Ok 😒 this “everyone in history that was important was secretly black” stuff got to stop we looking crazy “Columbas was a black moor” 😒

[Thatrogueassdiaz]

Parts of Southern Europe had African presence. But certainly not all of Europe.

If they coexisted, it means there was a mutual connection and genetic exchange of these groups.

“Transcript

An open le[tt]re to the L[ord] Maiour of London and th’alermen his brethren, And to all other Maiours, Sheryfes, &c. Her Ma[jes]tie understanding that there are of late divers Blackmoores brought into the Realme, of which kinde of people there are all ready here to manie, consideringe howe God hath blessed this land wth great increase of people of our owne Nation as anie Countrie in the world, wherof manie for want of Service and meanes to sett them on worck fall to Idlenesse and to great extremytie; Her Ma[jesty’]s pleasure therefore ys, that those kinde of people should be sent forthe of the lande. And for that purpose there ys direction given to this bearer Edwarde Banes to take of those Blackmoores that in this last voyage under Sir Thomas Baskervile, were brought into this Realme to the nomber of Tenn, to be Transported by him out of the Realme. Wherein wee Req[uire] you to be aydinge & Assysting unto him as he shall have occacion, and thereof not to failed.”

Open letter by Elizabeth I - The National Archives

https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/documents/audio/open-letter-by-elizabeth.mp3 Open letter by Elizabeth I to the mayors of England, 11 July 1596 (PC 2/21 f.304) During the Elizabethan period, the employment of Africans became increasingly common in England. They served in wealthy households as...

www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

“To the Lord Mayor of London and his officers and all other mayors and sheriffs in the country. Her Majesty, is aware that a lot of blackmoors have been brought to this country at a time when our own population is growing. Many of them need work but without it, turn to idleness and poverty. It is her Majesty’s wish that these kind of people should be sent [deported] out of the country. Edward Banes is to transport out of the country 10 Blackmoors brought into the country by Sir Thomas Baskerville. Everyone is to help him ensure that this happens.”

Source 2 - Elizabeth's Letter - The National Archives

Before you share this source with pupils, please be aware that it uses language that is inappropriate and unacceptable today.

www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

A bibliography of royal proclamations of the Tudor and Stuart sovereigns and of others published under authority, 1485-1714 : Crawford, James Ludovic Lindsay, Earl of, 1847-1913. n 50029012 : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

Issued also under title: Tudor and Stuart proclamations, 1485-1714

archive.org

"The results of the craniometric analysis indicated that the majority of the York population had European origins, but that 11% of the Trentholme Drive and 12% of The Railway study samples were likely of African decent."
(Leach et al. 2009, Migration and diversity in Roman Britain: a multidisciplinary approach to the identification of immigrants in Roman York, England)

You are thousands of years off. Do your Googles. I'm not about to go back and forth about easily accessible information.

 

[Geordi]

They didnt throw them out. They coexisted for thousands of years.

What happened to all the black people in Europe if they coexisted with white barbarians for thousands of years?

 

[Ish Gibor]

You are thousands of years off. Do your Googles. I'm not about to go back and forth about easily accessible information.

So now I’m thousands of years off??

Have you ever been to Europe, any European country?

I rarely use Google nowadays, I’m more aligned to use AI engines. These work faster.

But are you familiar with the VoC?

"On May 11, 1647 Stuyvesant arrived with four ships of soldiers, councilors and his wife. New Amsterdam residents gathered to watch him come ashore to relieve Kieft of his job. Anna van Angola, a widowed woman who had recently received rights to a farm, Anthony Congo, Jan Negro and other African residents watched with anticipation as the new Director General assured the crowd that he wanted to treat them “like a father over his children.” The crowd hooted as Kieft left. Stuyvesant could see the disorder that he had read about."

Peter Stuyvesant’s relentless quest for order in New Amsterdam pushes Africans out of the church

The slavocrats won and the baptism of slaves ceased. For the first time, commercial values in Manhattan trumped faith and moral values.

nycreligion.info

 

[Ish Gibor]

I've been doing an experiment lately, since I have a bunch of free time. I've been looking into the revisionist black history world. I have a technique that I use on all subjects. Start with the official story, look at the revisionists' proof, weigh it out.

On the subject of black Native Americans, I recently read a book, I wanna say last Thursday- Africans and Native Americans: The Language of Race and the Evolution of Red-Black Peoples- by this guy. This is his seminal work.

Jack Douglas Forbes (January 7, 1934 – February 23, 2011) was an American historian, writer, scholar, and political activist, who specialized in Native American issues. He is best known for his role in establishing one of the first Native American studies programs (at University of California Davis). In addition, he was one of the cofounders of D-Q University, a prominently Native American college in Davis, California.

Jack D. Forbes - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Starting around pg 249, he discusses us specifically by state: the laws, statutes, and court decisions. All up and down the east coast. What he found was that, overall, delineation was very wishy washy. The only natives clearly enumerated as such were the ones on reservations. Otherwise, they were free persons of color just like whatever free bp. On occasion, they were counted on the census as 'M,' mulatto. He concludes that, going forward, social scientists have to stop looking at 'free people of color' as a sort of proto- 'AfroAmerican' (his term) because it literally included everybody who wasn't white, except for three categories: unmixed Indians on reservations, unmixed Indians living in known Indian towns, and unmixed Africans.

I poked around some more and found that there was mass recategorization done during Jim Crow, pushing many well-established lines from more ambiguous categories straight into negro.

The Racial Integrity Act required that all birth certificates and marriage certificates in Virginia to include the person's race as either "white" or "colored". The Act classified all non-whites, including Native Americans, as "colored".[2]..

Indians reclassified as colored​

As registrar, Plecker directed the reclassification of nearly all Virginia Indians as colored on their birth and marriage certificates. Consequently, two or three generations of Virginia Indians had their ethnic identity altered on these public documents. Fiske reported that Plecker's tampering with the vital records of the Virginia Indian tribes made it impossible for descendants of six of the eight tribes recognized by the state to gain federal recognition, because they could no longer prove their American Indian ancestry by documented historical continuity

Racial Integrity Act of 1924 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Lastly, its so interesting to me that people have such strong opinions on shyt they never even read a book about. They weren't importing African men and women at the same rate, so who you think was reproducing? Wasn't enough wm in the colony to do the job. I mean, it's right on the damn wiki

However, Carolinians had more of a preference for African slaves but also capitalized on the Indian slave trade combining both.[40] By the late 1700s records of slaves mixed with African and Native American heritage were recorded.[41] In the eastern colonies it became common practice to enslave Native American women and African men with a parallel growth of enslavement for both Africans and Native Americans.[40] This practice also lead to large number of unions between Africans and Native Americans.[42] This practice of combining African slave men and Native American women was especially common in South Carolina.[40]

Black Indians in the United States - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

That's as far as I got.

What happened in the USA is indeed very complicated, but we have Native Americans in Latin America and meso-America who can be identified as such. There are still small pockets of native Americans in the USA, despite of the Dawes Rolls. These people genetically all fall under the same gene pool. And that is why these folks don’t want to do a DNA test, “blood quantum”. Because that would make them obsolete as a “Native American. Native American from Alaska to the deepest part of the Amazon region have a certain look, despite of have many different phenotypes.

• Like other Virginia Indians, the Eastern Chickahominy struggled to preserve their identity and culture early in the twentieth century. The Racial Integrity Act of 1924 and subsequent legislation banned interracial marriage in Virginia and asked for voluntary racial identifications on birth and marriage certificates. "White" was defined as having no trace of African ancestry, while all other people, including Indians, were defined as "colored." To accommodate elite Virginians who claimed Pocahontas and John Rolfe as ancestors, the law allowed for those who had "one-sixteenth or less of the blood of the American Indian and have no other non-Caucasic blood [to] be deemed to be white persons." The law essentially erased Virginia Indians as a category of people.”Eastern Chickahominy Tribe

Dawes Records of the Five Civilized Tribes

Return to Bureau of Indian Affairs Records: Tribal Rolls The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) has custody of the Final Rolls of the Five Civilized Tribes, known as the Final Dawes Rolls, as well as related census cards, enrollment applications, land allotment jackets, and...

www.archives.gov

Patterns of Genetic Ancestry of Self-Reported African Americans

Genome-wide ancestry estimates of African Americans show average proportions of 73.2% African, 24.0% European, and 0.8% Native American ancestry (Table 1).

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4289685/

Native American admixture recapitulates population-specific migration and settlement of the continental United States

Author summary The post-Colombian settling of North America brought African, European, and Native American populations into close proximity for the first time. The inevitable admixture among these groups resulted a reservoir of Native American ancestry in modern US populations, outside of...

journals.plos.org

 

[Thatrogueassdiaz]

So now I’m thousands of years off??

Have you ever been to Europe, any European country?

I rarely use Google nowadays, I’m more aligned to use AI engines. These work faster.

But are you familiar with the VoC?

"On May 11, 1647 Stuyvesant arrived with four ships of soldiers, councilors and his wife. New Amsterdam residents gathered to watch him come ashore to relieve Kieft of his job. Anna van Angola, a widowed woman who had recently received rights to a farm, Anthony Congo, Jan Negro and other African residents watched with anticipation as the new Director General assured the crowd that he wanted to treat them “like a father over his children.” The crowd hooted as Kieft left. Stuyvesant could see the disorder that he had read about."

Peter Stuyvesant’s relentless quest for order in New Amsterdam pushes Africans out of the church

The slavocrats won and the baptism of slaves ceased. For the first time, commercial values in Manhattan trumped faith and moral values.

nycreligion.info

Breh you are way off. Someone else posted about the ancient britons in here. Use the search. This was thousands of years before what you're referencing.

 

[Ish Gibor]

Breh you are way off. Someone else posted about the ancient britons in here. Use the search. This was thousands of years before what you're referencing.

Oh, you mean the Cheddar Man ? Or do you mean some Blacks in Roman legions, like the Aurelian Moors?

The first recorded African community in Britain [Background] Burgh by Sands | Cumbria County History Trust

The first recorded African community in Britain was based at Burgh by Sands some 1,800 years ago. There was a fort on Hadrian's wall at Burgh by Sands, known to Romans as Aballava. In the 3rd century AD it was home to a contingent of troops from North Africa called ‘the Aurelian Moors', named...

www.cumbriacountyhistory.org.uk

The View From My Study - 6th October | Bilton Grange

www.biltongrange.co.uk

The 1,800-year-old face of Beachy Head Lady is revealed for the first time

The face of an African woman who lived more than 1,800 years ago, whose skull was found in 1953 in Beachy Head, England, has been recreated using craniofacial reconstruction techniques.

www.ancient-origins.net

The argument becomes, was there a continuous gene flow?

 

[HarlemHottie]

Genome-wide ancestry estimates of African Americans show average proportions of 73.2% African, 24.0% European, and 0.8% Native American ancestry (Table 1).

DNA testing and research has provided some data about the extent of Native American ancestry among African Americans, which varies in the general population. Based on the work of geneticists, Harvard University historian Henry Louis Gates, Jr. hosted a popular, and at times controversial, PBS series, African American Lives, in which geneticists said DNA evidence shows that Native American ancestry is far less common among African Americans than previously believed.[71]

Their conclusions suggested that while almost all African Americans are racially mixed, and many have family stories of Native heritage, usually these stories turn out to be inaccurate,[72][73][74] with only five percent of African American people showing more than two percent Native American ancestry.[72] Gates summarized these statistics as follows: "If you have two percent Native American ancestry, you had one such ancestor on your family tree five to nine generations back (150 to 270 years ago)."[72] Their findings also concluded that the most common "non-Black" mix among African Americans is English and Scots-Irish.[74] Some critics thought the PBS series did not sufficiently explain the limitations of DNA testing for assessment of heritage.[75]

Another study, published in the American Journal of Human Genetics, also indicated that, despite how common stories of Native American ancestry are within African-American families, relatively few who were tested actually turned out to have detectable Native American ancestry.[76] A study reported in the American Journal of Human Genetics stated, "We analyzed the European genetic contribution to 10 populations of African descent in the United States (Maywood, Illinois; Detroit; New York; Philadelphia; Pittsburgh; Baltimore; Charleston, South Carolina; New Orleans; and Houston) ... mtDNA haplogroups analysis shows no evidence of a significant maternal Amerindian contribution to any of the 10 populations."[77] Despite this, some still insist that most African Americans have at least some Native American heritage.[78] Henry Louis Gates, Jr. wrote in 2009,

Here are the facts: Only 5 percent of all black Americans have at least 12.5 percent Native American ancestry, the equivalent of at least one great-grandparent. Those 'high cheek bones' and 'straight black hair' your relatives brag about at every family reunion and holiday meal since you were 2 years old? Where did they come from? To paraphrase a well-known French saying, 'Seek the white man.' African Americans, just like our first lady, are a racially mixed or mulatto people—deeply and overwhelmingly so. Fact: Fully 58 percent of African American people, according to geneticist Mark Shriver at Morehouse College, possess at least 12.5 percent European ancestry (again, the equivalent of that one great-grandparent).[79]

Black Indians in the United States - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I was perfectly clear in stating my concerns about DNA. The problem is the inconsistencies. Henry Louis Gates, Mr. African American DNA himself, can't even keep his story straight. One minute, only 5% of AAs have over 2%; the next, only 5% of AA's have over 12.5%. Which one is it? Was nobody in between? No 9%'ers?

Then, the vast difference between .8%- 2%- 12.5%? AI tells me that .8%= 5-7 gens ago. It also says that 2%= 5-6 gens ago. Which one is it?

There's an astounding lack of clarity but we're just expected to go along with it or be ridiculed by the very social scientists studying the topic. It's ridiculous.

Further, the historical record is well-documented. They did not import African slaves at a 50-50 gender ratio. Native Americans (mostly women, presumably the men were killed fighting the wm) were, in fact, enslaved side by side with us and did, in fact, reproduce. So where did ALL those people go? They weren't all absorbed into free people of color. The black-ish looking ones were, in fact, readily enslaved in perpetuity. So where did the genome go???

These are the basic questions I've been left with in my quick perusal of the matter. Ftr, yes, my family also has a NA myth, my paternal grandfather's grandmother. How many generations is that? It falls right into that 5-7 generations area, don't it? So many questions were raised that, when I shared what I found with my mother, she decided to get her DNA done, a thing she has always refused.

 

[HarlemHottie]

Genome-wide ancestry estimates of African Americans show average proportions of 73.2% African, 24.0% European, and 0.8% Native American ancestry (Table 1).

DNA testing and research has provided some data about the extent of Native American ancestry among African Americans, which varies in the general population. Based on the work of geneticists, Harvard University historian Henry Louis Gates, Jr. hosted a popular, and at times controversial, PBS series, African American Lives, in which geneticists said DNA evidence shows that Native American ancestry is far less common among African Americans than previously believed.[71]

Their conclusions suggested that while almost all African Americans are racially mixed, and many have family stories of Native heritage, usually these stories turn out to be inaccurate,[72][73][74] with only five percent of African American people showing more than two percent Native American ancestry.[72] Gates summarized these statistics as follows: "If you have two percent Native American ancestry, you had one such ancestor on your family tree five to nine generations back (150 to 270 years ago)."[72] Their findings also concluded that the most common "non-Black" mix among African Americans is English and Scots-Irish.[74] Some critics thought the PBS series did not sufficiently explain the limitations of DNA testing for assessment of heritage.[75]

Another study, published in the American Journal of Human Genetics, also indicated that, despite how common stories of Native American ancestry are within African-American families, relatively few who were tested actually turned out to have detectable Native American ancestry.[76] A study reported in the American Journal of Human Genetics stated, "We analyzed the European genetic contribution to 10 populations of African descent in the United States (Maywood, Illinois; Detroit; New York; Philadelphia; Pittsburgh; Baltimore; Charleston, South Carolina; New Orleans; and Houston) ... mtDNA haplogroups analysis shows no evidence of a significant maternal Amerindian contribution to any of the 10 populations."[77] Despite this, some still insist that most African Americans have at least some Native American heritage.[78] Henry Louis Gates, Jr. wrote in 2009,

Here are the facts: Only 5 percent of all black Americans have at least 12.5 percent Native American ancestry, the equivalent of at least one great-grandparent. Those 'high cheek bones' and 'straight black hair' your relatives brag about at every family reunion and holiday meal since you were 2 years old? Where did they come from? To paraphrase a well-known French saying, 'Seek the white man.' African Americans, just like our first lady, are a racially mixed or mulatto people—deeply and overwhelmingly so. Fact: Fully 58 percent of African American people, according to geneticist Mark Shriver at Morehouse College, possess at least 12.5 percent European ancestry (again, the equivalent of that one great-grandparent).[79]

Black Indians in the United States - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I was perfectly clear in stating my concerns about DNA. The problem is the inconsistencies. Henry Louis Gates, Mr. African American DNA himself, can't even keep his story straight. One minute, only 5% of AAs have over 2%; the next, only 5% of AA's have over 12.5%. Which one is it? Was nobody in between? No 9%'ers?

Then, the vast difference between .8%- 2%- 12.5%? AI tells me that .8%= 5-7 gens ago. It also says that 2%= 5-6 gens ago. Which one is it?

There's an astounding lack of clarity but we're just expected to go along with it or be ridiculed by the very social scientists studying the topic. It's ridiculous.

Further, the historical record is well-documented. They did not import African slaves to a 50-50 gender ratio. Native American (mostly women, presumably the men ere killed fighting the wm) were, in fact, enslaved side by side and did, in fact, reproduce. So where did ALL those people go? They weren't all absorbed into free people of color. The black-ish looking ones were, in fact, readily enslaved in perpetuity. So where did the genome go???

These are the basic questions I've been left with in my quick perusal of the matter. Ftr, yes, my family also has a NA myth, my paternal grandfather's grandmother. How many generations is that? It falls right into that 5-7 generations area.

 

[HarlemHottie]

What happened to all the black people in Europe if they coexisted with white barbarians for thousands of years?

They didn't co-exist. The "white barbarians" killed them off like the savages they are. There's a reason Cheddar Man and his ilk re not represented in modern British DNA.

The skeletal remains date to around the mid-to-late 9th millennium BC, corresponding to the Mesolithic period, and it appears that he died a violent death.

Cheddar Man - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

AI:

Genetic legacy in modern Britons

• Modern British people do not descend directly from Cheddar Man, but they do share a portion of ancestry with the larger Western European Mesolithic hunter-gatherer population he belonged to.
• This ancestry, representing around 10% of modern British genomes (for those without recent immigration history), was likely carried into Britain by the later migrations, rather than solely originating from Britain's Mesolithic population.
• The Y-DNA haplogroup of Cheddar Man (I2a2) is still present in the modern British Isles and other parts of Europe, but this represents only a small part of the genome and doesn't signify direct descent from him.
• While a direct lineage hasn't been established, a distant matrilineal relationship between Cheddar Man and a modern-day resident of Cheddar village was found through mitochondrial DNA analysis.

In summary, while modern British people share a genetic link to the broader population group to which Cheddar Man belonged, they are not direct descendants due to significant population replacements and intermixing throughout British history.

 

[2 Up 2 Down]

I don't know if you can called those early people like Cheddar Man "black". They would have went through evolutionary changes that would've made them look slightly different from the people still in Africa like the Australian aborigines

 

[Geordi]

They didn't co-exist. The "white barbarians" killed them off like the savages they are. There's a reason Cheddar Man and his ilk re not represented in modern British DNA.

The skeletal remains date to around the mid-to-late 9th millennium BC, corresponding to the Mesolithic period, and it appears that he died a violent death.

Cheddar Man - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

AI:

Genetic legacy in modern Britons

• Modern British people do not descend directly from Cheddar Man, but they do share a portion of ancestry with the larger Western European Mesolithic hunter-gatherer population he belonged to.
• This ancestry, representing around 10% of modern British genomes (for those without recent immigration history), was likely carried into Britain by the later migrations, rather than solely originating from Britain's Mesolithic population.
• The Y-DNA haplogroup of Cheddar Man (I2a2) is still present in the modern British Isles and other parts of Europe, but this represents only a small part of the genome and doesn't signify direct descent from him.
• While a direct lineage hasn't been established, a distant matrilineal relationship between Cheddar Man and a modern-day resident of Cheddar village was found through mitochondrial DNA analysis.

In summary, while modern British people share a genetic link to the broader population group to which Cheddar Man belonged, they are not direct descendants due to significant population replacements and intermixing throughout British history.

How do you know a light skin man killed him lol

The last sentence you wrote said his tribe was pawging with the new lightskins that showed up and that diluted his future genes. The whites were farmers and that was a better system leading to early civilization, than hunter gathering . So in this case its technically correct that the light skin people replaced the darker skin people over time.

All that is from 10000 bc and has nothing to do with Columbus time.

 

[HarlemHottie]

How do you know a light skin man killed him lol

Because that's what they do everywhere they go.

The last sentence you wrote said his tribe was pawging with the new lightskins that showed up and that diluted his future genes.

1) That wasn't me, that was AI.
2) His genes are not represented among contemporary British. AI is also contradicting itself. Funny how that happens over and over.

All that is from 10000 bc and has nothing to do with Columbus time.

Cheddar Man's death is circa 8300 bc.

What on earth would Cheddar Man have to do with Columbus? I was addressing the original, 'next thing you know, they gon be saying Europe was black first' comment.

 

[Geordi]

Because that's what they do everywhere they go.


1) That wasn't me, that was AI.
2) His genes are not represented among contemporary British. AI is also contradicting itself. Funny how that happens over and over.


Cheddar Man's death is circa 8300 bc.

What on earth would Cheddar Man have to do with Columbus? I was addressing the original, 'next thing you know, they gon be saying Europe was black first' comment.

Dark skin does not equal black person. Remember Kamala?

If you go back far enough everybody had dark skin, even white people. Its an adaptation to the environment. Cheddar man was dark skin with blue eyes, he was in the beginning stages to adapt and become white. People further north already adapted quicker to a colder environment and were able to migrate south into Europe and replace the future cacs who were too slow to change.

 

[Ty Daniels]

Because that's what they do everywhere they go.


1) That wasn't me, that was AI.
2) His genes are not represented among contemporary British. AI is also contradicting itself. Funny how that happens over and over.


Cheddar Man's death is circa 8300 bc.

What on earth would Cheddar Man have to do with Columbus? I was addressing the original, 'next thing you know, they gon be saying Europe was black first' comment.

Dude is just wasting folks time, we gave him all the tools, he refuses to use them.

More concerned about trying to "Debunk" what is being said, then to understand.

Don't even know the damn basics of world history, but trying to "Debunk" people, SMMFH

Talking about some "Cheddar Man Was In the Beginning Stages to Be White", LMFAO!!!!!!!!

And the Yamnaya were "Farmers", GTFOH with this Bullshyt!

Has ZERO FUKKING CLUE What he is talking about.

 

[HarlemHottie]

Dark skin does not equal black person. Remember Kamala?

If you go back far enough everybody had dark skin, even white people. Its an adaptation to the environment. Cheddar man was dark skin with blue eyes, he was in the beginning stages to adapt and become white. People further north already adapted quicker to a colder environment and were able to migrate south into Europe and replace the future cacs who were too slow to change.

You ever notice how a lot of these reconstructions look like they got botox? That's because they're using European tissue measurements on 'African' skulls. Like this one, for example.

That's supposed to be Nefertiti! She look crazy and so do Cheddar Man. It's because they're trying to hide African high cheek bones within a European phenotype.

Yall really need some more education on this topic. @Ty Daniels is right, you don't know enough. (@Ish Gibor might, but he's too trusting of the wm imo)