The Fomorians
There are many oblique references to the presence of Black people in ancient Ireland. Ancient Irish mythology refers to the original inhabitants of the island as being a giant, sea-faring people called the Fomorians (Fomors), which means “dark of the sea”. According to the ancient lore, they were a cushitic people from the African continent. Often depicted as demons, they defeated the first few incoming waves of invaders, but could not defeat the Firbolgs, who settled the land and lived side-by-side with the native Fomors.
Those myths may have a factual historical basis. It is proposed that the Formorians were a real people who were in all likelihood sailors from the African continent.
Two more invasions, the first led by the godly Tuatha de Danaan, and the second by the Celtic Milesians, took control of Ireland, mixing together with the Fomorians until they were no more.
There are credible sources for the African association with Ireland. The most likely of these is that they were Phoenicians and/or Egyptians. The Phoenicians were Canaanites, which came from the line of Ham. Ham is the mythological ancestor of the Black nation.
The Phoenicians were also well-known for their sailing skills, and are said to have traveled to the British Isles, which they called the “Tin Islands”. Perhaps, before Ireland was a Celtic domain, which it wasn’t until a few centuries BCE, the Phoenicians colonized it. It is noteworthy that the name Fomorians sounds a bit like Phoenicians.
There is also a legend that an Egyptian princess, Scota, left Egypt with some followers and journeyed to Ireland. Legend has it that Egyptians left many ancient tin mines all over Britain but especially Ireland which was their major source of the valuable metal.
Another idea is that they were Taureg Berbers. The Berber language is Hamitic, and the Berber people live in an area from which travel to Ireland would be easily accessible. The Berbers perhaps set sail from western Morocco, and settled on Ireland before the Celts, making it their new home.
Moorish Science Temple founder Drew Ali teaches that Ireland was once part of a Moorish empire, and that the Irish are a Moorish people. Perhaps there is a common root between the “moor” sound in Fomor and the word Moor?
Selkies and Half-Breeds
Another Irish legend tells of the Selkies, a sort-of “wereseal” that is a seal during day, but a human by nightfall. Sometimes, in an Irish family of fair-skinned, light-haired people, a child is born with dark hair eyes, and skin, and is called a Selkie.
The concept of the Selkies appears to make subliminal reference to the half-breed children that resulted from the extensive miscegenation that occurred between the Celts and the dark skinned original inhabitants that they had met upon their arrival in Ireland.
Many people of Irish descent have distant and recent African roots, and these features can still be seen in the people and in the culture. There are some Irish people with Afros (just like Andre the Giant a late continental European wrestler with afro-hair). In Southern Ireland, some people, referred to as “Black Irish”, are noted for their strikingly dark features, as opposed to the fair-skinned, light-haired north.
Although many Irish descendants are particularly pale, they do have pronounced Africoid facial features, as well as dark brown eyes, and dark brown hair that is sort-of kinky, especially in moist conditions. A sub race of the Irish called the Bronn are noticeably Mediterranean (read: African) in features especially their hair.
In addition to all of this, Celtic music is distinctly different from the rest of Europe, and easily comparable to African music.
Black, Viking and Irish
Unlike Scotland and England, Ireland was never colonized by the Romans. As a result, Ireland remained relatively isolated.
The Vikings established port cities like Dublin. The Viking texts left stories and descriptions of African soldiers captured in Ireland whom they called blaumen[blue-men].
Most Viking references to ”black” in Norse would have signified having black hair as opposed to skin color but blaumen meant black skinned. Most of these blaumen were captured soliders from Moorish Spain. It was observed that:
“A prominent Viking of the eleventh century was Thorhall, who was aboard the ship that carried the early Vikings to the shores of North America. Thorhall was “the huntsman in summer, and in winter the steward of Eric the Red. He was, it is said, a large man, and strong, black, and like a giant, silent, and foul-mouthed in his speech, and always egged on Eric to the worst; he was a bad Christian.””
“Another Viking, more notable than Thorhall, was Earl Thorfinn, “the most distinguished of all the earls in the Islands.” Thorfinn ruled over nine earldoms in Scotland and Ireland, and died at the age of seventy-five. His widow married the king of Scotland. Thorfinn was described as “one of the largest men in point of stature, and ugly, sharp featured, and somewhat tawny, and the most martial looking man… It has been related that he was the foremost of all his men.””
What about Scotland and Wales?
“Any comprehensive account of the African presence in early Europe should include England, Ireland, Scotland, Wales and Scandinavia. The history and legends of Scotland confirm the existence of “purely Black people.” We see one of them in the person of Kenneth the Niger. During the tenth century Kenneth the Niger ruled over three provinces in the Scottish Highlands.
The historical and literary traditions of Wales reflect similar beliefs. According to Gwyn Jones (perhaps the world’s leading authority on the subject), to the Welsh chroniclers, “The Danes coming in by way of England and the Norwegians by way of Ireland were pretty well all black: Black Gentiles, Black Norsemen, Black Host.””
Ogu Eji Ofo Annu
Sources:
Ancient And Modern Britons, by David Mac Ritchie
Nature Knows No Color-Line, by J.A. Rogers
I just wanted to add one quick comment.
“You are aware that Africans have actually travelled to America as well as the Vikings. Bear in mind Africa is alot further away from Europe.”
There’s actually no solid proof of this. As of the present, it’s only a hypothesis, as is the idea that the Chinese, Japanese. Australian Aborigines, Irish, Romans, Greeks, Phoenicians, Carthaginians, Babylonians, Canaanites, Egyptians, Arabs, Persians, Indians, and Austronesians reached the Americas before Columbus or the Vikings. Not yet fact, but maybe eventually. So far, only the Vikings are known to have been the earliest Old World settlers of the Americas, after migrants from Siberia that became the Native Americans, of course.
“The Vikings were black and so where the Celts. Also, The Kings and Queens of early England were all Moorish Hebrews. Anglo Saxons mean Angelic Sons of Isaac, Jews.â€
Skeptic I actually dont believe that. To be quite honest with you im as skeptic as you are, thats why when someone said there African Viking kings I asked for evidence.
Quote Skeptic
“Well, Svartgoth, I apologize if I seemed to be arguing that white people are superior to others. I don’t believe that.”
Well ok fair enough as you can imagine this is a touchy subject for me, I have had to deal with alot of racism at school where I was constantly told that African people were stupid.
To be quite honest I dont know as much as you do on this subject so im going to have to end this discussion. I also think youre wasting your time with these guys I think they have an agenda, and its a shame because there will be black people out there looking for knowledge and these guys are giving people the wrong information.
Wow, what an interesting discussion. I surfed here from the other article about this, thanks for the link skeptic:
The Africans Who Discovered Europe — First Europeans Part II
It makes me laugh to be accused of racism for these kind of thoughts. Like Leakey, I’m the child of missionaries who worked in Africa. I ran with the African kids and learned their ways, and culturally if not in colour, I am probably more african than most of you all posting here. I knew I was different, but assumed I’d grow up to be black like normal people eventually. 🙂 And this is West Africa I’m talking about. Black people. 🙂
My heritage is german/polish/czeck, and I’m a Canadian Pentecostal. I married a frisian/dutch Canadian fellow whose extremely old family history goes straight back to the Vikings (I kid you not, father to son right back to the first Christian convert, a Frisian Grand Jarl who was a paladin of Charlemagne in 778 AD). Hence the unusual surname.
I might add that my mother is a brown person, even though she is 100% german background, to our knowledge. I guess she’s a throwback to a mongolian or roman ancestor. She could be easily mistaken for a Hispanic. She by no means suffered under the hot African sun, in fact she loves the tropics and spends as much there (like many of us) as possible. lol she’s far from a “cold white” woman. But she’s a german Canadian. So much for that stereotype!
So given all that background, I assure you I do not think one colour or race is superior to another. But I do believe that there are generalized genetic/phenotypic qualities which I find interesting, particularly as clues to history and prehistory.
Race is a very nebulous concept, but differences exist and it is because of brain-stultifying political correctness and embittered emotionalism that people try to deny it.
Race seems to originate quite quickly by such things as founder’s effect, where a genetic bottleneck allows genotypes to double up and become fixed into the family heritage. An example of this is the “Blue Fugates of Kentucky,” a clan in which some had blue skin. Google it! Given a few thousand years of isolation and there might be a blue race!
One thing I like about these articles is that they take mythology and religious historical writings seriously. I think a lot of things there are based on oral history and perhaps even racial memories of actual historic, even prehistoric events.
Take the european tradition of trolls. These were very strong creatures that lived in caves and under bridges and were very strong. The would catch and eat people if they could, especially children. They liked gold and glittery objects. Their culture was not as advanced as ours. So, might this myth not be based on the Neanderthals?
Now I’m going to propose a half-way solution to this argument. According to Judeo-christian and Islamic tradition, mankind started in the levant and spread out from there. Now anthropology does indicate that mankind developed in northeast Africa and traveled northward. Might a group of very early homo sapiens sapiens have become populous in the area from Nubia to Iraq and disseminated into the whole world from there? I’m talking long ago, maybe say 60 thousand years ago?
Just kicking around a few ideas…
whoops, wrong website link. Try this one.
Oh, and by the way no one has a corner on cannibalism, human sacrifice and poor treatment of children, servants, aliens and women. Universally everyone has had a poor record.
I think it has been the Judeo-christian influence more than anything which has reduced this in history, since it teaches that humans are made in the image of God and therefore human life is sacred.
In our area of Africa where we worked for example, there used to be 4 ways to acquire a wife:
1. Buy one. yes, an african buying an african slave as a concubine.
2. Trade sisters with your bosom buddy.
3. Save up your money and cows and approach your chosen lady’s male relatives with the dowry, make a deal. This is the usual way.
4. Way back when, invade a neighboring tribe and steal one of the women. No longer a popular option, I must admit.
Consider also the treatment of unwanted children and babies worldwide. This is one source of slavery, in my opinion. Baal- worshipping Carthaginians in North Africa sacrificed many children for hundreds of years. In West Africa twins were often considered demonic and were exposed to die. Chinese cultures drowned newborn unwanted babies, usually girls. Romans and Greeks sacrificed them to the gods by exposure outside the city walls (where christians gathered them up, raising them in the Christian tradition).
There were only a few faiths way back then that despised human sacrifice, and Judaism was one. Christianity and Islam are founded on Judaic practice.
Which part of Africa or West Africa are you talking about and what year is it ?
Slavic people were no slaves, please get your fact straight and do not talk about subjects you do not understand..
Here is a definition for you all.
The origin of the word Slav remains controversial. Excluding the ambiguous mention by Ptolemy of tribes Stavanoi and Soubenoi, the earliest references of “Slavs” under this name are from the 6th century. The word is written variously: Sklabenoi, Sklauenoi, Sklabinoi – in Byzantine Greek; Sclaueni, Sclauini, Sthlaueni – in Latin.
The oldest documents written in Old Slavonic and dating from the 9th century use the word “slovÄ›ne”. Note the first vowel “o”, rather than an “a” as in Greek and Latin.
Folk etymologies and some scholars (e.g., Roman Jacobson) traditionally link the name either with the word slava (“glory”, “fame”) or with the word slovo (“word, talk”). Thus slovÄ›ne would mean “people who speak (the same language)”, i.e. people who understand each other
Slav
The real etymology of “slav” is slave.
See: Definition of Slave from Merriam-Webster Dictionary
Etymology: Middle English sclave, from Old French or Medieval Latin; Old French esclave, from Medieval Latin sclavus, from Sclavus Slavic; from the frequent enslavement of Slavs in central Europe
See also: Definition of Slave from Bartleby
ETYMOLOGY: Middle English sclave, from Old French esclave, from Medieval Latin sclvus, from Sclvus, Slav (from the widespread enslavement of captured Slavs in the early Middle Ages). See Slav.
WORD HISTORY: The derivation of the word slave encapsulates a bit of European history and explains why the two words slaves and Slavs are so similar; they are, in fact, historically identical. The word slave first appears in English around 1290, spelled sclave. The spelling is based on Old French esclave from Medieval Latin sclavus, “Slav, slave,†first recorded around 800. Sclavus comes from Byzantine Greek sklabos (pronounced sklävs) “Slav,†which appears around 580.
You can also find additional sources in older versions of the Oxford English Dictionary.
Besides the slavs, virtually all the commoners of Europe were enslaved by Europeans Nobility. They were mostly called “Serfs” another euphemism for slavery. Serfs were part and parcel of the land which they lived on and which they were prohibited on the pain of death from leaving. They worked the land to attain certain set portions of crops payable to the Lordis who owned the estates and the serfs that lived on them. All the misery and injustice therein created were part of the “great European civilizing mission”.
This iniquity was spread all over the world by the “great christian missionaries” so much like someone on this board…hahaha.
Jahdey
You have got it wrong AGAIN, it is something you obviously want to believe. Trying change the facts and to belittle other ethnic groups only shows you own insecurities about who you are and where you come from. How TYPICAL!..hahahahaha
Origin of the Word “Slav”
The actual origin of the term “Slav” can be readily determined in accordance with the way in which it was historically used by the Slavic peoples.
At the outset, the Latin (not Greek) word for “slave” was spelled quite differently from its anglicized derivative. Western words such as these in Latin would not have been used by the Slavs in the East in their earliest history. Far from being slaves to anyone, the early history of Rus’ demonstrates that the Slavs were not only war-like and independent-minded, but they actually made war several times against the Roman Empire at its later capital city of Byzantium. There are several Greek Church commemorations of Byzantium being saved through Divine intervention from the onslaught of the Slavic armies.
“Slava” means “glory.” In actual fact, this term has nothing to do with any other country’s assessment of Slavic culture and traditions, but with the spirit of Slavic values.
The glory that is talked about here is not about the egotism of achieving personal glory through heroic acts so that everyone else may acclaim it.
To achieve “Glory” has meant, to the Slavs in history, an heroic self-sacrifice of individuals and groups on behalf of the interests of their wider community and nation. To give one’s life for the preservation or in defence of one’s nation is to have truly achieved “Glory.” This meaning is also wonderfully captured in the phrase coined by Metropolitan Ilarion Ohienko, “To serve one’s people is to serve God.”
That “glory” doesn’t end with the sacrifice of the individuals, however. The story of such heroic struggles against all odds became deeply imbedded in the consciousness and oral and written tradition of the Slavic peoples who constantly referred to them, especially in times of crisis, as to sources of inspiration for the present. “Glory” is also a foundation of values to which Slavs aspire and point to as their glorious past. Even Slavic Saints are markedly different in their character than other Saints in that service to their nation/society is something that tends to be the guide-post of their lives.
Slavs are therefore very highly socially developed as a people. Their traditions reflect this brilliantly. For example, the formal prayers after meals are interrupted to allow for everyone to thank the person(s) who prepared it. There are many examples too numerous to list here.
This is also why the Orthodox Christian Faith took such a great hold on them, especially the Eastern Slavs. Orthodoxy is the religion of the worship of the Holy Trinity which is a social conception of God. All this relates back to the social understanding of glory and “Slava” which is at the root of Slavic history and values.
Dr. Alexander Roman