Yes they were, egyptian berbers originally of the western desert close to the the nile.
Egyptians/thebians didn't like them and their heretic worship that's why the sanctioned Piye of Napata to overthrow the 24th berber dynasty and establish the 25th kushite dynasty.
Posted by Mazigh (Member # 8621) on :
Where can you find/see that they didn't like them and their heretic worship?
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
Could they all have been Tamazight-speakers? Possible.
Were they all *definitely* Tamazight-speakers? Questionable. Where is the concrete evidence that each of the said groups spoke one?
Posted by Mazigh (Member # 8621) on :
Did they belong to one ethnic group (a speakers of one language)?
If so, then we don't have to proove that all of them spoke an X language.
Posted by Clyde Winters (Member # 10129) on :
No they were not Berbers. The Tuareg should not be considered Berbers.
Many researchers falsely states that the Berber speakers were Libyans. This is false, as proven by Diop (1977). Diop (1977) illustrates that the Berber genealogies place their origin in Saudi Arabia, and point to a very recent settlement(2000 years ago) in the Central Sahara. Diop (1977) believes that the Berbers are the result of the early mixture of Africans and Germanic speaking Vandals. (Diop 1986) This would explain the evident close relationship between the Berber and German languages.
These Proto-Saharans were called Ta-Seti and Tehenu by the Egyptians. Farid (1985,p.82) noted that "We can notice that the beginning of the Neolithic stage in Egypt on the edge of the Western Desert corresponds with the expansion of the Saharian Neolithic culture and the growth of its population". (emphasis that of author)
The inhabitants of the Fezzan were round headed Africans. (Jelinek, 1985,p.273) The cultural characteristics of the Fezzanese were analogous to C-Group culture items and the people of Ta-Seti . The C-Group people occupied the Sudan and Fezzan regions between 3700-1300 BC (Jelinek 1985).
The inhabitants of Libya were called Tmhw (Temehus). The Temehus were organized into two groups the Thnw (Tehenu) in the North and the Nhsj (Nehesy) in the South. (Diop 1986) A Tehenu personage is depicted on Amratian period pottery (Farid 1985 ,p. 84). The Tehenu wore pointed beard, phallic-sheath and feathers on their head.
The Temehus are called the C-Group people by archaeologists.(Jelinek, 1985; Quellec, 1985). The central Fezzan was a center of C-Group settlement. Quellec (1985, p.373) discussed in detail the presence of C-Group culture traits in the Central Fezzan along with their cattle during the middle of the Third millennium BC.
The Temehus or C-Group people began to settle Kush around 2200 BC. The kings of Kush had their capital at Kerma, in Dongola and a sedentary center on Sai Island. The same pottery found at Kerma is also present in Libya especially the Fezzan.
The C-Group founded the Kerma dynasty of Kush. Diop (1986, p.72) noted that the "earliest substratum of the Libyan population was a black population from the south Sahara". Kerma was first inhabited in the 4th millennium BC (Bonnet 1986). By the 2nd millennium BC Kushites at kerma were already worshippers of Amon/Amun and they used a distinctive black-and-red ware (Bonnet 1986; Winters 1985b,1991). Amon, later became a major god of the Egyptians during the 18th Dynasty.
There are similarities between Egyptian and Saharan motifs(Farid,1985). It was in the Sahara that we find the first evidence of agriculture, animal domestication and weaving (Farid , 1985, p.82). This highland region is the Kemites "Mountain of the Moons " region, the area from which the civilization and goods of Kem, originated.
The rock art of the Saharan Highlands support the Egyptian traditions that in ancient times they lived in the Mountains of the Moon. The Predynastic Egyptian mobiliar art and the Saharan rock art share many common themes including, characteristic boats (Farid 1985,p. 82), men with feathers on their head (Petrie ,1921,pl. xvlll,fig.74; Raphael, 1947, pl.xxiv, fig.10; Vandier, 1952, p.285, fig. 192), false tail hanging from the waist (Vandier, 1952, p.353; Farid, 1985,p.83; Winkler 1938,I, pl.xxlll) and the phallic sheath (Vandier, 1952, p.353; Winkler , 1938,I , pl.xvlll,xx, xxlll).
Posted by Mazigh (Member # 8621) on :
Thanks Clyde Winters,
But do you think that those tribes (Tjehenu, Libu, Tamahu, Meshwesh...) belonged to one ethnic group (although several tribes)?
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: [QB] No they were not Berbers. The Tuareg should not be considered Berbers.
Many researchers falsely states that the Berber speakers were Libyans. This is false, as proven by Diop (1977). Diop (1977) illustrates that the Berber genealogies place their origin in Saudi Arabia, and point to a very recent settlement(2000 years ago) in the Central Sahara. Diop (1977) believes that the Berbers are the result of the early mixture of Africans and Germanic speaking Vandals. (Diop 1986) This would explain the evident close relationship between the Berber and German languages.
This quote is the only argument for denying their origin. The rest is general information. If not, how can we see those informations as arguments for their non-Berber origin?
Another question: Why should the touaregs not be considered as Berbers?? Posted by Clyde Winters (Member # 10129) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mazigh: Thanks Clyde Winters,
But do you think that those tribes (Tjehenu, Libu, Tamahu, Meshwesh...) belonged to one ethnic group (although several tribes)?
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: [QB] No they were not Berbers. The Tuareg should not be considered Berbers.
Many researchers falsely states that the Berber speakers were Libyans. This is false, as proven by Diop (1977). Diop (1977) illustrates that the Berber genealogies place their origin in Saudi Arabia, and point to a very recent settlement(2000 years ago) in the Central Sahara. Diop (1977) believes that the Berbers are the result of the early mixture of Africans and Germanic speaking Vandals. (Diop 1986) This would explain the evident close relationship between the Berber and German languages.
This quote is the only argument for denying their origin. The rest is general information. If not, how can we see those informations as arguments for their non-Berber origin?
Another question: Why should the touaregs not be considered as Berbers??
The Taureg have traditionally been associated with the Western Sudan and Sahel. Not North Africa.
The Libyans can not be homogenous because beginning with the invasion of the Peoples of the Sea numerous ethnic groups were deposited in the Delta and other parts of North Africa.
But it is a basical fact that the Berbers is not Germanic. It is an afro-asiatic language. The claim that is it would be a germanic language is completely unfounded:
The used argument to classify (doe-it-self-classification) is like stated in another topic (one of yours) wrong. The T-T is found in the Afro-asiatic languages: "Teweret", "Tanit", "Tefnakht" "Tekelot"... all this ancient names are not Germanic.
I wonder if such structure is found in Germanic languages. English is one those Germanic languages, and i speak also Dutch which is also a Germanic language. That structure is no where based.
As far as the Touareg are concerned, their language is also classified as a Berber language. They consider themselves as Berbers. More then that, their own name referring to themselves: Tamashaq, tamahaq... is nothing others than the Berber real name "Imazighen". The difference in the names: sh/h/j in place of "Z" and the Q in place of "Gh" is due to the phoenitical changes. The touareg dialects tends to change in the letter "z" in "ch/h/j" and the "gh" in "q".
Anta diop used also another argument to prove the non-african origine of the Berbers: the genealogy of classic Berbers.
To him, it is not contradictory with the Germanic/Vandal hypothese. Because both of the arguments deny their african origin. But scientifiacally it is an absurd methodology.
The date of the supposed Arab migration to North Africa (2000 ago) is also strage and has no place in considerable methodology. Why would those arabs lose their arabic language? Why didn't the Romans mention that, since North Africa was in Roman hands at that time in full power.
Those arguments cannot resist in front of any rational analyse. It is can be only seen a afro-centric attempt to deny the non-balck popluations of North Africa.
Best regards.
Posted by homeylu (Member # 4430) on :
^^ Diop is not saying that German is a Berber language, don't be ridiculous. He is stating that many of the word spoken by 'some' modern day Berbers are 'loan' words from the German language. It's just like other scholars and linguists that show several Berber words with 'Arabic' loan words, what's the difference? Berber is not some pure language. There are different dialects spoken amongst different populations. It has yet to be "standardized".
I cannot say whether the Tuareg consider themselves "Berber" using the etymology of the term Berber per se, but one could argue that they consider themselve distinct from other North African groups classified as 'Berbers' and linguistic studies has shown their language to be a more "pure form of Berber" without many loan words from outside 'invaders'. They are identified as one of the only groups to still use the ancient "Berber" or should I say "Libyan" script,"Tifinagh." They claim descent from the Fezzan and the ancient Garamante, so it's very probable that they are descendants of who the AE refer to as the Temehu.
Posted by anguishofbeing (Member # 16736) on :
quote:Originally posted by homeylu: ^^ Diop is not saying that German is a Berber language, don't be ridiculous. He is stating that many of the word spoken by 'some' modern day Berbers are 'loan' words from the German language.
LOL exactly!
Posted by Mazigh (Member # 8621) on :
It is so with those blackcentric people.....
Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
The Tuareg are the remnant of people called and still called Aulamidden, Iforas, Maghira, Imazighen and Imaketan those ancient peoples lining the coasts of North and East Africa referred to by the Romans as Ifuraces, Makkhuritae, Mazikes, and Macetae or Macutuni. Also referred to in Arab texts as Lamtuna, Beni Ifren or Ferwan, Maghrawa, Mazigh, and Ketama.
The term Berber originally referred to related people in east Africa still called Afar also known as Danakil. These people called there towns Berber after water wells.
Modern Berbers are not a singular cultural or biological population and are only linked linguisticaly and on a nationalistic basis. Tuareg are the people the Greeks called the Ethiopians sundered in twain stretching to the Atlas who have mixed with Syrians, Turks and Tartars (according to African manuscripts).
Leo Africanus calls the Lamtuna and other Tuareg tribes a remnant of "the Numidians".
Posted by Yonis2 (Member # 11348) on :
quote:dana marniche wrote:
The Tuareg are the remnant of people called and still called Aulamidden, Iforas, Maghira , Imazighen and Imaketan those ancient peoples lining the coasts of North and East Africa referred to by the Romans as Ifuraces, Makkhuritae, Mazikes, and Macetae or Macutuni . Also referred to in Arab texts as Lamtuna, Beni Ifren or Ferwan, Maghrawa , Mazigh, and Ketama.
Stop making up your own tribes/ethnicities, when exactly are you going to provide sources for all these wild claims you make here?
Posted by Mazigh (Member # 8621) on :
Yes, it seems a long list. It is safe to say that they are part of the Berber peoples/groups. The most probale is that they're remnants of the Getules.
Posted by homeylu (Member # 4430) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mazigh: It is so with those blackcentric people.....
I don't understand what you mean? Do you have a problem accepting that there are "Black" Berbers, or would you rather assume the 'true' Berbers are 'White-skinned' who absorbed 'Blacks' thru slavery?
There was a "Black" mummy discovered by Professor Fabrizio several years ago in the central Libyan desert, carbon dated to be older than Egyptian culture, and frankly for a "Spanish" scholar to label the mummy as "Black" it must have exhibited all the physical attributes typified to be "negroid", because we are all too aware of those dark skinned 'caucasoids' aren't we?
Is it difficult for you to imagine people with melanin-rich skin could have actually crossed the South Saharan desert and migrate northwards in prehistoric times?
The Egyptians did depict the Tehenu with very dark skin, this is a fact. There were BLACK Ancient Libyans, deal with it.
Were the Celtics Black, I can't say they were, were the Ancient Germans Black, highly dubious at best, but I can assure you, that prehistoric Africans were BLACK, before they mixed with other ethnic groups, and I don't give a damn if you label this as BLACK-centric!
Posted by Mazigh (Member # 8621) on :
I'm not againt the idea of black berbers, especially when they really are, like Garamantes who were possibly black. But i'm againt the blackisation of the world, and the used methodes like denying the existence of white north africans by claiming they're remnants of the Vandals or sea people. That is the question.
My remark in your quote, is because you said 'don't be reiduclous'.
Posted by homeylu (Member # 4430) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mazigh: I'm not againt the idea of black berbers, especially when they really are, like Garamantes who were possibly black. But i'm againt the blackisation of the world, and the used methodes like denying the existence of white north africans by claiming they're remnants of the Vandals or sea people. That is the question.
My remark in your quote, is because you said 'don't be reiduclous'.
Ok, I didn't understand where you were coming from, so I apologize. But I don't think anyone could deny an African their origins no matter what complexion they are. The oldest surviving African tribe on the continent WITHOUT foreign admixture, so happens to be the light-skinned color Khoisan, and that is also a fact. Africans are not all one 'jet black' color, just as all Europeans are not pale White with blonde hair blue eyes. There is no such thing as a 'pure race'. It's only natural that humans that border other continents will have two-way migrations with each other, which is why they would share DNA, languages, etc.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mazigh:
Did they belong to one ethnic group (a speakers of one language)?
If so, then we don't have to proove that all of them spoke an X language.
Mazigh, tell me, short of speculation, why you take it that either the Tehenu, Tamahu, Libu or Meshwesh particularly spoke Tamazight, other than assuming so, because they purportedly lived west of Egypt and in northern Africa? Give me some substance to work with here.
Posted by Djrk8 (Member # 17548) on :
Mazigh:
Listen up, you are a fat, lousy, no good, dirty rotten, pig looking, azz eating, mischeif starting, chaos causing, European turd juice breath, Mofo............
Real talk, you need to go on with all that lying and shyt. You be one lying white piece of EuroShyt.
Fvck a blue-eye, blonde haired, dysfunctional family, and the African Black Nuts That Made You!
I Miss You From Stormfront BUDDY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by Clyde Winters (Member # 10129) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mazigh: I'm not againt the idea of black berbers, especially when they really are, like Garamantes who were possibly black. But i'm againt the blackisation of the world, and the used methodes like denying the existence of white north africans by claiming they're remnants of the Vandals or sea people. That is the question.
My remark in your quote, is because you said 'don't be reiduclous'.
The Garamante, were Mande speakers--not Berbers.
.
Posted by Clyde Winters (Member # 10129) on :
The Berber languages as pointed out by numerous authors is full of vocabulary from other languages. Many Berbers may be descendants of the Vandels (Germanic) speaking people who ruled North Africa and Spain for 400 years. Commenting on this reality Diop in The African Origin of Civilization noted that: “Careful search reveals that German feminine nouns end in t and st. Should we consider that Berbers were influenced by Germans or the referse? This hypothesis could not be rejected a priori, for German tribes in the fifth century overran North Africa vi Spain, and established an empire that they ruled for 400 years….Furthermore, the plural of 50 percent of Berber nouns is formed by adding en, as is the case with feminine nouns in German, while 40 percent form their plural in a, like neuter nouns in Latin.
Since we know the Vandals conquered the country from the Romans, why should we not be more inclined to seek explanations for the Berbers in the direction, both linguistically and in physical appearance: blond hair, blue eyes, etc? But no! Disregarding all these facts, historians decree that there was no Vandal influence and that it would be impossible to attribute anything in Barbary to their occupation” (p.69).
The influence of European languages on the Berber languages and the grammar of the Berber languages indicate that many contemporary Berbers are probably of European, especially Vandal origin.
Posted by Clyde Winters (Member # 10129) on :
The Germanic languages are not spoken in Southern Europe. Germanic languages are spoken in Northern Europe. The only German people who could have influenced the grammar and vocabulary of the Berbers were the Germanic speaking Vandals.
The Berber, or Amazigh, people live in Northern Africa throughout the Mediterranean coast, the Sahara desert and Sahel which used to be a Berber world before the arrival of Arabs. Today, there are large groups of Berber people in Morocco and Algeria, important communitites in Mali, Niger and Libya, and smaller groups in Tunis, Mauritania, Burkina-Faso and Egypt. The Tuareg of the desert also belong to the Berber group. The Berber people speak 26 closely related languages.
Consonants
Berber consonants include:
glottalized consonants, so called because the space between the vocal cords (glottis) is constricted during their pronunciation; implosive consonants produced with the air sucked inward; ejective consonants produced with the air "ejected" or forced out; geminate (doubled) consonants produced by holding them in position longer than for their single counterparts. Click here to listen to a Berber song recorded in Morocco.
Grammar
Noun phrase
Berber nouns have two cases. One case is used for the subject of intransitive verbs, while the other is used for the subject of transitive verbs and objects of prepositions. There are two genders: masculine and feminine. The plural of nouns has a masculine and a feminine form.
Verb phrase
Verbs are marked for tense and aspect. The perfective of the verb is formed by reduplication of the second consonant of the root, or by the prefix -tt-.
Vocabulary Most of the vocabulary is Berber in origin with borrowings from Latin, Arabic, French, Spanish, and other sub-Saharan languages. There is generally little or no intelligibility between the dialects.
.
.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by homeylu:
The oldest surviving African tribe on the continent WITHOUT foreign admixture, so happens to be the light-skinned color Khoisan, and that is also a fact.
How is any of the highlighted aspects a fact; according to what specifics?
Posted by Yonis2 (Member # 11348) on :
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
quote:Originally posted by Mazigh: I'm not againt the idea of black berbers, especially when they really are, like Garamantes who were possibly black. But i'm againt the blackisation of the world, and the used methodes like denying the existence of white north africans by claiming they're remnants of the Vandals or sea people. That is the question.
My remark in your quote, is because you said 'don't be reiduclous'.
The Garamante, were Mande speakers--not Berbers.
.
"Dr" Clyde Winters, when exactly do you think is the best time for your retirement?
Posted by homeylu (Member # 4430) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer:
Originally posted by homeylu: -------------------------------------------------- "The oldest surviving African tribe on the continent WITHOUT foreign admixture, so happens to be the light-skinned color Khoisan, and that is also a fact." --------------------------------------------------- How is any of the highlighted aspects a fact; according to what specifics?
According to the diversity of their DNA, simply put, and the fact that they evolved 'isolated' from foreign(meaning outside of Africa) influences.
“The genetic structure of the indigenous hunter-gatherer peoples of southern Africa, the oldest known lineage of modern human, is important for understanding human diversity.” http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20164927
We paid particular attention to the Khoi and San (Khoisan) people of South Africa because they are considered to be a unique relic of hunter-gatherer lifestyle and to carry paternal and maternal lineages belonging to the deepest clades known among modern humans……Our results suggest that the early settlement of humans in Africa was already matrilineally structured and involved small, separately evolving isolated populations.”
I realize that there are 'older' clades in the Ethiopian population, but some of their genetic structure involves back migration from Asia, as their geographic location is not completely 'isolated'.
Posted by Mazigh (Member # 8621) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: Mazigh, tell me, short of speculation, why you take it that either the Tehenu, Tamahu, Libu or Meshwesh particularly spoke Tamazight, other than assuming so, because they purportedly lived west of Egypt and in northern Africa? Give me some substance to work with here. [/QB]
Tell me why not?
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
homeylu...
quote:Originally posted by homeylu:
According to the diversity of their DNA, simply put, and the fact that they evolved 'isolated' from foreign(meaning outside of Africa) influences.
“The genetic structure of the indigenous hunter-gatherer peoples of southern Africa, the oldest known lineage of modern human, is important for understanding human diversity.” http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20164927
I had a feeling that you would cite something like that, without actually giving me the *precise* matter that it is, which is supposed to make KhoiSans the "oldest" people on earth. What about the diversity of their DNA; how is that anymore diverse than those of other Africans?
Further sign of the dubious quality of your claim about "non-foreign admixture" in KhoiSans is highlighted by the contradiction elicited in your acknowledgement of "diversity of" KhoiSan DNA; how was such diversity attained in a *single* inbreeding group without "foreign admixture" from an out-group at some point or another? And in this aspect, how is the KhoiSan different from any other African populations?
homeylu then cites the following as her defense...
quote: We paid particular attention to the Khoi and San (Khoisan) people of South Africa because they are considered to be a unique relic of hunter-gatherer lifestyle and to carry paternal and maternal lineages belonging to the deepest clades known among modern humans……Our results suggest that the early settlement of humans in Africa was already matrilineally structured and involved small, separately evolving isolated populations.”
What are these "deepest" clades, as per your understanding? Do only KhoiSans have such clades?
quote: I realize that there are 'older' clades in the Ethiopian population, but some of their genetic structure involves back migration from Asia, as their geographic location is not completely 'isolated'.
If you realize that there are older clades in Ethiopian populations, then why did you make that claim about KhoiSans being the "oldest" African "tribe"? I know...you are likely going to qualify that with your claim about the lack of "foreign admixture in their DNA", yet another dubious observation as questioned above and needs answering.
Mazigh...
quote:Originally posted by Mazigh:
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: Mazigh, tell me, short of speculation, why you take it that either the Tehenu, Tamahu, Libu or Meshwesh particularly spoke Tamazight, other than assuming so, because they purportedly lived west of Egypt and in northern Africa? Give me some substance to work with here.
Tell me why not?
In other words, you simply cannot provide a substantive reasoning that guides you to claim that said groups must have spoken Tamazight? If so, it is just as probable that they were *not* Tamazight speakers, and then what say you?
Also, you claim that the groups you mentioned were of a single ethnicity. That is obviously a misguided statement to make, for the Meshwesh would not have been distinguished from the Tamahu, and they in turn would not have been distinguished from the Tehenu and so forth. As a matter of fact, observers have noted distinct geographical locations of one or another of these groups from the other, to the west of Egypt. How do you go about addressing those viewpoints?
Posted by Mazigh (Member # 8621) on :
@The explorer, Lets say that i can provide a substative reasoning for their Berber language.
But you have also to acknowledge, that you also have no right to say the contrary, since you didn't too provide the eleminating argument.
I've copied some for you:
quote: . The Tjehenu : this population is generally identified as “Libyans” (FAULKNER, Dict Middle Eg, p. 305). But on several victory reliefs from the Old- and Middle Kingdoms the names of captive Tjehenu are definitely Egyptian, and their leader bears the title of hatya (Hatj-a), which is also an Egyptian military title. So I wonder whether the Tjehenu were Libyans, Berbers at all. Wouldn’t they be good candidates to be Egyptians left behind in the desert when others withdrew to the Valley ? From what I’ve read, Berber languages are only distantly related to Ancient Egyptian, so the Tjehenu with their Egyptian names and titles wouldn’t have been Berbers then. Since they’re the people, the name of whose region is written with the stick, a similarity with the perch of the Buto Heron-god, even if it was true, contra GARDINER, wouldn’t prove a link with Berber peoples from the Sahara, but with “desert-Egyptians”. As to their appearance, it can easily be reconciled with that of archaic Egyptians : they wear penis sheaths, they wrap (leather ?) bandlets around their chest (as Egyptian warriors did), their hair is long (Egyptians represented their primeval gods as primitives, and these have long hair too)... The main difference I can see is the braided beard of gods, not a Tjehenu feature AFAIK. If it’s they who had the sign of Neith tattooed on their skin, and if they were indeed desert-Egyptians, this would be one proof relative to a Neith-worship by Berber Saharan peoples which one would need to drop. You once made a remark which I understood as attesting to a similarity between the name of another Sahara people, the Temehu or Tjemehu (FAULKNER, p. 304), and a Berber root such as seen in the word Tamachek etc. This would then be interesting, for these putative Berbers, the Tjemehu, are attested as early as the 6th dyn. (inscriptions from tomb of Her-khou-f in Aswan), when they apparently lived far to the west of Yam (= Kerma ?), i.e. rather far south (latitude of S. Tibesti or N. Ennedi). Did they live in these mountains, rather than in the arid plains of the Sahara ? BTW, are Libyan names such as Sheshanq, Osorkon, Tiklat understandable for a specialist in Berber tongues ? (by J.D. Degreef )
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mazigh:
@The explorer, Lets say that i can provide a substative reasoning for their Berber language.
But you have also to acknowledge, that you also have no right to say the contrary, since you didn't too provide the eleminating argument.
I don't need to "provide eliminating argument", since *no evidence* has been put forward to eliminate.
quote:
I've copied some for you:
quote: . The Tjehenu : this population is generally identified as “Libyans” (FAULKNER, Dict Middle Eg, p. 305). But on several victory reliefs from the Old- and Middle Kingdoms the names of captive Tjehenu are definitely Egyptian, and their leader bears the title of hatya (Hatj-a), which is also an Egyptian military title. So I wonder whether the Tjehenu were Libyans, Berbers at all. Wouldn’t they be good candidates to be Egyptians left behind in the desert when others withdrew to the Valley ? From what I’ve read, Berber languages are only distantly related to Ancient Egyptian, so the Tjehenu with their Egyptian names and titles wouldn’t have been Berbers then. Since they’re the people, the name of whose region is written with the stick, a similarity with the perch of the Buto Heron-god, even if it was true, contra GARDINER, wouldn’t prove a link with Berber peoples from the Sahara, but with “desert-Egyptians”. As to their appearance, it can easily be reconciled with that of archaic Egyptians : they wear penis sheaths, they wrap (leather ?) bandlets around their chest (as Egyptian warriors did), their hair is long (Egyptians represented their primeval gods as primitives, and these have long hair too)... The main difference I can see is the braided beard of gods, not a Tjehenu feature AFAIK. If it’s they who had the sign of Neith tattooed on their skin, and if they were indeed desert-Egyptians, this would be one proof relative to a Neith-worship by Berber Saharan peoples which one would need to drop. You once made a remark which I understood as attesting to a similarity between the name of another Sahara people, the Temehu or Tjemehu (FAULKNER, p. 304), and a Berber root such as seen in the word Tamachek etc. This would then be interesting, for these putative Berbers, the Tjemehu, are attested as early as the 6th dyn. (inscriptions from tomb of Her-khou-f in Aswan), when they apparently lived far to the west of Yam (= Kerma ?), i.e. rather far south (latitude of S. Tibesti or N. Ennedi). Did they live in these mountains, rather than in the arid plains of the Sahara ? BTW, are Libyan names such as Sheshanq, Osorkon, Tiklat understandable for a specialist in Berber tongues ? (by J.D. Degreef )
I fail to see how this helps you; in fact, it's premise seems to be arguing against you.
Posted by Mazigh (Member # 8621) on :
- Denying is not the established fact. So you cannot deny they're Berbers too. Conclusion: Neither I nor you gave an answer. (No confirmation and no refutation).
-I posted it to help you with giving the arguments of their non-Berber origin. I'm helpful Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mazigh:
- Denying is not the established fact.
Ah but Mazigh, you don't get it: I cannot deny something that is *not* an established fact to begin with. To deny something, you'd have to establish that it is in fact real, but that I choose not to face reality.
quote: So you cannot deny they're Berbers too.
I don't rule out the possibility that one or some of the named groups could have been related to contemporary Tamazight speakers, but this is just based on speculation on my part, and one I'm willing to acknowledge. By the same token, I don't rule out the possibility that they could not have been Tamazight speakers either; in fact this one would be less speculative than the former, since it is predicated on lack of positive evidence of Tamazight-speaking by the mentioned groups.
The burden is on you really, because what I'm saying here, is that you made a specific claim but you don't have evidence in your corner to back it up; namely, writing off the groups you mentioned as simply "Berbers".
quote: Conclusion: Neither I nor you gave an answer. (No confirmation and no refutation).
Correction: *You* gave no answer. We are dealing with *your* position. I am not the one calling them "Berbers", or anything other than what the ancients called them; you are.
quote: -I posted it to help you with giving the arguments of their non-Berber origin. I'm helpful
Well, you did it in vain, because I did not need one. The posting you cited does not reflect my position; it reflects your *assumption* of my position.
Posted by homeylu (Member # 4430) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: homeylu...
I had a feeling that you would cite something like that, without actually giving me the *precise* matter that it is, which is supposed to make KhoiSans the "oldest" people on earth. What about the diversity of their DNA; how is that anymore diverse than those of other Africans?
Further sign of the dubious quality of your claim about "non-foreign admixture" in KhoiSans is highlighted by the contradiction elicited in your acknowledgement of "diversity of" KhoiSan DNA; how was such diversity attained in a *single* inbreeding group without "foreign admixture" from an out-group at some point or another? And in this aspect, how is the KhoiSan different from any other African populations?
Now we're exhibiting a lack of understanding in population genetics. The more DIVERSE human genetics are between certain groups, the OLDER those markers are. The LONGER a population has existed, the MORE diversity in it's genetic make-up. This is how population geneticist are able to pinpoint the location where modern humans first evolved. KhoiSAN is simply a generic term to describe the union between Khoi people and Sandawe (San) people. The Sandawe supposedly originated in East Africa and are genetic ancestors to what is now described as khoi-SAN.
quote:how was such diversity attained in a *single* inbreeding group without "foreign admixture" from an out-group at some point or another?
Seriously, their diversity between eachother, does not mean 1 khoisan mixed with an Asian, another mixed with a European, another mixed with an Arab, this is simply naive. What it means is that they harbor the genomes to give rise to all genotypes we see amongst outsiders, rather than all outsiders breeding to give rise to THEM.
For example the Khoisan belong to Haplogroup A; Haplogroup A is the FATHER for all the other Haplogroups. On their MtDNA side they have the HIGHEST frequency Haplogroup L0, which is the oldest direct lineage to Mitochondial Eve. This doesn't mean that other African groups do NOT carry frequencies of L0, it means that the frequency is HIGHEST in Khoisan.
If they were heavily "mixed" with foreigners, they would carry other types, such as M, N, etc... whereas in Ethiopian populations, which I pointed out to you earlier, you find L0, but you also find L1-L6, M, and N as well.
I hope this is clear enough for you.
Posted by AswaniAswad (Member # 16742) on :
I think Diop was right about the Berbers
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by homeylu:
Now we're exhibiting a lack of understanding in population genetics.
That's exactly what I noticed about your post, a lack of understanding of what you cited.
quote: The more DIVERSE human genetics are between certain groups, the OLDER those markers are.
This further demonstrates your delving into a matter you obviously don't have a good grasp of.
quote: The LONGER a population has existed, the MORE diversity in it's genetic make-up.
Really? I've asked you in the last post to give us concrete data of what makes the "KhoiSan" more diverse than any other group in Africa; instead you came back with more blabber and no data.
quote: This is how population geneticist are able to pinpoint the location where modern humans first evolved.
LOL, this simplistic assessment is symptomatic of laypersons who simply try to debate matters they don't fully comprehend.
quote: KhoiSAN is simply a generic term to describe the union between Khoi people and Sandawe (San) people. The Sandawe supposedly originated in East Africa and are genetic ancestors to what is now described as khoi-SAN.
Non-issue.
quote:Seriously, their diversity between eachother, does not mean 1 khoisan mixed with an Asian, another mixed with a European, another mixed with an Arab, this is simply naive.
Want to see naive, then here it is -- your poor reading comprehension, and hence, inability to deliver a relevant answer. Who said anything about "Europeans" et al. other than yourself of course?
quote:
For example the Khoisan belong to Haplogroup A; Haplogroup A is the FATHER for all the other Haplogroups.
And so, you imagine that KhoiSans are the only groups who have this clade, right?...which would make them the "oldest" surviving people on earth.
quote:This doesn't mean that other African groups do NOT carry frequencies of L0, it means that the frequency is HIGHEST in Khoisan.
More BS. Even if it were true, which it isn't, how does having the highest frequency become tantamount to being the "oldest"?
Further, enlighten me how your mtDNA works with the Y-DNA information to demonstrate a scenario wherein the KhoiSan would have emerged before any other group, and hence, the "oldest" surviving "tribe"?
quote: If they were heavily "mixed" with foreigners, they would carry other types, such as M, N, etc... whereas in Ethiopian populations, which I pointed out to you earlier, you find L0, but you also find L1-L6, M, and N as well.
This is funny. So, only when clades come from out-groups who are not Africans, do you then consider gene flow from an out-group as "foreign admixture"?
quote:
I hope this is clear enough for you.
This is what's clear to me: That even you don't seem to be sure about what you are saying and whether it makes sense...but we will very soon see who is ignorant about genetics here.
Posted by The Gaul (Member # 16198) on :
From a relatively old 2000 study replete with the overusage of the word "pygmy" and refers to Wolof/Madinka as "bantu":
quote:Additional sets of RFLPs subdivided macrohaplogroup L* into two extended haplogroups—L1 and L2—both of which appeared in the Kung and Khwe. Besides revealing the significant substructure of macrohaplogroup L* in African populations, these data showed that the Biaka Pygmies have one of the most ancient RFLP sublineages observed in African mtDNA and, thus, that they could represent one of the oldest human populations.
quote:In addition, the Kung exhibited a set of related haplotypes that were positioned closest to the root of the human mtDNA phylogeny, suggesting that they, too, represent one of the most ancient African populations
I don't know but this maybe what Homeylu is referring to.
Now, Explorer, if you have knowledge or information that contests the above, why can't you just simply state it without being an a-hole? Homeylu turned you down when you asked for the number? Bad day today?
Why must you engage in the most assholistic, back-and-forth, childish, moronic, nit-picking banter that dissolves almost every thread here into a needless form of debate as if a trophy is awarded to the winner?
Simply state information you have and add some value to the thread.
Posted by homeylu (Member # 4430) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: That's exactly what I noticed about your post, a lack of understanding of what you cited.
This further demonstrates your delving into a matter you obviously don't have a good grasp of.
Really? I've asked you in the last post to give us concrete data of what makes the "KhoiSan" more diverse than any other group in Africa; instead you came back with more blabber and no data.
LOL, this simplistic assessment is symptomatic of laypersons who simply try to debate matters they don't fully comprehend.
Non-issue.
Want to see naive, then here it is -- your poor reading comprehension, and hence, inability to deliver a relevant answer. Who said anything about "Europeans" et al. other than yourself of course?
And so, you imagine that KhoiSans are the only groups who have this clade, right?...which would make them the "oldest" surviving people on earth.
More BS. Even if it were true, which it isn't, how does having the highest frequency become tantamount to being the "oldest"?
This is funny. So, only when clades come from out-groups who are not Africans, do you then consider gene flow from an out-group as "foreign admixture"?
"You don't understand..you don't have a grasp..you don't comprehend" << Is this your elementary way of refuting a statement, WITHOUT offering an alternative view? Dissecting and critiquing individual statements out of its original context appears to be what you do best, yet in all this negating, you didn't offer a single alternative. Why?? Because you don't have one, and it's typical, next you'll be far off the original argument, choosing to debate individual sentences, which is also typical.
You have yet to show an understanding of genetic diversity WITHIN the same group, which is definitely measured separately from diversity BETWEEN separate groups. If you don't understand this basis, then how can you possibly understand the theory of modern humans originating in Africa. It should be known by anyone claiming knowledge in this area, that the higher diversity WITHIN the same groups, helps determine the AGE of genes, I don't know what else I can add, except advice to read up more on it, and gain a better understanding.
Why not simply show another tribe with genetics OLDER than the group I listed above without outside admixture, which would qualify as a REAL refutation, then come back and prove the statement inaccurate.
And when you do, have it published in a scientific journal such as the one I posted above, and then you could be credited with not only refuting ME, but the SCIENTIST who published the information themselves. These are MEASURED results. When another group is sequenced to show a higher diversity, only then are the results of these findings invalidated.
Posted by homeylu (Member # 4430) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Gaul: From a relatively old 2000 study replete with the overusage of the word "pygmy" and refers to Wolof/Madinka as "bantu":
quote:Additional sets of RFLPs subdivided macrohaplogroup L* into two extended haplogroups—L1 and L2—both of which appeared in the Kung and Khwe. Besides revealing the significant substructure of macrohaplogroup L* in African populations, these data showed that the Biaka Pygmies have one of the most ancient RFLP sublineages observed in African mtDNA and, thus, that they could represent one of the oldest human populations.
quote:In addition, the Kung exhibited a set of related haplotypes that were positioned closest to the root of the human mtDNA phylogeny, suggesting that they, too, represent one of the most ancient African populations
I don't know but this maybe what Homeylu is referring to.
Now, Explorer, if you have knowledge or information that contests the above, why can't you just simply state it without being an a-hole? Homeylu turned you down when you asked for the number? Bad day today?
Why must you engage in the most assholistic, back-and-forth, childish, moronic, nit-picking banter that dissolves almost every thread here into a needless form of debate as if a trophy is awarded to the winner?
Simply state information you have and add some value to the thread.
Actually I already presented him with the latest study which is dated FEB 2010. The one you posted is a bit outdated, but it shows how new studies can refute older studies, which is what I'm waiting on him to provide.
Posted by The Gaul (Member # 16198) on :
Yes you're right, but I guess it's useless to exchange information with some who have the decorum of a rabid fox whenever they disagree.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Gullible monkey:
Now, Explorer, if you have knowledge or information that contests the above, why can't you just simply state it without being an a-hole? Homeylu turned you down when you asked for the number? Bad day today?
Why must you engage in the most assholistic, back-and-forth, childish, moronic, nit-picking banter that dissolves almost every thread here into a needless form of debate as if a trophy is awarded to the winner?
Simply state information you have and add some value to the thread.
Homeless vampire, go and suck the blood off yo mama's cunt, and stop being a tampon-wearing sycophant non-factor here.
homeylu's non-responsive reply entails...
quote: "You don't understand..you don't have a grasp..you don't comprehend" << Is this your elementary way of refuting a statement, WITHOUT offering an alternative view?
Alternative view to something you clearly don't understand; how does that work?
quote:
You have yet to show an understanding of genetic diversity WITHIN the same group
I see that I've at least clued you in about the difference between diversity "within" groups vs. "between certain groups". Yes, that clearly shows you as the one in the understanding, LOL.
And no, contrary to your simpleton view, diversity within a group alone doesn't suffice to make a "population" the oldest "tribe" on the planet.
...diversity of which you still haven't specified to us.
quote: It should be known by anyone claiming knowledge in this area, that the higher diversity WITHIN the same groups, helps determine the AGE of genes, I don't know what else I can add, except advice to read up more on it, and gain a better understanding.
What is known to me, is you simply don't have a clue about what you are talking. Tell me, how does "higher diversity" within the same group become tantamount to said group being the "oldest tribe" on earth; give me details on how this works. How does this apply to KhoiSans vs. other Africans...data is what's wanted, not cheap gossip.
quote: Why not simply show another tribe with genetics OLDER than the group I listed above without outside admixture
Easy. Unlike you, I understand that Group I clades in Semino et al.'s post is not restricted to KhoiSans. You have merely demonstrated your inability to understand your own sources.
quote:
And when you do, have it published in a scientific journal such as the one I posted above, and then you could be credited with not only refuting ME, but the SCIENTIST who published the information themselves. These are MEASURED results. When another group is sequenced to show a higher diversity, only then are the results of these findings invalidated.
Chit chat all aside, here's the deal: You are not correctly reading your own source, and what it is *actually* demonstrating. Hence you confuse your confusion with my not having data to refute you. And publishing does not automatically make a claim accurate, as you seem suckered into thinking.
Ps: Don't think I haven't noticed you dodged the requests for specific data, which is why you refrained from addressing them as put to you in the point by point format.
Posted by Mazigh (Member # 8621) on :
quote:Ah but Mazigh, you don't get it: I cannot deny something that is *not* an established fact to begin with. To deny something, you'd have to establish that it is in fact real, but that I choose not to face reality.
I don't understand how someones like Anta Diop could say that nonsense. This because it can only understood as blackcentrism...
He would claim that the modern Egyptians are not the descendants of the ancient Egyptians, like the modern Berbers are not the descendants of the Ancient Libyans.
But this no the correct principe. If he/you cannot prove that there were a genocide, or great escape migration, or wide spread illness that brought the original popluation to death, or..., then he cannot simply justify their end. Even if the modern Egyptians do not speak the ancient Egyptian language, they are remain their descendatns. This proces is called "arabization".
Posted by anguishofbeing (Member # 16736) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: Homeless vampire, go and suck the blood off yo mama's cunt
LOL Jew boy at his best. He gets this passionate too when he cant prove his people were gassed. Oh the memories. lol
Posted by Mazigh (Member # 8621) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: You are not correctly reading your own source, and what it is *actually* demonstrating. Hence you confuse your confusion with my not having data to refute you. And publishing does not automatically make a claim accurate, as you seem suckered into thinking.
Ps: Don't think I haven't noticed you dodged the requests for specific data, which is why you refrained from addressing them as put to you in the point by point format.
Which is it, the publishing is not accurate, or the interpretation of it is not accurate? Or you simply can't find a valid argument?
You have reference to the data, if you need "specifics" then access the 'full abstract'. It is not worth the investment of my time or money, to provide data to YOUR satisfaction.
You seem intent on pointing out my discrepancies, why don't we flip the script, and YOU ENLIGHTEN ME, try this angle.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
Mazigh...
quote:
He would claim that the modern Egyptians are not the descendants of the ancient Egyptians, like the modern Berbers are not the descendants of the Ancient Libyans.
Your rantings about Diop have zip to do with our ongoing discussion.
quote: But this no the correct principe. If he/you cannot prove that there were a genocide, or great escape migration, or wide spread illness that brought the original popluation to death, or..., then he cannot simply justify their end. Even if the modern Egyptians do not speak the ancient Egyptian language, they are remain their descendatns. This proces is called "arabization".
Absence of positive proof of "genocide" as you attempt to put it, is not equivalent to absence of demographic shifts. What does this mean? It means that it is not inconceivable that an earlier population could have moved from its traditional location or could have integrated into newcomers. You speak of the AE and contemporary Egyptians, but the AE are different from modern Egyptians in many respects, both biologically and culturally. For one, they were not Arabic speakers; add to this, subsequent series of demic diffusions into the region over a protracted period of time. Likewise, even if one were to assume that one or the other of the groups you mentioned are related to contemporary Imazighen, it doesn't serve as positive proof that either of said groups were Tamazight speakers. It is your position that they were Tamazight speakers, and so, the burden is on you to demonstrate this. It is not for me or some other to disprove a negative, in order for you to claim that you are making some legitimate case. The negative in this case, is your non-existent evidence for your claim.
homeylu...
quote:Originally posted by homeylu:
Which is it, the publishing is not accurate, or the interpretation of it is not accurate? Or you simply can't find a valid argument?
Nonsense. The fault lies with *your* comprehension skills, not your source. It is out of sync with what's actually being demonstrated in that Semino et al. journal you cited. I'll probably repeat this ad infinitum before it soaks in.
quote: You have reference to the data, if you need "specifics" then access the 'full abstract'.
Yes, I have access to the said data. Quite simply, it doesn't support your dubious post.
quote: It is not worth the investment of my time or money, to provide data to YOUR satisfaction.
If you don't have the necessary "investment" to back up your unsupported opinions, then perhaps you might reconsider thinking twice about making them.
quote: You seem intent on pointing out my discrepancies, why don't we flip the script, and YOU ENLIGHTEN ME, try this angle.
That's silly. It is not so much as "discrepancies" as it is your making stuff up or blindly parroting hearsay claims, and then after the fact, frantically googling for a source you hardly understand, just to concoct the desperately needed material support you're being pressed for. You might get away with such shabby scholarship...only if you were dealing with your fellow rookies.
--
Ps: In case you need reminding of your obligations, here they are:
1)You claim that Semino et al.'s Group I clade makes KhoiSans the "oldest" surviving "tribes". This clearly not the position of the journal, nor is it factually apparent, since Group I clades are not restricted to KhoiSans in African gene pool. So, how then does Group I make KhoiSans the "oldest" surviving "tribe"?
2)On the other hand, you acknowledge that mtDNA L0 is not restricted to them, but you speak of " high frequencies". How does that make KhoiSans the "oldest" surviving "tribe"?
3)How does the biohistorical processes of mtDNA L0 factor in with the Y-DNA information you posted, in demonstrating how the KhoiSans are the "oldest" surviving "tribes"?
4)You claim that "the more DIVERSE human genetics are between certain groups, the OLDER those markers are." Where did you get that kind of thinking from?
Posted by AswaniAswad (Member # 16742) on :
Mazigh i think the berbers bring the most confusion to historians because they look at there color and think its out of place in North Africa.
If u read arab historians on the origins of Berbers their claims all contradict eachother one says they came from Khadar amongst the families of Khadar jews, another arabic tarikh al sahara says the Berbers are pagans non arabs.
What do socalled Berbers claim there origins to be
Posted by homeylu (Member # 4430) on :
Explorer, what makes you a faux scholar, and I hope it is evident to the more intelligent amongst us, is that you are amongst the FIRST to jump on the view that a Biological Race does not exist. While simultaneously DENYING that such a view canNOT exist when it comes to Africans.
Hence you are desperately trying to deny the claim that Africans have the most DIVERSE genetics on the planet; Because they carry the OLDEST DNA, known to mankind.
All humans can trace their lineage to a single source on the African continent.
Not only is there more diversity between Khoisans and other Khoisans, there is more diversity between biological WEST Africans and other WEST Africans, as well as EAST Africans and other EAST Africans.
Yet you join the ranks of the 'intellectually' impaired, because in your naive view of genetics, I'm sure you're trying to figure out how could people who share the same PHENOTYPE, have such diverse GENOTYPES.
Well the diversity occurs when genes have been mutating over a long period of time, even if they have NEVER left the continent, as is the case with remote tribes like the Khoisan. By counting the mutation rates, is how scientist are able to determine the age.
This is why the OLDEST genes exist in Africa, this is how scientist theorize that all humans descend from Africa, and this is how they are able to trace the OLDEST DNA to a given living tribe in AFRICA. So although Khoisans apparently share the same "physical features", BIOLOGICALLY speaking they are more diverse than any other group in the world. Why is that, the "naive may ask", because the genes that account for our PHYSICAL features make up such a small insignificant portion of our entire genetic make-up. Of the several million genes in our biological make up, only a handful could explain our eye color, another handful to explain our skin color, and another handful to explain our hair texture. Yet we have millions of other genes that distinguish us from one another; and the reason Khoisan have millions of these other genes that diversify them genetically, is because they are the OLDEST group known to scientist.
Instead of just repeatedly issuing ignorant remarks that serve no purpose other than attempting to make yourself appear as an authority on the subject; Go out and find a group with DNA older than the Khoisan group, otherwise accept the evidence that has been presented to you.
And you can keep referring to this post as my final position on the matter. Thanks.
Posted by Mazigh (Member # 8621) on :
@The explorer, the modern Egyptians are not Blacks (also not Nordic), therefore, Afrocentrism isn't seeing them as descendants of ancient Egyptians. The language change is called "arabization". Culture can be changed like the language. If you follow well this discussion, you see i didn't use any argument in favour of the Berber background of those Tehenu, Libu..., but you fail to give the opposate arguemnt...
@AswaniAswad, how relevant are the classic arab historians/genealogists to the history of the Berbers or the history generally? You act like if the Arabs could see the supposed Berber movements...
Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
Mazigh
quote:the modern Egyptians are not Blacks (also not Nordic), therefore, Afrocentrism isn't seeing them as descendants of ancient Egyptians. The language change is called "arabization". Culture can be changed like the language.
Wrong "some" Modern Egyptians are not blacks others are most definitely so and state that fact very clearly. agree with the Arabization though.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vBz0Cllbch4 And please be more specific about your supposed Afrocentrics not seeing Modern Egyptians as descended from the Ancient Kemites other-wise you are making a blanket statement.
Posted by Mazigh (Member # 8621) on :
Of course they're not all whites, but the average Egyptian is brown:
Zahi Hawass said once that the Egyptians are neither arabs neither blacks, the conviced blacks called him liar..., the blacks of America said him you're not white, you're black, the egyptians were black.. If he -Zahi Hawass- is black, then i agree that the Egyptians are black, he represents the average Egyptian, but then, i think the thema would be what is "black": Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
He is average from where he is from a big city in the north
Of Jamarican decent..of course he has some non African ancestry but that's the point.And another Powell, Adam Clayton Jr that is. Looking like the Turk that he is not..but self described Black-man and politician.Btw no relation to Colin Powell.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by homeylu:
Explorer, what makes you a faux scholar, and I hope it is evident to the more intelligent amongst us, is that you are amongst the FIRST to jump on the view that a Biological Race does not exist.
Firstly, this is off-tangent yammering -- irrelevant to our discussion. Secondly, you have faux-intelligence and here's the sign: How does rejecting the concept of human races, the reigning scientific standpoint, make one a faux scholar? You must then be of the imagination that science is faux scholarship, but of course your subjective religious view of the world carries no currency here.
quote:
While simultaneously DENYING that such a view canNOT exist when it comes to Africans.
I'm not sure how this is remotely relevant, other than showing that you are comprehension-challenged in reading.
quote: Hence you are desperately trying to deny the claim that Africans have the most DIVERSE genetics on the planet
No, the above is *your* position. You disagree? Cite me.
quote: Because they carry the OLDEST DNA, known to mankind.
You are a petty liar. You said the "KhoiSans" are the oldest surviving "tribe". This is a whole universe apart from making a general statement about "Africans" being the most diverse and having the oldest populationS. You can't even stay consistent about your views for a second, and you are out there teaching in schools. What has this country [the U.S.] come to?
quote: All humans can trace their lineage to a single source on the African continent.
That ancestor was not a KhoiSan, as you imagine.
quote: Not only is there more diversity between Khoisans and other Khoisans, there is more diversity between biological WEST Africans and other WEST Africans, as well as EAST Africans and other EAST Africans.
Pointless off-tangent rambling. No doubt, it is a symptom of the condition being educated on how "the more diverse human genetics is between groups, the older they are" is an intellectually-absent comment to make.
quote: Yet you join the ranks of the 'intellectually' impaired
That makes you the club of what; morons who can't even go to the toilet on their own?...as I am clearly having a field day demonstrating how not a single braincell of your's is functioning.
quote: , because in your naive view of genetics, I'm sure you're trying to figure out how could people who share the same PHENOTYPE, have such diverse GENOTYPES.
Thinking is not your suit. You live in crack-land.
quote: Well the diversity occurs when genes have been mutating over a long period of time, even if they have NEVER left the continent, as is the case with remote tribes like the Khoisan. By counting the mutation rates, is how scientist are able to determine the age.
You are such an ignoramus klutz. First, you have cowered away from answering the questions you were *actually* asked, and instead answer fairy tale ones which are not even an issue, like the above, which in any case shows just how much of a simpleton you really are. A number of factors can go into the rate of accumulation of diversity, that simpletons like you cannot fathom. KhoiSans are not the only people wherein mutations accumulate over a long period of time, as you imagine and will therefore not help you. So for the nth time now: what is it *specifically* that makes KhoiSans the "oldest" surviving "tribe", you blank-headed paralytic? or is it that your "brain simply cannot compute" the question?
quote: So although Khoisans apparently share the same "physical features", BIOLOGICALLY speaking they are more diverse than any other group in the world.
According to what? You never cite the specifics, you just mindlessly ramble on and on.
quote: Why is that, the "naive may ask", because the genes that account for our PHYSICAL features make up such a small insignificant portion of our entire genetic make-up.
You are such an off-tangent rambling mental-handicap.
quote: and the reason Khoisan have millions of these other genes that diversify them genetically, is because they are the OLDEST group known to scientist.
Just more of your crack-world fairy tales, and you know it, because you can't back it up with the requested specifics.
quote: Instead of just repeatedly issuing ignorant remarks that serve no purpose other than attempting to make yourself appear as an authority on the subject
As a matter of fact, you have demonstrated that I am indeed an authority on the subject, at least when compared to you, as you remain incapable of directly answering the questions I *actually* asked and *repeated* to you in the last post with a numbering system. You did not address a single one of them, but you did go on your highly imaginative rambling rampage.
quote: Go out and find a group with DNA older than the Khoisan group, otherwise accept the evidence that has been presented to you.
That won't be unnecessary, since you haven't established that the KhoiSan are the "oldest" surviving "tribe", which is merely a figment of your imagination.
Like I've told the other clowns before you, the burden lies not on one to disprove a negative, but rather on the claimant of that "negative" to prove the negative as being something otherwise.
quote: And you can keep referring to this post as my final position on the matter. Thanks.
Copping out now, are you? It never fails when one is backed into the corner.
The gist of your post: So much off-tangent fussing, but not a single substantive data to back up your fairy tale theory around KhoiSans!
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mazigh:
@The explorer, the modern Egyptians are not Blacks (also not Nordic)
This is a simplistic comment to make, as it implies that no "black" Egyptian populations remain today. If so, can you substantiate that premise?
quote: , therefore, Afrocentrism isn't seeing them as descendants of ancient Egyptians.
What does Afrocentrism have to do with our discussion? You are grasping in the dark.
quote: The language change is called "arabization".
The language "change" is simply one reflection of the reality that AE are not one and same as the modern counterparts, or are you saying, biologically nothing has changed either?
quote: Culture can be changed like the language.
Well, if culture has "changed", then those modern Egyptians with the "changed culture" are not going to be the same as the AE, are they?
quote: If you follow well this discussion, you see i didn't use any argument in favour of the Berber background of those Tehenu, Libu..., but you fail to give the opposate arguemnt...
You asked if they were "berbers" under this particular topic, BUT you have written them off as "berbers" in other discussions. Are now you in denial of that fact? If not, then the burden still lies squarely on you to prove that claim, not on me to disprove something that is simply a fairy tale.
Posted by zarahan (Member # 15718) on :
Homeylu wrote: Hence you are desperately trying to deny the claim that Africans have the most DIVERSE genetics on the planet..
Huh? The following were quoted by Explorer on ES years ago. So you are saying he now denies this?
"Estimates of genetic diversity in major geographic regions are frequently made by pooling all individuals into regional aggregates. This method can potentially bias results if there are differences in population substructure within regions, since increased variation among local populations could inflate regional diversity. A preferred method of estimating regional diversity is to compute the mean diversity within local populations. Both methods are applied to a global sample of craniometric data consisting of 57 measurements taken on 1734 crania from 18 local populations in six geographic regions: sub-Saharan Africa, Europe, East Asia, Australasia, Polynesia, and the Americas. Each region is represented by three local populations.
Both methods for estimating regional diversity show sub-Saharan Africa to have the highest levels of phenotypic variation, consistent with many genetic studies." (Relethford, John "Global Analysis of Regional Differences in Craniometric Diversity and Population Substructure". Human Biology - Volume 73, Number 5, October 2001, pp. 629-636)
"Previous studies of genetic and craniometric traits have found higher levels of within-population diversity in sub-Saharan Africa compared to other geographic regions. This study examines regional differences in within-population diversity of human skin color. Published data on skin reflectance were collected for 98 male samples from eight geographic regions: sub-Saharan Africa, North Africa, Europe, West Asia, Southwest Asia, South Asia, Australasia, and the New World. Regional differences in local within-population diversity were examined using two measures of variability: the sample variance and the sample coefficient of variation. For both measures, the average level of within-population diversity is higher in sub-Saharan Africa than in other geographic regions. This difference persists even after adjusting for a correlation between within-population diversity and distance from the equator. Though affected by natural selection, skin color variation shows the same pattern of higher African diversity as found with other traits." -- Relethford JH.(2000). Human skin color diversity is highest in sub-Saharan African populations. Hum Biol. 2000 Oct;72(5):773-80.)
"Africa contains tremendous cultural, linguistic and genetic diversity, and has more than 2,000 distinct ethnic groups and languages.. Studies using mitochondrial (mt)DNA and nuclear DNA markers consistently indicate that Africa is the most genetically diverse region of the world." (Tishkoff SA, Williams SM., Genetic analysis of African populations: human evolution and complex disease. Nature Reviews Genetics. 2002 Aug (8):611-21.)
Mazigh wrote:
He [Diop] would claim that the modern Egyptians are not the descendants of the ancient Egyptians, like the modern Berbers are not the descendants of the Ancient Libyans.
Huh? Diop said modern Egyptians are not descendants of ancient Egyptians? This is indeed news to anyone with even a passing familiarity to Diop's work. Can you show me a quotation of Diop where this is the case? Not a link to web page that comes up blank or doesn't give the answer but an actual quote from his work.. Referring people to your Diop thread provides nothing to back up your claim. In fact you have several purported quotations by Diop listed, but curiously, give no source and date as to when he allegedly said these things. Please provide accurate references.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by zarahan:
Homeylu wrote: Hence you are desperately trying to deny the claim that Africans have the most DIVERSE genetics on the planet..
Huh? The following were quoted by Explorer on ES years ago. So you are saying he now denies this?
homeylu is simply reduced to making stuff up [strawmen], because she actually has no answers to the questions I put to her. No sane reading-affluent individual who has ever read my posts will come to that harebrained notion that I deny African diversity or that I treat "racialism" as objective scientific reasoning in any shape or form.
Posted by Mazigh (Member # 8621) on :
@Zarahan, I said "would", this is a conclusion. If he believes that the modern Egyptians are the descendants of the ancient Egyptians, then why claiming they were black!
Of course, it would be difficult that they were completely remplcaed, but he would say "The color of the Egyptians has become lightened down through the years, like that of the West Indian Negroes".
This can be see as the blacks intermixed with some hyper-white people that they now became lighter...
If you agree that the actual egyptians represent the Ancient Egyptians, than stop saying they're black... We can see it self.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mazigh:
@Zarahan, I said "would", this is a conclusion. If he believes that the modern Egyptians are the descendants of the ancient Egyptians, then why claiming they were black!
Of course, it would be difficult that they were completely remplcaed, but he would say "The color of the Egyptians has become lightened down through the years, like that of the West Indian Negroes".
This can be see as the blacks intermixed with some hyper-white people that they now became lighter...
If you agree that the actual egyptians represent the Ancient Egyptians, than stop saying they're black... We can see it self.
Mazigh, acknowledging that modern Egyptians are not one and same with AE does not have to be mutually exclusive of the possibility that AE descendants still reside in the same territory. For instance, in the Americas the ancient "Indian" societies left their descendants but it would be naive to say that the modern populations of these regions are one and same as those that were there in antiquity. Egypt has been impacted by multiple waves of migration from outside; how can the territory go through all that and still not have populations that have undergone change?
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
Serious historians acknowledge that in terms of human populations change is an absolute fact of nature. And it is the denial of this fundamental fact of human history that shows clearly that some people are more concerned about supporting an agenda as opposed to the facts. Ancient Egypt and modern Egypt are totally and completely different things. Ancient Egypt was a primarily African population practicing African culture with clear cultural, linguistic and population relationships with people in Africa. Modern Egypt is a primarily mixed population practicing Arabic culture and cultural, population and linguistic relationships with Arabia and the Northern Levant, on top of African elements of culture and populations.
You cannot claim with any amount of seriousness that the two are completely the same. They are not.
But then again, the onus is on those who make this claim to support it with facts from biology and anthropology, not emotion. And when they can show that cranial and genetic markers are the same between ancient Egyptians and people like Hawass or President Mubarak, then they can make a claim to be arguing from a basis in fact.
The first lady of Egypt is half Welsh from her mother's side, which shows clearly that modern Egyptians can be and are mixed.
What is odd is that many of these people who often play up the non African ancestry of some North African populations, turn right around and then try and pretend to still be as indigenous to Africa as black Africans with little to no foreign ancestry. You cannot have it both ways.
This presents a dilemma for those who uphold the Eurasian ancestry as a unique marker for "Berbers" even as the Berber languages do not originate in Eurasia, but in Africa. Hence rather than abandoning the attempt to tie Berber with Eurasian ancestry they claim that everyone else has it wrong in saying Berber languages originate in Africa among Africans (not Eurasians).
Posted by Mazigh (Member # 8621) on :
It is not the Berbers who tie themselves with the Eurasians but many blackcentrists like "Anta diop".
Posted by MindoverMatter718 (Member # 15400) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: For instance, in the Americas the ancient "Indian" societies left their descendants but it would be naive to say that the modern populations of these regions are one and same as those that were there in antiquity.
Precisely. This is a point I've also made before. For example a study was conducted some years back on the island of Puerto Rico. The results yielded DNA of Indigenous Tainos native to the island at a pretty significant amount more-so than was previously thought, along with showing presence of African and European DNA as well. So, with this finding is it suffice to say these Puerto Ricans are representative of ancient Tainos? Of course not, do they carry Taino blood lines? Yes. Are there individuals on the island who carry the indigenous DNA at higher frequencies while others may show little to none? Of course. Same can be said when it comes to ancient and modern Egypt.
Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
Mazigh
quote:It is not the Berbers who tie themselves with the Eurasians but many blackcentrists like "Anta diop".
So you are blaming Amazigh's anti Black sentiments on Diop?
Posted by Mazigh (Member # 8621) on :
There are no Amazigh anti-blacksentiments, if needed, then it is anti-blackcentric sentiments.
Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
Mazigh There are no Amazigh anti-blacksentiments, if needed, then it is anti-blackcentric sentiments. Please clarify^not sure what you mean.
Posted by Mazigh (Member # 8621) on :
I mean the "Amazigh/Berber" activists have no anti-black sentiments. But they didn't appreciate the so-called afrocentrism (which is synonymous for "blackcentrism").
It is not only againt blackcentrism, but also against eurocentrism and arabcentrism. It doesn't mean that all the europeans are eurocentric, because many of them gave great assistence to the Berber history, but in the case of the blacks, i'm not familiar with such neutral black historians. Firsltly, because they're not alot of black scholars (like as the Berbers themselves from Africa) and secondly because those few ones are focusing on the black race not the history of North Africa.
quote:In an interview with an American historian who holds that the Roman emperor Septimius Severus was black, a journalist recently asked whether he wasn't Berber, and received the simple answer, "What's that"?
Blackcentrism and Berbercentrism are totally different. The Berbers claim a far ancienity in North Africa, while the Blackcentrists (like anta diop, and many others) have to reduce them to recent periods (Vandals?) to claim a black Africa. The ideologies are totally contradictory.
Some afrocentrists would believe that the Berbers shoudl agree that they are the unrooted people of North Africa descending from recent times, but this can hardly seen as an attiring idea excepts fro the blackcentrists. Right?
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mazigh: I mean the "Amazigh/Berber" activists have no anti-black sentiments. But they didn't appreciate the so-called afrocentrism (which is synonymous for "blackcentrism").
It is not only againt blackcentrism, but also against eurocentrism and arabcentrism. It doesn't mean that all the europeans are eurocentric, because many of them gave great assistence to the Berber history, but in the case of the blacks, i'm not familiar with such neutral black historians. Firsltly, because they're not alot of black scholars (like as the Berbers themselves from Africa) and secondly because those few ones are focusing on the black race not the history of North Africa.
quote:In an interview with an American historian who holds that the Roman emperor Septimius Severus was black, a journalist recently asked whether he wasn't Berber, and received the simple answer, "What's that"?
Blackcentrism and Berbercentrism are totally different. The Berbers claim a far ancienity in North Africa, while the Blackcentrists (like anta diop, and many others) have to reduce them to recent periods (Vandals?) to claim a black Africa. The ideologies are totally contradictory.
Some afrocentrists would believe that the Berbers shoudl agree that they are the unrooted people of North Africa descending from recent times, but this can hardly seen as an attiring idea excepts fro the blackcentrists. Right?
Mazigh, "Berber" is a language group not a particular ethnic group or physical type. And Berber languages originate wholly within the continent of Africa. Therefore, it is African. Again, you keep trying to distinguish Berber from African based on ancestry and geography which is simply not correct. Berber is and always will be a distinctly African language and therefore, as an African language, cannot be said to originate with Eurasians from outside Africa.
And quite unlike what you claim there are indeed many African scholars of Berber languages all over Africa.
But again, this is the whole point of the contradictions that come about with some who wish to identify as both African and non African at the same time. Either "Berber" is a language and culture that is African at heart with elements borrowed from other cultures and peoples or it is not African at all. It cant be both. Likewise, either Berber speakers are primarily Africans, some with a lot of non African ancestry or they are not Africans at all. Take your pick. But stop trying to pretend that this is an issue somehow created by Africans in knowing who they are as Africans. That is nonsense. You need to make up your mind as to what you are identifying with. Are you identifying with traditions and languages that are African as has been shown in various fields of study or are you simply identifying with a certain degree of non African ancestry as some "distinct" marker for African cultural and linguistic traditions. If it is the latter then it is inherently a contradictory form of identification because one cannot come from the other. African traditions and language cannot come from non African ancestry as that would invalidate it as African now wouldn't it.
So the bottom line is, what is "Berber"? Is it a language, a culture, a phenotype or ancestry and how do you define it? People can define themselves in time and space however they want. But when it comes to history such definitions are not fixed and always change over time.
The issue here seems that some find "Berber" being an African language and culture historically an inconvenient truth. It is inconvenient because Africa has an association with blackness. And because some people have come to try and disavow or look down upon blackness they have a problem with identifying as African. The geography of North Africa straddling Europe, Africa and the Levant as a crossroads of history is what is the cause of this particular conundrum and nothing else. Because some are not white enough to be accepted as equals to Europeans, not Arab enough to be considered equals to Arabs and not African enough (by some groups) to be African, they try and find their own identity and stand behind it. But that really is more of a geopolitical issue versus strictly linguistic, historic or anthropological. This whole socio-political context did not exist even 1000 years ago, let alone 3000. Therefore, while I understand the need for solidarity in the current context among some Berber speakers, I disagree that this need has always been present or that it has any historical meaning beyond recent social and political developments in North Africa.
Therefore, given that the socio-political context has changed a lot over time, you cannot stretch current forms of Berber identity back 4,000 years. The Tjemehu and Tjehenu were ethnic groups living in totally different socio-political context. It is not even known for sure if they spoke a variant of Berber languages. Therefore, outside of these groups being generally ancestors of modern north Africans, it is impossible to put them into the same social and political context as modern "Berbers". Their world was not bounded by Arabs, Europeans or even the idea of African. Their world was totally different in many ways.
The fact is that things change. People move, environments change, time moves on. I understand wanting to bring recognition and solidarity to Berber speaking populations in Northern Africa, but I don't think they need to sacrifice their Africanness to do it. Likewise, I think it is ironic that some would look to Europe as the basis for this resurgence when Europe has done much to foment anti Berber sentiment to begin with in many ways.
Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
Mazigh
quote:Blackcentrism and Berbercentrism are totally different. The Berbers claim a far ancienity in North Africa, while the Blackcentrists (like anta diop, and many others) have to reduce them to recent periods (Vandals?) to claim a black Africa. The ideologies are totally contradictory. Some afrocentrists would believe that the Berbers are the unrooted people of North Africa descending from recent times, but this can hardly seen as an attiring idea excepts fro the blackcentrists. Right?
Well that was just a theory from Diop..as a possible explanation after-all the Vandals were there in North-Africa so it wasn't un-reasonable to explain the lite-skinned Berbers in that direction..now whether he was wrong or right is a whole different story.
My own pet theory is that the lite-skinned Berbers have half their origins in the sea-peoples who sacked everywhere between Troy and Kemet during the time of Merneptah and were allies of the dark-skinned Libyans who they intermixed with..that's why I believe they vary widely in features and complexion and carry both Eurasian and East African DNA but that would not make even the lightest of them non Africans by genes or pre-Islamic culture. Again this man is an African American and a self-proclaimed Black-man if he were born amongst the Berbers and recognized himself as a non Black that would not change the fact of his black ancestry.
If the historian being interviewed didn't know what a Barber was and wasn't being sarcastic when discussing Septimus Servus then he should be fired.
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
Mazigh
How long you have been on this forum yet you seem to continue to forget on purpose, that Berber is a LANGUAGE Group, not an ethnicity.
Now you have TWO choices.
1. Berbers are a multi ethnic language group that originates in East Africa.
OR
2. Berbers are really non-Africans.
Now these are as easy as it gets. No excuse for being on this forum so long and repeating the same things. Open your mind to reality and leave Fantasy behind. There is nothing wrong with admiting that Berbers started off As Blacks and now has white members.
Peace
Posted by Mazigh (Member # 8621) on :
It is difficult with all those loaded with afrocentric convintions... You discoverd now that Berber is a language not an ethnic group. So, what? It sounds like as the others names are ethnic and not a language! Prove then that the identification of the Berbers is others than any otgher ethnicity!!!!!!
And claiming it is a reasonable theory that the Berber would originate with the vandals and sea people, is just the repeated afrocentrism of Anta Diop.
Two choices? No thanks!
Posted by Jari-Ankhamun (Member # 14451) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mazigh: It is difficult with all those loaded with afrocentric convintions... You discoverd now that Berber is a language not an ethnic group. So, what? It sounds like as the others names are ethnic and not a language! Prove then that the identification of the Berbers is others than any otgher ethnicity!!!!!!
And claiming it is a reasonable theory that the Berber would originate with the vandals and sea people, is just the repeated afrocentrism of Anta Diop.
Two choices? No thanks!
So where in your research did the Berbers come from, remember the language originated in East Africa. From my studies Eurasians arrived from the East but N. Africa was poulated by blacks already. Its obvious these Eurasians adopted the language from the Blacks. Then you have the sea people and Vandal invasions plus white Slavery that HAD to make and impact these people did not just vanish into thin air.
Posted by Mazigh (Member # 8621) on :
I didn't speak on the origin of the Berber language. Wether it originate in the Central Sahara or in East Africa, it is always African.
You seem confuse the question: If the language is African, then why claiming they're remnants of sea people and Vandals?
You mean that their language is originating in East Africa, so they were black, but they became white with the Vandals and sea people?
Anta Diop, unlucky, tried to prove the Germanic origin of the Berber language. Knowing it is false, How do you prove it?
Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
Mazigh!! I said lite-skinned Berbers!!
quote:And claiming it is a reasonable theory that the Berber would originate with the vandals and sea people, is just the repeated afrocentrism of Anta Diop.
Did the Sea Peoples settle to the West of Kemet or not?.. were they not allies of the Libyans?...and again I stated this as a theory not a fact..which in my view seems reasonable..again it don't make them non Africans as stated above in either Culture,language or Genes.
Posted by Mazigh (Member # 8621) on :
Many europians claim also the European origin of the light skinned Berbers, because they are white...
Those Sea people allied with the Libyans, but those white Libyans predate the Sea people! How can you clarify that?
Sea people: 1200 bc. Tamahu: third millenium.
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
The point is that Berber languages do not originate with white skinned North Africans. Hence, looking for the historic presence of white skinned people in North Africa does not equate with the history, origin and extent of Berber languages or culture. White Northern Africans are part of the Berber community and one of the most visible parts of the community but that does not make white Northern Africans the "epitome" of Berber people now or historically.
Again, whites in North Africa are the result of foreign migrations into North Africa and none of those migrations brought Berber languages into Africa. Likewise there is no proof of ancient white Africans originating in the Sahara except in the minds and imaginations of white Europeans who have historically tried their best to make the Sahara and North Africa a cradle for ancient White civilization, which would include Egypt and The Berbers.
Taking a hand full of images out of the literally thousands found on the rocks in North Africa depicting black Africans constitutes nothing more than distortion and nonsense.
Posted by Mazigh (Member # 8621) on :
But you have to justify your conclusion! The Berber language originate with the Capsians (12 000 - 6 000 BC), and the actual Berbers (generally speaking) are their descendants. There is no discunitnuity.
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
There is no such thing as "The Capsians". The Capsian is a historical time period defined based on archaeological artifacts found in Algeria, Tunisia, LIbya and the Sahara. It is not a race and it is entirely African. The skeletons and anthropological evidence has been used to argue for and against foreign mixture.
The Capsian is not a linguistic term. Nobody knows what language the Capsians spoke. There is nothing therefore that connects them to "Berbers" because again, Berber is a language not a race or phenotype.
So again, you are simply trying to tie Berber languages which are entirely African, with evidence for non African white phenotypes in North Africa, as if Berber originates with white Non African migrants to Africa when it doesn't. Yes, some north Africans are whites and there have been whites in North Africa historically due to migrations, but that does not imply that Berber language and culture originated with whites in North Africa.
Can you let me see that the identification of the Berbers is others than the other ethnicities? With other words, are the other ethnicities race defined, while the Berbers are language defined?
Can you prove that African means always black?
Posted by astenb (Member # 14524) on :
That is the dilemma. The DONT want to see themselves as MIXED they want to see themselves as some PURE continuum that has always existed in The Maghreb. They WANT to believe that "white Northern Africans ARE the "epitome" of Berber people now and historically." To add insult to INJURY many of them speak ill of the SOUTHERN Berber speakers and how "Mixed they are with Negroes."
Even in the face of all evidence. In fact I brought this up in a different website and these Euroclowns and "North Afrocentrics" danced around the issue in a way that would make Micheal Jackson proud.
Here it is folks, tell me that this is not significant. Mazigh I would specifically like YOU to comment on this because you seem smart.
I am going to quote the Abstract because it makes a VERY IMPORTANT POINT I will highligh:
quote: Africa is the source of all modern humans, but characterization of genetic variation and of relationships among populations across the continent has been enigmatic. We studied 121 African populations, four African American populations, and 60 non-African populations for patterns of variation at 1327 nuclear microsatellite and insertion/deletion markers. We identified 14 ancestral population clusters in Africa that correlate with self-described ethnicity and shared cultural and/or linguistic properties. We observed high levels of mixed ancestry in most populations, reflecting historical migration events across the continent. Our data also provide evidence for shared ancestry among geographically diverse hunter-gatherer populations (Khoesan speakers and Pygmies). The ancestry of African Americans is predominantly from Niger-Kordofanian (~71%), European (~13%), and other African (~8%) populations, ...
Sounds fair enough, now lets NAME those 14 Ancestral clusters:
Mbugu, Chadic, Saharan Cushitic, Eastern Bantu, NiloSaharan, Saharan/Dogon, Fulani, Western Bantu, S.African Khoesan/Mbuti, Niger Kordofanian, Sandawe, Central Sudanic, Hadza, W.Pygmy.
If you notice these clusters were based on and "correlate with **self-described ethnicity** and shared cultural and/or linguistic properties".
Now ask yourself where does the **Self Described Ethnicity** and Shared cultural / linguistic group represented as "Berber People" in these 14 Ancestral Clusters?
Thats right, YOU DONT SEE IT BECAUSE IT SIMPLY DOES NOT EXIST!
These are the continent wide 14 Clusters.
This is the North African sample:
Notice the North African sample (Mozabite Berber) does not have its OWN specific Ancestral cluster but is a mixture of 3 primary clusters - Niger Kordofanian, Eurasian, Cushitic.
Mazigh - Based on this study please explain again the uniqueness of the "Self described Ethnicity" of Berber people and how it fits in with this genetic sampling of African populations. Once you come to accept the conclusion that Berber people are not unique genetically but are just Mixed Africans then it will be easy to move on from there and try to figure out WHEN they Africans now inhabiting North African became mixed.
Posted by astenb (Member # 14524) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mazigh: Can you let me see that the identification of the Berbers is others than the other ethnicities? With other words, are the other ethnicities race defined, while the Berbers are language defined?
Can you prove that African means always black?
The only time "African" does NOT equal Black is when it is MIXED. See my post above. Tishkoff et al found 14 Unique African Clusters : These African clusters that are listed above are "Self Described" ethnicities of "BLACK" peoples within Africa. NONE of them are designated for white peoples. The only one designated as Non African is the "EURASIAN" cluster (light Blue) of which "Mozabite Berbers" owe a large portion of Ancestry to. You should take note the Ligh Blue "Euarasian" cluster is hard to distinguish from a Very old Ancestral African cluster, So it is probably a bit of Both. But i am sure you can figure out which populations have mostly "Eurasian" ancestry as opposed to "Ancestral African" Ancestry.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mazigh:
Many europians claim also the European origin of the light skinned Berbers, because they are white...
I read that the white population is found in the Saharan rock arts from 6 000 year b.C.
Any photos? I hope it is not that same one(s) that you provided in this link yesterday:
...since I had noted therein that the example displaying female figures riding Taurines is likely a more recent rock-painting than the other Saharan examples. Or are you referring to male figures painted in white pigment?
quote: Those Sea people allied with the Libyans, but those white Libyans predate the Sea people! How can you clarify that?
Sea people: 1200 bc. Tamahu: third millenium.
I question the level of contribution of "the Sea people" into coastal Northwest African gene as one of a considerable degree, because sections of coastal northwest African Imazighen have asymmetrical uniparental genealogical structure, wherein the predominant male gene pool constitutes the characteristic Tamazight marker hg E1b1b1b of the P2 clade, accompanied by other hg E1b1b1 markers. European hg R and hg I subclades are generally rare to absent in Imazighen populations. Ask yourself this: Are we to assume that the "Sea People" gave away their females to autochthonous Saharans, as opposed to "the Sea People" males disproportionately taking in concubines from those autochthonous populations, assuming that the "Sea People's" presence in coastal northern Africa was not one of weakness or subjugation but of imperialist expansion?
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mazigh:
It is difficult with all those loaded with afrocentric convintions... You discoverd now that Berber is a language not an ethnic group.
Actually this fact has been repeatedly stated here as long as 6 years ago, if not more, long before you joined the board. So, it is not some new revelation.
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mazigh: Can you let me see that the identification of the Berbers is others than the other ethnicities? With other words, are the other ethnicities race defined, while the Berbers are language defined?
Can you prove that African means always black?
Firstly the point is what is African. African means predominantly carrying African genetic lineages. That is the key point. The blackness is simply a reflection of the fact that populations in Africa are adapted to tropical and subtropical environments. Hence, those features would be passed on and prominent among those carrying mostly African lineages.
Now, when I say African, I don't mean simply living in the continent of Africa. I don't mean someone who migrated to Africa from somewhere else. I am referring to populations whose primary existence and genetic lineages exist within the confines of the African continent, since the beginning of the human species.
That is the only definition of African I am referring to.
Ethnicities are not race defined, which is my point. Berbers are made up of various ethnic groups. There is no single Berber ethnicity or phenotype. It is simply a group of related languages and cultural traits. It seems you are trying to tie it to one ethnicity and phenotype which simply does not reflect reality.
Most likely these are part of the Zenata Berber groups that have been long known to inhabit the Central Maghreb.
quote: According to the French historians Emile Felix Gautier and Gabriel Camps, Zenata tribes entered in Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia from the east of Africa in pre-Islamic times and grouped themselves with the tribes of Maghrawa, Miknasa, and Banu Ifran, etc....
Now ask yourself where does the **Self Described Ethnicity** and Shared cultural / linguistic group represented as "Berber People" in these 14 Ancestral Clusters?
Thats right, YOU DONT SEE IT BECAUSE IT SIMPLY DOES NOT EXIST!
Sorry, i'm a great ignorant of the Geneticology But as the study didn't deny the existence of the Ango-Americans, it doesn't also deny the existence of the Berbers. At first sight (i cannot go deeper ), the studies is concerning the blacks. African is used as black.
Sorry if i'm wrong, in fact i've to acknowledge i'm not that smart Posted by astenb (Member # 14524) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mazigh:
quote:Originally posted by astenb:
Now ask yourself where does the **Self Described Ethnicity** and Shared cultural / linguistic group represented as "Berber People" in these 14 Ancestral Clusters?
Thats right, YOU DONT SEE IT BECAUSE IT SIMPLY DOES NOT EXIST!
Sorry, i'm a great ignorant of the Geneticology But as the study didn't deny the existence of the Ango-Americans, it doesn't also deny the existence of the Berbers. At first sight (i cannot go deeper ), the studies is concerning the blacks. African is used as black.
Sorry if i'm wrong, in fact i've to acknowledge i'm not that smart
To make it simply just look at the map and look at the colors.
This study sampled 121 different Ethnic groups. After doing so they noted that ALL these ethnic groups can best be seen as MIXTURES of 14 Separate Genetic "ANCESTRAL" clusters. Sure some of them are different, with different culture and language but underneath it all the genetics ties them into 14 ancestral clusters. Those clusters are named above. Some of the distinct clusters are Khoi/Pygmy, Cushitic, Western Bantu, Chadic, Nilo-saharan etc.
Take a look at the Cape Colored population of South Africa. This population is historically documented to be a mixture of Click speakers with partial ancient Cushitic Ancestry , Bantu Speakers, Europeans, South East Indians and Malaysians. You can read about them here.
Genetically being a population of RECENT MIXED ANCESTRY they did not produce their OWN SPECIFIC ANCESTRAL Cluster.......but were a member of various OTHER ANCESTRAL CLUSTERS. Represented by the colors: Purple- Cushitic Blue- Eurasian Orange-Niger-Kordofanian Green-Khiosan
That should be a simple enough explanation to explain the METHOD. Now lets move to Mozabite Berbers.
They TOO being of MIXED ANCESTRY did not produce their OWN SPECIFIC ANCESTRAL Cluster.......but were a member of various OTHER ANCESTRAL CLUSTERS. Represented by the colors: Blue- Eurasian Purple-Cushitic Orange-Niger Kordofanian.
If you notice North African Mozabite and South African "CMA or Cape MIXED Ancestry" is made up of some of the SAME ANCESTRAL COMPONENTS. It doesn't matter that they inhabit the opposite geographical extremes of the continent. NEITHER population is genetically distinct like you see with the East African population called "HADZA" displayed in yellow which forms ITS OWN ancestral cluster.
I think you understand what I am getting at:
Looking at what we KNOW of Berber people. And looking at the genetic makeup of Berber people found in THIS STUDY you only really have 3 MAIN lines to choose from: Blue-Eurasian Purple-Cushitic Orange-Niger Kordofanian
-Which line of Ancestry do you think is most likely to be responsible for the indigenous male lines of Ancestry seen in North Africa (E-m81, E-v65)
-Which line of Ancestry do you think is most likely to be responsible for the predominant Eurasian Female Ancestry now found in North Africa
-Which line of Ancestry do you think is most responsible for the African language group :Berber that is spoke in North Africa.
-Which line of Ancestry do you think is most responsible for the Berber People that can best be described as "Black"
-Which line of Ancestry do you think is most responsible for the Berber People tha can best be described as "White"
Which lines do you think are the OLDEST and represent what it actually means to be "Berber"?
of course its not this simple but once you accept the fact the North Africans are MIXED the same what South African Cape "Coloreds" are also MIXED then you can move past it. Other wise you must force a square peg in a round hole and say Eurasians are responsible for Berber language and African male genetic markers. Like some one said it before, you cannot have it both ways.
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
LOL! Can't resist posting music whenever Berber culture comes up:
@astenb , I appreciate your post/explanation. Once, i will be able to understand that.
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mazigh: @astenb , I appreciate your post/explanation. Once, i will be able to understand that.
Keep in mind this is only a subset of a larger Y Mtdna tree which originates in East Africa and represents ancient movements of Africans in and Out of Africa. It makes no sense to try and separate this from its larger African context.
And looking at the Tishkof data its very clear that the "Cushitic" Ancestral Cluster would be responsible for that E-M81 and v65 that shows in North Africa.
What is even MORE surprising in all of this is that North Africa had no specific cluster. And Even if Egypt was sampled I would figure them to be "clusterless" as well. Underneath it all, like the Beja they would be "Cushitic" (at least in my opinion) This sort of goes against the idea of Egyptians(hypothetically) and Berbers (In this study) being a Ethnic group that is differentiated genetically by DEEP Ancestry. UNLIKE the Chadic, Central Sudanic and Nilo-Saharan.
I guess I am somewhat disappointed by this, It almost makes things TOO simple. It would have been FAR more interesting if North Africans (Mozabite Berbers) were truly in a Genetic Grouping of their own. Even West Bantu and East Bantu were separate! To me this means that People looking at the sparse distribution skeletal remains in North Africa need to reassess WHO the modern descendants of those remains really are [until some FULL genetic analyst has taken place.]....or if they even exist. And for North Africans looking at 15, 20, 30, 40, or 50 Thousand year old remains, those MAY NOT YOUR ANCESTORS. There is too much pride in thinking your people are a pure unit that has been in the Maghreb since time immortal.
Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
quote:Originally posted by Yonis2:
quote:dana marniche wrote:
The Tuareg are the remnant of people called and still called Aulamidden, Iforas, Maghira , Imazighen and Imaketan those ancient peoples lining the coasts of North and East Africa referred to by the Romans as Ifuraces, Makkhuritae, Mazikes, and Macetae or Macutuni . Also referred to in Arab texts as Lamtuna, Beni Ifren or Ferwan, Maghrawa , Mazigh, and Ketama.
Stop making up your own tribes/ethnicities, when exactly are you going to provide sources for all these wild claims you make here?
i've already given my sources many times on this forum skinny. But, you might want to start looking at the article The African Heritage and Ethnohistory of the Moors: Background to the Emergence of Early Berber and Arab peoples... by Dana Reynolds-Marniche in, The Golden Age of the Moors.
But that's only if you have time to read what black people write. Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
quote:Originally posted by astenb:
quote:Originally posted by Mazigh:
quote:Originally posted by astenb:
Now ask yourself where does the **Self Described Ethnicity** and Shared cultural / linguistic group represented as "Berber People" in these 14 Ancestral Clusters?
Thats right, YOU DONT SEE IT BECAUSE IT SIMPLY DOES NOT EXIST!
Sorry, i'm a great ignorant of the Geneticology But as the study didn't deny the existence of the Ango-Americans, it doesn't also deny the existence of the Berbers. At first sight (i cannot go deeper ), the studies is concerning the blacks. African is used as black.
Sorry if i'm wrong, in fact i've to acknowledge i'm not that smart
To make it simply just look at the map and look at the colors.
This study sampled 121 different Ethnic groups. After doing so they noted that ALL these ethnic groups can best be seen as MIXTURES of 14 Separate Genetic "ANCESTRAL" clusters. Sure some of them are different, with different culture and language but underneath it all the genetics ties them into 14 ancestral clusters. Those clusters are named above. Some of the distinct clusters are Khoi/Pygmy, Cushitic, Western Bantu, Chadic, Nilo-saharan etc.
Take a look at the Cape Colored population of South Africa. This population is historically documented to be a mixture of Click speakers with partial ancient Cushitic Ancestry , Bantu Speakers, Europeans, South East Indians and Malaysians. You can read about them here.
Genetically being a population of RECENT MIXED ANCESTRY they did not produce their OWN SPECIFIC ANCESTRAL Cluster.......but were a member of various OTHER ANCESTRAL CLUSTERS. Represented by the colors: Purple- Cushitic Blue- Eurasian Orange-Niger-Kordofanian Green-Khiosan
That should be a simple enough explanation to explain the METHOD. Now lets move to Mozabite Berbers.
They TOO being of MIXED ANCESTRY did not produce their OWN SPECIFIC ANCESTRAL Cluster.......but were a member of various OTHER ANCESTRAL CLUSTERS. Represented by the colors: Blue- Eurasian Purple-Cushitic Orange-Niger Kordofanian.
If you notice North African Mozabite and South African "CMA or Cape MIXED Ancestry" is made up of some of the SAME ANCESTRAL COMPONENTS. It doesn't matter that they inhabit the opposite geographical extremes of the continent. NEITHER population is genetically distinct like you see with the East African population called "HADZA" displayed in yellow which forms ITS OWN ancestral cluster.
I think you understand what I am getting at:
Looking at what we KNOW of Berber people. And looking at the genetic makeup of Berber people found in THIS STUDY you only really have 3 MAIN lines to choose from: Blue-Eurasian Purple-Cushitic Orange-Niger Kordofanian
-Which line of Ancestry do you think is most likely to be responsible for the indigenous male lines of Ancestry seen in North Africa (E-m81, E-v65)
-Which line of Ancestry do you think is most likely to be responsible for the predominant Eurasian Female Ancestry now found in North Africa
-Which line of Ancestry do you think is most responsible for the African language group :Berber that is spoke in North Africa.
-Which line of Ancestry do you think is most responsible for the Berber People that can best be described as "Black"
-Which line of Ancestry do you think is most responsible for the Berber People tha can best be described as "White"
Which lines do you think are the OLDEST and represent what it actually means to be "Berber"?
of course its not this simple but once you accept the fact the North Africans are MIXED the same what South African Cape "Coloreds" are also MIXED then you can move past it. Other wise you must force a square peg in a round hole and say Eurasians are responsible for Berber language and African male genetic markers. Like some one said it before, you cannot have it both ways.
LOL!
Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mazigh: There are no Amazigh anti-blacksentiments, if needed, then it is anti-blackcentric sentiments.
I think you need to visit Morocco matie or for that matter Youtube.
Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mazigh: Of course they're not all whites, but the average Egyptian is brown:
Zahi Hawass said once that the Egyptians are neither arabs neither blacks, the conviced blacks called him liar..., the blacks of America said him you're not white, you're black, the Egyptians were black.. If he -Zahi Hawass- is black, then i agree that the Egyptians are black, he represents the average Egyptian, but then, i think the thema would be what is "black":
Mazigh Americans would not try to call Zahi a white person. They would probably call him an Arab and it would be most likely in a derogatory sense, unfortunately. (Its a long story that has to do with grocery stores.) These two people would not even be considered brown by blacks in the U.S. by blacks though maybe by some Midwestern U.S. white person not used to seeing Middle East people in their midst.
Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
quote:Originally posted by astenb: That is the dilemma. The DONT want to see themselves as MIXED they want to see themselves as some PURE continuum that has always existed in The Maghreb. They WANT to believe that "white Northern Africans ARE the "epitome" of Berber people now and historically." To add insult to INJURY many of them speak ill of the SOUTHERN Berber speakers and how "Mixed they are with Negroes."
Even in the face of all evidence. In fact I brought this up in a different website and these Euroclowns and "North Afrocentrics" danced around the issue in a way that would make Micheal Jackson proud.
Here it is folks, tell me that this is not significant. Mazigh I would specifically like YOU to comment on this because you seem smart.
I am going to quote the Abstract because it makes a VERY IMPORTANT POINT I will highligh:
quote: Africa is the source of all modern humans, but characterization of genetic variation and of relationships among populations across the continent has been enigmatic. We studied 121 African populations, four African American populations, and 60 non-African populations for patterns of variation at 1327 nuclear microsatellite and insertion/deletion markers. We identified 14 ancestral population clusters in Africa that correlate with self-described ethnicity and shared cultural and/or linguistic properties. We observed high levels of mixed ancestry in most populations, reflecting historical migration events across the continent. Our data also provide evidence for shared ancestry among geographically diverse hunter-gatherer populations (Khoesan speakers and Pygmies). The ancestry of African Americans is predominantly from Niger-Kordofanian (~71%), European (~13%), and other African (~8%) populations, ...
Sounds fair enough, now lets NAME those 14 Ancestral clusters:
Mbugu, Chadic, Saharan Cushitic, Eastern Bantu, NiloSaharan, Saharan/Dogon, Fulani, Western Bantu, S.African Khoesan/Mbuti, Niger Kordofanian, Sandawe, Central Sudanic, Hadza, W.Pygmy.
If you notice these clusters were based on and "correlate with **self-described ethnicity** and shared cultural and/or linguistic properties".
Now ask yourself where does the **Self Described Ethnicity** and Shared cultural / linguistic group represented as "Berber People" in these 14 Ancestral Clusters?
Thats right, YOU DONT SEE IT BECAUSE IT SIMPLY DOES NOT EXIST!
These are the continent wide 14 Clusters.
This is the North African sample:
Notice the North African sample (Mozabite Berber) does not have its OWN specific Ancestral cluster but is a mixture of 3 primary clusters - Niger Kordofanian, Eurasian, Cushitic.
Mazigh - Based on this study please explain again the uniqueness of the "Self described Ethnicity" of Berber people and how it fits in with this genetic sampling of African populations. Once you come to accept the conclusion that Berber people are not unique genetically but are just Mixed Africans then it will be easy to move on from there and try to figure out WHEN they Africans now inhabiting North African became mixed.
This is all soooo true. Especially people more than half European Berber descent claiming they are more Berber than southern ones.
Good advice about moving on but I doubt they'll take it. Posted by Nehesy (Member # 17252) on :
I saw many comments where Dana was saying that many so-called berbers had european ancestry ( european slaves in North Africa) and I found the clues in two books :
1 . "Esclaves et domestiques au Moyen âge", 2006, Jacques Heers
" Slaves and servants in the Middle Age"
2 . "Les barbaresques" , Jacques Heers , 2001.
Alger the capital of Algeria was full of christian renegates ( French, Italian, Spanish , Albanians , Corsians...Converted to islam), Turks , saqalibas from the balkans , Italian slaves ( Thevenot in the 17th century suggested to not speak italian in Alger if you wanted to keep a secret). Catalans used to sell christians slaves to North Africans ( Alger).
Alger ,Oran , Bougie ( in Kabylie), Tlemcen have all been occupied by Europeans ( Spanish , Pirates : usually christian renagates , Turks etc).
Page 227 (book 2)he says that almost 50 % of Alger inhabitants were christian slaves...Then king of Alger were often Turks ( barberousse) or renegates like Hassan Pacha (Venitian)
Posted by Mazigh (Member # 8621) on :
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche:
quote:Originally posted by Mazigh: There are no Amazigh anti-blacksentiments, if needed, then it is anti-blackcentric sentiments.
I think you need to visit Morocco matie or for that matter Youtube.
I'm Moroccan. Dana,
The Black of Morocco is the Mexican of America. Morocco traded in slaves like it was the mode at that times. Black is sometimes called "Abid" in arabic. Abid means "slave", but in many times, it loses the cannotation with "slave" and remains only "black". In Berber some say "Ismegh" which means slave, but i remember my mother calling "ismegh", because it believed that it means "black". Female slaves are called "Taya" in Berber language. Although Taya has no cannotation with "black", i found in at least one oral story that Taya was "black".
So, Jew (Yhudi) has also a cannotation with "malignant". In Berber language it seems that "Judaism" (Tudayt) means only "cowardice".
The Berber language didn't understand yet that they're no romans any more. An European is called "Roman". Roman is associated with cruelity. So, you can frequently hear in the Berber language "He has a Roman heart" (He has no pity = Cruel).
It is possible that those cannotations are recent (some centuries ?).
This is also not general, some tribes are more hostile to blacks, others towards the Europeans while others are against the Arabs....
Posted by astenb (Member # 14524) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mazigh:
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche:
quote:Originally posted by Mazigh: There are no Amazigh anti-blacksentiments, if needed, then it is anti-blackcentric sentiments.
I think you need to visit Morocco matie or for that matter Youtube.
I'm Moroccan. Dana,
The Black of Morocco is the Mexican of America. Morocco traded in slaves like it was the mode at that times. Black is sometimes called "Abid" in arabic.
You do understand that "Mexicans" have always lived in "America" right?
You do understand that "Mexico" IS in Central AMERICA right?
You do understand that the Borders of "Mexico" have been, and ETHNICALLY still overlap upon the range of Northern "America" right?
You still have not accepted your mixed Nature.
Posted by argyle104 (Member # 14634) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mazigh: There are no Amazigh anti-blacksentiments, if needed, then it is anti-blackcentric sentiments.
I think you need to visit Morocco matie or for that matter Youtube.
I'm Moroccan. Dana,
The Black of Morocco is the Mexican of America. Morocco traded in slaves like it was the mode at that times. Black is sometimes called "Abid" in arabic. Abid means "slave", but in many times, it loses the cannotation with "slave" and remains only "black". In Berber some say "Ismegh" which means slave, but i remember my mother calling "ismegh", because it believed that it means "black". Female slaves are called "Taya" in Berber language. Although Taya has no cannotation with "black", i found in at least one oral story that Taya was "black".
So, Jew (Yhudi) has also a cannotation with "malignant". In Berber language it seems that "Judaism" (Tudayt) means only "cowardice".
The Berber language didn't understand yet that they're no romans any more. An European is called "Roman". Roman is associated with cruelity. So, you can frequently hear in the Berber language "He has a Roman heart" (He has no pity = Cruel).
It is possible that those cannotations are recent (some centuries ?).
This is also not general, some tribes are more hostile to blacks, others towards the Europeans while others are against the Arabs....
Mazigh i could have guessed you were from Morocco with people that have the most hostility in North Africa towards blackness. Everybody knows that in the Arab world today "abid" means a black person or slave even though in some places it is at least derogatory. You have made my point. In the last 2-300 years during the period of the Ottoman Turks black slaves were more predominant in North Africa than they had been previously. That doesn't mean one can change history and say now therefore the original people called Berbers and/or Amazighen were never taking white slaves and concubines, or that they were never called blacks, or that when the Syrians and Europeans called them "blacks" or "Ethiopians" they didn't really mean "black".
Nationalism and political circumstances of today can not distort the history. Berber were originally a people with a particular phenotype, culture and language that stretched across the coasts of North Africa and East Africa claimed pre-Islamic Canaanite origins. The fact that they have mixed with literally everybody and their mother doesn't change any of these facts. There were associated with particular tomb types associated with the early Berbers and Tuareg found in Nubia and Abyssinia. Their culture show intrusion in the iron age of Greek type tombs, pottery and other non-African elements particular skeletal and cranial remains. I'm sorry if your people hate what the term black stands for or that you consider certain sub-Saharans less than you. That is not my problem.
And let's leave the natives of "Mexico" and their treatment in the U.S. out of this. Neither they nor blacks are as disrespected as black-skinned inidividuals are among many of the peoples in your country and other parts of the Near and Middle East - at least not any more. Posted by Mazigh (Member # 8621) on :
Are you all hostile to me?? This is because you have prejugements.
I don't hate blacks at all. I don't mind if they were inferior or not. I only try to survive, i've no interesting in judging the ethnicities.
Unfortunately, the blacks were enslaved, but slavery is not black. But since, the blacks were strong, but without state to defend them, they became enslaved. The Berbers were enslaved too...
By Mexican i mean Mexican (nationality) and not the natives of early America. The blacks of today in Morocco are involved in illegal immigration through morocco to Europa.
Posted by 9th Element (Member # 17629) on :
quote:Originally posted by Yonis2: Yes they were, egyptian berbers originally of the western desert close to the the nile.
Egyptians/thebians didn't like them and their heretic worship that's why the sanctioned Piye of Napata to overthrow the 24th berber dynasty and establish the 25th kushite dynasty.
Journal of Genetic Genealogy, 5 (1):35-65, 2009
Y Haplogroups, Archaeological Cultures and Language Families: A
Review of the Possibility of Multidisciplinary Comparisons Using the Case of Haplogroup E-M35
Scenario 3. More recent Afroasiatic, originating in Africa. Despite its large impact, the founding population.
Our review of the E-M35 evidence gives many insights useful for multidisciplinary consideration in both linguistics and archaeology:
Berber populations, while overwhelmingly dominated by specific E-M35 male lineages, are not the same sub-clades as found along the Nile and into the Horn of Africa.
"The evidence strongly suggests that the male lineage most strongly associated with Afroasiatic, E-M35, clearly has an origin far from the Levant, in Africa."
An examination of Nubian and Egyptian biological distances: Support for biological diffusion or in situ development?
K. Goddea, b, Corresponding Author Contact Information, E-mail The Corresponding Author
aDepartment of Anthropology, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, 250 South Stadium Hall, Knoxville, TN 37996, USA
bDepartment of Science, South College, 3904 Lonas Dr, Knoxville, TN 37909, USA
Received 31 July 2008; accepted 10 August 2009. Available online 19 September 2009.
Abstract
Many authors have speculated on Nubian biological evolution. Because of the contact Nubians had with other peoples, migration and/or invasion (biological diffusion) were originally thought to be the biological mechanism for skeletal changes in Nubians. Later, a new hypothesis was put forth, the in situ hypothesis. The new hypothesis postulated that Nubians evolved in situ, without much genetic influence from foreign populations. This study examined 12 Egyptian and Nubian groups in an effort to explore the relationship between the two populations and to test the in situ hypothesis. Data from nine cranial nonmetric traits were assessed for an estimate of biological distance, using Mahalanobis D2 with a tetrachoric matrix. The distance scores were then input into principal coordinates analysis (PCO) to depict the relationships between the two populations. PCO detected 60% of the variation in the first two principal coordinates. A plot of the distance scores revealed only one cluster; the Nubian and Egyptian groups clustered together. The grouping of the Nubians and Egyptians indicates there may have been some sort of gene flow between these groups of Nubians and Egyptians. However, common adaptation to similar environments may also be responsible for this pattern. Although the predominant results in this study appear to support the biological diffusion hypothesis, the in situ hypothesis was not completely negated.
Posted by 9th Element (Member # 17629) on :
The nubian mesolithic: A consideration of the Wadi Halfa remains
References and further reading may be available for this article. To view references and further reading you must purchase this article.
Meredith F. Small*
Department of anthropology, University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado 80302, U.S.A.
Received 4 June 1980; accepted 30 October 1980. Available online 5 April 2006.
Morphological variation of the skeletal remains of ancient Nubia has been traditionally explained as a product of multiple migrations into the Nile Valley. In contrast, various researchers have noted a continuity in craniofacial variation from Mesolithic through Neolithic times. This apparent continuity could be explained by in situ cultural evolution producing shifts in selective pressures which may act on teeth, the facial complex, and the cranial vault.
A series of 13 Mesolithic skulls from Wadi Halfa, Sudan, are compared to Nubian Neolithic remains by means of extended canonical analysis. Results support recent research which suggests consistent trends of facial reduction and cranial vault expansion from Mesolithic through Neolithic times.
Posted by 9th Element (Member # 17629) on :
How everything came about, and not just popped out of thin air!!!!!!?
The continuum!
Nubia's Oldest House?
Some of the most important evidence of early man in Nubia was discovered recently by an expedition of the Royal Ontario Museum, Toronto, under the direction of Dr. Kryzstof Grzymski, on the east bank of the Nile, about 70 miles (116 km) south of Dongola, Sudan. During the early 1990's, this team discovered several sites containing hundreds of Paleolithic hand axes. At one site, however, the team identified an apparent stone tool workshop, where thousands of sandstone hand axes and flakes lay on the ground around a row of large stones set in a line, suggesting the remains of a shelter. This seems to be the earliest "habitation" site yet discovered in the Nile Valley and may be up to 70,000 years old.
What the Nubian environment was like throughout these distant times, we cannot know with certainty, but it must have changed many times. For many thousands of years it was probably far different than what it is today. Between about 50,000 to 25,000 years ago, the hand axe gradually disappeared and was replaced with numerous distinctive chipped stone industries that varied from region to region, suggesting the presence in Nubia of many different peoples or tribal groups dwelling in close proximity to each other. When we first encounter skeletal remains in Nubia, they are those of modern man: homo sapiens.
Nubia's Oldest Battle?
From about 25,000 to 8,000 years ago, the environment gradually evolved to its present state. From this phase several very early settlement sites have been identified at the Second Cataract, near the Egypt-Sudan border. These appear to have been used seasonally by people leading a semi-nomadic existence. The people hunted, fished, and ground wild grain. The first cemeteries also appear, suggesting that people may have been living at least partly sedentary lives. One cemetery site at Jebel Sahaba, near Wadi Halfa, Sudan, contained a number of bodies that had suffered violent deaths and were buried in a mass grave. This suggests that people, even 10,000 years ago, had begun to compete with each other for resources and were willing to kill each other to control them.
Professor of African American Studies and History, Northeastern University
Timothy Kendall
Former Associate Curator, Dept. of Ancient Egyptian, Nubian, and Near Eastern Art, Museum of Fine Arts, Boston; and Vice President, International Nubian Studies Society
Mission archéologique suisse au Soudan Université de Neuchâtel Institut de Préhistoire et des Sciences de l’Antiquité Matthieu Honegger
Three scale models—of the Mesolithic hut of el-Barga (7500 B.C.), the proto-urban agglomeration of the Pre-Kerma (3000 B.C.) and the ancient city of Kerma (2500-1500 B.C.)—give a glimpse of the world of the living. They show the evolution of settlements for each of the key periods in Nubian history. Huts indicate the birth of a sedentary way of life, the agglomeration confirms the settling of populations on a territory and the capital of the Kingdom of Kerma marks the culmination of the complexification of Nubian architecture with its ever more monumental constructions. The three models were created in Switzerland by Hugo Lienhard and were installed in the museum in January 2009.
Nubia Net Posted by 9th Element (Member # 17629) on :
Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada and the University of Alberta
BACKGROUND
Nubia served in antiquity as an important north-south corridor for trade and military contacts with civilizations of Egypt and the Ethiopian highlands, and as a route east to the Red Sea and west through the Chad depression to West Africa. Much of our knowledge of ancient Nubia comes from a series of archaeological surveys and salvage excavations that began in 1907, prior to the raising of the first Aswan dam. The last salvage campaign was directed by UNESCO and involved 27 countries in excavation and preservation work during the 1960s and 1970s along a stretch of the Nile River that was to be flooded by the construction of the Aswan High Dam, south of Aswan.
The skeletal remains examined in this study of biological affinities and palaeopathology were excavated by the Scandinavian Joint Expedition in 1963-1964 and are now curated at the Laboratory of Biological Anthropology at the University of Copenhagen. The A-Group sample is from Site 277 and dates to the Classic/Terminal A-Group, corresponding to the Egyptian protodynastic or Archaic periods, the time of Egyptian unification.
The C-Group remains are from Site 179, which is most likely contemporaneous with the First Intermediate Period or early Middle Kingdom of dynastic Egyptian civilization
One of the oldest remains from Upper Egypt, shows strong sub-Saharan affinities, and early northern Egypt also shows sub-Saharan affinities through cultural traits- the 'Nubian complex' of technology and production.
"The morphometric affinities of the 33,000 year old skeleton from Nazlet Khater, Upper Egypt are examined using multivariate statistical procedures.. The results indicate a strong association between some of the sub-Saharan Middle Stone Age (MSA) specimens, and the Nazlet Khater mandible. Furthermore, the results suggest that variability between African populations during the Neolithic and Protohistoric periods was more pronounced than the range of variability observed among recent African and Levantine populations." (PINHASI Ron, SEMAL Patrick (2000). The position of the Nazlet Khater specimen among prehistoric and modern African and Levantine populations. Journal of human evolution. 2000, vol. 39, no3, pp. 269-288 )
"..Middle Paleolithic and the transition to the Upper Paleolithic in the Lower Nile Valley are described... the Middle Paleolithic or, more appropriately, Middle Stone Age of this region starts with the arrival of new populations from sub-Saharan Africa, as evidenced by the nature of the EarlyOne of the oldest remains from Upper Egypt, shows strong sub-Saharan affinities, and early northern Egypt also shows sub-Saharan affinities through cultural traits- the 'Nubian complex' of technology and production.
"The morphometric affinities of the 33,000 year old skeleton from Nazlet Khater, Upper Egypt are examined using multivariate statistical procedures.. The results indicate a strong association between some of the sub-Saharan Middle Stone Age (MSA) specimens, and the Nazlet Khater mandible. Furthermore, the results suggest that variability between African populations during the Neolithic and Protohistoric periods was more pronounced than the range of variability observed among recent African and Levantine populations." (PINHASI Ron, SEMAL Patrick (2000). The position of the Nazlet Khater specimen among prehistoric and modern African and Levantine populations. Journal of human evolution. 2000, vol. 39, no3, pp. 269-288 )
"..Middle Paleolithic and the transition to the Upper Paleolithic in the Lower Nile Valley are described... the Middle Paleolithic or, more appropriately, Middle Stone Age of this region starts with the arrival of new populations from sub-Saharan Africa, as evidenced by the nature of the Early to Middle Stone Age transition in stratified sites. Throughout the late Middle Pleistocene technological change occurs leading to the establishment of the Nubian Complex by the onset of the Upper Pleistocene." (Van Peer, Philip. Did middle stone age moderns of sub-Saharan African descent trigger an upper paleolithic revolution in the lower nile valley? Anthropologie. vol. 42, no3, pp. 215-225 ) to Middle Stone Age transition in stratified sites. Throughout the late Middle Pleistocene technological change occurs leading to the establishment of the Nubian Complex by the onset of the Upper Pleistocene." (Van Peer, Philip. Did middle stone age moderns of sub-Saharan African descent trigger an upper paleolithic revolution in the lower nile valley? Anthropologie. vol. 42, no3, pp. 215-22 Posted by 9th Element (Member # 17629) on :
Egypt, 8000–2000 b.c. Encompasses ancient Egypt and northern ancient Nubia
ca. 4500–3800 B.C.(Badarian Period) Although most sites of this period are cemeteries located in the low desert of the Nile valley proper, the Delta site of Merimde Beni Salama is the largest known in Egypt from this time. The Nile valley sites located in Middle Egypt in the vicinity of the modern town of Badari give the period its name. The numerous Badarian cemeteries reveal a formal burial program that includes constructing a tomb, positioning the body, and supplying the deceased with equipment for an afterlife. The most common burial objects are finely made bowls of Nile clay in brown or red. Tombs occasionally contain jewelry—including the earliest glazed stone beads—and sometimes small human figures of ivory.
Some Notes about an Early African Pool of Cultures from which Emerged Egyptian Civilization
These archaeological data outline a new map of the formation of ancient Egypt: Tasian and Badarian Valley sites were not the centres of a predynastic culture, but peripheral provinces of a network of earlier African cultures where Badarians, Saharans, Nubian and Nilotic peoples regularly circulated along (Darnell 2008) and Nabta Playa could be one of the ceremonial high circles.
The pottery collection consists of 14,285 pottery sherds, including some worked sherds used as tools, four entire vessels and half of a big pot. There are also thin sections of prehistoric sherds and clay samples, both from the Western Desert....etc
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 neriod origin."
History in the Interpretation of the Pattern of p49a,f TaqI RFLP Y-Chromosome Variation in Egypt: A Consideration of Multiple Lines of Evidence,
"ABSTRACT"
The possible factors involved in the generation of p49a,f TaqI Y-chromosome spatial diversity in Egypt were explored. The object was to consider explanations beyond those that emphasize gene flow mediated via military campaigns within the Nile corridor during the dynastic period. Current patterns of the most common variants (V, XI, and IV) have been suggested to be primarily related to Middle Kingdom and New Kingdom political actions in Nubia, including occasional settler colonization, and the conquest of Egypt by Kush (in upper Nubia, northern Sudan), thus initiating the Twenty-Fifth Dynasty. However, a synthesis of evidence from archaeology, historical linguistics, texts, distribution of haplotypes outside Egypt, and some demographic considerations lends greater support to the establishment, before the Middle Kingdom, of the observed distributions of the most prevalent haplotypes V, XI, and IV. It is suggested that the pattern of diversity for these variants in the Egyptian Nile Valley was largely the product of population events that occurred in the late Pleistocene to mid-Holocene through the First Dynasty, and was sustained by continuous smaller-scale bidirectional migrations/interactions.
The higher frequency of V in Ethiopia than in Nubia or upper (southern) Egypt has to be taken into account in any discussion of variation in the Nile Valley. Am. J. Hum. Biol. 17 : "
Haplotypes and percentages
Region (n) IV V XI VII VIII XI XV Lower Egypt (162) 1.2 51.9 11.7 8.6 10.5 3.7 6.8 Upper Egypt (66) 27.3 24.2 28.8 4.6 3.0 0.0 6.1 Lower Nubia (46) 39.1 17.4 30.4 2.2 2.2 0.0 0.0 1
From Lucotte and Mercier (2002).
Posted by 9th Element (Member # 17629) on :
QUOTE:
"Despite the difference, Gebel Ramlah [the Western Desert- Saharan region] is closest to predynastic and early dynastic samples from Abydos, Hierakonpolis, and Badari.."
the Badarians were a "good representative of what the common ancestor to all later predynastic and dynastic Egyptian peoples would be like"
"A comparison of Badari to the Naqada and Hierakonpolis samples .. contradicts the idea of a foreign origin for the Naqada (Petrie, 1939; Baumgartel, 1970)"
Evidence in favor of continuity is also demonstrated by comparison of individual samples. "Naqada and especially Hierakonpolis share close affinities with First-Second Dynasty Abydos.. These findings do not support the concept of a foreign dynastic ''race''"
"Thus, despite increasing foreign influence after the Second Intermediate Period, not only did Egyptian culture remain intact (Lloyd, 2000a), but the people themselves, as represented by the dental samples, appear biologically constant as well."
(Joel D. Irish (2006). Who Were the Ancient Egyptians? Dental Affinities Among Neolithic Through Postdynastic Peoples. Am J Phys Anthropol. 2006 Apr;129(4):529-43.)
Africans have the highest dental diversity "Previous research by the first author revealed that, relative to other modern peoples, sub-Saharan Africans exhibit the highest frequencies of ancestral (or plesiomorphic) dental traits... The fact that sub-Saharan Africans express these apparently plesiomorphic characters, along with additional information on their affinity to other modern populations, evident intra-population heterogeneity, and a world-wide dental cline emanating from the sub-continent, provides further evidence that is consistent with an African origin model."
(Irish JD, Guatelli-Steinberg D.(2003) Ancient teeth and modern human origins: an expanded comparison of African Plio-Pleistocene and recent world dental samples. Hum Evol. 2003 Aug;45(2):113-44.) Posted by 9th Element (Member # 17629) on :
NUBIA AND EGYPT- Nubians and Egyptians were so close in various eras that they were virtually indistinguishable
“The ancient Egyptians referred to a region, located south of the third cataract the Nile River, in which Nubians dwelt as Kush.. Within such context, this phrase is not a racial slur. Throughout the history of ancient Egypt there were numerous, well documented instances that celebrate Nubian-Egyptian marriages. A study of these documents, particularly those dated to both the Egyptian New Kingdom (after 1550 B.C.E.) and to Dynasty XXV and early Dynasty XXVI (about 720-640 BCE), reveals that neither spouse nor any of the children of such unions suffered discrimination at the hands of the ancient Egyptians. Indeed such marriages were never an obstacle to social, economic, or political status, provided the individuals concerned conformed to generally accepted Egyptian social standards. Furthermore, at times, certain Nubian practices, such as tattooing for women, and the unisex fashion of wearing earrings, were wholeheartedly embraced by the ancient Egyptians." (Bianchi, 2004: p. 4)
'It is an extremely difficult task to attempt to describe the Nubians during the course of Egypt's New Kingdom, because their presence appears to have virtually evaporated from the archaeological record.. The result has been described as a wholesale Nubian assimilation into Egyptian society. This assimilation was so complete that it masked all Nubian ethnic identities insofar as archaeological remains are concerned beneath the impenetrable veneer of Egypt's material; culture.. In the Kushite Period, when Nubians ruled as Pharaohs in their own right, the material culture of Dynasty XXV (about 750-655 B.C.E.) was decidedly Egyptian in character.. Nubia's entire landscape up to the region of the Third Cataract was dotted with temples indistinguishable in style and decoration from contemporary temples erected in Egypt. The same observation obtains for the smaller number of typically Egyptian tombs in which these elite Nubian princes were interred.(Bianchi, 2004, p. 99-100)
Robert Bianchi ( 2004). Daily Life of the Nubians. Greenwood Publishing Group Posted by 9th Element (Member # 17629) on :
Mazigh u are from Magrib and u think that Abid means black slave ahahhhahhah u are not even a original arabic speaker so dont use this knew 7th centruy definition during Islamic expansion.
If u want to find the meaning of Abd look to the root of the word but u are Mazigh u are not a original arabic speaker try the word for white in arabic and u might find something special
Abd means black ahhahahahhahhahah Men Hareef Men Reef
Posted by Mazigh (Member # 8621) on :
You think i'm not arabic speaking? you're wrong!
Abd means "slave" in arabic. I do know that. It is you who don't know that the word "slave" got the cannotation of "black". Therefore, it might happen in Morocco that a black would be called "abd" (slave) while meaning "black".
"It was a case of once an 'abd always an 'abd, whether manumitted or not. And while not all 'abid were black, the terms for negro and slave were used interchangeably" Note from: Slavery in the Islamic Middle East - page 63 by Shaun Elizabeth Marmon. (You can find the page on google books).
The use of the word "3bid" (3 = 'ayn of arabic) as "black" is not widespread, maybe because of the cultural/language changes because of school?
I read a book of someone, the author noted that a Berber was calling a black (Berber) 3bid, while someone others (Berbers too) asked "how 3bid" wherafter he answered "3bid" or "black" i don't mind. The author got the story of the second Berber as calling the black Berber as slave, since this second Berber (his disapproaving of the word "3bid" is not due to his education, but he wanted to make the first look bad) was not aware of the use of the word "3bid" as "black" (somehow innocent).
The remain of such cannotation is found in this puzzle: (This is a variety of the story) "جزيرة خضرا دماءها حمراء مفتاحها حديد سكانها عبيد " A green island, with red bloods. Her key's is metal, and it inhabitands are slaves" What is it? Watermelon.
Thus, since this story is not only Moroccan, i believe that the cannotation is not Moroccan, but was possibly introduced by the arab culture. But,like i said such cannotation does also exist in the Berber language, possibly under the influence of the medieval times of slavery.
Posted by AswaniAswad (Member # 16742) on :
The word "3bd" is composed in Arabic of three letters "A'een, Ba and Dal".
Abd means Endurance and Fortitude of the Worshiper Abdul Karim.
When diversifies to singular ABD "Servant" in a non-derogatory form, whereas, the Theo-Islamic doctrine considers every living soul a "servant" of the divine supernatural being and creator Allah. The usage of "Abd" harkens back to this sense.
3bd has never ever been used as referring to color of skin Hence the Word Bilad al Sudan Bilad Al Aswad Bilad Al Asmar this is the word for black not 3bd.
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
Hence
quote: Abdullah ("servant of God", also spelled Abdullah, Abdulah, Abd Allah, Abdallah, Abdellah, Abdulla and Abdalla) is a common Arabic name. Humility before God is an essential value of Islam, hence Abdullah is a favorite name among Muslims.
From: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E2%80%98Abdullah_%28name%29
Posted by Mazigh (Member # 8621) on :
Doug M, you seek the evidence to support your black brother?
quote: Abd "Arabic: عبد" is an Arabic word meaning one who is totally subordinated; a slave or a servant...
As "abd" means "slave" in Arabic, the word is sometimes used as a pejorative term to refer to black people.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abd_%28Arabic%29
quote:Some tribal sheiks in Iraq still keep blacks, called Abd, which means servant or slave in Arabic, as slaves
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery
Posted by argyle104 (Member # 14634) on :
AswaniAswad wrote:
quote:
I knew that it was bogus from the moment I heard. This black slavery in the middle east is another piece of fiction that people go along with either from stupidity or their own race fantasies.
Anyone with half a brain knows that most of the slaves in west/central/south asia were those same people from west/central/south asia as well as significant number of europeans (west europe included).
Posted by argyle104 (Member # 14634) on :
Wikipedia is a joke. I know that your dumb berber ass didn't go to the best schools since your country is 3rd world backward, but you could at least give thinking and research the old college try.
You should take the time you spend chasing race fiction and use it to learn reality.
Findo the descendants of your berber ancesters who came to Brazil, Cuba, Puerto Rico, Dominican Republic, and America as slaves.
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
Of course Islam took slaves in every region of the world they conquered, from Eastern and Western Europe, Turkey, Southern Russia, Central Asia, East Asia, South Asia, Arabia and Africa.
It did not originate with blacks and was not synonymous with it. Also all people labeled as slaves in Islam were not slaves. But beyond all of that, slavery and taking war captives is old in all parts of the world and somewhat a universal practice among ALL populations. Whites took white slaves, Africans took African slaves, Asians took Asian slaves.
Of course wikipedia promotes this nonsense that blacks were the only slaves or somehow synonymous with slaves which is pure nonsense.
quote: The Arab slave trade was the practice of slavery in the Arab World, mainly Western Asia, North Africa, East Africa and certain parts of Europe (such as Iberia and southern Italy) during their period of domination by Arab leaders. The trade was focused on the slave markets of the Middle East and North Africa. People traded were not limited to a certain color, ethnicity, or religion and included Arabs and Berbers, especially in its early days.
Later, during the 8th and 9th centuries of the Islamic Caliphate, most of the slaves were Slavic Eastern Europeans (called Saqaliba), people from surrounding Mediterranean areas, Persians, Turks, peoples from the Caucasus mountain regions (such as Georgia, Armenia and Circassia) and parts of Central Asia and Scandinavia, Berbers from North Africa, and various other peoples of varied origins as well as those of Black African origins.
Later, toward the 18th and 19th centuries, slaves increasingly came from East Africa, until slavery was officially abolished by the end of the 19th century.[1][2][3][4] It still continues today in a smaller form in the Arab states of the Persian Gulf, where women and children are trafficked from the post-Soviet states, Eastern Europe, Far East, Africa, South Asia and other parts of the Middle East.
The article starts off and points out the fact that most slaves in Islam were European, Central Asian or Turkic, yet they turn around and focus the entire article on the African trade which came much later, primarily because the Turkic and European populations became stronger and better able to resist Islamic forces and their conquests.
But of course that won't be mentioned.
And if any group is synonymous with the word slaves it is white Europeans named slavs, where the word slavery derives from.
Abd in Islam is simply a reflection of the fact that all Muslims are servants of allah, therefore the term does not explicitly mean "black slave" and if the term was used to refer to actual slaves or servants it had nothing to do with any specific ethnic group as opposed to being a generic label.
Another wiki article that touches on the various forms of slavery.
quote: Slavery in Asia Main article: History of slavery Persian slave in the Khanate of Khiva, 19th century
As late as 1908, women slaves were still sold in the Ottoman Empire.[75] A slave market for captured Russian and Persian slaves was centred in the Central Asian khanate of Khiva.[76] According to Sir Henry Bartle Frere (who sat on the Viceroy's Council), there were an estimated 8 million or 9 million slaves in India in 1841. In Malabar, about 15% of the population were slaves. Slavery was abolished in both Hindu and Muslim India by the Indian Slavery Act V. of 1843.[11][77] In Istanbul about one-fifth of the population consisted of slaves.[69]
In East Asia, the Imperial government formally abolished slavery in China in 1906, and the law became effective in 1910.[78] Slave rebellion in China at the end of the 17th and the beginning of the 18th century was so extensive that owners eventually converted the institution into a female-dominated one.[79] The Nangzan in Tibetan history were, according to Chinese sources, hereditary household slaves.[80] Indigenous slaves existed in Korea. Slavery was officially abolished with the Gabo Reform of 1894 but remained extant in reality until 1930. During the Joseon Dynasty (1392–1910) about 30% to 50% of the Korean population were slaves.[81] In late 16th century Japan, slavery was officially banned; but forms of contract and indentured labor persisted alongside the period penal codes' forced labor.[82]
In Southeast Asia, a quarter to a third of the population of some areas of Thailand and Burma were slaves.[11] The hill tribe people in Indochina were "hunted incessantly and carried off as slaves by the Siamese (Thai), the Anamites (Vietnamese), and the Cambodians."[83] The Siamese military expedition had been converted into a slave hunting operation on a large scale.
Again, wikipedia is not a true scholarly resource and is only as good as the people who edit it. In most cases it is only good as a potential starting point for further research. In terms of slavery it was much more widespread and involved more whites and other populations than simply blacks. The focus on black slavery is a legacy of the EuroImperial domination of the slave trade for the last 400 years, which is only the latest aspect of slavery and certainly not the entire scope of the practice throughout the world or in history.
However, all that said, slavery has had a horrendous impact on black people as a result of the rise of slavery among blacks by white Europeans, Asians and others.
Posted by Mazigh (Member # 8621) on :
@argyle104, While you acknowledge that i'm copying you insist to attack me. It is because you don't like it, you personalize it to make the illusion that it is me who is inventing the facts.
@ Doug M, I didn't say that slavery originate with blacks, i stated it became associated with blacks in Morocco (and Irak... according to WK), whether it is historically true or false.
Posted by Mazigh. (Member # 17579) on :
In my opinion if you want to see the problem in Africa, you have to look at the lack of resources on a bigger scale.
The K for kmt, is essential in discovering the true identity of the true Egyptians. The other K is for Kush and the Kushite empire written in ancient times. The other K is another but an unknown tribe (Kedar) that no one seem to have any info on. To aid in this research check out this site, we have a few of online researchers doing online research for us at this time. Just take a look at it see what you think. Thanks
The book is a perfect example of the nonsense one way migration theory and population interaction theory championed by Euro racists in the last few centuries. Notably that the migrations only occurred in one direction, from outside Africa into Africa and that Africans were only the passive recipients of this non African stock. Never ever is any notion of black African movements in the other direction ever considered or its impact on populations outside of Africa.
Posted by astenb (Member # 14524) on :
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: The book is a perfect example of the nonsense one way migration theory and population interaction theory championed by Euro racists in the last few centuries. Notably that the migrations only occurred in one direction, from outside Africa into Africa and that Africans were only the passive recipients of this non African stock. Never ever is any notion of black African movements in the other direction ever considered or its impact on populations outside of Africa.
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
You still have not accepted your mixed Nature.
![[Mad]](mad.gif)