It's okay to talk about Black History, as long as we don't say we're the real Jews?
- Thread starter LionofJudah
- Start date
Such a viewpoint had dual merit for European purposes: it maintained the image of the Negro as an inferior
being, and it pointed to the alleged fact that development could come to
him only by mediation of the white race.32 It also implied a self-appointed
duty of the 'higher' races to civilize the 'lower' ones, a notion which was
eventually formulated as 'the white man's burden'. At this point in time
the Hamite found himself in an ambiguous position. On the one hand he
was considered to be Caucasoid, that is superior. On the other hand he was
a native, part of the 'burden', a man to benefit from European civilization.
Here the Teutonic theory of race showed its adaptability. Having devised
a hierarchy within the Caucasian race, the builders of the theory placed
the Teutonic Anglo-Saxon on top of the ladder with the Slavs on the
lowest rung. But an even lower position could always be added, and the
Hamites filled the space admirably. 'Politics and race theories seemed
natural allies';33 they provided a seemingly cogent ideological framework
for colonial expansion and exploitation.
The beginning of the twentieth century saw the Caucasoid-Hamite
solidly established. Science supplanted theology as the alpha and omega of
truth. Racial 'scientific' classifications, which had to face the physical
diversity of the various 'Hamites', established a separate Hamitic branch
of the Caucasian race, closely following the creation of a linguistic entity
called a family of Hamitic languages. Linguistic typologies were based on
racial types and racial classifications on linguistic definitions. The con-
fusion surrounding the 'Hamite' was steadily compounded as the terms
of reference became increasingly overlapping and vague. The racial classi-
fication of 'Hamites' encompassed a great variety of types from fair-
skinned, blonde, blue-eyed (Berbers) to black (Ethiopians). Two early
racial typologies were devised by Sergi34 and Brinton.35 Sergi called certain
populations Hamitic chiefly on the basis of their linguistic characteristics.
Among these were the inhabitants of the Sahara, the Berbers and even
such people 'who have wholly, or partially, lost their language', like the
Egyptians, Watusi and Masai. They were divided into the Eastern branch,
and the Northern branch. The Eastern branch included the ancient and
modern Egyptians (excluding the Arabs), Nubians, Bejas, Abyssinians,
Gallas, Danakil, Somali, Masai and Watusi (or Wahuma). The Northern
branch included the Berbers, Tebus, Fulbes (Fulani) and the Gaunches of
the Canaries.36 Brinton denoted Lybians, Egyptians and the East African
groups as Hamitic, and remarked that each of these groups is distinguished
by physical and linguistic differences.37
(Cont)
being, and it pointed to the alleged fact that development could come to
him only by mediation of the white race.32 It also implied a self-appointed
duty of the 'higher' races to civilize the 'lower' ones, a notion which was
eventually formulated as 'the white man's burden'. At this point in time
the Hamite found himself in an ambiguous position. On the one hand he
was considered to be Caucasoid, that is superior. On the other hand he was
a native, part of the 'burden', a man to benefit from European civilization.
Here the Teutonic theory of race showed its adaptability. Having devised
a hierarchy within the Caucasian race, the builders of the theory placed
the Teutonic Anglo-Saxon on top of the ladder with the Slavs on the
lowest rung. But an even lower position could always be added, and the
Hamites filled the space admirably. 'Politics and race theories seemed
natural allies';33 they provided a seemingly cogent ideological framework
for colonial expansion and exploitation.
The beginning of the twentieth century saw the Caucasoid-Hamite
solidly established. Science supplanted theology as the alpha and omega of
truth. Racial 'scientific' classifications, which had to face the physical
diversity of the various 'Hamites', established a separate Hamitic branch
of the Caucasian race, closely following the creation of a linguistic entity
called a family of Hamitic languages. Linguistic typologies were based on
racial types and racial classifications on linguistic definitions. The con-
fusion surrounding the 'Hamite' was steadily compounded as the terms
of reference became increasingly overlapping and vague. The racial classi-
fication of 'Hamites' encompassed a great variety of types from fair-
skinned, blonde, blue-eyed (Berbers) to black (Ethiopians). Two early
racial typologies were devised by Sergi34 and Brinton.35 Sergi called certain
populations Hamitic chiefly on the basis of their linguistic characteristics.
Among these were the inhabitants of the Sahara, the Berbers and even
such people 'who have wholly, or partially, lost their language', like the
Egyptians, Watusi and Masai. They were divided into the Eastern branch,
and the Northern branch. The Eastern branch included the ancient and
modern Egyptians (excluding the Arabs), Nubians, Bejas, Abyssinians,
Gallas, Danakil, Somali, Masai and Watusi (or Wahuma). The Northern
branch included the Berbers, Tebus, Fulbes (Fulani) and the Gaunches of
the Canaries.36 Brinton denoted Lybians, Egyptians and the East African
groups as Hamitic, and remarked that each of these groups is distinguished
by physical and linguistic differences.37
(Cont)
He went on to state that 'the physical appearance of the Libyan peoples distinctly marks them as
members of the white race, often of uncommonly pure blood. As the race
elsewhere, they present the blonde and brunette type, the latter predomin-
ant, but the former extremely well marked'. Because Brinton also considered
the Iberians to be Hamites, and not Basques, his description of the Libyans
seems to imply that the Libyans are a sort of half-way house of the 'Hamitic'
race, because they combine elements of the blonde Hamites (of Europe)
and the brunette Hamites (of East Africa). This reasoning appears to be no
more logical than that of Sergi, who first bases a racial group on its lin-
guistic characteristics and then includes in it people who have 'wholly or
partially' lost the language!
Linguistic classifications were based on geography, racial characteristics
and occupation, rather than on rigorous methodology pertaining solely to
language. Grammatical gender became the main diagnostic of the so-
called Hamitic languages. Although grammatical gender exists in many un-
related languages of the world, it was not found in the languages of the
'true' Negro (racial category again). Thus linguistic typologies had racial
bases just as racial typologies were based on linguistics.38
Because the Hamites discovered in Africa south of the Sahara were
described as pastoralists and the traditional occupation of the Negro was
supposedly agriculture, pastoralism and all its attributes became endowed
with an aura of superiority of culture, giving the Hamite a third dimension:
cultural identity.
The historians who began to compile histories of Africa wrote with an
often unconscious racial bias, and accepted the dicta of the discoverers of
that continent as indisputable proven facts and presented them as historical
explanations of the African past.39
Much of anthropology gave its support to the Hamitic myth. Seligman
found a cultural substratum of supposedly great influence in Africa.40 In
1930 he published his famous Races of Africa, which went through several
editions and which was reprinted in I966 still basically unchanged. He
refined the Sergi-devised classifications of Hamitic peoples, adding the
category of Nilotes or 'half-Hamites'. Every trace and/or sign of what is
usually termed 'civilized' in Africa was attributed to alien, mainly Hamitic,
origin. In such a way, iron-working was supposed to have been introduced
to the Negroes by pastoral Hamites, along with complex political institu-
tions, irrigation and age-grade systems.41
(Cont)
members of the white race, often of uncommonly pure blood. As the race
elsewhere, they present the blonde and brunette type, the latter predomin-
ant, but the former extremely well marked'. Because Brinton also considered
the Iberians to be Hamites, and not Basques, his description of the Libyans
seems to imply that the Libyans are a sort of half-way house of the 'Hamitic'
race, because they combine elements of the blonde Hamites (of Europe)
and the brunette Hamites (of East Africa). This reasoning appears to be no
more logical than that of Sergi, who first bases a racial group on its lin-
guistic characteristics and then includes in it people who have 'wholly or
partially' lost the language!
Linguistic classifications were based on geography, racial characteristics
and occupation, rather than on rigorous methodology pertaining solely to
language. Grammatical gender became the main diagnostic of the so-
called Hamitic languages. Although grammatical gender exists in many un-
related languages of the world, it was not found in the languages of the
'true' Negro (racial category again). Thus linguistic typologies had racial
bases just as racial typologies were based on linguistics.38
Because the Hamites discovered in Africa south of the Sahara were
described as pastoralists and the traditional occupation of the Negro was
supposedly agriculture, pastoralism and all its attributes became endowed
with an aura of superiority of culture, giving the Hamite a third dimension:
cultural identity.
The historians who began to compile histories of Africa wrote with an
often unconscious racial bias, and accepted the dicta of the discoverers of
that continent as indisputable proven facts and presented them as historical
explanations of the African past.39
Much of anthropology gave its support to the Hamitic myth. Seligman
found a cultural substratum of supposedly great influence in Africa.40 In
1930 he published his famous Races of Africa, which went through several
editions and which was reprinted in I966 still basically unchanged. He
refined the Sergi-devised classifications of Hamitic peoples, adding the
category of Nilotes or 'half-Hamites'. Every trace and/or sign of what is
usually termed 'civilized' in Africa was attributed to alien, mainly Hamitic,
origin. In such a way, iron-working was supposed to have been introduced
to the Negroes by pastoral Hamites, along with complex political institu-
tions, irrigation and age-grade systems.41
(Cont)
This shyt is like fan fiction on steroids 
Archaeological findings of any magnitude were also ascribed to outside influences, and kept the Negro African out of his own culture history.42 In the eyes of the world the Negro
stood stripped of any intellectual or artistic genius and of any ability at all
which would allow him, now, in the past, or in the future, to be the master
of his life and country.
The confluence of modern nationalism and the ensuing modern racism
evolved from earlier nineteenth-century national romanticism and devel-
oped through theories of de Gobineau and adaptations of the Darwinian
revolution. It was echoed in all Western nations, culminating finally in the
ideology of Nazi Germany. Because that leading exponent of racism
became the enemy of most of Europe and of the United States during
World War II, German-championed ideology seemed to have lost some of
its popularity. The Hamitic myth ceased to be useful with African nations
which have been gaining their independence one by one, and the growing
African nationalism drew scholarly attention to Africa's past. Many of the
scholars were unencumbered by colonial ties; some of them were them-
selves African. They began to discover that Africa was not a tabula rasa,
but that it had a past, a history which could be reconstructed; that it was
a continent which knew empire builders at a time when large areas of
Europe stagnated in the Dark Ages; that it knew art and commerce.
Some writers started to throw doubts on the Hamitic hypothesis by
discovering indigenous Negro achievement of the past,43 while others
attempted to explode it.44 Still the myth endures, is occasionally subverted
by new terminology (such as 'Southern Cushytes',)45 and stubbornly
refuses to give way and allow an unbiased look at what can be validly ascer-
tained from African culture history. It would be well-nigh impossible to
point to an individual and recognize in him a Hamite according to racial,
linguistic and cultural characteristics to fit the image that has been presen-
ted to us for so long. Such an individual does not exist. The word still
exists, endowed with a mythical meaning; it endures through time and
history, and, like a chameleon, changes its colour to reflect the changing
light. As the word became flesh, it engendered many problems of scholarship.
(Cont)
stood stripped of any intellectual or artistic genius and of any ability at all
which would allow him, now, in the past, or in the future, to be the master
of his life and country.
The confluence of modern nationalism and the ensuing modern racism
evolved from earlier nineteenth-century national romanticism and devel-
oped through theories of de Gobineau and adaptations of the Darwinian
revolution. It was echoed in all Western nations, culminating finally in the
ideology of Nazi Germany. Because that leading exponent of racism
became the enemy of most of Europe and of the United States during
World War II, German-championed ideology seemed to have lost some of
its popularity. The Hamitic myth ceased to be useful with African nations
which have been gaining their independence one by one, and the growing
African nationalism drew scholarly attention to Africa's past. Many of the
scholars were unencumbered by colonial ties; some of them were them-
selves African. They began to discover that Africa was not a tabula rasa,
but that it had a past, a history which could be reconstructed; that it was
a continent which knew empire builders at a time when large areas of
Europe stagnated in the Dark Ages; that it knew art and commerce.
Some writers started to throw doubts on the Hamitic hypothesis by
discovering indigenous Negro achievement of the past,43 while others
attempted to explode it.44 Still the myth endures, is occasionally subverted
by new terminology (such as 'Southern Cushytes',)45 and stubbornly
refuses to give way and allow an unbiased look at what can be validly ascer-
tained from African culture history. It would be well-nigh impossible to
point to an individual and recognize in him a Hamite according to racial,
linguistic and cultural characteristics to fit the image that has been presen-
ted to us for so long. Such an individual does not exist. The word still
exists, endowed with a mythical meaning; it endures through time and
history, and, like a chameleon, changes its colour to reflect the changing
light. As the word became flesh, it engendered many problems of scholarship.
(Cont)
Last edited:
Why would anyone waste time doing that? when you only except the Bible as truthful....if I were to do that which would be fairly easy to do..you would just deny it and throw them under the Hamitic category anyway.
EDITH R. SANDERS
SUMMARY
The anthropological and historical literature dealing with Africa abounds with
references to a people called the 'Hamites'. 'Hamite', as used in these writings,
designates an African population supposedly distinguished by its race-
Caucasian-and its language family, from the Negro inhabitants of the rest of
Africa below the Sahara.
There exists a widely held belief in the Western world that everything of
value ever found in Africa was brought there by these Hamites, a people inher-
ently superior to the native populations. This belief, often referred to as the
Hamitic hypothesis, is a convenient explanation for all the signs of civilization
found in Black Africa. It was these Caucasoids, we read, who taught the Negro
how to manufacture iron and who were so politically sophisticated that they
organized the conquered territories into highly complex states with themselves
as the ruling elites. This hypothesis was preceded by another elaborate Hamitic
theory. The earlier theory, which gained currency in the sixteenth century, was
that the Hamites were black savages, 'natural slaves'-and Negroes. This
identification of the Hamite with the Negro, a view which persisted throughout
the eighteenth century, served as a rationale for slavery, using Biblical interpre-
tations in support of its tenets. The image of the Negro deteriorated in direct
proportion to the growth of the importance of slavery, and it became imperative
for the white man to exclude the Negro from the brotherhood of races. Napo-
leon's expedition to Egypt in I798 became the historical catalyst that provided
the Western World with the impetus to turn the Hamite into a Caucasian.
The Hamitic concept had as its function the portrayal of the Negro as an
inherently inferior being and to rationalize his exploitation. In the final analysis
it was possible because its changing aspects were supported by the prevailing
intellectual viewpoints of the times.
Now I'ma leave it up to y'all to decide if @LionofJudah is either a blatant c00n, and just completely naive.
SUMMARY
The anthropological and historical literature dealing with Africa abounds with
references to a people called the 'Hamites'. 'Hamite', as used in these writings,
designates an African population supposedly distinguished by its race-
Caucasian-and its language family, from the Negro inhabitants of the rest of
Africa below the Sahara.
There exists a widely held belief in the Western world that everything of
value ever found in Africa was brought there by these Hamites, a people inher-
ently superior to the native populations. This belief, often referred to as the
Hamitic hypothesis, is a convenient explanation for all the signs of civilization
found in Black Africa. It was these Caucasoids, we read, who taught the Negro
how to manufacture iron and who were so politically sophisticated that they
organized the conquered territories into highly complex states with themselves
as the ruling elites. This hypothesis was preceded by another elaborate Hamitic
theory. The earlier theory, which gained currency in the sixteenth century, was
that the Hamites were black savages, 'natural slaves'-and Negroes. This
identification of the Hamite with the Negro, a view which persisted throughout
the eighteenth century, served as a rationale for slavery, using Biblical interpre-
tations in support of its tenets. The image of the Negro deteriorated in direct
proportion to the growth of the importance of slavery, and it became imperative
for the white man to exclude the Negro from the brotherhood of races. Napo-
leon's expedition to Egypt in I798 became the historical catalyst that provided
the Western World with the impetus to turn the Hamite into a Caucasian.
The Hamitic concept had as its function the portrayal of the Negro as an
inherently inferior being and to rationalize his exploitation. In the final analysis
it was possible because its changing aspects were supported by the prevailing
intellectual viewpoints of the times.
Now I'ma leave it up to y'all to decide if @LionofJudah is either a blatant c00n, and just completely naive.
LionofJudah
Banned
Exactly. So why would I PROVE something to someone who doesn't believe in it anyway?
@Czar , do you mind bolding the relevant parts? Nobody is reading all that shyt, fam
Read it all bruh. All of it is important. TRUST me. This is a credible university telling y'all that you've been lied to all this time by eurocentric minds.
It also proves that the Zondervan Bible Dictionary adheres to that racist hypothesis.
I'm used to vBULLETIN where you can do that. It's easier for me to type quote/unquote as a way of breaking up long paragraphs and responding point by point. I assumed it could be done on this board...as I have done before on here.. oh well
LionofJudah
Banned
Pretend Hamitic and Shemitic characterizations didn't originate from the Bible brehs.
Pretend you're not a c00n who doesn't get ethered every time by me breh.
Where did these 'linguistic categorizations' come from?
Shem and Ham referred to peoples who spoke/speak specific languages
Afroasiatic (Afro-Asiatic), also known as Afrasian and traditionally Hamito-Semitic (Chamito-Semitic), is a large language family, of several hundred related languages and dialects. There are about 300 or so living languages and dialects, according to the 2009 Ethnologue estimate. It includes languages spoken predominantly in the Middle East, North Africa, the Horn of Africa, and parts of the Sahel. The Afro-Asiatic family is significant to the field of historical linguistics as possessing the longest recorded history of any language family.
Afro-Asiatic languages are spoken by almost 362 million native speakers, the third largest number of any language family. The most widely spoken Afroasiatic language is Arabic (including literary Arabic and the spoken colloquial varieties), with about 200 to 230 million native speakers, spoken mostly in the Middle East and parts of North Africa. Berber (including all its varieties) is spoken in Morocco, Algeria, Libya, Tunisia, northern Mali, and northern Niger by about 25 to 35 million people. Other widely spoken Afroasiatic languages are Hausa, the dominant language of northern Nigeria and southern Niger, spoken as a first language by 25 million people and used as a lingua franca by another 20 million across West Africa and the Sahel; Oromo of Ethiopia and Kenya, with about 33 million speakers total; Amharic of Ethiopia, with over 25 million native speakers, not including the millions of other Ethiopians speaking it as a secondary language; Somali, spoken by 15.5 million people in Greater Somalia; and Modern Hebrew, spoken by about seven million people worldwide.
In addition to languages spoken today, Afroasiatic includes several important ancient languages, such as Ancient Egyptian, Akkadian, Biblical Hebrew, and Aramaic. Several disputed proposals link Afro-Asiatic as a whole or certain parts of its branches to other major language families.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afroasiatic_languages
SEE THE BOLD, little nikka...these are your Biblical Hamites and Shemites
^^^^^
if afro-asiatic peoples spoke those ancient languages guess what? that means they have links to those ancient peoples
Berbers,Somali, Amharic, Oromo are Hamites
Jews and Arabs are Shemites
West Africans Niger Congo are West African Niger Congo
deal with it
if afro-asiatic peoples spoke those ancient languages guess what? that means they have links to those ancient peoples
Berbers,Somali, Amharic, Oromo are Hamites
Jews and Arabs are Shemites
West Africans Niger Congo are West African Niger Congo
deal with it