I see alot of "anglo-saxons" aka celtic iberians both here in Australia and in the US who are fascinated by egypt and equally roman and greek culture but take almost no interest in the culture of their forebearers?
With the exception of of a few new age types? and some interested in the la tene celtic culture of europe - noone appears to pay mind to the curious celts of the british isles.I personally am fascinated with it.
Australia is overwhelmingly anglo-saxon but there is not a single dept in "celtic history" its greece/rome/egypt across the country.... I must ask "wasp america and australia and canada etc" why are your ancestors at the sidelines?
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
^^^Because Celts were Black people - put down your high school history book and read an anthropology book.
BBC - Sunday, 30 June, 2002, 15:31 GMT 16:31 UK English and Welsh are races apart
Gene scientists claim to have found proof that the Welsh are the "true" Britons. The research supports the idea that Celtic Britain underwent a form of ethnic cleansing by Anglo-Saxons invaders following the Roman withdrawal in the fifth century. It suggests that between 50% and 100% of the indigenous population of what was to become England was wiped out, with Offa's Dyke acting as a "genetic barrier" protecting those on the Welsh side. And the upheaval can be traced to this day through genetic differences between the English and the Welsh.
Academics at University College in London comparing a sample of men from the UK with those from an area of the Netherlands where the Anglo-Saxons are thought to have originated found the English subjects had genes that were almost identical. But there were clear differences between the genetic make-up of Welsh people studied. The research team studied the Y-chromosome, which is passed almost unchanged from father to son, and looked for certain genetic markers. They chose seven market towns mentioned in the Domesday Book of 1086 and studied 313 male volunteers whose paternal grandfather had also lived in the area. They then compared this with samples from Norway and with Friesland, now a northern province of the Netherlands. The English and Frisians studied had almost identical genetic make-up but the English and Welsh were very different.
The researchers concluded the most likely explanation for this was a large-scale Anglo-Saxon invasion, which devastated the Celtic population of England, but did not reach Wales. Dr Mark Thomas, of the Centre for Genetic Anthropology at UCL, said their findings suggested that a migration occurred within the last 2,500 years. It reinforced the idea that the Welsh were the true indigenous Britons. In April last year, research for a BBC programme on the Vikings revealed strong genetic links between the Welsh and Irish Celts and the Basques of northern Spain and south France. It suggested a possible link between the Celts and Basques, dating back tens of thousands of years. The UCL research into the more recent Anglo-Saxon period suggested a migration on a huge scale. "It appears England is made up of an ethnic cleansing event from people coming across from the continent after the Romans left," he said.
Archaeologists after the Second World War rejected the traditionally held view that an Anglo-Saxon invasion pushed the indigenous Celtic Britons to the fringes of Britain. Instead, they said the arrival of Anglo-Saxon culture could have come from trade or a small ruling elite. But the latest research by the UCL team, "using genetics as a history book", appears to support the original view of a large-scale invasion of England. It suggests that the Welsh border was more of a genetic barrier to the Anglo-Saxon Y chromosome gene flow than the North Sea. Dr Thomas added: "Our findings completely overturn the modern view of the origins of the English."
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
humanityiloveyou - You are however correct in one respect: There is VERY little research into the original civilizations of southwestern Europe (these people spread north). The research situation is so pathetic that this is the ONLY known AUTHENTIC image of an ancient Celt/Gaul.
Posted by Tyrann0saurus (Member # 3735) on :
quote:Originally posted by humanityiloveyou: I see alot of "anglo-saxons" aka celtic iberians both here in Australia and in the US who are fascinated by egypt and equally roman and greek culture but take almost no interest in the culture of their forebearers?
With the exception of of a few new age types? and some interested in the la tene celtic culture of europe - noone appears to pay mind to the curious celts of the british isles.I personally am fascinated with it.
Australia is overwhelmingly anglo-saxon but there is not a single dept in "celtic history" its greece/rome/egypt across the country.... I must ask "wasp america and australia and canada etc" why are your ancestors at the sidelines?
That's probably because Greeks and Romans are seen as "civilized" whereas the Celtic and Germanic people they conquered or tried to conquer were "barbarians". It is ironic, in a way, given these peoples were arguably whiter than the Greco-Romans.
You do have some interest in Germanic mythology; Beowulf (fine reading if you can plow through the archaic prose) is required reading in high schools all over the Anglophone world. The Celts, too, have their fans; has anyone heard of the Asterix comics? They're hilarious, and they've got Celts sticking it up to the Romans.
Posted by Johnny Blaze (Member # 13931) on :
Cool 411, thank.
Posted by Jari-Ankhamun (Member # 14451) on :
quote:Originally posted by humanityiloveyou: I see alot of "anglo-saxons" aka celtic iberians both here in Australia and in the US who are fascinated by egypt and equally roman and greek culture but take almost no interest in the culture of their forebearers?
With the exception of of a few new age types? and some interested in the la tene celtic culture of europe - noone appears to pay mind to the curious celts of the british isles.I personally am fascinated with it.
Australia is overwhelmingly anglo-saxon but there is not a single dept in "celtic history" its greece/rome/egypt across the country.... I must ask "wasp america and australia and canada etc" why are your ancestors at the sidelines?
The point you bring up is very valid, the thing is in Western civilization.....if you didnt live in Grand Stone or Marble buildings.....Create your own philosophy...ect then you are somehow....Inferior or uncivil......White Supremist many of which decend from ancestors....who really played a VERY SMALL role in the ancient world(they DID play a Magnificent and uniqe role) are quick to throw the Greeks and Romans as sign of Supremacey from a people who Killed, Masucured, enslaved, slandered, raped...and HATED their ancestors...many white American would be hard pressed to even KNOW that the ancient celtic, La Tiene and Galatians are the TRUE ancestors. Also many white Americans that DO take pride in their true culture will be hard pressed to know of the achievments, social structure, knowledge their ancestors produced and contributed to the ancient world....places such as the Ancient site of Sakara Brea or the Irish Manuscripts that preserved Roman litereature....etc.
On the flip side how many African Americans actually take pride in their West African ancestors instead of the Ancient Egyptians and Nubians. How many African Americans know about Muhammed Askia Toure, Mansu Musa, Sundijiata, Sonni Ali, or Jenne Jenno or Timbuctou...THE REAL TIMBUCTOU...
How many African Americans think Mathmatics is a white mans thing when during the Golden Era of Songhai the Mathmatics being taught in Jenno was far advanced than anything in Europe(other than the few Spainish nations that didnt rid themselves of Islamic Scence and math.)....or how many African Americans know that their ancestors produced Iron and Brone, Produced cities built of stone, straw, stucco...ect.
I have never seen on Afrocentric book on West African achievements....
Also the very few (good) books that are on celtic or scandanavian cultures are from Europe....The ones I own are great.....Its funny becuase one writer in the celtic book says in the book.."Imagine if the Celts are destoyed Rome...We would be using a "Celtic Script"...or something like that...LOL...WHAT CELTIC SCRIPT....The ROMANS GAVE the celts their script...The other guy on the scandanavians is like...Yeah they didnt write their own language...SO WHAT!!!! LOL....its kinda funny...Sort of an inferioty complex I guess....Like your a savage if you didnt "Invent" a written script...LOL. Hell Im GLAD 100 percent the Malians and Song Hai adopted the Arabic script.
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
Actually, the history of West African kingdoms IS part of many good books on African history and it is definitely part of the Afrocentric curriculum or African Studies curriculum in University. The CONFUSION here is one where African historians are equated with WHITE historians as EQUALLY motivated by racism. WRONG. The thread title hits the nail right on the head, because WHITES are the ones trying to identify with something that THEIR ancestors had nothing to do with. They PURPOSELY distort the history of many parts of the world BECAUSE they know their ancestors had VERY LITTLE to do with it. And ALL of it is in support of the nationalist racist agenda of white supremacy. Therefore, Africans can NEVER be on the same level of whites who have been raping, killing, destroying and LYING about almost EVERY black civilization they have come across in the last 500 years. White historians have distorted ALL African history, not JUST that of the Nile Valley. This includes East Africa, West Africa, the Sahara, Central Africa and South Africa. And it is BECAUSE of this that African scholars are waging an ONGOING battle to correct the history of ALL of Africa, not just Egypt. It is also because of this that LITTLE of Africa's TRUE history PRIOR to the arrival of Europeans is really known. Africans were NOT living in poverty and squalor, unable to figure out how to put FOOD in their mouths before Europeans came. In many cases, the way Africans lived PRIOR to the arrival of Europeans is QUITE DIFFERENT from the way they lived AFTER Europeans. THIS is what the historians are trying to uncover and this is precisely what the Europeans are TRYING TO HIDE.
By now, you should understand that Europeans are on a QUEST to make a history for themselves that has NO BASIS in reality and is ALL based on their SICK concept of might makes right, which allows them to TAKE history and MAKE it what they want, regardless of whether or not it is THEIRS or not.
Europeans, being the BIGGEST THIEVES, murderers, racists, warmongers, savages and rapists ON THE PLANET, want NOTHING LESS than to be worshipped as GOD'S gift to mankind. THAT is the whole purpose of their PROPAGANDA machine, which CONSTANTLY bombards you with how GOOD white civilization is how it is built on VALUES and how those VALUES make them RIGHTEOUS and WORTHY of all the things they have acquired. But in reality WE ALL KNOW that the VALUES that got them where they are ARE NOT GOOD in ANY SENSE of the term. In fact, MOST blacks are simply CAUGHT UP in trying to LIVE the fantasy of a BETTER LIFE as promised by white propaganda and some REFUSE to see ANYTHING different even when it has a FOOT square in their *sses.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by Tyrann0saurus:
quote:Originally posted by humanityiloveyou: I see alot of "anglo-saxons" aka celtic iberians both here in Australia and in the US who are fascinated by egypt and equally roman and greek culture but take almost no interest in the culture of their forebearers?
With the exception of of a few new age types? and some interested in the la tene celtic culture of europe - noone appears to pay mind to the curious celts of the british isles.I personally am fascinated with it.
Australia is overwhelmingly anglo-saxon but there is not a single dept in "celtic history" its greece/rome/egypt across the country.... I must ask "wasp america and australia and canada etc" why are your ancestors at the sidelines?
That's probably because Greeks and Romans are seen as "civilized" whereas the Celtic and Germanic people they conquered or tried to conquer were "barbarians". It is ironic, in a way, given these peoples were arguably whiter than the Greco-Romans.
You do have some interest in Germanic mythology; Beowulf (fine reading if you can plow through the archaic prose) is required reading in high schools all over the Anglophone world. The Celts, too, have their fans; has anyone heard of the Asterix comics? They're hilarious, and they've got Celts sticking it up to the Romans.
T-rex provided the very answer to the topic question. It is precisely because of Eurocentric doctrines that those of Northwestern European descent take no pride in their true historical heritage. This is moreso true for those of the colonial descendants of North America and Australia than for peoples of Northwest Europe proper where pride in their heritage is much stronger. For example, another great original Germanic work is the saga Nibelungenlied or the 'Song of the Nibelungs' one story of which is the 'Ring Saga' from which J.R.R. Tolkien's Lord of the Rings is based on. A similar saga among the Celtic people would be the Ulster Cycle of Ireland and the hero epic Finn McCuhl. Obviously these epics have as much influence today as Greek works like the Iliad and Odessy, as can be seen in Tolkien's work, but stories alone are just the tip of the ice berg when it comes to the contributions of these so-called 'barbarians' who were the direct ancestors of most colonial Westerners today.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jari-Ankhamun: The point you bring up is very valid, the thing is in Western civilization.....if you didnt live in Grand Stone or Marble buildings.....Create your own philosophy...ect then you are somehow....Inferior or uncivil......White Supremist many of which decend from ancestors....who really played a VERY SMALL role in the ancient world(they DID play a Magnificent and uniqe role) are quick to throw the Greeks and Romans as sign of Supremacey from a people who Killed, Masucured, enslaved, slandered, raped...and HATED their ancestors...many white American would be hard pressed to even KNOW that the ancient celtic, La Tiene and Galatians are the TRUE ancestors. Also many white Americans that DO take pride in their true culture will be hard pressed to know of the achievments, social structure, knowledge their ancestors produced and contributed to the ancient world....places such as the Ancient site of Sakara Brea or the Irish Manuscripts that preserved Roman litereature....etc.
The problem is how does living in grand stone or marble structures necessarily correlate with developing philosophy?? Is not philosophic thought based soley on the works of the mind and intellectual inquiry and conjecture alone?? Certainly the Celts and Germanic peoples had philosophies of thier own, why discount them because they were not as 'urban' as their Mediterranean counterparts. Again this goes back to Eurocentric Doctrines 2-4:
#2 TECHNOLOGICAL CALIBRATION DOCTRINE: Insists on forcing archaeological finds as well as living cultures into a grid of "development" based on whether tools, materials and techniques valued by "Western" scholars were in use. Example: "They were a stone age civilization who never discovered the wheel!" This model forces cultures into a progressional paradigm: Old and New Stone Ages, Bronze Age, Iron Age, Industrial Revolution, Space Age. This classification ignores the complexity of culture, and the fact that metallurgic technology and military might are not the ultimate measure of advanced culture.
#3 STAGES OF DEVELOPMENT DOCTRINE: The assumption that "primitive" cultures represent lower "stages" in historical evolution, and have yet to attain advanced forms of culture. One English scholar referred to "the child-races of Africa." Usually, social hierarchy, militarization and industrialization are taken as prime measures of "advanced" civilization. In the 19th century, scholars openly used the terms "savage," "barbarian," "civilized." Though these offensive words have (mostly) been dropped, the underlying assumptions are still quite influential. (For a good discussion of how the insistence on talking about "tribes" distorts African history, see http://www.africaaction.org/bp/ethall.htm.)
#4 SPREAD OF CIVILIZATION DOCTRINE: Credits all achievements to conquering empires, assuming their superiority in science, technology, and government. Adherents are usually incapable of perceiving advanced earth-friendly systems of land management, agronomy, medicine, collective social welfare networks, healing, astronomical knowledge, or profound philosophical traditions among peoples considered "primitive" by dominant "Western" standards.
quote:On the flip side how many African Americans actually take pride in their West African ancestors instead of the Ancient Egyptians and Nubians. How many African Americans know about Muhammed Askia Toure, Mansu Musa, Sundijiata, Sonni Ali, or Jenne Jenno or Timbuctou...THE REAL TIMBUCTOU...
How many African Americans think Mathmatics is a white mans thing when during the Golden Era of Songhai the Mathmatics being taught in Jenno was far advanced than anything in Europe(other than the few Spainish nations that didnt rid themselves of Islamic Scence and math.)....or how many African Americans know that their ancestors produced Iron and Brone, Produced cities built of stone, straw, stucco...ect.
I have never seen on Afrocentric book on West African achievements....
Also the very few (good) books that are on celtic or scandanavian cultures are from Europe....The ones I own are great.....Its funny becuase one writer in the celtic book says in the book.."Imagine if the Celts are destoyed Rome...We would be using a "Celtic Script"...or something like that...LOL...WHAT CELTIC SCRIPT....The ROMANS GAVE the celts their script...The other guy on the scandanavians is like...Yeah they didnt write their own language...SO WHAT!!!! LOL....its kinda funny...Sort of an inferioty complex I guess....Like your a savage if you didnt "Invent" a written script...LOL. Hell Im GLAD 100 percent the Malians and Song Hai adopted the Arabic script.
Unfortunately the answer is that simply many African Americans have unwittingly inherited these very same Eurocentric doctrines.
By the way, Malians, Songhai, and other West African civilizations have actually developed their own scripts.
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
Actually, these "models" of civilization are a farce when considering that ALL models of civil-ization originate outside of Europe. The model of UN CIVIL ization, justified by the so-called Greek 'philosophy' of might makes right is not. That is not civilization that is barbarism.
Bottom line, modes of human existence are based on culture. The ONLY thing that man needs to live on this planet is air, water and the fruits of the earth. EVERYTHING else is culture, in terms of HOW you relate to one another, the planet and the universe. THAT is what determines how you USE the earth and its resources. But in terms of the MOST successful lifestyle EVER LIVED by mankind, it is the HUNTER GATHERER. Hominids lived for hundreds of thousands, if not MILLIONS (counting cro-magnons, neanderthals and all the other pre HSS hominids) of years QUITE successfully, by simply being hunter gatherers and simple pastoralists. The CONCEIT of modern civilization is that it is the BEST and MOST SUCCESSFUL mode of living, when it is not. The MOST successful is that which lasts the LONGEST and by ANY measure, man has been living as a hunter gatherer for MOST of his existence on this planet. And this mode of living or survival strategy worked QUITE WELL, considering that it allowed man to populate the four corners of the earth, from the desert to the mountains, from the seas to the arctic, ALL without the benefit of computers, hi tech industries and everything else that we feel we "need" to live today.
Posted by Clyde Winters (Member # 10129) on :
quote: On the flip side how many African Americans actually take pride in their West African ancestors instead of the Ancient Egyptians and Nubians. How many African Americans know about Muhammed Askia Toure, Mansu Musa, Sundijiata, Sonni Ali, or Jenne Jenno or Timbuctou...THE REAL TIMBUCTOU...
The West African kingdoms are part of the curriculum for 6th Grade (World History) courses around the U.S.
As early as the 1930's, Carter G. Woodson made the West African kingdoms part of his history text. Since then, the West African kingdoms have been included in any text dealing with Afro-American history.
Any AA that took Black History since the 1930's knew about the West African kingdoms.
.
Posted by Jari-Ankhamun (Member # 14451) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
quote:Originally posted by Jari-Ankhamun: The point you bring up is very valid, the thing is in Western civilization.....if you didnt live in Grand Stone or Marble buildings.....Create your own philosophy...ect then you are somehow....Inferior or uncivil......White Supremist many of which decend from ancestors....who really played a VERY SMALL role in the ancient world(they DID play a Magnificent and uniqe role) are quick to throw the Greeks and Romans as sign of Supremacey from a people who Killed, Masucured, enslaved, slandered, raped...and HATED their ancestors...many white American would be hard pressed to even KNOW that the ancient celtic, La Tiene and Galatians are the TRUE ancestors. Also many white Americans that DO take pride in their true culture will be hard pressed to know of the achievments, social structure, knowledge their ancestors produced and contributed to the ancient world....places such as the Ancient site of Sakara Brea or the Irish Manuscripts that preserved Roman litereature....etc.
The problem is how does living in grand stone or marble structures necessarily correlate with developing philosophy?? Is not philosophic thought based soley on the works of the mind and intellectual inquiry and conjecture alone?? Certainly the Celts and Germanic peoples had philosophies of thier own, why discount them because they were not as 'urban' as their Mediterranean counterparts. Again this goes back to Eurocentric Doctrines 2-4:
#2 TECHNOLOGICAL CALIBRATION DOCTRINE: Insists on forcing archaeological finds as well as living cultures into a grid of "development" based on whether tools, materials and techniques valued by "Western" scholars were in use. Example: "They were a stone age civilization who never discovered the wheel!" This model forces cultures into a progressional paradigm: Old and New Stone Ages, Bronze Age, Iron Age, Industrial Revolution, Space Age. This classification ignores the complexity of culture, and the fact that metallurgic technology and military might are not the ultimate measure of advanced culture.
#3 STAGES OF DEVELOPMENT DOCTRINE: The assumption that "primitive" cultures represent lower "stages" in historical evolution, and have yet to attain advanced forms of culture. One English scholar referred to "the child-races of Africa." Usually, social hierarchy, militarization and industrialization are taken as prime measures of "advanced" civilization. In the 19th century, scholars openly used the terms "savage," "barbarian," "civilized." Though these offensive words have (mostly) been dropped, the underlying assumptions are still quite influential. (For a good discussion of how the insistence on talking about "tribes" distorts African history, see http://www.africaaction.org/bp/ethall.htm.)
#4 SPREAD OF CIVILIZATION DOCTRINE: Credits all achievements to conquering empires, assuming their superiority in science, technology, and government. Adherents are usually incapable of perceiving advanced earth-friendly systems of land management, agronomy, medicine, collective social welfare networks, healing, astronomical knowledge, or profound philosophical traditions among peoples considered "primitive" by dominant "Western" standards.
quote:On the flip side how many African Americans actually take pride in their West African ancestors instead of the Ancient Egyptians and Nubians. How many African Americans know about Muhammed Askia Toure, Mansu Musa, Sundijiata, Sonni Ali, or Jenne Jenno or Timbuctou...THE REAL TIMBUCTOU...
How many African Americans think Mathmatics is a white mans thing when during the Golden Era of Songhai the Mathmatics being taught in Jenno was far advanced than anything in Europe(other than the few Spainish nations that didnt rid themselves of Islamic Scence and math.)....or how many African Americans know that their ancestors produced Iron and Brone, Produced cities built of stone, straw, stucco...ect.
I have never seen on Afrocentric book on West African achievements....
Also the very few (good) books that are on celtic or scandanavian cultures are from Europe....The ones I own are great.....Its funny becuase one writer in the celtic book says in the book.."Imagine if the Celts are destoyed Rome...We would be using a "Celtic Script"...or something like that...LOL...WHAT CELTIC SCRIPT....The ROMANS GAVE the celts their script...The other guy on the scandanavians is like...Yeah they didnt write their own language...SO WHAT!!!! LOL....its kinda funny...Sort of an inferioty complex I guess....Like your a savage if you didnt "Invent" a written script...LOL. Hell Im GLAD 100 percent the Malians and Song Hai adopted the Arabic script.
Unfortunately the answer is that simply many African Americans have unwittingly inherited these very same Eurocentric doctrines.
By the way, Malians, Songhai, and other West African civilizations have actually developed their own scripts.
Its amazing how Eurocentrism has totally distorted history to the point where their very own ancestors are ignored. As someone mentioned the only whites that take pride in indigenous Nordic Achievements such as the tales of Finn McChaul(a story I have read) and other Scandinavian Sagas which if you read some of the earliest which mainly date from the Christian period in Scandinavia make no or little references to Greece or Rome...or to some supreme white race..
I doubt that the ancient Nordics were racist.
As far as white supremacy goes...Its a very illogical doctrine due to the fact that so much of western civilization is based on Eastern and African achievements where 80 percent of the achievers were non whites or "Arab" or people that practice a religion (Islam) that even presidential candidate Barack Obama has to distance himself from shows how people view Muslims as Barbaric in the West. The fact that people actually believe in such Foolishness as a Supreme race is beyond me....
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ That's because Eurocentricism itself is one gigantic propaganda machine perpetuated by those in cultural power to maintain their power. It comes to show that Eurocentrism not only hurts non-European peoples but even Europeans themselves!
Finn McChul by the way, is an Irish epic. I have read many stories and know many things about Celtic and Norse peoples than most Euro-Americans have even heard, and I'm not even white! Ain't that said. Posted by Tyrann0saurus (Member # 3735) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: By the way, Malians, Songhai, and other West African civilizations have actually developed their own scripts.
Could you please cite a source for this? My impression what they used the Arabic script as well as an oral tradition.
BTW, writing, while certainly useful, is not essential to a civilization. Andean civilization in South America got on perfectly fine without writing.
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
quote:Originally posted by Tyrann0saurus:
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: By the way, Malians, Songhai, and other West African civilizations have actually developed their own scripts.
Could you please cite a source for this? My impression what they used the Arabic script as well as an oral tradition.
BTW, writing, while certainly useful, is not essential to a civilization. Andean civilization in South America got on perfectly fine without writing.
South American civilizations are not a good example, because of the fact that they built monumental structures BEFORE they learned to make Pottery. This suggests that elements of their civilization were borrowed.
Posted by Explorateur (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by Doug M:
By now, you should understand that Europeans are on a QUEST to make a history for themselves that has NO BASIS in reality and is ALL based on their SICK concept of might makes right, which allows them to TAKE history and MAKE it what they want, regardless of whether or not it is THEIRS or not.
Which is what drives this fanatically-Eurocentric fellow to say something like this in an earlier discussion:
Doesn't matter what you give a hoot about, you are not important. Fact is, it is taught as a near eastern society whether you like it or not. - Horemheb
----------------------------------------- On the flip side how many African Americans actually take pride in their West African ancestors instead of the Ancient Egyptians and Nubians. -----------------------------------------
And why shouldn't AAs take pride in Ancient Egyptians and the so called "Nubians"?
You're not much of a scholar aren't you? Because anyone with minimal intellect and research abilities knows that AA ancestry comprises of northern, southern, eastern, and western Africans.
Just a word of advice. You shouldn't put on display an intellect, mentality, or dogma that gives people the impression that you are on the lower level of the intellectual spectrum.
Posted by argyle104 (Member # 14634) on :
Posted by argyle104 (Member # 14634) on :
Posted by Jari-Ankhamun (Member # 14451) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ That's because Eurocentricism itself is one gigantic propaganda machine perpetuated by those in cultural power to maintain their power. It comes to show that Eurocentrism not only hurts non-European peoples but even Europeans themselves!
Finn McChul by the way, is an Irish epic. I have read many stories and know many things about Celtic and Norse peoples than most Euro-Americans have even heard, and I'm not even white! Ain't that said.
I have a book that is a collection of Norse, Classic, and Celtic myths so I tend to blend the civlizations over. The Norse and Celts were no fools they had indiginous cultures that are worth mentioning the sad thing is they scholars always try to compare the culture o Northern Europe to that of Greece, Egypt, or Rome...Civlizations which ooutshine them. Like I said inferiority complex.
Posted by Jari-Ankhamun (Member # 14451) on :
quote:Originally posted by argyle104: Jari-Ankhamun wrote:
First off, what AA do or take pride in is not of my concern, My stance is valid becuase I don't decend from Egyptians or Nubian...I as most AA decend from a west African ancestor. I take full pride in Egyptian Nilotic culture but I take MORE pride in the Achivements of Mali and songhai...Two cultures majority of AA don't even know about.
As far as showing Intellect, I can assure you Intellegence and the likes of you don't mix. If you did have even a shred of the intellegence I had you would be on here being productive rather than being the bigges cock sucking fag on this site....
To tell you the truth you bore me, until a few moments ago I had no clue of your existance on this site due to the vast amount of non sense you must spew out of your filthy nut sucking mouth. Unlike Djhuti, Alive, Al Tukruri..ect your not very intellegent and it shows dude....
Yeah its pathetic....
So the next time you decide to waste my time boy, realise no one really likes you...and no one really cares or even reads what your retarded arse types(Unless your talking your usual troll B.****)
So please realize the difference between a Man, and a person typing idle threats behind a computer screen on the internet....
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by Tyrann0saurus: Could you please cite a source for this? My impression what they used the Arabic script as well as an oral tradition.
I have read a couple of books on it before and unfortunately despite my searching for the past couple of days I could not find any sources online. What I do know is that before Arabic, the Songhai people used the Berber script Tifinagh, but recent archaeological excavations have revealed that in the tombs of the first dynasties there seemed to have been some form of pictographic or hieroglyphic script that is of course untranslated.
quote:BTW, writing, while certainly useful, is not essential to a civilization. Andean civilization in South America got on perfectly fine without writing.
Of course you don't need to write to build things, but the ancient Andeans did have other alternative forms of mass communication besides writing as seen here.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jari-Ankhamun: First off, what AA do or take pride in is not of my concern, My stance is valid becuase I don't decend from Egyptians or Nubian...I as most AA decend from a west African ancestor. I take full pride in Egyptian Nilotic culture but I take MORE pride in the Achivements of Mali and songhai...Two cultures majority of AA don't even know about.
He does not even know what he's talking about over 90% of the time. For example, he just said the ancestors of AAs come from all over the African continent when in fact the vast majority of African American ancestry is from West and Central Africa, with a some from Southern Africa and only relatively few from Eastern or Northern Africa per historical documentation as well as recent genetic studies, but I forgot he doesn't believe in such valid studies.
Indeed. I fail to understand why a white british boy would be so consumed over AAs and their issues! He talks like he is somehow the spokesperson of African Americans or something when he is just a nasty degenerate white male brit.
quote:As far as showing Intellect, I can assure you Intellegence and the likes of you don't mix. If you did have even a shred of the intellegence I had you would be on here being productive rather than being the bigges cock sucking fag on this site....
To tell you the truth you bore me, until a few moments ago I had no clue of your existance on this site due to the vast amount of non sense you must spew out of your filthy nut sucking mouth. Unlike Djhuti, Alive, Al Tukruri..ect your not very intellegent and it shows dude....
Yeah its pathetic....
Indeed, yet the fool still lingers around this forum like a bad odor along with the rest of his boyfriends-- Akobago (gay nazi) and Xyzboy.
quote:So the next time you decide to waste my time boy, realise no one really likes you...and no one really cares or even reads what your retarded arse types(Unless your talking your usual troll B.****)
So please realize the difference between a Man, and a person typing idle threats behind a computer screen on the internet....
Good luck with that Jari! LOL Posted by Charlie Bass (Member # 10328) on :
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
quote: On the flip side how many African Americans actually take pride in their West African ancestors instead of the Ancient Egyptians and Nubians. How many African Americans know about Muhammed Askia Toure, Mansu Musa, Sundijiata, Sonni Ali, or Jenne Jenno or Timbuctou...THE REAL TIMBUCTOU...
The West African kingdoms are part of the curriculum for 6th Grade (World History) courses around the U.S.
As early as the 1930's, Carter G. Woodson made the West African kingdoms part of his history text. Since then, the West African kingdoms have been included in any text dealing with Afro-American history.
Any AA that took Black History since the 1930's knew about the West African kingdoms.
.
Co-signs. Even here in the Mississippi Delta rural area of Mississippi students know about the West African kingdoms, but of course this took years to incorporate into the curriculum.
Posted by argyle104 (Member # 14634) on :
Jari-Ankhamun wrote:
quote: First off, what AA do or take pride in is not of my concern
If that's so then why did you previously write:
quote: On the flip side how many African Americans actually take pride in their West African ancestors instead of the Ancient Egyptians and Nubians.
I figured out from your postings that you were dumb but damn, you actually raised the ceiling on your own stupidity. LOL
Posted by argyle104 (Member # 14634) on :
Djehuti wrote:
quote: For example, he just said the ancestors of AAs come from all over the African continent when in fact the vast majority of African American ancestry is from West and Central Africa, with a some from Southern Africa and only relatively few from Eastern or Northern Africa per historical documentation as well as recent genetic studies, but I forgot he doesn't believe in such valid studies.
Define West Africa.
Define Central Africa.
Folks, watch and see if he provides an answer. Afterall it shouldn't take much for someone that is a scholar to provide a basic definition of the two terms above.
Posted by argyle104 (Member # 14634) on :
Djehuti wrote:
quote: He does not even know what he's talking about over 90% of the time. For example, he just said the ancestors of AAs come from all over the African continent when in fact the vast majority of African American ancestry is from West and Central Africa, with a some from Southern Africa and only relatively few from Eastern or Northern Africa per historical documentation as well as recent genetic studies, but I forgot he doesn't believe in such valid studies.
Notice that Djehuti doesn't provide historical evidence or facts for his opinions and fantasies.
But let's just humor him just this one time. Per your statement above, African Americans come from all parts of Africa, so why are you getting upset when someone says that African American ancestry comes from all parts of Africa?
Are you not being a hypocrite? Or does that fact frighten you because it means that people who you think should not associate with certain parts of Africa, have more of a right to do so than your dirt phillopeeeno ass. LOL!
Posted by argyle104 (Member # 14634) on :
Djehuti wrote: ---------------------------------- the ancestors of AAs come from all over the African continent when in fact the vast majority of African American ancestry is from West and Central Africa, with a some from Southern Africa and only relatively few from Eastern or Northern Africa ----------------------------------
Why are you posting such Eurocentric pseudoscience? Are mentally ill? There is something very wrong with you.
Notice again his belief in the true negro.
Djehuti why don't you try explaining the following historical facts away.
The Guinea Coast of West Africa where the vast majority of slave trading posts were you idiot. Do you even know what the Guinea Coast is??
quote:Define Central Africa.
The Congo coast where the other slave trading posts were.
quote:Folks, watch and see if he provides an answer. Afterall it shouldn't take much for someone that is a scholar to provide a basic definition of the two terms above.
Of course I have answers, but apparently a moron like you does not realize that it doesn't take an actual scholar but someone with basic knowledge of American history to know such answers.
quote: Notice that Djehuti doesn't provide historical evidence or facts for his opinions and fantasies.
Wrong again, sodomist fool:
A more comprehensive map:
quote:But let's just humor him just this one time. Per your statement above, African Americans come from all parts of Africa, so why are you getting upset when someone says that African American ancestry comes from all parts of Africa?
LOL What makes you think I was upset?! I merely pointed out a fact that the vast majority of African American ancestry is from Western and Central Africa, which is true. This is not to say there is no North or East African ancestry at all, but it is very minimal.
quote:Are you not being a hypocrite? Or does that fact frighten you because it means that people who you think should not associate with certain parts of Africa, have more of a right to do so than your dirt phillopeeeno ass. LOL!
LMAO Why should I think blacks should not "associate" with other parts of Africa, you demented psycho?!! This is no more of an issue than whites of Northwestern European ancestry trying to associate with southern European cultures like Rome and especially Greece! Speaking of which as per the topic of this thread, why the hell are YOU a white Northwestern European still obsessing about other peoples heritages especially African Americans while ignoring your own!! ROTFL Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
LMAO
This debauched boy-george cracks me up! Here we dedicate a thread to the true Celtic and Germanic heritage of Northwest Europeans and the twisted wanker from the UK still trolls on about African American ancestry! LOL
It's times like this that you wish Egyptsearch had an online psychiatrist! Posted by Heru-(London's Finest) (Member # 11484) on :
quote:Originally posted by Tyrann0saurus: has anyone heard of the Asterix comics? They're hilarious, and they've got Celts sticking it up to the Romans.
Asterix, Obelix, Getafix, Dogmatix and a host of other fixes... ah the good old days before the politics back home in Africa. I read hundreds of Asterix comic books.
Might go pick one up.
Posted by argyle104 (Member # 14634) on :
Its interesting that all you can do is post a pic of some made up chart as if that is supposed to counteract HISTORICAL documented evidence.
I just posted historical documented evidence and like someone that believes in racial hierarchy he posts up some chart that in his mind erases history. LOL
Checkout his earlier postings and you will find that he believes in the concept of true negro. Which is why he hates west Africans. He needs to believe that true negroes were slaves, so that he a dirty filthy phillopeeeno can have self-esteem.
Phillopeeeno, you can't beat history, you just can't. : )
quote:Gaygoyle999 wrote: Its interesting that all you can do is post a pic of some made up chart as if that is supposed to counteract HISTORICAL documented evidence.
I didn't post one but two pictures of actual maps contructed from actual scholarly studies of the slave trade. The second one from the University of Wisconsin, nutbag.
quote:I just posted historical documented evidence and like someone that believes in racial hierarchy he posts up some chart that in his mind erases history. LOL
You didn't post any documented evidence just 'google' links! LOL
And why the hell do you keep saying I believe in some "racial hierarchy"?!! What makes you say this?? I told you before to cite evidence of this false claim, but since it is false of course you can't.
quote:Checkout his earlier postings and you will find that he believes in the concept of true negro. Which is why he hates west Africans. He needs to believe that true negroes were slaves, so that he a dirty filthy phillopeeeno can have self-esteem.
LMAO Okay, then please feel free to actually quote any past posts I made which speak of "true negroes"! Can you please do that instead of just talking the same bullsh*t accusations?!
quote:Phillopeeeno, you can't beat history, you just can't. : )
Why should I, when I am a proponent of history you moron!! And again I am an American citizen who knows alot about American history including African Americans! Who are you, but a derranged sodomist Brit?!
quote:I think I'll spread more scholarship. See Below.
All I see links about various other peoples non of which has to do with African American slave ancestors! LOL
But again WHY oh WHY do you keep obsessing about African American ancestry in THIS thread about YOUR 'supposed' Northwest European ancestry?! Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
Guys, it's obvious what we have here is another case of a degenerate white male (Gaygoyle) who is ashamed of his true Northwest European ancestry which is why he tries to hijack this thread with his nonsense trolls about African American ancestry when he is just know-scholarly nothing nitwit from the UK.
Let's keep the thread moving and ignore the wacky wanker for now. Posted by Mmmkay (Member # 10013) on :
^ Don't waste your time or typing Djehuti. He is a troll-baiter, like the other three horsemen (debunked, wolofi, akoben) idiots and worthless trolls.
Stop playing his stupid back and forth insult games and he'll go away.
Posted by TheAmericanPatriot (Member # 15824) on :
White Americans have been interested in Celtic history for centuries. Irish and Scottish Americans are very aware of their heritage.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ Oh really?? So what about English Americans?? Why is it Anglo-Americans seem to know more about Rome or Greece than say the Geats and Vikings who were their ancestors?
Tell me professor, what do you know about ancient Germanic culture and its contributions to modern 'Western' culture, since there are in fact many?
Posted by TheAmericanPatriot (Member # 15824) on :
I never said that Germans did not make valuable contributons to western civilization. The dual pillars of western civilization are Christianity and Greco-Roman culture. People in general know more about Rome and Greece because of that very reason. This is not 'Rocket Science' Djehuti. You yourself know much about them and my guess is you are neither Greek or Italian.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ The problem lies in the very definition of 'Western civilization'. We use 'western' as a code word for 'European' but let's see, Christianity as we know it originates from Southwest Asia NOT Europe. And as for Greco-Roman culture, many of the most power Western nations today are in Northern and Western Europe. Italy was left in the annals a while after the fall of Rome and poor old Greece is not discussed altogther long before then. And even then, the very roots of Greco-Roman civilization lie in Asia and Africa.
So what is 'Western' civilization but a bastardization of many cultural contributions, many of which are not European in origin?
Posted by TheAmericanPatriot (Member # 15824) on :
Thats true of any culture or civilization. Greco Roaman culture spread into northern Europe after the fall of Rome. Richard Fletcher has done great work on that subject in his book, 'The Barbarian Conversion.' The Roman Catholic church served to hold Europe together during the few centuries after the fall of Rome. Keep in mind also that Britain and Gaul were Roman provinces for several centuries. Greece itself may not have been mentioned but even today western civilization is built on a Greek foundation. Certanily christianity is not of european origin, Greco Roman culture was.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ That still doesn't seem to be a good excuse as to why the modern descendants of those so-called "barbarians" disregard their history and culture, OR why they are so admit that cultures like Egypt are one of their roots yet deny it is black African or vice-versa-- admit the Egyptians were black Africans yet deny their cultural roots to the 'West'.
Posted by TheAmericanPatriot (Member # 15824) on :
If Egypt is one of their roots it is a very very tiny root. I disagree that they disregard their heritage. Nobody can accuse the Germans of disregarding their heritage. The development of western civilization is an on going process that has lasted for 2,500 years and is not finished yet, it continues to evolve. Different groups had roles to play at various times.
Posted by argyle104 (Member # 14634) on :
Djehuti wrote:
quote: The Guinea Coast of West Africa where the vast majority of slave trading posts were you idiot. Do you even know what the Guinea Coast is??
quote: The Congo coast where the other slave trading posts were
Folks, this sounds like something that you would find on a white race loon site doesn't it?
Posted by humanityiloveyou (Member # 14404) on :
Great post Jari,I too question the emphasis with african americans on egypt instead of the rich history of ancient west africa [which I love] admittingly though alot of west and even [southern bantu] oral history places their own much eariler origins in nubia and egypt.
And yes it does seem true that what is commonly called the "wasp" in america or "anglo" here in australia do adore and study the history of their brief colonisers,it's culture which they inherited and expanded on instead of the britons from whom they descend.
It's very interesting.
quote:Originally posted by Jari-Ankhamun:
quote:Originally posted by humanityiloveyou: I see alot of "anglo-saxons" aka celtic iberians both here in Australia and in the US who are fascinated by egypt and equally roman and greek culture but take almost no interest in the culture of their forebearers?
With the exception of of a few new age types? and some interested in the la tene celtic culture of europe - noone appears to pay mind to the curious celts of the british isles.I personally am fascinated with it.
Australia is overwhelmingly anglo-saxon but there is not a single dept in "celtic history" its greece/rome/egypt across the country.... I must ask "wasp america and australia and canada etc" why are your ancestors at the sidelines?
The point you bring up is very valid, the thing is in Western civilization.....if you didnt live in Grand Stone or Marble buildings.....Create your own philosophy...ect then you are somehow....Inferior or uncivil......White Supremist many of which decend from ancestors....who really played a VERY SMALL role in the ancient world(they DID play a Magnificent and uniqe role) are quick to throw the Greeks and Romans as sign of Supremacey from a people who Killed, Masucured, enslaved, slandered, raped...and HATED their ancestors...many white American would be hard pressed to even KNOW that the ancient celtic, La Tiene and Galatians are the TRUE ancestors. Also many white Americans that DO take pride in their true culture will be hard pressed to know of the achievments, social structure, knowledge their ancestors produced and contributed to the ancient world....places such as the Ancient site of Sakara Brea or the Irish Manuscripts that preserved Roman litereature....etc.
On the flip side how many African Americans actually take pride in their West African ancestors instead of the Ancient Egyptians and Nubians. How many African Americans know about Muhammed Askia Toure, Mansu Musa, Sundijiata, Sonni Ali, or Jenne Jenno or Timbuctou...THE REAL TIMBUCTOU...
How many African Americans think Mathmatics is a white mans thing when during the Golden Era of Songhai the Mathmatics being taught in Jenno was far advanced than anything in Europe(other than the few Spainish nations that didnt rid themselves of Islamic Scence and math.)....or how many African Americans know that their ancestors produced Iron and Brone, Produced cities built of stone, straw, stucco...ect.
I have never seen on Afrocentric book on West African achievements....
Also the very few (good) books that are on celtic or scandanavian cultures are from Europe....The ones I own are great.....Its funny becuase one writer in the celtic book says in the book.."Imagine if the Celts are destoyed Rome...We would be using a "Celtic Script"...or something like that...LOL...WHAT CELTIC SCRIPT....The ROMANS GAVE the celts their script...The other guy on the scandanavians is like...Yeah they didnt write their own language...SO WHAT!!!! LOL....its kinda funny...Sort of an inferioty complex I guess....Like your a savage if you didnt "Invent" a written script...LOL. Hell Im GLAD 100 percent the Malians and Song Hai adopted the Arabic script.
Posted by humanityiloveyou (Member # 14404) on :
great posts Djehuti,it took me a good while to find the ulster cycles as noone here mentioned them,I read them last month and I loved them especially those fomorian stories!
Sad that most people here aren't even aware of them yet carry their ancestry.
quote:
Finn McChul by the way, is an Irish epic. I have read many stories and know many things about Celtic and Norse peoples than most Euro-Americans have even heard, and I'm not even white! Ain't that said.
Posted by humanityiloveyou (Member # 14404) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ Oh really?? So what about English Americans?? Why is it Anglo-Americans seem to know more about Rome or Greece than say the Geats and Vikings who were their ancestors?
Tell me professor, what do you know about ancient Germanic culture and its contributions to modern 'Western' culture, since there are in fact many?
I had to explain to my australian friend [4th generation australian] that he was scottish as was indicated by his surname,he was confused by this and had no idea.
I then had to explain that his ancestors were probably celtic or pictish common to scotland.He had no idea what I was talking abt but he loved brad pitt in gladiator!ha.
Also the thread is not about the germanic tribes but the britons and celtic iberians of the british isles from which so many of us in the west descend [I have english/welsh/irish ancestry myself]
Posted by humanityiloveyou (Member # 14404) on :
double post
Posted by humanityiloveyou (Member # 14404) on :
quote:Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot: If Egypt is one of their roots it is a very very tiny root. I disagree that they disregard their heritage. Nobody can accuse the Germans of disregarding their heritage. The development of western civilization is an on going process that has lasted for 2,500 years and is not finished yet, it continues to evolve. Different groups had roles to play at various times.
The germanic and celtic tribes of europe from which many in the west descend are not on most school curriculums at primary,high school or university level at least here in Australia...despite being an overwhelmingly "anglo-saxon" country.Trust me i've scoured the country because its what i'm interested in,and its all greece/rome/egypt.
The professors at the ancient history [egyptian] dept of my university are all germans,they seem unaware of or vaguely interested in the scythians,ostrogoths and various tribal peoples from who they likely descend.I am puzzled when I watch them lecture,thinking there own ancestors sit their silent as the grave.
Posted by humanityiloveyou (Member # 14404) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: [QB] ^^^Because Celts were Black people - put down your high school history book and read an anthropology book.
mike I was expelled from high school... probably because of my refusal to be endoctrinated by lies.
Posted by humanityiloveyou (Member # 14404) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: ^BBC - Sunday, 30 June, 2002, 15:31 GMT 16:31 UK English and Welsh are races apart
This article is from 2002,Sykes did a major study of the british isles and concluded that the people were mostly of celtic iberian stock.The invaders left only minimal genetic traces in places like orkney and east anglia[Danish and Norse],and some small traces of north african and middle eastern ancestry from "roman soliders".
Posted by argyle104 (Member # 14634) on :
Djehuti wrote:
quote: I didn't post one but two pictures of actual maps contructed from actual scholarly studies of the slave trade. The second one from the University of Wisconsin, nutbag.
If they are so scholarly, why did they miss all of the evidence of non-West Africans being brought over to the Americas? After all I found documented sources why couldn't they?
quote: I merely pointed out a fact that the vast majority of African American ancestry is from Western and Central Africa, which is true. This is not to say there is no North or East African ancestry at all, but it is very minimal.
1. How do you know? Were you there?
2. Why does your map not reflect North, Southern, and East Africa?
3. Why does your map not reflect India, Arabia, Persia, Turkey, etc.? Aren't those guys supposedly scholars? How could they make such an error?
Did they error or are they just like the numerous racist archaeologists, anthropologists who lie about Africa on so many fronts including denying that the ancient egyptians were Africans?
The fact that I have provided documented evidence that people came from north, southern, east Africa, as well as other places debunks your racist belief that only "true negroes" were slaves.
Its not my fault that your dirty slant eyed filopeeno ass doesn't want to read. Its funny because why should anyone take what you say seriously if you are too lazy to read what simply is at the other side of a mouse click?
Djehuti, that's simply not scholarly and wreaks of someone on the lower end of the intellectual spectrum.
Djehuti, why do you passionately hate West Africans?
Posted by argyle104 (Member # 14634) on :
Those maps that you posted are no different than those maps that dichotomize Africa into caucasoid, partial caucasoids, and Asians.
You are a sick creature Djehuti.
Notice that:
1. They made very sure that they didn't include Mauritania and Mali, yet alone the rest of Africa.
2. They have west Africans as the world's slaves despite the evidence that I posted that debunks such eurocentric lunacy. They have hundreds of millions of them being shipped everywhere.
There shouldn't be any of them left.
What is it with your hatred of west Africans filopeeno? How did you get so sick that you would resort to posting Eurocentric race propaganda to further your sick agenda?
Posted by Knowledgeiskey718 (Member # 15400) on :
quote:The fact that I have provided documented evidence that people came from north, southern, east Africa, as well as other places debunks your racist belief that only "true negroes" were slaves.
Contradictions never end. So let me get this straight, Dj and I say majority of African Americans are descended from West Africans, this to you means that we're saying only "true negro" Africans were brought to the Americas, right?
Ok, so basically you're saying West Africans are considered "true Negros" while all other Africans aren't?
If not, then how would (us) saying African Americans are largely descended from West Africans, imply to you that we are saying only "true Negroes" were brought to the Americas, if you didn't think West Africans were "true Negro" in the first place.
In actuality your thought is that West Africans are synonymous with "True Negros", am I wrong?
Posted by argyle104 (Member # 14634) on :
Djehuti,
Why don't you take all of the energy that you are commiting to hating certain Africans and spend some time researching all of those many slaves that the Spanish, Portugese, and West Asians were shipping all across the globe.
Posted by argyle104 (Member # 14634) on :
No because I am using quote marks indicating that I am using a term that you two have used quite frequently.
You two have an insane history of anti west African rhetoric for some reason.
Meanwhile when called out to prove this, you still fail to provide any proof/evidence of when I said this, or your erroneous anti-west African agenda. Why?
West African, which to you, is synonymous with "true negro" as seen below.
quote:Originally posted by Knowledgeiskey718:
quote:The fact that I have provided documented evidence that people came from north, southern, east Africa, as well as other places debunks your racist belief that only "true negroes" were slaves.
Contradictions never end. So let me get this straight, Dj and I say majority of African Americans are descended from West Africans, this to you means that we're saying only "true negro" Africans were brought to the Americas, right?
Ok, so basically you're saying West Africans are considered "true Negros" while all other Africans aren't?
If not, then how would (us) saying African Americans are largely descended from West Africans, imply to you that we are saying only "true Negroes" were brought to the Americas, if you didn't think West Africans were "true Negro" in the first place.
In actuality your thought is that West Africans are synonymous with "True Negros", am I wrong?
Btw..... What is a "true Negro", argtroll?
Posted by argyle104 (Member # 14634) on :
Knowledgeiskey718 wrote: ---------------------------- Contradictions never end. So let me get this straight, Dj and I say majority of African Americans are descended from West Africans, this to you means that we're saying only "true negro" Africans were brought to the Americas, right? ----------------------------
African Americans descend from Africa all of it. Its funny because along with white supremacists and race forum loons, you two are the only other people who that fact seems to upset. Why?
Does it upset a precoceived racial hierarchy of yours?
You can't beat historical facts, you just can't.
Now watch people how upset Knowledgeiskey718 and Djehuti get.
Posted by argyle104 (Member # 14634) on :
Knowledgeiskey718 wrote: ---------------------------- What is a "true Negro" ----------------------------
You tell me, that is your sick term. That is why I place it in quotation marks.
Posted by Knowledgeiskey718 (Member # 15400) on :
^^^^You can try to escape your contradictions by spreading false accusations and propagation's, all you want but they are still there, obviously you can't answer how saying African Americans are largely the descendants of West Africans, this somehow implies "True Negro"<<<Can you explain this?
Nor have you shown me where I ever used to term "True Negro". Why is that?
quote:Posted by Knowledge: Contradictions never end. So let me get this straight, Dj and I say majority of African Americans are descended from West Africans, this to you means that we're saying only "true negro" Africans were brought to the Americas, right?
quote:posted by argtroll African Americans descend from Africa all of it. Its funny because along with white supremacists and race forum loons, you two are the only other people who that fact seems to upset. Why?
^^^This is not an answer to my above question, now try again.....
Dj and I say majority of African Americans are descended from West Africans, this to you means that we're saying only "true negro" Africans were brought to the Americas, right?
Not only have you yet to prove the majority of African Americans weren't from West Africa, but you also always avoid my questions, why?
Posted by Afrosaxon (Member # 15871) on :
I could not agree more with you,a great post.
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: Actually, these "models" of civilization are a farce when considering that ALL models of civil-ization originate outside of Europe. The model of UN CIVIL ization, justified by the so-called Greek 'philosophy' of might makes right is not. That is not civilization that is barbarism.
Bottom line, modes of human existence are based on culture. The ONLY thing that man needs to live on this planet is air, water and the fruits of the earth. EVERYTHING else is culture, in terms of HOW you relate to one another, the planet and the universe. THAT is what determines how you USE the earth and its resources. But in terms of the MOST successful lifestyle EVER LIVED by mankind, it is the HUNTER GATHERER. Hominids lived for hundreds of thousands, if not MILLIONS (counting cro-magnons, neanderthals and all the other pre HSS hominids) of years QUITE successfully, by simply being hunter gatherers and simple pastoralists. The CONCEIT of modern civilization is that it is the BEST and MOST SUCCESSFUL mode of living, when it is not. The MOST successful is that which lasts the LONGEST and by ANY measure, man has been living as a hunter gatherer for MOST of his existence on this planet. And this mode of living or survival strategy worked QUITE WELL, considering that it allowed man to populate the four corners of the earth, from the desert to the mountains, from the seas to the arctic, ALL without the benefit of computers, hi tech industries and everything else that we feel we "need" to live today.
Posted by Egmond Codfried (Member # 15683) on :
Where did White Supremacy start? And Why?
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: Actually, the history of West African kingdoms IS part of many good books on African history and it is definitely part of the Afrocentric curriculum or African Studies curriculum in University. The CONFUSION here is one where African historians are equated with WHITE historians as EQUALLY motivated by racism. WRONG. The thread title hits the nail right on the head, because WHITES are the ones trying to identify with something that THEIR ancestors had nothing to do with. They PURPOSELY distort the history of many parts of the world BECAUSE they know their ancestors had VERY LITTLE to do with it. And ALL of it is in support of the nationalist racist agenda of white supremacy. Therefore, Africans can NEVER be on the same level of whites who have been raping, killing, destroying and LYING about almost EVERY black civilization they have come across in the last 500 years. White historians have distorted ALL African history, not JUST that of the Nile Valley. This includes East Africa, West Africa, the Sahara, Central Africa and South Africa. And it is BECAUSE of this that African scholars are waging an ONGOING battle to correct the history of ALL of Africa, not just Egypt. It is also because of this that LITTLE of Africa's TRUE history PRIOR to the arrival of Europeans is really known. Africans were NOT living in poverty and squalor, unable to figure out how to put FOOD in their mouths before Europeans came. In many cases, the way Africans lived PRIOR to the arrival of Europeans is QUITE DIFFERENT from the way they lived AFTER Europeans. THIS is what the historians are trying to uncover and this is precisely what the Europeans are TRYING TO HIDE.
By now, you should understand that Europeans are on a QUEST to make a history for themselves that has NO BASIS in reality and is ALL based on their SICK concept of might makes right, which allows them to TAKE history and MAKE it what they want, regardless of whether or not it is THEIRS or not.
Europeans, being the BIGGEST THIEVES, murderers, racists, warmongers, savages and rapists ON THE PLANET, want NOTHING LESS than to be worshipped as GOD'S gift to mankind. THAT is the whole purpose of their PROPAGANDA machine, which CONSTANTLY bombards you with how GOOD white civilization is how it is built on VALUES and how those VALUES make them RIGHTEOUS and WORTHY of all the things they have acquired. But in reality WE ALL KNOW that the VALUES that got them where they are ARE NOT GOOD in ANY SENSE of the term. In fact, MOST blacks are simply CAUGHT UP in trying to LIVE the fantasy of a BETTER LIFE as promised by white propaganda and some REFUSE to see ANYTHING different even when it has a FOOT square in their *sses.
Posted by Egmond Codfried (Member # 15683) on :
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: Actually, these "models" of civilization are a farce when considering that ALL models of civil-ization originate outside of Europe. The model of UN CIVIL ization, justified by the so-called Greek 'philosophy' of might makes right is not. That is not civilization that is barbarism. .
This is highly interesting to me as I'm trying to figure out how Renaissance came about. I have read that the idea of Medieval Europe being ‘backward’ was developed during the Renaissance, which claimed Classical culture as well as Neo-Platonism. Still we can see how Renaissance art developed out of medieval art, and was not a clean break as suggested. The Renaissance rulers saw themselves as the inheritors of the Roman Emperors, who themselves claimed inheritance of the Greek civilisation. To me the most distinguishing mark of the Renaissance is the Absolutist Kingship, with European King’s keeping a standing army. The Renaissance gave way to the Age of Reason. This era ended with the French Revolution (1789), and in the 19th century anything Medieval was hot. No more 'Reason' but 'Emotion' was the key-word. No Classicism but Gothic. So perhaps these Eurocentrist are still following the Renaissance approach, and reject indigenous European cultures and peoples.
Posted by Egmond Codfried (Member # 15683) on :
quote:Originally posted by humanityiloveyou: Great post Jari,I too question the emphasis with african americans on egypt instead of the rich history of ancient west africa [which I love] admittingly though alot of west and even [southern bantu] oral history places their own much eariler origins in nubia and egypt.
[/QB][/QUOTE]
[Ancient Egyptian lock]
Nice remark. I remember Sheikh Anta Diop comparing the role of Classical Egypt for African civilisation to that of Classical Greece for Europe. He did linguistic comparison research and showed that African culture is one whole culture. Refuting this ‘North of Sahara’ and ‘South of Sahara’ divide, which is a racist Eurocentric ploy to claim the pyramids for the Caucasian Nation, meaning White's. Somebody wrote that these Eurocentrists present the Sahara Desert as some sort of 'DNA sieve,' incinerating any Black DNA which tries to cross. Coming from Surinam and familiar with some aspects of Winti, the Surinam version of African religion, I have noticed similarities with some Egyptian godhead’s. In Surinam they have a Bakru which resembles Bes. Our Aisa, goddess of the Earth, looks a lot like Isis and our Kra resembles their Ka. Then the Surinam Marroons maintain till now African traditions like the burial of chiefs in a grave chamber and wrapping him up in many pieces of fabric. Pickling him, as it were, with alcohol and reduction of oxygen. Very, Egyptian like. Finally these Marroons used to have a lock which was 100% like the Egyptian lock, later used to make modern Yale locks. So I would say that we talk a lot about Egypt because there we make our stand, with Eurocentrist trying to steal Blacks greatest achievements. Are we off-topic here?
Posted by Egmond Codfried (Member # 15683) on :
quote:Originally posted by argyle104: Knowledgeiskey718 wrote: ---------------------------- What is a "true Negro" ----------------------------
You tell me, that is your sick term. That is why I place it in quotation marks.
The Eurocentrist have dreamed up some crazy distinction between Africans: the South of Sahara (SSA) and the North of Sahara (NSA). The NSA are 'good' the SSA are 'bad' because they are supposed to be 'prognastic' and have 'frizzled hair.' So they are declared 'ugly.' I use the name Classical Africans. Diop showed that the narrow skulled, narrow nosed and lips type is just a variation found all over Africa, and they are not some superior elite among the broad skulled Africans. These people themselves are horrified by the idea that they are considered Caucasians. As I have pointed out in my other threads this Classical African type, the 'bad' one, was just what Europeans used obsessively in their art: The Moor (1300-1900). Almost always a Classical African. Are we off-topic?
Posted by Egmond Codfried (Member # 15683) on :
"A Moor." By Juriaen van Streeck [Dutch Baroque Era Painter, 1632-1687]
Posted by argyle104 (Member # 14634) on :
Knowledgeiskey718 wrote: ------------------------------------- Nor have you shown me where I ever used to term "True Negro". Why is that? -------------------------------------
Boy you're crazy. There is no way that I'm going to go look through all of your 660+ posts in search of your nonsense racial rhetoric, and I'm damn sure not going to do so without a search engine.
For you to even think that any sane person would take their time to do so only emphasizes how nutty you are and proves my point exactly. You need to step away from your computer sometime.
PS. You're not a sockpuppet are you? LOL : )
Posted by argyle104 (Member # 14634) on :
Knowledgeiskey718 wrote:
quote: obviously you can't answer how saying African Americans are largely the descendants of West Africans
quote: Not only have you yet to prove the majority of African Americans weren't from West Africa
At first this clown has been saying since he's been posting on this forum that African Americans were west African only. This boy even tried the Eurocentric white man's shell game of excluding Mauritania and Mali from west Africa. The boy has problems.
Now he's retreating and trying to save face by saying that the "majority" whatever that means are from his fantasy of west Africa. You see when you provide evidence and facts your opponent only recourse is to retreat and mount a panicked defense. Which in his case change what he has been saying since he's been posting on this forum.
Notice that his west Africa doesn't include Algeria, Tunisia Morocco, Mauritania, Mali, and Niger. Again Knowledgeiskey718 comes from the school of racists like Howell, Coon, and Blumenbach.
LOL! : ) Let us even humor him and say that the majority of people came from his "west" African fantasy. That still does not negate the fact that African Americans have ancestry from the rest of Africa (North, Southern, and East). Since I have provided evidence that people were brought from those places as well.
I've even shown that people were brought over from India, Iran, Arabia as well as other places.
Posted by argyle104 (Member # 14634) on :
The question has to be asked why is he so obsessively hell focused on "west" Africans being the only ones brought over here despite the evidence to the contrary?
1. Is it that African Americans having ancestry to north, southern, and east Africa threatens his racial dogma since he thinks that African Americans are the lowest on humanities totem pole so they can only come from people that he thinks are equally low? In his mind it is the so called "west" African.
2. Is it because he thinks that west Africans are inferior and they are the only ones who would have ever been brought over?
3. Is it because he thinks highly of anyone that is not an African American or non-"west" Africa (Remember, he doesn't consider Mauritania, Mali, and Burkino Faso to be "west" African). Therefore none of these other groups should dare be mentioned in 1. the same group as African Americans or 2. be associated with slavery.
Knowledgeiskey718 how did you allow the white man to rape your mind like this? Don't you know that they do this just so they can claim Africa's history and culture?
And this boy considers himself to be a scholar. This boy is a sad joke.
Posted by Afrosaxon (Member # 15871) on :
great post,thats my main point why has europe rejected it's indigenous European cultures and peoples. Not so much mainland europe because they are quite interested in their history in some areas.But the commonwealth countries who are largely from the british isles who have no interest in celtic history from which they descend.Britons/celts are very distinct from mainland europe they have been on those isles for 6,000 years.My ancestors even have lived in the same village in england since before the reign of queen anne.
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: Actually, these "models" of civilization are a farce when considering that ALL models of civil-ization originate outside of Europe. The model of UN CIVIL ization, justified by the so-called Greek 'philosophy' of might makes right is not. That is not civilization that is barbarism. .
This is highly interesting to me as I'm trying to figure out how Renaissance came about. I have read that the idea of Medieval Europe being ‘backward’ was developed during the Renaissance, which claimed Classical culture as well as Neo-Platonism. Still we can see how Renaissance art developed out of medieval art, and was not a clean break as suggested. The Renaissance rulers saw themselves as the inheritors of the Roman Emperors, who themselves claimed inheritance of the Greek civilisation. To me the most distinguishing mark of the Renaissance is the Absolutist Kingship, with European King’s keeping a standing army. The Renaissance gave way to the Age of Reason. This era ended with the French Revolution (1789), and in the 19th century anything Medieval was hot. No more 'Reason' but 'Emotion' was the key-word. No Classicism but Gothic. So perhaps these Eurocentrist are still following the Renaissance approach, and reject indigenous European cultures and peoples.
Posted by Afrosaxon (Member # 15871) on :
quote:The Eurocentrist have dreamed up some crazy distinction between Africans: the South of Sahara (SSA) and the North of Sahara (NSA). The NSA are 'good' the SSA are 'bad' because they are supposed to be 'prognastic' and have 'frizzled hair.' So they are declared 'ugly.' ]
absolutely,the estonians,baltic people,swedes etc
are very very distinct from the sardinians,russians and spanish
but everyones calls them "european" they are rarely split up into seams or removed from their central ethnic indentity because of differences in their features.
A few clever kids call the finns finno ugric but generally they are all "european".
I'm all for some new divisions e.g europeans around the black sea can be BSE black sea europeans,europeans from the british isles can be isleotic people on par with nilotics and on and on with the idiocy.
Posted by Afrosaxon (Member # 15871) on :
quote:Originally posted by Egmond Codfried: [Ancient Egyptian lock]
Nice remark. I remember Sheikh Anta Diop comparing the role of Classical Egypt for African civilisation to that of Classical Greece for Europe. He did linguistic comparison research and showed that African culture is one whole culture. Refuting this ‘North of Sahara’ and ‘South of Sahara’ divide, which is a racist Eurocentric ploy to claim the pyramids for the Caucasian Nation, meaning White's. Somebody wrote that these Eurocentrists present the Sahara Desert as some sort of 'DNA sieve,' incinerating any Black DNA which tries to cross. Coming from Surinam and familiar with some aspects of Winti, the Surinam version of African religion, I have noticed similarities with some Egyptian godhead’s. In Surinam they have a Bakru which resembles Bes. Our Aisa, goddess of the Earth, looks a lot like Isis and our Kra resembles their Ka. Then the Surinam Marroons maintain till now African traditions like the burial of chiefs in a grave chamber and wrapping him up in many pieces of fabric. Pickling him, as it were, with alcohol and reduction of oxygen. Very, Egyptian like. Finally these Marroons used to have a lock which was 100% like the Egyptian lock, later used to make modern Yale locks. So I would say that we talk a lot about Egypt because there we make our stand, with Eurocentrist trying to steal Blacks greatest achievements. Are we off-topic here?
Don't get me started on west african anthropological elements in ancient egypt.
e.g - headbinding[acd]practiced throughout ancient west africa ...djenne sculptures from mali to katsina heads even up until the 1950s with the mangbetu keeping it up and elsewhere.
ancient nok head from west africa
Head of Nefertiti
her daughters
But really what's the point? people are bound by blood and emotion drives reason so afro/eurocentrists will never have any interest in any african elements in egypt and vice versa - that's not anyones fault, we are all bound by blood.Thinking objectivity exists is the mistake, you cannot depart from your blood.
I have minor interest in ancient egypt only for what it can tell me about other parts of Africa.Pomposity and glory eventually die their own deaths ,but africa is old and wise as wise can be.
Posted by Afrosaxon (Member # 15871) on :
dble post.
Posted by Egmond Codfried (Member # 15683) on :
quote:Originally posted by Afrosaxon:
quote:The Eurocentrist have dreamed up some crazy distinction between Africans: the South of Sahara (SSA) and the North of Sahara (NSA). The NSA are 'good' the SSA are 'bad' because they are supposed to be 'prognastic' and have 'frizzled hair.' So they are declared 'ugly.' ]
absolutely,the estonians,baltic people,swedes etc
I'm all for some new divisions e.g europeans around the black sea can be BSE black sea europeans,europeans from the british isles can be isleotic people on par with nilotics and on and on with the idiocy.
You are so right! I consider the dark and broadskulled, husky built Alpine Race as descendents of Africans and Asian, along the Rhine and Donau. They should be the 'West Africans' of Europe. On some of the British Island, Coon (1963) mentions a type 'The Old Black Breed.' They are small, dark haired, thick lipped and probably dark coloured too. Van Sertima wrote that some Spanish people should be considered Negrito's. Which is a non treathening way of saying they are Black's, for them not to freak out. When you are in Gibraltar you can almost touch Africa, and you can even make out individual buildings. So all Europeans are Europeans, but some Africans are not Africans. Why? It's the pyramids they are after. Or the Black European Kings I find, are supposed to be 'White' by their insane definitions. Well they are not!
But children, this we know already. WHAT IS THE WHY BEHIND THESE DENIALS?
Posted by HORUS HAS RIZEN (Member # 11484) on :
^ Good question.
Posted by argyle104 (Member # 14634) on :
Interesting how the scalded racists (Knowledgeiskey718 and Djehuti) have retreated again after suffering yet another scholarly intellectual defeat and again having their deep rooted racial psychosis exposed for all to see.
Posted by argyle104 (Member # 14634) on :
Doug M wrote:
quote: Actually, the history of West African kingdoms IS part of many good books on African history and it is definitely part of the Afrocentric curriculum or African Studies curriculum in University. The CONFUSION here is one where African historians are equated with WHITE historians as EQUALLY motivated by racism. WRONG. The thread title hits the nail right on the head, because WHITES are the ones trying to identify with something that THEIR ancestors had nothing to do with. They PURPOSELY distort the history of many parts of the world BECAUSE they know their ancestors had VERY LITTLE to do with it. And ALL of it is in support of the nationalist racist agenda of white supremacy. Therefore, Africans can NEVER be on the same level of whites who have been raping, killing, destroying and LYING about almost EVERY black civilization they have come across in the last 500 years. White historians have distorted ALL African history, not JUST that of the Nile Valley. This includes East Africa, West Africa, the Sahara, Central Africa and South Africa. And it is BECAUSE of this that African scholars are waging an ONGOING battle to correct the history of ALL of Africa, not just Egypt. It is also because of this that LITTLE of Africa's TRUE history PRIOR to the arrival of Europeans is really known. Africans were NOT living in poverty and squalor, unable to figure out how to put FOOD in their mouths before Europeans came. In many cases, the way Africans lived PRIOR to the arrival of Europeans is QUITE DIFFERENT from the way they lived AFTER Europeans. THIS is what the historians are trying to uncover and this is precisely what the Europeans are TRYING TO HIDE.
By now, you should understand that Europeans are on a QUEST to make a history for themselves that has NO BASIS in reality and is ALL based on their SICK concept of might makes right, which allows them to TAKE history and MAKE it what they want, regardless of whether or not it is THEIRS or not.
Europeans, being the BIGGEST THIEVES, murderers, racists, warmongers, savages and rapists ON THE PLANET, want NOTHING LESS than to be worshipped as GOD'S gift to mankind. THAT is the whole purpose of their PROPAGANDA machine, which CONSTANTLY bombards you with how GOOD white civilization is how it is built on VALUES and how those VALUES make them RIGHTEOUS and WORTHY of all the things they have acquired. But in reality WE ALL KNOW that the VALUES that got them where they are ARE NOT GOOD in ANY SENSE of the term. In fact, MOST blacks are simply CAUGHT UP in trying to LIVE the fantasy of a BETTER LIFE as promised by white propaganda and some REFUSE to see ANYTHING different even when it has a FOOT square in their *sses.
We can only hope that racists such as Djehuti and Knowledgeiskey718 will some day understand the above and relinquish their racist dogma that has resulted in them displaying on public a very disturbing mental illness.
I doubt it since they believe the white man's ice is colder (ie. his racial propaganda is truth and Africans are simply liars).
Posted by AllixDarcy (Member # 15670) on :
^ The Black President in less than 40 days now!
POOP YOUR PANTIES YOU LADYBOY!!! BWAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! Posted by xyyman (Member # 13597) on :
Guess you listen to Rush L. Who himself is lying about what Obama said.
Posted by Knowledgeiskey718 (Member # 15400) on :
quote:Originally posted by argyle104: Interesting how the scalded racists (Knowledgeiskey718 and Djehuti) have retreated again after suffering yet another scholarly intellectual defeat and again having their deep rooted racial psychosis exposed for all to see.
Lmao you and your parrot pal akoben are two peas in a pod, say the same things over and over even after you've been virtually smacked for the things you say.
Remember when you first tried this with me on the Kabyle Berber thread? I literally smacked the fire out of you. You had absolutely no response, why? Could it be because it actually had something to do with science and critical thinking ? Lmaooooooooooo
Btw.... how are you-the white man-calling me racist to my own people ?
Posted by AllixDarcy (Member # 15670) on :
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: Guess you listen to Rush L. Who himself is lying about what Obama said.
Obama PWNS McCain.
Sky News (501 on your sky set-top box) at 2a.m. sharp, Don't miss it!!! Posted by Afrosaxon (Member # 15871) on :
quote:Originally posted by Egmond Codfried:
quote:Originally posted by Afrosaxon:
quote:The Eurocentrist have dreamed up some crazy distinction between Africans: the South of Sahara (SSA) and the North of Sahara (NSA). The NSA are 'good' the SSA are 'bad' because they are supposed to be 'prognastic' and have 'frizzled hair.' So they are declared 'ugly.' ]
absolutely,the estonians,baltic people,swedes etc
I'm all for some new divisions e.g europeans around the black sea can be BSE black sea europeans,europeans from the british isles can be "isleotic" people on par with the term nilotics and on and on with the idiocy.
You are so right! I consider the dark and broadskulled, husky built Alpine Race as descendents of Africans and Asian, along the Rhine and Donau. They should be the 'West Africans' of Europe. On some of the British Island, Coon (1963) already. WHAT IS THE WHY BEHIND THESE DENIALS?
Alpines are europeans as are people from the british isles they have only small amounts of african dna from 6-8% but who knows what the ethics are in that.Europeans who do private dna tests get much higher african results,getting higher as you go south and very high in places like portugal.. I'm at least 30% SSA but I look like any italian.
The variety between europeans in appearence has not fractured their central indentity as europeans they are not set into such distinct ludicrous groups as africans are.Things break apart more easily when there is a fracture.Saying europeans are west african is insane.
Posted by Knowledgeiskey718 (Member # 15400) on :
quote:I'm at least 30% SSA but I look like any italian.
Very well, and hence why classifiations or distinctions such as "Caucasoid" are absolutely mooted by overlapping genes which puts an end to biologically distinct groups of humans, simply because "race" doesn't exist. Everyone comes from Africa. Everyone is African under the skin.
It's just prejudice, bigoted and uneducated people who think otherwise or simply find it hard to accept .
The fact that Europeans are closest genetically to Africans whereas the original OOA populations. I.e Oceanians appear furthest away genetically from Africa, if Oceanians and Europeans are part of the same non-African OOA population structure, then Europeans should be as distant genetically from Africans, as Oceanians are. If this is not due to post OOA Neolithic migrations into Europe from Africa, then will/can anyone else explain otherwise????
Genes, peoples, and languages
L. Luca Cavalli-Sforza
It is reassuring that the analysis of other markers also consistently gives the same results in this case. Moreover, a specificevolutionary model tested, i.e., that Europe is formed by contributions from Asia and Africa,fits the distance matrix perfectly (6). In this simplified model, the migrations postulated to have populated Europe are estimated to have occurred at an early date (30,000 years ago), but it is impossible to distinguish, on the basis of these data, this model from that of several migrations at different times . The overall contributions from Asia and Africa were estimated to be around two-thirds and one-third , respectively. Simulations have shown (7) that this hypothesis explains quite well the discrepancy between trees obtained by maximum likelihood and neighbor joining. Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
Stuff like this should put to rest differences in "Race". Findings like this should make people get along better.
This shows that our skin color is really only "Skin" deep.
All the hate that people show each other over color or ethnicity is wrong. We should be using this stuff to Unite the races instead of dividing the races. Stuff like this needs to be promoted to other places and put on Horus new website. This is the stuff that needs to be shown on mainstream websites and talked about more.
More people need to know that we are one people, so the hatred and senseless fighting needs to stop. We need to talk more about what brings us together then what divides us. It's time people recognize we come from one people, "Adam" and "Eve". We have so much violence throughout the world over petty differences, war in Sudan, I think Congos, Iraq, and Afganhistan. These people need to see a better way of dealing with there problems then just war. One people, One Love, God Bless
Peace
Posted by Knowledgeiskey718 (Member # 15400) on :
Regardless of how much some may deny the following facts and information, it will always be true, and will NEVER change. Actually, this will only become more enhanced and further established and secured. Which is why so many Euro-centrists are against the already genetically and anthropologically proven fact, which is OOA(Out Of Africa).
1)"Taken together, the remains show that these early modern humans were ...much like the people in southern Ethiopia and the southern Sudan today, " Pearson said.-----University of New Mexico anthropologist Osbjorn Pearson
2)Until now, the lack of human fossils of appropriate antiquity from sub-Saharan Africa has meant that these competing genetic models of human evolution could not be tested by paleontological evidence.
The skull from Hofmeyr has changed that. The surprising similarity between a fossil skull (Hofmeyr) from the southernmost tip of Africa and similarly ancient skulls from Europe is in agreement with the genetics-based "Out of Africa" theory, which predicts that humans like those that inhabited Eurasia in the Upper Paleolithic should be found in sub-Saharan Africa around 36,000 years ago. The skull from South Africa provides the first fossil evidence in support of this prediction.
3)European early modern humans and the fate of the Neandertals Erik Trinkaus*
"The skull is large and robust. The maximum estimated length and breadth of the neurocranium, as well as most measurements of the facial skeleton,lie at or exceed two standard deviations (SD) of the means for modern African males ,whereas they lie within these limits for Late Pleistocene crania from Eurasia and North Africa (table S3)."
"As a result of an ongoing cleansing of the fossil record through direct radiometric dating, a series of obviously modern, and in fact Late Upper Paleolithic or Holocene, human remains have been removed from consideration (7). This cleansing has helped to dilute the impression that the earliest modern humans in Europe were just like recent European populations.
Thus, Hofmeyr is seemingly primitive in comparison to recent African crania in a number of features, including a prominent glabella;moderately thick, continuous supraorbital tori; a tall, flat, and straight malar; a broad frontal process of the maxilla; and comparatively large molar crowns.
4)Multivariate Analysis of the Postcranium of Markina Gora (Kostenki XIV) , A 30,000-Year-Old Skeleton from Russia
"The Markina Gora skeleton was excavated in 1954. Debets (1955, Sovetskaia Etnografiia 1: 43--53) described it as "negroid" based on its marked alveolar prognathism and high brachial and crural indices"
Body proportions in Late Pleistocene Europe and modern human origins*1
Trenton W. Holliday
Department of Anthropology, The College of William and Mary, P.O. Box 8795, Williamsburg, Virginia 23187-8795, U.S.A.
Abstract
Body proportions covary with climate, apparently as the result of climatic selection. Ontogenetic research and migrant studies have demonstrated that body proportions are largely genetically controlled and are under low selective rates; thus studies of body form can provide evidence for evolutionarily short-term dispersals and/or gene flow. Following these observations, competing models of modern human origins yield different predictions concerning body proportion shifts in Late Pleistocene Europe. Replacement predicts that the earliest modern Europeans will possess “tropical” body proportions (assuming Africa is the center of origin), while Regional Continuity permits only minor shifts in body shape, due to climatic change and/or improved cultural buffering. This study tests these predictions via analyses of osteometric data reflective of trunk height and breadth, limb proportions and relative body mass for samples of Early Upper Paleolithic (EUP), Late Upper Paleolithic (LUP) and Mesolithic (MES) humans and 13 recent African and European populations. Results reveal a clear tendency for the EUP sample to cluster with recent Africans, while LUP and MES samples cluster with recent Europeans. These results refute the hypothesis of local continuity in Europe, and are consistent with an interpretation of elevated gene flow (and population dispersal?) from Africa, followed by subsequent climatic adaptation to colder conditions. These data do not, however, preclude the possibility of some (albeit small) contribution of genes from Neandertals to succeeding populations, as is postulated in Bräuer’s “Afro-European Sapiens” model.
Brachial and crural indices of European Late Upper Paleolithic and Mesolithic humans
Trenton W. Holliday
Department of Anthropology, Tulane University, New Orleans, Louisiana, 70118, U.S.A.f1
Abstract
Among recent humans brachial and crural indices are positively correlated with mean annual temperature,such that high indices are found in tropical groups. However, despite inhabiting glacial Europe, the Upper Paleolithic Europeans possessed high indices, prompting Trinkaus (1981) to argue for gene flow from warmer regions associated with modern human emergence in Europe. In contrast, Frayeret al. (1993) point out that Late Upper Paleolithic and Mesolithic Europeans shouldnotexhibit tropically-adapted limb proportions, since, even assuming replacement, their ancestors had experienced cold stress in glacial Europe for at least 12 millennia.
This study investigates three questions tied to the brachial and crural indices among Late Pleistocene and recent humans. First, which limb segments (either proximal or distal) are primarily responsible for variation in brachial and crural indices? Second, are these indices reflective ofoveralllimb elongation? And finally, do the Late Upper Paleolithic and Mesolithic Europeans retain relatively and/or absolutely long limbs? Results indicate that in the lower limb, the distal limb segment contributes most of the variability to intralimb proportions, while in the upper limb the proximal and distal limb segments appear to be equally variable. Additionally, brachial and crural indices do not appear to be a good measure of overall limb length, and thus, while the Late Upper Paleolithic and Mesolithic humans have significantly higher (i.e., tropically-adapted) brachial and crural indices than do recent Europeans, they also have shorter (i.e., cold-adapted) limbs. The somewhat paradoxical retention of “tropical” indices in the context of more “cold-adapted” limb length is best explained as evidence for Replacement in the European Late Pleistocene, followed by gradual cold adaptation in glacial Europe.
Gough's Cave 1 (Somerset, England): an assessment of body size and shape TRENTON W. HOLLIDAY a1 and STEVEN E. CHURCHILL a2
Abstract
Stature, body mass, and body proportions are evaluated for the Cheddar Man (Gough's Cave 1) skeleton. Like many of his Mesolithic contemporaries, Gough's Cave 1 evinces relatively short estimated stature (ca. 166.2 cm [5′ 5′]) and low body mass (ca. 66 kg [146 lbs]). In body shape, he is similar to recent Europeans for most proportional indices. He differs, however, from most recent Europeans in his high crural index and tibial length/trunk height indices. Thus, while Gough's Cave 1 is characterized by a total morphological pattern considered ‘cold-adapted’, these latter two traits may be interpreted as evidence of a large African role in the origins of anatomically modern Europeans. Posted by Afrosaxon (Member # 15871) on :
for those from the british isles who care about our actual ancestors.
back to the actual topic the premise of the thread which is the preference for ancient egypt over the ancient cultures of europe and the british isles which existed at the same time and who are our rightful ancestors.Why are we studying foreigners?
Posted by Mmmkay (Member # 10013) on :
^ Just curious, why do you call yourself afrosaxon?
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot: If Egypt is one of their roots it is a very very tiny root...
LOL Well apparently many Western scholars disagree. Here are just twoexamples
quote:..I disagree that they disregard their heritage. Nobody can accuse the Germans of disregarding their heritage.
We are not talking about Germans or mainland Europeans. We are speaking of those of Western colonial descent.
quote:The development of western civilization is an on going process that has lasted for 2,500 years and is not finished yet, it continues to evolve. Different groups had roles to play at various times.
So what does this mean? That Western civilization is not truly European civilization but it goes back to my point of a bastardization or hybridization of other cultures??
quote:gaygoyle wrote: Folks, this sounds like something that you would find on a white race loon site doesn't it?
No moron. They are historical FACTS based on actual slave trading records. Moving on..
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by humanityiloveyou: Great post Jari,I too question the emphasis with african americans on egypt instead of the rich history of ancient west africa [which I love] admittingly though alot of west and even [southern bantu] oral history places their own much eariler origins in nubia and egypt.
Actually, I believe the main reason why African Americans and others of the diaspora emphasize Egypt so much is due to the simple fact that Egypt's African idenitity has been denied for so long by those in mainstream i.e. white Western scholarship.
quote:And yes it does seem true that what is commonly called the "wasp" in america or "anglo" here in australia do adore and study the history of their brief colonisers,it's culture which they inherited and expanded on instead of the britons from whom they descend.
It's very interesting.
That brings up another point. Where does the line between 'Briton' and 'Anglo' begin and end? The Germanic tribes that invaded the British Isles i.e. the Angles, Saxons, and Jutes intermarried with the Britons and other Celtic populations did they not??
quote:great posts Djehuti,it took me a good while to find the ulster cycles as noone here mentioned them, I read them last month and I loved them especially those fomorian stories!
Sad that most people here aren't even aware of them yet carry their ancestry.
Yes, I also find some of the stories strikingly similar to other Indo-European myths like those told by the ancient Indians and Greeks.
quote: I had to explain to my australian friend [4th generation australian] that he was scottish as was indicated by his surname,he was confused by this and had no idea.
I then had to explain that his ancestors were probably celtic or pictish common to scotland.He had no idea what I was talking abt but he loved brad pitt in gladiator!ha.
Also the thread is not about the germanic tribes but the britons and celtic iberians of the british isles from which so many of us in the west descend [I have english/welsh/irish ancestry myself]
This brings me back to my question about the Germanic-Celtic division...
Posted by prmiddleeastern (Member # 14038) on :
quote:Originally posted by humanityiloveyou: I see alot of "anglo-saxons" aka celtic iberians both here in Australia and in the US who are fascinated by egypt and equally roman and greek culture but take almost no interest in the culture of their forebearers?
With the exception of of a few new age types? and some interested in the la tene celtic culture of europe - noone appears to pay mind to the curious celts of the british isles.I personally am fascinated with it.
Australia is overwhelmingly anglo-saxon but there is not a single dept in "celtic history" its greece/rome/egypt across the country.... I must ask "wasp america and australia and canada etc" why are your ancestors at the sidelines?
Because perhaps Celt culture are primitive to them, so they choose the most advanced ones.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:gaygoyle wrote: If they are so scholarly, why did they miss all of the evidence of non-West Africans being brought over to the Americas? After all I found documented sources why couldn't they?
What do you mean by non-West Africans? The maps specifically show that most slaves came from Central Africa and even in some periods from South Africa.
quote:1. How do you know? Were you there?
I know because of historical documentation, idiot. How do YOU know anything you speak of since you don't make any sense?
quote:2. Why does your map not reflect North, Southern, and East Africa?
Because those were not areas that had any major slave ports to the Americas, fool!
quote:3. Why does your map not reflect India, Arabia, Persia, Turkey, etc.? Aren't those guys supposedly scholars? How could they make such an error?
Because the map was about African slave trade to America, nitwit!!
quote:Did they error or are they just like the numerous racist archaeologists, anthropologists who lie about Africa on so many fronts including denying that the ancient egyptians were Africans?
There is no error, and why do they have to lie about the trans-Atlantic slave trade to America?! You are just a raving lunatic.
quote:The fact that I have provided documented evidence that people came from north, southern, east Africa, as well as other places debunks your racist belief that only "true negroes" were slaves.
LOL where did I say anything about "true negroes" you boy-george buffoon?!!
quote:Its not my fault that your dirty slant eyed filopeeno ass doesn't want to read. Its funny because why should anyone take what you say seriously if you are too lazy to read what simply is at the other side of a mouse click?
LOL Correction, it is your fault that I am educated in many things especially in American history including African Americans while you are NOT and so in your usual frustration make insults about my ethncity while the only dirty person around here is YOU, a dirty degenerate brit.
quote:Djehuti, that's simply not scholarly and wreaks of someone on the lower end of the intellectual spectrum.
What's not scholarly? Citing sources from actual academic institutions the way I have? Instead of providing links to what you "googled" LOL
quote:Djehuti, why do you passionately hate West Africans?
LMAO No! Why would I?! But you obviously hate intelligent posters like me! Perhaps YOU hate not only West Africans but *all* Africans since you found out about your mixed-African ancestry!
Don't make me do to you what Rasol did to your boyfriend Ako! Posted by argyle104 (Member # 14634) on :
Djehuti wrote:
quote: The maps specifically show that most slaves came from Central Africa and even in some periods from South Africa.
Then how do you explain the documented facts of Indians, Persians, whites, Arabians, and Turks being brought over?
Explain the documented facts of the so called berbers and other north Africans, ethiopians and other east Africans, and southern Africans that were brought over.
While you're at it:
Define "west" Africa and "central" Africa.
You see how this shitty slant eyed filopeeeeno contradicts himself. First its "west" Africans were slaves and now when actual documented facts that exposing his racism against Africans that he doesn't like he's trying to say that "central" Africans were the slaves.
Posted by argyle104 (Member # 14634) on :
Djehuti wrote: ---------------------------------- Because the map was about African slave trade to America, nitwit!! ----------------------------------
No it was a map in the form of negroids and caucasoid and lying about history. Which is what your dumb slant eyed ass has been expousing for the longest.
Either prove the below is false or be relegated to another crazed race loon. Po Po Filopeeno.
white people archive.salon.com/books/it/2000/06/15/white_slaves/
West Asians toptraveldealz.com/bermuda/bermuda-history.html
Japanese google.com/search?as_q=&hl=en&suggon=0&num=100&btnG=Google+Search&as_epq=japanese+slaves&as_oq=&as_eq=&lr=&cr=&as_ft=i&as_filetype=&as_qdr=all&as_nlo=&as_nhi=&as_occt=any&as _dt=i&a s_sitesearch=&as_rights=&safe=images
Chinese google.com/search?num=100&hl=en&lr=&suggon=0&as_qdr=all&q=+%22chinese+slaves%22+%22latin+america%22&btnG=Search
jwsr.ucr.edu/archive/vol5/number1/v5n1r1.php (east african slaves in new york)
Posted by argyle104 (Member # 14634) on :
Djehuti wrote:
-------------------------------- What's not scholarly? Citing sources from actual academic institutions the way I have? Instead of providing links to what you "googled" LOL --------------------------------
Well if you call historical documentation inacurate as not scholarly as opposed to posting racial propaganda, then I guess you have a problem with intellect. As in you lack it.
You also have a problem with reading, but considering the way your eyes are I guess it is understandable. LOL : )
Posted by argyle104 (Member # 14634) on :
Djehuti wrote: ------------------------------ There is no error, and why do they have to lie about the trans-Atlantic slave trade to America?! You are just a raving lunatic. ------------------------------
Folks this is what has been pointed out about the dirty filopeeno racist. You see he doesn't believe that eurocentrists will lie about the Africans he considers to be heathens. In his mind the eurocentrists only lie about ancient egypt.
Folks this is what happens when you don't eat normal foods and eat rats, bats, cats, dogs, and tarantulas, and serpants like this slant eyed filopeeeno.
Folks, you better eat right. : ) LOL
Posted by argyle104 (Member # 14634) on :
Jari-Ankhamun wrote:
--------------------------------- On the flip side how many African Americans actually take pride in their West African ancestors instead of the Ancient Egyptians and Nubians. How many African Americans know about Muhammed Askia Toure, Mansu Musa, Sundijiata, Sonni Ali, or Jenne Jenno or Timbuctou...THE REAL TIMBUCTOU... ---------------------------------
Well according to the maps your racial stooge friend nobody came from songhai or timbuktu.
Anyone with even subminimal intellect can see what the racist goal of the maps `_` posted were trying to achieve.
Posted by argyle104 (Member # 14634) on :
Folks, Djehuti is a dirty filopeeno who has nothing to be proud of since his wretched island is a heap a ****, so he tries to lord over Africans using a name from an Egyptian god. The pitiful sick sap.
He feels threatened that Africans he feels are lower than him have more relationship to the Ancient Egyptians than his pathetic dirty ass.
Look philopeeeno, its not our fault that your dogshit country isn't worth a damn. Its not our fault that if one looks up philopeeenos and slavery they'll get just as many current day documentations as they do historical documentations.
Finally, its not our fault that your face looks like this: `_`
bwaaahahahahahahahhahahahaha : )
Posted by Afrosaxon (Member # 15871) on :
dble post/
Posted by Afrosaxon (Member # 15871) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: That brings up another point. Where does the line between 'Briton' and 'Anglo' begin and end? The Germanic tribes that invaded the British Isles i.e. the Angles, Saxons, and Jutes intermarried with the Britons and other Celtic populations did they not??
Yes, I also find some of the stories strikingly similar to other Indo-European myths like those told by the ancient Indians and Greeks.
The celts of the british isles are not the same as the celts of mainland europe [It use to be thought that we were related to them].But it has since been found through population genetics that our closest genetic "blood brothers" are iberians from spain,a pre farming people who would have come to the british isles in the Neolithic period .We use the term "celts" only because the people spoke a celtic language.
We are not related genetically to the Celts who spread south and east to Italy, Greece and Turkey from the heartlands of Hallstadt and La Tene culture.
Culturally the english do derive elements [placenames etc] from the angle/saxon tribes and there is evidence of a slight genetic influence in areas like east anglia,but genetically we are overwhelmingly iberian on the maternal and paternal line.There are groups in the Orkney and Shetland Islands who show strong viking [Rus]influence [40%]as well as viking [Rus] influence in central, northern, and eastern England.
Areas were romanised culturally but genetically the romans left very little dna.
The genetic makeup of Britain and Ireland is overwhelmingly what it has been since the Neolithic period
I'm glad as I never had interest in rome or greco-roman culture and feel a very strong bond to the british isles.I still believe I have jute blood! [my ancestors were all from kent] even if genetic evidence says otherwise.:-)
2/ I don't subscribe to the concept of "indo-european" sorry,simply because it is applied to similarities between a spoken not written language.
The ulster cycles were heavily "orientalized" due to christianity so would show affinity with the greek texts, but I think most mythologies have a central root e.g cinderella in ancient chinese texts.
Our iberian roots should not come as a suprise to anyone who has read the ulster cycles e.g the Milesians -Míl Espáine.
Djehuti,why do people here treat you so horribly?
Posted by Egmond Codfried (Member # 15683) on :
quote:Originally posted by Afrosaxon: [QUOTE] Djehuti, why do people here treat you so horribly?
Dear Afrosaxon, I'm looking for quotes which might answer your question.
------------------------------------------------- Posted by kenndo (Member # 4846) on 11 July, 2006 12:30 PM:
You are dismissed. You are like a child, Winters is right about you, you know if have clearly show you pictures of the the the shilluk, etc, but instead of admitting you are wrong this time, you kept up with the dribble. You are haunted. You are sick and need help. I think getting of the computer for awhile would do you some good.
-------------------------------------------------- Posted by rasol (Member # 4592) on 11 July, 2006 12:41 PM:
quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- you are sick and need help. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
^ Your childish tantrums and flame-attacks are amusing but are also dismissed, and won't distract anyone from your failures to produce any evidence of relevance to this discussion.
Your rage is the result of your own ineptitude and is typical of debate failure.
If you take the time to learn modern anthropolgy it would clear up your massive confusion.
Instead you would rather argue in ignorance, only to end up enraged at your ignorance being exposed.
I feel for you Kenndo, but it's no ones fault but your own. Posted by Afrosaxon (Member # 15871) on :
quote:Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot: [ [QUOTE][qb]..I disagree that they disregard their heritage. Nobody can accuse the Germans of disregarding their heritage.
The few german people I know here in Australia have never heard of the suebi one of the central germanic tribes.
Posted by Afrosaxon (Member # 15871) on :
There were some indigenous african scripts I know of bamum which was self invented.I know of the Zaire and Mende scripts.Some have'nt been deciphered.
they did'nt get it down onto paper until the christians arrived and then it dissapeared.It's similar to runes [scratches and whatnot]
If only Africans lept on and studied their scripts the way the brits/irish/scots obsess over ogham.Africans in the African diaspora should really look into it.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
quote:Originally posted by Tyrann0saurus: Could you please cite a source for this? My impression what they used the Arabic script as well as an oral tradition.
I have read a couple of books on it before and unfortunately despite my searching for the past couple of days I could not find any sources online. What I do know is that before Arabic, the Songhai people used the Berber script Tifinagh, but recent archaeological excavations have revealed that in the tombs of the first dynasties there seemed to have been some form of pictographic or hieroglyphic script that is of course untranslated.
quote:BTW, writing, while certainly useful, is not essential to a civilization. Andean civilization in South America got on perfectly fine without writing.
Of course you don't need to write to build things, but the ancient Andeans did have other alternative forms of mass communication besides writing as seen here.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by Afrosaxon: The celts of the british isles are not the same as the celts of mainland europe [It use to be thought that we were related to them].But it has since been found through population genetics that our closest genetic "blood brothers" are iberians from spain,a pre farming people who would have come to the british isles in the Neolithic period .We use the term "celts" only because the people spoke a celtic language.
Last time I checked, Iberia is in mainland Europe, plus there were Celts there as well! Have you not heard of 'Celtiberians'?? Also, I never said anything about genetic about the Celts.
quote:We are not related genetically to the Celts who spread south and east to Italy, Greece and Turkey from the heartlands of Hallstadt and La Tene culture.
Well that depends... what genes or genetic signatures do you speak of??
quote:Culturally the english do derive elements [placenames etc] from the angle/saxon tribes and there is evidence of a slight genetic influence in areas like east anglia, but genetically we are overwhelmingly iberian on the maternal and paternal line. There are groups in the Orkney and Shetland Islands who show strong viking [Rus]influence [40%]as well as viking [Rus] influence in central, northern, and eastern England.
Areas were romanised culturally but genetically the romans left very little dna.
The genetic makeup of Britain and Ireland is overwhelmingly what it has been since the Neolithic period
I'm glad as I never had interest in rome or greco-roman culture and feel a very strong bond to the british isles. I still believe I have jute blood! [my ancestors were all from kent] even if genetic evidence says otherwise.:-)
The peoples of the isles ties to Iberia since Neolithic times sure explains why they carry African lineages associated with Neolithic expansions from North Africa into southern Europe..
New research has identified the first genetic evidence of Africans having lived amongst "indigenous" British people for centuries. Their descendants, living across the UK today, were unaware of their black ancestry.
The University of Leicester study, funded by the Wellcome Trust and published today in the journal European Journal of Human Genetics, found that one third of men with a rare Yorkshire surname carry a rare Y chromosome type previously found only amongst people of West African origin.
The researchers, led by Professor Mark Jobling, of the Department of Genetics at the University of Leicester, first spotted the rare Y chromosome type, known as hgA1...
quote:2/ I don't subscribe to the concept of "indo-european" sorry, simply because it is applied to similarities between a spoken not written language.
What's the difference? It describes a language phylum in general.
quote:The ulster cycles were heavily "orientalized" due to christianity so would show affinity with the greek texts, but I think most mythologies have a central root e.g cinderella in ancient chinese texts.
I don't know about the word "orientalized", but yes like many myths and legends of western and northern Europe there definitely was heavy influence, if not editing from Christian missionaries and proselytizers. Hence, the peoples of Ulster being survivors of 'Noah's flood'. Although flood stories themselves are not necessarily Christian or even Eastern in origin.
quote:Our Iberian roots should not come as a suprise to anyone who has read the ulster cycles e.g the Milesians -Míl Espáine.
Of course! Even archaeology is shows that the ancient cities spoken of in the cylces were based on real urban cultures in ancient Iberia.
quote:Djehuti, why do people here treat you so horribly?
LMAO It's only the psychotic and idiotic trolls that do so. Why? I don't know. I guess I have bad luck with people mentally challenged folks. I work with kids in education in real life and I always get in trouble with the 'special' ones. Posted by Alive-(What Box) (Member # 10819) on :
Djehuti's cool.
As for the dilweed who's following him around, he's one of a couple aliases that only popped up right after couple trolls were exposed.
Well, in particular, he created his acount even later a few days After this thread was made for those exposed trolls. Check it out.
Just ignore those whose only purpose thread after thread is to throw sh*t at posters like monkies (funny that before they were exposed they noticed/flamed everyone BUT themselves).
What's funny is those trolls got *real* quiet for a second after their expose but now again flame out at every chance that get (I'm guessing they might be getting ready to eventually drop what they feel are the most exposed accounts but I think they like all their trolling personalities too much).
Anywho, ignore them, and don't waste too much energy on it.
Posted by Afrosaxon (Member # 15871) on :
I am aware of the tiny little "Revis" gene and its A1 west african presence in yorkshire,it's what 18 men in total? one family branch! in all of england.Brits do have african dna in small amounts on autosomal tests but its overwhelmingly basque/siberian ket/iberian read sykes and oppenheimer! they can calculate the mutations on these things which is why they put their arrival in britain in the neolithic not in some imagined continental celtic invasion story like all know and love.They are not continental! they were not celts when they got there in the neolithic the celtic language was aquired by a few continental celts that drifted in later.
2/ Indo-European is a contructed language with almost no written records in northern,western and central europe prior to romanisation unless you want to include the scratch oghams posted above and some runes.I have no problem with people following it or looking for the "ayran homeland" but I don't personally buy any of it.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
quote:Originally posted by Afrosaxon:
[QUOTE][qb]We are not related genetically to the Celts who spread south and east to Italy, Greece and Turkey from the heartlands of Hallstadt and La Tene culture.
Well that depends... what genes or genetic signatures do you speak of??
quote:Culturally the english do derive elements [placenames etc] from the angle/saxon tribes and there is evidence of a slight genetic influence in areas like east anglia, but genetically we are overwhelmingly iberian on the maternal and paternal line. There are groups in the Orkney and Shetland Islands who show strong viking [Rus]influence [40%]as well as viking [Rus] influence in central, northern, and eastern England.
Areas were romanised culturally but genetically the romans left very little dna.
The genetic makeup of Britain and Ireland is overwhelmingly what it has been since the Neolithic period
I'm glad as I never had interest in rome or greco-roman culture and feel a very strong bond to the british isles. I still believe I have jute blood! [my ancestors were all from kent] even if genetic evidence says otherwise.:-)
The peoples of the isles ties to Iberia since Neolithic times sure explains why they carry African lineages associated with Neolithic expansions from North Africa into southern Europe..
New research has identified the first genetic evidence of Africans having lived amongst "indigenous" British people for centuries. Their descendants, living across the UK today, were unaware of their black ancestry.
The University of Leicester study, funded by the Wellcome Trust and published today in the journal European Journal of Human Genetics, found that one third of men with a rare Yorkshire surname carry a rare Y chromosome type previously found only amongst people of West African origin.
The researchers, led by Professor Mark Jobling, of the Department of Genetics at the University of Leicester, first spotted the rare Y chromosome type, known as hgA1...
quote:2/ I don't subscribe to the concept of "indo-european" sorry, simply because it is applied to similarities between a spoken not written language.
What's the difference? It describes a language phylum in general.
quote:The ulster cycles were heavily "orientalized" due to christianity so would show affinity with the greek texts, but I think most mythologies have a central root e.g cinderella in ancient chinese texts.
I don't know about the word "orientalized", but yes like many myths and legends of western and northern Europe there definitely was heavy influence, if not editing from Christian missionaries and proselytizers. Hence, the peoples of Ulster being survivors of 'Noah's flood'. Although flood stories themselves are not necessarily Christian or even Eastern in origin.
quote:Our Iberian roots should not come as a suprise to anyone who has read the ulster cycles e.g the Milesians -Míl Espáine.
Of course! Even archaeology is shows that the ancient cities spoken of in the cylces were based on real urban cultures in ancient Iberia.
quote:Djehuti, why do people here treat you so horribly?
LMAO It's only the psychotic and idiotic trolls that do so. Why? I don't know. I guess I have bad luck with people mentally challenged folks. I work with kids in education in real life and I always get in trouble with the 'special' ones.
Posted by Afrosaxon (Member # 15871) on :
by romanisation I also mean christianity,until the monks got to these areas it was rock marks.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by Afrosaxon: I am aware of the tiny little "Revis" gene and its A1 west african presence in yorkshire,it's what 18 men in total? one family branch! in all of england.Brits do have african dna in small amounts on autosomal tests but its overwhelmingly basque/siberian ket/iberian read sykes and oppenheimer! they can calculate the mutations on these things which is why they put their arrival in britain in the neolithic not in some imagined continental celtic invasion story like all know and love. They are not continental! they were not celts when they got there in the neolithic the celtic language was aquired by a few continental celts that drifted in later.
Oh I understand what you are saying now. Of course they descend from the continent but during pre-Celtic times, yes that was my point.
quote:2/ Indo-European is a contructed language with almost no written records in northern,western and central europe prior to romanisation unless you want to include the scratch oghams posted above and some runes. I have no problem with people following it or looking for the "ayran homeland" but I don't personally buy any of it.
Actually, full study of Indo-European languages did not start until relatively later in the modern era. Even the very term "aryan" wasn't used by Europeans until they discovered that many languages of India were Indo-European. The I-E phylum like all language phylums are based on the simple fact that all these languages do show relation to one in other in a number of ways to suggest common origin. If you don't believe in the existence of IE, do you not believe in the existence of say African language phylums like Afrasian or Niger-Congo?? And we are speaking strictly of language here and not actual populations or genetic lines.
Posted by Afrosaxon (Member # 15871) on :
no I don't - I believe people interact and adopt each others languages, I don't believe they belong to mythical proto-families.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ I understand what you are saying now, but apparently you are confused. Linguistic phylum and genetic population are two different things that necessarily do not correlate, and they often don't!
There exists an Indo-European language phylum consisting of various language groups with many individual languages that all ultimately descend from a single language group or proto-language. But as you say, language is easily adopted or borrowed. So of course the IE languages or its ancestral proto-language does not reflect the actual ancestry of its speakers! I never suggested that it did!
Posted by argyle104 (Member # 14634) on :
Interesting how the filopeeeeno racist avoids answering because he fears further exposure of his selective African racism.
Posted by T. Rex Master (Member # 3735) on :
quote:Originally posted by argyle104: the filopeeeeno racist
The irony of that combination of words is owning itself.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ Again, the reason why I chose to ignore Gaygoyle is evident. What's the use engaging someone who is without reason?
Posted by Ta Setis revenge (Member # 15713) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jari-Ankhamun: [QUOTE]Originally posted by humanityiloveyou: [qb] I have never seen on Afrocentric book on West African achievements....
That is not true...., Have you read the book "Destruction of the black race"? and "Book of the Songhai".....
and there are others...., Written by Afrocentrists.....,
And not to mention Dr. YOsef Ben Jochanon.... Who consistantly portrayed Africans of the Western regions achievements along with Egypts...
Posted by Ta Setis revenge (Member # 15713) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ Again, the reason why I chose to ignore Gaygoyle is evident. What's the use engaging someone who is without reason?
correct..., They have no other reason to except to disengage the facts about Africa and Africans....,
Posted by Afrosaxon (Member # 15871) on :
Yes and i've said several times thats it's used heavily as an anthroplogical term and a cultural term just as much as a lingustic one.If you order a dna test today it will tell you in percentages your "indo-european" ancestry.There is implied in the term esp. among archaeologists and anthropolgists that a bond/relationship/unity despite enormous differences in cultural output exists. The coloureds in south africa today speak an indo-european language but you don't see any of them digging up the indus valley and claiming it as the work of their ayran forefathers.They know they adopted the language through colonialism.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ I understand what you are saying now, but apparently you are confused. Linguistic phylum and genetic population are two different things that necessarily do not correlate, and they often don't!
There exists an Indo-European language phylum consisting of various language groups with many individual languages that all ultimately descend from a single language group or proto-language. But as you say, language is easily adopted or borrowed. So of course the IE languages or its ancestral proto-language does not reflect the actual ancestry of its speakers! I never suggested that it did!
Posted by Afrosaxon (Member # 15871) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ The problem lies in the very definition of 'Western civilization'. We use 'western' as a code word for 'European' but let's see, Christianity as we know it originates from Southwest Asia NOT Europe. And as for Greco-Roman culture, many of the most power Western nations today are in Northern and Western Europe. Italy was left in the annals a while after the fall of Rome and poor old Greece is not discussed altogther long before then. And even then, the very roots of Greco-Roman civilization lie in Asia and Africa.
So what is 'Western' civilization but a bastardization of many cultural contributions, many of which are not European in origin?
exactly.
Posted by Egmond Codfried (Member # 15683) on :
Djehuti, Argyl104, Doug M and Ta Setis revenge are nick's of the same Djehuti. He has been participating with at least four nick's, answering his own postings in this one thread. For the Love of Christ! When will this psychiatric cabaret ever end?
Posted by Alive-(What Box) (Member # 10819) on :
(^He spams this everywhere.)
Posted by humanity (Member # 15871) on :
huh???
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ Egmond Codpiece is another psychotic homosexual troll here in Egyptsearch who accuses me, Knowledge, Doug, Ta-Seti, and a couple of other trolls of being the same person!!
It's obvious he suffers from delusional paranoia. Any sane person can see that we are not the same person not only by our very different writing styles but even our very different IP addresses. Posted by humanityb (Member # 14404) on :
to get back to the topic why do most europeans in the west forego the study of their own ancestry and cultural history?
Posted by brick (Member # 20331) on :
quote:Originally posted by humanityb: to get back to the topic why do most europeans in the west forego the study of their own ancestry and cultural history?
Because many of them have low self-esteem.
Posted by DHDoxies (Member # 19701) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: ^^^Because Celts were Black people - put down your high school history book and read an anthropology book.
BBC - Sunday, 30 June, 2002, 15:31 GMT 16:31 UK English and Welsh are races apart
Gene scientists claim to have found proof that the Welsh are the "true" Britons. The research supports the idea that Celtic Britain underwent a form of ethnic cleansing by Anglo-Saxons invaders following the Roman withdrawal in the fifth century. It suggests that between 50% and 100% of the indigenous population of what was to become England was wiped out, with Offa's Dyke acting as a "genetic barrier" protecting those on the Welsh side. And the upheaval can be traced to this day through genetic differences between the English and the Welsh.
Academics at University College in London comparing a sample of men from the UK with those from an area of the Netherlands where the Anglo-Saxons are thought to have originated found the English subjects had genes that were almost identical. But there were clear differences between the genetic make-up of Welsh people studied. The research team studied the Y-chromosome, which is passed almost unchanged from father to son, and looked for certain genetic markers. They chose seven market towns mentioned in the Domesday Book of 1086 and studied 313 male volunteers whose paternal grandfather had also lived in the area. They then compared this with samples from Norway and with Friesland, now a northern province of the Netherlands. The English and Frisians studied had almost identical genetic make-up but the English and Welsh were very different.
The researchers concluded the most likely explanation for this was a large-scale Anglo-Saxon invasion, which devastated the Celtic population of England, but did not reach Wales. Dr Mark Thomas, of the Centre for Genetic Anthropology at UCL, said their findings suggested that a migration occurred within the last 2,500 years. It reinforced the idea that the Welsh were the true indigenous Britons. In April last year, research for a BBC programme on the Vikings revealed strong genetic links between the Welsh and Irish Celts and the Basques of northern Spain and south France. It suggested a possible link between the Celts and Basques, dating back tens of thousands of years. The UCL research into the more recent Anglo-Saxon period suggested a migration on a huge scale. "It appears England is made up of an ethnic cleansing event from people coming across from the continent after the Romans left," he said.
Archaeologists after the Second World War rejected the traditionally held view that an Anglo-Saxon invasion pushed the indigenous Celtic Britons to the fringes of Britain. Instead, they said the arrival of Anglo-Saxon culture could have come from trade or a small ruling elite. But the latest research by the UCL team, "using genetics as a history book", appears to support the original view of a large-scale invasion of England. It suggests that the Welsh border was more of a genetic barrier to the Anglo-Saxon Y chromosome gene flow than the North Sea. Dr Thomas added: "Our findings completely overturn the modern view of the origins of the English."
Mike you stupid White people hating, History stealing, Lying, Black racist, Black supremacist son of satan. Stop trying to steal other people's history, heritage & identities. The Celts were NOT Black and you know it.
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)