U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > Africa
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-08-2013, 11:55 AM
 
Location: Victoria TX
42,663 posts, read 74,241,442 times
Reputation: 36087

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Motion View Post
I mentioned how this descendant from kings & queens view of Africa was popular with many Afrocentric rappers in the late 80's to early 90's. Another related phrase that was popular in Afrocentric rap was:

"From Pyramids To Projects" (housing projects)

The view here was that black-Americans were actually descendant from the Nile Valley Africans(Egyptians mainly,Nubians)who built the pyramids. So when the phrase 'descendant from kings and queens' is used I think many are suggesting that black-Americans are descendant from the kings and queens of ancient Egypt. But that's not where our actual African ancestors came from. Some of these views on Africa that have been developed by many Afrocentric black-Americans may be the results of us not being familiar with the specifics of the different regions of Africa,their history and the different tribes of the area. So many black-Americans kinda have a generalized idea of us being descendant from all Africans in a way.
It would be a mistake to think that all Black Bantus from the entire continent are descended from the Nubians who inhabited the Nile valley in fairly recent times. The opposite is the case -- the Nubians are one small demographic arm of Greater Africa, who split off beyond the desert and flourished there, probably in an admixed culture with more advanced people who had been in the Mediterranean basin for a much longer period of time.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-08-2013, 02:33 PM
Status: "Then everything change forever..." (set 14 days ago)
 
5,179 posts, read 8,025,013 times
Reputation: 4269
Quote:
Originally Posted by Motion View Post
When you hear that phrase what does it mean to you?

This phrase has been popular in U.S Afrocentric circles for years. It was even popular among Afrocentric rappers back in the late 80's and early 90's. It's basically this idea that black-Americans are descendant from a grand,majestic African past. But how realistic is it? Weren't most of our west and central African ancestors just farmers and fishermen?
Its an ego boost, nothing more!

The reality is that there's no way an authentic African American (think descendants of the slaves that were brought to the USA as oppose to African Americans from more recent migration) would descend from royalty, because people belonging to African blue blood were never sold into slavery by the African slave catchers and traders.

The "majestic African" kingdoms in the Bight of Benin area, which is where most African Americans would trace their African genetics if they actually do a DNA test, became rich thanks to the slave trade. Europeans even paid rent for the land that their slave holding castles in Western Africa were built and they even asked permission from the African royalty in order to built those castles in the first place!

The royalty of many of these Western African kingdoms waged wars against their neighbors for the sole purpose of capturing new flesh to be sold to the European traders who stayed on the coast. When a new group was captured, the high ranking Africans of the captured group was usually slaughtered (or sacrificed) and his everyday people (ie. the non-blue blood types) were sold into slavery.

The only Americans of full or partial African ancestry that may descend from royal blood are those who descend from Africans that migrated on their own well after slavery and even segregation ended. Take, for example, Barack Obama. He might be of blue blood because of his Kenyan born father (I don't know if he is, I'm simply stating that he has a much greater chance of descending from African blue blood than the typical African American, for the sole reason that Obama doesn't descend from slaves.)

There is simply no way that royalty was sold into slavery by the very Africans, so there's also no way that descendants of slaves in the USA have a royal past.



The whole "descendants of kings and queens" is nothing more than one more myth that is perpetuated in the African American community. Here are a few more:



Another widespread myth is pretending that the union between a white person and a black person produces a black child (as oppose to a mixed-race child), but that's another can of worms. lol

Also the suppose "Willie Lynch Letter" is another lie that many African Americans believe was true.

Too many lies can't possibly be good for any society and to me this points towards the possibility that African Americans as a group, or maybe just a good percentage of them, have some serious self-image problems.

Last edited by AntonioR; 07-08-2013 at 02:41 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-08-2013, 03:24 PM
 
Location: Vineland, NJ
8,483 posts, read 10,464,129 times
Reputation: 5401
Quote:
Originally Posted by AntonioR View Post
Its an ego boost, nothing more!

The reality is that there's no way an authentic African American (think descendants of the slaves that were brought to the USA as oppose to African Americans from more recent migration) would descend from royalty, because people belonging to African blue blood were never sold into slavery by the African slave catchers and traders.

The "majestic African" kingdoms in the Bight of Benin area, which is where most African Americans would trace their African genetics if they actually do a DNA test, became rich thanks to the slave trade. Europeans even paid rent for the land that their slave holding castles in Western Africa were built and they even asked permission from the African royalty in order to built those castles in the first place!

The royalty of many of these Western African kingdoms waged wars against their neighbors for the sole purpose of capturing new flesh to be sold to the European traders who stayed on the coast. When a new group was captured, the high ranking Africans of the captured group was usually slaughtered (or sacrificed) and his everyday people (ie. the non-blue blood types) were sold into slavery.

The only Americans of full or partial African ancestry that may descend from royal blood are those who descend from Africans that migrated on their own well after slavery and even segregation ended. Take, for example, Barack Obama. He might be of blue blood because of his Kenyan born father (I don't know if he is, I'm simply stating that he has a much greater chance of descending from African blue blood than the typical African American, for the sole reason that Obama doesn't descend from slaves.)

There is simply no way that royalty was sold into slavery by the very Africans, so there's also no way that descendants of slaves in the USA have a royal past.



The whole "descendants of kings and queens" is nothing more than one more myth that is perpetuated in the African American community. Here are a few more:



Another widespread myth is pretending that the union between a white person and a black person produces a black child (as oppose to a mixed-race child), but that's another can of worms. lol

Also the suppose "Willie Lynch Letter" is another lie that many African Americans believe was true.

Too many lies can't possibly be good for any society and to me this points towards the possibility that African Americans as a group, or maybe just a good percentage of them, have some serious self-image problems.
I agree with this post. Why would West Africans sell their royalty into the slave trade? Wouldn't it be the opposite? If there were royal family members shipped out into slavery, it was most likely due to mistaken identity.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-08-2013, 04:03 PM
 
Location: Victoria TX
42,663 posts, read 74,241,442 times
Reputation: 36087
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwillyfromphilly View Post
I agree with this post. Why would West Africans sell their royalty into the slave trade? Wouldn't it be the opposite? If there were royal family members shipped out into slavery, it was most likely due to mistaken identity.
As in Europe, people with tribal royalty were often deposed, and retained their claim to royalty in exile. Having probably lost their influence and wealth, they still had their title, and continued to pass it on to their descendants, but were powerless to prevent being sold as slaves by their rivals who had usurped power from them. Not saying that that is what happened, but it is a scenario that needs to be considered.

It would be instructive to find a source that sheds some light on the current status of royalty among African tribes and families (not something I have a grasp on at the moment), and assume that the circumstances 300 years ago might have been analogous. My friends, the Nigerian princesses, who lived in my building, have moved away, or else I could ask them.

This might be a useful starting point:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monarchies_in_Africa

However, the links are useless, and the author does not indicate where he got the figure 165 current monarchies. Here is an extract from a site that is available by subscription only, if anybody want to pay to gather the information and pass it along to us.

Monarchies: 1900 to Present: Africa

Moulay Younes Elbousty

, The African continent is home to thousands of regional monarchies: some that exist within the boundaries of a particular nation (sub-national monarchies), and some whose territory extends across several national boundaries (transnational monarchies). In Botswana, South Africa, Ghana, and Uganda, various ancient kingdoms and chiefdoms are constitutionally protected. In Nigeria, hundreds of traditional states are legally recognized. Regional monarchies are bound by the laws of the republics within which they reside and may seem impotent to an outside observer; however, presidents of African .. (end of free extract)


http://knowledge.sagepub.com/view/cu...yemea/n384.xml

Last edited by jtur88; 07-08-2013 at 04:27 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-08-2013, 04:20 PM
 
Location: San Diego, California Republic
16,435 posts, read 22,354,780 times
Reputation: 8623
Quote:
Originally Posted by AntonioR View Post
Its an ego boost, nothing more!

The reality is that there's no way an authentic African American (think descendants of the slaves that were brought to the USA as oppose to African Americans from more recent migration) would descend from royalty, because people belonging to African blue blood were never sold into slavery by the African slave catchers and traders.

The "majestic African" kingdoms in the Bight of Benin area, which is where most African Americans would trace their African genetics if they actually do a DNA test, became rich thanks to the slave trade. Europeans even paid rent for the land that their slave holding castles in Western Africa were built and they even asked permission from the African royalty in order to built those castles in the first place!

The royalty of many of these Western African kingdoms waged wars against their neighbors for the sole purpose of capturing new flesh to be sold to the European traders who stayed on the coast. When a new group was captured, the high ranking Africans of the captured group was usually slaughtered (or sacrificed) and his everyday people (ie. the non-blue blood types) were sold into slavery.

The only Americans of full or partial African ancestry that may descend from royal blood are those who descend from Africans that migrated on their own well after slavery and even segregation ended. Take, for example, Barack Obama. He might be of blue blood because of his Kenyan born father (I don't know if he is, I'm simply stating that he has a much greater chance of descending from African blue blood than the typical African American, for the sole reason that Obama doesn't descend from slaves.)

There is simply no way that royalty was sold into slavery by the very Africans, so there's also no way that descendants of slaves in the USA have a royal past.



The whole "descendants of kings and queens" is nothing more than one more myth that is perpetuated in the African American community. Here are a few more:



Another widespread myth is pretending that the union between a white person and a black person produces a black child (as oppose to a mixed-race child), but that's another can of worms. lol

Also the suppose "Willie Lynch Letter" is another lie that many African Americans believe was true.

Too many lies can't possibly be good for any society and to me this points towards the possibility that African Americans as a group, or maybe just a good percentage of them, have some serious self-image problems.
As a Black American, I thank you for this post! The only way we can know who we truly are is to except the truth that actually exist rather than making it up. Repped you for this
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-09-2013, 10:47 AM
 
Location: Maryland
18,624 posts, read 16,426,727 times
Reputation: 6348
Quote:
Originally Posted by Motion View Post
When you hear that phrase what does it mean to you?

This phrase has been popular in U.S Afrocentric circles for years. It was even popular among Afrocentric rappers back in the late 80's and early 90's. It's basically this idea that black-Americans are descendant from a grand,majestic African past. But how realistic is it? Weren't most of our west and central African ancestors just farmers and fishermen?

To those of you who are African what is the actual relationship between kings/chiefs and the rest of the tribe? Are all tribal members considered to be related to the kings and queens of the tribe?
A lot of times the King or Queen is akin to a local mayor. Only the King of a major tribe like the Asantehene approaches anything close to actual royalty. Also the by the nature of African mating patterns( ie polygamy, cousin marriages being taboo) many people are connected to the king one way or another.

I guess we also should define farming. Since farming in Africa was mostly a female affair with the cultivation on small plots of land of yams. Nothing like the large scale endeavors found in Europe, Middle East or Asia.

Last edited by EdwardA; 07-09-2013 at 11:03 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-09-2013, 11:12 AM
 
Location: Maryland
18,624 posts, read 16,426,727 times
Reputation: 6348
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwillyfromphilly View Post
I agree with this post. Why would West Africans sell their royalty into the slave trade? Wouldn't it be the opposite? If there were royal family members shipped out into slavery, it was most likely due to mistaken identity.
Being a slave for most of history simply meant you were part of a defeated group. It is interesting to note that before the abolitionist movement in the West slaves that sought their freedom didn't complain about the system but merely the fact that they were slaves. Spartacus fought for his freedom and revenge against Romans he would have had no problem enslaving someone else. Look at in this context it would make perfect sense to sell off a deposed king into slavery. Outside of killing him what better humiliation could you inflict?

In fact many Africans who were slaves in America who returned to Africa returned to slaving. The leader if the Amistead slaves is thought to have returned to slaving. History is a lot more complicated then the good guy/bad guy narratives Americans seem find of. Human beings are too complicated to fit into neat categories.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-09-2013, 12:23 PM
 
6,559 posts, read 9,070,030 times
Reputation: 2837
Quote:
Originally Posted by EdwardA View Post
Only the King of a major tribe like the Asantehene approaches anything close to actual royalty.
What's the difference between someone who is a king vs someone who is a chief? Sometimes I've heard of tribal leaders being called kings then other times I've heard of them being called tribal chiefs. Is a king someone who rules over a larger tribe?



Quote:
Also the by the nature of African mating patterns( ie polygamy, cousin marriages being taboo) many people are connected to the king one way or another.
So then is there some merit to this 'descendant from kings and queens idea?' Or is it still an idea that gets stretched and exaggerated?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-09-2013, 02:22 PM
 
Location: Maryland
18,624 posts, read 16,426,727 times
Reputation: 6348
Quote:
Originally Posted by Motion View Post
What's the difference between someone who is a king vs someone who is a chief? Sometimes I've heard of tribal leaders being called kings then other times I've heard of them being called tribal chiefs. Is a king someone who rules over a larger tribe?



So then is there some merit to this 'descendant from kings and queens idea?' Or is it still an idea that gets stretched and exaggerated?
Take this issue with Mandelas grandson. He's a "chief" of his area a small town. Some may even call him a king but the King of the Xhosa people trumps him. In fact he's removed him from his chieftainship. Something similar. Folks like to make themselves more important.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-10-2013, 04:25 AM
 
Location: Sydney, Australia
159 posts, read 182,143 times
Reputation: 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by AntonioR View Post
Its an ego boost, nothing more!

The reality is that there's no way an authentic African American (think descendants of the slaves that were brought to the USA as oppose to African Americans from more recent migration) would descend from royalty, because people belonging to African blue blood were never sold into slavery by the African slave catchers and traders.

The "majestic African" kingdoms in the Bight of Benin area, which is where most African Americans would trace their African genetics if they actually do a DNA test, became rich thanks to the slave trade. Europeans even paid rent for the land that their slave holding castles in Western Africa were built and they even asked permission from the African royalty in order to built those castles in the first place!

The royalty of many of these Western African kingdoms waged wars against their neighbors for the sole purpose of capturing new flesh to be sold to the European traders who stayed on the coast. When a new group was captured, the high ranking Africans of the captured group was usually slaughtered (or sacrificed) and his everyday people (ie. the non-blue blood types) were sold into slavery.

The only Americans of full or partial African ancestry that may descend from royal blood are those who descend from Africans that migrated on their own well after slavery and even segregation ended. Take, for example, Barack Obama. He might be of blue blood because of his Kenyan born father (I don't know if he is, I'm simply stating that he has a much greater chance of descending from African blue blood than the typical African American, for the sole reason that Obama doesn't descend from slaves.)

There is simply no way that royalty was sold into slavery by the very Africans, so there's also no way that descendants of slaves in the USA have a royal past.



The whole "descendants of kings and queens" is nothing more than one more myth that is perpetuated in the African American community. Here are a few more:



Another widespread myth is pretending that the union between a white person and a black person produces a black child (as oppose to a mixed-race child), but that's another can of worms. lol

Also the suppose "Willie Lynch Letter" is another lie that many African Americans believe was true.

Too many lies can't possibly be good for any society and to me this points towards the possibility that African Americans as a group, or maybe just a good percentage of them, have some serious self-image problems.
IIRC (but I could be wrong) the famous abolitionist Olaudah Equiano (from a part of what's now modern-day Nigeria) was a tribal chief's son and was kidnapped by slave traders.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > Africa
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top