The Black Image in the White Mind: The Debate on Afro-American Character and Destiny, 1817-1914

[blac_da_rappa]

Justice and freedom, wisdom and understanding
We the lost children of Israel in this western world region
Nas: Revelutionary Warfare

 

[tmonster]

Well...I can make any book sound any way I want by quoting tiny excerpts out of context
what's your point?

 

[QamYasharahla]

The old 'out of context' argument. Typical bullshyt.

 

[tmonster]

The old 'out of context' argument. Typical bullshyt.

 

[Czar]

Justice and freedom, wisdom and understanding
We the lost children of Israel in this western world region
Nas: Revelutionary Warfare

That book promotes the Hamitic Hypothesis, which is a Eurocentric theory.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamitic#Hamitic_hypothesis

In the mid-19th century, the term Hamitic acquired a new meaning as a few European writers claimed to identify a distinct "Hamitic race" that was superior to "Negroid" populations of Sub-Saharan Africa. The theory arose from early anthropological writers, who linked the stories in the Bible of Noah's sons to actual ancient migrations of a supposed Middle-Eastern sub-group of the Caucasian race.

Here's an article from The Journal of African History Vol 4 (I969, pages 521-531) published by Cambridge University. Even they admit the HH was created by Eurocentrist looking to claim African cultures as their own. Including Ancient Egypt.

http://www.mediafire.com/view/w3qukq8ul79amqo/HamticAfrica.pdf




As for Samuel Morton.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel_George_Morton#Craniometry

Morton claimed in his Crania Americana that the Caucasians had the biggest brains, averaging 87 cubic inches (1,426 cc), Indians were in the middle with an average of 82 cubic inches (1,344 cc) and Negroes had the smallest brains with an average of 78 cubic inches (1,278 cc). Morton believed that the skulls of each race were so different that a wise creator from the beginning had created each race and positioned them in separate homelands to dwell in.

Morton believed that cranial capacity determined intellectual ability, and he used his craniometric evidence in conjunction with his analysis of anthropological literature then available to argue in favor of a racial hierarchy which put Caucasians on the top rung and Africans on the bottom. His skull measurements then came to serve as "evidence" for racial stereotypes. He described the Caucasian as "distinguished by the facility with which it attains the highest intellectual endowments"; Native Americans were described as "averse to cultivation, and slow in acquiring knowledge; restless, revengeful, and fond of war, and wholly destitute of maritime adventure" and the Africans he described as "joyous, flexible, and indolent; while the many nations which compose this race present a singular diversity of intellectual character, of which the far extreme is the lowest grade of humanity".

Morton's followers, particularly Josiah C. Nott and George Gliddon in their monumental tribute to Morton's work, Types of Mankind (1854), carried Morton's ideas further and backed up his findings which supported the notion of polygenism – the premise that the different races were separately created by God. The publication of Charles Darwin's On The Origin of Species in 1859 changed the nature of the scholarly debate.


In a 1978 paper and later in The Mismeasure of Man (1981), Stephen J. Gould asserted that Morton had, perhaps because of an unconscious bias, selectively reported data, manipulated sample compositions, made analytical errors, and mismeasured skulls in order to support his prejudicial views on intelligence differences between different populations. Gould's book became widely read and Morton came to be considered a one of the main cases of the effects of unconscious bias in data collection, and as one of the main figures in the early history of scientific racism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_racism#Samuel_George_Morton

In the 19th century, an early physical anthropologist, the American physician and polygenist Samuel George Morton (1799–1851), collected human skulls from worldwide, and attempted a logical, classification scheme. Influenced by contemporary racialist theory, Dr Morton said he could judge racial intellectual capacity by measuring the interior cranial capacity, hence a large skull denoted a large brain, thus high intellectual capacity, conversely, a small skull denoted a small brain, thus low intellectual capacity; superior and inferior established. After inspecting three mummies from ancient Egyptian catacombs, Morton concluded that Caucasians and Negroes were already distinct three thousand years ago. Since the bible indicated that Noah's Ark had washed up on Mount Ararat, only a thousand years ago before this, Morton claimed that Noah's sons could not possibly account for every race on earth. According to Mortons theory of polygenesis, races have been separate since the start.

In Morton's Crania Americana Morton claimed based on Craniometry data, that the Caucasians had the biggest brains, averaging 87 cubic inches, Indians were in the middle with an average of 82 cubic inches and Negroes had the smallest brains with an average of 78 cubic inches.

In The Mismeasure of Man (1981), the historian of science Stephen Jay Gould argued that Samuel Morton had falsified the craniometric data, perhaps inadvertently over-packing some skulls, to so produce results that would legitimize the racist presumptions he was attempting to prove. A subsequent study by the anthropologist John Michael found Morton's original data to be more accurate than Gould describes, concluding that "[c]ontrary to Gould's interpretation... Morton's research was conducted with integrity." Jason Lewis and colleagues reached similar conclusions as Michael in their reanalysis of Morton's skull collection.

In 1873, Paul Broca, founder of the Anthropological Society of Paris (1859), found the same pattern of measures—that Crania Americana reported—by weighing specimen brains at autopsy. Other historical studies, proposing a black race–white race, intelligence–brain size difference, include those by Bean (1906), Mall (1909), Pearl (1934), and Vint (1934).

Samuel Morton’s followers, especially Dr Josiah C. Nott (1804–1873) and George Gliddon (1809–57) extended Dr Morton’s ideas in Types of Mankind (1854), claiming that Morton’s findings supported the notion of polygenism—mankind has discrete genetic ancestries; the races are evolutionarily unrelated, and is predecessor of the modern human multiregional origin hypothesis. Moreover, Morton, himself, had been reluctant to espouse polygenism, because it theologically challenged the Christian creation myth espoused in the Bible.

Later, in The Descent of Man (1871), Charles Darwin proposed the single-origin hypothesis, i.e., monogenism—mankind has a common genetic ancestry, the races are related, opposing everything that the polygenism of Nott and Gliddon proposed.

Be against Eurocentrism while promoting Eurocentrism brehs.

 

[Czar]

The old 'out of context' argument. Typical bullshyt.

More like typical ignorance from you, since you have the critical thinking and reasoning skills of a 3 year old (along with the height of one)

It's no coincidence that you were oblivious to the Hamitic Hypothesis until I brought it to your attention last year. And here you are a year later still defending it.

All cause you wanna push another flawed theory, and will use any source of information (even blatantly Eurocentric ones) as "proof."

 

[QamYasharahla]

More like typical ignorance from you, since you have the critical thinking and reasoning skills of a 3 year old (along with the height of one)

It's no coincidence that you were oblivious to the Hamitic Hypothesis until I brought it to your attention last year. And here you are a year later still defending it.

All cause you wanna push another flawed theory, and will use any source of information (even blatantly Eurocentric ones) as "proof."

Are you ready to tell me why Agagite translates to Macedonian in the Greek Septuagint yet, Edomite?

Oh and BTW, you can bring up 'Hamitic Hypothesis' until you become blue (or in your case RED) in the face, they DISCOVERED thorugh reseach that Negroes weren't Egyptian, irregardless of a dumbass Hamitic Hypothesis retard. It wasn't their goal to prove Negroes were the children of Israel, but inadvertently, that's what they did. You just cut yourself dumbass.

 

[QamYasharahla]

Punkass @Czar must have snitched to get this moved to the Race Track. You fakkit whiteboys hate the truth.

 

[Czar]

Are you ready to tell me why Agagite translates to Macedonian in the Greek Septuagint yet, Edomite?

Oh and BTW, you can bring up 'Hamitic Hypothesis' until you become blue (or in your case RED) in the face, they DISCOVERED thorugh RESEARCH that Negroes weren't Egyptian, irregardless of a dumbass Hamitic Hypothesis retard. It wasn't their goal to prove Negroes were the children of Israel, so you really just made cut yourself.

Ah yes, the straw man argument. When all else fails, bring up a weak argument totally unrelated to the thread topic. (Fwiw, your Agagite" argument was already debunked, but that's neither here nor there. Let's not mention you running from the "Lashawan Qadash" question).


Oh and BTW, do some research before YOU cut yourself.

That book promotes the Hamitic Hypothesis, which is a Eurocentric theory.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamitic#Hamitic_hypothesis

In the mid-19th century, the term Hamitic acquired a new meaning as a few European writers claimed to identify a distinct "Hamitic race" that was superior to "Negroid" populations of Sub-Saharan Africa. The theory arose from early anthropological writers, who linked the stories in the Bible of Noah's sons to actual ancient migrations of a supposed Middle-Eastern sub-group of the Caucasian race.

Here's an article from The Journal of African History Vol 4 (I969, pages 521-531) published by Cambridge University. Even they admit the HH was created by Eurocentrist looking to claim African cultures as their own. Including Ancient Egypt.

http://www.mediafire.com/view/w3qukq8ul79amqo/HamticAfrica.pdf




As for Samuel Morton.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel_George_Morton#Craniometry

Morton claimed in his Crania Americana that the Caucasians had the biggest brains, averaging 87 cubic inches (1,426 cc), Indians were in the middle with an average of 82 cubic inches (1,344 cc) and Negroes had the smallest brains with an average of 78 cubic inches (1,278 cc). Morton believed that the skulls of each race were so different that a wise creator from the beginning had created each race and positioned them in separate homelands to dwell in.

Morton believed that cranial capacity determined intellectual ability, and he used his craniometric evidence in conjunction with his analysis of anthropological literature then available to argue in favor of a racial hierarchy which put Caucasians on the top rung and Africans on the bottom. His skull measurements then came to serve as "evidence" for racial stereotypes. He described the Caucasian as "distinguished by the facility with which it attains the highest intellectual endowments"; Native Americans were described as "averse to cultivation, and slow in acquiring knowledge; restless, revengeful, and fond of war, and wholly destitute of maritime adventure" and the Africans he described as "joyous, flexible, and indolent; while the many nations which compose this race present a singular diversity of intellectual character, of which the far extreme is the lowest grade of humanity".

Morton's followers, particularly Josiah C. Nott and George Gliddon in their monumental tribute to Morton's work, Types of Mankind (1854), carried Morton's ideas further and backed up his findings which supported the notion of polygenism – the premise that the different races were separately created by God. The publication of Charles Darwin's On The Origin of Species in 1859 changed the nature of the scholarly debate.


In a 1978 paper and later in The Mismeasure of Man (1981), Stephen J. Gould asserted that Morton had, perhaps because of an unconscious bias, selectively reported data, manipulated sample compositions, made analytical errors, and mismeasured skulls in order to support his prejudicial views on intelligence differences between different populations. Gould's book became widely read and Morton came to be considered a one of the main cases of the effects of unconscious bias in data collection, and as one of the main figures in the early history of scientific racism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_racism#Samuel_George_Morton

In the 19th century, an early physical anthropologist, the American physician and polygenist Samuel George Morton (1799–1851), collected human skulls from worldwide, and attempted a logical, classification scheme. Influenced by contemporary racialist theory, Dr Morton said he could judge racial intellectual capacity by measuring the interior cranial capacity, hence a large skull denoted a large brain, thus high intellectual capacity, conversely, a small skull denoted a small brain, thus low intellectual capacity; superior and inferior established. After inspecting three mummies from ancient Egyptian catacombs, Morton concluded that Caucasians and Negroes were already distinct three thousand years ago. Since the bible indicated that Noah's Ark had washed up on Mount Ararat, only a thousand years ago before this, Morton claimed that Noah's sons could not possibly account for every race on earth. According to Mortons theory of polygenesis, races have been separate since the start.

In Morton's Crania Americana Morton claimed based on Craniometry data, that the Caucasians had the biggest brains, averaging 87 cubic inches, Indians were in the middle with an average of 82 cubic inches and Negroes had the smallest brains with an average of 78 cubic inches.

In The Mismeasure of Man (1981), the historian of science Stephen Jay Gould argued that Samuel Morton had falsified the craniometric data, perhaps inadvertently over-packing some skulls, to so produce results that would legitimize the racist presumptions he was attempting to prove. A subsequent study by the anthropologist John Michael found Morton's original data to be more accurate than Gould describes, concluding that "[c]ontrary to Gould's interpretation... Morton's research was conducted with integrity." Jason Lewis and colleagues reached similar conclusions as Michael in their reanalysis of Morton's skull collection.

In 1873, Paul Broca, founder of the Anthropological Society of Paris (1859), found the same pattern of measures—that Crania Americana reported—by weighing specimen brains at autopsy. Other historical studies, proposing a black race–white race, intelligence–brain size difference, include those by Bean (1906), Mall (1909), Pearl (1934), and Vint (1934).

Samuel Morton’s followers, especially Dr Josiah C. Nott (1804–1873) and George Gliddon (1809–57) extended Dr Morton’s ideas in Types of Mankind (1854), claiming that Morton’s findings supported the notion of polygenism—mankind has discrete genetic ancestries; the races are evolutionarily unrelated, and is predecessor of the modern human multiregional origin hypothesis. Moreover, Morton, himself, had been reluctant to espouse polygenism, because it theologically challenged the Christian creation myth espoused in the Bible.

Later, in The Descent of Man (1871), Charles Darwin proposed the single-origin hypothesis, i.e., monogenism—mankind has a common genetic ancestry, the races are related, opposing everything that the polygenism of Nott and Gliddon proposed


Be against Eurocentrism while promoting Eurocentrism brehs.

I don't think you realize how the dense arguments you parrot contradict each other.

When needing proof of the Biblical Hebrews being black, you'll use the examples of Moses, Joseph and Paul being confused for Egyptians. You'll also point out how Joseph, Mary and Jesus fled into Egypt to "hide amongst other black people" since the Israelites and Egyptians were "physically indistinguishable."

Then you'll turn around and and refute yourself by using Eurocentric theories from the 19th century which have their roots in scientific racism.


1 Corinthians 14:38 "But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant"

 

[Czar]

Punkass @Czar must have snitched to get this moved to the Race Track. You fakkit whiteboys hate the truth.

You're bearing false witness in more than one way hypocrite..

Exodus 20:18: "Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour."
Exodus 23:1: "Thou shalt not raise a false report: put not thine hand with the wicked to be an unrighteous witness."

This is what happens when a lame such as yourself gets desperate and upset. They start lying and looking for excuses to run from the truth.

 

[QamYasharahla]

I don't think you realize how the dense arguments you parrot contradict each other.

When needing proof of the Biblical Hebrews being black, you'll use the examples of Moses, Joseph and Paul being confused for Egyptians. You'll also point out how Joseph, Mary and Jesus fled into Egypt to "hide amongst other black people" since the Israelites and Egyptians were "physically indistinguishable."

Then you'll turn around and and refute yourself by using Eurocentric theories from the 19th century which have their roots in scientific racism.


1 Corinthians 14:38 "But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant"

That doesn't contradict each other at all dumbass. I never said Africans and Hebrews didn't look alike physically to some degree, I said they weren't the same people which they aren't. If the size of skulls prove that, then it is what it is. I seriously doubt the Romans were checking skull sizes to determine the Hebrews from the Africans. Are you ever going to stop the being the lying, slithering, serpent you are? That's a rhetorical question by the way.

 

[QamYasharahla]

You're bearing false witness in more than one way hypocrite..

Exodus 20:18: "Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour."
Exodus 23:1: "Thou shalt not raise a false report: put not thine hand with the wicked to be an unrighteous witness."

This is what happens when a lame such as yourself gets desperate and upset. They start lying and looking for excuses to run from the truth.

Please tell me what the truth is besides a racist ass devil using the 'Hamtic Hypothesis' finding out the Negroes in America are the true children of Israel inadvertently?

BTW: You're not my neighbor. The Most High hates, and is going to destroy you, and your family members, including your children.

 

[Czar]

That doesn't contradict each other at all dumbass. I never said Africans and Hebrews didn't look alike physically to some degree, I said they weren't the same people which they aren't. If the size of skulls prove that, then it is what it is. Are you ever going to stop the being the lying, slithering, serpent you are? That's a rhetorical question by the way.

The Hebrews and Egyptians were different, and it had NOTHING to do with physical appearance. FYI, Exodus 8:23 is not "proof" of a physical distinction/division either, especially if you READ THE CONTEXT surrounding that verse

I mean, you DO realize when you try to create a separation between the words "Negro" and "Black" you are making yourself look foolish? Since Negro MEANS Black in Spanish and Portuguese. Even worse is your defense of the skull size theory. As if we can't point out that the Mangbetu people ALSO have large skulls and are very much considered "negroid."

Only someone with no common sense would defend Phrenology and use it as "proof" for a dense conspiracy theory, WHEN PHRENOLOGY HAS BEEN REFUTED AS PSEUDOSCIENCE.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phrenology

Phrenology (from Greek: φρήν, phrēn, "mind"; and λόγος, logos, "knowledge") is a pseudoscience primarily focused on measurements of the human skull, based on the concept that the brain is the organ of the mind, and that certain brain areas have localized, specific functions or modules.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_anthropometry

The history of anthropometry includes the use of anthropometry as an early tool of physical anthropology, use for identification, use for the purposes of understanding human physical variation, in paleoanthropology, and in various attempts to correlate physical with racial and psychological traits. At various points in history, certain anthropometrics have been cited by advocates of discrimination and eugenics, often as part of novel social movements or based upon pseudoscientific claims.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_anthropometry#Craniometry_and_paleoanthropology

Samuel George Morton (1799–1851), whose two major monographs were the Crania Americana (1839), An Inquiry into the Distinctive Characteristics of the Aboriginal Race of America and Crania Aegyptiaca (1844) concluded that the ancient Egyptians were not Negroid but Caucasoid and that Caucasians and Negroes were already distinct three thousand years ago. Since The Bible indicated that Noah's Ark had washed up on Mount Ararat only a thousand years before this Noah's sons could not account for every race on earth.

Are you even aware that very (false) theory you're parroting asserts that YOU are less intelligent than the Ancient Egyptians because you are of "Negroid" descent and they were supposedly "Caucasian"????

This is why you get horrifically ethered when you attempt to engage in topics you aren't remotely learned in.

Please tell me what the truth is besides a racist ass devil using the 'Hamtic Hypothesis' finding out the Negroes in America are the true children of Israel inadvertently?

YOU'RE using the Hamitic Hypothesis breh.

Do some research and stop being ignorant. Cause your cluelessness is making you look completely unlearned.

 

[QamYasharahla]

The Hebrews and Egyptians were different, and it had NOTHING to do with physical appearance. FYI, Exodus 8:2 is not "proof" of a physical distinction/division either, especially if you READ THE CONTEXT surrounding that verse

I mean, you DO realize when you try to create a separation between the words "Negro" and "Black" you are making yourself look foolish? Since Negro MEANS Black in Spanish and Portuguese. Even worse is your defense of the skull size theory. As if we can't point out that the Mangbetu people ALSO have large skulls and are very much considered "negroid."

Only someone with no common sense would defend Phrenology and use it as "proof" for a dense conspiracy theory, WHEN PHRENOLOGY HAS BEEN REFUTED AS PSEUDOSCIENCE.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phrenology


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_anthropometry


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_anthropometry#Craniometry_and_paleoanthropology



Are you even aware that very (false) theory you're parroting asserts that YOU are less intelligent than the Ancient Egyptians because you are of "Negroid" descent and they were supposedly "Caucasian"????

This is why you get horrifically ethered when you attempt to engage in topics you aren't remotely learned in.



YOU'RE using the Hamitic Hypothesis breh.

Do some research and stop being ignorant. Cause your cluelessness is making you look completely unlearned.

Did 'Hamitic Hypothesis'-using Morton come to the conclusion that Negroes in America were slaves to the Ancient Egyptians, yes or no?

 

[Czar]

Did 'Hamitic Hypothesis'-using Morton come to the conclusion that Negroes in America were slaves to the Ancient Egyptians, yes or no?

Stop using trick questions.

The Hamitic Hypothesis-using Morton concluded that the ancient Egyptians were Caucasian.

My question to you is, do YOU agree with him?