Discussion in 'All Things Africa' started by Charlie_Bass, Oct 17, 2005.
Divide and rule tricknology.
Its not divide and rule tricknology, all of those peoples listed on that chart are black Africans. The ones who have been misclassified the most are the Elongated Africans like Somalis, Tutsis, Ethiopians, and Fulanis because it was previously thought that their looks were due to mixture with Arabs and Berbers, but Hiernaux states that their looks are due to adaptations to climate, thus he isn't dividing people. He's noting the diversity of sub-Saharan Africans and dismisses the myth that so called "True blacks" can only look one way. Hiernaux concludes that sub-Saharan Africans are the most diverse people in the world and that is the truth.
As I read this chart I am more concerned with dividing Ethiopia and Sudan from Egypt (which is not on the list) considering the long history of interaction between the people of this region.
Any division of Egypt and the rest of North Africa, particularly areas wher BLACK civilizations such as Carthage or Numidia were present, to me, is suspect.
As I stated, it is divide and rule tricknology.
Hiernaux studied *LIVING POPULATIONS* of sub-Saharan Africa, not ancient ones. Modern Egyptians are not the same as ancient Egyptians, except in Upper Egypt where you can still find remnants of the original population that still worship Egyptians gods.
I am quite aware of these facts. My concern is this dividing of Africans into E3a/E3b and Sub-saharan with "North?east?" African.
greeks, romans and "middle easterners" are not the same as they were in antiquity either.
North Africans[Supra-Saharans], Sub-Saharan East/West/Central/Southern Africans are all united by the the E3[PN2] clade, there is no separation. There is proof that the Natufians, the earliest agriculturalists in the Levant, were in fact partially sub-Saharan influenced skeletally and the E3b1 delta has an antiquity that goes hand in hand with this. Greeks and Romans haven't really changed morphologically.
you know what I find disturbing about this notion of identifying black people in anthropological terms, is that it depicts our people like something akin to laboratory specimens. The cold languge of western science offers nothing in the way of connecting with our people in a cultural and spiritual context
You're taking things the wrong way, a Pygmy doesn't look the same as a Hausa or a Tuareg and a Yoruba doesn't look the same as a Somali, all these people are black Africans, but they look different in some way. You cannot lump all Africans together as one monolithic group of people, there are cultural, linguistic, and religious differences amongst them.
brother Sekhemu, I hear you. I don't think this guy is reading anything I'm saying so I'm gonna leave him alone. I'd rather not continue to entertain all this dividing US into "haplogroups" either.
Separate names with a comma.