EgyptSearch Forums
  Ancient Egypt and Egyptology
  Negroid affinities in ancient Greece??? (Page 6)

Post New Topic  Post A Reply
profile | register | preferences | faq | search

UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone!
This topic is 9 pages long:   1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9 
next newest topic | next oldest topic
Author Topic:   Negroid affinities in ancient Greece???
Horemheb
Member

Posts: 882
Registered: Jan 2004

posted 21 January 2005 11:26 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Horemheb     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
da Bass. I can't believe you are saying that!!! All we hear on this board is this black crap all day on every thread. People have left this board after complaing and gone to the other AE boards for that very reason. My contention has been that this is not a history board but a radical black Afrocentric board. If you don't believe that then spend some time reading previous threads. Many of us have posted non racial history threads and nobdy responds...why because they don't care about history. If you baned racial topics from this board 9as other AE boards do) 90% of these guys would be gone in a minute.

IP: Logged

lamin
Member

Posts: 161
Registered: Nov 2004

posted 21 January 2005 11:28 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for lamin     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
But I have noticed that "aveolar prognathism" is also very evident among East Asians--Chinese, Malay, Thai, Cambodian, Indonesian, etc. So why is it specifically a "negroid trait". In fact the only phenotypical trait that Africoids have but is relatively rare among other groups is the curled hair type. This "curled hair" trait seems to be a recent adaptation given that the hair of other groups seem to approximate that of simians--apes, chimps, etc. Are the hair forms of non-Africoid types then "archaic"?

IP: Logged

supercar
Junior Member

Posts:
Registered:

posted 21 January 2005 11:33 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for supercar     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Horemheb:
OI see Bass, its OK for him to spout anti European racist dribble but I can't call him on it. If you can't confront the issues go crawl back into what ever hole you came out of.

The outmoded 19th century Egyptology existed,did it not? It was perpetrated by the then racist European historians and scientists, was it not? This concerns Egyptology, and I have simply stated what is well known. Hence, your remarks about some racially prejudice members from other ehnicities is irrelevant to the damage that was done to Egyptology, which is now appropriately being corrected by the scientific community.

IP: Logged

rasol
Member

Posts: 2149
Registered: Jun 2004

posted 21 January 2005 11:46 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for rasol     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Good comment Lamin. Another form of bias in phenotypical classification has to do with the notion of 'clustering and intermediacy'.

For example: The curliest and thickest form of hair, sometimes called 'peppercorn' is most commonly found among San, and some Twa diminuative type Africans. At the other extreme is 'east Asian' hair which tends to be completely straight and also thin.

This means that most Europeans hair which is wavy and not straight, thin but not as thin as East Asian is intermediate between the two hair texture extremes.

Also most Black African hair 'woolly-Afro but not peppercorn'... thick but not as thick as 'khoisan' also clusters in-between.

Interestingly Badarian hair samples cluster in between Nilotic African and Khosianoid!

European's also have the most highly variable hair which tends to be thinnest in the Nordic and Euroasian regions, and thickest and curliest in Southern Europe.

European hair is therefore both intermediate - between African and East Asian - and also highly variable, and so cannot lend circumstantical phenotypical evidence to a pure race hypothesis.

[This message has been edited by rasol (edited 21 January 2005).]

IP: Logged

Horemheb
Member

Posts: 882
Registered: Jan 2004

posted 21 January 2005 11:47 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Horemheb     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
First Supercar, there was no damage and secondly, it is not being corrected in thge manner you suggest. You have bought into a mindset that is leading you in the wrong direction. My primary field of study is the American Civil War. That war happened only 140 years ago, not 5000. We are learning new things about the war all the time but that does not mean previous scholars were being dishonest. Dr roth who has a phd in Egyptology said in her essay that AE's were darker than Greeks and lighter than Nubians. that is the general view held by most mainline Egyptologists. The field should be included in Mideastern Studies and not African for a variety of reasons that have nothing to do with race.

IP: Logged

rasol
Member

Posts: 2149
Registered: Jun 2004

posted 21 January 2005 11:51 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for rasol     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
First Supercar, there was no damage
Arguably you are living proof of the damage. The walking wounded so to speak...
ok, carry on rant....

IP: Logged

Horemheb
Member

Posts: 882
Registered: Jan 2004

posted 21 January 2005 11:57 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Horemheb     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
right rasshole, you are the problem we are trying to correct. You are the guy who worries about those evil white Euros, guess that makes me your daddy.

IP: Logged

rasol
Member

Posts: 2149
Registered: Jun 2004

posted 21 January 2005 12:09 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for rasol     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
"you are the problem we are trying to correct."

Good luck.

This forum offers a wealth of useful information and thoughtful interactions with intelligent discussants.

And we have you for comic relief. It's perfect!

IP: Logged

supercar
Junior Member

Posts:
Registered:

posted 21 January 2005 12:48 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for supercar     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Horemheb:
First Supercar, there was no damage and secondly, it is not being corrected in thge manner you suggest.

Reactionary backward people can be in the midst of real events as we speak, and still deny it's happening. Hence, Horemheb reasoning with you, isn't the way to go about business.

quote:
Horemheb:
The field should be included in Mideastern Studies and not African for a variety of reasons that have nothing to do with race.

Okay you brough it up, but for the sake of amusement, as we all know the ensuing answer, what is Middle Eastern?
What does the basis of Kemetian social structure have in come in with Far Eastern societies? If you figure out the correct answers to these questions, you just might begin to come out the world of clowns. Again, the choice is yours: reationary backwardness, or joining the civilized world!

[This message has been edited by supercar (edited 21 January 2005).]

IP: Logged

Horemheb
Member

Posts: 882
Registered: Jan 2004

posted 21 January 2005 12:56 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Horemheb     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Lets first cut the kemetian crap, most people today use ancient Egypt. as an Empire Egypt looeked to the middle east. Nubia was the only aspect of its foreign poicy that looked south.
The United states borders on Mexico but we have little in common with Latin America past geography. The extention of the egyptian Empire to the north and its affect on middle eastern politics clearly puts it in that sphere. Additionally, After the Nubian period Egypt was conquored by assyria, Persia Greece and Rome demonstrating clearly that it was a basic part of the Med political system.

IP: Logged

supercar
Junior Member

Posts:
Registered:

posted 21 January 2005 01:14 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for supercar     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Horemheb:
Lets first cut the kemetian crap, most people today use ancient Egypt. as an Empire Egypt looeked to the middle east. Nubia was the only aspect of its foreign poicy that looked south.
The United states borders on Mexico but we have little in common with Latin America past geography. The extention of the egyptian Empire to the north and its affect on middle eastern politics clearly puts it in that sphere. Additionally, After the Nubian period Egypt was conquored by assyria, Persia Greece and Rome demonstrating clearly that it was a basic part of the Med political system.

Horemheb, thank you for admitting that you don't know the answers to the elementary school type of questions forwarded to you. It's been fun playing games with you. Have a nice weekend!

IP: Logged

Horemheb
Member

Posts: 882
Registered: Jan 2004

posted 21 January 2005 01:19 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Horemheb     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
supercar...I did not answer the culture question because it is not relevant to the issue of why AE should be included in the middle east and not Africa. If you were not so ill informed you would know that we have many people with terminal degrees in African history who did not study Egypt at all in their degree plans. Conversely, everyone with a history degree in middle eastern studies has to do a major portion of their work in AE. I understand that that fact does not conform to the black crap you are hung up on and obsessed by but it is true all the same.

IP: Logged

supercar
Junior Member

Posts:
Registered:

posted 21 January 2005 01:37 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for supercar     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Horemheb:
supercar...I did not answer the culture question because it is not relevant to the issue of why AE should be included in the middle east and not Africa. If you were not so ill informed you would know that we have many people with terminal degrees in African history who did not study Egypt at all in their degree plans. Conversely, everyone with a history degree in middle eastern studies has to do a major portion of their work in AE. I understand that that fact does not conform to the black crap you are hung up on and obsessed by but it is true all the same.

Horemheb, as you would put it: let's cut the half-baked geopolitical "crackpot" crap, and look at the real world just for a minute. What is Kemet civilization, if it's not about its culture? So what if they dealt with people in your misinformed view of what the Middle East is? It only goes to show that these regions became part of the Kemetian empire, not the other way around. United states deals with a number of countries around the globe, not to mention recent adventures in the Middle East. Does this suddenly make the U.S Middle Eastern? This seems to be your train of thought. If only you took time to actually understand Kemetian culture, you would instantly realize how psychologically isolated you truly are for placing Kemet outside of what you preceive as being African. Just a pointer; Kemetians dealt with other Africans on either side of their border, including the Land of Punt (not that you are familiar with any of this, as you last comment clarifies). Remember: a mind is a terrible thing to waste!

IP: Logged

Horemheb
Member

Posts: 882
Registered: Jan 2004

posted 21 January 2005 01:47 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Horemheb     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Thats the only reason I am still here supercar, might be able to save at least one mind here. The info I gave you is not 'my view' it is 'the view.' Ancient Egypt is taught in every Westerv Civ class AS A PART OF THE MIDDLE EAST. I have taught that class at least 20 times myself. If you will kindly check the Glencoe-McGraw Hill Text on world history you will find your beloved AE taught in the section with mesopotamia.....NOT IN THE SECTION WITH AFRICA. This is just the way it is and the way it has to be. I'm not being ugly supercar...I honestly believe you have been brainwashed with incorrect information.
By the way , in the text I mentioned they do not call it Kemet.

IP: Logged

supercar
Junior Member

Posts:
Registered:

posted 21 January 2005 01:53 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for supercar     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Horemheb:
Thats the only reason I am still here supercar, might be able to save at least one mind here. The info I gave you is not 'my view' it is 'the view.' Ancient Egypt is taught in every Westerv Civ class AS A PART OF THE MIDDLE EAST. I have taught that class at least 20 times myself. If you will kindly check the Glencoe-McGraw Hill Text on world history you will find your beloved AE taught in the section with mesopotamia.....NOT IN THE SECTION WITH AFRICA. This is just the way it is and the way it has to be. I'm not being ugly supercar...I honestly believe you have been brainwashed with incorrect information.
By the way , in the text I mentioned they do not call it Kemet.

Kemet is being taught in the West, Africa, Asia and elsewhere. This is supposed to be some kind of a wacko logic, that it suddenly makes Kemet European, South American, Australian, Japanese and why not throw the entire globe in. Horemheb, we at least know that you are waisting your mind, but please spare others this predicament. It's your call.

IP: Logged

Horemheb
Member

Posts: 882
Registered: Jan 2004

posted 21 January 2005 01:57 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Horemheb     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Check the text i mentioned....only an idiot cannot learn...don't put yourself in that catagory.

IP: Logged

rasol
Member

Posts: 2149
Registered: Jun 2004

posted 21 January 2005 01:58 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for rasol     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Horemheb:
The field should be included in Mideastern Studies and not African for a variety of reasons that have nothing to do with race.

and...
quote:

as an Empire Egypt looeked to the middle east.
..is non-sequitor as the middle east a European concept of no relevance to Kemetian history. Failure to grasp that fact is one of the 1st signs of an inadequete education in the history of the Nile Valley.

quote:
Nubia was the only aspect of its foreign poicy that looked south.

That's close to being a redundany as Nubia defines the south.
Nubia. Or....
* Ta Khent (land of the beginnings)
* Ta Neter (God's Land)

Also, the Kemetian royal etymology literally reads as "He who comes from the South" Nsu Biti.

* Nubia (Ta Seti) played a role in the Foundation of Kemet.

* Nubia was a part of Kemet for centuries.
* Kemet was a part of Kush for nearly a century.

quote:
cut the Kemet crap

lol. You wish. You must hate references to the Kememu of Kemet[nu] (Black people of the Black Nation) because it spells doom for your ideology.

quote:
I did not answer the culture question because it is not relevant to the issue of why AE should be included in the middle east and not Africa. If you were not so ill informed you would know that we have many people with terminal degrees in African history who did not study Egypt at all in their degree plans. Conversely, everyone with a history degree in middle eastern studies has to do a major portion of their work in AE
That is a tautalogy passing itself off as an answer. However, it's more than you are usually worth, so I give you a D- for this post instead of the usual enivitable F. Keep trying Professor!

IP: Logged

supercar
Junior Member

Posts:
Registered:

posted 21 January 2005 02:02 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for supercar     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Horemheb:
Check the text i mentioned....only an idiot cannot learn...don't put yourself in that catagory.

You are right; you have shown us, from your self-repesentation, how an idiot cannot learn. Go hit the basics of Kemetian culture; it will do you some good. We've moved on from the 19th century European awareness of the world.

IP: Logged

Horemheb
Member

Posts: 882
Registered: Jan 2004

posted 21 January 2005 02:07 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Horemheb     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Check the Glencoe text Supercar...it wasn't published in the 19th century but rather three years ago...the 21st. you are letting these people make a fool out of you.

IP: Logged

lamin
Member

Posts: 161
Registered: Nov 2004

posted 21 January 2005 02:09 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for lamin     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
And that exactly is the reason why some of the posts are contentious. For example, the history of South East Africa(Mozambique, Zimbabwe, etc.) is quite different from that of West Africa yet "African History" covers both areas so why isn't the history of North Africa not included equally in an African History course. After all, one cannot understand the history of Songhay without understanding the history of Morocco(cf. the Battle of Tondibi in 1596 in which Moroccan mercenaries invaded Songhay aand sacked Timbuktu). One cannot also explain the contentious history of the Sudan and its North-South divide without incorporating the history of the Anglo-Egyptian Condominium over the Sudan.

We should also note that terms such as "Middle East" are of very recent vintage and were coined by the British and French during a very racially conscious(on the part of the European colonisers) colonial era.

IP: Logged

supercar
Junior Member

Posts:
Registered:

posted 21 January 2005 02:12 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for supercar     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Horemheb:
Check the Glencoe text Supercar...it wasn't published in the 19th century but rather three years ago...the 21st...

So are the reactionary backward clowns, as the types in stormfront. They supposedly live in the 21st century, but their intelligence level goes back to where the Vikings left off, if the not pre-stone age era capacity of thinking.


[This message has been edited by supercar (edited 21 January 2005).]

IP: Logged

Horemheb
Member

Posts: 882
Registered: Jan 2004

posted 21 January 2005 02:18 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Horemheb     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
lamin, You were doing well until you could not resist throwing in the British and French. at least you know that AE is not generally taught as an African discpline, nor is North Africa. Mexico is in North America but it is taught as a part of Latin america and not generally included with the US and Canada. North africa and Egypt are generally considered to part of the Med political system. They were in the Greek and Roman empires, they politically and ecomically faced the north and northeast .
i mentioned to an earlier poster that the Glencoe world history text puts AE with mesopotamia, not with Africa. these Afrocentric radicals are liars and do not have the best interest of history at heart.

IP: Logged

supercar
Junior Member

Posts:
Registered:

posted 21 January 2005 02:33 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for supercar     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Hey Horemheb, here is a newsflash: Africans learn about Greek and Roman history. I guess that would make Greek and Roman African after all. Well, what do you know, in your world anything is possible.

IP: Logged

ausar
Moderator

Posts: 3309
Registered: Feb 2003

posted 21 January 2005 02:34 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for ausar     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote

This is all a matter of semantics of where ancient Egyptian history is taught. Let's compare and contrast what similarities there are between Egypt and other surrounding civlizations in the Near East:


1. ancestor veneration[found in all African soceities and especially in ancient Egyptian soceities]

2. City state urbanization vs. villages[most of mesopotamia and Greece were city states] Egyptian civlization is known as the civlization without cities. Most of Egypt was nothing more than village nomes.


3. Divine kingship and the rain maker king[almost absent in Mesopotamia and other Near-Eastern civlizations]


4. Egyptians forbade their priests from wearing sheep skin garments[we find this in Middle eastern and Asiatic countries but not in Egypt] Sinhue in his very own tales of Sinuhe relates how he would not like to be buried in sheep skin.


5. The absence of mummification and mortuary rites associated with it[Sumerians buried their dead underneath houses] I can show you remains of a elaborate mummified remains from the Sahara older than anything in Egypt.


6. Treat of women and Matrilineal desent[the Semetic cultures are patrilineal] Women in mediterranean soceity were subdorant to men. In African cultures women are not. Ancient Egyptian was no exception.


IP: Logged

ausar
Moderator

Posts: 3309
Registered: Feb 2003

posted 21 January 2005 02:35 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for ausar     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote

This is all a matter of semantics of where ancient Egyptian history is taught. Let's compare and contrast what similarities there are between Egypt and other surrounding civlizations in the Near East:


1. ancestor veneration[found in all African soceities and especially in ancient Egyptian soceities]

2. City state urbanization vs. villages[most of mesopotamia and Greece were city states] Egyptian civlization is known as the civlization without cities. Most of Egypt was nothing more than village nomes.


3. Divine kingship and the rain maker king[almost absent in Mesopotamia and other Near-Eastern civlizations]


4. Egyptians forbade their priests from wearing sheep skin garments[we find this in Middle eastern and Asiatic countries but not in Egypt] Sinhue in his very own tales of Sinuhe relates how he would not like to be buried in sheep skin.


5. The absence of mummification and mortuary rites associated with it[Sumerians buried their dead underneath houses] I can show you remains of a elaborate mummified remains from the Sahara older than anything in Egypt.


6. Treat of women and Matrilineal desent[the Semetic cultures are patrilineal] Women in mediterranean soceity were subdorant to men. In African cultures women are not. Ancient Egyptian was no exception.


IP: Logged

Horemheb
Member

Posts: 882
Registered: Jan 2004

posted 21 January 2005 02:39 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Horemheb     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
All of that is not the point of the argument....IF it were all true that would not change the fact that from a geo-political point of view AE is a middle eastern africa. Even if AE was as African as the Zulus they would still historically face the middle east. That is the way the history played out ausar. Check the text i mantioned and others as well and you will get what I am trying to say.

IP: Logged

King_Scorpion
Member

Posts: 149
Registered: Jul 2004

posted 21 January 2005 02:44 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for King_Scorpion     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
You cannot use school textbooks as proof of the Kemetians. Not only is AE taught on a very small level, but it's still taught as a Middle Eastern civilization...ONLY because that's the status-quo. That doesn't make it right though. Now, you can learn the truth in numerous colleges where the curriculum is more open and free.

[This message has been edited by King_Scorpion (edited 21 January 2005).]

IP: Logged

supercar
Junior Member

Posts:
Registered:

posted 21 January 2005 02:53 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for supercar     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by King_Scorpion:
You cannot use school textbooks as proof of the AE. Not only is AE tuaght on a very small level, but it's still taught as a Middle Eatern civilization...ONLY because that's the status-quo. That doesn't make it right though. Now, you can learn the truth in numerous colleges where the curriculum is more open and free.

There is no such thing an ancient Middle Eastern history. Reactionary backward Eurocentric clowns come up with these terminologies. The problem with their mindset, is that they actually miss the fact that Middle East is just another geopolitical term that applies to both African and Asian countries. Mental hibernation has done more damage than good to these reactionary folks.

[This message has been edited by supercar (edited 21 January 2005).]

IP: Logged

rasol
Member

Posts: 2149
Registered: Jun 2004

posted 21 January 2005 03:00 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for rasol     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
All of that is not the point of the argument
There doesn't seem to be one.
As usual, when you don't like the answer to your question, you pretend it was not answered.

quote:
IF it were all true that would not change the fact that from a geo-political point of view AE is a middle eastern africa.

Here is something for you Professor. It comes from the Britanica, so you should find the source unobjectionable.

It is written at a very basic level, so you should understand it.

The Middle East -
The term was coined in 1900 and in its earliest uses designated the northern approaches to India from Iran to Tibet. The Middle East therefore occupied the area between the Near East, a term used to signify the Ottoman Empire and its successor states from Serbia to Iraq, and the Far East, consisting principally of China and Japan. Following the break up of the Ottoman Empire after World War I the term Near East declined in popularity (although it has never disappeared) and parts of its domain, namely the Arab Near East, came to be described in British official terminology as the Middle East. The Middle East thus began a journey westwards and was further enlarged during World War II when, in British political and military usage, the term came to signify more or less the area defined above. The Middle East was a wholly [European] strategic concept; countries and peoples were not grouped together because it was thought they had any cultural affinities one with another, but because outsiders, mainly the British, found it convenient to treat them as a bloc for their military and political purposes.

Now try to think about that Professor. No response is even being asked of you. Just quietly sit and think about it.

IP: Logged

Horemheb
Member

Posts: 882
Registered: Jan 2004

posted 21 January 2005 04:28 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Horemheb     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
ITS ABOUT TIME, at least 'King' can read and is aware of what i was trying to say...here is the point
1. I don't care whether you think it is right or wrong...AE is taught with the near east in history text
2. It doesn't matter whether you think AE is populated by blacks or Martians, its is still taught as a neareast subject
3. I don't care if you think that fact that its taught that way is regressive or not...its still taught that way. It will continue to be taught that way.

IP: Logged

supercar
Junior Member

Posts:
Registered:

posted 21 January 2005 06:22 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for supercar     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Horemheb:
ITS ABOUT TIME, at least 'King' can read and is aware of what i was trying to say...here is the point
1. I don't care whether you think it is right or wrong...AE is taught with the near east in history text
2. It doesn't matter whether you think AE is populated by blacks or Martians, its is still taught as a neareast subject
3. I don't care if you think that fact that its taught that way is regressive or not...its still taught that way. It will continue to be taught that way.

Poor thing: your mind is not in tune with reality. You have no regard for reality, and so why should it matter to you? You could be rescued, you know; it doesn't have to be this way. You now have yourself believing that people criticizing you, are actually being hypnotize by all this logic-free ranting. Hence your reference to King_scorpian.

Horemheb: You being the type who will never get the concept of the terminology of Middle Eastern/Near Eastern, as Rasol appropriately pointed out (which rational people realize isn't a euphemism for 'outside of Africa'), here is what the real world is doing about the Nile Valley as part of African studies, but reationary-backward sections of Eurocentrics have missed it, like you pointed out somewhere.:

Columbia university :http://www.columbia.edu/cu/lweb/indiv/africa/cuvl/AncEgypt.html

University of Pennsylvania:http://www.sas.upenn.edu/African_Studies/Country_Specific/Egypt.html

Berkley:http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/MRC/AfricanVid.html

University of Florida:http://www.clas.ufl.edu/users/aleslie/K_12Websites/K-12WebsiteList.html#EDUCATIONAL%20RESOURCES

Cornell University:http://www.library.cornell.edu/africana/guides/ancient.html

Boston University:http://www.bu.edu/africa/outreach/materials/videos/vidlevel/adult.html

Fordham University:http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/africa/africasbook.html

HistoryTeacher.nethttp://library.thinkquest.org/C002739/AfricaSite/1ancientcivilizations.htm

Ohio State University:http://www.coe.ohio-state.edu/mmerryfield/global_resources/modules/AfHAncient.htm

BBC:http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/africa/features/storyofafrica/index_section3.shtml...

I am sure the list would go on, but rational people will have already gotten the drift.


[This message has been edited by supercar (edited 21 January 2005).]

IP: Logged

Evil Euro
Member

Posts: 148
Registered: Jan 2005

posted 22 January 2005 07:12 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Evil Euro     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by rasol:
Your pure race caucasoids catagory now includes prognathesism, sickle cell anemia, dark skin, dark eyes, and curly black hair. Physical traits that falsify your hypothesis.

With the exception of sickle cell, which I've already explained to you, none of those traits are "non-white" or "non-European". Mediterranean types are documented in Europe as far back as the Upper Paleolithic period, having adapted all of said traits in situ long before the arrival of "recent African genes". Jelinek describes a set of European skulls from 25,000 years ago as "gracile dolichomorphic" and "practically typical Mediterranean" (Current Anthropology, Vol. 10, No. 5., Dec. 1969, pp. 475-503).

For the last time, Negro, my contention is that Southern Europeans are close to racially pure. By that I mean that they're more than 95% Caucasoid. They -- and Europeans in general -- may be genetically mixed (different haplogroups) and subracially mixed (different phenotypes), but their descent is almost purely Caucasoid. This has been established using autosomal DNA (see this study), which happens to be the best kind of DNA to analyze -- but I wouldn't expect you to know that. What it all proves is not that Southern Europeans are "100% pure", but that they don't have enough non-Caucasoid admixture to affect them from a racial standpoint. Get it, monkey?

quote:
Well according to Arredi and other molecular geneticists...you only have to go back as far as the Moorish conquest of Spain, because that's where much of your African DNA comes from. But, let me guess....she's in idiot too?

No, the only idiot here is you. I don't know what exactly you're referring to (no doubt some study you didn't understand), but all of the material I've seen on the subject shows that Spain was minimally affected by the Moorish occupation. Do some real research before opening your mouth and making a fool of yourself. I'll help you out:

http://www.angeltowns.com/members/racialreal/spaniards.html

And anyway, the Moors were fully Caucasoid (Arab-Berber):

http://www.angeltowns.com/members/racialreal/phoen_moors.html

quote:
I see we are once again in the business of providing elementary education for the geographically impared rejects from EuroDisneyLand:

"Ethiopia: Located in northeastern Africa, in an area known as the Horn of Africa...." (Encyclopedia Britannica)

"Ethiopia, located in the 'Horn of Africa', is not usually considered as part of Sub-Saharan Africa...." (Source)

Map Centre: Northeastern Africa

quote:
One of the nice things about the best of Sicily website is that it shows that some folks are ready to move the game on: [URL]http://www.bestofsicily.com/genetics.htm [/URL]

I already dealt with the methodological flaws of that website in another thread. Posting the link again only confirms that you're a fool who knows nothing about the field of population genetics.

[This message has been edited by Evil Euro (edited 22 January 2005).]

IP: Logged

rasol
Member

Posts: 2149
Registered: Jun 2004

posted 22 January 2005 08:10 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for rasol     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by rasol:
Your pure race caucasoids catagory now includes prognathesism, sickle cell anemia, dark skin, dark eyes, and curly black hair. Physical traits that falsify your hypothesis.

quote:
With the exception of sickle cell, which I've already explained
No you rationalise in order to remain in denial. That is not a form of 'explanation'.


quote:

in situ long before the arrival of "recent African genes".
...non European genes which by definition contradicts your fantasy of a Europe that is quote "racially pure".

quote:
Jelinek describes a set of European skulls from 25,000 years ago as "gracile dolichomorphic" and "practically typical Mediterranean"
Mediterranean is weasel word used to disguise the FACT of heterogenity in Europe.


quote:
my contention is that Southern Europeans are close to racially pure. By that I mean that they're more than 95% Caucasoid.
A far fetched concept that is not supported by modern genetics, not supported by modern physical anthropology, and asserted by method of dumb repettition of nonsense words, which seek, but fail to assuage their ethnophobic paranoia.

quote:

They -- and Europeans in general -- may be genetically mixed
LOL. Listen to him...MAY be. Can't even speak the obvious truth straight out. Classic ethnophobe in denial. When you learn to simply accept the facts of diversity and stop asserting race purity mantras that you know very well are specious, you will be less angry and frustrated, EuroDisney.

quote:
Well according to Arredi and other molecular geneticists...you only have to go back as far as the Moorish conquest of Spain, because that's where much of your African DNA comes from. But, let me guess....she's in idiot too?

quote:
No, the only idiot here is you. I don't know what exactly you're referring to
Which doesn't matter to you anyway, since you comment out of ethnophobia, in the abscense of all logic and reason.

quote:
but all of the material I've seen on the subject shows that Spain was minimally affected by the Moorish occupation.

I doubt it. Self deluding xenophobes hear only what they want to hear and ignore the facts even when plainly stated:

the proportion of haplogroup E chromosomes of African origin (E[xE3b], E-M35*, and E-M81) was <5% in three Spanish locations; 10.0% and 14.2% in northern and southern Portugal, respectively; and >40% in the Pasiegos (table 1). A relatively high frequency of E-M81 in a different sample of Pasiegos (18%) and non-Pasiegos Cantabrians (17%) has also recently been reported (Maca-Meyer et al. 2003). Such differences in the relative African contribution to the male gene pool of different Iberian populations may reflect, at least in part, the different durations of Islamic influence and introgression in different parts of the peninsula, as well as drift/founder effects for the small Pasiegos group.
Fulvio Cruciani,1 Roberta La Fratta, et al.

Imagine a EuroDisney reject, reading the above and concluding that the influence of the Moorish conquests in Southern Europe were 'minimal' and that Europeans therefore constitute a pure race.

EuroDisney: It's a small small (minded) 'world' (you live in), after all.

[This message has been edited by rasol (edited 22 January 2005).]

IP: Logged

King_Scorpion
Member

Posts: 149
Registered: Jul 2004

posted 22 January 2005 08:30 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for King_Scorpion     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
You know Evil, just from the simple fact that you're calling people Negro's and monkey's takes away all validity you MAY have had...which wasn't a lot anyway. Passionate beliefs can only go so far on this board. And you can stop with the Racial Real links too. That site supports some of the most out-dated and debunked nonsense on the internet. Aside from maybe Stormfront, but they probably get some of their info from there...like you. Evil, are you from the ol'Front? Why keep playing games with us, just come out and tell us your beliefs in the "Master Race."

IP: Logged

S.Mohammad
Member

Posts: 333
Registered: Apr 2004

posted 22 January 2005 10:23 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for S.Mohammad     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by King_Scorpion:
You know Evil, just from the simple fact that you're calling people Negro's and monkey's takes away all validity you MAY have had...which wasn't a lot anyway. Passionate beliefs can only go so far on this board. And you can stop with the Racial Real links too. That site supports some of the most out-dated and debunked nonsense on the internet. Aside from maybe Stormfront, but they probably get some of their info from there...like you. Evil, are you from the ol'Front? Why keep playing games with us, just come out and tell us your beliefs in the "Master Race."

racial reality is HIS website, he's the webmaster, no lie.

IP: Logged

rasol
Member

Posts: 2149
Registered: Jun 2004

posted 22 January 2005 10:48 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for rasol     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by S.Mohammad:
racial reality is HIS website, he's the webmaster, no lie.



In that case, you'd think he'd have better material.

Anyone who wants to try to convince people that Ethiopia is not in sub-saharan Africa is a 3rd rate distortion junkie of the most crude sort.

For such demagogues, fibbing is par for the course. Thus their approach to information is essentially - 'caveat emptor', let the buyer beware.

Perhaps he will next claim that Britain is 'often considered' part of the "Amazon Basin", therefore making the Inca civilisation Anglo Saxon Aryans.

How pathetic. I'm not impressed.

[This message has been edited by rasol (edited 22 January 2005).]

IP: Logged

supercar
Junior Member

Posts:
Registered:

posted 22 January 2005 09:18 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for supercar     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Come on, you intelligent folks can do better than this. The moment somebody makes uninformed remarks, in regards to elementary school geography, then it is clear that there is no need to go any further discussing bio-anthropological studies. Elementary geography is essential to these studies. For instance, informed folks know where the Sahara lies, and which countries lie on and beyond it. 12 year old kids can't miss this. If someone says that the horn of Africa is in the Sahara or above it, then again, there is no need to go further. It is pretty clear that such a person needs this elementary stuff first, before getting into deep bio-anthropological arguments. I mean think about, if Ethiopia is North Africa, that would make Senegal, Mali and the like, also North Africa...rational people know better.

For those who need elementary school education on geography; here are three African maps-one is about political boundaries, and the others are geological:


(courtesy of worldatlas)


(courtesy of EnchantedLearning)


(courtesy of calacademy)


This one (below) is a bonus for folks like Horemheb, who are lost about what "Middle East" means (ps-not a continent):

It is really sad that this board has boiled down to this. One would think that participants here will have familiarized themselves with this basic stuff long ago, before taking on educated folks on the more serious stuff.


IP: Logged

rasol
Member

Posts: 2149
Registered: Jun 2004

posted 22 January 2005 09:31 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for rasol     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Well, EuroDisney is a distortion junkie. He knows the geography but rearranges it to suit his ideology. In his next ridiculous post he will provide some lame excuse for his wild claims, complete with Arthor Kemp weblink showing Ethiopia and Egypt to be the location of Aryan Valhalla!

IP: Logged

rasol
Member

Posts: 2149
Registered: Jun 2004

posted 22 January 2005 09:39 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for rasol     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
More important thing is to understand 'why' ethnophobes like EuroDisney need to resort to such obvious geographic falsehood where East Africa is concerned. Will allow him to attempt to re-justify yet again though before moving the game on.

IP: Logged

alTakruri
Junior Member

Posts:
Registered:

posted 22 January 2005 11:31 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for alTakruri     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by rasol:
Well, EuroDisney is a distortion junkie. He knows the geography but rearranges it to suit his ideology. In his next ridiculous post he will provide some lame excuse for his wild claims, complete with Arthor Kemp weblink showing Ethiopia and Egypt to be the location of Aryan Valhalla!


Well, I think Deniakes and his various websites are actually
a N. Med reaction to Aryans who bar them from Valhalla. Instead
of being proud of the distinctive mindset and history of the sunny
Mediterranean their idea is to outwhite the Aryans thus their
contrived exaggerated antiblack attitides.

This way of thinking is also displayed by the Mulatto Movement who
blame hypodescent on the blacks rather than the whites, and the Amazigh
Activists who take great pains to disconnect themselves from all
other Africans excepting Egypt and claim all culture in West Africa
was derived from Imazighen from the neolithic to the Songhai empire.


[This message has been edited by alTakruri (edited 22 January 2005).]

IP: Logged

HERU
Member

Posts: 138
Registered: Dec 2004

posted 22 January 2005 11:45 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for HERU     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by supercar:

Columbia university :http://www.columbia.edu/cu/lweb/indiv/africa/cuvl/AncEgypt.html

University of Pennsylvania:http://www.sas.upenn.edu/African_Studies/Country_Specific/Egypt.html

Berkley:http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/MRC/AfricanVid.html

University of Florida:http://www.clas.ufl.edu/users/aleslie/K_12Websites/K-12WebsiteList.html#EDUCATIONAL%20RESOURCES

Cornell University:http://www.library.cornell.edu/africana/guides/ancient.html

Boston University:http://www.bu.edu/africa/outreach/materials/videos/vidlevel/adult.html

Fordham University:http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/africa/africasbook.html

HistoryTeacher.nethttp://library.thinkquest.org/C002739/AfricaSite/1ancientcivilizations.htm

Ohio State University:http://www.coe.ohio-state.edu/mmerryfield/global_resources/modules/AfHAncient.htm

BBC:http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/africa/features/storyofafrica/index_section3.shtml...

I am sure the list would go on, but rational people will have already gotten the drift.


I'm sorry LOL but ...

You officaly OWN Horemheb

IP: Logged

Thought2
Member

Posts: 978
Registered: May 2004

posted 23 January 2005 12:31 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Thought2     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by alTakruri:

Well, I think Deniakes and his various websites are actually
a N. Med reaction to Aryans who bar them from Valhalla. Instead
of being proud of the distinctive mindset and history of the sunny
Mediterranean their idea is to outwhite the Aryans thus their
contrived exaggerated antiblack attitides.[This message has been edited by alTakruri (edited 22 January 2005).]

Thought Writes:

Bingo. Here is a "Nordicist" response to the "Meds". These "purity" debates are comedy:
http://www.white-history.com/refuting_rm/7.html

"Also keep in mind, Greeks have 28% Near Eastern HG9 and 28% North African HG21. Much of this ancestry may date from the Neolithic, but it is curious that RM doesn't interpret this data to mean Greeks are 56% "Hamito-Semitic" and therefore very much less than "pure" European."

"The presence of Negroid or partially-Negroid types in Greece is confirmed by cranial evidence. J.L. Angel reports:

In my own skeletal samples from Greece I note apparent negroid nose and mouth traits in two of fourteen Early Neolithic (sixth millenium B.C.), only two or three more among 364 from fifth to second millenium B.C., one among 113 Early Iron Age, one or two among 233 Classic and Hellenistic skeletons, but four clear Negroids (all from one area of Early Christian Corinth) among ninety-five Roman period, two among eighty-five Medieval, and of course ten among fifty-two Turkish period Greeks, yet none among 202 of Romantic (nineteenth century) date."

"Considering the foregoing, it should come as no surprise that Richards et al. (2000) detected Ethiopian mtDNA haplogroup M1 in Greece. Additionally, sub-Saharan Y-chromosome haplogroup A (most common among Khoisians and Ethiopians) was found in an individual from Mitilini (Di Giacomo et al. in press). Other sub-Saharan haplogroups are found in Greece's neighbors. Note, Greece remains relatively little studied with respect to population genetics. The few relevant studies that have been done have fairly small sample sizes. It's too early to say much about levels of sub-Saharan mtDNA markers compared to other countries in Europe. In any event, exact levels of recent sub-Saharan mtDNA and Y-chromosome markers aren't all that relevant, since larger amounts of Negroid genes may have entered Greece via Negroid-admixed, E3b-carrying North African males.

E3b, the most common Y-chromosome haplogroup in Greece, "probably originated in eastern Africa" (Semino et al. 2004). It has been proposed that the most frequent E3b subclade in Greece, E-M78, which accounts for nearly half of Peloponnesian Y-chromosomes (Cruciani et al. 2004), originated in Somalia (Sanchez et al. 2003). Bearing in mind the above, it is perhaps not so surprising that the much maligned study "HLA Genes in Macedonians and the sub-Saharan Origin of the Greeks" independently reported a genetic connection between Ethiopians and Greeks (Arnaiz-Villena et al. 2001).

In addition to ancient admixture, some Negroid admixture may have accrued to Greece during Ottoman times. Buxton and Rice (1931) mention that "in Cyprus there is a greater proportion of platyrrhiny among the lower classes than in other social strata, but this is perhaps due to the importation of negro slaves by the Turks." Angel (1945) mentions a "Turkish period skeleton" from Athens, "which is unquestionably the remains of a Negroid individual, though possibly with very slight white admixture." Interestingly, 4.3% of Y-chromosomes in a sample of Turkish Cypriots are sub-Saharan (Cruciani et al. 2004; values for Greek Cypriots aren't reported)."


IP: Logged

King_Scorpion
Member

Posts: 149
Registered: Jul 2004

posted 23 January 2005 12:48 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for King_Scorpion     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
According to Angel, "Nordic-Iranians were tall and muscular, strong-necked, and probably included tawny-haired blue- or green-eyed blonds as well as brunets." Angel also mentions the "noteworthy resemblances" of this type "to Anglo-Saxons" and the partial "northwestern relations of this Greek type".

Modern Greeks are overwhelmingly dark-haired and rarely fair-skinned.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!These people crack me up. It's amazing what people can come up with....hey it's a creative imagination.

IP: Logged

Evil Euro
Member

Posts: 148
Registered: Jan 2005

posted 23 January 2005 08:13 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Evil Euro     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Evil Euro:
my contention is that Southern Europeans are close to racially pure. By that I mean that they're more than 95% Caucasoid.

quote:
Originally posted by rasol:
A far fetched concept that is not supported by modern genetics

Um, yes it is. Learn how to click on links and then read and understand page content. It's a very useful skill:

http://dienekes.ifreepages.com/blog/archives/000619.html

quote:
"Such differences in the relative African contribution to the male gene pool of different Iberian populations may reflect, at least in part, the different durations of Islamic influence and introgression"

The operative words being "may" and "in part". Further, Pasiegos form an isolated Moorish refuge -- i.e. they're subject to drift/founder effect and not representative of Spaniards.

quote:
I doubt it. Self deluding xenophobes hear only what they want to hear and ignore the facts even when plainly stated

You're talking about yourself there. Again, read (under "Genetics") these plainly stated facts about ethnic Spaniards:

http://www.angeltowns.com/members/racialreal/spaniards.html

And one more not to be missed:

http://racialreality.blogspot.com/2004/08/iberian-y-chromosomes.html

quote:
Mediterranean is weasel word used to disguise the FACT of heterogenity in Europe.

No. Mediterranean describes a European/Caucasoid phenotype, like Alpine, Dinaric, Baltic, Nordic etc. Such phenotypes were produced by environmental pressures and intermixing among Caucasoids. For example, Nordics are a hybrid of Paleolithic brunet Mediterraneans from Central Europe and depigmented East Baltics from Northern Europe. Genetically, however, they're nearly pure Caucasoid, like all of the other subraces.

IP: Logged

rasol
Member

Posts: 2149
Registered: Jun 2004

posted 23 January 2005 08:54 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for rasol     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Such differences in the relative African contribution to the male gene pool of different Iberian populations may reflect, at least in part, the different durations of Islamic influence and introgression"

quote:
EuroDisney writes:
"The operative words being "may" and "in part"

Actually the operative word for you is -> denial.

Originally posted by rasol:

quote:
[re: caucasiod race purity] A far fetched concept that is not supported by modern genetics.

quote:
EuroDisney writes: Um, yes it is. Learn how to click on links and then read and understand page content

Uhm, no it isn't, and once again, you better read your links carefully before citing them.....

quote:
from dienekes.com: Dienekes writes: PS: Of course the authors do not use "racial" terminology

NO. They don't do they. Of course not, because most molecular geneticists have rejected such nonsense as.....far fetched concepts and that is why Dienekes - THE FRAUD - inserts racial classifications himself, in order to generate the hilarious debate that ensues. You miss that, because as usual...you hear only what you want to hear.

Such is the art of self-delusion.

And this is why Dienekes and his website are regarded by bioanthropologists as an internet freak show.


Then again, perhaps your Dienekes-links are really meant to illustrate:

Thought Writes:
These "purity" debates are comedy:

If so, point taken.

[This message has been edited by rasol (edited 23 January 2005).]

IP: Logged

S.Mohammad
Member

Posts: 333
Registered: Apr 2004

posted 23 January 2005 09:13 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for S.Mohammad     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Evil Euro:
No. Mediterranean describes a European/Caucasoid phenotype, like Alpine, Dinaric, Baltic, Nordic etc. Such phenotypes were produced by environmental pressures and intermixing among Caucasoids. For example, Nordics are a hybrid of Paleolithic brunet Mediterraneans from Central Europe and depigmented East Baltics from Northern Europe. Genetically, however, they're nearly pure Caucasoid, like all of the other subraces.


There goes that idiot once again calling genes Caucasoid aftwer it has been proven that genes aren't Caucasoid or Negroid.

IP: Logged

rasol
Member

Posts: 2149
Registered: Jun 2004

posted 23 January 2005 09:52 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for rasol     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:

There goes that idiot once again calling genes Caucasoid aftwer it has been proven that genes aren't Caucasoid or Negroid.

Disinfecting Dienekes:

quote:

These findings conflict with popular notions of distinct and relatively homogeneous human races, and may also call into question the apparent usefulness of ethnic classification in, for example, medical diagnostics

These results suggest that, at random biallelic loci, there is little evidence, if any, of a clear subdivision of humans into biologically defined groups.


- Patterns of Human Diversity, within and among Continents, Inferred from Biallelic DNA Polymorphisms {
Chiara Romualdi, David Balding, et al} - Italian scientific journal


IP: Logged

EGyPT2005
Member

Posts: 106
Registered: Aug 2004

posted 23 January 2005 10:11 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for EGyPT2005     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Roy_2k5:
Evil Euro:
The early Mediterraneans are not white, but instead black skinned people with straight hair. They may look "Caucasoid"-like, but they do NOT originate from Caucasus. Their ancestor did come from East Africa, just like everyone of us, but they did not have any Caucasian ancestry.

This would explain why, an old acquaintance of mine looks and appears the way he does.......

As you can see from the picture above, he is a model. But, when we first met, I noticed he had an accent.

So when I asked him where he was from, I was astonished at his reply. He said he was from Sicily, and migrated here to the states when he was 15.

He also told me, he gets mistaken for being black(African-American) all the time. He also stated to me that he does not like being referred to as black.

So when I asked him, what does he prefer to be referred to as? He simply replied back saying "Sicilian"

All I could say at the time was "Interesting to say the least!"

[This message has been edited by EGyPT2005 (edited 23 January 2005).]

IP: Logged

Thought2
Member

Posts: 978
Registered: May 2004

posted 23 January 2005 11:11 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Thought2     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by rasol:
And this is why Dienekes and his website are regarded by bioanthropologists as an internet freak show.[This message has been edited by rasol (edited 23 January 2005).]

Thought Writes:

Exactly!

IP: Logged

Roy_2k5
Member

Posts: 144
Registered: Jan 2005

posted 23 January 2005 02:03 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Roy_2k5     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by S.Mohammad:

There goes that idiot once again calling genes Caucasoid aftwer it has been proven that genes aren't Caucasoid or Negroid.

Dispelling Fallacy:

"We know that some anthropologists tried to identify the Dravidians with what is known as “the Mediterranean race’. Such a general label which conceals gaps in our knowledge of anthropology is indeed confusing"

Truth:
"Consequently, it might have been less ambiguous, as some experts have done, to call that Mediterranean race the “Negroid race” , since its characteristics are precisely those of the blacks in general: an elongated skull, dark or brown skin, these two adjectives being quite often euphemisms for ‘black’. I refer you to [u]Alexander Moret’s[/u] description of the ancient Mediterraneans. This is the place to mention once again the fact that the ancient Greeks did not label as white the former inhabitants of North-West Africa, that is to say, of the present Magreb_Morocco, Algeria and Tunisia -- since they called the inhabitants Mauroi or ‘moors’, meaning men with ‘ a dark skin’. And Herodotus tells us that the Colchidians, a Middle East people, were as ‘Black as Egyptians”"


Dr. K.P. Aravanan
Vice Chancellor
Manonmaniam Sundaranar University
Tirunelveli, Tamil Nadu

[This message has been edited by Roy_2k5 (edited 23 January 2005).]

[This message has been edited by Roy_2k5 (edited 23 January 2005).]

IP: Logged


This topic is 9 pages long:   1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9 

All times are GMT (+2)

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Administrative Options: Close Topic | Archive/Move | Delete Topic
Post New Topic  Post A Reply
Hop to:

Contact Us | EgyptSearch!

(c) 2003 EgyptSearch.com

Powered by Infopop www.infopop.com © 2000
Ultimate Bulletin Board 5.45c