Is there a prevalent Germanic/European genetic contribution to Tunisia/North Africa due to the Vandals?

Thats in like 0.3% of people

Anyway the Sarmtian ones are there because there were Sarmatians stationed near Cagliari during Roman times, there is even a Sarmatian cemetery in Quartucciu

I'm pretty sure the Arabs genocided whatever populations were in North Africa, so no. The Berbers were an exception and live on to this day.

At least one of those is kailash

>Sarmatians
Gee, I wonder who could be behind this posts?
>biggest wewuzzer of the board

Sarmatians were in the roman army in scotland and other roman provinces

I'm not even slavic. Germanic tribes were mostly confederations, they absorbed a lot of Balts and Slavs and other various ethnic people/natives. Sarmatians, Scythians and some Germanics served as mercs for Romans. I don't know what's your problem.

this

This. Also many anthropologists from 20th century like Coon wrote that Berbers and Canary Islanders are Nordic. Sad that they are not as Nordic as they used to be in the times of Vandals though :(

>Scyth/Sarmat
You mean Alani?

Scytho-Sarmatian lineages in Western Europe are mostly found in Spain, where these brave Nordic warriors migrated in conjunction with Germanic Visigoths during Volkerwanderung. Catalonia is literally Goth-Alania, and Catalonians are more Nordic (therefore superior) to the Castillians ("Spaniards proper").

The sarmatian ones are there because sarmatians were in Sardinia during roman times

Not because of the vandals

Nah, Berbers are just natively white. The ancient Egyptians had a four-colored classification of their local world: they were the red people, nubians were the black people, semites were the yellow people, and berbers were the white people. Most have just been diluted by millenia of SSA and Arab mixture, blonde berbers are very rare these days but still exist.

Berbers were depicted white with black hair, Syrians white with red/blonde hair

I don't get how sometimes black means literally black, and other times it doesn't?

In English black people means sub saharan africans to at least 51% admixture.

How can you tell their percentage by looking at somebody. The one drop rule has been the standard. Steph Curry is "black" it's odd.

1 drop rule is bullshit. I'm 0.013% black, am i black then?

Yet the US census would not allow this man(an Egyptian) to identify as black. The inconsistencies are striking in regards to what is considered "black", and I believe worthy of further research.

Why are you acting like retarded Americans are an authority on race? Americans unironically think speaking a different language or having a different religion changes your race, who gives a fuck what they say?

So the difference between the red Egyptian and the black Nubian is a few percentage points. Does skin color change that dramatically from 49-51%.

Probably because he comes from Egypt so he'll be labelled as an Arab which trumps being black.

But the US does set the global race policy to a large degree. I've even heard black Africans in and from Africa get called african-americans. It's odd and cringey, and indicative of an ulterior motive, even if it's on a subconscious level for most.

Well the difference is more culture, red egyptians would say theyre egyptian and live like that despite any nubian admixture, and the same in reverse.

But its also literally 3000 years ago, race is a fluid concept. Today, in the western world, black people are subsaharan africans.

Why is Africa split, but not europe. Sub-saharans equivalent in Europe would be sub-alpine, but that is never used. Is Terrance Howard really the same as Mugabe? They're both "black". There needs to be some meaningful consistency that properly expresses the nuiances.

Because Europe is extremely genetically homogenous. Africa isn't.

Next time use Transalpine and Cisalpine, please.

Thank you!

Because there is a gigantic fucking desert that has divided people culturally and racially for the dawn of humanity.

Europe isn't split, but Eurasia sure is, for the exact same reason. We don't consider Europeans and Chinese the same despite being on the same land mass because between them there is vast swathes of empty land and mountain ranges.

This

So Sardinians are the epitome of being European.

Of course

Except people have always lived in the Sahara. The transition zone is called the sahel. There is no wall or body of water.

No there are just mountains that were largely impassable.

You're comparing extreme ends of a spectrum as if there is no gradient in between. Central Asians have always existed.

The contact was minimal during much history because the camel was introduced pretty recently from Arabia, hte periosd of a more rainy Sahara are ancient as fuck, thats why the North of the desert was populated from the west.

There has always been fuck all in the Sahel, mostly just a few nomadic tribals. It's a very inhospitable land.

>Fuck all
>Home of the Moors

Why does this bother you? You must be one of those racial purists who believes people all across the world were separated by walls until five years ago. It's an insecure germanic way of thinking.

Moors don't come from the Sahel, they come from Northern Africa mostly. Morocco and Algeria.

>Minimal contact
Where do you think they got their black soldiers and people from? Outer space?

Ethiopia you fucking faggot, that's why Greeks and Romans called all blacks "Ethiops".
Also check this map of Roman empire and look where the Mauri/Mauretania is located. Perfectly within north Africa.

...

>Ethiopia

But I thought you said the Sahara was so inhospitable no contact was ever made across it. Also what is Mauritania?

GUYS WE STILL EXIST ! ONE DAY NORTH AFRICA WILL BE OURS AGAIN ! A FREE SECULAR BERBER COUNTRY. and stop helping Arabs and muslims they hate you anyways ..

>But I thought you said
You thought wrong.

Sahara was actually much greener in the times of the Romans. And Maghreb, especially former Carthage region was one of the richest provinces in the Empire.

You implied that africa was completely separated by utter isolation, even though that has never been the case and their has always been significant overlap between black Africans and Arabs. They are called afro-arabs and they inhabit the land you claim no one ever inhabited.

No nigger I never implied shit, that was a different user. Focus on what we're discussing, which is the Sahel, which has always been depopulated as fuck.

>Sahara was actually much greener in the times of the Romans.
Horseshit. It was greener maybe in the early bronze age, not by the time of the Romans.

Yea but they live hard lives, it is a barrier, this cannot be denied. Rivers are also barriers.

Yes, these barriers are not impassible and people live in them, that isn't the point, you don't need to get all ACHKUALLY on me, the point is they are enough of a barrier to create ethnic and cultural divisions.

If anything those war like nomadic peoples became the barrier of separation, even when trade happened, they were the mediators, Chinese didn't go to Europe or vice versa, it was through these people.

No. While they did kill all the men and rape all the local women to replace the pre-Vandal demographics, they were in turn erased by the same means when the Arabs swept through.

how would yo tell apart modern descendants of vandals in north africa from modern descendants of the original nordic inhabitants of ancient north africa?

>No. While they did kill all the men and rape all the local women to replace the pre-Vandal demographics

Lol what?

Anyway they were murdered/enslaved by the Byzantines before the Arabs came

You do realize that after 1000 years it's impossible for people in North Africa to descend EXCLUSIVELY from Vandals, right?

Even assuming they had a small impact in today's population, people have thousands of ancestors from 500 ad

>Anyway they were murdered/enslaved by the Byzantines before the Arabs came
These greek larpers got what they deserved back in 1453.

I mean really no offense but your IQ must be in the low 70s at best if you make such a stupid question

why?

read this

that post makes no sense. if there were some vandals living in isolated rural communities and they didn't mix much with outsiders then they could easily still be predominantly of vandal descent after 1000 years.

Why are you still comparing two opposite ends of the spectrum. I'm referring to the concept of population continuity. Do you notice how peoples eyes get slightly more chinky as you go east.

Now take that concept and realize that Senegal and Mauritania directly border each other.

No, they fucking couldn’t, because there are no such things in Tunisia

US census considers Sudanese white. Take it as you wish, Sudanese are darkest of niggas.