Roland Coltrane
Superstar
yeah but european chattel slavery and all it's accoutrement is not the same as intra African slavery by a long shot
I have no argument with your statements. However, I would point out that warfare in Africa and warfare in Europe are the same. It is death and misery. Since we know that no one willingly became a slave anywhere in this World then that means that warfare would have had to have happened. We know that there was hundreds of years of warfare in Africa that led to vast tracts of land being depopulated to this very day. The Africans may not have known what was going to happen to the people that they were capturing in warfare and selling; but they did know what they had to do to capture those people which was to kill. You can not tell me that they did not know that killing and spreading misery far and wide was wrong.
The craziest part is that colonialism was a natural result of hundreds of years of warfare to capture people as slaves.
Big Brown Areola
Young Soul
We should do a thread next about the black jews in europe. 
Sithlord Piff
Superstar
How about you pick up a book on the Moors or the very least read the posts in this thread. For one Berber Muslims do NOT wear Fez and never had. These was how the Moors would have look/dressed like.
Second. I already shown that the men with the Fez with Queen Elizabeth were a fighting force from NIGERIA. Third, the men we see in the Congo were from the Swahili Coast and were NOT Berbers. How about you and others actually do research on the role those Swahili slavers from the coast played in the Congo colonization.
https://www.degruyter.com/downloadpdf/books/9783110541441/9783110541441-008/9783110541441-008.pdf
And turbans? So freaking what. Is EVERY African Muslim now a Moor? And I already know what the term Moor means. So you don't have to lecture me. And with the bolded you defalte your own argument. According to your logic EVERY Black Muslim is a Moor even if they had nothing to do with the Iberian invasion. What are you guys smoking?
"Moor" in its true sense meant the Black inhabitants of Northwest Africa. Group who the Europeans largely saw as "Moor" were Black Berber groups such as Masmuda, Sanhaja, Tuaregs, and other Berbers. And NOT West African and Swahili Muslims which you posted.
How about you pick up a book on the Moors or the very least read the posts in this thread. For one Berber Muslims do NOT wear Fez and never had. These was how the Moors would have look/dressed like.
Second. I already shown that the men with the Fez with Queen Elizabeth were a fighting force from NIGERIA. Third, the men we see in the Congo were from the Swahili Coast and were NOT Berbers. How about you and others actually do research on the role those Swahili slavers from the coast played in the Congo colonization.
https://www.degruyter.com/downloadpdf/books/9783110541441/9783110541441-008/9783110541441-008.pdf
And turbans? So freaking what. Is EVERY African Muslim now a Moor? And I already know what the term Moor means. So you don't have to lecture me. And with the bolded you defalte your own argument. According to your logic EVERY Black Muslim is a Moor even if they had nothing to do with the Iberian invasion. What are you guys smoking?
"Moor" in its true sense meant the Black inhabitants of Northwest Africa. Group who the Europeans largely saw as "Moor" were Black Berber groups such as Masmuda, Sanhaja, Tuaregs, and other Berbers. And NOT West African and Swahili Muslims which you posted.
The turban as well as the Fez both represent Moors. Thats why modern Moors adopted them.
LoStranger
Banned
The turban as well as the Fez both represent Moors. Thats why modern Moors adopted them.
Can you show a photograph or painting of Berbers wearing the Fez? Since the majority of Moors were made up of Berbers....
Estevanico - Wikipedia
They literally used a black moor to transverse the lands of the Americas, because, well, he blended in with the natives.
“Estevan must have been an extremely charismatic and enterprising figure. We know from the Cabeza de Vaca account that he had adopted the persona of a native shaman“
The Mysterious Journey of Friar Marcos de Niza
So you are telling me that a black African would scout ahead in uncharted territories acting as a SHAMAN?! I don’t think a black moor is able to act as a Shaman Unless the paleoAmerican m shamans usually looked like him.
That explains this:
ACCORDING TO 17TH CENTURY CAC ARTWORK, INDIANS IN THE AMERICAS LOOKED LIKE THIS??
They literally used a black moor to transverse the lands of the Americas, because, well, he blended in with the natives.
“Estevan must have been an extremely charismatic and enterprising figure. We know from the Cabeza de Vaca account that he had adopted the persona of a native shaman“
The Mysterious Journey of Friar Marcos de Niza
So you are telling me that a black African would scout ahead in uncharted territories acting as a SHAMAN?! I don’t think a black moor is able to act as a Shaman Unless the paleoAmerican m shamans usually looked like him.
That explains this:
ACCORDING TO 17TH CENTURY CAC ARTWORK, INDIANS IN THE AMERICAS LOOKED LIKE THIS??
Last edited:
Double
You're trying very hard to pin the Atlantic Slave Trade to Africans. Quite strange. British Involvement in the Transatlantic Slave Trade: The Abolition of Slavery Project
AGENT/CACYes indeed, they had pawg slaves.
Slavery is wrong in any kind of way.
Yaboysix
That nikka
Lemme watch this pussass video before I comment.
There would have been no Atlantic slave trade or for that matter Arab slave trade without the Africans. I don't know why people will not accept that basic fact. It is a historical fact. It was acknowledged by the Europeans; the slaves that were captured and by the African Kingdoms themselves like Dahomey and the Ashanti, etc.
There were millions of people captured and shipped out. Most of the people captured were from inland communities that White people didn't know anything about, because White people didn't have maps or know the terrain. So obviously these had to be large scale military operations by the Africans and they did it for hundreds of years; at first with the the Portuguese and later with the English, Dutch and the French. All of those Europeans had treaties and business deals with the Africans.
But without the Moors in Europe, the Europeans wouldn't have known much about West Africa. And their expedition in West Africa led them to Central Africa. The atlas the Portuguese used in their first expedition was a moorish atlas and a lot of the sailors and early middlemen in the slave trade, before European started breeding with African women to create mulattos, were moors.
Also, a lot of the fighting forces Europeans used in the colonization of Africa against the tribes that put up resistance were Afro-caribbeans. But I'd say the bulk of the ones they used in West Africa were Hausas, Mandes from Sierra Leone, and Fulanis. In the case of the colonial Brits and French for example, they had a better relationship with the African tribes that are mostly Muslims than the other African tribes, hence a lot of them freely enlisted in the colonial army. The same thing played out in East Africa where the Italians used the Somalis against Ethiopia.
The colonization of Africa was a different event than the Triangle slave trade. During slavery the European militaries were roundly defeated by African forces. During colonization the Europeans had developed medications to solve malaria and they had developed the machine gun.
The turban as well as the Fez both represent Moors. Thats why modern Moors adopted them.
Post images that have already been debunked/refuted brehs. ONCE AGAIN(read the posts in threads), the first images are NOT of Moors but Nigerian soldiers from Nigeria.
The reign of Queen Elizabeth II
Its like you guys don't even give a shyt about facts. You seriously believe those Royal British Nigerian soldiers were Moors.
‘National service had its moments’: the Queen’s Commonwealth tour of Nigeria, 1956
And how does the Moorish Temple prove your point? They don't even practice authentic Berber culture, speak a Berber language or have Berber names like the Moors that invaded Iberia did. I DARE you to name a Berber practice among them.
^^Notice how those Berbers don't even dress like those Moorish Temple people. And like @LoStranger stated SHOW US an old medieval painting of Moors wearing Fex because not even the recent 19th century ones do.
I wouldn't say European military were roundly defeated during slavery because most of the powerful African kingdoms weren't on the coast like that, apart from Aro confederacy that had the Calabar/Akwa-Ibom coast of Nigeria in the bight of Biafra. So the Europeans used capture for disjointed tribes and trading with the big kingdoms and empires. The only place that got ugly is Kongo where the Portuguese fought brutal wars and were able to capture a lot of Africans while taking heavy losses (they ended up losing those wars).
As for colonization, a lot of African tribes already had sophisticated guns by then and the game changer was the cannon gun
Regardless, without the moors in Europe, the Europeans wouldn't have known about West Africa and they also played a big role at the beginning. And weren't the moors the same people who invaded Timbuktu and captured Ahmad Baba, one of its greatest scholars, and destroyed part of its libraries? Moors are the greatest race traitors. So I don't understand why people are defending them on this thread. Yes, they achieved a lot in Europe and they were black. But that doesn't negate what they did when they left Europe.