From a Russian site (Russia borders Finland and Scandinavia) comes this picture of a 1st century BC shaman living in the same area of the Saami / Lapp. Tacitus described the dwellers of those northern regions as black. We can safely say that picture is of the original Saami / Lapp.
During the Germanic Migration period after the 5th century AD, these Germanic peoples reached lands we now call Sweden, Denmark, Switzerland, Norway. They encountered the Lapp / Saami. Here is what you can read about their relationship and what I, Marc Washington, note as the beginning of the white Vikings following in the tradition of those we can call the black Vikings for want of a better term. Read:
It has to be noted that it is highly probable that at least the Late Iron Age sewn boats of Northern Norway were all built by Saami boat builders. The Saami proficiency in sewn boatbuilding is attested by the famous Icelandic historian Snorri Sturlason, while dealing with the 12th century pretenders the Norwegian throne. Two 24-oared sewn shipes were built for King Sigurd Slembadiaekn, when in the North. Even a poem was composed on the elegant swiftness of the ships. The Sea Saamis of that area are known from the 16th century onwards in written sources to build boats regularly for their Norwegian neighbors.
[b]The Saami built boats for the Norwegians coming from the landlocked Russsian Steppes. But, no doubt this boat-building for their neighbors went back centuries and not only for the Norwegians but for all the Germanic peoples who migrated to those lands.
Take a look at the 8th century peoples of Sweden. They are prognacious, black. They were the Saami:
And note this page and the two pictures at the bottom of "blacks" one of them "tawny."
This shows the beginning of the end of the black Vikings aka Saami / Lapp.
Below, for your information, is more on the Germanic Migration Period which turned Europe from black to white:
The Germanic peoples (also called Teutonic in older literature) are a historical ethno-linguistic group, originating in Northern Europe (Marc's note: read, late BC Russian Steppes) and identified by their use of the Indo-European Germanic languages which diversified out of Common Germanic in the course of the Pre-Roman Iron Age. The descendants of these peoples became, and in many areas contributed to, the ethnic groups of North Western Europe: the Danish, Norwegians, Swedish, Finland-Swedes, Faroese, English, Icelanders, Germans, Austrians, Dutch and Flemish, and the inhabitants of Switzerland, Alsace and Friesland on the continent.
Migrating Germanic peoples spread throughout Europe in Late Antiquity (300-600) and the Early Middle Ages. Germanic languages became dominant along the Roman borders (Austria, Germany, Netherlands, Belgium and England), but in the rest of the (western) Roman provinces, the Germanic immigrants adopted Latin (Romance) dialects. Furthermore, all Germanic peoples were eventually Christianized to varying extents. The Germanic people played a large role in transforming the Roman Empire into Medieval Europe.
<snip>
Wandering tribes then began staking out permanent homes as a means of protection. Much of this resulted in fixed settlements from which many, under a powerful leader, expanded outwards. A defeat meant either scattering or merging with the dominant tribe, and this continual process of assimilation was how nations were formed. In Denmark the Jutes merged with the Danes, in Sweden the Geats merged with the Swedes. In England, the Angles merged with the Saxons and other groups as well as a large number of natives to form the Anglo-Saxons.
By the late 2nd century, B.C., Roman authors recount, Gaul, Italy and Hispania were invaded by migrating Germanic tribes, culminating in military conflict with the armies of the Roman Empire. Six decades later, Julius Caesar invoked the threat of such attacks as one justification for his annexation of Gaul to Rome.
While the Germanic peoples were slowly converted to Christianity by varying means, many elements of the pre-Christian culture and indigenous beliefs remained firmly in place after the conversion process, particularly in the more rural and distant regions.
. .
Posted by Marc Washington (Member # 10979) on :
. .
This is a picture from a Russian site of a black shaman from the first century BC. A Saami / Lapp.
Why? Out went the black, in came the white. One civilization destroyed, another built on its ashes.
Panoramic view of Ale's Stones in Scania, southern Sweden. This ship setting is a Vendel Period burial monument, most likely dating from the 7th century AD. This was built by the Lapp / Saami. But, they might also have been called Celts and also identified as being part of the La Tene culture which was related to the Halstaat. Which was related to the African phase of the Roman Republics. Which was settled from northern Africa by the Phoenicians who were Canaanite traders who established Carthage and later Mauritania and were also known as the Moors.
One people and a million names. That whole mixture, however, was properly a mixing of cultures of northern Africans (Lapp descendents from Mesolithic far north and first century-ish BC Phoenicians-Moors-Celts-Romans ..
. .
Posted by Afronut Slayer (Member # 16637) on :
Unfugding believable how Afronuts have no shame. Afronuts are the modern day pseudo-academic terrorists! They're laying claim to european lands too? Are there any bounds with these people? These nutcases have effectively laid claim to every single land, culture and history on the face of the earth. It's like there is no difference bet. them and the islaamo-jihadist terrorists. The M.O. of the two extremist groups are identical! Thank God! these nutcases are nothing more than a fringe group.
Check out this nutburger's website if you don't believe me - http://www.beforebc.de/all_europe/ Posted by Egmond Codfried (Member # 15683) on :
We have always had a few nutty professors on this forum with twenty or so nicks used all together at once. I feel that these same persons now present themselves as anti-afrocentrists, to vent their hatred of humanity even more. The enemy of the Negro is the Negro himself and these blacks have obviously lost it completely.
Posted by Marc Washington (Member # 10979) on :
There were never black vikings. Eurocentrics always making up stuff to make fools out of afrocentrics.
Posted by Bob_01 (Member # 15687) on :
Marc, please provide academic sources to back up the claims above. I would also provide reviews of those studies as well.
Don't get me wrong, I am just skeptical about this claim. You need to have evidence outside of images and linguistics as well. How about genetics, or fossil remains?
Afronut: You better not include Djehuti et al and myself into that category. I don't know anything about the Vikings. Most of us have proven that we're superior men.
It is quite ironic that a privilege white male has such a terrible stature. The use of strawmen and inability to read studies still continues to startle me. How the hell do you afford to use the internet?
Saying that, as I said earlier, I don't know much about the Vikings. For that reason, I'll just fall with the mainstream assumption that they were European. However African influence within Europe is an undeniable fact and can be seen in various dimensions.
Posted by MindoverMatter718 (Member # 15400) on :
I know the Vikings were a diverse group as proven genetically...
Authentic Viking DNA Retrieved From 1,000-year-old Skeletons
quote: ScienceDaily (May 28, 2008) — Although "Viking" literally means "pirate," recent research has indicated that the Vikings were also traders to the fishmongers of Europe. Stereotypically, these Norsemen are usually pictured wearing a horned helmet but in a new study, Jørgen Dissing and colleagues from the University of Copenhagen, investigated what went under the helmet; the scientists were able to extract authentic DNA from ancient Viking skeletons, avoiding many of the problems of contamination faced by past researchers.
Analysis of DNA from the remains of ancient humans provides valuable insights into such important questions as the origin of genetic diseases, migration patterns of our forefathers and tribal and family patterns.
Unfortunately, severe problems connected with the retrieval and analysis of DNA from ancient organisms (like the scarcity of intact molecules) are further aggravated in the case of ancient humans. This is because of the great risk of contamination with abundant DNA from modern humans. Humans, then, are involved at all steps, from excavation to laboratory analyses. This means that many previous results have subsequently been disputed as attributed to the presence of contaminant DNA, and some researchers even claim that it is impossible to obtain reliable results with ancient human DNA.
Using freshly sampled material from ten Viking skeletons from around AD 1,000, from a non-Christian burial site on the Danish island of Funen, Dissing and colleagues showed that it is indeed possible to retrieve authentic DNA from ancient humans.
Wearing protective suits, the researchers removed the teeth from the jaw at the moment the skeletons were unearthed when they had been untouched for 1,000 years. The subsequent laboratory procedures were also carefully controlled in order to avoid contamination.
Analysis of the Viking DNA showed no evidence of contamination with extraneous DNA, and typing of the endogenous DNA gave reproducible results and showed that these individuals were just as diverse as contemporary humans. A reliable retrieval of authentic DNA opens the way for a valuable use of prehistoric human remains to illuminate the genetic history of past and extant populations.
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
MindoverMatter718 - So "No Race" boy, how are we to interpret that bit of "White-withheld" information. Was it White-1, White-2, White-3. Black-1, Black-2, Black-3. Or maybe even that the people who plied those north Sea waters were Blacks, Whites, Mongols. Damn, this new White "no-race" world sure is complicated!
Posted by Marc Washington (Member # 10979) on :
. .
[Betty writes]
Don't get me wrong, I am just skeptical about this claim. You need to have evidence outside of images and linguistics as well. How about genetics, or fossil remains?
[Marc writes]
Betty. You ask for me to present authorities that state that Africans inhabited Europe and were the first Vikings? You ask that of a people that little over a hundred years ago used blacks as slaves, lynched and burned blacks after Sunday church in a picnic atmosphere; claimed any inventions by blacks as the property of their "masters" and ask that of white institutions that even in African and African-American Studies programs fill 98% of those positions with white teachers and not black?
White scholars are as inclined to produce such facts as it is likely that a stone shed tears.
You do not have to accept the two dozen pieces of corroborating evidence. They stand on their own merit and if you feel there is none, that is your prerogative.
. .
Posted by Marc Washington (Member # 10979) on :
. .
Sorry. The above was to have been addressed to Bob, not Betty.
Betty, you write, "Eurocentrics always making up stuff to make fools out of afrocentrics."
You are saying that Eurocentrics are stating that Africans were the first Vikings? Which and where?
. .
Posted by Bob_01 (Member # 15687) on :
quote:Originally posted by Marc Washington: . .
[Betty writes]
Don't get me wrong, I am just skeptical about this claim. You need to have evidence outside of images and linguistics as well. How about genetics, or fossil remains?
[Marc writes]
Betty. You ask for me to present authorities that state that Africans inhabited Europe and were the first Vikings? You ask that of a people that little over a hundred years ago used blacks as slaves, lynched and burned blacks after Sunday church in a picnic atmosphere; claimed any inventions by blacks as the property of their "masters" and ask that of white institutions that even in African and African-American Studies programs fill 98% of those positions with white teachers and not black?
White scholars are as inclined to produce such facts as it is likely that a stone shed tears.
You do not have to accept the two dozen pieces of corroborating evidence. They stand on their own merit and if you feel there is none, that is your prerogative.
. .
It's true. These institutions are white dominated. Bias would definitely exist, but the peer review process is an open one.
That allows such evidence to be scrutinized. For that reason, I suggest providing such evidence in a mainstream magazine and seeing how it stands in the review process.
Evidence highlighting African origin of Ancient Egypt has withstood the rigor of the peer review process, so everything is definitely possible. I do understand that Africans influenced and migrated into Europe, but do not know if that applies for that specific population.
Posted by Marc Washington (Member # 10979) on :
[Bob writes]
Don't get me wrong, I am just skeptical about this claim. You need to have evidence outside of images and linguistics as well. How about genetics,
or fossil remains?
[Marc writes]
mine is the most thorough work you will find anywhere on the subject. It is I who am the authority here. Those at Harvard, Yale, Oxford, and Cambridge should be studying me in regard to a comprehensive review of the fossil evidence.
These institutions are white dominated. Bias would definitely exist, but the peer review process is an open one.
[Marc writes]
That is simply not true when it comes to black issues. They are almost totally biased, totally racist about some issues. I have personally researched African, Africana, Afro-American History staffing. At Oxford, Cambridge, Upsalla in Sweden, Berkeley and so on, if they have 20 people teaching those courses, they may have only one black or maybe none.
Not all are like that. Harvard and U of P do well. They are the rare exceptions.
How in the heck do they justify whites teaching black history over all the qualified blacks? Because they are racist.
You will get new interpretations and honest opinions about blacks in ancient history from blacks, not whites. In many cases NOT EVEN A SINGLE ONE!!!
If you and Betty are honest with yourselves
[And you can see Betty's attitude where she writes: "Eurocentrics always making up stuff to make fools out of afrocentrics."]
you will recognize that.
By the way. My pages are far better supported providing a huge range of corroborative material and as a whole are far more scholarly than a genetics study looking only at a single haplotype or some small family of them. Mine is a multidisciplinary work though genetics is often excluded.
Until the lion has his own storyteller, the hunters will always get the best part of the tale
. .
Posted by SirInfamous (Member # 16497) on :
Now this is funny.
Posted by cassiterides (Member # 18409) on :
Marc, please provide academic sources to back up the claims above =========
All they have is the ''Black Danes'' from the Irish Annals of Ulster.
I will however explain who these were, working on a short essay on them at the moment.
And no, they were not negroids.
Posted by TheHorsenation (Member # 18137) on :
LOL, Marc Washington is killing Afrocentrism all by himself. looks like I'm out of work soon!
