The _29 (A-G) mutation is believed to be of Sub-Saharan African origin and is specially frequent in Black Americans (Gonzalez-Redondo et al., 1991). Its presence in Morocco could be explained by migration during the Almoravid dynasty (1055–1130 AD) or through the caravan routes.
GENETIC TESTING Volume 12, Number 4, 2008 Molecular Basis of b-Thalassemia in Morocco: Possible Origins of the Molecular Heterogeneity
Posted by Hammer (Member # 17003) on :
"believd to be" "could be" "or" ??????????
another supposition. This is why you guys get your facts screwed up all the time.
Posted by .Charlie Bass. (Member # 10328) on :
quote:Originally posted by Hammer: "believd to be" "could be" "or" ??????????
another supposition. This is why you guys get your facts screwed up all the time.
Thats means either one of the two could have carried this gene to Morocco Professor Hore, from sub-Saharan Africa that is. Stupid.
Posted by anguishofbeing (Member # 16736) on :
he he he
The jackass country school teacher lacks comprehension skills.
Posted by Hammer (Member # 17003) on :
No Bass, it does not prove anything at all. You can always tell a rookie. they get all excited over one piece of data and are unable to look at the exact meaning of words. In other words, it says what you want it to say.
Posted by .Charlie Bass. (Member # 10328) on :
quote:Originally posted by Hammer: No Bass, it does not prove anything at all. You can always tell a rookie. they get all excited over one piece of data and are unable to look at the exact meaning of words. In other words, it says what you want it to say.
So please to us what the passage means Mr Professor, since you say it means something different from what the Bass posted. The gene is of sub-Saharan origin.
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
Hammer
Well we have a study that states a Gene, is believed to be Sub-Saharan African origin, Yet hammer wants people to think this does not prove anything?
Very rare in studies do they come out and say something is exactly where it's from. They always leave the door open for new findings. That said if the concensus is leaning towards a certain place, they will say what they have said like in in this study.
Saying that, this is as close we will get to people coming out and stating that the Almoravids were Black Africans. So hammer what do you see in this study that is wrong?
Peace
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
I've been confused about this for a long time because I have a hard time believing Leo Africanus said these things. I wish I pressed this earlier I've read things about how Leo Africanus was badly mistranslated just from mistakes and not bias but I think bias would have distorted it even more later on.
"Not Quite Venus from the Waves: The Almoravid Conquest of Ghana in the Modern Historiography of Western Africa" by Pekka Masonen
see page 3 quoting Leo Africanus is this mistranslated?
quote:Originally posted by Hammer: "believd to be" "could be" "or" ??????????
another supposition. This is why you guys get your facts screwed up all the time.
Science doesn't use absolute language, troll. Even economists understand that. I guess this lack of education deficiency plays a role.
I'll get the paper. Makes sense, though considering similar trends with sickle cell.
Samples:
quote: The population sample consisted of 80 unrelated patients selected from different regions of Morocco. The diagnosis of b-thalassemia was based on clinical presentation of thalassemic features, further supported by relevant hematological data, as well as raised HbA2 levels in heterozygous family members. Blood samples were collected from patients during their attendance for blood transfusion in six major hospitals located in the different cities of the country, namely Rabat, Casanblanca, Tangier, Larache, Al-Hoceima, and Oujda.
I didn't type out the above article because I couldn't copy and paste it. Ghanah was absorbed into the Almoravid empire right? I think there might be a drive to distort this history in order to downplay the influence of these empires. For one thing its interesting how the Almoravids went to Spain and everything but they were too backwards to have any influence on the Ghanah empire. This is what Cooley, author of "Negroland of the Arabs" claimed. That alone makes all of this suspicious. I'm wondering if there are allot of mistranslations here
"The Negroland of the Arabs examined and explained" 1841
quote: "The people of Ghanah had for neighbours, on the east, a nation, which, according to historians, was called Susu; after which came another named Mali; and after that another known by the name of Kaukau ; although some people prefer a different orthography, and write this name Kagho. The last-named nation was followed by a people called Tekrur.6 The people of Ghanah declined in course of time, being overwhelmed or absorbed by the Molaththemun (or muffled people —that is, the Morabites), who, adjoining them on the north towards the Berber country, attacked them, and, taking possession of their territory, compelled them to embrace the Mohammedan religion.16' The people of Ghanah, being invaded at a later period by the Susu, a nation of Blacks in their neighbourhood, were exterminated, or mixed with other Black nations.
quote:It is stated in the foregoing extract that Ghanah merged in the empire of the Morabites, an event which may be assigned, with much probability, to the year of the Hijra 469, when the Mohammedan faith was forcibly imposed on the pagan nations of Negroland contiguous to the Western Desert.16 But the Morabites, bred up in a wild life, and under a loose patriarchal authority, cannot be supposed to have thought much of social or political organization. It is likely that they extended their dominions without propagating a form of government, and that the kingdom of Ghanah remained little changed by the loss of its independence. In the time of El Idrisi, or a little before the year of the Hijra 548, it was ruled by a descendant of Abu Taleb—that is, by a Zenagah—and this state of things continued probably half a century longer.
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
This gets all the more interesting. So from the above Cooley claimed that the Morabites absorbed the Ghanah empire but the Morabites were too backwards to have any effect on them... But later look what happens:
"Veiled People" bellow is a translation of Morabites.
"Medieval West Africa: Views From Arab Scholars and Merchants"
The king of Zafun is stronger than the veiled people of the Maghreb and more versed in the art of kingship. The veiled people acknowledge his superiority over them, obey him and resort to him in all important matters of government. One year the king, on his way to the pilgrimage, came to the Maghreb to pay a visit to the commander of the Muslims, the veiled king of the Maghreb, of the tribe of Lamtuna. The Commander of the Muslims met him on foot, wheras the king of Zafun did not dismount for him. He was tall, of deep black complexion and veiled
page 45 From Ibn Sa'id 13th century
In the same latitude is Zafun, which belongs to pagan Sudan and whose ruler enjoys a good reputation among (other) kings of the Sudan
page 98 by Ibn Khaldun is talking about how Takedda and other cities were subject to the ruler of Mali of the "Sudan"
quote: In the year 1353, in the days of sultan Abul 'Inan [of Morocco], I went to Biskara on royal business and there encountered the ambassador of the ruler of Takedda at the residence of Yusof al-Muzani, emir of Biskara. He told me about the prosperous state of this city and the continual passage of wayfares and said: "This year there passed through out city on the way to Mali a caravan of merchants from the east containing 12,000 camels." Another [informant] has told me that this is a yearly even. his country is subject to the sultan of Mali of the Sudan as is the case at present with the rest of the desert regions known as [the land of] the veiled people
Posted by King_Scorpion (Member # 4818) on :
quote:Originally posted by KING: Hammer
Well we have a study that states a Gene, is believed to be Sub-Saharan African origin, Yet hammer wants people to think this does not prove anything?
Very rare in studies do they come out and say something is exactly where it's from. They always leave the door open for new findings. That said if the concensus is leaning towards a certain place, they will say what they have said like in in this study.
Saying that, this is as close we will get to people coming out and stating that the Almoravids were Black Africans. So hammer what do you see in this study that is wrong?
Peace
But you see, this is a scientific study. It's results mean little if it's not copied and published in books and articles and other media. People will continue to parrot old debunked theories.
Posted by Bob_01 (Member # 15687) on :
quote:Originally posted by King_Scorpion:
quote:Originally posted by KING: Hammer
Well we have a study that states a Gene, is believed to be Sub-Saharan African origin, Yet hammer wants people to think this does not prove anything?
Very rare in studies do they come out and say something is exactly where it's from. They always leave the door open for new findings. That said if the concensus is leaning towards a certain place, they will say what they have said like in in this study.
Saying that, this is as close we will get to people coming out and stating that the Almoravids were Black Africans. So hammer what do you see in this study that is wrong?
Peace
But you see, this is a scientific study. It's results mean little if it's not copied and published in books and articles and other media. People will continue to parrot old debunked theories.
Correct. The problem "guide" or "self-help" books tend to delay altering radical information. That is, especially the case in a competitive market, where racial biases are supreme. White educators, in opinion (second to white hip hop heads), tend to be very racist. I mean, it's easier to look down at some partially educated "Negroid" child even when budget hits and the privatization of the education sector ensues.
Sooner or later, these reaffirmed evidence in the academia will become mainstream knowledge. That won't be stopped, but I think it's much better if we cite primary scientific literature. It's more direct and a higher level of analysis.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ The irony is that much older evidence exists but was either ignored or somehow "explained" away by racist Westerners. But as time passes and advances in science such as the example here with genetics becomes more available, the significance of black Africans in global history cannot be ignored. And it is only ignoramuses like Hammered who continue to do so like the fool who ignores an elephant in his bedroom. Speaking of which...
quote:Originally posted by Hammered: "believed to be" "could be" "or" ??????????
another supposition. This is why you guys get your facts screwed up all the time.
I thought it was explained to you before 'professor' that in science suppositions are based on probability which is further based on evidence. The more evidence the higher the probability until a general theory is arrived. Which is more than we can say about any findings that show Egyptian or Nile Valley civilization being the product of non-Africans or some "caucasians".
But getting back to the topic, as a pop quiz for you 'professor' can you tell us who the Almoravids are? You may (or may not) recall that I explained to you who the Almoravids are numerous times in other threads bearing the title of a name under which the Almoravids and other related peoples were called. Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
Its been assumed that scholars like Ibn Khaludn were prejudiced but I think its more of a case of colonialists putting their own biases into their writings. However these writers had no problem with ancient Ghana and Mali dominating northward. It is so easy to ignore the power and influence of these empires but I really hope people look into this. I've been interested for a long time on the influence of empires like ancient Ghana and Mali in the world
Its interesting they were absorbed in without being changed
quote:It is stated in the foregoing extract that Ghanah merged in the empire of the Morabites, an event which may be assigned, with much probability, to the year of the Hijra 469,.... But the Morabites, bred up in a wild life, and under a loose patriarchal authority, cannot be supposed to have thought much of social or political organization. It is likely that they extended their dominions without propagating a form of government, and that the kingdom of Ghanah remained little changed by the loss of its independence.
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
quote:Originally posted by markellion: This gets all the more interesting. So from the above Cooley claimed that the Morabites absorbed the Ghanah empire but the Morabites were too backwards to have any effect on them... But later look what happens:
"Veiled People" bellow is a translation of Morabites.
"Medieval West Africa: Views From Arab Scholars and Merchants"
The king of Zafun is stronger than the veiled people of the Maghreb and more versed in the art of kingship. The veiled people acknowledge his superiority over them, obey him and resort to him in all important matters of government. One year the king, on his way to the pilgrimage, came to the Maghreb to pay a visit to the commander of the Muslims, the veiled king of the Maghreb, of the tribe of Lamtuna. The Commander of the Muslims met him on foot, wheras the king of Zafun did not dismount for him. He was tall, of deep black complexion and veiled
page 45 From Ibn Sa'id 13th century
In the same latitude is Zafun, which belongs to pagan Sudan and whose ruler enjoys a good reputation among (other) kings of the Sudan
page 98 by Ibn Khaldun is talking about how Takedda and other cities were subject to the ruler of Mali of the "Sudan"
quote: In the year 1353, in the days of sultan Abul 'Inan [of Morocco], I went to Biskara on royal business and there encountered the ambassador of the ruler of Takedda at the residence of Yusof al-Muzani, emir of Biskara. He told me about the prosperous state of this city and the continual passage of wayfares and said: "This year there passed through out city on the way to Mali a caravan of merchants from the east containing 12,000 camels." Another [informant] has told me that this is a yearly even. his country is subject to the sultan of Mali of the Sudan as is the case at present with the rest of the desert regions known as [the land of] the veiled people
Markellion, can please stop posting the same quotes from the same books over and over and over again? I mean you seem to use these same few quotes as the basis of almost all your arguments lately. Why not go buy the whole books and other books on Ancient West Africa. There are tons more than that that talk about the extent and power of black Africans at the time.
But yes, there is much debate over whether the Almoravids actually conquered Ghana at all. The fact is that the wars between various African groups were more than simply wars between Northerners and Southerners. That in itself is an oversimplification and example of racial bias.
This is why I'm asking for more to be researched on it epically the influence of these empires over the Muslim world and control of trade the role of these soldiers and ability to manipulate things to their own advantage.
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
The very suspicious way that Cooley believes the Almoravids absorbed Ghana while not having effect on that nation, plus later these Almoravids seem very subordinate to nations of the "Sudan". In fact the quote about Zafun makes them look completely dependent. (However this was at a later date)
Plus the way that colonial writers portrayed the situation makes it seem they are hiding something, that there could be something deeper about the extent of "Sudanese" control and ability to manipulate things. This of course would all be tied in with trade
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: The fact is that the wars between various African groups were more than simply wars between Northerners and Southerners. That in itself is an oversimplification and example of racial bias.
But there is something astounding here because there is almost an astounding lack of bias from the "northerners" and there are many more accounts of their extreme honesty but allot of other literature has been distorted
This is also significant keep in mind the extreme ignorance of people about the geography of most of Africa, that combined with how extraordinarily well informed these Africans were of places outside of Africa and seemed very concerned about what was going on in the world. This almost screams conspiracy
"Trans-Saharan Trade and the West African Discovery of the Mediterranean World" by Pekka Masonen
quote: The situation was perhaps similar to that in the early 19th century, when European explorers, who had penetrated the African interior in order to unveil her secrets, were amazed at how well the West Africans knew what was going on in the outside world. When Mungo Park arrived in Segu on the Niger in July 1796, being the first European in this city, he was told that the British and French were fighting in the Mediterranean. The news probably concerned the battles that took place after the treaty of Basle which was made in April 1795, when Park was in his way to Gambia. In 1824, Hugh Clapperton visited Kano, being again the first European in this city, and he was surprised by Muhammad Bello, the ruler of Sokoto caliphate, who asked him detailed questions concerning the British policy in India and the religious situation in Europe. In early 1871, Gustav Nachtigal, the famous German traveller who had left Tripoli in 1869 in order to explore Central Africa, was told in Bornu that a war had broke out between franse and nimse, meaning Frenchmen and Germans. Considering that the Franco-Prussian war began in July 1870, the news had reached Bornu very quickly.
Perhaps news of the great events in the medieval Mediterranean, like the fall of Acre in 1291 or the Turkish conquest of Constantinople in 1453, were heard in the capital of Mali as quickly. However, there are only few mentions in the contemporary Arabic sources concerning the transmission of news across the Sahara. We know, for example, that Mansa Musa of Mali sent a delagation to congratulate the Marinid Sultan Abu 'l-Hasan for the conquest of Tlemcen. Since Tlemcen had fallen to Marinids in April 1337, the news most probably arrived in Mali with the traders who had left Morocco in autumn, which was the usual season of departure for the caravans to the south. The Malian delegation was sent to Fez probably in the following summer, when the caravans returned to the north. Similarly, another Malian delegation was sent to congratulate Sultan Abu 'l-Hasan for the conquest of Constantine in 1349. The prompt action on part of the Malian rulers proves that they knew well the political geography of Northern Africa, being fully aware of the consequenses of the Marinid expansion to central Maghrib....
Similarly, it was another channel for West Africans to the outside world: in 1594 a Portuguese navigator reported that he had in Senegal met many blacks who were not only capable of speaking French but have even visited France. In was only during the age of imperialism that the encounter of West Africans with other civilisations turned definitely from controlled relationship to collision.
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
The above mentioned Tlemcen which was on the Mediterranean. Its mentioned here too:
"Medieval West Africa: Views From Arab Scholars and Merchants"
Author Notes: "Therefor the conquest of Walata by Takrur refers here to the northward expansion of Mali and its annexation of Walata at the middle of the thirteenth century. The victorious king of Mali encouraged the Maqqari brothers to continue their trade, and cultivated relations with the rulers of the Maghrib"
Bellow is the letter page 49:
quote:When Takrur [Mali] conquered the region of Iwalatan [Walata] and its dependencies their wealth, along with the wealth of the region, was affected, although he [the Maqqari brother who was there] had gathered men together in defense of [the town and] his property. Then he entered into relations with their king, who made him welcome and enabled him to trade in all his country, addressing him as a dear and sincere friend. Then the king began to correspond with those [members of the Maqquri family] in Tlemcen, seeking from them the accomplishment of his desires and addressing him [them] in similar terms. I have letters from him and from the kings of the Maghrib that tell of this. When they had obtained the confidence of the kings the earth became submissive to their traveling upon it. Their wealth knew no bounds and became more than could be counted, for before the people of Egypt penetrated the desert land there used to be imported to them from the Maghrib goods of inconsiderable value which were exchanged [in Mali] for a considerable price
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
It seems that metallurgy could be used as an advantage for the "Sudanese" people. This can also explain why terms like "Sudanese" were used because they had certain skills
quote:H. Lhote, to whom one must render hommage, observed that:
1. the bellows made of pottery is original and exclusive to the Sudan
2. that the Berbers in the Sahara are not metallurgists: they mistrusted iron-working (the 'Enaden' are mostly repairmen)
3. no traces of blast furnaces have been found in the Sahara even though iron is present but the nearby peoples do not on their own know how to work iron;
4. there are numerous traces of blast furnaces in the Sudanese zone up to the 16th northern parallel [4]
5. the northern limits to finding these blast furnaces are found up to approximately the southern reaches of the BRZL linguistic family that uses a word of semitic origin for iron....
....To this debate, detailled articles by P. Huard added more elements [10]. He separates, for example, the origin of the libyan-berber of the sagaie teda [11]. He instead supports, as does V. Paques, two traditions on the introduction of metal working to Fezzan: Jews from the North brought it to Sebba, Sudanese smiths brought it to Ghat [12]. This group, he writes, 'passes for having been one of the first peoples to have worked iron in Chad..., the Zaghawa were mentioned by the Arab story tellers since the 8th century... . How did the Arab story tellers describe the Zaghawa?
- Ibn Munabbet (738) 'counts the Zaghawa as belonging to the Sudanese peoples';
- Idrisi (12th century) 'depicts them as negro camel riders who occupied the area between Fezzan and Chari, Xaouar and Darfour'.
- Ibn Khaldoun (14th century) 'includes the Zaghawa as part of the black kingdoms of the Sudan.'
Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
At least one poster here..lemmie see who could that be..Oh!! Fawal who stated in another that north Africans never admit to any connection between themselves and their souhtern neighbours here is an earlier recognizition Leo Africanus
quote:For all the negroes or black Moors are descendants of Cush,the son of Ham,who was the son of Noah.But whatever difference there is between the negroes and the twany Moor,it is a fact that they are all of the same ancestry.
Leo Africanus, A Geographical Historie Of Africa,1600.
And that's why I asked him to answer the question were did the Almorivids got their start and on what river...but no ans.
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
Markellion, if you would do more than read little quotes from books and read the entire books and other books you would probably be able to get a better grip on what you ask. I don't really even see your point. Nobody denies that the Amoravids were from points South. What is it you are trying to get at? The Zaghawa are partly in Sudan the modern Country. I don't see your point.
Yes it is true that black Africans had considerable skill in metallurgy from West Africa. There is no doubt about that. And it is true that the Zaghawa were part of the ancient trade networks linking the Nile Valley across the Sahara to West Africa. Probably far older than the Zaghawa as ethnic reference. And certainly metallurgy was quite possibly transmitted from South to North.
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
quote:Originally posted by Brada-Anansi:
quote:For all the negroes or black Moors are descendants of Cush,the son of Ham,who was the son of Noah.But whatever difference there is between the negroes and the twany Moor,it is a fact that they are all of the same ancestry.
Leo Africanus, A Geographical Historie Of Africa,1600.
Yes thats why I was asking about those translations of Leo Africanus earlier. I'm sure if more is looked into it some surprising things will be found. And just because one translation looks like an improvement doesn't mean it is perfectly accurate
In many ways the "Sudanese" definitely seemed to have an advantage, metallurgy, trade, even in governing remember the king of Zafun who the Almoravids looked to in all matters of government. Possibly more Sudanese traveled north than the other way around until later times in history.
My point is that there is a trend of "Sudanese" dominance
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: Nobody denies that the Amoravids were from points South. What is it you are trying to get at?
My point wasn't that the Almoravids came from the south my point was "Sudanese" dominance and no I do not mean anything about the modern country of Sudan. "Veiled people" refers to Almoravids
If my point was simply the southern origins of the Almoravids I would not have posted this
"The king of Zafun is stronger than the veiled people of the Maghreb and more versed in the art of kingship. The veiled people acknowledge his superiority over them, obey him and resort to him in all important matters of government. One year the king, on his way to the pilgrimage, came to the Maghreb to pay a visit to the commander of the Muslims, the veiled king of the Maghreb, of the tribe of Lamtuna. The Commander of the Muslims met him on foot, wheras the king of Zafun did not dismount for him."
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
Note that this article is wrong when it says Nubian troops were not allowed to be the most elite soldiers. These soldiers were of the highest importance since before Islam. Also I have a feeling if more is looked into translations more astonishing things will be found about "Sudanese" domination (not having anything to do with modern country of Sudan). The Makurians were able to invade Egypt several times but isn't mentioned in this article but the author does admit that they were highly feared. I've also read many things regarding trade and in these terms the "Nubians" could have an advantage over the Muslim world
To say that the Sahara was a major obstacle to invasion has allot of truth to it but there were invasions from south to north and tens of thousands of camels traveled across the Sahara every year. With the supreme importance of these "Sudanese" (including Nubian) soldiers in Muslim armies and importance of "Sudanese" trade one can see how there was a great amount of influence
Edit: Remember that Islam spread amongst Africans themselves
"The Spread of Islam and the Nubian Dam" by David Ayalon
The absolutely unambiguous evidence and unanimous agree of the early Muslim sources is that the Arabs abrupt stop was caused solely and exclusively by the superb military resistance of the Christian Nubians. That is what I call the Nubian Dam. The array of those early sources includes the two most important chronicles of early Islam, al-Tabari (d. 926) and al-Yaqubi (d. 905); the two best extant books on the Muslim conquests, al-Baladhuri (d. 892( and Ibn al-A tham al-Kufi (d. 926); the most central encyclopedic work of al-Masudi (d.956); and the two best early sources dedicated specifically to Egypt, Ibn Abd al-Hakim (d. 871) and al-Kindi (961).
On page 19 he quotes Al-Masudi The people of Hijaz and Yemen and the rest of the Arabs learned archery from them (The Nubians)
Bellow on page 20:
This act carries a lot of weight for one cannot see any reason for the Arabs to praise the Nubians so highly, along with their admission of their own failure in the field of battle. At the same time it is a great tribute to the objectivity in the case of the Muslim sources, and it also enhances considerably the chances of the reliability of their accounts, at least about the Muslim expansion in other fronts, and perhaps much more beyond that. .
3. The awe and respect that the Muslims had for their Nubian adversaries are reflected in the fact that even a rather late Umayyad caliph, Umar b Abd al- Aziz (Umar II 717-720), is said to have ratified the Nubian-Muslim treaty out of fear for the safety of the Muslims (he ratified the peace treaty out of consideration for the Muslims and out of [a desire] to spare their lives)
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
Markellion you are all over the place posting random quotes and not making a coherent point. Where is Zafun? Who originally wrote the statement and what does Zafun have to do with the Zhaghawa? You are literally simply posting a series of disjointed quotes and not making a coherent argument. Haven't you READ any of these books?
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by markellion: [QB] I didn't type out the above article because I couldn't copy and paste it. Ghanah was absorbed into the Almoravid empire right? I think there might be a drive to distort this history in order to downplay the influence of these empires. For one thing its interesting how the Almoravids went to Spain and everything but they were too backwards to have any influence on the Ghanah empire. This is what Cooley, author of "Negroland of the Arabs" claimed. That alone makes all of this suspicious. I'm wondering if there are allot of mistranslations here
"The Negroland of the Arabs examined and explained" 1841
quote: "The people of Ghanah had for neighbours, on the east, a nation, which, according to historians, was called Susu; after which came another named Mali; and after that another known by the name of Kaukau ; although some people prefer a different orthography, and write this name Kagho. The last-named nation was followed by a people called Tekrur.6 The people of Ghanah declined in course of time, being overwhelmed or absorbed by the Molaththemun (or muffled people —that is, the Morabites), who, adjoining them on the north towards the Berber country, attacked them, and, taking possession of their territory, compelled them to embrace the Mohammedan religion.16' The people of Ghanah, being invaded at a later period by the Susu, a nation of Blacks in their neighbourhood, were exterminated, or mixed with other Black nations.
quote:It is stated in the foregoing extract that Ghanah merged in the empire of the Morabites, an event which may be assigned, with much probability, to the year of the Hijra 469, when the Mohammedan faith was forcibly imposed on the pagan nations of Negroland contiguous to the Western Desert.16 But the Morabites, bred up in a wild life, and under a loose patriarchal authority, cannot be supposed to have thought much of social or political organization. It is likely that they extended their dominions without propagating a form of government, and that the kingdom of Ghanah remained little changed by the loss of its independence. In the time of El Idrisi, or a little before the year of the Hijra 548, it was ruled by a descendant of Abu Taleb—that is, by a Zenagah—and this state of things continued probably half a century longer.
Aside from guess work, do you have any concrete evidence that Ghana was ever absorbed by the Almoravids. This is the first time I'm coming across such a claim. Yes, they got into skirmishes with the Sahelian group, but absorption of Ghana into Almoravid territory? Furthermore, it has been pointed out in a number of works that Islamic conversions in Ghana took place before the arrival of the Almoravids; so, how the latter suddenly become the agents of this for the first time, is anyone's guess.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by .Charlie Bass.:
The _29 (A-G) mutation is believed to be of Sub-Saharan African origin and is specially frequent in Black Americans (Gonzalez-Redondo et al., 1991). Its presence in Morocco could be explained by migration during the Almoravid dynasty (1055–1130 AD) or through the caravan routes.
GENETIC TESTING Volume 12, Number 4, 2008 Molecular Basis of b-Thalassemia in Morocco: Possible Origins of the Molecular Heterogeneity
Naturally, as uniparental DNA [particularly mtDNA] shows that the west Sahelian Tamasheq (Tuareg) groups have more affinity with "sub-Saharan" west Africans than they do with coastal northwestern Imazighen groups; west Saharan Imazighen groups were found to be intermediate between coastal northern Imazighen and the non-Imazighen groups of the Sahel and "sub-Saharan" west Africa.
Posted by King_Scorpion (Member # 4818) on :
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: Markellion you are all over the place posting random quotes and not making a coherent point. Where is Zafun? Who originally wrote the statement and what does Zafun have to do with the Zhaghawa? You are literally simply posting a series of disjointed quotes and not making a coherent argument. Haven't you READ any of these books?
This dude cracks me up sometimes. I really don't think he can help himself. Every post he makes comes with a random quote about another topic lol.
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: Aside from guess work, do you have any concrete evidence that Ghana was ever absorbed by the Almoravids. This is the first time I'm coming across such a claim. Yes, they got into skirmishes with the Sahelian group, but absorption of Ghana into Almoravid territory? Furthermore, it has been pointed out in a number of works that Islamic conversions in Ghana took place before the arrival of the Almoravids; so, how the latter suddenly become the agents of this for the first time, is anyone's guess.
Will this is why I was asking about translations from writers like Ibn Khaldun and I was wondering if it actually said something else and the translation was distorted. My point has been about nations of the Sudan and their overall influence in the world
"The Negroland of the Arabs examined and explained" 1841
quote: "The people of Ghanah had for neighbours, on the east, a nation, which, according to historians, was called Susu; after which came another named Mali; and after that another known by the name of Kaukau ; although some people prefer a different orthography, and write this name Kagho. The last-named nation was followed by a people called Tekrur.6 The people of Ghanah declined in course of time, being overwhelmed or absorbed by the Molaththemun (or muffled people —that is, the Morabites), who, adjoining them on the north towards the Berber country, attacked them, and, taking possession of their territory, compelled them to embrace the Mohammedan religion.16' The people of Ghanah, being invaded at a later period by the Susu, a nation of Blacks in their neighbourhood, were exterminated, or mixed with other Black nations.
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
I've also been wanting to show that population movements might have been heavily south to north because people like the Zaghawa and other groups traveled enlisted as soldiers. I have reason to believe Zanj travled to the "Middle East" more than the other way around at least until maybe the 18th and 19th centuries
There is a thread on African imperialism if anyone has more information "Imperial Africans"
Zafun was a state near the Sahara and was later incorportated into the Mali empire. Notice the king of Zafun enjoyed good relations with other kings of the Sudan. If people didn't realize it the term "the veiled people" was refering to the people that made up the Almoravid empire and I thought it was interesting that the "Sudan" seemed to have so much influence over them. That is also why I brought up the suspicious translations about the Almoravids and the ancient Ghana empire.
I brought up metalurgy for a good reason because apparently the "Sudan" were able to use this technology to their advantage. I also brought up trade here and this of course was key to the dominance of the "Sudanese" nations from Ghana to Zanj
Edit:
Also I've found it interesting I hear about the influence of Almoravids so much but in reality later on they seemed under the influence of "Sudanese" nations
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
Respectfully though, why is it that you are posting that stuff here which is really not relevant to the topic? Those quotes by themselves aren't anything more than anecdotes. You need more than simple spamming of random quotes to make a coherent point. READ the books and come up with a coherent point and use the books and quotes as references.
I mean everyone knows that large parts of Africa were called Sudan and had great kings and warriors during the medieval period. Who is even arguing that? That isn't even the subject of the thread and you already have like 8 threads with the same set of quotes already. Is it necessary to post the same thing in every thread?
If you are going to post the quotes at least put them all together in one post as opposed to stringing them out.
Posted by Hammer (Member # 17003) on :
What you guys never do is offer any context to anything you post. It is like dealing with people with heads made out of solid rock.
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
The influence of Sudanese empires over the Almoravids I've made that very clear.
quote:Originally posted by markellion: This is also significant keep in mind the extreme ignorance of people about the geography of most of Africa, that combined with how extraordinarily well informed these Africans were of places outside of Africa and seemed very concerned about what was going on in the world. This almost screams conspiracy
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
I am stringing all these together its just that you don't seem to get my point. Both metallurgy and "Sudanese" soldiers are tied together becasue they were highly depended upon. Don't forget the dependance on the "Sudanese" for navigation from Spain to China. These skills gave the "Sudanes" an advantage. This dependance means ability to manipulate. The king of Mali was manipulating people
quote:Originally posted by markellion:
In many ways the "Sudanese" definitely seemed to have an advantage, metallurgy, trade, even in governing remember the king of Zafun who the Almoravids looked to in all matters of government. Possibly more Sudanese traveled north than the other way around until later times in history.
Posted by argyle104 (Member # 14634) on :
King_Scorpion ------------------------------ This dude cracks me up sometimes. I really don't think he can help himself. Every post he makes comes with a random quote about another topic lol. ------------------------------
And you know what, nobody even bothers to read the garbage. All it is, is cut and paste that no one wants to take the time to investigate and confirm whether its true or not.
Its basically spam.
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
The reason I was asking about the translations about Ghana was because Cooley apparently didn't think the Almoravids had much impact on them for some reason. On the other hand I was astonished to find the Almoravid's dependance on Zafun, a nation of the Sudan, this is the very core of what I was asking about. Were the Almoravids dependant on Ghana?
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
And there is the phenomenon of long distance contacts and trade despite the extreme ignorance of outsiders when it came to the geography of most of Africa. It doesn't seem like enough is looked into that
Posted by Jari-Ankhamun (Member # 14451) on :
I don't see what the big deal is. The Almoravids originated in the area around Senegal, The Almoravids were known to be Jet black?? How is this big news? My question would be is the Almohads who were also Berber of a darker or lighter Tribe.?? All I can find is info on the original name of the tribe...The Masmuda Tribe.
Any way... Up
Military Organisation in the Reconquista
Armies of Al-Andalus and Orders of Battle for the better known battles, . Armies of Al-Andalus Andalusian
Andalusian armies were composed of a number of elements. The proportion of these elements changed depending on the political situation, and particular armies would concentrate on some and not others.
Organisationally the army was composed of 5 groups (Heath, 1980):
Jund, hereditary regulars,
Hashid ("recruits"), volunteers recruited for a single expedition,
Mujahids or al-Murabitun, unpaid religious volunteers,
Murtaziqa, regular foreign mercenaries
Muttawia, unpaid foreign irregulars
Ethnically the army was also compose of 5 groups:
Arabs. Arab immigrants provided the basis of some early armies; the significant influxes were in 711, 712, and 741 (Heath, 1980).
Slavs (Saqlabi). European Slave troops were employed from the reign of al-Hakam I (796-822) although only became a large professional military force in the 10th century (Kennedy, 1996). Despite being called Slavs, most were recruited from Kingdom of Leon.
Berbers. Berbers mercenary/immigrants were being employed throughout the history of Al-Andalus, however, there were particular bursts of recruitment: under Abd al-Rahman II (822-852), Al-Hakam II (961-976), and the vizier Al-Mansur (976-1002) (Kennedy, 1996).
Negroes. Negro slaves and mercenaries were employed periodically - particularly as a counter-balance to either the Slavs or Berbers (Kennedy, 1996).
Andalusians. Muslims born in Al-Andalus of any extraction (native, Arab, Berber).
Abd al-Rahman I (756-788) imported 40,000 Berber mercenaries from North Africa as a counter-foil to the Arab Jund already settled in Al-Andalus. He also recruited a Black Guard of 2,000 men.
Al-Hakam I (796-822) had an army of 50,000 (Heath, 1980). it consisted mainly of Berbers and Negroes, but also included a Christrian Guard known as al-Khurs ("The Mutes") of 2,000 infantry and 3,000 cavalry.
The vizier Al-Mansur (976-1002) had a fully professional army of 60,000 (Kennedy, 1996; Heath, 1980). He particularly favored Berbers, bringing many over from North Africa. This emphasis meant the army was predominately cavalry. In c. 978 Al-Mansur disbanded the existing Caliph's Slav bodyguard of 3,750 men, but Slavs continued to form a significant proportion of the army. A small Andalusian element remained although the Andalusian elite was largely demilitarised by this time (Nicolle, 1988) .
The Caliph Muhammad II (1008-1010) was opposed by the Berber generals, and most, but not all, of the Slavs abandoned him to pursue their own political aims (Kennedy, 1996). As a result he attempted to recruit a militia from the native Cordobans which faired badly against the Berbers.
The Caliph Al-Qasim ibn Hammud (1018-1021, 1023) attempted to counterbalance the Berbers by recruiting a Negro bodyguard (Kennedy, 1996).
Taifa armies were small (Kennedy, 1996). In 1055 Seville took Algerciras with only 200 horse, and in 1069 when they took Cordoba they had an advance guard of 200 horse and a main body of 1,000. However, having called for volunteers to retake Barbastro, Al-Muqtadir of Zaragoza managed to raise an army which included 6,000 archers and 50 horsemen from Seville. Granadine garrisons may have been as low as 100 Zanata in Granada itself and 300 at Malaga. Al-Murabitun
The Al-Murabit leaders were all from the Banu Turgut of the Lamtuna tribe of the Sanhaja Berbers (Kennedy, 1996). Originally the men were from the Lamtuna tribe, these and the Guddala and Massufa (also Sanhaja) remained the mainstay of the armies throughout the period. Other groups were assimilated including the other Sanhaja tribes (Gazzula, Lamta, Banu Warith), Masmuda tribesmen of the Atlas and Zanata of northern Morocco.
The armies appear to be comprised of various groups (Kennedy, 1996): Al-Murabitun, Mercenaries, Slave soldiers, Andalusian Volunteers, Guards.
Al-Murabitun. Probabaly Berbers of the Lamtuna, Guddala and Massufa, but possibly any Sanhaja.
Mercenaries (Hashm). I suspect these are non-Al-Murabitun Berbers.
Black slave soldiers (Abid). Nicolle (1988) mentions larges numbers of black Africans and I presume these are the Abid mentioned by Kennedy (1996). Most were recruited form Senegal, and they used bamboo spears, long leather shields, bows, and massed drums. A slave soldier sparked the Cordoban rebellion in 1121, and many black slaves were in the army the Aragonese defeated in 1129.
Andalusian Volunteers (Muttawia).
Christian. The Murabitun employed Christian mercenaries and converted prisoners (Nicolle, 1988).
Guards. Ibn Tashfin formed a guard of slave soldiers - 2,000 blacks, 500 uluj, and Andalusian horsemen (Kennedy, 1996; Nicolle, 1988). Nicolle says the blacks were horsemen, but Kennedy only says the Uluj were. Nicolle also says the uluj were non-Berber including Arabs, Turks and Europeans, but Kennedy suggest they were probably of Frankish origin. .
The Murabitun used camels - later armies had 30,000 available - although as time when on they relied more on cavalry (Nicolle, 1988).
The mercenaries and slave soldiers adopted the veil in imitation of the Al-Murabitun (Kennedy, 1996).
Most Al-Murabitun fought on foot with a front rank of long spears and javelinmen behind (Kennedy, 1996; Nicolle, 1988). The commander of each unit carried a flag that was used to direct his men: stand when the banner is up and kneel when the banner is lowered. Under Ibn Tashfin and subsequently Murabitun made use of war drums (Nicolle, 1988).
From 1132 to 1144 a Catalan renegade called Reverter - the one time viscount of Barcelona - lead the elite corps of the Al-Murabitun army (Kennedy, 1996). This may have been the Uluj mentioned as part of the guards ??.
The Al-Murabitun armies could reach 20-30,000, but were usually smaller, for example, in 1058 Abu Bakr led a force of 400 horsemen, 800 camel men and 2,000 foot (Kennedy, 1996). The invasion force of 1086 had 12-20,000 men. 4,000 men were sent to the siege of Aledo. Even provincial forces were up to 5,000. In 1102 the Al-Murabitun had 17,000 horsemen in Al-Andalus: 4,000 in Seville, 1,000 in Cordoba, 1,000 in Granada, 4,000 in the Levante, and the remaining 7,000 distributed along the frontier. These figures are for horse only and it is unclear how many foot were maintained although it is worth remembering that foot considerably outnumbered horse in Al-Murabitun armies.
Although powerful in the field, the Al-Murabitun were reliant on their Andalusian allies for expertise in siege work (Kennedy, 1996). Almohads Included black slaves, Murabitun deserters, and elite Ghuzz Turkish archers (Nicolle, 1988). Almohads made even more use of war drums than the Murabitun. Almohad infantry formed similarly to the Murabitun: a front rank with long spears, a second with javelins and spears and a third of slingers.
Blacks(as well as Black Berbers along with Lighter Berbers) were used from the beginining of the invasion of Iberia.
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
The reason that "blacks" absolutely must be depicted as slaves is to get around the fact that very large numbers were traveling around the world.
quote:Originally posted by Jari-Ankhamun:
Black slave soldiers (Abid). Nicolle (1988) mentions larges numbers of black Africans and I presume these are the Abid mentioned by Kennedy (1996). Most were recruited form Senegal, and they used bamboo spears, long leather shields, bows, and massed drums. A slave soldier sparked the Cordoban rebellion in 1121, and many black slaves were in the army the Aragonese defeated in 1129.
The Arabs were very black too but there seems to be something significant about nations of the "Sudan". And there are allot more astonishing things I forgot about for one thing scholarship:
"Sudanese" scholars traveled everywhere in the Muslim world and cities like Timbuktu became centers of knowledge in the Muslim world. There is a story about someone from Hidjaz who traveled to Timbuktu not being able to keep up he traveled to Fez to find employment. All the great universities had connections with each other so indigenous knowledge from the Mandingo to the Bantu had some impact on the Muslim world
And as I've mentioned earlier "Sudanese" blacksmiths in some places had almost a monopoly on their craft and as far as China "Sudanese" navigators were essential when it came to fighting pirates and navigation ect. "Sudanese" soldiers were of the highest significance and of course control over trade
Posted by Jari-Ankhamun (Member # 14451) on :
quote:Originally posted by markellion: The reason that "blacks" absolutely must be depicted as slaves is to get around the fact that very large numbers were traveling around the world.
quote:Originally posted by Jari-Ankhamun:
Black slave soldiers (Abid). Nicolle (1988) mentions larges numbers of black Africans and I presume these are the Abid mentioned by Kennedy (1996). Most were recruited form Senegal, and they used bamboo spears, long leather shields, bows, and massed drums. A slave soldier sparked the Cordoban rebellion in 1121, and many black slaves were in the army the Aragonese defeated in 1129.
The Arabs were very black too but there seems to be something significant about nations of the "Sudan". And there are allot more astonishing things I forgot about for one thing scholarship:
"Sudanese" scholars traveled everywhere in the Muslim world and cities like Timbuktu became centers of knowledge in the Muslim world. There is a story about someone from Hidjaz who traveled to Timbuktu not being able to keep up he traveled to Fez to find employment. All the great universities had connections with each other so indigenous knowledge from the Mandingo to the Bantu had some impact on the Muslim world
And as I've mentioned earlier "Sudanese" blacksmiths in some places had almost a monopoly on their craft and as far as China "Sudanese" navigators were essential when it came to fighting pirates and navigation ect. "Sudanese" soldiers were of the highest significance and of course control over trade
The reason why I don't like to use black which is confusing becuase there are blacks and the Arabs especially Southern Arabs are a shade lighter than many so called Blacks...but the info I posted shows that Soildiers from the South of the desert as well as the North with Berber populations was used in Moorish Spain which means that as usual the Moors were a Mix of Blacks, Berbers, and Arabs also Native Iberians and Slavs were present..
Posted by Red, White, and Blue + Christian (Member # 10893) on :
Charlie Bass I was thinking about you and I see you posted this. If your ancestors came from the Mississipi Delta area, then you have a likelyhood of being part Tuareg. I am learking fascinating thins about this group from French books on the subject containing stuff not in English.
You should look again at Wikipedia's entry. Of Course, you know some Tuaregs are descended from Moroccan Moors.
quote:Originally posted by Jari-Ankhamun: but the info I posted shows that Soildiers from the South of the desert as well as the North with Berber populations was used in Moorish Spain which means that as usual the Moors were a Mix of Blacks, Berbers, and Arabs also Native Iberians and Slavs were present..
Yes but the article is highly problematic because while many "Sudanese" were present as slaves the article assumes that a very large number of "Sudanese" soldiers were slaves without evidence
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
I think I remember alTakruri saying something about Mansa Musa going on the pilgrimage in order to intimidate the people of Morocco
Edit: oops that probably didn't involve Morocco. Something about intimidation
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by Hammered: What you guys never do is offer any context to anything you post. It is like dealing with people with heads made out of solid rock.
And please show us how we never present "any context"! The context of this thread based on the title article is quite clear, at least to anyone with a sane functioning mind.
And how about you answering my prior question...
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ..pop quiz for you 'professor' can you tell us who the Almoravids are? You may (or may not) recall that I explained to you who the Almoravids are numerous times in other threads bearing the title of a name under which the Almoravids and other related peoples were called.
Posted by Jari-Ankhamun (Member # 14451) on :
quote:Originally posted by markellion:
quote:Originally posted by Jari-Ankhamun: but the info I posted shows that Soildiers from the South of the desert as well as the North with Berber populations was used in Moorish Spain which means that as usual the Moors were a Mix of Blacks, Berbers, and Arabs also Native Iberians and Slavs were present..
Yes but the article is highly problematic because while many "Sudanese" were present as slaves the article assumes that a very large number of "Sudanese" soldiers were slaves without evidence
True but Slave soldiers were different in class than the typical slave: Even a cursory glance at the history of Muslim peoples reveals the extraordinary role played by men of slave origins in the armed forces. They served both as soldiers and as officers, then often acquired preeminent roles in administration, politics, and all aspects of public affairs http://www.danielpipes.org/448/military-slaves-a-uniquely-muslim-phenomenon Im not advocating that all the blacks were slave soldiers but it was highly likely I mean why pay an Army when you can use highly traind slaves at a time when Slave soldiers were the norm in Muslim Societies. If it helps alot of the White Soldiers such as the Slavs in Al-Andalus were slave soldiers.
Muslim societies were the cream of the crop at one point in time and my personal conclusion was that it was all due mainly to the Knowledge they got from various people such as Egypt, India, Nubia, Persia and it all came together...In other words it had nothing to do with Islam itself but the scoiety that Early Islam embraced...The fact that you had to be literate to read the Koran helped.
Posted by Jari-Ankhamun (Member # 14451) on :
Besides Mercenaries were used so not all the blacks were Slaves..hell alot of Arabs, Jews, Berbers etc travelled to Ghana for trade and even to stay so why assume that the Ghana and other African did not travel to Al-Andalus as traders and to make a home?
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jari-Ankhamun:
Muslim societies were the cream of the crop at one point in time and my personal conclusion was that it was all due mainly to the Knowledge they got from various people such as Egypt, India, Nubia, Persia and it all came together...
Yes but the knowledge of so many other people is ignored for example Timbuktu didn't become a famous center of knowledge by simply copying the knowledge of Egypt, India, Nubia or Persia they contributed new ideas to the Musilm world. All the Muslim Universities were linked together and so Muslim scholars contributed new ideas and others like Kilwa on the Swahili Coast and cities like Kano were also places of learning in the Muslim world and would have also contributed new knowledge. And there is a great amount of evidence that the knowledge and skills of different "Sudanese" peoples were essential when it came to Muslim empires like in Spain and these same people were able to manipulate things to their own advantage, in other words these "Sudanese" had the upper hand in these relations. The indigenous knowledge of these people had an impact on the Muslim world
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
What’s significant about crosses circulating all the way to the Coast (see bellow) is that it shows influence from all over Africa could have also reached places like Spain and India. This is why I have been posting information about far reaching influence of African languages like Hausa or the far reaching influence of the Swahili language within the continent. It is to show the great many long distance connections that exist within the continent and with this remarkable long distance trade and exchange of ideas everything shouldn’t be seen as simply coming from Arabs or whatever. Why should so much be seen as coming from Yemen and other places when there was already so many cultural connections within the continent? Doesn’t it seem reasonable that these Africans from the Swahili Coast and other places traveled to the “Middle East” and other places even more, perhaps, than the other way around? With all the far reaching connections within the continent they would have influenced places outside of the continent too
It wasn’t just control of trade that gave the “Sudanese” a great advantage in the world but also knowledge of it just like with the king of Zafun whose knowledge in the art of kingship was important to the commander of the Muslims at Marrakesh and the world wide usefulness of “Sudanese” navigators and in some places “Sudanese” had a monopoly when it came to certain industries. And I have to ask if the commander of the Muslims was so dependant on the king of Zafun when it came to matters of government what did the Almoravids do in earlier times? Also impact on agriculture had to be very great in Spain and other places
There a problem with the general idea that "Sudanese" soldiers were simply "used" and were simply there following orders. Of course they were there being used but they could also manipulate things to their own advantage and their importance would definitely be a way in which the "Sudanese" had the upper hand
quote: Among the genuine tillers the whole life of the family is taken up in agriculture, and hence the months are by preference called after the operations which they demand. Constant clearings change forests to fields, and the ground is manured with the ashes of the burnt thicket. In the middle of the fields rise the light watch-towers, from which a watchman scares grain-eating birds and other thieves. An African cultivated landscape is incomplete without barns. The rapidity with which, when newly imported, the most various forms of cultivation spread in Africa says much for the attention which is devoted to this branch of economy. Industries, again, which may be called agricultural, like the preparation of meal from millet and other crops, also from cassava, the fabrication of fermented drinks from grain, or the manufacture of cotton, are widely known and sedulously fostered.
Page 89
quote:Livingstone (1871) passed thirty smelting houses in one journey, and Cameron came across bellows with valves, .. and tribes who used knives in eating. He found tribes which no Europeans had ever visited, who made ingots of copper in the form of the St. Andrew’s cross, which circulated even to the coast…. Wilson (1856) found natives in West Africa who could repair American watches. ….
….Caille found the Negroes in Bambana manufacturing gunpowder (1824-28), and the Hausa make soap; so, too, Negroes in Uganda and other parts have made guns after seeing European models.
page 91
quote:The Negro is a born trader. Lenz says, "our sharpest European merchants, even Jews and Armenians, can learn much of the cunning and trade of the Negroes". We know that the trade between Central Africa and Egypt was in the hands of Negroes for thousands of years, and in early days the cities of the Sudan and North Africa grew rich through Negro trade.
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
Markellion that last post doesn't make sense. You haven't done anything but post random quotes that have no logical coherent flow and don't really say anything. The only trading these quotes reference is trade across Africa between African countries. But the evidence of trade within Africa among indigenous Africans is widespread and does not need to rely on various incoherent quotes for support.
but where is the "world wide" trade that you talked about? Come on dude. What ports were involved? What was traded, when and who was involved? Answering these types of questions means READING books, multiple books and multiple sources, not simply depending on one or two quotes. It isn't as if there isn't more information out there that can be used to support your argument. Therefore either posting these random quotes means that you don't want to take the time to actually go do some research or you don't know where to look or both.
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
We know that all the great Muslim centers of learning were connected together and these existed in several places throughout Africa and we know that these "Sudanese" scholars traveled to different places in the Muslim world and taught. We also know that people from all over the Muslim world traveled to these centers of learning in Africa to both teach and learn. The reason I'm talking about trade within Africa was to emphasize that they were able to keep outsiders out while at the same time controlling important aspects of world trade like through the Sahara. The spread of ideas through Africa would also make it's way through the Muslim world.
We also know that these "Sudanese" mercenaries were of the highest importance since before Islam and we also know that "Sudanese" traveled all over the world including China and India because they had certain skills
quote:The Negro is a born trader. Lenz says, "our sharpest European merchants, even Jews and Armenians, can learn much of the cunning and trade of the Negroes". We know that the trade between Central Africa and Egypt was in the hands of Negroes for thousands of years, and in early days the cities of the Sudan and North Africa grew rich through Negro trade.
"Medieval West Africa: Views From Arab Scholars and Merchants"
The king of Zafun is stronger than the veiled people of the Maghreb and more versed in the art of kingship. The veiled people acknowledge his superiority over them, obey him and resort to him in all important matters of government. One year the king, on his way to the pilgrimage, came to the Maghreb to pay a visit to the commander of the Muslims, the veiled king of the Maghreb, of the tribe of Lamtuna. The Commander of the Muslims met him on foot, wheras the king of Zafun did not dismount for him. He was tall, of deep black complexion and veiled
page 45 From Ibn Sa'id 13th century
In the same latitude is Zafun, which belongs to pagan Sudan and whose ruler enjoys a good reputation among (other) kings of the Sudan
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
One thing that needs to be stressed is the knowledge of geography, which I pointed out before. There was a great amount of ignorance by outsiders when it came to the geography of most of Africa while on the other hand these Africans were extraordinarily well informed when it came to the goings on in the world. The ruler of Mali sent letters to distant people that suggested he was manipulating them and this emperor was very well informed concerning anything connected to Malian trading interests. This in itself is remarkable and is highly significant in regards of world trade. While people from many different places in the world came since the old Ghana empire to make money there was still a great deal of ignorance in geography, this would also mean it would be very hard to manipulate these "Sudanese" people because knowledge is power. These people came to make money but the ignorance concerning geography remained.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jari-Ankhamun:
The reason why I don't like to use black which is confusing becuase there are blacks and the Arabs especially Southern Arabs are a shade lighter than many so called Blacks...but the info I posted shows that Soildiers from the South of the desert as well as the North with Berber populations was used in Moorish Spain which means that as usual the Moors were a Mix of Blacks, Berbers, and Arabs also Native Iberians and Slavs were present..
Moors was a reference to "black Africans" in the Iberian peninsula. And the 'black' presence goes beyond mere foot soldiers, they were the leaders: The Almoravids, a genealogical subject of this thread before it drifted off, was led by "black" figures; with regards to Yusuf ibn Tashfin, we are told from translations:
“Brown in color, middle height, thin, little beard, soft voice, black eyes, straight nose, lock of Muhammad falling on top of his ear, eye brow joined, wooly hair” - Abd Allah, Roudh el-Kartas.
Chronicler Al-Fasi described him as "brown man with wooly hair", per Miriam DeCosta, The Portrayal of Blacks in a Spanish Medieval Manuscript.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
One question I have is why did these scientists attribute this mutation to Sub-Saharan origins but associate it with the Almoravids when if I recall, the Almoravids were of the Lamtuna clan of Tuareg which is native to areas of northern Mauritania, southern Morocco, and western Algeria?? Again this all shows the ridiculous false dichotomy of African populations into Sub-Saharan and North. Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
I've read accounts from one from Ivan Van Sertima that the first Moors in Spain were "Sudanese" (very black as opposed to brown). White meant brown or dark skinned versus black. Much of the technology example agriculture that was brought to Spain probably came from different parts of Africa
It was not just control of trade but knowledge that allowed for these empires like ancient Ghana to have an advantage and finance the conquest of Spain. It was this kind of thing that allowed for the financing of the Muslim conquests:
100 things that you did not know about Africa 26-50
quote:28. Cheques are not quite as new an invention as we were led to believe. In the tenth century, an Arab geographer, Ibn Haukal, visited a fringe region of Ancient Ghana. Writing in 951 AD, he told of a cheque for 42,000 golden dinars written to a merchant in the city of Audoghast by his partner in Sidjilmessa.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ "brown" in the Arabs' point of view could be dark-brown as in chocolate brown. You have to understand that many Arabs themselves were pretty dark and "brown" to Europeans already.
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
But concerning "blacks" ancient Ghana was sophisticated enough do you think it is possible that they and other "Sudanese" people were pulling the strings here and contributed greatly to the skills, technologies ect. in Spain? Some scholars actually claim that the Almoravids had much of their success because of the slaves and loot they supposedly took from invading the lands of the south. This is fascinating because it shows that soldiers and wealth from the south were essential. European colonialists would be especially keen in distorting this period of history by distorting and mistranslating the texts and everything Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
One question I have is why did these scientists attribute this mutation to Sub-Saharan origins but associate it with the Almoravids when if I recall, the Almoravids were of the Lamtuna clan of Tuareg which is native to areas of northern Mauritania, southern Morocco, and western Algeria?? Again this all shows the ridiculous false dichotomy of African populations into Sub-Saharan and North.
The Imazighen presence extended as far south as near Senegal. Is it any wonder where the term "Senegal" comes from? The attribution to Almoravids comes from the fact that the group had been involved as far south as ancient Ghana, and the fact that they ruled northwestern Africa, which was subsumed under the Almoravid empire, before heading to the Iberian peninsula. The mutation presumably has its greatest frequencies in regions below coastal northwestern African areas.
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
quote:Originally posted by markellion: But concerning "blacks" ancient Ghana was sophisticated enough do you think it is possible that they and other "Sudanese" people were pulling the strings here and contributed greatly to the skills, technologies ect. in Spain? Some scholars actually claim that the Almoravids had much of their success because of the slaves and loot they supposedly took from invading the lands of the south. This is fascinating because it shows that soldiers and wealth from the south were essential. European colonialists would be especially keen in distorting this period of history by distorting and mistranslating the texts and everything
Markellion, why are you saying the same thing over and over again? Nobody is debating you.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by markellion:
I've read accounts from one from Ivan Van Sertima that the first Moors in Spain were "Sudanese" (very black as opposed to brown). White meant brown or dark skinned versus black. Much of the technology example agriculture that was brought to Spain probably came from different parts of Africa
It was not just control of trade but knowledge that allowed for these empires like ancient Ghana to have an advantage and finance the conquest of Spain. It was this kind of thing that allowed for the financing of the Muslim conquests:
100 things that you did not know about Africa 26-50
quote:28. Cheques are not quite as new an invention as we were led to believe. In the tenth century, an Arab geographer, Ibn Haukal, visited a fringe region of Ancient Ghana. Writing in 951 AD, he told of a cheque for 42,000 golden dinars written to a merchant in the city of Audoghast by his partner in Sidjilmessa.
There is no mystery about the Moors. The visual aids of the heads of the four princes makes no mistake about what it means. The description of the usherer of the Almoravid rule, Yusuf ibn Tashfin, makes no mistake about this either. I highly doubt Arabs would assume that "white folks" of Europe were "brown and wooly haired" as opposed to, well, "white". This is the confusion that some people of today create for themselves.
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: Markellion, why are you saying the same thing over and over again? Nobody is debating you.
It would be nice to have more accurate translations of the Arabic texts so we can read more about Ghana and Mali manipulating the Muslim world and funding/supporting their conquests
About Senegal I heard a random guy say it was a mispronunciation of a woloff word. This is from the Senegal site about the origins of the name:
quote:The name 'Sénégal' is said to come from the Wolof name of the dugout canoe, as it was mispronounced by visiting Portuguese sailors in the middle of the 15th century
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
It is implicated to have come from the word "Zenega", which is associated with an Imazighen community. What is this word "canoe" that you are alluding to?
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
I don't know the guy made a big deal out of it and said that it meant "our dugout" and how colonialists mispronounced these words and including Algeria
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
The word is reportedly "Sunugaal", meaning "our canoe".
Posted by hajsabir (Member # 17428) on :
why someone deny the fact that couldn't be covered.i mean anything almoravids took and contributed to spain or all andalouse brought from africa since their movement began at the banks of river senegal.everything crafts, gold, ivory,irrigation technics came from african moravids.omar ibnu yahya amir of morabids is a saint well known in and around niger river,that part of west africa
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
quote:Originally posted by markellion:
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: Markellion, why are you saying the same thing over and over again? Nobody is debating you.
It would be nice to have more accurate translations of the Arabic texts so we can read more about Ghana and Mali manipulating the Muslim world and funding/supporting their conquests
About Senegal I heard a random guy say it was a mispronunciation of a woloff word. This is from the Senegal site about the origins of the name:
quote:The name 'Sénégal' is said to come from the Wolof name of the dugout canoe, as it was mispronounced by visiting Portuguese sailors in the middle of the 15th century
The gold of Africa financed large parts of the Islamic and European world for a thousand years or more. And for a large part of that time it was the Africans who controlled the trade and grew wealthy off it, including ancient Ghana, the Almoravids and so forth. I don't recall any particular historian that disputes this.
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
They certainly dispute the agency of empires like the ancient Ghana empire. Changing the meaning of a few words could dramatically change the meaning of the text and it would be important to have accurate translations
Edit: And I've found translations that came after 1841 to be worse. The 1841 translation of Ibn Khaldun said that the Almoravids took over ancient Ghana, later translations add descriptions about mass pillaging and senseless destruction (rather than simply conquering them)
"Not Quite Venus from the Waves: The Almoravid Conquest of Ghana in the Modern Historiography of Western Africa" by Pekka Masonen
quote:According to Leo Africanus, the Land of the Blacks, including Guechet and Cano [Ghana] was first opened up in AH 380/1012 AD, after the arrival in North Africa of a certain Muslim. The land of the Blacks was then “inhabited by people, who lived like brutes, without kings, lords, republics, government and any customs, and without knowing husbandry.”
"The Negroland of the Arabs examined and explained" 1841
quote: The people of Ghanah declined in course of time, being overwhelmed or absorbed by the Molaththemun (or muffled people —that is, the Morabites), who, adjoining them on the north towards the Berber country, attacked them, and, taking possession of their territory, compelled them to embrace the Mohammedan religion.
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: The gold of Africa financed large parts of the Islamic and European world for a thousand years or more. And for a large part of that time it was the Africans who controlled the trade and grew wealthy off it, including ancient Ghana, the Almoravids and so forth. I don't recall any particular historian that disputes this.
It was not simply the gold it was also the knowledge of trade as I've pointed out and it would be empires like Ghana and Mali and others that could manipulate this trade. They also had knowledge of metallurgy and the working of iron. I've also shown that later the people who made up the Almoravid empire were subject or reliant on "Sudanese" nations. The emperor of the later Mali empire was encouraging and also manipulating merchants even those that weren't within his domains. Merchants came and took advantage of the wealth of these empires but in turn the merchants were also being manipulated
quote:The Negro is a born trader. Lenz says, "our sharpest European merchants, even Jews and Armenians, can learn much of the cunning and trade of the Negroes". We know that the trade between Central Africa and Egypt was in the hands of Negroes for thousands of years, and in early days the cities of the Sudan and North Africa grew rich through Negro trade.
100 things that you did not know about Africa 26-50
quote:28. Cheques are not quite as new an invention as we were led to believe. In the tenth century, an Arab geographer, Ibn Haukal, visited a fringe region of Ancient Ghana. Writing in 951 AD, he told of a cheque for 42,000 golden dinars written to a merchant in the city of Audoghast by his partner in Sidjilmessa.
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
Whats significant about this Cheque is that the amount of the "debt of this amount was unheard of in the Eastern provinces of the Muslim world". The same article bellow also mentions the Maqqari brothers. One is easily given a false impression that north African merchants had the advantage but this is deceiving and I've read translations of texts about Audoghast and it's relations with the ancient Ghana empire that have made me suspicious for a long time.
You morons find a study with a qualified conclusion. This means the people who did the study admitted by their qualifiers(might be, could indicate etc) that the study was not meant to be seen as concrete information. You take that study and just accept it as fact without a single alternative point of view to offer. This is why you folks come up with crazy points of view that will never be mainstream.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: I thought it was explained to you before 'professor' that in science suppositions are based on probability which is further based on evidence. The more evidence the higher the probability until a general theory is arrived. Which is more than we can say about any findings that show Egyptian or Nile Valley civilization being the product of non-Africans or some "caucasians".
Okay, how's this for more definite?...
Biotechnic & Histochemistry 2005, 80(1): 7_/13
"Materials and methods In 1997, the German Institute for Archaeology headed an excavation of the tombs of the nobles in Thebes-West, Upper Egypt. At this time, three types of tissues were sampled from different mummies: meniscus (fibrocartilage), skin, and placenta. Archaeological findings suggest that the mummies dated from the New Kingdom (approximately 1550_/1080 BC). The basal epithelial cells were packed with melanin as expected for specimens of Negroid origin."
Getting more to the topic, do you know who the Almoravids are 'professor'?? You really should since you incessantly keep referring to their peoples.
Posted by Hammer (Member # 17003) on :
You give me six lines from a 1997 study and have the nerve to offer that as some kind of evidence. every time you post your IQ drops a point.
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
About these translations there are many other translations that are very different for example Ibn Khaldun does not show any prejudice here. The author of "The Nubian Dam" showed translations that had a remarkable lack of bias and showed some evidence of Makuria intimidating and taking advantage of Egypt which is similar to the two accounts bellow
In case anyone missed the significance of the bellow the "Veiled People" is a translation of Morabites or Almoravids. The king of Zafun traveled to Marrakesh. Zafun was later incorporated into the Mali empire. Everything I've said here has revolved around this. I think that there exists different translations and some of them are tainted with racism and others aren't
"Medieval West Africa: Views From Arab Scholars and Merchants"
quote: Page 40 quote from Yaqut Edit: This is said to have happened in the 2nd quarter of the 12th century:
The king of Zafun is stronger than the veiled people of the Maghreb and more versed in the art of kingship. The veiled people acknowledge his superiority over them, obey him and resort to him in all important matters of government. One year the king, on his way to the pilgrimage, came to the Maghreb to pay a visit to the commander of the Muslims, the veiled king of the Maghreb, of the tribe of Lamtuna. The Commander of the Muslims met him on foot, wheras the king of Zafun did not dismount for him. He was tall, of deep black complexion and veiled
page 45 From Ibn Sa'id 13th century
In the same latitude is Zafun, which belongs to pagan Sudan and whose ruler enjoys a good reputation among (other) kings of the Sudan
page 98 by Ibn Khaldun is talking about how Takedda and other cities were subject to the ruler of Mali of the "Sudan"
quote: In the year 1353, in the days of sultan Abul 'Inan [of Morocco], I went to Biskara on royal business and there encountered the ambassador of the ruler of Takedda at the residence of Yusof al-Muzani, emir of Biskara. He told me about the prosperous state of this city and the continual passage of wayfares and said: "This year there passed through out city on the way to Mali a caravan of merchants from the east containing 12,000 camels." Another [informant] has told me that this is a yearly even. his country is subject to the sultan of Mali of the Sudan as is the case at present with the rest of the desert regions known as [the land of] the veiled people
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by Hammered: You give me six lines from a 1997 study and have the nerve to offer that as some kind of evidence. every time you post your IQ drops a point.
Nope! It YOUR IQ that is below the retardation level if you can't comprehend what that relatively recent study says plain and simple. Also, it was you who claims we never present any valid scientific studies, yet the one I just posted is just one of hundreds while you have yet to present just ONE that supports your ridiculous assertions.
And how about you address the topic for once. Tell us who are the Almoravids and what significance do they have to world history, specifically European history??
Posted by Jari-Ankhamun (Member # 14451) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: I thought it was explained to you before 'professor' that in science suppositions are based on probability which is further based on evidence. The more evidence the higher the probability until a general theory is arrived. Which is more than we can say about any findings that show Egyptian or Nile Valley civilization being the product of non-Africans or some "caucasians".
Okay, how's this for more definite?...
Biotechnic & Histochemistry 2005, 80(1): 7_/13
"Materials and methods In 1997, the German Institute for Archaeology headed an excavation of the tombs of the nobles in Thebes-West, Upper Egypt. At this time, three types of tissues were sampled from different mummies: meniscus (fibrocartilage), skin, and placenta. Archaeological findings suggest that the mummies dated from the New Kingdom (approximately 1550_/1080 BC). The basal epithelial cells were packed with melanin as expected for specimens of Negroid origin."
Getting more to the topic, do you know who the Almoravids are 'professor'?? You really should since you incessantly keep referring to their peoples.
Obviously The guy has no Idea where the Almoravids originated: The Almoravids are a Berber dynasty of Sahara, which lived between the current Senegal and south of the current Morocco.
The Lamtuna are a Berber tribe from the region of Mauritania-Western Sahara-Morocco-Algeria. They claim descent from Himyar, one of the South Arabian eponyms.[citation needed] The Almoravids, the founders of Marrakech in Morocco where they established their capital, originated from this tribe. [b]
The most powerful of the tribes of the Sahara near the Sénégal River was the Lamtuna, whose culture of origin was 'Wadi Noun' (Nul Lemta). They later came together as the upper leger River culture, which founded the city of Aoudaghost. They converted to Islam in the 9th century.
Modern day Southern Mauritaunians and Morroccans..
[b]The first manuscript known to have been written in Mauritania, according to Salem, is a collection of advice on how to apply the Almoravid law code, titled Al-Ishara fi Tadbir al-Imara, by Imam al-Hadrami, who died in 1097. It is now in the Abd al-Mu’min library in Tichi-So profesor can you explain why these Black West Africans possess a Manuscript on Almoravid Law, Does it anger you Porfessor that these Black West African had thousands of Libraries, established Architecture such as this:
While your Irish ancestors could barley master 50 Books. These Black West Africans were practicing Law, Astronomy, Surgery, Algebra, etc. While your Irish ancestors were living in dirt floor huts.
Does it anger you professor???
You make Texans look bad Professor....
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jari-Ankhamun: The most powerful of the tribes of the Sahara near the Sénégal River was the Lamtuna, whose culture of origin was 'Wadi Noun' (Nul Lemta). They later came together as the upper leger River culture, which founded the city of Aoudaghost. They converted to Islam in the 9th century.
This is so confusing because didn't the cities of Walata and Aoudaghost have cultures similar to the Ghana and Mali empires? Or Walata did anyway. Both cities important trading centers on the southern part of the desert
Posted by argyle104 (Member # 14634) on :
Jari-Ankhamun wrote:
quote: Im not advocating that all the blacks were slave soldiers but it was highly likely I mean why pay an Army when you can use highly traind slaves at a time when Slave soldiers were the norm in Muslim Societies. If it helps alot of the White Soldiers such as the Slavs in Al-Andalus were slave soldiers.
Folks, look at how this boy continues his quest to perpetuate eurocentric falsehoods and race fantasy as actual facts. Your dick gets on hard off of this type of stuff doesn't it?
Just like most racialists and people who believe in a bogus racial hierarchy such as yourself.
And whats also funny is that he says:
"If it helps alot of the White Soldiers such as the Slavs in Al-Andalus were slave soldiers."
As if he is trying to throw anyone who will call him out for his tired pathetic race mythology. Its the same "well there white people that were slaves, but it was the Slavic people". Even in trying to deflect from their own craziness, they still reflect the dementia that is racialism. Notice how they will never claim that the English, French, or Germans were slaves. It violates their crazy lunatic race hierarchy beliefs.
Posted by argyle104 (Member # 14634) on :
Jari-Ankhamun wrote: ------------------------------------- Included black slaves, Murabitun deserters, and elite Ghuzz Turkish archers (Nicolle, 1988). Almohads made even more use of war drums than the Murabitun. Almohad infantry formed similarly to the Murabitun: a front rank with long spears, a second with javelins and spears and a third of slingers. -------------------------------------
Your dismissed Jari-Ankhamun. Nobody is believing your white pseudohistory. Notice its the patented tactic of fictionalizing the "blacks" as the slaves.
It just goes to show just how pathetic the mind of Jari-Ankhamun is.
Posted by argyle104 (Member # 14634) on :
Doug M,
Do you agree with the assesment made below?
quote: Im not advocating that all the blacks were slave soldiers but it was highly likely I mean why pay an Army when you can use highly traind slaves at a time when Slave soldiers were the norm in Muslim Societies. If it helps alot of the White Soldiers such as the Slavs in Al-Andalus were slave soldiers.
Posted by argyle104 (Member # 14634) on :
Explorer,
Do you agree with the assesment made below?
quote: Im not advocating that all the blacks were slave soldiers but it was highly likely I mean why pay an Army when you can use highly traind slaves at a time when Slave soldiers were the norm in Muslim Societies. If it helps alot of the White Soldiers such as the Slavs in Al-Andalus were slave soldiers.
Posted by Jari-Ankhamun (Member # 14451) on :
^^^^ Let me remove my ladder and adress this SWINE EATING TROLL. There were Black Slave Soldiers in Al-Andalus. Get over it and stop crying. First off Slave Soldeirs were not American Slaves, they had alot more rights and could achieve high positions in the society. Fatimid Egypt is a good example of this, if you knew anything you would know this you swine eating yellow tooth English peice of Dog ****.
If it helps alot of the White Soldiers such as the Slavs in Al-Andalus were slave soldiers."
As if he is trying to throw anyone who will call him out for his tired pathetic race mythology. Its the same "well there white people that were slaves, but it was the Slavic people". Even in trying to deflect from their own craziness, they still reflect the dementia that is racialism. Notice how they will never claim that the English, French, or Germans were slaves. It violates their crazy lunatic race hierarchy beliefs. Posts: 2119 | Registered: Jan 2008 | IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Bitch swine eating rat, Did you not see what I posted that White Slaves were used in Al-Andalus.?? Does this make you sad, little bitch?? Also.. Davis said. Most previously estimated slave counts have thus tended to be in the thousands, or at most in the tens of thousands. Davis, by contrast, has calculated that between 1 million and 1.25 million European Christians were captured and forced to work in North Africa from the 16th to 18th centuries.
Im still waiting for Fawal to adress that and you can let it sink in too, Your Pink Swine eating Whore Women were enslaved in great numbers and you little pigs could do nothing but live in fear. You are nothing but Trash...Now Get off my mother fucking dick Punk ass BOI!! You been shooting shots my way for way too long old Bitch ass boi!!
Stop trying to cause diversions swine...
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
There were slave soldiers throughout the Islamic world some of whom were Turkish, Asian, European(slavic) and African. That has nothing to do with the fact that the primary invaders of Spain were made up of African blacks who were not slaves.
Posted by Jari-Ankhamun (Member # 14451) on :
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: There were slave soldiers throughout the Islamic world some of whom were Turkish, Asian, European(slavic) and African. That has nothing to do with the fact that the primary invaders of Spain were made up of African blacks who were not slaves.
And where have I ever disagreed?? Argyle is just trying to get us to argue over something I never implied. I never said all the blacks were slaves in Al Andalus I said there was a large number of Slave Soldiers as compared to paid soldiers, and many of them were black, berber and slav. The Almoravids were not Slaves, the Berbers under Ibn Ziyad were not Slaves, The traders and intellectuals from Morocco, Mauritaunia, and Ghana were not Slaves. Why let a troll ruin this tread?
Posted by anguishofbeing (Member # 16736) on :
Doug just wanted to say sh!t. He couldn't give up the opportunity to let us know he knows stuff. lol
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
You must learn to control your anguish LOL!
Posted by argyle104 (Member # 14634) on :
Jari-Ankhamun wrote: ----------------------------- The traders and intellectuals from Morocco, Mauritaunia, and Ghana were not Slaves. -----------------------------
You sick pile of garbage. So now you are trying to dichotomize back into your patented it was all the dumb "negroids" that were slaves. Why don't you just go ahead and be a man, and say it outright who you believe these black slaves were and where they came from.
Posted by argyle104 (Member # 14634) on :
Doug M wrote: ---------------------------- There were slave soldiers throughout the Islamic world some of whom were Turkish, Asian, European(slavic) and African. That has nothing to do with the fact that the primary invaders of Spain were made up of African blacks who were not slaves. ----------------------------
Jari-Ankhamun has been doing this crap for years. Its amazing the difference between your post and Jari's. Jari is hellbent on making people whom he calls "negroes" as the world's slaves.
While your post shoots the eurocentric fantasy of negro slaves and non-negros as free down in flames.
Posted by argyle104 (Member # 14634) on :
People, to see more indepthly how Jari-Ankhamun's eurocentricly sodomized mind works view the thread below.
Also note the scholarly beatdown I administered when I refuted his racism against Africans.
Here are the salient components of this thread, "Fawal". You should address the issues at hand, neurotic punk. As for being an "Afrocentrists" (substantiate that with my past posts), I'm as much as your ancestral mother, who was sucking African cock.
You can decide on whether he was some Samuel L Jackson-equivalent belonging to the middle ages, some post man, or an African slave. Either way, the ancestry is there and you can't deny that at all.
Oh and please don't try to debate. I crushed your illiterate ass last time and it will happen again. The "man", who cannot cite sources and fails to use appropriate sources. Historians describing and measuring human diversity, welders practicing thyroid surgery and what not.
PS: Why not attack Explorer, who maintains a very similar position as myself?
quote:Originally posted by Bob_01:
quote:Originally posted by Hammer: "believd to be" "could be" "or" ??????????
another supposition. This is why you guys get your facts screwed up all the time.
Science doesn't use absolute language, troll. Even economists understand that. I guess this lack of education deficiency plays a role.
I'll get the paper. Makes sense, though considering similar trends with sickle cell.
Samples:
quote: The population sample consisted of 80 unrelated patients selected from different regions of Morocco. The diagnosis of b-thalassemia was based on clinical presentation of thalassemic features, further supported by relevant hematological data, as well as raised HbA2 levels in heterozygous family members. Blood samples were collected from patients during their attendance for blood transfusion in six major hospitals located in the different cities of the country, namely Rabat, Casanblanca, Tangier, Larache, Al-Hoceima, and Oujda.
The _29 (A-G) mutation is believed to be of Sub-Saharan African origin and is specially frequent in Black Americans (Gonzalez-Redondo et al., 1991). Its presence in Morocco could be explained by migration during the Almoravid dynasty (1055–1130 AD) or through the caravan routes.
GENETIC TESTING Volume 12, Number 4, 2008 Molecular Basis of b-Thalassemia in Morocco: Possible Origins of the Molecular Heterogeneity
Naturally, as uniparental DNA [particularly mtDNA] shows that the west Sahelian Tamasheq (Tuareg) groups have more affinity with "sub-Saharan" west Africans than they do with coastal northwestern Imazighen groups; west Saharan Imazighen groups were found to be intermediate between coastal northern Imazighen and the non-Imazighen groups of the Sahel and "sub-Saharan" west Africa.
Posted by Bob_01 (Member # 15687) on :
quote:Originally posted by Hammer: You give me six lines from a 1997 study and have the nerve to offer that as some kind of evidence. every time you post your IQ drops a point.
Err, I uploaded the study several times. The fact you lack the faculty to even read the study makes me question why you'd want me to cite it.
The irony is that your institution does not provide you access with these papers. You are a professor, are you not? I am provided access through many avenues, by the way.
XCOPY
quote:Originally posted by Bob_01:
quote:Originally posted by fawal: [qb] @ Bob_01 [QUOTE][...].
[...].
quote:Determination of optimal rehydration, fixation and staining methods for histological and immunohistochemical analysis of mummified soft tissues
A-M Mekota1, M Vermehren2
Biotechnic & Histochemistry 2005, 80(1): 7_/13
"Materials and methods In 1997, the German Institute for Archaeology headed an excavation of the tombs of the nobles in Thebes-West, Upper Egypt. At this time, three types of tissues were sampled from different mummies: meniscus (fibrocartilage), skin, and placenta. Archaeological findings suggest that the mummies dated from the New Kingdom (approximately 1550_/1080 BC).
The basal epithelial cells were packed with melanin as expected for specimens of Negroid origin."
[...]
Dishonest American troll. Start learning how to go beyond mere googling.
quote:Skin sections showed particularly good tissue preservation, although cellular outlines were never distinct. Although much of the epidermis had already separated from the dermis, the remaining epidermis often was preserved well (Fig. 1). The basal epithelial cells were packed with melanin as expected for specimens of ****Negroid origin.**** In the dermis, the hair follicles, hair, and sebaceous and sweat glands were readily apparent (Fig. 2). Blood vessels, but no red blood cells, and small peripheral nerves were identified unambiguously (Fig. 3). The subcutaneous layer showed loose connective tissue fibers attached to the dermis, and fat cell remnants were observed. To evaluate the influence of postmortum tissue decay by micro-organisms, the samples were tested for the presence of fungi using silver staining. Fungi were observed in some samples and were widespread in both epidermis and dermis. The molecular preservation of the antigen determinants, due to tissue preser- vation, determines the accuracy of the immunohis- tological stains. Depending on the rehydration
The link has been verified, troll. Your role is to be a prostitute on this forum, and nothing more.
Posted by Bob_01 (Member # 15687) on :
Samples:
Thebes-West, Upper Egypt.
Dated approx 1550-1080BC (New kingdom) "All sections were prepared in the Pathological Institute of the Ludwig-Maximilians-Universitat, Munchen, Germany. "
Posted by argyle104 (Member # 14634) on :
Notice how Jari-Ankhamun scurries away when someone exposes his pseudoracial beliefs.
Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
quote:Originally posted by .Charlie Bass.:
quote:Originally posted by Hammer: No Bass, it does not prove anything at all. You can always tell a rookie. they get all excited over one piece of data and are unable to look at the exact meaning of words. In other words, it says what you want it to say.
So please to us what the passage means Mr Professor, since you say it means something different from what the Bass posted. The gene is of sub-Saharan origin.
Philosopher King Hammer didn't respond to the passage to this because he thought the passage was yours. I guess because it didn't have quotes around it - or something.
Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
quote:Originally posted by Hammer: You morons find a study with a qualified conclusion. This means the people who did the study admitted by their qualifiers(might be, could indicate etc) that the study was not meant to be seen as concrete information. You take that study and just accept it as fact without a single alternative point of view to offer. This is why you folks come up with crazy points of view that will never be mainstream.
Why not give us "6 lines" from any 1997 -2010 study showing the alternative point of view.
As if there are any.
If u'd stop pretending to be Philosopher King u'd perhaps discover that - No nothing! But one never knows with hammered people.
Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
quote:Originally posted by Doug M:
quote:Originally posted by markellion: But concerning "blacks" ancient Ghana was sophisticated enough do you think it is possible that they and other "Sudanese" people were pulling the strings here and contributed greatly to the skills, technologies ect. in Spain? Some scholars actually claim that the Almoravids had much of their success because of the slaves and loot they supposedly took from invading the lands of the south. This is fascinating because it shows that soldiers and wealth from the south were essential. European colonialists would be especially keen in distorting this period of history by distorting and mistranslating the texts and everything
Markellion, why are you saying the same thing over and over again? Nobody is debating you.
LOL. I've noticed Markellion does this on every site on the subject of Moors or Arabs.
This is the first time I've ever heard of the Almoravids being composed of "slaves" from south of Senegal. It is inappropriate to speak of Mande and other groups that took part in the Almoravid invasions as slaves first of all.
Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jari-Ankhamun:
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ [QUOTE]Originally posted by Djehuti: [qb] I thought it was explained to you before 'professor' that in science suppositions are based on probability which is further based on evidence. The more evidence the higher the probability until a general theory is arrived. Which is more than we can say about any findings that show Egyptian or Nile Valley civilization being the product of non-Africans or some "caucasians".
Okay, how's this for more definite?...
Biotechnic & Histochemistry 2005, 80(1): 7_/13
"Materials and methods In 1997, the German Institute for Archaeology headed an excavation of the tombs of the nobles in Thebes-West, Upper Egypt. At this time, three types of tissues were sampled from different mummies: meniscus (fibrocartilage), skin, and placenta. Archaeological findings suggest that the mummies dated from the New Kingdom (approximately 1550_/1080 BC). The basal epithelial cells were packed with melanin as expected for specimens of Negroid origin."
Getting more to the topic, do you know who the Almoravids are 'professor'?? You really should since you incessantly keep referring to their peoples.
Hammered doesn't care who the Almoravids are. He is only trying to get a response from us and some respect.
The Almoravids were mainly Aulamidden (Lamtuna) Tuareg now centered in Niger. Lower caste Tuareg smiths to whom much of the craftmanship of the Moors was probably due are of Nilo-Saharan origin related to Teda Tibbu-Krit or Ikaradan groups.
The Hassaniyya looking man sitting down in your picture is probably of predominantly Arab origin. Many Tuareg, Hassaniyya and Trarza of Mauritania are the same Moors who are described in the 18th century were dragging European blue eyed Christian slaves through the desert. Many other concubines came from the Ottoman Turkish (Balkan) world. They are thus more mixed therefore than other black Africans.
Hassaniyya claim descent from the Sulaym or Maqil the well known black Arabians who came across North Africa. The fact that they and especially high classed "Moors" - a name for the the Hassaniyya and Trarza in Mauritania and elsewhere- are today "a shade lighter" than Mande and other black Africans speaks to the number of white slaves they have been trading between Morocco and Mauritania and Senegal until recently. But, it certainly says nothing of what they looked like in the Almoravid 12th century and before.
This trade went on until the last century. See he 1902 book, The Moors: A Comprehensive Description by Budgett Meakin 1902 p. 138.
From the chapter entitled "Slavery among the Moors" which speaks of the white slave trade in Morocco - “Another way in which the Europeans have been frequently outwitted is by the importation of Circassian and other slaves and eunuchs from Turkey via braltar or Algiers in foreign vessels, usually entered as members of the family of their master. Notwithstanding the nominal prohibition of the trade in the Turkish Empire, there are houses on the Bosporus where young children are trained for the hareems by instruction in music and dancing, and even in English and French, as well as in the degrading arts by which the women of these lands endeavour to secure the favour of their lords...This is often the case with white concubines, who are in great demand, even if natives. Consequently white girls are frequently kidnapped, and in time of war openly sold, to be trained by dealers in this special article, but though, if report is to be credited, some do occasionally yield to the temptation to sell their own daughters by slave-mothers, such a proceeding is not only illegal, but in the highest degree abhorrent in native eyes.”
Aulamidden (Lamtuna) originate from coastal North Africa like most of the Sanhadja and Ketama. They are the Ethiopians mentioned in old Greek sources thought to have come from Canaan, i.e. Phoenicia. They are later called Mauri.
“Ephorus says the Tartessians report that Ethiopians overran Libya as far as Dyris [the Atlas Mountains] and that some of them stayed in Dyris, while others occupied a great part of the sea-board.” Lacus Curtius Strabo book I Chapter 2
The Tuareg and all true Berbers claim to have fled from the Kenaana or southern Arabian area during the time of Joshua or Moses or over 3,200 years ago after which time they took over what came to be called Egypt and Syria/Palestine and finally advanced to the Maghreb.
Posted by Hammer (Member # 17003) on :
Lets go back to the post Bass put up to start this thread. Since Bass misrepresentd what the post actally said we have to conclude thst the question has not been answered. What Bass should have done is find several historians who have written extensively on the history of the Almmoreavids and use thaier information to try to establish their origins.
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
quote:
quote:Originally posted by Doug M:
Markellion, why are you saying the same thing over and over again? Nobody is debating you.
But you said this later in another thread
Originally posted by Doug M:
quote:
But the record of Islam makes it a love/hate relationship for Africans. They love parts because they see themselves in it and they hate parts because they see hatred and racism.
To be honest to the history of Islam one should not over glorify the role of Africans because that would down play the hatred and racism that has also played a part in that history as well.
Were you saying there was a great deal of racism in the Islamic world against "Africans"? If this is so then you should show the error of the things I have been saying because I've been talking about the influence of these same people in the Islamic world. How could they be discriminated against and be influential at the same time? Or maybe I'm not getting what your saying
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche: The fact that they and especially high classed "Moors" - a name for the the Hassaniyya and Trarza in Mauritania and elsewhere- are today "a shade lighter" than Mande and other black Africans speaks to the number of white slaves they have been trading between Morocco and Mauritania and Senegal until recently. But, it certainly says nothing of what they looked like in the Almoravid 12th century and before.
This is where the term "Sudan" comes in because the "Sudan" were a shade darker. "Veiled People" bellow is a translation of Morabites, who were the Almoravids and were probably a shade lighter than the Sudan. The king of Zafun here was probably Muslim but the kingdom later had a pagan king in the era that Ibn Sa'id wrote. Zafun influence was so great that the Almoravids showed a great deal of respect for their king and relied on him "in all matters of government". This might show there was influence from this Zafun kingdom in Moorish Spain but according to the author of this book this incident probably occurred during the decline of the Almoravids. The Tuaregs and Morabites later became an important part of the Mali empire which was also Sudan very black
I posted this several times but I wanted to show the importance. Also note that there are still many things in this book have been mistranslated to fit colonial bias. All books are mistranslated to fit colonial bias
"Medieval West Africa: Views From Arab Scholars and Merchants"
quote: Page 40 quote from Yaqut (Probably referring to the 12th century)
The king of Zafun is stronger than the veiled people of the Maghreb and more versed in the art of kingship. The veiled people acknowledge his superiority over them, obey him and resort to him in all important matters of government. One year the king, on his way to the pilgrimage, came to the Maghreb to pay a visit to the commander of the Muslims, the veiled king of the Maghreb, of the tribe of Lamtuna. The Commander of the Muslims met him on foot, wheras the king of Zafun did not dismount for him. He was tall, of deep black complexion and veiled
page 45 From Ibn Sa'id 13th century
In the same latitude is Zafun, which belongs to pagan Sudan and whose ruler enjoys a good reputation among (other) kings of the Sudan
page 98 by Ibn Khaldun is talking about how Takedda and other cities were subject to the ruler of Mali of the "Sudan"
quote: In the year 1353, in the days of sultan Abul 'Inan [of Morocco], I went to Biskara on royal business and there encountered the ambassador of the ruler of Takedda at the residence of Yusof al-Muzani, emir of Biskara. He told me about the prosperous state of this city and the continual passage of wayfares and said: "This year there passed through out city on the way to Mali a caravan of merchants from the east containing 12,000 camels." Another [informant] has told me that this is a yearly even. his country is subject to the sultan of Mali of the Sudan as is the case at present with the rest of the desert regions known as [the land of] the veiled people
Posted by Jari-Ankhamun (Member # 14451) on :
quote:Originally posted by Hammer: Lets go back to the post Bass put up to start this thread. Since Bass misrepresentd what the post actally said we have to conclude thst the question has not been answered. What Bass should have done is find several historians who have written extensively on the history of the Almmoreavids and use thaier information to try to establish their origins.
Hammer, Stop it...I mean seriously just GIVE IT UP ALREADY!! The Almoravids have already been confirmed to be of African origin. They came from the Area of Sensegal. you have been on here from 5-7 yrs. Not once have you ever done anything but troll and bait. I honestly think you have a mental problem, you must be a Meth addicted Dope-fiend. While all the eroll always realize they heve been defeated and retreat to other blogs after trhowing racial slanders in fits of rage, you have constantly been here ignoring the truth. Why should Bass waste his time...We could give you sources to fill the Library at Alexandria and your Redneck Dope-fiend ass would still say the Almoravids were not black. You say were are nuts and crazy so Why in the HELL ARE YOU HERE. Go...save yourself another 5 yrs of not being the One Trick Pony of Egyptsearch...
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche: The Almoravids were mainly Aulamidden (Lamtuna) Tuareg now centered in Niger. Lower caste Tuareg smiths to whom much of the craftmanship of the Moors was probably due are of Nilo-Saharan origin related to Teda Tibbu-Krit or Ikaradan groups.
I think this might have allot to do with European and especially French colonialism. I think the smith skills would give people an edge and thus make them more dominant not the other way around. I've been talking about this skills thing over and over but I was hoping people would incorporate it into their overall view of this history. Notice that these Africans conquered northward into the Sahara this is not just fun facts but something to incorporate into the overall view of history. This directly relates to Moors in Spain because as dana marniche pointed out these people are "to whom much of the craftmanship of the Moors was probably due". This does give good evidence of the power and influence of these "Sudanese" (very black) people
"The question of the Iron Age in Africa" This article talks about blacksmiths (Because you mentioned craftsmen above I thought this was interesting)
According to Ibn Sa’id the authority of the sultan of Kanim extended over Kawar and Fazzan, and the Berbers were slaves of the king of Kanim. He confirmed that during periods of strength Kanim expanded northward into the Sahara, rather than southward
page 44
From Ibn Sa'id directly (13th century)
"This sultan has authority there over kingdoms such as those of the Tajuwa, Kawar, and Fazzan. God has assisted him and he has many descendants and armies. His clothes are brought to him from the capital of Tunish. He has scholars around him..."
Posted by Hammer (Member # 17003) on :
Jari, First, I did not say they were not of african origin. I outlined the proper way to answer the question. Based on what we have seen here in this thread nobody would know they were of african origin. Stop trying , making a point to sound uneducated. You can do better.
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
quote:Originally posted by Hammer: Based on what we have seen here in this thread nobody would know they were of african origin.
The Tuaregs acted as the henchmen of "Sudanese" or "Sub-Saharan" (taken from thread title) African nations. With such a close relationship of course they were related. Isn't that obvious from the kind of relationship they had?
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche:
The Almoravids were mainly Aulamidden (Lamtuna) Tuareg...
They would be reliant on "Sudanese" (very black Moors) for
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche: smiths to whom much of the craftmanship of the Moors was probably due
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by Hammered: Lets go back to the post Bass put up to start this thread. Since Bass misrepresentd what the post actally said we have to conclude thst the question has not been answered. What Bass should have done is find several historians who have written extensively on the history of the Almmoreavids and use thaier information to try to establish their origins.
First of all, the name of the dynasty is ALMORAVID. This was the name of the Moorish dynasty which ruled Iberia! Thus, the article Charles cited is more proof that Moors were far from 'non-black'.
Second, there is really no need to cite what historians say about the Almoravids' origins, since those of us educated posters here already know and have stated where the Almoravids originated, that is if you've been paying attention. Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche:
Hassaniyya claim descent from the Sulaym or Maqil the well known black Arabians who came across North Africa. The fact that they and especially high classed "Moors" - a name for the the Hassaniyya and Trarza in Mauritania and elsewhere- are today "a shade lighter" than Mande and other black Africans
This is what happened to those high ranking Moors
Morabite dynasty=Almoravids
“The Negroland of the Arabs examined and explained” footnote at the bottom of page 72
quote: Respecting the Masufah, who were generally called el Takshif, that is, the scouts or couriers, and who appear to have occupied the whole road from Teghaza to Tomboktu, there is a passage in Ibn Khaldun (fol. 89) which, with a little abridgment, is worth transcribing.—" After the fall of the Morabite dynasty, the tribes of the Molaththemun returned to the desert, and now occupy the countries which they originally possessed in the vicinity of Negroland. But as we have already observed, the emigration of the Zenagah tribes was but partial: a few only of the Masfifah and Lumtunah obeyed the impulse, while the majority of the tribes remained behind, and keep in our days their old settlements in the Sahra, paying tribute to the Kings of Negroland, on whom they depend, and in whose armies they serve. The Goddalah are directly opposite to the DhawiHassan, a branch of the Moakel Arabs, settled in Siis el Aksa ; the Lumtunah are opposite to the Dhawi-Mansiir and Dhawi 'Obeidu-llah, branches of the same great tribe living in Maghrebu-l-Aksa. The Masufoh face the Zaghabah, an Arab tribe in Maghrebu-l-Ausat ; and the Lamtah adjoin the Benu Riyyah, who occupy Ez-Zab."—Thus it appears that the Masufah inhabiting the tract of desert between Sijilmesah and Tomboktu were in their old settlements, and, therefore, in the tract between Sijilmesah and Ghanah. (See page 17.) Leo (pt. I. c. 17-19) points out the situation of the various families of the Machil (Moakel) tribe of Arabs.
Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
.
Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
quote:Originally posted by Red, White, and Blue + Christian: Charlie Bass I was thinking about you and I see you posted this. If your ancestors came from the Mississipi Delta area, then you have a likelyhood of being part Tuareg. I am learking fascinating thins about this group from French books on the subject containing stuff not in English.
You should look again at Wikipedia's entry. Of Course, you know some Tuaregs are descended from Moroccan Moors.
That's interesting. The French strike again. Too bad they know more about U.S. history than the Europeans in America.
The present celebrities that are know to descend in part from the Tuareg from dna studies include Morgan Freeman and one of the founders of the current black reparations movement in the U.S..
Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
quote:Originally posted by Hammer: Jari, First, I did not say they were not of african origin. I outlined the proper way to answer the question. Based on what we have seen here in this thread nobody would know they were of african origin. Stop trying , making a point to sound uneducated. You can do better.
Yes Jari. You can do better. Listen to the philosopher king - the Great Thor HAS SPOKEN. LOL. Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
quote:Originally posted by markellion:
quote:Originally posted by Hammer: Based on what we have seen here in this thread nobody would know they were of african origin.
The Tuaregs acted as the henchmen of "Sudanese" or "Sub-Saharan" (taken from thread title) African nations. With such a close relationship of course they were related. Isn't that obvious from the kind of relationship they had?
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche:
The Almoravids were mainly Aulamidden (Lamtuna) Tuareg...
They would be reliant on "Sudanese" (very black Moors) for
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche: smiths to whom much of the craftmanship of the Moors was probably due
As you wish Markellion. And whatever you meant. Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
I'm saying these "Sudanese" were able to manipulate things to their advantage with their knowledge of trade and valuable skills
Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
Im starting to think u are a reincarnated Klansmen, Markellion, who doesn't have faith that there were any successful black African kingdoms.
Like i said - As you wish, SINCE YOU OBVIOUSLY DON'T BELIEVE what you repeatedly cut and paste.
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
I want to make my sources clear because I don't think it amounts to much if I say "I read this and that" but yes we know that the Tuaregs acted as henchmen
Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
quote:Originally posted by markellion:
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche: The fact that they and especially high classed "Moors" - a name for the the Hassaniyya and Trarza in Mauritania and elsewhere- are today "a shade lighter" than Mande and other black Africans speaks to the number of white slaves they have been trading between Morocco and Mauritania and Senegal until recently. But, it certainly says nothing of what they looked like in the Almoravid 12th century and before.
This is where the term "Sudan" comes in because the "Sudan" were a shade darker. [/b]
[/QUOTE]
Umm - the Tuareg and other Moors were also darker before the mixed with non-black people. I think most people know where the term Sudan comes from.
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
In the 12th century they were already lighter skinned than the "Sudan" thus the use of the word. However the slave trade would have a major impact but slaves were also brought to the Mali empire and places like that
Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
quote:Originally posted by markellion: I want to make my sources clear because I don't think it amounts to much if I say "I read this and that" but yes we know that the Tuaregs acted as henchmen
This statement in response to what I have been posting is irrelevant - as usual. Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
I've heard things about fair skinned slaves in Mali but I have no idea know how many
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche: As you wish Markellion. And whatever you meant
What I said was a response to you my point is that these African empires had a great amount of influence. I think you'd be useful if I can convert you to my side side so I'm going to keep trying
Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
quote:Originally posted by markellion: In the 12th century they were already lighter skinned than the "Sudan" thus the use of the word. However the slave trade would have a major impact but slaves were also brought to the Mali empire and places like that
Who is they and who says Markellion. And what the heck are you trying to say again. As I said above your thinking pattern leaves me stumped.
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
They is the Tuaregs and the Moors that were a shade lighter than the "Sudanese" Moors
Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
quote:Originally posted by markellion: I've heard things about fair skinned slaves in Mali but I have no idea know how many
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche: As you wish Markellion. And whatever you meant
What I said was a response to you my point is that these African empires had a great amount of influence. I think you'd be useful if I can convert you to my side side so I'm going to keep trying
Convert me to what. The sad thing Markellion is that u can't even understand I am already on your side due to ur inferiority complex about Sudanic civilization which is more ancient than Tuareg nomads in sub-Saharan Africa. Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
How about your obsession with Arab and Arab mixed ruling classes?
Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
quote:Originally posted by markellion: They is the Tuaregs and the Moors that were a shade lighter than the "Sudanese" Moors
The Moors became lighter after mixing with other people whether you like it or not. What sources do you have that say they were lighter in the 12th century.
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
Their use of the word "Sudan" (Yes Moors were very dark skinned Sudanese just means very black)
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche: The Hassaniyya looking man sitting down in your picture is probably of predominantly Arab origin. Many Tuareg, Hassaniyya and Trarza of Mauritania are the same Moors who are described in the 18th century were dragging European blue eyed Christian slaves through the desert. Many other concubines came from the Ottoman Turkish (Balkan) world. They are thus more mixed therefore than other black Africans.
Hassaniyya claim descent from the Sulaym or Maqil the well known black Arabians who came across North Africa. The fact that they and especially high classed "Moors" - a name for the the Hassaniyya and Trarza in Mauritania and elsewhere- are today "a shade lighter" than Mande and other black Africans speaks to the number of white slaves they have been trading between Morocco and Mauritania and Senegal until recently. But, it certainly says nothing of what they looked like in the Almoravid 12th century and before.
This trade went on until the last century. See he 1902 book, The Moors: A Comprehensive Description by Budgett Meakin 1902 p. 138.
From the chapter entitled "Slavery among the Moors" which speaks of the white slave trade in Morocco - “Another way in which the Europeans have been frequently outwitted is by the importation of Circassian and other slaves and eunuchs from Turkey via braltar or Algiers in foreign vessels, usually entered as members of the family of their master. Notwithstanding the nominal prohibition of the trade in the Turkish Empire, there are houses on the Bosporus where young children are trained for the hareems by instruction in music and dancing, and even in English and French, as well as in the degrading arts by which the women of these lands endeavour to secure the favour of their lords...This is often the case with white concubines, who are in great demand, even if natives. Consequently white girls are frequently kidnapped, and in time of war openly sold, to be trained by dealers in this special article, but though, if report is to be credited, some do occasionally yield to the temptation to sell their own daughters by slave-mothers, such a proceeding is not only illegal, but in the highest degree abhorrent in native eyes.”
I guess this would explain European paintings such as these..
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ This reminds me... It's funny how Europeans and especially Eurocentric scholars are so loquacious about the black African presence in Europe or in the 'Western' world at large as slaves but always silent about white Europeans being the ones enslaved by blacks. Yet here below is an example of one of black African slave heritage who also happened to be a member of a powerful European elite during Medieval times. This gentleman was discussed many times before in this forum, as the veterans of the forum know.
Both of the objects highlighted here feature Alessandro de' Medici (1511-37), the first Duke of Florence. It is thought that Alessandro's mother was a Moorish slave.
The Medici, an Italian family of merchants, bankers, rulers, patrons and collectors, dominated the political and cultural life of Florence from the 15th century to the mid 18th century. They were expelled from Florence in 1494-1512 and 1527-30. In 1530, after a long and bitter siege, the army of the Holy Roman Emperor Charles V conquered the city and backed the installment of Alessandro de' Medici as the first Duke of Florence. Alessandro's reign ended in 1537, when he was assassinated by his cousin and rival Lorenzino de' Medici. As he had no children with his wife (Margaret of Austria, illegitimate daughter of the emperor Charles V), and his illegitimate son Giulio was only four years old, Alessandro was succeeded by a member of another branch of the Medici family, Cosimo I.
Officially, Alessandro was the illegitimate son of Lorenzo de' Medici, Duke of Urbino (1492-1519), but it was rumoured that Lorenzo's cousin Giulio (later Pope Clement VII), had fathered him. Alessandro's mother, Simonetta, was allegedly a Moorish slave who had worked in the household of Lorenzo and his parents during their exile in Rome.
Although Alessandro's paternity was disputed, contemporaries acknowledged his maternal ancestry, even nicknaming him 'Il Moro', the Moor. This term was (and is still) used in Italy to describe Africans and also Europeans with dark complexions or hair. But contemporary references to Alessandro's dark skin, curly hair, wide nose and thick lips, as well as visual evidence from surviving portraits, suggest that he was indeed of mixed heritage.
The slave status and possible African origin of Alessandro's mother are not surprising. Black Africans had been imported into Europe as slaves since 1440 onwards, when the Portuguese opened a new trade route between Mediterranean Europe and the west coast of sub-Saharan Africa. Many Italians, often from the maritime republics of Genoa and Venice, were involved in the trade, and in the 1460s there developed a fashion for using black African female slaves for domestic labour. These slaves were seen as symbols of status but also of the exotic new lands that were then being discovered.
Sometimes, there were sexual relations between female slaves and their masters or other freedmen. Florentine statutes of 1415 granted children born of such unions the free legal status of the father. However, Roman law, which applied across much of the Italian peninsula, stated that the legal status of a child followed that of its mother. Female slaves were therefore often freed by their masters so that their children would be free. After Alessandro's birth in Urbino, Simonetta was freed and moved to Colle Vecchio, near Rome, where she lived with her husband Lostensor (whose name may suggest that he was also of African descent) and their two children.
Like many freed Africans in Renaissance Italy, Simonetta lived in poverty. Letters that she wrote to Alessandro in the 1530s, asking for financial aid, reveal a stark contrast between her scanty means and the wealth of her son.
The cameo shown here, possibly made by Alessandro's court medallist and gem-engraver Domenico de' Vetri, bears a profile portrait of the duke, bearded and dressed in the style of a Roman emperor. The choice of green chalcedony may have been intended to represent Alessandro's dark skin and tightly curled hair. During the Renaissance, cameo portraits in the classical tradition were important as emblems of dynastic power. They were highly prized by collectors and were often presented as gifts.
The painting of Alessandro, in which his dark skin and hair is visible, follows an earlier half-length portrait by the Florentine painter Jacopo Pontormo (1494-1556), now in the Philadelphia Museum of Art. The Philadelphia portrait shows Alessandro dressed in mourning for the death of Clement VII and drawing the profile of a woman in silverpoint. It was commissioned in 1534 as a gift for Taddea Malaspina, the mother of two of his illegitimate children, probably in commemoration of the birth of their daughter Giulia.
Alessandro had many enemies among Florentine exiles. They regarded him as a tyrannical despot responsible for depriving republican Florence of its liberty. Seemingly unconcerned with the ethnicity of his mother, they mocked Alessandro for her peasant status, even accusing him of poisoning her to hide his lowly origins. This suggests that people of African or mixed heritage who held positions of power, such as ambassadors and dignitaries, were less likely to be subjected to racial stereotyping than their poor or enslaved counterparts.
As the first of the Medici to be installed as a hereditary ruler of Florence, Alessandro has received surprisingly little study. Historians have criticised his rule for its severity, but contemporaries were more favourable. They commented on his political skills, spontaneous generosity and concern for the poor, as well as his informal style of leadership. Like other members of the Medici dynasty, Alessandro was also a patron of the arts.
His ethnicity has usually been ignored, perhaps because historians were uncomfortable with the fact that Alessandro's descendants married into eminent houses all over Europe. Writers who did acknowledge his mixed heritage judged him harshly, claiming that he was an unprincipled, sexually voracious seducer of aristocratic women. Hopefully, the recent academic interest in Alessandro will lead to an unbiased reassessment of his character, reign and significance in European history.
^ The very last paragraph is no surprise there.
Alessandro de' Medici Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche: As you wish Markellion. And whatever you meant.
This is what I mean. The "Sudanese" were the original Jews who manipulated trade and everything to dominate the world. Please read the article about African iron age it'll explain why I was referring to what you said about black smiths
quote:Originally posted by markellion:
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche: The Almoravids were mainly Aulamidden (Lamtuna) Tuareg now centered in Niger. Lower caste Tuareg smiths to whom much of the craftmanship of the Moors was probably due are of Nilo-Saharan origin related to Teda Tibbu-Krit or Ikaradan groups.
I think this might have allot to do with European and especially French colonialism. I think the smith skills would give people an edge and thus make them more dominant not the other way around. I've been talking about this skills thing over and over but I was hoping people would incorporate it into their overall view of this history. Notice that these Africans conquered northward into the Sahara this is not just fun facts but something to incorporate into the overall view of history. This directly relates to Moors in Spain because as dana marniche pointed out these people are "to whom much of the craftmanship of the Moors was probably due". This does give good evidence of the power and influence of these "Sudanese" (very black) people
"The question of the Iron Age in Africa" This article talks about blacksmiths (Because you mentioned craftsmen above I thought this was interesting)
According to Ibn Sa’id the authority of the sultan of Kanim extended over Kawar and Fazzan, and the Berbers were slaves of the king of Kanim. He confirmed that during periods of strength Kanim expanded northward into the Sahara, rather than southward
page 44
From Ibn Sa'id directly (13th century)
"This sultan has authority there over kingdoms such as those of the Tajuwa, Kawar, and Fazzan. God has assisted him and he has many descendants and armies. His clothes are brought to him from the capital of Tunish. He has scholars around him..."
quote:The Negro is a born trader. Lenz says, "our sharpest European merchants, even Jews and Armenians, can learn much of the cunning and trade of the Negroes". We know that the trade between Central Africa and Egypt was in the hands of Negroes for thousands of years, and in early days the cities of the Sudan and North Africa grew rich through Negro trade.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ This reminds me... It's funny how Europeans and especially Eurocentric scholars are so loquacious about the black African presence in Europe or in the 'Western' world at large as slaves but always silent about white Europeans being the ones enslaved by blacks. Yet here below is an example of one of black African slave heritage who also happened to be a member of a powerful European elite during Medieval times. This gentleman was discussed many times before in this forum, as the veterans of the forum know.
Both of the objects highlighted here feature Alessandro de' Medici (1511-37), the first Duke of Florence. It is thought that Alessandro's mother was a Moorish slave.
The Medici, an Italian family of merchants, bankers, rulers, patrons and collectors, dominated the political and cultural life of Florence from the 15th century to the mid 18th century. They were expelled from Florence in 1494-1512 and 1527-30. In 1530, after a long and bitter siege, the army of the Holy Roman Emperor Charles V conquered the city and backed the installment of Alessandro de' Medici as the first Duke of Florence. Alessandro's reign ended in 1537, when he was assassinated by his cousin and rival Lorenzino de' Medici. As he had no children with his wife (Margaret of Austria, illegitimate daughter of the emperor Charles V), and his illegitimate son Giulio was only four years old, Alessandro was succeeded by a member of another branch of the Medici family, Cosimo I.
Officially, Alessandro was the illegitimate son of Lorenzo de' Medici, Duke of Urbino (1492-1519), but it was rumoured that Lorenzo's cousin Giulio (later Pope Clement VII), had fathered him. Alessandro's mother, Simonetta, was allegedly a Moorish slave who had worked in the household of Lorenzo and his parents during their exile in Rome.
Although Alessandro's paternity was disputed, contemporaries acknowledged his maternal ancestry, even nicknaming him 'Il Moro', the Moor. This term was (and is still) used in Italy to describe Africans and also Europeans with dark complexions or hair. But contemporary references to Alessandro's dark skin, curly hair, wide nose and thick lips, as well as visual evidence from surviving portraits, suggest that he was indeed of mixed heritage.
The slave status and possible African origin of Alessandro's mother are not surprising. Black Africans had been imported into Europe as slaves since 1440 onwards, when the Portuguese opened a new trade route between Mediterranean Europe and the west coast of sub-Saharan Africa. Many Italians, often from the maritime republics of Genoa and Venice, were involved in the trade, and in the 1460s there developed a fashion for using black African female slaves for domestic labour. These slaves were seen as symbols of status but also of the exotic new lands that were then being discovered.
Sometimes, there were sexual relations between female slaves and their masters or other freedmen. Florentine statutes of 1415 granted children born of such unions the free legal status of the father. However, Roman law, which applied across much of the Italian peninsula, stated that the legal status of a child followed that of its mother. Female slaves were therefore often freed by their masters so that their children would be free. After Alessandro's birth in Urbino, Simonetta was freed and moved to Colle Vecchio, near Rome, where she lived with her husband Lostensor (whose name may suggest that he was also of African descent) and their two children.
Like many freed Africans in Renaissance Italy, Simonetta lived in poverty. Letters that she wrote to Alessandro in the 1530s, asking for financial aid, reveal a stark contrast between her scanty means and the wealth of her son.
The cameo shown here, possibly made by Alessandro's court medallist and gem-engraver Domenico de' Vetri, bears a profile portrait of the duke, bearded and dressed in the style of a Roman emperor. The choice of green chalcedony may have been intended to represent Alessandro's dark skin and tightly curled hair. During the Renaissance, cameo portraits in the classical tradition were important as emblems of dynastic power. They were highly prized by collectors and were often presented as gifts.
The painting of Alessandro, in which his dark skin and hair is visible, follows an earlier half-length portrait by the Florentine painter Jacopo Pontormo (1494-1556), now in the Philadelphia Museum of Art. The Philadelphia portrait shows Alessandro dressed in mourning for the death of Clement VII and drawing the profile of a woman in silverpoint. It was commissioned in 1534 as a gift for Taddea Malaspina, the mother of two of his illegitimate children, probably in commemoration of the birth of their daughter Giulia.
Alessandro had many enemies among Florentine exiles. They regarded him as a tyrannical despot responsible for depriving republican Florence of its liberty. Seemingly unconcerned with the ethnicity of his mother, they mocked Alessandro for her peasant status, even accusing him of poisoning her to hide his lowly origins. This suggests that people of African or mixed heritage who held positions of power, such as ambassadors and dignitaries, were less likely to be subjected to racial stereotyping than their poor or enslaved counterparts.
As the first of the Medici to be installed as a hereditary ruler of Florence, Alessandro has received surprisingly little study. Historians have criticised his rule for its severity, but contemporaries were more favourable. They commented on his political skills, spontaneous generosity and concern for the poor, as well as his informal style of leadership. Like other members of the Medici dynasty, Alessandro was also a patron of the arts.
His ethnicity has usually been ignored, perhaps because historians were uncomfortable with the fact that Alessandro's descendants married into eminent houses all over Europe. Writers who did acknowledge his mixed heritage judged him harshly, claiming that he was an unprincipled, sexually voracious seducer of aristocratic women. Hopefully, the recent academic interest in Alessandro will lead to an unbiased reassessment of his character, reign and significance in European history.
^ The very last paragraph is no surprise there.
Alessandro de' Medici
I can see why this fellow's lips might be described thick amongst Euro observers, since many Euro-folks tend to have paper thin upper lips, but the nose? At least from the images presented in your post, the fellow's nose is anything but "wide" to me; his nose profile is a rather high bridged narrow nasal-width one from what I can see in those images.
quote:Originally posted by markellion:
They is the Tuaregs and the Moors that were a shade lighter than the "Sudanese" Moors
"Tuaregs" come in varying shades, from light brown to dark brown. Unlike sections of coastal northern Africans however, they are rarely ever outside the natural African continuum.
It would also be a mistake to assume that "Tuareg" is mutually exclusive of "sub-Saharan" African, not only geographically and politically speaking, but also biologically speaking.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by markellion:
In the 12th century they were already lighter skinned than the "Sudan" thus the use of the word. However the slave trade would have a major impact but slaves were also brought to the Mali empire and places like that
Bilad al-Sudan in many Arabic literature of the Medieval period was from a general geographic context rather than skin color, even though -- yes, the basis of the term is one of reference to skin color. The "Maghreb" was on the other hand, a general reference to coastal northwestern Africa -- again, a geographic context. I highly question that from the use of those terms, especially in Eurocentric "translation" efforts, that you will be able to materially put forward that "Tuaregs" are either not "black Africans" or that they are mutually exclusive of "sub-Saharan" Africans.
As for the Almoravids; the group is said to have originated from around the Senegal River area. What does that mean to you?
Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche: The Hassaniyya looking man sitting down in your picture is probably of predominantly Arab origin. Many Tuareg, Hassaniyya and Trarza of Mauritania are the same Moors who are described in the 18th century were dragging European blue eyed Christian slaves through the desert. Many other concubines came from the Ottoman Turkish (Balkan) world. They are thus more mixed therefore than other black Africans.
Hassaniyya claim descent from the Sulaym or Maqil the well known black Arabians who came across North Africa. The fact that they and especially high classed "Moors" - a name for the the Hassaniyya and Trarza in Mauritania and elsewhere- are today "a shade lighter" than Mande and other black Africans speaks to the number of white slaves they have been trading between Morocco and Mauritania and Senegal until recently. But, it certainly says nothing of what they looked like in the Almoravid 12th century and before.
This trade went on until the last century. See he 1902 book, The Moors: A Comprehensive Description by Budgett Meakin 1902 p. 138.
From the chapter entitled "Slavery among the Moors" which speaks of the white slave trade in Morocco - “Another way in which the Europeans have been frequently outwitted is by the importation of Circassian and other slaves and eunuchs from Turkey via braltar or Algiers in foreign vessels, usually entered as members of the family of their master. Notwithstanding the nominal prohibition of the trade in the Turkish Empire, there are houses on the Bosporus where young children are trained for the hareems by instruction in music and dancing, and even in English and French, as well as in the degrading arts by which the women of these lands endeavour to secure the favour of their lords...This is often the case with white concubines, who are in great demand, even if natives. Consequently white girls are frequently kidnapped, and in time of war openly sold, to be trained by dealers in this special article, but though, if report is to be credited, some do occasionally yield to the temptation to sell their own daughters by slave-mothers, such a proceeding is not only illegal, but in the highest degree abhorrent in native eyes.”
I guess this would explain European paintings such as these..
It largely explains the presence of fairer- skinned women represented in so many 18th century paintings.
But some of the fairer-skinned men were not necessarily related to the Moors or even Moorish Arabs. The Rustamite kingdom of Algeira was founded by Iranians in a place were the Lam or Aulammiden Tuareg used to be. There were also many merchants of Syria and Khorasan (Iran) and other places occupying the Maghreb even before the Turks came (who were of Central Asian and Slavic origin).
According to Bornu manuscripts the Tuareg mixed with "Turks and Tartars" mentioned by Palmer. Those of the Hoggar are descendants of the Ihaggaren, Hawara, Lamta Tuareg who have mixed with the Syrian and Khorasani merchants.
Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
quote:Originally posted by markellion: How about your obsession with Arab and Arab mixed ruling classes?
Those are your words. Please don't project your ignorance and sense of inferiority onto me. I am trying to preserve black African history and explain to u what their own oral traditions mean of Yemenite and Canaanite origins. If you can not accept African traditions which stem from Sudan itself then you need to stop watcing so many Tarzan movies!
Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
quote:Originally posted by markellion:
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche: As you wish Markellion. And whatever you meant.
This is what I mean. The "Sudanese" were the original Jews who manipulated trade and everything to dominate the world. Please read the article about African iron age it'll explain why I was referring to what you said about black smiths
quote:Originally posted by markellion:
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche: The Almoravids were mainly Aulamidden (Lamtuna) Tuareg now centered in Niger. Lower caste Tuareg smiths to whom much of the craftmanship of the Moors was probably due are of Nilo-Saharan origin related to Teda Tibbu-Krit or Ikaradan groups.
I think this might have allot to do with European and especially French colonialism. I think the smith skills would give people an edge and thus make them more dominant not the other way around. I've been talking about this skills thing over and over but I was hoping people would incorporate it into their overall view of this history. Notice that these Africans conquered northward into the Sahara this is not just fun facts but something to incorporate into the overall view of history. This directly relates to Moors in Spain because as dana marniche pointed out these people are "to whom much of the craftmanship of the Moors was probably due". This does give good evidence of the power and influence of these "Sudanese" (very black) people
"The question of the Iron Age in Africa" This article talks about blacksmiths (Because you mentioned craftsmen above I thought this was interesting)
quote:The Negro is a born trader. Lenz says, "our sharpest European merchants, even Jews and Armenians, can learn much of the cunning and trade of the Negroes". We know that the trade between Central Africa and Egypt was in the hands of Negroes for thousands of years, and in early days the cities of the Sudan and North Africa grew rich through Negro trade.
Exactly Markellion and the fact they came from Yemen and Hejaz in Arabia where THEY CLAIM TO HAVE COME FROM and where Jews originated doesn't make them any less black. Get it ?! Posted by anguishofbeing (Member # 16736) on :
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche:
quote:Originally posted by markellion: How about your obsession with Arab and Arab mixed ruling classes?
Those are your words. Please don't project your ignorance and sense of inferiority onto me. I am trying to preserve black African history and explain to u what their own oral traditions mean of Yemenite and Canaanite origins. If you can not accept African traditions which stem from Sudan itself then you need to stop watcing so many Tarzan movies!
LOL
Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer:
quote:Originally posted by markellion:
In the 12th century they were already lighter skinned than the "Sudan" thus the use of the word. However the slave trade would have a major impact but slaves were also brought to the Mali empire and places like that
Bilad al-Sudan in many Arabic literature of the Medieval period was from a general geographic context rather than skin color, even though -- yes, the basis of the term is one of reference to skin color. The "Maghreb" was on the other hand, a general reference to coastal northwestern Africa -- again, a geographic context. I highly question that from the use of those terms, especially in Eurocentric "translation" efforts, that you will be able to materially put forward that "Tuaregs" are either not "black Africans" or that they are mutually exclusive of "sub-Saharan" Africans.
As for the Almoravids; the group is said to have originated from around the Senegal River area. What does that mean to you?
Thank you, Explorer, and I have been trying to tell Markellion the name Sudan also early on included the Arabian peninsula among Arabic speaking non-Arabs.
Also, Sudan originally referred to a group of people that came from the tribe of Kenaana in their land south of Medina in the Asir.
Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
The Sudan is not defined originally as "black" Markellion. THe word Sudan, like Nabit, Egyptian, Kanaani, Kush, Nigritae became words for black people because of their black color. Sorry to bust your bubble.
Thus, the true Arab Ibn abd-al Hakam born in the 9th century a member of a prominent Arab family who had settled in Egypt wrote "Canaan is the father of the Sudan and the Abyssinians." Hakam was of Arabian stock and not just an Arabic speaker. He had no problem in saying that "the Sudan" and "Abyssinians" were of the same origin as his own people - the Kenaana tribal area in southwest Arabia. I tried to tell you previously Sudan, Kenaana and Kush were very ancient names of peoples of southern Arabia. But u are not getting it.
The Akhbar al Zaman attributed to Masudi 9th c. of Baghdad also refers to "Sudan as the son of Canaan"
Ibn Qutaybah quotes Wah ibn Munabbih as saying "the races of Sudan" were "the Nuba (Nobatae), Zanj, Qaran, ...and Berber." As I have told you the Beriberi and the Sudan were originally the same people.
These Iraqi historians also say the Sudan were cursed and BLACK. All of them!
Thus your assessment of what was originally meant by "the Sudan" is fundamentally off course.
Kush, Sudan, Kenaana, Habeshat, Nabit were originally tribal names that became geographical designations and then finally color designations, and not vice versa.
The Akhbar es Zaman also says that "Nabit was a child of Canaan" and that "the word Nabit means black".
See the Curse of Ham: Race and Slavery in early Judaism Christianity and Islam p. 352
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: Bilad al-Sudan in many Arabic literature of the Medieval period was from a general geographic context rather than skin color, even though -- yes, the basis of the term is one of reference to skin color. The "Maghreb" was on the other hand, a general reference to coastal northwestern Africa -- again, a geographic context. I highly question that from the use of those terms, especially in Eurocentric "translation" efforts, that you will be able to materially put forward that "Tuaregs" are either not "black Africans" or that they are mutually exclusive of "sub-Saharan" Africans.
As for the Almoravids; the group is said to have originated from around the Senegal River area. What does that mean to you?
Thank you this helps put it in context for me about the word "Bilad al-Sudan". I was referring specifically to another comment and I've shown the close relationship that existed so there aren't strict barriers between people
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeing:
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche:
quote:Originally posted by markellion: How about your obsession with Arab and Arab mixed ruling classes?
Those are your words. Please don't project your ignorance and sense of inferiority onto me. I am trying to preserve black African history and explain to u what their own oral traditions mean of Yemenite and Canaanite origins. If you can not accept African traditions which stem from Sudan itself then you need to stop watcing so many Tarzan movies!
LOL
Most of this is a result of European colonialism. Why would all these people be descended from Yemen and Canaanites
Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
Veiled people is not a translation of Morabites. Veiled people is a translation of mulathimun. Morabites is a translation of al~Murabitun. Al~Murabitun are those who are members of a ribat.
quote:Originally posted by markellion: "Veiled People" below is a translation of Morabites, who were the Almoravids
Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
It doesn't matter so much what one thinks as what the facts are on the ground. In Africa, for complex reasons, there are despised endogenous smith "castes."
They have a negative mystique surrounding them because of the nature of transforming ore into metal by fire and then hammering out finished products.
Unfortunately the genral African concept of metallurgy, whether stigmatized or lauded, is the main reason others outstripped Africa in metals technology in terms of sheer output.
quote:Originally posted by markellion:
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche: The Almoravids were mainly Aulamidden (Lamtuna) Tuareg now centered in Niger. Lower caste Tuareg smiths to whom much of the craftmanship of the Moors was probably due are of Nilo-Saharan origin related to Teda Tibbu-Krit or Ikaradan groups.
I think this might have allot to do with European and especially French colonialism. I think the smith skills would give people an edge and thus make them more dominant not the other way around.
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
Thanks for the information alTakruri I have allot of reading to do
But when talking about the craftsmanship of the "Moors" they would have to be reliant on the people with the relevant knowledge. The people with the knowledge would then in fact have an edge and this would be trading partners in Bilad al-Sudan
The portolan image of a mulathimun never used in popular presentations. The veiled camel rider (may as well be Yusuf ibn Tashifin himself) is more than "a shade" darker than the enthroned potentate.
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
I was going off of these translations
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: with regards to Yusuf ibn Tashfin, we are told from translations:
“Brown in color, middle height, thin, little beard, soft voice, black eyes, straight nose, lock of Muhammad falling on top of his ear, eye brow joined, wooly hair” - Abd Allah, Roudh el-Kartas.
Chronicler Al-Fasi described him as "brown man with wooly hair", per Miriam DeCosta, The Portrayal of Blacks in a Spanish Medieval Manuscript.
In the part from me you quoted you left out the part about the conquests going northward into the Sahara. Concerning Moorish Spain in particular it would not have been a good idea to discriminate against people with such valuable skills
Posted by anguishofbeing (Member # 16736) on :
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: The portolan image of a mulathimun never used in popular presentations. The veiled camel rider (may as well be Yusuf ibn Tashifin himself) is more than "a shade" darker than the enthroned potentate.
You know, despite all your Jew sh!t, I really do miss your contributions Great Jew. Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
"Golden age of the Moor" By Ivan Van Sertima page 37 according to him Ibn Hawkal (950) said that the Tuaregs originally came from the "Sudan"
AlTakruri you have been holding out on us Bru this is suppose to be the same as this depicting Mansa Musa or another monarch at another time..?
"WOW" thanks man,so when were these maps made and is one older than the other..
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
The seated man is reportedly Mansa Musa. It is an Italian sourced painting made sometime in the 14th century; I have made note of this here before.
I stand corrected here, per metmuseum site, which reports that it is of Spanish origin. They note: Facsimilie of a map drawn in Spain and dated to 1375, showing the king of Mali holding a gold nugget. Image courtesy of the British Library. The original is held by the Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris. Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
So they are both Mansa Musa..so who or why did the Camel rider got darker or liter depending on which was made first?.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
Either both are repros, or one of them is a repro. The original is in the possession of "Bibliotheque Nationale" based in Paris, as noted above. My guess is that the top one is the repro.
Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
quote:Originally posted by markellion: "Golden age of the Moor" By Ivan Van Sertima page 37 according to him Ibn Hawkal (950) said that the Tuaregs originally came from the "Sudan"
They did come from the Sudan originally Markellion. The veiled "Beriberi" were thought by ibn Khaldfun to have spread from the Riff region of Abyssinia in remote times. Even in the 11th century some people of Nubia and Zeila in Somalia wore the veil as did nobles of Ghana and Kaukau and the merchants of Takrur according to Idrisi. And of course they claimed to have arrived there in East Africa from the Arabia.
Khaldun said, "Having multiplied in these parts (the riff) they formed several tribes such as Goddala, the Lamtuna, the Masufa, Targa, Zaghawa and Lamta."
Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
Though I am loathe to research and report here anymore due to the decline of scholarship on these forums you're a good guy Bru so here's for you.
The top map is a copy of Abraham Cresque the Jew of Palma's Mappamundi originally made in 1375 and the bottom map is a copy/version of the Mappamundi delivered by request to a French king decades later.
The text near the potentate roughly reads:
quote:This Black lord is called Musa Mali, Lord of the Blacks of Guinea. So abundant is the gold which is found in his country that he is the richest and most noble king in all the land.
This map, a Jewish product, was a fresh breath of air in comparison with earlier maps breaking away from conventions that populated Africa with beasts of myth and nature placing "elephants where should be towns."
Without Aragonese tolerance of Jews we'd not have the Mappamundi and its testament image of a "black as a pot" mulithamun of Saharan Kel taGelmust.
quote:Originally posted by Brada-Anansi: AlTakruri you have been holding out on us Bru this is suppose to be the same as this depicting Mansa Musa or another monarch at another time..?
"WOW" thanks man,so when were these maps made and is one older than the other..
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
alTakruri
Never leave these forums.
Your needed. And also Your research is integral to these forums.
Peace
Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
King
Once there was mutual scholarship and the goal of promoting African studies on the old EgyptSeach Ancient Egypt and Egyptology forum.
Now sadly, since the forum split, we just have two opinionated chat lists not worth the time and effort of posting up original research and analysis that would just get buried under tons of conversation based on nothing but emotion and, as revealed very recently, the spewing of stereotyping, prejudice, and bias even by self-labeled blacks against Maghrebis and Arabs sparked by personal dialog yet geared at whole ethnies.
I don't need all that immature hateful nonsense in my African studies and don't want to be so associated It's no better that the Euro, Maghrebi, and Arab trolls everybody complains about yet they indulge it themselves.
What effect does a vial of oil have in a cesspool? Does it sweeten it or come out smelling like ****? I'm not going anywhere but there's not much for me to do here in the current reeking "ambiance" of this forum which is now beginning to spill over into the Egyptology forum which was supposeed to be the moderated refuge for those of us who were serious about our Africana.
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
I don't understand why people seem to be ignoring the metallurgy thing. This seems extremely important and a big part in understanding the overall history
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: It doesn't matter so much what one thinks as what the facts are on the ground. In Africa, for complex reasons, there are despised endogenous smith "castes."
They have a negative mystique surrounding them because of the nature of transforming ore into metal by fire and then hammering out finished products.
Unfortunately the genral African concept of metallurgy, whether stigmatized or lauded, is the main reason others outstripped Africa in metals technology in terms of sheer output.
quote:Originally posted by markellion:
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche: The Almoravids were mainly Aulamidden (Lamtuna) Tuareg now centered in Niger. Lower caste Tuareg smiths to whom much of the craftmanship of the Moors was probably due are of Nilo-Saharan origin related to Teda Tibbu-Krit or Ikaradan groups.
I think this might have allot to do with European and especially French colonialism. I think the smith skills would give people an edge and thus make them more dominant not the other way around.
Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
Why don't we try dealing in facts instead of theories.
Show me in the histories of Europe or Asia where craftsmen and "people with the knowledge" "have an edge" over the people of the government and their militants thus forcing them into reliance.
quote:Originally posted by markellion:
But when talking about the craftsmanship of the "Moors" they would have to be reliant on the people with the relevant knowledge. The people with the knowledge would then in fact have an edge and this would be trading partners in Bilad al-Sudan
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
It fits with the general history of the dependence on "Sudanese" empires
Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
You fail to honor my request
quote:Why don't we try dealing in facts instead of theories.
Show me in the histories of Europe or Asia where craftsmen and "people with the knowledge" "have an edge" over the people of the government and their militants thus forcing them into reliance.
and instead offer the weak talk of opinionated supposition ruining there forums.
Nowhere do I know craftsmen and inteligentsia to run the show and neither do you. They are everywhere subservient to and perform the will of the rulership under pain of their militants (guards/police/army/etc.)
If not, please relieve me of my ignorance by supplying examples to the contrary, thank you.
quote:Originally posted by markellion: It fits with the general history of the dependence on "Sudanese" empires
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
Will yes I'm just making theories but my goal is to look into new avenues to research.
First I'm not saying the craftsmen were dominating but the people like the Zaghawa would have an edge because they could provide things that others couldn't provide for themselves. If you upset me you will no longer have access to the products my blacksmiths produce or I will not allow my blacksmiths in your territories
Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
More supposition. No historical fact. No evidence from any history anywhere on earth.
This is how it goes. The rulers direct the craftsmen: Make me some product and get paid or refuse to produce and get killed. The craftsmen not being stupid or relying on unproven theories readily comply.
Endogamous "castes" of iron workers were scattered throughout the Sahara right in the vicinity of those demanding their labor. It's how they survived.
Please go study African history instead of presenting fantasy in place of hypothesis derived from research.
Do you even know who the Zaghawa are and their place in the history of Kanem? Do you think Zaghawa were all and only blacksmiths? I don't understand and your game is bursting my brain. I refuse to play anymore.
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
Possibly I'm misinformed. Note that I'm not talking about blacksmiths running things I'm talking about the rulers who directed the blacksmiths would have an advantage
quote:H. Lhote, to whom one must render hommage, observed that:
1. the bellows made of pottery is original and exclusive to the Sudan
2. that the Berbers in the Sahara are not metallurgists: they mistrusted iron-working (the 'Enaden' are mostly repairmen)
3. no traces of blast furnaces have been found in the Sahara even though iron is present but the nearby peoples do not on their own know how to work iron;
4. there are numerous traces of blast furnaces in the Sudanese zone up to the 16th northern parallel [4]
5. the northern limits to finding these blast furnaces are found up to approximately the southern reaches of the BRZL linguistic family that uses a word of semitic origin for iron.
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
I first thought about this dependence thing when reading about the importance of African navigators
The quote about the king of Zafun talks specifically about dependence on him on matters of government and about how he was more knowledgeable on matters of kingship so perhaps they were dependent on "Sudanese" kings in earlier times too
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
Ok the metallurgy is just one thing but there are other crafts.
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche:
The Almoravids were mainly Aulamidden (Lamtuna) Tuareg now centered in Niger. Lower caste Tuareg smiths to whom much of the craftmanship of the Moors was probably due are of Nilo-Saharan origin related to Teda Tibbu-Krit or Ikaradan groups.
“The Negroland of the Arabs examined and explained” footnote at the bottom of page 72
quote:there is a passage in Ibn Khaldun (fol. 89) which, with a little abridgment, is worth transcribing.—"After the fall of the Morabite dynasty, the tribes of the Molaththemun returned to the desert, and now occupy the countries which they originally possessed in the vicinity of Negroland. But as we have already observed, the emigration of the Zenagah tribes was but partial: a few only of the Masfifah and Lumtunah obeyed the impulse, while the majority of the tribes remained behind, and keep in our days their old settlements in the Sahra, paying tribute to the Kings of Negroland, on whom they depend, and in whose armies they serve.
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
Seriously Moorish Spain is known for a time when people with all kinds of skills traveled and brought technology. A people that have certain skills and technologies have an advantage over people who don't. Thus the dependency described in the quote above
quote:The policy of extending a nation's authority by territorial acquisition or by the establishment of economic and political hegemony over other nations....
...imperialism
Acquisition by a government of other governments or territories, or of economic or cultural power over other nations or territories, often by force. Colonialism is a form of imperialism.
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
quote:Originally posted by markellion: Seriously Moorish Spain is known for a time when people with all kinds of skills traveled and brought technology. A people that have certain skills and technologies have an advantage over people who don't. Thus the dependency described in the quote above
quote:The policy of extending a nation's authority by territorial acquisition or by the establishment of economic and political hegemony over other nations....
...imperialism
Acquisition by a government of other governments or territories, or of economic or cultural power over other nations or territories, often by force. Colonialism is a form of imperialism.
Moorish Spain would not have fell if it was simply a case of craftsmen. At the end of the day the military class and those who defend the "family jewels" along with the ruling elite are what determines the fate of the nation.
Likewise, imperialism is primarily defined by force of arms not by force of craftsmen. Name one empire that was not built on and maintained by military conquest and political domination.
There are none.
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
The situation can be compared to Japan and the advantage they have when it comes to world trade because of their technology
I've mentioned world trade and the "Sudanese" soldiers in places all over the Muslim world these are multiple things that come together
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
There are many accounts where "Sudanese" rulers were actively having communication with different people in the world and this wasn't just limited to the ruler of Mali and the Maqqari brothers that was just one example I gave. It is important to note the keen interest these rulers had on international events where they sought to turn things to their own advantage.
Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
AlTakruri
quote:Though I am loathe to research and report here anymore due to the decline of scholarship on these forums you're a good guy Bru so here's for you.
Thanks Bru AL. I understand what you are saying the problem is no moderation.. self or otherwise but remember this your audiance goes waay beyond the folks who are posters...so take heart you and the older vets have inspired hundreds even thousands to go and make new discoveries in Africana for themselves and that includes one Jamaican called Anansi...respect..
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
And one thing, and this is of the highest importance and something that urgently needs to be incorporated into peoples' overall view of this history, is the long distance trade and contacts within Africa. This phenomenon of distant contacts is incompatible with the idea of Africans being passive. Ethnic groups are fluid as with the spread of ideas and everything. Muslim literature seemed to have been very ignorant about the bulk of the interior of Africa since Europeans for centuries were still trying to "open" the continent and most of the continent was unkown to Europeans despite the works of early geographers. I would think this would be strongly to the advantage of "Sudanese" people. What makes it more astonishng was that many "Sudanese" people were also part of the Muslim world
Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
Mark
quote:Muslim literature seemed to have been very ignorant about the bulk of the interior of Africa since Europeans for centuries were still trying to "open" the continent and most of the continent was unkown to Europeans despite the works of early geographers.
Mark do you even read Arabic? do you have access to their materials,did you know that trade routes were sometimes a jealously guarded secret and people not of the the trading network were discouraged or sometimes killed? why don't you just ask one of the Arabic speaking brothers right here on E/S if they have materials at hand instead of making assumptions. Europeans were not part of the trade network so off-course the bulk of African interior was un-known to them...they were simply not invited.
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
Cooley actually believed that early Europeans were actually more informed about the geography than Ibn Batutta. Also note that "white men cannot penetrate" elsewhere he says that "white men" will be killed if they travel that far
See the information on the thread "African Christianity influence on Islam" about Sudanese domination over the Islamic world.
quote:"From Muli (says Ibn Batutah) the river descends to Yufi (Nufi), one of the greatest kingdoms of Negroland, but to which white men cannot penetrate; and thence it flows to Nubia." It would appear, from this, that the superiority now enjoyed by the people of Nufi in arts and industry, was already acknowledged in the fourteenth century. It is manifest also that the system of the native geographers which converts the Chad da into a continuation of the Kowara, by which the waters of this great river are carried across Bornii to the Nile of Egypt, is of some antiquity. Ibn Batutah believed that the great river below Muli flowed some distance to the south or south-east before it turned eastwards to Nubia. In speaking of Kulwa (Kilwa, or Quiloa), on the eastern coast of Africa, he uses these words:—" A merchant there told me, that the town of Sofalah is half a month's journey from Kulwa, and one month from Yufi in the country of the Limiyin, and that gold is brought from Yufi to Sofalah."" The boldness here evinced in bringing together and joining in commerce countries far asunder, is constantly exhibited in the geographical speculations of an early or ill-informed age. Distances are then enlarged as expediency requires; hypothesis leaps over the vacant spaces, and forcibly stretches the known portions in the opposite sides of a continent till they meet in the centre. Illustrations of this truth may be found in all ages. During the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, Abyssinia, Congo, and Monomotapa were all supposed to meet together. One of the Jesuits resident in Abyssinia asserts, that salt was carried from that country to Tomboktu.1" The reasoning which led to this statement was, in its nature, exactly the same as that from which the Arabs inferred an intercourse between Sofalah and Yufi. It is not surprising, therefore, that Ibn Batutah, who had far less accurate means of ascertaining the true positions of the places visited by him than the Catholic missionaries, should believe that the remote interior, whence gold was brought to Sofalah, was occupied by the same nation who filled the interior viewed in the opposite direction from Mali. Erroneous as this kind of inference may be, it yet rests on ideas of direction so manifest and unambiguous as to be of material service in explaining an author's meaning. It is plain, then, that Ibn Batutah thought Yufi to lie between Mali and Sofalah, and that the Great River from Muli to Yufi flowed towards Sofalah, but beyond Yufi turned eastwards to Nubia.
On page 94 we see this footnote
quote:152 In like manner the supposed Christian King named Ogane', of whom the early Portuguese navigators received intelligence at Benin, was at once assumed to be the King of Abyssinia. The fable of an intercourse between Abyssinia and Western Africa has been gravely repeated by a recent writer (M'Queen's Survey of Africa, p. 5). Fernandez de Enciso (Suma de Geografia, 1518) says, that in the Bight of Benin are the Blacks who trade with Libya and Meroe. Lalande (Memoires de Paris, 1795, p. 15) has collected with equal industry and credulity the stories of an overland commerce between the eastern and western coasts of Africa.
quote:The policy of extending a nation's authority by territorial acquisition or by the establishment of economic and political hegemony over other nations....
...imperialism
Acquisition by a government of other governments or territories, or of economic or cultural power over other nations or territories, often by force. Colonialism is a form of imperialism.
At the end of the day the military class and those who defend the "family jewels" along with the ruling elite are what determines the fate of the nation.
Likewise, imperialism is primarily defined by force of arms not by force of craftsmen.
The dictionary said economic and cultural power. A look at everything I've said would strongly indicate that I believe economic hegemony or economic and cultural power were forces of imperialism and the dictionary happens to say the same thing. I believe that the quote from Cooloey above gives good evidence concerning forces of imperialism
These forces of imperialism would also be how I would explain the kind of domination showed in the thread bellow
quote: The situation was perhaps similar to that in the early 19th century, when European explorers, who had penetrated the African interior in order to unveil her secrets, were amazed at how well the West Africans knew what was going on in the outside world. When Mungo Park arrived in Segu on the Niger in July 1796, being the first European in this city, he was told that the British and French were fighting in the Mediterranean. The news probably concerned the battles that took place after the treaty of Basle which was made in April 1795, when Park was in his way to Gambia. In 1824, Hugh Clapperton visited Kano, being again the first European in this city, and he was surprised by Muhammad Bello, the ruler of Sokoto caliphate, who asked him detailed questions concerning the British policy in India and the religious situation in Europe. In early 1871, Gustav Nachtigal, the famous German traveller who had left Tripoli in 1869 in order to explore Central Africa, was told in Bornu that a war had broke out between franse and nimse, meaning Frenchmen and Germans. Considering that the Franco-Prussian war began in July 1870, the news had reached Bornu very quickly.
Perhaps news of the great events in the medieval Mediterranean, like the fall of Acre in 1291 or the Turkish conquest of Constantinople in 1453, were heard in the capital of Mali as quickly. However, there are only few mentions in the contemporary Arabic sources concerning the transmission of news across the Sahara. We know, for example, that Mansa Musa of Mali sent a delagation to congratulate the Marinid Sultan Abu 'l-Hasan for the conquest of Tlemcen. Since Tlemcen had fallen to Marinids in April 1337, the news most probably arrived in Mali with the traders who had left Morocco in autumn, which was the usual season of departure for the caravans to the south. The Malian delegation was sent to Fez probably in the following summer, when the caravans returned to the north. Similarly, another Malian delegation was sent to congratulate Sultan Abu 'l-Hasan for the conquest of Constantine in 1349. The prompt action on part of the Malian rulers proves that they knew well the political geography of Northern Africa, being fully aware of the consequenses of the Marinid expansion to central Maghrib....
Similarly, it was another channel for West Africans to the outside world: in 1594 a Portuguese navigator reported that he had in Senegal met many blacks who were not only capable of speaking French but have even visited France. In was only during the age of imperialism that the encounter of West Africans with other civilisations turned definitely from controlled relationship to collision.
Posted by Jari-Ankhamun (Member # 14451) on :
quote:Originally posted by markellion: I already posted this but I'm going to post this again
"Trans-Saharan Trade and the West African Discovery of the Mediterranean World" by Pekka Masonen
quote: The situation was perhaps similar to that in the early 19th century, when European explorers, who had penetrated the African interior in order to unveil her secrets, were amazed at how well the West Africans knew what was going on in the outside world. When Mungo Park arrived in Segu on the Niger in July 1796, being the first European in this city, he was told that the British and French were fighting in the Mediterranean. The news probably concerned the battles that took place after the treaty of Basle which was made in April 1795, when Park was in his way to Gambia. In 1824, Hugh Clapperton visited Kano, being again the first European in this city, and he was surprised by Muhammad Bello, the ruler of Sokoto caliphate, who asked him detailed questions concerning the British policy in India and the religious situation in Europe. In early 1871, Gustav Nachtigal, the famous German traveller who had left Tripoli in 1869 in order to explore Central Africa, was told in Bornu that a war had broke out between franse and nimse, meaning Frenchmen and Germans. Considering that the Franco-Prussian war began in July 1870, the news had reached Bornu very quickly.
Perhaps news of the great events in the medieval Mediterranean, like the fall of Acre in 1291 or the Turkish conquest of Constantinople in 1453, were heard in the capital of Mali as quickly. However, there are only few mentions in the contemporary Arabic sources concerning the transmission of news across the Sahara. We know, for example, that Mansa Musa of Mali sent a delagation to congratulate the Marinid Sultan Abu 'l-Hasan for the conquest of Tlemcen. Since Tlemcen had fallen to Marinids in April 1337, the news most probably arrived in Mali with the traders who had left Morocco in autumn, which was the usual season of departure for the caravans to the south. The Malian delegation was sent to Fez probably in the following summer, when the caravans returned to the north. Similarly, another Malian delegation was sent to congratulate Sultan Abu 'l-Hasan for the conquest of Constantine in 1349. The prompt action on part of the Malian rulers proves that they knew well the political geography of Northern Africa, being fully aware of the consequenses of the Marinid expansion to central Maghrib....
Similarly, it was another channel for West Africans to the outside world: in 1594 a Portuguese navigator reported that he had in Senegal met many blacks who were not only capable of speaking French but have even visited France. In was only during the age of imperialism that the encounter of West Africans with other civilisations turned definitely from controlled relationship to collision.
Wow, Good Info Markellion!!
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
quote:The policy of extending a nation's authority by territorial acquisition or by the establishment of economic and political hegemony over other nations....
...imperialism
Acquisition by a government of other governments or territories, or of economic or cultural power over other nations or territories, often by force. Colonialism is a form of imperialism.
At the end of the day the military class and those who defend the "family jewels" along with the ruling elite are what determines the fate of the nation.
Likewise, imperialism is primarily defined by force of arms not by force of craftsmen.
The dictionary said economic and cultural power. A look at everything I've said would strongly indicate that I believe economic hegemony or economic and cultural power were forces of imperialism and the dictionary happens to say the same thing. I believe that the quote from Cooloey above gives good evidence concerning forces of imperialism
These forces of imperialism would also be how I would explain the kind of domination showed in the thread bellow
Markellion, you aren't really contradicting my point. Yes there is a cultural component to imperialism, but you cannot have imperialism without force of arms. The idea that the Islamic influence on Christianity was purely cultural and without conflict and force of arms is absurd. Likewise the suggestion that the Islamic influence on Europe and the African role in that was without force of arms is also absurd and unsupported.
That is my only point.
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
quote:Originally posted by markellion: I already posted this but I'm going to post this again
"Trans-Saharan Trade and the West African Discovery of the Mediterranean World" by Pekka Masonen
quote: The situation was perhaps similar to that in the early 19th century, when European explorers, who had penetrated the African interior in order to unveil her secrets, were amazed at how well the West Africans knew what was going on in the outside world. When Mungo Park arrived in Segu on the Niger in July 1796, being the first European in this city, he was told that the British and French were fighting in the Mediterranean. The news probably concerned the battles that took place after the treaty of Basle which was made in April 1795, when Park was in his way to Gambia. In 1824, Hugh Clapperton visited Kano, being again the first European in this city, and he was surprised by Muhammad Bello, the ruler of Sokoto caliphate, who asked him detailed questions concerning the British policy in India and the religious situation in Europe. In early 1871, Gustav Nachtigal, the famous German traveller who had left Tripoli in 1869 in order to explore Central Africa, was told in Bornu that a war had broke out between franse and nimse, meaning Frenchmen and Germans. Considering that the Franco-Prussian war began in July 1870, the news had reached Bornu very quickly.
Perhaps news of the great events in the medieval Mediterranean, like the fall of Acre in 1291 or the Turkish conquest of Constantinople in 1453, were heard in the capital of Mali as quickly. However, there are only few mentions in the contemporary Arabic sources concerning the transmission of news across the Sahara. We know, for example, that Mansa Musa of Mali sent a delagation to congratulate the Marinid Sultan Abu 'l-Hasan for the conquest of Tlemcen. Since Tlemcen had fallen to Marinids in April 1337, the news most probably arrived in Mali with the traders who had left Morocco in autumn, which was the usual season of departure for the caravans to the south. The Malian delegation was sent to Fez probably in the following summer, when the caravans returned to the north. Similarly, another Malian delegation was sent to congratulate Sultan Abu 'l-Hasan for the conquest of Constantine in 1349. The prompt action on part of the Malian rulers proves that they knew well the political geography of Northern Africa, being fully aware of the consequenses of the Marinid expansion to central Maghrib....
Similarly, it was another channel for West Africans to the outside world: in 1594 a Portuguese navigator reported that he had in Senegal met many blacks who were not only capable of speaking French but have even visited France. In was only during the age of imperialism that the encounter of West Africans with other civilisations turned definitely from controlled relationship to collision.
But, other than those who believe Africans to be dumb savages with no culture and connection to the outside world, why would this be shocking to those who know the truth about African history and culture? Africans were not isolated from the rest of the world. They never have been and the only ones propagating that nonsense are the liars from Europe who wanted to promote their own hegemony on the continent.
And after all, the earliest settlers and explorers across the Mediterranean were black Africans anyway. Therefore the idea that blacks first discovered this area only a thousand or so years ago is purely ridiculous to begin with. Likewise, trade routes between West Africa and the Mediterranean are much older than the 8th century as there are accounts of Phoenician and Carthaginian trade routes to the interior, along with trade with the Garamantes, Numidians and other African groups who traded with the interior.
Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
Mark, I am not disagreeing with the above after-all Mali and the Sudanic complex were no back water but Swahili business men were present at Zimbabwe at the time the Portuguese first got there and Ibn Batutta made mention of whitemen, he made no mention of Arabic speaking blackmen not going as they please..unless yo want to make the argument that Black Arabs or Black Arabic speakers don't exist.
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
quote:Originally posted by markellion: And one thing, and this is of the highest importance and something that urgently needs to be incorporated into peoples' overall view of this history, is the long distance trade and contacts within Africa. This phenomenon of distant contacts is incompatible with the idea of Africans being passive. Ethnic groups are fluid as with the spread of ideas and everything. Muslim literature seemed to have been very ignorant about the bulk of the interior of Africa since Europeans for centuries were still trying to "open" the continent and most of the continent was unkown to Europeans despite the works of early geographers. I would think this would be strongly to the advantage of "Sudanese" people. What makes it more astonishng was that many "Sudanese" people were also part of the Muslim world
Who is this addressed to? Surely you don't pretend to be telling people on this forum who are knowledgeable something they didn't already know?
I mean the point of research is to do away with such misconceptions and in that regard provide light and insight into the actual history and culture of the people of the time.
Likewise, I don't understand the point signifying "Sudanese" people as if anyone should downplay the role of blacks in African history. Of course blacks would have an important role in African history. Who would even say otherwise other than retarded racist European scholars?
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
Will first off the "Western Sudan" had far reaching trading contacts throughout the "Sudan" the people of the north were more dependent on Trans-Saharan trade than the other way around. In this way the "Sudanese" had an advantage.
quote:H. Lhote, to whom one must render hommage, observed that:
1. the bellows made of pottery is original and exclusive to the Sudan
2. that the Berbers in the Sahara are not metallurgists: they mistrusted iron-working (the 'Enaden' are mostly repairmen)
3. no traces of blast furnaces have been found in the Sahara even though iron is present but the nearby peoples do not on their own know how to work iron;
4. there are numerous traces of blast furnaces in the Sudanese zone up to the 16th northern parallel [4]
5. the northern limits to finding these blast furnaces are found up to approximately the southern reaches of the BRZL linguistic family that uses a word of semitic origin for iron...
...The greatest black Empires, from the most ancient (Ghana) to the most recent (Songhai), Sahelian or Sudanese were postioned mostly in the Sahara, many large regions of which were directly administered by black governers [8].
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
quote:Originally posted by Brada-Anansi: Mark, I am not disagreeing with the above after-all Mali and the Sudanic complex were no back water but Swahili business men were present at Zimbabwe at the time the Portuguese first got there and Ibn Batutta made mention of whitemen, he made no mention of Arabic speaking blackmen not going as they please..unless yo want to make the argument that Black Arabs or Black Arabic speakers don't exist.
If you read the way "white men" are sometimes treated for example Ibn Batutta thought he was being disrespected for being a "white man". The trade was to the advantage of the "Sudanese" as the bellow shows the Arabs were restricted to a zone of special status
“Medieval Christian Nubia and the Islamic World: A Reconsideration of the Baqt Treaty” by Jay Spaulding
page 589 of the journal (the actual article isn’t that many pages).
quote:758, when the new Abbasid governor of Egypt wrote to the Makurian monarch: “[Here] no obstacle is placed between your merchants and what they want – [they are] safe and contented wherever they go in our land. You, however… behave otherwise… nore are our merchants safe with you.”
On the next page Spaulding says that over time the “Nubians” (including states other than Makuria) gradually allowed northern merchants certain rights and some established places specifically for foreigners. This is why he refers to a “northern zone of special status” bellow
Page 590 we also learn some about “Nubian” merchants
quote:Meanwhile some Nubian subjects themselves, especially from the northern zone of special status, had also become private merchants and had begun to conduct their own commercial ventures northward into Egypt. The Nubian king attempted to maintain his hold over subjects living abroad, and to profit from their private commerce, by negotiating an arrangement according to when a royal Makurian agent was authorized to reside and to travel within the Islamic caliphate in order to collect taxes from the Nubians living abroad.
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
quote:Originally posted by Doug M:
quote:Originally posted by markellion: The dictionary said economic and cultural power. A look at everything I've said would strongly indicate that I believe economic hegemony or economic and cultural power were forces of imperialism and the dictionary happens to say the same thing. I believe that the quote from Cooloey above gives good evidence concerning forces of imperialism
These forces of imperialism would also be how I would explain the kind of domination showed in the thread bellow
Markellion, you aren't really contradicting my point. Yes there is a cultural component to imperialism, but you cannot have imperialism without force of arms. The idea that the Islamic influence on Christianity was purely cultural and without conflict and force of arms is absurd. Likewise the suggestion that the Islamic influence on Europe and the African role in that was without force of arms is also absurd and unsupported.
That is my only point.
I didn't say just cultural imperialism I talked about economic imperialism. If there is anything wrong with what I said please point it out
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: But, other than those who believe Africans to be dumb savages with no culture and connection to the outside world, why would this be shocking to those who know the truth about African history and culture? Africans were not isolated from the rest of the world. They never have been and the only ones propagating that nonsense are the liars from Europe who wanted to promote their own hegemony on the continent.
It is significant because things were more one sided to the advantage of the "Sudanese"
"Trans-Saharan Trade and the West African Discovery of the Mediterranean World"
In the early 13th century, the governor of Sijilmasa, which was the most important terminus of the trans-Saharan caravan routes in southern Morocco, sent a following letter to the king of Ghana who was by then the most powerful ruler in Western Africa:
We are neighbours in benevolence even if we differ in religion; we agree on right conduct and are one in leniency towards our subjects. It goes without saying that justice is an essential quality of kings in conducting sound policy; tyranny is the preoccupation of ignorant and evil minds. We have heard about the imprisonment of poor traders and their being prevented from going freely about their business. The coming to and fro of merchants to a country is of benefit to its inhabitants and a help to keeping it populous. If we wished we would imprison the people of that region who happen to be in our territory but we do not think it right to do that. We ought not to "forbid immorality while practising it ourselves". Peace be upon you. Considering the contents of this letter, there is no doubt who had the actual control over the trade in the south.
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
Concerning soldiers Spaulding talks about how the fact that most slaves were women can't be reconciled with the idea of all these male slave soldiers. It does give reason to believe that these soldiers were free people that enlisted into these armies. This gave the strength to Muslim armies to spread their conquests
“Medieval Christian Nubia and the Islamic World: A Reconsideration of the Baqt Treaty” by Jay Spaulding
quote: No figures whatsoever exist concerning the magnitude of this trade at any period; yet without such data, no remotely plausible assessment of total slave exports is possible. Even in the absence of absolute numbers, however, it is possible to challenge the assertion by Cliometricians that most slaves exported from the Northeast Africa to the Islamic Orient were female, for the claim is difficult to reconcile with a source literature from medieval Egypt in which corps of black male military slaves are conspicuous while Africa females are not. The actual primary evidence on the question is perhaps instructive; the one known baqt shipment in the form of slaves by an independent Makurian monarch comprised one male and one female.
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
I almost forgot the quote from Ibn Battuta about Yufi and trade with Swahili some websites think he was combining Great Zimbabwe and Ife together.
Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
Whatever the mistakes Ibn Battuta may have made. it is still a fact that Swahili buesiness men were present at Zimbabwe when the Portuguese arrived.
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
Yes that was the point I was emphasizing the ignorance of outsiders about the geography of Africa plus that of the long distance trade. Those Swahili were just Bantus like other Bantus. They were part of the "Sudan"
Concerning Bantu languages:
On Bantu languages "The Uganda protectorate" By Harry Hamilton Johnston 1904
quote:The Bantu languages, in fact, are rather more closely related one to the other—even in their extremest forms—than are the Aryan languages. This is so much the case that a native of Zanzibar can very soon make himself understood on the Congo, while a man of the Cameroons would not be long before he grasped the vocabulary of the Zulu. This interesting fact must play a certain part in the political development of Africa south of the fifth degree of north latitude. The rapidity with which the Kiswahili tongue of Zanzibar—a very convenient, simple, and expressive form of Bantu speech— has spread far and wide over East Central Africa, and has even gained a footing on the Congo, hints at the possibility of the Bantu Negroes at some future time adopting a universal Bantu language for inter-communication.
Perry Noble read 160-162 Bantu languages to 164 African languages in general
quote:The beauty, plastic power and richness of Bantu languages delight and amaze all. They possess almost limitless flexibility, pliancy and softness. Their grammatical principles are founded on the most philosophical and systematic basis. Their vocabularies are susceptible of infinite expansion. They can express even delicate shades of thought and feeling. Perhaps no other languages are capable of greater definiteness and precision. Grout doubts whether Zulu — the purest type of a Bantu dialect, the lordly language of the south, the speech of a conquering and superior race — is surpassed in forming derivatives by German or Greek. Livingstone characterized as witnesses to the poverty of their own attainments men who complain of the poverty of Bantu languages. Bentley, after referring to the flexibility, fulness, subtlety of idea and nicety of expression in Kongoan, accredits this wealth of forms and ideas to the Bantu family in bulk. The wide sway of these qualities points out their immense practical importance to civilization. Three languages may be taken as the English tongue of their respective spheres. Zulu stretches from Natal to Nyasa, Swahili from Zanzibar welNnigh across equatorial Africa, and Mbundu (Ngolan) from Portuguese West Africa far eastward. In French Kongo the Fan (Mpangwe) and in Belgian Kongo below Livingstone Falls the Kongoan are strong developing factors. But Zulu, Swahili and Mbundu form representative and standard languages for the south, the east, the west
"Portuguese Conceptual Categories and the "Other" Encounter on the Swahili Coast" by Jeremy, Prestholdt
quote:
Bellow notes on page 18 of article
....In terms of language, Manuel de Faria e Sousa noted that Arabic, for example, was not widely spoken between Kirimba and Sofala: “the language of those people cannot be harsh, being mostly compounded of the soft letters 1 and m” (Theal, 1898(1):22). The Portuguese generally described Arabic dialects as “harsh,” while Swahili, or the “language of the coast of Melinde,” was described as “soft”. M. de Figueroa described Swahili as “clearer than Arabic” (Figueroa, 1967:62). By the seventeenth century, Portuguese accounts made strong distinctions between ‘mouros da costa’ (Swahili) and‘mouros da Arabia’ (Omanis or Yemenis). See, for example, “Carta de Março de 1622” (Livros dos Monções: Liv. 16, fol. 411), Leaé (c. 1696), and n.a., Relação da perda e restauração de Mombaça(c.1698). Portuguese narrators invariably described ‘mouros da Arabia’ in scathing terms, especially after the Portuguese loss of Muscat, while ‘mouros da costa’ were treated in a more even-handed fashion.
quote:Originally posted by markellion: Will first off the "Western Sudan" had far reaching trading contacts throughout the "Sudan" the people of the north were more dependent on Trans-Saharan trade than the other way around. In this way the "Sudanese" had an advantage.
quote:H. Lhote, to whom one must render hommage, observed that:
1. the bellows made of pottery is original and exclusive to the Sudan
2. that the Berbers in the Sahara are not metallurgists: they mistrusted iron-working (the 'Enaden' are mostly repairmen)
3. no traces of blast furnaces have been found in the Sahara even though iron is present but the nearby peoples do not on their own know how to work iron;
4. there are numerous traces of blast furnaces in the Sudanese zone up to the 16th northern parallel [4]
5. the northern limits to finding these blast furnaces are found up to approximately the southern reaches of the BRZL linguistic family that uses a word of semitic origin for iron...
...The greatest black Empires, from the most ancient (Ghana) to the most recent (Songhai), Sahelian or Sudanese were postioned mostly in the Sahara, many large regions of which were directly administered by black governers [8].
How about there has always been trade within and across Africa throughout history and also including non Africans at various times.
Again, only if you are someone just starting to understand African history does that quote come across as anything other than something that should already be painfully obvious.
The point being that trade in Africa goes back 100,000 years or more and over that time there have been hundreds of cultures, languages, artifacts, trade routes and other details that can and should be researched to some degree of specifics without relying on little small paragraphs which really say absolutely nothing about the extent of such trade over time and in various places.
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
quote:Originally posted by markellion:
quote:Originally posted by Doug M:
quote:Originally posted by markellion: The dictionary said economic and cultural power. A look at everything I've said would strongly indicate that I believe economic hegemony or economic and cultural power were forces of imperialism and the dictionary happens to say the same thing. I believe that the quote from Cooloey above gives good evidence concerning forces of imperialism
These forces of imperialism would also be how I would explain the kind of domination showed in the thread bellow
Markellion, you aren't really contradicting my point. Yes there is a cultural component to imperialism, but you cannot have imperialism without force of arms. The idea that the Islamic influence on Christianity was purely cultural and without conflict and force of arms is absurd. Likewise the suggestion that the Islamic influence on Europe and the African role in that was without force of arms is also absurd and unsupported.
That is my only point.
I didn't say just cultural imperialism I talked about economic imperialism. If there is anything wrong with what I said please point it out
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: But, other than those who believe Africans to be dumb savages with no culture and connection to the outside world, why would this be shocking to those who know the truth about African history and culture? Africans were not isolated from the rest of the world. They never have been and the only ones propagating that nonsense are the liars from Europe who wanted to promote their own hegemony on the continent.
It is significant because things were more one sided to the advantage of the "Sudanese"
"Trans-Saharan Trade and the West African Discovery of the Mediterranean World"
In the early 13th century, the governor of Sijilmasa, which was the most important terminus of the trans-Saharan caravan routes in southern Morocco, sent a following letter to the king of Ghana who was by then the most powerful ruler in Western Africa:
We are neighbours in benevolence even if we differ in religion; we agree on right conduct and are one in leniency towards our subjects. It goes without saying that justice is an essential quality of kings in conducting sound policy; tyranny is the preoccupation of ignorant and evil minds. We have heard about the imprisonment of poor traders and their being prevented from going freely about their business. The coming to and fro of merchants to a country is of benefit to its inhabitants and a help to keeping it populous. If we wished we would imprison the people of that region who happen to be in our territory but we do not think it right to do that. We ought not to "forbid immorality while practising it ourselves". Peace be upon you. Considering the contents of this letter, there is no doubt who had the actual control over the trade in the south.
And none of that really addresses the core issue of the force of arms as the basis of that imperialism. Without force of arms culture by itself is not imperialistic, as other people have a choice as to whether or not to adopt particular cultural or economic practices. Specifically, the cultural and economic influence of Africans over the Sahara and into Islamic Spain was backed by force of arms, which as you keep posting was due to the respect and reverence had for the power of some of the African leaders and their military might.
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
In 1980 Japan could smelt a ton of steel at 1/3 less cost than United States companies giving them an advantage. Do you see how the this ties in here concerning the quote about iron working
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
I have actually mentioned soldiers allot but I don't have much information that I can post here. From what I've read people from places like Ethiopia were elite soldiers in the Arab world since before Islam. This continued on into the era of Muslim conquests
quote:Originally posted by markellion: Concerning soldiers Spaulding talks about how the fact that most slaves were women can't be reconciled with the idea of all these male slave soldiers. It does give reason to believe that these soldiers were free people that enlisted into these armies. This gave the strength to Muslim armies to spread their conquests
“Medieval Christian Nubia and the Islamic World: A Reconsideration of the Baqt Treaty” by Jay Spaulding
quote: No figures whatsoever exist concerning the magnitude of this trade at any period; yet without such data, no remotely plausible assessment of total slave exports is possible. Even in the absence of absolute numbers, however, it is possible to challenge the assertion by Cliometricians that most slaves exported from the Northeast Africa to the Islamic Orient were female, for the claim is difficult to reconcile with a source literature from medieval Egypt in which corps of black male military slaves are conspicuous while Africa females are not. The actual primary evidence on the question is perhaps instructive; the one known baqt shipment in the form of slaves by an independent Makurian monarch comprised one male and one female.
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
In this thread I see things as being three kinds of imperialism
Acquisition by a government of other governments or territories, or of economic or cultural power over other nations or territories, often by force. Colonialism is a form of imperialism.
1.Cultural/Religious
2. Economic
3. Military intimidation
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
quote:Originally posted by markellion: Yes that was the point I was emphasizing the ignorance of outsiders about the geography of Africa plus that of the long distance trade. Those Swahili were just Bantus like other Bantus. They were part of the "Sudan"
Concerning Bantu languages:
On Bantu languages "The Uganda protectorate" By Harry Hamilton Johnston 1904
quote:The Bantu languages, in fact, are rather more closely related one to the other—even in their extremest forms—than are the Aryan languages. This is so much the case that a native of Zanzibar can very soon make himself understood on the Congo, while a man of the Cameroons would not be long before he grasped the vocabulary of the Zulu. This interesting fact must play a certain part in the political development of Africa south of the fifth degree of north latitude. The rapidity with which the Kiswahili tongue of Zanzibar—a very convenient, simple, and expressive form of Bantu speech— has spread far and wide over East Central Africa, and has even gained a footing on the Congo, hints at the possibility of the Bantu Negroes at some future time adopting a universal Bantu language for inter-communication.
Perry Noble read 160-162 Bantu languages to 164 African languages in general
quote:The beauty, plastic power and richness of Bantu languages delight and amaze all. They possess almost limitless flexibility, pliancy and softness. Their grammatical principles are founded on the most philosophical and systematic basis. Their vocabularies are susceptible of infinite expansion. They can express even delicate shades of thought and feeling. Perhaps no other languages are capable of greater definiteness and precision. Grout doubts whether Zulu — the purest type of a Bantu dialect, the lordly language of the south, the speech of a conquering and superior race — is surpassed in forming derivatives by German or Greek. Livingstone characterized as witnesses to the poverty of their own attainments men who complain of the poverty of Bantu languages. Bentley, after referring to the flexibility, fulness, subtlety of idea and nicety of expression in Kongoan, accredits this wealth of forms and ideas to the Bantu family in bulk. The wide sway of these qualities points out their immense practical importance to civilization. Three languages may be taken as the English tongue of their respective spheres. Zulu stretches from Natal to Nyasa, Swahili from Zanzibar welNnigh across equatorial Africa, and Mbundu (Ngolan) from Portuguese West Africa far eastward. In French Kongo the Fan (Mpangwe) and in Belgian Kongo below Livingstone Falls the Kongoan are strong developing factors. But Zulu, Swahili and Mbundu form representative and standard languages for the south, the east, the west
"Portuguese Conceptual Categories and the "Other" Encounter on the Swahili Coast" by Jeremy, Prestholdt
quote:
Bellow notes on page 18 of article
....In terms of language, Manuel de Faria e Sousa noted that Arabic, for example, was not widely spoken between Kirimba and Sofala: “the language of those people cannot be harsh, being mostly compounded of the soft letters 1 and m” (Theal, 1898(1):22). The Portuguese generally described Arabic dialects as “harsh,” while Swahili, or the “language of the coast of Melinde,” was described as “soft”. M. de Figueroa described Swahili as “clearer than Arabic” (Figueroa, 1967:62). By the seventeenth century, Portuguese accounts made strong distinctions between ‘mouros da costa’ (Swahili) and‘mouros da Arabia’ (Omanis or Yemenis). See, for example, “Carta de Março de 1622” (Livros dos Monções: Liv. 16, fol. 411), Leaé (c. 1696), and n.a., Relação da perda e restauração de Mombaça(c.1698). Portuguese narrators invariably described ‘mouros da Arabia’ in scathing terms, especially after the Portuguese loss of Muscat, while ‘mouros da costa’ were treated in a more even-handed fashion.
Bantus cannot be Swahilis because they are both languages and quite different. They are all black Africans. But again why are you focusing on outdated references to the scope and nature of indigenous African trading, economic and cultural activities when there are plenty more references that can and should be used to provide a fuller picture.
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: Bantus cannot be Swahilis because they are both languages and quite different.
Swahili language is part of the Bantu languages it is a "Bantu" language. What makes you think otherwise?
Posted by Doctoris Scientia (Member # 17454) on :
quote:Originally posted by Doug M:
quote:Originally posted by markellion: Yes that was the point I was emphasizing the ignorance of outsiders about the geography of Africa plus that of the long distance trade. Those Swahili were just Bantus like other Bantus. They were part of the "Sudan"
Concerning Bantu languages:
On Bantu languages "The Uganda protectorate" By Harry Hamilton Johnston 1904
quote:The Bantu languages, in fact, are rather more closely related one to the other—even in their extremest forms—than are the Aryan languages. This is so much the case that a native of Zanzibar can very soon make himself understood on the Congo, while a man of the Cameroons would not be long before he grasped the vocabulary of the Zulu. This interesting fact must play a certain part in the political development of Africa south of the fifth degree of north latitude. The rapidity with which the Kiswahili tongue of Zanzibar—a very convenient, simple, and expressive form of Bantu speech— has spread far and wide over East Central Africa, and has even gained a footing on the Congo, hints at the possibility of the Bantu Negroes at some future time adopting a universal Bantu language for inter-communication.
Perry Noble read 160-162 Bantu languages to 164 African languages in general
quote:The beauty, plastic power and richness of Bantu languages delight and amaze all. They possess almost limitless flexibility, pliancy and softness. Their grammatical principles are founded on the most philosophical and systematic basis. Their vocabularies are susceptible of infinite expansion. They can express even delicate shades of thought and feeling. Perhaps no other languages are capable of greater definiteness and precision. Grout doubts whether Zulu — the purest type of a Bantu dialect, the lordly language of the south, the speech of a conquering and superior race — is surpassed in forming derivatives by German or Greek. Livingstone characterized as witnesses to the poverty of their own attainments men who complain of the poverty of Bantu languages. Bentley, after referring to the flexibility, fulness, subtlety of idea and nicety of expression in Kongoan, accredits this wealth of forms and ideas to the Bantu family in bulk. The wide sway of these qualities points out their immense practical importance to civilization. Three languages may be taken as the English tongue of their respective spheres. Zulu stretches from Natal to Nyasa, Swahili from Zanzibar welNnigh across equatorial Africa, and Mbundu (Ngolan) from Portuguese West Africa far eastward. In French Kongo the Fan (Mpangwe) and in Belgian Kongo below Livingstone Falls the Kongoan are strong developing factors. But Zulu, Swahili and Mbundu form representative and standard languages for the south, the east, the west
"Portuguese Conceptual Categories and the "Other" Encounter on the Swahili Coast" by Jeremy, Prestholdt
quote:
Bellow notes on page 18 of article
....In terms of language, Manuel de Faria e Sousa noted that Arabic, for example, was not widely spoken between Kirimba and Sofala: “the language of those people cannot be harsh, being mostly compounded of the soft letters 1 and m” (Theal, 1898(1):22). The Portuguese generally described Arabic dialects as “harsh,” while Swahili, or the “language of the coast of Melinde,” was described as “soft”. M. de Figueroa described Swahili as “clearer than Arabic” (Figueroa, 1967:62). By the seventeenth century, Portuguese accounts made strong distinctions between ‘mouros da costa’ (Swahili) and‘mouros da Arabia’ (Omanis or Yemenis). See, for example, “Carta de Março de 1622” (Livros dos Monções: Liv. 16, fol. 411), Leaé (c. 1696), and n.a., Relação da perda e restauração de Mombaça(c.1698). Portuguese narrators invariably described ‘mouros da Arabia’ in scathing terms, especially after the Portuguese loss of Muscat, while ‘mouros da costa’ were treated in a more even-handed fashion.
Bantus cannot be Swahilis because they are both languages and quite different. They are all black Africans. But again why are you focusing on outdated references to the scope and nature of indigenous African trading, economic and cultural activities when there are plenty more references that can and should be used to provide a fuller picture.
Swahili is a Bantu language
"Swahili (Kiswahili) is a Bantu language spoken by various ethnic groups that inhabit several large stretches of the Indian Ocean coastline from northern Kenya to northern Mozambique, including the Comoros Islands."
"The Swahili are unique Bantu inhabitants of the East African Coast mainly from Kenya, Tanzania, and Mozambique. They are mainly united by culture and under the mother tongue of Kiswahili, a Bantu language."
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
quote:Originally posted by markellion:
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: Bantus cannot be Swahilis because they are both languages and quite different.
Swahili language is part of the Bantu languages it is a "Bantu" language. What makes you think otherwise?
I am pointing out that Swahili and Bantu are both black African groups speaking African languages (which are different) and therefore the linguistic/ethnic distinction is real, but it does not distinguish blackness. They are all black and I don't think anyone even claimed otherwise.
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
Bantu is just language groups and Swahili language is a Bantu language. Do you have evidence for the otherwise? How are they different?
What I'm emphasizing here is that African groups had access to the whole Muslim world for trade but the Muslim world was limited to whom they could trade with
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
Doug M
I don't want to argue but since when is Swahili NOT a Bantu Language?
Maybe you have a source that states this. If you do, that would be news.
Peace
Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
Mark! the Swahili were Muslems and belonged to the Muslem world atlarge why is it impossible for an African to be Muslem and still be African?.
quote:What I'm emphasizing here is that African groups had access to the whole Muslim world for trade but the Muslim world was limited to whom they could trade with
And if the Swahili could trade inland I don't see any reason why non Swahili Muslems could not do the same especially if they had Sawhili protection and backing.
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
Because of the gross ignorance of geographers concerning the geography of most of Africa. These Africans were part of the Muslim world but kept non-Africans from coming into their trade. I already said Africans were part of the Muslim world when I posted this:
Markellion you post things that don't make a coherent point and are just a mish mash of various quotes that really don't support what you are saying.
For example
quote:Originally posted by markellion: Yes that was the point I was emphasizing the ignorance of outsiders about the geography of Africa plus that of the long distance trade. Those Swahili were just Bantus like other Bantus. They were part of the "Sudan"
That whole post was about nothing but language and nothing about Africans stopping non muslims from accessing the interior. While it may be true, nothing YOU posted actually suggests or states that directly. That is what I mean by you posting one little tidbit of something and then running off like you said a whole lot....
No offense, but there are plenty of sources that are available to actually support a lot of what you are saying. The problem is that maybe you don't know how to find them?
Likewise, you cannot claim that ancient geographers were ignorant when we have this:
or this
So again, I keep asking who is it that is ignorant?
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
Europeans must have had a very hard time translating Arabic because they remained ignorant about the geography of Africa
Anyway this is interesting read pages 25-35 "Ethiopia's alleged control of the Nile" by Richard Pankhurst
Edit: To the point there is unknown lands and all the Prester John stuff.
quote:The myth that the Nile had, or could, be redirected by the misnamed Prester John....
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
Coming back to this for a moment, everyone knows I'm talking about competing in the world economy and everything right? I mean you completely make me look absurd
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Why don't we try dealing in facts instead of theories.
Show me in the histories of Europe or Asia where craftsmen and "people with the knowledge" "have an edge" over the people of the government and their militants thus forcing them into reliance.
See thread "What was sold northward through the Sahara?"
quote:Originally posted by markellion: Europeans must have had a very hard time translating Arabic because they remained ignorant about the geography of Africa
Anyway this is interesting read pages 25-35 "Ethiopia's alleged control of the Nile" by Richard Pankhurst
Edit: To the point there is unknown lands and all the Prester John stuff.
quote:The myth that the Nile had, or could, be redirected by the misnamed Prester John....
What Europeans remained ignorant? The Periplus of the Erythrean Sea was written by Europeans. And the later travels of European colonists were primarily guided by the tales and stories of fabulous wealth and trade to be found in Africa. Hence, I don't see the ignorance.
They may LIE about what they know but that is different from ignorance.
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
quote:Originally posted by markellion:
"The Negroland of the Arabs examined and explained" 1841
quote:"From Muli (says Ibn Batutah) the river descends to Yufi (Nufi), one of the greatest kingdoms of Negroland, but to which white men cannot penetrate; and thence it flows to Nubia." It would appear, from this, that the superiority now enjoyed by the people of Nufi in arts and industry, was already acknowledged in the fourteenth century. It is manifest also that the system of the native geographers which converts the Chad da into a continuation of the Kowara, by which the waters of this great river are carried across Bornii to the Nile of Egypt, is of some antiquity. Ibn Batutah believed that the great river below Muli flowed some distance to the south or south-east before it turned eastwards to Nubia. In speaking of Kulwa (Kilwa, or Quiloa), on the eastern coast of Africa, he uses these words:—" A merchant there told me, that the town of Sofalah is half a month's journey from Kulwa, and one month from Yufi in the country of the Limiyin, and that gold is brought from Yufi to Sofalah."" The boldness here evinced in bringing together and joining in commerce countries far asunder, is constantly exhibited in the geographical speculations of an early or ill-informed age. Distances are then enlarged as expediency requires; hypothesis leaps over the vacant spaces, and forcibly stretches the known portions in the opposite sides of a continent till they meet in the centre. Illustrations of this truth may be found in all ages. During the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, Abyssinia, Congo, and Monomotapa were all supposed to meet together. One of the Jesuits resident in Abyssinia asserts, that salt was carried from that country to Tomboktu.1" The reasoning which led to this statement was, in its nature, exactly the same as that from which the Arabs inferred an intercourse between Sofalah and Yufi. It is not surprising, therefore, that Ibn Batutah, who had far less accurate means of ascertaining the true positions of the places visited by him than the Catholic missionaries, should believe that the remote interior, whence gold was brought to Sofalah, was occupied by the same nation who filled the interior viewed in the opposite direction from Mali. Erroneous as this kind of inference may be, it yet rests on ideas of direction so manifest and unambiguous as to be of material service in explaining an author's meaning. It is plain, then, that Ibn Batutah thought Yufi to lie between Mali and Sofalah, and that the Great River from Muli to Yufi flowed towards Sofalah, but beyond Yufi turned eastwards to Nubia.
On page 94 we see this footnote
quote:152 In like manner the supposed Christian King named Ogane', of whom the early Portuguese navigators received intelligence at Benin, was at once assumed to be the King of Abyssinia. The fable of an intercourse between Abyssinia and Western Africa has been gravely repeated by a recent writer (M'Queen's Survey of Africa, p. 5). Fernandez de Enciso (Suma de Geografia, 1518) says, that in the Bight of Benin are the Blacks who trade with Libya and Meroe. Lalande (Memoires de Paris, 1795, p. 15) has collected with equal industry and credulity the stories of an overland commerce between the eastern and western coasts of Africa.
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
Concerning world trade one person even referred to the spice trade as a "massive conspiracy"
…The possibility that these spices reached Southern Arabia for transshipment north via India and/or neighboring regions of the subcontinent, seems intuitive but is in fact cast in doubt by its near total absence in contemporaneous literature, ships-logs, travel descriptions, navigation guides, ect. Miller marshals considerable evidence that cinnamon was instead transported directly across the Indian Ocean to Madagascar and the South Eastern African coastline, eventually reaching the fabled entrepot Rhapta, before being further transshipped to the “Cinnamon Coast” just below where the Red Sea meets the Indian Ocean. The trade was carried on in sewn, double outrigger boats known as mtepe, which were found throughout the coast in ancient times can still be seen in a modern variant, the wooden single or double outrigger maingalawa (ingalawa is the singular of this Swahili word). Miller (1969), and Allen (1993) even further, discuss the nature of secrecy and obfuscation used in trade during these times, in order to protect the sources of commodities, and to keep others at bay in their quests for circumvention. This helps to explain, as Allen (1993) put it, the “massive conspiracy by which all the Mediterranean consumers of cinnamon and cassia were for centuries deceived as to the real source of these products”…
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
quote:Originally posted by markellion: Coming back to this for a moment, everyone knows I'm talking about competing in the world economy and everything right? I mean you completely make me look absurd
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Why don't we try dealing in facts instead of theories.
Show me in the histories of Europe or Asia where craftsmen and "people with the knowledge" "have an edge" over the people of the government and their militants thus forcing them into reliance.
See thread "What was sold northward through the Sahara?"
1) Identified the scope of the "world" economy you are referring to 2) What was traded 3) Where it originated 4) Who controlled it and how 5) What the entry points and exit points were from Africa
Basically you are rambling and simply continuing to digress from the topic of the thread no?
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: Because you have not:
1) Identified the scope of the "world" economy you are referring to 2) What was traded 3) Where it originated 4) Who controlled it and how 5) What the entry points and exit points were from Africa
Basically you are rambling and simply continuing to digress from the topic of the thread no?
1. The Muslim world but relations between the nations of the "Sudan" and the "veiled people" in particular. The Tuaregs often acted as henchmen who were dependent on the "Sudan" and played a big part in carrying on the Trans-Saharan trade
2. Cotton cloth, gold, ect. but a specific interest in iron production
3. The Trans-Saharan trade
4. The nations of the "Sudan" who were able to exert a great amount of influence in the Muslim world
5. Cities on the Sahara like Walata and other places that I've talked about
It would be through this manner than the nations of the "Sudan" could exert influence over Moorish Spain. This is why this is important
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
You are focusing exclusively on certain west african trade hubs as representing "Sudan". First off black Africans across ALL OF AFRICA controlled the trade in Africa and with outsiders for most of their history. It wasn't limited to West Africa but was also in the Sahara, North Africa East Africa and Southern Africa. African gold and other commodities were very important commodities in all of these locations and it wasn't just in West Africa and the agents were primarily blacks and not just "veiled" people.
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: You are focusing exclusively on certain west african trade
I don't understand why you said that. First you say my posts are not coherent and then you say this.
Posted by Hammer (Member # 17003) on :
markellion, He does not know, he just babbles. the man has never produced a well researched bit of information since he has been on the board.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ This from the so-called 'college professor' who has never been able to fully cite a scholarly source in the decade that he's spent in this forum. Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
It is common knowledge that Europeans remained ignorant of the geography of Africa until like the times of king Leopold what were all the explorers and opening up the heart of darkness about? You ask questions about things I've already addressed after claiming that my posts are not coherent. I had already pointed the ignorance about the geography and about keeping people out of the interior
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: Markellion you post things that don't make a coherent point and are just a mish mash of various quotes that really don't support what you are saying.
For example
quote:Originally posted by markellion: Yes that was the point I was emphasizing the ignorance of outsiders about the geography of Africa plus that of the long distance trade. Those Swahili were just Bantus like other Bantus. They were part of the "Sudan"
That whole post was about nothing but language and nothing about Africans stopping non muslims from accessing the interior. While it may be true, nothing YOU posted actually suggests or states that directly. That is what I mean by you posting one little tidbit of something and then running off like you said a whole lot....
No offense, but there are plenty of sources that are available to actually support a lot of what you are saying. The problem is that maybe you don't know how to find them?
Likewise, you cannot claim that ancient
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
They were not ignorant in the sense of not knowing about Africa and the interior as much as you think. There were maps and stories from the Islamic world and elsewhere detailing the people of Africa with maps and legends of great wealth. THAT is why Europeans wanted to explore the world, which is to take the great wealth. So no, they were not ignorant in that sense at all. The Periplus of the Erythrean sea was 1500 years old when Europeans set out on their voyages of "discovery". Much of the idea of Europeans "discovering" everything and being ignorant is simply a lie told to cover up the fact that Europeans were simply on a quest to steal as much as they could everywhere they went based on the knowledge of the wealth that existed in various legends, writings and other sources they had available to them. Of course they knew about the gold of Africa, that was no secret in Europe and was common knowledge.
Anyway, as for the Almoravids, the fact that they were from areas to the South makes it obvious they were black. However, there were blacks in Morocco who were indigenous to that region as well.
1) Identified the scope of the "world" economy you are referring to 2) What was traded 3) Where it originated 4) Who controlled it and how 5) What the entry points and exit points were from Africa
Its like everything I have said is for nothing. This is an extremely important topic and needs to be taken seriously. Why did you ask what was traded when all of this time I was talking about African industries
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Why don't we try dealing in facts instead of theories.
Show me in the histories of Europe or Asia where craftsmen and "people with the knowledge" "have an edge" over the people of the government and their militants thus forcing them into reliance.
quote:Originally posted by Doug M:
Likewise, imperialism is primarily defined by force of arms not by force of craftsmen. Name one empire that was not built on and maintained by military conquest and political domination.
There are none.
You completely twist what I say when I said imperialism involves economic, political, and military forces. Saying that economic domination is important doesn't automatically means I'm saying that other aspects of imperialism weren't essential. You treat the things I'm saying as not being connected together but all the information is meant to be seen as part of the whole picture.
Of many reasons why Great Brittan was able to continue the trade with the United States one big reason was British industries. This was not the only reason given but such industries do seem to give a nation an advantage over other nations. This is so much the case that after the Revolution the former colonies remained dependent on the mother country
“History of domestic and foreign commerce of the United States, Volumes 1-2”
quote:Again, Great Britain was developing in industry more rapidly than was the continent of Europe, and hence was not only a better market for exported foods but was also able better to supply America with the manufactures which the people of the United States required. When the British monopoly of American trade was terminated by the Revolution and the staple articles of export from America were no longer "enumerated," but were free to go to any market in the world, there proved to be little demand for the articles outside of Great Britain, where they had previously been sold…..
…..One other reason that may be noted as in part accounting for the control of American trade by Great Britain after the Revolution was that many, if not most, of the staple articles of manufactures desired by American buyers were made better in Great Britain and sold more cheaply there than in continental Europe. As an illustration of this, Lord Sheffield cites the fact that "when France granted a sum of money to Congress for clothing the American troops, Mr. Laurens, Jr., was employed to provide it; but instead of laying out the money in France he went to Holland and bought English cloths and sent them to America."
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
And then, the way seem people take the things I say, someone will say the two things are not connected together. What does craftsmen have to do with such uneven trade relationships that I showed in this quote?
And yet I have actually posted information about African industries and then someone says that my posts are incoherent. And then say that I haven't addressed things that I have already addressed
Like the information I showed about outsiders being ignorant about the geography of Africa which was ignored. That is significant because it has to do with trade routes
Posted by xyyman (Member # 13597) on :
bump
Posted by .Charlie Bass. (Member # 10328) on :
bump
Posted by claus3600 (Member # 19584) on :
.
Posted by typeZeiss (Member # 18859) on :
quote:Originally posted by markellion: Its been assumed that scholars like Ibn Khaludn were prejudiced but I think its more of a case of colonialists putting their own biases into their writings. However these writers had no problem with ancient Ghana and Mali dominating northward. It is so easy to ignore the power and influence of these empires but I really hope people look into this. I've been interested for a long time on the influence of empires like ancient Ghana and Mali in the world
Its interesting they were absorbed in without being changed
quote:It is stated in the foregoing extract that Ghanah merged in the empire of the Morabites, an event which may be assigned, with much probability, to the year of the Hijra 469,.... But the Morabites, bred up in a wild life, and under a loose patriarchal authority, cannot be supposed to have thought much of social or political organization. It is likely that they extended their dominions without propagating a form of government, and that the kingdom of Ghanah remained little changed by the loss of its independence.
I have a good friend from Benin City, who told me the Oni of Ile Ife controlled as far north as to the shore of Algeria. I have said it many times on these forms. I think these Europeans have played a TERRIBLE game with history, to the detriment of Africans and African history.
Posted by Askia_The_Great (Member # 22000) on :
Yeah how relevant is this study today? Because it seemed the Almoravids had very southern origins.
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Mad]](mad.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
