Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)
Moors were Black |
Post Reply 
|
Page <1 2122232425 26> |
| Author |
 Share Topic Printable Version Google Delicious Digg StumbleUpon Windows Live Yahoo Bookmarks reddit Facebook MySpace Newsvine Furl Topic Search  Topic Options
|
||||||||||||||||||
Prince of Zeila 
Housecarl 
Joined: 20-Mar-2009 Online Status: Offline Posts: 33 |
 Quote Reply
 Topic: Moors were BlackPosted: 20-Mar-2009 at 04:20 |
||||||||||||||||||
you got me?
 My friend i got you!! Clearly you didn't bother reading my first post thoroughly but instead went on a blind attack. If you had taken a little time to give a new person some proper respect by reading their contribution as oppose to putting them into a 'box' then you would have figured out my opinion about the Moors or their modern descendants by yourself. I said they looked like the modern North Africans - are the modern North Africans blacks? I have friends of that region that i have known since kindergarden but i don't see how they are really different from their neighbours across the Gibraltar other than religion and language.
There is my answer to your Q. More good faith, less prejudice can do wonders Pinguin
 |
|||||||||||||||||||
 |
|||||||||||||||||||
|
goldenstar
Samurai 
Joined: 09-Mar-2009 Location: Europe Online Status: Offline Posts: 120 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 20-Mar-2009 at 06:54 |
||||||||||||||||||
Unlike Sudan, which was once sub-Saharan millenia ago and then adhered to the Northern civilisation attaching itself to Egypt for the begining of history, Mauritania is not sub-Saharan Africa at all, it is between Black Africa and Maghreb geographically, and is inhabited by the so-called "Moors", the Arabs of Mauritania, people of Maghrebi or mixed Maghrebi-Black ancestry. Same for Northern Mali, added to the modern French made Black state of Mali by French colonisers themselves. Most Black Malians live in the South in the green part of the country, the North is desert. Unlike Egypt, which is relatively speaking directly linked to Black and mixed populations by the Nile River and by a relatively short distance from Sudan, Maghreb and Black Africa are totally separated by thousands of miles of desert width, and Mauritania is part of this desert separation not a part of Black Africa at all unlike what he pretends, besides perhaps in a tiny strip in the exteme South. Even Asian Yemen and Saudi Arabia are closer geographycally to sub-Saharans through the Red Sea and its straits, and the point is, of course, this desert is the main reason why North Africans were and still are so extremely limited in their relations with sub-Saharan Africa, because it is like the emtpy and huge plains and steppes between Europe and the Asiatic countries. He desperately tries to make it look like all Blacks are one single people and know each other, while people of the Maghreb have more ties and contacts with West Africa than East Africa does, and we probably know West Africans better than he ever does. The fact is Mauritanians do not feel Black, there is even some tensions between them and the Black minority of the South. Now he'll say I contradict myself because I first said we have nothing to do with sub-Saharan Africa and now I assume West Africans and North Africans have political and trade contacts...  Edited by goldenstar - 20-Mar-2009 at 07:28 |
|||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
gcle2003
King 
Suspended Joined: 06-Dec-2004 Online Status: Offline Posts: 7035 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 20-Mar-2009 at 10:22 |
||||||||||||||||||
|
Prince, you seem to me to have reflected the views of the modern-day sub-Saharan Africans I know very well. (That's meant to be a compliment, in case anyone reads it differently.)
I don't think I've ever come across a real African (born there, raised there) who thought the Moors were black.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
goldenstar
Samurai
Joined: 09-Mar-2009 Location: Europe Online Status: Offline Posts: 120 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 20-Mar-2009 at 10:26 |
||||||||||||||||||
Do you know a prestigious French institute (Sciences-Po) tested Wikipedia and declared it was a joke, warning students about it? Because they intentionally put tons of delirious and senseless statements and they remained online for months without any correction from the community, while they were obviously illogical. http://tf1.lci.fr/infos/high-tech/0,,3491099,00-polemique-quand-wikipedia-punit-sciences-.html There is nothing concrete because those amateurs' encyclopaedias are not credible, you may even have written on their pages a few minutes before to post the links, it is a free tool. Show something reliable.
Don't tire yourself, you are Wrong. She is allegedly teaching people about sciences and genetics, and when she shows "the faces of Morocco" she puts plenty of Algerian faces, it is like showing the faces of France and putting together French and German faces, which is ridiculous... Not to mention she always contradicts the scientific studies she posts on her blog, and someone here said she disagrees that human beings originated from Africa, while all scientists agree on this. Your sources are totally unreliable.
There is no excuse, I need reliable scientific sources, not amateurs' websites, otherwise I'll create my own today and I expect you to accept and regard all that I write as scientific facts... I can help you however, go to the sources of Wikipedia and answer.com on the bottom of the pages, and read the corresponding articles rather than these so-called "encyclopaedias" themselves.
Yes it is! Your article has a source link, and it leads to the page of Wikipedia...  http://wysinger.homestead.com/aksum.htm You just never read your whole pages, you just select what you think will help win by resistance instead of reasoning as penguin would say, but it always ridiculs you because I am more intelligent than you and can easily find all of your contradictions... 
1999 is outdated???  For your information, 1999 is only 10 years ago, what I learnt when I was at Middle school, and I am very young. So it is outdated but not the old studies you posted from a pseudo-scientist who was born in the 1800s? You have such a bad faith, you prefer to occult all the reliable and scientific sources that prove you wrong and rather post amateurs' encyclopaedias or blogs to resist.
Your article says: The origins and rise of the ancient West African Empire of Ghana, situated in the far western savannah, are obscure. It may have existed as early as the 5th century AD or even before. http://www.accessgambia.com/information/ghana.html The origins of the state is obscure and come from the first millenium A.D. And since answers.com is a valide source for you, then you'll have to accept that the "civilisation" of the Songhai empire was founded by Southern Berbers too... Songhai or Songhay (both: sŏng'gī') , largest of the former empires in the western Sudan region of N Africa. The state was founded (c.700) by Berbers on the Middle Niger, in what is now central Mali. http://www.answers.com/topic/songhai Whether you like it, the development of sub-Saharan Africa in its Eastern and Western parts was heavily influenced by Northern civilisations of the Arab World. As for the rest of Black Africa, I do not think they had any real civilisations in the common sense of the term, probably because they didn't enjoy the benefits of other people's achivements unlike lucky Northern Blacks... 
My source from an American university says they came centuries after the early Ghananian state had been founded, and ruled over a former entity that existed before them... I do not see by the way, how an East African like you has anything to do with Soninke people, it is like a person from Asian Turkey claiming the civilisation of Asian Bangladesh as his own...
A very small part perhaps, can you show it by the way? You said Southern Mauritania was Savannah, while most of it is Saharan and an other small part is Sahel, but I do not see any Savannah. Perhaps there is some Savannah, show a proof and I'll believe you, but it still doesn't change the fact it would represent a tiny portion of land, which is not the same as what you said.
I know that ancient and present Ghana are not the same, just like ancient and modern Mauritania, but my source tells ancient Ghana was created by Southern Maghrebi Berbers, as for modern Ghana it seems to be a creation of Europeans.
If I am ignorant, then help me. Tell me what did such Black states you think I am jealous of, achive in sciences and technology, and how they influenced the world or surpassed my forefathers, to lead me to feel jealousy...
You're changing the subject, so I ask the question again, why wouldn't Arab geographers mention a state inhabited by Southern-Berbers or even Middle-Eastern Arabs, where is logic? Your argument was that since Arab geographers mentioned the existence of Ghana it meant Ghana was not made by Maghrebi Arabs or related Southern Berber-speakers, which makes no sense...
Are you that simple-minded? I said most of the lands of the Sahara desert belong to North African states, Sub-saharan Africans have a smaller portion of the Sahara, and one doesn't need the United Nations to grab a map of the Sahara and the states it lies in. It is interesting to note that just like the terms Africa-African for the Black Africans' identity and their ancestrlal land's name, come from the Northern Arab World, the word Sahara comes from Arabic, and simply means desert...  Funny that the influence of Maghreb was big enough to make a whole continent's people adopt its identity: AFRICA...
An other of your ridiculous statements. North Africans are not Saharan people, the Saharan part of North Africa is nearly EMPTY, the population is concentred in the Atlas Mountains and neighbooring plains in Maghreb, and in the Nile valley in Egypt. So to answer, Mali and Chad are sub-Saharan countries not North African, the Black population of Mali and Chad mostly inhabit the sub-Saharan part of their respective countries, Saharan Mali is the land of Berber-speaking Tuaregs and Arab Moors by the way, even if there are such senseless boundaries recently created by colonisers. May this map help you...   Edited by goldenstar - 20-Mar-2009 at 11:07 |
|||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
goldenstar
Samurai
Joined: 09-Mar-2009 Location: Europe Online Status: Offline Posts: 120 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 20-Mar-2009 at 10:28 |
||||||||||||||||||
If more than a millenium ago means recently to you, then English people recently adopted English... 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, which happened again in medieval times and in the 19th and 20th centuries. I guess you'll also say Black Americans and their achivements are a part of your sub-Saharan history, even if they're Western citizens and live in the Western world for centuries ... so top trying to steal the history of Sudan only because its people have a similar hair texture and skin tone as yours, they consider themselves to be linked FIRST to the Arabs not to the alien Black Africans...
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. I wonder if you ever met a Sudanese Arab, it seems you haven't.
Yes but I still didn't get it, you posted some pics (some didn't work) and didn't explain anything, what did it mean?
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.
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.
I never said you did, even if you're close to his ideas.
You are the one who posted this website, whose articles are made by the same person, and such articles contradict you, yet you have the audacity to blame me of posting your own source...
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. Anyway, what are you talking about? The point is Somalia is not an Arab country but was accepted in the Arab League, as Turkey is not a Western country but was accepted in the Western organisation of NATO.
Wrong again,your source says Senegealese have 4% of Caucasoid markers, and that ancient and modern Egyptians are the same racially. Besides your own source is silly and I only used it against you (as Mathilda's blog and her so-called "complicated Egyptian ancestry"), most anthropologists and archeologists assume the ancient Egyptians are the direct ancestors of modern Egyptians, who consider Blacks are aliens to them, face it. By the way I spoke with an Egyptian friend and told him about this Afrocentrist delirium, his reaction about people like you were as expected a hard laugh, and also a feeling of pity.
Then be specific and speak correctly if you want people to understand correctly. You're so strange and senseless that I wonder whether you meant it and now change your version or simply badly epressed your thought, the first hypothesis being prefered considering all your lies and self-contradictions, in particular about Mauritanians being sub-Saharans then Arabs and then sub-Saharans again...  Oh and, do you have a source for Greeks adopted religious ideas from Egypt and the Middle-East only during the Hellestic era? Scholars can demonstrate influence on Greek mythology from the Middle East much more reliably than influence from Crete. Greek mythology owed much to cultures in Mesopotamia and Anatolia, especially in the realm of cosmogony (origin of the universe) and theogony (origin of the gods). To take one example, a clear parallel exists in an early Middle Eastern myth for Greek poet Hesiod’s story about the castration of Uranus by his son Cronus and the subsequent overthrow of Cronus by his son Zeus. The Middle Eastern myth tells of the sky god Anu who was castrated by Kumarbi, father of the gods. The weather and storm god Teshub, in turn, displaced Anu. Scholars continue to bring to light more and more similarities between Greek and Middle Eastern mythologies. http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761570116_6/Greek_Mythology.html#s23
East Africans yes, and magically they're the ones who are so close to the Arabian peninsula... So let's summarise, you're the only sub-Saharans having a real history in term of civilisation, the only sub-Saharans having already travelled out of Africa and occupied a portion of non-sub-Saharan land, and the only sub-Saharans who do not always exhibit typical "Negroid" features... strange... but so close to Arabia geographically...
Noone said it was present only in Europe, 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.
I never doubted or said sub-Saharan Africa never had any relations with North-Africa, and West Africa had relations with North Africans because North-Africans had a technology allowing them to reach Black people, not the contrary. Again, what you fail to understand is having trade contacts with people doesn't mean being brothers, sub-Saharans trade with Westerners and Asians for centuries as well. And I am not racist, I am talking about you as a single individual, not about all Blacks, and I think you are jealous of light skinned people and want to look like them physically... Because 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, it says you want to attach yourself with North Africa...
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. 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... Edited by goldenstar - 20-Mar-2009 at 13:47 |
|||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
goldenstar
Samurai
Joined: 09-Mar-2009 Location: Europe Online Status: Offline Posts: 120 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 20-Mar-2009 at 12:51 |
||||||||||||||||||
Wa A'laykom assalam (translation for others: "And Hello to you"). Ewa is Moroccan, it is rather "Aywa" in Eastern Algeria's Arabic, but it is ok... I didn't make any revisionism or attack towards your people, I was refering to the government of Somalia, not to the population itself. Read again and you'll see my own words. I do not think you have to be loyal to North-Africans, I do not feel close to Somalians just because they're Muslims as my ancestors, but if you feel close to North-Africa it is up to you. All I feel is Somalians are closer to me than Zimbabweans because they have had relations with some Arab states and practise the same religion.
I never said Somalians wanted to be Arab, and I do not know the comparison between the civil war in Somalia and the conflict between the 2 former Arab countries making today Yemen. Anyway, that's nice Somalians helped and saved many Yemenis, I personally remember when I was a child in the early 1990s, each child was asked by our teachers in France to bring at least one rice packet to help Somalia, solidarity is a good thing. I do not want to contradict you, but I found plenty of websites telling about a severe famine in Somalia in 1974, when Somalia joined the Arab League. A drought in 1974 and 1975 caused widespread starvation, and motivated Somalia to join the Arab League. http://fr.encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761554555/somalie.html http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761554555_5/Somalia.html#s24 I do not deny the above claims, even if your sources are not visible online and come from books I do not own, but you cannot deny that the Somalian government has probably joined the Arab League also for economic purposes, to benefit from aid from other members (from the Arab Fund for Economic and Social Development in particular), or a free trade area between members of the Arab League. Somalians probably do not care about this, governments decide.
I was refering to the movement among some intellectuals and politicians because Somalia and Djibouti didn't have Arabic as their official language, Somalia adopted Arabic only in the 1970s. Many European politicians are in favour of the membership of Turkey in EU and actively voice their wish, while many are strongly opposed to this idea.
True, I have been telling this for days.
You probably didn't read all my posts, I always said that I don't generalise all Blacks, and that most Blacks I know are out of this Afrocentrist propaganda, even if many who are nice and respectful are still influenced by it, strangely.
Why do my interlocutors always base their answers, allegedly scientific, on facts that are not concrete or representative? People in France love the Brazilian team and support it, there was a time they loved Argentinian players, it is only sport... I never said sub-Saharans wished harm to anyone, I said they see North Africans as aliens, and if they don't it means they have an identity problem, perhaps based on geographical misinterpretations, because North Africans actually consider Black Africans as totally alien to their civilisation and see Southern Europeans as much closer. It doesn't mean they do not like you, and doesn't mean Palestinians detest people from China and Japan, it is only logic. By the way you cannot use the Horn of Africa's people, who are closer to Arabia, and apply their opinion to the thousands of different sub-Saharan ethnicities in the rest of Africa (Democratic Republic of Congo, South Africa, Zimbabwe, Swaziland, and so on...). Religiously, Black Muslims are closer to North Africans than Southern Europeans are, it may create some warm contacts, but it doesn't mean anything else, not to mention the majority of the population of Black Africa is of Christian faith, which would only create a bigger distance.
Moroccans do not want to join the European Union, their controversial former king as well as the former Tunisian president made a request to join the European Common Market that were refused in the past decades, it wasn't the same entity as the later formed European union of the 1990s and present days.
I do not want to offend you or seem irrespectful, but the Horn of Africa has really nothing to do with the Mediterranean world, which only includes Southern Europe, the Arab World, and Turkey, themselevs not being as close to each other as Britishers and French are by the way, your comparison is highly exaggerated (besides for Turks and Arabs). The Horn of Africa shares some real historical ties with the Arabian peninsula, but not with the rest of the Arab World and certainly not with the Arab Maghreb. Edited by goldenstar - 20-Mar-2009 at 18:37 |
|||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
Guests
Guest 
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 20-Mar-2009 at 12:57 |
||||||||||||||||||
Modern Maghrebians, you mean. They are the Moors of the history and today. And they aren't "sudanese" or SS Blacks.
If you know that, why don't you allow us to close this dumb thread?
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 20-Mar-2009 at 13:04 |
||||||||||||||||||
Right on target!
Some people here knows a bit about the relation between Egypt, Arabia and the Horn and just project that freely to the West side of Africa. They forget that all throught all history, the Maghreb, Southern Europe and West Asia have been a very close unity, kept together by the Mediterranean sea.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
Prince of Zeila
Housecarl
Joined: 20-Mar-2009 Online Status: Offline Posts: 33 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 20-Mar-2009 at 14:46 |
||||||||||||||||||
Salaam/Greetings!
Thanks, of course i'm not a spokesperson for an entire continent, there could be individuals who feel what i have said is completely untrue. My post displays only what i have processed from inter-acting with people from that large geographical region, so it is cool that your friends don't contradict my previous post
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
AksumVanguard
Samurai
Joined: 01-Feb-2009 Online Status: Offline Posts: 127 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 20-Mar-2009 at 15:56 |
||||||||||||||||||
The Sonninke people were trading long before the arrival of Moors in that region.ANd they id have the possession of the camel as i stated in a previous post.You think Ghana was invented and prospered due to foreign intervention. http://www.accessgambia.com/information/ghana.html existed as early as the 5th century AD or even before. However, by the 8th century AD Ghana had become important enough for its fame as "The Land of Gold" to reach Baghdad. The introduction of the camel, which preceded Muslims and Islam by several centuries, brought about a gradual revolution in trade, and for the first time, the extensive gold, ivory, and salt resources of the region could be sent north and east to population centers in North Africa, the Middle East and Europe in exchange for manufactured goods. If for some outrageous region it was started or progressed as a result of foreign occupation,why is the Ghana mentioned for having good commerce before the arrival of Moors http://www.lycos.com/info/ghana--ancient-ghana.html The Tarikh as-Sudan, a book of West African history written in Timbuktu around 1650 A.D., claims that the Empire of Ghana had 22 kings before the beginning of the Muslim era (622 A.D.), and 22 kings afterwards. Morever the Ife had long possesed the ability of metal working in that region of west africa.
Well I mentioned the Ancient Egyptians because GoldenStar claimed that Kush was started by supposed Egyptian colonizers in that region,but there is eveidence to suggets otherwise when becuase not only does evidnece suggest they were of San origin but also the same people with the same customs at Nabata Playa. The culture and relgion is the same in pre-dynastic times of both Nubia and Egypt. |
|||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
Prince of Zeila
Housecarl
Joined: 20-Mar-2009 Online Status: Offline Posts: 33 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 20-Mar-2009 at 16:22 |
||||||||||||||||||
|
My reply magically dissappeared when i pressed 'post reply' so i had to start over again
Salaam/Greetings!
That makes sense, considering i grew up with Moroccans
It's good to know that!
It actually has little to do with religion, i have Chinese friends who are very dear to me but if a Chinese bigot were to attack me I wouldn't begin insulting Chinese people because i feel loyal to my friends. Even if there is no link between me and the attacker, i still don't engage the person with the same venom, I wasn't sure wether you would react to my first post with 'Stormfront language' which is why i made it clear that i would not reply in kind, but you seem like a pleasant person, so my bad!
I doubt it had any effect especially considering that when the UN entered Somalia the famine had allready ended a few months earlier, but your right; extending your hand with the right intention to a person that needs it will create allies.
The economic factor did play a part, i was just trying to show you that the reason for joining was multi-dimensional. The particular drought of 1974/1975 was successfully countered through re-settlement programmes in which the Somali government turned 145 000 Pastoralists into farmers and fishermen. Most of these programmes were funded by the Soviet Union.
It's like continuesly calling Chinese people 'Indian' because they practice Buddhism
If people were stereotyping the French as bigots and ethnocentric towards the Brazilians but there was evidence on the contrary that the French actually thoroughly enjoyed Brazilian football,cuisine, resorts,music then there is not a single sociologist out there that would omit these very important factors out of their study. Sport is a very powerful medium and i was sharing with you what i personally have seen.(mind you it's neither scientific or concrete but simply P.E)
My point was I(and those who i have spoken with) don't see North Africans as 'ancient or medieval invaders' but a legitimate group that has lived there since time immemorial.
I perfectly understand what your saying and have tried to highlight that very important fact whenever some militant Afrocentric tried to put me in a monolithic box; there is more history between a Ethiopian/Eritrean and a European than the former has with a West African, there is more history between a Somali and a Indian than the former has with a South African, that's a simple fact of history so i agree!
If you asked a group of Somalis whom they feel closer to; a Malaysian or a Ethiopian? I'm very certain a large chunk will put ''Malaysian' despite the fact that Ethiopians are their closest cousins, so again i agree.
There was a steady trade link between modern Somalia and states on the Mediterranean since at least the second millenium B.C( Mycenaean pottery was found in Somali tombs and temples at Hafun).
The analogy with the French/Brits was geographically of course and Somalia does have historical relations with other parts of the Arab world. Somali merchants settled in places like Egypt and Syria and Somali scholars established their own porticos in Al-Azhar,Cairo and the Ummayyad mosque,Damascus aswell which graduated many interesting figures. As for the Maghreb you are correct, but in Somali cities like Barawa and Merka there are pure Arab populations who have genealogical written records that links their migration with the collapse of Al-Andalus[1]
Of course all of this is no different from Central Asians establishing their own Tashkent in Mogadishu after the Mongol conquest of their lands in the 13th century or Somali merchants settling in Pakistan/India or Indians and Pakistanis settling in Somali port cities so all in all i agree that this fairytale of a united African sphere of the past is silly(come on the African continent is like 30 million sq km)
[1] - The Origins and Development of Mogadishu AD 1000 to 1850: A Study of the Urban Growth Along the Benadir Coast of Southern Somalia by Ahmed Dualeh Jama pg 18( I'm very sorry but i currently don't have the book in my possession so i can't quote what was exactly said
 ) |
|||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
Prince of Zeila
Housecarl
Joined: 20-Mar-2009 Online Status: Offline Posts: 33 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 20-Mar-2009 at 16:28 |
||||||||||||||||||
Do i have the key or something?
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 20-Mar-2009 at 17:07 |
||||||||||||||||||
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. And trade (and progress) started when the goods of SS Africa were demanded by the Classical civilization; and not the other way around.
Oh yes, but that is another topic.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
goldenstar
Samurai
Joined: 09-Mar-2009 Location: Europe Online Status: Offline Posts: 120 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 20-Mar-2009 at 18:34 |
||||||||||||||||||
He seems normal, I do not think he is from the Afrocentrist club. From my experience most Afrocentrists tend to be Christian, I do not say this to defend Muslims but because it seems there are more Arab haters among Black Christians. They see Arabs as Muslim invaders in Africa and consider the North of the continent to be their native land that Northerners allegedly stole from them in the past... There are also the moderated Afrocentrists, who are not hateful at all, even respectful normal people, but they still believe in fairy tales, and there are plenty of Black Muslims among these brainwashed people. One day I talked to a nice Black Senegalese of Muslim faith, who seemed totally out of politics or history, he was still informed about the idea of ancient Egypt being a Black nation and tried to convince me Western intellectuals are liars and want to lower Black cultures. I tried to explain to him that it was not a matter of Western or Eastern intellectuals, and that Egyptians themselves considered this idea as totally stupid, but he still didn't understand and kept on talking about a so-called Western conspiracy theory... Edited by goldenstar - 20-Mar-2009 at 19:19 |
|||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
goldenstar
Samurai
Joined: 09-Mar-2009 Location: Europe Online Status: Offline Posts: 120 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 20-Mar-2009 at 18:49 |
||||||||||||||||||
Pinguin answered well, before the Muslim Moors there were ancient Maghrebis including Carthaginians. By the way, who brought camels to West Africa, if not North Africans?
Some sources tell it, as explained earlier. Just like the Horn of Africa's civilisations were close to Arabia and influenced by it, it seems like the Sahelian empires were close to Southern Berbers and benefited from their influence.
My sources say the civilisation of Kush was a direct result of Egyptianisation. By the way, since you think Wikipedia is a reliable source, it shows that I was right about Kush having occupied the territory corresponding to D'mt and Aksum...  Edited by goldenstar - 20-Mar-2009 at 18:57 |
|||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 20-Mar-2009 at 19:10 |
||||||||||||||||||
I agree. This guy don't have the same mental pattern than the Afrocentrists we are acustummed to.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
goldenstar
Samurai
Joined: 09-Mar-2009 Location: Europe Online Status: Offline Posts: 120 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 20-Mar-2009 at 19:17 |
||||||||||||||||||
It already happened to me. The best when you make long posts is to write them first on a wordpad page rather than on this website.
The U.N is a joke...
Somalians are not Arab, but Northern Sudanese feel Arab for centuries, and some idiots use the example of non-Arab members of the Arab League like Somalia to attack Arab identity and pretend the term Arab doesn't mean anything, while everyone knows who is an Arab. People know who are the Arabs but the only thing some people do not understand sometimes is the Arabs do not originate from Arabia but from their respective countries, an Algerian Arab is not a descendent of Saudi or Yemeni settlers.
Well, my point is just because you like the cuisine or culture of a country, doesn't mean you feel you're the same as it. French people adore couscous (a Maghrebi recipe), it is one of their best dishes but they still consider Maghreb as an alien entity, not as alien as sub-Saharan Africa but still a former Muslim ennemy entity that spent the last centuries warring against Europe and France in particular.
I already answered about this trade thing, there is still trade between the Horn of Africa and the whole world right now, all countries in the world traded with each other and all populations travelled in all countries since ancient times (besides isolated native Americans or Southern Africans). I am not talking about trade ties, relationships between rulers, treaties between states (Morocco and Algeria were the first states to recognise the U.S.A, which doesn't mean they were closer to it than its British ennemy was), but rather about the local populations and their degree of familiarity with other populations, what they share together, and so on.
Then I understand your point, I am loyal to nice people generally speaking, regardless of their religion or ethnicity. I do not think I am a pleasant person, just normal, but thank you so much... Edited by goldenstar - 20-Mar-2009 at 19:35 |
|||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
Prince of Zeila
Housecarl
Joined: 20-Mar-2009 Online Status: Offline Posts: 33 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 20-Mar-2009 at 19:24 |
||||||||||||||||||
|
Fair enough,Goldenstar you make good points.
and on that note i'm leaving this topic.
Salaam/Greetings!
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
goldenstar
Samurai
Joined: 09-Mar-2009 Location: Europe Online Status: Offline Posts: 120 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 20-Mar-2009 at 19:36 |
||||||||||||||||||
Have fun! |
|||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
AksumVanguard
Samurai
Joined: 01-Feb-2009 Online Status: Offline Posts: 127 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 21-Mar-2009 at 05:17 |
||||||||||||||||||
First and Foremost I gave more refrences than wikipeida.The only reason I showed the wikipedia one was to show how some craniomatics in africa are considered caucasoid to prove that the word is used to often,your just mad becuase you have no credible source to back your argument. i do beleive you used britannica once also as a refrence so it will state it clearly for you http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/11794/Aksum/11794rellinks/Related-Links Despite common belief to the contrary, Aksum did not originate from one of the Semitic Sabaean kingdoms of southern Arabia but instead developed as a local power. Your excuses are becoming useless and it is desperrate attempt to shy away from the embarassement of being proven wrong so many times.Now can you say britannica a reknowned encyclopedia webiste is tampered with,contrary to your dusty old text on a history of great kingdom.
Again she put the faces of North-Western Africans face up to facts you have websites who is ratherly in your favor becuase of her underlying racist views but still the facts make surmounting approval of the my cliams. Your sources are totally unreliable.
Yes it is! Your article has a source link, and it leads to the page of Wikipedia... http://wysinger.homestead.com/aksum.htm
Please man up,even though they may be flaws in the online encyclopedias,they are mostly based on facts besides I only referenced it a few times with certain points,and second I gave more references than wiki.You have to find cheap outdated websites to make a comeback.
They are always no discoveries in archeology,it was thought that the Olmecs were the first civilzation in america 20 years ago now it is Caral, it was thought that humans interbred with Neaanderthals now science proves an inability to interbreed,so being 10 years ago is subsequently old .Not to mention that having a more known enclopedia than an alternative website doesn't stand to well.
There not obscure if you read carefully it even said that berbers had Skirmisheds with th Soninke people,the facts is the Berbers seldomly traveled in that area,and if they did create it they would of tooken credit for it.Koumbi Saleh was the first capital which brought alot of wanderers far and wide,especially the Northern Afrcans who said it was rich and gold.
The Songhai people came way later after the Ghana Empire were talking 800 years after the founding of ghana.Your own Arab mate al-bakr said it was Ghana was founded sometime in the 4th century,but the Songahi were already indoctrinted with Islam,while the Wagadou was based solely on the Serpent worship of the Emperor itself.
Get your chronooogy in order,songhai came long after and your mad because all your fragile theories are disproven and we did not need an outside intervention,can you prove otherwise rather than give a meaningless website.
Its irrelveant becuase the Berbers did not have thatmuch contact with the Sonike people who founded the empire in 4th ad ,so it doesn't matter whether they were in the Sahara or not.
Again I was not talking to you and source is ver unrelaible and is the only lifeline you have.
Just as Afro-centrist try to claim the Moors were black you are trying to claim the Sooninke people were Berebers now I thought you wanted no part of West Africna history.
Now you can't face reality,you said it was started by Maghrebs who made most of their cities motsly in on the coast of Northern Africa,you said it yourself:
not to mention there is now record even according to your Maghreb schoars that Ghana was started by Berbers, becuase they stake no claim to it only trade with them,and they say they came into contact with them in the 8th ce so
The facts is that berbers roam the northern portion of the Sahara,and according to whom do blacks inherit only a small portion of the Sahara,ever heard of Chad and the Sudan.
An other of your ridiculous statements. North Africans are not Saharan people, the Saharan part of North Africa is nearly EMPTY, the population is concentred in the Atlas Mountains and neighbooring plains in Maghreb, and in the Nile valley in Egypt. [/quote] Alright so since the Saharan part of North Africa is nearly empty ,you would conclude the berbers weren't in any frequent contact with Wagadou Ghana to start the empire thats the point. |
|||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||
)|
Post Reply
|
Page <1 2122232425 26> |
| Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz
This page was generated in 0.133 seconds.
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz
This page was generated in 0.133 seconds.
