence to support it. And the entire problem itself goes back to the "racial stereotypes" created by Europeans where if someone has "Negroid" features they must be from Africa. And that mentality still does exist today predominantly among Europeans but you refuse to accept this because according to you, this association between facial features and "race" is an Afrocentric issue when it is not. And to reiterate, the idea of African contact with the Americas is not super far fetched to begin with. The problem is just that no actual direct evidence of such contacts for the Olmecs has been found. And that extends to most of those who claim that "black Indians" or "black native Americans" are Africans.
But again, the first to claim blacks in the Americas were the Europeans and we can go back to the Spanish with their legends of Queen Califa:
quote: Calafia, or Califia, is the fictional queen of the island of California, first introduced by 16th century poet Garci Rodríguez de Montalvo in his epic novel of chivalry, Las sergas de Esplandián (The Adventures of Esplandián), written around 1510.[1] The Californias, a region of North America encompassing the U.S. state of California and the Mexican states of Baja California and Baja California Sur, take their name from Calafia and her kingdom.
In the novel, Calafia is a pagan warrior queen who ruled over a kingdom of black women living on the Island of California (an island off the coast of Asia). Calafia is convinced to raise an army of women warriors and sail away from California with a large flock of trained griffins so that she can join a Muslim battle against Christians who are defending Constantinople. In the siege, the griffins harm enemy and friendly forces, so they are withdrawn. Calafia and her ally Radiaro fight in single combat against the Christian leaders, a king and his son the knight Esplandián. Calafia is bested and taken prisoner, and she converts to Christianity. She marries a cousin of Esplandián and returns with her army to California for further adventures.[2]
The name of Calafia was likely formed from the Arabic word khalifa (religious state leader) that is known as caliph in English and califa in Spanish. Similarly, the name of Calafia's realm, California, likely originated from the same root, fabricated by the author to remind the 16th century Spanish reader of the reconquista, a centuries-long fight between Christians Iberians and Muslims Arabs Invaders that had recently concluded in Spain. The character of Calafia is used by Rodríguez de Montalvo to portray the superiority of chivalry in which the attractive virgin queen is conquered, converted to Christian beliefs, and married off. The book was very popular for many decades—Hernán Cortés read it—and it was selected by author Miguel de Cervantes as the first of many popular and presumed-harmful books to be burnt by characters in his famous novel Don Quixote.[2]
The point you seem to have a problem with is AAs calling out the historical presence of black skinned populations around the world as biggest case of "modern" pseudo science. When Europeans themselves have called out the presence of black skinned natives around the world. There shouldn't be any debate about the natural trait of diversity among any indigenous populations as that is not the exception, it is the rule. Now whether or not they call them "moors" or "Africans" can be debated but the point of human diversity in phenotype as a common factor across all human populations shouldn't be something that is only "Afrocentric". Because again, the whole idea of "race" and put people into "racial groups" is due to Europeans believing in light skin supremacy and doing anything and everything in their power to promote it. You lumping all Africans into one bucket and trying to slander them all as making up facts for feel good purposes is the problem I am pointing out. In fact, lets not forget the reason why the Spanish called the natives of America Indians or "Indios" is because they looked similar to the dark skinned people of India......
quote: Thor Heyerdahl died is what happened, but he accomplished what he set out to do which is to show it was possible to sail across the ocean in a reed raft. And there are others that have taken up where he left off, which means that plenty of Europeans and others still see this theory as a possibility. That doesn't mean evidence wont be found of African contact or that everybody outside of Afrocentrics have abandoned the idea altogether. Also, as far as serious scholarship goes, the last person to promote this theory was Ivan Van Sertima who is also dead. Meaning that in general, the theory is still a theory but the evidence for direct African contact has not been found at least that I know of so there isn't a lot of scholarship on it any longer. It is still a theory, but to this day, it was never an Afrocentric, regardless of whatever anonymous Afrocentrics you claim to be promoting it. And why are you talking about anonymous internet Afrocentrics anyway? Who introduced Olmecs into this thread?
Thor Heyerdahl did a lot of things, some things had more scientific credibility than others. Yes he died, and he belonged to a an older generation. Seems that most archaeologists, historians, linguistics and others do not support all of his ideas. Ivan van Sertima is well known and among those who work with American archaeology, anthropology and genetics (I know personally people who have worked with archaeology in the Americas for many years, one in 25 years) his ideas are not directly accepted. Already many years ago there were written articles that refuted many of his claims.
There is a lot of archaeology done, especially in Mesoamerica, and an African presence would have been discovered at least in some of the meticulous archaeological and anthropological investigations and research that is conducted there. But of course there are speculations, there will always be.
Then it of course differ which kind of speculations, and how it goes from speculation to pure fabrication like in this video. There are a lot of over the top stuff on the net and in books and articles by certain authors.
Some of the "Afrocentrics" (in the lack of better names) are maybe not so anonymous, like Clyde Winters who is well known online (also here on ES with his Mande Olmecs). And people like David Imhotep have also promoted speculations about these things. And they have a number of followers on social media, some anonymous and others not.
Social media have kept many ideas alive that otherwise few would have heard about.
But as I said not only African Americans promote pseudo history and wild speculations, such things one can see among most peoples.
Yes there is misinformation everywhere, but the issue I see most is that people follow racial models in assuming certain features imply African descent when they don't. And this model does no originate with Afrocentrics, even if some of them do follow these theories which obviously originates with Europeans. That does not mean that diversity in human features around the world does not exist, nor that ancient humans did not originate in Africa. It just means that certain features do not automatically indicate recent African origin. At least that is my way of looking at it and everybody is different.
Posts: 8890 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
@Doug M, If I could give a "like" to that post above, I would.
With that being said, that image from the Swedish encyclopedia has to be accurate, considering that modern and surviving populations in the Amazon still look like this. So it's not a stretch to consider that populations that have died out, also have been described and portrayed accurately.
The ill-informed Black Americans are misinformed, which is different from spreading misinformation.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: But again, the first to claim blacks in the Americas were the Europeans and we can go back to the Spanish with their legends of Queen Califa.
Is it not always important who claimed a thing first. When we call people out who is spreading misinformation, is it up to us to try to refute their claims. It is hard to debate authors who lived in the 1500s, 1600s, 1700s, 1800s or dead authors from the 1900s. It is up to us to debate those people who are spreading such ideas today.
quote: The point you seem to have a problem with is AAs calling out the historical presence of black skinned populations around the world as biggest case of "modern" pseudo science. When Europeans themselves have called out the presence of black skinned natives around the world. There shouldn't be any debate about the natural trait of diversity among any indigenous populations as that is not the exception, it is the rule. Now whether or not they call them "moors" or "Africans" can be debated but the point of human diversity in phenotype as a common factor across all human populations shouldn't be something that is only "Afrocentric". Because again, the whole idea of "race" and put people into "racial groups" is due to Europeans believing in light skin supremacy and doing anything and everything in their power to promote it. You lumping all Africans into one bucket and trying to slander them all as making up facts for feel good purposes is the problem I am pointing out. In fact, lets not forget the reason why the Spanish called the natives of America Indians or "Indios" is because they looked similar to the dark skinned people of India......
I do not say it is the biggest case of pseudoscience, there is a lot of other pseudo science as well that I have adressed in other fora, like the ideas of white Europeans paddling over the Atlantic to the Americas during the paleolithic, or ideas of some Native American tribes being Welsh, or ideas of white Europeans in ancient Peru. There are a lot of weird ideas out there, not supported by any real evidence. I maybe talk about the Black versions of pseudo history here on ES, among other because some debaters on ES has proposed some pseudo historical claims about Mande speaking Olmecs and similar.
Pseudo history is pseudo history whoever promotes it.
quote: Yes there is misinformation everywhere, but the issue I see most is that people follow racial models in assuming certain features imply African descent when they don't. And this model does no originate with Afrocentrics, even if some of them do follow these theories which obviously originates with Europeans. That does not mean that diversity in human features around the world does not exist, nor that ancient humans did not originate in Africa. It just means that certain features do not automatically indicate recent African origin. At least that is my way of looking at it and everybody is different.
The important is who promotes different ideas. If some Black people promote certain ideas they must also be called out. Those blacks that are spreading desinformation can not be exempt from criticism just because they are Black.
The same with other peoples, if they are promoting misinformation they ought to be called out too.
Let´s take our fellow ES member Clyde Winters, is he not responsible for spreading theories about Mande speaking Olmecs and similar which he promotes? We can hardly blame his books and articles, or posts on social media, on the whites, even if whites invented those ideas from the beginning. If we disagree with Clyde winters we still have to take a discussion with him, instead of blaming it on for example Leo Wiener who is dead since long time ago. The only ones we can call out are those who promotes these ideas now.
quote:Originally posted by Ish Geber: @Doug M, If I could give a "like" to that post above, I would.
With that being said, that image from the Swedish encyclopedia has to be accurate, considering that modern and surviving populations in the Amazon still look like this. So it's not a stretch to consider that populations that have died out, also have been described and portrayed accurately.
The ill-informed Black Americans are misinformed, which is different from spreading misinformation.
All black Americans aren't misinformed. Some just go too far with certain ideas beyond what is reasonable. And the fact is that the hard scholarship of previous eras of African scholarship has fallen off since the 90s. But I wouldn't put everybody in the same boat.
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx:
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: But again, the first to claim blacks in the Americas were the Europeans and we can go back to the Spanish with their legends of Queen Califa.
Is it not always important who claimed a thing first. When we call people out who is spreading misinformation, is it up to us to try to refute their claims. It is hard to debate authors who lived in the 1500s, 1600s, 1700s, 1800s or dead authors from the 1900s. It is up to us to debate those people who are spreading such ideas today.
quote: The point you seem to have a problem with is AAs calling out the historical presence of black skinned populations around the world as biggest case of "modern" pseudo science. When Europeans themselves have called out the presence of black skinned natives around the world. There shouldn't be any debate about the natural trait of diversity among any indigenous populations as that is not the exception, it is the rule. Now whether or not they call them "moors" or "Africans" can be debated but the point of human diversity in phenotype as a common factor across all human populations shouldn't be something that is only "Afrocentric". Because again, the whole idea of "race" and put people into "racial groups" is due to Europeans believing in light skin supremacy and doing anything and everything in their power to promote it. You lumping all Africans into one bucket and trying to slander them all as making up facts for feel good purposes is the problem I am pointing out. In fact, lets not forget the reason why the Spanish called the natives of America Indians or "Indios" is because they looked similar to the dark skinned people of India......
I do not say it is the biggest case of pseudoscience, there is a lot of other pseudo science as well that I have adressed in other fora, like the ideas of white Europeans paddling over the Atlantic to the Americas during the paleolithic, or ideas of some Native American tribes being Welsh, or ideas of white Europeans in ancient Peru. There are a lot of weird ideas out there, not supported by any real evidence. I maybe talk about the Black versions of pseudo history here on ES, among other because some debaters on ES has proposed some pseudo historical claims about Mande speaking Olmecs and similar.
Pseudo history is pseudo history whoever promotes it.
quote: Yes there is misinformation everywhere, but the issue I see most is that people follow racial models in assuming certain features imply African descent when they don't. And this model does no originate with Afrocentrics, even if some of them do follow these theories which obviously originates with Europeans. That does not mean that diversity in human features around the world does not exist, nor that ancient humans did not originate in Africa. It just means that certain features do not automatically indicate recent African origin. At least that is my way of looking at it and everybody is different.
The important is who promotes different ideas. If some Black people promote certain ideas they must also be called out. Those blacks that are spreading desinformation can not be exempt from criticism just because they are Black.
The same with other peoples, if they are promoting misinformation they ought to be called out too.
Let´s take our fellow ES member Clyde Winters, is he not responsible for spreading theories about Mande speaking Olmecs and similar which he promotes? We can hardly blame his books and articles, or posts on social media, on the whites, even if whites invented those ideas from the beginning. If we disagree with Clyde winters we still have to take a discussion with him, instead of blaming it on for example Leo Wiener who is dead since long time ago. The only ones we can call out are those who promotes these ideas now.
OK and what does Clyde and his theories have to to with Great Zimbabwe and racial misinformation and pseudoscience spread by Europeans over 100s of years? It is like you are trying to elevate so-called "Afrocentrics" to the level of colonizers, thieves and liars like Europeans when that was the topic of the thread. This is the problem with trying to use so-called "Afrocentric pseudoscience" as a defense against the critiques of the facts of European pseudoscience and racism.
Posts: 8890 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The important for me is how Native Americans themselves perceive it, and obviously some of them feel a need to call out also "Afrocentrists". And as I posted even some African Americans, Whites and Latinos seem to think that they ought to be called out.
I have seen the comparison between misinformation about Great Zimbabwe and about the Olmec culture here and there. But since it is not the purpose of this thread I will leave it with that.
(I actually made a thread once about that subject, but it was removed)
-------------------- Once an archaeologist, always an archaeologist Posts: 2684 | From: Sweden | Registered: Mar 2020
| IP: Logged |
As far as missing peoples in U.S. History education, it depends on the local school system and state.
I for one grew up in GA which decades ago was one of the first states to implement a comprehensive demographic history of the U.S. where it's not just the white majority that is taught but other minority groups from Blacks to Indigenous Americans and Hispanics. However pseudo-history has begun to corrupt that policy as well with the neo-Marxist 1618 Project that distorts and outright lies about the history of Blacks and puts them into a perpetual victim class. This is being done as social engineering or mass mind programming on black children. Thankfully at least here in GA enough black educators aren't falling for it.
As for pseudo-history in general, such was always used as a political tool of domination to justify political bias and lull populaces into a certain mindset. I explained this all before and it will never stop until people wake up and realize who is in power and what they want.
But to make the story short pseudo-history was first started by European colonizers as a means to justify their dominance. The de-Africanization of North Africa and especially Egypt is an example par-excellence of that. To Archaeopteryx, yes there are African American pseudo-historians and scholars but these are not taken seriously by mainstream academia as the white ones nestled within the ivory towers.
Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: The important for me is how Native Americans themselves perceive it, and obviously some of them feel a need to call out also "Afrocentrists". And as I posted even some African Americans, Whites and Latinos seem to think that they ought to be called out.
I have seen the comparison between misinformation about Great Zimbabwe and about the Olmec culture here and there. But since it is not the purpose of this thread I will leave it with that.
As I stated before the people who align with this theory aren't people who believe in Afrocentrism. They do not even believe they came from Africa. Central to Afrocentrism is the origin and root of Africa. Most of these people aren't the brightest on the bunch.
Here is a discussion going on with people who are pro ABOS and anti-ABOS. One ABOS guy is under the assumption that slave ships couldn't hold human cargo. The anti-ABOS explained that other cargo was shipped over as well. The pro-ABOS says, that human cargo is different, it's heavier than other types of cargo. This is what the pro-ABOS persons claimed. This of course defies all logic in physics.
Out of all scholarship, this online phenomena is irrelevant. It's weird, and irrelevant.
And another group is the people who have Native American Indian ancestry, which they claim.
As always you are arguing in circles and are saying nothing.
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: (I actually made a thread once about that subject, but it was removed)
It was probably the same repetitive circular B.S.
Joe Rogen has hundreds of millions of views. Here you have a white polish woman claiming to be a Native American Indian. She complains about untraceable genetic regions to confirm her claims.
The Problem with DNA Testing for Native American Heritage w/Shannon O'Loughlin | Joe Rogan
quote: Originally posted by Djehuti: To Archaeopteryx, yes there are African American pseudo-historians and scholars but these are not taken seriously by mainstream academia as the white ones nestled within the ivory towers.
Yes, those are very seldom taken seriously. Some of them really have ideas which are far out there.
Like in this video with two well known proponents of somewhat odd ideas:
When it comes to some Native Americans feelings about the ideas of the pseudo historians and their followers, they see it as yet another attempt by foreigners to take something away from them. They see it as cultural appropriation and attacks on their identity. And Identity issues are often very sensitive.
About pseudo history in schools, here is one example: Once the University of New Mexico arranged travels for students to Mexico, to help students learn about the “African presence” in Mexico, also during Olmec times. That caused protests and the University made changes in their reasons for the study trips.
quote: The University of New Mexico came under fire online from anthropologists, archaeologists, activists, and skeptics after a flyer for an upcoming study abroad trip sponsored by their Chicano Studies department caused outrage by promising to help students learn about the “African presence” in Mexico during Olmec times. The trip, scheduled for May, was intended to explore the African experience in Mexico across time, including in the colonial period and in contemporary Mexico. But it was the decision to follow the Afrocentric claim that Olmec society had an African component that set off alarm bells.
-------------------- Once an archaeologist, always an archaeologist Posts: 2684 | From: Sweden | Registered: Mar 2020
| IP: Logged |
What primary research have Dr. Clyde Winters and Dr. David Imhotep done? What primary sources do they use? The philosophical question becomes. Do they have the right to form an hypothesis? Yes, or no?
And with that, you yourself have been spreading fake news, false information trying to misinform people pertaining well documented and recorded American history.
quote:Everything has an underlying cause and people have been attempting to explain those causes ever since the curiosity has started to arisen in man’s mind. In scientific method, explanations were based on theories that came up from hypotheses. Accepted hypothesis becomes a theory but rejected hypothesis will never get that status
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: As far as missing peoples in U.S. History education, it depends on the local school system and state.
I did't grow up with the U.S. education system, so I take it from what is being told. Apparently it's still an issue.
At times I do follow some of these conversations on Youtube. And what most of these "self proclaimed ABOS" (Aboriginals) have in common is that they don't know basic US history. Questions like name me this president so and so… and they didn't know. Most of the methodology we apply here they reject, refuse to acknowledge. So it's all based on hypothesis and a philosophical premise.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
I already cited an old study from Galloway commenting on the 'Bushmanoid' features of ancient Zimbabweans albeit mixed with 'Negroid' traits but I cited a more recent craniometric study showing how one woman showed close affinities to the Teita which is interesting since Michael Crichton's 1966 thesis paper showed Egyptians to also have close craniometric affinities to the Teita.
This reminds me of the 'Kaffir race' hypothesis. I don't know who came up with it, but I recall that it entailed an orthognathous race that inhabited the southeastern and southern areas of the African continent. In the Phenotypes thread, I did bring up the fact that 19th century French anthropologist Jacques Joseph Champollion-Figeac believed the African continent was inhabited by three main races: ‘Negroes proper’, the Kaffirs, and the Moors, with Egyptians comprising the last grouping.
The Kaffirs though distinct from "Negroes" possessed some traits similar to Negroes while others similar to the Moors as described in the following two sources.
The Past and Future of the Kaffir Races (1866): Holden, William Clifford But the Kaffirs are a fine tall race of men, many being jet black, and some a dark copper colour. Their features are often fine, with the forehead well developed, and the whole of their physical and mental character standing out in broad contrast against the Hottentot race; and, apparently, having no affinity with the Negro. The above contains most of the views which have been advanced upon this subject by travellers and writers; but there is nothing certain or satisfactory among them; nor am I able to write with certainty, but can only place the subject in a new light, which is more satisfactory to my own mind than any of the theories advanced by other authors. Indeed, so many and so great are the difficulties attendant on the various theories which have been advanced, that I am unable to embrace any of them. After deep and long-continued inquiry and investigation, my opinion is, that the entrance of the different races into Africa is much more remote than any attempted to be assigned to it in relation to either Abraham or Ishmael. I am much more disposed to place it in connexion with the dispersion at the confusion of tongues, when "the Lord scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth" I also think that, if no previous great differences of physical conformation existed, God at that time added to the confusion of language distinctions of colour, size, and other great family characteristics. I am unable to account for the thick, matted, woolly hair of the Negro, Kaffir, and Hottentot, as distinguished from the long fine hair of the European; and I am unable to account for the jet black of the Kaffir and Negro, as distinguished from the fair European, on the grounds usually assigned to them, namely, those of climate, habit, &c, &c. According to these principles the Hottentot should change his sallow colour to the black of the Kaffir, —he should change his diminutive body to the athletic body of the Kaffir. The Hottentots live in the same country, subsist on the same food, breathe the same air, bask under the same sun, and are the subjects of the same habits; and yet they assimilate no nearer their Kaffir neighbours than they did centuries ago; and hence, reasoning from analogy, I am unable to account for these great tribal and national distinctions upon the grounds above named; and can only account for them satisfactorily upon the hypothesis advanced by myself.
The Kaffir Race of Natal (1867): Mann, Robert James The Kaffirs of the South-Eastern African coast, and of the Natal district, are undoubtedly of Negro blood. The distinctive characteristics of the Negro organisation,— the black woolly hair, dark eyes, flat face, depressed nose, jutting jaws, thick lips, large mouth, and peculiar odour of skin,— are all found among them in frequent and full development. But the Negro organisation is as unquestionably mingled in the Kaffir with some higher and nobler type. The woolly hair and peculiar odour of the skin are never absent. But the observer continually encounters men with sharp features, thin lips, prominent nose, and upright prominent, and often square foreheads of unmistakeable capacity. Another peculiarity which is very remarkable among these people, and which I think is wanting among the pure Negro races, is the lightness and slimness of the limbs. This is so strikingly obvious in the children that it at once attracts the notice of the most casual observers. Mr. Crawfurd justly remarks that the type features of Negro organisation are found in a "greatly mitigate form in the Kaffirs of the Eastern African coast. Now this modification of organisation must, I conceive, be attributed to one or two causes. It must be due either to external circumstances, brought into operation in the eastern districts, which do not attain in the western; or it must be a result of the commingling of different bloods. In my own limited sphere of observation I have never been able to detect the existence of the first class of influences. Certainly there is nothing in the practice of these people of the proceeding which has been conceived to call forth in some instances finer types of organisation, namely, the selection of exceptionally handsome women for their mates by privileged and distinguished men. The more I have moved about among these Kaffirs, and studied the interesting diversities of their features and organisation, the stronger the conviction has, almost unconsciously, and certainly involuntarily, grown in my own mind, that they are not of pure Negro blood, but that there are at least two distinct elements in their organisation, which are continually cropping out, now one, and now the other, into predominance in even the same families.
Not surprisingly the Kaffirs were basically a southern African version of 'Hamites' postulated to have a Eurasian origin.
Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ish Geber: What primary research have Dr. Clyde Winters and Dr. David Imhotep done? What primary sources do they use? The philosophical question becomes. Do they have the right to form an hypothesis? Yes, or no?
Did you see the video? I hope you do not think that Clyde Winters cave theory, or David Imhoteps pyramids on Mars is well founded.
Of course they have the right to speculate how much they want, but everyone has also the right to call them out. Especially if they spread misinformation about Native American history.
I did not spread misinformation, it is only you who interpret everything with a bad intention. And it also sounds that you are unable to understand the perspectives of Native Americans about how some of them can feel when others try to misrepresent their history.
Buffalo soldiers did partake in the wars against Native Americans
Only about 1% of Native American tribes held slaves
The question about reparations is a moral issue and not a scientific one. And it is up to Black people to fight for it, they will not get it for free.
Native Americans have not got enough compensation for lost land or past sufferings yet. But that is also a moral question.
There is no tangible evidence of any African presence in precolumbian America. I suppose most archaeologists and anthropologists would agree to that (and I have spoken to many. I have friends that been archaeologists in America for many years. They have not found any traces of any African precolumbian presence. If you for example conduct archaeological excavations all over Mesoamerica for 25 years without finding anything tangible then you would not draw the conclusion that there were Africans all around the place). The fact that Black people have mixed with Native Americans post contact is another matter. People mix, that is natural. They did it already 50 000 years ago, and they do it today.
If you are worried about the so called "5 dollar Indians", it is up to you to to spread information about the matter, write articles, write on social media or whatever. No one forbids you. But you are not really concerned are you?
Who suffered most? Can one really tell?
-------------------- Once an archaeologist, always an archaeologist Posts: 2684 | From: Sweden | Registered: Mar 2020
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: Did you see the video? I hope you do not think that Clyde Winters cave theory, or David Imhoteps pyramids on Mars is well founded.
No I did not watch the video, but I have seen other videos by Winders on Philippe SHOCK Matthews. And I know there are no pyramids on Mars. At least not by what peer reviewed science tells.
As others have explained prior, the internet is loaded with people who make these type of unfound claims. I don't take it seriously.
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: Of course they have the right to speculate how much they want, but everyone has also the right to call them out. Especially if they spread misinformation about Native American history.
By that token you should call everyone out who makes erroneous claims.
Goodluck with that one… arguing over a hypothesis.
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: I did not spread misinformation, it is only you who interpret everything with a bad intention. And it also sounds that you are unable to understand the perspectives of Native Americans about how some of them can feel when others try to misrepresent their history.
Yes you have on several occasions. And no, it's not a matter of interpreting. It's you making false and erroneous claims. OVER AND OVER! I described this as you having a low EQ.
You don't know any real Native Americans, you are sitting on a couch making up crap. If you are truly worried with actual Native Americans, you would be on these 5 dollar pretendians who steal billions of dollars. Instead you are worrying with some people who are online (mostly anonymous) claiming weird things like we came out of the earth in America etc. Most of these individuals do not even follow any scientific methodology not believe in the consensus.
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: Buffalo soldiers did partake in the wars against Native Americans
Yes because as explained before, some Indian tribes sided with confederates and enslaved Black Americans. So logically they (Black Americans) fought these Indian tribes. DUH.
On the other hand there as Indian tribes that aligned with Black Americans.
And for these reason you have a low EQ and are a cognative dissonant liar.
quote:During the antebellum period, the Cherokee and other Southeast Native American nations known as the Five Civilized Tribes held African-American slaves as workers and property. The Cherokee "elites created an economy and culture that highly valued and regulated slavery and the rights of slave owners" and, in "1860, about thirty years after their removal to Indian Territory from their respective homes in the Southeast, Cherokee Nation members owned 2,511 slaves (15 percent of their total population)." It was slave labor that "allowed wealthy Indians to rebuild the infrastructure of their lives even bigger and better than before," such as John Ross, a Cherokee chief, who "lived in a log cabin directly after Removal" but a few years after, "he replaced this dwelling with a yellow mansion, complete with a columned porch." After the American Civil War, the Cherokee Freedmen were emancipated and allowed to become citizens of the Cherokee Nation in accordance with a reconstruction treaty made with the United States in 1866.
quote:The Black Maroons of Florida, also known as Black Seminoles, Seminole Maroons, and Seminole Freedmen, were a community derived from Runaway slaves who integrated into American Indian culture.
[…]
During the first of two so-called Seminole Wars, Blacks and Indians fought side by side against American incursion into the region. Spain sold Florida to the United States in 1819 but even before the transfer, in 1818, General Andrew Jackson sent U.S. forces down the Apalachicola River to defeat and destroy Maroon, Seminole, and Creek communities. They destroyed the Maroons’ and Indian villages. Black Maroons and the Seminoles responded by moving further south into the more remote forests of central and southern Florida. Many Black Seminoles left Florida for Andros Island in the Bahamas.
[...]
They were mostly Gullah fugitives who escaped from the rice plantations in South Carolina and Georgia who joined with the newly formed Seminole groups who broke away from the Muskogee or Creek people.
[…]
Black maroons and the Seminoles also shared numerous cultural similarities regarding cuisine, tribal dancing, and dwelling construction There were differences such as religious practices and languages—the Seminoles spoke Creek and the maroons spoke Afro-Seminole Creole. These differences, however, did not prevent intercultural marriages or military alliances. The Florida Native American communities protected Black Seminoles from re-enslavement. In return, they provided manpower in military conflicts with the Spanish or Americans. Overall, the Florida Maroons lived independently of the Indians without oversight.
quote:At the outset of the war, many nations in Indian Territory signed treaties with the Confederacy—supported by a minority of wealthy slave-holding Indians within their communities. But those sympathies weren’t monolithic: Many Indians leaned toward abolitionism and advocated for sovereign independence from the U.S. and its bloody conflict. As the war progressed, momentum shifted as three Indian Home Guard regiments emerged to support the Union and protect vulnerable tribal communities from violent guerrilla warfare. The result: Indians fighting Indians in a white man’s war.
While Native American soldiers went to battle for a variety of reasons—to support or fight slavery, to defend tribal sovereignty and to protect family and community—the war did little to advance their needs and interests. Instead, it aggravated longstanding internal tribal tensions and ravaged territory the U.S. government had relocated them to decades earlier, creating a new wave of impoverished refugees.
You have the tendency to argue over things that have been refuted and debunked. And for this reason I have explained that you use circular babble.
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: Only about 1% of Native American tribes held slaves
Where is this 1% evidence and how does this refute the fact that they held Blacks as slaves? Does this now mean Black Americans had no rights to fight back? lol
quote:
In 1860…Cherokee Nation citizens owned 2,511 slaves (15 percent of their total population), Choctaw citizens owned 2,349 slaves (14 percent of their total population), and Creek citizens owned 1,532 slaves (10 percent of their total population). Chickasaw citizens owned 975 slaves, which amounted to 18 percent of their total population, a proportion equivalent to that of white slave owners in Tennessee, a former neighbour of the Chickasaw Nation and a large slaveholding state.
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: The question about reparations is a moral issue and not a scientific one. And it is up to Black people to fight for it, they will not get it for free.
This circular argument has been encountered addressed and refuted over and over.
If this was a moral issues, why didn't they pay out reparations to Black Americans already? I mean Native Americans did receive autonomous land and money. The still receive monetary money on a yearly basis although it benefits the 5 dollar Indians mostly.
quote:Tribal sovereignty refers to the right of American Indians and Alaska Natives to govern themselves. The U.S. Constitution recognizes Indian tribes as distinct governments and they have, with a few exceptions, the same powers as federal and state governments to regulate their internal affairs.
quote: Callie House is most famous for her efforts to gain reparations for former slaves and is regarded as the early leader of the reparations movement among African American political activists. Callie Guy was born a slave in Rutherford Country near Nashville, Tennessee. Her date of birth is usually assumed to be 1861, but due to the lack of birth records for slaves, this date is not certain. She was raised in a household that included her widowed mother, sister, and her sister’s husband. House received some primary school education.
The justice claim for reparations has been going on since the days of 40 acres and a mule. And the corrupt government keeps telling the "social issues" have to be studied, meanwhile the government kept expanding on the socioeconomic disfranchisement with mass incarceration. Black Americans want and need a Marshal plan.
quote: The Idea of Reparations
Reparations for the slavery is not a new idea. Before the Civil War ended, General William Tecumseh Sherman issued an order in South Carolina. He wanted 40 acres and the loan of an Army mule set aside for each former slave family. This order was never carried out. After the war, Radical Republicans in Congress passed laws requiring confiscation of former-Confederate property to provide the ex-slaves with "40 acres and a mule." In 1866, President Andrew Johnson vetoed the legislation.
The next push for reparations took place at the turn of the century. Several black organizations lobbied Congress to provide pensions for former slaves and their children. One bill introduced into the U.S. Senate in 1894 would have granted direct payments of up to $500 to all ex-slaves plus monthly pensions ranging from $4 to $15. This, and several similar bills, died in congressional committees. The pension movement itself faded away with the onset of World War I.
During the 1960s, some black leaders revived the idea of reparations. In 1969, James Forman (then head of the Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee) proclaimed a "Black Manifesto." It demanded $500 million from American churches and synagogues for their role in perpetuating slavery before the Civil War. Black nationalist organizations, such as the Black Panther Party and Black Muslims, also demanded reparations.
In the 1980s, a new call arose for black reparations. It was stimulated by two other movements that successfully secured payments from the U.S. government. The Supreme Court in 1980 ordered the federal government to pay eight Sioux Indian tribes $122 million to compensate for the illegal seizure of tribal lands in 1877. Then in 1988, Congress approved the payment of $1.25 billion to 60,000 Japanese-American citizens who had been interned in prison camps during World War II.
In April 1989, Council Member Ray Jenkins guided through the Detroit City Council a resolution. It called for a $40 billion federal education fund for black college and trade school students. About the same time, a conference of black state legislators meeting in New Orleans backed the idea of a federally financed education fund for descendants of slaves. Shortly afterward, Rep. John Conyers Jr. (D-MI) drafted a bill calling for the establishment of a congressional commission to study the impact of slavery on African-Americans.
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: There is no tangible evidence of any African presence in precolumbian America. I suppose most archaeologists and anthropologists would agree to that (and I have spoken to many. I have friends that been archaeologists in America for many years. They have not found any traces of any African precolumbian presence. If you for example conduct archaeological excavations all over Mesoamerica for 25 years without finding anything tangible then you would not draw the conclusion that there were Africans all around the place). The fact that Black people have mixed with Native Americans post contact is another matter. People mix, that is natural. They did it already 50 000 years ago, and they do it today.
Not being able to find and not finding are two different things. If you want to argue you need to pick up that argument with these white scholars who made those claims, pertaining these primary findings they did.
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: If you are worried about the so called "5 dollar Indians", it is up to you to to spread information about the matter, write articles, write on social media or whatever. No one forbids you. But you are not really concerned are you?
I am worried about this, this is why I am addressing it to you. You don't know what I do outside of this. So that was "another assumptions" you made.
Stealing billions has a far more priority than some unknown people making weird claims about the earth being flat etc. And yes, they believe that as well. They also deny the MAAFA etc.
You are the 'self proclaimed "Native Indian American" expert', so tell me how large is the actual Native American population and how much have the 5 dollar pretendians stolen from the actual Native Americans?
quote:The Commission to the Five Civilized Tribes was appointed by President Grover Cleveland in 1893 to negotiate land with the Cherokee
Will Rogers and his wife, 1935. Will's application to the Dawes Commission in 1900 was accepted, and he was enrolled as a member of the Cherokee Nation.
As far as missing peoples in U.S. History education, it depends on the local school system and state.
I for one grew up in GA which decades ago was one of the first states to implement a comprehensive demographic history of the U.S. where it's not just the white majority that is taught but other minority groups from Blacks to Indigenous Americans and Hispanics. However pseudo-history has begun to corrupt that policy as well with the neo-Marxist 1618 Project that distorts and outright lies about the history of Blacks and puts them into a perpetual victim class. This is being done as social engineering or mass mind programming on black children. Thankfully at least here in GA enough black educators aren't falling for it.
As for pseudo-history in general, such was always used as a political tool of domination to justify political bias and lull populaces into a certain mindset. I explained this all before and it will never stop until people wake up and realize who is in power and what they want.
But to make the story short pseudo-history was first started by European colonizers as a means to justify their dominance. The de-Africanization of North Africa and especially Egypt is an example par-excellence of that. To Archaeopteryx, yes there are African American pseudo-historians and scholars but these are not taken seriously by mainstream academia as the white ones nestled within the ivory towers.
The point is that the Eurocentric ideology has a world wide system of institutions and organizations to spread these views and legitimize it as part of the history of colonial expansion. Meanwhile native and indigenous cultures have been robbed of their land, history, languages, cultures, resources and so forth and don't have educational institutions of their own to teach their own history or identity. So of course Europeans will defend those institutions and prop them up as "objective" meaning allowing misinformation, lies and half truths to continue to spread. This is why so often these people spend so much time trying to find and focus on frauds(and in some cases propping them up) in order to misdirect people away from their own frauds and history of lies and pseudoscience. And it is because of that control over institutions of education world wide that the "classical model" of history is the dominant model everywhere in the world. Obviously that model does not include Africa, Asia or the Americas except as tertiary players in world history.... which is obviously silly, since Rome and Greece derive their civilization from Africa and Asia. Not to mention the classical civilizations in the Americas like the Olmecs predate Greece. And that control of these institutions is how these 'racial models' of history also came to proliferate as well even though they try to sit here and deny it. This also means control of world history via the control of the archaeology and anthropology of the world is critical to maintaining that Eurocentric focus. This is why you need to go to Europe and European universities to get a degree in Egyptology and similarly to get a Degree in MesoAmerican studies you need a degree from European created universities.
In fact, that control of the archaeology and anthropology is key to understanding the situation in Africa today. Because Africans do not seem to want to take control of the story of their own history and anthropology. And unfortunately, in Africa it is the Europeans who still control the excavation, analysis, study and dissemination of information about African history, including the Great Zimbabwe civilization.
And in the USA specifically, there has always been a tug of war ideologically between the white left and white right over what to do with the "negro problem". Meaning controlling the agenda, direction and discourse around black issues, including propping up black faces to be the mascots for these agendas. And that also means creating programs and initiatives that masquerade as helping black people but mostly are not (affirmative action, integration, etc). The 1618 project isn't so much a "neo marxist" movement, but part of the white left taking over the discourse on campus surrounding racism, oppression and injustice. And that means funding certain projects and giving money to certain black academics and creating whole institutes and departments to focus on 'antiracism' and "social justice", which fake from top to bottom. Not to mention 'black history month' itself reflects a lack of African identity in North America. And it often focuses on glorifying token figures and often misses the point that there is nothing to celebrate about living under oppression. To the point that most black people don't know that the Democrats are the party of segregation, slavery and the confederacy.
Posts: 8890 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: Originally posted by Ish Geber: You don't know any real Native Americans, you are sitting on a couch making up crap. If you are truly worried with actual Native Americans, you would be on these 5 dollar pretendians who steal billions of dollars. Instead you are worrying with some people who are online (mostly anonymous) claiming weird things like we came out of the earth in America etc. Most of these individuals do not even follow any scientific methodology not believe in the consensus.
Idiotic accusation. Indeed I know Native Americans mainly in USA, Mexico and Brazil, and I have for many years. Do you know any, have you ever participated in any action for Native rights? Are you member of any organisation for the support of Native Americans?
quote:I described this as you having a low EQ
Seems you have even lower EQ. If we now shall discuss each others eventual EQ. You seem unable to understand how some Native Americans view cultural appropriation. You seem only interested in Black peoples perspective.
The rest of your post is mostly spam bringing up a lot of things irrelevant for the discussion. Seems you are just out to have a quarrel.
Are you jealous that some Native Americans got a very small compensation for some of the land loss and suffering they had to endure? Jealousy is a bitch.
quote: Not being able to find and not finding are two different things. If you want to argue you need to pick up that argument with these white scholars who made those claims, pertaining these primary findings they did.
Well, I bring it up also with those Black people that uphold and promote outdated ideas about Black Olmecs or other Black/African peoples in precolumbian America. You will be hard pressed to find experts on precolumbian cultures promoting such ideas today. Ask an expert like Ann Cyphers if you do not believe me.
How many archaeologists, anthropologists, geneticists and others specializing in precolumbian Native American cultures do you know?
-------------------- Once an archaeologist, always an archaeologist Posts: 2684 | From: Sweden | Registered: Mar 2020
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: I already cited an old study from Galloway commenting on the 'Bushmanoid' features of ancient Zimbabweans albeit mixed with 'Negroid' traits but I cited a more recent craniometric study showing how one woman showed close affinities to the Teita which is interesting since Michael Crichton's 1966 thesis paper showed Egyptians to also have close craniometric affinities to the Teita.
This reminds me of the 'Kaffir race' hypothesis. I don't know who came up with it, but I recall that it entailed an orthognathous race that inhabited the southeastern and southern areas of the African continent. In the Phenotypes thread, I did bring up the fact that 19th century French anthropologist Jacques Joseph Champollion-Figeac believed the African continent was inhabited by three main races: ‘Negroes proper’, the Kaffirs, and the Moors, with Egyptians comprising the last grouping.
The Kaffirs though distinct from "Negroes" possessed some traits similar to Negroes while others similar to the Moors as described in the following two sources.
The Past and Future of the Kaffir Races (1866): Holden, William Clifford But the Kaffirs are a fine tall race of men, many being jet black, and some a dark copper colour. Their features are often fine, with the forehead well developed, and the whole of their physical and mental character standing out in broad contrast against the Hottentot race; and, apparently, having no affinity with the Negro. The above contains most of the views which have been advanced upon this subject by travellers and writers; but there is nothing certain or satisfactory among them; nor am I able to write with certainty, but can only place the subject in a new light, which is more satisfactory to my own mind than any of the theories advanced by other authors. Indeed, so many and so great are the difficulties attendant on the various theories which have been advanced, that I am unable to embrace any of them. After deep and long-continued inquiry and investigation, my opinion is, that the entrance of the different races into Africa is much more remote than any attempted to be assigned to it in relation to either Abraham or Ishmael. I am much more disposed to place it in connexion with the dispersion at the confusion of tongues, when "the Lord scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth" I also think that, if no previous great differences of physical conformation existed, God at that time added to the confusion of language distinctions of colour, size, and other great family characteristics. I am unable to account for the thick, matted, woolly hair of the Negro, Kaffir, and Hottentot, as distinguished from the long fine hair of the European; and I am unable to account for the jet black of the Kaffir and Negro, as distinguished from the fair European, on the grounds usually assigned to them, namely, those of climate, habit, &c, &c. According to these principles the Hottentot should change his sallow colour to the black of the Kaffir, —he should change his diminutive body to the athletic body of the Kaffir. The Hottentots live in the same country, subsist on the same food, breathe the same air, bask under the same sun, and are the subjects of the same habits; and yet they assimilate no nearer their Kaffir neighbours than they did centuries ago; and hence, reasoning from analogy, I am unable to account for these great tribal and national distinctions upon the grounds above named; and can only account for them satisfactorily upon the hypothesis advanced by myself.
The Kaffir Race of Natal (1867): Mann, Robert James The Kaffirs of the South-Eastern African coast, and of the Natal district, are undoubtedly of Negro blood. The distinctive characteristics of the Negro organisation,— the black woolly hair, dark eyes, flat face, depressed nose, jutting jaws, thick lips, large mouth, and peculiar odour of skin,— are all found among them in frequent and full development. But the Negro organisation is as unquestionably mingled in the Kaffir with some higher and nobler type. The woolly hair and peculiar odour of the skin are never absent. But the observer continually encounters men with sharp features, thin lips, prominent nose, and upright prominent, and often square foreheads of unmistakeable capacity. Another peculiarity which is very remarkable among these people, and which I think is wanting among the pure Negro races, is the lightness and slimness of the limbs. This is so strikingly obvious in the children that it at once attracts the notice of the most casual observers. Mr. Crawfurd justly remarks that the type features of Negro organisation are found in a "greatly mitigate form in the Kaffirs of the Eastern African coast. Now this modification of organisation must, I conceive, be attributed to one or two causes. It must be due either to external circumstances, brought into operation in the eastern districts, which do not attain in the western; or it must be a result of the commingling of different bloods. In my own limited sphere of observation I have never been able to detect the existence of the first class of influences. Certainly there is nothing in the practice of these people of the proceeding which has been conceived to call forth in some instances finer types of organisation, namely, the selection of exceptionally handsome women for their mates by privileged and distinguished men. The more I have moved about among these Kaffirs, and studied the interesting diversities of their features and organisation, the stronger the conviction has, almost unconsciously, and certainly involuntarily, grown in my own mind, that they are not of pure Negro blood, but that there are at least two distinct elements in their organisation, which are continually cropping out, now one, and now the other, into predominance in even the same families.
Not surprisingly the Kaffirs were basically a southern African version of 'Hamites' postulated to have a Eurasian origin.
Has anyone looked in whether or not Black South Africans have any significant ancestry from northeastern Africa? I've read that Khoisan groups might have obtained some alleles for lighter skin through admixture with East African pastoralists, but not that this would have impacted Bantu-speakers in the region to a significant degree.
posted
Guys, guys, please. I've tolerated enough posts about racist propaganda and U.S. history. This thread is about racist propaganda and historical revisionism pertaining to Great Zimbabwe a.k.a. Monomotapa Civilization. If you want to discuss the former more general topic I suggest you do so in my original thread here: Racism, History, and Lies
quote:Originally posted by BrandonP: Has anyone looked in whether or not Black South Africans have any significant ancestry from northeastern Africa? I've read that Khoisan groups might have obtained some alleles for lighter skin through admixture with East African pastoralists, but not that this would have impacted Bantu-speakers in the region to a significant degree.
That theory of Khoisan having Eurasian ancestry has already been debunked, but I do plan on creating a thread on explanations for their light complexion soon. Though I should remind of you Tukuler's thread on the flaws of PCA analysis. As for the Kaffir Race Theory and connections to Northeast Africa, so far there is no evidence for such. Although, if I recall correctly, genetics has revealed a very ancient pre-Bantu population in Eastern Africa that has nothing to do with Mota or Pastoralists. I will have to look into that more.
Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: That theory of Khoisan having Eurasian ancestry has already been debunked, but I do plan on creating a thread on explanations for their light complexion soon. Though I should remind of you Tukuler's thread on the flaws of PCA analysis. As for the Kaffir Race Theory and connections to Northeast Africa, so far there is no evidence for such. Although, if I recall correctly, genetics has revealed a very ancient pre-Bantu population in Eastern Africa that has nothing to do with Mota or Pastoralists. I will have to look into that more.
Maybe a population similar to that of the Hofmeyr specimen, then? They supposedly resembled Upper Paleolithic Europeans to the exclusion of recent sub-equatorial Africans.
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic