The reason I ask this is because I am often asked by Nigerians if I am Nigerian. When I tell them I am of Caribbean parentage they look a little disappointed LOL. So I ALWAYS ask them which tribe I resemble most and they always have said IGBO!

do you need help gettin more than 1 page on this thread.

just ask.

somalia11: do you need help gettin more than 1 page on this thread.

just ask.

Not from a somalian thanks

Jayvarley:

Not from a somalian thanks

It's somali, okay. Why don't you like somali people

somalia11:



It's somali, okay. Why don't you like somali people

I was ok with them until I met you on this forum. So I guess you've spoiled it for the rest

No. Most of the time, it is all about guessing.

Yeah. Few times. When you look at their facial futures/appearance.

Especially their region in Africa.....southern, western or eastern....

.

sometimes we just guess...

Jayvarley:
The reason I ask this is because I am often asked by Nigerians if I am Nigerian. When I tell them I am of Caribbean parentage they look a little disappointed LOL. So I ALWAYS ask them which tribe I resemble most and they always have said IGBO!

@ Jayvarley: Yes, sometimes.

Some people have a garden variety look while others have a look that is synonymous with a paticular area. In Nigeria we can sometimes tell if a person is Igbo, Yoruba or Hausa based on their looks.

A few months ago, I met an African American woman who looked distinctively South African. She had the Khoi San cheek bones and the crazy waist to hip ratio that their women are known for. I would be willing to wager money that a DNA test would prove me right

she could have been part Asian as well though.

Phut:


@ Jayvarley: Yes, sometimes.

Some people have a garden variety look while others have a look that is synonymous with a paticular area. In Nigeria we can sometimes tell if a person is Igbo, Yoruba or Hausa based on their looks.

A few months ago, I met an African American woman who looked distinctively South African. She had the Khoi San cheek bones and the crazy waist to hip ratio that their women are known for. I would be willing to wager money that a DNA test would prove me right

Well that could be quite plausible, as the trade stretched far and wide not just in West & West-Central Africa as many people seem to think.
When certain populations were exhausted slave traders simply went to other areas.

tpiadotcom:
she could have been part Asian as well though.

Part Asian but stronger Black genes,snice Asians don't have that kind of anatomy.

Phut:


A few months ago, I met an African American woman who looked distinctively South African. She had the Khoi San cheek bones and the crazy waist to hip ratio that their women are known for. I would be willing to wager money that a DNA test would prove me right

If the Europeans took slaves from the area of modern South Africa to the Americas, then it would appear that no account of it has survived, either in written European documents or in the oral traditions of the South Africans or in the Afro-American and Afro-Caribbean cultures...which is odd.


As has been said, the American girl you speak about may owe her cheek bones to some Asian ancestry. And as for the hip-waist ratio, that is quite common too among non-Khoisan black Africans.

A good book by "The rise of African Slavery in the Americas" By Professor David Eltis actually provides records of the embarkation points and origins of slaves Across Africa. South Africa was also affected by the slave trade however South Africa provided very low numbers of slaves. Which is probably why their cultural influence is not seen in the Americas. There are even records of slaves being taken from Madagascar to Barbados. It is my belief that slavery Affected the whole of Africa, nevertheless the West African coast was most obviously affected because of its closer proximity to the new world. Slavery was first propagated by the Arabs who took slaves from East Africa to the Arab world and India.

The transatlantic slave trade exhausted West Africa's population so the slavers simply went further inland and marched captured Africans across the continent Sadly Slavery was a big business not limited to West Africa.

Madagascar is also an origin.

tpiander:
Madagascar is also an origin.

So that means that Madagascar was originally inhabited by Africans? Or were they heavily mixed with Asians pre Slavery?

Ihuomadinihu:

So that means that Madagascar was originally inhabited by Africans? Or were they heavily mixed with Asians pre Slavery?

By Africans, do you mean black people cos the last time I checked Madagascar in an African country.

Afam4eva:

By Africans, do you mean black people cos the last time I checked Madagascar in an African country.

Yes,black Africans. I find it difficult to put black close to Africa,considering that Africa is already associated with the black race. Madagascar is currently populated by Africans, Asians and Arabs. So i wanna know if it was multi racial during slavery.

The people of Madagascar who were sold were the Malagasy people. The Malagasy people are basically southeast Asian in their looks and language, but they also clearly have a considerable Bantu admixture. It would appear the trans-Atlantic slave trade wasn't entirely 'race-specific'. Even Moroccans and other North Africans were occasionally victims.


On the issue of South Africa and the trans-Atlantic slave trade: I found a paper that estimated that between 1400 and 1900, South Africa exported a little less than two thousand slaves to the Americas. This is a very small number, considering that in the same period, Angola, Nigeria and Ghana exported 3.6 million, 1.4 million and 1.6 million slaves (according to the same paper) respectively, to the New World. This is something I didn't know before now, and I'm quite surprised. We learn everyday.

Ihuomadinihu:

Yes,black Africans. I find it difficult to put black close to Africa,considering that Africa is already associated with the black race. Madagascar is currently populated by Africans, Asians and Arabs. So i wanna know if it was multi racial during slavery.

Madagascar just like Mauritius and other Island countries off mainland Africa was discovered by Europeans, the French in most cases and black Africans were taken, mostly from Eastern Africa to these islands. So, the blacks in these places became the indegenes or creole like they're called. The Indians and Arabs came later due for work and stayed.

Afam4eva:

Madagascar just like Mauritius and other Island countries off mainland Africa was discovered by Europeans, the French in most cases and black Africans were taken, mostly from Eastern Africa to these islands. So, the blacks in these places became the indegenes or creole like they're called. The Indians and Arabs came later due for work and stayed.

Well,i think i finally got my answers. Let me just point out a few things: Europeans did not take Africans to Madagascar cos many Africans(East African Bantu) migrated out of their own free will. The Early inhabitants of Madagascar were more likely than not a mixture of Bantus and Polynesians,while the other racial groups were later migrants.
Therefore,the people of Madagascar that were transported to the new world had multi-racial background. I just had to confirm this cos Europeans did not sell or buy people that remotely resembled them(asians/mongoloid).
How sad!

@Radoillo @Jayvarley

South Africans (Blacks & KhoiSans) were never sold into slavery. And there were no white people in SA in the 14th century.

Tumisang:
@Radoillo @Jayvarley

South Africans (Blacks & KhoiSans) were never sold into slavery. And there were no white people in SA during the 14th century.

There were no white people in Angola or Nigeria in the 14th century either, so what's your point?

You might want to check out the paper, "The Long-Term Effects of Africa's Slave Trades" by Nathan Nunn for the estimates of the number of slaves sold from South Africa. An estimated 1,944 were sold into the trans-Atlantic system, and an estimated 87 sold into the Indian Ocean slave trade system. These numbers are super-small, and show that South Africa was only marginally affected by the slave trade. But affected it was.

Anyway, the Portuguese and the Dutch had been visiting the South African coast since the 16th century if not earlier, and Arabs and Swahili had been trading in nearby Mozambique since before 1000 AD, and had trading networks that went into the hinterland. Taking these into consideration, it is quite plausible that Nunn is right, and a small number of slaves were exported from South Africa.

Tumisang:
@Radoillo @Jayvarley

South Africans (Blacks & KhoiSans) were never sold into slavery.

Vey low numbers were of people from were sold South East Africa including the Makua people and Malagasy people.
Slavery existed in South Africa until the abolition of slavery in 1834.

Not really ....