Songhay Empire

« “Africans sold their own people as slaves”

Michael Jackson: Don’t Stop ‘Til You Get Enough »

Songhay Empire

Sat Aug 29th 2015 by abagond

The Songhay Empire (1468-1591), also written as Songhai, was an empire in West Africa centred on the Niger River. It was one of the largest and most advanced states of its time. Timbuktu, then in its golden age, was larger than London.

The three main empires of West Africa and when they reached their height:

1000s: Ghana
1100s:
1200s:
1300s: Mali
1400s:
1500s: Songhay

The Songhay Empire was the largest. It ruled two-thirds of all West Africans. In terms of present-day countries, it extended across Gambia, southern Senegal, almost all of Mali, western Niger and north-western Nigeria.

The backbone was the Niger River and its cities that traded among themselves and with the caravans that came across the Sahara – a pattern that goes back to -500. The river lay between the Sahara to the north and the forests to the south – a perfect place to create an empire using armed men on horseback. Think Genghis Khan. By the late 1400s, Songhay’s cavalry was the toughest and fastest of West Africa.

Cities: Its three main cities, from west to east along the Niger River, were

Jenne (or Djenne),
Timbuktu – the richest,
Gao – the capital.

Trade: The empire stood at the meeting point of several trade routes, coming south across the Sahara, west across the Sahel, all the way from the Nile, and north from the forests and its gold fields. It traded gold, ivory, spices, kola nuts, slaves and cotton goods for salt, cloth, arms, horses, copper, glassware, sugar and North African crafts.

Education: Its scholars went to top universities like al-Azhar in Cairo and al-Qarawiyyin in Fez, Morocco, but soon Timbuktu’s own Sankore University was itself a top university. It had scholars from as far away as North Africa and West Asia. It taught religion, law, grammar, rhetoric, logic, astrology, astronomy, history and geography. It was heavy on Islamic law: it and other universities turned out the judges who pretty much ran many of the cities and towns.

Language: Arabic was the language of scholarship, much as Latin was in the West. The top people in Jenne, Timbuktu and Gao spoke the imperial tongue, Songhay. In the east people spoke Hausa.

Religion: Islam was common among the upper crust. The masses, though, did not become largely Muslim till the 1800s, long after the empire fell. While the empire did fight a jihad against the Mossi to the south, it generally did not force Islam on its own people. Unlike Arabs, it sold both Muslims and non-Muslims as slaves.

Class structure: in rough terms:

nobles – served in government and the military, fought in the cavalry;
freemen – independent farmers, fought in the infantry;
guild members – craftsmen;
slaves – worked especially on royal estates.

Military: In addition to its cavalry, it had a navy on the Niger River. But there was one thing it did not have: guns. Already weakened by civil war, it was destroyed at the Battle of Tondibi in 1591 by Morocco – armed by Queen Elizabeth I.

– Abagond, 2015.

See also:

520

Posted in stuff | 81 Comments

81 Responses

on Sat Aug 29th 2015 at 02:20:22 talibmensah

Nice post, but you left out the other Europeans who participated in the Moroccan invasion. Some of them became, like Judar Pasha, the military elites who dominated for Timbuktu long after Morocco gave up its dreams of West African empire.

Timbuktu was at its Golden Age as you indicated here. I’ve read elsewhere that the population was anywhere from 50,000 to 100,000 people, meaning it was probably one of the largest cities in Africa at the time.

LikeLike
on Sat Aug 29th 2015 at 18:26:45 blakksage

This is a great post Abagond! However, I advise you to go even deeper than this. Why? Because left in this state, you’re short changing glorious history of black people in general. More specifically, you’re inadvertently cutting short the history of God’s chosen people who were actually pushed out of northeast Africa(Israel) by the Romans. There isn’t a whole lot of discussion about this, but there is a reason why the Arab, European and Amerikan slave trade systems centered around the west coast of Africa. Again, GO DEEP!

Shalom!

LikeLike
on Sat Aug 29th 2015 at 21:18:53 Fan of Mack, Origin, Kwamla, Matari, Franklin, Onitaset, Cooper, Trojan Pam

@Blakksage

Perhaps Abagond won’t delete your comment/post …. about God’s chosen people – if you care to share it with the rest of us.

LikeLike
on Sat Aug 29th 2015 at 23:26:49 Nana

I came out of lurk mode to say thank you for this post. I love learning about my history.

LikeLike
on Sun Aug 30th 2015 at 00:12:28 blakksage

@Fan of Mack, etc.,
For the reason you just mentioned, is why I posted in brevity. As we all know by now, Abagond is quick to delete sometimes. lol!

LikeLike
on Sun Aug 30th 2015 at 08:32:09 jefe

But there was one thing it did not have: guns. Already weakened by civil war, it was destroyed at the Battle of Tondibi in 1591 by Morocco – armed by Queen Elizabeth I.

Leads credence to the “Guns, Germs and Steel” argument.

(https://abagond.wordpress.com/2009/11/09/guns-germs-and-steel/)

LikeLike
on Sun Aug 30th 2015 at 13:43:22 abagond

@ blakksage

You could throw me a clue, like talibmensah did.

LikeLike
on Sun Aug 30th 2015 at 18:26:06 Fan of Mack, Origin, Kwamla, Matari, Franklin, Onitaset, Cooper, Trojan Pam,

And while you’re considering … Abagond, you might also consider doing a series of posts on what present day blacks in America and other places outside of the motherland LOST when we stopped participating in various AFRICAN “rites of passage” and began copying the ways of white people.

LikeLike
on Sun Aug 30th 2015 at 21:39:47 blakksage

@Abagond,

From A.D. 66 – 70, the Romans besieged Jerusalem and subjugated the black Jews. The Romans (Edomites) enslaved and invaded many countries and treated its inhabitants as slaves because they refused to make sacrifices to Julius Caesar. Obviously, Rome didn’t care too much about religion. They were more concerned about annual tax revenues from the Jews. When the black Jews, Yahawa’s/God’s chosen people revolted, Roman Emperor Titus surrounded the city of Jerusalem with soldiers and somehow blocked flowing water from running through Jerusalem. People began to die from starvation and other plagues. “When ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.” (Luke 21:20.)

The Jews responded and killed quite a few Roman soldiers that were assigned to keep Jerusalem under Rome’s control. Emperor Titus was incensed and eventually attacked the Temple. Hundreds of thousands of Jews were killed, silver and gold were carried away as spoils of war and all of the buildings were set ablaze. Historian and black Jew Josephus Flavius, (one of the first documented Uncle Tom) account states that there were actually over 1 million Jews killed during the ransacking of Jerusalem.

Eventually, Yahawa’s/God people were told to flee to the mountains (Africa). “Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains” (Matthew 24:16). Those that stayed or captured in Jerusalem were either enslaved or sent to Egypt and other parts of Africa (Canaan) as proprietary subjects. Most of the Jews ended up on the west coast of Africa to stay away as far as possible from Egypt the land of bondage, which of course, is on the central East coast of Africa. “I am the LORD thy God, which brought thee out of the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage” (Deuteronomy 5:6).

Over a period of time, the Black Jews numbered once again in the million while in the wilderness (Canaan/Africa). However, they were still blessed by attaining infinite wisdom in regards to farming, irrigation, medicine, math, geometry, masonry, architecture, combat, geography, navigation, exploration, science, physics and astronomy just to name a little more than a few things. the Kingdom of Ghana, the Mali Empire, the Songhai Empire, the Ethiopian Empire, the Mossi Kingdoms and the Benin Empire on mostly the central west coast of Africa and needless to say, flourished as well.

Even further, the Republic of Benin was once referred to as The Slave Coast due to the amount of slave ports with the area. Therefore, when the Amerikans, British and Arabs plundered the west coast of Africa for human commodity, they knew exactly who they were enslaving once again. In fact, these enslaving governments mentioned above, especially the Amerikans and British, were nothing but modern Romans continuing the tradition of hatred of their forefathers.

Again, I truly enjoyed reading your post, but this is essentially why the great African empires existed primarily on the west coast of Africa as opposed to the east coast of Africa.

LikeLike
on Mon Aug 31st 2015 at 02:05:30 talibmensah

Speaking of Elizabeth I, do you know of any primary sources or books about blacks in Elizabethan England? I recall reading somewhere, several years ago, about the small but conspicuous community of ‘blackamoors’ in London. I believe Elizabeth I had them kicked out of the country, too.

Also, I believe part of the reason Elizabeth and Morocco formed that alliance was because of European/Mediterranean politics of the age. The Moroccans were surrounded by the growing Ottoman Empire and powerful Spain, and England opposed Spain for obvious reasons.

LikeLike
on Mon Aug 31st 2015 at 07:41:32 Fan of Mack, Origin, Kwamla, Matari, Franklin, Onitaset, Cooper, Trojan Pam, etc

@Blakksage,

I enjoyed reading your history lesson!

Who were the Khazars? When, why and how did they become “Jews?”

LikeLike
on Mon Aug 31st 2015 at 14:18:35 blakksage

@Fan of Mack etc.,

the Khazars are a nomadic Turkish group of people who co-opted the life of Hebrew Israelites who lived in the Georgia, Azerbaijan, Syria and Ukraine area of Western Asia and Eastern Europe. Simply put, they are converts who converted to Judaism and by extension, co-opted or stole the way of life of the Black Jews/Hebrew Israelites. The Illuminati, the United Nations, the Bilderberg group and other secret governments is responsible for putting them in the State of Israel in 1948. They are wandering settlers. They are not of the 12 tribes of Israel. Even today, their bible is the Talmud, which is the book of the pagan religion for the Babylonians who were demonic, devilry worshippers who despised The Ancient One, The Most High, Yahawa, the True God of Israel!

“I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty, (but thou art rich) and I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan” (Revelation 2:9).

LikeLike
on Mon Aug 31st 2015 at 15:52:41 resw77

@talibmensah

The UK national archives has documentation of “blackamoors” in the royal courts of England and Scotland in the 1500s: http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/pathways/blackhistory/early_times/moors.htm

I imagine a lot of the “moors” in England were from Songhay, especially after 1591.

LikeLike
on Tue Sep 1st 2015 at 05:24:34 talibmensah

@resw77

Thanks, such fascinating stuff. I think a lot of these blackamoors were West Africans the Portuguese had brought into northern Europe with them. The early slave trade from West Africa to the Iberian peninsula and Mediterranean Europe started in the 1400s, and by the end of the century, nearly 10 percent of Lisbon’s population were blacks.

@blakksage

You are saying a lot of nonsense. Khazars did convert to Judaism, but the modern Jews of Israel, including the Askenazi, are of Middle Eastern origins. Population genetics proves they’re related to the Arabs of the Levant and adjacent regions. I didn’t want to say anything earlier, but if you’re going to make nonsensical claims that the ‘real’ Israelites are people in West Africa, then I had to correct you. That you allude to nonsensical conspiracy theories proves you have no idea what you’re talking about.

Not trying to start a riot or anything, but don’t make nonsensical claims or talk about conspiracy theories. If you wanted to have a conversation about ‘Lost Tribes of Israel’ in Africa, then we should be talking about the Lemba people of southern Africa or the so-called Falashas of Ethiopia, but I am suspicious generally of any African ethnic groups claiming descent from Israel or the Middle East. Even the Yoruba of West Africa have made similar ludicrous claims in oral traditions about Oduduwa coming from the Middle East. Lots of Muslims or Islamized African ethnic groups fabricated genealogies or legends to connect themselves to the Middle East.

LikeLiked by 1 person
on Tue Sep 1st 2015 at 07:47:09 talibmensah

@Kiwi

Thank you! It annoys me so much when we run around claiming to be Israelites, Asiatic Black Man, Moors or whatever is popular at the moment. Songhay was a great West African Empire that doesn’t need any fictional ties to Jews or Ancient Egypt.

LikeLiked by 1 person
on Tue Sep 1st 2015 at 16:06:51 Bastion Bane

Will you be doing posts on other empires of Africa? Great Zimbabwe, Congo, Nubia?

LikeLike
on Tue Sep 1st 2015 at 18:37:25 blakksage

@Talibmensah,

you just barely qualify for a response. What in the world are you talking about?? Apparently you didn’t comprehend my post. If you’d re-read my post, you’d realize that I stated that the Khazars are simply converts to Judaism who are originally from the Turkish-Russian area. Nonetheless, they certainly aren’t the biblical Hebrew Israelites/Jews that are currently occupying the land of Israel. But I understand, some black folks will say almost anything, including denying their own heritage when they don’t know biblical prophecies, which is to say in the alternative, your OWN HISTORY. Pick up a Bible, perhaps you will learn something about yourself. The Ethiopians and Lemba tribe of South Africa are also Jews. Again, if you’d read the Bible, you would’ve known that Yahawa(God) scattered his people to the four corners of the earth. I’m not at all surprised that Jews are also in South Africa and Ethiopia. You clearly lack knowledge. You know the old saying: “Know thyself!”

Hosea 4:6 My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge:

Deuteronomy 30:3 then the LORD your God will restore you from captivity, and have compassion on you, and will gather you again from all the peoples where the LORD your God has scattered you.

@Kiwi, you certainly don’t qualify for a response, at least not more than what’s mentioned here. Judging from other posts, I believe you’re of Asian descent. I will never tell an Asian, Iranian or an Iraqi who they are. Especially if I’m not of the same race. You must be off your rockers today!

You both are making complete fools of yourself. I advise both of you to pick some history books and the Bible, preferably the 1611 King James version while you’re at it!

LikeLike
on Tue Sep 1st 2015 at 20:18:43 Mz.Nikita

This post, is so, richly informative and awesome!!!

LikeLike
on Tue Sep 1st 2015 at 21:03:05 blakksage

Kiwi said: That was the whole point of this thread on the Songhay Empire. Blacks should be able to independently stand on their own feet and be proud of their own history without having to hitch their cultural heritage to another supposedly more respected ethnicity’s traditions. What blackksage also gets wrong is that Blacks don’t need to claim descent from another ethnicity to be proud of their own culture(s) and history.

Kiwi, you are more comical than I originally thought. If you was to tell me that you’re a direct, bloodline descendant of either Buddha, Ghengis khan or Sun Tzu, I wouldn’t argue with you. Why? I wouldn’t argue with you because who better to tell a history of a people than an individual of the same race? But here, you’re foolish enough to believe that American black folks sprung out of thin air and grace the earth on the west coast of Africa simply to be enslaved. NOPE! You’re wrong! The glorious history of black people is much deeper than that. Therefore, it’s quite confusing to me to hear someone of Asian descent, foolishly tell a black person that he doesn’t know his own history. Once again, if you’d know black history like I know black history, you’d quit making a darn caricature of yourself because you are not all knowing as it pertains to black history. I am black and don’t know everything. But certainly, I know a whole lot more than you!

@Kiwi and @Talibmensah, I encourage both of you to ponder on this verse:

They have said, Come, and let us cut them off from being a nation; that the name of ISRAEL may be no more in remembrance (Psalm 83:4).

Kiwi, what biblical tribe are you from and what race of Asian descent are you??

Talibmensah, are you African American and what tribe are you from as well?

LikeLike
on Tue Sep 1st 2015 at 23:34:42 talibmensah

@blakksage

Ok, I’ll play. Recommend me some historical books or articles from peer-reviewed journals. What are your sources for any of your nonsense (I hope not Dierk Lange)? I hope it’s not just the Bible, because that’s hardly a useful historical source on its own. If you can produce any serious sources, we can discuss this. However, if all you have are Biblical verses, it’s a huge waste of time.

If you want to have real conversation about the presence of Jews or Judaism in precolonial African history, we can certainly discuss that. One topic germane to this post would be the small Jewish community in precolonial Timbuktu. For example, why did one of the Songhay emperors actually adopt anti-Semitic policies in the 1500s? We could also discuss the history of Jewish communities in North Africa and Egypt.

As for the Lemba people and Ethiopian Jews, those are small populations and certainly no proof that all Africans are descendants of the ancient Israelites (I’m still skeptical of any connections between the Lemba and Judaism, too). I’m not sure how that would in any way prove your claims about West Africans being descendants of the Israelites or ancient Hebrews.

Why do you think anyone said Blacks just magically appeared in West Africa to be enslaved? Do you know anything about evolution, human migrations across Africa, or the study of history as a discipline? Anatomically modern humans have lived in West Africa for tens of thousands of years, probably even earlier, but the human fossil evidence is lost because of the climate. Have you ever heard of the Bantu expansions, movements of African populations across the continent over the last several thousands of years? If anatomically modern humans, arising in East Africa, made it to southern Africa over 100,000 years ago, what makes you think anatomically modern humans were not present in West or Central Africa, too?

Have you ever heard of the Hamitic Hypothesis? It was a product of colonialist histories of Africa, which claimed all civilizations/societies in precolonial Africa were started by light-skinned (or the oxymoronically termed dark-skinned whites) Hamites from the Middle East. One of the great ironies of certain forms of Afrocentrism is they’re reviving this concept and trying to reverse it by making everyone in the ancient Near East black. It’s all excrement mounted on piles of more excrement.

Also, if you really believe only blacks can write black history, you might be hopeless.

LikeLiked by 1 person
on Wed Sep 2nd 2015 at 01:10:57 blakksage

Sorry ’bout that Talibmensah, the Bible is my source of authority. I read peer-reviewed articles, essays and journals while I was in college. Currently, I’m beyond those years by many years. Peer-reviewed articles were important and authoritative just enough to get through the courses. Now, the Bible is not only my source of history, but personal strength as well. Thus far, not one prophecy has fail that’s written in the Bible that The Most High, The Ancient One, Yahawa, the True God of Israel said would take place.

When you have a chance, check out Dr. George Gliddon and Dr. Samuel Morton collaborative effort, In Crania Aegyptiaca. Their research efforts proved that the Egyptians and Negroes (those that were enslaved in Egypt) were two different people through skull comparison.

Also, for further personal edification, check out the following link for further DNA evidence proving what I mentioned above. Good bye and have fun not knowing who you truly are!

https://www.facebook.com/e1b1ahaplogroupnation

LikeLike
on Wed Sep 2nd 2015 at 02:11:01 talibmensah

@blakksage

Okay, so we have your confirmation that you really don’t have any sources except what you take literally in the Bible?

Also, I don’t take Gliddon and Morton seriously, they were pro-slavery ‘scientists’ in a nascent field. They’re part of the wave of scientific racism in the 19th century, like Gobineau. I don’t see any real sources or studies on the Facebook page.

Goodbye, let me know if you want to do real historical debates one day

LikeLike
on Wed Sep 2nd 2015 at 02:45:21 sharinalr

@Kiwi

“What blackksage also gets wrong is that Blacks don’t need to claim descent from another ethnicity to be proud of their own culture(s) and history.”—They don’t need to, but it is also not that simple. A lot of black history has been removed, whitewashed, or just plain turned white. It becomes a matter of determining what is yours and learning it. I remember reading how the kingdom of Kush was said to be Caucasian out of disbelief that it could be black. It is a process of rediscovery.

LikeLike
on Wed Sep 2nd 2015 at 03:07:13 talibmensah

@sharinalr

If you don’t mind me responding, I agree with you. But one must avoid the kind of Afrocentric hyperbole that is unfortunately too common. I agree with you that there has been a lot of whitewashing or omissions of African history from the mainstream narratives, but we shouldn’t make up history either. Instead of obsessing with alleged ‘Black’ Hebrews or talking about Ancient Egypt so much, why don’t we discuss Kush, Meroe, Aksum, the Asante Empire, the ancient Ghana/Wagadu kingdom, Songhay, Mali, Kuba, Luba, Kongo, Great Zimbabwe, Mapungubwe, Swahili Coast, Buganda, Rwanda, or the various other African kingdoms and societies? Various societies in precolonial West Africa had advanced surgery and medicine, engaged in long-distance trade within West Africa centuries before the rise of Islam. Or we could discuss the fascinating and impressive metallurgy technology of various African societies? Or the tradition of walls and impressive architecture? What about the discovery of antibiotics in ancient Kush and Meroe?

When we waste time pretending or claiming to be ‘Moors’ or ‘Israelites’ or ‘Egyptians,’ we forget the vast advances made into real African historical research. I mean, we have had amazing work by archaeologists in West Africa, like the McIntosh couple, who have shown how urbanism evolved uniquely in places like Jenne-Jeno, but we’ll never hear about that if we waste our time interpreting lines from the Bible as if they were fact and calling all West Africans descendants of Israel.

http://anthropology.rice.edu/Content.aspx?id=500

LikeLiked by 1 person
on Wed Sep 2nd 2015 at 03:19:05 talibmensah

Not sure if my earlier comment was erased, but I want to say I agree with you, @sharinalr

The problem is we lose track of real advances in African history and archaeology by grasping nonsensical Afrocentric theories. There’s good Afrocentrism that is valid, rooted in historical and intellectual rigidity and evidence, then there’s the wild Afrocentrism that claims every civilization in world history was started by Blacks. When we obsess over being ‘Moors,’ or ‘Black Israelites’ or connections with Ancient Egypt, we forget about the several complex and fascinating societies throughout precolonial Africa.

Abagond could write endlessly about the civilizations of ancient Ghana, the Asante Empire, Dahomey, the Hausa city-states, Futa Jallon, Mali, Songhay, advanced metallurgy in African history, impressive fortifications and walls, Great Zimbabwe, Mapungubwe, Kush, Aksum, Lalibela, Zulu, Luba, Lunda, Kongo, Kuba, Ndongo, Matamba, Rwanda, Buganda, Bunyoro, Swahili city-states, Madagascar, Christian Nubia, trans-Saharan trade, the spread of Islam, the slave trade, literary traditions, art, Nok terracotta, Nri, Yoruba city-states, Oyo, the philosophy of Christian Ethiopia, the writing systems of Nubia, etc. African history is so complex and fascinating, but we lose sight of that by attaching ourselves to fringe Afrocentric groups.

LikeLiked by 1 person
on Wed Sep 2nd 2015 at 05:26:46 louiejacuzzi

Never forget. I hope we can rebuild. Here’s the intriguing thing. Western society knows about the zulu, but 200 years earlier there was an empire more powerful and more advanced. I’ll admit this is a bit of a reach, but you can’t tell the story of Donghae because it depicts blacks “too positive” a perspective. You can show primitive half naked zulus, as they can be painted as good but not great, but an empire of scholars is too close to an admission of black potential.

LikeLike
on Wed Sep 2nd 2015 at 13:48:08 blakksage

Sharinair said: “I remember reading how the kingdom of Kush was said to be Caucasian out of disbelief that it could be black. It is a process of rediscovery.”

You nailed it, thank you Sista!

LikeLike
on Wed Sep 2nd 2015 at 14:10:13 gro jo

talibmensah wrote: “When we waste time pretending or claiming to be ‘Moors’ or ‘Israelites’ or ‘Egyptians,’ we forget the vast advances made into real African historical research.” Ok, tell me how you managed to separate the Nubians from the Egyptians, when there’s solid evidence that they both evolved side by side for millennia? Why is Madagascar more authentically “African” than Egypt when a good chunk of its population came from Indonesia? What is it about Ethiopia or the Swahili city states that make them more “African” than Ancient Egypt? I applaud your rejection of the nonsense people like blakksage write but you seem to veer in the same direction by positing that Egypt was some kind of non-African culture that miraculously appeared on the Nile. I hope I misunderstood you.

LikeLike
on Wed Sep 2nd 2015 at 14:19:18 blakksage

Louiejacuzzi said: “You can show primitive half naked Zulus, as they can be painted as good but not great, but an empire of scholars is too close to an admission of black potential.”

This is so true and always has been the objective of white supremacy, that is, to arrest the imagination of those they consider to be inferior. Closely followed by white-washing and destroying the cultures and ways of doing things that have been in place for hundreds of years and in some instances, even longer.

I’ve always believed that in order for us as Black people to know ourselves, we must also know the history or conduct a small sampling of a background check on white people (Edomites). And behold, you’d then, realize how magnificent Black cultures truly was. For example, the Almoravides (Black Moors), they were masters of science, astronomy and medicine. But yet, through the white historical gaze, they’d rather have you believe that all Black people, tribes or cultures were running around the continent of Africa naked as they depicted in Tarzan tell-lie-vision shows.

LikeLike
on Wed Sep 2nd 2015 at 14:31:13 blakksage

When responding to Talibmensah, Gro Jo said: “I applaud your rejection of the nonsense people like blakksage write but you seem to veer in the same direction by positing that Egypt was some kind of non-African culture that miraculously appeared on the Nile. Ok, tell me how you managed to separate the Nubians from the Egyptians?”

You appear to be an unsung comedian. Did you get kicked off of the comedic circuit? The Egyptians and Israelites can easily be seen depicted in the paintings on the walls of the pyramids. Perhaps once you remove this faculty block of yours, then you’ll realize that were not and still aren’t the same people. Quit making a fool out of yourself and open your mind! Check out these painting that clearly depict two different set of people.

http://www.therealhebrewisraelites.com/

LikeLike
on Wed Sep 2nd 2015 at 15:23:21 gro jo

blakksage the clown calling me a clown! You haven’t provided any evidence for your nonsense. Any idiot can put some pictures up on a site and make ridiculous claims, so much for your link. I’m allergic to sages like you who skip the part where they have to do research on a topic.
“Quit making a fool out of yourself and open your mind!” My response is: “Physician, heal thyself” Luke 4:23. Sound advice from your book of wisdom.

LikeLike
on Wed Sep 2nd 2015 at 15:25:44 gro jo

Why the hell is my comment in ‘moderation’ when blakksage’s attack is ok? I demand the right to reply.

LikeLike
on Wed Sep 2nd 2015 at 15:56:09 talibmensah

@gro jo

I believe the origins of Ancient Egypt lie to the South, and the evidence does indicate Ancient Egypt evolved side by side with Ancient Nubia. I mean, come on! I believe material culture indicates from pottery to tools and certain cultural practices, that the early populations of predynastic Egypt came from the South and there are many similarities between the A-Group culture of Lower Nubia and the Naqada cultures of Upper Egypt, which are the direct origin of the early dynastic period. I did not mean to deny that Ancient Egypt is part of Africa, I just don’t believe it should always be the topic we discuss in relation to Africa, the second largest continent.

On Madagascar, I don’t believe one should divide the African continent into our socially constructed ‘races’ or ‘authenticity.’ North Africa should be studied, too, and I’m certain that light-skinned people have been in that region for thousands of years. Does that mean it’s somehow less African? Any society that evolves in the African continent is African, and certainly Madagascar was not isolated from the African continent. Mainland East Africans populated Madagascar, too.

Shoot, even the white South Africans, the Afrikaaners, are African. They came to southern Africa centuries ago and adopted many cultural habits of Khokhoi and San peoples, and even their language has been creolized in the southern African context.

@blakksage

On the Almoravids, they do seem to come from West African and the southern Sahara, and many of their soldiers (and presumably leadership) were ‘black,’ but I’m not sure they themselves were so ‘civilized’ as you say. They were Desert and Sahel Berbers who adopted an extreme form of Islam, and they were only in power in Spain for less than a century. If they had advanced sciences, they presumably just used it from the long-established Muslim presence in Spain or from societies in the Maghreb, which were used to larger cities, more cosmopolitan, etc. I am not trying to deny the existence of towns and cosmopolitan cultures in the Sahel region, but we shouldn’t exaggerate things either. Didn’t the Almoravids sack Sijilmasa? Didn’t they try to impose Islam on West Africans, even allegedly sacking the ancient Ghana kingdom? They sound more like religious zealots than anything.

LikeLike
on Wed Sep 2nd 2015 at 16:38:05 sharinalr

@talibmensah

I don’t mind your response. I agree that we should not make up history, but I also don’t think it wise to play into the narrative of what “whites” have deemed is our history. Much of what is white washed in our history is what whites think have no definite race. No clear view of who they are or what they are, so they lay claim to it being white or Caucasian. I personally am not quick to hold out the idea that the Egyptians were not black for that very reason. Also whites are now trying to claim Ethiopians as Caucasian so yea. It goes pretty deep.

“we forget the vast advances made into real African historical research.”—Many can’t forget something they never knew about. Egyptians and moors are eye openers into the idea that blacks did more. It is not until they dig deep and realize what they really did and the acts to hide it. They have to know first and in order to know we have to teach at some point.

LikeLike
on Wed Sep 2nd 2015 at 16:44:35 sharinalr

@blakksage

I, even to this day, ask what is it that blacks did to white people that make them hell bent on white-washing their history. It makes no sense to me considering they will quickly scream about how in the past it is when confronted.

LikeLike
on Wed Sep 2nd 2015 at 16:46:10 sharinalr

@talibmensah

“I did not mean to deny that Ancient Egypt is part of Africa, I just don’t believe it should always be the topic we discuss in relation to Africa, the second largest continent.”—Fully agree. I thought that is what you meant, but was unsure.

LikeLike
on Wed Sep 2nd 2015 at 16:52:11 talibmensah

@sharinalr

Yes, I am aware of certain attempts to whitewash Ethiopia, Nubia, and the Horn of Africa. The thing about Ethiopia that we must admit, however, is that there have always been migrations back and forth across the Red Sea. Eurocentrism wants us to forget that Aksumites one dominated South Arabia, but there have also been historical/cultural ties across the region for at least 3000 years, in the pre-Aksumite period. I believe some Semitic-speaking people from the southern Arabian peninsula did come to the northern Horn of Africa at some point, but that doesn’t make Ethiopians “Caucasian.” The same thing happened with northern Egypt thousands of years ago: people from Syria-Palestine did settle in parts of Lower Egypt throughout its dynastic and postdynastic history. It doesn’t make Egyptian or Ethiopian ancient civilzations ‘white,’ and anyone making that argument would be the absurd Eurocentrists.

So you think the Moors were black? Interesting. Some undoubtedly were, but “moor” is an ambiguous term that originally meant dark, dark-skinned. To the ancient Romans that could mean just about anything, and I don’t like how some Afrocentrists have exaggerated the black presence in Moorish Spain or Sicily. ‘Blacks’ were obviously there, but we shouldn’t pretend they were the dominant group or were somehow always present. Visual and textual sources indicate that ‘Black’ Moors were usually a minority, at least from what we have from Spain.

Are you familiar with Ziryab? His origins are unclear, but some say he was a ‘Black’ who had a tremendous influence on Muslim Spain.

LikeLike
on Wed Sep 2nd 2015 at 17:06:26 gro jo

“@gro jo

I believe the origins of Ancient Egypt lie to the South, and the evidence does indicate Ancient Egypt evolved side by side with Ancient Nubia. I mean, come on! I believe material culture indicates from pottery to tools and certain cultural practices, that the early populations of predynastic Egypt came from the South and there are many similarities between the A-Group culture of Lower Nubia and the Naqada cultures of Upper Egypt, which are the direct origin of the early dynastic period. I did not mean to deny that Ancient Egypt is part of Africa, I just don’t believe it should always be the topic we discuss in relation to Africa, the second largest continent.”
talibmensah, I can’t find fault in your comment, so carry on.

LikeLike
on Wed Sep 2nd 2015 at 19:38:00 sharinalr

@talibmensah

“So you think the Moors were black”—No, I can’t say that because I do not know enough about them and have not taken the time out to.

“Are you familiar with Ziryab”—No, I am not but he seems worth looking into.

LikeLike
on Wed Sep 2nd 2015 at 20:08:59 Linda

talibmensah@ Shoot, even the white South Africans, the Afrikaaners, are African. They came to southern Africa centuries ago and adopted many cultural habits of Khokhoi and San peoples, and even their language has been creolized in the southern African context.

Linda says,

Absolute Nonsense… if that’s all it takes to claim indigenous roots to a Continent,

then you, me and everyone here are indigenous Europeans because we speak English and have cultural habits, mannerism, and education that originated in the British Isles.

the dutch settlers occupied South Africa in the 1652, thanks to the Portuguese, who made it possible. They learned how to survive thanks to the San, Khoi, and Xhosa people who they murdered and enslaved in order to take their land.

http://www.sahistory.org.za/topic/pre-mandela-period-colonial-history-south-africa-1652-1917

Afrikaners are indigenous white Europeans. they are NOT indigenous Africans.

the same way most white Europeans do not see African, Caribbean, or Asian people born in Europe, as Europeans — no matter how long their family has lived there.

There are some Afrikaners with roots that date back to the 1700s who are mixed race because because the Dutch men either raped or had children with the African or Indonesian/Malay women due to the low number of white women settlers.

the ones who could not pass as “white” are who we know as “Coloured” – because they were not considered to be “Afrikaners” by the Afrikaners.

The “mixed” Afrikaners who could pass, have done their utmost to breed the black and brown out since increased European immigration of the 1800s – Dutch, French, British, Irish, Scandinavians, and German settlers

but sometimes they get caught, like Sandra Laing’s parents.

LikeLiked by 1 person
on Wed Sep 2nd 2015 at 20:11:27 Linda

The Afrikaans language is NOT African, it is a creolized Dutch.

Afrikaans is 90 to 95% Dutch in origin, mixed with Portuguese, Malay, the language of the Xhosa and Khoisan, and other languages.

(The Dutch initially imported slaves from Indonesia, Malaysia, Madagascar, and Mozambique, so many of their words are incorporated into Afrikaans.)

“Afrikaans retains some features of 18th century Dutch, together with vocabulary from various Bantu and Khoisan languages and also from Portugese and Malay. Speakers of Afrikaans can understand Dutch, though Dutch speakers tend to need a while to tune into Afrikaans.

From about 1815 Afrikaans started to replace Malay as the language of instruction in Muslim schools in South Africa. At that time it was written with the Arabic alphabet. Afrikaans, written with the Latin alphabet, started to appeared in newspapers and political and religious works in about 1850.”

http://www.omniglot.com/writing/afrikaans.htm

If Afrikaans gets to be a “recognize” language by white western academia, then so should Jamaican patois.

LikeLiked by 1 person
on Wed Sep 2nd 2015 at 20:47:53 talibmensah

@Linda

Look, I never said white South Africans are ‘indigenous’ to Africa. My larger point is that we shouldn’t make ‘blackness’ central to an entire continent. And you admitted my point, Afrikaans has evolved into a distinct form of Dutch, rooted in southern Africa. The white South Africans are not ‘indigenous’ to southern Africa, but they’re certainly African because their entire identity is rooted in the African continent.

Would you say Berber groups in North Africa are not African because some are light-skinned? I would say they’re just as African as Bantu-speakers in Central Africa or Hausa people in Nigeria. Why? Well, the Berber languages and ethnic identities evolved within the African continent. Should they be removed from Africa because they might not fall under ‘blackness’?

What does it mean to you to be African? Does one have to be ‘black’? My larger point is to move away from these social constructs of race when discussing the history of a continent. Obviously, we can’t ignore the importance of race, particularly in colonial and postcolonial contexts, but I don’t think we should make ‘blackness’ a key component of being African. Nobody says one must be ‘white’ to be European or ‘yellow’ to be Asian. That is why I hate the term ‘Black African.’

White South Africans might refer to Black South Africans as ‘African,’ but they’re certainly a product of centuries of social, cultural, and ethnic developments within southern Africa. To say being a ‘true’ African means being Black is as absurd as saying ‘real’ Europeans have to be white.

What you’re saying about African-Americans (assuming you are African-American like me, Linda) is also irrelevant. I never said anything about being indigenous. And no, no African-American born in the US should be considered English or British unless they move there and self-identify as such. Why? We’re Americans, born and raised in a US context. Just because we speak English doesn’t mean we’re British or English, which is what I’m trying to say about Afrikaaners and white South Africans. They may speak a language of Dutch origin, but that certainly doesn’t make them Dutch or European.

I suspect we agree on more than we differ, maybe it’s just the medium of communication here that leads to confusion.

LikeLike
on Wed Sep 2nd 2015 at 22:28:25 gro jo

“So you think the Moors were black”. Yes some Moors were black, Fulani to be precise. They were also “black” based on the criterion used by the person speaking or writing about them. “Moors are not a distinct or self-defined people.[7] Medieval and early modern Europeans variously applied the name to Sub-Saharan Africans, Arabs, Berbers and Muslim Europeans.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moors

LikeLike
on Wed Sep 2nd 2015 at 23:18:24 Linda

talibmensah @ The white South Africans are not ‘indigenous’ to southern Africa, but they’re certainly African because their entire identity is rooted in the African continent.

White South Africans might refer to Black South Africans as ‘African,’ but they’re certainly a product of centuries of social, cultural, and ethnic developments within southern Africa. To say being a ‘true’ African means being Black is as absurd as saying ‘real’ Europeans have to be white.

Linda says,

No, Afrikaners/white south African’s social, cultural, and ethnic identity is rooted in Europe. They are settlers in Africa, who adapted to the land in order to survive and co-opted practices of different groups of people from Africa and Asia they enslaved.

but they have done EVERYTHING in their power to further white supremacy in Africa by maintaining their European identity

Afrikaners/white south Africans were European settlers who were seeking to occupy new land in the interest of their mother countries, Holland and Britian– just like Australia and North/South America

can real Africans go back to their forefather’s homeland on a different Continent?

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Africa/2010/0517/White-South-Africans-use-Facebook-in-campaign-to-return-to-Holland

“White South Africans use Facebook in campaign to return to Holland

They want the Dutch authorities to enact a “Jus Sanguinis” or right of blood law allowing Afrikaners to return to what they claim is their original home.”

so, it seems that even white South Africans disagree with you about the African-ness of their “ethnicity”

I’m not discussing skin colour when I speak of Afrikaners, but they themselves do — because according to them, to be “Afrikaners” is to be “white” (no black/brown Africans, coloureds, Arabs, or Jews apply thank you)

They are the ones who worked hard to uphold the “racial” definition of their so called settler-based “ethnic group” and have used every means necessary in order to uphold their rights to the occupied lands against the British and indigenous Africans. (such as claiming south Africa was empty when they got there)

Our ethnic identities are based on where our Ancestors came from. And there were “distinct” phenotype differences between Ethnic groups on each Continent.

these distinctions allow us descendants in the “new world” to label ourselves “Afro-whatever” and gives us the ability to trace our genealogy and our Ancestral identities

and these differences is what Europeans used to create racial groups and the ridiculous “one-drop” rule in North America.

So yes, as far as I’m concerned
real Europeans have “tan to snow white” skin colour.
real Africans have skin colour that ranges from black to tan. Semetic/Arabic/Amharic people from the Levant/Middle East have skin colour that ranges from dark brown to white.
South Asians have skin colour that ranges from black to tan.
(people who are mixed with any of these can go from dk brown to white)

LikeLiked by 1 person
on Wed Sep 2nd 2015 at 23:58:15 Linda

talibmensah @ What you’re saying about African-Americans (assuming you are African-American like me, Linda) is also irrelevant. I never said anything about being indigenous. And no, no African-American born in the US should be considered English or British unless they move there and self-identify as such. Why? We’re Americans, born and raised in a US context.

Linda says,

By calling white South Africans/Afrikaners – “African”-, you are equating them to an “ethnic group” that is equivalent to the Xhosa or Zulu, who are indigenous people.

You are really discussing “Nationality” not Ethnicity — they are “south Africans”, that is their Nationality but ethnicity, they are Europeans, not African.
(fyi, I am not African American, I’m Jamaican)

The only real Americans in North or South America are the Native “Indians” that got shoved onto reservations.

Everyone else could always pick a Continent and if possible, go “home” (but even that gets sticky because race/ethnic group-wise, many people are mixed, like me)

400 years does not make a group “indigenous” (that’s why after 700 years of Muslim rule, the Spanish ethnic-cleansed their country of anyone who looked or smelled “Moor”/Arabic, Jew, or Muslim)

but yes, we all can claim the Nationality of the respective country we were born in or where our ancestors immigrated to (voluntarily or involuntarily) , especially those of us who live in the Americas or other settler countries like Australia, New Zealand, or South Africa.

If the countries name changes, then so does your Nationality but your ethnicity(ies) will always stay the same.

If you do a DNA genealogy test, your results will reflect an Ethnic group that has been in Africa, Europe, or Asia for thousands of years. (or even Native American)

For me, it’s not about race or skin colour…I don’t buy into racial classifications because it’s bogus — the construct was created by Europeans, to be used to justify their behavior towards non-European people.

LikeLiked by 1 person
on Thu Sep 3rd 2015 at 01:43:39 talibmensah

I see where you’re coming from re. ethnicity vs. nationality. But it sounds as if you are equating race with ethnicity. Ethnicity is about culture, as well as heritage or social bonds, which is, by definition, always changing. If you want to distinguish “whites” or “Asians” or anyone who is not ‘black’ from being African in places like South Africa or East Africa, then what you’re doing is not ethnicity but limiting it by race.

And I certainly agree with you about settler colonialism. The problems that we see in the US, Algeria under France, and South Africa are examples of how race can be used by settler colonists for their own political purposes.

I don’t like to engage in trying to essentialize continents, like you’re saying. It leads to the problem of race and trying to validate it. You say you don’t believe in it, but that’s exactly what you’re saying when you say “real” Europeans, “real” Africans, “real Asians,” etc. The xenophobic and racist circles in France, UK, and other countries do the same thing. The only “real” French are this, the only real British are that. Even Native Americans disagree about who are the “real” Natives.

This reminds me of a silly debate between anti-immigration economist Paul Collier and Medhi Hasan (and a panel of experts in the UK). Collier and Hasan got into a row over what is an “indigenous” Briton, and it’s a question that reveals how problematic the concept of ‘indigeneity’ is. If Medhi Hasan isn’t British, then what is he? How many generations back does his family line have to extend for him to be a “real” Briton? If his family’s Muslim or Indian background precludes them being “real” Britons, what are they? Is he not a product of a multicultural, “multiracial” society in which the very definition of a “real” Briton fluctuates all the time? Does he have to be “indigenous” to be part of the ethnic diversity of the UK?

(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dA1-JtBACeg)

LikeLike
on Thu Sep 3rd 2015 at 01:53:49 GulliverFredrich

Linda this is false, South Asians can be white and to black, not black to tan, South Asia includes Afghanistan and Pakistan, and there are “White tribes” there are who are just as “White” looking as Dutch or Northern Europeans (look up the Kalash and Nuristani tribes and red haired pashtuns, light featured Punjabi’s, certain bollywood actresses etc); infact WHITE PEOPLE ARE SOUTH ASIANS, THEY ACTUALLY COME FROM THERE AND ORIGINATE WITHIN SOUTH ASIA!!

WHITE EUROPEANS ARE THE ALBINO’S OF SOUTH ASIANS/INDIANS,SOUTH ASIANS; AND INDIANS CARRY THE EXACT HAPLOGROUP GENES AS WHITES DESPITE THEIR DIFFERENT AVERAGE APPEARANCES!!! THEIR FACIAL AND SKULL FEATURES ARE THE SAME IRREGARDLESS OF SKIN COLOR.

HERE IS WHAT I’M TALKING ABOUT WHEN I SAY WHITE EUROPEANS ARE THE ALBINO’S OF SOUTH ASIANS/INDIANS:

http://www.galeriehilanehvonkories.de/en/deffner/white-too-white/

Do you see the uncanny resemblance between this indian man with albinism and Northern Europeans Linda? Besides the obvious light eyes and light hair and light skin, look at the facial and bone structure; pretty much the same as any modern central/Northern European.

LikeLike
on Thu Sep 3rd 2015 at 04:18:02 Linda

GulliverFredrich,

that’s why I said “as far as I’m concerned” meaning –that’s my opinion. It is not a fact.

Thank you for the information on the Afghans, I’ve always considered them to be “central” Asians since Afghanistan is a region that has historically been ran through by invading groups (like North Africa) from Europe and Asia.
(the Nuristani have their European soldier forefathers to thank for their features)

India is as genetically diverse as Africa but skin colour-wise, I don’t give the light skin Indians a “white” pass because to my eyes, their skin colour is not the same as white Europeans…photoshop and skin bleaching creams don’t count.

south Asians do NOT have the same/exact haplogroups as Europeans – certain groups do share Y-DNA (haplogroup R1a1) but they are not identical (since when do Scotts or Russians carry Dravidian DNA)

Talking about skulls and facial features pays homage and gives relevance to the same silly rhetoric that started Europe’s scientific racism

fyi, you need to join the line, Afrocentrist have already laid claim to the Europeans being Albinos that migrated out of Africa.

LikeLike
on Thu Sep 3rd 2015 at 06:20:39 Linda

Also, GulliverFredrich, I don’t want to derail this thread but I will say this

I know that there is a controversy about this old theory because the British used it to lay claim to India

but the new theory backed by new studies indicates haplogroup R1a1 is a European Y-DNA that came into India via the Aryan invasion (the people who are credited for starting India’s caste system and put themselves at the top) and that light-skinned Indians are the “mestizos” of India.

“The majority of the Aryan invaders were men who transmitted their European Y-chromosome to their sons born from the native women and placed themselves at the top of the caste hierarchy. But the maternal lineage remains largely “proto-Asian.”

http://worldhistoryconnected.press.illinois.edu/3.2/manian.html

according to academia, that’s how the genes found its way into the region; so there seems to be challenges to your “Europeans are south Asian Albino” theory

Abagond has a thread about Proto-Indo-Europeans if you wish to take it there:

https://abagond.wordpress.com/2015/03/21/the-proto-indo-europeans/

LikeLike
on Thu Sep 3rd 2015 at 17:34:30 blakksage

@Sharinair,

I don’t believe its a question of what we did to whites/Edomites, but rather, a matter of control; arresting a whole group of people’a imagination and outright jealousy. Hell, even racist ass Adolf Hitler mentioned in a training video on Youtube that the original Jews were black and that the FAKE Khazar JewISH people are bastards. On the other hand, you got some brain-washed NEGROES of today residing in North and South America who still want to believe what the white man tell them who they are.

For the brain-washed Negroes, I suggest that you all read Rudolph Windsor’s book: From Babylon to Timbuktu. The black Americans who are in America today is the same black man that built Timbuktu!

LikeLike
on Thu Sep 3rd 2015 at 19:48:10 talibmensah

@blakksage

Oh! You actually have a book you recommend. I’ll ignore your anti-Semitic conspiracy theories, Hitler allusion, and Khazar ‘bastards.’

I’m not sure why you think we are brain-washed because we don’t interpret the Bible literally and believe in conspiracy theories like you.

I looked up Rudolph Windsor. There doesn’t appear to be any real historical sources but his interpretations of the Bible through an Afrocentric lens.

Do you know anything about the origins of Timbuktu? You know, it was originally a seasonal camp for nomadic peoples in West Africa, then evolved into a diverse, cosmopolitan city because of its strategic location over the last 1000 years. It’s not too far from the Niger River, and it’s near the Sahara: perfect for West African and trans-Saharan trade. The pirogues and boats that used the Niger River as a highway for trade and exchange of ideas could connect with the trade across the Sahara.

I’m not sure why you think Babylon has anything to do with Timbuktu. Timbuktu has only been around since, maybe the 900s-1100s. Babylon was around thousands of years earlier. Where’s the proof of connections? Where are the remnants of Judaism or its influence in precolonial West Africa? You can’t produce any real historical sources beyond conspiracy theory and some potentially anti-Semitic claims.

If anyone wants to learn more about Timbuktu, its real history, here are some sources to check out:

1. John Hunwick has written extensively about Islam, writings by West African Muslims, and the so-called ‘Western Sudan’ region that comprises the great empires of Ghana, Songhai, Mali.

2. Marq De Villiers, and Sheila Hirtle wrote a very accessible book on Timbuktu. They’re not academics, so you can’t take everything they say as being as authoritative on Timbuktu as other scholars (not that scholars are infallible…). The book is called Timbuktu: The Sahara’s Fabled City of Gold.

3. Nehemia Levtzion wrote extensively about Ghana, Mali, etc. He was an Israeli historian who used the Arabic sources and other evidence to write about Ghana and Mali in great detail. Timbuktu doesn’t come up as much in his work, but he provides a scholarly overview of these kingdoms without Afrocentric hyperbole. I recommend “Ancient Ghana and Mali.”

4. Roderick and Susan McIntosh are archaeologists who have worked for quite some time in West Africa, studying the development of unique forms of urbanism. I believe they’re associated with the ‘urban cluster’ model that seeks to explain the rise of Jenne-Jeno and Jenne as being good examples of that. They, to my knowledge, haven’t written much about Timbuktu, but their research is important for understanding West Africa.

5. Ray A. Kea wrote a fascinating (very long, too) article about the societies of this part of Africa (Sahel and savanna regions of West Africa. I highly recommend it: Expansions And Contractions: World-Historical
Change And The Western Sudan World-System
(1200/1000 B.C.–1200/1250 A.D.

6. A blogger from exploring-africa.blogspot has written about Timbuktu in a serious way. Anyone interested in Timbuktu, Islam, and historical legacy should check out their series of posts on Timbuktu.

http://exploring-africa.blogspot.com/2010/03/timbuktu-stripping-has-began.html

7. The Empires of Medieval West Africa is an excellent introduction to the history of the Ghana, Mali, and Songhai Empires. David Conrad is a legitimate scholar on this part of West Africa. (I can email pdfs of this this, and Levtzion’s)

8. Patrick J. Munson has written about possible antecedents of Ghana from southern Mauritania. There we see the rise of fortified villages and settlements over 2000 years ago, and the Soninke people might have moved south from there due to desertification.

9. Ann McDougall has written some useful articles for those interested in the Sahara and trans-Saharan trade. Good source for those interested on cultural diversity in those trading towns, how the towns in the Sahel and northern shores of the Sahara looked, etc. I recommend her “The View from Awdaghust”

10. Ralph Austen’s ‘Trans-Saharan Africa’ in world history is a great intro to the importance of the historical trans-Saharan trade. Lots of commentary on, naturally, trade across the Sahara, but also about Islam, cultures, historical developments, the decline of the trade, etc.

11. Suzan Aradeon wrote a good article on the myth of Al-Sahili, a Muslim from Al-Andalus, being the origin of the unique architecture of Timbuktu. Basically, Eurocentrists claim that Al-Sahili, who passed through Timbuktu during the reign of Mansa Musa, somehow created the city’s architectural traditions.

12. David Conrad and Humphrey Fisher have written about the ‘myth’ of the Almoravid conquest of GHana. Fascinating two-part essay for anyone interested in Islam in West Africa, the Almoravids, and Ghana. Look it up, ‘The Conquest That Never Was’

13. Everyone serious about learning the history of Timbuktu and that region of West Africa, but who can’t read the Arabic primary sources, check out the Corpus of Early Arabic Sources for West African History. It consists of translations of various Arabic sources on West Africa from the 800s onward. Lots of interesting stuff here, and although translated, it’s necessary for those who can’t read primary sources to get some idea of Ghana, Mali, Songhai.

This book includes some primary sources which challenge a lot of racist, Eurocentric assumptions about West Africa. For instance, many Eurocentrists assume all Berber groups and Arabs ‘started’ the kingdoms of West Africa and founded all the cities, that these ‘whites’ were the ones responsible for the growth of these societies. The primary sources from writers in Arabic show nothing could be further from the truth. Indeed, many of the Berber groups, like the Sanhaja, were under the authority of ‘black’ kings from Ghana or other societies, and distictons based on ‘color’ were more complex.

14. Bruce Hall, whose work I am ambivalent about, has also written some intriguing essays and an entire book on local conceptions of ‘race’ and ‘ethnicity’ in the southern Sahara/Sahel regions of West Africa.

15. D.T. Niane’s retelling of the Sundiata epic is required reading for those wanting to learn more about the Mali empire

16. Leo Africanus’s account of his travels in Timbuktu under the Songhai empire seems to be the source for a lot of fascination with the city in Europe. Leo Africanus, a North African with origins in Muslim Spain, traveled to Timbuktu and praised the city’s people for their attention to books, learning, trade.

http://www.learnnc.org/lp/editions/nchist-colonial/1982

17. Haven’t read it yet, but Elias N. Saad wrote ‘The Social History of Timbuktu’, published by Cambridge University Press. I’m sorry, blakksage, but I’ll take anything published by them more seriously than Rudolph Windsor…Not saying all academics are necessarily ‘right’ but they have been trained in academic disciplines, learn to read historical sources, familiarize themselves with the secondary sources, engage in conferences and debates with others who make their lives centered on their studies…

18. Famous Timbuktu scholar, Ahmed Baba, and his thoughts on slavery, have been studied by academics. Gratien even did a podcast about Ahmed Baba, for those interested in a famous scholar from Timbuktu and slavery. You can find it on the Ottoman History Podcast…

http://www.ottomanhistorypodcast.com/2014/01/race-slavery-islamic-law.html

19. Basil Davidson’s History of West Africa is perhaps a bit outdated, but an excellent introduction to West African history. Davidson was one of the first to study African History while moving away from the Eurocentric, colonialist interpretations.

20. Lugard’s A Tropical Dependency is outdated, but a fascinating account of West African history. The wife of the British governor of Nigeria, Lugard is incredibly biased, but even she reluctantly admits how advanced many West African societies were, like the Hausa.

21. The Meanings of Timbuktu is also good reading for those who care about Timbuktu. Edited by Shamil Jeppie.

Sorry for very long response, I just want people to know that real historical research on Songhai, Timbuktu and West Africa in general exists. No need to bring up Babylon, Egypt, or other irrelevant things…

On the importance of centers of learning in Timbuktu, Jenne, and other cities, like Walata, it’s important to remember that the governing elites of the Mali and Songhai empires were tolerant and did not, for the most part, impose themselves on the ulama of those cities. In the case of Mali, the mansas appointed ‘farbas’ to collect taxes and represent the state, but otherwise local populations seemed to retain a lot of independence. I believe Ibn Battuta talks about this in his travels to West Africa.

Sorry for this long response! I’ve been typing away so fast, I didn’t even realize the length of this comment!

LikeLike
on Thu Sep 3rd 2015 at 21:15:41 GulliverFredrich

Linda please, you obviously don’t know much about what you are talking about, but like many whites you try to pretend that you are an expert just by your opinion alone and think you know more then you do and more then people like myself who know more about this topic then you.

First of all the Nuristani and the Kalash are not descendants of European soldiers, they have a history there that predates Jesus christ in chronology and independent that of Europe, i don’t know where you got that stupid idiot opinion from and why you obviously believe that; also there are pashtuns that have redder hair then many scots and irish people and they are not results of “rape” of any kind.

Also Indians have a higher R1a percentage then even central asian populations and populations in Iran, almost equal to that of Europe. I am not disputing the Aryan invasion, however R1a did originate within the India/East Africa stratum area, what happened was that there was back migration AFTER Caucasian-type people originated within the India-East African corridor and migrated to CENTRAL ASIA AS ALBINO’S TO ESCAPE THE TEMPERATURE AND SUNLIGHT OF THE SOUTH ASIA. THEN THEY INVADED INDIA, EUROPE, IRAN, ANATOLIA etc etc.

It’s a scientific FACT that once the Out-of-Africa migration happened a group FROM SOUTH ASIA WENT DIRECTLY TO CENTRAL ASIA/SIBERIA, Spencer Wells the famous geneticist/documentary maker HAS CONFIRMED THIS! The question is who were these people and why would they leave for the harsh steppes of Central Asia?

Why it’s the Indian Albino’s (or soon to be Europeans) who would later invade Europe but escaped South Asia from the heat and sunlight there. BTW Linda i’m sure that if you aren’t a complete ignoramus, you would know that White Europeans aren’t actually NATIVE TO EUROPE but are CENTRAL ASIANS!!
At least when we talk about MODERN WHITE EUROPEANS!!!

Also many British geneticists and scientists have postulated a connection genetically between Indians and groups like the Scots and Irish, you can look this up yourself on google. The thing is that skin color does not completely dictate race, skull types and bone structure and facial patterns also help. Indians have been classified as racially Caucasoid by skull and skeletons; regardless of how “Racist” it is, (and you sound really dumb and ignorant beyond comprehension when you say that), it is a valid factor and analyzing tool for race .

Liberal race realist blogger Robert Lindsay has even admitted that he has confused and admitted that some Indian Sikhs were “white people”, and that the Caucasoid race has origins in the East Africa-India corridor. Why do so many Anglo-Indians look “white”?

Why does Princess Diane who has Indian ancestry from India look completely “white” and not show any typical “non-white” features? Why do so many Anglo’s who have Indian ancestry in the British Isles look completely “white”?
Why it’s because THEY ARE THE EXACT SAME GODDAMN RACE!! I mean considering all this, who and why should anyone care what your obvious ignorant self thinks or has an opinion on regarding classifications? I’m right and your wrong and I have the facts to back it up, your opinion is based on ignorant conjecture and feel good feelings.

Also IT’S OFFICIAL THAT AFGHANISTAN IS LOCATED WITHIN SOUTH ASIA AND NOT CENTRAL ASIA, LOOK IT UP ONLINE OR ON A ATLAS OR A GLOBE OF THE MODERN 21st CENTURY KIND!! I mean if you have a problem with “afrocentrism” why are you even on this blog lol?

Then there is the fact that IT’S ON A PUBLIC MEDICAL DATABASE (pubmed etc) THAT HAPLOGROUP R1A, A MAIN GENETIC COMPONENT IN EUROPEAN POPULATIONS IN THE BALTICS AND EASTERN/CENTRAL/NORTHERN EUROPE HAD ORIGINS WITHIN SOUTH/SOUTHWEST/ ASIA AND THE SOUTHERN PART OF CENTRAL ASIA!! EVEN THE MEDICAL ESTABLISHMENT AGREES AND CONFIRMS MY THEORY ABOUT EUROPEANS BEING ALBINO INDIANS FOR CHRIST SAKE!!

Also did you look at that picture gallery of those South Indian albino’s that I have provided to you? Why do so many of them look like Central/Eastern/Northern Europeans? I mean HOW OBVIOUS CAN IT BE, that Whites are a fixed albino race and are mainly the albino’s of south Asians when the PICTORIAL EVIDENCE IS RIGHT INFRONT OF YOUR EYES!! THESE ALBINO’S HAVE NO EUROPEAN ANCESTRY WHATSOEVER BUT LOOK LIKE THEM! WHAT MORE EVIDENCE DO YOU NEED? I BET YOU DID NOT LOOK AT ALL THE PICTURE GALLERIES B/C YOU ARE HEAVILY IN DENIAL AND EMOTIONAL ABOUT THE TRUTH!!

THE ARYAN INVASION THEORY DOES NOT NEGATE THE FACT THAT MODERN DAY CAUCASOID S AND EUROPIDS HAVE AN ORIGIN WITHIN SOUTH ASIA, YOU HAVE ALL THE LINGUISTIC, PHOTOGRAPHIC, GENETIC, HISTORICAL, AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL EVIDENCE TO BACK IT UP!! LOOK IT UP YOURSELF IF YOU ARE STILL IN DENIAL!!

STOP LIVING IN A FANTASY WORLD AND GET YOUR HEAD OUT OF THE SAND!! WHITE PEOPLE ARE ALBINO’S, ALL OF THEM! AND THEY ARE NOT NATIVE TO EUROPE AT ALL, THEY ORIGINATED PRINCIPALLY WITHIN SOUTH ASIA AND CENTRAL ASIA AND THE SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE 100% BACKS UP MY CLAIMS AND THIS COMPLETELY 100%!!!!

LikeLike
on Thu Sep 3rd 2015 at 21:19:08 talibmensah

Oh, and Michael A. Gomez has written specifically about Timbuktu under Songhay.

“Timbuktu Under Imperial SonghaI: A Reconsideration of Autonomy” from the Journal of African History.

LikeLike
on Thu Sep 3rd 2015 at 21:55:32 Kartoffel

@ talibmensah

Thanks for that list. It is very appreciated.

LikeLike
on Thu Sep 3rd 2015 at 22:55:06 blakksage

@Talibmensah,

blah, blah, blah, blah, … you’re so funny! How could a black man like me be considered anti-semitic when I’m in fact SEMITIC??? Are you telling me I’m anti-self??? I am a descendant of Shem (perhaps you are also), which makes me Shemitic, which is a derivative of the name Shem. My goodness, … need I now explain to you also that the word semitic comes from the biblical name Shem? Are you sure you know what you’re talking about!

Again, go and read Mr. Rudolph’s book that I suggested above and quit making yourself appear to be a contemporary fool, simply due to a lack of knowledge!

Are you African American?

My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge: because thou hast rejected knowledge, I will also reject thee, that thou shalt be no priest to me: seeing thou hast forgotten the law of thy God, I will also forget thy children. (Hosea 4:6).

LikeLike
on Fri Sep 4th 2015 at 00:00:31 talibmensah

@blakksage

Again, more of your nonsense! Shem is a Biblical myth, and should NOT be taken seriously. There’s no such thing as Shem, Ham, and Japheth. When you spout that garbage it sounds just like how Europeans constructed ‘races’ based on black Ham, ‘Semitic’ Shem, and European/Caucasian Japhet. What’s next, are you going to say the world has only existed for 6,000 years?

I speculated that you might be anti-Semitic because of your conspiracy theories about Bilderburg and Khazars. Reminds me of that Protocols of the Elders of Zion garbage and similar anti-Semitic claims that try to make it seem like the Jewish population of Israel aren’t “real” Jews. It’s absurd. What the hell is a “real” Jew anyway?

I saw no convincing evidence in Rudolph’s book that ancient “Black Jews” or “Black Hebrews” from the Middle East moved into West Africa. You have failed to produce any serious articles or books. Your Rudolph talks about Biblical prophecy and has only a few reputable historical sources. None of his reputable sources prove that the ancient population of the Middle East were “Black,” so it’s really just Rudolph’s imagination. Where’s the real evidence that just about every human population in the Ancient Middle East was ‘Black” until the ‘Germanic Invasions’ Rudolph talks about? Where’s the evidence that these “Blacks” moved into Africa thousands of years ago?

Where is the evidence of this alleged movement of “Black Middle Eastern Jews” into West Africa? Any pottery evidence? Similariities in domesticates? Any Semitic languages in West Africa before Islam? Any evidence of ancient Middle Eastern people from Palestine, Iraq, or elsewhere influencing architecture, cities, styles of kingship in precolonial West Africa before Islam?

If you believe ancient ‘Black’ peoples, you call them Jews, came and populated West Africa thousands of years ago, we need some evidence. Otherwise, you’re just stating your beliefs in Biblical ‘prophecy’ from some lunatic. And no, your Rudolph doesn’t ‘prove’ that these ancient ‘Black Jews’ brought civilization to West Africa either.

LikeLike
on Fri Sep 4th 2015 at 00:12:06 blakksage

@Talibmensah,

you see, the stark difference between me and you is that you’re into reading VOLUMES of meaningless books. On the other hand, yours truly is into reading QUALITY books, which of course includes the Bible, the 1611 King James version. Perhaps this explains and summarizes why you’re unaware and totally vacuous of your true identity today.

Therefore, carry on and continue to read books that in all likelihood continually succeed in distorting your image of self concept and worldview from a historical and contemporary angle. Just don’t blame me for not knowing who you truly are!

Isaiah 1:3 The ox knoweth his owner, and the ass his master’s crib: but Israel doth not know, my people doth not consider.

LikeLike
on Fri Sep 4th 2015 at 00:14:28 talibmensah

What you’re doing is not historically grounded at all! It’s a combination of your Biblical literalism, conspiracy beliefs, and desire to cultivate a mythology of the ‘Black’ race that acts as therapy for your low self-esteem. All my ‘meaningless’ books is grounded in actual research and history as a discipline instead of your mythology. It’s like the Nation of Islam and their ‘Asiatic black man’ garbage and Yakub.

LikeLike
on Fri Sep 4th 2015 at 12:53:47 GulliverFredrich

Hey abagond, could you please allow my post response to Linda? It’s saying it still needs to be “moderated”.

LikeLike
on Fri Sep 4th 2015 at 18:42:24 Linda

GulliverFredrich,

First off, I have to say: HaHaHa, Ha….LOL, LOL

you have got to be kidding me… thanks for the humour and your sorry attempt at telling me off….feel better, now? All that fire and passion and you still didn’t say Anything worth the time I’m about to waste in responding to you.

(and remember, I was respectful in my response to you, but since you chose to take it there, don’t feel bad about where I take this- you started it)

So much is so wrong with what you posted, that I don’t know where to begin, but I’ll do my best:

GulliverFredrich@ Linda please, you obviously don’t know much about what you are talking about, but like many whites you try to pretend that you are an expert just by your opinion alone and think you know more then you do and more then people like myself who know more about this topic then you.

Linda says,
1st: Reading seems to be a problem for you because you missed the part where I said, “my thoughts are my opinions, and my opinions aren’t Facts”

First sentence that I wrote, So miss me with your Bullsh’t!

2nd: I’m Jamaican, b’tch! I am surrounded by people of African, European, Lebanese, Chinese, and Indian descent, and everything possible mix in between them all.

and to me, NO, light-skinned Indians do not look NOT white, so deal with that!!
I don’t need a book to tell me about what is sitting at my dining room table.

LikeLike
on Fri Sep 4th 2015 at 18:45:20 Linda

GulliverFredrich @ Why does Princess Diane who has Indian ancestry from India look completely “white” and not show any typical “non-white” features? Why do so many Anglo’s who have Indian ancestry in the British Isles look completely “white”?
Why it’s because THEY ARE THE EXACT SAME GODDAMN RACE!!

Linda says,

Eliza Kewark, Princess Diana’s great-great-grandmother, was half-Indian.

Her daughter Katherine looked “brown” enough that they had to lie and say her mother was half-Armenian. So no, it has nothing to do with being of the same race.

I guess you missed the part in Biology called Mendel’s Laws of Inheritance the lesson with all the pretty flowers

Since reading other people’s posts are a challenge for you, I give you a picture so you can follow:

mixed-race Katherine married a white British man, and her children married white British men. So after all that procreating with white men, they bred the “brown” out of their physical features

Diana looks like what she is—white (but of course, genetically, the Indian genes are still there)

“BritainsDNA says it is confident of Kewark’s lineage because it traced Williams’ mitochondrial DNA, or mtDNA, which is passed down from mother to child. BritainsDNA took saliva samples from two unnamed members of the royal family and traced it back seven generations to Kewark, who was born around 1790.

Kewark’s mtDNA is so rare, BritainsDNA said, that it has only been found in 14 other people, all but one of whom was Indian (the other one was Nepali). “

http://abcnews.go.com/News/princess-dianas-hidden-ancestral-secret-revealed/story?id=19401903

if Europeans and Indians have the EXACT same genetic makeup, then most Europeans would carry Eliza’s rare mtDNA?!

As for the rest of the bullsh’t that you are screaming about, where’s the backup links, darling….

you notice that I attach links about what I say…. without that, you’re just giving me YOUR OPINIONs, not fact

LikeLike
on Fri Sep 4th 2015 at 19:01:15 Linda

GulliverFredrich@ EVEN THE MEDICAL ESTABLISHMENT AGREES AND CONFIRMS MY THEORY ABOUT EUROPEANS BEING ALBINO INDIANS FOR CHRIST SAKE!! Also did you look at that picture gallery of those South Indian albino’s that I have provided to you? Why do so many of them look like Central/Eastern/Northern Europeans? I mean HOW OBVIOUS CAN IT BE, that Whites are a fixed albino race and are mainly the albino’s of south Asians when the PICTORIAL EVIDENCE IS RIGHT INFRONT OF YOUR EYES!!

I mean if you have a problem with “afrocentrism” why are you even on this blog lol?

Linda says: Jesus take the wheel !!!!

I don’t have to swallow everything I hear just because it came from a black persons mouth.

so No, I don’t believe white people are “Albinos” out of Africa or Asia, and you haven’t Said or provided any links to Anything that says white people are African or South Asian “Albinos”

Every group on the planet earth can produce an Albino, having the male Y chromosome R1A, has nothing to do with Albinism.

as far as this blog being Afrocentric, there is a difference between being “black and aware” and being “black and a supremacist”

“A movement spearheaded by African-American scholars to prove that, despite what most people would like to believe, ancient Africa had her own civilizations, languages, cultures, and history long before the arrival of the first Europeans to the continent.

Afrocentrism is not Black Supremacism. There are Black Supremacists who hold Afrocentric views, but they also hold views that claim to elevate blacks above whites. That is not the aim of Afrocentrism.”

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=afrocentrism

Black supremacists have high-jacked the term Afrocentric. People can explain the difference’s all day but that’s how “Afrocentric” is used is used nowadays.

I might be wrong to make that association, but I don’t know what else to call it when black people try to associate Africa with all kinds of things, such as

White people being considered “Albinos”. That theory is nothing more than a knee jerk response to white supremacist racial pseudoscience… it’s just as dumb as HBDers who believe in racial superiority based on IQ tests.

and as far as I know, Abagond’s blog is about being “black and Aware”

and I’m Very aware about my African heritage, Thank You– your whacked a’s is just crazy and talking nonsense

LikeLike
on Fri Sep 4th 2015 at 19:03:31 Linda

Correction:

The original meaning of Afrocentrism:

“A movement spearheaded by African-American scholars to prove that, despite what most people would like to believe, ancient Africa had her own civilizations, languages, cultures, and history long before the arrival of the first Europeans to the continent.

Afrocentrism is not Black Supremacism. There are Black Supremacists who hold Afrocentric views, but they also hold views that claim to elevate blacks above whites. That is not the aim of Afrocentrism.”

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=afrocentrism

LikeLike
on Fri Sep 4th 2015 at 19:11:12 Linda

GulliverFredrich@ Also IT’S OFFICIAL THAT AFGHANISTAN IS LOCATED WITHIN SOUTH ASIA AND NOT CENTRAL ASIA, LOOK IT UP ONLINE OR ON A ATLAS OR A GLOBE OF THE MODERN 21st CENTURY KIND!!

Linda,

Please miss me with your intro 101 pseudo-knowledge about science, geography, and anthropology.

When I was in school, I learned that Afghanistan was a part of Central Asia

White governments and academia have changed the names and the goal posts on so many things (creating the term “sub-Saharan Africa)

creating countries that never used to exist (Pakistan, Iraq) disregarding the historical Names and boundaries used by the native population.

the same way Afghanistan used to be considered part of Central Asia but now is part of “South Asia” and some people consider it part of the Middle East — so who is correct?

Doesn’t mean I’m wrong, just behind on the current “politically correct” term

LikeLike
on Fri Sep 4th 2015 at 19:36:47 Linda

BTW Linda i’m sure that if you aren’t a complete ignoramus, you would know that White Europeans aren’t actually NATIVE TO EUROPE but are CENTRAL ASIANS!! At least when we talk about MODERN WHITE EUROPEANS!!!

Also many British geneticists and scientists have postulated a connection genetically between Indians and groups like the Scots and Irish, you can look this up yourself on google. The thing is that skin color does not completely dictate race, skull types and bone structure and facial patterns also help. Indians have been classified as racially Caucasoid by skull and skeletons; regardless of how “Racist” it is, (and you sound really dumb and ignorant beyond comprehension when you say that), it is a valid factor and analyzing tool for race .

Linda says,

For me, its a continuous process in breaking the chains of the white western “indoctrination” that has affected all us African descendants living in the Diaspora.. and for the most part, I feel that I’m winning the battle.

but I see that your chains have choked you to the point that you are beYond sad, delusional, and ignorant.

The only sensible response to your ridiculous babble:

“The information about the origin and ethnic association of haplogroups on this website should not be read as hard facts, but, as is often the case in science, as a model in constant evolution based on the present knowledge and understanding (of the author).

Whenever the advancement of genetics couldn’t provide irrefutable answers, we have attempted to provide the most likely and logical hypothesis based on archeological, historical and linguistic evidence. This page is being updated regularly to keep up with recent studies giving additional insights or rectifying possibly erroneous theories.”

http://www.eupedia.com/europe/origins_haplogroups_europe.shtml

White Europeans themselves are NOT genetically identical.

they are not the same “race” as South Asians

they share some genetic components, just like almost every other Ethnic group on the planet that mixed with other people

the concept of race was created by white European race scientists. Just because you wish to drink the Kool-aide doesn’t mean I have to.

Good day to you, sir… it has NOT been a pleasure.

LikeLike
on Fri Sep 4th 2015 at 19:41:03 Linda

Correction:

and to me, NO, light-skinned Indians do NOT look white, so deal with that!!
I don’t need a book to tell me about what is sitting at my dining room table.

LikeLike
on Fri Sep 4th 2015 at 19:41:45 talibmensah

“A movement spearheaded by African-American scholars to prove that, despite what most people would like to believe, ancient Africa had her own civilizations, languages, cultures, and history long before the arrival of the first Europeans to the continent.”

@Linda

I believe this is a good definition of Afrocentrism. Nonetheless, there are certain academic standards that must be maintained, and unfortunately, those standards are not always taken seriously by some ‘Afrocentrists.’

In the aforementioned definition of ‘Afrocentrism’, I would actually see myself as one. It’s a reasonable argument and one that most of academia takes seriously now, even the white scholars who some claim cannot write or ‘know’ African history.

I find people like Runoko Rashidi incredibly problematic, as are other ‘Afrocentrists.’ I wouldn’t call Rashidi a Black Supremacist though, I just think he’s misguided and not really doing African History. He doesn’t have the academic or intellectual standards or expectations that most academic institutions take seriously. So, I think there’s a misguided, academically fraudulent or dishonest wing of Afrocentrism that lacks real evidence, and then there’s the ‘Black Supremacist’ offshoot that buys into melanin pseudoscience, etc.

LikeLike
on Fri Sep 4th 2015 at 19:50:51 sharinalr

@Linda

Well d*mn. Thanks for the info though.

LikeLike
on Fri Sep 4th 2015 at 19:59:54 Linda

Sharina, chica , you know how it is when people try to come for you for no reason… I made vow to try and tone it down but sometimes it gets hard

LikeLike
on Fri Sep 4th 2015 at 20:17:17 Linda

talibmensah,

I’m open-minded about a lot of things.

I’m not against everything I hear that Afrocentric/black supremacist say, just the obvious bullsh’t.

I’m actual interested in learning more about the Melanin theory… I don’t believe or disbelieve it…. I don’t know enough about it, to form an “informed opinion”

but what I do know, is that almost anything is open to interpretation depending on whose view it’s from.

I don’t see western “academia” as being the sole bearers of Truth because many times, there is an Agenda behind the it and many things have been left out of modern history books.

I’m open to continuously learning from Many sources because if you combine them all, they sometimes fill in the missing links that got left out by the popular theorists.

I want all of us to know the history of our African ancestors so that we can shut white American/European racist BS with the Facts, Truth, and realness as we know it

but we also need to honest and careful not to do creative revisions ourselves.

LikeLike
on Fri Sep 4th 2015 at 20:45:01 talibmensah

Linda,

On the melanin theory stuff, it’s not rooted in any real science by people who are biochemists, biologists, geneticists, etc. I don’t think a psychologist like Welsing (Isis Papers) is qualified to write about melanin. One interesting claim that comes with some ‘Afrocentric’ camps who discuss melanin is the possibility that having more melanin may impact how African-Americans deal with drug addiction. I have no training in the ‘hard’ sciences, so I can’t say whether or not that’s true or false, but it seems unlikely until scientists who specialize on it publish more of their research.

I am not saying western “academia” is infallible or the sole bearers of ‘Truth,’ but when it comes to history as an academic discpline, a specialized field, people need training. Any fool on the street who starts talking about ‘Black Moors’ or ‘Black Ancient Chinese’ probably doesn’t have much of a background in history as a discipline, intellectual historiography, or theoretical considerations. One can see it in their writings and lack of degrees from accredited or respectable institutions. Most of the ‘Afrocentrists’ are out there writing all kinds of things, or like blakksage, not writing history, but creating mythologies or therapeutic ‘glorious’ pasts that are not rooted in historical research and debate.

To be honest, I think we waste too much time with this obsession with a ‘glorious’ past anyway. It’s too often modeled on Eurocentric standards of ‘civilization’, which is exactly why so many Afrocentrists obsess over Egypt, because it’s always been a considered an ‘advanced’ civilization by European.

What we need to do is address the persistence of educational inequities for people of color and the poor in America. Our high schools and middle schools must do a better job incorporating Africa into world history, too. I’m sure, assuming you’re in the US, that you know how racist or stereotypical generalizations of the African past are unfortunately all too common. It was only at the university level where African History was taken seriously (not by every department, but enough), so we clearly have a lot of work to do in the US to disseminate African history across the school systems.

LikeLike
on Fri Sep 4th 2015 at 21:13:57 resw77

@talibmenseh

Welsing is not a psychologist, which requires a PhD, but a psychiatrist, which requires an MD. It’s a “medical practitioner specializing in the diagnosis and treatment of mental illness.”

Sorry, Abagond, I know it’s off topic, but this myth needed to be corrected.

LikeLiked by 1 person
on Fri Sep 4th 2015 at 21:19:19 talibmensah

@resw77

I’ve been publicly depantsed!

Thank you, I didn’t realize I was wrong about her background.

LikeLike
on Fri Sep 4th 2015 at 21:52:13 Linda

“talibmensah @ To be honest, I think we waste too much time with this obsession with a ‘glorious’ past anyway.”

Linda says

but we really don’t spend enough time on Africa’s glorious past

that’s why so many people, regardless of colour, don’t know anything about Africa’s many civilizations like Ghana, Mali, and Songhai…

and regardless of country, too many African descendants remain Ignorant of their African heritage and Africa’s past.

I’m concerned about all of Africa, not just the region where I believe my ancestors came from… so yes, Egypt has got to be defended

because the Egyptians themselves have given away and actively try to bury the blackness of their African history, in their desire to be “white”

the same way the white South Africans try to divide the indigenous Africans by saying “the San was in South Africa before black people (Zulus)”

as if the Khoi/San aren’t considered “black” too according to white racial ideology that they subscibe to.

but people with Agendas try to twist words, meaning, and history to suit themselves. We need to know all the versions.

I am based in the US and Caribbean, I go back and forth frequently, and my points of view are from the perspective of a non-USA outsider—I’m aware of what is happening in the US and outside of it.

So many people get things wrong because they are only getting a part of the story…

many people in Jamaica don’t even realize that smoking Ganja (marijuana) and Rastafarianism is rooted in Hinduism from India.

due to where the slave ships landed and the histories we were taught, there are so Many missing pieces, that’s it’s not funny.

In the Caribbean, Central and South America, we’ve retained so much more of our African heritage in our cultures, than black people in the USA but it all gets drowned out by the European noise and the whitewashing that we’ve all received

LikeLiked by 1 person
on Fri Sep 4th 2015 at 22:10:49 talibmensah

@Linda

I see what you mean. I’m not trying to suggest that we stop talking about Egypt completely, it just seems like it’s falling into the Eurocentric trap to constantly talk about it or claim its influenced every other part of Africa. Africa is a huge continent, so why should we constantly bring up the Nile Valley in reference to precolonial West Africa or Central Africa? It would be like bringing up the Olmecs all the time in a conversation about the Mound Builders or Powhatan. All of those are precolonial societies of the Americas, all have their own distinct histories and features that are not connected.

On ‘glorious past,’ I mean, we seem to again fall into the trap of praising African societies of the past that were more aligned with Western European standards of ‘civilization.’ We don’t talk about decentralized but fascinating societies of the Niger Delta in the precolonial period. We never mention the decentralized Bobangi trader firms that operated around the Malebo Pool area of Central Africa. What about the age-grade systems of the Oromo peoples of Ethiopia and East Africa? We don’t talk about these people as having a ‘glorious past’ even though there’s absolutely nothing wrong with their relatively decentralized socio-political systems? What about the concept of wealth in people in precolonial Central Africa? The systems of political thought or ideals that governed societies like the Kongo kingdom, or the Kuba kingdom? What does ‘glorious’ really mean if its just about praising the kind of societies that appear more aligned with Western standards? Is it really history, or just mythology or hagiography?

Africa is so diverse and its history is just like that of every other part of the world: rich, diverse, cosmopolitan, constantly changing, influential, and full of surprises. Yes, Eurocentrism has tried to construct an idea of Africa that is just as ludicrous as the self-construct of the ‘West’ as the center of all that is great, but that doesn’t somehow mean African History is always under attack or that we must constantly talk about the same few regions or countries. There’s been a lot of research in the last few decades that have overturned the Eurocentric creation of Africa, and West Africa is one such region that deserves more critical attention.

I wish we could discuss this in a way more pertinent to Songhay, but we can’t because we’re caught up in the trap of trying to connect Songhay or Timbuktu with the Egypt, Nubia, ‘Ancient Black Middle Eastern’ peoples, or an absurd idea that somehow Black People are the ‘Jews’ who were enslaved because of their alleged Jewish origins.

LikeLike
on Fri Sep 4th 2015 at 22:28:12 Linda

talibmensah @ I wish we could discuss this in a way more pertinent to Songhay, but we can’t because we’re caught up in the trap of trying to connect Songhay or Timbuktu with the Egypt, Nubia, ‘Ancient Black Middle Eastern’ peoples, or an absurd idea that somehow Black People are the ‘Jews’ who were enslaved because of their alleged Jewish origins.

Linda says,

Not I… I’ve always talked about Ghana, Mali, and Songhai Empires as “stand alone” eras.

I also try to keep perspective by not crossing or overlapping different Regions because genetically and ethnically, Africa is diverse

I agree, Africa is large and complex, and it doesn’t need to be associated with anyone else as far as it’s historical accomplishments.

don’t let one persons views distract you.. what ever pertinent information you have… Please share

LikeLike
on Fri Sep 4th 2015 at 22:31:45 talibmensah

@Linda

Okay. I feel like you and I agree on much more than we disagree. Thank you, it’s always comforting to know there are folks who are genuinely interested in Ghana, Mali, Songhai, etc. instead of the unfounded assertions some subsets of Afrocentrism espouse.

LikeLike
on Fri Sep 4th 2015 at 22:56:55 Mary Burrell

@taliensah: I have enjoyed your post and have been enlightened.

LikeLike
on Sat Sep 5th 2015 at 02:15:31 talibmensah

Some more African History podcasts sites to check out.

1 .New Books in African Studies includes interviews with writers in African history and politics. Some podcasts cover West Africa, the Slave Trade.
http://newbooksinafricanstudies.com/

2. Africa Past and Present is a great online podcast series associated with Michigan State. Lots of great interviews with scholars about West Africa, slavery, Islam, apartheid, colonialism, contemporary politics, and other topics.
http://afripod.aodl.org/

LikeLike
on Sat Sep 5th 2015 at 19:10:25 Kartoffel

@ talibmensah

“On ‘glorious past,’ I mean, we seem to again fall into the trap of praising African societies of the past that were more aligned with Western European standards of ‘civilization.’”

What makes people think of a society as “great”. That is a very interesting question. The admiration for big architecture, large empires, complex institutions and manuscript culture.

LikeLike
on Sun Sep 6th 2015 at 15:05:27 sharinalr

@talibmensah

“On ‘glorious past,’ I mean, we seem to again fall into the trap of praising African societies of the past that were more aligned with Western European standards of ‘civilization.’”—-I agree. I don’t think people in general see how toxic Western European standards are, but that is another story for another day.

Bottom line is black people have been brainwashed to see value in what whites want them to value. It makes it easier to create a bunch of consumers who will put all their money into white businesses and white products, while denying or looking down on their own.

LikeLike