posted 18 August, 2011 02:41 PM
Were Africans the Basques of Prehistoric Spain? ========
The answer is yes they were, the Basques migrated from North Africa.
The Basques (as their modern descendants) belong to the oldest Caucasoid Gracile Meditterenean racial stock.
The Meditterenean race is Caucasoid (white), not Negroid (black).
So you have the geographical origin correct, just the race completely wrong.
Posts: 2408 | From: My mother's basement | Registered: Dec 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted 18 August, 2011 05:27 PM
^The Basques come originally from Africa, yet you imply that they are from Caucasus by calling them Caucasoid or Caucasians?
What's up?
Posts: 7419 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by IronLion: ^How the the Basques come originally from Africa, yet you imply that they are from Caucasus by calling them Caucasoid or Caucasians?
What's up?
Caucasoids migrated into North Africa in 12,000 BC. The natives there were a small population of Capoids.
Negroids were not in North Africa until 2000 BC, 10k after the Caucasoids.
The Negroid (Black) race is a recent mutation -
'True' Black Africans appear as a recent adaptive radiation in the above dendrograms, apparently branching off from an ancestral Pygmy population -- a line of ancestry also indicated by osteological data (Coon 1962:651-656; Watson et al. 1996). This radiation seems to have occurred somewhere in West Africa. Before the Bantu expansion about 3,000 years ago, true Black Africans were absent from the continent's central, eastern, and southern regions (Cavalli-Sforza 1986:361-362; Oliver 1966). They were also absent from the middle Nile until about 4,000 years ago, at which time they begin to appear in paintings from Pharaonic Egypt and in skeletal remains from Nubia (Junker 1921).
Posts: 2408 | From: My mother's basement | Registered: Dec 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by IronLion: ^How the the Basques come originally from Africa, yet you imply that they are from Caucasus by calling them Caucasoid or Caucasians?
What's up?
Caucasoids migrated into North Africa in 12,000 BC. The natives there were a small population of Capoids.
Negroids were not in North Africa until 2000 BC, 10k after the Caucasoids.
The Negroid (Black) race is a recent mutation -
'True' Black Africans appear as a recent adaptive radiation in the above dendrograms, apparently branching off from an ancestral Pygmy population -- a line of ancestry also indicated by osteological data (Coon 1962:651-656; Watson et al. 1996). This radiation seems to have occurred somewhere in West Africa. Before the Bantu expansion about 3,000 years ago, true Black Africans were absent from the continent's central, eastern, and southern regions (Cavalli-Sforza 1986:361-362; Oliver 1966). They were also absent from the middle Nile until about 4,000 years ago, at which time they begin to appear in paintings from Pharaonic Egypt and in skeletal remains from Nubia (Junker 1921).
You say Negroes evolved 3000 years ago. Do you mean expanded their population or evolved? here read your own source again:
quote: Before the Bantu expansion about 3,000 years ago, true Black Africans were absent from the continent's central, eastern, and southern regions (Cavalli-Sforza 1986:361-362; Oliver 1966)
Cashitty, do you know what they mean by Bantu Expansion?
Your article says Negros branched off from Pygmies. Do you know that Pygmies are the oldest stock of humanity? If Negros branched off from the oldest stock of humanity, where did Pinkoids branch of from? What is your human family branch?
I await your response. Posts: 7419 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted 18 August, 2011 10:34 PM
During the Bantu expansion the Negroids moved into north, east and central africa. Prior to that they had only been in West Africa.
The natives of Africa are Capoids, not Negroids. There are huge genetic and morphological differences in race between the two.
Also remember blacks have been killing the bushmen for thousands of years as well as the pygmies. Blacks hunt down the pygmies and even cook them.
The ancestors of Caucasoids are proto-Caucasoids like the Cro-Magnon and other Paleolithics.
The entire Homo genus has had racial divergences for hundreds of thousands of millions of years in proto-forms.
I believe the earliest proto-Caucasoid skull is 33,000 B.P and was found somewhere around the Czech Republic.
Cro magnon art head 26,000 years old -
heavy brows, long straight hair. Clearly not negroid.
Posts: 2408 | From: My mother's basement | Registered: Dec 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted 19 August, 2011 06:02 AM
Some readings for Cashitty:
Hieroglyphics sign for Batu/Bantu:
Where are the Bantus from:
Kenyan Bantu oral traditions recall a southerly migration from Egypt.
The following sources of accounts of migrations of some of the Bantu speakers in Kenya are taken from:
i) Kenya an official handbook
ii) Story of Africa from earliest times, Book one, A.J Willis
iii) Longman GHC, E.S Atieno Odhimbo, John N. B. N. I Were
iv) Studies done by Cheik Anta Diop
Almost all the Bantu people living in Kenya speak of a migration from up North. The people of Marachi location are known to have come from Elgon although other clans of the same group came from Egypt. They came in canoes on the River Nile as far as Juja, Uganda and later moved eastward into lake Victoria. They changed course until Asembo and separated with the Luo who walked along the lake shore but the rest crossed into South Nyanza. They then turned northwards and reached Butere and then moved on to Luanda and to Ekhomo.
The Luo people were behind them right from Egypt.
The people of Samia location came from Egypt on foot.
The Abakhekhe clan too originated from Egypt on foot.
The Abachoni clan originally came from Egypt on foot.
The people of Bukusu originally came from Egypt in canoes.
The Luhya oral literature of origin, suggest a migration into their present-day locations from the north. Virtually all sub-ethnic groups claim to have migrated first south from Misri, or Egypt. In one of the Luhya dialect the word 'Abaluhya' means 'the people of the North', or 'Northerns'
Other sources report that the following Bantu people, the Luhya, Baganda, Nyarwanda, Rundi of Burindi, Kikuyu, and the Zulu all claim a southerly migration from Egypt. Moreover there are many groups of Bantu speakers from Tanzania, Mozambique, Congo, Zambia, Malawi, South Africa, who testify a southerly migration from Egypt. There are even groups of people from West Africa who migrated from Egypt into their present day location.
Note: The settlements of the Bantu in West Africa may have been a result of two streams of Bantu emigrants: one from the Congo basin and the other directly from the Nile valley.
See also:
References:
The Restatement Of Bantu Origin and Meru History. Alfred M M'Imanyara Longman Kenya UNESCO General History Of Africa, Vol1,2 Egypt Before The Pharaohs. Michael A Hoffman The Peopling Of Africa. James L Newman Ancient Egypt and Black Africa. Dr Theophile Obenga Civilisation or Barbarism. Cheikh Anta Diop The Children Of Woot. A history of the Kuba People. Jan Vansina Indaba My Children. VusamaZulu Credo. Mutwa Wikipidia Languages Of Africa. Joseph H. Greenberg
posted 19 August, 2011 06:29 AM
Caucasoids did not originate in Africa, they migrated there in 12,000 BC. Races excluding the Capoid and Australoid only date the the Holcene, yet they have proto-forms. The Proto-Caucasoids are the Cro-Magnon's.
White skin in Caucasoids is a recent mutation, from 10,000 - 7,000 years ago.
The original branch of the Caucasoid, were the Meditterenean race - olive skinned, dark haired and slender. Absolutely nothing to do with Negroids.
Exameple of Meditterenean race -
Catherine Zeta Jones - olive or brunette-white skin, dark hair, darkish eyes.
This is how the earliest Caucasoids looked, and proto-Caucasoids ten's of thousands of years ago.
Posts: 2408 | From: My mother's basement | Registered: Dec 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by cassiterides: Caucasoids did not originate in Africa, they migrated there in 12,000 BC. ..
LoL...they arrived from where? Czechosolvakia?
quote: Originally posted by Cashitty; Races excluding the Capoid and Australoid only date the the Holcene, yet they have proto-forms. The Proto-Caucasoids are the Cro-Magnon's.
White skin in Caucasoids is a recent mutation, from 10,000 - 7,000 years ago.
The original branch of the Caucasoid, were the Meditterenean race - olive-skin, dark haired and slender. Absolutely nothing to do with Negroids....
Olive skin is black:
Aha. You are admitting Mike111 has been teaching you a lot. Now you know why we call you an albino:
But then where can one find artefacts and skeletal evidence of those "Mediterranean" races in Neolithic Europe? Here?:
posted 19 August, 2011 08:00 AM
LoL...they arrived from where? Czechosolvakia? ========
The cradle was in south-west asia.
''The Mediterranean race, then, is indigenous to, and the principal element in, the Southwest Asia, and the greatest concentration of a highly evolved Mediterranean type falls among two of the most ancient Semitic-speaking peoples, notably the Arabs and the Jews (Although it may please neither party, this is the truth.). The Mediterraneans occupy the center of the stage; their areas of greatest concentration are precisely those where civilization is the oldest. This is to be expected, since it was they who produced it and it, in a sense, that produced them." - Carleton Coon, the Story of the Middle East, 1958, pp. 154-157
I only said Proto-Caucasoids were in Europe as Cro-Magnon Paleolithic types, not Caucasoids in their [b]modern[b] form.
Modern races excluding the capoid and australoid only have their origins at the beginning of the Holocene.
Olive skinned (Caucsoid):
Black skinned (Negroid):
--
Since all blacks are self-haters and hate very dark skin they claim olive skinned meds are ''black'' as they crave those lighter features and straight hair.
Posts: 2408 | From: My mother's basement | Registered: Dec 2010
| IP: Logged |
''The Mediterranean race, then, is indigenous to, and the principal element in, the Southwest Asia, and the greatest concentration of a highly evolved Mediterranean type falls among two of the most ancient Semitic-speaking peoples, notably the Arabs and the Jews (Although it may please neither party, this is the truth.). The Mediterraneans occupy the center of the stage; their areas of greatest concentration are precisely those where civilization is the oldest. This is to be expected, since it was they who produced it and it, in a sense, that produced them." - Carleton Coon, the Story of the Middle East, 1958, pp. 154-157
baa...baa...baaaaaaa
--
Since all blacks are self-haters and hate very dark skin they claim olive skinned meds are ''black'' as they crave those lighter features and straight hair. [/QB]
Explain this:
“So striking” writes Professor Elliot Smith, “is the family likeness between the early Neolithic peoples of the British Isles and the Mediterranean and the bulk of the population, both ancient and modern, of Egypt and East Africa, that the description of the bones of an Early Briton of that remote epoch might apply in all essential details to an inhabitant of Somaliland. (The Ancient Egyptians, p. 58.)
“So striking” writes Professor Elliot Smith, “is the family likeness between the early Neolithic peoples of the British Isles and the Mediterranean and the bulk of the population, both ancient and modern, of Egypt and East Africa, that the description of the bones of an Early Briton of that remote epoch might apply in all essential details to an inhabitant of Somaliland. (The Ancient Egyptians, p. 58.) ======
I own this work in original print.
Grafton Elliot Smith believed the egyptians were CAUCASOID, not negroid.
You are making a fool of yourself by quoting works you clearly have never read.
p.50 from the same work -
''The hair of the Proto-Egyptians was precisely similar to that of the brunet South European or Iberian People of present day''
continued p. 51 -
''it presented no resemblance whatever to the so- called ''woolly'' appearance...of the negro's hair''
pp.55-65 clarify that Elliot believed the egyptians were the same race as South Europeans or the Meditterenean race.
Thoughout his work, Elliot sharply maintained the ancient egyptians were never negroid.
Please read works properly before making a fool of yourself. You clearly are no book reader. You just have two or three quotes from works you don't understand and have never read.
Posts: 2408 | From: My mother's basement | Registered: Dec 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by cassiterides: and this one from Central Europe, Bratislava Medieval period: =======
what about it?
Its shows white men and woman. If you look closely you can see some of the woman are also blonde with long flowing hair.
Stop the self-hatred and embrace your own history.
You must be on meth. But I gonna help you here:
THIS IS SO-CALLED WHITE:
Whereas an Albino Green snake is pink:
An Albino Brown baby is pink: Psoraisis already?
An albino Dravidian:
AND THESE ARE MUURS, THE ORIGINAL PEOPLE OF EUROPE: YOUR SO-CALLED BLACK AFRICANS :
Explain this:
“So striking” writes Professor Elliot Smith, “is the family likeness between the early Neolithic peoples of the British Isles and the Mediterranean and the bulk of the population, both ancient and modern, of Egypt and East Africa, that the description of the bones of an Early Briton of that remote epoch might apply in all essential details to an inhabitant of Somaliland. (The Ancient Egyptians, p. 58.)
posted 19 August, 2011 04:44 PM
HAHA! cosmetic dread! You are one funny dude! There is not one Black person in that image save this!
What the icon really proves is that the devils are Black. Had you claim that, I doubt you would have gotten an argument from anyone.
Posts: 1340 | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted 19 August, 2011 04:54 PM
Cosmetic dread, you are a fool who does not even know how to apply basic art interpretation to iconography. Notice the naked WHITE MAN weighed against the scale of judgment. The scale tilts in his favor to the Saints (while tilting away from the nigger-devils) --they therefore petition on his behalf and he triumps over the BLACK DEVILS who seek to chastise him (LOL)!!! Christianity was born out of the caucasian race, and non-caucasoids are graced by it. Humble yourself my dude.
posted 19 August, 2011 05:09 PM
^No dread-clown, deal with the original icon you presented. Dont run from it. Now... explain why the devils are depicted as Niggers and why the man who is proffered salvation in the scene is depicted white?
Posts: 1340 | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged |
Now, about the picture I put up, you mean your albino blue eyes are dysfunctional as well?
I will assist you one last time:
THIS IS SO-CALLED WHITE:
Whereas an Albino Green snake is pink:
An Albino Brown baby is pink: Psoraisis already?
An albino Dravidian's pink face:
AND THESE ARE MUURS, THE ORIGINAL PEOPLE OF EUROPE: YOUR SO-CALLED BLACK AFRICANS :
Explain this:
“So striking” writes Professor Elliot Smith, “is the family likeness between the early Neolithic peoples of the British Isles and the Mediterranean and the bulk of the population, both ancient and modern, of Egypt and East Africa, that the description of the bones of an Early Briton of that remote epoch might apply in all essential details to an inhabitant of Somaliland. (The Ancient Egyptians, p. 58.)
posted 19 August, 2011 05:48 PM
^No, cosmetic wanna-be-dread, address my points I made regarding your original icon. I await thee!
Cosmetic dread, you are a fool who does not even know how to apply basic art interpretation to iconography. Notice the naked WHITE MAN weighed against the scale of judgment. The scale tilts in his favor to the Saints (while tilting away from the nigger-devils) --they therefore petition on his behalf and he triumps over the BLACK DEVILS who seek to chastise him (LOL)!!! Christianity was born out of the caucasian race, and non-caucasoids are graced by it. Humble yourself my dude.
Posts: 1340 | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged |
“So striking” writes Professor Elliot Smith, “is the family likeness between the early Neolithic peoples of the British Isles and the Mediterranean and the bulk of the population, both ancient and modern, of Egypt and East Africa, that the description of the bones of an Early Briton of that remote epoch might apply in all essential details to an inhabitant of Somaliland. (The Ancient Egyptians, p. 58.) ===========
I already have.
p.50 from the same work -
''The hair of the Proto-Egyptians was precisely similar to that of the brunet South European or Iberian People of present day''
continued p. 51 -
''it presented no resemblance whatever to the so- called ''woolly'' appearance...of the negro's hair''
According to Grafton Elliot Smith, the egyptians were CAUCASOID, straight haired Meeditterenean's like southern europeans.
You basically owned yourself when you quote from a book - you clearly have never read.
Posts: 2408 | From: My mother's basement | Registered: Dec 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by cassiterides: Explain this:
“So striking” writes Professor Elliot Smith, “is the family likeness between the early Neolithic peoples of the British Isles and the Mediterranean and the bulk of the population, both ancient and modern, of Egypt and East Africa, that the description of the bones of an Early Briton of that remote epoch might apply in all essential details to an inhabitant of Somaliland. (The Ancient Egyptians, p. 58.) ===========
I already have.
p.50 from the same work -
''The hair of the Proto-Egyptians was precisely similar to that of the brunet South European or Iberian People of present day''
continued p. 51 -
''it presented no resemblance whatever to the so- called ''woolly'' appearance...of the negro's hair''
According to Grafton Elliot Smith, the egyptians were CAUCASOID, straight haired Meeditterenean's like southern europeans.
You basically owned yourself when you quote from a book - you clearly have never read.
Oh shut your distraction and start fessing up, little wannabe Europoid, Central Asian albino!
This passage here talks about East Africans being similar to Neolithic peoples of the British Isle. I asked you to explain it and you started whinning about negro. Gosh, are you that dumb?
Show me a picture of those East Africans Professor Elliot was talking about?:
quote:“So striking” writes Professor Elliot Smith, “is the family likeness between the early Neolithic peoples of the British Isles and the Mediterranean and the bulk of the population, both ancient and modern, of Egypt and East Africa , that the description of the bones of an Early Briton of that remote epoch might apply in all essential details to an inhabitant of Somaliland. (The Ancient Egyptians, p. 58.)
East Africans:
Cashitty, we are waiting... Posts: 7419 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:(while tilting away from the nigger-devils) --they therefore petition on his behalf and he triumps over the BLACK DEVILS who seek to chastise him (LOL)!!! Christianity was born out of the caucasian race, and non-caucasoids are graced by it. Humble yourself my dude.
According to the Epistle of Barnabas (c. 70-100), the Devil was known as ''the black one'' and appears as a black ethiopian.
In the Acts of Peter (xx11), Peter sees the Devil in the shape of a foul-looking woman who was all 'black and filthy like an Ethiopian''
white = good, pure, beauty black = evil, not pure, ugly
Throughout medieval art in europe, the devil or satan is found portrayed as a black ethiopian.
A modern academic work which discusses these Saracens, demons, & Jews: making monsters in medieval art 2003.
The ''monsters'' of medieval folklore were black people - because whites when they first encountered them found them ugly and strange looking.
Posts: 2408 | From: My mother's basement | Registered: Dec 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted 19 August, 2011 06:22 PM
Show me a picture of those East Africans Professor Elliot was talking about?: =======
When the nonadaptive aspects of craniofacial configuration are the basis for assessment, the Somalis cluster with Europeans before showing a tie with the people of West Africa or the Congo Basin.
Posts: 2408 | From: My mother's basement | Registered: Dec 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by cassiterides: Show me a picture of those East Africans Professor Elliot was talking about?: =======
When the nonadaptive aspects of craniofacial configuration are the basis for assessment, the Somalis cluster with Europeans before showing a tie with the people of West Africa or the Congo Basin.
Clearer picture please. Colour picture preferable. Just google an East African that would look like what Prof Elliot was talking about. Post someone with hair too...
Thanks Posts: 7419 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted 19 August, 2011 06:29 PM
As well, we find the devil depicted black in Moslem art.
quote:Originally posted by cassiterides: According to the Epistle of Barnabas (c. 70-100), the Devil was known as ''the black one'' and appears as a black ethiopian.
In the Acts of Peter (xx11), Peter sees the Devil in the shape of a foul-looking woman who was all 'black and filthy like an Ethiopian''
white = good, pure, beauty black = evil, not pure, ugly
Throughout medieval art in europe, the devil or satan is found portrayed as a black ethiopian.
A modern academic work which discusses these Saracens, demons, & Jews: making monsters in medieval art 2003.
The ''monsters'' of medieval folklore were black people - because whites when they first encountered them found them ugly and strange looking.
quote:Originally posted by Confirming Truth: As well, we find the devil depicted black in Moslem art.
quote:Originally posted by cassiterides: According to the Epistle of Barnabas (c. 70-100), the Devil was known as ''the black one'' and appears as a black ethiopian.
In the Acts of Peter (xx11), Peter sees the Devil in the shape of a foul-looking woman who was all 'black and filthy like an Ethiopian''
white = good, pure, beauty black = evil, not pure, ugly
Throughout medieval art in europe, the devil or satan is found portrayed as a black ethiopian.
A modern academic work which discusses these Saracens, demons, & Jews: making monsters in medieval art 2003.
The ''monsters'' of medieval folklore were black people - because whites when they first encountered them found them ugly and strange looking.
Pink Serpent
Behold the Black Mother of God:
Posts: 7419 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted 19 August, 2011 06:33 PM
Prof Elliot is talking of a race now extinct in East Africa in pure form. The Meditterenean race there has intermixed with blacks, however this is why some East Africans have thin noses and other Caucasoid facial features still visible -
Compare to negroids:
Both are different races.
Th Caucasoid element in east africans has also been proven via genetics. If you want a study i can show.
Posts: 2408 | From: My mother's basement | Registered: Dec 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Prof Elliot is talking of a race now extinct in East Africa in pure form.
Prof Elliot said Modern East Africans! Read the statement again!
Point out where he said anything about "pure east African race"
Point out in that statement where he said that race was extinct.
Then don't forget to address Professors Boule and Vallois' citation just below.
We are waiting:
quote: Explain this:
“So striking” writes Professor Elliot Smith, “is the family likeness between the early Neolithic peoples of the British Isles and the Mediterranean and the bulk of the population, both ancient and modern, of Egypt and East Africa, that the description of the bones of an Early Briton of that remote epoch might apply in all essential details to an inhabitant of Somaliland. (The Ancient Egyptians, p. 58.)
This is from Bratislava in Slovakia. Shows Byzantine stylistic influences derived from Constantinople. Some of the figures are clearly blonde.
This is from Ethiopia. The figure is St George imagined as a brown East African. Also shows Byzantine stylistic influences, probably derived via Egypt.
Unidentified members of a modern Ethiopian church, including some Jamaicans by the look of it.
quote: Explain this:
“So striking” writes Professor Elliot Smith, “is the family likeness between the early Neolithic peoples of the British Isles and the Mediterranean and the bulk of the population, both ancient and modern, of Egypt and East Africa, that the description of the bones of an Early Briton of that remote epoch might apply in all essential details to an inhabitant of Somaliland. (The Ancient Egyptians, p. 58.)
It is a fact that the ancient Britons were relations of the Basque people, and also of North Africans (Certain Berber tribes in Morocco can be understood by Gaelic speaking Scots). The Berbers are in turn related to certain East Africans, sharing the E haplotype. However neither have much to do with negroids or bantu speakers. A northern Ethiopian or an Eritraean will not infrequently look more like a Briton or a Spaniard (notwithstanding the darker skin colour and curlier hair) than they will like one of the negroids of the tribes inhabit the south.
Observe: Basque woman (Mediterranean caucasoid)
Kabeyle Berber woman (Mediterranean caucasoid):
Eritraean and Ethiopian women (Mediterranean caucasoid):
Southern Ethiopian (Mursi) woman (negroid).
This re-enforces the point that has already been made. Anyone who wants to portray the original Basques or Britons as negroids is barking mand. Ethiopians may be black but many of them are not at all negroid, and British and Spanish people have if anything more claim to connection with the race of the Ancient Egyptians than do the descendants of tropical West Africans, whose ancestors, being from the region between Sierra Leone and Ghana, come from almost further away geographically!
Posts: 870 | From: uk | Registered: Apr 2011
| IP: Logged |
This is from Bratislava. Shows Byzantine stylistic influences derived from Constantinople. Some of the figures are blonde.
This is from Ethiopia. The figure is St George imagined as a brown East African. Also shows Byzantine stylistic influences, probably derived via Egypt.
Unidentified members of a modern Ethiopian church, including some Jamaicans by the look of it.
quote: Explain this:
“So striking” writes Professor Elliot Smith, “is the family likeness between the early Neolithic peoples of the British Isles and the Mediterranean and the bulk of the population, both ancient and modern, of Egypt and East Africa, that the description of the bones of an Early Briton of that remote epoch might apply in all essential details to an inhabitant of Somaliland. (The Ancient Egyptians, p. 58.)
It is a fact that the ancient Britons were relations of the Basque people, and also of North Africans (Certain Berber tribes in Morocco can be understood by Gaelic speaking Scots). The Berbers are in turn related to certain East Africans, sharing the E haplotype. However neither have much to do with negroids or bantu speakers. A northern Ethiopian or an Eritraean will not infrequently look more like a Briton or a Spaniard (notwithstanding the darker skin colour and curlier hair) than they will like one of the negroids of the tribes inhabit the south.
Observe:
.....
Eritraean and Ethiopian women (Mediterranean caucasoid):
Southern Ethiopian (Mursi) woman (negroid).
Anyone who wants to portray the original Basques or Britons as negroids is barking mand. Ethiopians may be black but many of them are not at all negroid. [/QB]
Rahotep
Are you trying to say that neolithic Basques looked like the Ethiopians Amhara or Oromos? Please expatiate further...
Thanks
Posts: 7419 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted 19 August, 2011 07:14 PM
Neolithic Basques probably looked the similar to how modern Basques invariably do, although they may have absorbed a bit of Frankish and Visigothic blood. Modern Amhars and Oromos meanwhile have probably absorbed blood from surrounding African populations. You can get a general idea from comparing modern peoples but it is only a valid exercise up to a point. It's not rocket science to surmising the likely effects of geography and history.
By the way I have trouble believing that the second extract you quoted (without citation) belongs with the first. It sounds like afrocentric propaganda to me.
Posts: 870 | From: uk | Registered: Apr 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted 19 August, 2011 07:28 PM
By the way, also, this statue from Empuries (originally a Greek colony in Spain) is a Roman woman, not a Celt (or a negro, and not with an 'afro').
The hair is piled up at the fromt as per a particular style that was briefly popular.
Here are some other examples of the style:
The curls only form a sort of crest, as stated, it is not a ball of fuzz.
quote:Originally posted by rahotep101: Neolithic Basques probably looked the similar to how modern Basques invariably do, although they may have absorbed a bit of Frankish and Visigothic blood. ......
What is your authority for saying so? Are you smarter than Prof. Elliot? Do you have more expertise in this area than Prof. Boule or Prof Valloir? They all are pink people like you, and very well educated. Authorities in their field.
Read what they said
quote: Explain this:
“So striking” writes Professor Elliot Smith, “is the family likeness between the early Neolithic peoples of the British Isles and the Mediterranean and the bulk of the population, both ancient and modern, of Egypt and East Africa, that the description of the bones of an Early Briton of that remote epoch might apply in all essential details to an inhabitant of Somaliland. (The Ancient Egyptians, p. 58.)
posted 19 August, 2011 07:54 PM
The African Land of Spain
By Ogu-Eji-Ofo-Annu
According to the British Encyclopedia:
“Spain is shaped like a gigantic bull’s hide stretching in the sun between Europe and Africa. Spain’s large area of 195,379 square miles (506,030 square kilometers) covers about five sixths of the Iberian Peninsula. In Western Europe, only France is larger. At its widest Spain stretches some 635 miles (1,022 kilometers) from east to west. From north to south the country is about 550 miles (885 kilometers) long.”
Spain has a coastline which stretches in some parts for 1,700 miles (2,740 kilometers) along the Mediterranean Sea from the eastern end of the Pyrenees mountain chain to the Strait of Gibraltar. Spain shares with Portugal the peninsula’s coast which borders the Atlantic.
Since ancient times Spain has been physically and culturally a part of Africa because both land mass used to share a common land bridge across what is now the Strait of Gibraltar. Whereas Spain was physically connected with Africa in the ancient times and was only separated by an earth quake in relatively near antiquity, it was always separated physically and culturally from Europe by the Pyrenees Mountain.
According to the Encyclopedia Britannica:
“Of all Europe’s mountain ranges, the jagged and often snowcapped Pyrenees, 270 miles (435 kilometers) long, have functioned most effectively as a barrier to human movement. Unlike the Alps, the Pyrenees have no low foothills or hospitable valleys to ease access into and through their heights. Rather, the Pyrenees rise abruptly from the flanking plains of France and Spain with only steep gorges and steep-walled natural amphitheaters that lead to almost impassable lofty summits. The French peasant’s adage, Africa begins with the Pyrenees, is not without a large measure of truth in emphasizing the historic significance of the Pyrenees as a barrier in the development of Spain. In the words of the U.S. historian Will Durant, Spain’s mountains, particularly the Pyrenees, “were her protection and tragedy: they gave her comparative security from external attack, but hindered her economic advance, her political unity, and her participation in European thought. The continued political independence of the tiny principality of Andorra is largely a result of its remote location amid the Pyrenees between France and Spain.” (Encyclopedia Britannica )
The Moorish Story:
The ancient Maghreb which spanned Morrocco and Algeria has been populated for longer than most of the rest of the world. There is evidence of people living there as far back as 200,000 BC, and cave paintings depict a fairly vibrant Neolithic culture living thriving around 6000 BC, when the climate of the Sahara was very different.
Then the area that is now Sahara had giant lakes, and lush savannah land teeming with wild life. Cultural complex were developed in that area and extended to nearby Iberia, onward across Southern Europe as far as Black sea. These people have been called various confusing names (such as Cro-Magnons, Aurignacians, Grimaldi, Celto-Iberians, etc) by European anthropologists to hide their African cultural roots. Eventually the various peoples who lived in the Central Sahara area formed the people now known as the Touaregs/Moors/Berbers.
At its shortest point to Africa, Spain is separated by a strait of water about 8 kilometers in width. It is possible to stand on one end of Africa and observe actions on the Spanish side of the coast. Racist Euro-centric scholars would want us to believe that for 100, 000 years, the Africans who lived on the opposite side of the Mediterranean coast were so incurious and incapable that they could not cross an 8 mile water strait, whereas the Cro-Magnon man could do a 10,000 kilometers trek crossing the impassable Mount Pyrenees, a mountain of barrier against ingress from Europe and successfully established themselves successfully in Spain. But the ridiculousness of such a thesis is self-evident. In full recognition of the fact that Africans were the first to establish communities on both side of the Mediterranean coast, classical scholars have used such moniker as “Ibero-maurisian†culture to describe the early inhabitants of Spain. Maurisian stands for Maures…Africans.
Since the earliest periods, the Moors(including the Berbers) had spread out from Central Sahara, Northern Africa, into Portugal Southern Spain, and Southern France. Those in North Africa are described as the Berber/Moors of North Africa while those in Spain are described as the ancient Iberians (Ibero-Maurisians). Those in the Mediterranean are called the pre-Hellenistic Aegean or Creteans. (See: Arnaiz-Villena A, Iliakis P, Gonzalez-Regueiro Hevilla M et al. The origin of Cretan populations as determined by characterization of HLA alleles. Tissue Antigens 1999 53:213-26. See further, E. Gomez-Casado, P. del Moral, J. Marti´nez-Laso, A. Garcia-Gomez, L. Allende, C. Silvera-Redondo, J. Longas, M. Gonzalez-Hevilla, M. Kandil, J. Zamora, A. Arnaiz-Villena; HLA genes in Arabic-speaking Moroccans: Close relatedness to Berbers and Iberians; Tissue Antigens 2000: 55: 239249.)
Berbers of Libya North Africa and the Mediterranean had in later antiquity fallen under the influence of the Black Carthaginians/Phoenicians sailors. Originally from the Horn of Africa, the Carthaginian/Phoenicians a sea faring migratory people, had settled in Canaan/Palestine and Syria. A group of them later journeyed back again to their original motherland Africa, but this time they settled along the coast of Tunisia.
The Phoenicians had arrived around 800 BC. They formed an alliance with the Berber groups which enabled them to gained power rapidly. They eventually became the most influential and strongest power in the Mediterranean partly due to their largely Berber-staffed army. They controlled the Northwest coast of Africa as well as the Iberia the regions where the Berbers have lived in since the earliest human records. They founded the Iberian city of Cadiz among many others.
Carthage and Roman were soon colliding since it was that the Romans had tried to muscle in on the lucrative maritime routes controlled exclusively by the Carthaginian Empire. The trade competition led to armed conflict known in history as the Punic wars. Carthage lost both of the Punic wars to regional upstart Rome.
After losing the first Punic War to Rome, many Berbers became disaffected with the regional power Carthage and thus rebelled and gained a large amount of independence. In modern-day Algeria, then called Numidia, two main kingdoms emerged. These eventually united under Masinissa, who teamed up with Rome (and especially with Scipio Africanus) to launch devastating attacks on Carthage.
It was also in the course of the second Punic wars that the great African General Hannibal mobilized in North Africa and Iberia and then marched into the Roman Empire and ceased most of its European territories. Hannibal actually ruled western European section of the Roman Empire with the exception of the city of Rome itself which gates he had reached several times before being fought off.
Eventually Carthage lost the Punic wars and Hannibal committed suicide after having been betrayed and disappointed by high-ranking officials of Carthage. Rome thereupon destroyed Carthage, took over possession of its territories including the Iberian Peninsula and shared out to its vassals and client states.....
posted 19 August, 2011 08:52 PM
The Elliot Smith quote has already been explained. Morphologically and genetically most East Africans are closer European (Caucasoid) than Sub-Saharan African (Negroid).
Elliot Smith on the hair of the ancient egyptians:
p.50 from the same work -
''The hair of the Proto-Egyptians was precisely similar to that of the brunet South European or Iberian People of present day''
continued p. 51 -
''it presented no resemblance whatever to the so- called ''woolly'' appearance...of the negro's hair''
- The ancient egyptians were straight haired, not wooly - which is clear anthropological evidence they were not Negroid since blacks aren't straight haired.
Posts: 2408 | From: My mother's basement | Registered: Dec 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Prof Elliot is talking of a race now extinct in East Africa in pure form.
Prof Elliot referred to Modern East Africans! Read his statement again! Dunce!
Point out where he said anything about "pure east African race"?
Point out in that statement where he said that race was extinct?
Then don't forget to address Professors Boule and Vallois' citation just below.
We are waiting:
quote: Explain this:
“So striking” writes Professor Elliot Smith, “is the family likeness between the early Neolithic peoples of the British Isles and the Mediterranean and the bulk of the population, both ancient and modern, of Egypt and East Africa, that the description of the bones of an Early Briton of that remote epoch might apply in all essential details to an inhabitant of Somaliland. (The Ancient Egyptians, p. 58.)
quote:Originally posted by IronLion: [QB] [What is your authority for saying so? Are you smarter than Prof. Elliot? Do you have more expertise in this area than Prof. Boule or Prof Valloir? They all are pink people like you, and very well educated. Authorities in their field.
Where does the prof. say they looked vastly different?
quote: “So striking” writes Professor Elliot Smith, “is the family likeness between the early Neolithic peoples of the British Isles and the Mediterranean and the bulk of the population, both ancient and modern, of Egypt and East Africa, that the description of the bones of an Early Briton of that remote epoch might apply in all essential details to an inhabitant of Somaliland. (The Ancient Egyptians, p. 58.)
They still look similar in many cases.
Compare Ramesses II to the English composer Edward Elgar:
quote:Originally posted by cassiterides: The Elliot Smith quote has already been explained. Morphologically and genetically most East Africans are closer European (Caucasoid) than Sub-Saharan African (Negroid).
Elliot Smith on the hair of the ancient egyptians:
p.50 from the same work -
''The hair of the Proto-Egyptians was precisely similar to that of the brunet South European or Iberian People of present day''
continued p. 51 -
''it presented no resemblance whatever to the so- called ''woolly'' appearance...of the negro's hair''
- The ancient egyptians were straight haired, not wooly - which is clear anthropological evidence they were not Negroid since blacks aren't straight haired.
Well found! Nothing like seeing an afrocentric clown debunked by their own chosen sources.
Posts: 870 | From: uk | Registered: Apr 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote: Originally posted by rahotep101: Neolithic Basques probably looked the similar to how modern Basques invariably do, although they may have absorbed a bit of Frankish and Visigothic blood. ......
quote:Originally posted by IronLion: [QB] [What is your authority for saying so? Are you smarter than Prof. Elliot? Do you have more expertise in this area than Prof. Boule or Prof Valloir? They all are pink people like you, and very well educated. Authorities in their field.
quote:Originally posted by rahotep101: [QB] Where does the prof. say they looked vastly different? [QUOTE]
[QUOTE] Originally posted by IronLion: “So striking” writes Professor Elliot Smith, “is the family likeness between the early Neolithic peoples of the British Isles and the Mediterranean and the bulk of the population, both ancient and modern, of Egypt and East Africa, that the description of the bones of an Early Briton of that remote epoch might apply in all essential details to an inhabitant of Somaliland. (The Ancient Egyptians, p. 58.)
quote: Originally posted by Rahotep: They still look similar in many cases.
What are you rambling Rahotep?
I said provide me your authority that ancient Mediterraneans like Basques did not look like the BULK OF THE POPULATION OF MODERN EAST AFRICA, but rather look like the Visigoths, and the Franks, like you implied.
I am still waiting for your authority. Photospamming and eyeballing by a novice does not impress me.
quote:
Compare Ramesses II to the English composer Edward Elgar:
......
There is grand difference in the external occiptal bone protuberance measurement between modern Africans and modern Europeans. Africans have medium to extreme occipital bones protuberance. Europoids-Pinkoids today have none. In the past, the occipital measurement of ancient Europeans looked like that of today's Africans. Do you get the flow? Goosh, are you that fresh in this area?
Your so-called Ramses has medium to extreme occipit:
Compare
This is Akhenaten's skull, observe the extreme external occipital bone protuberance:
The pink modern European you put up there, like most Europeans of today has virtually minimal to no occipital bone:
compare
Posts: 7419 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted 20 August, 2011 07:11 AM
Akhenaten has no "opolo ori"/frontal lobe, that's whay he was the fucking cunt pharaoh who got kicked out of Egypt for being a menace.
Posts: 1819 | From: odesco baba | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by cassiterides: The Elliot Smith quote has already been explained. Morphologically and genetically most East Africans are closer European (Caucasoid) than Sub-Saharan African (Negroid).
Elliot Smith on the hair of the ancient egyptians:
p.50 from the same work -
''The hair of the Proto-Egyptians was precisely similar to that of the brunet South European or Iberian People of present day''
continued p. 51 -
''it presented no resemblance whatever to the so- called ''woolly'' appearance...of the negro's hair''
- The ancient egyptians were straight haired, not wooly - which is clear anthropological evidence they were not Negroid since blacks aren't straight haired.
Well found! Nothing like seeing an afrocentric clown debunked by their own chosen sources.
Cashitty is a liar who has never the Elliot Smith's book. You are so silly you cannot see he refused to explain the simple quote of Prof Elliot respecting skeletal similarities and went off on a flight of fancy about negro hair?
You sound like you are out of air yourself. Are you feeling overwhelmed?
Read below:
quote:Originally posted by IronLion:
quote:Originally posted by IronLion:
quote:Originally posted by Cashitty: Prof Elliot is talking of a race now extinct in East Africa in pure form.
Prof Elliot referred to Modern East Africans! Read his statement again! Dunce!
Point out where he said anything about "pure east African race"?
Point out in that statement where he said that race was extinct?
Then don't forget to address Professors Boule and Vallois' citation just below.
We are waiting:
quote: Explain this:
“So striking” writes Professor Elliot Smith, “is the family likeness between the early Neolithic peoples of the British Isles and the Mediterranean and the bulk of the population, both ancient and modern, of Egypt and East Africa, that the description of the bones of an Early Briton of that remote epoch might apply in all essential details to an inhabitant of Somaliland. (The Ancient Egyptians, p. 58.)
Morlachs (Mauro-Vlachs or Mavrovlachi, also Nigri Latini in Latin sources, meaning “Black Vlachs”; in Greek: mauros-valchio, in Serbian and Croatian Mor-laci [mor-latsi]) were a population of Vlachs. In another version their name comes from the slavic terms of “mor – ski-Vlasi” or Sea Vlachs.
The morlachs were shepherds that lived in the Dinaric Alps (western Balkans in modern use), seasonally migrating in search for better pastures for their sheep flocks (between mountains, in the summertime, and the sea shores, in the wintertime). They were a blend of previously Romanized indigenous peoples and new settled Roman army veterans and Roman colonists.
The adjective “black” may be used here with the meaning of “northern”, this metaphor probably deriving from the Turkish practice of indicating cardinal directions by colors.
Reports from the mid-11th century tell how the Morlachs lived in the mountainous regions of Montenegro, Bosnia, Stari Vlah, and Herzegovina …”
posted 20 August, 2011 08:12 AM
Clearly Europeans have become lighter skinned, but they have not become subject to morphological shift since prehistoric times. The similarity to fine-featured, proto-caucasian East Africans is quite striking still, in many cases. By the way Cassiterides is not a liar. G. Elliot Smith's book is on googlebooks, and the relevant quotes (about early Egyptian hair being the same as S. European hair today, and not like negroid hair) can be found here (actually on page 58):
G. Elliot Smith calls the proto-Egyptian a kinsman of all the Mediterranean peoples. Furthermore a long head was a feature of Mediterranean caucasians.
From Wikipedia:
quote:The Mediterranean race was thought to be prevalent in southern Europe, parts of Eastern Europe, most of North Africa, Northeast Africa, West Asia and parts of South Asia, Parts of Wales, Southern Scotland,[1] as well as parts of southwestern Ireland and western Great Britain,[2] and was characterized by moderate to short stature, long (dolichocephalic) or moderate (mesocephalic) skull, aquiline nose, dark hair, dark eyes and olive complexion.
Somalis are still to be found who more-or-less fit this description, despite centuries of mixing with other African populations.
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic