|
Post by Planet Asia on Jan 14, 2006 13:53:38 GMT -5
The Songhai simply fought a retreating type of fight because the Morrocans had weapons and also used Spanish soldiers. No matter what, they were never able to repa any riches from Songhai and their occupation was short. Morocco left it to the Moroccan soldiers who stayed there, these soldiers intermarried the locals and their descandents would form the new elite. Morocco had no interest in a stable Songhai, they just wanted cheap (for Moroccans this means free ;D ) gold and slaves. Morrocans got neither and there was very little intermarriage between the two.
|
|
|
Post by atlantis on Jan 14, 2006 14:12:53 GMT -5
Morrocans got neither and there was very little intermarriage between the two. Yes, it did. Most Subsaharan slaves entered Morocco after the fall of these West African kingdoms around the 16th century. You know this very well. In 1590, the sultan of Morocco, Ahmad al-Mansur, sent troops with muzzle loading rifles, to seize control of the trans-Saharan trade in gold. They took the Songhai by surprise, and Moroccan guns threw the Songhai army into confusion. The Moroccans defeated the Songhai near Gao and went on to capture Timbuktu and Jenne. The Songhai empire broke into several independent states. Some Moroccans settled around the northern portion of the Niger River, and they began marrying local women. A sense of independence from Morocco developed among their descendants, the sultans of Morocco having their names dropped from Friday prayers in the mosque at Timbuktu. And gold was being diverted for trade with Europeans on the coast.www.fsmitha.com/h3/h28af3.htmlMost of the Moroccan soldiers married local women, and their sons came to constitute a military caste known as the Arma, which selected the pashas (local leaders).encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761568071_4/Mali_(country).html(most sources agree with this)
|
|
|
Post by Crimson Guard on Jan 14, 2006 14:22:56 GMT -5
Not to mention that the ancient Berber kingdom-state of Mauritania was right their in West Africa just a tiny bit to the North..don't bother arguing with this incompetent buffoon known as Bass ect,he's neither rational nor honest. Everything with him about Africa is Black this and Black that.
Remember what Berter told you Atlantis!
|
|
|
Post by Planet Asia on Jan 14, 2006 14:57:03 GMT -5
Not to mention that the ancient Berber kingdom-state of Mauritania was right their in West Africa just a tiny bit to the North..don't bother arguing with this incompetent buffoon known as Bass ect,he's neither rational nor honest. Everything with him about Africa is Black this and Black that. Remember what Berter told you Atlantis! Irrational and dishonest? Give me a break! Ancient Mauretanian isn't the same as modern Mauretania you fool. And quit with the strawman arguments you retard.
|
|
|
Post by Planet Asia on Jan 14, 2006 14:59:40 GMT -5
Not to mention that the ancient Berber kingdom-state of Mauritania was right their in West Africa just a tiny bit to the North..don't bother arguing with this incompetent buffoon known as Bass ect,he's neither rational nor honest. Everything with him about Africa is Black this and Black that. Contemporary Mauritania is still ruled to this day by the so called "white maurs". Former president Current leader Note: these "maurs" have nothing to do with the Moroccans that I talked about previously in this thread You remind, I haven't seen Berter post for a while now. Ancient Mauretania and modern day Mauretania aren't the same. The original inhabitants of the area thats modern day Mauretania were Bafour people and Imagreun people, who were black people. Their descendants moved south with the desiccation of the Sahara and those who stayed behind were ruled by Berbers who moved south.
|
|
|
Post by Planet Asia on Jan 14, 2006 15:03:46 GMT -5
At any rate, the Morrocans conquered a Songhai empire under weak and ineffective leaders. Under the leadership of Sonni Ali and Askia Muhammad the Songhai were nearly unconquerable and frequently whipped the Tuareg and other Berbers.
|
|
|
Post by atlantis on Jan 14, 2006 15:31:42 GMT -5
At any rate, the Morrocans conquered a Songhai empire under weak and ineffective leaders. Under the leadership of Sonni Ali and Askia Muhammad the Songhai were nearly unconquerable and frequently whipped the Tuareg and other Berbers. It is times like this that you need a source to prove your point. Songhai did manage to incorporate some Tuareg positions deep in the Sahara, that's it. Now give me a source where they "whipped" other Berbers. Songhai was merely a trading post for for the Moors in the North. When Morocco got sick of Songhai and the other West African states Morocco went to destroy it fairly easy. And you need to know that around this period Morocco was involved in many wars against Portugal, Christian Spain, expanding Ottoman Empire, ...
|
|
mmmkay
Full Member
Internet Philosophiser, Leftist Hero
Posts: 127
|
Post by mmmkay on Jan 14, 2006 19:04:09 GMT -5
1. Berbers are not native to the continent of africa, they are either ultimately of near-eastern or iberian origin. 2. Prove that all they conquered was "a tent and a few camels", why on gods green earth would they bother to "conquer" it? These settlements must have been substantial for them to even get a passing mention. 3. Your "small cavalry" is more like a force of 4,000 soldiers added to spanish and portuguese mercenaries equipped with arquebuses and canons. The "conquest" apparently was mis-handled seeing as they could'nt even install a competent administration to rule the conquered subjects. They rather hastily withdrew from the situation and left songhai fragmented into various kingdoms. Your "conquest" was more like a half-assed cowboy run. www.africa.upenn.edu/Articles_Gen/morco_1591.html
|
|
|
Post by asdf on Jan 14, 2006 21:05:30 GMT -5
They've been there since the Paleolithic, and few or no one were there before them.
|
|
mmmkay
Full Member
Internet Philosophiser, Leftist Hero
Posts: 127
|
Post by mmmkay on Jan 14, 2006 22:46:33 GMT -5
They've been there since the Paleolithic, and few or no one were there before them. Your kidding right? black africans are the only native people to africa. Berbers didnt even exist during the 5OO,OOO year long paleothic period.
|
|
|
Post by Planet Asia on Jan 15, 2006 4:40:18 GMT -5
At any rate, the Morrocans conquered a Songhai empire under weak and ineffective leaders. Under the leadership of Sonni Ali and Askia Muhammad the Songhai were nearly unconquerable and frequently whipped the Tuareg and other Berbers. It is times like this that you need a source to prove your point. Songhai did manage to incorporate some Tuareg positions deep in the Sahara, that's it. Now give me a source where they "whipped" other Berbers. Songhai was merely a trading post for for the Moors in the North. When Morocco got sick of Songhai and the other West African states Morocco went to destroy it fairly easy. And you need to know that around this period Morocco was involved in many wars against Portugal, Christian Spain, expanding Ottoman Empire, ... No, why don't you read about Sonhai under the leadership of Sonni Ali and Askia Muhammad, t was no mere trading post but a huge kingdom that stretched from Senegal in the west to Kano in the East in Nigeria, larger than any Berber kingdom. They didn't destroy Songhai fairly easily, the Songhai fought a retreating war because they didn't have the cannons and foreign mercenaries that the Moroccans used. Like I said, their occupation was short lived and they acquired none of the gold and riches Songhai was rivaled for. In other words, their conquest of Songhai was a failure.
|
|
|
Post by atlantis on Jan 21, 2006 14:56:31 GMT -5
1. Berbers are not native to the continent of africa, they are either ultimately of near-eastern or iberian origin. Even your friend Bass says that Berbers are native to Africa. The fact that there are no valuable Berber towns in the South Sahara proves my point. If you think they are valuable then you prove it, maybe by posting some images of these so called "Saharan Berber towns"? I said the Moroccan army that destroyed Songhai was relatively small. I said relatively small because the opponents had an army of 40,000! 4000 vs 40000 is according to my standards small. It's not my anything! This shit happened 5 centuries ago! Wake up to the 21 century mate
|
|