Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
quote:Originally posted by Baalberith: Are you seriously making a distinction between being "on vacation" vs being "banned"? Bro no offense, but you're being naïve. Like I feel that you're not grasping the situation at hand here. These aren't just "personal disagreements" between peers, these are personal attacks! Clashes of the culture war, for which he's an active participant in, much like most of the people on this forum. Only that he's our antagonist and he made it his "mission" to challenge Afrocentrism. We're the Afrocentrists in his eyes! It's one of the reasons why most of his interactions with some of the members here have been hostile and bad faith. You can see this through his condescending demeanor that he's showing in this thread. And no, he wasn't banned once as "Nassbean". He was banned before under the moniker Hamilcar and again under his other handle HotepBoy. So he was banned three times! In fact, a couple of months ago he made another account when he came back from his vacation as "Antalas". He's not interested in having conversations for the pursuit of sharing intellectual content for this forum. He said this himself! He's only interested in baiting us to engage with him in these silly semantic debates about the Black presence in the MENA world. He's just a verified troll and you'll only be feeding his ego (or information) by continuing to allow him to be on this site.
🤷🏾♂️
Posts: 2493 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Elmaestro: I believe a main argument which is never addressed was about the coinage is that the Negro is on the opposite side of an Asian elephant. And depictions of Asian Elephants on coinages of that region were exceptionally rare. It was known that Surus/ the Syrian, Hannibal's Elephant was a specially selected Asian Elephant. There has been no explanation as to why the Mahout are not opposing typical African Elephants.
Yes because this syrian elephant was the only one who survived... or do you think all the mahouts died with their elephants ?
No I just thought they were likely to ride North African elephants... like everyone else, except Hannibal. North African Elephants related to African Forest Elephants were smaller and more avaialable to the Carthaginians. The last surviving elephant was thought to be Surus, Hannibal's elephant.
You're not teaching me anything here you simply did not understand : Again, there was only one elephant left when the people of Arretium could see Hannibal's army and of course it would have been led by one of the available black mahout who, like one of the quote above highlights, knew the art of handling these beasts.
Picture being an Italian of the 3rd century BC, witnessing for the first time such a majestic beast, and atop it, a black/Aethiopian man. As Snowden suggests, this spectacle would undoubtedly have etched a powerful impression on them.
Cut the fluff, your theory is that it was just a guy, mahout if you may, who was conveniently riding the last remaining elephant, Surus?
Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
could it be Hannibal? Maybe or a God or a generic African
mahout? I don't think so because as wee can see from these other coins with elephant, there is no special relationship between the person depicted and the elephant Also I posted a mahout riding an elephant on the previous page on one of these coins (blue background) and he is not looking like above dude. Africans of this type are rare on these coins but there are some on Lesbos coins as well as one the gold looking coin I posted on the previous page from Phocaea the ancient Ionian Greek city in Anatolia, no elephant on the obverse
Posts: 42920 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
No one's being god damn "naive." UNTIL Antalas breaks the rules such as spamming or racial slurs then quit crying. I'm also not the only admin on here. Pull your boots straps up and DEBATE/destroy his arguments then. Getting tired of BOTH sides(those who lean "Afrocentric" and those who lean "Eurocentric") cry about who needs to be banned and who doesn't. Until I see one of the rules being broken then notify me.... Until then put your boots straps on.
Posts: 1891 | From: NY | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ty Daniels: What is the point of Banning (not suspension, but actually banning) someone, if they can just create a new account?
If a poster has been banned multiple times, where they have to create a whole brand new account each time, how many times is too much?
I'm not trying to tell anyone how to do their job, but fair is fair.
I wasn't admin/mod when that account was banned. So speak with the other mods/admins. Second, there have been PLENTY of posters who been banned and unbanned such as Xyyman.
Edit:
You hardly even contribute to this site to even complain about "what is fair."
Posts: 1891 | From: NY | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Elmaestro: Cut the fluff, your theory is that it was just a guy, mahout if you may, who was conveniently riding the last remaining elephant, Surus? [/QB]
This is not "my theory" but the conclusion made by Historians and numismatists. Here additional sources :
quote: The heavy cavalry consisted, according to Polybius, of Carthaginians, Libyans, Spaniards, and "Gauls." In the Carthaginian armies, elephants were also seen, guided by Ethiopians. Heeren suggests that it was only after the wars of Pyrrhus in Sicily that the Carthaginians began using these animals in battles.
D. De la Malle, Afrique ancienne, Carthage, p. 138 (ebook)
quote:The Second Punic War probably provided them with the opportunity (24), as there were Blacks in Hannibal's army, some of whom were used as mahouts for elephants. According to the most common interpretation, it was they who inspired a type of Etruscan coin from the 2nd century BCE, featuring on the obverse the head of a Negro and on the reverse an elephant (25).
Again some elephants and their mahouts provided by ptolemaic Egypt (btw Silius Italicus mentions "nubae" being part of Hannibal's army) :
quote:Ptolemaic Egypt may have provided assistance and the first mahouts,and indeed a few indian elephants seem to have found their way into Carthaginian employ , which can only have come via Egypt. The mahouts are called indians, but this seems to have become a general term for elephant drivers regardless of nationality. A few true indians may have come, via Egypt, to start the corps. Later mahouts included Negroes and Moors.
Duncan Head, Armies of the Macedonian and Punic Wars 359 BC to 146 BC, A Wargames Research Group Publication, 1982, p. 35
Similarly to one of the quotes I shared on the previous page, the coins might have been minted earlier, possibly in reference to the Carthaginian defeat at Panormus (250 BC). I also don't understand why you disregard the coins minted by Hannibal's family (Barcid) and under his own rule. None of his family members are depicted as "black," and as far as my knowledge extends, there is no evidence of such coins from Carthage. What we do know is that black mahouts were integral to Carthaginian armies, and this information isn't solely derived from those specific coins. There is also the possibility that there is no direct correlation between the two faces of the coin. In any case, both the elephant and the presence of black soldiers would undeniably have left a lasting mark on those Italian populations.
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
posted
- Provides sources saying that Ptolemy likely supplied Asian Elephants
- Provides sources that Aethiopians were among the Mahouts
I've read those already. They still beg the question.
Was the last living elephant Surus and was it mounted by a "negro"? The combination of these ^ two elements is what suggests it's Hannibal on the coin. On the other hand, the fact that it is a Negro is basis for the suggestions prior (He could have been an Aethiopian Mahout, It could have been an Elephant provided by Ptolemy.)
Essentially the argument is, "We know Hannibal isn't black so the guy on the back of the Asian Elephant isn't Hannibal regardless of the circumstances. That's the line of reasoning being challenged.
Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Elmaestro: - Provides sources saying that Ptolemy likely supplied Asian Elephants
- Provides sources that Aethiopians were among the Mahouts
I've read those already. They still beg the question.
Was the last living elephant Surus and was it mounted by a "negro"? The combination of these ^ two elements is what suggests it's Hannibal on the coin. On the other hand, the fact that it is a Negro is basis for the suggestions prior (He could have been an Aethiopian Mahout, It could have been an Elephant provided by Ptolemy.)
Essentially the argument is, "We know Hannibal isn't black so the guy on the back of the Asian Elephant isn't Hannibal regardless of the circumstances. That's the line of reasoning being challenged.
How is it challenged ? You literally have no evidence that it is Hannibal and again you keep ignoring the coins he and his family minted during their lifetime. If Hannibal was a negro/black/aethiopian it would have been highlighted by ancient sources.
So let's recap :
- You have no evidence that it depicts Hannibal
- You are hesitant to align with the established historical consensus, even disregarding insights from a black historian specializing in ancient depictions of Blacks in the Classical Mediterranean.
- You of course ignore coins minted by Hannibal's family and Carthage, his bust, and DNA/anthropological results of Punics are also dismissed.
Your stance seems to boil down to: "Assuming no Punic aristocrat could be black is an unfounded starting point; your reasoning appears biased".
But what was I expecting ? I'm talking to someone who believes Nefertiti's bust is fake and Numidians were black ...
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
I've read it suggested that Surus's name (which is Latin rather than Punic) might have its roots in the Latin term surus for stakes used in palisade, which would mean it was referring to the animal's tusks. We don't know that it meant a Syrian origin for his elephant. There's also the point Archaeopteryx raised earlier in the thread that those coins may not necessarily have anything to do with the Carthaginians at all (see this article they cited).
I want to add that I don't buy the common argument that Hannibal's elephants, as well as those of the Ptolemies and other North African powers, were either African forest elephants or a distinct North African species that was also smaller than the Asian elephant. For one, African forest elephants are adapted to the humid rainforests of Central Africa, not deserts or dry scrub like that of North Africa. Secondly, the notion that these North African elephants were smaller than the Asian elephants might be based on one Greek historian's mistaken belief.
quote:Given this result, why did Polybius claim that the Asian elephants were larger than African elephants? It turns out that in the ancient world there was a legend that, due to the wet climate, animals were always larger in India than they were elsewhere. This legend was widespread among authors before and after Polybius. Go back and look at the way the translation of the Polybius text is worded. Even in translation, it is evident that Polybius has interjecting his own beliefs onto the account, and not recounting an actual observation.
It seems much more likely to me that the elephants that the Carthaginians and other North African peoples rode into battle were African bush elephants, which are larger than the other extant elephant species and do range into deserts as well as savanna. Some safaris to this day let you ride African bush elephants.
posted
Nice to see the Black actor Denzel playing the role of Hannibal on Netflix. We watched this year on Netflix a Black lady playing the role of Cleopatra.
Posts: 5374 | From: sepedat/sirius | Registered: Jul 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Antalas: Carthage's aristocracy was not endogamous but was above all defined by wealth hence why we have testimonies of unions between Carthaginians and Greeks, iberians or Numidians.
So basically the Elites of Carthage, which the Barcans were, were more than likely a mix of non African peoples, got it.
quote:I've already posted countless evidence of Carthage's population being predominantly North African with possibly a large south european minority (we also have DNA results from Kerkouane in Tunisia, and many punic sites in Southern Europe).
We're not talking about the "Population" of Carthage but Hannibal, an Elite member of the ruling elite, hence the shedding of Crocodile tears over a black Hannibal.
quote:So yes, this is appropriation of our History. I won't even adress your ridiculous last sentence.
Yeah, you won't address it because you know the implications, and this it basically boils down to faux outrage and pearl clutching...
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-: So basically the Elites of Carthage, which the Barcans were, were more than likely a mix of non African peoples, got it.
Not necessarily, they could have been predominantly north african too but black is far-fetched of course.
quote:Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-: We're not talking about the "Population" of Carthage but Hannibal, an Elite member of the ruling elite, hence the shedding of Crocodile tears over a black Hannibal.
Like I said Carthage's aristocracy used to contract unions with aristocrats from their allies or subjects. I don't see how this contradict my point. The likelihood of finding "blacks" is higher within the broader population than among the elite.
quote:Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-: Yeah, you won't address it because you know the implications, and this it basically boils down to faux outrage and pearl clutching...
Yeah the implications...next time I'll claim Achaemenid Persia because libyan soldiers used to fought for them as auxiliaries or maybe I'll be ok with Plato being portrayed by a moroccan actor because libyan soldiers (mercenaries)fought on Athens' side during the Peloponesian War. Just shut up at this point you're embarassing yourself by trying to insert yourself everywhere begging for acceptance and recognition. You don't even know if you're related to the aethiopians mentionned in those quotes...smh
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Antalas:Not necessarily, they could have been predominantly north african too but black is far-fetched of course.[
Who is saying they were black, I think you and I are in agreement that Hannibal was likey not black, Im talking about the Elites being non natives.
quote:Originally posted by Antalas: they could have been
Translation: "I CANT BACK UP WTF IM SAYING...I ADMIT DEFEAT"
quote:Like I said Carthage's aristocracy used to contract unions with aristocrats from their allies or subjects. I don't see how this contradict my point. The likelihood of finding "blacks" is higher within the broader population than among the elite.
Agreed
quote:Yeah the implications...next time I'll claim Achaemenid Persia because libyan soldiers used to fought for them as auxiliaries or maybe I'll be ok with Plato being portrayed by a moroccan actor because libyan soldiers (mercenaries)fought on Athens' side during the Peloponesian War.
This is a strawman argument, you don't know where the African soldiers in the Carthaga army came from, nor can you deny there were blacks living in the territory of Carthage proper...
quote:Just shut up at this point you're embarassing yourself by trying to insert yourself everywhere begging for acceptance and recognition. You don't even know if you're related to the aethiopians mentionned in those quotes...smh
More deflecting, strawman, typical Nassabean one trick pony-ism...
black be they North African natives or immigrants were a part of Carthage, it's as much of their history as a luekoberber.. You mad bruh.. Now carry on crying your Crocodile tears like a lil whiny azz valley gal Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Wait hold up bruh, isn't your whole schtick, LOOKS, I.E Denzel can't play Hannibal because he does'nt look like Hannibal, Now all of a sudden its about being related...and blacks were only Mercenaries in Carthage...lol SMH
quote:Originally posted by Antalas: [QB] by trying to insert yourself everywhere begging for acceptance and recognition. You don't even know if you're related to the aethiopians mentionned in those quotes...smh
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-: [QB]
quote:Originally posted by Antalas:Not necessarily, they could have been predominantly north african too but black is far-fetched of course.[
Who is saying they were black, I think you and I are in agreement that Hannibal was likey not black, Im talking about the Elites being non natives.
quote:Originally posted by Antalas: they could have been
Translation: "I CANT BACK UP WTF IM SAYING...I ADMIT DEFEAT"
Huh?? I think you underestimate how much they mixed with numidian aristocrats. Actually most testimonies of such unions involve Numidians. Moreover the elite of the 3rd cent. BC certainly wasn't the same as the one you had in the 8th/7th cent. BC.
quote:Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-: This is a strawman argument, you don't know where the African soldiers in the Carthaga army came from, nor can you deny there were blacks living in the territory of Carthage proper...
I actually do know since there aren't many possibilities. In all cases those people were not described as libyans, numidians or Moors.
quote:Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-: More deflecting, strawman, typical Nassabean one trick pony-ism...
black be they North African natives or immigrants were a part of Carthage, it's as much of their history as a luekoberber.. You mad bruh.. Now carry on crying your Crocodile tears like a lil whiny azz valley gal
How can you seriously write this ? So now greek history is as much mine as it is for a greek because of a few north african merchants living in some Greek city-state ? You're clearly desesperate and writing this because you know how wrong it is to use an afro-american actor to portray a north african figure such as Hannibal.
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-: [QB] Wait hold up bruh, isn't your whole schtick, LOOKS, I.E Denzel can't play Hannibal because he does'nt look like Hannibal, Now all of a sudden its about being related...and blacks were only Mercenaries in Carthage...lol SMH
Yes because you're playing on the aethiopian presence in order to legitimate the use of a modern afro-american actor. Basically : "It isn't as crazy as you think because there were aethiopian soldiers okay??!"
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Antalas:Huh?? I think you underestimate how much they mixed with numidian aristocrats. Actually most testimonies of such unions involve Numidians. Moreover the elite of the 3rd cent. BC certainly wasn't the same as the one you had in the 8th/7th cent. BC.
Do you have evidence the Barcans were mixed with Numidians?
quote:I actually do know since there aren't many possibilities. In all cases those people were not described as libyans, numidians or Moors.
So where were they from? Do you have primary evidence? Also were the Mahouts the only Magical Barrier SSAs in Carthage?
quote:How can you seriously write this ? So now greek history is as much mine as it is for a greek because of a few north african merchants living in some Greek city-state ? You're clearly desesperate and writing this because you know how wrong it is to use an afro-american actor to portray a north african figure such as Hannibal.
I don't think an AA should play Hannibal, Ill admit that, but I think that say if they wanted to make IDK a story about everyday life in Carthage, hell IDK, They could include AA/SSA actors, not exclusively but yeah...
Honestly, IDK why they never made the Taharqo Move with Will Smith, or make movies/TV shows about the Kandaces...IDK, but Im sure you all would cry your Crocodile tears even then because the Nubians are Eurasian Kakazoids.. Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
I actually don't agree with Denzel as Hannibal, not just his looks but as someone pointed out his age, its such a weird choice, it seems like its deliberate to garner rage clicks and hate views ...IDK, All I was pointing out is black North Africans have a stake in Cathage history as Tawny N/As
quote:Originally posted by Antalas:
quote:Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-: [QB] Wait hold up bruh, isn't your whole schtick, LOOKS, I.E Denzel can't play Hannibal because he does'nt look like Hannibal, Now all of a sudden its about being related...and blacks were only Mercenaries in Carthage...lol SMH
Yes because you're playing on the aethiopian presence in order to legitimate the use of a modern afro-american actor. Basically : "It isn't as crazy as you think because there were aethiopian soldiers okay??!"
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-: Do you have evidence the Barcans were mixed with Numidians?
Wait..so if I understand you correctly you're pushing the idea there is no reason to get offended by this because they might have had non-african ancestry ?
I literally got offended when Caesar was portrayed by a redheaded Scot in the Roman Empire series on Netflix, and you think I won't for Hannibal ? Lol
quote:Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-: So where were they from? Do you have primary evidence? Also were the Mahouts the only Magical Barrier SSAs in Carthage?
Stop acting childish. I was literally the first one on this site to shine a light on the presence of Ethiopian populations up in the northern edges of the Sahara. I also brought up that 5th-century BC Ethiopian soldiers quote before anyone else, so cut it out with the strawman and this whole "Magical Barrier" nonsense. Yeah, the Sahara was a serious genetic and geographical barrier, but there were already "black" communities living up north that weren't necessarily closely tied to SSAs and didn't have to brave that desert.
Anyway, those Ethiopians could've come from the Sahara and its northern fringes (south of where the Moors/Numidians/Libyans lived), or, as I pointed out, they might've come from the Red Sea area, or maybe even brought over by the Garamantes, considering we know they were selling black slaves in western Libya and Tunisia during the Roman Era.
I can only think of one exception when it comes to "Ethiopians" possibly living even farther north, up in Northern Tunisia. But there is the interesting possibility that those were in fact an isolated remnant Iberomaurusian community (reinforced by the discovery of some mechtoid skulls found in Tunisia and going back to the Punic and roman era).
quote:Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-: I don't think an AA should play Hannibal, Ill admit that, but I think that say if they wanted to make IDK a story about everyday life in Carthage, hell IDK, They could include AA/SSA actors, not exclusively but yeah...
I totally agree if they keep their numbers low but here we're talking about Hannibal only.
quote:Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-: Honestly, IDK why they never made the Taharqo Move with Will Smith, or make movies/TV shows about the Kandaces...IDK, but Im sure you all would cry your Crocodile tears even then because the Nubians are Eurasian Kakazoids.. [/QB]
I'm always for taking actors from the ethnicity you're going to portray of course but if they can't then afro-americans with quite elevated level of euro ancestry can perhaps pass as Nubians. This would be less far-fetched than using an AA for Hannibal.
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-: [QB] I actually don't agree with Denzel as Hannibal, not just his looks but as someone pointed out his age, its such a weird choice, it seems like its deliberate to garner rage clicks and hate views ...IDK, All I was pointing out is black North Africans have a stake in Cathage history as Tawny N/As
Nope, not really, because you're not exactly sure where those Ethiopians came from, and there's no guarantee that today's black North Africans are directly linked to them (thanks to slavery and all). Plus, those black Ethiopians weren't the majority or even a significant chunk of the population, unlike us. You'll find more black folks in modern Tunis than you would have in ancient Carthage.
You don't see me appropriating Rome's history or claiming it is as much mine as any italian just because Rome had its NA diaspora and in this case it's even worse because there literally was NA emperors/senators/knights...meanwhile there is not a single mention of a black aristocrat/senator/general in Carthage's History.
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-: I actually don't agree with Denzel as Hannibal, not just his looks but as someone pointed out his age, its such a weird choice, it seems like its deliberate to garner rage clicks and hate views
quote:Originally posted by Askia_The_Great: Because White people were the first FUCKING ones who not only depicted Hannibal as "Black" but also ARGUED Hannibal as being "Black."
You are being naïve! The fact that you're still not grasping with what I'm trying to warn you about shows it.
quote:Pull your boots straps up and DEBATE/destroy his arguments then.
This is exactly what I'm talking about. How do you expect me to destroy his arguments when one of the very sites I use as an archive as well as a place for discussion to be combative against misinformation about the African Diaspora like his, is at the same time BEING USED BY THE SAME GUY as a battleground for the culture war, all the while still spreading the misinformation that I'm trying to combat against? I can't even go one minute looking at thorough informative threads without seeing derailment, bickering, from this subversive to the point that I'm forced to double checked his information to be sure he's not bullshitting. There were numerous times he did this where the posters he was debating were oblivious to or did a freudian slip where he was able to do a "gotcha" on them. Mind you, you don't have a leg to stand on in debating or "destroying" his arguments either. I've seen how you interacted with this guy before, both here and on Anthrogenica, and let me tell you, you're not as equipped in debating the marketplace of ideas in so much that you do a lot of appealing to your opponents. Yet you're the one telling me to put my boots straps up? In fact, very few people here are even equipped in arguing against this guy, say for a few people like Djehuti, Swenet, and the Lioness. At least through my independent research and note taking, I've been getting good at addressing most of the misinformation and strawmen arguments he spouted throughout this forum.
Posts: 331 | From: Hell | Registered: Jun 2019
| IP: Logged |
Baalberith
Ungodly and Satanic Entity
Member # 23079
posted
Mind you, some of the arguments he made here are the same ones that are surfacing around my part of the web.
Posts: 331 | From: Hell | Registered: Jun 2019
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Elmaestro: - Provides sources saying that Ptolemy likely supplied Asian Elephants
- Provides sources that Aethiopians were among the Mahouts
I've read those already. They still beg the question.
Was the last living elephant Surus and was it mounted by a "negro"? The combination of these ^ two elements is what suggests it's Hannibal on the coin. On the other hand, the fact that it is a Negro is basis for the suggestions prior (He could have been an Aethiopian Mahout, It could have been an Elephant provided by Ptolemy.)
Essentially the argument is, "We know Hannibal isn't black so the guy on the back of the Asian Elephant isn't Hannibal regardless of the circumstances. That's the line of reasoning being challenged.
How is it challenged ? You literally have no evidence that it is Hannibal and again you keep ignoring the coins he and his family minted during their lifetime. If Hannibal was a negro/black/aethiopian it would have been highlighted by ancient sources.
So let's recap :
- You have no evidence that it depicts Hannibal
- You are hesitant to align with the established historical consensus, even disregarding insights from a black historian specializing in ancient depictions of Blacks in the Classical Mediterranean.
- You of course ignore coins minted by Hannibal's family and Carthage, his bust, and DNA/anthropological results of Punics are also dismissed.
Your stance seems to boil down to: "Assuming no Punic aristocrat could be black is an unfounded starting point; your reasoning appears biased".
But what was I expecting ? I'm talking to someone who believes Nefertiti's bust is fake and Numidians were black ...
The evidence people used to suggest that he was black is on the coins themselves; The Asian elephant. Telling me how the elephants got and/or that there were Aethiopian mercenaries there doesn't explain the combination of images on the coin. You're sources are irrelevant cause they don't address the issue.
Let me help with sources that actually does address the issue: -One which suggests the coin is propaganda in preparation of Hannibal or Hasdrubal's arrival. -And another which states that there was mysticism around both the African face and Asian elephant among Greeks so it was copied in Etruria.
You really have a bad habit of gish-galloping.
Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
You are being naïve! The fact that you're still not grasping with what I'm trying to warn you about shows it.
quote:Pull your boots straps up and DEBATE/destroy his arguments then.
This is exactly what I'm talking about. How do you expect me to destroy his arguments when one of the very sites I use as an archive as well as a place for discussion to be combat against misinformation about the African Diaspora like his, is at the same time BEING USED BY THE SAME GUY as a battleground for the culture war, all the while still spreading the misinformation that I'm trying to combat against? I can't even go one minute looking at thorough informative threads without seeing derailment, bickering, from this subversive to the point that I'm forced to double checked his information to be sure he's not bullshitting. There were numerous times he did this where the posters he was debating were oblivious to or did a freudian slip where he was able to do a "gotcha" on them. Mind you, you don't have a leg to stand on in debating or "destroying" his arguments either. I've seen how you interacted with this guy before, both here and on Anthrogenica, and let me tell you, you're not as equipped in debating the marketplace of ideas in so much that you do a lot of appealing to your opponents. Yet you're the one telling me to put my boots straps up? In fact, very few people here are even equipped in arguing against this guy, say for a few people like Djehuti, Swenet, and the Lioness. At least through my independent research and note taking, I've been getting good at addressing most of the misinformation and strawmen arguments he spouted throughout this forum.
Seems like you have more of an issue with everyone else for not providing enough ammo. You should pay a bit more attention to the section and threads that are able to be hijacked.
Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
Baalberith
Ungodly and Satanic Entity
Member # 23079
quote:Seems like you have more of an issue with everyone else for not providing enough ammo.
Yes, but it's also the appealing that frustrates me. You have communities online collecting information and having discussions over various topics without getting disrupted by nuisances. Yet here we can't even have a formal discussion without it having to end up as a battleground for the culture war. This place with all of its potential should be utilized for some good as a place for people across the Diaspora to turn to for information on Africana and African population genetics. This latter point is especially important to note because we're at a unfortunate time as Afrocentrists (Yes, I am using Afrocentrist for people whose focus and interests are on Africa and its Diaspora) where you have literal misinformation being perpetuated by wignats/MENA Nats on one end and Hoteps on the other end. I just want what's best for this place that's all.
quote:You should pay a bit more attention to the section and threads that are able to be hijacked.
And that's what I usually do, even going so far as to look further into the information provided in these threads. But my main problem lies with how some members here still handle these conversations when it comes to information, as simply formal discussions, rather than formal debates. You don't think it's just a coincidence that whenever someone says something frank about MENAs or uses a one digit source for a supposed claim, he overwhelms threads with his spam of citations now do you?
Posts: 331 | From: Hell | Registered: Jun 2019
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think you're give Nassa/Antalas way to much credit. Are you saying that he is posting on multiple sites deliberatly posting mis-inormation?
IMO his core arguments are stuff that people within his community believe or propagate.
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
You are being naïve! The fact that you're still not grasping with what I'm trying to warn you about shows it.
quote:[Pull your boots straps up and DEBATE/destroy his arguments then.
This is exactly what I'm talking about. How do you expect me to destroy his arguments when one of the very sites I use as an archive as well as a place for discussion to be combative against misinformation about the African Diaspora like his, is at the same time BEING USED BY THE SAME GUY as a battleground for the culture war, all the while still spreading the misinformation that I'm trying to combat against? I can't even go one minute looking at thorough informative threads without seeing derailment, bickering, from this subversive to the point that I'm forced to double checked his information to be sure he's not bullshitting . There were numerous times he did this where the posters he was debating were oblivious to or did a freudian slip where he was able to do a "gotcha" on them. Mind you, you don't have a leg to stand on in debating or "destroying" his arguments either. I've seen how you interacted with this guy before, both here and on Anthrogenica, and let me tell you, you're not as equipped in debating the marketplace of ideas in so much that you do a lot of appealing to your opponents. Yet you're the one telling me to put my boots straps up? In fact, very few people here are even equipped in arguing against this guy, say for a few people like Djehuti, Swenet, and the Lioness. At least through my independent research and note taking, I've been getting good at addressing most of the misinformation and strawmen arguments he spouted throughout this forum.
Facts!
-------------------- It's not my burden to disabuse the ignorant of their wrong opinions Posts: 2699 | From: New York | Registered: Jun 2015
| IP: Logged |
Baalberith
Ungodly and Satanic Entity
Member # 23079
quote:Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-: I think you're give Nassa/Antalas way to much credit. Are you saying that he is posting on multiple sites deliberatly posting mis-inormation?
IMO his core arguments are stuff that people within his community believe or propagate.
IT IS STUFF THAT'S PROPAGATED IN HIS COMMUNITY (communities?) and it's some of the stuff that my community has been addressing. He's not the only one, but he's one of the people that tops the list. Ironically, some of the stuff that his community has been peddling actually originated from the Anthrogenican tards corner of the internet.
Posts: 331 | From: Hell | Registered: Jun 2019
| IP: Logged |
posted
Funny part is Antalas admits that there's evidence of what he calls "blacks" being native to N/A and he's one of the few in his community to admit it, Though he tries to down play their impact or dismiss them as a minority
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
When it comes to Carthage and it´s surroundings. How many of the population there could have been considered "black" and how many would be considered non "black"? What impression does one get by for example from Carthaginian art?
-------------------- Once an archaeologist, always an archaeologist Posts: 2684 | From: Sweden | Registered: Mar 2020
| IP: Logged |
posted
I mean instead of art you. can always just focus on the studies done on archeo/anthropological remains, there's quite a few...
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Elmaestro: The evidence people used to suggest that he was black is on the coins themselves; The Asian elephant. Telling me how the elephants got and/or that there were Aethiopian mercenaries there doesn't explain the combination of images on the coin. You're sources are irrelevant cause they don't address the issue.
Let me help with sources that actually does address the issue: -One which suggests the coin is propaganda in preparation of Hannibal or Hasdrubal's arrival. -And another which states that there was mysticism around both the African face and Asian elephant among Greeks so it was copied in Etruria.
You really have a bad habit of gish-galloping. [/QB]
Your reasoning is built on numerous conjectures and false premises. You speak of a combination that may not be what it seems and completely overlook coins minted under his command, depicting him, his brother, and his father. Furthermore, you also disregard the fact that in our literary sources, it is often emphasized that these black soldiers were particularly skilled in guiding elephants and, therefore, often held the position of mahout in Carthaginian armies therefore if there was any combination this one would make perfect sense.
Now, regarding this Asian elephant, an article by Michael B. Charles that I just came across emphasizes that there is actually very little evidence of the Carthaginians using Indian elephants, including for this "Surus". Furthermore, it effectively demonstrates that the depiction of this elephant may not necessarily be that of a Carthaginian elephant, and the attributed date for this coin is far from certain.
quote: Even the commonly cited view that there was at least one Indian under Carthaginian command, i.e., the beast named Surus, is not at all secure, since it rests on the unproven assumption that the name refers to an elephant of Syrian origin, and that an animal of Syrian origin somehow fell into Punic hands. Carthage clearly had no direct access to Indian elephants at any point in its history, so an intermediary is required. Yet the regularly espoused view that Ptolemaic Egypt was this intermediary emerges as highly problematic, if not completely untenable. Furthermore, there is little cause to suppose that other Mediterranean powers with access to Indian elephants, such as Syria and Macedon, would have assisted Carthage in stocking its elephant arsenal. Elephants were clearly not easy for these Hellenistic powers to come by, especially as the links forged by Alexander the Great between the Mediterranean world and the Far East began to break down, and because any elephant breeding program, if such ever existed, would not have resulted in surplus animals. In the end, one wonders why Carthage would have needed Indian elephants in any case, since Rome, its principal enemy during the period in question, was entirely bereft of the animals
quote:Robinson, however, proposed that the “seditious” coins were issued by Arretium “in 208-7”, with the depiction of elephants, which seem to be “Indian rather than African”, although probably “a memory picture at best”, being intended as a deliberate provocation to Rome.41 In considering this, Scullard adds that it is possible that “the purpose of the issue was to herald the hoped-for arrival of Hasdrubal [son of Hamilcar] from Spain with his reinforcements and new elephants”.42 Now, Hasdrubal’s elephants would have been Africans, so this view would mean that the engraver was really just producing a depiction of an “elephant”, and not specifically a Carthaginian one. That the beast turned out to be an Indian might simply be the result of the models that the engraver had available, and which could have come from anywhere, such as the Hellenistic world, where Indian beasts were the norm. If so, the utility of this coin as evidence for Carthage using Indian elephants remains uncertain. Likewise, that the elephant is Hannibalic is still not entirely secure, for the coin’s date simply cannot be ascertained with confidence. It is only circumstantial evidence that led Scullard to a date of 217 B.C.
Michael B. Charles, Carthage and the Indian Elephant, in: L'Antiquité Classique T. 83 (2014), pp. 115-127
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-: Funny part is Antalas admits that there's evidence of what he calls "blacks" being native to N/A and he's one of the few in his community to admit it, Though he tries to down play their impact or dismiss them as a minority
"he tries to down play their impact" feel free to show us this impact since you know more than me apparently.
"dismiss them as a minority" so now blacks composed the majority ?
Seems like you're highly confused, lost between reason and the instinctive need to appropriate North Africa's history by overestimating the presence and impact of such populations which of course aren't even related to your own black ancestors but americans have difficulties grasping this.
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
quote:Posted by just call me Jari I mean instead of art you. can always just focus on the studies done on archeo/anthropological remains, there's quite a few...
One maybe must look at different kinds of source material like art, written accounts, anthropological studies, DNA and so on.
We have for example these DNA studies on Phoenician remains from Lebanon and Sardinia respective Ibiza
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: [QB] When it comes to Carthage and it´s surroundings. How many of the population there could have been considered "black" and how many would be considered non "black"? What impression does one get by for example from Carthaginian art?
It's a lost cause because even when showing them representations from the Punic era, they remain in denial, claiming that these populations could very well have had the same features as modern North Africans but with darker skin, similar to Equatorial Africans. Alternatively, they may selectively highlight the few rare examples of engraved scarabs or apotropaic masks featuring black faces. One then has to turn to later and polychrome representations from the Roman era, but even then, they bring up the excuse of "they could be foreigners". They also disregard anthropological analyses of human remains from Carthage and other Punic-Libyan cities. They overlook genetic studies and Greek accounts that distinguish between Libyans and Aethiopians.
These are the same individuals who acknowledge that the Paleolithic Maghreb hunters-gatherers did not share facial features with Equatorial Africans but that such traits for a north african of the 3rd century BC is perfectly logical...
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Antalas: I'm always for taking actors from the ethnicity you're going to portray of course but if they can't then afro-americans with quite elevated level of euro ancestry can perhaps pass as Nubians. This would be less far-fetched than using an AA for Hannibal.
This is incorrect non-sense. The average nubian in early modern modern times and before modern times still did not have any outside race admixture. By the way most nubians became arabized overtime when the funj empire was around. Now today most nubians do have some form of outside race admixture but some do not.
Posts: 2560 | From: Somewhere | Registered: May 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
You're original inquiry was to see if the Carthagenean population had people that you would call "Black" in it correct, then why are you focusing on Phonecians and not studies/artwork on the population as a whole, the Phonecians were not even the majority in Carthage.
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx:
quote:Posted by just call me Jari I mean instead of art you. can always just focus on the studies done on archeo/anthropological remains, there's quite a few...
One maybe must look at different kinds of source material like art, written accounts, anthropological studies, DNA and so on.
We have for example these DNA studies on Phoenician remains from Lebanon and Sardinia respective Ibiza
quote: A study conducted in 1970 by M. Chabeuf, the then Doctor of Science from the University of Paris, showed little difference between 17 modern Tunisians, and 68 Punic remains. An analysis the following year on 42 North-West African skulls dating back to Roman times concluded that they were overall similar to modern Berbers and other Mediterranean populations, especially eastern Iberians. They also noted the presence of one outlier in Tunisia who appears to have inherited mechtoid traits, which led them to hypothesize the persistence of such affinities well into the Punic and Roman era.
M. C. Chamla and D Ferembach (1988) in their entry dealing with the craniometric conclusions of Protohistorical Algerians and Punics in the region of Tunisia, found strong sexual dimorphism with male skulls being robust. Mediterranean elements were dominant, but Mechtoid features, as well as 'Negroid' traits were present in some of the samples. Overall, Punic burials showed affinities with Algerians, Roman Era skulls from Tarragona (Spain), Guanches, and to a lesser extent Abydos (XVIIIth dynasty), Etruscans, Bronze Age Syrians (Euphrates) and skulls from Lozere (France). The anthropological position of the Algerian and Punic people when it comes to populations of the Mediterranean Basin agreed quite well with the geographical situation.
Jehan Desanges stated that "In the Punic burial grounds, negroid remains were not rare and there were black auxiliaries in the Carthaginian army who were certainly not Nilotics".
In 1990, Shomarka Keita, a biological anthropologist, had conducted a craniometric study which featured a set of remains from Northern Africa. He examined a sample of 49 Maghreban crania which included skulls from pre-Roman Carthage and concluded that, although they were heterogeneous, many of them showed physical similarities to crania from equatorial Africa, ancient Egypt, and Kush. S.O.Y. Keita's report in 2018, found the pre-Roman Carthaginian series to be intermediate between the Phoenician and Maghrebian. He noted the findings are consistent with an interpretation that it reflects both local and Levantine ancestry due to specific interactions in the ancient period.
In 2016, an ancient Carthaginian individual, who was excavated from a Punic tomb in Byrsa Hill, was found to belong to the rare U5b2c1 maternal haplogroup. The Young Man of Byrsa specimen dates from the late 6th century BCE, and his lineage is believed to represent early gene flow from Iberia to the Maghreb.
By the way most nubians became arabized overtime when funj empire was around. Now today most nubians do have some form of outside race admixture but some still do not.
Social stratification without genetic differentiation at the site of Kulubnarti in Christian Period Nubia Kendra A. Sirak, 2021
Relatively little is known about Nubia’s genetic landscape prior to the influence of the Islamic migrations that began in the late 1st millennium CE. Here, we increase the number of ancient individuals with genome-level data from the Nile Valley from three to 69, reporting data for 66 individuals from two cemeteries at the Christian Period (~650–1000 CE) site of Kulubnarti, where multiple lines of evidence suggest social stratification. The Kulubnarti Nubians had ~43% Nilotic-related ancestry (individual variation between ~36–54%) with the remaining ancestry consistent with being introduced through Egypt and ultimately deriving from an ancestry pool like that found in the Bronze and Iron Age Levant. The Kulubnarti gene pool – shaped over a millennium – harbors disproportionately female-associated West Eurasian-related ancestry. Genetic similarity among individuals from the two cemeteries supports a hypothesis of social division without genetic distinction. Seven pairs of inter-cemetery relatives suggest fluidity between cemetery groups. Present-day Nubians are not directly descended from the Kulubnarti Nubians, attesting to additional genetic input since the Christian Period.
Examining uniparentally inherited parts of the genome (“Methods”; Supplementary Data 12; Supplementary Note 5; Supplementary Fig. 6), we find that 35 out of 63 individuals from both cemeteries who were not first-degree relatives sharing a maternal lineage belong to 11 mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) haplogroups that are presently distributed predominantly in West Eurasia, although the presence of such lineages for thousands of years in northeastern Africa as well has been established by previous work31,66,67. The observation of 35 individuals carrying mtDNA haplogroups that are most common in West Eurasia is what would be expected for anywhere between 43 and 68% of maternal ancestry at Kulubnarti coming from West Eurasian ancestors via northeastern Africa (based on evaluating whether each proportion in this range included 35 West Eurasian mitochondrial haplogroups within its 95% central CI), which overlaps the 59–77% estimate of West Eurasian-related ancestry deriving from females made by comparing ancestry proportions on the autosomes and X chromosome (“Methods”).
Thirteen individuals from both cemeteries belong to H2a, a European-centered mtDNA haplogroup not previously found in ancient contexts in Africa to our knowledge. Upon closer examination, the presence of three additional mutations not typically found in members of this haplogroup suggests that they are likely part of a previously undocumented branch of H2a. Ten individuals from both cemeteries belong to mtDNA haplogroup U5b2b5, though they also exhibit three additional mutations not typically found in members of this haplogroup. One of these mutations was detected in a 4000-year-old mummy from Deir el-Bersha, Egypt also assigned to this haplogroup67, raising the possibility that the presence of U5b2b5 at Kulubnarti reflects deep connections with Egypt; other mtDNA haplogroups, including J2a2e, R0a1, T1a7, U1a1, and U3b are also found both at Kulubnarti and in ancient Egyptians31. U1a1, U3b, and N1b1a2 have also been identified in Bronze Age individuals from Israel and Jordan42, so the presence of these lineages also at Kulubnarti is consistent with the genome-wide data. Previously published ancient Egyptian data in ref. 31 includes only one individual belonging to an African-originating L mtDNA haplogroup, suggesting that female-specific African ancestry may have had a limited impact as far north as Egypt as late as the Roman Period31. In contrast, 28 individuals from Kulubnarti belong to seven different L lineages, the most common being the eastern African sub-clade L2a1d1, supporting a deep matrilineal connection to this region68. Four individuals from Kulubnarti belong to L5a1b, a lineage of the rare L5a haplogroup centered in East Africa. mtDNA haplogroup L5 has been observed only at low frequency in East and Central Africa and also in Egypt69,70,71; the L5a1b lineage has previously been identified in a Pastoral Neolithic individual from Hyrax Hill in Kenya dating to ~2300 years BP58.
Posts: 42920 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Firewall: Clearly when racist mean nubians they are not talking about these type of nubians and these types get ignored,more so in sudan,darfur,hill nubians.
Midobi, Tid-n-Aal in Sudan people group profile | Joshua Project
NUBIA Project المشروع النوبى - DO YOU KNOW????? The Nubian tribes in Darfur and Kurdofan: Midob tribe in northern Darfur is one of the Nubian tribes of Darfur The Midob language is
quote: Clearly when racist mean nubians they are not talking about these type of nubians and these types get ignored,more so in sudan,darfur,hill nubians.
Note- i should say certain racist when egyptian art shows certain nubians as slaves in egypt,or paying tribute,or when kush was conquered by egypt or to downplay nubian achievements. By way some of these same racist would contradict themselves and say nubians look like that when certain nubians are shown as slaves etc.. but nubians don't look those types of nubians or don't look black if they pointing out achievements or showing certain nubians in modern times.
quote: Sirak et al. 2021 obtained and analyzed the whole genomes of 66 individuals from the site of Kulubnarti situated in northern Nubia between the 2nd and 3rd cataract, near the modern Egyptian border, and dated to the Christian period between 650 and 1000 CE. The samples were obtained from two cemeteries. The samples' genetic profile was found to be a mixture between West Eurasian and Sub Saharan Dinka-related ancestries, with ~60% West Eurasian related ancestry that likely came from ancient Egyptians but ultimately resembles that found in Bronze or Iron Age Levantines, and ~40% Dinka-related ancestry.
quote: Modern Nubians, despite their superficial resemblance to the Kulubnarti Nubians on the PCA, were not found to be descended from Kulubnarti Nubians without additional later admixtures. Modern Nubians were found to have an increase in Sub-Saharan ancestry along with a change in their west Eurasian ancestry from that which was found in the ancient samples.
Source wikipedia.
I know about about the Kulubnarti nubians of lower nubia. I am talking about some in lower nubia but more so most in upper and southern nubia and most did not have outside race admixture until later when most became arabized when the funj empire was around. For most, outside race admixture happen overtime, not when christian nubia was around. For example most nubians in the kingdom of alwa(southern nubia) did not have other outside race admixture and that was the largest nubian kingdom in size and population in the middle ages and early modern times.
Posts: 2560 | From: Somewhere | Registered: May 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-: [QB] You're original inquiry was to see if the Carthagenean population had people that you would call "Black" in it correct, then why are you focusing on Phonecians and not studies/artwork on the population as a whole, the Phonecians were not even the majority in Carthage.
In many scientific publications, "Phoenician" and "Punic" are used interchangeably. There is no evidence to suggest that the man of Byrsa was a pure Phoenician. What we primarily know is that he died in Carthage and carried a maternal haplogroup of Iberian origin.
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Elmaestro: The evidence people used to suggest that he was black is on the coins themselves; The Asian elephant. Telling me how the elephants got and/or that there were Aethiopian mercenaries there doesn't explain the combination of images on the coin. You're sources are irrelevant cause they don't address the issue.
Let me help with sources that actually does address the issue: -One which suggests the coin is propaganda in preparation of Hannibal or Hasdrubal's arrival. -And another which states that there was mysticism around both the African face and Asian elephant among Greeks so it was copied in Etruria.
You really have a bad habit of gish-galloping.
Your reasoning is built on numerous conjectures and false premises. You speak of a combination that may not be what it seems and completely overlook coins minted under his command, depicting him, his brother, and his father. Furthermore, you also disregard the fact that in our literary sources, it is often emphasized that these black soldiers were particularly skilled in guiding elephants and, therefore, often held the position of mahout in Carthaginian armies therefore if there was any combination this one would make perfect sense.
Now, regarding this Asian elephant, an article by Michael B. Charles that I just came across emphasizes that there is actually very little evidence of the Carthaginians using Indian elephants, including for this "Surus". Furthermore, it effectively demonstrates that the depiction of this elephant may not necessarily be that of a Carthaginian elephant, and the attributed date for this coin is far from certain.
quote: Even the commonly cited view that there was at least one Indian under Carthaginian command, i.e., the beast named Surus, is not at all secure, since it rests on the unproven assumption that the name refers to an elephant of Syrian origin, and that an animal of Syrian origin somehow fell into Punic hands. Carthage clearly had no direct access to Indian elephants at any point in its history, so an intermediary is required. Yet the regularly espoused view that Ptolemaic Egypt was this intermediary emerges as highly problematic, if not completely untenable. Furthermore, there is little cause to suppose that other Mediterranean powers with access to Indian elephants, such as Syria and Macedon, would have assisted Carthage in stocking its elephant arsenal. Elephants were clearly not easy for these Hellenistic powers to come by, especially as the links forged by Alexander the Great between the Mediterranean world and the Far East began to break down, and because any elephant breeding program, if such ever existed, would not have resulted in surplus animals. In the end, one wonders why Carthage would have needed Indian elephants in any case, since Rome, its principal enemy during the period in question, was entirely bereft of the animals
quote:Robinson, however, proposed that the “seditious” coins were issued by Arretium “in 208-7”, with the depiction of elephants, which seem to be “Indian rather than African”, although probably “a memory picture at best”, being intended as a deliberate provocation to Rome.41 In considering this, Scullard adds that it is possible that “the purpose of the issue was to herald the hoped-for arrival of Hasdrubal [son of Hamilcar] from Spain with his reinforcements and new elephants”.42 Now, Hasdrubal’s elephants would have been Africans, so this view would mean that the engraver was really just producing a depiction of an “elephant”, and not specifically a Carthaginian one. That the beast turned out to be an Indian might simply be the result of the models that the engraver had available, and which could have come from anywhere, such as the Hellenistic world, where Indian beasts were the norm. If so, the utility of this coin as evidence for Carthage using Indian elephants remains uncertain. Likewise, that the elephant is Hannibalic is still not entirely secure, for the coin’s date simply cannot be ascertained with confidence. It is only circumstantial evidence that led Scullard to a date of 217 B.C.
Michael B. Charles, Carthage and the Indian Elephant, in: L'Antiquité Classique T. 83 (2014), pp. 115-127 [/QB]
Your first paragraph has no purpose; "Your reasoning is built on numerous conjectures and false premises." Why would you even say this if my reasoning is literally based on two facts. A negro on a coin, and Asian Elephant on the same coin, lmao.
But at least you finally addressed the issue with your source, good job. It only took 5 posts! I would say that the passage seems to be in between both sources I posted before. But it adds another layer of mystery to the coin and it's context in circulation.
Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Elmaestro: Your first paragraph has no purpose; "Your reasoning is built on numerous conjectures and false premises." Why would you even say this if my reasoning is literally based on two facts. A negro on a coin, and Asian Elephant on the same coin, lmao.
But at least you finally addressed the issue with your source, good job. It only took 5 posts! I would say that the passage seems to be in between both sources I posted before. But it adds another layer of mystery to the coin and it's context in circulation. [/QB]
To suggest that this is Hannibal, that the elephant is Surus, that there is a direct link between the symbols on both faces, and to claim that the dating is certain... if this is not conjecture, then I don't know what it is.
In any case, no researcher believes or has come to the conclusion that it is a representation of Hannibal, including a black historian specializing in the depiction of blacks in classical iconography. Moreover, a thorough analysis clearly shows that the often-made associations do not hold up.
Tbh I take a lot of pleasure in engaging in these debates because they allow me to conduct research, discover new studies that enhance my knowledge, and enable me to better discredit the Afrocentrist movement.
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
posted
IDK why you are posting this to me, Archeo brought up the man of Bysara.Funny though that you seem bothered, do you think the average Phonecian would have resembled the average Tunisian Berber? and the Man of Bysra is to Euro looking?
quote:Originally posted by Antalas:
quote:Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-: [QB] You're original inquiry was to see if the Carthagenean population had people that you would call "Black" in it correct, then why are you focusing on Phonecians and not studies/artwork on the population as a whole, the Phonecians were not even the majority in Carthage.
In many scientific publications, "Phoenician" and "Punic" are used interchangeably. There is no evidence to suggest that the man of Byrsa was a pure Phoenician. What we primarily know is that he died in Carthage and carried a maternal haplogroup of Iberian origin.
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-: [QB] IDK why you are posting this to me, Archeo brought up the man of Bysara.Funny though that you seem bothered, do you think the average Phonecian would have resembled the average Tunisian Berber? and the Man of Bysra is to Euro looking?
I am not bothered by that. I'm just pointing out a fact because it seems like you are trying to discredit the reconstruction on the pretext that it is a pure Phoenician settler, even though you have no evidence of that.
The individual doesn't strike me as European, and I believe the typical Phoenician would have seemed much more relatable to me than a contemporary European. While Levantines have their distinct features, they share more commonalities with us than Europeans.
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^^Where did I try to "discredit" the reconstruction? Did you even read what I wrote?
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-: ^^^Where did I try to "discredit" the reconstruction? Did you even read what I wrote?
This is what you said after he posted that reconstruction :
"then why are you focusing on Phonecians and not studies/artwork on the population as a whole, the Phonecians were not even the majority in Carthage."
Implying that he's not representative of the Carthaginian population (because he's "phoenician") and that to establish the significance of blacks in this region, one should rely on iconography.
In any case, I already posted a study which shows that "blacks" only made up around 8.33% of the punic sample. Similarly, no genetic sample from Punic sites in Africa and Europe showed an individual of black/SSA origin (they either had level of SSA below or at the same level as the one you'll see among modern North Africans.)
Now, concerning iconography, as emphasized by Jehan Desanges, there are few representations of blacks in the Maghreb, and often those that exist depict blacks in Nilotic contexts. The only representations in the Punic domain, to my knowledge, are some apotropaic funerary masks and a few engravings on scarabs. So, to answer Archéo, there were few black individuals in the territory of Carthage at that time.
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
Topic Closed
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic