U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Genealogy
 [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)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 09-21-2013, 12:00 AM
 
Location: Vineland, NJ
8,482 posts, read 10,430,026 times
Reputation: 5387

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by knowledgeiskey View Post
This link explains it all. Apparently, Horners are products of migration events between Eurasia and Africa that have occurred thousands of years ago. I have seen the haplogroups of some Horners, and a good amount of them have mtDNA and Y DNA that aren't native to Africa. This explains why they speak Afro-Asiatic languages. It's also worthy to mention how the Roman Empire stretched well into Eritrea and Ethiopia. It's absurd to think non-African populations didn't leave any genes behind.



Genomics and African queens: Diversity within Ethiopian genomes reveals imprints of historical events

Quote:
Originally Posted by knowledgeiskey View Post
Fulanis of West Africa. Nomadic group who have admixture of similar proportions to Horners.








Some of you guys need to go back to the Politics and Other Controversies forum because your lack of anthropological knowledge is profound.
This logic proves that the so called "Sub-Saharan Africa" wasn't some isolated barrier that was cut off completely from the rest of the world until European arrival. This also shows the tremendous flaws of trying to use the Sahara as some sort of racial dividing line. In general, people put way too much emphasis on race. We should never put a color in front of a continent.

 
Old 09-21-2013, 10:47 PM
 
6,932 posts, read 8,065,658 times
Reputation: 3024
Here's an interesting paper. It appears there's Sub Saharan mtDNA in present day North Africa. These are remnants from the Arab slave trade that occurred centuries ago.


Quote:
A proportion of 1/4 to 1/2 of North African female pool is made of typical sub-Saharan lineages, in higher frequencies as geographic proximity to sub-Saharan Africa increases. The Sahara was a strong geographical barrier against gene flow, at least since 5,000 years ago, when desertification affected a larger region, but the Arab trans-Saharan slave trade could have facilitate enormously this migration of lineages. Till now, the genetic consequences of these forced trans-Saharan movements of people have not been ascertained.
http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2148/10/138
 
Old 09-23-2013, 10:09 AM
 
Location: Illinois
3,168 posts, read 4,316,432 times
Reputation: 5595
This thread is very long so I did not read many of the responses.

West Africans are mixed with other SSA populations.
 
Old 09-24-2013, 07:59 PM
 
1,371 posts, read 1,805,661 times
Reputation: 1649
Funny. I'm black American and I've actually had both east and west Africans tell me that I look Ethiopian (my mother has as well). But we are black Americans, so I think it is safe to say that our slave ancestors were not east African. Plus I don't think I look Ethiopian at all.

There is so much diversity within groups that one cannot stereotype so easily. And there is nothing wrong with not having wavy hair and a thin nose.
 
Old 09-27-2013, 09:30 PM
 
Location: Somewhere in the universe
2,161 posts, read 3,979,334 times
Reputation: 1427
Quote:
Originally Posted by TiltheEndofTime View Post
Funny. I'm black American and I've actually had both east and west Africans tell me that I look Ethiopian (my mother has as well). But we are black Americans, so I think it is safe to say that our slave ancestors were not east African. Plus I don't think I look Ethiopian at all.

There is so much diversity within groups that one cannot stereotype so easily. And there is nothing wrong with not having wavy hair and a thin nose.
Not necessarily. My mother's family is from the South and had a history of slavery and they were able to trace most of their ancestry back to Kenya.
 
Old 12-08-2013, 05:18 AM
 
2 posts, read 4,195 times
Reputation: 10
Simple answer: west Africa had the Sahara desert to its north and the Atlantic Ocean to its east and west. They aren't near any other continent.

East Africa borders basically with the Middle East. From Egypt down to Eritrea. East has always been close in border with others so have adopted and mixed with them.

Look at the South Africans. They border with no one and have stayed the same. They look similar to west Africans.

It's a really simple answer. Pure geography and knowing a little works history. Hope this helped
 
Old 12-08-2013, 05:30 AM
 
2 posts, read 4,195 times
Reputation: 10
Correction: I meant to say the Atlantic Ocean borders west Africa on its west and southern borders. Getting over to west Africa from the east by foot, camel or horse (which is how the peoples outside of Africa would of had to travel before the invention of ships) would have been like going from D.C to California. That's crossing a whole continent. Not really a reality. The Romans (well, technically the Greeks because Alexander the Great was GREEK and Roman) were able to do it from Italy all the way to Pakistan and India's border at one time. They were only able to do it because the land from Italy to Pakistan is not full of jungles and wild life like the land is from east Africa to west Africa. Once Alexander the Great crossed the border into India that's where he failed. India is much like sub Sahara Africa. It turns into jungle and is not flat land that's capable of just being ruled in a day like much if the Middle East, Europe and east Africa. Don't believe me? Look it up. Only reason India ever got colonized by the English is because the English developed the use of ships and sailed to the bottom of India and ruled that way. Never by land.
 
Old 12-08-2013, 07:09 PM
 
88 posts, read 141,714 times
Reputation: 178
Quote:
Originally Posted by purple rage View Post
Yes, I know this. But why aren't the West Africans as mixed as the Ethiopians?? That's my question that no one can seem to answer
What a ridiculous question!

First of all Ethiopians are not mixed. What makes you think that you have to be mixed because you don't look west African the original balcks are the San bushmen. There is no one black look. The question also assumes that mixed people are better then pure blacks.
 
Old 12-09-2013, 12:40 AM
 
3,443 posts, read 2,486,521 times
Reputation: 6646
Probably been said already, but some are. Just google "Fulani."
 
Old 12-10-2013, 04:32 PM
 
11,901 posts, read 20,317,442 times
Reputation: 19221
Closed for review
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.


Closed Thread

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 > General Forums > Genealogy
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