Yo what's up with the static? Did I tell you about your mom? I guess you're trying to live up to your nickname of "gramps" and find it hard to disagree without being disagreeable cuz you fancy yourself a know-it-all sage.
You posted a link to old ES thread arguing about whether Sergi "causasoided" africans with his mediterranean and eurafrican wackiness. That's not the same thing I'm arguing. Maybe if you didn't jump to conclusions and actually took the few seconds to understand what I wrote you'd know that. I'm saying the hamitic concept is inherently racist because it divides africans into the chosen few who are civilizers and the rest who are your average do-nothing african savage. Said chosen few africans are then made to be close kin of whichever white or non-african group the theorist can claim he belongs to but unrelated to other africans. So what if Sergi said some euros were descended from
the chosen few black africans? Those chosen few
in his eyes aren't related to the other africans on the continent and are superior to them. All Sergi did was take racist concepts such as Eurafricans and Hamites from other established authors and rearrange their arguments so that those arguments favored his segment of European people. I’ll demonstrate below.
Sergi’s theory of hamites is largely based on the work of the racist nordicists, especially Karl Richard Lepsius. Pg 248 of Mediterranean Race, Sergi says:
That work Sergi refers to is his previous book “Africa: antropologia della stirpe camitica (Eurafrican species)” which in English means “Africa: anthropology of the hamitic stock (Eurafrican species)”. In that book he goes over the theories on Hamites given by racist nordicists such as Lepsius, Henry Morton Stanley, Stulhmann and Speke. He then goes on to lay out his version of Hamitic theory which is largely based on Lepsius’s theory except that Sergi doesn’t view hamites as white descendants who moved to Africa. Below is Sergi’s list of Africans who are Hamites (pg 41 of Mediterranean Race):
Eastern Branch:
• Ancient and modern Egyptians excluding arabs
• Nubians, bejas
• Abyssinians
• Gallas, Danakil, Somalis
• Masai
• Wahuma or watusi
Northern branch:
• Berbers or Mediterranean, Atlantic, and Sahara
• Tebus or Tubus
• Fulahs or Fulbes
• Guanches of the Canaries
This list of hamites and their division into E and N branches is virtually the same as that from Lepsius. Sergi just switched around a few of the ethnies between E and N. Further, Sergi divides Africans mainly into 3 groups which is again copied from Lepsius. Sergi has (1)Mediterraneans, (2)other african hamites related to mediterraneans, and then (3) the rest of Africans all lumped together mostly undefined. This is a rip off of Lepsius’s 3 zones of Africa (outlined on pg1 of Sergi’s Africa: antropologia…).
Any African ethny not on Sergi’s hamite list was viewed as a different species from Hamites and likely a savage. Look at this gem of a quote from Sergi:Source: Sergi's “Differences in customs and morals, and their resistance to rapid change”, Papers on inter-racial problems: communicated to the first universal racial congress vol1., pg 72. Notice how Sergi mentions Africans together with Oceanians which was common at the time cuz those 2 groups (not including hamites in africa) were viewed as the lowest among all humans.
And I see you were impressed with Sergi’s praise of Mutesa. Notice Mutesa’s Buganda people aren’t on Sergi’s hamite list. Why? Cuz Sergi only included Mutesa among hamites cuz racist nordicists such as Morton Stanley and Speke said the leadership of the Buganda were founded by Hamites and wrote nice things about Mutesa. Pg 248 of Sergi’s Africa: Antropologia:
So Mutesa and the Buganda leadership are fine examples of hamites but the rest of Bugandans ain’t ish but bunch a lowly negroes/bantus; the hutu ain’t ish either but the tutsis aka wahuma are great hamites.
Sergi wrote over 400 works only a handful maybe of which were translated to english. If you want to focus on 1 book only that he wrote cuz it happens to not disrupt your cherished views of benign Sergi then go ahead. From the start I was talking about the man's racial theories and approach them holistically as any scholar should. Also his Africa: Antropologia is prologue and foundation to his The Mediterranean Race so it makes even less sense to ignore the former but do you.
Last pt, Idk why you list all those black authors who apparently like Sergi’s work. If they view a backhanded compliment as a true compliment then that’s their mistake. Benjamin Disraeli the jewish prime minister of Britain said jews were Aryans and credited that as the reason for their accomplishments. It still didn’t mean that decades later that same nordicist racism wasn’t used to destroy his people by the Nazis. The oppressed often take up the symbols and views of the oppressor or even rework them to suit their goals. Ain't nothing new. You mentioned Parker and his Hamitic World League. Here is the stated goal of the league:
The league says negroes are the greatest race yet I just showed that Sergi don’t give a ish about Negroes and views Mediterrranean race (who are supposedly brown but include some white people like the british) as the greatest race. Next in greatness comes the hamites and Nordics to complete the Eurafrican species triumvirate. Negroes all the way at the bottom of the humanoid ladder in Sergi world.