Joined: 04 May 2005 {Posts: 2021 } Location: santiago, chile
Posted: Thu 08 Feb 2007 18:20 Post subject: Meds
Salsassin wrote:
Caucasoid is a disproven term. They are African. And Berbers come in all colors.
Berbers are Africans, but that does not mean they are closely related to Subsaharians any more that to theirs neighbours in the Mediterranean. After all, Meds live quite a lot closer, and Berbers have always being considered Meds.
Posted: Thu 08 Feb 2007 18:32 Post subject: Re: Meds
oevega wrote:
Salsassin wrote:
Caucasoid is a disproven term. They are African. And Berbers come in all colors.
Berbers are Africans, but that does not mean they are closely related to Subsaharians any more that to theirs neighbours in the Mediterranean. After all, Meds live quite a lot closer, and Berbers have always being considered Meds.
Omar
They show affinity to both. Feel free to provide evidence they are not related.
Joined: 04 May 2005 {Posts: 2021 } Location: santiago, chile
Posted: Thu 08 Feb 2007 18:43 Post subject:
You know Jaime, I get tired of your manipulations of reality. I won't provide evidence because we have discussed the topic many times, and we know they are in a cline between Europe and Central Africa.
You know Jaime, I get tired of your manipulations of reality. I won't provide evidence because we have discussed the topic many times, and we know they are in a cline between Europe and Central Africa.
But Berbers are a people. They are the Moors.
Omar
No, they are Imazhigen. Berber and Moor are both foreign names to them. And the only one manipulating reality is yourself. Thus you fail to provide evidence.
I can show plenty of evidence of DNA affinity between Berbers, Ethiopians and Somalis Both of which are Sub Saharan. And plenty of which are dark skinned.
Joined: 04 May 2005 {Posts: 2021 } Location: santiago, chile
Posted: Thu 08 Feb 2007 20:02 Post subject:
Salsassin wrote:
oevega wrote:
You know Jaime, I get tired of your manipulations of reality. I won't provide evidence because we have discussed the topic many times, and we know they are in a cline between Europe and Central Africa.
But Berbers are a people. They are the Moors.
Omar
No, they are Imazhigen. Berber and Moor are both foreign names to them. And the only one manipulating reality is yourself. Thus you fail to provide evidence.
I can show plenty of evidence of DNA affinity between Berbers, Ethiopians and Somalis Both of which are Sub Saharan. And plenty of which are dark skinned.
You can keep trying Salsassin. But you well know the issue is the following:
(1) Afrocentrists, particularly the Black Americans, identity with the term Moor, but they are wrong. The Moors are people different not only in genetics but in history, to theirs ancestors. The intention behind it is to show in ancient times the Black peoples conquered Europe, but that does not agree with historical facts.
(2) The historical Moors of Spain were the Muslim of Spain. They were Spaniards, Arabs, Syrians and Coastal Berbers, like the Imazhigen. Now Imazhigen is almost the same as Berber (they are the majority) and Berber is the same as MOOR, at least when the SPANIARDS talk about North Africans. And the Spaniards wrote the history of Spain.
(3) Relations exist between people, but Somalians nor Ethiopians were Moors. The Moors were the Muslims (one context) and the Coastal Berbers
(other meaning). That's all.
You know Jaime, I get tired of your manipulations of reality. I won't provide evidence because we have discussed the topic many times, and we know they are in a cline between Europe and Central Africa.
But Berbers are a people. They are the Moors.
Omar
No, they are Imazhigen. Berber and Moor are both foreign names to them. And the only one manipulating reality is yourself. Thus you fail to provide evidence.
I can show plenty of evidence of DNA affinity between Berbers, Ethiopians and Somalis Both of which are Sub Saharan. And plenty of which are dark skinned.
You can keep trying Salsassin. But you well know the issue is the following:
(1) Afrocentrists, particularly the Black Americans, identity with the term Moor, but they are wrong. The Moors are people different not only in genetics but in history, to theirs ancestors. The intention behind it is to show in ancient times the Black peoples conquered Europe, but that does not agree with historical facts.
(2) The historical Moors of Spain were the Muslim of Spain. They were Spaniards, Arabs, Syrians and Coastal Berbers, like the Imazhigen. Now Imazhigen is almost the same as Berber (they are the majority) and Berber is the same as MOOR, at least when the SPANIARDS talk about North Africans. And the Spaniards wrote the history of Spain.
(3) Relations exist between people, but Somalians nor Ethiopians were Moors. The Moors were the Muslims (one context) and the Coastal Berbers
(other meaning). That's all.
Omar
I find it funny Omar that you believe you have the correct definition of what a Moor is when even anthropologists and historians are not able to agree on this. Just because you state something does not make it fact-no matter how many times you say it.
I see you use "blacks" and "Arabs" in your post but neither blacks nor Arabs are homogenous ethnic groups-they are defined by whomever is talking about them. It may interest you to know that many people from northern africa who live in Europe call themselves black and there are many people who are your definition of black who are from Northern Africa. Arabs themselves only define their ethnicity as people who are direct descendents of Noah end of story;they make no mention of color, race, hair texture etc.Berbers are a mixture of Nomadic groups from different parts of Africa. So yes they are a people but all cultures are a mixture of things that came to be there own group.
As far as your Moor argument-there are also many different meanings. I noticed your biased in including Spaniards in your definition of what Moors are even though they didn't invade Spain until the eighth century. They were a people long before that. According to 1st century Roman writings Moors came in a variety of colors from Caucasian to what you consider black. Shakespeare always used Moor to mean black as he describes Othello as "black as a stove". Moors were also called black during the middle ages in Europe. The original Oxford dictionary definition of Moor is black or swarthy. The knight Morien was described as all black and in The Song of Roland in France the Moors were described as "black as ink". The Moorish emperor Yusuf ben Tachfin was described by Arab writers as "a brown man with wooly hair". The description of wooly hair puts him in your definition of black. As well as all of the black soldiers recruited throughout Europe were called Moors by Europeans.
There may be many interpretations of what these people I just described were thinking when they described blacks this way but the FACT is Moor comes from the Greek word for black or dark-skinned. What sense does it make that they would use this word to describe a group of people that were Caucasian as you say?
In Spain and latin countries today Moors are used only to describe the lighter inhabitants of certain countries-this is obviously the definition you're using but that does not however make it correct. You did not give any evidence when asked because you do not have any. You have only your definition that you've been given and you stating something does not make it evidence.
What you have written is a majority of your own perceptions with bits of historical facts thrown in. But history is proven as close as we can by writings and drawings from those times which I have presented examples of here but you have not. It is absolutely ridiculous that you post whatever you know and try to demand people take it as fact.
You can keep trying Salsassin. But you well know the issue is the following:
(1) Afrocentrists, particularly the Black Americans, identity with the term Moor, but they are wrong. The Moors are people different not only in genetics but in history, to theirs ancestors. The intention behind it is to show in ancient times the Black peoples conquered Europe, but that does not agree with historical facts.
Which is a strawman, because I never made that claim. But there were dark skinned Moors among those invasions.
Quote:
(2) The historical Moors of Spain were the Muslim of Spain. They were Spaniards, Arabs, Syrians and Coastal Berbers, like the Imazhigen. Now Imazhigen is almost the same as Berber (they are the majority) and Berber is the same as MOOR, at least when the SPANIARDS talk about North Africans. And the Spaniards wrote the history of Spain.
Berber and Moor are imposed names. Just like Black. Among the Imazhigen there were people that were dark. There still are.
Quote:
(3) Relations exist between people, but Somalians nor Ethiopians were Moors. The Moors were the Muslims (one context) and the Coastal Berbers
(other meaning). That's all.
Sorry bub. But plenty of evidence links those people along with others of the Mediterranean. Look up Haplogroup E3b (M35) (previously called Hg21)
Joined: 04 May 2005 {Posts: 2021 } Location: santiago, chile
Posted: Mon 19 Feb 2007 13:03 Post subject:
histgirl wrote:
...
They were a people long before that. According to 1st century Roman writings Moors came in a variety of colors from Caucasian to what you consider black. Shakespeare always used Moor to mean black as he describes Othello as "black as a stove". Moors were also called black during the middle ages in Europe. The original Oxford dictionary definition of Moor is black or swarthy. The knight Morien was described as all black and in The Song of Roland in France the Moors were described as "black as ink". The Moorish emperor Yusuf ben Tachfin was described by Arab writers as "a brown man with wooly hair". The description of wooly hair puts him in your definition of black. As well as all of the black soldiers recruited throughout Europe were called Moors by Europeans.
.
Pretty bad sources you got, fellow. Shakespeare was never in Spain and all the other sources you have are from Northern Europe, where they don't have a clue.
In Spain, from where the term Moor come from, it is impossible to pass a Black person as a Moor. The distinction between both group was always clear. That's all. So, the "confusion" between Blacks and Moors exist in Northern Europe, not in the South were they are better known.
And you know why? Because the people of the Magreb has always been in contact with Portugal, Spain, Southern France and Italy, from the very beginning. And the people of the Magreb are not South Saharan Africans.
So, who could know Moors better that Southern Europeans? Shakespeare? Ha. He was a gringo
Yes, Afrocentrism is not a replacement of Education, indeed.
Pretty bad sources you got, fellow. Shakespeare was never in Spain and all the other sources you have are from Northern Europe, where they don't have a clue. ...
I am not sure that I understand Omar's point. Surely he is not saying that the Berbers and other Muslim North Africans lacked sub-Saharan admixture. Omar himself gave a good explanation of the pre-modern gene flow throughout northern Africa, from the Mediterranean all the way south to Nigeria, in his post at http://www.backintyme.com/odr/viewtopic.php?p=18931#18931. If Omar is suggesting that northern Europeans had no clue as to the demographics and culture of the Muslim world, then he may have forgotten about the Crusades. I think that Omar errs in suggesting that it is "Afrocentrism" to point out that the Mediterranean has been a genetic mixing bowl for millennia. This fact has been shown by copious cultural as well as molecular evidence.
Last edited by fwsweet on Tue 20 Feb 2007 01:16; edited 1 time in total
Joined: 07 Feb 2007 {Posts: 1301 } Location: Lookin DC Metro, Feelin Geneva
Posted: Mon 19 Feb 2007 15:28 Post subject:
Salsassin wrote:
oevega wrote:
Salsassin wrote:
There is still the assumption that she needed to have African ancestry to have those features. She didn't.
By the way, I laugh at the portrayal, in this cover, of Ganibal.
...
Wasn't he like that? Ganibal was Subaharan African, remember. He wasn't Moor, Arab or "in-between", at least I am wrong. If so, please say so... kinddly.
Now, we must make it clear that he was not "Czar of all Russias" but only a favorite and later general in the Czar's court. Just in case
Omar
Actually there is a dispute that he either was from Ethiopia or from Cameroon/Chad. So we really do not know that. But he was definitely not a Moor or wearing Moorish clothes. He was brought over as a child. And the claim about Cameroon/Chad seems just as speculative as that of Ethiopia. The truth is, we just don't know.
He was supposedly brought over as a child from the Ottoman Sultan's court where he was a prince held captive according to some legends. If that were the case I would assume he came from East Africa. I am not sure how long he was in the Ottoman Empire but I assume he was either a Christian or a Muslim. He would likely not have dressed as a anything other than an Ottoman in Turkey or a Russia while in Russia. How dark he was is not know, but if he was Ethiopian (which I see a lot of in the DC area) he did not look like a West Africa in facial appearance...not to say he was not dark, but his facial features probably looked different.
There are currently Arabs in Chad for instance, but predominate people to live there are quite black. Technically it is in and borders the Sahara...this area is known as the Sahel.
The current president of Chad
As far as Niger the same thing holds...there are some Arabs and Berbers in the north but most of the country is not Arab or Berber, not even 15% of the population. I would assume when Gannibal was alive they were even less in number.
Joined: 07 Feb 2007 {Posts: 1301 } Location: Lookin DC Metro, Feelin Geneva
Posted: Mon 19 Feb 2007 15:38 Post subject:
oevega wrote:
You know Jaime, I get tired of your manipulations of reality. I won't provide evidence because we have discussed the topic many times, and we know they are in a cline between Europe and Central Africa.
But Berbers are a people. They are the Moors.
Omar
Berbers are a multiracial population with all types of admixture.
It really depends on the population sampled.
Quote:
The appearance and the genetic make-up of Berbers is best examined together with that of their fellow Arabic-speaking inhabitants of North Africa; both share a predominant Berber ancestry of dominant Y chromosome contributions from ancient East Africa and dominant mitochondrial contributions from western Asia.
[edit] Coastal Northwest Africans
About 75% of Northwest Africans live on the coast. Berber groups such as the Riffis and Kabyles have the least recent sub-Saharan admixture (~2%) and the highest European admixture (~15%); Arabic-speaking groups have about 7% recent sub-Saharan admixture overall. Berber groups in this zone include:
* Kabyles
* Chawis
* Riffis
* Chenwas
[edit] Northwest Africans of the interior
About 20% of Northwest Africans live between the Atlas Mountains and the Sahara; these groups have moderate, recent sub-Saharan admixture (~20%), including:
* Mozabites
* Chleuhs
[edit] Saharan Northwest Africans
About 5% of Northwest Africans live in the Sahara; these groups have the highest recent and ancient West African admixture, sometimes reaching 80-90% among the Tuaregs. They include:
Joined: 07 Feb 2007 {Posts: 1301 } Location: Lookin DC Metro, Feelin Geneva
Posted: Mon 19 Feb 2007 15:39 Post subject:
If you look at various genetic maps of Berbers...they usually fall equal distant between Subsaharian Africans and Europeans or just slightly closer to Europeans.
They are definately quite genetically distant (on average) from Italians, Lebanese, Gulf Arabs, or Greeks.
Joined: 04 May 2005 {Posts: 2021 } Location: santiago, chile
Posted: Mon 19 Feb 2007 18:39 Post subject: moors
Whatever,
People that are known as Moor in historical Spain is the first group up there: the coastal Berbers, plus Arabs, Syrians and local Spaniards. Yes, no doubt one or other Tuareg would be in the lot as well. But saying Moors are Subsaharans is like saying Russians are Mongolians. Some are, most aren't.
So, when Van Sertima publish a best seller with a very Black person on the cover, showing that Moors were all subsaharians, just be cautious. That's all.
The Berbers exist as a distinct people and deserve to keep theirs history for them.
Joined: 07 Feb 2007 {Posts: 1301 } Location: Lookin DC Metro, Feelin Geneva
Posted: Mon 19 Feb 2007 19:53 Post subject:
I don't think anyone is trying to say that all the Moors were black or all Berbers are black. That is obviously false and not the point.
I think it would be more accurate to post that the Moors were made up primarily of Berbers (who are obviously of mixed ancestry with a racial cline from Med Caucasoid to Sub-Saharan African), Arabs (who are predominately Med Caucasoid with various admixtures of Slavic, Sub-Saharan East and West African), and indigenous Iberians (who converted to Islam) as well as pure black sub-Saharan and Saharan African slaves and free military men.
That was the reality, based on history and the genetic data.
I would say that the majority of Moors in Iberia were converts to Islam who were Native to the region (Iberian-Gallic-Germanic mix). The ruling classes were likely originally Berber and then overtime mixed and became more native Iberian due to intermarriage with converts (primarily on the female side) until a person who claimed Berber ancestry looked no different from a Christian Iberian. This same thing also occurred in Egypt.
I would say a significant portion of the military (mainly foot soldiers and some offers) were pure black. There were also some Berbers or Arabs who were descendent of black mothers and Arab and Berber fathers...this was not uncommon in the Middle East, and is the reason that 12% of Middle Eastern men today have direct black ancestry on their mother's side, but less than 2% on their fathers. Male slaves were often castrated.
I'm not going to apply a one-drop rule, but I'm pretty sure many of the folks walking around Iberia during Muslim rule, who considered themselves Berber and Arab would be black by contemporary American racial standards.
This being said I do not think a majority or a significant minority of the leadership in these campaigns or states were pure black African.
I think the point is that there was sub-Saharan African contribution, just as their was Slavic and Caucasian (from the Caucasuses) in the Ottoman Empire.
Pretty bad sources you got, fellow. Shakespeare was never in Spain and all the other sources you have are from Northern Europe, where they don't have a clue.
So, who could know Moors better that Southern Europeans? Shakespeare? Ha. He was a gringo
I'm not sure why you act so knowledgeable and then think Rome or France is in Northern Europe! Because I gave sources from both of these places as well as a source from Arabs themselves. So I don't know why you are harping on the Shakespeare source. If you feel the Spaniards are more knowledgeable than the Arabs then I can not waste further energy on telling you the truth. All of them can be easily confirmed! Moor is from the Greek word for dark not Spanish.
And are you accusing Europeans from the Middle Ages of be Afrocentric? Because I think you know that doesn't make sense. I'm sure that's not a reason for them to call Moors black!
Also since you consider other Europeans totally ignorant about this subject and only consider Spain another source of pictures comes from the Alphonso X's Book of Games. He clearly shows pictures of Arab invaders that are all of different colors.
And again let me say that you just stating something is NOT evidence. You ask about my sources when mine can be looked up but I haven't been given any of yours.
Last edited by histgirl on Tue 20 Feb 2007 00:08; edited 2 times in total
There are currently Arabs in Chad for instance, but predominate people to live there are quite black. Technically it is in and borders the Sahara...this area is known as the Sahel.
The current president of Chad
As far as Niger the same thing holds...there are some Arabs and Berbers in the north but most of the country is not Arab or Berber, not even 15% of the population. I would assume when Gannibal was alive they were even less in number.
Joined: 07 Feb 2007 {Posts: 1301 } Location: Lookin DC Metro, Feelin Geneva
Posted: Tue 20 Feb 2007 00:36 Post subject:
Well in actuality it does not, but Omar seems to think that these are not SubSaharan African countries...now I believe he is trying to imply the pepole are not black, but mixed or non-black.
That is hardly the case...blacks are the overwealming majority in these nations, none blacks are a small minority in the Northern parts.
'
FAQ
Search
Register
Log in
