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.
The term race will often come up now & then, so lets tackle its definition. Like damn near every word, this term and its equivalents have gone through various changes over time & space. One of its definition is similar to the meanings of tribe (qabila) & ethnic group. Race, in this sense, is defined by culture and/or genealogical descent (real or imagined) from a famous ancestor. These meanings of race are much more aligned with how Afro-Arabian peoples conceived of themselves and others, at least this is my conclusion from my studies. The genealogical attribute was not strictly biological either, as ibn Khaldun mentioned it was not so much common descent that united & bonded a people to each other but the feelings usually associated with common descent such as concern for one's kinsmen and having a sense of a shared destiny.
Again, this is not to say color was not noted in the pre-colonial period, nor that there were never any negative sentiments attached to them. There is some evidence that in Andalus, the ethnic tensions & political could lead to mass riots. Although appearance does have to do with identifying the Other, the Other was largely determined by ethnic/tribal affiliation, though given the context, it was easier to identify quickly the African born Barbari & Sudani than any of the other ethnic components of Andalus. Nevertheless, at least within the ethnic/tribal unit, it would not be uncommon to see people who don't look like one another, within the same family and community.
Of course this manner of social organization is diametrically opposed to the American, Americans place scorn on knowing the English language above the 5th grade level and ridicule multi-lingualism. Americans define people based solely on how they look & any contact between Americans who don't look similar can lead to violence. So there you have the reasons why the American (irregardless of color) just can not accept northern African history. It totally destroys everything the American has been conditioned to believe. It does not matter what melanin levels the American possesses, psychologically, northern African history & culture is just too much for the feeble American mind to grasp.
Now cats like Brace & Hiernaux, in particular have demolished the pseudo-scientific, racialist definitions of race. Basically this version of race takes phenotype (outward physical attributes such as hair and skin) and links these traits with behavioral, intellectual and other mental characteristics.
The population of the Horn & the Sahara are often classed as part of the Caucasian/Caucasoid race, in particular the sub-branch variously called Hamitic, Mediterranean or Brown. This branch was once thought to have originated somewhere in southwestern Asia. One of the main reasons for the inclusion of Horn/Saharan Africans under the term Caucasoid was because they had a relatively straight and narrow nose.
Thus the oldest evidence of the phenotype associated with Saharan/Horn Africans is nowhere near the Mediterranean Sea, even farther away from the Caucasus Mountains, nor is it even in Ethiopia (I don't think writers who use Ethiopoid are doing anything useful). And this is not even counting the inconsistency in which the terms Negroid, Caucasoid & Mongoloid are applied.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kovert
d. Can't believe I almost left out The history and geography of human genes. This excerpt I linked to has interesting info on the Khoisan people of southern Africa. They have have so-called "Mongloid racial traits" such as the particular eye shapes along with the so-called Mongloid spot. Yet they possess more "southwestern Asian genes" than the populations of the Horn of Africa. Plus it is mentioned that there are existing groups of Khoisan-like peoples still within the Horn.
The Khoisan are sometimes classed as part of the "negroid, black african" race and sometimes not. The Khoisan have more "southwestern genes" than Horn Africans despite the Horn Africans being geographically closer and having a much more continuous interactions with there neighbors across the Red Sea. Yet even more curiously the Khoisan have "Mongloid racial traits" such as a certain spot along with their physical similarities with eastern Asians. The ethnocentric term the Khoisan use for themselves they also use for eastern Asians, though this term is not inclusive of Euros and other Africans.
Another group is the one variously called Mechtoid, Mechta-Afalou, or just Cro-Magnon. Although I have seen some online reconstructions that present these peoples as blue eyed & blond & academia may classify them as Caucasoid, Marta Luhrs sees them with originating in eastern Africa. These specimens represent the early humans that migrated from eastern Africa to populate the world and later Saharan cultures such as the Aterians, Oranians, possibly the Mushabians of southwestern Asia and the various cultures of the Nile before the appearance of the Sebilians (who might represent the phenotype of the groups currently associated with Saharan/Horn Africans).
Sometimes the diminutive Africans like the Twa are also not considered "black african". This is not even considering the fact that these racialist labels are not given objectively. Thus I have decided to do away with the terms negroid, mongoloid & caucasoid, as they are used inconsistently and often have racialist assumptions underlining them. I will continue to use black african but only in the sense that Leo Africanus & Marmol used them. That is in a geographic sense, indicating the populations and polities from the Senegal & Niger Rivers, Lake Chad & the Sudanese Nile Valley. To me black african indicates nothing more nor less than what is in the previous sentence. The populations related to the diminutive Twa, Khoisan; Dinka & Nuba/Kordofian speaking peoples were also present in certain regions of the Sahara & the Horn, so those regions were neither homogeneous in terms of phenotypes. Thus even excluding the Hellenes, Canaanites, Andalusi, Banu Hilal Arabs & others, there were/is quite a variety of peoples that inhabited northern Africa throughout history.
Again black african is a strictly geographic term for the purposes of this thread and does not indicate a people have to have a certain number of physical features. In lieu of caucasoid, I will use southwestern Eurasian, since Europe is a peninsula of Asia, & the geno/phenotype of southern Europeans & many (but not all) southwestern Asians are very close. Also note given the increasing amount of evidence that homo sapiens evolved & migrated out of eastern African, pheno/genotypical traits that are generally with non-Africans can show up among populations such as the Khoisan, Horn & Saharan Africans since these people also come from the same general area where the Out of Africa migrations began (see Sarah Tishkoff about the Khoisan genetics).
I believe I have hit most of the points I wanted to, but there may be 1 more contextualizing post, if I remember an important detail.
I also can't emphasize enough that one does not have to possess a certain melanin level nor hate anyone or anything to have an interest in northern African history. I must warn that there are savage afro-nazis out there in the world, such as the freaks I have identified in this post along with recent attempts by angry afrocentrics to spread their anger and hate:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucario
.... I don't apologize for being pro-black,....
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucario
You are not of African descent, so what reason would you have to be sensitive to the rampantness of racism on, say, Politics and Other Controversies? Anyway,who is fighting fire with fire? I have nothing to be wary or ashamed of. Nothing I have ever said or written will reflect badly on me.
These people are nothing more than berserk savages. They have no concepts of discipline, responsibility & credibility. They do not have a culture & value system which appreciates critical thinking, contemplation. In fact their value system absolutely rejects this. They are incapable of preserving and advancing knowledge & understanding within the fields of Africana Studies; Saharan Studies; Egyptology; & evolution, Out of Africa migrations. The only 3 R's these freaks are interested in is riot, rampage, and ruin.
Now mind you it is the culture & value system, one which prompts them to destroy themselves & everything around, that is the root of the problem. And quite frankly my fellow Americans you reap what you sow.
You've allowed them to see the prison & welfare system as an adequate means to obtain food, clothing & shelter; convinced them they never have to feel any shame nor responsibility for their destructive actions; those that do have some standards like Snowden or Cosby, instead of wacking the deviants upside the head when Cos & Snow where being called sellouts, you either ignored the miscreants or gave them timeouts ().
Worst of all, you've brought the afro-nuts one step closer to their goal of dragging humanity to their despicable level. You not only don't promote hip hoppers like KRS-1 who have some integrity, you enable them to export the most ridiculous and revolting media AROUND THE GLOBE. Then, my fellow Americans, you scratch your head in confusion at the hordes of welfare enabled losers, looking at you angrily, demanding "Gimme!"
America, you created these Afrostein monsters, and for those that try to trash the left, it was Daniel Patrick Moynihan who brought the culture of poverty problem into the political debate and caught a lot of flack for it. Still perhaps, in these days & times, Ron Paul may be able to succeed where Moynihan failed.
The rewarding of failure at the top with the bailouts and the cultivation of the sentiment that the Civil Rights Movement was nothing but a blank welfare check, no strings attached for those at the bottom.
Middle income & working Americans, you shoot themselves in the foot, each & every time.
The term race will often come up now & then, so lets tackle its definition. Like damn near every word, this term and its equivalents have gone through various changes over time & space. One of its definition is similar to the meanings of tribe (qabila) & ethnic group. Race, in this sense, is defined by culture and/or genealogical descent (real or imagined) from a famous ancestor. These meanings of race are much more aligned with how Afro-Arabian peoples conceived of themselves and others, at least this is my conclusion from my studies. The genealogical attribute was not strictly biological either, as ibn Khaldun mentioned it was not so much common descent that united & bonded a people to each other but the feelings usually associated with common descent such as concern for one's kinsmen and having a sense of a shared destiny.
Sometimes the diminutive Africans like the Twa are also not considered "black african". This is not even considering the fact that these racialist labels are not given objectively. Thus I have decided to do away with the terms negroid, mongoloid & caucasoid, as they are used inconsistently and often have racialist assumptions underlining them. I will continue to use black african but only in the sense that Leo Africanus & Marmol used them. That is in a geographic sense, indicating the populations and polities from the Senegal & Niger Rivers, Lake Chad & the Sudanese Nile Valley. To me black african indicates nothing more nor less than what is in the previous sentence. The populations related to the diminutive Twa, Khoisan; Dinka & Nuba/Kordofian speaking peoples were also present in certain regions of the Sahara & the Horn, so those regions were neither homogeneous in terms of phenotypes. Thus even excluding the Hellenes, Canaanites, Andalusi, Banu Hilal Arabs & others, there were/is quite a variety of peoples that inhabited northern Africa throughout history.
Again black african is a strictly geographic term for the purposes of this thread and does not indicate a people have to have a certain number of physical features.
Time to wrap up.
Once again, when using the term race within this thread, I will be using it in the sense of qabila/tribe/ethnicity/nationality rather than the usual pseudo-scientific sense my fellow Americans so dearly know & love.
One thing I will note to be aware of, is that Tawy (literally 2 lands, indigneous term for dynastic Egypt) depictions of populations resembling modern Twa, Dinka, Nuer, Nuba/Kordarfonian SHOULD NOT BE AUTOMATICALLY LABELLED AS SLAVES OR CAPTIVES, IF THERE IS NOT ANY EVIDENCE OF SUCH. Its an old colonial habit that has no place in this day and age.
Black African in the sense I will be using in this thread can also be thought as a synonym of Sudani, though again, this Arabic term has been applied to various individuals & groups over since the 7th century. Vincent Cornell in Realm of the Saint, notes that the term gnw and its many variants seem to be used as a synonym for "black" in the Maghreb. Though when he defines the term in the endnotes, he states that the term gnw and its variants, mean something along the lines of stammering, jibberish, possibly a linguistic term for anyone not speaking a Tamazight tongue. John Ogilby, sourcing from Marmol, states that the geographic region ranging from the Senegal River to the Sudanese Nile Valley was called Geneve Sinch & Neuba. I believe the Sinch stands for the Songhai empire, whose rulers were from a Nilo-Saharan speaking background. Again this strengthens my theory that Afro-Arabian peoples primarily defined people by cultural characteristics moreso than anything else. The Arabic "aswad" might be a translation from Tamazight gnw, & gnw seems to be used as a catch all term for those individuals & ethnic/tribal groups that did not speak Tamazight. Perhaps over time it came to be synonymous with the region from modern Senegal to Sudan.
Likewise, the term haratine, now has meanings in the 21st century that conflicts with those from earlier times. Haratine can mean an agricultural laborer in Arabic. The Saharans as reported by Rene , Barth from what I gather from Webb also used haratine to refer to any kind of mixture between Sahrawi & Sudani (again black african, geographical sense). In this context the term should not be seen as having anything to do with slavery nor is it tied to a specific occupation, although these associations should be studied to understand how they now dominate Western media & academia.
It should also be noted that how Western media & academia refers to people IS NOT NECESSARILY HOW THE PEOPLE SO REFERRED CONCEIVE OF THEMSELVES. Thus the peoples of southern Morocco, Western Sahara & Mauritania might not have often called themselves Moors, just like modern Westerners do not call themselves Rumi or Nasari (terms related to Christianity and Rome, used by Magribi). It should also be noted that certain occupations/classes were associated with certain color terms. These were later racialized during the colonial era, but although it is debatable how much social mobility Saharan societies offered, the different classes and their color associations should be properly seen as referring to social status rather than actual differences in skin color. Greenberg has even demonstrated that class/color associations were even common in non-Saharan cultures.
Ibn Khaldun noted that northern Africans were defined by color due to the fact that this physical characteristic was somewhat peculiar to the Hellenes and the Latins, and this was inherited by the Arabic/Islamic civilization (unlike modern religious extremists, ibn Khaldun respected and acknowldeged the contributions of individuals & peoples, even if they were of non-Abrahamic religious affiliation).
I can think of no better sources than Snowden, Thompson, Greenberg for insight into Hellenic, Latin & Hebrew color terms. Forbes, Willis, & Nachtigal are very helpful in understanding how Arabic, Italian, Portuguese, Spanish color terms are to be understood in English. It still takes some getting used to as I'm not familiar with the words copper & bronze being used to refer to skin color in American English. The terms that I am familiar with such as white sometimes used as an equivalent to Arabic biyad;tanned/tawny and olive don't have the same meaning. The Romance & Arabic color terms have to be considered in context, relative rather than absolute. Biyad/white can include within its range peoples, otherwise classed as ahmar/red/copper/bronze, such as the Fulani, Soninke, Tubu, Qibt, Neubi, Habashi/Horn Africans & Khoisan peoples, in addition to the various Banu Mazigh qabilas.
There are certain cultural nuances that can inhibit understanding Saharan cultures. Thanks to Heinrich Barth quote of the original Italian edition of Leo's description of Sahrawi womens',......, er,....., assets:le parti di dietro pienissime e grasse, is often translated as just plain fat or obesity by Anglophone academics. This come from modern Westerners delusion that women who look like pre-pubescent boys are somehow beautiful & and their ignorance that women with ample hips, thighs & behind BUT WITH A SLIM WAIST, was the feminine ideal for centuries before colonization.
I think that about covers what I wanted as far as being able to put things in their proper context. Now based on what I've observed it seems that Francophone scholarship is way ahead of Anglophone scholarship when it comes to Saharan & Horn African history as a whole. My fellow Americans in particular, by & large don't have the mental capacity to deal with northern African history. Not surprising for a society which mass produces afro & neo-nazis & prides itself on having the attention span & reading comprehension ability of a 5th grader.
I think the best bet are the Canadians. The Canadian gov't actively supports multi-culturalism; Canadians can draw on the rich academic traditions of both Francophone & Anglophone scholars. The biggest plus is that they don't seem to have as much hangups as my fellow Americans about color & Mooselums. This is not to say the Canucks are perfect, or there are not old nor new ethnic tensions, but they seem to more balanced whereas in the states, the most loud mouthed, ignorant, extremist is the one who is most adored & admired.
Basically, if Anglophone scholarship on northern Africa is pass from its immaturity, then non-Americans & U.S. citizens not rooted in anti-intellectual American culture are going to have to take the lead. The American public just does not want to get its head out of the 19th century, and the afro-nazis are pretty much an evolutionary dead end.
So when I have been saying that ambitious, grad students looking to make a name for themselves should look into Africana Studies, Saharan Studies, Egyptology, Evolution & Out of Africa migrations, they need not be Americans (in fact it may be for the best they are not). I am appealing to the global Anglophone community, particularly the young, because they will be the ones that can take us to new heights & rescue us from the deepest depths.
The decolonization of history continues!!!!!!!!!!!
I have no delusions of being an expert on this topic, but since this situation involves Islam & oil, of course the American people are likely going to have to foot the bill for yet another military (misad)venture. Americans should at least have some self-control to tune out Lil Wayne, Rush & Beck just enough to at least get an idea of the region & history of the potential blood bath we're sending our young men & women into.
As I have often stated before certain racialist ideologies, a leftover from colonialism, is a contributing factor in recent events in Mauritania, Sudan & Rwanda. These nations are not the only African nations with these problems but they are the most (in)famous within the Anglo-phone world. The modern nations of Mali & Niger, as evidenced above, are also grappling with these issues.
I would recommend A History of Race in Muslim West Africa, 1600-1960 by Bruce Hall for fellow Anglo-phones to get an idea of how the current racial/ethnic tensions going on around the Niger River have come about.
Now of course just because I recommend this text does not mean that I don't have any criticisms of it. For one I do believe Hall does not put terms and their definitions in their proper context.
Hall refers to Ibn Batutta as "Arab" and "white". I have already written that many Ajami often claimed Arab ancestry for political & socio-economic gain.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kovert
Its around the 9th century that Arabic writings begin giving the above named Ajami retroactive status as Arabs, either as decendants of pre-Islamic Yemenites and/or descendants of the great warriors of the early Islamic conquests. When the Ajami replaced the Arabs as the dominant military force within Islam, the Ajami would take Arab lineal pretensions further and if not link their descent with that of the Sharif (descendant of the family of Muhammad) would try to claim Qurayshi descent at least (tribal confederation Muhammad belonged to).
This occurred even if they were not Muslim, but lived under Muslim rule and/or if they were surrounded by Islamic polities such as the case among Christian Horn Africans. Ibn Batutta was Luwati, of the Zenetiya/Butr Amazigh, though like many of the Ajami living within Islamic societies, Arab ancestry was a frequently made claim.
Now dealing with the term white;
Quote:
Originally Posted by kovert
Forbes, Willis, & Nachtigal are very helpful in understanding how Arabic, Italian, Portuguese, Spanish color terms are to be understood in English. It still takes some getting used to as I'm not familiar with the words copper & bronze being used to refer to skin color in American English. The terms that I am familiar with such as white sometimes used as an equivalent to Arabic biyad;tanned/tawny and olive don't have the same meaning. The Romance & Arabic color terms have to be considered in context, relative rather than absolute. Biyad/white can include within its range peoples, otherwise classed as ahmar/red/copper/bronze, such as the Fulani, Soninke, Tubu, Qibt, Neubi, Habashi/Horn Africans & Khoisan peoples, in addition to the various Banu Mazigh qabilas.
There are certain cultural nuances that can inhibit understanding Saharan cultures.
I have also used the works on Arabic skin color terms by Bernard Lewis in order to help my fellow Anglo-phones understand skin color terms as applied to Saharan, Horn & Khoisan Africans.
Ahmar/humr, I argue should be seen as an Arabic term akin to the English term reddish, rather than meaning the absolute color red. The British English equivalent would be copper & probably bronze. The American English equivalent would be reddish brown.
Asfar, I see as yellowish rather than absolute yellow. Brits would use tawny/tawnie or deep sallow as an synonym for this type of complexion. This corresponds to yellowish brown in American English.
Sumr/asmar, I see as a range from all the way from light to medium to dark brown, thus brownish. Thus sumr could encompass both asfar & ahmar/humr. British equivalent would be swarthy, brown, dusky. American English brown also best fits this definition.
Bayad/bidan/bizan, should be understood as light or bright. This term would likewise encompass ahmar/humr/, asfar, and the lighter spectrum of sumr/asmar. Brits have used white as its equivalent (in the most expanisve sense). I can think of no American English equivalent for this term. I would not be surprised if bayad/bidan/bizan is the conceptual forerunner of the use of Caucasian/Caucasoid for the peoples of western Eurasia, South Asia, along with northern & eastern Africa. Caucasoid/caucasian comes with a lot of pseudo-scientific, racialist baggage, though over time its not inconceivable that bayad is not immune from colonial legacies, still whatever these terms MEAN NOW SHOULD NOT ALWAYS BE PROJECTED BACKWARD IN TIME, ESPECIALLY IF EVIDENCE DOES NOT SUPPORT IT.
I would further recommend New evidence on the origins of the Kunta for it is one of the few Anglophone gems that does not marginalize if not completely erase the Amazigh tribes from history. Excellent source for the Zenaga/Sanhadja tribes of modern Mauritania and the Western Sahara. It comes in 2 parts
The author of the above article likewise mentions speaking Azer, a dialect of the Soninke, is part of what defines a bidani/bizani. Mauritania by Alfred G. Gerteiny likewise states that the locals also add the requirement that being a nomad is necessary to define one as bidani.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kovert
It should also be noted that certain occupations/classes were associated with certain color terms. These were later racialized during the colonial era, but although it is debatable how much social mobility Saharan societies offered, the different classes and their color associations should be properly seen as referring to social status rather than actual differences in skin color. Greenberg has even demonstrated that class/color associations were even common in non-Saharan cultures.
It should also be kept in mind that certain classes and occupations were associated with color terms and yes terms associated with the English equivalent of black would often be used for those at the lower end of the pecking order. These social constructs should not be confused with pseudo-scientific notions of race, albeit there may be some similarities between these constructs and over time they have been influenced by colonial notions of race.
Hall seems to have given the impression that the Sudani of the Maghrib were often at the mercy of the semi-nomadic bidani of the sahra.
This is not always the case as the kingdom of the Kaw (not sure of location or ethno-linguistic constituents) was said to be a mighty empire, one that the Sanhaja Amazigh even acknowledged as being dominant. At times the polities of Ghana, Mali, & Songhai even extended quite a distance north into the Sahara. The Tuaregs by H.T. Norris mentions that many of the Amazigh tribes adopted Arab genelogies to escape the wrath of the 1st great Songhai ruler, Sonni Ali. The next Songhai ruler is credited with bringing the southern Sahara & the Sahel in line with the greater Islamic world (recommend checking out the works of John Hunwick). It was the Songhai above all, that should be credited with integrating the Sudani & Bidani of the southernmost Maghrib into the Islamic mainstream.
Hall also repeats the Anglo-phone academic mantra that the Arabs drove the feeble Berbers into submission to the mountains and deserts. Hall fails to note recent scholarship that recognizes that the Arabs needed powerful bedouin Amazigh tribes like the Luwata to conquer the Maghrib, or the fact that this conquest was really limited to the seacoast of the Tell (I'll delve into this in future posts). Somehow the Fatimids (backed by the Hawara, Sanhadja and above all, the Kutama), Al Murabitun, Al Molhadun, Zenetiyah dynasties of the further & central Maghrib, along with the Hawara of the Said in Misr and other Amazig tribes of the Nubian Nile and the deserts west of it are conveniently ignored. Erased from history, out of sight, out of mind.
Despite all this I highly recommend Hall's text, it is truly a great resource & I am grateful of his gift to the interested English speaking world.
The situation around the Niger River also should serve as a lesson for my fellow Americans. I wish I could remember the name of a very interesting article I came across one day at a university. The article mentioned how either in the area of the Balkans, perhaps also the former USSR parts of Eurasia that there were pseudo-scientific studies that "proved" biological differences between the various ethnic groups.
So, although in an American context, we would see them all as white, in the local context, they may see themselves as being biological distinct and probably incompatible "races". This seems to be similar to events in northern & eastern Africa and this type of racialist ideology is exactly what drives the afronuts.
The afronuts are not something to be taken lightly, they are not to be coddled, rationalized or justified. They should not be given a free pass, they are as much a danger to a nation that values property rights, civil rights & liberties. The afro--nazi are nothing but berserk savages bent on destroying themselves and everything around. If they were alive today, MLK & Malik Shabazz would be considered sellouts & traitors to their race by the (afrocen)tricks (and yes I am implying trick in the lowlife sense of the word).
Denouncing and rejecting the afronuts is not about "political correctness" or anything like that, its to stop the infection before the legacy of MLK and others are totally squandered by the crackheads.
I hear Toronto may have or perhaps already insured the creation of a permanent underclass by creating an afrocentrick school. This added to Ms. Aston enabling of them in Britain, plus the mass producing of Khalid Muhammads in America, pretty spells the doom of serious scholarship coming from these Anglo-phone areas.
This does not negate the need for such scholarship and I think its up to northern African communities in places like Quebec and island Cubanos in Canada to produce credible historical scholarship. Quebeci northern Africans are probably a no brainer, but I've met quite a few well educated island Cubanos in Canada and there is a whole wealth of Spanish language research going even back into the Canaanite colonies or even further back to the Oranian Neolithic influencing the neolithic within the Iberian pensinsula. Afrocentrick ideology just has too much a stranglehold on Anglophone Afro populations, so the Francophone and other Latin speaking Afro populations have to step up to the plate. The crackheads have ruled with impunity for much too long.
So I hope multilingual Francophone/Quebeci northern Africans & Canuck Cubanos, I hope to see excellent scholarship from your communities in the coming years.
I shall end this post with a quote from the late, great Snowden:
I have also used the works on Arabic skin color terms by Bernard Lewis in order to help my fellow Anglo-phones understand skin color terms as applied to Saharan, Horn & Khoisan Africans.
Ahmar/humr, I argue should be seen as an Arabic term akin to the English term reddish, rather than meaning the absolute color red. The British English equivalent would be copper & probably bronze. The American English equivalent would be reddish brown.
Asfar, I see as yellowish rather than absolute yellow. Brits would use tawny/tawnie or deep sallow as an synonym for this type of complexion. This corresponds to yellowish brown in American English.
Sumr/asmar, I see as a range from all the way from light to medium to dark brown, thus brownish. Thus sumr could encompass both asfar & ahmar/humr. British equivalent would be swarthy, brown, dusky. American English brown also best fits this definition.
Bayad/bidan/bizan, should be understood as light or bright. This term would likewise encompass ahmar/humr/, asfar, and the lighter spectrum of sumr/asmar. Brits have used white as its equivalent (in the most expanisve sense). I can think of no American English equivalent for this term.
Khudra, greenish seems to be an appropriate translation for this word. This term seems to represent the darker spectrum of sumr/asmar. This tone in British English is equivalent to olive (again British English, roughly from the Middle Ages to mid 20th century). The American English brown or dark brown would suffice for this category.
The author of the above article likewise mentions speaking Azer, a dialect of the Soninke, is part of what defines a bidani/bizani. Mauritania by Alfred G. Gerteiny likewise states that the locals also add the requirement that being a nomad is necessary to define one as bidani.
Hall seems to have given the impression that the Sudani of the Maghrib were often at the mercy of the semi-nomadic bidani of the sahra.
This is not always the case as the kingdom of the Kaw (not sure of location or ethno-linguistic constituents) was said to be a mighty empire, one that the Sanhaja Amazigh even acknowledged as being dominant. At times the polities of Ghana, Mali, & Songhai even extended quite a distance north into the Sahara. The Tuaregs by H.T. Norris mentions that many of the Amazigh tribes adopted Arab genelogies to escape the wrath of the 1st great Songhai ruler, Sonni Ali. The next Songhai ruler is credited with bringing the southern Sahara & the Sahel in line with the greater Islamic world (recommend checking out the works of John Hunwick). It was the Songhai above all, that should be credited with integrating the Sudani & Bidani of the southernmost Maghrib into the Islamic mainstream.
It should also be noted that many of the Sudani rulers of Ghana, Mali & Songhai were said to be of veiled Sanhadja descent by Leo Africanus & Marmol. This may have to do with the noble & ruling families of the Sudani & Bidani conducting diplomatic marriages with each other to cement alliances. The Sudani & Bidani were thus never hermetically sealed & distinct groups of mutually hostile peoples.
Whatever happens in Mali & Niger, I hope the international community does not let another Rwanda happen. Americans would either botch the job or just aggravate the situation, BUT its in the southern Europeans best interest to let things not totally get out of hand. The flood of refugees would be directed to the PIGS & the PIGS got enough problems on their hands right now. Lets learn from history for once and not make the same mistakes.
I have no delusions of being an expert on this topic, but since this situation involves Islam & oil, of course the American people are likely going to have to foot the bill for yet another military (misad)venture. Americans should at least have some self-control to tune out Lil Wayne, Rush & Beck just enough to at least get an idea of the region & history of the potential blood bath we're sending our young men & women into.
As I have often stated before certain racialist ideologies, a leftover from colonialism, is a contributing factor in recent events in Mauritania, Sudan & Rwanda. These nations are not the only African nations with these problems but they are the most (in)famous within the Anglo-phone world. The modern nations of Mali & Niger, as evidenced above, are also grappling with these issues.
The situation around the Niger River also should serve as a lesson for my fellow Americans. I wish I could remember the name of a very interesting article I came across one day at a university. The article mentioned how either in the area of the Balkans, perhaps also the former USSR parts of Eurasia that there were pseudo-scientific studies that "proved" biological differences between the various ethnic groups.
So, although in an American context, we would see them all as white, in the local context, they may see themselves as being biological distinct and probably incompatible "races". This seems to be similar to events in northern & eastern Africa and this type of racialist ideology is exactly what drives the afronuts.
The afronuts are not something to be taken lightly, they are not to be coddled, rationalized or justified. They should not be given a free pass, they are as much a danger to a nation that values property rights, civil rights & liberties.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kovert
Whatever happens in Mali & Niger, I hope the international community does not let another Rwanda happen.
Let this be a lesson to all the afronuts crying about how hard they have it & America is so horrible. You are living in paradise compared to what other people are going through. You scream and shout about events that happened decades, centuries ago, as though there aren't people going through just as traumatic & devastating tragedies RIGHT NOW. The discrimination; ethnic/"racial" polarization & violence; gov't sanctioned attacks going on RIGHT NOW outside the states makes the US version look like Little House on the Prairie.
So, shut the hell up with the afronut nonsense; be thankful for what you have here in America; AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, learn how to work with fellow Americans to build a better future for the coming generations, so they don't repeat the mistakes of the past.
Frankly, all Americans should take heed of the above words. Don't take for granted the property rights, civil rights & civil liberties so many have fought & died for. The benefits of public and/or affordable education for middle income & working people; public libraries; public transportation; an accessible Internet; concepts of freedom of speech, assembly, to bear arms in self-defense, peaceful dissent & civil disobedience; separation of church & state; these gifts our forbears gave us are not to be taken lightly.
It doesn't take a genius to see what letting: mystical chalkboard worshippers; crackheads claiming to be Nubian Olmecs, new black panther groupies along with the rest of the afronuts; and other lunatic fringe freaks control the debate would inevitably lead to.
These freaks would gladly plunge the states into the same mixture of anarchy, theocracy, & ethnic/"racial" violence that is plaguing many nations around the world. Americans don't let the inmates run the asylum.
1st and foremost, although its quite apparent geographically (although only recently acknowledged academically) the Nile Valley and its Delta, along with the Tell of the Maghrib are actually (very) large oases of the Sahara desert.
The former, created by the Nile river and its various tributaries, the latter by the mountain ranges that extend from Cyrenaica in modern Libya to the Atlantic Ocean coast of what is know known as the nation of Morocco.
The Sahara desert also crosses many international borders, including certain nations that are usually defined as sub-Saharan in Anglophone circles, despite the fact that portions of them are actually located in the desert proper. Nations in this category include Mauritania, Niger, Mali, Chad, and the Sudan.
There are also areas that are technically, not Saharan but have been in contact with this region since, well, the origin of humanity itself. Areas in this class include the Senegal and Niger rivers, Lake Chad, certain parts of the modern Sudan and above all the area of and around the Horn of Africa.
Just as with black African, if I use sub-Saharan Africa/ns, it will be used in strictly an environmental sense. Thus I mean Africa south of the greatest desert of Mother Earth, nothing more, nothing less.
The area of sub-Saharan Africa from the Senegal River to the non-Saharan portion of the Sudanese Nile Valley is sometimes referred to as the Sahel. One should keep in mind that climatic variations have shifted the boundaries of the Sahara & the Sahel over the millennium. Once again sub-Saharan and Sahel are environmental terms.
Now as for slavery in northern Africa, particularly during the Islamic period, for the most part one should not confuse it with slavery in the Americas. Conflict, impoverishment, crime could lead to enslavement. It is also sometimes difficult to distinguish slavery from indentured servitude. There are just certain concepts that are difficult to translate from one cultural worldview to another.
White Gold gives an excellent example of the difference between slavery in the Americas and the contemporary Barbary. It was apparently not uncommon for enslaved European Christian males to be bred with female African slaves of non-Abrahamic religious affiliation. Slavery also did not seem to carry as great a stigma as many rulers had enslaved ancestors, since the royal harems often included women of every color & nationality.
On this note mention should be made of former African slaves such as James Riley. Much to the chagrin of the racialists (neo & afro-nazi alike), enslaved Europeans like Riley, became some of the most outspoken abolitionists once they regained their freedom. Abraham Lincoln was said to have been influenced by Riley's experience & anti-slavery position. Former enslaved Europeans like Riley identified with enslaved Africans, so the Barbary slave experience actually increased opposition to slavery rather than increase racialist justifications for enslavement.
Once again, I will recommend that anyone interested in northern African history, should consider learning French. When it comes to non-European history, Anglophones seem to be more into China, India, especially the new Agers. The American public in particular, just does not have the mental capacity to deal with northern African history with any maturity. Psychologically, its just too much for them as northern African history is diametrically opposed to everything Americans have been conditioned to believe in. As America goes down the tubes, I can only hope the Canadians are strong enough to keep North America from descending into chaos & savagery.
Not to give the impression that all history in the making is necessarily bloody.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kovert
This article is on a major energy project in the works between European and African Mediterranean nations.
"A few years ago, scientists began to calculate just how much energy the Sahara holds. They were astounded at the answer. In theory, a 35,000-sq.-mi. (90,600 sq km) chunk of the Sahara — smaller than Portugal and a little over 1% of its total area — could yield the same amount of electricity as all the world's power plants combined. A smaller square of 6,000 sq. mi. (15,500 sq km) — about the size of Connecticut — could provide electricity for Europe's 500 million people. "I admit I was skeptical until I did the calculations myself," says Michael Pawlyn, director of Exploration Architecture, one of three British environmental companies comprising the Sahara Forest Project, which is testing solar plants in Oman and the United Arab Emirates. Pawlyn calls the Sahara's potential "staggering."
Quote:
Originally Posted by kovert
"A Seawater Greenhouse converts sea water into fresh water using nothing more than the sun’s rays. It does this by running air through a structure whose walls are infused with cold sea water. As air enters it is immediately cooled, humidified, and then condensed into fresh water by sunlight."
This fresh water project seems very promising. The development of this technology SHOULD be lead by the US. This is not only helpful to us domestically as fresh water is not exactly a renewable resource.
We could use the ability to provide fresh water as leverage internationally. China and India are going to be hard pressed to provide fresh water for their populations as their industrialization and population continues to rise.
Much of the instability in places like Sudan (Darfur), Yemen, Somalia comes from lack of water due to increasing desertification and even the Saudis would eventually be more compliant if we had the means to increase their water supply. We might be able to reduce the loss of American tax payer money and blood with technological and diplomatic precision rather than poorly planned and reactionary brute force.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kovert
Now mind you these projects are not magic pills, and they require heavy duty R&D investment, not to mention much international diplomatic cooperation.
Still this would be a much better way to sway the sentiment of the local (and particularly Islamic) populations toward a favorable view of the US rather than picking a fight with every Islamic resource rich nation in the world at the cost of trillions of dollars and the bodies of thousands of America's youth.
The Saharan peoples might be better off teaming up with the Aussies however (look under Dyson Award 2011: Harvesting Water from Dry Desert Air)
"An experimental solar-powered airplane took off from Switzerland on its first transcontinental flight on Thursday, aiming to reach North Africa next week.
Time to update the thread with the latest results of my research.
One of the major problems with Anglophone awareness of northern African (and really African history in general) is the lack of English language publications. It is largely in the Francophone world that has studied the region. Now I'm not suggesting that the Francophone world is somehow free of pseudo-scientific racism or any other colonial legacies but at least they have access to a wide range of information to counterbalance this as opposed to interested Anglophones such as myself.
Combined with an American mentality which prides itself on anti-intellectualism; throw in the constant coddling and pampering of the dregs and losers of society and its no surprise that the States is a breeding ground for crack heads claiming to be Nubian Olmecs; high priests of Diop and all the other ridiculous strains of afro-nazism.
So therefore I feel it is time to take a look at the issue of slavery since this way too often undermines Anglophone awareness and appreciation of northern African history.
So lets start with the Sahel.
As I have previously stated there is no consistent definition for a lot of the terms one will find researching African history, so I will define the Sahel as the savanna/steppe region below the Sahara desert and above the area where tsetse flies and other environment factors prevent the development of pastoralism (lifestyle based on the herding of animals such as cattle). Keep in mind this definition is environmental so the boundaries of the Sahal have expanded and contracted over time, but it generally covers the area from the Senegal and Niger rivers, towards Lake Chad and finally to the non-Saharan portion of the Nubian Nile Valley of what is now the modern nation of the Sudan.
In terms of physical anthropology, again there is no consistent terminology used but the earliest human remains found in the Sahel belong to a type variously called Cro-Magnon, Mechta-Afalou, Mechtoid, "archaic", homo sapiens as opposed to homo sapiens sapiens. These fellows have physical features considered to be reminiscent of earlier homo species such as Neanderthal along with features consistent with human populations existing today. Many scholars believe existing human populations descended from from this early humans but others question this. However irregardless of this debate, for now, I will just refer to them as archaic sapiens through the rest of my posts.
The archaic sapiens bring up a bone of contention I have about the idea humans can neatly be categorized into the various "iod" races. If a skeleton has a low and wide nose and moderate to high amount of facial projection (prognathism), physical anthropologists will deem it "negroid". If a skeleton has a high and narrow nose, a narrow face, mild facial projection and a elongated skull, the skeleton will be classed as "caucasoid or caucasian". The thing with archaic sapiens is they not only have "negroid" and "caucaosid" (see Hiernaux in physical anthropology recommendation) phenotypical features but they also have "australoid" features as well (see Marta Luhrs recommendation). In reality since archaic sapiens existed before any existing humans were a twinkle in their eye, it would be more accurate to say us moderns have "Mechtoid" features since they existed before us and we possibly evolved into us from them. Also the use of terms like negroids when referring to archaic sapiens will mislead individuals into assuming the archaic sapiens looked like existing humans and that is clearly not the case. If someone has a flat nose just say they have a flat nose, if they have an elongated skull just say they have an elongated skull. Frankly nothing good seems to come from the "iod" race theories and they bring with them a whole lot of baggage and racialist connotations. The more I research the more I understand why many want to move away from those terms.
Kevin MacDonald seems to argue that archaic sapiens (from reading Chamla & Heirnaux I believe Kevin's "Sudanese" are more probably archaic sapiens but of the Nile Valley variant, they should not be confused with modern African populations) were the earliest inhabitants of west and central Africa below the Sahara. Kevin argues they spoke an ancestral language family called Niger-Saharan which eventually gave birth to Niger-Congo & Nilo-Saharan.
The McIntoshs seem to agree, at least that the southern Sahara and the Sahel were inhabited by archaic sapiens. Andrew Smith is in general agreement and further notes that archaic sapiens were present as recent as around 2000 B.C.E. The archaic sapiens also had neighbors who phenotypically resembled types found among the Capsians of the Maghrib; Badarians; and the Natufians of the Levant. Though it should be noted that the earliest evidence I have come across about this phenotype has come from Eburrans/Kenyan Capsian, which goes back to at least 16000 B.C.E.
I have not come across much of the history of the Sahel before the Islamic period but it appears that it was populated by the same stocks that were present along the Nile and in the Tell and desert of the Magrib.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kovert
Biyad/white can include within its range peoples, otherwise classed as ahmar/red/copper/bronze, such as the Fulani, Soninke, Tubu, Qibt, Neubi, Habashi/Horn Africans & Khoisan peoples, in addition to the various Banu Mazigh qabilas.
Given the earlier stocks present in the southern Sahara and the Sahel, its no wonder that the Soninke, the Kanembu & Kanuri (of the Tubu) and above all the Fulani were sometimes classed as "whites" along with the Banu Mazigh and Habashi. They were of similar ancestral stock. The Soninke were known as red men by their name Sarakheli, Ture and other variants.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kovert
Likewise, the term haratine, now has meanings in the 21st century that conflicts with those from earlier times. Haratine can mean an agricultural laborer in Arabic. The Saharans as reported by Rene , Barth from what I gather from Webb also used haratine to refer to any kind of mixture between Sahrawi & Sudani (again black african, geographical sense). In this context the term should not be seen as having anything to do with slavery nor is it tied to a specific occupation, although these associations should be studied to understand how they now dominate Western media & academia.
Other Sahelians such as the Wolof and Serer of the Atlantic family of languages (like Pulaaren) along with the Bambara and Malinke (Mande like the Soninke) and the Songhai might have been considered mulattoes or haratines by Saharans. Briggs in Tribes of the Sahara mentioned that Hamra, red, was used to describe the descendants of bidani and more southern Africans. Ahmar was also used to describe the abid army, Muley Ismael of the Filali Sharifian dawla (dynasty, state) created. Hamrunis from Tafilalt also seem to be described by a similar term.
The people of the Sahel were described by various Europeans as having "regular or European" facial features (narrow nose and face along with relatively thin lips), their hair was variously called long (often in braids/plaits); soft; silky; bushy; straight or crisp. These descriptions seem similar to the styles known as honkwil and dirwa among the Bedja, check the linked pics below.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kovert
Indeed, in order to understand ancient Egypt, one should also learn about the cultures and peoples of the Sahara and the Horn (these guys look like they come out of some hieroglyphics).
But all too often people seem to overlook that modern Nile country inhabitants are the closest descendants of the ancient Nile country inhabitants in terms of ancestry and culture.
These hairstyles appear to have been present from one end of northern Africa to the other (and at least as old as the Predynastic according Toby Wilkinson's research in Misr's eastern desert).
As I have often stated it does not make sense to cut off Nile Delta & Valley, the Maghrib, the Horn and the Sahal from each other, Francophone scholarship has begun to understand that but Anglophones still seem to be ambivalent if not hostile to that thought, though there has been progress over the decades.
The peoples of the Sahel were at times able to extend their realms into the Sahara such as Ghana, Mali, Songhai; Kanem/Bornu at times extended themselves to the Fezzan. John Kelly Thornton is an excellent source for understanding the martial capabilities of the people of the Sahel. When the Iberians were wiping the floor with the people of the Tell and the desert proper, the naval expertise and poisoned darts and arrows of the Sahelians gave the Europeans pause. In fact, other sub-Saharans proved to be not worth the hassle in raiding and the various European nations sought alliance and negotiation.
This is why the afronut and aryanista stranglehold on the minds of Americans is so problematic. The melanin based "us vs. them" that is so dominant among the Leonard Jeffries and blonde Africans partisans does not allow for one to look at the complexity of historical relationships nor how they might have changed and developed over time.
The fact of the matter is that the Sahelians were not the enslaved ancestors of modern African Americans. For the most part, they were the enslavers and conquerors of the ancestors of modern day African Americans. The only time the Sahelians were enslaved was when they fought amongst themselves or with the Sahrawis.
For the most part the Sahelians seemed to have resisted selling slaves to the Atlantic slave trade, though their involvement in the trans-Saharan, Red Sea & Indian Ocean trade probably continued. These routes don't have as much a paper trail so it might be harder to get the details. The few Sahelains that were enslaved seemed to have enriched America with their language and their horse and cattle raising skills (see Africanisms recommendation).
And although some may blame Muslims for the slave trade, the fact of the matter is Dahomey, Ashanti, Ibos, and Bambara were all non-Muslim, many were also non-Abrahamic period, and they sold far more Africans into the Atlantic slave trade than any Muslims. Thornton has even demonstrated that west central & central Africans, many of whom were nominal Christians, outsold even western Africans in providing cargo for European slave ships. Neither the Europeans nor the Muslims created the African slave trade, they just tapped into a pre-existing system and opened up new markets for it. The Muslims at least tried to restrict and regulate the sale of Muslims and dhimmi under their protection.
Slavery seemed to be the African alternative to incarceration and Guantanamo. Slavery in Africa could have been as brutal as it was in America but there were also slaves in positions of authority over "freemen" similar to the Islamic system. Some authors contend the Atlantic slave trade may have been reserved as punishment for problematic slaves similar to how certain regions in America, problematic slaves were sent to. Therefore the most undesirable; the dumbest and most idiotic; the laziest; the ugliest; the ones with the most questionable character and integrity came to compose the vast majority of America's slave population. Quite frankly, judging from the behavior of the afronuts, the fruit does not seem to fall far from the tree.
Oh and for those claiming that American slaves were stripped of their culture, that is not necessarily true in all cases. Most Africans in America and their immediate descendants knew what tribe they were from, they did not necessarily lose knowledge of their culture and heritage. It was only gradually over time as direct imports from Africa stopped, that knowledge of the culture the Africans brought with them began to fade. The slave owners were pretty clear on what groups and areas would likely have the labourers they wanted. The issue over breeding is likewise disputed in recommendation B. There are some great works about the slave trade, particularly coming from the African perspective. Deep Roots is a text I highly recommend as it uses historical linguistics (much like Chris Ehret) to reconstruct African history. The problem is languages and other cultural practices are dying out. Unfortunately since the American system caters to the people who would rather riot & rampage than research & record, I have no confidence in my fellow Americans to contribute anything of value protecting, preserving knowledge and making new discoveries. Thus I hope any interested Anglophone (a person capable of communicating in English at least at an 8th grade level, whether they be Canadian, Brit or otherwise) who has the skills and ambition will not let knowledge and understanding be lost to future generations.
The below are excellent recommendations to learn about African slavery.
"A U.S.-based unit has been selected as the Army’s first “regionally aligned” brigade, and by next year its soldiers could begin conducting operations in Africa. "
They largely concur with Sarah Tishkoff that the vast majority of African Americans are far more genetically related to populations south of the Sahel, in particular West Central & Central Africans rather than Sahelians like the Fulbe/Hal Pulaaren. Quite frankly African Americans share far more of their ancestry with Euro Americans than Sahelians, though whether these 2 groups of Americans are willing to acknowledge this is a whole 'nother story.
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.
). 
