Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
To the OP.. BERBER PEOPLE ARE ALIENS ... FROM THE PLANET ZURON ... THIRD GALAXY FROM ALPHA CENTAURI ...
(... why do you guys keep reacting to these racist so-called "Spaniards" ... and lonely trolls?)
When it comes to the Berbers a lot of people seem to be misinformed. First and foremost the Berbers are Indigenous African people. Berbers are not Europeans and they are not Arab. They have had there own language and culture that predates Arab and European occupation. Like Tiger Beer said in the earlier post they often get put in a vague catch-all "Arabic" umbrella. The reason for that is that most Berbers today are Arabized due to the Arab invasions that happen around the 7th century AD. But even still, many Berbers still embrace their indigenous heritage and language.
On the topic of what race are the Berbers. It is clearly evident that they are part of the same race as the rest of the indigenous people of Africa. I know many people are going to say " How can they be black when they don't look like the average black person?" or an even more ridiculous question; "How is it possible for a "Black African" to be indigenous in Africa that is not in Sub-Saharan Africa?".
The problem with society is that we put to much emphasis on blackness when it comes to African identity. Africa spans over 6,000 miles from North to South, and it would be complete ignorance to suggest everyone in Africa is going to have the same skin complexion. When people think Black African they think only of Jet Black skin and anyone who doesn't fall into that category is somehow mixed or not a true African which is absurd. Also many people try to rely on the "Sub-Saharan" racial line divide as if that is somehow a great way to determine a racial divide between the "Black" Africans from the "Anything but Black" Africans.
Africa is Africa and if you are indigenous than you should be part of the African race. I don't know why most people in society go out of their way to refer to the Continent as "Sub-Sahara" or the even worse term "Black Africa". When applying the same rederick to other continents it sounds silly(ex. Red America, White Europe, and Yellow Asia). Also here is a link if any of you want to learn more about the Berber people.
As a Berber/Amazigh myself I agree with this. We are an African fair skinned people, because we are Africans we tend to color faster. From a slight tan to an almost black. We are neither black (as some African internet pseudo scholars) would describe us because they have the need for ethnic profiling like their "white"colleagues, nor are we white.
We can all agree that we are not Arabs, and as a matter of fact we are much older than the Arabs. Having said that, it's not unlikely to have fair skinned people in Africa, did not al peoples of the earth originate from our continent. Why is it then strange to believe that there are fair skinned peoples who are indigenous to Africa?
And to my African brethren, don't confuse the north with our Touareg brothers and sisters. They live across Mali and the Niger, ofcourse they are going to mix with its inhabitants and have some "negroid" (I don't like this term) feautures. In Morocco for example we Berbers had slaves (white and black ones), and as our culture dictates, we accept all children we produce as our own. Not only that, if a slave is freed we consider that slave as one of us as well when he or she adopts our language and culture.
You talk about scholars and books, try asking a Berber where he/she comes from and why there is a varation in color when it comes to us Berbers. We Amazigh consider us free from those limited boundries, we have a culture of freedom (sadly enough limited due to the Arabs), we don't do color profiling, we don't do races and we don't care about what most of you are rambling about. In our language for millenia we don't had any term for a race except for three)
Aromi = Roman (used for white people, not Berbers)
Abershen = Black (used for Black people, not Berbers)
A3abi = Arab (used for actual Arabs)
It's a bit hard to call other blacks (with no racist intent) if we are predominantly black to.
We don't care about race, we care about our own culture and language, the rest is nonsense.
Berbers are African people when it's all said and done. Silly racial designations don't hold much weight.
It is a well known fact that most of today’s Arabic-speaking peoples are predominantly descended from the pre-Islamic populations that lived there. The true original Arabs, the (peninsular) Arabians (Saudis, Yemenis, Omanis, Qataris, Emiratis), mostly carry Y-DNA haplogroup J1. The main haplogroup in Syrians, Iraqis, Palestinians, Lebanese, Bahrainis, and Jordanians is haplogroup J2, not J1. The main haplogroup in Egyptians and Libyans is E1b1b1b1 while most Tunisians, Algerians, Moroccans, and Mauretanians carry E1b1b1b2. Ironically, the only “Arabs” of the Arab world that carry mostly J1 are the Sudanese, who look black. However, the Sudanese carry a different subclade (“subgene”) of the haplogroup (gene) J1 than the peninsular Arabians. So therefore, who is to say that the “Arabs” (aka “Moors”, which is a foreign name that the Muslims of North Africa & Spain never used for themselves) of Spain were also not locals? It seems like they were because there are many descendants of the Spanish Muslims in Morocco and Tunisia, and many of them look European.
Well, first of all, there is no such thing as “Muslim ancestry”. Second of all, most of the Muslims in Spain were neither North Africans nor Middle Easterners. Initially of course, the first Muslim inhabitants of Spain were Arabians and Berbers. Later on, a few Syrians arrived. However, the majority of the Spaniards living within al-Andalus underwent a gradual process of cultural change similar to the cultural change which would impact most of the Amerindians in Latin America. Notice that when I say “cultural change”, that does not mean “genetic change” or “racial change”. It is simply a change in culture.
Most of the Amerindians in Mexico for example, became admixed with Spaniards. However, for those that didn’t and remained “pure”, their culture was still dramatically changed. They adopted the Castillian (“Spanish”) language and the Roman Catholic religion, and alot of them identify as “Hispanics” or “Latinos” (especially in the USA) even though obviously they are neither Spaniards nor Italians.
Likewise, a similar thing happened in the Muslim-ruled areas of Iberia/Spain itself from the 8th century to the 15th century. The original Muslim conquerors and settlers were mainly Berbers with a minority of Arabian (Bedouin, Yemeni, “Saudi”) settlers and later by a few Syrians who followed the Umayyad caliph ‘Abd ar-Rahman who fled Syria. Add to this a small number of enslaved peoples brought to al-Andalus (mainly blacks and eastern Europeans). Gradually however, the Arabic language and the religion of Islam took hold in the Andalusian society. Notice that at no point in the history of Andalusia were Spaniards ever reduced to a minority. (I use the word Andalusia to refer to all al-Andalus, not just today’s “Andalusia” province of the Kingdom of Spain.) The majority of Spaniards up until the middle of the 10th century were Christians who spoke in a form of Latin. Their form of Latin increasingly adopted Arabic words, phrases, and general lexicon and grammar. Around the middle of the 10th century, the majority of Spaniards living within Andalusia had converted to Islam. The Arabic language was then fully adopted by the 12th century, and it had supplanted the Arabized-Latin dialect (“Mozarabic”) that was spoken in Andalusia. So yes, Muslims did make the majority of Andalusia at one period in history, however, those Muslims were not North Africans or Middle Easterners, those Muslims were Spaniards. By the time of the Fall of Granada, the Muslim Spaniards had assimilated the minorities (MidEasterners, NorthAfricans, Visigoths, blacks, east Europeans) and the whole nation had become an “Arab” Andalusian society. That is to say, they identified as “Arabs” and these are the people who are ignorantly called “Moors” in the West. The only real Moors are Moroccans and North Africans.
That may seem far fetched, but consider that the Egyptians, Syrians, Iraqis, Moroccans, Libyans, Sudanese, and Mauritanians all identify as “Arab” even though they are of diverse origins and DNA studies have shown none of these people originate from Arabia. The only real Arabs are the Yemenis, Omanis, Saudis, Qataris, Emiratis, and probably Kuwaitis (maybe Jordanians too). Egyptians, Syrians, Iraqis, Lebanese, Palestinians, Bahrainis, Sudanese, Mauritanians, Moroccans, Libyans, Tunisians, Algerians, and the “Arabs” of the Sahara and Iran are not truly Arabs at all. They are just descendants of pre-Islamic peoples who converted to Islam, adopted the Arabic language, and eventually became called as “Arabs”. It’s quite obvious that the Sudanese, for example, are not Arabs but it is harder for people to tell that Syrians, Egyptians, etc. are not Arabs either due to their Middle Eastern looks. So the Andalusian “Arabs” were not Arabs (nor Berbers nor blacks), they were just Arabic-speaking Muslim indigenous Iberians. This is similar to how the “Turks” of Turkey speak Turkish and are Muslims, yet they are obviously not Central Asian or Mongolic; they are Anatolians (plus some Greeks, Caucasians, Slavs, Albanians, etc.) who adopted the Turkish language and the Islamic religion. Spaniards, Portuguese, French, Moldovans, Romanians, and alot of Belgians and Swiss all speak in Romance/Latin languages, though that does not make them Romans or Italians right? This is all proved and backed up by multiple genetic studies. To deny this is to deny scientific evidence and believe in the old ignorance of medieval times.
It is a well known fact that most of today’s Arabic-speaking peoples are predominantly descended from the pre-Islamic populations that lived there. The true original Arabs, the (peninsular) Arabians (Saudis, Yemenis, Omanis, Qataris, Emiratis), mostly carry Y-DNA haplogroup J1. The main haplogroup in Syrians, Iraqis, Palestinians, Lebanese, Bahrainis, and Jordanians is haplogroup J2, not J1. The main haplogroup in Egyptians and Libyans is E1b1b1b1 while most Tunisians, Algerians, Moroccans, and Mauretanians carry E1b1b1b2. Ironically, the only “Arabs†of the Arab world that carry mostly J1 are the Sudanese, who look black. However, the Sudanese carry a different subclade (“subgeneâ€) of the haplogroup (gene) J1 than the peninsular Arabians. So therefore, who is to say that the “Arabs†(aka “Moorsâ€, which is a foreign name that the Muslims of North Africa & Spain never used for themselves) of Spain were also not locals? It seems like they were because there are many descendants of the Spanish Muslims in Morocco and Tunisia, and many of them look European.
Well, first of all, there is no such thing as “Muslim ancestryâ€. Second of all, most of the Muslims in Spain were neither North Africans nor Middle Easterners. Initially of course, the first Muslim inhabitants of Spain were Arabians and Berbers. Later on, a few Syrians arrived. However, the majority of the Spaniards living within al-Andalus underwent a gradual process of cultural change similar to the cultural change which would impact most of the Amerindians in Latin America. Notice that when I say “cultural changeâ€, that does not mean “genetic change†or “racial changeâ€. It is simply a change in culture.
Most of the Amerindians in Mexico for example, became admixed with Spaniards. However, for those that didn’t and remained “pureâ€, their culture was still dramatically changed. They adopted the Castillian (“Spanishâ€) language and the Roman Catholic religion, and alot of them identify as “Hispanics†or “Latinos†(especially in the USA) even though obviously they are neither Spaniards nor Italians.
Likewise, a similar thing happened in the Muslim-ruled areas of Iberia/Spain itself from the 8th century to the 15th century. The original Muslim conquerors and settlers were mainly Berbers with a minority of Arabian (Bedouin, Yemeni, “Saudiâ€) settlers and later by a few Syrians who followed the Umayyad caliph ‘Abd ar-Rahman who fled Syria. Add to this a small number of enslaved peoples brought to al-Andalus (mainly blacks and eastern Europeans). Gradually however, the Arabic language and the religion of Islam took hold in the Andalusian society. Notice that at no point in the history of Andalusia were Spaniards ever reduced to a minority. (I use the word Andalusia to refer to all al-Andalus, not just today’s “Andalusia†province of the Kingdom of Spain.) The majority of Spaniards up until the middle of the 10th century were Christians who spoke in a form of Latin. Their form of Latin increasingly adopted Arabic words, phrases, and general lexicon and grammar. Around the middle of the 10th century, the majority of Spaniards living within Andalusia had converted to Islam. The Arabic language was then fully adopted by the 12th century, and it had supplanted the Arabized-Latin dialect (“Mozarabicâ€) that was spoken in Andalusia. So yes, Muslims did make the majority of Andalusia at one period in history, however, those Muslims were not North Africans or Middle Easterners, those Muslims were Spaniards. By the time of the Fall of Granada, the Muslim Spaniards had assimilated the minorities (MidEasterners, NorthAfricans, Visigoths, blacks, east Europeans) and the whole nation had become an “Arab†Andalusian society. That is to say, they identified as “Arabs†and these are the people who are ignorantly called “Moors†in the West. The only real Moors are Moroccans and North Africans.
That may seem far fetched, but consider that the Egyptians, Syrians, Iraqis, Moroccans, Libyans, Sudanese, and Mauritanians all identify as “Arab†even though they are of diverse origins and DNA studies have shown none of these people originate from Arabia. The only real Arabs are the Yemenis, Omanis, Saudis, Qataris, Emiratis, and probably Kuwaitis (maybe Jordanians too). Egyptians, Syrians, Iraqis, Lebanese, Palestinians, Bahrainis, Sudanese, Mauritanians, Moroccans, Libyans, Tunisians, Algerians, and the “Arabs†of the Sahara and Iran are not truly Arabs at all. They are just descendants of pre-Islamic peoples who converted to Islam, adopted the Arabic language, and eventually became called as “Arabsâ€. It’s quite obvious that the Sudanese, for example, are not Arabs but it is harder for people to tell that Syrians, Egyptians, etc. are not Arabs either due to their Middle Eastern looks. So the Andalusian “Arabs†were not Arabs (nor Berbers nor blacks), they were just Arabic-speaking Muslim indigenous Iberians. This is similar to how the “Turks†of Turkey speak Turkish and are Muslims, yet they are obviously not Central Asian or Mongolic; they are Anatolians (plus some Greeks, Caucasians, Slavs, Albanians, etc.) who adopted the Turkish language and the Islamic religion. Spaniards, Portuguese, French, Moldovans, Romanians, and alot of Belgians and Swiss all speak in Romance/Latin languages, though that does not make them Romans or Italians right? This is all proved and backed up by multiple genetic studies. To deny this is to deny scientific evidence and believe in the old ignorance of medieval times.
I'm dying for someone to definitively define who is black and who is not and I ask with the full knowledge that no one will be able to. I recent had the opportunity to meet and talk with Sarah Tishkoff one of the preeminent experts on the genetics of Africa's diverse populations, as a result of her studies one genetic group of Africans, even "sub-saharan" Africans, have far more genetic distance between one another than they do with other "races." So where does that leave us, we are left with a 18th-19th overtly racist method for characterizing the diversity of modern humans.
I'm dying for someone to definitively define who is black and who is not and I ask with the full knowledge that no one will be able to. I recent had the opportunity to meet and talk with Sarah Tishkoff one of the preeminent experts on the genetics of Africa's diverse populations, as a result of her studies one genetic group of Africans, even "sub-saharan" Africans, have far more genetic distance between one another than they do with other "races." So where does that leave us, we are left with a 18th-19th overtly racist method for characterizing the diversity of modern humans.
Technically speaking, the concept of race has no meaning. You could line up the entire world population from the blondest, straightest hair, whitest-skinned person to the blackest, kinkiest hair, darkest skin person and no one could put a finger on where one "race" begins and another ends. "Race" is a sociopolitical term used to maintain one "race's" financial superiority over another. "Race" is what the "majority" uses against the "minority".
I'm dying for someone to definitively define who is black and who is not and I ask with the full knowledge that no one will be able to. I recent had the opportunity to meet and talk with Sarah Tishkoff one of the preeminent experts on the genetics of Africa's diverse populations, as a result of her studies one genetic group of Africans, even "sub-saharan" Africans, have far more genetic distance between one another than they do with other "races." So where does that leave us, we are left with a 18th-19th overtly racist method for characterizing the diversity of modern humans.
What did the "Moors" (who for a time laid claim to Sicily and parts of the Iberian peninsula) look like in general?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No!
