All this talk of the prehistoric presence of anatomically modern humans in North Africa and specifically the Maghreb remind me of certain populations in the area some of which are relatively isolated who exhibit robust cranio-facial features one might associate today with Australian aborigines such as large jaws and teeth and heavy brow ridges in conjunction with wavy hair. Indeed, there were some Western anthropologists who proposed that the 'Australoid' racial type was once more widespread than it is today and included North Africa and in some cases Europe! In fact some of these anthropologists proposed 'Australoids' to be the original racial type ancestral to all others. In the case of North Africans there are a few people who stand out in this, one in particular are the Ushetettas of Tunisia.
In a recent google search I came across one thread posted on this issue in the Anthrocivitas forum:
The poster even includes examples from the old literature that speaks of ‘Australoids’ in North Africa. We all know such features have nothing to do with 'Australoids' and racial groups don’t really exist, but what do you guys make of such a phenotype in the Maghreb? They surely do not conform to the 'classical Hamitic' type associated with North Africans let alone white Berbers. Do you think this to be a surviving remnant from Mesolithic or even Paleolithic times??
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: All this talk of the prehistoric presence of anatomically modern humans in North Africa and specifically the Maghreb remind me of certain populations in the area some of which are relatively isolated who exhibit robust cranio-facial features one might associate today with Australian aborigines such as large jaws and teeth and heavy brow ridges in conjunction with wavy hair. Indeed, there were some Western anthropologists who proposed that the 'Australoid' racial type was once more widespread than it is today and included North Africa and in some cases Europe! In fact some of these anthropologists proposed 'Australoids' to be the original racial type ancestral to all others. In the case of North Africans there are a few people who stand out in this, one in particular are the Ushetettas of Tunisia.
In a recent google search I came across one thread posted on this issue in the Anthrocivitas forum:
The poster even includes examples from the old literature that speaks of ‘Australoids’ in North Africa. We all know such features have nothing to do with 'Australoids' and racial groups don’t really exist, but what do you guys make of such a phenotype in the Maghreb? They surely do not conform to the 'classical Hamitic' type associated with North Africans let alone white Berbers. Do you think this to be a surviving remnant from Mesolithic or even Paleolithic times??
I do believe these are "aboriginal" remnants of a population that existed in Africa and eventually left to make up a significant portion of the base population that later came to dominate parts of Asia and Europe. Calling them "australoid" is just another way of saying 'archaic' or 'aboriginal' as most early Europeans called the Australian aborigines the remnants of an ancient "primitive" form of human, with the emphasis being 'primitive' as a way of downgrading them and therefore justifying subjugation. But even in that racist way of looking at things, it implies this represents a very old strain of African genes and a very old phenotype that remained intact in Australia and parts of South Asia due to the tropical environment there.
I even made the same argument myself right here on ES and even used some of the same images a few years ago in one of the many threads on North African Berbers.
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
Note the following 2 old books about North Africans. The first is referenced in the threads posted above and the second is in French and talks about Kabylia.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: In fact some of these anthropologists proposed 'Australoids' to be the original racial type ancestral to all others.
. We all know such features have nothing to do with 'Australoids' and racial groups don’t really exist, but what do you guys make of such a phenotype in the Maghreb?
If you believe races don't exist why can't you figure out how to write a thread in that context?
People in this forum say races don't exist. They should then be able to articulate questions coming from that perspective, for example, not using the word "race" or groups of people with "oid' at the end.
Instead what people do is quote people who believe in race and then try to disown the racial element of the point. That's a bullcrap dishonest way of doing things. They can never express the point in a new paradigm And this constantly lends authority to old authors who believed in race always asking us to recall what they said. That is not forward thinking. That is not to say never recall what they said but the norm has become always recall their perspective, each and every time.
I will now rewrite the original thread removing the racial references:
Deracialized original post:
All this talk of the prehistoric presence of anatomically modern humans in North Africa and specifically the Maghreb reminds me of certain populations in the area some of which are relatively isolated who exhibit robust cranio-facial features one might associate today with Australian aborigines such as large jaws and teeth and heavy brow ridges in conjunction with wavy hair. Indeed, there were some Western anthropologists who proposed that this phenotype was once more widespread than it is today and included North Africa and in some cases Europe! In fact some of these anthropologists proposed this phenotype to be ancestral to all others. In the case of North Africans there are a few people who stand out in this, one in particular are the Ushetettas of Tunisia. In a recent google search I came across one thread posted on this issue in the Anthrocivitas forum: http://anthrocivitas.net/forum/showthread.php?t=10848 What do you guys make of such a phenotype in the Maghreb? They surely do not conform to modern North Africans let alone the Berbers who have European ancestry. Do you think this to be a surviving remnant from Mesolithic or even Paleolithic times?? I do believe these are aboriginal remnants of a population that existed in Africa and eventually left to make up a significant portion of the base population that later came to dominate parts of Asia and Europe. This may represent a very old strain of African genes and a very old phenotype that remained intact in Australia and parts of South Asia due to the tropical environment there. I even made the same argument myself right here on ES and even used some of the same images a few years ago in one of the many threads on North African Berbers.
lioness productions
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^^ Why don't you worry less about how I "word" things and more about your livelihood as one of Mathilda's brothel maids, trick! The way I worded my post proves my point exactly. Racial groups don't exist and the people of Northwest Africa despite their appearance have no relation to Australian aborigines or other Eurasians who resemble them. My question about their phenotype is in regards to their immediate ancestors in the vicinity, so get off my nuts you silly Euro-slut.
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: I do believe these are "aboriginal" remnants of a population that existed in Africa and eventually left to make up a significant portion of the base population that later came to dominate parts of Asia and Europe. Calling them "australoid" is just another way of saying 'archaic' or 'aboriginal' as most early Europeans called the Australian aborigines the remnants of an ancient "primitive" form of human, with the emphasis being 'primitive' as a way of downgrading them and therefore justifying subjugation. But even in that racist way of looking at things, it implies this represents a very old strain of African genes and a very old phenotype that remained intact in Australia and parts of South Asia due to the tropical environment there.
I even made the same argument myself right here on ES and even used some of the same images a few years ago in one of the many threads on North African Berbers.
Yes, but your argument is WRONG since there is no evidence whatsoever that these people of Northwest Africa are ancestral to Australian aborigines or to the early Eurasian ancestors of these groups! That is what I meant by the erroneous use of racial groupings. If anything their 'archaic' features tie them to earlier populations in the Maghreb area like Jebel Irhoud. Explorer and others say that most Maghrebi peoples carry lineages from the Neolithic but then there is the presence of earlier lineages like U6 and L1 etc.
quote: Note the following 2 old books about North Africans. The first is referenced in the threads posted above and the second is in French and talks about Kabylia.
The old literature, despite some of its outdated themes, still hold some value. The book's description of the Berbers is very interesting since it shows that Berbers are not as "Caucasian" as many Euronuts today believe.
Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: All this talk of the prehistoric presence of anatomically modern humans in North Africa and specifically the Maghreb remind me of certain populations in the area some of which are relatively isolated who exhibit robust cranio-facial features ...
If you can get the book Imazighen: The Vanishing Traditions of Berber Women Margaret Courtney-Clarke; Geraldine Brooks New York: C. Potter, 1996
it's got at least one pic of an archaic admixed looking woman in the mountain fastnesses. I've never seen the type anywhere else in print or the 'net. It's either overlooked (intentionally ?) or it's very rare.
It's one of the books of my now lost personal library. I'll try and find it and scan the relevant pics.
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: If you can get the book Imazighen: The Vanishing Traditions of Berber Women
Geraldine Brooks New York: C. Potter, 1996
it's got at least one pic of an archaic admixed looking woman in the mountain fastnesses.
Kabyle woman, old postcard
Posted by Bettyboo (Member # 12987) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
Forehead and brow bone looks Australoid
Looks African
Looks Aboriginal from Southern India or somewhere in Asia
Looks very Papuan or South Pacific
South Pacific looking or Asian looking
Asian looking mixed with south pacific.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ LOL Excellent take on how these Maghrebi individuals look like! Interesting how your choices consist mostly of South Pacific aborigines or admixtures thereof as well as South Indian and Australian aborigines. All these aboriginal groups of Asia and the Pacific were often grouped under the macro-racial group 'Austric'. But again, since race doesn't exist, how a population looks is often totally different from whom they are actually related to. We know that Maghrebi people share genetic ties with other Africans as well as with Europeans which is not surprising considering the geographic position of the Maghreb itself.
quote:Originally posted by the lyinass:
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: If you can get the book Imazighen: The Vanishing Traditions of Berber Women Margaret Courtney-Clarke; Geraldine Brooks New York: C. Potter, 1996
it's got at least one pic of an archaic admixed looking woman in the mountain fastnesses. I've never seen the type anywhere else in print or the 'net. It's either overlooked (intentionally ?) or it's very rare.
It's one of the books of my now lost personal library. I'll try and find it and scan the relevant pics.
It is not clear what ethnicities would comprise such an "admixture"
I don't know if that is the picture Tukuler is referring to but as far as what ethnicities were involved, Explorer put it best here when he posted the following.
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: ..The EpiPaleolithic Maghreb types had a separate phylogenesis from the contemporary Maghrebi populations. One is not the descendant of the other. **Saying that contemporary Maghrebi absorbed a small portion of preexisting elements**, is not saying they are a continuation of EpiPaleolithic Maghrebi types. It’s like trying to say that just because some Europeans eventually mixed with some American Indians, that contemporary European-derived populations in America must then be American Indians...
Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
If you don't have the book then wait and don't speculate.
Posted by Bettyboo (Member # 12987) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ LOL Excellent take on how these Maghrebi individuals look like! Interesting how your choices consist mostly of South Pacific aborigines or admixtures thereof as well as South Indian and Australian aborigines. All these aboriginal groups of Asia and the Pacific were often grouped under the macro-racial group 'Austric'. But again, since race doesn't exist, how a population looks is often totally different from whom they are actually related to. We know that Maghrebi people share genetic ties with other Africans as well as with Europeans which is not surprising considering the geographic position of the Maghreb itself.
The only one that looks African to me is the second one.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ Yes but that is assuming 'African' entails a specific type exclusive of all the others.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ Yes but that is assuming 'African' entails a specific type exclusive of all the others.
Even the second picture could be argued as looking like a non-African aboriginal.
Posted by Bettyboo (Member # 12987) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ Yes but that is assuming 'African' entails a specific type exclusive of all the others.
Even the second picture could be argued as looking like a non-African aboriginal.
^Yes I see the second pic as a specific type that excludes the other pics. The second pic when in comparison to the others look African to me. Even with the comparison you gave above I still swing African looking. It's my opinion not a fact.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ Of course, which is exactly why phenotypic groupings or 'races' are subjective.
But getting back to the issue, does anyone know if there are studies that make a comparison between contemporary Maghrebi populations or individuals within the populations and Maghrebi populations of the Epipaleolithic or earlier?
Posted by KingMichael777 (Member # 20401) on :
Do these people carry A?
Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler:
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: All this talk of the prehistoric presence of anatomically modern humans in North Africa and specifically the Maghreb remind me of certain populations in the area some of which are relatively isolated who exhibit robust cranio-facial features ...
If you can get the book Imazighen: The Vanishing Traditions of Berber Women Margaret Courtney-Clarke; Geraldine Brooks New York: C. Potter, 1996
it's got at least one pic of an archaic admixed looking woman in the mountain fastnesses. I've never seen the type anywhere else in print or the 'net. It's either overlooked (intentionally ?) or it's very rare.
It's one of the books of my now lost personal library. I'll try and find it and scan the relevant pics.
Will looking for the book, you've mentioned, I found this book. I never read it thou.
quote:Originally posted by KingMichael777: Do these people carry A?
What do you mean by "A"?? mitochondrial hg or Y-chromosomal? Either way, these people carry lineages typical of the Maghreb. In the Y-chromosome, is mostly E1b1b (E-M81), J1 (M267), and a little R1b. The mitochondrial lineages are much more diverse. hg H, HV0, HV, R0, J associated with Europe and U as well as M1 typically associated with the 'Near East' though there's debate they could be African and L0-L5 which are typically African.
Posted by KingMichael777 (Member # 20401) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
quote:Originally posted by KingMichael777: Do these people carry A?
What do you mean by "A"?? mitochondrial hg or Y-chromosomal? Either way, these people carry lineages typical of the Maghreb. In the Y-chromosome, is mostly E1b1b (E-M81), J1 (M267), and a little R1b. The mitochondrial lineages are much more diverse. hg H, HV0, HV, R0, J associated with Europe and U as well as M1 typically associated with the 'Near East' though there's debate they could be African and L0-L5 which are typically African.
Y-DNA.
Y-DNA A arose in Northwest Africa and some Berber groups STILL carry it...
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ That's news to me. Where did you hear that??
Posted by KingMichael777 (Member # 20401) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ That's news to me. Where did you hear that??
I know I shouldn't be using Wikipedia, but...
"Haplogroup A1a-M31 also has been found in 3% (2/64) of a sample of Berbers from Morocco[12] and 2.3% (1/44) of a sample of unspecified ethnic affiliation from Mali."
A arose in Northwest Africa in the first place. And some Egyptian males carry A.
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
^^^^^ footnote [12] A Back Migration from Asia to Sub-Saharan Africa Is Supported by High-Resolution Analysis of Human Y-Chromosome Haplotypes (2002)
the article is quoted in my thread about that article:
Also a notable Djehutie quote for the same thread:
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ It's even worse than that. 'Lioness' a.k.a. 1Arm is an Arabized northern Sudanese who believes that nothing good can come from 'pure' black Africans. They have to be mixed in order for them to be intelligent enough to create civilization or for them to be beautiful. This is the same pyschotic mentality of those committing genocide in Darfur. It's a shame really.
Posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova (Member # 15718) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: All this talk of the prehistoric presence of anatomically modern humans in North Africa and specifically the Maghreb remind me of certain populations in the area some of which are relatively isolated who exhibit robust cranio-facial features one might associate today with Australian aborigines such as large jaws and teeth and heavy brow ridges in conjunction with wavy hair. Indeed, there were some Western anthropologists who proposed that the 'Australoid' racial type was once more widespread than it is today and included North Africa and in some cases Europe! In fact some of these anthropologists proposed 'Australoids' to be the original racial type ancestral to all others. In the case of North Africans there are a few people who stand out in this, one in particular are the Ushetettas of Tunisia.
In a recent google search I came across one thread posted on this issue in the Anthrocivitas forum:
The poster even includes examples from the old literature that speaks of ‘Australoids’ in North Africa. We all know such features have nothing to do with 'Australoids' and racial groups don’t really exist, but what do you guys make of such a phenotype in the Maghreb? They surely do not conform to the 'classical Hamitic' type associated with North Africans let alone white Berbers. Do you think this to be a surviving remnant from Mesolithic or even Paleolithic times??
^Alleged "Australoid" features are within the range for tropical Africans,relatively speaking. Hanihara 1996 clusters "Australoids" and sub-Saharan Africans together based on certain cranial resemblances. They are not identical but there is a definite overlapping range.
And some data shows ancient North African types with cultural and physical links to Africans further south. If by a back-migration, the "backflowees" still resembled tropical Africans.
Pennarun et al say in the article that an Asian origin for U6 and M1 remains speculative. It is a viable origin hypothesis they say, but they found no clear evidence in support.
"A Southwest Asian origin has been proposed for U6 and M1 [27-29]. Yet, this claim remains speculative unless some novel “earlier” Southwest Asian-specific clades, distinct from the known haplogroups, are found in which the described so far M1 and U6 lineages are nested. Claims for basal mutations shared with M1 have recently been made in the case of haplogroup M51 and M20 (both East Asian-specific clades [40,41]): They share a root mutation (C14110T) with M1. However, one should be cautious with phylogenetic inferences drawn from these findings because this mutation is not unique in the phylogeny of mtDNA: it also occurs in the background of non-M haplogroups and therefore identity by descent within haplogroup M remains uncertain. Unfortunately, the sampling of extant populations of Africa and West Asia may not solve the question of their origin...
Assuming that M1 and U6 were introduced to Africa by a dispersal event from Asia, it would be difficult to accept their involvement in the first demographic spread of anatomically modern humans around 40–45 KYA, as suggested by Olivieri et al. (2006), [29] who associated these two clades with the spread of Dabban industry in Africa. It has indeed been previously suggested that the colonisation of North Africa from the Levant took place during the early Upper Paleolithic, as marked by the “Dabban” industry in North Africa [42]. However, comparison of early Upper Palaeolithic artefacts from Haua Fteah and Ksar Akil does not support the notion that the early Dabban of Cyrenaica is an evidence of a population migration from the Levant into North Africa [43]. Marks [44] also noted differences between the two areas in terms of the methods of blade production, further arguing against a demographic connection between the regions. Likewise, the new coalescent date estimates for M1 obtained in this study are not compatible with the model implying the spread of M1 in Africa during the Early Upper Palaeolithic, 40–45 KYA...
Our analyses do not support the model according to which mtDNA haplogroups M1 and U6 represent an early dispersal event of anatomically modern humans at around 40–45 KYA in association with the spread of Dabban industry in North Africa as proposed earlier [28,29]. A West Asian origin for these haplogroups still remains a viable hypothesis as sister clades of U (and ancestral to it, macro-hg N (including R)) and M are spread overwhelmingly outside Africa, notably in Eurasia, even though the phylogeographic data on extant populations do not present a clear support for it. /i]
[i]No southwest Asian specific clades for M1 or U6 were discovered. U6 and M1 frequencies in North Africa, the Middle East and Europe do not follow similar patterns, and their sub- clade divisions do not appear to be compatible with their shared history reaching back to the Early Upper Palaeolithic."
FROM: --Pennarun, et al (2012) Divorcing the Late Upper Palaeolithic demographic histories of mtDNA haplogroups M1 and U6 in Africa. BMC Evolutionary Biology 2012, 12:234
ASSORTED IBERO/MECHTA AFALOU TEXT DUMP FROM WYSINGER LINK
"The Caspian population, as known from skeletal remains from the burials in middens are less robust, and more gracile than the Mechta-Afalou peoples though they are undoubtedly descended from the.. Not a litte body mutilation is to he seen. This takes the form of incisor tooth extraction (also a feature of the Iberomaurusian), skulls that were modified after death by sawing, cutting and drilling, in one instance to form a kind of mask or 'trophy skull';" --History of humanity, Volume 6 By Sigfried J. de Laet, 1994
and
"Almost the entire region may have been depopulated as a result of extreme aridity. The first sign of people returning dates to around 18,000 t0 20,000 years ago, Mode 5 Epiplaeolithic industries that continue into the Holocene without any abrupt change. In relation to the origins of behavioral modernity and the symbolism question, there is not a lot of direct evidence. If there was a sudden change in behavior toward the end of the Middle Palaeolithic, it corresponds with the complete disappearance of people. On the other hand, the technological norms associated with the Aterian undoubtedly point to the emergence of an ethnic identity that could be expressed in material culture. It was the first true North African "culture" in the full range of its anthropological definition." --P. Willoughby. 2006. The evolution of modern humans in Africa
"Some researchers such as Debenath (1994) argue that the Aterian extends along the coast if Algeria and Morocco with sites decreasing in density farther inland. But Kleindienst suggests that this might be a product of the fact that most research has been done in the Maghreb. for her, there could be a link between the Aterian and the Lupemban industry of central and West Africa, where bifaces and occasional tanged pieces are present in other wise Middle Stone Age contests (Kleindienst 2001:6.9 Hawkins and Kleindienst 2002)." --P. Willoughby. 2006. The evolution of modern humans in Africa
"The Aterian appeares to be a facies of the North African Middle Paleolithic and is characterized by tanged points and oter tools; bifacial points are known from some Aterian sites, notably in the eastern and southern areas, such as Bir Tarfawi in Egypt and Adrar Bous in Niger." -- Encyclopedia of human evolution and prehistory. 1999. Eric Delson, Ian Tattersall, John A. Van Couvering. "The African Epipaleolithic (Mesolithic) sample, comprising material from Nubia (Jebel Sahaba-sites 117 and 8905 and Wadi Haifa) and the Magreb (Afalou-bou-Rhummel and Taforalt), is quite homogenous both morphologically and metrically. American Journal of Physical Anthropology. Volume 96. Issue 3, 1995
Ancient "Asselar Man" from 'North Africa' - Mali, shows some resemblances to nearby Africans
"The bones are those of a man of late middle age, tall (1.70 metres or about 5 ft. 7 in.), distinctly Homo sapiens but not of 'Mediterranean' type. From the shape of the nasal and long bones it is clear that Asselar Man was some sort of negroid. The skull is dolichocephalic and has a high vault, whereas the rather short face is broad. There is marked alveolar-dental prognathism, ansd the mental eminence is well marked. The teeth are large and the third molar well developed. There was avulsion (i.e. 'knocking out') of the upper incisors, an ancient practice. The nearest living type to Asselar Man would seen to be that of the southern African Bantu-speaking peoples." -- Alan Houghton Brodrick. Man and his ancestors (1971)
Posted by -Just Call Me Jari- (Member # 14451) on :
Isnt it funny how these Archaic North Africans resemble many of the important Moors/Lybians of the Classical Era..
_______ Juba II Numidian African ____________ Typical Euro-Roman
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
no, they all look different
and as my ass istant Djehutie says:
"how a population looks is often totally different from whom they are actually related to"
Posted by KoKaKoLa (Member # 19312) on :
Posted by KoKaKoLa (Member # 19312) on :
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by KoKaKoLa: [QB] of slave descent
then why is her hair like that?
Posted by IronLion (Member # 16412) on :
Middle East=> * Israéliens ashkénazes et samaritains * Juifs libanais et syriens * Juifs kurdes du Sud Est de l’Irak * Juifs iraniens * Bédouins d’Amman (Jordanie) * Kurdes libanais et syriens
Rh+/- system
Afrique:* Juifs d’Algérie, d’Egypte,du Maroc, de Tunisie et d’Ethiopie
Europe: * Juifs d’Europe
Middle East: * Juifs de Syrie et Liban, d’Irak, d’Iran, du Yémen, * Israéliens ashkénazes et orientaux,
ABO Quant à la proximité génétique de la population noire de Jerba avec des populations d’Afrique noire (notre banque de données contient des informations sur les populations du Sénégal, du Nigéria, du Soudan, du Tchad, du Mali, d’Ethiopie, du Ghana et du Niger), il est surprenant de constater que seules quelques populations soudanaises et ghanaises sont proches des Noirs jerbiens.
Rh+/-
les Noirs jerbiens ne changent pas beaucoup de voisinage génétique entre ABO et Rhésus : ils restent près du Moyen Orient et de l’Europe du sud et deviennent proches des Falachas
The conclusion contradicts your racist position.Perhaps you dont read French but what it says is that the Black population of Jerbans carry genetic signature for Middle East and Europe.
Clyde Winters please take note of the Jerbians as you track the genetic origins of so-called European Y-DNA haplogroups. Your work on Haplogroup R and Cameroon is quite commendable already.
Posted by KoKaKoLa (Member # 19312) on :
Posted by KoKaKoLa (Member # 19312) on :
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
LOL! Racist clowns kill me with their bull sh*t. Blacks are the original population of North Africa. Period. No back migration suddenly came in and replaced the blacks of North Africa 20,000 years ago and suddenly turned them into all white folks. Sorry no it did not happen.
Notice that Djerba is the Northernmost island in North Africa, next to gibraltar which is why it was studied. But again, North AFrica is not simply the extreme coasts of North Africa. North Africa includes Sudan, Mali, Chad, Niger and Mauritania. All of which includes black indigenous populations who are not "sub saharan". But notice these folks are not included in any discussion of North Africa, let alone the blacks in the Southern Areas of Libya, Algeria, Morocco and Egypt who are the best examples of the original populations of the area.
Posted by KoKaKoLa (Member # 19312) on :
Posted by IronLion (Member # 16412) on :
quote:Originally posted by KoKaKoLa:
quote:Originally posted by IronLion:
quote:Originally posted by KoKaKoLa: ... Rh+/-
les Noirs jerbiens ne changent pas beaucoup de voisinage génétique entre ABO et Rhésus : ils restent près du Moyen Orient et de l’Europe du sud et deviennent proches des Falachas
The conclusion contradicts your racist position.Perhaps you dont read French but what it says is that the Black population of Jerbans carry genetic signature for Middle East and Europe.
Clyde Winters please take note of the Jerbians as you track the genetic origins of so-called European Y-DNA haplogroups. Your work on Haplogroup R and Cameroon is quite commendable already.
Sorry, but i speak french fluently. It didnt said that Black jerbians "carry genetic signature for Middle East and Europe". It only put in evidence a genetic proximity between some south european and middle eastern groups. However Black Jerbians are really close with some Ghaneans and Sudaneses groups because black jerbians descend from those people.
It is known that black Jerbians descend from slaves. The only native people of Jerba are the berbers.
You are a disingenuous liar girl. Read your own source again and translate into English:
population noire [black population]: Soudan et Niger
........
Rh+/-
les Noirs jerbiens ne changent pas beaucoup de voisinage génétique entre ABO et Rhésus : ils restent près du Moyen Orient et de l’Europe du sud et deviennent proches des Falachas
Here is Google Translator for you, Duncey liard. Click if you dare:
les Noirs jerbiens ne changent pas beaucoup de voisinage génétique entre ABO et Rhésus : ils restent près du Moyen Orient et de l’Europe du sud et deviennent proches des Falachas
The conclusion contradicts your racist position.Perhaps you dont read French but what it says is that the Black population of Jerbans carry genetic signature for Middle East and Europe.
Clyde Winters please take note of the Jerbians as you track the genetic origins of so-called European Y-DNA haplogroups. Your work on Haplogroup R and Cameroon is quite commendable already.
Sorry, but i speak french fluently. It didnt said that Black jerbians "carry genetic signature for Middle East and Europe". It only put in evidence a genetic proximity between some south european and middle eastern groups. However Black Jerbians are really close with some Ghaneans and Sudaneses groups because black jerbians descend from those people.
It is known that black Jerbians descend from slaves. The only native people of Jerba are the berbers.
You are a disingenuous liar girl. Read your own source again and translate into English:
population noire [black population]: Soudan et Niger
........
Rh+/-
les Noirs jerbiens ne changent pas beaucoup de voisinage génétique entre ABO et Rhésus : ils restent près du Moyen Orient et de l’Europe du sud et deviennent proches des Falachas
Here is Google Translator for you, Duncey liard. Click if you dare:
You are an unrepentant roach, who does not know how to read.
You sited sources that contradicted you, and when exposed you tell bare-faced lies.
When further exposed by the translation of your source you now deny your sources.
Did not the citation you posted above say that:
1) Jerbans are intermediate between Middle East and South Europe? See your citation again above. It is there for you in black and white, and translated.
What else now, oh you racists pussy hawking harlot, from the underworld!
READ YOUR OWN SOURCE OR STOP POSTING IN LANGUAGES YOU CANNOT READ....
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by KoKaKoLa:
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by KoKaKoLa: [QB] of slave descent
then why is her hair like that?
Probably because she had arab/berber admixture. If she was not of slave descent, she was probably of nomadic descent, which i doubt because she lived in Tunis. Blacks of Tunis descend from slaves.
A general distinction is maintained between the Wargliyya who are the blacks from the southern Tunisian oases and who are considered more or less indigenous, and the rest of the black population, which is understood as descendants of displaced sub-Saharans, the vast majority of whom were slaves (Zawadowski 1942)
In African Americans there are all sorts of mixtures with whites in average 17-22% But you don't see this very straight hair. It tends toward afro or bushy unless they perm it. The girl looks Oceanic/Tamil to me with that hair unless it's artifically starightened in some way. Maybe she is part of a small ancient Oceanic-looking population of Tunisia
There is some mention here of Wargliya in French but I can't read it:
this is what wikipedia says on the demographics of Tunisia:
The majority (98%) of modern Tunisians are Arabized Berber or Arab-Berber, and are speakers of Tunisian Arabic. However, there is also a small (1 percent at most) of pure native Berbers located mainly in the Jabal Dahar mountains in the South East and on the island of Jerba. The Berbers primarily speak Berber languages, often called Shelha, or have shifted to Tunisian Arabic. Demographics of Tunisia, Data of FAO; Number of inhabitants in thousands. Nearly all Tunisians (98 percent of the population) are Muslim. There is a Jewish population on the southern island of Djerba and Tunis. There is also a small indigenous Christian population
Muurs!
Posted by KoKaKoLa (Member # 19312) on :
Posted by KoKaKoLa (Member # 19312) on :
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
quote:Originally posted by KoKaKoLa:
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: blablabla...
quote:There were two distinct groups of blacks in Tunis, according to him: the Wargliyya,22 a term applied to blacks from the oases, and perhaps referring (mainly) to Ḥarāṭīn, and the wuṣfān (plural of waṣīf, slave), a term applied to the other blacks. The wuṣfān were organized in corporate fashion under the bāsh-āghā, who was in former times the chief eunuch of the bey of Tunis, also known as the “governor over the black skin” (al-Ḥākim fī ’l-qishra al-sawdā’).
22 I.e., from Wargla, an oasis in south-eastern Algeria.
As for the girl, well, MY OWN MOTHER has the same type of hair and she is as dark as her. My mother, who is often mistaken by the euro for a sri lankan/malagasy/comorian or whatever , doesnt descend from an ancient oceanic looking tunisian population (PURE BULLSHIT). Her roots is from modern day Sudan/south Egypt.
your link talks about the ouargla oasis (Algeria)
Anyway, Blacks in Tunisia descend mostly from slaves. Take it as a fact (IronLion). 1) Because im BLACK and FROM THERE. So obviously, i know what its going on. 2) Most blacks there, intermarry with each other 3) Most blacks there, know each other
Kokola you are talking pure B.S.
Look up Tunisia slave trade and most of the documented slavery in Tunisia was of European white folks. LOL!
Obviously you fell and hit your head if you are going to sit there and tell us that this didn't matter and that blacks in Africa are only there because of slavery but whites are indigenous.
Tunisians come in various shades with some being Jet black and others brown and lighter. And these folks have different features from the Africans further south, which is the whole point of the thread. Thee are black populations in Northern Africa who are part of an aboriginal stock who have features similar to aboriginal types elsewhere on the planet, like Asia in North Africa.
White people are not an ancient Aboriginal population in North Africa no matter how much you want to believe they are.
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
KoKaKoLa So you are saying you descend from slaves? excuse me for asking
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Doug M:
(to KoKaKoLa)
Look up Tunisia slave trade and most of the documented slavery in Tunisia was of European white folks. LOL!
Obviously you fell and hit your head if you are going to sit there and tell us that this didn't matter and that blacks in Africa are only there because of slavery but whites are indigenous.
The History of Tunisia is subdivided into the following articles:
Outlines of early Tunisia History of Punic era Tunisia History of Roman era Tunisia History of early Islamic Tunisia History of medieval Tunisia History of Ottoman-era Tunisia History of French-era Tunisia History of modern Tunisia
The Atlas mountains and the Sahara desert both played a prominent role in ancient times, first with the famous Punic city of Carthage, then as the Roman province of Africa, which was known as the "bread basket" of Rome. Later, Tunisia was occupied by Vandals during the 5th century AD, Byzantines in the 6th century, and Arabs in the 8th century.
^^^Doug what was the demographics of Tunisia at this point before the Turks came in?
Under the Ottoman Empire, Tunisia was known as "Regency of Tunis". It passed under French protectorate in 1881. After obtaining independence in 1956 the country took the official name of the "Kingdom of Tunisia"
The Barbary pirates, sometimes called Barbary corsairs or Ottoman corsairs, were pirates and privateers who operated from North Africa, based primarily in the ports of Tunis, Tripoli and Algiers.In the first half of the 1600s, Barbary corsairs - pirates from the Barbary Coast of North Africa, authorised by their governments to attack the shipping of Christian countries - ranged all around Britain's shores. However though Tunis was a slave trading hub Tunisia was not a major slave trading country.
__________________________________________
Islam's Black Slaves: The Other Black Diaspora By Ronald Segal
Posted by KoKaKoLa (Member # 19312) on :
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
LOL I think Kokokola is being facetious. He/she knows that all these Berbers I posted are indigenous and live in rural areas that had nothing to do with any slave trade. Of course the Euronuts will claim any black person in North Africa or outside of 'Sub-Sahara' as "slave descended" but such claims are hilariously false.
quote:Originally posted by the lyinass,: ^^^^^ footnote [12] A Back Migration from Asia to Sub-Saharan Africa Is Supported by High-Resolution Analysis of Human Y-Chromosome Haplotypes (2002)
the article is quoted in my thread about that article:
Yeah the same thread which I and others debunked your dumbass! So West Africans like Cameroonians and others of 'true negroid' affiliation are Eurasian descendants, huh? So what do we make of Jari's thread here?
I can see you make of it something that upsets your lyinass claims. Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
Why is slavery being attributed to the looks of these rural Berbers?? Last time I checked, Sub-Saharans don't have loose, wavy, or straight looking hair the way these folks do. I even cited sources showing how Westerners distinguished them from Sub-Saharans in physical appearance. Even Bettyboo says they look more Australian or Pacific aborigine than 'Sub-Saharan'. Obviously the 'Sub-Saharan slave ancestry' is an invalid and I dare say pathetic attempt to explain these groups. As I stated, these folks likely represent aboriginal peoples of the area.
Posted by GOMTUU (Member # 19606) on :
cacakala alias casserites and the laughing hyena,why don't this hybrid people accept the truth they came from the dark races.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
I wonder why fatheadbonkers avoids this thread? Could it be because it refutes his nutty racialist claims? Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler:
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: All this talk of the prehistoric presence of anatomically modern humans in North Africa and specifically the Maghreb remind me of certain populations in the area some of which are relatively isolated who exhibit robust cranio-facial features ...
If you can get the book Imazighen: The Vanishing Traditions of Berber Women Margaret Courtney-Clarke; Geraldine Brooks New York: C. Potter, 1996
it's got at least one pic of an archaic admixed looking woman in the mountain fastnesses. I've never seen the type anywhere else in print or the 'net. It's either overlooked (intentionally ?) or it's very rare.
It's one of the books of my now lost personal library. I'll try and find it and scan the relevant pics.
OK here it is (finally)
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ Wow. Thanks for the picture Tukuler. I do find it fascinating from an anthropological standpoint (and not the dehumanizing way racist Western 'experts' are often guilty of). Do you know what area that woman is from and what ethnic group or tribe she is part of??
Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
The lady's an Ait Mgoum from the Moroccan Atlas Valley of Roses iirc.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ That's not too far from where this painting was found.
Just curious, but do you know if the Ait Mgoum or other tribes in the area display steatopygea too? LOL Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ That's not too far from where this painting was found.
Just curious, but do you know if the Ait Mgoum or other tribes in the area display steatopygea too? LOL
Removed from its context, what is this and what are you using it to promote? I can see ithyphallic steatopygous and complexion characteristics like in South African rock art depicting San.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ It's funny you should mention the comparison to San because the rock art image I posted comes from the Atlas Mountains of Morocco! I guess you missed it when Amun-Ra first posted the pic on another thread. It was discovered in the Atlas Mountains by a Susan Searight. My point of posting that picture was that it probably gives us a clue as to how the indigenes of the Atlas Mountain area looked like. That it bears a striking resemblance to the art of South African San may be an indication of a commonality that reaches to times immemorial. That's why I asked if you know of Berber tribes in the area displaying such traits as steatopygea. In fact many Western anthropologists in a time not long ago postulated 'Bushmanoid' types as being aboriginal to North Africa.
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
Carleton Coon's theory: before the Pleistocene map Capid aka Khoisan purple "Congoid" yellow corresponds with steatopygous in rock art
However Australoids are not Khoisans
FIG. 4 (2 views, photo H. H. Kidder). A moderately tall, long-faced Algerian Kabyle.
FIG. 5 (2 views); Shluh Berber from the Sous, south- ern Morocco.
"These two individuals may be considered representatives of the Mediterranean invaders who entered western Europe over Gibraltar in the Neolithic"
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
Comparison Khoisan to Aboriginal Austrailian
Ironically the Khoisan looks relatively closer to an East Asian than does the Austrailian who is much closer geographically
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
Comparison Nigerian to Aboriginal Austrailian
Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ It's funny you should mention the comparison to San because the rock art image I posted comes from the Atlas Mountains of Morocco! I guess you missed it when Amun-Ra first posted the pic on another thread. It was discovered in the Atlas Mountains by a Susan Searight. My point of posting that picture was that it probably gives us a clue as to how the indigenes of the Atlas Mountain area looked like. That it bears a striking resemblance to the art of South African San may be an indication of a commonality that reaches to times immemorial. That's why I asked if you know of Berber tribes in the area displaying such traits as steatopygea. In fact many Western anthropologists in a time not long ago postulated 'Bushmanoid' types as being aboriginal to North Africa.
I saw it earlier. Other than those three features it tells me nothing about indigenous Atlas Moroccans except whoever these folk are they used bows. Posting images, charts, and graphs citationless and outside of context can be misleading. Guess I'll have to get Searight's book to learn about this piece.
The Lioness posted some stuff I remember seeing long ago about NA phenotype similarities to Click speakers.
Old school anthropology remarked on "Khoisan"- like people in NA. It was disputed and dropped but art like this and nrY DNA support the discredited idea. We need to revisit it.
Sorry, I know no steatopygous NAs besides the usual phatasses nearly all populations can have. Whites seem to have developed it to some extent from eating meat raised on estrogen supplements.
Also a precision. The lady is an Ait Mgoun (not Mgoum).
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: Comparison Khoisan to Aboriginal Austrailian
Ironically the Khoisan looks relatively closer to an East Asian than does the Austrailian who is much closer geographically
(repost - lost Khosian image previously)
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
note: multi-recipient PM intercepted
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ I don't know why you're citing studies on Central African speakers when the topic is on North Africans. As for the old Coon stuff, you're beginning to sound like Anglo-idiot. We know the phenotype of North Africans is diverse and one can easily point out Khoisan-like features among certain groups. And we know that what you and others call 'Australoid' features are merely archaic features which are preserved in a number of populations including groups in North Africa.
More recent photos of North Africans who look San.
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler:
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ It's funny you should mention the comparison to San because the rock art image I posted comes from the Atlas Mountains of Morocco! I guess you missed it when Amun-Ra first posted the pic on another thread. It was discovered in the Atlas Mountains by a Susan Searight. My point of posting that picture was that it probably gives us a clue as to how the indigenes of the Atlas Mountain area looked like. That it bears a striking resemblance to the art of South African San may be an indication of a commonality that reaches to times immemorial. That's why I asked if you know of Berber tribes in the area displaying such traits as steatopygea. In fact many Western anthropologists in a time not long ago postulated 'Bushmanoid' types as being aboriginal to North Africa.
I saw it earlier. Other than those three features it tells me nothing about indigenous Atlas Moroccans except whoever these folk are they used bows. Posting images, charts, and graphs citationless and outside of context can be misleading. Guess I'll have to get Searight's book to learn about this piece.
The Lioness posted some stuff I remember seeing long ago about NA phenotype similarities to Click speakers.
Old school anthropology remarked on "Khoisan"- like people in NA. It was disputed and dropped but art like this and nrY DNA support the discredited idea. We need to revisit it.
Sorry, I know no steatopygous NAs besides the usual phatasses nearly all populations can have. Whites seem to have developed it to some extent from eating meat raised on estrogen supplements.
Also a precision. The lady is an Ait Mgoun (not Mgoum).
Yeah, I admit years ago I used to entertain that old theory of old Khoisan groups in North Africa. Though 'Khoisan' is a poor choice of words, I do know that early populations in North Africa prior to the Holocene did share craniofacial traits with them as well as other Sub-Saharan groups so I don't know why the relation is limited to Southern African San only when there are populations immediately adjacent who are far more related. There are authors who postulate origins in East Africa for both southern African Khoisan and pre-Holocene North Africans.
In the sum, the results obtained further strengthen the results from previous analyses. The affinities between Nazlet Khater, MSA, and Khoisan and Khoisan related groups re-emerges. In addition it is possible to detect a separation between North African and sub-saharan populations, with the Neolithic Saharan population from Hasi el Abiod and the Egyptian Badarian group being closely affiliated with modern Negroid groups. Similarly, the Epipaleolithic populations from Site 117 and Wadi Halfa are also affiliated with sub-Saharan LSA, Iron Age and modern Negroid groups rather than with contemporaneous North African populations such as Taforalt and the Ibero-maurusian. -- Pierre M. Vermeersch (Author & Editor), 'Palaeolithic quarrying sites in Upper and Middle Egypt', Egyptian Prehistory Monographs Vol. 4, Leuven University Press (2002).
Both hypotheses are compatible with the hypothesis proposed by Brothwell (1963) of an East African proto-Khoisan Negro stock which migrated southwards and westwards at some time during the Upper Pleistocene, and replaced most of the local populations of South Africa. Under such circumstances, it is possible that the Nazlet Khater specimen is part of a relict population of this proto-Khoisan Negro stock which extended as far north as Nazlet Khater at least until the late part of the Late Pleistocene. --- The Position of the Nazlet Khater Specimen Among Prehistoric and Modern African and Levantine Populations, Ron Pinhasi, Departent of Biological Anthropology, University of Cambridge, U.K., Patrick Semal, Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences, Belgium; Journal of Human Evolution (2000) vol. 39.
As for the rock painting, I don't know how old it's dated but note that there are many rock paintings throughout North Africa showing steatopygous forms.
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
^^^^ I made a a mistake here in identifying these people
correction follows
-however the result is similarly unusual, instead of North Africa try are described as Arabian
Plate 19. GYPSIES, DARK-SKINNED MEDITERRANEANS, AND SOUTH ARABIAN VEDDOIDS
The Gypsies, who are believed to have left their home in the lower Indus Valley about the turn of the present millennium, and who arrived in Europe some four centuries later, belong, when comparatively unmixed, to a dark-skinned, small-bodied racial type of general Mediterranean appearance which is common in India.
FIG.. 1 (2 views, photo V.. Lebzelter, from "Anthropologische Untersuchungen an serbischen Ziguenern," MAGW, vol. 52, 1922). A nomadic Serbian Gypsy, appar- entJy relatively pure, who shows the characteristic Gypsy combination of straight jet black hair, black eyes, and dark skin; in connection with Mediterranean facial features.
FIG. 2 (2 views).. An English Gypsy of the Cooper family, whose ancestors moved to New England a century ago. Although some of the Coopers and Stanleys are blue- eyed and show other signs of non-Gypsy mixture, this individual possesses a sallow brownish skin, straight, coarse, shiny black hair, and dark brown eyes. He is appar- ently a relatively pure representative of the Gypsy prototype
FIG.3 (2 views). Of much greater antiquity outside of India is a dark-skinned, black- eyed, and straight-haired Mediterranean type which appears with some frequency in southern Iraq and along the coasts of the Persian Gulf. This young sailor from Kuwait will serve as an example. The origin and affiliations of this type have not as yet been fully explained.
FIG. 4 (2 views). In southern Arabia, south of the Ruba' el Khali desert, the popula- tions consist of a Mediterranean upper stratum overlaid upon a non-white racial group whose affinities are with the Vedda of Ceylon, and the curly-haired aboriginal tribes of southern India; more remotely, it possesses strong connections with the aborigines of Australia.. The individual shown in FIG. 4 is an extreme example of this Veddoid pro- totype. Note the great prognathism, the ringlet hair form, the extreme nasion depres- sion, and the general form of the nose and lips. Except for his light unexposed skin color, this individual, who is quite brown where exposed, could pass for an Australian aborigine.
FIG. 5 (2 views). A coarse type of Hadhramauti, who represents a mixture between the Veddoid element shown above and the Mediterranean race; or who might be called a less extreme example of the former.
FIG. 6 (2 views, photo Wm. M. Shanklin). A coarse, dark-skinned type of Ruwalla Bedawi. Among the North Arabian Bedawin, besides the more delicately formed Medi- terranean types already observed, occur individuals who seem to show relationships with the Veddoid element on the other side of the desert, and perhaps also with the deeply pigmented element of southern Iraq, as exemplified by FIG. 3. Tribes and populations possessing these racial elements do not possess the normal 25 per cent of incipi- ent blondism characteristic of most Mediterranean groups
FIG. 1 (2 views, photo Ales Hrdlicka. From Hrdlicka, A., Anthropometric Survey of the Natives Of Kharga Oasis, Egypt; MCSI, vol. 59, #1, Washington, D. C., 1912, pl. 14). An oasis dweller from Kharga. This extremely dolichocephalic, low-vaulted, and relatively low-nosed Mediterranean sub-type is typical of the inhabitants of the oases of the Libyan desert, in Siwa and Awjla, where Berber is spoken, as well as in Arabic- speaking Kharga.
FIG. 2 (2 views, photo N. Puccioni, Puccioni, N., Anthropometria delle Genti della Cire- naica, Firenze, 1936, Tab. XVI, #277). A tall, slender North African Arab from the tribe of el Hasa in Cyrenaica. The narrow, prominent nose, the sloping forehead, and the protruding occiput are features typical of the nomadic Arabs of North Africa from Cyrenaica to the Atlantic.
FIG. 3 (2 views, from Zeltner, F. de, " A Propos des Touareg du Sud," RA, vol. 25, 1915, p. 172;
FIG. 3 from original blocks). A young Bourzeinat Tuareg, from the region of Timbuctu; this southern Tuareg shows clearly the Mediterranean character of this Saharan Berber people. Pictures of unveiled Tuareg men are very rare.
FIG. 4 (2 views, photo H. H. Kidder). A moderately tall, long-faced Algerian Kabyle.
FIG. 5 (2 views); A small Mediterranean who may be taken as a type example of this race in its North African form. This individual is a Shluh Berber from the Sous, south- ern Morocco.
FIG. 6 (2 views). An equally standardized Mediterranean from the Riffian coastal tribe of Beni Itteft, northern Morocco. These two individuals may be considered repre- sentatives of the Mediterranean invaders who entered western Europe over Gibraltar in the Neolithic.
Posted by Faheemdunkers (Member # 20844) on :
^ A lot of those are not what they are labelled as. For example Fig.1 of the Kharga Oasis man is described as having a Negroid component by Coon, as is Fig. 3.
Posted by Son of Ra (Member # 20401) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: [QB] ^ I don't know why you're citing studies on Central African speakers when the topic is on North Africans. As for the old Coon stuff, you're beginning to sound like Anglo-idiot. We know the phenotype of North Africans is diverse and one can easily point out Khoisan-like features among certain groups. And we know that what you and others call 'Australoid' features are merely archaic features which are preserved in a number of populations including groups in North Africa.
More recent photos of North Africans who look San.
Are the people in the pictures an isolated group? Like they live in the rural areas? Because to be quite honest I've never seen such features like that on North Africans. I know North Africans are very diverse. But the girl in the first picture on the right looks Southeast Asia like Cambodia.
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Faheemdunkers: ^ A lot of those are not what they are labelled as. For example Fig.1 of the Kharga Oasis man is described as having a Negroid component by Coon, as is Fig. 3.
prove that that is not the correct caption as the picture appeared in the book.
Posted by Faheemdunkers (Member # 20844) on :
They appear in the book. I'm pointing out if you then go to the specific pages where he describes them, he notes they are part Negroid.
- As I already explained to Swenet and the others (who are too dumb to get it), Coon didn't have the time to establish countless hybrid types, so many times he just lumped individuals who show admixture under a "pure" racial type, much like John Baker (also since both weren't strict typologists, you can find lumping throughout their works).
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Faheemdunkers: They appear in the book. I'm pointing out if you then go to the specific pages where he describes them, he notes they are part Negroid.
- As I already explained to Swenet and the others (who are too dumb to get it), Coon didn't have the time to establish countless hybrid types, so many times he just lumped individuals who show admixture under a "pure" racial type, much like John Baker (also since both weren't strict typologists, you can find lumping throughout their works).
In many cases it's subjective to indicate a type is 'hybrid' on a biological level a mixture of 'pure' things. That can't always be done by looking it has to be done genetically. If you look at point B you can't always assume it's a hybrid of A and C because evolutionarily speaking there could have been a point where C didn't even exist yet. Therefore B was not a product of a mixture between A and C. B was an outgrowth of A and C was an outgrowth of B. The fact that B might look like a hybrid doesn't mean it is a hybrid and is less 'pure' than C
Genetics are a deeper more intenal way of looking at things yet your prefer the external more superfical way of looking at things. You often talk about what's ugly and what's pretty. But like looking at things genetically, character, intelligence and talent are internal things and trump superficial things like prettiness and external 'beauty'. . Carlton Coon on the existence of Bigfoot Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by Son of Ra:
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ I don't know why you're citing studies on Central African speakers when the topic is on North Africans. As for the old Coon stuff, you're beginning to sound like Anglo-idiot. We know the phenotype of North Africans is diverse and one can easily point out Khoisan-like features among certain groups. And we know that what you and others call 'Australoid' features are merely archaic features which are preserved in a number of populations including groups in North Africa.
More recent photos of North Africans who look San.
Are the people in the pictures an isolated group? Like they live in the rural areas? Because to be quite honest I've never seen such features like that on North Africans. I know North Africans are very diverse. But the girl in the first picture on the right looks Southeast Asia like Cambodia.
I take it you haven't seen many aboriginals of southern Africa such as the San bushmen or the Khoi-Khoin pastoralists. Some Westerners in the past have classified the Khoisan peoples as a different racial stock from other Sub-Saharan 'Negroes' due to their features and some have even postulated a common origin with 'Mongoloid' peoples of eastern Asia. The point is the Khoisan are Africans closely related to other Sub-Saharan groups sharing the oldest lineages in the world. As for the northern Africans I posted, the first two are Tuareg Saharan nomads and the last are a Haratin family in Morocco. These are North Africans closely related to other indigenous North Africans even if their features differ.
Posted by Son of Ra (Member # 20401) on :
^^^I know about westerners trying to separate Khoisans. I was just asking do they live in an isolated area, because some people *cough* Eurocentrics *cough* *cough* will claim that they are 'mixed'. I am soon going to make a thread similar to this topic.
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
Son of Ra asked Djehuti if the above people were an isloated group of North Africans.
Djehutie's answer was to the effect 'don't you know anything about Khosians of Southern Africa'
-as if that answers a question about North Africans
Posted by Faheemdunkers (Member # 20844) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by Faheemdunkers: They appear in the book. I'm pointing out if you then go to the specific pages where he describes them, he notes they are part Negroid.
- As I already explained to Swenet and the others (who are too dumb to get it), Coon didn't have the time to establish countless hybrid types, so many times he just lumped individuals who show admixture under a "pure" racial type, much like John Baker (also since both weren't strict typologists, you can find lumping throughout their works).
In many cases it's subjective to indicate a type is 'hybrid' on a biological level a mixture of 'pure' things. That can't always be done by looking it has to be done genetically. If you look at point B you can't always assume it's a hybrid of A and C because evolutionarily speaking there could have been a point where C didn't even exist yet. Therefore B was not a product of a mixture between A and C. B was an outgrowth of A and C was an outgrowth of B. The fact that B might look like a hybrid doesn't mean it is a hybrid and is less 'pure' than C
Genetics are a deeper more intenal way of looking at things yet your prefer the external more superfical way of looking at things. You often talk about what's ugly and what's pretty. But like looking at things genetically, character, intelligence and talent are internal things and trump superficial things like prettiness and external 'beauty'. . Carlton Coon on the existence of Bigfoot
Bigfoot probably exists; one theory interprets it as a Gigantopithecus.
Google International Committee for the Study of Hairy Humanoids and you get my page at Metapedia.
Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
quote:Originally posted by Faheemdunkers: International Committee for the Study of Hairy Humanoids
Modo-face, are you included in this description?
Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
Prehistoric Levantine skull. Compare the tall maxilla and somewhat flaring zygomatic arches they have in common.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ Interesting comparison. What site is the skull from and from what time period?
quote:Originally posted by Son of Ra: ^^^I know about westerners trying to separate Khoisans. I was just asking do they live in an isolated area, because some people *cough* Eurocentrics *cough* *cough* will claim that they are 'mixed'. I am soon going to make a thread similar to this topic.
Well the Haratin of Morocco tend to be relatively isolated, but the other pictures as I said are Tuareg who are nomads who have wide ranges and have mixed with various people depending on the tribe.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
...
Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
^A site in Northern Negev, called Shiqmim. I don't know what time period, but its prehistoric. It appears in Smith 2002.
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
extreme high cheekbones and elongation here, long distance from nasal to jaw
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ LOL @ lyinass and her photoshop art. So we have an idea of the structure of the face but what about other features like skin color? You don't expect the ancient Maghrebis or the prehistoric Levantine folks to be fair-skinned like the modern Berber woman do you?
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: A site in Northern Negev, called Shiqmim. I don't know what time period, but its prehistoric. It appears in Smith 2002.
I'll look it up myself.
Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
FIG. 4 (2 views, photo H. H. Kidder). A moderately tall, long-faced Algerian Kabyle.
FIG. 5 (2 views); Shluh Berber from the Sous, south- ern Morocco.
"These two individuals may be considered representatives of the Mediterranean invaders who entered western Europe over Gibraltar in the Neolithic"
LYIN' _SS are you crazy are just dumb. Oh that's right - both I guess! Since I have this book of Coon's at home I am just wondering why you are putting photographs from Coon's book of these three 20th century Arabians from diverse tribes in this post and calling them Berbers.
If you are going to picture spam at least find out if the internet sources you are copying from are right.
You probably don't even care your getting caught in your outright lies and involuntary mistakes. nothing you post can be trusted. (As if I am just finding that out. Truly sickening.
Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
Haratin are very likely related to the early smaller gracile San- looking populations of neolithic Europe and Sahara. Even in Europe, Diop noted there were populations with bushmen or San-like pottery and other cultural features.
You can see these same facial features among some of the Beja, ancient Egyptians, Amhara and Somali. Ehret didn't call the early Afro-Asiatics Afrosan for nothing. They were likely once spread to the Horn and admixed with the much taller people there.
Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by Faheemdunkers: They appear in the book. I'm pointing out if you then go to the specific pages where he describes them, he notes they are part Negroid.
- As I already explained to Swenet and the others (who are too dumb to get it), Coon didn't have the time to establish countless hybrid types, so many times he just lumped individuals who show admixture under a "pure" racial type, much like John Baker (also since both weren't strict typologists, you can find lumping throughout their works).
In many cases it's subjective to indicate a type is 'hybrid' on a biological level a mixture of 'pure' things. That can't always be done by looking it has to be done genetically. If you look at point B you can't always assume it's a hybrid of A and C because evolutionarily speaking there could have been a point where C didn't even exist yet. Therefore B was not a product of a mixture between A and C. B was an outgrowth of A and C was an outgrowth of B. The fact that B might look like a hybrid doesn't mean it is a hybrid and is less 'pure' than C
Genetics are a deeper more intenal way of looking at things yet your prefer the external more superfical way of looking at things. You often talk about what's ugly and what's pretty. But like looking at things genetically, character, intelligence and talent are internal things and trump superficial things like prettiness and external 'beauty'. . Carlton Coon on the existence of Bigfoot
Trolling to be a comdien like I said may have been funny a few years ago but aren't cute anymore. Go away. Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche: LYIN' _SS are you crazy are just dumb. Oh that's right - both I guess! Since I have this book of Coon's at home I am just wondering why you are putting photographs from Coon's book of these three 20th century Arabians from diverse tribes in this post and calling them Berbers.
If you are going to picture spam at least find out if the internet sources you are copying from are right.
You probably don't even care your getting caught in your outright lies and involuntary mistakes. nothing you post can be trusted. (As if I am just finding that out. Truly sickening. [/QB]
You are too late fool I already put up the correction
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche: Trolling to be a comdien like I said may have been funny a few years ago but aren't cute anymore. Go away. [/QB]
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeing:
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche: The Old Testament Israel was in Arabia
In your alternative interpretation.
dana your alternative Arabist theories aren't cute anymore go away
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ Neither are your alternative white-wash North African theories. Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ Neither are your alternative white-wash North African theories.
I have no allternative NA theory. I put up the DNATribes analysis and dana agreed with it, then came in with True Black theory
Posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova (Member # 15718) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
quote:Originally posted by Son of Ra:
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ I don't know why you're citing studies on Central African speakers when the topic is on North Africans. As for the old Coon stuff, you're beginning to sound like Anglo-idiot. We know the phenotype of North Africans is diverse and one can easily point out Khoisan-like features among certain groups. And we know that what you and others call 'Australoid' features are merely archaic features which are preserved in a number of populations including groups in North Africa.
More recent photos of North Africans who look San.
Are the people in the pictures an isolated group? Like they live in the rural areas? Because to be quite honest I've never seen such features like that on North Africans. I know North Africans are very diverse. But the girl in the first picture on the right looks Southeast Asia like Cambodia.
I take it you haven't seen many aboriginals of southern Africa such as the San bushmen or the Khoi-Khoin pastoralists. Some Westerners in the past have classified the Khoisan peoples as a different racial stock from other Sub-Saharan 'Negroes' due to their features and some have even postulated a common origin with 'Mongoloid' peoples of eastern Asia. The point is the Khoisan are Africans closely related to other Sub-Saharan groups sharing the oldest lineages in the world. As for the northern Africans I posted, the first two are Tuareg Saharan nomads and the last are a Haratin family in Morocco. These are North Africans closely related to other indigenous North Africans even if their features differ.
^Some have argued that the Natufians were of "Bushmanoid" stock.. whatever that means.. lol
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ Yes, there were some anthropologists from back in the day who attempted to classify Natufians as 'bushmanoid' based on features like wide nasal index, large cranial index, and gracile limbs. This is what Dana meant by gracile proto-Mediterraneans with Bushman-like features. Of course we know these people have nothing to do with Bushmen of southern Africa but instead represent aboriginal peoples of coastal northeast Africa and parts of the Mediterranean.
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
^^^ she looks Khoisan, no one really knows where her roots are or exactly what Africa looked like before the bantu expansion. It seems strange that she would look so similar to a Khosian and not be Khosian
^^^^ here desribed as "bushman like features" compared to a Khosian below they have a similar wide face and wide set eyes with similar eye shape. There is a resmblance yet at the same time differnces the 'bushman-like' berber has a more squarish chin and his straight hair are unlike the Khosian below.
.
^^^^ yet the boy with the caption that says "bushman-like features" has hair like she has:
Perhaps there were once Khosians in North Africa (incl steatopygous rock art) and also these 'archaic' types with straight hair (unless it's European/Near eatern or Indian hair - there are a lot of possibilities)
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ Yeah there are a lot of possibilities-- in your mind! LOL
The archaeological and genetic records are quite clear. 'Khoisan' is a cultural group NOT a phenotype nor even an ethnic group since Khoisan include several peoples, mainly Khoi-Khoin and San. There is no evidence whatsoever that any of these peoples of southern Africa lived in northern Africa. Neither is there any evidence of Bantus in North Africa as well. Were there aboriginal populations in North Africa who may have shared similar features? Very likely but that doesn't mean they share direct ancestry with Khoisan peoples proper.
As for straight hair, how many times and in how many threads must we tell your lyinass that wavy hair form is native to Africa and has NOTHING to do with Near-Easterners or Indians? Are you aware that even many Berbers of the coasts have very curly hair and even many 'Arab' Egyptians have kinky hair, whereas there are isolate communities of blacks in and south of the Sahara who have lose or wavy hair??
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: wavy hair form is native to Africa
do you have a peer reviewed article stating that? that means text not picture spam -and keep in mind I used the term "straight" not "wavy" (I warned you about games)
^^^ Here is the person I was talking about. You are suggesting he is pure deep rooted African? maybe yes maybe no
Below Swenet had proposed a comparison of the below berber woman to a non-African Your remark : "interesting comparison". Tukeuler had also proposed she was admixed But now we have this kid example and you cry
quote:Originally posted by Swenet:
Prehistoric Levantine skull. Compare the tall maxilla and somewhat flaring zygomatic arches they have in common.
Chemical and Physical Behavior of Human Hair By Clarence R. Robbins 2012, pub: Springer Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
photo disappeared from post
whose hair is more suited to the arid environment?
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
extreme high cheekbones and elongation here, long distance from nasal to jaw
comparison to Otzi man, discovered in Italy
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ LOL Apparently you are as blind as you are stupid if you think there is a strong resemblance between Otzi and Maghrebi woman and Levantine skulls. The latter two display archaic features such as prominent zygomatic (cheek) bones and not just 'high' cheek bones, as well as heavy brows and maxillary prognathism-- all of which Otzi is missing.
Your attempt to suggest Otzi possessed such traits let alone was somehow of the same 'type' is as pathetic as your comparison of Tut's bust to an Indian! LOL
quote:Originally posted by the lyinass,:
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: wavy hair form is native to Africa
do you have a peer reviewed article stating that? that means text not picture spam -and keep in mind I used the term "straight" not "wavy" (I warned you about games)
B|tch, the only one playing games is YOU. The reason why I say "wavy" as opposed to "straight" is because Euronuts like you would then move the goal post to include bone-straight forms like among Asians. As for peer-reviewed texts, no I don't have any but my proof comes from the mouths of actual Africans as well as pictures of Africans from rural isolated communities who are very black or even 'negroid' in appearance but still have loose hair texture anyway. Your premise that loose hair texture among Africans is due to Eurasian admixture yet you offer no explanation as to how Eurasians affected hair form only but not other phenotypical traits. In fact the burden of proof is on YOU to provide peer-reviewed evidence that loose hair form is not indigenous to Africa and is the result of Eurasian genetic influence.
quote:
^^^ Here is the person I was talking about. You are suggesting he is pure deep rooted African? maybe yes maybe no
I didn't suggest anything about the individual above, trick! LOL That he is a Berber of North African and judging by his features, yes he does have indigenous African ancestry. Is he 'pure' probably not due to his very light skin.
quote:Below Swenet had proposed a comparison of the below berber woman to a non-African Your remark : "interesting comparison". Tukeuler had also proposed she was admixed But now we have this kid example and you cry
LOL Typical Lyinass distortions of others words. Yes, Tukuler claimed she was archaic-admixed. Why she is 'admixed' is obvious from her very fair skin and blue eyes which us knowledgeable folks know are infrequent features to the Maghreb and are associated with those of European descent. As for the so-called 'non-African' skull from the Levant. The skull belongs to the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B culture which is derived from the African Harifian culture of Egypt. So obviously it's not as 'non-African' as you think or wish it to be! LOL
quote:Chemical and Physical Behavior of Human Hair By Clarence R. Robbins 2012, pub: Springer
Okay. But what does the above source have to say about the wavy hair found in Africans which is different from European hair because it is more eliptical and stronger?? Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: A site in Northern Negev, called Shiqmim. I don't know what time period, but its prehistoric. It appears in Smith 2002.
I'll look it up myself.
I found it. The Shiqmim site dates to the Chalcolithic i.e. PPNB Culture which we know is derived from both Natufian and incoming Harifians from Africa.
Viewed from above the skull was narrow with a post-occipital bulge,... Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: photo disappeared from post
whose hair is more suited to the arid environment?
Like I said Trolling for dollars is on another channel. Its called youtube. Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ LOL Apparently you are as blind as you are stupid if you think there is a strong resemblance between Otzi and Maghrebi woman and Levantine skulls. The latter two display archaic features such as prominent zygomatic (cheek) bones and not just 'high' cheek bones, as well as heavy brows and maxillary prognathism-- all of which Otzi is missing.
^^^ pretending to be a forensic expert. There is a notable resemblance in skull shape also xyyman says Otzi man is African see other thread
Chemical and Physical Behavior of Human Hair By Clarence R. Robbins 2012, pub: Springer
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:Okay. But what does the above source have to say about the wavy hair found in Africans which is different from European hair because it is more eliptical and stronger??
read the first sentence of the page above again
Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
Tukuler claimed she was archaic-admixed. Why she is 'admixed' is obvious from her very fair skin and blue eyes which us knowledgeable folks know are infrequent features to the Maghreb and are associated with those of European descent.
I shouldn't've used admixed because here on ES it means Eurasian admixed. My precise wording should have been atavistic; i.e., "generational throwback."
Ms Lo isn't very fair. Nicole Kidman is very fair.
Not sure her eyes are blue. They look grey with some little brown. Maybe they're light hazel.
Lo is a cave dweller in a remote valley of Maroc's Atlas. Considering that and her atavism I don't quite see where she's Eurasian admixed. Even medium tone African complexions can show ruddiness in the face particularly in the ears, cheeks, nose, and forehead.
This would be especially so for a born and bred cave dweller.
Note Lo's complexion between her bracelet and sleeve. Still somewhat dark for someone spending her life shielded from the sun in a cave.
I doubt economically disadvantaged troglodytes purchased Euro slaves. You know they're miserably paid for those magnificent Berber rugs they make.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ My theory is based on the complexions of Berbers whom Euros described from Medieval to Modern times just a few centuries ago. The indigenous people of the Canary Islands were also described as black with exception of Tenerife Island who share the same complexion as Ms. Lo whom Euronuts often fixate on as proof that Berbers were originally white. Also, such European admixture need not be due to purchase of slaves as you cited Roman sources of obscure white tribes in the Maghreb though they be a minority.
quote:Originally posted by the lyinass,: pretending to be a forensic expert. There is a notable resemblance in skull shape also xyyman says Otzi man is African see other thread.
LOL I'm not pretending to be anything! I have EYES that can discern the difference! Now you are hiding behind Xyzman, even though he not only is he NOT an expert either but he obviously doesn't know what he's talking about! LMAO
I suggest you go on pretending to be a black girl.
quote:Chemical and Physical Behavior of Human Hair By Clarence R. Robbins 2012, pub: Springer read the first sentence of the page above again
I did, trick. It talks about stereotypical hair types of Europeans and then the stereotypical hair of Africans. It does NOT address non-stereotypical the loose hair of Africans which again is different from that of European counterparts.
Go back to Mathilda's brothel. Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ My theory is based on the complexions of Berbers whom Euros described from Medieval to Modern times just a few centuries ago. The indigenous people of the Canary Islands were also described as black with exception of Tenerife Island who share the same complexion as Ms. Lo whom Euronuts often fixate on as proof that Berbers were originally white. Also, such European admixture need not be due to purchase of slaves as you cited Roman sources of obscure white tribes in the Maghreb though they be a minority.
Libyan and Maghrebi peoples were in general darker than South Europeans. Nonetheless, and as you know, Egyptian art and Greco-Latin literature prove some were nally yally and even white.
Trade items and archaeology prove contact between North Africa and South Europe pre-dates those historic notices. So yes at least Iberian women were early presumed lighteners of select ancient and even early Holocene Maghrebis.
But were not some very light complexions produced naturally in a Maghreb whose temperatures and climate is more like Greece than other places in Africa?
I doubted so until Keita proposed the lightest North Africans besides trans-Mediterranean gene flow may result from intentional endogamy of
I just don't see why some people in high elevations with serious snow in country with climate akin to South Europe and the same approximate latitude could not have lost some pigmentation of no environmental strategic value.
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: [QB] ^ My theory is based on
is based on True Blacksim
ignoring both Manilius who described Mauri as lighter than medium tone as well as Ptolemy and Pliny on Leucæthiopians
Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: A site in Northern Negev, called Shiqmim. I don't know what time period, but its prehistoric. It appears in Smith 2002.
I'll look it up myself.
I found it. The Shiqmim site dates to the Chalcolithic i.e. PPNB Culture which we know is derived from both Natufian and incoming Harifians from Africa.
Viewed from above the skull was narrow with a post-occipital bulge,...
But Shiqmim is a site, not a culture or phase. How do you know that cranium I posted earlier is associated with this complex (PPN)? Or was it only inhabited during this period? Thanks for that paper BTW.
Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
You're an anti-black agenda joker and I won't take you seriously anymore though I did try to this past season.
You showed real promise but in the end really let me down.
Leukaethiops were far south of the Mauri whose very name means black in Greek (ancient and modern). Just goto GOOGLE TRANSLATE from English to Greek and key in black.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^^
quote:Originally posted by the lyinass: Your [Djehuti's] theory is based on True Blacksim
ignoring both Manilius who described Mauri as lighter than medium tone as well as Ptolemy and Pliny on Leucæthiopians
LOL You still try to spin what Manilius actually meant!
Apparently Takruri had hope in you, since you let him down. I on the other hand put no hope or faith in a Euronut whore who spreads her lies like STDs.
According to Manilius' list of dark/BLACK peoples from darkest to lightest:
Egyptians who lie smack dab in between the others are medium tone among the blacks NOT all peoples, you lying whore! LOL
The Aforans and Maures are lighter than the Egyptians but they are still considered dark or BLACK by Manilius!
From Snowden: The Mauri, another northwest African people whose color received frequent notice, were at times described as 'nigri' (black) and 'adusti' (scorched).
So quit with the pig sh*t. Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: But Shiqmim is a site, not a culture or phase. How do you know that cranium I posted earlier is associated with this complex (PPN)? Or was it only inhabited during this period? Thanks for that paper BTW.
I know Shiqmim is a site, but when I did a search on it featuring Smith, that is the first thing I found along with other sources relating to it. So that is probably where the skull is from since the site featured a number of male skulls with mandibles missing.
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^^
quote:Originally posted by the lyinass: Your [Djehuti's] theory is based on True Blacksim
ignoring both Manilius who described Mauri as lighter than medium tone as well as Ptolemy and Pliny on Leucæthiopians
LOL You still try to spin what Manilius actually meant!
Apparently Takruri had hope in you, since you let him down. I on the other hand put no hope or faith in a Euronut whore who spreads her lies like STDs.
According to Manilius' list of dark/BLACK peoples from darkest to lightest:
Egyptians who lie smack dab in between the others are medium tone among the blacks NOT all peoples, you lying whore! LOL
The Aforans and Maures are lighter than the Egyptians but they are still considered dark or BLACK by Manilius!
From Snowden: The Mauri, another northwest African people whose color received frequent notice, were at times described as 'nigri' (black) and 'adusti' (scorched).
So quit with the pig sh*t.
Bitch keep up, I made numerous posts in The Manilius thread exemplifying the medium skin tone of the dark set described by Manilius all of these folks below being examples of that skin tone:
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
the land of Egypt, flooded by the Nile, darkens bodies more mildly owing to the inundation of its fields: it it a country nearer to us and its moderate climate imparts a medium tone.
MEDIUM SKIN TONE
Ramesses II Relief Brooklyn Museum
Tutamkhamun, wooden bust, black background
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ LOL B|tch, who is you fooling?! That collage of photos of modern people have NOTHING to do with the ancient black peoples whom Manilius is referring to! You post North Asians and then a (modern) Maghrebi man of obvious mixed ancestry and Will Smith a modern light-skinned African American who also has mixed ancestry. We are talking about ANCIENT indigenous peoples who lived south of the Romans and were called DARK/BLACK by the Romans!
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ LOL B|tch, who is you fooling?! That collage of photos of modern people have NOTHING to do with the ancient black peoples whom Manilius is referring to! You post North Asians and then a (modern) Maghrebi man of obvious mixed ancestry and Will Smith a modern light-skinned African American who also has mixed ancestry. We are talking about ANCIENT indigenous peoples who lived south of the Romans and were called DARK/BLACK by the Romans!
Notice how Djehutie will never call Will Smith black though the ancient Greeks most certainly would.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ LMAOH
Another idiotic red-herring. Will Smith, a modern day African American is called 'black' despite his very light complexion for political reasons in that he has black ancestry. This has no bearing on Manilius and his ancient peers who referred to the peoples to their south in Africa due to their very dark complexions.
This is why you never bothered to respond to the Snowden quote where he admitted the Romans called the Maure (allegedly the lightest blacks in Manilius list) as nigri (black).
Posted by Son of Ra (Member # 20401) on :
^^^Not only that but his 'Negroid' features...Skin complexion means ****...
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ LMAOH
Another idiotic red-herring. Will Smith, a modern day African American is called 'black' despite his very light complexion for political reasons in that he has black ancestry. This has no bearing on Manilius and his ancient peers who referred to the peoples to their south in Africa due to their very dark complexions.
This is why you never bothered to respond to the Snowden quote where he admitted the Romans called the Maure (allegedly the lightest blacks in Manilius list) as nigri (black).
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
According to Manilius' list of dark/BLACK peoples from darkest to lightest:
according to your quote Manilius describes Indians as blacker than Egyptians and "Afrorans" as being lighter than the Egyptians and the Maure (later "Moors"- meaning BLACK) being lighter still.
Using the above photo of the King Tut wood bust photgraphed in a darkly lit gallery (I'll allow it to help you) lets see an example of the following lighter than Egyptian listed>
"Afroran"
and the lighter still
Maure (later "Moors"- meaning BLACK)
If necessry I will cut out the faces and put them next to each other. Rememer as per Manilus each discernably lighter than the previous 'BLACK' person
unless you're scared
-lioness
Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
LOL At the above, so now all Africans need to have to similar skin tone in order to comprise the racist Eurocentric stereotype.
Despite of living in different reigns and climates!LOL
Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
Do you have any idea what a cline is? At one end is the quantified extreme. At the other is its least expression.
No discrete abutted monocolor blocks. That would be a clineless bar graph.
I don't take Manilius to mean India had no one of Aethiopian darkness or vice versa but that there is always some interlap with some exclusion.
A cluster approach showing overlap
as best my tool allows no egg shape ovals or slanted ovals and no ovals I did make are absolute just a visual way to percieve Manilius' data.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ You are correct, Tukulor. Manilius writings are quite clear no matter who tries to spin it. Speaking of which...
quote:Originally posted by the lyinass twit,: according to your quote Manilius describes Indians as blacker than Egyptians and "Afrorans" as being lighter than the Egyptians and the Maure (later "Moors"- meaning BLACK) being lighter still.
Using the above photo of the King Tut wood bust photgraphed in a darkly lit gallery (I'll allow it to help you) lets see an example of the following lighter than Egyptian listed>
"Afroran"
and the lighter still
Maure (later "Moors"- meaning BLACK)
If necessary I will cut out the faces and put them next to each other. Remember as per Manilus each discernibly lighter than the previous 'BLACK' person
unless you're scared
-lioness
B|tch nobody's scared except YOU which is why you are desperately spinning and outright LYING.
Now, THIS thread of mine here is about Modern Day North Africans who Exhibit 'Archaic' Features NOT Manilius we already have a couple threads on that such here and here where your lyinass was debunked on BOTH. So take it up there! Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
^^^ the old in the shadows trick
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ LMAO There's no "trick" at all. Even in the shadows, one can clearly see the above are all BLACK peoples!
In your case it's the old out your lyinass trick. So either discuss the actual topic of this thread which is archaic features or take your lyinass complaints in the thread where it belongs.
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Interesting how your choices consist mostly of South Pacific aborigines or admixtures thereof as well as South Indian and Australian aborigines. All these aboriginal groups of Asia and the Pacific were often grouped under the macro-racial group 'Austric'. But again, since race doesn't exist, how a population looks is often totally different from whom they are actually related to. We know that Maghrebi people share genetic ties with other Africans as well as with Europeans which is not surprising considering the geographic position of the Maghreb itself.
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Truly sickening.
