| RelliK | 16 Jul 2010 8:34 a.m. PST |
Whats the difference in appearance between Numidians and Moors? Can anybody give me some insight? Thanks, Mike |
| CooperSteveOnTheLaptop | 16 Jul 2010 8:38 a.m. PST |
Numidians were Caucasian, Moors were negroid |
| lugal hdan | 16 Jul 2010 9:58 a.m. PST |
Numidians are Berbers. Moors were North African Muslims who invaded Spain. They were originally Berbers, but Arabs and Black Africans were also called "Moors" by Europeans. People mostly use the term "Moors" for Medieval Spainish/Andalusian types, and Numidians for Classical Era Berbers, like those who fought in the Punic Wars. I'd give Moors more "Arab Conquest" era looking clothes (whites and tans, robes and maybe turbans) and Numidians simple brownish wool garments. |
Doms Decals  | 16 Jul 2010 9:59 a.m. PST |
Yes and no – "Moor" has been used as a catch-all for all manner of groups over the centuries, so Moors could be similar to Numidians in appearance (ie. Berbers) or could be coloured (ie. Almoravids from Nigeria etc.) or even Arabic, amongst others. |
Doms Decals  | 16 Jul 2010 10:00 a.m. PST |
Oops, my post was in response to Steve – looks like lugal hdan and I were simultyping
. |
| Caesar | 16 Jul 2010 10:12 a.m. PST |
|
| Mulopwepaul | 16 Jul 2010 10:22 a.m. PST |
Numidians were a subset of the groups who would become known as Moors. The usage of "Moor" is so broad as to be almost useless, but is generally used, as noted, to refer to African Muslims of the Reconquista period generally. And, of course, most people falling under the heading of "Moor" were not Negroid--modern Berbers and modern Spaniards are genetically almost indistinguishable. |
aecurtis  | 16 Jul 2010 10:26 a.m. PST |
In classical times, Numidians and Moors (Mauri) were cousins: both Berber (Amazigh) peoples, with a great deal of interaction between the ruling houses. At one point, King Juba of Numidia simply crossed the border and became King Juba of Mauretania. The Negroid association doesn't come until later, when black slaves were brought in, both westward from eastern Africa, and northward across the western Sahara, by mostly Arab traders. Due to the presence of blacks in North Africa and al Andalus, especially because of the large-scale use as slave-soldiers, Europeans became confused. The original designation of the Mauri as "black" does not mean they were Negroid. As we've said before, think Zinedine Zidane, not Denzel Washington. The establishment and recognition of the later Numidian and Moorish kingdoms was a bit of an artificial distinction inflicted by Rome partly (first) as a reward to their Numidian allies after the Punic wars, partly (later) to split up the Berber realms when fractious or to reward good (ally) behavior, and finally to bring them under direct Romand control. Yes, it's Wikipedia, but it's a good summary: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Numidia en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mauretania Allen |
aecurtis  | 16 Jul 2010 10:29 a.m. PST |
For figure design purposes, up until becoming Roman provinces, Numidian and Mooorish appearance would be practically identical and seems to have experienced little change over time. As we've discussed before, some of the artifacts we use as clues to Carthaginian arms and armor are actually Numidian in origin. Allen |
aecurtis  | 16 Jul 2010 10:34 a.m. PST |
It's interesting that in turn, the Amazigh call Westerners "Romans"! link |
| jdeleonardis | 16 Jul 2010 11:34 a.m. PST |
No, Im sorry
The Moops
.The Moops |
| thabear | 16 Jul 2010 2:43 p.m. PST |
I found in parts of Sth Italy , people from Nth Africa are still referred to as "Moors" and it doesn't refer to colour of skin but from place of origin. Tom |
| RelliK | 16 Jul 2010 3:24 p.m. PST |
Thanks all and especially you Allen. I can see you make alot of effort here on TMP. Thanks again! I'll sculpt them like the ones on Trajans column basically caucasion with frizzy/curly hair. Mike |
| goragrad | 16 Jul 2010 5:31 p.m. PST |
Interestingly the term blackamoor, which is presumed to be a compound of black and moor, dates to the 16th century (1547?). It appears from this that the English of the time felt a need to differentiate between 'Moors' based on skin color. The term apparently degenerated over time into a slang/derogatory term for blacks in general. |
| Mulopwepaul | 16 Jul 2010 6:06 p.m. PST |
Given the number of Englishmen who passed through the Barbary slave casernes, it's not surprising that further distinctions were made. |
| CooperSteveOnTheLaptop | 17 Jul 2010 8:40 a.m. PST |
Yeah I confess to over-simplifying. hOWEVER Othello is a 'coal-black Moor' or similar in Shakespeare, many references show he's supposed to be really dark skinned not just a bit mediterranean looking. Not that the Bard's opus is the last word on anthropology |
| Mulopwepaul | 18 Jul 2010 12:01 p.m. PST |
Othello is pretty clearly meant to be Negroid, but most people apprehended by the term "Moor" in its most common usage were not--the general pre-modern tendency was to call sub-Saharan Negroid tribes "Ethiops" or "Ethiopians." "Moor" was for Maghrebi Muslims in general, regardless of origin--hence the need for "blackamoor." |