ACCORDING TO 17TH CENTURY CAC ARTWORK, INDIANS IN THE AMERICAS LOOKED LIKE THIS??

[Black Panther]

nikkas in here really trying to use indigenous artwork and old engravings to prove Native Americans were black?

By some of y'alls logic, the images below are PROOF that the original Africans were Asian:

"What African do you know with light skin and slanted eyes breh" :infocrazy:

"AGAIN...look at the slanted eyes and CLEAR epicanthic folds, flat round face, and smooth nose bridge, definitely Asiatic features" :infocrazy:
​

Spoiler

Please do not explain to me why this is African art. I already know it is.

Obviously, I don't believe these examples to be proof that the original Africans were Asiatic. My point is to say, that if you're basing your assumptions on artwork that isn't concerned with perfect anatomical accuracy, then you're going to come to some pretty crazy conclusions. Not to mention that many of the Western works cited in this thread were based on second- and third-hand descriptions of Native Americans. You think these were live illustrations or something?

The examples cited in this thread of European artists drawing dark-skinned indigenous Native Americans can easily be chalked up to the inherent racial attitudes or color biases of the artist; it may well have been the case that many westerners saw all races that were darker than "white" to be pretty much the same.

 

[Cynic]

"maybe"... Yep.. You aren't sure what you are saying... Nice mj emoji though...

Did you see the year of those visits? There was no "previous experiences with whites" This was uncharted territory they were sending the black moor too.

Doesnt the word "hotep" relate to "Africa" and "Egypt"?, this thread has nothing to do with Africa or Egypt.

This thread's subject matter obviously has you feeling some kind of way. You've been talking in circles, and your attempts to look for an argument are admirable, but ineffective... Thread will continue.

You miss the part I said, by sending a black man they could retreat unharmed if things went left?

Isn't that exactly what happened ? Zuni murked the moor and the cacs dipped.


You've yet to give one rebuttal worth a damn except a single moor who died as a scout for euro-cacs.

 

[YouMadd?]

You miss the part I said, by sending a black man they could retreat unharmed if things went left?

Isn't that exactly what happened ? Zuni murked the moor and the cacs dipped.


You've yet to give one rebuttal worth a damn except a single moor who died as a scout for euro-cacs.

SO what are you even trying to debate at this point?

If you are trying to debate that their were no "black" indians, than you are just flat out wrong...

 

[YouMadd?]

nikkas in here really trying to use indigenous artwork and old engravings to prove Native Americans were black?

By some of y'alls logic, the images below are PROOF that the original Africans were Asian:

"What African do you know with light skin and slanted eyes breh" :infocrazy:

"AGAIN...look at the slanted eyes and CLEAR epicanthic folds, flat round face, and smooth nose bridge, definitely Asiatic features" :infocrazy:
​

Spoiler

Please do not explain to me why this is African art. I already know it is.

Obviously, I don't believe these examples to be proof that the original Africans were Asiatic. My point is to say, that if you're basing your assumptions on artwork that isn't concerned with perfect anatomical accuracy, then you're going to come to some pretty crazy conclusions. Not to mention that many of the Western works cited in this thread were based on second- and third-hand descriptions of Native Americans. You think these were live illustrations or something?

The examples cited in this thread of European artists drawing dark-skinned indigenous Native Americans can easily be chalked up to the inherent racial attitudes or color biases of the artist; it may well have been the case that many westerners saw all races that were darker than "white" to be pretty much the same.

Whats interesting is how offended some of ya'll get. We're just having a conversation and posting old world maps, artwork, and indigenous portrayals... it really isn't a big a deal as you are making it seem.

 

[Black Panther]

Whats interesting is how offended some of ya'll get.

"Offended"?

Ignorance isn't offensive; it's pitiful.

 

[YouMadd?]

nikkas in here really trying to use indigenous artwork and old engravings to prove Native Americans were black?

By some of y'alls logic, the images below are PROOF that the original Africans were Asian:

"What African do you know with light skin and slanted eyes breh" :infocrazy:

"AGAIN...look at the slanted eyes and CLEAR epicanthic folds, flat round face, and smooth nose bridge, definitely Asiatic features" :infocrazy:
​

Spoiler

Please do not explain to me why this is African art. I already know it is.

Obviously, I don't believe these examples to be proof that the original Africans were Asiatic. My point is to say, that if you're basing your assumptions on artwork that isn't concerned with perfect anatomical accuracy, then you're going to come to some pretty crazy conclusions. Not to mention that many of the Western works cited in this thread were based on second- and third-hand descriptions of Native Americans. You think these were live illustrations or something?

The examples cited in this thread of European artists drawing dark-skinned indigenous Native Americans can easily be chalked up to the inherent racial attitudes or color biases of the artist; it may well have been the case that many westerners saw all races that were darker than "white" to be pretty much the same.

Lets be clear, no one is here is saying ALL THE INDIANS WERE BLACK. We are simply researching the theory that their were more than just one phenotype of Indian. A lighter colored, and various darker skin tones.

Before photography, all we had were artist paintings and portrayals. Thats why Every single war in the US history has paintings and historical images

But lets go one step further. Im only using pictures because words are too hard for a lot of folks to digest on here.

How do you feel about the Italian Explorer GIovani De Verrazano's 1524 letter where he described the Indians of the Carolina? Is he wearing a tinfoil hat too? Curious as to the effort you will put into trying to deny first hand accounts..

They go completely naked except that around their loins they wear skins of small animals like martens, with a narrow belt of grass around the body, to which they tie various tails of other animals which hang down to the knees; the rest of the body is bare, and so is the head. Some of them wear garlands of birds’ feathers. They are dark in color, not unlike the Ethiopians, with thick black hair, not very long, tied back behind the head like a small tail. As for the physique of these men, they are well proportioned, of medium height, a little taller than we are. They have broad chests, strong arms, and the legs and other parts of the body are well composed. There is nothing else, except that they tend to be rather broad in the face: but not all, for we saw many with angular faces. They have big black eyes, and an attentive and open look. They are not very strong, but they have a sharp cunning, and are agile and swift runners. From what we could tell from observation, in the last two respects they resemble the Orientals, particularly those from the farthest Sinarian regions.2 We could not learn the details of the life and customs of these people because of the short time we spent on land, due to the fact that there were few men, and the ship was anchored on the high seas.

http://nationalhumanitiescenter.org/pds/amerbegin/contact/text4/verrazzano.pdf

 

[YouMadd?]

"Offended"?

Ignorance isn't offensive; it's pitiful.

This thread really isn't meant to be taken as absolute fact, it is a theory, much like EVERYTHING ELSE in existence. It is meant to open a discussion and hopefully folks come in and add info that disputes or helps the theory. But you aren't really adding anything to the thread. most of the disputing responses in here are emotional based with emojis and what not, When im not here to battle you. I like to learn. So any info you have on pre colonial history, im open to read.

Add something to the discussion. Or if you think im wrong, just agree to disagree and keep it moving. Im here to provide and receive info for folks who like to research. Im not here to argue with coli emojis

 

[YouMadd?]

FROM A BOOK, THAT IS LOCKED AWAY IN A LIBRARY ARCHIVE

"
A Man and Woman of the Island of St. John in their best Habits.
"

A Man and Woman of the Island of St. John in their best Habits. - JCB Archive of Early American Images

 

[YouMadd?]

Woman from Tierra del Fuego and her son, engraved from 1795
18th century engraving of an indigenous woman in Tierra del Fuego.

www.museodechile.com

Engraving titled "A Female savage of Terra del Fuego", published in 1795 and done by J. CHAPMAN In the engraving there is a semi-naked woman with a child in the area of the Strait of Magellan.

 

[KingDanz]

 

[YouMadd?]

THIS IS WHAT THE EARLIEST SKULLS IN THE AMERICA'S LOOKED LIKE:

"THAT TO ME, IS A NEGROID FACE"
-RICHARD NEAVE

 

[YouMadd?]

PHILIP GEORGE FRIEDRICH VON RECK'S 1736 PAINTING OF A CREEK INDIAN WAR PARTY CAMP

FROM THE BOOK VON RECK'S VOYAGE 1736

 

[BlackMajik]

Like i've said 100s of times b4 Black Folks were never just confined to Africa

That lie has been repeated by cacs and non-blacks

If u mention black people being somewhere outside of Africa in history they will lie and try to say they were just "slaves"

 

[YouMadd?]

Like i've said 100s of times b4 Black Folks were never just confined to Africa

That lie has been repeated by cacs and non-blacks

If u mention black people being somewhere outside of Africa in history they will lie and try to say they were just "slaves"

Exactly... I just feel the need to keep adding to the thread because folks come in here mucking up the thread without really adding anything, even if they are disagreeing...

 

[YouMadd?]

I see multiple shades of natives here