Chyz*:

Yes. It Sudan got its independence in 1956 from both the britiash and egypt. Ghana got theirs 1957.

PhysicsMHD:


That's what I thought. But I'm always hearing this Ghana claim, especially (but not only) from Ghanaians. I wonder if I shouldn't post this same topic on ghanaweb.com, but with a more provocative title.

Ikengawo:

well south africa was independant long before anyone of those two

Ikengawo:

so why is ethiopia not a part of black africa?

EzeUche_:

Maybe they were referring Sudan as an North African nation. Remember that this country supposedly has many "Arabs."

I think the Ghana claim is basically based on a bizarre classification technicality. My point was that Ghana was second in black Africa, and if not for the strange Sudan classification (because we all know the Sudanese are not North Africans, regardless of whatever rubbish the UN comes up with) by some uninformed body like the UN, that Ghana claim would have died out quickly.
This UN classification is especially silly because Mali, which is classified as West African and also in "sub-Saharan" Africa by everybody, is not lower geographically than Sudan, but is never classified as North African.

Technically and strictly speaking the term sub means under or beneath. So sub saharan in its strictest sense denotes countries lying beneath the saharan desert. since sudan and mali lies within the sahara, they should not be subsaharan countries. my simple reasoning for this is from information it seems much of sudanese population are within the sahara whiles much of malians are immediately without so in terms of the demographics it seems fairly reasonable to put mali in sub sharan africa while sudan is out hence ghana's status as the first black african country south of the shara to gain independence. the accurate refernce to ghana's status is as i have stated first black country south of the shara.

cheikh:

kabna

@kabna

Your reply may appear plausible but that's an exercise in sophistry. It has nothing to do with the 'demographics' you're trying to peddle.  Who 'Technically' defined and coined the phrase 'Sub' -  when and for what purpose? The only reason Sudan was seen as non African was because of pseudo-political and linguistic affinity with the Arabs of the Middle East who were very keen to 'Arabise' Sudan by co-opting Sudan into the Arab league hence the wars in the Sudan with the attendant gross and spurious interpretation 'sub' this and 'sub' 'that' which sadly has gained currency even amongst Africans. It's amazing how persistent lies become legitimised and then become 'technically'^ truth . Pls I am not trying to negate your history or the stories that Ghanains have consistently told themselves. I am happy for you if it makes you happy and us as fellow Africans share in your progressive match.

kabna:

Before I comment on this, I will reveal my identity: AM A PROUD GHANAIAN. ( NOW LET YOUR PREJUDICE BECLOUD YOUR THINKING)

Technically and strictly speaking the term sub means under or beneath. So sub saharan in its strictest sense denotes countries lying beneath the saharan desert. since sudan and mali lies within the sahara, they should not be subsaharan countries. my simple reasoning for this is from information it seems much of sudanese population are within the sahara whiles much of malians are immediately without so in terms of the demographics it seems fairly reasonable to put mali in sub sharan africa while sudan is out hence ghana's status as the first black african country south of the shara to gain independence. the accurate refernce to ghana's status is as i have stated first black country south of the shara.

PhysicsQED,PhysicsMHD,PhysicsHD, etc.:

lol, Prejudice? Not at all. Lighten up.

I have a lot of admiration for Ghanians. The Ashanti empire, Akan symbols, art, architecture, J.E. Casely Hayford, James Aggrey, Jerry Rawlings, etc. But you guys are so cheeky sometimes with your claims. One Ghanaian poster on this board made some claim a while back about some obscure Ghanaian physicist being the only African with any scientific term or idea named after him. I nearly fell out of my chair in shock that he had the gall to make such a statement, but then I remembered that the poster was a Ghanaian poster.


But please come with facts next time and not cheeky Ghanian assertions. It's indeed true that most of the Malian population is in the south and near the capital.

However, Just because the capital of Sudan (Khartoum), which has about 5-7 million or so people is in the Northeast, that does not mean that the population of Sudanese is in the actual Sahara desert and not beneath it. It is actually the case that the overwhelming majority of Sudanese are beneath the Sahara, as in Mali.

southern sudan will be in either central or eastcentral africa while northern sudan will be north africa, and arab.

sudan used to be part of egypt so technically cant be wholly considered black.

But Egypt used to be wholly black, just like Sudan used to be. You need to put down your colonial handbook on African ''history''.

A major reason why Sudan came to be categorized as part of North Africa was white 'embarrassment' at the glorious black Nubian civilization of antiquity, of fine temples, chariots, and pyramids.

The racists who dictate UN policy could not bring themselves to publicly associate such majesty with black Africa, so, just as they did with Egypt, they lifted Sudan and placed her somewhere in the middle east or ''North Africa'' against all common sense.

PhysicsRND:

Lol, don't worry about that false claim.

I've already responded to that guy's post twice and put his idea in the dustbins of history with facts, but this anti-spam bot kept getting me, so I'll wait to see if the post reappears. If not I'll post a modified version of my earlier rebuttal in separate parts.