posted
Grand Vizier Nevsehirli Damat Ibrahim Pasa, by Jean Baptiste Vanmour, c. 1727 - c. 1730 Nevşehirli Damat Ibrahim Pasha (1666 – October 16, 1730) served as Grand Vizier for Sultan Ahmed III of the Ottoman Empire during the Tulip period.
Portrait of a Black Dignitary undated Oil on wood Jean-Baptiste Vanmour
The Great Lord in the Seraglio, with the Kizlar Ağası after Paintings by Jean-Baptiste Vanmour (Van Mour), 1671-1737
The Kizlar Ağası, head of the black eunuchs. He is the keeper of the harem of the Great Lord
The Kizlar Agha (Ottoman Turkish: قيزلر اغاسی, Turkish: Kızlar Ağası, "Agha of the [slave] Girls"), formally the Agha of the House of Felicity (Arabic: Aghat Dar al-Sa'ada, Turkish: Darüssaade ağa),[1][2] was the head of the eunuchs who guarded the Imperial Harem of the Ottoman Sultans in Constantinople. Due to his proximity to the Sultan and the role the harem ladies played in court intrigues, the post ranked among the most important in the Ottoman Empire until the early 19th century. Soon after its creation and until its abolition at the end of the Ottoman Empire, the post came to be occupied by Black African eunuch slaves, and hence is also referred to as the Chief Black Eunuch.
19th-century depiction of the Chief Black Eunuch (left), a court dwarf (middle) and the Chief White Eunuch (right)
The post of the Kizlar Agha was created in the reign of Murad III (ruled 1574–1595) in 1574, with the Ethiopian Mehmed Agha as its first occupant.[1][3] Until then, the Ottoman palace had been dominated by the white eunuchs, chiefly drawn from the Christian populations of the Balkans or the Caucasus. The 16th century, however, saw a rapid rise of the population of the Topkapi Palace, including among eunuchs, whose numbers rose from 40 under Selim (r. 1512–1520) to over a thousand under Murad III. While black eunuchs had served alongside white eunuchs in the palace, by 1592, for reasons that are unclear, both a separation of roles as well as the ascendancy of the black eunuchs over the white ones had become established: white eunuchs were restricted to the supervision of the male pages (içoğlan), while black eunuchs took over the far more prestigious supervision of the private apartments of the Sultan and the palace women (harem).[4] Consequently, the Chief Black Eunuch quickly eclipsed the "Chief White Eunuch" or Kapi Agha (kapı ağası, "Agha of the Gate"), who had hitherto been the head of the palace personnel, and rose to become, in the words of the Orientalist C. E. Bosworth, "in practice the principal officer of the whole palace".[2][5][6] At the height of the post's power in the 17th and 18th centuries, the Kizlar Agha was a vizier of the first rank ("with three horsetails") and came third in the state hierarchy, next only to the Empire's chief minister, the Grand Vizier, and the chief religious authority, the Sheikh ul-Islam.[2][7]
Depiction of a Kizlar Agha, ca. 1809
Kizlar Agha, 1682. Ptuj Prmoz Regional Museum
Posts: 43045 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Those Albino "FAKE" Indians are not invalidating anything, they are in fact validating the fact that they are illegitimate, and thus seeking to validate all, thereby legitimizing all, themselves included.
Has anybody ever seen these supposed Indians? Many are PURE Albino, the others different levels of mulatto! They have a cozy relationship with their brethren Albinos who rule the stolen lands: They get to make money, while denying rights to "REAL" Indians - Black native Americans. Pure Albino trickery and Modus.
posted
Along the same vein; U.S. Albinos are quite the hypocrites, their media create this sound and video chamber around America, then they tell the world that they are transparent to the world.
When in fact Americans see what Albino media shows them, and foreign media gets the same feed.
.
Dave Archambault II, chairman of the Standing Rock Sioux tribe, waits to give his speech against the Energy Transfer Partners' Dakota Access oil pipeline during the Human Rights Council at the United Nations in Geneva, Switzerland on Sept. 20, 2016. .
.
Considering that Europeans are Albinos too: I wonder how many of them thought it strange that another Albino European from the U.S. was presenting himself as a native American, and supposedly representing the interests of Native Americans before the U.N.Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
Ever wonder why the U.S. government so hates the United Nations, especially the Bush jr. administration?
Well the U.N. didn't turn out the way they wanted when they created it.
The powerful Albino countries wanted to lord it over the world, with the U.N. rubber stamping it - which often happens anyway.
But because most leaders of the world are "NOW" Non-Albino, and have no power, they have to find novel ways to expose Albino duplicity. Such an occasion came in 2007.
The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), says in part:
Article 7 1. Indigenous individuals have the rights to life, physical and mental integrity, liberty and security of person. 2. Indigenous peoples have the collective right to live in freedom, peace and security as distinct peoples and shall not be subjected to any act of genocide or any other act of violence, including forcibly removing children of the group to another group.
The declaration was adopted by the General Assembly on Thursday, 13 September 2007, by a majority of 144 states in favor, with 4 votes against: those against were Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United States: all of which had institutionally committed those very crimes against Indigenous Peoples since the arrival of the Albino people.Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
Those Albino "FAKE" Indians are not invalidating anything, they are in fact validating the fact that they are illegitimate, and thus seeking to validate all, thereby legitimizing all, themselves included.
Has anybody ever seen these supposed Indians? Many are PURE Albino, the others different levels of mulatto! They have a cozy relationship with their brethren Albinos who rule the stolen lands: They get to make money, while denying rights to "REAL" Indians - Black native Americans. Pure Albino trickery and Modus.
^^^ is YOUR source, stupid, Roxanne Dunbar-Ortiz
And Africans and Indians, many of the later also having dark skin how would you know if you had an Native American ancestry? DNA testing
Posts: 43045 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Black Indians are people of mixed African-American and Native American heritage, who have strong ties to Native American culture.[2] Many Indigenous peoples of the Eastern Woodlands, such as the Narragansett, Pequot, Lumbee and Cherokee have a significant number of African ancestors. Historically, certain Native American tribes have had close relations with African Americans, especially in regions where slavery was prevalent, or where free people of color have historically resided. Members of the Five Civilized Tribes participated in enslaving Africans, and some Africans migrated with them to the West on the Trail of Tears in 1830 and later. In peace treaties with the US after the American Civil War, the slaveholding tribes, which had sided with the Confederacy, were required to emancipate slaves and give them full citizenship rights in their nations. The Cherokee, Creek, and Seminole have created controversy in recent decades as they tightened rules for membership in their nations and excluded Freedmen who did not have at least one Native American ancestor on the early 20th-century Dawes Rolls. The Chickasaw Nation never extended citizenship to Chickasaw Freedmen.[3]
Overview
Until recently, historic relations between Native Americans and African Americans were relatively neglected in mainstream United States history studies.[4] At various times, Africans had varying degrees of contact with Native Americans, although they did not live together in as great number as with Europeans. African slaves brought to the United States and their descendants have had a history of cultural exchange and intermarriage with Native Americans, as well as with other enslaved people who possessed Native American and European ancestry. Most interaction took place in the Southern United States, where the largest number of people were enslaved.[5] A significant number of African Americans thus have some Native American ancestry, although not all have current social, cultural or linguistic ties to Native peoples.[6] Relationships among different Native Americans, Africans, and African Americans have been varied and complex. Some groups were more accepting of Africans than others and welcomed them as full members of their respective cultures and communities. Native peoples often disagreed about the role of ethnic African people in their communities. Other Native Americans saw uses for slavery and did not oppose it for others. After the American Civil War some African Americans became members of the US Army and fought against the Native Americans, especially in the Western frontier states. Their military units became known as the Buffalo Soldiers. Black Seminole in particular were recruited and worked as Native American scouts for the Army. On the other hand, other Native Americans and people of African descent fought alongside one another in armed struggles of resistance against U.S. expansion into Native territories, as in the Seminole Wars in Florida.
History
Colonial America
Records of contacts between Africans and Native Americans date back to April 1502, when the first enslaved African arrived in Hispaniola. Some Africans escaped inland from the colony of Santo Domingo; those who survived and joined with the natives became the first circle of Black Indians.[7][8] In the lands which later became part of the United States of America, the first recorded example of an African slave escaping from European colonists and being absorbed by Native Americans dates to 1526. In June of that year, Lucas Vasquez de Ayllón established a Spanish colony near the mouth of the Pee Dee River in present-day South Carolina. The Spanish settlement was named San Miguel de Gualdape; its inhabitants included 100 enslaved Africans. In 1526 the first enslaved African fled the colony and took refuge with local Native Americans.[8] Pueblo peoples had contact with the Moroccan slave Esteban de Dorantes in 1534 before any European contact. As part of the Spanish Pánfilo de Narváez expedition, Esteban traveled from Florida in 1528 to what is now New Mexico in 1539, when he is thought have been killed by Zunis.[9] Intermarriage between enslaved African and Native Americans began in the early 17th century in the coastal settlements[which?].[10][dead link] In 1622 Native Americans attempted to overrun the European colony of Jamestown. They killed the Europeans but brought the African slaves as captives back to their own communities, gradually integrating them.[11] Interracial relationships occurred between African Americans and members of other tribes in the coastal states.[10] Several colonial advertisements for runaway slaves made direct reference to the connections which Africans had in Native American communities. "Reward notices in colonial newspapers now told of African slaves who 'ran off with his Indian wife' or 'had kin among the Indians' or is 'part-Indian and speaks their language good.'"[12][13] Colonists in South Carolina felt so concerned about the possible threat posed by the mixed African and Native American population (arising due to runaways) that they passed a new law in 1725. This law stipulated a fine of 200 pounds for persons bringing a slave to the frontier regions. In 1751 South Carolina passed a law against holding Africans in proximity to Native Americans, which was deemed[by whom?] detrimental to the security of the colony. South Carolina under Governor James Glen (in office 1743-1756) promoted an official policy that aimed to create in Native Americans an "aversion" to African Americans in an attempt to thwart possible alliances between them.[14][15] In 1726 the British governor of colonial New York exacted a promise from the Iroquois Confederacy to return all runaway slaves. He required the same from the Huron tribe in 1764 and from the Delaware tribe in 1765.[11] Despite their agreements, the tribes never returned any escaped slaves[11] - they continued to provide a safe refuge for escapees. In 1763, during Pontiac's War, a Detroit resident reported that Native Americans killed whites but were "saving and caressing all the Negroes they take". He worried lest this might "produce an insurrection". Chief Joseph Brant's Mohawk in New York welcomed runaway slaves and encouraged adoption of them into the tribe and intermarriage.[11] The Native American adoption systems knew no color line.[11] Carter G. Woodson's notion of an escape hatch from slavery proved correct: Native American villages welcomed fugitive slaves and some served as stations on the Underground Railroad. Diana Fletcher (Black Seminole, b. 1838), adopted into the Kiowa tribe. Her father was African American, and her mother was Seminole. Her stepfamily was Kiowa.
During the transitional period of Africans' becoming the primary race enslaved, Native Americans were sometimes enslaved at the same time. Africans and Native Americans worked together, lived together in communal quarters, produced collective recipes for food, and shared herbal remedies, myths and legends.[citation needed] Some intermarried and had mixed-race children.[17] Ads asked for the return of both African American and Native American slaves. Some Native Americans resented the presence of Africans.[18] In one account, the "Catawaba [sic] tribe in 1752 showed great anger and bitter resentment when an African American came among them as a trader."[18] Europeans and European-Americans actively tried to divide Native Americans and African Americans against each other. "Whites sought to convince Native Americans that African Americans worked against their best interests."[19] Europeans considered both races inferior and made efforts to make Native Americans and Africans enemies.[20] Native Americans received rewards if they returned escaped slaves, and African Americans received rewards for fighting in Indian Wars.[20][21][22] European colonists told the Cherokee that the smallpox epidemic of 1739 was due to disease brought by African slaves, to create tension between the groups.[23] The British tried to restrict contact between Africans and Native Americans. They feared Native Americans taking enslaved Africans as spouses and tried to discourage trade between the groups. The British also passed laws prohibiting the carrying of slaves into the frontier of the Cherokee Nation's territory to restrict interactions between the two groups.[23] Some tribes were said[by whom?] to encourage marriage between the two groups, to create stronger children from the unions.[24] Among the Cherokee, interracial marriages increased as the number of slaves held by the tribe increased.[23] The Cherokee had a reputation for having slaves work side by side with their owners.[23] Resisting the Euro-American system of chattel slavery created tensions between the Cherokee and European Americans.[23] The Cherokee tribe began to become divided; as intermarriage between white men and native women increased and there was increased adoption of European culture, so did racial discrimination against those of African-Cherokee blood and against African slaves.[23] Cultural assimilation among the tribes, particularly the Cherokee, created pressure to be accepted by European Americans.[23] In 1758 the governor of South Carolina James Glen stated:
It has always been the policy of this government to create an aversion in them Indians to Negroes.[23]
n the 18th century, some Native American women turned to freed or runaway African men due to a major decline in the male population in Native American villages. At the same time, the early enslaved African population was disproportionately male. Records show that some Native American women bought African men as slaves. Unknown to European sellers, the women freed and married the men into their tribe. Some African men chose Native American women as their partners because their children would be free, as the child's status followed that of the mother. The men could marry into some of the matrilineal tribes and become accepted, as their children were considered to belong to the mother's people. As European expansion increased in the Southeast, African and Native American marriages became more numerous.[20]
1800s through Civil War
In the early 19th century, the US government believed that some tribes had become extinct, especially on the East Coast and those without reservations.[25] It did not have a separate census designation for Native Americans. Those who remained among the European-American communities were frequently listed as mulatto, a term applied to Native American-white, Native American-African, and African-white mixed-race people, as well as tri-racial people.[25] The Seminole people of Florida formed in the 18th century, in what is called ethnogenesis, from Muscogee (Creek) and Florida tribes. They incorporated some Africans who had escaped from slavery. Other maroons formed separate communities near the Seminole, and were allied with them in military actions. Much intermarriage took place. African Americans living near the Seminole were called Black Seminoles. Several hundred people of African descent traveled with the Seminole when they were removed to Indian Territory. Others stayed with a few hundred Seminole in Florida. By contrast, an 1835 census of the Cherokee showed that 10% were of African descent.[13] In those years, censuses of the tribes classified people of mixed Native American and African descent as "Native American".[26] By contrast, during the registration for the Dawes Rolls, generally Cherokee Freedmen were classified separately on a Freedmen roll, even if individuals had Cherokee ancestry and qualified as "Cherokee by blood." This has caused problems for their descendants in the late 20th and 21st-century, as the Nation has passed legislation and a constitutional amendment to make membership more restrictive, open only to those with certificates of blood ancestry (CDIB). Western frontier artist George Catlin described "Negro and North American Indian, mixed, of equal blood" and stated they were "the finest built and most powerful men I have ever yet seen."[11] By 1922 John Swanton's survey of the Five Civilized Tribes noted that half the Cherokee Nation were Freedmen and their descendants. Former slaves and Native Americans intermarried in northern states as well. Massachusetts Vital Records prior to 1850 included notes of "Marriages of 'negroes' to Indians". By 1860 in some areas of the South, Native Americans were believed to have intermarried with African Americans to such an extent that white legislators thought the Native Americans no longer qualified as "Native American," as they were not paying attention to culture but only race. Legislators wanted to revoke their tax exemptions.[11] Freed African Americans, Black Indians, and some Native Americans fought in the American Civil War against the Confederate Army. During November 1861, the Muscogee Creek and Black Indians, led by Creek Chief Opothleyahola, fought three pitched battles against Confederate whites and allied Native Americans to reach Union lines in Kansas and offer their services.[11] Some Black Indians served in colored regiments with other African American soldiers.[27] Black Indians were documented in the following regiments: The 1st Kansas Colored Infantry, the Kansas Colored at Honey Springs, the 79th US Colored Infantry, and the 83rd US Colored Infantry, along with other colored regiments that included men listed as Negro.[27] Civil War battles occurred in Indian Territory.[28] The first battle in Indian Territory took place July 1 and 2 in 1863, and involved the 1st Kansas Colored Infantry.[28] The first battle against the Confederacy outside Indian Territory occurred at Horse Head Creek, Arkansas on February 17, 1864. The 79th US Colored Infantry participated.[28] Many Black Indians returned to Indian Territory once the Civil War had been won by the Union.[27] When the Confederacy and its Native American allies were defeated, the US required new peace treaties with the Five Civilized Tribes, including provisions to emancipate slaves and make them full citizens of their nations, with equal rights in annuities and land allotments. The former slaves were called "Freedmen," as in Cherokee Freedmen, Chickasaw Freedmen, Choctaw Freedmen, Creek Freedmen and Seminole Freedmen. The pro-Union Cherokee government had freed their slaves in 1863, before the end of the war, but the pro-Confederacy Cherokee kept hold of the slaves until later.[11][29]
Native American slave ownership
Slavery existed among Native Americans before it was introduced by the Europeans, although it was unlike chattel slavery where slaves become the personal property of a master. In oral tradition, for instance, Cherokees recounted people being enslaved as the result of failure in warfare, and as a temporary status pending adoption or release.[30] As the United States Constitution and the laws of several states permitted slavery, Native Americans were legally allowed to own slaves, including those brought from Africa by Europeans. Benjamin Hawkins was the federal agent assigned to the southeastern tribes in the 1790s and advised the tribes to take up slaveholding.[23] The Cherokee tribe had the most members who held black slaves, more than any other Native American nation.[31] In colonial North America, the first exposure that Africans and Native Americans had to each other came from Africans being imported as laborers, both indentured servants and as slaves.[10] Records from the slavery period show several cases of brutal Native American treatment of black slaves. However, most Native American masters rejected the worst features of Southern practices.[11] Federal Agent Hawkins considered the form of slavery the tribes were practicing to be inefficient because the majority didn't practice chattel slavery.[23] Travelers reported enslaved Africans "in as good circumstances as their masters." A white Indian Agent, Douglas Cooper, upset by the Native American failure to practice more severe rules, insisted that Native Americans invite white men to live in their villages and "control matters."[11] Though less than 3% of Native Americans owned slaves, racial bondage and pressure from European-American culture created destructive cleavages in their villages. Many had a class hierarchy based on "white blood."[11] Native Americans of mixed white blood stood at the top, "pure" Native Americans next, and people of African descent were at the bottom.[11] As among mixed-race African Americans, some of the status of white descent may also have been related to the economic and social capital passed on by white relations. Numerous people of African descent were held as slaves by members of Native groups up until the Civil War. Some later recounted their lives for a WPA oral history project during the Great Depression in the 1930s.[32]
Native American Freedmen Members of the Creek (Muscogee) Nation in Oklahoma around 1877 of mixed European, African and Native American ancestry. Lochar Harjo, Principal Chief of the Creeks, an unidentifed man, John McGilvry ( aka Tal-wa-mi-ko - Mixed-Blood Creek) and Silas Jefferson (aka. Hotulkomiko), African. Silas Jefferson was one of the team of dynamic African leaders of the Muskogee Nation. He was sometimes known as Tucker or Ducker, also. On more than one occasion, Silas Jefferson accompanied the Muskogee delegation to Washington DC. Being fully bilingual, he served as a an interpreter for the delegation, and he also worked for the conservative party in the Nation.
Jefferson was often considered to be a dependable person, because of his language skill and because he could also speak to people his leaders considered to be "insurgents. He was included as part of the Creek delegation to negotiate terms with the rebels during the Green Peach War.
Silas Jefferson is one of the few African identified in tribal pictures from the nation, although he was one of several Africans who served their nation with honor and distinction.
What then is the Silas Jefferson connection to the Cow Tom Family and his descendants. They were all African Creeks or part of the Creek or Muskogee Nation. After the Civil War in 1866, the United States government required new treaties with the Five Civilized Tribes, who each had factions allied with the Confederacy. They were required to emancipate their slaves and grant them citizenship and membership in the respective tribes, as the United States freed slaves and granted them citizenship by amendments to the US Constitution. These people were known as "Freedmen," for instance, Muscogee or Cherokee Freedmen. Similarly, the Cherokee were required to reinstate membership for the Delaware, who had earlier been given land on their reservation, but fought for the Union during the war.[34] Many of the Freedmen played active political roles in their tribal nations over the ensuing decades, including roles as interpreters and negotiators with the federal government. African Muscogee men, such as Harry Island and Silas Jefferson, helped secure land for their people when the government decided to make individual allotments to tribal members under the Dawes Act. Some Maroon communities allied with the Seminole in Florida and intermarried. The Black Seminole included those with and without Native American ancestry. When the Cherokee Nation drafted its constitution in 1975, enrollment was limited to descendents of people listed on the Dawes "Cherokee By Blood" rolls. On the Dawes Rolls, US government agents had classified people as Cherokee by blood, intermarried whites, and Cherokee Freedmen, regardless of whether the latter had Cherokee ancestry qualifying them as Cherokee by blood. The Shawnee and Delaware gained their own federal recognition as the Delaware Tribe of Indians and the Shawnee Tribe. A political struggle over this issue has ensued since the 1970s. Cherokee Freedmen have taken cases to the Cherokee Supreme Court. The Cherokee later reinstated the rights of Delaware to be considered members of the Cherokee, but opposed their bid for independent federal recognition.[34] The Cherokee Nation Supreme Court ruled on March 2006 that Cherokee Freedmen were eligible for tribal enrollment. In 2007, leaders of the Cherokee Nation held a special election to amend their constitution to restrict requirements for citizenship in the tribe. The referendum established direct Cherokee ancestry as a requirement. The measure passed in March 2007, thereby forcing out Cherokee Freedmen and their descendants unless they also had documented, direct "Cherokee by blood" ancestry. This has caused much controversy.[35] The tribe has determined to limit membership only to those who can demonstrate Native American descent based on listing on the Dawes Rolls.[36] Similarly, the Seminole Nation of Oklahoma moved to exclude Seminole Freedmen from membership. In 1990 it received $56 million from the US government as reparations for lands taken in Florida. Because the judgment trust was based on tribal membership as of 1823, it excluded Seminole Freedmen, as well as Black Seminoles who held land next to Seminole communities. In 2000 the Seminole chief moved to formally exclude Black Seminoles unless they could prove descent from a Native American ancestor on the Dawes Rolls. 2,000 Black Seminoles were excluded from the nation.[37] Descendants of Freedmen and Black Seminoles are working to secure their rights.
"There's never been any stigma about intermarriage," says Stu Phillips, editor of The Seminole Producer, a local newspaper in central Oklahoma. "You've got Indians marrying whites, Indians marrying blacks. It was never a problem until they got some money."
An advocacy group representing descendants of Freedmen of the Five Civilized Tribes claims that members are entitled to be citizens in both the Seminole and Cherokee Nations, as many are indeed part Native American by blood, with records to prove it. Because of racial discrimination, their ancestors were classified and listed incorrectly, under only the category of Freedmen, at the time of the Dawes Rolls. In addition, the group notes that post-Civil War treaties of these tribes with the US government required they give African Americans full citizenship upon emancipation, regardless of blood quantum. In many cases, Native American descent has been difficult for people to trace from historical records.[38] Over 25,000 Freedmen descendants of the Five Civilized Tribes may be affected by the legal controversies.[37] The Dawes Commission enrollment records, intended to establish rolls of tribal members for land allocation purposes, were done under rushed conditions by a variety of recorders. Many tended to exclude Freedmen from Cherokee rolls and enter them separately, even when they claimed Cherokee descent, had records of it, and had Cherokee physical features. Descendants of Freedmen see the tribe's contemporary reliance on the Dawes Rolls as a racially based way to exclude them from citizenship.[39][40] Before the Dawes Commission was established,
"(t)he majority of the people with African blood living in the Cherokee nation prior to the Civil war lived there as slaves of Cherokee citizens or as free black non-citizens, usually the descendants of Cherokee men and women with African blood....In 1863, the Cherokee government outlawed slavery through acts of the tribal council. In 1866, a treaty was signed with the US government in which the Cherokee government agreed to give citizenship to those people with African blood living in the Cherokee nations who were not already citizens. African Cherokee people participated as full citizens of that nation, holding office, voting, running businesses, etc."[41]
After the Dawes Commission established tribal rolls, in some cases Freedmen of the Cherokee and the other Five Civilized Tribes were treated more harshly. Degrees of continued acceptance into tribal structures were low during the ensuing decades. Some tribes restricted membership to those with a documented Native ancestor on the Dawes Commission listings, and many restricted officeholders to those of direct Native American ancestry. In the later 20th century, it was difficult for Black Native Americans to establish official ties with Native groups to which they genetically belonged. Many Freedmen descendants believe that their exclusion from tribal membership, and the resistance to their efforts to gain recognition, are racially motivated and based on the tribe's wanting to preserve the new gambling revenues for fewer people.[34][42]
Geneology
Tracing the genealogy of African Americans and Native Americans is a difficult process. Enslaved Africans were renamed by slaveholders and surnames were infrequently used until after the war. Historical records, such as censuses, did not record the names of enslaved blacks before the American Civil War. Some major slaveholders kept extensive records which historians and genealogists have used to create family trees, but generally researchers find it difficult to trace families before the Civil War. Slaves were forbidden to learn to read and write. A majority of Native Americans did not speak English, let alone read or write it.[4] In some cases elder family members may withhold information about Native American heritage.[4] However, knowing the family's geographic origins is a key factor in helping individuals unravel Native American ancestry.[4] Many modern African Americans have taken an interest in genealogy and are learning about Native American heritage within their individual families. Some African Americans may work from oral history of the family and try to confirm stories of Native ancestry through genealogical research and DNA testing. Because of such findings, some have petitioned to be registered as members of Native American tribes. Each tribe establishes its own criteria for membership. Most do not accept DNA tests as proof, especially since these cannot distinguish among the tribes. DNA testing and research has provided more facts about the extent of Native American ancestry among African Americans, which varies in the general population. As Harvard University historian Henry Louis Gates, Jr. wrote in 2009,
"Here are the facts: Only 5 percent of all black Americans have at least 12.5 percent Native American ancestry, the equivalent of at least one great-grandparent. Those 'high cheek bones' and 'straight black hair' your relatives brag about at every family reunion and holiday meal since you were 2 years old? Where did they come from? To paraphrase a well-known French saying, “Seek the white man.” African Americans, just like our first lady, are a racially mixed or mulatto people—deeply and overwhelmingly so. Fact: Fully 58 percent of African American people, according to geneticist Mark Shriver at Morehouse College, possess at least 12.5 percent European ancestry (again, the equivalent of that one great-grandparent). George Bonga (1802–1880), "Black" fur trader L to R: Mrs. Amos Chapman, her daughter, sister (all Southern Cheyenne, and an unidentified girl of African American descent. 1886[43]
In contradiction to Gates statement The Indigenous Peoples Council on Biocolonialism (IPCB) notes that:
"Native American markers" are not found solely among Native Americans. While they occur more frequently among Native Americans they are also found in people in other parts of the world.[45]
Geneticists also state:
not all Native Americans have been tested especially with the large number of deaths due to disease such as small pox, it is unlikely that Native Americans only have the genetic markers they have identified, even when their maternal or paternal bloodline does not include a non-Native American.[46][47]
It should be noted that most statisticians would not necessarily view the IPCB and Geneticists remarks directly above as preventing a sound analysis of genomic contributions from various continents to the make-up of an admixed individual. In general, these analyses are not based on the presence of markers, single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), that the sophisticated analyst would describe as African, Asian, European, or Amerind. Peeking under the hood, one would see that autosomal analysis, as opposed to mtDNA and Y-chromosome analysis discussed below, is based on the relative distribution of the SNPs in these populations coupled with their distribution in the genome being analyzed. Techniques such as maximum likelihood estimation and Bayesian re-estimation provide instruments for assessing ancestry, which also assign a level of confidence to the estimate. Relatively small segments of the genome can be analyzed with these techniques, which are well established, having been applied with great effect in many other areas. The two common types of tests used are Y-chromosome and mtDNA (mitochondrial DNA) testing. The tests processes for direct-line male and female ancestors. Each follows only one line among many ancestors and thus can fail to identify others. Some critics thought the PBS series did not sufficiently explain the limitations of DNA testing for assessment of heritage.[46][47][47] In addition, while full testing may tell an individual if he or she has some Native American ancestry, it cannot distinguish among separate Native American tribes.[48] African Americans are using DNA testing to find out more about all their ancestry. Native American identity has historically been based on culture, not just biology. Autosomal DNA tests survey all the DNA that has been inherited from the parents of an individual.[49] Autosomal tests focus on SNPs, which might of course be found in Africans, Asians, and people from every other part of the world.[49] DNA testing will not determine an individual's full ancestry with absolute certitude.[49]
Notable "Black" Indians
Historic
Crispus Attucks (1723-1770) Wampanoag-African, slave, dockworker, merchant seaman, icon in the anti slavery movement, first casualty of the Boston Massacre and the American Revolutionary War. Joseph Louis Cook, a Colonel in the Continental Army during the American Revolutionary War. Edmonia Lewis (1845–1911), Ojibwe, African American and Haitian sculptor[50] William Apess (1798–1839), "Black" Pequot Methodist minister and author. John Horse (Juan Caballo) (1812–1882), African-Seminole war leader in Florida, also leader of African-Seminole in Mexico. Charlie Patton (1887–1934), African-Cherokee American and founding father of the blues in the Mississippi Delta. George Bonga (1802–1880), African-Ojibwe fur trader and interpreter in what is now Minnesota, son of trader and interpreter Pierre Bonga. Marguerite Scypion (ca. 1770s—after 1836), African-Natchez slave who won her freedom in court. Illinois Jacquet (October 31, 1922 – July 22, 2004) was an American jazz tenor saxophonist, best remembered for his solo on "Flying Home", critically recognized as the first R&B saxophone solo.
Contemporary
Martha Redbone, Native American Music Award-winning soul music of Shawnee, Choctaw and African American ancestry[51] Radmilla Cody, 46th Miss Navajo Nation (1998), traditional singer, enrolled member of the Navajo Nation with ancestry, and advocate against domestic violence in both the Navajo Nation and the state of Arizona. France Winddance Twine (born 1960) enrolled Muscogee (Creek) Nation sociologist.[52]
First Nation, Métis and Native American DNA Confirmation Services
As an industry leader in parentage (paternity and maternity testing), Family relationship and ancestral heritage testing, Viaguard Accu-metrics offers a variety of DNA tests for First Nation, Métis and Native Americans to help define if you belong to a particular ethno-geographical group.
The DNA results can be used in enrollment, disenrollment, claiming social benefits, or simply for a peace of mind. We understand the impact that this testing service has on the First Nation and Native American community and we try to use our expertise for the community's overall interests.
2500 COLLECTION CENTERS ACROSS NORTH AMERICA TO SERVE EVERY STATE AND PROVINCE FREE professional and confidential consultation: Call 1-877-842-4827 or 416-691-4167
Native American linkage is based on a sample comparison to a proven member of the group, which identifies specific tribal linkage. According to Office of Management and Budget, "American Indian or Alaska Native" refers to a person having origins in any of the original peoples of North and South America (including Central America) and who maintains tribal affiliation or community attachment. There are 562 recognized tribes in the U.S.A., plus at least 50 others in Canada, divided into First Nation, Inuit, and Metis. Viaguard Accu-metrics can determine if you belong to one of these groups.
First Nation and Native American Ancestry DNA Test
DNA contains the information to determine an individuals ancestral heritage. During the migration of the human population, First Nation and Native Americans developed unique genetic markers that allows them to be accurately identified. These genetic markers can be identified in Métis and anyone who may have aboriginal ancestry. This test shows the percentage of a person's DNA consistent with the Native American population and the percentage of his or her DNA consistent with other populations.
Posts: 43045 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), says in part:
Article 7 1. Indigenous individuals have the rights to life, physical and mental integrity, liberty and security of person. 2. Indigenous peoples have the collective right to live in freedom, peace and security as distinct peoples and shall not be subjected to any act of genocide or any other act of violence, including forcibly removing children of the group to another group.
This goes as long as the indigenous group isn't White. If they are then they get no indigenous rights in their own land and are told they don't exist and aren't counted as indigenous to anywhere. Therefore they can flood our land w/ non indigenous in an attempt to make us a minority in our land (Europe) before wiping us out (FEMA camps anyone lol), while brainwashing our youth to hate themselves & to intermarry & produce non-White children who will grow up to hate their White parent & family members ala Jesse Williams and that jock sob in order to further decrease our population, all while inflaming the non-White hoards against us,all while making laws making it illegal for us to speak out about it.
Posts: 3257 | From: Madisonville, KY USA | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
The immigrant above has some nerves. lol smh.
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: Continuing the U.N. theme:
Ever wonder why the U.S. government so hates the United Nations, especially the Bush jr. administration?
Well the U.N. didn't turn out the way they wanted when they created it.
The powerful Albino countries wanted to lord it over the world, with the U.N. rubber stamping it - which often happens anyway.
But because most leaders of the world are "NOW" Non-Albino, and have no power, they have to find novel ways to expose Albino duplicity. Such an occasion came in 2007.
The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), says in part:
Article 7 1. Indigenous individuals have the rights to life, physical and mental integrity, liberty and security of person. 2. Indigenous peoples have the collective right to live in freedom, peace and security as distinct peoples and shall not be subjected to any act of genocide or any other act of violence, including forcibly removing children of the group to another group.
The declaration was adopted by the General Assembly on Thursday, 13 September 2007, by a majority of 144 states in favor, with 4 votes against: those against were Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United States: all of which had institutionally committed those very crimes against Indigenous Peoples since the arrival of the Albino people.
And rightfully so, after all they had to go through, for hundreds of years of oppression.
Posts: 22249 | From: Omni | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't know but doesn't that number seem quite high as an invading force to Britain?
Posts: 1123 | From: New York | Registered: Feb 2016
| IP: Logged |
quote: According to the later chronicler Ibn Abd-el-Hakem, in 711, Tariq Ibn Ziyad led an approximately 1,700-strong raiding force from North Africa to southern Spain.[9] However, 12,000 seems a more accurate figure.[10] Ibn Abd-el-Hakem reports, one and a half centuries later, that "the people of Andalus did not observe them, thinking that the vessels crossing and recrossing were similar to the trading vessels which for their benefit plied backwards and forwards." They defeated the Visigothic army, led by King Roderic, in a decisive battle at Guadalete in 712. Tariq's forces were then reinforced by those of his superior, the wali Musa ibn Nusair, and both took control of most of Iberia with an army estimated at approximately 10,000–15,000 combatants.[11]
Interesting account of a 12th century legend that Ireland+Britain was conquered in the 6th century by an "African king":
The 12th century author is Welsh cleric Geoffrey of Monmouth. Historia Regum Britanniae (English: The History of the Kings of Britain) 1136 AD
footnote 3 from the above:
3. The following account reflects Geoffrey's familiarity with Gorrnont et Isembard, a contemporary chanson de geste _
Geoffrey wrote several works of interest, all in Latin, the language of learning and literature in Europe during the medieval period. His major work was the Historia Regum Britanniae (History of the Kings of Britain), the work best known to modern readers. It relates the purported history of Britain, from its first settlement by Brutus, a descendant of the Trojan hero Aeneas, to the death of Cadwallader in the 7th century, taking in Julius Caesar's invasions of Britain, two kings, Leir and Cymbeline, later immortalised by William Shakespeare, and one of the earliest developed narratives of King Arthur.
______________________
The chanson de geste, Old French for "song of heroic deeds" (from gesta: Latin: "deeds, actions accomplished"[1]), is a medieval narrative, a type of epic poem that appears at the dawn of French literature.
Gormond et Isembart
The extant work only survives in a fragment (two parchment sheets that had been used as a binding of a book[3]) of 661 octosyllable[2][3] (unusual for a chanson de geste) verses in assonanced laisses (conserved in the Royal Library of Belgium in Brussels[3]) written in a central France dialect,[3] dating from c. 1130, and that form the end of a much longer poem.[2] The content of the entire poem can be inferred from two sources:
a rhymed chronicle from the 13th century by Philippe Mousket;[2] a 15th-century German adaptation/translation, Loher und Maller (1437), of a prose version of a late 14th/early 15th century French romance, Lohier et Mallart.
Gormond et Isembart is an Old French chanson de geste from the second half of the eleventh or first half of the twelfth century.[2][3] Along with The Song of Roland and the Chanson de Guillaume, it is one of the three chansons de geste whose composition incontestably dates from before 1150;[4] it may be slightly younger than The Song of Roland and, according to one expert, may date from as early as 1068.[3] The poem tells the story of a rebellious young French lord, Isembart, who allies himself with a Saracen king, Gormond, renounces his Christianity, and battles the French king. The poem is sometimes grouped with the Geste de Doon de Mayence or "rebellious vassal cycle" of chansons de geste.
The reconstructed plot is as follows: The young French lord Isembart is cruelly persecuted by the French court and his uncle, king Louis, and he goes into exile in England, joining the Saracen king Gormond and renouncing Christianity. Isembart incites Gormond to attack France, to destroy Isembart's own lands and surrounding country, and to burn down the Abbey of Saint-Riquier. The French king comes to battle them at Cayeux (Cayeux-en-Santerre or Cayeux-sur-Mer). (The surviving fragment begins here.) In the battle, after a series of victorious combats, Gormond falls to Louis, but the king is himself mortally injured when he tries to remain on his horse. The Saracen troops are briefly in chaos, but Isembart takes over the army. He eventually unhorses his own father. Four days later, the Saracens give up the battle and Isembart dies, returning to Christianity in his last breaths
Saracen was a term widely used among Christian writers in Europe during the Middle Ages. The term's meaning evolved during its history. In the early centuries AD, Greek and Latin writings used this term to refer to the people who lived in desert areas in and near the Roman province of Arabia, and who were specifically distinguished as a people from others known as Arabs.[1][2] In Europe during the Early Medieval era, the term came to be associated with Arab tribes as well.[3] By the 12th century, "Saracen" had become synonymous with "Muslim" in Medieval Latin literature. Such expansion in the meaning of the term had begun centuries earlier among the Byzantine Romans, as evidenced in documents from the 8th century.[1][4][5] In the Western languages before the 16th century, "Saracen" was commonly used to refer to Muslim Arabs, and the words "Muslim" and "Islam" were generally not used (with a few isolated exceptions).[6]
Beginning no later than the early fifth century, Christian writers began to equate Saracens with Arabs. Saracens were associated with Ishmaelites (descendants of Abraham’s older son Ishmael) in some strands of Jewish, Christian, and Islamic genealogical thinking. The writings of Jerome (d. 420) are the earliest known version of the claim that Ishmaelites chose to be called Saracens in order to identify with Abraham’s “free” wife Sarah, rather than as Hagarenes, which would have highlighted their association with Abraham’s “slave woman” Hagar.[10] This claim was popular during the Middle Ages, but derives more from Paul’s allegory in the New Testament letter to the Galatians than from historical data.[clarification needed] The name "Saracen" was not indigenous among the populations so described, but was applied to them by Greco-Roman historians based on Greek place names.[11]
As the Middle Ages progressed, usage of the term in the Latin West change, but its connotation remained negative, associated with opponents of Christianity, and its exact definition is unclear.[12] In an 8th-century polemical work, John of Damascus criticized the Saracens as followers of a false prophet and "forerunner[s] to the Antichrist."[13]
By the 12th century, Medieval Europeans had more specific conceptions of Islam, and used the term "Saracen" as an ethnic and religious marker.[1][14] In some Medieval literature, Saracens—that is, Muslims—were described as black-skinned, while Christians were lighter-skinned. An example is in The King of Tars, a medieval romance.[15][16] The Song of Roland, an Old French 11th-century heroic poem, refers to the black skin of Saracens as their only exotic feature.
Saracens and Crusaders" 1325-1330. Illuminated Manuscript of Les Chroniques De France, British Library, MS. Royal 16G VI, F.44
Posts: 43045 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Mena: Castrating a man is an evil, savage and disgusting act. Arab Muslim civilization find it moral to castrated million of slaves to worked for them in their palaces and harems.
Castrated slaves in the Arab Muslim Slave Trade
CONTRASTS IN CAPTIVITY
A comparison of the Islamic slave trade to the American slave trade reveals some interesting contrasts. While two out of every three slaves shipped across the Atlantic were men, the proportions were reversed in the Islamic slave trade. Two women for every man were enslaved by the Muslims.
While the mortality rate for slaves being transported across the Atlantic was as high as 10%, the percentage of slaves dying in transit in the Trans Sahara and East African slave trade was between 80 and 90%.
While almost all the slaves shipped across the Atlantic were for agricultural work, most of the slaves destined for the Muslim Middle East were for sexual exploitation as concubines, in harems, and for military service.
While many children were born to slaves in the Americas, and millions of their descendants are citizens in Brazil and the USA to this day, very few descendants of the slaves that ended up in the Middle East survive.
While most slaves who went to the Americas could marry and have families, most of the male slaves destined for the Middle East were castrated, and most of the children born to the women were killed at birth.
It is estimated that possibly as many as 11 million Africans were transported across the Atlantic (95% of which went to South and Central America, mainly to Portuguese, Spanish and French possessions. Only 5% of the slaves went to the United States).
African Slaves
However, at least 28 million Africans were enslaved in the Muslim Middle East. Since at least 80% of those captured by Muslim slave traders were calculated to have died before reaching the slave markets, it is believed that the death toll from 1400 years of Muslim slave raids into Africa could have been over 112 million. When added to the number of those sold in the slave markets, the total number of African victims of the Trans Saharan and East African slave trade could be significantly higher than 140 million people.
THE ABSENCE OF ARABIC ABOLITIONISTS
While Christian Reformers spearheaded the anti-slavery abolitionist movements in Europe and North America, and Great Britain mobilised her Navy, throughout most of the 19th Century, to intercept slave ships and set the captives free, there was no opposition whatsoever to slavery within the Muslim world.
Even after Britain outlawed the slave trade in 1807 and Europe abolished the slave trade in 1815, Muslim slave traders enslaved a further 2 million Africans. This, despite vigorous British Naval activity and military intervention to limit the Islamic slave trade.
By some calculations, the number of victims of the 14 centuries of Islamic slave trade could exceed 180 million.
Nearly 100 years after President Abraham Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation in America, and 130 years after all slaves within the British Empire were set free by parliamentary decree, Saudi Arabia and Yemen, in 1962, and Mauritania in 1980, begrudgingly removed legalised slavery from their statute books. And this only after international pressure was brought to bear. Today numerous international organisations document that slavery still continues in some Muslim countries.
THE ISLAMIC SLAVE TRADE
The birth of Islam and its conquests, brought about the birth of INSTITUTIONALIZED, SYSTEMATIZED and RELIGIOUSLY SANCTIONED SLAVE TRADE, on a MASSIVE & GLOBAL SCALE.
As Ronald Segal in "Islam's Black Slaves" documents: "When Islam conquered the Persian Sassanid Empire and much of the Byzantine Empire, including Syria and Egypt, in the 7th Century, it acquired immense quantities of gold from stripping churches and monasteries ... either directly or by taxes, payable in gold, imposed on the clergy.... looting gold from tombs, the state encouraged the search and sanctioned the seizure, in return for a fifth (khums) of the finds."
Segal notes: "Female slaves were required in considerable numbers as musicians, singers and dancers....many more were bought for domestic workers....and many were in demand as concubines (RAPE). The harems of rulers could be enormous. The harem of Abdal Rahman III (912 - 961) in Cordoba contained over 6000 concubines. The one in the Fatimid Palace in Cairo had twice as many."
The death toll from 14 centuries of the Islamic slave trade in Africa is estimated at over 140 million.
Islam's Black Slaves also reveals that the castration of male slaves was common place. "The Calipha in Baghdad at the beginning of the 10th Century had 7000 black eunuchs and 4000 white eunuchs in his palace."
It was noted that there were widespread "homosexual relations" as well. Islam's Black Slaves notes that Islamic teachers throughout the centuries consistently defended slavery: "For there must be masters and slaves."
Others noted that blacks "lack self-control and steadiness of mind and they are overcome by fickleness, foolishness and ignorance. Such are the blacks who live in the extremity of the land of Ethiopia, the Nubians, Zanj and the like."
Ibn Khaldun (1332 - 1406) the pre-eminent Islamic medieval historian and social thinker wrote: "The Negro nations are as a rule submissive to slavery, because they have attributes that are quite similar to dumb animals."
By the Middle Ages, the Arabic word "abd" was in general use to denote a black slave while the word "mamluk" referred to a white slave.
It is not common knowledge that the Arabic word 'ABD' is synonymous with the meaning of SLAVE; that is, in the language of the Arabs,
ALL BLACK PEOPLES ARE CALLED 'ABEED' PLURAL FOR 'SLAVES'.
Even as late as the 19th Century, it was noted that in Mecca "there are few families that do not keep slaves; they all keep mistresses in common with their lawful wives."
It should be noted also, that black slaves were castrated "based on the assumption that the blacks had an ungovernable sexual appetite."
When the Fatimids came to power, they slaughtered all the tens of thousands of black military slaves and raised an entirely new slave army. Some of these slaves were conscripted into the army at age ten. From Persia to Egypt to Morocco, slave armies from 30,000 to up to 250,000 became common-place.
Posts: 5376 | From: sepedat/sirius | Registered: Jul 2012
| IP: Logged |
A comparison of the Islamic slave trade to the American slave trade reveals some interesting contrasts. While two out of every three slaves shipped across the Atlantic were men, the proportions were reversed in the Islamic slave trade. Two women for every man were enslaved by the Muslims.
While the mortality rate for slaves being transported across the Atlantic was as high as 10%, the percentage of slaves dying in transit in the Trans Sahara and East African slave trade was between 80 and 90%.
While almost all the slaves shipped across the Atlantic were for agricultural work, most of the slaves destined for the Muslim Middle East were for sexual exploitation as concubines, in harems, and for military service.
While many children were born to slaves in the Americas, and millions of their descendants are citizens in Brazil and the USA to this day, very few descendants of the slaves that ended up in the Middle East survive.
While most slaves who went to the Americas could marry and have families, most of the male slaves destined for the Middle East were castrated, and most of the children born to the women were killed at birth.
It is estimated that possibly as many as 11 million Africans were transported across the Atlantic (95% of which went to South and Central America, mainly to Portuguese, Spanish and French possessions. Only 5% of the slaves went to the United States).
African Slaves
However, at least 28 million Africans were enslaved in the Muslim Middle East. Since at least 80% of those captured by Muslim slave traders were calculated to have died before reaching the slave markets, it is believed that the death toll from 1400 years of Muslim slave raids into Africa could have been over 112 million. When added to the number of those sold in the slave markets, the total number of African victims of the Trans Saharan and East African slave trade could be significantly higher than 140 million people.
THE ABSENCE OF ARABIC ABOLITIONISTS
While Christian Reformers spearheaded the anti-slavery abolitionist movements in Europe and North America, and Great Britain mobilised her Navy, throughout most of the 19th Century, to intercept slave ships and set the captives free, there was no opposition whatsoever to slavery within the Muslim world.
Even after Britain outlawed the slave trade in 1807 and Europe abolished the slave trade in 1815, Muslim slave traders enslaved a further 2 million Africans. This, despite vigorous British Naval activity and military intervention to limit the Islamic slave trade.
By some calculations, the number of victims of the 14 centuries of Islamic slave trade could exceed 180 million.
Nearly 100 years after President Abraham Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation in America, and 130 years after all slaves within the British Empire were set free by parliamentary decree, Saudi Arabia and Yemen, in 1962, and Mauritania in 1980, begrudgingly removed legalised slavery from their statute books. And this only after international pressure was brought to bear. Today numerous international organisations document that slavery still continues in some Muslim countries.
THE ISLAMIC SLAVE TRADE
The birth of Islam and its conquests, brought about the birth of INSTITUTIONALIZED, SYSTEMATIZED and RELIGIOUSLY SANCTIONED SLAVE TRADE, on a MASSIVE & GLOBAL SCALE.
As Ronald Segal in "Islam's Black Slaves" documents: "When Islam conquered the Persian Sassanid Empire and much of the Byzantine Empire, including Syria and Egypt, in the 7th Century, it acquired immense quantities of gold from stripping churches and monasteries ... either directly or by taxes, payable in gold, imposed on the clergy.... looting gold from tombs, the state encouraged the search and sanctioned the seizure, in return for a fifth (khums) of the finds."
Segal notes: "Female slaves were required in considerable numbers as musicians, singers and dancers....many more were bought for domestic workers....and many were in demand as concubines (RAPE). The harems of rulers could be enormous. The harem of Abdal Rahman III (912 - 961) in Cordoba contained over 6000 concubines. The one in the Fatimid Palace in Cairo had twice as many."
The death toll from 14 centuries of the Islamic slave trade in Africa is estimated at over 140 million.
Islam's Black Slaves also reveals that the castration of male slaves was common place. "The Calipha in Baghdad at the beginning of the 10th Century had 7000 black eunuchs and 4000 white eunuchs in his palace."
It was noted that there were widespread "homosexual relations" as well. Islam's Black Slaves notes that Islamic teachers throughout the centuries consistently defended slavery: "For there must be masters and slaves."
Others noted that blacks "lack self-control and steadiness of mind and they are overcome by fickleness, foolishness and ignorance. Such are the blacks who live in the extremity of the land of Ethiopia, the Nubians, Zanj and the like."
Ibn Khaldun (1332 - 1406) the pre-eminent Islamic medieval historian and social thinker wrote: "The Negro nations are as a rule submissive to slavery, because they have attributes that are quite similar to dumb animals."
By the Middle Ages, the Arabic word "abd" was in general use to denote a black slave while the word "mamluk" referred to a white slave.
It is not common knowledge that the Arabic word 'ABD' is synonymous with the meaning of SLAVE; that is, in the language of the Arabs,
ALL BLACK PEOPLES ARE CALLED 'ABEED' PLURAL FOR 'SLAVES'.
Even as late as the 19th Century, it was noted that in Mecca "there are few families that do not keep slaves; they all keep mistresses in common with their lawful wives."
It should be noted also, that black slaves were castrated "based on the assumption that the blacks had an ungovernable sexual appetite."
When the Fatimids came to power, they slaughtered all the tens of thousands of black military slaves and raised an entirely new slave army. Some of these slaves were conscripted into the army at age ten. From Persia to Egypt to Morocco, slave armies from 30,000 to up to 250,000 became common-place.
The Empress is carried and accompanied by palace eunuchs, before 1908
A Qing dynasty eunuch, China, before 1911
Chief Eunuch of Ottoman Sultan Abdul Hamid II at the Imperial Palace, 1912.
Black eunuch of the Ottoman Sultan. Photograph by Pascal Sebah, 1870s
A eunuch (/ˈjuːnək/; Greek: εὐνοῦχος)[1] is a man who has been castrated, typically early enough in his life for this change to have major hormonal consequences. In some ancient texts, "eunuch" may refer to a man who is not castrated but who is impotent, celibate, or otherwise not inclined to marry and procreate. In Latin, the words eunuchus,[2] spado (Greek: σπάδων spadon),[3][4] and castratus were used to denote eunuchs.[5]
Castration was typically carried out on the soon-to-be eunuch without his consent in order that he might perform a specific social function; this was common in many societies. The earliest records for intentional castration to produce eunuchs are from the Sumerian city of Lagash in the 21st century BC.[6][7] Over the millennia since, they have performed a wide variety of functions in many different cultures: courtiers or equivalent domestics, treble singers, religious specialists, soldiers, royal guards, government officials, and guardians of women or harem servants.
Eunuchs would usually be servants or slaves who had been castrated in order to make them reliable servants of a royal court where physical access to the ruler could wield great influence.[8] Seemingly lowly domestic functions—such as making the ruler's bed, bathing him, cutting his hair, carrying him in his litter, or even relaying messages—could in theory give a eunuch "the ruler's ear" and impart de facto power on the formally humble but trusted servant. Similar instances are reflected in the humble origins and etymology of many high offices (e.g., chancellor originally denoted a servant guarding the entrance to an official's study).
Eunuchs supposedly did not generally have loyalties to the military, the aristocracy, or to a family of their own (having neither offspring nor in-laws, at the very least), and were thus seen as more trustworthy and less interested in establishing a private 'dynasty'. Because their condition usually lowered their social status, they could also be easily replaced or killed without repercussion. In cultures that had both harems and eunuchs, eunuchs were sometimes used as harem servants (compare the female odalisque) or seraglio guards.
Ancient Middle East Eunuchs were familiar figures in the Assyrian Empire (ca. 850 until 622 BC) and in the court of the Egyptian Pharaohs (down to the Lagid dynasty known as Ptolemies, ending with Cleopatra),(30 BC). Eunuchs sometimes were used as regents for underage heirs to the throne, as it seems to be the case for the Neo-Hittite state of Carchemish.[25] Political eunuchism became a fully established institution among the Achamenide Persians.[26] Eunuchs held powerful positions in the Achaemenide court. The eunuch Bagoas (not to be confused with Alexander's Bagoas) was the Vizier of Artaxerxes III and IV, and was the primary power behind the throne during their reigns, until he was killed by Darius III.[27]
Ancient Greece, Rome and Byzantium[edit] The practice was also well established in other Mediterranean areas among the Greeks and Romans, although a role as court functionaries does not arise until Byzantine times. The Galli or Priests of Cybele were eunuchs.
In the late period of the Roman Empire, after the adoption of the oriental royal court model by the Emperors Diocletian and Constantine, Emperors were surrounded by eunuchs for such functions as bathing, hair cutting, dressing, and bureaucratic functions, in effect acting as a shield between the Emperor and his administrators from physical contact, thus enjoying great influence in the Imperial Court (see Eusebius and Eutropius). Eunuchs were believed loyal and indispensable.[citation needed]
The Roman poet Martial rails against a woman who has sex with partially castrated eunuchs (those whose testicles were removed or rendered inactive only) in the bitter epigram (VI, 67): "Do you ask, Panychus, why your Caelia only consorts with eunuchs? Caelia wants the flowers of marriage – not the fruits." [28] It is up for debate whether this passage is representative of any sort of widely practiced behavior, however.
At the Byzantine imperial court, there were a great number of eunuchs employed in domestic and administrative functions, actually organized as a separate hierarchy, following a parallel career of their own. Archieunuchs—each in charge of a group of eunuchs—were among the principal officers in Constantinople, under the emperors.[29] Under Justinian in the 6th century, the eunuch Narses functioned as a successful general in a number of campaigns. By the last centuries of the Empire the number of roles reserved for eunuchs had reduced, and their use may have been all but over.
Following the Byzantine tradition, eunuchs had important tasks at the court of the Norman kingdom of Sicily during the middle 12th century. One of them, Philip of Mahdia, has been admiratus admiratorum, and another one, Peter the caid, was prime minister.
China[edit] See also: Category:Chinese eunuchs.
A group of eunuchs. Mural from the tomb of the prince Zhanghuai, 706 AD. In China, castration included removal of the penis as well as the testicles. Both organs were cut off with a knife at the same time.[30][31][32][33]
From ancient times until the Sui Dynasty, castration was both a traditional punishment (one of the Five Punishments) and a means of gaining employment in the Imperial service. Certain eunuchs gained immense power that occasionally superseded that of even the Grand Secretaries. Zheng He, who lived during the Ming Dynasty, is an example of such a eunuch. Self-castration was a common practice, although it was not always performed completely, which led to its being made illegal.
It is said that the justification for the employment of eunuchs as high-ranking civil servants was that, since they were incapable of having children, they would not be tempted to seize power and start a dynasty. In many cases, eunuchs were considered more reliable than the scholar officials. A similar system existed in Vietnam.[34]
The tension between eunuchs in the service of the emperor and virtuous Confucian officials is a familiar theme in Chinese history. In his History of Government, Samuel Finer points out that reality was not always that clear-cut. There were instances of very capable eunuchs who were valuable advisers to their emperor, and the resistance of the "virtuous" officials often stemmed from jealousy on their part. Ray Huang argues that in reality, eunuchs represented the personal will of the Emperor, while the officials represented the alternate political will of the bureaucracy. The clash between them would thus have been a clash of ideologies or political agenda.[35]
The number of eunuchs in Imperial employ fell to 470 by 1912, when the practice of using them ceased.[citation needed] The last Imperial eunuch, Sun Yaoting, died in December 1996.
Ottoman Empire
Chief Eunuch of Ottoman Sultan Abdul Hamid II at the Imperial Palace, 1912. In the Ottoman Empire, eunuchs were typically slaves imported from outside their domains. A fair proportion of male slaves were imported as eunuchs.[217]
The Ottoman court harem—within the Topkapı Palace (1465–1853) and later the Dolmabahçe Palace (1853–1909) in Istanbul—was under the administration of the eunuchs. These were of two categories: Black Eunuchs and White Eunuchs. Black Eunuchs were African slaves who served the concubines and officials in the Harem together with chamber maidens of low rank. The White Eunuchs were Europeans from the Balkans or the Caucasus, either purchased in the slave markets or were boys taken from Christian families in the Balkans who were unable to pay the Jizya tax. They served the recruits at the Palace School and were from 1582 prohibited from entering the Harem. An important figure in the Ottoman court was the Chief Black Eunuch (Kızlar Ağası or Dar al-Saada Ağası). In control of both the Harem and a net of spies in the Black Eunuchs, the Chief Eunuch was involved in almost every palace intrigue and could thereby gain power over either the sultan or one of his viziers, ministers, or other court officials.[218] One of the most powerful Chief Eunuchs was Beshir Agha in the 1730s, who played a crucial role in establishing the Ottoman version of Hanafi Islam throughout the Empire by founding libraries and schools.[219] The entire Devşirme system, where the children of Christian families in the Balkans unable to pay the onerous jizya tax were taken away, and- depending upon their sex- became either concubines, in the case of the girls, or, in the case of the boys, were conscripted into Janissary Corps or became eunuchs. The act (emasculation) made Ottoman rule much hated by Christians in the Balkans.
Coptic involvement Many sources claim that eunuchs in the nineteenth century Ottoman Empire were created mainly at one Coptic Monastery, variously said to be called "Abou Gerghè", "Abou Gerhè", or "Abou Gerbe".
Edmund Andrews of the Northwestern University, in an 1898 article called "Oriental Eunuchs" in the American Journal of Medicine, refers to Coptic priests in "Abou Gerhè in Upper Egypt" castrating slave boys.[220]
Black eunuch of the Ottoman Sultan. Photograph by Pascal Sebah, 1870s Coptic castration of slaves was discussed by Peter Charles Remondino, in his book History of Circumcision from the Earliest Times to the Present,[221] published in 1900. He refers to the "Abou-Gerghè" monastery in a place he calls "Mount Ghebel-Eter". He adds details not mentioned by Andrews such as the insertion of bamboo into the victim. Bamboo was used with Chinese eunuchs. Andrews states his information is derived from an earlier work, "Les Femmes, les eunuques, et les guerriers du Soudan"[221] published by a French explorer, Count de Bisson, in 1868, though the place does not appear in de Bisson's book.[222]
Remondino's claims were repeated in similar form by Henry G. Spooner in 1919, in the American Journal of Urology and Sexology. Spooner, an associate of William J. Robinson, referred to the monastery as "Abou Gerbe in Upper Egypt".[223]
According to Remondino, Spooner and several later sources, the Coptic priests sliced the penis and testicles off Nubian or Abyssinian slave boys around the age of eight. The boys were captured from Abyssinia and other areas in Sudan like Darfur and Kordofan, then brought into Sudan and Egypt. During the operation, the Coptic clergyman chained the boys to tables, then, after slicing off their sexual organs, stuck a piece of bamboo into the genital area, and then submerged them in neck-high sand to burn. The recovery rate was ten percent. The resulting eunuchs fetched large profits in contrast to eunuchs from other areas.[224][225][226]
An identifiable Coptic area named in relation to castration of slaves is the former village of Al-Zawya. Slave traders travelling north from the Sudan would castrate their slave boys here, before entering the Muslim city of Asyut, 10 miles north, where they could be sold.
Indian subcontinent Eunuchs in Indian sultanates (before Mughals)[edit] Eunuchs were frequently employed in Imperial palaces by Muslim rulers as servants for female royalty, as guards of the royal harem, and as sexual mates for the nobles. Some of these attained high-status positions in society. An early example of such a high-ranking eunuch was Malik Kafur, a Hindu boy captured and enslaved (along with tens of thousands of other Hindus who were typically captured during such raids), during the raids of the Delhi Sultanate into Gujarat. Eunuchs in Imperial palaces were organized in a hierarchy, often with a senior or Chief Eunuch (Urdu: Khwaja Saras), directing junior eunuchs below him. Eunuchs were highly valued for their strength- an ability to provide protection for ladies' palaces and trustworthiness- allowing eunuchs to live amongst women with fewer worries. This enabled eunuchs to serve as messengers, watchmen, attendants and guards for palaces. Often, eunuchs also doubled as part of the King's court of advisers.[227][228]
The Hijra of South Asia Main article: Hijra (South Asia)
Hijras of Delhi, India The Ancient Indian Kama Sutra refers to people of a "third sex" (triteeyaprakrti), who can be dressed either in men's or in women's clothes and perform fellatio on men. The term has been translated as "eunuchs" (as in Sir Richard Burton's translation of the book), but these persons have also been considered to be the equivalent of the modern Hijra of India.[citation needed]
Hijra, a Hindi and Urdu term traditionally translated into English as "eunuch", actually refers to what modern Westerners would call transgender women and effeminate homosexual men (although some of them reportedly identify as belonging to a third sex). Some of them undergo ritual castration, but the majority do not. They usually dress in saris (traditional Indian garb worn by women) or shalwar kameez (traditional garb worn by women in South Asia) and wear heavy make-up. They typically live in the margins of society and face discrimination.[229] However, they are integral to several Hindu ceremonies which is the primary form of their livelihood. They are a part of dance programs (sometimes Adult) in marriage ceremonies. They also perform certain ceremonies for the couple in Hindu tradition. Other means to earn their living are: by coming, uninvited at weddings, births, new shop openings and other major family events, singing until they are paid or given gifts to go away.[230] The ceremony is supposed to bring good luck and fertility, while the curse of an unappeased hijra is feared by many. Other sources of income for the hijra are begging and prostitution. The begging is accompanied by singing and dancing and the hijras usually get the money easily. Some Indian provincial officials have used the assistance of hijras to collect taxes in the same fashion- they knock on the doors of shopkeepers, while dancing and singing- embarrassing them into paying.[231] Recently, hijras have started to found organizations to improve their social condition and fight discrimination, such as the Shemale Foundation Pakistan.
Posts: 5376 | From: sepedat/sirius | Registered: Jul 2012
| IP: Logged |
Look at the hypocrite calling someone an immigrant when they themselves are an invader to a land of a people they hate & constantly degrade & dehumanize, but also tries to steal the identity & history of along with claiming their land as his/or her own. Sorry Anti-White but I'm only speaking the truth, you can't deny that Whites in Europe do not get Indigenous rights. Their land is being flooded by people like you & they are silenced &arrested,jailed when they object to it. When a European country tries to start a program to incite the indigenous Whites to have more children, its condemned as racist & never happens. Ohh the horror that a White country might actually want more White children born. Ohh noo White babies are wicked evil,racist oppressors who should never be born, the less White babies/White children the better right Troll Patrol,Fencer,TheReal,ElMaestro,MOM,Mike,Clyde,Fourty2Tribes,Xy-YTPeople-Hater,Jantavanta,Narmer,Zarahan
Posts: 3257 | From: Madisonville, KY USA | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
Native Americans are more genetically similar to Europeans than they are to Africans
So, subliminally you're admitting the Asian derivative, nice.
quote: The overall contributions from Asia and Africa were estimated to be around two-thirds and one-third, respectively.
--L. LUCA CAVALLI-SFORZA
Genes, peoples, and languages
quote:The figure, besides a separate clustering of east Africans, indicates the substantial contribution of Africans and east Africans to the founding of populations of Europe and Asia.
(TIF)
--Jibril Hirbo, Sara Tishkoff et al.
The Episode of Genetic Drift Defining the Migration of Humans out of Africa Is Derived from a Large East African Population Size
PLoS One. 2014; 9(5): e97674. Published online 2014 May 20. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0097674
Posts: 22249 | From: Omni | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by CelticWarrioress: Troll Patrol,
Look at the hypocrite calling someone an immigrant when they themselves are an invader to a land of a people they hate & constantly degrade & dehumanize, but also tries to steal the identity & history of along with claiming their land as his/or her own. Sorry Anti-White but I'm only speaking the truth, you can't deny that Whites in Europe do not get Indigenous rights. Their land is being flooded by people like you & they are silenced &arrested,jailed when they object to it. When a European country tries to start a program to incite the indigenous Whites to have more children, its condemned as racist & never happens. Ohh the horror that a White country might actually want more White children born. Ohh noo White babies are wicked evil,racist oppressors who should never be born, the less White babies/White children the better right Troll Patrol,Fencer,TheReal,ElMaestro,MOM,Mike,Clyde,Fourty2Tribes,Xy-YTPeople-Hater,Jantavanta,Narmer,Zarahan
Did you Know
It was the Native Americans who introduced Europeans to smoking tobacco. In doing so, they inadvertently had revenge on their European invaders who had destroyed hundreds of thousands of the Native Americans with smallpox and measles. Some estimate that in the 20th century, deaths from smoking in the developed world (mainly the US and Europe) exceeded 700 million.
The ‘savage natives’ were often shocked by European customs such as child-beating or exclusive family loyalty. As one native American said to a priest, ‘you love only your own children, but we love all children.’
"Not all the Native American tribes were fearful of the new arrivals. The coastal tribes of South Carolina welcomed the planting of Charles Town in 1670 as it protected them from the wild tribes of the interior." Hugh Brogan: The Penguin History of the United States
European Invasion
INDIANS?
About 30,000 years ago, the ice age froze so much water that it exposed a previously submerged piece of terrain; the land-bridge, the Bering Straits. Humans cross from the most eastern part of Asia into the most western part of North America. Civilizations rise, Mayan, Aztec and Inca, but none enter even the Iron Age, partly due to a lack of accessible tin and iron deposits. But as top predator, they’re suspected of making extinct several species, including the American horse. Without draught animals, the wheel can’t be exploited. The natives’ numbers and weaponry are enough, however, to see off Viking landings in the eleventh century. When Columbus encounters them in the fifteenth century, he thinks he’s in Asia and calls them Indians. 20th century cowboy films depict Indians as savages. In reality, from the original Plymouth pilgrims to later explorers like William and Clarke, Americans depend on a native people adapted to each and every environment.
90% KILL RATE
Many massacres were to come, on either side, but natives are first devastated by the infections the Europeans bring with them: measles, smallpox and yellow fever. With no immunity, only one in ten survive. European military technology will eventually be decisive, but initially, the depleted natives still possess the numbers and they can fire arrows nine times faster than their enemies can reload their muskets. But Spanish conquest up South and Central America is inexorable. North America is next.
MR SMITH MEETS THE NATIVES
Militarily, the Spanish are first, but it’s the British who colonise. In 1605, five natives are taken to England to prove the New World existed and its habitants malleable, in order to attract investment.
In 1607, sixty starving English settlers establish Jamestown in the middle of a 20,000 strong, Powhatan empire. Soldier of fortune, Captain John Smith makes first contact. He intimidates the natives into providing maize. But then he’s captured and he’s about to be executed when Pocahontas intervenes. An uneasy truce ensues, but it’s aggravated by the settler’s need for new tobacco fields which means constant expansion into natives’ lands. In March 1622, the natives retaliate and massacre a third of the 1,200 settlers in the first ‘Indian’ uprising. In response, the British send more arms. The subsequent killings stop any native problems for 20 years. In 1644, what’s left of the Powhatan empire rises again. Their leader is shot in the back and within a few years, an empire of 20,000 is reduced to under 2,000.
It’s the same story for the tribes that met the Plymouth pilgrims. In 1675, Metacom, or ‘King Philip’, the son of the chief behind the Thanksgiving peace of 1621, attempts to unite the tribes of southern New England against further European expansion. But it’s always a numbers game. The settlers lose 1.5% of their people. The natives lose 15%. King Philip is executed like a criminal. His supporters are sold into slavery. In terms of a European invasion, the beach-head had been secured.
Meet the Beachy Head Lady at Eastbourne Ancestors A rare and unexpected discovery in the UK of a sub-saharan African dating back to Roman times, found at Beachy Head. Analysis shows she grew up here - what's her story?
quote: Pictured: The 1,800-year-old face of 'Beachy Head Lady' is revealed for the first time thanks to 3D scanning
Skeleton of 30-year-old was found in Beachy Head, East Sussex in 1953
African lady lived until 245 AD - the middle of Roman period in Britain Possible she was the wife of an official or mistress of Roman villa nearby
Researchers were able to use the size of the skull and traces of where the muscle would have met the bone to build up a picture of the face
By Ellie Zolfagharifard
Published: 13:12 GMT, 4 February 2014 | Updated: 18:02 GMT, 4 February 2014
This is the face belonging to an ancient skeleton buried in Roman times, created using the latest 3D reconstruction technology.
The so-called 'Beachy Head Lady' - because she was discovered in the East Sussex beauty spot - had her face recreated using craniofacial reconstruction techniques.
Her skeleton was first discovered in Beachy Head 1953, and she is thought to have lived around 245 AD- the middle of the Roman period in Britain.
Unusually Beachy Head Lady is from sub-Saharan Africa which was outside of the Roman Empire.
This is the face of an ancient skeleton buried in Roman times, created using 3D reconstruction techniques
Experts are not entirely sure how she ended up in Britain, but researchers believe Beachy Head Lady probably grew up in the area and was possibly the wife or mistress of a local official at a nearby Roman villa.
Another theory is that she was a merchant trading wares in Europe and chose to settle in the country.
Jo Seaman, heritage officer at Eastbourne Borough Council, said: ‘This is a fantastic discovery for the south coast.
‘We know this lady was around 30 years old, grew up in the vicinity of what is now East Sussex, ate a good diet of fish and vegetables, her bones were without disease and her teeth were in good condition.
Researchers used the size of the skull and traces of where the muscle would have met the bone to build up a picture of Beachy Head Lady's appearance
WHAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT BEACHY HEAD LADY?
The female's skeleton suggests that the woman was around 30 years old when she died in 245AD.
Experts believe she grew up in Sussex despite being from Sub-Saharan Africa.
This is especially interesting as this area was beyond the reaches of the Roman Empire.
Because she was not found with any grave goods, archaeologists are unable to deduce what social status she was.
It is however possible that she was the wife or mistress of an official. She may also have been a merchant traveller too.
‘Without the context of seeing the burial site or grave goods, we don’t yet know why she was here, or her social status.
‘However based on what we know of the Roman era and a similar discovery in York, it’s possible she was the wife of a local official or mistress of the extensive Roman villa which is known to be close to Eastbourne Pier, or she may have been a Merchant, plying the trade routes around the Mediterranean up to this remote European outpost.’
Mr Seaman said that isotopes showed the Beachy Head Lady was raised in or around Eastbourne from a young age. He said the skeleton was in good condition with no signs of hard labour.
Eastbourne museums paired up with the University of Dundee to use Radio-Isotope Analysis to examine bones and teeth for trace elements absorbed from food and water during an individual’s lifetime, giving a geological fingerprint to the region in which they grew up.
Her full skeleton is on show for the first time to the public at Eastbourne Borough Council’s museum service which was awarded a grant of £72,000 by the Heritage Lottery Fund.
Beachy Head Lady's full skeleton is on show for the first time to the public at Eastbourne Borough Council's museum service which was awarded a grant of £72,000 by the Heritage Lottery Fund
Beachy Head is a chalk headland in Southern England, close to the town of Eastbourne
The skeleton makes up part of the Eastbourne Ancestors project at the museum.
The aim was to identify the gender and age of each skeleton in its collection to build up stories about them.
Testing of the bones and teeth has identified the national or regional origins, age, gender, state of health, diet, and in some cases, how they died.
The researchers were also able to use the size of the skull and traces of where the muscle would have met the bone to build up a picture of her appearance.
Most of the skeletons are Anglo-Saxon, from about 1,500 years ago, but some are Neolithic and more than 4,000 years old.
Eastbourne Borough Council Cabinet Member for Tourism and Leisure, Cllr Carolyn Heaps said: ‘It is very exciting to open the first local history related exhibition in ten years.
‘The exhibition is focused on telling the stories of those that date back to Prehistory, giving an insight into what they may have worked as, what cultures they may have adopted as well as their age and gender.’
The skeleton was first discovered in Beachy Head (pictured) in 1953, and she is thought to have lived around AD245 - the middle of the Roman period in Britain
posted
As some here may know I don’t believe everything written by Europeans. Their books are filled with lies. There is one research paper I posted on that concluded that the Moor were never expelled…at least to the extent “documented” in history books or to the locations they were supposedly expelled to. Which could mean one of several things. The Moor invasion force was very small. If it was a large force they were never expelled or they were killed off. Islamic custom was part of Iberian or Southern European culture PRIOR to the Moor invasion as I posted on also about a year ago when cemetery uncovered disclosed Islamic pre-dating “Mohammed” in Europe meaning the “moors” were in Europe BEFORE the religion was even conceived.
Europeans have a derange habiting or lying.
quote:Originally posted by Thereal: I don't know but doesn't that number seem quite high as an invading force to Britain?
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Post it in the thread, Xyyman! I have tried to talk to various people on this subject, but to no avail!
No one seems to be able to grasp the fact that Blacks were the first settlers and inhabitants of Europe and this continued all the way to the classical period; even though Europe is just a couple miles away from Africa.....
I have also noticed this tendency of verbal maneuvering and gymnastics and manipulation whenever I see an albino European talk about anything serious on any subject.
They are very good at coming across as all "mature" and "knowledgeable" and cognizant based on their verbal abilities; whenever you see an albino Euro in America on the news or in media, talk about subjects as wide ranging as the weather to the planets to current news; they have this fake pseudo bullshit way of verbally tricking people into thinking they are just generally knowledgeable about everything there is to know, and that they know everything, even if they are off or wrong on whatever it is that they are talking about.
And the simplistic and simple minded just seem to fall for this sort of verbal jargon and maneuvering and fake knowledgeable intelligent talk; but the critical minded can see through the fake verbal bullshit that the European albinos employ for their interests and purposes.
I don't really know how to describe all aspects of this, but I don't know if you ever noticed this Xyyman. The Euro albinos seem to have a way with words and controlling people, and talking the talk through bullshit "smart talk"......
Posts: 1558 | From: US | Registered: Sep 2015
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: Islamic custom was part of Iberian or Southern European culture PRIOR to the Moor invasion as I posted on also about a year ago when cemetery uncovered disclosed Islamic pre-dating “Mohammed” in Europe meaning the “moors” were in Europe BEFORE the religion was even conceived.
Islam didn't exist before Muhammad and Muhammad was never in Europe
Posts: 43045 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: Islamic custom was part of Iberian or Southern European culture PRIOR to the Moor invasion as I posted on also about a year ago when cemetery uncovered disclosed Islamic pre-dating “Mohammed” in Europe meaning the “moors” were in Europe BEFORE the religion was even conceived.
Islam didn't exist before Muhammad and Muhammad was never in Europe
There are theories that it did exist, before.
Go school yourself in theology.
Posts: 22249 | From: Omni | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Islam was founded by Muhammad. Please tell how something exists before its foundation. Also show where and who followed the 5 Pillars of the Faith or who proclaimed theshahada before he who is mentioned in it ever lived?
This I want to learn (something other than everyone is born Muslim only that their society weaned them from it) as I have a long ongoing interest in comparative religion.
And dont bother posting a cut n paste wall of text. Show you have thought this out with your own mind but do cite your sources via hyperlinks, please.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
That easy,aspect of Islam existed before Muhammed gave it form,I haven't done to much research,only some stuff I've heard in old lectures.
Posts: 1123 | From: New York | Registered: Feb 2016
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
The same can be said about any religion or philosophy. The same set of ingredients can make a cake or pie. But a cake is not a pie and do I need say the discrete ingredients are neither a cake nor a pie.
Scholarship please, opinions are fine but knowledge seekers require confirmations from accessible info anyone can go look up for themselves, thank you.
BTW have you read Volney's Ruins of Empires or African Origins of the Major Western Religions by Yosef ben Jochannan?
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
Wasn't disagreeing only answering the first part of the questions and no,I haven't read any of those peoples books,thank for the info.
Posts: 1123 | From: New York | Registered: Feb 2016
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: Islamic custom was part of Iberian or Southern European culture PRIOR to the Moor invasion as I posted on also about a year ago when cemetery uncovered disclosed Islamic pre-dating “Mohammed” in Europe meaning the “moors” were in Europe BEFORE the religion was even conceived.
I know the burial he's talking about. It was discussed before in a thread. The above statement is misleading. Islam had existed for about a hundred years before the Umayyads directed the invasion of Iberia (Spain etc.) from their bases in Africa, the armies thought to be comprised of berbers and Arabs although there is very little reliable contemporary record of the invasion. The PLOS source article did not say these burials found in Nimes, France were dated prior to Islam which begins in 610. France not Spain was the location another of the numerous errors xyyman typically makes, where the bodies were found . The fact that Muslim theologians like to say that Islam existed from the beginning of time is a separate issue.
They burial is speculated to be Muslim because they were positioned pointed toward Mecca. The Arabs, under Al-Samh ibn Malik, the governor-general of al-Andalus, took control of this area in France, then called Septimania around 719 and controlled it until 760. The dating of the burials is not that certain and as to whether one was there prior to the invasion (but post foundation of Islam). If so it does not mean the whole region was practicing Islam before the invasion. Visigoths were in control before the Muslims.
___________________________
Iberia comprised mainly of Portugal and Spain was the region Muslims controlled for hundreds of years although the invaders were a very small portion of the general population. It was called Al-Andalus
The Muladi were Muslims of local descent or of mixed Berber, Arab and Iberian origin, who lived in Al-Andalus during the Middle Ages. They were also called "Musalimah" (Islamized). In broader usage, the word mūwallad is used to describe Arabs of mixed parentage, especially those not living in their ancestral homelands.
Muladi is the Spanish form of the term muwalladun, referring to Arabic-speaking Muslims of Hispanic origin who showed the same behavior patterns as those rebels of Arab and Berber origin who rebelled against Arab rule.
According to Dozy, Muwallad means "anyone who, without being of Muslim origin, is born among the Muslims and has been raised as an Arab".[8] The word, according to him, does not necessarily imply Arab ancestry, either paternal or maternal.
In Islamic history muwalladun designates in a broader sense non-Arab Muslims or the descendants of converts. In the Muslim-ruled parts of the Iberian Peninsula, parts of the indigenous until-then Christian population (basically a mixture of the pre-Roman peoples of the Iberian Peninsula, ancient Romans, Visigoths and Suebi) converted to Islam in the 8th and 9th centuries. In the 10th century a massive conversion of Christians took place, so that muladies comprised the majority of the population of Al-Andalus by the century's end. However, the majority of Muwallads had embraced Islam early, but retained many pre-Islamic customs and characteristics.
Conversion to Islam was encouraged by the Umayyad caliphs and Emirs of Córdoba but it was not forced. Many Christians converted to Islam to avoid the Jizya tax which they were subjected to as Dhimmis. Conversion to Islam also opened up new horizons to the native Christians, alleviated their social position, ensured better living conditions, and broadened their scope for more technically skilled and advanced work
The Christians who embraced Islam became Mawali, or clients attached to an Arab tribe, and as such, were thoroughly islamized, adopting the Islamic dress code, customs, and language
The Muwallads were also called Muslima (Islamized), and elches (ilj, plural: ulus), in reference to the society from which they sprang. They later were denominated Aljamiados because of their non Arabic-tongue, that is, the Mozarabic languages.
Through the cultural Arabization of muladies and their increasing inter-marriage with some Berbers and Arabs present in Iberia, the distinctions between the different Muslim groups became increasingly blurred in the 11th and 12th centuries. The populations mixed with such rapidity that it was soon impossible to distinguish ethnically the elements of foreign origin from the natives. Thus they merged into a more homogeneous group of Andalusi Arabs generally also called Moors.
The Muwalladun were the mainstay of the economic framework of the country. Together with the Mozarabs they constituted the productive classes which were craftsmen and small tradesmen in the towns, and farmers and labourers in the rural countryside. However, they were inferior to the Arabs and Berbers in social status. Prominent positions in government and society were usually not available to individuals of Muladi descent. In spite of the Islamic doctrine of equality and brotherhood of Muslims, the Muwalladun were often looked down upon with the utmost contempt by the Arab and Berber aristocrats and were usually pejoratively referred to as "the sons of slaves".[13]
The Muwallads, in turn, in spite of their profession of faith, despised the Arabs whom they viewed as colonialists and foreign intruders. This mutual feeling of hatred and suspicion provoked frequent revolts and led the Muwallads to support the Abbasid political agents, the preachers of Shu'ubiyya (a non-Arab movement), and subversive activities against the Umayyad rule in Iberia
The invading forces were made up mainly of Berber tribesmen from the Maghreb (the north west of Africa), under Arab leadership. United by their religion, the two groups plus other Muslim soldiers --Egyptians, Syrians-- are now generally lumped under "Moors," and the territory they conquered they called al-Andalus, the southern part of which we now know as Andalusia.
Posts: 43045 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
You're welcome, and feel free to disagree with anything I say. I'm not a guru trying to build up a cult of followers. However I am a stickler for an authentic nonpedantic core system of African Studies and the many disciplines supporting it.
Of course history is an adjunct of politics but I'm not interested in swapping a set of pro-white lies for a set of pro-black lies even if the latter work to my advantage as a black man.
Like Bob I believe we have to "Tell the children the truth' but since the truth is a broken mirror each of us holding a shard yet sure it's the whole, we have to put our pieces together to try and uncover the facts and stand up to close skeptical scrutiny without sidestepping hard questions poised to us with excuses like * white man lies, * you are stupid if you disagree, * I said so and that settles it, * contrary evidence is fake or conspiratorial.
.
quote:Originally posted by Thereal: Wasn't disagreeing only answering the first part of the questions and no,I haven't read any of those peoples books,thank for the info.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Thereal: That easy,aspect of Islam existed before Muhammed gave it form,I haven't done to much research,only some stuff I've heard in old lectures.
That's correct. And this is supported by critical theology.
Posts: 22249 | From: Omni | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Having no education in comparative religion and lacking groundation in foregoing black scholarship -- like Doc Ben's Origins book -- means one cannot point out those aspects.
'Aspects' do not make for a distinct religion's tenets and praxis that distinguish it from other belief systems sharing the same aspects.
Ergo no documentation for the 5 Pillars of Faith nor the shahada before Muhammad's birth. Not in Iberia (sic, the Lioness has shown the place Xyyman referred to is in France) nor anywhere else either.
Dogging everything just because the Lion ass said it is poor methodology for disconfirming his/her posts.
The original issue was Islamic custom in southern Europe culture before Tariq and his Moors invaded in 711 CE. It awaits confirmation from accessible sources researches can use to replicate said confirmation.
So far there's only undocumented backlash Dr Feelgood pseudo-confirmation. Doesn't the knowledge seeking readership deserve better?
Maybe not. Maybe 'right on bro teach teach' is all that's needed.
No one contends there were no NW Africans in Iberia before Islam. Any such foolishness is easily refuted since the Strait of Gibraltar crossings even precede Epipaleolithic times and has continued ever since, including the Mauretanian progenitors of the Moors.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
Once Portugal and Spain established the profitability of the African slave trade, other European nations entered the field. The English made an initial foray into the African slave trade in 1530 when William Hawkins, a merchant of Plymouth, visited the Guinea Coast and left with a few slaves. Three decades later Hawkins’ son, John, set sail in 1564 for the Guinea Coast. Supported by Queen Elizabeth I, he commanded four armed ships and a force of one hundred and seventy men. Hawkins lost many of these men in fights with “Negroes” on the Guinea coast in his attempts to secure Africans to enslave. Later through piracy he took 300 Africans from a Spanish vessel, making it profitable for him to head for the West Indies where he could sell them for money and trade them for provisions. Queen Elizabeth I rewarded him for opening the slave trade for the English by knighting him and giving him a crest that showed a Negro’s head and bust with arms bound secure (Hale [1884] 1967 Vol. 3:60).
______________________________
SIR JOHN HAWKINS
England’s first slave trader who was Mayor of Plymouth
Johns’ father, William Hawkins senior, was one of the five richest men in Plymouth in 1543. He was worth £150 a year (to get a sense of scale bear in mind that the towns total income in that year was £63). Another fact:- during that year he was accused of being responsible for a fellow townsman’s near death by beating. He managed to avoid trial over this.
But these were dangerous times; merchant ships trading in coastal waters around Europe had to be prepared to repel borders by force as pirates of many nations were active. In those times Kings & Queens licensed pirates who were then called privateers. Captured ships were called prizes the crew and passengers butchered, their possessions shared among the crew.
William commanded privateers to Brazil at least three times and then continued to develop the trade from home to his immense profit. He became infamous to the Spanish and Portuguese colonies where his violent piracy was feared. As elected Lord Mayor William seems to have benefited during the dissolution of the monasteries. This was the time when Henry the VIII wanted to divorce Katherine of Aragon. The friars that upheld Church Law against the King lost their property and valuables (never mind lives) in the following conflagration. The Lord Mayor was the most powerful person in a town at that time; not a ceremonial position but for instance he would be in charge of the city militia and responsible for the defences of the city.
In 1544 William received the Kings Commission to ‘annoy the King’s enemies’. William trod a fine line between legality and piracy. He was sent to prison at one point but this did not prevent him on release from more piracy. When William died his estate went to his two sons William and John. William Junior managed the business at home and John took control at sea.
After marrying the daughter of the Treasury of the Navy, John formed a syndicate of wealthy London merchants to back a new venture trading against Spanish law with the Spanish Colonies in the Americas. These colonies were very short of labour and John Hawkins aimed to take slaves by force in Africa and trade them for the produce of Spanish America. This would produce a double turnover in one voyage. A huge profit would be made.
He sailed from Plymouth in 1562 with three ships. He violently kidnapped about four hundred Africans in Guinea and traded them in the West Indies for Elizabethan luxuries:- pearls, ginger, sugar and hides. He had become England’s first slave trader. He sailed again in 1564 from the Cattewater (part of the estuary of the river Plym) with four ships. The syndicate this time included Queen Elizabeth I, Navy Board Officers and members of the Privy Council. He violently enslaved around five hundred people in Guinea and traded them in the West Indies. His personal profit was huge and the Queen gave him a coat of arms. It had a bound slave as the crest (see below).
John Hawkins was responsible for seven ships in two squadrons sailing to Guinea in 1566. Another member of this expedition was Hawkins’ cousin Francis Drake. In 1567, after a service in St Andrews Church attended by the 400 men of his crews, he sailed to the West Indies via Guinea again. After much bloodshed on the Guinea coast 500 slaves were transported to the Caribbean. According to slavers accounts of the time this would probably have involved killing at least three times that number of people. Hawkins made three voyages to what is now Sierra Leone between 1562 and 1569 – enslaving around 1,200 Africans.
William Hawkins Junior was Mayor elect of Plymouth in 1568. In this year there were believed to be 50 Huguenot privateers operating in the English Channel. Thirty of them were English. William had the biggest stake in the fleet and was virtually Pirate-in-chief. During the period up to 1572 the state records are full of the screams of those Europeans and others who suffered under these marauders. Plymouth became the main base of their operations. In 1572, under political pressure from Spain, their fleet shifted to the other side of the channel. William and John went on buying cargoes in Plymouth from privateers and ‘ransoming’ Huguenot prizes. London Merchants were still financing slaving voyages to West Africa out of Plymouth. Ships were still sailing to the Caribbean, eight Hawkins vessels and six others in 1575.
Posts: 43045 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Arms granted to John Hawkins in 1565, for the massive profits he made in the slave trade. Sable on a point wavy, a lion passant or, in chief three bezants, crest, a demi Moor in his proper colour, bound and captive, with annulets in his arms and ears, or. Note the lion in the grant of arms is described as passant, but in the accompanying illustration is statant.
Sir john hawkins early arms
Date 4 January 1565
Source College of Arms, United Kingdom
Author William Harvey
Posts: 22249 | From: Omni | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
Queen Elizabeth I assisted the early merchant adventurers in 1561 by supplying ships and provisions. When they returned to English ports they brought not only valuable cargoes of commodities, but also more Africans, some of whom had probably become sailors on these merchant ships. Queen Elizabeth soon realised the economic value of this overseas trade.
quote:Centuries old Beachy Head Lady's face revealed
An exhibition exploring the origins of ancient skeletons in Sussex, including a woman from sub-Saharan Africa buried in Roman times, has opened.
The face of the so-called Beachy Head Lady was recreated using craniofacial reconstruction.
Eastbourne Borough Council's museum service was awarded a grant of £72,000 by the Heritage Lottery Fund for the Eastbourne Ancestors project.
The aim was to identify the gender and age of each skeleton in its collection.
Detailed scientific analysis of more than 300 skeletons of people who lived in the south of England thousands of years ago has undertaken by scientists and archaeologists.
Testing of the bones and teeth has identified the national or regional origins, age, gender, state of health, diet, and in some cases, how they died.
Most of the skeletons are Anglo-Saxon, from about 1,500 years ago, but some are Neolithic and more than 4,000 years old. The Beachy Head Lady was discovered in the East Sussex beauty spot in 1953, and she is thought to have lived around AD245. Jo Seaman, heritage officer at Eastbourne Borough Council, said: "This is a fantastic discovery for the south coast.
"We know this lady was around 30 years old, grew up in the vicinity of what is now East Sussex, ate a good diet of fish and vegetables, her bones were without disease and her teeth were in good condition."
The Beachy Head Lady forms part of an exhibition at the Eastbourne Museum which is opens on 1 February at the Pavilion.
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor: Arms granted to John Hawkins in 1565, for the massive profits he made in the slave trade. Sable on a point wavy, a lion passant or, in chief three bezants, crest, a demi Moor in his proper colour, bound and captive, with annulets in his arms and ears, or. Note the lion in the grant of arms is described as passant, but in the accompanying illustration is statant.
Sir john hawkins early arms
Date 4 January 1565
Source College of Arms, United Kingdom
Author William Harvey
Be careful with these Ish, be sure to go deeper, an alarm went off when I noticed no primary sources for the claim of what the crest ment. On further research, there are disagreements on that being the meaning of the crest. I'm going to dig a bit more for this specific one though.
Posts: 310 | From: US | Registered: Jun 2015
| IP: Logged |
posted
Something obviously deeper was going on I think. Its possible from what I've read that Hawkins was under a covert mission. But besides the point, something isn't adding up... Because... you have "historians" telling you one thing. And... people exploring these places telling themselves another thing amongst themselves.
"The letters of Sir Walter Scott and Charles Korkpatrick Shape to Tobert Chambers, 1821-45: with original memoranda of Sir Walter Scott"
"When the King of France resided in the Abbey Madame Polistron, his favourite, dwelt in a small WHITE WASHED house, on the left of the Chapel, looking into the Park. Her son by him, Louis Polistron, was a Madame Rossignol's Dancing School - a very handsome youth - he died young."
"I remember many fragments of the royal bodies shown in the chapel; and a Countess of Roxburgh entire, saving one hand. THE WOMAN WENT INTO THE VAULT, AND THREW OUT THE BODY ON THE GRASS - LIKE A BLACKAMOOR'S; WITH ONE WHITE TOOTH, WHICH GAVE AN UNDESCRIBABLE HORROR TO THE FACE - IT USE TO MAKE CHILDREN SQUALL PRODIGIOUSLY. In later times, I once paid a visit to the chapel with some friends after the royal vault had been shut up."
Who knows what else these vile beings have locked away.
Thankfully, the albinos seem to be in the process of self destructing (one last hoorah before they lose everything, as they have broadcasted their entire hand now) so we may get access to these things soon enough.
Posts: 310 | From: US | Registered: Jun 2015
| IP: Logged |
Prophet Elijah from a two-sided icon dated to the late 12th century. The reverse side is decorated with an image of St. John the Theologian. Image courtesy of the Byzantine Museum, Kastoria:
Last Judgment Voronet Monastery Romania, 1488:
Europe, Romania, Voronet village, Voronet monastery c. 1488, The Last Judgment, Heaven:
Rare image of Henry II (972-1024) King of Italy and Germany also Holy Roman Emperor during the time of the Ottonian Dynasty. From the Sacramentary of Henry II (1002 -1014):
Hieromartyr Clement the Pope of Rome - Orthodox Church in America:
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic