North and sub-Saharan Africa according to Africans

[Said Mohammad]

VI. RATIONALE



The current African history sequence is orgainzed geographically, with separate North and Subsaharan regional courses. It would be far more effective to reorganize them in a more chronological and topical fashion, dividing the sequence between precolonial and modern Africa. This would bring our offerings more in line with current teaching approaches and classroom materials. Moreover, it would prevent the repetition of skills and content, providing more time to develop topics or case study projects.



Few American, and certainly no African universities continue to divide their African history general survey geographically. While a north-south division may have some validity in contemporary political studies, it is not given wide currency in historical analyses. Most historians of prehistoric, ancient or precolonial Africa contend that the Sahara was more a bridge than barrier, and contact more the norm than isolation. Furthermore, thorughout the great expanse of human history, similar social processes were underway both north and south: hunting and gathering, the transtition to agriculture, state formation, long-distance trade, religious conversion, and so forth. Such themes are best dealt with together, is a single unit, rather than dispersed between two regional courses.



Few reasonably up-to-date texts or teaching materials are available for the sequence as it is currently arranged. Especially for the NOrth African course, there has not been a comprehensive textbook in several decades. Consequently, students must struggle through the only material available: monographs, articles and collections better suited to a senior seminar or graduate course. Contemporary undergraduate textbook and monograph publishing is geared towards a course sequence with a precolonial, modern division.



The current sequence also necessitates frequent repetition of skills and content within the two courses, making them unattractive to students who might otherwise take both. For example, prehistory should be covered in both a North African and a Subsaharan course. Thus, necessary milti-disciplinary skill units such as archaeology, linguistics must be repeated in both, never allowing time to fully develop either one. By placing skills lectures, exercises and readings in their relevant chronological sequence, however, they would be better integrated and the courses would be more coherent.



Course time gained through a more efficient presentation of skills and material, would allow more time to pursue topics in case studies. This would give students hands-on experience, answering inportant historical questions through packaged "primary" materials. The scope and breadth of African history is difficult to cover within a survey course, hence well developed case studies are the best means to introduce students to problems and topics.



www.ncate.lhup.edu/course_syllabi/Sec%20Ed/Social%20Studies/HIST362.htm

[Said Mohammad]

Few American, and certainly no African universities continue to divide their African history general survey geographically. While a north-south division may have some validity in contemporary political studies, it is not given wide currency in historical analyses. Most historians of prehistoric, ancient or precolonial Africa contend that the Sahara was more a bridge than barrier, and contact more the norm than isolation. Furthermore, thorughout the great expanse of human history, similar social processes were underway both north and south: hunting and gathering, the transtition to agriculture, state formation, long-distance trade, religious conversion, and so forth. Such themes are best dealt with together, is a single unit, rather than dispersed between two regional courses.


And that little troll Graeme had the nerve to say I was trying to steal history from North Africans. If only people knew how to read and not bitch and complain about things they have no knowledge of.

[Graeme]

You are being rude again. Troll, bitch. Try learning some new words if you can, oh black one. You Americans think the world cares what you lot think. What arrogance. Your universities! Universities are a caucasoid, European thing acquired by others from the Europeans. You Americans did not invent much really. Skateboards, basketball, Joseph McCarthy, Afrocentrism, Nordicism....

Your troppo blacks were limited to west Africa because they had no real food crops to husband or animals to domesticate. Most food crops and domestic animals had to be imported from other continents before your black lot could expand out of that west central corner of Africa. The Saharran zone was occupied by KhoiSan peoples until your lot killed them or forced them east and south. It is only in recent historic times that troppo Africans could colonise the south and east of Africa and very recently when they made an appearance in North Africa mostly as slaves. Maybe it suits you Americans to treat a large and racially diverse continent like Africa in a North American continental fashion except you lot forget one thing. Africa is not North America. Even Europe cannot be treated in that simplistic and naive manner. What is stated about American education is true!

[Said Mohammad]

Graeme said:

You are being rude again. Troll, bitch. Try learning some new words if you can, oh black one. You Americans think the world cares what you lot think. What arrogance. Your universities! Universities are a caucasoid, European thing acquired by others from the Europeans. You Americans did not invent much really. Skateboards, basketball, Joseph McCarthy, Afrocentrism, Nordicism....

You can't f*cking read can you, you shiteating retard. That article said African and American, not just American you f*cking dope. This has nothing to do with Americans so why attack only the Americans? Universities are Caucasoid European thing? What about this university? What was caucasoid European about this one?

www.timbuktufoundation.org/university.html

LOL tell me what is European Caucasoid about it.

Your troppo blacks were limited to west Africa because they had no real food crops to husband or animals to domesticate. Most food crops and domestic animals had to be imported from other continents before your black lot could expand out of that west central corner of Africa.

LOl what an idiot. Tropical Africans according to Keita aren't just west Africans you bitch, they include populations of the Horn of Africa, East Africa, Sudan, Central Africa, and involves a skeletal entity, not racial one dumbass. That explains tropical Africans. as for the agriculture part, tapdance do the hustle and jig dance to this:


Recent palaeoethnobotanical investigations in northern Ghana have focussed on the Kintampo site of Birimi (Figures 1 and 2), in collaboration with Dr. Joanna Casey (University of South Carolina). The origin of agriculture in sub-Saharan West Africa has been associated with the Kintampo, a ceramic Late Stone Age (LSA) cultural complex dating to the fourth millennium BP. Although often described as the earliest settled agriculturalists of West Africa, the nature of Kintampo subsistence has been the object of speculation since the early 1960s. Available evidence indicates that Kintampo peoples utilised and possibly managed tropical forest margin species, such as oil palm (Elaeis guineensis), incense tree (Canariam schweinfurthii) and hackberry (Celtis).

www2.sfu.ca/archaeology/dept/fac_bio/dandrea/birimi.htm

So much for outsiders bringing agriculture into west Africa bitch.

As for cattle domestication:

Journal of World Prehistory
16 (2): 99-143, June 2002
Copyright © 2002 Plenum Publishing Corporation
All rights reserved
Cattle Before Crops: The Beginnings of Food Production in Africa


Fiona Marshall
Department of Anthropology, Washington University in St. Louis, St.
Louis, MO; fmarshal@a...


Elisabeth Hildebrand
Department of Anthropology, Washington University in St. Louis, St.
Louis, MO

Abstract

In many areas of the world, current theories for agricultural origins
emphasize yield as a major concern during intensification. In Africa,
however, the need for scheduled consumption shaped the development of
food production. African cattle were domesticated during the tenth
millennium BP by delayed-return Saharan hunter-gatherers in unstable,
marginal environments where predictable access to resources was a
more significant problem than absolute abundance. Pastoralism spread
patchily across the continent according to regional variations in the
relative predictability of herding versus hunting and gathering.
Domestication of African plants was late (after 4000 BP) because of
the high mobility of herders, and risk associated with cultivation in
arid environments. Renewed attention to predictability may contribute
to understanding the circumstances that led to domestication in other
regions of the world.

And also:

BLENCH Roger : The westward wanderings of Cushitic pastoralists : Explorations in the Prehistory of Central Africa.

A study of Cushitic and Chadic livestock terminology has shown there are large numbers of somewhat unexpected links between the two. This may result from a migration of pastoralist Cushitic speakers westward. The example of the FulBe pastoralists who have expanded from Senegambia to the borders of Sudan in the last millennium shows that such a migration can occur. The animals accompanying this migration would have been three species of ruminant: cattle, goats and sheep. More controversially, donkeys, dogs and guinea-fowl may have been associated with this movement, although perhaps not kept as pastoral species. The inter-Saharan corridor is today and presumably in the past inhabited by Nilo-Saharan speakers. If such a migration took place, then one confirmatory piece of evidence should be the scattered presence of loaned livestock terms in Nilo-Saharan languages all the way between the Nile and Lake Chad. As the data sheets show, these loan-words extend to the other families of Nilo-Saharan. It is proposed that the westward movement of Cushitic pastoralists corresponds to the Leiterband pottery tradition identified in the Eastern Sahara, most specifically in the Wadi Howar, now a dry river system that stretches over 1 000 km between Eastern Chad and the Nile Valley. Leiterband traditions have yet to be convincingly dated directly, but if the chronological sequence linking it with the Khartoum Neolithic is correct, then it would begin to develop approximately 4,000 B.P[/i].[/b]





www.uni-bayreuth.de/afrikanistik/mega-tchad/Bulletin/bulletin97/mtrescom.html

So where are the outsiders who introduced cattle domestication to Africans? To be continued.....

[Said Mohammad]

Continued

The Saharran zone was occupied by KhoiSan peoples until your lot killed them or forced them east and south.

Proof? The saharan zone was occupied by Negroid peoples, east and south Africa was populated mostly by Khoisan peoples idiot. West Africans are descendants of Central Saharan peoples. Read:




The future of the central Saharans was not always the same as at Dhar
Tichitt. Evidence suggests that the people migrated, some southwest,
some southeast, some perhaps north, following the drying riverbeds as
they sought sites where they could sus- tain themselves. Since West
Africa had not yet been favorable to settlement, due to its dense
forests, the central Saharans may represent some of the early
ancestors of some of these peoples.



www.h-net.org/~africa/biblio/Winshall.html


Ok bitch, where is your proof? ;D

It is only in recent historic times that troppo Africans could colonise the south and east of Africa and very recently when they made an appearance in North Africa mostly as slaves.

Lets start with east Africa first:

Am J Phys Anthropol. 1975 May;42(3):351-69.


New studies of post-Pleistocene human skeletal remains from the Rift Valley, Kenya.

Rightmire GP.

Prehistoric human crania from Bromhead's Site, Willey's Kopje, Makalia Burial Site, Nakuru, and other localities in the Eastern Rift Valley of Kenya are reassessed using measurements and a multivariate statistical approach. Materials available for comparison include series of Bushman and Hottentot crania. South and East African Negroes, and Egyptians. Up to 34 cranial measurements taken on these series are utilized to construct three multiple discriminant frameworks, each of which can assign modern individuals to a correct group with considerable accuracy. When the prehistoric crania are classified with the help of these discriminants, results indicate that several of the skulls are best grouped with modern Negroes. This is especially clear in the case of individuals from Bromhead's Site, Willey's Kopje, and Nakuru, and the evidence hardly suggests post-Pleistocene domination of the Rift and surrounding territory by "Mediterranean" Caucasoids, as has been claimed. Recent linguistic and archaeological findings are also reviewed, and these seem to support application of the term Nilotic Negro to the early Rift populations.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=1096638

So much for a recent "Negro" migration into east Africa. The skulls studied were prehistoric and preceded the Bantu migrations. Another Graeme theory set to fire yet again. ;D

Now for North Africa:

Am J Phys Anthropol. 1990 Sep;83(1):35-48.


Studies of ancient crania from northern Africa.

Keita SO.

Department of Surgery, Howard University Hospital, Washington, DC 20060.

Historical sources and archaeological data predict significant population variability in mid-Holocene northern Africa. Multivariate analyses of crania demonstrate wide variation but also suggest an indigenous craniometric pattern common to both late dynastic northern Egypt and the coastal Maghreb region. Both tropical African and European metric phenotypes, as well intermediate patterns, are found in mid-Holocene Maghreb sites. Early southern predynastic Egyptian crania show tropical African affinities, displaying craniometric trends that differ notably from the coastal northern African pattern. The various craniofacial patterns discernible in northern Africa are attributable to the agents of microevolution and migration.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=2221029

Another Graeme theory set to fire. ;D Now i know your response to all the data I posted will be the normal "thats Negrocentric trash" type of response. Thats a normal and common response- that is when one cannot accept the truth and has no way of arguing back with data. In other words you will because you are wrong.

Maybe it suits you Americans to treat a large and racially diverse continent like Africa in a North American continental fashion except you lot forget one thing. Africa is not North America. Even Europe cannot be treated in that simplistic and naive manner. What is stated about American education is true!

You failed to read this:


Few American, and certainly no African universities continue to divide their African history general survey geographically.


www.ncate.lhup.edu/course_syllabi/Sec%20Ed/Social%20Studies/HIST362.htm

What about African univeristies not dividing history regionally?




Graeme 197?-2004 RIP. Put to rest by Said Mohammad. May Graeme rest in pieces and feces.

[Graeme]

The Nazis had a huge mass of research and study proving the superiority of the Aryans and the inferiority of the other races. What is the difference between them and you, Said? Absolutely nothing. A black skinned Joseph Goebbels.

You can keep posting your racist propaganda, over and over with different usernames. It won't convince anyone. I can see you pouring over every bit of trivia about negro Africa trying to find something to put into your afrocentrist BS. Whitewashing negroes doesn't make them white. And you can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. I am the only one who comments on your elephantine shit that you post on this forum. Everyone else is wise enough to ignore your gorilla rantings. I however want you to know that your racist ideas are not welcome and I will fight you.

You mentioned faeces, you are the one with shit skin, and no achievements to your name, which should be BlackJoeBalls. A nigrescent Nazi.

[Igu]

Algerians:


















(the black guys are not algerians, see the difference)


Portugal



greece.



Italy


Angolans
TEXT

[Igu]

[Igu]

www.britannica.com/eb/article?eu=42826

[Charlie Bass]

I don't know what your point is Igu, but North Africans and Africans below the Saharan are both biologically African. You can post tons of white Europeans and compare them to Algerians all you wish but north Africans are more related to other Africans than to Europeans. Most southern Europeans can tell the difference between themselves and north Africans and North Africans collectively look out of place in Europe.

[Charlie Bass]

Igu said:

Algerians:

(the black guys are not algerians, see the difference)

Portugal


greece.



Italy

Angolans

The article said posted had nothing to do with race or physical apperance and posting pictures of modern North Africans and comparing them to Angolans doesn't negate the fact both Angolans and Algerians are biologically African.

[Charlie Bass]

Igu said:

www.britannica.com/eb/article?eu=42826

Are you aware that the Aterian microlithic industry expanded from sub-Saharan Africa in North Africa?

[Melnorme]

Charlie said:

The article said posted had nothing to do with race or physical apperance and posting pictures of modern North Africans and comparing them to Angolans doesn't negate the fact both Angolans and Algerians are biologically African.

'Biologically African' is a meaningless term, Said. And take out the photos when you quote, dammit.

[Charlie Bass]

Graeme said:

The Nazis had a huge mass of research and study proving the superiority of the Aryans and the inferiority of the other races. What is the difference between them and you, Said? Absolutely nothing. A black skinned Joseph Goebbels.

You can keep posting your racist propaganda, over and over with different usernames. It won't convince anyone. I can see you pouring over every bit of trivia about negro Africa trying to find something to put into your afrocentrist BS. Whitewashing negroes doesn't make them white. And you can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. I am the only one who comments on your elephantine shit that you post on this forum. Everyone else is wise enough to ignore your gorilla rantings. I however want you to know that your racist ideas are not welcome and I will fight you.

You mentioned faeces, you are the one with shit skin, and no achievements to your name, which should be BlackJoeBalls. A nigrescent Nazi.

You can flame with Said all you want but those studies he posted are not remotely even close to anything neo-Nazi or racist propaganda. You need to come up with a more convincing, coherent argument than what you are saying. The American Journal of Physical Anthropology does not publish racist propaganda. Try comparing Nazi propaganda to those studies Said posted and you will see a very clear difference.

[Melnorme]

Charlie said:

north Africans are more related to other Africans than to Europeans.

Bullshit.