Jet magazine, October 19th 1967: notice the use of both “black” and “Negro”.
People in the US who look at least part African have been called different things by different people at different times. Here is an incomplete list:
Negars – what they were called when they first stepped off the boat in 1619, a year before the Mayflower:
“About the last of August came in a dutch man of warre that sold us twenty Negars.”
That was written by John Rolfe, widowed husband of Pocahontas. “Negars” seems to come from what the Dutch called them, which in turn comes from what the Spanish and Portuguese called them: negro, meaning “black”. The Dutch were big-time slave traders.
nigger – some say this comes from Scottish, but it seems more likely that it is an anglicization of Negar. It is a racial slur, called the N-word in mixed company.
Negro – was the main term used in written English from 1712 to 1972. It was the polite White middle-class word. It spread to Black middle-class use in the late 1800s. It came into English from Spanish in the middle 1500s, along with other bits of the racialized Spanish view of the Americas, like new meanings for the words Indian and race. In the 1960s, Malcolm X and the Black Power movement gave “Negro” a new meaning: someone brainwashed by White people – a meaning it still has, at least in Black American circles.
African – what Black Americans mainly called themselves till the 1830s. You see that in names like the African Methodist Episcopal (AME) Church, founded in 1787.
coloured – what many mixed-race house servants in the early 1800s called themselves. “Africans” were people who worked in the fields. It spread to general Black American use in the 1830s with the rise of the American Colonization Society, which wanted to send “Africans” back to Africa! In Jim Crow times (1877-1967), “colored” spread to polite White working-class use. Like Negro, it was swept aside in the 1960s by:
Black – in constant use since the 1620s, it did not become the main term till after the Black Power movement pushed it in the late 1960s. They and Malcolm X made it a word to wear with pride – “Black is beautiful” and all that. A bold move in a language where the colour black has stood for things bad or evil since at least the 1300s: black mark, black magic, blacklist, etc (something that comes from Christianity, not from racism).
African American – goes back to 1969 with the African-American Teachers Association. Pushed by Jesse Jackson and others in the late 1980s. Modelled on Irish American, etc. This term was almost unthinkable in the late 1800s when “Americans” meant US Whites and “Africans” meant “savages”.
fellow human being – who bleeds red and whose skin colour is undetectable by those who turn a blind eye to racism. Meant as a compliment by those who would otherwise see you as a Despised Other.
thug – the New Jim Crow way to say the N-word. It is to Black people what savage is to Native Americans and terrorist is to Muslims.
– Abagond, 2016.
Sources: mainly “Africanism in American Culture” (2005), 2nd edition, edited by Joseph E. Holloway; Google Ngram viewer (2008) and Etymology Online (2016).
See also:
- Whitespeak
- White American racism against Blacks: 1600s
- Malcolm X
- Black Power
- Pocahontas
- Back to Africa
549
Abagond 
Personally, some of these terms I am content with, but some I hate, but none more so than African American. Blacks in Amerika are the only group of people on the planet, unless someone can correct me, who are either named or referred to in connection with two continents, spatially thousands of miles apart (smh).
Again, this is personal. Therefore, folks on this board may refer to themselves however they deem appropriate. I am not African because Africa was named after Scipio Africanus, a Roman military general. There isn’t one iota of Italian blood running through my veins, therefore I’m not African.
I am not American either. I do not claim to be American because this country (which is really a corporation) is named after Amerigo Vespucci, a Florentine or Italian explorer/cartographer. Amerigo is an American spinoff from the Italian spelling of Americus in regards to his first name, hence, America. My biology, linguistics and physical appearance are absent of Italian phenotype, therefore, I’m not American either.
In the Bible, the prophets of old referred to themselves as being black or “niger” in many instances, hence the CORRUPT Latin word “nigger” or “negar”, which simply means black. In short, white settlers, land occupiers, slave merchants, cretins, contemporary Neanderthals and war mercenaries knew that in order to bring down and incrementally defeat a nation of people they had to reduce them from their once lofty perch, from a mental, social, historical, miseducation and biblical angle.
I AM BLACK!
LikeLike
The term Afro-American was predominantly used from 60s to 80s. when the extended version African American was popularized.
LikeLike
I like and prefer African american as it is as accurate as I think you can get.
My skin color is not exactly black,but both my parents where African american.
We had our native languages and cultures striped from us during slavery and had english and christainty imposed apon us.
What where the terms that the numerous meleniated skinned people of Africa use to refer to themselves,to their homeland ,to the contenient, the world.
How many African/dark skinned people know or are willing to learn their native language culture and religion?
As to African american ,most have little choice as black peoples agency in this world is very similar to women.
LikeLiked by 3 people
@blakksage
What are Asian Americans then?
LikeLike
@nomad
You’re right. That term was indeed in use for a while.
LikeLike
@jefe
“That term was indeed in use for a while”
For a generation. My generation. I was a little shocked (and irked) when they changed it to African American. Because, you know, our relationship with Africa had to made explicit. And, for Jackson and the rest, “Afro” just didn’t cut it. As if our only cultural value lay in our connection to Africa, which I’m not knocking,btw. But like blakksage said, I am black. No. Feel no need to capitalize it. (Actually, I’m kinda brown).
LikeLike
Jefe asked: “What are Asian Americans then?”
Asian Americans are Asian Americans. They are native to Asia. As far as I know, they are not purported or claiming to be biological descendants of Italians, Swedish or Zimbabweans, as so called African Americans are supposed descendants of Italian explorers and map makers, absent biological intervention. Simply put, African American is a whimsical term.
LikeLike
Mbeti said: “We had our native languages and cultures striped from us during slavery and had english and christainty imposed apon us.”
Well, what’s preventing you from reclaiming your heritage?
Mbeti said: “As to African American ,most have little choice as black peoples agency in this world is very similar to women.”
Uhmmm, … what the hell are you talking about? Are you saying that all African Americans are effeminate? Help me to understand.
LikeLike
@nomad said: “But like blakksage said, I am black. No. Feel no need to capitalize it. (Actually, I’m kinda brown).”
Nope! Actually, the entire sentence was capitalized for emphasis and clarity for people like you, not just the word BLACK.
LikeLike
if i had any friends hmm and btw everyone i talk to irl is black? idk depends on the person but never the n word
on this subject why does niger, the country retain its colonial name? at least india got mumbai now
LikeLike
damn i am so pauciloquent i had to come back and i already got it in there black, i guess idk my wife says she’s black and i’m white
LikeLike
my apologies, blakksage. No I wasn’t referring to you or that. I really hadn’t noticed whether you capitalize black or not. I was referring to the prevailing trend among African Americans.
LikeLike
and as for ‘people like me’ you can take that kinda this and shove it
LikeLiked by 1 person
I don’t have an issue with AA but to each his own.
LikeLike
@nomad, … chuckles, … carry on, with your bad self!
LikeLiked by 1 person
@blakksage，
You said
But Asian Americans are named or referred to in connection with two continents, spatially thousands of miles apart as well. So, I did not understand how “Blacks in Amerika” are the only group on the planet who experience that reference to more than one continent.
There are more. For example, we also have Asian Australians, Pacific Islander Americans, etc.
I also do not understand the following either
because the overwhelming majority of Asian Americans are actually native to the Americas. Or by “native”, do you mean have ancestral origins in a particular place?
I do agree that the term “African American” is an uncomfortable, perhaps awkward term, but your explanation does not seem to explain where your discomfort comes from.
I also have some discomfort with the term “Asian American”. The reason is because it suggests that they are associated with Asia instead of the US and are only “hyphenated” Americans. Most whites are uncomfortable with being called “European American” (understandably) and some whites are not even of European descent (but actually of Asian or African origin), which would make terms like “European American” completely wrong. When I was in Paris, Arabs with origins in North Africa told me they were of African origin.
LikeLike
@nomad,
I am also from the generation who grew up with the term “Afro-American”, so it felt awkward to me also when “African-American” started to gain ground.
I also find it uncomfortable when listen to news broadcasts in HK, when they use terms like “Asian American” (or translated into Chinese as “American of Asian descent”) and “African- American” (or translated into Chinese as “American of African descent”), but they never use “European American” or “American of European descent” — they just simply use “white”.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Afro-American goes back to 1853. It was starting to catch on in the 1970s and 1980s, but African American has all but killed it off.
LikeLike
@ jefe
Excellent point.
LikeLike
There was also Aframerican, Afram and Africo-American. In John Brunner’s “Stand on Zanzibar” (1968), a science fiction novel set in 2010, he has “afram” being used as the main term for Black Americans.
LikeLike
@ Abagond
I recently had a discussion if “negro” is the correct translation of german “Neger”. I thought that “negro” at some point was the general, political correct term and only later got replaced by “colored”. I gather from your post that that is correct?
The term “Afro-American” made its way into German (“Afroamerikaner”), but “African American” did not. So it is still the regular term for Black Americans.
LikeLike
@jefe
Europeans don’t even call themselves European. They are German or French or Dutch or Italian or Irish. You do find people that identify as Irish-American or Italian-American or Polish-American, but most people with European ancestry don’t consider that ancestry to be a defining part of their lives. So they may use the broad term American or more likely, the state they were born in or the state that they reside in as their descriptor.
LikeLike
@ Brian
The point of the term European American is to provide a substitute for the term white. To avoid using (rather inaccurate) colors as terminology for race.
I actually really like European American, but I seem to be a rarity.
Of course, that term also has its inaccuracies. It uses European as a synonym for the “white” phenotype, but as Jefe points out, some people who identify as white aren’t of European descent. It also obscures the fact that there are Europeans of African and Asian descent.
“most people with European ancestry don’t consider that ancestry to be a defining part of their lives.”
Except that it is a huge defining part of their/our lives. The fact that we as white people don’t see this is very telling.
I understand that a white American may not feel particularly connected to their European origins, especially if (like me) they are a mix of several different European ethnicities. But if we’re looking at “European ancestry” to mean race or racial phenotype, then it does in fact define and inform much of our life experiences.
LikeLike
Well, people can always use Caucasian instead of white as it is the most accurate term. And that term defines white america just as well as anything.
LikeLike
@ Brian
And a lot of white people do use that term, but I find it highly objectional. It comes from an outdated racial classification system, proven inaccurate by modern research. The other two terms used in that system, Negroid and Mongoloid, are now considered offensive. The word is derived from the fallacious theory that white people originated in the Caucaus Mountains region. I feel a lot more connection with the term European because my ancestors actually are from there, while none came from the Caucaus area.
LikeLike
*Caucasus Mountains
LikeLike
Why do whites insist on using a term like “Caucasian”, a term that avoids both continental and colour references?
But everyone else needs to be assigned to a continental origin?
LikeLike
And ditto to Solitaire.
“Caucasian” harks back to the early 20th century racial classification system which placed them on top. We have discarded the use of Negro and Mongolian to refer to race, but Caucasian has still remained. Does anyone ask why?
LikeLike
Most “Caucasians” in the US couldn’t find the Caucasus Mountains on a map if their lives depended on it. LOL!
LikeLiked by 2 people
During my childhood, the people around me favored Negro with a capital “N” and colored when they were trying to be genteel.
When “Black” moved from an epitaph to a favored word, I initially embraced it. I soon grew to dislike it. I found it was nearly always treated as a descriptive adjective and not as the proper name of a group of people. Every other group in this country has a properly capitalized name: Latino/Hispanic, Asian, Indian/Native American, Arab, East African and Alaska Native, etc.
Many news and magazine copy editors tend to swap out “white” for “Caucasian”. That would result in sentences that included portions like this: “…Hispanics, Asians, Caucasians, and blacks”. To me, that wording always reinforced the notion that Americans of visible African descent were a people from nowhere, with no history and no future. We were the lesser Americans.
When “African American” rose in usage, I adopted it wholeheartedly. It tied me to both America and Africa. It was also a self-determined name. Most of the other terms Black folk carry in this country were assigned to us by Europeans and Euro-Americans. That includes the “acceptable” names and the huge number of slurs and euphemisms.
The more I learned about Africa and its history, the more I grew to love African American. I developed an appreciation for African wood carving, agriculture, metal work, textiles, traditional education and religions. So “African” American to me is a term of pride.
I use Black (with a capital “B”) on this site and African American on other sites. On some sites I use Afram to save time. To me, they are all serviceable.
LikeLike
Negus means King in Ethiopia
Niger the African country means King
Nigeria the African country means Queen
Don’t get it twisted!!!
LikeLike
Europeans have this erroneous belief that they own this world. Unfortunately, most of the the world’s citizens still pay a very high cost for their greed and dangerous egomania. They have named everything according to their worldview. When last have white/Caucasian/albinic / thinskins been able to TREAT, nevertheless talk about other people in a respectful fashion? So ‘Black’, seemingly the most neutral that falls off the tongue. Let us not forget, there is a huge grudge for not having the total luxury to call people of African heritage their desired dehumanizing racial slurs. Their political correctness is always insincere. For heavens to Betsy, these people have managed to turn an innocuous watermelon into an awful caricature. So because white Americans say African American in a way that trips over their tongue, it not enough reason just to settle for ‘Black’ or ‘black without further reflection on one’s identity.
If we could look at a few points:
The conquest of Africa – European enslavement of Africans and colonialism re-defined African reality, imposing European paradigms and world view with their ideas of identity which was based on skin colour, not ethnicity or geographical location. And latterly, ‘thug’ complementing all other dehumanizing terms.
We are still caught up in the Eurocentric matrix, disadvantaged because historical and contemporary linguistic misnomers have been in service to white settler/invader reality that have been carefully sculpted to destroy African history for perpetuating their hegemonic stranglehold on its current victims- ‘thug’ the new ‘primitive’ e.g. American domestic slavery, aka euphemistically as prison complex.
I think we (people who are not white) fatally underestimate the cleverness and relentlessness of the invader/ settler. They use every means necessary including linguistic warfare. It is not by accident that The ORIGINAL or First people have been erased by the Caucasian / European settlers, by being reduced to tautological ‘Native American’. Supplanting the settler/colonialist the with just ‘American.’ The European settlers have employed clever ellipsis, not unlike the Afrikaners and Israelis. Their propaganda or political correctness should not be a reason that Americans with African heritage should not properly locate their historical and contemporary identity not based on skin colour but by ethnicity or at least geographical location.
Counterbalancing that, the rightful use of European settler/invader or at least white or European American should be employed more often by African/Black and First or Original People.
As has been spoken about on this blog, researching one’s ancestors through DNA testing and reading African history and philosophy and understanding the European eradication of West and South West African people’s culture, eg, Mbundu, Bakongo Igbo, Akan, Hausa, Fon, etc. upon enslavement in the Americas. It could bring about an understanding of the European eradication and interference of African identity.
Sorry for my verbosity.
LikeLike
. Oppressors- European enslavers, colonialists and beneficiaries of genocide do not like calling the real names of their victims. The invading European enslavers and later colonialists (notice the euphonic ring to that word) removed the humanity of Africans by dehumanizing and classifying them to a mere colour- blackamoor, ni**er, negroid, ( where is negroid land?) coloured, black. No ancestral, cultural or historical reference to the Motherland. Any possession of humanity had to be COMPLETELY stripped away.
One must realize that every other ethnic group has a reference to a land base- eg. Asian, Chinese , European, Finnish, except the American who only calls him or herself ‘black’and the South African ‘Coloured’- descendants of slaves
Let us be cognizant that without the invented ‘white’ there would be no ‘Black’ or ‘black’ and that the natives of Africa predate the Johnny come lately white settlers/ invaders.
LikeLike
“Sorry for my verbosity.”
Don’t apologize friend.
There is verbosity and then there is wisdom… keen insight, learned observations. You’ve left a lot to unpack and feast upon. Thanks for putting these items on the table!
LikeLike
Even though I also use Black and African American interchangeably,I see ‘Black’ as a reclaimed term, negative made positive, especially with its turn on its head use by the Black Consciousness revolutionaries with ‘Black is Beautiful’ as its awakening affirmation, yet it is still limiting (to my mind) and reducing in so far that African American lays claim to the natal modern day home – USA and the spiritual and historical Motherland- Africa. That huge landmass of rich, beautiful, diverse indigenous cultures, religions, languages, landscapes and staggering wealth.
That staggering wealth that European thieves have been pillaging left , right and centre for centuries to the modern day. The rejection of Americans of African heritage of the term ‘African American’ should think twice about what they are rejecting.
Is one still brainwashed in thinking that Christianity sets one as better than the African ‘ primitive’ or ‘sava ge’? The ‘cannibal’ has been one of the persistent tall stories by the invaders. Did the colonizers not tell you about the eye-popping natural beauty and the African people who generously WELCOMED them? Did they tell you about civilizations that they wanted to claim for themselves,e.g. Monomotapa in Great Zimbabwe? Can one see the absurdity of Dutch settlers calling themselves Afrikaners whilst laying claim to African land whilst African descendants embrace ‘black’ with a small letter, but has a claim to two continents?
The distance one sets oneself apart from the Motherland, is the extent the colonizer has been successful in erasing ones rightful legacy and the acceptance of their version. And America is rightfully yours, too. You have built America with blood, sweat and tears.
African Americans. Even though you are still heavily bombarded by white supremacy, you are the living testaments and living monument to the great triumph of African people surviving the greatest Holocaust in the world history straddling two continents.
Africans in diaspora are more than just a skin colour.
LikeLike
@ Kiwi
I have wondered about this as well. Maybe it is a way for White liberals to distance themselves from open racists. An open racist uses the term “Black” (if he doesn’t use racial slurs or outdated terms), but probably wouldn’t use “African American” other than mockingly.
LikeLike
@Kiwi & Kartoffel
I’ve noticed that too! I’ve even commented on it elsewhere and often pointed it out to people. They will lower their voice and say “Black” using the same tone they say “cancer” or something… like it’s a forbidden word. I think you’re correct in your assumptions that they don’t want to appear racist or offend anyone. However, what I find really telling, and why I point it out to people, is that it’s often an unnecessary adjective. It boggles my mind that people can be telling a story about a store clerk or a dentist or whatever and they feel the need to add “he was, you know, Black”… seriously, WTF is that?!?
I almost always follow with a response that includes me whispering “he was, you know, White” right back at them to highlight the absurdity. If it’s a person I know even slightly well, I will stop their story and ask them right then and there why the felt the need to interject race into their story and why they felt the need to whisper it. #1 answer: “I don’t know”.
Personally, and due in large part to forums like this, I use the term “Black” when discussing race related issues. Happy to exchange that if/when the prevailing consensus changes or even on an individual level if I know that a person prefers one term over another. I think discussing race is important and I’m not going to avoid the conversation over terminology.
LikeLike
@ Kiwi
“South Asians usually do not consider themselves “Asian” and refer to East Asians and Southeast Asians as out-groups. People often say “Asians and Indians” in the same sentence as if the two are separate groups, which is bizarre considering that India is in Asia.
I think this is mainly because “African American” was originally created by those of West African descent and “Asian American” was likewise created by those of East and Southeast Asian descent. This necessarily excluded others of varying physical appearances whose numbers at the time were far smaller in the US.”
This may be true, but I always thought it was a holdover from the old three-tiered classification system, where South Asians were placed under the heading of Caucasoid and were considered part of the Caucasian race (although not necessarily white; cf. United States v. Bhagat Singh Thind).
I still occasionally hear white Americans argue that Indians are Caucasian, not Asian. The fact that most (all?) of the South Asian languages are part of the Indo-European group adds to the confusion.
It does really highlight how much race is an artificial construct.
LikeLike
@taotesean: Don’t apologize for verbosity I enjoy reading your post and learn so much from them. Keep them coming.
LikeLike
@taotesan
Agreed. We are a people with a history, various cultures and a future. Black seems so one dimensional to me.
LikeLike
I’ve always wanted to know more about the term “moor”. It’s mostly a mystery to me.
LikeLike
I remember a time when the older generation of my family all who have passed on, those elders were offended at the word black. I even remember black people in America not to long ago being ashamed about Africa and getting very offended to it turning into a fight. I think about how white supremacy damaged the psyches of black Americans. There was a time when black people used the word “African ” in a way to disparage other black people and make fun of their features i.e. hair, skin tone, noses, lips. I still feel we are still sick and need healing.
LikeLike
I saw on my timeline from another black social media site. “Black is a color in the crayon box.” Sighs large sigh. This is so exhausting.
LikeLike
I use Black on this blog as well as when I have conversations with people about race.
Part of it is my attempt to show that the humanity is the same between white/Black, that one color of human isn’t superior over another color of human. I don’t mean it to be a color blind deflection away from racism. I don’t capitalize white to show it as the hierarchical default. I capitalize Black as a sign of respect.
LikeLike
Kartoffel
What people in the US tend to use as the polite term for Black Americans depends on their race, class and time period:
White middle class: Negro since the early 1700s, Black since the 1960s, with African American gaining ground since the 1990s. Coloured was never their preferred term, except maybe among some abolitionists.
Black house servants/middle class: coloured through most of the 1800s, Negro by 1900, Black after the 1960s, African American gaining ground since the 1990s.
Black field slaves/working class: African till the 1830s, then coloured till the 1960s. Black since then.
White working class: coloured by the late 1800s, Black after the 1960s.
All these terms and some others, like Afro-American, were in play and anyone could use any one of them, but that was the general pattern in the US, from what I understand.
White middle-class use is what you mainly see in written English.
LikeLike
SMH at “fellow human being” who bleeds red and whose skin colour is is undetectable by those who turn a blind eye to racism. Meant as a compliment by those who would otherwise see you as a Despised Other. When i read that bullet point i thought how backhanded that was. Those type of individuals are the willfully ignorant and obtuse whites who are uncomfortable talking about and making an effort to do all they can to understand what systemic racism is all about. And to also learn about whiteness, and white privilege and that these are real things that affect black people and other non white people.
LikeLike
@michaeljonbarker
While I understand your reasoning, please consider capitalizing White as a sign of respect and equality.
One group is not better, worse or more deserving of respect than another.
LikeLiked by 2 people
@ Mary Burrell
I remember the “Black” fights in the neighborhood, too.
I like how you keep things real. I appreciate your observations.
LikeLike
@Afrofem: I always enjoy reading you.
LikeLike
@Legion
“I’ve always wanted to know more about the term “moor”. It’s mostly a mystery to me.”
“In 711 the Moors invaded the Iberian Peninsula from North Africa and called the territory Al-Andalus, which at its peak included most of modern-day Spain, Portugal, and Septimania.”
After that, (the Moors were driven out of Europe at some point). the descendants of the remnants of those African muslims remaining in Europe seemed to have been called Moors, even if they were no longer muslim.. for ex, Allesandro the Moor, who actually ruled Florence for a time. Probably who Othello is based on.
LikeLike
YURUGU IE CAUCAZIODS SPIRITLESS INCOMPLETE BEINGS IE WHITE FOLK YOU DEFINE EVERYONE ELSE THIS IS YOU ASE’
LikeLike
“In 711 the Moors invaded the Iberian Peninsula from North Africa and called the territory Al-Andalus, which at its peak included most of modern-day Spain, Portugal, and Septimania.”
Africans conquering Europe. Bet they didn’t teach you that bit of history in school.
LikeLike
What affect will DNA testing have on how we classify ourselves? Now that we can, to some degree, pinpoint our country of origin, will Black Americans call themselves Nigerian (American), Senegalese (American), etc.? Being that I am almost half Nigerian, according to DNA testing (45% according Ancestry.com), I now consider myself as African American of Nigerian origin.
LikeLike
@ Legion
According to the Online Entymology Dictionary (http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=moor):
Moor (n.)
“North African, Berber,” late 14c., from Old French More, from Medieval Latin Morus, from Latin Maurus “inhabitant of Mauritania” (northwest Africa, a region now corresponding to northern Algeria and Morocco), from Greek Mauros, perhaps a native name, or else cognate with mauros “black” (but this adjective only appears in late Greek and may as well be from the people’s name as the reverse). Being a dark people in relation to Europeans, their name in the Middle Ages was a synonym for “Negro;” later (16c.-17c.) used indiscriminately of Muslims (Persians, Arabs, etc.) but especially those in India.
@ nomad
“Africans conquering Europe. Bet they didn’t teach you that bit of history in school.”
Yep. Not only conquered but held the land for centuries, during which time it was the most educated and civilized region of Western Europe. Funny how that tends to get left out of lessons about medieval history…
LikeLike
@Solitaire
Yep. In Middle Ages African kingdoms more advanced than Europe. Benin, for example had naturalistic sculpture a century before the Renaissance. The Moor presence among Europeans represents the mixing of white and black prior to the slave trade, or at least before it exploded. These people were known as Moors and as I say they could indeed be high ranking in European society. Like Othello and Allesandro de Medici.
LikeLike
http://www.aaregistry.org/historic_events/view/negro-word-history
‘negro’ — probably from — portuguese for black, don’t ya think?
LikeLike
@ Fan… my American friend, your words are too generous.
@ At Mary.
Thank you.
Strangely your family talk is not unfamiliar.
LikeLike
@ Afrofem
“It was also a self-determined name”
.All the more reason for ‘African American’ which is three-dimensional and affirming.
I have great respect for you as a commenter, and your worldview and enjoy and learn so much from your excellent posts,so I am hesitant to split hairs with you:
“While I understand your reasoning, please consider capitalizing White as a sign of respect and equality”.
‘white’ and ‘black’ was standard usage more than a decade ago.The small letters ‘black’ originated by white English speakers balancing it with ‘white’ also with small letters.
The reasons I write Black with a capital letter is also a show of respect. I think it is only in the last decade that Black people have been capitalizing Black leaving white in small letters or balancing it with capital letters. It would be good English usage,though, to capitalize ‘white’, yet I have not read many white writers showing respect capitalizing ‘Black.’ Even though, the practice of capitalizing ‘white’ might become mainstream, I would prefer the idiomatic reclamation of ‘Black’.
I am merely correcting their oversight, leaving ‘white’ intact as it was originated by whites themselves. It is my very small act of resistance against white supremacy. The respect I show to whites is that I see them as human beings, not inferior and definitively not superior.
LikeLike
@ taotesan
“I think it is only in the last decade that Black people have been capitalizing Black leaving white in small letters or balancing it with capital letters.”
I can remember seeing capital Black with lowercase white as far back as the 1980s, and I think some of those works were published in the 1970s (can’t cite any right now, sorry). It’s possible, though, that the usage has become more widespread now than in the past.
The APA style guide (American Psychological Association) has required Black and White to both be capitalized for, gosh, I think at least 25 years now. This is the style manual most often used in not just psychology but pretty much all of the social sciences in the U.S.
Which is not to quibble with your reasoning, just to share some information. 🙂
LikeLike
Poking around a little online, I’ve yet to find much information on the term “blackamoor.”
Obviously it’s derived from black and Moor, with the “a” acting as a connector, similar to “workaday.”
But I can’t find out why it came into use. It is first attested to in the early 1500s, which according to the information I posted above is about the same time that the English began to use “Moor” to refer to any Muslim. So possibly “blackamoor” arose to specifically reference African Muslims. This is just a guess on my part, though.
LikeLike
@taotesan
We are in agreement about the issue of respect. In a world social order that is blatantly unequal it can take years of internal work for most African descent people just get to a feeling of equality.
Due to centuries of White Supremacist propaganda, too many Black people end up regarding people who identify as “White” as either demigods (superior) or demons (inferior and really scary). Seeing Whites simply as fellow human beings can feel like a triumph.
To me, the real triumph is maintaining an internal understanding of your own equality and not caring about whether Whites reciprocate the basic human respect you show them. The majority won’t return that respect. That is a reflection on them, not you. Maintaining a sense of emotional and mental detachment can be vital to your own sanity.
As to “splitting hairs”, disagreement can be a vehicle for learning. The world would be a very dull place if we all agreed on everything. No learning, no flashes of insight, no widening of perspectives.
taotesan, thanks for sharing that viewpoint. I learned something.
LikeLike
To me, the real triumph is maintaining an internal understanding of your own equality and not caring about whether Whites reciprocate the basic human respect you show them. The majority won’t return that respect. That is a reflection on them, not you. Maintaining a sense of emotional and mental detachment can be vital to your own sanity..
Bingo! Albeit you put it more politely than I do.
I appreciate and enjoy the various viewpoints from the diaspora also, carry on!
LikeLiked by 1 person
@Solitaire
“Being a dark people in relation to Europeans, their name in the Middle Ages was a synonym for “Negro;” later (16c.-17c.) used indiscriminately of Muslims (Persians, Arabs, etc.) but especially those in India”
That’s ridiculous. Europeans depicted many muslims with pale skin, particularly those from the Ottoman Empire. They would never be considered moors.
It shows the level of historical revisionism and outright deception that pervades, even on Etymonline. They have to acknowledge that “Moor” and “Negro” were synonyms (because anyone with the internet can find out), but Etymonline still feels the need to deny, without evidence, that moors were black Africans. So pathetic.
LikeLike
@ resw
I took it to mean that Moor originally was used exclusively to signify black African Muslims but later widened in use, similar to how the n-word originally referred only to black Africans but later was used at least sporadically for East Indians, Arabs, Persians, Maori, Tahitians, etc.
I may have read it wrong, however.
LikeLike
Also, in the Philippines, the Muslim population in the southern islands are called Moro, which is the Spanish form of Moor (the Philippines being a former colony of Spain). The Moros are Filipinos (Asians); the distinction is religion, not race.
LikeLike
@Solitaire
“I took it to mean that Moor originally was used exclusively to signify black African Muslims but later widened in use”
No, they specifically say a moor is a “North African, Berber,” etymologically from “inhabitant of Mauritania” but was ALSO used as a synonym for Negro in the middle ages and later Muslims.
That’s why they made it a point to say that the “North African, Berber” are “a dark people in relation to Europeans.”
That is a deceptive way of saying, Moors were darker than Europeans but not stereotypical Negroes.
LikeLike
@ resw
The ruler who conquered al-Andalus was Caliph Al-Walid, an Umayyad.
The medieval world of Dar al-Islam was multiracial. They do not appear to have made great distinctions by race/color. Their armies were made up of diverse peoples, all united under Islam.
LikeLike
@Solitaire
“The ruler who conquered al-Andalus was Caliph Al-Walid, an Umayyad.”
No. Based on the etymological entry you posted, Al-Walid would not be a Moor. Etymonline describes a Moor as: “North African, Berber” “inhabitant of Mauritania”.
Al-Walid, according to historians, was from Nejd, Arabia.
“They do not appear to have made great distinctions by race/color. The medieval world of Dar al-Islam was multiracial. ”
“Moor” is not a term from “Dar al-Islam” that ever served as a self-description for Muslims. It is a term invented by European Christians.
LikeLike
T@ resw
“No. Based on the etymological entry you posted, Al-Walid would not be a Moor. Etymonline describes a Moor as: “North African, Berber” “inhabitant of Mauritania”.”
Is this true of Spanish? The word Moor didn’t enter the English language until several hundred years after the conquest and the establishment of al-Andalus. How was the word Moro being used in Spain by that time? Was it not already being extended even to Spanish converts to Islam?
“It is a term invented by European Christians.”
From what root word?
LikeLike
@Solitaire
“Was it not already being extended even to Spanish converts to Islam?”
I have seen it used in Cantiga de Santa Maria as a synonym for Muslims , including those who had the same complexion as the Christian king. But that book was written in the middle ages in the 13th century. That is centuries after Al-Walid lived, and almost a thousand years after the Greek root word was first used.
“From what root word?”
As Etymonline says, and with which I agree, the Greek word “Mauros” or mavro which still means black or very dark.
LikeLike
@ resw
The reason I brought up al-Walid was not to argue he was African or Berber but to point out that the Muslim armies which invaded Europe were racially and ethnically diverse. It would not have been atypical language behavior for the Spanish to refer to all by the name of one (similar to the use of the term Farang by Muslims in the Levant).
So if I understand correctly, you are saying that Mauros meant “black” or “dark” before it was used as a name for a specific group of people from a specific region, not vice versa?
And so the word Moor/Moro has no connection at all then to Mauritania?
LikeLike
@Solitaire
“The reason I brought up al-Walid was not to argue he was African or Berber but to point out that the Muslim armies which invaded Europe were racially and ethnically diverse”
That depends on which time period you’re talking about. Do we have evidence that the Muslim army that invaded Europe during al-Walid’s time was ethnically diverse? Did al-Walid or any people from his ethnicity ever step foot in Spain during his reign?
This is all unknown, but historians seem to agree that al-Walid “used” a native African group to expand in Hispania. Were they all from the same ethnic group? Also unknown.
“It would not have been atypical language behavior for the Spanish to refer to all by the name of one”
Yes, and that’s one book, Cantigas de Santa Maria, written 500+ years after al-Walid’s “Moors” invaded Spain. Who wrote it and was “mouros” used by other people in Spain in the same manner?
“So if I understand correctly, you are saying that Mauros meant “black” or “dark” before it was used as a name for a specific group of people from a specific region, not vice versa?”
Precisely.
“And so the word Moor/Moro has no connection at all then to Mauritania?”
Yes, but the Greek word Mauros obviously came first, then the Romans called the place where black people lived “Mauritania”.
It shouldn’t be surprising that the meaning of Mauros changed 1000 years later when the Cantiga of Santa Maria was written because a lot occurred during that time frame: Greeks settled in Africa, Romans settled in Africa, Christianity and Islam were created and spread in Africa, and Arabians settled in Africa. Obviously the people in North Africa changed.
LikeLike
@ resw
Ok. Then what is your opinion of the medieval Muslim sources that describe the invading armies as primarily composed of Berbers and Arabs? and that describe the Berber revolts that took place in al-Andalus shortly after the conquest?
LikeLike
@Solitaire
“Then what is your opinion of the medieval Muslim sources that describe the invading armies as primarily composed of Berbers and Arabs…and that describe the Berber revolts”
First, I don’t dispute that there were many foreigners who settled in Spain in the middle ages, including people from Arabia. However, historians seem to agree that most of the “invading armies” at least initially were mostly “Berbers” under Umayyad control (similar to how Romans used foreigners, aka “barbarian mercenaries” to expand its empire).
Second, there was no ethnic group called Berber back then, because that name didn’t exist. Etymonline says the word dates to 1820 and is from the Greek root word barbaros. But when Muslim writers used Barbar in the middle ages, they were not referring to the ethnic groups you call Berbers today.
LikeLike
@ resw
“But when Muslim writers used Barbar in the middle ages, they were not referring to the ethnic groups you call Berbers today.”
That’s interesting. Can you provide a source, please?
LikeLike
@Solitaire
Yes, for example, in Ibn Battuta’s travels: http://legacy.fordham.edu/halsall/source/1354-ibnbattuta.asp
LikeLike
@ resw
Thanks, but I was hoping for a modern source that established who the “Berbers” of al-Andalus were. I know that various tribes were named as being part of the “Berbers” in Muslim documents concerning the conquest and establishment of Muslim rule. Has anyone traced these peoples backwards and forwards to establish cultural continuancy or lack thereof?
LikeLike
@Solitaire
“Thanks, but I was hoping for a modern source that established who the “Berbers” of al-Andalus were”
The source I just gave was exactly what you asked for. As to your new request, you may recall that I said “Were they all from the same ethnic group? Also unknown.”
And I don’t see why modern historians should be deemed more trustworthy.
Modern historians tend to say just “Berber,” and without a proper definition of Berber and knowing that that term didn’t exist back then, I think that is sloppy work to say the least. Others have at least identified Tariq Jibral as a Zenata because medieval Muslim writers referred to him as al-Zanati, like Khalid ibn Hamid al-Zanati. But that’s just an interpretation.
LikeLike
@ resw
“The source I just gave was exactly what you asked for.”
No, it wasn’t. It only proves that one writer several hundred years later used the term for a different group. It doesn’t prove that the people called Berber now weren’t also called by that term in the 700s. That was what I was asking. It may be as you say, that we simply don’t know which groups were meant by the Berbers of the al-Andalus armies, and that there is no proper definition. But I was hoping you could point me to solid research on that, because I would like to read about it in more depth.
LikeLike
maybe you could parlay that into the sub-/super- saharan africa ‘nomenclature issue’
LikeLike
@Solitaire
“It only proves that one writer several hundred years later used the term for a different group. ”
Yes, because that is the claim I made. Recall I said “But when Muslim writers used Barbar in the middle ages, they were not referring to the ethnic groups you call Berbers today.”
” It doesn’t prove that the people called Berber now weren’t also called by that term in the 700s..”
And that’s not something I ever said could be proven. In fact, I’ve been taking the complete opposite argument. That I agree with Etymonline that the term Berber, as it’s used today, dates to 1800s…not any earlier.
” That was what I was asking’
And that was not clear. After I said “But when Muslim writers used Barbar in the middle ages, they were not referring to the ethnic groups you call Berbers today.” You responded, “That’s interesting. Can you provide a source, please?” and that’s exactly what I did.
LikeLike
@ resw
“Yes, because that is the claim I made. Recall I said ‘But when Muslim writers used Barbar in the middle ages, they were not referring to the ethnic groups you call Berbers today.'”
Your use of plural implies an absolute. You were speaking of writers in the aggregate. I find it interesting that earlier you argued one source (the Cantiga de Santa Maria) was not sufficient to prove an overall trend in usage, but now you’re arguing that one reference in one manuscript is sufficient proof of an overall trend in usage.
The difficulty we are both running into here is that the English words “Berber” and “Moor” are much newer than the words they derive from: “Barbar” and “Moro.” Relying on English translations, we can only guess whether (for example) the use of “Berber” in the translation definitely reflects the use of “Barbar” in the Arabic original.
And this is where modern historians come in, because they can examine all the extant manuscripts in the original language and look for patterns in word usage. I don’t know if anyone has done this for either “Barbar” or “Moro.” Perhaps they have, but neither you or I are aware of it. Perhaps they haven’t.
At any rate, our discussion is turning into quibbling and nit-picking, which I find an unproductive use of time. I am willing to admit this is not my area of expertise, and I don’t know enough about it to have any particular stake in continuing to argue semantics and narrow details.
LikeLike
@ resw
Just to head off any possible misunderstandings, let me clarify this statement:
“Relying on English translations, we can only guess whether (for example) the use of “Berber” in the translation definitely reflects the use of “Barbar” in the Arabic original.”
By the above, I was not referring to the Ibn Battuta manuscript but a generic original.
Better wording would be :”Relying on English translations, we can only guess whether (for example) the use of “Berber” in any given translation definitely reflects the use of “Barbar” in an Arabic original.”
Basically, the issue as I see it is not when “Berber” entered the English language but how “Barbar” was used in Arabic from the 700s on. We have modern English translations of Arabic medieval works that use “Berber” for certain contingents of the Muslim armies (and later settlers) in al-Andalus, but without examining the original Arabic, we don’t know whether or not the term “Barbar” was used. That is a examination beyond the scope of my knowledge of foreign medieval languages.
LikeLike
@Solitaire
“You were speaking of writers in the aggregate. I find it interesting that earlier you argued one source (the Cantiga de Santa Maria) was not sufficient to prove an overall trend in usage”
What I argued was that the Cantiga de Santa Maria was the only instance in the middle ages where I found moor to also describe people who were not not dark skinned. If you know of other intances, I’m happy to look at those.
Yes, as to the Muslim medieval use of barbar, I provided the example of ibn Battuta, implying that there were other Muslim writers, like Ibn Khaldun, for example.
“The difficulty we are both running into here is that the English words “Berber” and “Moor” are much newer than the words they derive from: “Barbar” and “Moro.”…., we can only guess whether (for example) the use of “Berber” in the translation definitely reflects the use of “Barbar” in the Arabic original. ”
Speak for yourself because I’m well aware of this subject matter and gave my opinion on it. You’re welcome to disagree with it, but I have done extensive research on this and that’s why I’m speaking about it.
LikeLike
@ resw
“I have done extensive research on this and that’s why I’m speaking about it.”
And I’ve already asked you once to direct me to that material. Not one word in one manuscript, but multiple sources of information. What resources would you recommend for someone wanting to undertake extensive research into the topic?
LikeLike
*crickets*
.
.
.
.
Probably just a coincidence that one of the top results when googling +Moors +medieval +race is a webpage that examines the depiction of Moors in the 13th-c. manuscript Cantigas de Santa Maria.
LikeLike
@ Kiwi
I’m actually disappointed. I thought it might be a bluff but was kind of hoping it wasn’t, because I’m getting interested in the topic but would prefer not spending a lot of time in the heavy-digging research myself.
LikeLike
Until other African diasporic groups can comprehend Wade in the Water, Ella’s Song, etc., then we should not only distinguish our subset of American history from other “ethnic” groups who are Black but also from other non-Black American groups. So, I love the term African American. I am recognizing our roots but also the branches in America from which we as leaves extend forth.
LikeLike
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WboggjN_G-4)
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hUBAx8jbYNs)
LikeLiked by 1 person
@ofbordelloandmen
That sounds quite like some lines of His Imperial Majesty’s address to the UN in 1963 :-]]]]
Well, speaking seriously, you can deny a sociological law that any social change requires interaction between various [and different] social groups all the way you want, and you can even go as far as deepening into your ‘Black Racism’ and ‘Separation’, or denying the fact that Russian people have the same post-slavery scars as the American Blacks, but don’t be surprised then that the same people who are raping my country now will be raping Mama-Africa in, say, ten years.
It’s already started, in fact. In the CAR, in Guinea, and even in Nigeria.
LikeLike
@ A Russian Nagpo
What people are you talking about?
LikeLike
@munubantu
Putin and some figures in his background behind the scene. The former KGB officers, mostly, or, to be more exact, their belligerent part, and the business / private military corporation owners with half-state, half-private companies like Rusal (mining) or Wagners’ (a PMC).
With the Chinese interests pushed out of Africa, it could be taken over by ‘New Russian Colonialism’ in less than ten years. The idea of Russian empire goes hand in hand with nationalism and slavery, and Russian imperialists are not nice even to the people of the same nation and race–
LikeLike
@ A Russian Nagpo
OK, I got the idea. I’ll try to digest what you are presenting here and maybe post later my own ideas on those issues.
In the meantime, this concept of game of empires was amply discussed in this forum three years ago, and I suggest that you go back to that thread and see what other people found out:
https://abagond.wordpress.com/2015/11/27/game-of-empires/
And my own take on:
https://abagond.wordpress.com/2015/11/27/game-of-empires/#comment-301785
I’ll go back later.
LikeLike
@munubantu
I don’t like chaos, observability or drawbacks, but am willing to make empires nothing but a game at nearly any cost, so thanks for the hint.
Yet, I have to finish reading my Sartre on Colonialism and Neocolonialism first.
LikeLike
@munubantu
I’ve posted my answer there (and have also managed to misspell your name with a typo, sorry).
https://abagond.wordpress.com/2015/11/27/game-of-empires/
LikeLike