Re: Early Amerind assimilation (Was: Re: Romans in the New World?)

Peter Bromfield (
Fri, 9 Aug 1996 13:40:55 GMT

G Sutton wrote:
> In article <>,
> Peter Bromfield <> wrote:
> >I don't think you are going back far enough. In order to gain more
> >insight into 'race' we need to examine the history of not only the
> >United States, but also that of Europe. In case you didn't know, The
> >so-called Moors ruled Portugal and Spain for about 500 years, they were
> >the ruling class there at that time. There is also reason for me to
> >believe that these Moors also ruled other parts of Europe as well.
> What other parts of Europe do you believe they ruled?

Perhaps parts of Austria, Germany and France for a shorter period of


> These Moors were a Muslim army from North Africa, composed of Arabs, Berbers
> and Syrians, all of which are Caucasoids and not Negroids.


> Of the medieval
> Caliphate of Cordova, it has been written, "most of the Caliphs were >fairor
> ginger-haired with blue eyes" (Moorish Spain, p.24).

This is absolutely absurd, it is common knowledge that the moors were

> In fact Arabs have
> always considered themselves distinct from Negroids and even in >present-day
> Iraq a citizen can obtain a legal judgment against a person falsely >accusing
> him of Negro ancestry (Caravan, p.161).

This is about the most rediculous thing I have ever heard. It sounds
like something from the slave days in the U.S. If Iraq actually does
this, then the Iraqi government and law makers are the dumbest people on
the planet. I thought the U.S. had stupid policies, this takes the cake.
I'd like to see a black Iraqi come over here and try to convince me that
he is white, when African-Americans look less 'negroid' than he does. I
know they put oil in their hair and crap, but they can't fool us.

> >It was an honor for white people to marry Moors at that time. I > >believe some
> >where near the 11th century, the Moors were conquered by Germanic people from
> >the East. It stands to reason that ALL OF THE MOORS WERE NOT KILLED OFF, many
> >converted to Christianity and became allies with the Germanic invaders, some
> >became Scientists, political leaders, and were accepted into German, British,
> >Dutch, and Polish noble families. So during a certain time period there WERE

> Again you have made the mistake of assuming the Moors were Negroids.


> Although
> I will agree that when the Visigothic aristocracy reemerged and drove >the
> Moors out of the Iberian penisula (a military operation which >culminated in
> the founding of the Spanish Empire and the discorvery of the New >World) that
> many of the Moors had already mixed with the Mediterranean population, >I fail
> to see how these Moors became the rulers of many parts of Europe.
> >If we assume the first people to settle in the U.S. were the 'elite' > >of
> >Europe, then there is a very high probability that these settlers were
> >of Moorish ancestry.
> No, the first people to settle in the U.S. were Northern Europeans and not the
> Spanish, who may or may not have had some Morrish ancestry.
> >Also, the European men didn't bring women with them when they first came here
> >so the first mothers in The U.S. and 'Latin America' were Native-American and
> >African slave women.

> That is true with the Spanish, but not with the Northern Europeans.


> The
> English settler, who often brought his family with him, was not as >prone to
> miscegenation as the lonely Spanish soldier.

The English settlers found the Indian and African woman irresitable.
Often times the English wives would get jealous of the African and
Indian women and do things like cut their breasts off, burn their faces
and mutilate the black women in other ways which I can't even say here.
The English women also had babies by the African and Indian men
sometimes out of jealously and other times just out of curiosity. The
English had black slaves and favorites in their own country before
comming to the U.S. and they did breed with them. It can be said that
many of them had a fetish for black men and women.

> Although their leaders, the
> conquistadores, exhibited many Norhtern European traits, the Spanish >soilder
> was of a darker shade and noticeably shorter than the Northern >European, this
> ment the Spanish soilder was less separated from the Indians by >physical
> traits.

It is perhaps the physical differences that attracted the Northern
Europeans to the blacks. There is abundant documented evidence that when
black troops were stationed in places like Germany, France, and England
the German and British ladies were attracted to the black men like
flies. At one point, the military officials had to build a large barbed
wire fence around the barracks where the negro troops were stationed, to
keep the white ladies out. Still they found the white ladies trying to
get over the fence and many descuised themselves as men just to get in.
During wwII black men were having babies by German women left and right
and it wasn't from rape either. So history has shown that Northern
Europeans are indeed very prone to miscegenation with negros.

> >Many 'white Americans' will argue until they are blue in the face and
> >insist that they know they are 100% pure white. The most common argument
> >I hear is "My family is from Germany", "I am part Polish", "I am
> >French", "we are Dutch", etc. If you examine the history of Europe (the
> >real history), the probability that your family lived in these parts of
> >Europe without have 'black people' in your family is very, very slim.

> I won't deny that many Americans who believe they are %100 pure white >are
> wrong, but I wouldn't say that, except for maybe Portugal that brought >Negroid
> slaves to their country, there is any large amounts of Negroid blood >in
> Europe.

Large amounts of 'negro' blood is all over Europe with the exception of

> >Any views stated above are not the views of my employer and it's > >content
> >in no way reflects any of the programs or policies of The United > >States
> >Geological Survey.

> All you have exhibted is another example of Negro revisionism.

All you have exhibited is ignorance and stupidity. Claiming that
Northern Europeans didn't and don't want to mix with black people.

> Claiming that
> the Moors were Negroids, reminds me of the claims that the "kingdoms" >or
> "empires" of Ghana, Mali and Songhai were the work of Negroids, when >actually
> they were founded by Hamitic Berbers and Semitic Arabs and were not in >West
> Africa at all, but in Western Sudan.

The Berbers themselves claim that they are descended from Black
Africans, indeed many of them are very black. The 'purest Semites' are
the bedowin Arabs who are largely negroid. Arabs are descended from
them. Negros just don't come from west Africa.