Originally posted by goldenstar No matter how many times you spread your propaganda, Sudanese are not your people, and they didn't only adopt Arabic they are part of the Northern civilisation for millenia since ancient times when Egypt and Sudan formed a same state and shared a common history and destiny,

Thats were your wrong my ancestors do come from this region not to mention that like somalis who are part of the Arab league still consider themselves black.

Plus there was civlization in Southern Sudan doeas have civilzation as previously told but you decide to be foolish.

I was refering to the creation of Northern Sudan's civilisations. Oh and, Sudan's history is not yours either, and since you try to steal Mauritanian history it is good to remind you Sudan doesn't want to be attached to Ethiopia and rather looks in the direction of its Northern Egyptian neighboor.

This shows how ignorant you are.If you are not interested in Sub-Sahran history please do not give any suggestions on it.The other comment is so ignorant I'm not going to answer that LOL.

You give yourself a personal right to comment a small number of alien ancestry, found in all the world populations, to make the conclusion that it is a big genetic contribution, while according to your source the same number of Caucasoid ancestry was found in extremely dark Black Senegalese. Noone is taking you seriously, reread the article I posted and see the conclusions of the scientists instead to play the anthropologist.

As I said caucosoid doesn't mean caucasian it is an excessive term .And 35% in the population is a signicficant contribution compared to 4%,try again.

I never said he had light eyes or light brown hair, can you ever read? The point is light eyes-hair are not rare in Arab populations, and the most common is light brown hair, which is even frequent in children. Red hair is rare even in European populations, and it is not present at all in sub-Saharan Africa, while it occurs sometimes in North-Africans, look at Algerian minister Khalida Toumi. .

Red hair is not present but can be a form of albinism,Europeans Scotish and Other Europeans don't have that kind of red hair found.

LOL LOL Thats what you are before you join the Arab League a Non -Arab member,so your artcicle says speaks for itself they are Arabs,although they are frequently ignored by Arab governments.

And all of Europe's non-European Union countries are not European until they join this organisation... ridiculous, Kuwait joined the Arab League as late as 1961, 15 years after its creation, it was always seen as an Arab entity by the world. Try again.

Syria and Jordan are not members of NATO, and NATO is not a panWestern organisation like the Arab League is panArab but a military alliance.

I never said it joined NATO I said it was in league with them,that is why Jordan have their eyes on Iraq

Wrong again,your source says Senegealese have 4% of Caucasoid markers, and that ancient and modern Egyptians are the same racially.

The Egytians are different from ancient to present the archeologits even say they mummies to 1st and 31st dynasty looked diiferent

Oh and, do you have a source for Greeks adopted religious ideas from Egypt and the Middle-East only during the Hellestic era?

Zeus was added with ammon,ammon,the Osiris and Isis added to the Apis,making Serapitus and othersI rather not type cause I am in a bit of a rush.

Most East Africans have those features period,so where are you getting at.

I have a straight nose from what I remember. However, straight nose is extremely rare in most Black ethnicities, wich rather have a flat one.

If thats you in the Avatar I would't say you have straight nose,second there alot of populations in africa who share different feature and it is difficultt o class one group in another.

Noone said it was present only in Europe,

cause you're obsessed with us and our features and have a compulsive and pathological idea about us being sub-Saharans who mutated and adapted Black skin

Again I said the North AFrcans have an EB3 that is common in east africa and the middle east,people were saying they were Arab invaders mixing in with supposed black africans settling in the land but I was teling they always lived in that regiona and always looked the same.

You're pathetic because you're so desperate that you say West Africa is your history, it is like people from Turkey telling Pakistan and Bangladesh is their history because they're both in Asia, I hope this comparison helped you see how pathetic you can seem.

Well you have Algerian ancestry how does that why are you proud of the accomplishments made by Morrcans or Maurantanians,secondly were is your weak logic coming from,Turkey is both EUrasia while Pakistan is in Eastern Asia way bad example.

Finally, what's nice is you constantly give up most of your delirious claims, your posts are gradually becoming more and more small... which means I succeeded to make you understand history, real history...

I can tell how young you are,I've chosen not to address every one of your statements because you find every excuse to make,and are probably beckoning for attention.It will we be unwise to argue with you while I make all points clear,it is very immature,and is your attempt to elude the ever present humility.I chose not to go on because you have been proven wrong so much it is useless to repeat myself.You chose to write alot fairy tales.

Originally posted by AksumVanguard Carthage was founded in 575 bc

You're so weak in the history of North and West Africa, poor thing...

Carthage was founded in the end of the 800s B.C, about 300 years before the date you put up...

Carthage (ancient city) (Latin Carthago) great city of antiquity, on the northern coast of Africa, near modern Tunis, Tunisia. Dido was the legendary founder and queen of Carthage; the city was probably established as a trading post toward the end of the 9th century BC by Phoenicians. The earliest artifacts unearthed by archaeologists at the site date from 800 BC.

http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761557005/Carthage_(ancient_city).html




You are often late, you also said it was such a shame that the Vandalic Maghreb did not resists Muslim Middle-Easterners in the 7th century A.D, while the Vandals' kingdom disappeared in the 500s... who's taking you seriously now...?

and the Maghrebs were only populated in the towrds the North your friend even said it,

An other lie.

I never said this, there were always millions of nomadic Berber-spakers in the Sahara, most of the Northern Maghrebi population live however near the Mediterranean and in the Atlas mountains while a minority settled in Northern oases.

As was stated in the article their was little contact with Berber civilzation and the soninke people.

Then why do your sources say the Soninke took over the Southern Berber settlements of Awkar, have you read Wikipedia's article about ancient Ghana?

Your article also says:

Revenue and Wealth: As Ghana was in those days a fertile area, its people were able to supply abundant foodstuffs and useful materials for housing for the upkeep of the king and his hierarchy of officials. Another source of wealth was provided by the revenue system of the empire based on annual tribute in produce, taxes on trade and the spoils of war. In addition, the strategic position of the capital city of Kumbi Saleh between the gold fields of Wangara and the desert routes of the North African merchants gave the city an important position in the Trans-Saharan Trade.





According to the main website of modern Ghana:

Empire of Ancient Ghana

Ancient Ghana derived power and wealth from gold and the introduction of the camel during the Trans-Saharan trade increased the quantity of goods that were transported. Majority of the knowledge of Ghana comes from the Arab writers.

http://www.ghanaweb.com/GhanaHomePage/history/ancient_ghana.php



What a civilisation, it left no informations about itself and has to be known through foreign eyes...

There is no proof to show that Berbers started the Ghana civilzation,they was even skirmishes with the Berbers

Your beloved source says they started the Songhai empire, the most powerful Black empire of its time, and my source says Ghana was originally the state of Awkar started by Southern Berbers and later taken over by the sub-Saharan Soninke.

According to your beloved Wikipedia, there was an earlier "state" but its structures and "civilisation" collapsed with the arrival of Southern Berbers, who created Awkar, later taken over by the Black Soninke in the end of the 1st millenium. The early politico-social "structure" disappeared with the Southern Berber period Wikipedia says.

It was probably a very primitive form of state, allegedly conquered by Southern Berbers who left their civilisation and state structures to the Black Soninke.



University of Washington State

The [Southern desert] Berbers were primarily a nomadic people and would eventually play a crucial role in the spread of Islam across northern Africa. In the fifth century, however, they formed a new kingdom, called Ghana or Awkar in an area that is now southeastern Mauretania. This Berber kingdom would form the model from which all the Sahelian kingdoms would be built.

Although it originated in the late fourth century, Ghana only became a major regional power near the end of the millenium. Although the state was originally formed by Berbers, it was built on the southern edge of Berber populations. Eventually the state became dominated by the Soninke, a Mande speaking people living in the region bordering the Sahara.

http://wsu.edu/~dee/CIVAFRCA/GHANA.HTM





Edited by goldenstar - 21-Mar-2009 at 11:16

Originally posted by pebbles BTW,Pakistan is in South Asia and a non-Turkic muslim country.   It's possible notional example as I've read some off-the-wall claims of cyberspace fanatic Turkish extremists on the net since 2007.These individuals' irrationality mainly resulted from their country being a reject of EU and will always consider " alien " to European people.

My point was it is senseless for an East African man to say West Africa is his own history.

Turkey is a Turkic-speaking country, Middle-Eastern (or Western Asian)  by its civilisation and history, related to Greece in term of ancient and medieval history (ancient Greece and Byzantine empire), and to the whole Eastern Europe concerning the Ottoman period, through military occupation though.

Pakistan is Indo-Iranian speaking (branch of the Indo-European group), has nothing to do with Middle-Eastern populations ethnically or historically (besides being a part of the Arab empire at a time as some portions of Southern Europe) , and doesn't share a lot of things with Turkey excepted the Islamic religion.

It would make no sense for Turks to feel Pakistani and to claim the heritage and history of Pakistani people as their own, just because Turkey is Asian (or Eurasian) like Pakistan, or just because they look similar as East and West Africans.

Originally posted by AksumVanguard This shows how ignorant you are.If you are not interested in Sub-Sahran history please do not give any suggestions on it.The other comment is so ignorant I'm not going to answer that LOL.

Sudan is not sub-Saharan Africa, and its people are a part of the Arab nation and identify with Northerners, not with sub-Saharans. As said earlier, no matter whether people of Sudan have a similar hair texture and skin colour as yours (most of them are lighter,  plus many are mixed and are not pure sub-Saharans by the way), all that matter is their history for millenia is in the direction of the North and is not related to most sub-Saharan ethnicities.

I know only races count in your eyes, because you're frustrated and thus obsessed with genetics and light skinned ethnicities, but to me and to most people I think, history and degree of familiarity are the first criterias to identifty with people, not the fact to be on the same landmass (Canadians VS Mexicans) or living in some islands that are located in a common ocean (Great-Britain VS sub-Saharan islands of the Atlantic Ocean).

As I said caucosoid doesn't mean caucasian it is an excessive term .

It is synonyms...

Cau·ca·soid  (kôk-soid) Anthropology

adj.

Of or relating to the Caucasian racial classification

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/caucasoid



It is not more an excessive term than African or sub-Saharan, it is a good expression to name people of the Mediterranean and neighbooring populations because they seem to share a similar ancestry and even history, even if it is not used anymore by scientists as a Caucasian race. You're jealous, that's why you dislike this term that groups so many great civilisations having taken places in Europe, North Africa, and Western Asia, and greatly contributed to develop sub-Saharan Africa.

And 35% in the population is a signicficant contribution compared to 4%,try again.

You misunderstood, your website says the Senegalese population that was tested showed 4% of Caucasoid sequences, an average of 4% of Caucasian sequences among Senegalese people...


Caucasoid mtDNA (maternal) sequences, labeled L3E and U6, were detected at frequencies of 96% in Moroccan Berbers, 82% in Algerian Berbers and 78% in non-Berber Moroccans, compared with only 4% in a Senegalese population.


Yet you say only 35% not even 100% of the Egyptian population that was tested, show a small relatedness to sub-Saharans. It is extremely low, and means not even half of the population have an extremely small ammount of sub-saharan genes. Plus here is what your [non-reliable] source itself, Mathilda's blog, says:

Although Hg 7 is typical of Khoisan populations, it has been observed in East Africans, Gambians, and East Bantus, and its presence in Egypt is probably due, once again, to limited gene flow from East Africa, perhaps through the Nile Valley.


I know you dream about a North Africa that is sub-Saharan and mutated adapting Black skin but we will always reject you as an alien person and will never see you as a member of our Mediterranean club... 


What a honour and pride to own a coastline on beautiful Mediterranea, the biggest touristic site on earth, where the world civilisation was born... are you that jealous...?

Red hair is not present but can be a form of albinism,Europeans Scotish and Other Europeans don't have that kind of red hair found.

A form of albinism? It is extremely rare, you're so desperate to claim Ramses II was a sub-Saharan that you use the example of diseases LOL

Albinism is a disease, it is not a natural feature of an ethnicity, I already posted pictures of Maghrebi albinos and they look very sick and sad.

Ramses II had red hair, which is not a feature found among Black people, even among Europeans it is extremely rare besides in the British islands.

I never said it joined NATO I said it was in league with them,that is why Jordan have their eyes on Iraq

And what's your point? Noone cares about this, it is off-topic.

The Egytians are different from ancient to present the archeologits even say they mummies to 1st and 31st dynasty looked diiferent

And you're wrong again, most archAeologists and anthropologists say modern Arab Egyptians are the direct descendents of the ancient population of Egypt, try again and post a credible source if you want your delirium to be believed.

And Carthage was founded in the 500s B.C you said LOL

Noone cares by the way, about the exact origins of Egypians, all that matters is they're the only ones who are descended from ancient Egyptians, now go and learn history.

Zeus was added with ammon,ammon,the Osiris and Isis added to the Apis,making Serapitus and othersI rather not type cause I am in a bit of a rush.

Post a source telling Greeks adopted religious ideas from Egypt and the Middle-East only during the Hellestic era...

If thats you in the Avatar I would't say you have straight nose,second there alot of populations in africa who share different feature and it is difficultt o class one group in another.

That's me, and I don't think the picture is clear and big enough to distinguish the exact feature of my nose...

Almost all sub-Saharan ethnicities (if not ALL) have a flat nose, in France there are people from all Black states and I rarely (if not never) saw any of them with a straight nose. You said Tutsis had a straight nose, it doesn't seem the same to me:

secondly were is your weak logic coming from,Turkey is both EUrasia while Pakistan is in Eastern Asia way bad example.

Do you prefer Turkey and Pakistan are Eurasia? So since "only" 95% of the Turks are in Asia, I will refer to them being on the continent of Eurasia with the Pakistanis. They should identify with the same nation as you do, but they just don't, they have a life I guess.

Bad faith again. You understood the comparison but focus on the 5% of Turks who live in the European part of Turkey, only to avoid to face my arguments. When you open such silly debates, peinguin's warning about the Afrocentrists' intellectual dishonesty (resisting rather than reasoning) makes so much sense. For your information the concept of Europe is an abusive term reflecting no geographical reality, European Turkey or Asian Turkey is the same landmass, so my logic is perfectly correct regardless of your intellectual dishonesty.

Again I said the North AFrcans have an EB3 that is common in east africa and the middle east

Only in East Africa and not in the rest of sub-Saharan Africa? Then it is probably Middle-Eastern/North African, not sub-Saharan, you are the one who are mixed, no wonder why your hair are a bit less kinky and your nose less flat than your sub-Saharan counterparts.

Your beloved Wikipedia says:

There is little published information on male immigration during the Neolithic but Oppenheimer suggests that haplotype J1 migrated up the Danube valley while haplotypes J2 and Eb3 migrated westward along the coast of Europe at this time.

http://209.85.229.132/search?q=cache:XzvnOopqEWYJ:en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_history_of_Europe+eb3+haplogroup&cd=3&hl=fr&ct=clnk&gl=fr

people were saying they were Arab invaders mixing in with supposed black africans settling in the land but I was teling they always lived in that regiona and always looked the same.

You lie and try to change your version as usual when you are trapped and finally understand how senseless and folish your statements sound. You first said North Africans are black sub-Saharans who migrated to the North and then adapted black skin by mutating...

can tell how young you are

It is off-topic, the point was only I am the same age as people who learnt what you call outdated knowledge (because it demolishes your fairy tales) at school a few years ago.

I've chosen not to address every one of your statements because you find every excuse to make,and are probably beckoning for attention.It will we be unwise to argue with you while I make all points clear,it is very immature,and is your attempt to elude the ever present humility.I chose not to go on because you have been proven wrong so much it is useless to repeat myself.You chose to write alot fairy tales.

You repeated exactly what I told you...

... all the sentences above are those I told you earlier including the expression "fairy tales"...

As said above, just like your ancestors of ancient times, you attempt to emulate non-sub-Saharans and copy everything from them including the way they speak and form their phrases. Pathetic...

Well you have Algerian ancestry how does that why are you proud of the accomplishments made by Morrcans or Maurantanians

Because through history Algerians and Moroccans were always a same nation, and often a same political entity (ancient Mauretania, Numidia, Umayyad empire, Idrissid period, Almoravid and Almohad empires, etc).

Algerian and Moroccan ancestry is the same Arab ancestry, of ancient Berber stock. Moroccans are the same ethnic group as Algerians, Mauritanians tend to be a bit distant and I don't usually directly identify with them even if they have a common civilisation.

I do not identify with Italians, Greeks, Persians, or Kurds, so why do you identify with every human being who has the same hair texture and skin colour as yours? Of course because your history is so poor that making a sum of heritages by grouping many small heritages, you have a hope to become important as Mediterraneans are in term of civilisation and glorious history.

I suggest you go and learn history first, Carthage was not created in the 500s B.C, and the Vandals did not occupy the Maghreb when Muslim Middle-Easterners arrived in the region in the 7th century A.D...




Edited by goldenstar - 21-Mar-2009 at 15:26

Originally posted by pinguin Hey Goldenstar, you are a library in this topic. Congrats!

Thank you so much, dear friend...

Originally posted by AksumVanguard I said carthage empire was founded 575 bce get your facts straight and looking for an excuse. I wasn't refering to Carthage being found in 575bce, http://www.bardicweb.com/?q=TempusCarthage After the fall of its mother-city Tyre in 575, Carthage became the leader of the Phoenician colonies in the west and founded an informal but powerful empire, which is known for its almost perennial struggle against the Greeks of Sicily and the Romans.

You did not say the Carthaginian Empire, you said Carthage, which first refers to the city itself (as Rome VS the Roman Empire or Republic), founded in the 800s B.C not in the 500s B.C. Be specific next time.

By the way, this is funny that now you googled and finally confirmed what I taught you before, you first implied Carthage became a big state ruled by Dido as soon as the small city of Carthage was created, until I taught you it evolved into a powerful empire only centuries after her death. You are now using my knowledge to try to make a point with Pinguin, funny...

Finally, your source is not clearly reliable, the link leads to an obscure website I did not understand the meaning.

Why must you chose to interject in a grown mans conversation LOL,you  are beckoning for attention aren't you.

From what I remember, you're the one who first addressed me, just like all Afrocentrists here.

Your friend said : pinguin Well, you forget the Maghreb is settled since thousand of years BC. Besides, Carthage was settled more than 1.000 years B.C. The first contacts accross the Sahara didn't happen with the Muslim invasion, but the Northern societies were more advanced by far. So if  he was speaking of the Carthaginian Empire,and how it influenced inhabitants South of Sahara,it was not an established empire until 575 BCE,so if he was saying that CarthagiNians inspired sub saharan civilizational development in around that time is a bit doubtful becuase there is no record of Carhaginian occupying the interior of the Sahara,we know of Garementians and Numidains who occupied the area.

Am I Pinguin? I am not him, so just ask him directly what he meant instead to justify.

Even if I am not Pinguin, we share a common and universal way to think unlike Afrocentrists, and thus I think he implied Carthage as a city and then an empire was founded centuries before the West African states existed, and the source I showed told Carthaginians have had some trade ties with the locals.

Since you're intellectually dishonest, you are focusing on Pinguin's small mistake about the exact date of the creation of Carthage, in order to make him forget that even the official date you gave for the creation of Carthage's empire, 575 B.C according to you, is almost a millenium before the creation of the early structures of what became later the empire Ghana.

There were the Carthaginian empire and other Maghrebi countries such as ancient Mauretania and Numidia, the tribes of the Getules, the  Garamantes, which were all existing long before the West African states, not to mention all sources including your favourite Websites say Southern Berber Tuaregs developed the trans-Sahara trade for millenia, and the same sources say such a trade was the reason why West African states grew up and prospered.

Conclusion, Pinguin is right, and you're wrong, as usual.

Second you are slightly wrong because the finding of Carthage is still being debated,there is some sources saying it was founded prior to 8 BCE. http://www.roman-empire.net/republic/carthage.html The date of the foundation of the city of Kart Hadasht, or Carthage as we know it, is not at all a clearly established fact. The ancient sources vary from 1200 BC to the middle of the seventh century BC. But in general it is thought that Carthage must have been founded some when between the late 9th century and the middle of the eight century BC.

I think you're slightly wrong, not me, because I never said the exact date was the 800s, historians do not exactly know the date of the creation of Carthage or Rome but they show aproximate periods, and the most accepted theory for Carthage is the end of 9th century B.C as I said and as your own source says.

But your statement says they are mostly concentrated in the towards the coast of the North Africa

And? There are still millions of people in the South, Tuaregs and modern Moors.

you did say the Berbers and Maghrebs wanted no part of Sub Saharan history

I was referring to modern Northerners, they have absolutely nothing to do with sub-Saharans, I was not referring to Southern desert Berbers, who clearly came in contact with sub-Saharans and mixed with them for millenia, which is why there are now so many pure Blacks or half-Blacks among them.

And for your information, such populations are not directly related to Northern Maghrebis, who are extremely different, in the sense of not related to the same degree as Northern Maghrebis are to each other, because they had a different history in the South thousands of miles away, influenced by their trips and life in the desert and in sub-Saharan Africa. Something that is very different from the geography and history of the Mediterranean and the Atlas mountains.

so why would they want to establish a city there,the Tuaregs and arab Moors in the Area would be Nomads roving around,not  making any settlement in the region. The fact is that they do not travel around the Sahara region to often and did not establish any settlements ,towns or cities there as you said,it is concentrated to  the north.LOL

Tuareg, indigenous people of the Sahara. They speak a Berber language, Tamarshak, and have their own alphabet. In ancient times, the Tuareg controlled the trans-Sahara caravan routes, taxing the goods they helped to convey and raiding neighbouring peoples.

http://uk.encarta.msn-ppe.com/encyclopedia_761552864/Tuareg.html



I never said all Arab Moors were nomads, and the Tuaregs were semi-nomadic and etablished plenty of settlements and towns. You simply have no knowledge of the region you just discovered these days while debating on this forum in a desperate attempt to win by resistance instead of reasoning. Timbuctu was one of the most important cities of West Africa, it was founded by the Berber Tuaregs themselves and then became an important Black city.

Even your beloved Answers recognises it apparently...


Timkutku, founded in the 11th century by the Tuareg, it became a major trading center (primarily for gold and salt) by the 14th century.

The fame of Timbuktu first spread far and wide when it became part of the Mali Empire in the fourteenth century.

We owe the name to the Tuareg people who founded the town in about 1100. They spoke a language known as Timbuktu Tamasheq, still used by about a quarter of a million people in Mali.

http://www.answers.com/topic/timbuktu



Wow, the Tuaregs started this town, which then became the centre of Black empires... what's more interesting to note is, when one looks at the map, all the major empires of West Africa are located at the border with Northerners (Southern Berbers and Mauritania's Arab Moors), just like Sudan and the Horn of Africa with Egypt and the Arabian peninsula...







In other words, besides those who were closer to North-Africans and Arabia's people, sub-Saharans seem to have not created any real empire. But I did not read everything in sub-Saharan history, so perhaps you can give some examples of real sub-Sahran states besides those that enjoyed the benefits of alien Northern civilisations.

Originally posted by goldenstar You lie and try to change your version as usual when you are trapped and finally understand how senseless and folish your statements sound. You first said North Africans are black sub-Saharans who migrated to the North and then adapted black skin by mutating... Originally posted by AksumVanguard I didn't say that go back and look at exactly what I said

Ok, I'll quote you:

Listen ,first off it physical feature are not totally definitive when it comes to determining genetic origin ,it seems you have more reading to do.And North Africans are african they have the e3b haplogroup which mean they are African and have mutated into phenotype far different from all rest of the africans

You said it right,what do you think I mean,since most geneaology scientist agree that black e3b is moreverly african and that is what most Northern Berbers possess then they are African who's phenotype did indeed just adapt black skin. You said yourself most scientist agree that they came from east africa.

By the Way Eurasia is  part East Africa, and yes  e3b is  in east Africa,and no I'm not saying that east africans should stake a claim to berber culture or are connected Im saying get you need to study about genetics a little more,and understand basic realities.

http://www.allempires.net/forum_posts.asp?TID=22762&PN=16



You first said North Africans are black sub-Saharans who migrated to the North and then adapted black skin by mutating...since you thought about how foolish and senseless you sounded in the eyes of other posters you're now lying and changing your version...

You also said Eurasia is East Africa, which is an other face of your delirium...

By the way, you always said Eb3 was sub-Saharan to conclude North Africans are Blacks who mutated, but in its article of genetic history of Europe your beloved Wikipedia mentions Eb3 moved along the coast of Europe as I said earlier, do you have a source telling it is really a sub-Saharan thing?

Were  talking about HG 9,and the interesting thing its not found very rarely  in North-West Africans. http://mathildasanthropologyblog.wordpress.com/2008/07/16/egyptian-y-chromosome-study-shows-a-complicated-ancestry/ Hg 9** is the second most common lineage in the Egyptian population (35%) and is also present, although at lower frequencies, in the two NW African populations examined (Moroccan Arabs 14%; Moroccan Berbers 4%). Interestingly, Hg 9 is also present at relatively high frequencies (25%) in the Ethiopian population, highlighting the extent to which Semitic peoples have left substantial traces in the Ethiopian gene pool at different times (Passarino et al. 1998) Theres also articles of Somlais being related to egyptians,but i won't bother right now

See, you gave up for the Senegalese population and now you just admit this is you who are mixed with Semitic genes left in Ethiopia and found in North-Africa too, not us with sub-Saharans. Just because Somalians mixed with a few Egyptians, it doesn't mean Egyptians who are in Egypt are related to Somalians, otherwise Blacks from the Carribeans and Americas are related to Europeans.

Your north African how would anyone take you seriously about west african history when you say your not concerned,

I may be a South American I still know the history of West Africa (which is more related to Maghreb in term of history than to East Africa), something you ignore totally.

also I said there population of blacks living in Maurantania.

There are Blacks living in Algeria too, noone cares, it is a minority.

Based on what,do you even know my familys history or who I am.

Not surprising, you're not courageous enough to say your nationality or original nationality...

It official you are jealous and are mad.

Jealous of the "civilisations" of sub-Saharan Africa LOLLLLLL

The point is the capital city of the ancient empire of Ghana is in an Arabic country, Mauritania, and its heritage belongs to Mauritanians, whether you like it or not.

LOLLOL Well you didn't actually create the Songhai Empire most of the territory Mali Empire which it reoccupied and the berbers were only able to make a civil war,between the Songhai the Mandike leading rulers

I don't know what you mean about the Mali Empire, which came after the Ghananian empire, created on the basis of Southern Berber state structures, but your beloved source says the Songhai empire was created by Southern Berbers. An other Black "empire" created by the Arab World it seems...


Songhai, An ancient empire of western Africa in present-day Mali. It was founded c. 700 by Berbers and reached the height of its power around 1500.

http://www.answers.com/topic/songhai

Thats why your source is wrong and mines right,you seem to have a undying infatuation with webpage,why can't you give more references.

I didn't understand what you said. Again, your beloved source says Southern Berbers started the Songhai empire, the most powerful Black empire of its time, and your own source says Ghana was originally the state of Awkar started by Southern Berbers and later taken over by the sub-Saharan Soninke.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghana_Empire#Origin

Wrong again they were was political structure that caused them to reformulate their socio-political structure but it wasn't recreated by berbers, No my friend the told you prior to 7th century when they started an empire their existed a civilzation before the skirmish with the berbers. The Ghana Empire is believed by many to have been a continuation of the cultural complex at Tichitt-walata attributed to Mandé people known as the Soninke. Subsequent incursions of Berber tribes, however, collapsed the earlier socio-political organization in the region and established small settlements in the area known as Awkar, around the middle of the fourth century. Around 750 or 800 AD however, the Soninke adjusted and united under Majan Dyabe Cisse or Dinga Cisse in taking over Awkar.[1][2]

There is still no mention of the Soninke founding the empire in the 4th century A.D, can't you quote a passage?

You are just confirming what I said earlier, there was a "civilisation" until Southern Berbers came and destroyed its structures totally, and imposed their own culturally "superior" civilisation, which was then followed by the Black Soninke who took over Awkar from Southern Berbers, ruling a kingdom which became the model for all the following Sahelian states.

Now I would say the Berbers got their hinds kicked back to the Sahara.

The heartland of the empire of Ghana was actually based in the Sahara, you are not paying attention.

Said what?I think what it says that the Wagadou Soninke  possesed great materials,products,and goods that Maghrebs were in need to take back to their across to the Sahara .The Moors Merchants knew it was vital to their trade.

The Soninke had no real technology, and lived off local natural ressources they sold to Northerners in exchange of manufactured goods and real refined products...

The obviosly tell of them trying to capture Akwar and did not succedd,also they would of kept on record would't they,I think you like West African history and trying to steal it to say you created it and distort,misinterpret history constantly. Now who is the Afro Centrist here

I still didn't understand what you meant, you implied since Arab geographers mentioned the empire of Ghana existed it means it was Blacks who created it, how is that, can you explain this logic?

I am not an Arabocentrist (you were looking for this term for a while, it's a present), and I have nothing to benefit in stealing a lower sub-Saharan history (lower in term of prestigiousness and accomplishments) when I have the history of the Arab World and its leading civilisations, which greatly contributed to shape the modern world the way it is today.

But the fact is the civilisations of sub-Saharan Africa have emerged partly (if not almost entirely) because of the influence of Northerners from Egypt, Maghreb, the Middle-East. It is an universally accepted fact, just like it is accepted that modern technology was brought in the area by Europeans. It is different from the theory that Black people civilised the whole world and invented everything LOL

Indeed and what a great account of Ghana civilzation the Arab writers do tell,speaking  it vast with riches.LOL

If it was so developed it would have had the technology of writing humanity had adopted millenia earlier LOL

Rich in natural ressources perhaps, like most African states today, but not in level of life for the natives. One needs to be intelligent and smart enough to exploit and enjoy what nature gives.

I only used wiki to show how some craniomatics in Africa are considered Caucasoid,is that your strategy to null all apparent facts. I only 2 simple refrence of wikipedia one pertaning to the archeaologist of classifying of races in anthropology

Meaning you used Wikipedia, that's the point, and since you think it is a reliable source then accept it when I post it.

And that's wrong again, you used many other websites that based their articles on those of Wikipedia.

You seem to be in love with the wsu.edu site,I think you should send him some fan mail. Can you give another reference shall we.

I like reliable sources like Western universities, not amateurs' websites, and the other references you're asking are actually your own sources as I said earlier.

Originally posted by goldenstar Wrong again, no matter how many times you repeat your lies. Somalia is a non-Arab member of the Arab League, they're not Arabic-speaking people and they joined that organisation for political, historical, and economic purposes. Sudan is a full Arabic nation, member of the Arab League, and its population, of mixed North African/sub-Saharan ancestry, is Arab and speaks the Arabic language. Sudanese are a part of the Northern civilisation since ancient times, being unified with Egypt for centuries during the Pharaonic, medieval, and modern period Originally posted by AksumVanguard Well if you say that then so are Sudanese ,who don't have a deep history for identfying with Arabism until recently

No, no matter how many times you repeat yourself, Sudan is a full Arab country and Arab member of the Arab League as said above, and Arabic is the mother tongue of its people not only the language of administration or elite as in Somalia.

As said earlier, if Sudanese started identifying with the Arabs only recently then English people started to identify with England recently and French people with France recently too. By the way, before to identify with modern Arabs, Sudanese were already linked to Egyptians for millenia during the Pharaonic era.

and btw Somalians do speak Arabic.

Somalians speak Italian too, and English.

Arabic is not the mother tongue of the native people of Somalia, besides of a small minority, mainly descending from Arab immigrants and those they Arabised.

Try again.

I said in Eastern Asia meaning east of Central Asia, Vietnam,Burma,and Laos are considered South East Asia, when Pakistan is father North then these countries.But it is considered South Asia.

South or East or North or West, noone cares, people from Turkey and Pakistan are both in the same Asian continent.

It doesn't matter what you think,the point is that your not East African or West AFrican,and you have no right to dictate what a foreign culture chooses to align it self with. Have you heard of the Pan African Parilament r the Assembly of  the African Union. Who are you to say african countries do not get along,I'm not saying your jealous but you do seem to be interested in Sub Sahran African matters.

I have a total right about universal concepts shared by most humans on earth, you attach yourself with every people who share a similar physical appearance while they see you as a foreigner.

The African Union, and parliament? LMAO

This is a joke, North-African states are members of it too, it is not a real panAfrican organisation but only a system of relative cooperation between the countries of the landmass called Africa.

Most of all the are different ethinic groups living in different countries such as the Fulani,Wolof,and Mandinka. The Hausa are people who are in both east and west Africa,the Azande in the Sudan and the Congo.Be concerned with your own matters and just as you identify with Pan Arabism so do alot of Africans reguardless of who you know.

People from West Africa do not seem to care about those from the Horn of Africa, not more than a Turk cares about Pakistanis, do not try it again, you're alien to them in term of history and civilisation, you only share their hair texture and skin colour as an Algerian and a Greek LOL




Edited by goldenstar - 23-Mar-2009 at 16:25

  

 

 

PART I

 “…a fair-skinned Arab is something inconceivable… “  Ibn Abd Rabbu of Cordoba born 9^thc. in El Iqd el Farid (The Precious Necklace), quoting Shuraik el-Qadi a 7^th century Arab of the clan of Nakha’l of the Maddhij in the Yemen.

 “…the Arabs describe their color as black and they describe the color of the non-Arab Persians as red.” Assertion of 13^th c. grammarian Ibn Manzur or Mandhur, in Lisaan al Arab, Vol. 4 (born in Tunis or northern  Egypt).

“Red, in the speech of the people from Hejaz means fair-complexioned, and this color is rare amongst the Arabs.  This is the meaning of the saying … a red man as if he is one of the slaves.”  From Seyar A’laam al-Nubalaa, vol. 2, by the Syrian Al-Dhahabi (Thahabi),of the century 14^th c. A.D.

 

The Book of Oaths (Kitab al Aiman)

Book 015, Number 4046:

“Ayyub said: We were sitting in the company of Abu Musa that he called for food and it consisted of flesh of fowl. It was then that a person from Banu Tamim visited him. His complexion was red having the resemblance of a slave. “

 

“…most Arabs are dark brown in color.” 13^th c. Ibn Mandhur, Lisaan al Arab, Vol. 4.

“Lank hair is the kind of hair that most non-Arab Persians and Romans have while kinky hair is the kind of hair that most Arabs have.” Lisaan al Arab, vol 3.  Ibn Mandhur.

“All the lands became inhabited by Arabs completely mixed with non-Arabs.”  Ahmed Amin in  Fajr el Islam, 1975, p. 91.

The above quotes cited in The Unknown Arabs, Tariq Berry, published, 2002.

 

TERMS TO KNOW

Batn – clan; literally meaning ‘from the belly of”

Ibn,  bin, banu, beni - meaning “son of”

Harrah or el Harra the northwestern volcanic region of Arabia stretching from border of Jordan southward through region of Medina

Hejaz – western coastal region of Arabia stretching towards Yemen  

Nejd – central Arabian land including Riyadh and Yemamah

Totemism – veneration of ancestral consciousness represented by animal names with cosmological significance and associations.

The Yemen -  the southern part of the Arabian peninsula

 

 

.   

 

       The following treatise documents the tribes of Afro-Arabians descended from the original Arab-speaking occupants of the Arabian peninsula. In the early centuries after the birth of the Muslim Prophet Mohammed early European documents describe the Moors in such descriptive phrases as “black as melted pitch” or “black as burnt brands” as in the epic of Morien. It is more than likely the original Arab populations of Spain that gave rise to such exclamations as they are also often described as black or jet black by authors of Near Eastern derivation.

Although the Arabians were not the first to be called Moors, it was the color of the people leaving the peninsula of Arabia that was mainly due the use of the term “Moor” for black and woolly haired people in Spain, France, Italy and other parts of Europe in Islamic times.  When the Chanson de Roland which speaks of the time of the Moorish battles in Gallic France speaks of  “those hordes and hordes blacker than the blackest ink – no shred of white on them except their teeth…” it is no mere exaggeration.  Anyone familiar with the Arabic writings of the Syrian, Iraqi and Iranian historians up until the 14^th century knows that this is also their description of the early “pure” Arab clans of the Arabian peninsula.

 Therefore, the use of the term “Moor” in this article refers to the inhabitants of the Arabian peninsula who long after the time of Mohammed shared the appearance of Ethiopians and other sub-Saharan Africans, as well as customs of present day Africans stretching from the present country of Sudan to Somalia in the East to Mauritania, Mali and Nigeria in the West. 

     Arabian dialects, totemism, ancestral veneration, including knowing the genealogy of cattle and sheep back many generations (almost all early Arabian tribal names are also the names of their animals and have an astronomical reference), matrifocal societies (including worship of Goddesses), the wearing of cowry shells, nose rings, plaited and totemic hair-styles, ululations, hennaed limbs and scarred faces are all African-associated traits and customs most of which date back several thousand years into the Neolithic. 

 These are the facts of pre-Islamic and early Islamic Arabia, which is why the Greeks and Romans considered Arabia an extension of Ethiopia and for Syrians much of Arabia part of “the Sudan” long after the time of the prophet Muhammed. (See Richmond Palmer’s, Bornu, Sahara and Sudan with regard to the Syrian Al Omari). It was from this colony of “blacks” (as the original Arabs invariably called themselves), that the numerous tribes of  the men Europeans once called “Moors”  left after the time of the Muslim prophet to also spread over parts of the Middle East, North Africa and the Iberian peninsula. 

 Although Iranians had settled the Yemen or south of the peninsula in the centuries immediately preceding the Prophet Mohammed; though Turks, Circassians,  mercenaries, concubines and slaves from all parts of he world had come to settle the land of the true Arabs later in Islamic times, large numbers of inidigenous peoples of African appearance still occupy the peninsula Arabia preserving their indigenous and original Afro-Arab customs.

Descriptions and Ethnogenesis of the Original Arabs:

 The tribes leaving the north and central parts of Arabia occupying the Hejaz and Nejd can be divided into major branches.  They include those traditional genealogy called “Ishmaelites” or descendants of Kedar, like the tribes of Qays ibn Ailan or El Nas and El Yas, and the Rabi’ah and Wa’il all based in the central regions of the peninsula.  Many of these were “the Saracens” whom Ammianus Marcellinus, Roman general of the 4^th c. A.D. claimed had originated “from the cataracts of the Nile” in Sudan.

It is the north and central group of Arabians inhabiting the Jordan, the Harra and the Nejd whose ancestors came to be called Ishmaelites, descendants of Thamud (the second A’d), Kedar and Naba’it (all traditionally children of Ismail). (The Nabataeans were among those known also as Amurru or Amorites in late Assyrian texts.)

In the tradition of Syria and in the later European Jewish or Rabbinic tradition the term “Kushi” signified black peoples, and in fact, became a derogatory term.  A European Jewish Targum text Song 1:5 employs the phrase “as black as the Kushi who live in the tents of Kedar.”

Because many of the indigenous Arabian people of Jordan and Hejaz were near black in color and claim descent from the Kedar, Kinanniyya (Kana’ani or Cana’an), and Nabataeans (such as the modern Haweit’at), the Syrians and others who had come to adopt Arabic nationality (or who had been colonized by the Arabs), came to presume names such as Nabit, Kedar, Kanaan meant “black” people. 

David Goldberg’s author of The Curse of Ham: Race and Slavery in Early Judaism, Christianity and Islam   wrote “Dimashqi, who lists the Nabataeans (Nbt) among the descendants of Ham together with the Copts, the BrBr (Berbers) and the Sudan … and the Akkbar al Zaman, which lists the Nabit , among the children of Canaan… also said the word, ‘Nabit’ signifies  ‘black’…”  see p. 313 The 10^th c. Al Masudi of Baghdad , is thought to have written the text, Akbar al Zaman.   Al Dimashqi of Syria  belonged to the 13^th century.

In the southern part of Arabia the modern Qahtan Arabs’ are descendants of  the peoples known mainly as Sabaeans, Himyarites, Ma’in and Azd (also called Asad, Zayyed or Sid) in Arab genealogy.  These came to spread north and became the progenitors of many “Ismailites” . Thus, many groups have genealogies which make them both north Arabian descendants of Ismail and descendants of Qahtan through the Azdites  (Zayyed) or Maddhij of Yemen, two descendants of Himyar and Kahlan sons of Saba.  Most of the living Qahtan tribes told the European colonial ethnographers that they came in remote times from Africa.  Thus, Bertram Thomas in 1929 said that the Shahara (Banu Shahr), Mahra or Maheyra, and Bautahara and Qarra or Kara had “a tradition of African origin” in “The Southeastern Borderlands of the Rub-al Khali”,in Geography Journal, Vol. 73, 3.  These clans are also described as having a “dark pigmentation” and “fuzzy hair” as recently as 2001 (see David Philips, Peoples on the Move, pp. 250-251). 

 

In 1872, a European named von Maltzan commenting on the inhabitants of southwest Arabia in Yemen said, “The inhabitants of this part of Arabia nearly all belong to the race of Himyar. Their complexion is almost as black as the Abyssinians,” see p. 121 in “Geography of Southern Arabia” by Baron von Maltzan,  in Proceedings of the Royal Geographical Society of London, Vol. 16, No. 2 , pp. 115-123.

 

On the Qara of Hadramaut and Oman who are said to descend from the Kinda or Thaur from the Banu Kalb (Caleb) of Yemen, it was recently written, “European observers have made much of their physical resemblance to Somalis and Ethiopians…” P. 261  J. E. Peterson  “Oman’s Diverse Society: Southern Oman”,  Middle East Journal Vol. 38, No. 2  Spring 2004. 

 

NORTHERN ARABIAN “ISHMAELITES” IN SPAIN –  EL NAS AND AL YAS

 

 

THE QAYS AILAN BIN MUDAR - DESCRIPTIONS AND SETTLEMENT IN SPAIN: The descriptions of the Qays clans families and individuals are many. To the Qays Ailan groups belonged the famous northern Arabian tribes of the Harra and Hejaz including the well-described children of Mansur (Mansour or Manas’ir)  Sulaym bin Mansur, Mazin bin Mansur and Hawazin bin Mansour whose sub clans are in the dozens. The descendants Mansur bin Ikrima bin Khasafa bin Qays bin Ailan in Arabia, like most early Arabs in Arabia are referred to as black and dark brown in texts. Although they were famous for their slave raiding and use of Greco- Romans (Rum) concubines in ancient times, many clans, in fact, remain near black in color in the peninsula today.

The Iraqi Al Jahiz (9^th c.) and Ibn Athir, the Kurd (12^th -13^th c.) both refer to the Sulaym bin Mansour in particular as “pure” Arabs and “black” in color, not simply dark brown which was also common in the Hejaz.  Al Jahiz said that all the tribes of the Harra an area south of Jordan and extending into Hejaz were black like the lava and animals in the region.

Some Sulaym (Sulaym ibn Mansour bin Ikrima bin Khasafa) had settled in North Africa and entered Spain with the first governor of Andalusia, Abd el Azziz ibn Musa, and others also settled in Tudmir.  But most of the clans of early settlers from the Qays tribes of Sulaym, Ghatafan, Fahm, Abs, and Dhubyan (Zubyan) of the Ghatafan or Ghutayf came later from Jazira in Mesopotamia where they had been settled for some time.  

Ghatafan bin Sa’ad bin Qays Ailan, “settled the plain of Granada in a village called Ibra” in Spain, while the Abs of the Ghatafan (Abs bin Baghid bin Raith bin Ghatafan) settled in Jaen. (See bib. Taha, below) The closely related Banu Fezara (Fezara bin Dhubyan bin Raith) settled in Elvira where there was a section named for them. An early eyewitness upon seeing the Abs tribe in Arabia describes them as  “black-skinned men shaking their spears and digging in the earth with their feet.” (From Ibn Abd Rabbu of Andalusia, El Iqd El Fareed, vol. 6, cited in The Unknown Arabs, p. 78).  Both Ghutayf and Abs are originally known as batn or clans of the dark-skinned Murad of the Maddhij in Yemen according to original sources mentioned in, The Yemen in Early Islam, 1988.

The clans of Hawazin bin Mansour, like those of his brothers Sulaym and Mazin bin Mansour were also described in early Arabia. Among their modern remnants are the black and tall Dawasir of Yemamah and the “dark brown” Utayba (Oteiba or Ateibeh) and the lithe short “chocolate colored” Hamida of the Harb.

“A great number of Hawazin settled in Seville and Valencia” others settled in Elvira and  Grenada. (see below, Taha, p. 135 The Muslim Conquest…)

Circa 1879, the famed British adventurer Sir Richard Burton describing the Hamida as a large clan of the Banu Salim bin Auf of Hejaz, Sir Richard Francis Burton describes the men as, “small chocolate colored beings, stunted and thin… with mops of bushy hair… straggling beards , vicious eyes, frowning brows … armed with scabbards slung over the shoulder and Janbiyyah daggers…”  a people  “of the great Hejazi tribe that has kept his blood pure for the last  13 centuries…” ( Burton in  Personal Narrative of a Pilgrimage to el Medina and Mecca  .p. 173 3rd edition  William Mullen and Son.)

 

Concerning the Otaiba (also written Ateyba, Utaiba, Ateibe, etc.) a century ago, James Hamilton wrote , “they wore their hair in long curly plaits” and their skin was “a dark brown”.  See pp. 129-130, Wanderings Around the Birthplace of Mohammed, published by R. Bentley, 1857. 

Mazin bin Mansour’s descendants: 

Clans of Khazraj and Aus based in Medina and the surrounding area are two tribes whose individuals are often described in Arabic texts because of their being the “companions” of the Prophet. When individuals of these tribes are described by non-Arabian writers, they are usually called ‘black- skinned” and “huge” or massive in stature making it likely this group originally from the Yemen belong to the remnants of the old Ubaid or Obeid stock of neolithic Arabia and Syria, whom are described as having unusually “large bodies” and “negroid” aspect by early anthropologists like Archibald Sayce. The Ubaid crania show they were a people that with long, wide and platyrrhine noses according to early physical anthropologists A. Sayce and others. 

The Khazraj (Jazar or Gezer) and Aus (Uz) are the tribes from which came most of the Ansar or “companions” of Mohammed, the Prophet. One famous leader of the Ansar visiting the Byzantine ruled Egypt, Obadah bin Samit an aristocrat and chief of the Khazras or Khazaraj is described as “black” and by tradition was at least 8 ft tall, which may be an exaggeration of course, but then again may not have been. The famous Mohammed ibn Maslama of the Aus clan of al Ansar is also “tall, black-skinned, and huge.” By Ibn Saad (9^th century Baghdad, Iraqi) in El-Tabaqat El Kubra  vol. 3. (See Berry). While El Baladhuri (a 9^th century Iranian ) also calls Nabtali ibn Harith from the Aus Ansar as tall, jet black and huge, with nappy hair”.  See Tariq Berry’s book, The Unknown Arabs for more description of members of Aus and Khazraj.

Most of the “Medina al Ansar” settled in the region of Saragossa in Spain. (See below,  Taha, p. 118) The Khazraj clan of Sa’d bin Abada settled in Qarabalan near Saragossa in Spain, while the Aramramma clan settled Sidonia and Cordoba and “later moved to Elvira, Grenada, Toledo, Tortua and Jerica in the province of Castellon.”

 

ELYAS (ELIAS BIN MUZAR, MUZIR OR MUDAR)  

Muzar’s other descendants were the clans of Elyas of the southern Hejaz. When the tribes and individuals of the clans of Elyas are described, they are described in writings as “dark brown” or “black”. They were centered in Hejaz or western Arabia stretching southward toward the Yemen. The El Yas or Elias bin Muzir or Mudar was exemplified by the Kinaniyya or Kinana bin Khuzaima bin Mudrika bin Elyas (who became famously known as the Canaanites) from which came Mohammed’s tribe of the Qureish, and the tribes of Tamim bin Murra, Hudhail, Nadir, Mustaliq,  Makhzumi and Zahra. 

Elyasa or Elias included the famous Kinana who were described in European Talmudic texts as “black, thieving people” with “large male members”.  Wah ibn Munabbih a 7th century  descendant of Iranian mercenaries who had settled in the Yemen just before the period of Islam also made Cana’an “black”, being quite familiar with the Kinaaniyya tribe of Hejaz. The Banu Umayya who founded the Umayyad dynasty of Islam among the clans descended from tribes of Qureish founded the Umayyad dynasty.

Some Kinana or Kinaniyya who now live in Jericho today, the modern state of Israel are black, and many with the keenest features are jet black. (Some have tried to say they descend from Nubian slaves, which may be the case, but certainly not for the blacker ones.) The Quraish clan of the Kinaniyya were with Musa’s army (the first Arab governor in of Al-Andalus in Spain). Kinana also came to live in Jaen in Spain. 

When individuals of the Qureish clan of the Kinana in Arabia - especially relatives of the Prophet are mentioned in texts they described as “black”.  Ali, the son of the prophet’s cousin described as “black skinned” by the Turkish and Iranian writer el Suyuti and by Ibn Saad, a Baghdad, Iraqi of the 8^th c. in El Tabaqat ael Kabra vol. 8. (cited in Berry).  Ali’s great grandson according to Kitab el Aghani by Esfahani of Central Asia was “black skinned and huge”.

The black nationalistic views and horrifying racism of the original Arabs towards fair skinned peoples settling in Arabia is aptly illustrated by early writings and expressions from individuals of Mohammed’s own tribe in Arabia. Yazid ibn Muawia of the Omayya ibn Shams bin Abd Manaf of the Qureish tribe was “black skinned” and “hairy” and “kinky haired” according to Ibn Abd Rabbu 9^th c. of Cordoba and el Dhahabi the Syrian of the 14^th c. It was apparently Yazid’s father, Muawia, who said “I see these white folks have become very numerous and are saying bad things about those who have passed. I can envision a daring enterprise from them against the Arabs and authority.  I am thinking of killing half of them and leaving half of them to set up markets and to build roads. Whats your opinion?”  (This statement reported by Ibn Abd Rabbu, in El Iqd al Farid, vol 3. cited in The Unknown Arabs. P. 81) 

The Zuhra clan of Qureish also settled Saragossa. (see Taha) A member of the Banu Zuhra in Arabia named Saad ibn Waqqas is called very dark, “tall” and “flat-nosed” by El Dhahabi, of Syria. While Jahiz of Iraq (9^th.c.) calls him black-skinned and huge.

The tribe of Hudhail bin Mudrika bin El Yas settled Murcia and Saragossa. El Baladhuri, the 9^th century Iranian, describing Abdella ibn Mas’ud, a famous member of the Hudhail clan of Arabians says he was “short, thin and black”. (p. 17, Tariq Berry). Tabikha was brother of Mudrika in the genealogy.  When the Central Asian or Iranian writer Al Esfahan (from Esfahan in Iran) described an Arab of the clan of Tabikha and Banu Asad he described him as “black- skinned” with “black eyes”.  According to Taha (p. 137, The Muslim Conquest…), Banu Asad bin Khuzaima bin Mudrika settled in al Bushra near the Sierra Nevada mountains and Barajila.  The Unknown Arabs  Tariq Berry,  2002.  Available at Amazon.com

The Muslim Conquest and Settlement of North Africa and Spain, by Abdul Wahid Dhunan Taha, 1989.  

CENTRAL ARABIAN TRIBES OF THE NEJD IN SPAIN  PART II To Be Continued…

 Just curious to see what kind of feedback will be made by those claiming they know what the "Arabs" and "Moors" looked like.

Originally posted by Prince of Zeila Salaam/Greetings!   Dmarniche, when i stayed in Yemen sometime back i didn't have the feeling of being in the Horn of Africa, sure there were alot of interesting similarities but those are the result of cultural diffusion...    I wonder why 'black' centred scholarship always treats Africa as if it were a 'single country' in the past.  The Arabian peninsula is not a mere extension of 'Africa'  and if you were to travel from Somalia to Mauritania you wouldn't feel like you were traveling in one single country wether in antiquity or recent times. It's quite insulting actually, because your denying all of our differences and sacrifice them all for the sake of building a very 'shaky case'  and it's ultimate intention being is to 'steal other people's civilizations and history'   Let me make it clear, Somalia or it's people have nothing to do with the 'Moors' nor are they migrants from the Middle East as paternalistic 19th century scholarship claimed in the past.  So i'd appreciate it if we were kept out of these silly discussions! Thank you!

Originally posted by goldenstar [QUOTE=Prince of Zeila] Salaam/Greetings!   Well said... Do not pay attention to Black American extremists, their knowledge of Africa is very limited, they are in the West and don't know anything about that contient besides their ancestors came from there centuries ago.