European vs North American description of the Moors

[Ikwa]

@Swagnificent
I like how you ignore 90% of the post and only pick the bit which pleases you. Why did you ignore the fact that the NA slave trade was already happening during the Roman control of that territory and went on until recently? On the other hand the period in which white slaves were sold in NA happened between the 16th and 19th century. That's 3 centuries vs more than 9 (possibly more). Answer this.

Also the only bit of "proof" that you've provided so far is Ibn Battuta's quote calling Somalis Berbers. You're basing your whole argument on that. I'm using your own logic against you and said that Europeans referred to Sri Lankans and Filipinos as Moors. You then went on to claim that Sri Lankans and Filipinos are black

Bring proof that the Berbers were black around the 8th century.

@lotty Black South Africans do not consider their light skinned counterparts as black. Both groups are political rivals. You need to stop trying to impose your American way of thinking on the rest of the world, it simply won't work.

In America a light skinned or mixed race person is considered black but that isn't the case in South Africa and other places on earth.

The world does not stop at black & white.

 

[Ikwa]

@Swagnificent

Ibn Battuta referred to the town of Walata as the northern-most province of black people.
http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=TKh_21ZERH4C&pg=PA69&lpg=PA69&dq=ibn battuta walata is the northern most&source=bl&ots=5Rm9Jbj4yH&sig=eER409zl3DyNmNq9GnloKYiRyOM&hl=en&sa=X&ei=qFcNU5_1OKiN7AaQ8IHAAQ&ved=0CEIQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=ibn battuta walata is the northern most&f=false

If you check on a map you'll notice that Walatah is in modern day Southern Mauritania.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oualata

 

[bouncy]

@Swagnificent
I like how you ignore 90% of the post and only pick the bit which pleases you. Why did you ignore the fact that the NA slave trade was already happening during the Roman control of that territory and went on until recently? On the other hand the period in which white slaves were sold in NA happened between the 16th and 19th century. That's 3 centuries vs more than 9 (possibly more). Answer this.

Also the only bit of "proof" that you've provided so far is Ibn Battuta's quote calling Somalis Berbers. You're basing your whole argument on that. I'm using your own logic against you and said that Europeans referred to Sri Lankans and Filipinos as Moors. You then went on to claim that Sri Lankans and Filipinos are black

Bring proof that the Berbers were black around the 8th century.

@lotty Black South Africans do not consider their light skinned counterparts as black. Both groups are political rivals. You need to stop trying to impose your American way of thinking on the rest of the world, it simply won't work.

In America a light skinned or mixed race person is considered black but that isn't the case in South Africa and other places on earth.

The world does not stop at black & white.

Of course I know this didnt you read my post. The whites who have the real power meaning money and resources consider them "black" because their asses are in the slums with the "blacks". If Im correct whites own at least 50% of the economic structure in south africa yet make up a tiny minority of the land. Where are the coloreds if they are so different frim blacks?. Just because they have stockholm syndrome and try to seperate themselves to gain the power whites have, and play the game whites do, doesnt change the truth they are the same. Again if they werent they would both be in different circumstances, yet they are struggling just the same while whites.are.living much better then them and the whites are extremely low in population there.

The world is black&white because if it wasnt why is it that every person in every country who is in power happen to white or close in features to white while everyone whi has the less power happen to be as close to.black as possible?. You think this is just coincidence?. If they can do this why do you think they cant rewrite history for.their benefit?.

The problem is your view of the world is based in what you were taught which is white supremacy in its way of telling history. You just didnt catch to it because you are taught this when you are young so it becomes a part of who you are until you challenge it and you assume the world was always the way it is now excluding when we were.in the jungle. Again whites were the oddball. This means everything was "black". That is my whole point in this discussion. When whites came into the world, specifically the racists ones, all this nonsense.started and now we have all these different."races" when in reality it is just black and white un its essence. You just are blinded from accepting their teachings.but I bet your people are suffering from a low quality of life compared to your white or white featured peers in the part if Africa you're from. This is if in fact you are black of have features of a black person. You think this is a coincidence?.

You can recite history all day but when are going to start looking around you to see something isnt right with what we are being told?. Use your common sense. Why is Europe a small ass land but have the power of the world?. Why are dark areas poor as shyt like India, Africa, and Southeast Asia yet the area with "whites" doing good compared to them?. There can be two reasons. It was manipulated to be this way or whites are just more intelligent people. Most people accept the latter belief just in more subtle ways of saying it and this is the core of white supremacy. Open your eyes.

 

[alpo]

@lotty @Swagnificent he is an agent stop replying to him

 

[Knicksman20]

This is slightly off topic but did any of you know Beethoven's mother was a Moor?

http://open.salon.com/blog/ronp01/2009/09/27/the_african_heritage_of_ludwig_van_beethoven

 

[Swagnificent]

@Swagnificent
I like how you ignore 90% of the post and only pick the bit which pleases you. Why did you ignore the fact that the NA slave trade was already happening during the Roman control of that territory and went on until recently? On the other hand the period in which white slaves were sold in NA happened between the 16th and 19th century. That's 3 centuries vs more than 9 (possibly more). Answer this.

Also the only bit of "proof" that you've provided so far is Ibn Battuta's quote calling Somalis Berbers. You're basing your whole argument on that. I'm using your own logic against you and said that Europeans referred to Sri Lankans and Filipinos as Moors. You then went on to claim that Sri Lankans and Filipinos are black

Bring proof that the Berbers were black around the 8th century.

you want proof. okay. here it is. descriptions of the inhabitants of North Africa in the past by the people that actually saw them

http://www.africaresource.com/rasta...ing-to-european-perceptions-by-dana-marniche/

Most Arab-speaking historians beginning as far back as the 8th century when Wah ibn Munabihh a South Arabian and descendant of an Iranian mercenary claimed the Berbers belonged to black races of Ham. Several Muslim writers claimed the Berbers were the sons of Berr who were said to descend from Mazigh ibn (son of ) Canaan Ibn Ham Ibn Nuh (Noah). The tradition found cited in Nafousa: Berber Community in Western Libya, Omar Sahli citing Dabbuz. Retrieved on-line from http://www.tawalt.com/monthly/fessato_1.pdf , July. 12, 2008.

1st century A.D. – “Diodorus Siculus speaks in reference to the expedition of Agathocles a Sardinian general, of three Libyan tribes on the coast of Tunisia, the Micatani and Zufoni (see Zafan ),who were nomads and the Asfodelodi, who by the color of their skin resembled the Ethiopians” , p. 50 The Mediterranean Race Book XX, 38, 57 Guiseppe Sergi, 1901. The Micatani were also called Ukutameni and Khethim by Josephus. In later writings they are called Ketama Berbers. The name Maketa or Imakitan remains a name for the eastern branches of the Tuareg.

1st century A.D.– Marcus Valerian Martial was one of the earliest Europeans to use the phrase “woolly hair like a Moor” in one of his Satires, and the phrase was commonly used up until the Middle Ages. See Nature Knows No Color Line by J.A. Rogers, 1952. p. 50

1st -2nd century – Juvenal, the Roman writer in his Satire V. 53 referred to “a Gaetulian, as a black a Moor “so black you’d rather not see him at midnight”.. Found in Madan’s translation of Juvenal, vol. I by J. Vincent published at Oxford.

1st century Silius Italicus also describes the Moors with the term ‘Nigra’ meaning black. In the 3rd century Roman dramatist Platus or Plautus maintained the name Maure was a synonym for “Niger” which was a common term for the word black. 6th century Isidore Archbishop of Seville claimed the word Maure meant black according to Brunson and Runoko Rashidi in “The Moors in Antiquity” in Golden Age of the Moor, 1991.

6th A.D.- Corippus uses the phrase “facies nigroque colorus” meaning faces or appearance of black color to describe the North African Berbers. In his book Johannis, I/ 245.

6th A.D. – Procopius in his History of the Wars book IV contrasting the Germanic Vandals who had settled in North Africa with the Maures claimed the Vandals were not “black skinned like the Maurusioi” . The tribes he classified as Maurusioi are those now classified as ancient Berbers, the Numidians, Masaesyle, Gaitules, Massyles and Mezikes several other “Berber” tribes then settled between Tunisia and Morocco.

11th century – “The Berber women are from the island of Barbara, which is between the west and the south. Their color is mostly black though some pale ones can be found among them. If you can find one whose mother is of Kutama, whose father is of Sanhaja, and whose origin is Masmuda, then you will find her naturally inclined to obedience and loyalty in all matters, active in service, suited both to motherhood and to pleasure, for they are the most solicitous in caring for their children. “ 11th century the Christian Iraqi physician Ibn Butlan quoted by historian Bernard Lewis.

here are modern living breathing berbers that have retained their original features. its very easy to see from these descriptions, that this is who the ancients saw when they came to north africa

 

[GetInTheTruck]

You guys want to see the world as black and white and then accuse others of being "cacs" or "agents" of cacs.

culture language and ethnicity have separated groups of people since the beginning of human society. Skin color and hair texture means jack shyt.

 

[Im Kemet Rocky & I like penis]

@Swagnificent puttin in those ethers though...

@Van Taak im suprised you aint give up yet..

 

[Im Kemet Rocky & I like penis]

You guys want to see the world as black and white and then accuse others of being "cacs" or "agents" of cacs.

culture language and ethnicity have separated groups of people since the beginning of human society. Skin color and hair texture means jack shyt.

umm, they're discussing how the moors were regarded as black phenotypically and of course genetically.

they have contributed to mounds of descriptions, if you would like to contribute how the moors weren't black. i suggest you out up some ancient Moorish remains for genetic testing...
i would love to see the results..

 

[Swagnificent]

@Swagnificent

Ibn Battuta referred to the town of Walata as the northern-most province of black people.
http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=TKh_21ZERH4C&pg=PA69&lpg=PA69&dq=ibn battuta walata is the northern most&source=bl&ots=5Rm9Jbj4yH&sig=eER409zl3DyNmNq9GnloKYiRyOM&hl=en&sa=X&ei=qFcNU5_1OKiN7AaQ8IHAAQ&ved=0CEIQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=ibn battuta walata is the northern most&f=false

If you check on a map you'll notice that Walatah is in modern day Southern Mauritania.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oualata

you should understand that he's referring to "black" there as the west african phenotype. there are other black afican phenotypes. you claim to be somalian, i'm sure you'll agree with me that the east african phenotype is different from the west african phenotype but still black. right?

well it shouldn't be surprising. I don't think anyone here has claimed that the berbers looked exactly like the bantu tribes of west africa. what we are saying is that they were similar in type of the black tribes living there RIGHT NOW.
you know these people

if you don't believe me then please explain away this picture

this is a picture and news clipping about the barbary pirates. as you can see from the news clipping, this riff pirate was off the seaboard of Morocco. and he is CLEARLY black.

 

[GetInTheTruck]

umm, they're discussing how the moors were regarded as black phenotypically and of course genetically.

they have contributed to mounds of descriptions, if you would like to contribute how the moors weren't black. i suggest you out up some ancient Moorish remains for genetic testing...
i would love to see the results..

I believe the moors were of varied complexions/appearances, if you want to consider them black it doesn't matter one bit to me. Like I said, "race" wasn't a factor back then the way it is now.

 

[GetInTheTruck]

Can you answer my question.

Also if you really think about it they are black, just different frkm what we are told what is black. If you really think about it the whiteman is the oddball, and the people he seeded included mixed races like "arabs" as we see them today. If you really look at it white racism did a good job at making you think every one is different when in reality they are different. A black family always has different looks even in the heart of Africa. They have the most genetic diveristy. Im not racist but Im seeing the white man played a mind trick on the world that was big.

So before the whiteman everybody saw each other as brothers?

 

[Swagnificent]

You guys want to see the world as black and white and then accuse others of being "cacs" or "agents" of cacs.

culture language and ethnicity have separated groups of people since the beginning of human society. Skin color and hair texture means jack shyt.

we know that stupid.

I've never claimed that the world is just black or white. Its crakkkas that decided that. No one in Africa thought of themselves as black before the crakkkas arrived. In the past, people just classified themselves by tribes and nations. The Greeks/Romans looked down upon the lighter skin, blonde hair, blue eyed Germanic tribes to the north. They did not consider themselves the same. In fact there are some interesting writing of the Greeks talking about how they are superior to all men on earth because they are an inbetween from the lighter skin tribes to the north and darker skin tribes to the south.

It was white europeans circa the 1700s with the rise of the Transatlantic slave trade that started the modern concept of race. They're the ones that elevated all people with white skin from europe to being superior. And delegated all the darker skin peoples on earth as inferior. And they specially focused in on black people and said that anyone with dark skin and curly/kinky hair was inferior.

I'm not a racial absolutist. To me race doesn't exist. Science has proven that we are more alike than different. That our outer features are but skin deep. However, I'm not gonna allow white people to define anyone with black skin and kinky hair for the last 500 years as subhuman and then turn around and pretend that black skin and kinky hair doesn't matter in defining blackness when it comes to ancient civilizations like the Egyptians, Moors, and Berbers. Thats straight up bullshyt and you cacs know it.

 

[GetInTheTruck]

we know that stupid.

I've never claimed that the world is just black or white. Its crakkkas that decided that. No one in Africa thought of themselves as black before the crakkkas arrived. In the past, people just classified themselves by tribes and nations. The Greeks/Romans looked down upon the lighter skin, blonde hair, blue eyed Germanic tribes to the north. They did not consider themselves the same. In fact there are some interesting writing of the Greeks talking about how they are superior to all men on earth because they are an inbetween from the lighter skin tribes to the north and darker skin tribes to the south.

It was white europeans circa the 1700s with the rise of the Transatlantic slave trade that started the modern concept of race. They're the ones that elevated all people with white skin from europe to being superior. And delegated all the darker skin peoples on earth as inferior. And they specially focused in on black people and said that anyone with dark skin and curly/kinky hair was inferior.

I'm not a racial absolutist. To me race doesn't exist. Science has proven that we are more alike than different. That our outer features are but skin deep. However, I'm not gonna allow white people to define anyone with black skin and kinky hair for the last 500 years as subhuman and then turn around and pretend that black skin and kinky hair doesn't matter in defining blackness when it comes to ancient civilizations like the Egyptians, Moors, and Berbers. Thats straight up bullshyt and you cacs know it.

If race doesn't exist then what are you arguing about?

Europeans didn't base their characterizations of superiority/inferiority on the "skin color" of peoples, that's absurd...they based them on what they believed certain groups of people had accomplished. Europeans always admired civilizations like Egypt and India (who were dark skinned) that's why they tried to claim them as white. They considered other groups of africans to be inferior because they didn't believe they had civilizations worth talking about....it had nothing to do with the fact that they were "black."

all this black/white shyt is for the birds.

 

[Swagnificent]

@Van Taak here are more references to the berbers by ancient historians

http://www.africanark.org/berbersandmoors.html

4th c. A.D.--Many authors between the 5th and 15th century referred to Berbers as cursed and black due to their presumed descendancy from Cana'an and Ham. The Syrian, Al Dimashqi, (d.1327) wrote the Nukhbat al Dahr fi ajaib al barr wa’l – bahr, in which one section has the heading - “The Fifth Secton [of the Ninth Chapter] Concerning the Sons of Ham, Son of Nuh (peace be upon him!) Namely the Copts, the Nabateans, the Berbers and the Sudan with their Numerous Divisions”. He outlines some of the reasons commonly held for what he calls “the cause of the black complexion of the sons of Ham” - i.e. of the Copts, Kinanah, Berbers and Sudan. He stated, “It is said that Ham begat three sons Qift, Kan’an, and Kush. Qift is the ancestor of the Copts, Kush of the Sudan, and Kan’an of the Berbers…) (Hopkins, J. F. P., & Levtzion, N. (2000). Corpus of early Arabic sources for West African history. Princeton, NJ: Markus Weiner Publishers, p. 213)

14h c. A.D.--Ibn Khaldun whose family was from Andalusia also gave a telling explanation of why some people of his time believed Berbers had come to possess the black complexions they did. He writes, “Ham, having become black because of a curse pronounced against him by his father, fled to the Maghrib to hide in shame.... Berber, son of Kesloudjim [Casluhim], one of his descendants, left numerous posterity in the Maghrib” (Smith, R. (2003). “What happened to the ancient Libyans? Chasing sources across the Sahara from Herodotus to Ibn Khaldun,” Journal of World History 14:4, p. 482).

Now compare what we've seen so far with the descriptions of berbers in the 1800s by Europeans.

According to James Prichard, Kabylia was a name of the mountainous areas of the north of Tunisia and Algeria and included those speaking the dialects called Showia. (See Researches into the Physical history of Mankind. Vol. II, 1851, p. 20) Colonial observers actually mention two distinct peoples of Kabylia, plus those who were a mixture between these. The ones described as dark brown and near black were said to live in Numidian type huts of the ancient Berbers called "Magalia". Others were of a different culture and appearance, quite fair in color, and according to recent scholars dress themselves and make jewelry and pottery like that of the early and modern inhabitants of the Balkans, Greeks and ancient Vandals. These fair skinned populations of the Algerian Kabyle area who speak the Berber dialects have palm prints and blood groupings which link them directly to the European peoples of the southern Mediterranean and are thus largely descendants of ancient and modern Europeans and Turks who have absorbed Berber or Kutama blood. Unlike the early matrifocal Berbers and modern Tuareg, they have also been documented as the most patrifocal people in Africa. (Algeria: A Country Study, 1985) The darker-skinned Kabyle groups mentioned above - "their complexion brown and sometimes nearly black" - are those whose origins belong to the ancient Berbers but, are almost never spoken of by modern observers. As stated by the colonialists, their culture is very different. Their dancing, for example, with rapid shoulder movement resembles that of modern Ethiopians and Eritraeans.

There you have it. Europeans in the 1800s basically breaking it down exactly as we've been saying so far. The light skin almost white looking berbers are groups that came from europe and were absorbed into berber society. They were different culturally than the black berbers who retained a culture similar to modern day ethiopians and eritereans. People from the horn of africa that were called berbers as well in ancient times.

I mean how much more evidence do you need?