Monday, December 08, 2008

Colonization and Intolerance

There are several interesting things about the following article from Science News. The first one is the point of the article itself: the genetic evidence that the Moors (and the Sephardic Jews) did not simply disappear from the Iberian Peninsula after the Reconquista.

But the article has other facets worth noticing, ones which the author presumably never intended. Let’s take a look:

Spanish Inquisition couldn’t quash Moorish, Jewish genes

Finding suggests modern history, not just prehistory, can leave a strong mark on a region’s genetic signature

Hold the history book presses. The Moorish invasion of Spain was never completely repelled, a new genetic analysis reveals.

As many as one in 10 men from Spain and Portugal still carry genetic evidence of North African ancestry, and nearly twice that number had Sephardic Jewish ancestors, reveals a study in the Dec. 12 American Journal of Human Genetics. Those results don’t fit with expectations from the historical record.

Sephardic Jews, who were likely in the Iberian Peninsula since Roman times, were supposed to all have fled the region in the wake of pogroms and persecutions between the early eighth and 14th centuries. In the late 15th century, 160,000 Spanish Jews (Sepharadh is the Hebrew word for Spain) were expelled and then settled in other parts of the Mediterranean.

OK, so far so good. A straightforward summary of a population genetics study. But check out this next paragraph:
- - - - - - - - -
Moors from northern Africa swept into Spain in 711, colonizing the peninsula and spreading Islam. But during the Spanish Inquisition, Spanish Muslims were driven out or forced to convert in a wave of religious intolerance. [emphasis added]

Note the asymmetry of this formulation. The Moors “swept into Spain” like a snowstorm or a sirocco. No invasion, no slaughter, no forcible conversions. The Muslims arrived, and ZAP! Spaniards became Muslims, just like magic.

But later on those nasty Christians “drove out” the civilized Moors and forcibly converted any remaining survivors. What ruthless barbarians they were!

The article continues (read all the way to the bottom for the punch line):

But the new study, which analyzed Y chromosomes from 1,140 men from the Iberian Peninsula, shows that, even though large numbers of Sephardic Jews and Spanish Muslims left the peninsula, these groups also left behind descendents and a strong genetic presence.

Genetic studies of populations are often used to track movements of people from prehistoric times. But these results indicate that more modern events — religious persecution and conversion, modern migration and intermarriage — can shape human genetic landscapes more than previously suspected.

Certain groups have minor genetic variations that are characteristic. The researchers in this study used genetic markers found in North African populations, specifically Morocco and Algeria, to trace the North African contribution in the Iberian Peninsula. Sephardic Jewish genetic markers came from populations in Israel and Turkey.

Studies such as the new one “tell the true history of everyone’s ancestors and not just the history book lessons of kings and queens,” says James Wilson, a population geneticist at the University of Edinburgh in Scotland who was not involved in the study.

Wilson said he would have expected to find small but significant evidence of North African ancestry in southern Spain, where the Moorish reign lasted longest, but “to find it in the west defies my expectations,” he said. The researchers expected to find a gradient, with stronger ancestry in the south that would lessen farther north. In fact, they found a weaker North African presence in southern Spain.

Sephardic Jewish roots run deep in the peninsula, the researchers found. Nearly 20 percent of men in the study showed evidence of Sephardic Jewish ancestry.

“We think it might be an over estimate,” says Francesc Calafell, a human population geneticist at the Institute of Evolutionary Biology and Pompeu Fabra University in Barcelona, Spain. Calafell and Mark Jobling at the University of Leicester in England led the study.

The genetic makeup of Sephardic Jews is probably common to other Middle Eastern populations, such as the Phoenicians, that also settled the Iberian Peninsula, Calafell says. “In our study, that would have all fallen under the Jewish label.”

Still, the findings reflect how religious intolerance on the peninsula led to conversion of non-Christian groups and then integration into the larger Christian community, he says.

Science News is such a beacon of historical clarity!

Now we know that “religious intolerance” caused the conversions to Christianity in 1492. But what caused the conversions to Islam in 711?

Were the Christian natives of Iberia suddenly overcome with an inexplicable urge to declaim “La illaha ila Allah, wa Muhammadun rasul Allah!”

Did the Moors convince them through the force of their reasoned arguments?

Why this urge to whitewash Islam and paint Christianity in the worst possible light?

What’s wrong with us??


Hat tip: TM.

21 comments:

Armance said...

Nice how an article supposed to give scientific information looks like "The New York Times".
The difference between the so-called scientific publications/TV channels and mainstream media has become irrelevant nowadays. It's enough to watch for a few minutes a historical documentary on Discovery, the same crap about the wonders of Islamic medieval medicine, the unmatched glorious civilization of the human-sacrifice-loving Aztecs and how all the scientific discoveries of the ancient Greeks were stolen from the much wiser Black Egyptians.
Tough times, when indoctrination is called "science".

Conservative Swede said...

Baron B:
What’s wrong with us??

Religious intolerance -- against Christianity.

Racial intolerance -- against white people.

And so on...

Our very concept of morality -- that is programmed deeply into our bones -- is wrong, suicidal and must be discarded.

islam o' phobe said...

This article comes just a few days after the broadcast of the BBC documentary After Rome: Holy War and Conquest in which the Mayor of London Boris Johnson informs us that Spaniards freely converted to Islam - possibly influenced by "the occasional persecutions in which both sides indulged" (8:11).

Rocha said...

That don't surprize me. Take a look
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Ethnographic_Iberia_200_BCE.PNG . Nortwestern iberia was badly colonised by celts and non indo-european cultures were absorved by them. Peoples who continued their existence in morrocos and algeria.

CzC said...

History lessons of Kings and Queens?

The enlightened scientists might not have heard of rape. This could also be a contributing factor.

DWMF said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
DWMF said...

It's called "He who pays the piper calls the tune". Have you noticed the amount of advertising by Arab companies that is broadcast on the cable news networks? (e.g. CNN, BBC, EuroNews, SkyNews) One program criticising the "beloved customer" and their campaign gets yanked, depriving the channel of much-needed moolah. This is particularly acute now that times are harder, and profits are thinner.

The need to avoid offense infects the whole group, so other channels like Discovery have to comply. It is quite possible that this magazine is a member of such a news group, whose TV channel is surviving on their advertising.

Czechmade said...

Was not North Africa Christian?

It could be also called "reuniting of the family".

Would our scientists dare to look at the current Turkish genes?

Western Turkey might be genetically "Byzantine".

Henrik R Clausen said...

Czechmade, great point!

'Turkishness' is an ideology of a similar strain as Islam, and it is no coincidence that Turkey insists, in article 301, that insulting 'Turkishness' is a punishable offense.

Most 'Turks' as we know them today descend from various strains of minorities that used to inhabit Asia Minor, but who have come to self-identify as 'Turks' over the ages.

'Ages' in this context would mean about one century. Before that, the word 'Turk' in the Ottoman Empire was a derogative. Only the 'Young Turks' movement, the CUPS party etc. (yes, the ones with the Armenian Genocide) brought the word 'Turk' back into daily use, with pride.

Turkish identity is inseparately tied to this bloody birth fo the nation. No wonder they refuse to recognize the Armenian Genocide as a crime...

Afonso Henriques said...

I wanted to say that I am very curious about studies like this one, especially when it deals with Portugal and Spain. Therefore, I went to read all of the article at Science News. And I got my conclusions.

I also did make a relatively extense comment about... ten hours ago, it was 2:00, I was tired, I did exit the page by mistake erasing the comment in that way. I then went on to sleep. In that comment I gave "proofs" and reasons to my conclusion, I won't do so here, I will do so only if rquested.

My conclusions are the following: What the hell??? I've seen many studies like this one and this one goes against them all. Seriously, and it does not make any sense.

Yes, the 10% of North African "linages" thing is real. However, no serious person can claim it is soley derived by the moorish invasion and subsequent 850 years long occupation! There were other sources...

But I am okay with that. I am ok with that because that is manipulation of the truth, yes it is to strenghten multicultural propaganda but it is only a manipulation of the truth.

The problem is when they say that "Jewish" "linages" - or Middle Eastern for that matter - double the North African ones and reach the 20%. Of course, this is nonesense. In all other studies the "Middle Eastern" (instead of soley Jewish) linages were half the ones of North Africa, that is, 5% of the total. I wonder how the hell they rise the "Jewish" influence 300% to quadriplicate it.

To say that the Middle Eastern influence on us is so high is an outragous lie. Really, for the God's sake just read some History or for that matter lok to a damn map and wonder how the hell we're closer to the Middle East than North Africa.
For "Jews" to be 20% they had to be great sex machines... And we had to have lots of Jews here once the Sephardites (from Spain and Portugal) abound in North Africa, Turkey, the Balkans and even the Netherlands and England, here however... for instance, I remember reading a post on the blog of one of the men I admire most on the Centre-Left here where he explained how Salonika became Greek and while, under the Turks, it was mainly a Jewish Ladino (mixture of Hebrew and Latin the Jews here spoke) speaking city with synagogues with names such as Lisboa, Évora and Madrid...

And that, I don't like that becaue it is more than a "manipulation of the truth", there is no truth to manipulate, they erase the truth and replace it with what suits them best. And that, I can not tolerate.

--------------------------------

And Rocha, I prefer these two more exact maps: This one from around 250 b.C., and this one from fifty years later, this last one is more simplified and reflects the time when the Romans started popping in as well as the Celtic colonisation of the Alentejo and Algarve...

And Rocha, this is especially for you, I bet you will enjoy this:
Read it in Wikipedia (in Portuguese and in English) so that you are prepered to then read all these series. You better scroll down and start with part I, and than part II and finally part III.
It is about Moiras Encantadas and it is not what I thought it was - however, it is usefulll to distinguish the "Moiras Encantadas" from the Histories of Morrish Princesses from the Reconquest.

Afonso Henriques said...

Between, Henrik,

"Most 'Turks' as we know them today descend from various strains of minorities that used to inhabit Asia Minor, but who have come to self-identify as 'Turks' over the ages."

Right... "minorities"... they wish...
According to Orhan Pamuk Istambul was a majority Greek City up untill the 1950s, in his book "Istambul, Memories of a City", he claims that the "Rums" (Greeks) still called the city Constantinople. And of course, we all know how Izmir got Turkish and other areas in Anatolia...

Afonso Henriques said...

"Studies such as the new one "tell the true history of everyone’s ancestors and not just the history book lessons of kings and queens""

History lessons of Kings and Queens? Are you kidding me, I will tell you about the "History book lessons of Kings and Queens"...
I remember a conversation in a forum with a Mexican citizen who happeed to be white. He claimed he was born in Madrid to Spanish parents and moved early to Mexico City. He claimed that while at school in Mexico, he leraned that he too was a "mestizo", and that is the Mexican State view on race: Everybody from Native Americans to Europeans is somewhat mixed and every Mexico belongs to "La Razza". This happens in many Latin American countries and the hypocrasy of the white elite shows, especially in places like Rio de Janeiro.
In Hispania proper, Franco claimed that his great race, "the razza española" was a great race and (as far as I know) everybody was part of it: Portuguese, Goths, Jews, and maybe a little bit of North African. Not to forget the Celtiberians instead of Celts and Iberians.
At the same time, in Portugal, Salazar's schools thought that "The Portuguese race, is a "cadilho" of races" meaning that it is a mixture of everything and that we magically retained only the best of each "race" or people to be more exact. I must warn that the term "race" in Portuguese and Spanish has also other meanings and as such, there was a "Day of the Race" untill so recently that the actual Conservative Preident said this year during the National Day: "I will not say anything about that. Today is the day of the race and above all today, what we have to celeberate is that, this day and the race".

Exemples of actual Portuguese State "lessons of Kings and Queens" (at least from the early 1820s) over race:

Marcelo Rebelo de Sousa, one of the most important and certainly more influent men on the Portuguese right. And it apears that he is indeed somewhat Conservative and right wing. He had this to say:

"I am a person of the right. (It's) public and noticable. And (I am a) Nationalist. (It's) public and noticable. A man of the right and Nationalist can never be xenophobic, never. Because that is to not know the History of the Portuguese Nation. We do not correspond to any pure race, the Portuguese derives from the crossing of many races and ethnicites according to History (...) and half of the Portuguese, (5 millions) are emmigrants (...) (so) with what moral authority do we, Nationalists and right wingers have to..."
Well. The conversation was about mass immigration so I think you know how it ends.

Also, His Royal Highness, D. Duarte of Bragança, the heir to the Portuguese Crown, had this to say in a recent interview to a National Newspaper. An excerpt:

"Q - Are you respected in the Arab Countries?
D. Duarte - When I am in an Arab Monarchy I am desdendent of the prophet Mohamed.
Q - Why?
D. Duarte - The Holly Queen Isabel descendended from an Arabic Prince which in turn descended from Mohamed. Be cause of that, my position is completely different from that of any embassador of the Portuguese Republic.
Q - Is that recognised in the whole Arab World?
D. Duarte - Yes. But when I am in Israel I say that D. Afonso Henriques descended from the King David (...)"

In my view, this is just a move of charm but, it also shows the multicultural madness. Independent of reality or the truth.

Afonso Henriques said...

Well, the last comment got too big... and I was not able to say what you people will find more... shocking:

" The Moors “swept into Spain” like a snowstorm or a sirocco. No invasion, no slaughter, no forcible conversions. The Muslims arrived, and ZAP! Spaniards became Muslims, just like magic.
But later on those nasty Christians “drove out” the civilized Moors and forcibly converted any remaining survivors."

It was more or less in that way, indeed. The moors came not to convert people but to aquire new land. Of course the Christitans had to be dihmis, they could only wear blue and there were many social pressures to shift religion but few did. In fact, muslims were always a minority, the majority of which were Hispanic converts to Christianity. Of coure there were massacres and opression and pressure but the muslims did not really try hard to convert Christians.

On the other hand, the Christians were there to conquer their lost lands, their lost people and to tell the muslims to get lost. The Christions gave two options to the moors, they could convert or they could fled; the muslims did not expelled the Christians from their new conquered lands.

THIS BECAUSE THE MOSLEMS WERE FOREIGNERS AND THE HISPANICS WERE NOT, THEY WERE IN THEIR OWN LANDS UNDER OCCUPATION.

Few moslems converted. The majority fled. In the end, those who converted had to face Inquisition and the rest is History.

--------------------------

So people, the moslems conquered, the Christians drove them out. The moslems did not drove the Christians out despite the fact that large areas were depopulated and some fertile lands with thriving rivers were transformed in deserts.

Ultimately, the moors were more multicultural than the Christians and that is why the Multiculturalists prefer the Moslems than the Christians. They see a Multicultural society as superior to a monocultural one even if the Multicultural society has a group opressed by a minority.
When that society has a white or European majority being opressed by a non European minority, to the multiculturalists, that society is the perfect one.

Afonso Henriques said...

The hard left here is crazy over this new study...

Rocha said...

Thanks Afonso for the maps and the articles. Specially for the articles, i had already heard of the mouras encantadas in my family being 100% portuguese since the 1870's =] )but i'm sure it will shed new light on the matter. Afonso since you touched the matter slighty in another thread whats the real people (not goverment) feeling about the Galizan - Portuguese question in Portugal and if you can in Galiza? What's the real people feeling for an Iberian Union?

Thanks.

Conservative Swede said...

Afonso,

I also did make a relatively extense comment about... ten hours ago, it was 2:00, I was tired, I did exit the page by mistake erasing the comment in that way. I then went on to sleep. In that comment I gave "proofs" and reasons to my conclusion, I won't do so here, I will do so only if rquested.

Aw, that sound like the typical Obama excuse to me: the dog ate my birth certificate.

Well, sorry for that cheap shot :-) I know it's pest when ambitious posts are lost in that way

Conservative Swede said...

The Baron wrote:
Note the asymmetry of this formulation. The Moors “swept into Spain” like a snowstorm or a sirocco. No invasion, no slaughter, no forcible conversions. The Muslims arrived, and ZAP! Spaniards became Muslims, just like magic.

But later on those nasty Christians “drove out” the civilized Moors and forcibly converted any remaining survivors. What ruthless barbarians they were!


Another piece of sharp analysis here. Cutting through BS like x-ray.

Czechmade said...

Afonso, Rocha

last week I met a Portuguese person from North of Lisboa/New York. She did not share any of your views on Galicia, describing a very different Portuguese attitude to this cause.

Now what you said sounds to me rather artificial.

Lex said...

Of course Greeks still called the city Constantinople. All my family from there did. Same with Smyrna for Izmir. I use the names alternately depending on whether I'm talking to a Greek or Turk.

Please stop saying "The Armenian Genocide" as if Assyrians and Greeks weren't killed and driven out as well. I realize this request always falls on deaf ears, but it's rather disrespectful. As for the modern Turks, they generally were not taught about this part of their history and I find it's better not to continue the squabble as my relatives are now at peace. But then I generally like Turks;)

Graham Dawson (Archonix) said...

You are asking us to ignore a mass-murder on a scale that would have made Stalin balk? The near-total destruction of a civilisation that was old when Jesus was still learning to walk? I'm happy that you've found your peace and all but until Turkey acknowledges its role in the genocide, well, I think you'll be fairly lonely in that. The assyrians and the greeks were driven out, the armenians were genocided. Their culture was virtually destroyed within two generations. You ask people to forget that? And then talk about disrespect?

Of course Turkey doesn't acknowledge what it did to the assyrians or the greeks, either. Does that make it better?

Lex said...

Graham--I'm asking you TO acknowledge what happened to the Assyrians and Greeks, not to forget about it! I meant to include them and the entire long period of slaughter and death marches of all the Christians of Asia Minor and not just to narrow this down to certain years and one group, the Armenians. The Pontics and Assyrians were also murdered en masse inland, the Ionians in stages from early village attacks in the 1800s to the burning of Smyrna Harbor. They weren't all driven out, though many did get out. Many left their names behind (not just Sano Halo).

That's all I asked, to include all of the slaughtered. If not for respect for their sufferings then at least for historical accuracy.

And yes, Byzantium does live on in some capacity in exile. Visit Tarpon Springs Florida sometime, you can hear all of this first or second hand. But we're still kicking Graham;)