Belief that race and racism is a new construct is something that modern Europeans have attempted to propel into people’s consciousness but we must be aware of the false history they are trying to get into our minds. They have tried to make it seem that in ancient times their ancestors weren’t racist and they are trying to revert the world back to this era socially, all of this is purely untruth and can easily be trashed with minimal effort. Race and racism is very old, I have shown this before but I am going to unveil key stereotypes held by our enemies in Eurasia since ancient times. One of those stereotypes is of the supposed evilness of black and black people. This is in blatant juxtaposition to Ancient Afrika where the colour black was a sign of power and greatness, including Amun and Amunet (the Supreme Being), Ausar and Auset (who represent the black soil) and Kamit meaning ‘black nation’ due to the fertile dark soil and the colour of the people’s skin. This brazen lie that Eurasians are the descendants of Ancient Afrikans is being pushed by Eurocentric people even though modern Afrikan traditional spiritualists and Afrikan langauges claim black to be good and powerful which is coherence with the past. Obibini is the Twi (Akan language) word for Afrikan people including Afrikans from outside of Afrika, the root bibri meaning blue, to do with dark blue been the colour of the sky at night and it’s relation to blackness/darkness, dark is tuum which is also used as a descriptor for black people: otuntum and also the colour black: tumtum and is also the root word for power in Twi which is tumi. The words for black and white people are used commonly in Ghana with oburini used for Europeans, which also has disparaging meaning. The idea that race is solely European removes our ability to see our own history and own languages which have understood race too from their own point of view from the very start. If you go to modern Ghana it is usual to hear ‘hello obibini’ and ‘hello oburini’ which literally means hello black person and hello white person, race is not a European thing and is certainly not unknown in Afrika.
After normalising contact and gaining understanding of the blacks of the Mediterranean area of North Afrika during the antiquity, Europeans have consistently shown a negative view of Afrikans. Not unknown to scholars, the Ancient Romans held stereotypes of Afrikans and this expanded in detail and record during the Christendom era of Europe (mostly the Dark Ages).
‘The above image, from a Roman bathhouse in modern-day Tunisia, depicts a macrophallic black male. Such images were, according to this blog, meant to ward off the evil eye and, at the same time, a joke and play on stereotypes of oversexed, macrophallic blacks. Images of ithyphallic and macrophallic black men were common in Roman iconography, and, in addition to passing on a tradition of lascivious blacks to Christian patristic literature, through which such stereotypes of Africans survives to this day, also represented common scientific views of the world and beliefs in the fertility of the Nile. For instance, some Greco-Roman thinkers believed that drinking the waters of the Nile gave Egyptians fertility, explaining the preponderance of triplets born. The spread of Nile Valley deities into the Greco-Roman world also pervaded this, since swarthy and “Ethiopian” men and women from the Nile Valley were often key participants in temple rituals in honor of Isis, Bes, and other gods whose worship became common in the Roman world. Thus, as my earlier Nile mosaic post indicated, the spread of Isiac worship and other Nile Valley gods led to a proliferation of exotic depictions of Nilotic scenes as well as associations of the exotic Nile (especially “Aethiopia,” the ill-defined land of ‘black people’ that usually referred to Nubia or Kush, but could also include parts of Saharan North Africa, East Africa and India) with black fertility and servility. Some suggest that the Egyptian dwarf god, Bes, also associated with fertility and possibly of “Nubian” origin, also influenced the proliferation of pygmies and dwarves that appear in some Nile mosaics, such as the second picture below. These dwarves are depicted in several Greco-Roman world Nile scenes hunting, fleeing, and riding animals. In some depictions of Isis worship in Roman cities, dark-skinned figures appear, too, likely “Ethiopians” and Egyptians. In one mosaic, a dark-skinned figure with what may be the feathers of the headdress of the Egyptian god Bes seems to be dancing (in my Nile Mosaic post), which could represent another tie between perceived blackness, the Nile, and ancient Egypt.’ This clearly shows in the European psyche Afrikans and lust, sexuality and fertility have been synonymous for a very long time. This also display the ‘large phallus black male’ stereotype from the ancient tradition of Europe. Fertility still remains high amongst black people, 2000 years and little has changed, Europeans have now progressed from looking on the outside at Afrikans to trying to curtail the fertility of Afikans. The lumping of all black people into a foreign race ‘Aethopians’ by Europeans is also present from the Greco-Roman era.
The Pygmy depictions should not be surprise as Greeks spoke on the Afrikan ‘Troglodyte’ pygmies who lived south deep in the Sahara and south of it. This proves by first hand, at the time, evidence Niger-Congo peoples were not the major population to the south of the Sahara. The Dogon also speak of ‘red skin’ (brown skin) pygmies living in their current location prior to them and also archaeological records that show West Afrika was only open to mass migration and farming 3000 years ago when the rainforest decreased in density and size a few thousand years after the Sahara first commenced to drying up the rainforest that was once further north.
‘Ancient Greco-Roman climate theory endeavored to explain the biological diversity of the world, positing the temperate zone or clime of the Mediterranean as ideal for human development, beauty, and culture. This automatically barbarized all of northern Europe, and most of Asia and Africa. Indeed, Greco-Roman accounts consider the two opposite poles of color, the white Scythians and blackest Ethiopians, and because of their location in the cold and hot, tropical climes of the world, they are necessarily too pale, too dark, barbaric and lacking. In addition, some non-Christian writers of the Roman empire, as well as early Christians, adopted this theory of ethnocentric Mediterranean ideals and “Ethiopia,” the large part of Africa inhabited by dark-skinned peoples, became associated with lust, fertility, and sexuality, probably due in part to the association of Nilotic gods with fertility and the swarthy and black inhabitants of Egypt and Nubia.’ Mediterranean supremacist ideology practised by the Greco-Romans, but they list the nations and ethnicities that make up the races along colour lines. Presenting concepts of race 2000 years prior to genetics and well over 1000 years before the supposed invention of race by European colonialism and imperialism, disproving the false Eurocentric history they are pushing of it been a social construct not realised before 500 years ago.
Astronomia 4 (poem) by Manilius
‘Idcirco in varias leges variasque figuras dispositum genus est hominum, proprioque colore formantur gentes, sociataque iura per artus materiamque parem privato foedere signant. flava per ingentis surgit Germania partus, Gallia vicino minus est infecta rubore, asperior solidos Hispania contrahit artus. Martia Romanis urbis pater induit ora Gradivumque Venus miscens bene temperat artus, perque coloratas subtilis Graecia gentes gymnasium praefert vultu fortisque palaestras, et Syriam produnt torti per tempora crines.
Aethiopes maculant orbem tenebrisque figurant perfusas hominum gentes; minus India tostos progenerat; tellusque natans Aegyptia Nilo lenius irriguis infuscat corpora campis iam propior mediumque facit moderata tenorem. Phoebus harenosis Afrorum pulvere terris exsiccat populos, et Mauretania nomen oris habet titulumque suo fert ipsa colore.’
Listing of skin colour in gradients.
‘In Manilius’ order white complexions from the most light to the least light are –
In Manilius’ order black complexions from the most dark to the least dark are
You can see in both Latin and English that dark people are listed completely different from the pale peoples, in different paragraphs, listed from the base of darkness or paleness.
‘Of course, color symbolism of ancient religions also played a role, but early Christianity, to it’s credit, had a universalizing goal, expanding from small Jewish Christian communities to include Axum, Armenia, the Roman empire, and beyond, despite the sometimes offensive patristic exegesis that used the skin color of the “Ethiopian” to represent sin until Christian baptism washed the “Ethiopian” white. Indeed, such an interpretation of the dusky bride in Song of Songs by Origen illustrates this attitude. Unfortunately, this association of “Ethiopia” with heat, blackness as representative of evil, misfortune, and fertility contributed to the negative image of blacks. Furthermore, the oversized phallus of the numerous examples of black males in Roman iconography, meant to belittle them and avert the evil eye in bathhouses, fed into stereotypes of lascivious, oversexed Africans that entered into Christian, Jewish, and Islamic thought. The result, centuries-old stereotypes of an entire ‘race’ persist to this day, and, in some ways, it can be traced directly to the world of the Roman Empire, Christian literature and patristic literature, and stereotypes based on poor science (or lackthereof).’ Proof of both the evil, criminal black male stereotype and black male sexual image disseminating from Rome, the same society they are now trying to purify to seem ‘colourblind’.
‘Peter Biller has uncovered the rebirth of the stereotype of the Black “Jezebel” or lascivious, oversexed black male in medieval Paris, where university natural philosophy professors were developing “proto-racial” thought in regards to Blacks and Jews, and some of the ‘scientific’ claims made by people like Albert Magnus in 13th century Europe. Some transmission through Islamic ‘science’ is also likely, since Islamic writers would attribute claims of black mental inferiority, overly long phalli and a lustful nature to Galen, the legendary Roman doctor.’ More proof of the Roman impact on later racist thoughts across Eurasia. It is showing that these people put these views into their utilisation of the religions which demonstrates why blackening up these beliefs won’t work as the peoples viewed as legitimate within these religions hold these perspectives.
‘Now I cannot beget the fourth son whose children I would have ordered to serve you and your brothers! Therefore it must be Canaan, your first born, whom they enslave. And since you have disabled me from doing ugly things in the blackness of night, Canaan’s children shall be born ugly and black! Moreover, because you twisted your head around to see my nakedness, your grandchildren’s hair shall be twisted into kinks, and their eyes red; again because your lips jested at my misfortune, theirs shall swell; and because you neglected my nakedness, they shall go naked, and their male members shall be shamefully elongated.’ The earliest recording of the curse of Ham was in the Talmud, this quote displays the hackneyed ideas of black people been ugly, black people as servile and the big black penis stereotype. The Talmud is a mainstay of Western Eurasian Jewry, it was written down and finished in 5th century AD. Eurocentric worldview attempts to paint it as a legitimate extension to earlier Judaism when in reality it evaluates much of the Bible which isn’t even a Jewish text. The Talmud was not relevant to Jews outside of Western Eurasia, as there are Jews in Southern Afrika and Jews in China, it’s a religion after all. The interwoven hatred of Afrikans and religious values is common throughout Eurasian history, the curse of Ham is literally 1000 years older than Transatlantic Slavery and is a perfect example of IMA’s looking into their past to help excuse current behaviour. They now seek to teach us race and racism is a new phenomenon, clearly not.
‘2nd century A.D. – the Historia Augusta: The life of Marcus Aurelius Part 2:21 mentions the attacks by the “Mauri” who had engaged the Romans in battle in the Iberian Peninsula and who had “wasted almost the whole of Spain” . The peoples of early Iberia like Isidore of Seville were thus quite familiar with what Mauri looked like.
3rd c. A.D. – by this period derivatives of the word Mori or Mauri had come to signify black things. Morum had come to mean blackberry or Mulberry tree. Roman dramatist Platus or Plautus used the word morulus (blackberry-colored) for a black man or “Nigri”.
4th c. the document Expositio Totius Mundi says a barbarous population lived in the desert south of Tripoli known both as “Mazices and Ethiopians”(Carocopino, 1940, p. 391-393; Gsell, 1927, p. 2).The Mazikes or Mazikha were a people extending from North Africa into the eastern Desert and across the Red Sea into the Yemen, it is originally the name of the Tuareg peoples. Today the name “Amazigh” is a generic and nationalist name for people who speak Berber, but was originally exclusively used by Shluh and Tuareg “the veiled men of Sahara”. Herbert Wendt assert that, in Rome “every other slave was called Amasix, Maxyx, Maxitanus or simply Max” and that “the negroes” luxury slaves on Greek or Hellenic vases were named Amaseos or “folk of Amasis”, an ancient ruler of Libyan ethnicity in Egypt whom he refers to as a Berber king. Herodotus refers to these “Libyans” as the “Maxyes”. (Wendt, 1962, p. 66).
4th c. A.D. – the Roman Claudius complained of the chief of the “Mauri Bavares” in North Africa taking noble Roman women of the Levant. It was written of the chief, “when tired of each noblest matron, Gildo hands her over to the Moors.” And these, “Sidonian mothers, married in Carthage city must needs mate with barbarians. He thrusts upon me an Ethiopian as a son-in law, a Berber as a husband. The hideous hybrid affrights its cradle” (Platnauer, 1922, p.113
5th c. A.D. – “The Moors have bodies black as night, while the skin of the Gauls is white…” written by Isidore of Seville in The Etymologies of Isidore of Seville – translation by Steven A. Barney published 2007. p. 386. St. Isidore also, “underlines the fact that Moors are so named because they are black, and their blackness comes from the heat of the sun.” St. Isidore(9.2.121-23)” (Ramey, L., Monstrous Alterity in Early Modern Travel Accounts. Esprit Createur, (48)1, pp. 81-952008).
6th c. A.D.- Corippus, a Byzantine in Book I 245 of Johannidus, Book 1, 245, speaking of Moors in the area of North Africa who he felt had “faces of a horrible black color” stated – “Maura videbatur facies, nigro colore horrida” (Michell, G.B. (1903, Jan.). The Berbers. Journal of the Royal African Society, 2(6), (pp. 161-194). He also refers to some Moorish captives as “black as crows”.
6th c. A.D. – Procopius, a Byzantine in his History of the Wars book IV contrasting a white peoples who had settled in North Africa claimed they were not “black skinned like the Mauri…” The Mauri he knew lived in the area stretching from Leptis Magna to the Aures and Kabyle Mountains. The history books today call them “Berbers”.
9th c. A.D. – A Norse saga translated into Gaelic speaks of the Moors of the 9th c. reads, “After this the Lochlanns (Danes) passed over the whole country, and they plundered and burnt the whole country and they carried off a great host of them as captives to Erin and these are the blue men of Erin, for Mauri is the same as black (Nigri) man and Mauritania is the same as blackness…Long indeed were these blue men in Erin…’ Howorth, H.H. (1884). Early Intercourse Between the Franks and Danes, Transactions of the Royal Historical Society 1, pp. 18-61
9th c. A.D. – Saedulius Scotus, a Celtic monk in a letter to an Italian ruler refers to the horrible “black faces” of “the Saracen” invaders of southern Italy.’
Quotes from contemporary sources which capture how these people felt about Afrikans from towards the expiration of the Roman Empire to deep into the Dark Ages; just before the Crusades. It also reinforces several stances Europeans have tried to claim are ‘Afrocentric’ when in reality it is truth and historically based. Iberia has always had Afrikans in it from long before the ‘Moorish invasion’ in the 700’s and this ratifies that claim, Romans claiming they were a common occurrence from before they conquered the majority of Mediterranean North Afrika. The other quote is the Saracens, another Greco-Roman term used by later Europeans for Arab tribes, having black faces, but many people still don’t want to believe that there have ALWAYS been black people called Arabs by interlopers, for the name Arabia was first applied by the Persains for a region ‘east of the Nile’ into the Syro-Arabian desert, this is also corroborated by Herodotus’s world map.
‘Arabia or Achaemenid Arabia was a satrapy (province) of the Achaemenid Empire by the name of Arabâya. Achaemenid Arabia corresponded to the lands between Nile Delta (Egypt) and Mesopotamia, later known to Romans as Arabia Petraea. According to Herodotus, Cambyses did not subdue the Arabs when he attacked Egypt in 525 BCE.’ Arabs were in Kamit from way before their invasion of the Roman Empire, they clearly were not mostly Eurasian at the time. Arabs weren’t even one group, some were descendants from Yemen and others from a the Blemmeys in Eastern Sudan/Eritrea, they were lumped together by outside groups. All of this before the rise of Arabic, Islam and a concept of an ‘Arab’ identity as Arabia was largely inhabited by the Yemenite peoples who had closer relations with those across the Red Sea than futher eastwards into Eurasia.
Moor, the word itself is adopted from an offensive word in Ancient Egypt mer meaning dead which was related to the term meru in the Medu Neter which means damned people, wretched and slave. The word first surfaces in Indo-European languages as mauros and comes from Greek meaning black and was applied to the people of Mauretania (Greeks called Mauri) the name given by Indo-Europeans to a nation who lived in ancient times in what is now Northern Morocco. If this isn’t a wake up call about how much Eurocentrists, at this point, are making up history then what is. Most people don’t even know that moor was originally a pejorative term which exhibits clearly that there was an abysmal view of Afrikans since foregone times in European culture.
‘A Maure, since the 11th century, is the symbol of an African head. The term has Phoenician and Greek origins; see Moors’. The 1000’s, over a thousand years and the sign of the ‘black enemy’ has been consciously and continuously used in Europe, but their descendants are trying to teach us that they only just began to be racist in the 1500’s. The Maure can still be seen on the Sardinian and Corisican flags and coats of arms, directly an offshoot of the Crown of Aragon flags, the Aragon a peoples from Northern Spain whom controlled the islands and much of the Western Mediterranean at one point. Aragon, which is now incorporated into Spain, took on the head of an Afrikan defeated as symbolism for the fact they were reconquering Spain from outsiders (reconquista). The question is if according to Eurocentrists black people were not common in the ‘Moorish’ invasion why are they used as a motif of their enemy throughout Europe? It is obvious two things have happened, 1: is that the Moor was never a self-identified name, it changed meaning over time from meaning black people to any old Muslim and that 2: to be associated with and to be labelled an Afrikan as a Eurasian is offensive in their world hence the designations continual usage beyond when blacks were the majority of people on the North Afrikan coast. The covering of tracks has now had to be done in order to reshuffle history into the phony narrative they have tried to set up in retrospect.
Coat of Arms of Aragon from the 1400’s to the mid 1900’s.
Current legitimate official Coat of Arms of Aragon set from 1984. This really exemplifies the purpose redrawing of history by Eurocentric people, this time spearheaded by the old wealth aristocracy in Europe.
‘The textile is an orphrey, the decorative strip sewn on to the back of a chasuble, the garment worn by a Catholic priest when celebrating the Mass. The embroidery shows a black African beating Jesus with a club. The scene is one from the Passion, the period of Christ’s suffering and death on the cross. There is no basis in the Gospels for representing Christ’s tormentors as black.
The torturer may be shown as black to indicate his evil nature, his ignorance of the Christian message or perhaps to give a sense of impending doom. The colour black has long been used to evoke a negative image, and the colour white a positive one. In the later Middle Ages, the persecutors of Jesus were sometimes depicted as black, perhaps with exaggerated features, as were the Jews.’ The continuity of Greco-Roman ideas on Afrikans by the ancestors of modern Europeans. The intermixing of racism and religion has always been key to pale skin peoples power, wherever they moved to the traditional religions and viewpoints were chastised and demonised and then came along a religion (or perspective of one) which always made pale skin better socially, mentally and spiritually. Hinduism in India is another example of Caucasians polluting previous religions and creating a supremacist ideology out of its shell. There is no Biblical basis for racism against Afrikans, there is no problematic relationships which we see with Jews and Jesus but somehow Afrikans are metaphorical of the devil prior to Transatlantic Slavery. The basis of modern racism towards black people is not slavery, the majority of slaves in this same span of time were European slaves so how comes there skin colour was not viewed negatively by their captors in Asia and Afrika?
‘The colour black was also used for the depictions of the devil and demons that often featured in the visions of saints and monks. In medieval theatre, actors wore black masks to play demons, and in literature and folklore Satan went by a variety of names, including the ‘black knight’, ‘black man’, ‘black Jehovah’ and ‘black Ethiopian’.’ The disdain for Afrikans is not new and was bound to occur once you look at the pigeonholing of Afrikans into negative boxes throughout European history prior to chattel slavery.
Many black people try to or want to forget much of the abhorrence against us is not due to our behaviour but the simple loathing of our phenotype by others, something they didn’t really hide until recently. This still becomes apparent when we observe the attempts to degrade or dismiss the existence black female beauty, disrespect of Negroid facial features and dark skin is still common (within the black collective too) and the fact that non-blacks seem to be as shook up by the presence of black people in large crowds or at nearby by themselves on the street. The latter can be seen by these people’s relative lack of representation in police shootings in America. Non-Afrikan people generally do not cross the street when they see a mulatto or an albino black person, the assessed ugliness/wickedness in relation to black the colour and the people has a psychological consequence not just for us but for our treatment. It has been established in psychological studies time and time again that someone who is viewed as ugly is likely to receive harsher treatment even for the same thing, unfair as it is this is life. We have to realise where we stand so we can know how to deal with what we face.
‘But while Elizabeth may have enjoyed being entertained by Black people, in the 1590s she also issued proclamations against them. In 1596 she wrote to the lord mayors of major cities noting that there were ‘of late divers blackmoores brought into this realm, of which kind of people there are already here to manie…’. She ordered that ‘those kinde of people should be sente forth of the land’.
Elizabeth made an arrangement for a merchant, Casper van Senden, to deport Black people from England in 1596. The aim seems to have been to exchange them for (or perhaps to sell them to obtain funds to buy) English prisoners held by England’s Catholic enemies Spain and Portugal.
No doubt van Senden intended to sell these people. But this was not to be, because masters of Black workers – who had not been offered compensation – refused to let them go. In 1601, Elizabeth issued a further proclamation expressing her ‘discontentment by the numbers of blackamores which are crept into this realm…’ and again licensing van Senden to deport Black people. It is doubtful whether this second proclamation was any more successful than the first.’
This occurred well before the bulk of the chattel slavery. The views of black self-abasement and subservience were already commonplace in Europe, even though the Sahelian kingdoms were not only keeping abreast but were vastly richer than they were at the same time. This propaganda war on the black image as evil, servile, oversexual, cursed by God and stupid started long before chattel slavery, the images would later justify the treatment of us at these peoples hands. This is wanton criminalistic psychology, not just to avoid guilt but preconceived hatred for little to no reason. The attempts to remove a minor percentage of the populace from England, decreed by the monarch shows well established and deep seated scorn held by these people and particularly their elites. The excuses made by later generations of these people do not suffice the behaviour. Indeed it makes no logical sense when you look at the fact that Europeans and other Eurasians held condescending views of Afrikan people. On top of that Spain was expelling Afrikans, Muslims and Jews from it’s shores at the same time they propose this bargaining was supposedly going down.
Black people, we need to stop looking into bogus storylines handed down by our enemies. The adverse judgement of us a peoples is neither contemporary nor temporary, we must understand this is a protracted war that has been fought on many levels before Europeans ventured into Afrika en masse. The erasure of the history of our past interactions and the displacement of Afrikans as the majority population of the Mediterranean coastline should have been red lights that these people are dangerous to our existence. These people are only continuing what their progenitors have laid out for them, they were given a template on how to view us, how to treat us and how to depict us to others and since they have gained global command many stereotypes exclusive to Western Asia have now become all-encompassing and have become heavily internalised by many Afrikans. These people know their history, they know our history, they know the tricks and indoctrination they have undertook against us. They also know they will never quit, if they wanted to they would have done it ages ago, if they wanted to they would have never even held such views in the first place, especially after prolonged contact with us. They haven’t quit and we shouldn’t quit fighting back, we have the right to self-determination and we can’t allow ourselves to be determined in iconography by these people.