Rastas

The Black African Foundation of China: The First Chinese

64 Comments
Spread the love
51
Shares

The First Chinese

By Dr. Clyde Winters
Edited by Ogu-Eji-Ofo-Annu

It can be reasonably assumed that the first inhabitants of the chinese mainland were Black Brown Africans from East, West and Central regions of Africa given that the earliest human skeletal remains in China are of “Negro” (or “Negritos” a psuedo-scientific term commonly used today) people. The next oldest skeletal type after the period of predominance of the African immigrants were the Classical Mongoloids or Austronesian speakers.

Archaeological research makes it clear that “Negroids” (read: Central African skeletal types) were very common to ancient China. F. Weidenreich in Bull. Nat. Hist. Soc. Peiping 13, (1938-30) noted that the one of the earliest skulls from north China found in the Upper Cave of Chou-k’ou-tien, was of a Oceanic Negroid/ Melanesoid ” (p.163). This is the so-called Peking Man. This would place people in China during the Mesolithic looking like African/Negro people , not native American.

These Blacks were the dominant group in South China. Kwang-chih Chang, writing in the 4th edition of Archaeology of ancient China (1986) wrote that:” by the beginning of the Recent (Holocene) period the population in North China and that in the southwest and in Indochina had become sufficiently differentiated to be designated as Mongoloid and OCEANIC NEGROID races respectively….”(p.64). By the Upper Pleistocene the Negroid type was typified by the Liu-chiang skulls from Yunnan (Chang, 1986, p.69).

Negroid skeletons dating to the early periods of Southern Chinese history have been found in Shangdong, Jiantung, Sichuan, Yunnan, Pearl River delta and Jiangxi especially at the initial sites of Chingliengang (Ch’ing-lien-kang) and Mazhiabang (Ma chia-pang) phases (see: K.C. Chang, The archaeology of ancient China, (Yale University Press:New Haven,1977) p.76) . The Chingliengang culture is often referred to as the Ta-wen-k’ou (Dawenkou) culture of North China. The presence of Negroid skeletal remains at Dawenkou sites make it clear that Negroes spread out from the North to South China. The Dawenkou culture predates the Lung-shan culture which is associated with the Xia civilization.

Many researchers believe that the Yi of Southern China were the ancestors of the Austronesian, Polynesian and Melanesian people.

In the Chinese literature the Blacks were called li-min, Kunlung, Ch’iang (Qiang), Yi and Yueh. The founders of the Xia Dynasty and the Shang Dynasties were blacks. These blacks were called Yueh and Qiang. The modern Chinese are descendants of the Zhou. The second Shang Dynasty (situated at Anyang) was founded by the Yin. As a result this dynasty is called Shang-Yin.

The Yin or Classical/Oceanic Mongoloid type is associated with the Austronesian speakers ( Kwang-chih Chang, “Prehistoric and early historic culture horizons and traditions in South China”, Current Anthropology, 5 (1964) pp.359-375 :375). Djehuti your Austronesian or Oceanic ancestors were referred to in the Chinese literature as Yin, Feng, Yen, Zhiu Yi and Lun Yi.

It is not clear that contemporary European and Chinese people are descendants of the original Black population which lived in Europe and Asia; neither is it clear that the Chinese are descendants of the Austronesian speaking people.

Textual evidence and the skeletal record seem to indicate that contemporary Chinese and European people come out of nowhere after 1500 BC, the European Sea People came from the North and attacked Egypt, and the Chinese (Hua) people came from the North and ran the Black Qiang and Yueh tribes, along with the Austronesian Yin (classical mongoloid or Austronesian speakers) off the Chinese mainland back into Southeast Asia or on to the Pacific Islands.

Related Posts:


Spread the love
51
Shares

64 thoughts on “The Black African Foundation of China: The First Chinese”

  1. The multi-region theory is more suitable , remember the ‘mungo man’ look it up.

  2. I feel like this, if you all agree on the bible; well we are all related to one another. Because we all come from Adam and Eve etc.. Garden of Eden, I feel is somewhere in the East African region around the red sea area, just because of what the bible says. Speaking of Havilah and the land of Kush.

    Plus, I’m not sure if anyone agrees on the Pangea Theory “where all the continents were once connected.” Well, what if the little islands west of india that inhabit african looking people broke off from the continent of Africa if that makes sense. We have all these continents and terriotories that suggest it’s part of Asia just because of where it is located but to me obviously broke off of Africa. Than there is the Eastern part of S. America or the Afro-Latino population of Mexico and other countries in that area. All, I’m saying it’s possible.

    Also, the reason why blacks are so into figuring out the ancestry because they have the right. But because many many generations ago, our ancestors were taught they will never amount to anything, therefore, leading to nothing; so now that we are doing all this research and discovering, hey, what if my ancestors were israelites, what if my ancestors were Egyptians or Ethiopians, or even Asian, the thing is feeling this way is not racist, it’s just searching for identity that was not giving to us as in our last names are really not ours.

  4. Hi, this is interesting. However, I believe the website has misconstrued evidence. For one thing, Washington quotes that the busts/head statues “resemble” Black Africans. That is an exaggeration. Taking a subjective approach to the issue, the statues appear more Asian than African. The eyes, nose, and mouth are appear more Asian than African. Even the god Dian appear more Asian with the flat broad nose, flat face, and the line for a mouth.

    The problem is is that this is only a subjective approach. You need more DNA studies to make your theory valid, and you need reliable sources that mention this.

    Washington does not do that. He quotes a piece but then he adds his opinion about the “origins of Chinese” in such a way that makes his scientific citations appear to say and support his opinion. Also, similarities between civilizations are usually coincidental. It does not necessarily mean that one civilizatin and its people gave rise to another.

    Although interesting overall, the theory that Black Africans is base more on “belief” than actual forensic evidence. For this theory to be more valid, proper quotations must be used and appropriate evidence must be found.

    Please do not say that modern Chinese or any other group is hiding evidence, destroying it, or miscontruing it. So far, many scientists from all parts of the world have taken objective approaches and make proper citations and quotations.

  5. To My Kin Who Posted A Reply on This Site…There Is Free Spiritual Science Literature
    For Nubians On The Web..Please Google ” Afronauts -Laws Of opposites” And Download
    Before Its No Longer Availble! Powerful And Intense Information..But Have Your own Mind and Do Your Own Re-Search!!
    Peace & Kultivation…..

  6. The one thing that many people don’t understand is that Modern humans are very different from Original humans.

    According to the most accepted theory, the “Out of Africa” theory, Homo Sapiens evolved into anatomically modern humans in Africa and began migrating out of Africa as early as 250,000 years ago.

    Original humans do not have the physical characteristics that the population today regard as “races”.

    It is after the migration that different languages and cultures are developed.

    Therefore, claiming that “Black Africans”, who are just as modern people as “White Europeans”, and “Yellow East Asians” etc, as the founder of Chinese civilization is absurd.

    We humans are all of the same species, so it is not unusual for people to share certain physical characteristics. Not all East Asians have small eyes, not all “White Europeans” have blond hair/blue eyes, not all Africans have big lips. (I apologize for any offense, I’m just thinking up stereotypical images)

    There are absolutely no Chinese literature support for the existence of any kingdoms or important people that constitutes people that resembles Modern “Black Africans”. Just like there are no Chinese records of Marco Polo ever being in China, much less been in the court of the Emperor of China at the time, and served as a Chinese official. There are however, Chinese records of the Chinese people first having contact with “White Europeans”, the Chinese described the “White Europeans” as looking just like monkeys; red and brown and hairy all over.

    The Taiwanese article on Black Pygmies has nothing to do with the Chinese civilization, which started along the banks of the Yellow River, not in Taiwan, in fact, mass Chinese colonization of Taiwan did not start until the 15th century. The native people of Taiwan are the ancestors to the Modern Polynesian people.

    Sources:
    Chinese History Archives
    Any major museum of natural history in the world
    Any biology/genetics text book (3 of my biology textbooks to be specific)

  7. Wow! It still amazes me how with the support of ancient documantation people are proving the true origins of various Asian and european cultures and still some people will deny and shout down the truth.
    ‘The Shang was given the name Nakhi (Na-Black, khi-Man) under the Black dynasty. The black Chinese established the basic forms of graceful calligraphy that has lasted to the present day. The first Chinese emperor, the legendary Fu-his (2953-2383 BC), was without doubt black and his African brothers and sisters established government, social institutions and cultural inventions.’
    Jeez even the martial arts of China( which I practice) trace there beginnings to a copper hued man named Damo who brought Lohan (Priest-Scholar) 18 Hand Movements to Shaolin Temple. Come on people.
    Much of the problem lies in the language which is used. Connotative meanings and ideas are used to hide the facts.
    The name Africa is not an ancient name. ALKEBU-LAN is the true name of the continent. The ancients didn’t use modern terms such as africa, or egypt, the middle east, china. That’s all made up stuff to confuse the issue. The ancient name for that continent is Manchuria. China is a modern name.
    Wikipedia which I cite for reference says:
    ‘The word “China” is derived from Cin (???), a PERSIAN name for China popularized in Europe by Marco Polo. In early usage, “china” as a term for porcelain was spelled differently than the name of the country, the two words being derived from separate Persian words. Both these words are derived from the Sanskrit word C?na (???), used as a name for China as early as AD 150. The origin of this word is the subject of several conflicting scholarly theories. The traditional theory, proposed in the 17th century by Martin Martini, is that the word is derived from “Qin” (?)(778 BC – 207 BC), the westernmost of the Chinese kingdoms during the Zhou dynasty, or from the succeeding Qin dynasty (221 – 206 BC).[17] In the Hindu scriptures Mah?bh?rata (5th century BC ) and Laws of Manu (2nd century BC), the word C?na is used to refer to a country of “yellow-colored” barbarians located in the Tibeto-Burman borderlands east of India.’
    Its stunning how when you look on a map how many place are found on what’s now know as the african continent but still you wish us to believe they’re not apart of the continent. The text says these people came from the west, through what’s presently called Iran and brought there sciences.
    The reason you can’t find “blacks”,” “africans”, “negros” etc in history is because you may not know the actual etymological names of the peoples, places and things. No one is trying to fit ‘Snoop dog’ characters into history where they don’t belong, but copper hued people have been here for thousands of years and are the originators of civilization. The scholars of those times wrote about their earliest ancestors often times describing them with terms such as “black people”,’ black hair or black skinned’, ‘seafaring’, ‘moors’, ‘as black as night’, ‘gypties’ (short for egyptians), etc and you keep trying to tell us we’re interpreting something. Shame on you. It is not a theory when the ancients text document it.
    Here in America we still think Columbo discovered America. (He never went past Haiti) But if we read HIS journals or those of the Barbosa Brothers we see who He really says were here when he arrived. No not indians (they’re in Hindustan)
    I’m sorry you’ve been lied to. They lied to me too but now that I’m an adult I read as a scholar and use sciences such as etyomology, seeking facts and truths and not just information that supports my own ideals or agendas. I leave my emotions at the door.
    The terms black and white DO NOT denote any land mass or people but refer to caste systems. So please stop using these connotative words and the ideas behind them especially when researching. They don’t apply. People are not crayons.
    Its all coming out now. I suggest we all doing the reading necessary to understand what really was and what really was not. We must remember there is only one race… the Human race. How much longer are we going to deny our ancient ancestors and origins? It is because of this denial a karmic debt that must be paid.
    I’m FOR all peoples. I’ve traveled the world and have dear friends from many different cultures but I know they’re not crayons.
    I’m sure there may be those who are unstudied or with personal agendas who will dismiss this comment as some racist/racial rant but the scholarly and studied will know that the denial of the truth is an attack against humanity itself.
    Study, Study Study…
    peace

Comments are closed.