“This is fortified by a religious faith of intense force, amounting often to primitive intolerance. But it should be not be impossible to convince the Moors that neither their independence nor their religion is threatened, and that it will be worth their while to live on terms of friendship with their neighbors. That the French are precisely the right people to convey this message has not been made clear. They’re not unnatural desire to appropriate portions of Moorish territory exposes them more particularly than any other people to the suspicion of the Moors. Moreover, their repeated failures in attempts at colonization reveal them as anything but ideal negotiators with a dusky race.” See Saturday Review of Politics, Literature, Science and Art, Volume 106
“A comparison between British and French Somaliland will illustrate our point. At Berbera or Zaila the natives are respectful, well behaved and contended. Proceed a few miles further u the cast to Jibuti and you find men of the selfsame race, even of this very same tribes, insolent, dishonest and mutinous. The difference is due to the fact the British know and the solely due to the fact that the British know and the French do not know how to manage natives. And if the French have failed to manage natives.”
“And if the French have failed so consciously with so elementary a type as the Somali, how can they exact to succeed in pacifying the Moors. We have always said the Act of Algeciras was a mistake, and that the only hoe of satisfactory settlement in Morocco is to be found in the selection of another emissary of European civilization. The policy of Europe, which has accepted the somewhat sudden, surprising call of Turkey for the Turks, must go a little further and accustom itself to the sound of Morocco for the Moors.” See Saturday Review of Politics, Literature, Science and Art, Volume 106
“They have not the knack of civilization, and their errors of tact are certain to cause incessant friction, The French have their own, entirely their own, ideas of liberty, equality and fraternity at home, but they have never succeeded in giving any meaning to the words when dealing with native races.” See Saturday Review of Politics, Literature, Science and Art, Volume 106Read More
“In 711 A.D., the Black Moors and others sailed across the straits of Gibraltar and invaded Europe. They stayed in Iberia for centuries. Although they could be brutal at times, their efforts helped lift Europe out of the ‘Dark Ages’ and ushered in the Renaissance. In 705, al Khina was defeated and killed. Her defeat was feasible only because of the lack of unity among the various black groups. In any case, her death was a terrible blow to Africans. Hassan Bin Numans successor, Musa ibn Nusair, completed the conquest of North Africa, including Morocco, with the exception of Ceuta. Among those African chiefs who converted to Islam was one Tarik, later governor of Mauritania. He had fought valiantly against the Arabs before his capture and conversion to Islam in order to preserve his life ad still maintain his position as general. A great warrior, he was to play a prominent role in the Moorish conquest of Spain.” See Moorish Europe By Aylmer von Fleische
The Moors were by no means the first Blacks to have invaded Europe. In addition to the Grimaldi Man, known to have entered Europe in prehistoric times, around 700 B.C. the Nubian, Taharka, then a general and not yet king, invaded Spain where he was known as Tarraco., Al Makkary in his work, The History of the Mohammedan Dynasties in Spain, recounted how Spain was once hit by a terrible drought. That was over 3,000 years ago. Later, on, Africans who had staged an abortive revolution were expelled and left for Spain, settling at modern day Cadiz under the leadership of Batrikus, his Latin name. His African name is unknown. Everywhere they went they set up civilizations, staying and ruling Spain for over a century before being uprooted by the Romans. During the fifth century, the Romans began to lose Spain to the ‘barbarian’ tribes such as the Alans, Suev and Vandals who occupant the North, Southern and Western parts of the country. By the end of the seventh century, the Visigoths had extended their rule all over the Iberian Peninsula.” See Moorish Europe By Aylmer von Fleische
“The earliest of dwellers of Arabia were themselves black, referred to by various names such as Kushites, Adites, Thamudites or Vedoids. With the encroachment of Whites and Asiatics, known as The Red Race to the Arabian Peninsula, the original black inhabitants were pushed back to the south western arts Oman, Yemen and Hadramaut, known as Arabia Felix or Hay Arabia. Black Dynasties in early Arabia included those of the Mineans, the Sabeans and the Himyarites. Himyar was a descendant of Cush through Seba. The relationship between The Red Races, of the North and the black Arabians was tenuous at best.”
“However, the inevitable amalgamation occurred between the different races in the peninsula. Mohammed’s ethnic group, the Koreysh, claimed to be descendants of Ishmael through Hagar. A carving of a huge head near Medina with unmistakable African features is widely believed to be that of Ishmael. The black Koreysh ethnic group itself is said to be a branch of one of the oldest dynasties of Arabia, the Kinana. A major division into two ethnic groups later occurred, and the lateral branch of the family is said to have the Koreysh, claimed to be descendants of Ishmael through Hagar. A carving of a huge head near Mediina with unmistakable African features is widely believed to be that of Ishmael. See Moorish Europe By Aylmer von Fleische The black Koreysh ethnic group itself is said to be a branch of one of the oldest dynasties of Arabia, the Kinana. A major division int two ethnic groups later occurred, and the lateral branch of the family tree is said, to have mixed with “The Red Race,” creating in effect the Abid Shem family, ancestors of the Harb, the Abu Sofian, the Muawiya and the great Ummayyah family.”
“Despite all the mixture, it is clear tht eh dusky skin was still much in evidence among the Ummayades. The historian, Toynbee, has said: “The Primitive Arabs who were the ruling element of the Umayyad Caliphate called themselves ‘the swarthy people’ with a connotation of racial superiority and their Persian and Turkish subjects ‘the ruddy people’ with a connotation of racial inferiority. Black Africans have left their mark on the early history of the Arabian Peninsula.” See Moorish Europe By Aylmer von Fleische In Dr. Wesley Muhammad, PhD’s article “Was The Prophet Muhammad Black or Caucasian?” he gave the following excerpts from, Black Arabia and The African Origin of Islam (2009).” Click Here
“In his work, Islam’s Black Legacy: Some Leading Figures (1993), Mohammed Abu-Bakr includes among 62 leading Black figures of Islam the Prophet Muhammad himself. Abu-Bakr rightly notes: According to Muslim tradition, Prophet Muhammad descended in a straight line from Ishmael’s second son Kedar (Arabic: Qaidar), whose name in Hebrew signifies ‘black’…From the sons of Kedar inhabiting the northern Arabian desert, sprang the noblest tribe in Arabia, the Koreish (Quraish), the tribe from which Prophet Muhammad descended.” See Was The Prophet Muhammad Black or Caucasian?”
“As we have also discussed above, the Arabian Qedar were a black tribe akin to the equally black Nabateans, and these two were in someway related to the Quraish, the black tribe par excellenceof ancient Makka. As Robert F. Spencer remarks: “It is said that the Quraish explained their short stature and dark skin by the fact that they always carefully adhered to endogamy.” al-Jahiz (d. 869), the important Afro-Iraqi scholar of ninth century Baghdad, noted in his KitabFakhr al-Sudan ala al-biyadan (The Boast of the Blacks over the Whites): The ten lordly sons of Abd al-Mutalib were deep black (dalham) in colour and big/tall (dukhm). When Amir b. al-Tufayl saw them circumambulating (the Kaaba) like dark camels, he said, “With such men as these is the custody of the Kaaba preserved.” See Was The Prophet Muhammad Black or Caucasian?”
“Abd Allah ibn Abbas was very black and tall. Those of Abu Talibs’s family, who are the most noble of men, are dark skinned, black and tall (sud).” This report is important for our discussion, not only because Abd al-Mutalib and his ten black sons were pure Arabs, but also because they are also the family of the Prophet, Abd al-Mutalibbeing his paternal grandfather. The Syrian scholar and historian al-Dhahabī (d. 1348) too reported that Abd Allah ibn Abbas, Prophet Muhammad’s first cousin, and his son, Alī ibn AbdAllah, were “very dark-skinned.” Alī ibn Abu Talib, first cousin of the Prophet and future fourth caliph, is described by al-Suyuti and others as “husky, bald…pot-bellied, large-bearded…and jet-black (shadīd al-udma).” See Was The Prophet Muhammad Black or Caucasian?”
“Ali’s son, Abu Jaffa , according to Bin Sad’s (d. 845), described Ali thusly: “He was a black-skinned man with big, heavy eyes, pot-bellied, bald, and kind of short.” This convergence of blackness, nobility and Quraishī ethnicity is further demonstrated in these lines attributed to the seventh century CE Quraishī poet, al-Fadl ibn al-Abbas, called al-Akhdar al-Lahabi “The Flaming Black”. Al-Fadl is the Prophet Prophet Muhammad’s first cousin and he said: “I am the black skinned one (al-Akhdar). I am well-known. My complexion is black. I am from the noble house of the Arabs.” Ibn Manzour (d. 1311) notes the opinion that al-ahkdar here means aswad al-jilda, ‘Blackskinned’, and signifies that al-Fadl is from the pure Arabs, “because the color of most of the Arabs is dark (al-udma).” See Was The Prophet Muhammad Black or Caucasian?”
“Similarly Ibn Berry (d. 1193) said also: “He (al-Fadl) means by this that his genealogy is pure and that he is a pure Arab (arabi mahd ) because Arabs describe their color as black (al-aswad).” Thus, al-Fadl’s blackness (akhdar) is the visual mark of his pure, Quraishī background, being born of a pure Arab mother and father. The Quraish consisted of several sub-clans. Abd al-Mutalib and his descendents, including Prophet Muhammad, belonged to the Banu Hashim. Henry Lammens takes notice of “les Haśhimites, famille où dominait le sang nègre” (“the Hashimites, the family where Black blood dominated”).” See Moorish Europe By Aylmer von Fleische “Lammens remarks that they are généralement qualifies de آدم = couleur foncée” (“generally described as adam =dark colored”).” See Was The Prophet Muhammad Black or Caucasian?”
“But the Banu Hashim were not the only sub-clans noted for their blackness. The Banu Zuhra, the tribe from which the prophet’s mother, Amina bint Wahab, hailed, was likewise noted for its blackness. See for example the famous Saad ibn Abī Waqqās (d.ca. 646), cousin of Amina and uncle of Prophet Muhammad. He is described as very dark, tall and flat-nosed. Prophet Muhammad, it should be noted, was quite proud of his uncle Saad whose military contributions we shall discuss below. We are told that once Prophet Muhammad was sitting with some of his companions and Saad walked by. The prophet stopped and taunted: “That’s my uncle. Let any man show me his uncle.” See Was The Prophet Muhammad Black or Caucasian?”
“This blackness of the Quraish tribe is not insignificant to the religious history of Islam. The Quraish were the custodians of the cult of the Kaaba in pre-Quranic Makka and at religious ceremonies they would declare nahnu ahlu Allah (“We are the People of Allah”) and throughoutArabia they were known as ahlu Allah, the People of Allah. In other words, the black tribe par excellence was also the Allah-tribe par excellence and custodians of the cult of the Black Stone. Nevertheless, or rather as a consequence, Prophet Muhammad’s greatest struggle was with his own kinsmen, this black, Allah-venerating Quraish tribe. In the end, however, it would be the black Quraish that became the foundation of Islam in its inception, at least in the short term. Not only were the Sunni caliphs drawn from them, but the Shiite Imams, descendents of the black Alī ibn Abu Talib, were likewise black Quraishi Arabs.” See Was The Prophet Muhammad Black or Caucasian?”
“Britons began their seaborne trade in the Mediterranean basin and the east Atlantic during the reign of Queen Elizabeth and repeatedly found themselves, merchants and sailors alike, clashing with Turks and Moors. At the end of the sixteenth century, numerous Britons were taken captive in regions extending from the Ottoman Levant and the North African regencies to Morocco, all the way to the Atlantic half a century later (1640), there were “thousands” of captives in Algiers and Sale, according to an Act of Parliament. But by the beginning of the eighteenth century, Britain had succeeded in establishing its control over the major commercial and maritime zones, and although captives continued to be taken (mainly as a result of the ship wreck), their numbers declined dramatically, ending completely at the beginning of the nineteenth century.” (Page 1)
“Numerous literary critics have written about the impact of captivity on British “identity,” “hybridity”, “multiculturalism,” and “performativity,” while others have interpreted Elizabethan and Jacobean literature (drama in particular) in the light of captivity. Historians have studied the captivity of Europeans in the early modern Mediterranean and Atlantic, emphasizing its violence and anti-Christian motivations, and extrapolating from the seizure of Britons (and Continental Europeans) a casus belli that resulted in the European commercial and maritime domination of the basin.” (Page 1)
“Notwithstanding the pillage committed by all parties, Christian and Muslim alike, and notwithstanding the indiscriminate nature of captivity in the Mediterranean and the Atlantic the scholarly and popular focus has been chiefly on North Africans and their Islamic anti-christian design. Such focus has led to parallels with recent events in the Middle East and elsewhere thus the baginos of the seventeenth century in North Africa have been compared to the Stalinist Gulag, while the Muslim pirates of early modernity have been seen as precursors of modern day Middle Eastern terrorist and of Somali pirates.”(Page 1)
“It’s unfortunate that the study of North African and Mediterranean captivity has been underpinned, as Gordan M. Sayre has noted, by geopolitical events since 2008. For, allusions to contemporary geopolitical events ignore historical specificity and invoke the Orientalist doctrine, described by Edward said, that all Muslims are alike in their position to the West, that their actions never change, and that the piracy of the Mediterranean Algerians in 1608 continues among the Somalis of the Indian Ocean in 2008. (Page 1)
Such comparisons raise serious historiographical concerns about the ideological motives of captivity scholarship since those motives do not remain confined to the ivory towers of academic agreement or disagreement Muslim piracy, slavery, and terrorism serve in stoking contemporary Islamaphobia because they ignore completely ‘Christian piracy, slavery, and “terrorism” (per Janice E. Thomson) that occurred at the same time in the same waters. With the exception of a few careful historians whose work I will be citing frequently, scholars and popular authors continue to demonize the “Barbary Corsairs,” and by extension Muslims, at the same time that the media entertainment industry romanticize ‘Christian’ corsairs.” (Page 1)
“The pirates of the Caribbean, who were contemporaries’ o the “Barbary Corsairs,” have been celebrated in theme parks in Disney Worked, in “Pirates’ Dinner Adventure” in Orlando, Florida, and in the Johnny Depp film sequence Pirates of the Caribbean. No denunciation of the ‘Christianity’ of those pirates is on record, neither now or in the early modern period when numerous reasons were presented t the King Charles II in 1670 why “privateers should not be wholly discontinued in the West Indies. The focus on captivity and piracy by the Barbary Corsairs’ that excludes the concurrent captivity and piracy by the ‘Christian Corsairs’ serves to confirm a binary between evil and good, Muslim and Christian, African and European.”(Page 1)
Captivity of ‘Christians’ by ‘Muslims’ has become one the dominate motifs in the study of early modern relations between the ‘West’ and ‘Islam’ in the same manner that the accounts of captivity of English colonist by Indians in Cotton Mather’s Decennium Luctuosum (1699) became, as Louise K. Barnett has observed, “the central experience of white-Indian relations. Although the white colonist forced Indians out of their lands, theological and scholarly studies have remained focused on the whites who were captured by the Indians and on their ordeals and tribulations. As Pauline Turner Strong has argued, the number of Indians captured by the Colonist was by far higher than the number of colonist captured by the Indians, and that “it is in large part through….the suppression of the colonist’ role as captors of Indians that the selective tradition of captivity has gained its ideological force” in American studies.” (Page 1)
A similar suppression has dominated the study of British and other European captives in North Africa, and as in scholarship on North America where the “heathenism” and “savagery” of the Indian precipitated suppression of the Indian perspective, so in the prevailing scholarship on ‘Muslim’ captors and ‘Christian” captives. From R.L. Playfair’s work about North Africa with its ominous title, The Scourge of Christendom, to the many book blurbs and titles about “Christian slaves” and “Muslim masters,” there is emphasis on irreconcilable religious polarization that captives shape to much of the critical body of literature on the “Barbary Corsairs” and allows for the continued use of the term “Barbary coast” in contemporary scholarship, a term that was never used by the North Africans themselves and that does not appear on any modern atlas.” (Page 1)
First the Euro Christian did not see only Muslims as their adversaries to be captured, tortured, and enslaved. Jews too were captured, making the Muslim and the Jew fellow victims of the ‘Christian Master.’ In their piracy and privateering, Western Europeans captured Jews from North Africa, selling or exchanging hem in the manner they did Muslims. After, all in the early modern Islamic world lived the largest number of Jews in the world, spread from the interior of Morocco all the way to the Ottoman Levant and beyond. In North Africa, Jews were employed at court, were sent as diplomatic emissaries and a Jew serving the Moroccan ruler (Mulay Zaydan) turned pirate and captured three Spanish ships.”
There were many occasions when Jews appealed to Muslim authorities to help them against Europeans: Mulay Ismail (reg. 1672-1727) defended and supported their causes in Morocco, as did the Beys and Deys of the regencies. Actually, when Ismail sent Hayyim Tulidanu as ambassador to England, he indicated clearly that the Jew was a “dhimmi of our house,” and because he was of “our house,” he was to receive all honor due to an ambassador. A letter from the British consul in Algiers described how “Turks, Moors and Jews” demanded justice from the Dey “on score of a British Satia freighted by their friends from Tunis to this place.
In 1751, and at the signing of a treaty between the British Consul-General, William Petticrew and Sidi Muhammad of Morocco (reg. 1757-1790), the latter insisted on an article that his “Subjects, whether Jewish or Muslim, should not be prohibited from living and working in Gibraltar.” In December 1715, George Paddon, the British ambassador to Morocco, wrote from Gibralter: In this Garrison [Gibraltar] of Moors and Jews about the Number of our Captives in Mequiness, Subjects of Mulay Ismail & some of those Jews Principals who have the handling of the Emperors Money and pay him yearly use for the same. The only way to make them weary…is to use the Jews here as the poor Christians are used in Barbary rather worse…to seize on their Goods, they being all belonging to the Moors, to put in Prison the Chief, making the others work at the fortifications, to keep all manner of Trade from them, in ships to hover on the Coasts and what should strictly examined & under pretext be brought in & rummaged well for contraband Goods… the Jews at Mequiness fr the sake of their Brethren here would help in procuring a lasting Peace. I wish the Jews in my Power I have & am well assured that the Chief of the Jews at Salee & one Pettet a French broken Merchant have been the sole occasion of our Rupture.” (Page 5-6)
The capture and enslavement of Jews by Europeans encouraged an English resident in Morocco to inquire in 1716 from secretary of state, after an English ship had been seized by pirates, “whether he may not size the Moors & Jews Inhabitants of Gibraltar by way of Reprisal for the cruel usages of British Captives. Because Jews were part o the North African politics, they were viewed by Europeans as part of the enemy and therefore legitimate slaves. Secondly, the Christian slaves on board the Muslim galleys were rarely Easter Christian Arabs or Greeks-unless they were living in west European countries. In the period under study and in the eastern Mediterranean of the Ottoman Empire lived the largest indigenous Christian population outside Western Europe. A French captive in Algiers in 1619 wrote that 3,000 families of free Christian merchants (presumably Catholic) and 179 Greek (Orthodox) families were living in the city and over 20,000 free Christians in other parts of North Africa, outside the Spanish and Portuguese colonies.” (Page 5-6)Read More
WHEREAS, The Supreme Court of the United States has solemnly declared its opinion that the congressional enactment known as the civil rights law, of February 27, 1875, is not in accordance with the United States Constitution, and consequently inoperative as a measure for the protection of the negro in his manhood rights; and whereas, the customs and traditions of many of the States in the Union are inimical to the negro as a man and as a citizen, he finds neither in the common law nor in the sentiments of his white fellow citizens, [See Introduction To Moorish Treaties 1662-1856] that full protection which he has earned by his loyalty and devotion to the nation in its hour of extreme peril; Page 44 THE RESOLUTIONS. See Henry McNeal Turner, 1834-1915. The Barbarous Decision of the United States Supreme Court Declaring the Civil Rights Act Unconstitutional and Disrobing the Colored Race of All Civil Protection.
A free negro of the African race, whose ancestors were brought to this country and sold as slaves, is not a “citizen” within the meaning of the Constitution of the United States. 5. When the Constitution was adopted, they were not regarded in any of the States as members of the community which constituted the State, and were not numbered among its “people or citizens.” Consequently, the special rights and immunities guarantied to citizens do not apply to them. And not being “citizens” within the meaning of the Constitution, they are not entitled to sue in that character in a court of the United States. They had for more than a century before been regarded as beings of an inferior order, and altogether unfit to associate with the white race either in social or political relations, and so far inferior that they had no rights which the white man was bound to respect, [See Introduction To Moorish Treaties 1662-1856] and that the negro might justly and lawfully be reduced to slavery for his benefit.
He was bought and sold, and treated as an ordinary article of merchandise and traffic whenever a profit could be made by it. This opinion was at that time fixed and universal in the civilized portion of the white race. [See Introduction to Moorish Race and Nationality.]”And in no nation was this opinion more firmly fixed or more [p408] uniformly acted upon than by the English Government and English people. They not only seized them on the [West] coast of Africa and sold them or held them in slavery for their own use, but they took them as ordinary articles of merchandise to every country where they could make a profit on them, and were far more extensively engaged in this commerce than any other nation in the world. The opinion thus entertained and acted upon in England was naturally impressed upon the colonies they founded on this side of the Atlantic.
“And, accordingly, a negro of the African race was regarded by them as an article of property, and held, and bought and sold as such, in every one of the thirteen colonies which united in the Declaration of Independence and afterwards formed the Constitution of the United States. The slaves were more or less numerous in the different colonies as slave labor (Study the History of the U.S. Department of Labor) was found more or less profitable. But no one seems to have doubted the correctness of the prevailing opinion of the time. The legislation of the different colonies furnishes positive and indisputable proof of this fact. Taney left out the legal understanding as to Moors demonstrating a legal distinction because he was well aware of the treaties between Great Britian and Morocco, that Moors were in the United States and that the Constitution to which he himself as a White man was bound to respect has a Supremacey Clause making treaties the Supreme Law of the United States i.e. Federal law. [See Introduction To Moorish Treaties 1662-1856] Click here to read Scott v. Sandford
Abraham Lincoln Represented a Moorish plaintiff from Portugal in William Dungey (plaintiff) v. Joseph Spencer (defendant). The newspapers referred to William as “Black Bill”. Lincoln Successfully argued: “My client is not a Negro, though it is a crime to be a Negro–no crime to be born with a black skin. But my client is not a Negro. His skin may not be as white as ours, but I say he is not a Negro, though he may be a Moore.”
“Mr. Lincoln,” interrupted Judge Davis, scarcely able to restrain a smile, “you mean a Moor, not Moore.” “Well, your Honor, Moor, not C.H. Moore,” replied Mr. Lincoln, with a sweep of his long arm toward the table where Moore and I sat. “I say my client may be a Moor, but he is not a Negro.” On October 18, 1855, the jury returned a verdict of guilty and granted Dungey $600 in damages plus court costs of $137.50. Lincoln charged a $25 fee, which Lawrence Weldon considered minimal. See Introduction to Moorish Nationality and Status.
The Negro in the New World By Sir Harry Hamilton Johnston states: “When the Portuguese discovers, urged on by Prince Henry of Portugal, had rounded Cape Bojador, and after reaching Rio d’Ouro in 1435……” In his Footnotes it says “This is the reason why blackamoor in English, Morioan in Dutch, Morian in German, Moro in Spanish, Portuguese, and Italian and Moriaud in French were early names for Negroes. “Negro”, a Spanish word, did not come into common use in England till the nineteenth century.” Here the author clearly acknowledges that Moors were given the name Negroes during the era beginning the Atlantic Slave Trade.
Precursor Black historians made he assumption that the name Africa was given to a large land mass by the millennial black people who lived there, and it was further assumed by them that these people called themselves Africans. First and Second Wave Black historians—virtually to a historian accept the same assumptions and write their historical works upon them. But the historical truth is, as will be detailed in Chapter 5, neither the words nor names of Africa or African have their origins with the millennial black people who lave lived on what history, for more than two thousand years, has called Africa. The word Africa is an ancient Greek word, and it was the ancient Greeks, as well as the Carthaginians and the Romans, who gave the name Africa to a land mass, that resulted in the people of the land being called Africans. Europeans after the Romans, and for centuries, used the words Africa and African, which were not even known or used by most people who were supposed to be the Africans and were known by other people in the world as Africans, living in Africa. Citing William D. Wright from “Black History and Black Identity: A Call for a New Historiography” Page 16.
But on the other hand, early Black historians did not regard all Africans in what they understood to be Africa as being Negroes. For instance, in the first volume of his History of the Negro Race, George Washington Williams wrote, “But in our examination of African tribes we shall not confine ourselves to that class of people known as Negroes, but all attention to other tribes as well. In talking about the black people who came to America as slaves, Benjamin Brawley, a college teacher of English literature but also a lay Black historian of the early twentieth century, in his A Social History of the American Negro, remarked, “Those who came were by no means all of exactly the same race stock and language… A number of those who came here were of entirely different race stock from the Negroes; some were Moors, and a very few were Malays from Madagascar. Citing William D. Wright from “Black History and Black Identity: A Call for a New Historiography”
What Brawley and Williams were evidencing with their comments, which was also true with other lay Black historians, was confusion about race (biology), ethnicity, and nationality, mainly because this confusion existed widely among intellectuals in America and Europe. Race, ethnicity, and nationality were often projected in scholarship and other kinds of writings as being synonymous, even the word “nation” would appear in scholarly or other kinds of writings and would be employed to mean race or ethnicity. Precursor Black historians, like other intellectuals in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries in America and European, did not appreciate the biological or physical variation that might appear in a given race, and this was particularly true when the focus was on the black race. In America, as in Europe, when white or black people thought, wrote, or spoke of black people, meaning the black race, they meant the people who were understood to be Negroes; that is, people with “Negroid” features, such as black skin, kinky hair, broad noses, thick lips, and rounded behinds. Racism was involved here to which even precursor Black historians acceded. Owing to their racism, white people in America and Europe felt that all black people looked alike, that is, they all had “Negroid” features, which of course, were denigrated in a racist manner, to demean and belittle them and to reinforce the notion of their singularity within the black race. People of the black race which white people (as well as Black people), called the “Negro race” or the “Colored race,” employing all terms interchangeably who did not have all Negroid”..Citing William D. Wright from “Black History and Black Identity: A Call for a New Historiography”
“The Spanish and the Portuguese, when initiating the use of the word negro, employed it primarily as an adjective for the purpose of distinguishing between the black people they knew as Moors and the new black people they were enslaving in Spain and Portugal, who were taken from Africa, which both countries sometimes [historically are] referred to as Guinea.” Citing William D. Wright from “Black History and Black Identity: A Call for a New Historiography”
The Greek word for Moors was Mauri, and for the Romans (i.e. in Latin) it was Maurus. These Greek and Roman words would appear in other European languages. Citing William D. Wright from “Black History and Black Identity: A Call for a New Historiography” Page 97
This development was aided by the traditional names for Moors in Spanish and Portuguese, but it was also aided by the serious inauguration of the African slave trade, which had initially taken such slaves to Spain and Portugal… Citing William D. Wright from “Black History and Black Identity: A Call for a New Historiography” Page 100
The Moors were clearly an object of this racist thinking, as well as a source or motivation for its development. The presence of black slaves in Europe during the Middle Ages and the Renaissance was another source. Citing William D. Wright from “Black History and Black Identity: A Call for a New Historiography” See Page 99
As will be noted in the case of Dutch, the above allows for dark (obscur) and brun to be subsumed under negro and uses French more (moor) as equivalent to a negro frm Guinea. The word negro or its equivalent in other European languages….. Page 101