tonychristopher:



Then northern fringe of tropics is still part of tropics

No it's not, the land is arid to semi-arid.....

Fulaman198:


Kanem-Bornu was a Saharan empire. It extended from Nigeria to Libya. You do know what a map is right. Most of Niger and Libya is in the Sahara.....

Why do you think Kanuri is also classified as a Saharan language.

When i mentioned Libya,i was referring to Nok civilization not Kanem.

Fulaman198:


Why do you keep arguing facts, Most Of Mali is in not Sub- Sahara Africa, just a small southern portion. Timbuktu is in the Sahara desert like Agadez. Most of us with cultural ties to the region know this. I don't know why you keep saying it's in Sub-Sahara Africa when this issue has been beaten to death and proven wrong.

In that premise,it's not a subsaharan civilization. Do you see the point now?

Ihuomadinihu:

In that premise,it's not a subsaharan civilization. Do you see the point now?

Because it's not. You claim that you don't let whites define what is sub-Saharan, but you are going about it the wrong way.

The truth is blacks (many black groups) are indigenous to the Sahel and Sahara.

From the Hausa, Fulani, Kanuri, Nubians, Gourara, Tebu/Toubou, Tuaregs, there are so many black Saharan/Sahelian groups I haven't even listed.

Ancient Egypt was obviously black and many white PhDs have even admitted to it finally. It's only the overly racist and Eurocentric ones that don't.

Also, Afro-Asiatic languages started in Africa, this means that Arabic, Aramaic and Hebrew all came from a language in Africa. Nigeria and Cameroon alone have 150 spoken Afro-Asiatic languages.

The reason why Nilotic people are referred to Nilotic is because they all came from the Nile... The Nile is in Egypt and parts of Sudan.

Fulaman198:


A simple Google search would help. Most of Mali is not even geographically situated in Sub-Sahara Africa. That's why I say whites have brainwashed a lot of people about what "Sub-Sahara" Africa is.

When google search look more confusing that was why I suggested Atlas

Funjosh:


When google search look more confusing that was why I suggested Atlas

Loll you are too funny.

It's just that we are living in the technological age, so stuff like Google Maps and Satellite cam are at our beck and call these days.

tonychristopher:


Oga the basis of argument is west Africa where they said Benin is the first kingdom that had a relation with EU which I countered with Timbuktu and Songhai

Is that not the basis ?

Songhai and Mali had relationship with Arabia. Benin remain the first African people to have relations with Western Europeans.
The Portuguese established relationship with Ethiopia in 1520.
They first reached Benin in 1478 and established diplomatic relation in 1482.

bokohalal:

Songhai and Mali had relationship with Arabia. Benin remain the first African people to have relations with Western Europeans.
The Portuguese established relationship with Ethiopia in 1520.
They first reached Benin in 1478 and established diplomatic relation in 1482.

Good

Interestingly, a Nigerian compilation of important African dates rather overlooked the Benin connection and instead emphasised Ethiopia's. Do not have to be told that the author is a Southern "majority."

bokohalal:
Interestingly, a Nigerian compilation of important African dates rather overlooked the Benin connection and instead emphasised Ethiopia's. Do not have to be told that the author is a Southern "majority."

Well at least you know your history.

Ihuomadinihu:

Whether it's on the Southern or Northern fringe,it's regarded as Subsaharan. It's quite obvious that black Africans are the problem with Africa. They have taken away Egypt from Black Africa,next is Mali,and Africans will sit here and nod in affirmation. What next? Nok, Kanem Bornu, Ife and Igboukwu? Last time i checked,they said they were forgotten civilizations of Libyan something something. Nice try!

Lolz............ You know that can't be possible.

Funjosh:



Lolz............ You know that can't be possible.

It's not possible. I want you to know how bad it can get when they want to claim certain African civilizations.

Ihuomadinihu:

It's not possible. I want you to know how bad it can get when they want to claim certain African civilizations.

The way our history is been re-written is appalling. Most African countries are wise now painfully some still in stone age

Fulaman198:


Because it's not. You claim that you don't let whites define what is sub-Saharan, but you are going about it the wrong way.

The truth is blacks (many black groups) are indigenous to the Sahel and Sahara.

From the Hausa, Fulani, Kanuri, Nubians, Gourara, Tebu/Toubou, Tuaregs, there are so many black Saharan/Sahelian groups I haven't even listed.

Ancient Egypt was obviously black and many white PhDs have even admitted to it finally. It's only the overly racist and Eurocentric ones that don't.

Also, Afro-Asiatic languages started in Africa, this means that Arabic, Aramaic and Hebrew all came from a language in Africa. Nigeria and Cameroon alone have 150 spoken Afro-Asiatic languages.

The reason why Nilotic people are referred to Nilotic is because they all came from the Nile... The Nile is in Egypt and parts of Sudan.

Battery is low,so i will join the conversation later.
When Tony brought up Timbuktu,we were arguing about people and civilizations that had contacts with non Africans, Arabians inclusive.
Secondly, you are quick to hold unto Egypt and the rest as ''Black civilizations without understanding the concept of ''black or Subsaharan in this argument. I don't subscribe to this general defintion of black just because of geographical location and skin colour. We don't need need a magnifying glass to know that there are different classification of blacks. Even in Nigeria,the difference is more pronounced. The blacks that built the timbuktu civilization are remarkably different from the blacks of Benin,Ife and Igboukwu civilization. That is the crux of the matter. And your having ties with them still emphasizes a previous argument that Fulani are not subsaharan.

Ihuomadinihu:

In that premise,it's not a subsaharan civilization. Do you see the point now?

Does it have to be 'subsaharan' before it can be regarded as an authentic black African achievement? Subsaharan is nothing but a geographic designation. And as far as geography goes Timbuktu is Saharan, rather than sub-saharan.

The reason you are having difficulties getting the point Fulaman is trying to pass is that you (like many people) have accepted the erroneous idea that subsaharan is synonymous with black African...and that everything north of the Subsaharan line is not 'authentic black'. You need to shake off that idea. There are many black African ethnicities in the Sahara: the Tubus, etc. Timbuktu is equally a Saharan city, a West African city and a heritage of the black people. Get out of the 'Subsaharan equals to Black African' mindset.

Wulfruna:


Does it have to be 'subsaharan' before it can be regarded as an authentic black African achievement? Subsaharan is nothing but a geographic designation. And as far as geography goes Timbuktu is Saharan, rather than sub-saharan.

The reason you are having difficulties getting the point Fulaman is trying to pass is that you (like many people) have accepted the erroneous idea that subsaharan is synonymous with black African...and that everything north of subsaharan line is not 'authentic black'. You need to shake off that idea. There are many black African ethnicities in the Sahara: the Tubus, etc. Timbuktu is equally a Saharan city, a West African city and a heritage of the black people. Get out of the 'Subsaharan equals to Black African' mindset.

The Black Africans of Congo and Yorubaland are different from the blacks of most parts of Niger and Chad. That is a fact! I don't care about your defintion of Black Africa but we are dealing with different types of black. No,it doesn't have to only Subsaharan before we can call it an African civilization but i will not pretend not to notice the difference in both geographical regions.
In simple terms, subsaharan is associated with groups of negriod extraction anything above it is associated with ''Arabian/Berber division of black Africa.

Ihuomadinihu:

Battery is low,so i will join the conversation later.
When Tony brought up Timbuktu,we were arguing about people and civilizations that had contacts with non Africans, Arabians inclusive.
Secondly, you are quick to hold unto Egypt and the rest as ''Black civilizations without understanding the concept of ''black or Subsaharan in this argument. I don't subscribe to this general defintion of black just because of geographical location and skin colour. We don't need need a magnifying glass to know that there are different classification of blacks. Even in Nigeria,the difference is more pronounced. The blacks that built the timbuktu civilization are remarkably different from the blacks of Benin,Ife and Igboukwu civilization. That is the crux of the matter. And your having ties with them still emphasizes a previous argument that Fulani are not subsaharan.

Like the Songhai, the Kanuri, the Hausa, the Tuaregs, the Wolof, the Serer, the Mande, the Nubians and several Nilotic groups, the Fulani are Sahelian/Saharan in Origin. West African yes! Black yes! But from a different and semi-arid to arid region. Mainly one Fulani group lives in the Sahara today, and that's the Wodaabe (and some other Fulani groups in Mali) who inhabit the Southern part of the Sahara.

The other Fulani just live in the Sahel belt or just south of it.

Wulfruna:


Does it have to be 'subsaharan' before it can be regarded as an authentic black African achievement? Subsaharan is nothing but a geographic designation. And as far as geography goes Timbuktu is Saharan, rather than sub-saharan.

The reason you are having difficulties getting the point Fulaman is trying to pass is that you (like many people) have accepted the erroneous idea that subsaharan is synonymous with black African...and that everything north of the Subsaharan line is not 'authentic black'. You need to shake off that idea. There are many black African ethnicities in the Sahara: the Tubus, etc. Timbuktu is equally a Saharan city, a West African city and a heritage of the black people. Get out of the 'Subsaharan equals to Black African' mindset.

I'm brimming and smiling very widely right now. Really well said!

Fulaman198:


I'm brimming and smiling very widely right now. Really well said!

Lol,i can't remember saying that those weren't African heritages but they shouldn't be lumped with Subsaharan Africans considering the geographical,historical and physical differences. *Different types of Blacks.

Fulaman198:


Like the Songhai, the Kanuri, the Hausa, the Tuaregs, the Wolof, the Serer, the Mande, the Nubians and several Nilotic groups, the Fulani are Sahelian/Saharan in Origin. West African yes! Black yes! But from a different and semi-arid to arid region.

That is the part i wanted you to acknowledge. We can't pretend we can't see the differences. That being said, these civilizations should be treated on individual basis. What is known as black Africa today is the Subsaharan Region. Those places upnorth don't count' They are not regarded as 'black African' civilizations.

Ihuomadinihu:

The Black Africans of Congo and Yorubaland are different from the blacks of most parts of Niger and Chad. That is a fact! I don't care about your defintion of Black Africa but we are dealing with different types of black. No,it doesn't have to only Subsaharan before we can call it an African civilization but i will not pretend not to notice the difference in both geographical regions.
In simple terms, subsaharan is associated with groups of negriod extraction anything above it is associated with ''Arabian/Berber division of black Africa

And I've already told you that this association is simplistic and in fact erroneous. There are Saharan 'Negroes' (to use your word). To deny Timbuktu's geographical location because you fear that describing it as Saharan means assigning it to the Arabs, is ridiculous. Its location is in the Southern Sahara, and therefore it is a Saharan city.

If describing it as a Saharan city makes you worry that we are handing our heritage over to Arabs, then you are the one who needs to revisit your definition of 'Saharan' and 'sub-Saharan'.

Ihuomadinihu:

That is the part i wanted you to acknowledge. We can't pretend we can't see the differences. That being said, these civilizations should be treated on individual basis. What is known as black Africa today is the Subsaharan Region. Those places upnorth don't count' They are not regarded as 'black African' civilizations.

But we can't just abandon the blacks in the sahara desert just because they are located above the sub-saharan region mainly dominated by blacks.

Ihuomadinihu:

Lol,i can't remember saying that those weren't African heritages but they shouldn't be lumped with Subsaharan Africans considering the geographical,historical and physical differences. *Different types of Blacks.

Different types of blacks yes (due to geographical makeup), but no less black nonetheless. It is our surroundings that shape us. Just like the other day, I was watching something about a remote village in Uganda, they were very short and small people, but they were a different kind of black from me. No less black though.

Funjosh:



But we can't just abandon the blacks in the sahara desert just because they are located above the sub-saharan region mainly dominated by blacks.

This post made me smile as well

Ihuomadinihu:

The Black Africans of Congo and Yorubaland are different from the blacks of most parts of Niger and Chad. That is a fact! I don't care about your defintion of Black Africa but we are dealing with different types of black. No,it doesn't have to only Subsaharan before we can call it an African civilization but i will not pretend not to notice the difference in both geographical regions.
In simple terms, subsaharan is associated with groups of negriod extraction anything above it is associated with ''Arabian/Berber division of black Africa.

We are all saying the same thing in short. That's correct! Although it goes even beyond that. The blacks of Congo are predominately Bantus whilst Yorubas are Yoruboid (if that even makes sense, but I think it means related to groups from Benin Republic, Togo and other parts of SW Nigeria). Black people are the most diverse people in the world. This is why we come in numerous skin tones (from light brown all the way to gorgeous dark brown Nuer/Dinka/Southern Sudanese colour).

We must embrace and love the diversity of blacks and Africa. One love!

bokohalal:

Songhai and Mali had relationship with Arabia. Benin remain the first African people to have relations with Western Europeans.
The Portuguese established relationship with Ethiopia in 1520.
They first reached Benin in 1478 and established diplomatic relation in 1482.

Do we have any scholarly evidences to back this bogus claim

Wulfruna:


And I've already told you that this association is simplistic and in fact erroneous. There are Saharan 'Negroes' (to use your word). To deny Timbuktu's geographical location because you fear that describing it as Saharan means assigning it to the Arabs, is ridiculous. Its location is in the Southern Sahara, and therefore it is a Saharan city.

If describing it as a Saharan city makes you worry that we are handing our heritage over to Arabs, then you are the one who needs to revisit your definition of 'Saharan' and 'sub-Saharan'.

Exactly also many people make the erroneous claim that Berbers are "white". I believe the true Berbers (like the Tuaregs, Siwa, Gourara whom actually practise Berber culture and speak the Berber language) are black but a different "kind" of black.

Funjosh:



But we can't just abandon the blacks in the sahara desert just because they are located above the sub-saharan region mainly dominated by blacks.

I think she wants us to override geographical reasoning and just call them subsaharan, because according to her 'saharan' and 'subsaharan' are not really geographical terms per se, but racial terms.

Saharan = Arab/Berber

Subsaharan = 'Negroid'

Fulaman198:


Exactly also many people make the erroneous claim that Berbers are "white". I believe the true Berbers (like the Tuaregs, Siwa, Gourara whom actually practise Berber culture and speak the Berber language) are black but a different "kind" of black.

Of course. The oldest skulls found through out the Sahara and even as far as Southern Algeria belonged to what anthropologists today will call the 'negroid' type.

The "white" or "whitish" element came in at a later point in history.

Wulfruna:


Of course. The oldest skulls found through out the Sahara and even as far as Southern Algeria belonged to what anthropologists today will call the 'negroid' type.

The "white" or "whitish" element came in at a later point in history.

It's just said how white people have brainwashed most of the world into thinking that the Sahara is Arab when it really is not. I mean even Africans are believing that rubbish. Arabs themselves don't even really fall into any specific skin colour whether black / white and the Shuwa (Baggara) and other black Arab groups found throughout the Sahel/Sahara are proof of that.

I think Western people either need to shut up about the Sahara or don't speak naively about it. They try so hard to cover up the truth about the black people that inhabit the Sahara.

I can see why there are some blacks (like one black guy who hails from Egypt) that are upset by being classified as white when he moved to America when he was clearly a black man.

Wulfruna:


And I've already told you that this association is simplistic and in fact erroneous. There are Saharan 'Negroes' (to use your word). To deny Timbuktu's geographical location because you fear that describing it as Saharan means assigning it to the Arabs, is ridiculous. Its location is in the Southern Sahara, and therefore it is a Saharan city.

If describing it as a Saharan city makes you worry that we are handing our heritage over to Arabs, then you are the one who needs to revisit your definition of 'Saharan' and 'sub-Saharan'.

Those civilizations are not considered 'black' African civilization. They are more related to North African and Berber populations racially. You don't only need to redefine Subsaharan but also the word Negro.

Wulfruna:


Of course. The oldest skulls found through out the Sahara and even as far as Southern Algeria belonged to what anthropologists today will call the 'negroid' type.

The "white" or "whitish" element came in at a later point in history.

The presence of the white/Arabic elements are pointers that racially there are different types of blacks,it doesn't remove the fact that they are Africans.