History Channel Portrays Hannibal as Black, White People Cry Foul Over ‘Historical Revisionism
quote:History Channel‘s newest documentary series, Barbarians Rising, tackles the fall of Rome over the course of 700 years of invasions. However, the most recent episode that aired Monday depicts Hannibal of Carthage as a Black man, and many white history buffs are crying foul over the “historical inaccuracy.” In the series, Hannibal is portrayed by Black British actor Nicholas Pinnock. The famous Carthaginian was a thorn in the empire’s side. He became a general at the age of 26 and managed to unite barbarian tribes to stop Rome’s imperial rise. The military genius was famous for climbing the Alps with war elephants whose sole purpose was to stomp the Roman army. Hannibal ultimately wanted to invade Rome, but he failed to do so. There have been debates over the race of Hannibal. This debate still continues till this day.
posted
^Agreed 100%. And these are also the same people who have no problem with the Ancient Egyptians being portrayed as lily white Europeans, with British accents mind you.. lol!
Posts: 1891 | From: NY | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
posted
The euronuts who responded, are typically those folks who have very little knowledge and understanding. They are the least intelligent, and follow racist YouTube-channels posting dumb stuff.
Gourara or Ghurara Berbers of southwestern Algeria are considered Zenata
quote:Zenata (Berber: Ijenaden) are a major old Berber ethnic group of North Africa. They were an umbrella-group encompassing probably hundreds of large linguistically or genealogically related Berber tribes in the north, center and east of Berber North Africa (excluding the Nile valley of Egypt). Zenata Berbers were the founders of several Berber empires, kingdoms and princedoms in North Africa.
posted
The actual problem here, is that the education system has falsified history and indigenous people for so long, common folks clearly have a misguided view on things.
quote:The Kingdom of Morocco
"Sanhaja, Masmoda, and Zenata are the three tribes constituting the Berbers ..."
quote:" ...in the old sources the terms Berber, Sanhaja, Massufa, Lamtuna and Tuareg are often used interchangeably"
--Marq de Villiers and Sheila Hirtle ( 2009). Timbuktu: The Sahara's Fabled city of Gold, p. 271.
quote:"Zenata (Berber: Ijenaden) are a major old Berber ethnic group of North Africa. They were an umbrella-group encompassing probably hundreds of large linguistically or genealogically related Berber tribes in the north, center and east of Berber North Africa (excluding the Nile valley of Egypt). Zenata Berbers were the founders of several Berber empires, kingdoms and princedoms in North Africa."
quote: "The Berber-Abidiya region is situated just south of the fifth Nile cataract in Sudan. This project, a joint mission with the Sudanese National Corporation for Antiquities and Museums (NCAM), is focussed on the late Kushite city of Dangeil (third century BC – fourth century AD) and associated cemeteries."
quote:Originally posted by Punos_Rey: These are the same people who'll whine that black people are obsessed with race and "race doesn't matter"...until its someone famous.
No, it's not them. It's the folks who will say North Africa is not black and never was. It stems from a long tradition of prejudice writings and other media-outlets.
UNBOXED: The World Beyond the West & the Problem of Eurocentrism
The argument is NOT with indigenous Northwest Africans/Berbers, who we(hell most Euronuts sometimes admit) all know were indigenous Africans and black especially according to classical writers and especially during the medieval period.
But with Hannibal Barca who is said to be of Phoenician descent, which is what most of these Eurocentrics are claiming and thus they claim we can't argue if Hannibal was black.
But there are historians who argue that Hannibal was black.
French historian Gabriel Audisio said in 1961:
"I consider Hannibal to be neither a Phoenician, nor a Carthaginian, nor a Punic, but a North African".
Gilbert Picard wrote:
"The majority of the (Carthaginian) populace seems to have had African, indeed Negroid, ancestry".
Audisio continued to explain why they were Black:
"The Carthaginians, colonizers of North Africa, in contrast to today's colonizers of Algeria, were not averse to mixed marriage. The historians agree that this was accepted social custom among the aristocracy as well as the middle & lower classes. One is, then, in no way hindered in saying that Hannibal was part of this majority of African ancestry".
So the argument of Hannibal's race/ethnicity is NOT as one sided as these Euronuts want it to be...
Posts: 1891 | From: NY | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
posted
I know Keita found in his studies of Northern African crania that ancient Carthaginian and other Maghrebi samples were "heterogeneous", showing a mix of African, European-like, and intermediate types. And I think it very likely that Saharan and West Africans were present in the region alongside people of Iberian and Phoenician heritage. Besides, the actor in that Hannibal video isn't even that dark-skinned, but could pass for an African/Phoenician mix. So I would say the video's depiction isn't out of the question.
Phoenician appears to be a cultural affiliation as opposed to strict ethnic race one. In any event, from the looks of artifacts and where they colonized, they were Black or mostly so.
Your probkem stems from bias caused by fake Euro nut history being the basis Of your thinking.
-------------------- Keldal Posts: 2818 | From: new york | Registered: Apr 2014
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Nodnarb: I know Keita found in his studies of Northern African crania that ancient Carthaginian and other Maghrebi samples were "heterogeneous", showing a mix of African, European-like, and intermediate types. And I think it very likely that Saharan and West Africans were present in the region alongside people of Iberian and Phoenician heritage. Besides, the actor in that Hannibal video isn't even that dark-skinned, but could pass for an African/Phoenician mix. So I would say the video's depiction isn't out of the question.
What does an African/Phoenician mix look like? The guy in the video looks like a typical "black" person to me. Hannibal in that past History Channel doc looked more like a African/Near Eastern mix.
Posts: 1891 | From: NY | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Nodnarb: I know Keita found in his studies of Northern African crania that ancient Carthaginian and other Maghrebi samples were "heterogeneous", showing a mix of African, European-like, and intermediate types. And I think it very likely that Saharan and West Africans were present in the region alongside people of Iberian and Phoenician heritage. Besides, the actor in that Hannibal video isn't even that dark-skinned, but could pass for an African/Phoenician mix. So I would say the video's depiction isn't out of the question.
What does an African/Phoenician mix look like? The guy in the video looks like a typical "black" person to me. Hannibal in that past History Channel doc looked more like a African/Near Eastern mix.
I meant to say he doesn't look that dark-skinned to me, so the odds are great he's carrying some light-skin allele that isn't of African origin. I would think that an African/Phoenician mix would possess an allele like that too.
That is of course assuming the founding Phoenicians from the Lebanese region mostly looked like this: Posts: 7069 | From: Fallbrook, CA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Also, to play devil's advocate, what do people here make of ancient Carthaginian coinage?
To be sure, some of these coins were made by Greek artists (source), but they're identified as depicting either Carthaginian deities like Tanit or Carthaginian politicians.
In fairness there is also this Italian coin which some have claimed depicts Hannibal:
quote:Originally posted by Nodnarb: I meant to say he doesn't look that dark-skinned to me, so the odds are great he's carrying some light-skin allele that isn't of African origin. I would think that an African/Phoenician mix would possess an allele like that too.
Wait what? Can you elaborate how dark you're speaking? Since "Black" people come in many shades. More importantly studies have shown that Africans have the largest skin color variation.
quote:Previous studies of genetic and craniometric traits have found higher levels of within-population diversity in sub-Saharan Africa compared to other geographic regions. This study examines regional differences in within-population diversity of human skin color. Published data on skin reflectance were collected for 98 male samples from eight geographic regions: sub-Saharan Africa, North Africa, Europe, West Asia, Southwest Asia, South Asia, Australasia, and the New World. Regional differences in local within-population diversity were examined using two measures of variability: the sample variance and the sample coefficient of variation. For both measures, the average level of within-population diversity is higher in sub-Saharan Africa than in other geographic regions. This difference persists even after adjusting for a correlation between within-population diversity and distance from the equator. Though affected by natural selection, skin color variation shows the same pattern of higher African diversity as found with other traits.
The Khoisans who skin color is apart of in-built African diversity are actually LIGHTER than that actors skin color.
Also the guy playing Hannibal has "stereotypical black" features
So what there is "not that African" about the actors features? I see Sahalian Africans with those features. You can see Northern Nigerians with those types of features.
Again I am talking about the actor.
Posts: 1891 | From: NY | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
posted
Just a question, are there *any* contemporary accounts describing what Hannibal may have looked like? Can't find anything and it would seem none of the statues said to be him are definitively him *shrugs*
--------------------
Meet on the Level, act upon the Plumb, part on the Square. Posts: 574 | From: Guinee | Registered: Jul 2014
| IP: Logged |
posted
'To be sure, some of these coins were made by Greek artists (source), but they're identified as depicting either Carthaginian deities like Tanit or Carthaginian politicians. '
You answered ur own question.
-------------------- Keldal Posts: 2818 | From: new york | Registered: Apr 2014
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Punos_Rey: Just a question, are there *any* contemporary accounts describing what Hannibal may have looked like? Can't find anything and it would seem none of the statues said to be him are definitively him *shrugs*
Finding any Ancient descriptions on Hannibal is extremely hard or even impossible. I posted the ethnic origins of Hannibal, but it was by a modern author and not a classical writer.
Posts: 1891 | From: NY | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Don't confuse ethnicity with race.
There's no question of Hannibal's ethnicity. He was Punic Carthaginian.
By Hannibal's time the ancient Lebanese founders of Khart Haddas were absorbed into the region's population as Doc Ben points out in his The Blackman's North and East Africa.
However, Carthge was cosmopolitan and neither 'pennies' of mahouts nor 'dollars' of Melkhart are likely to have Hannibal's living image.
This thread may present info not seen before but please don't neglect all the foregoing Hannibal threads posted on ES over the past decade.
There's a wealth of info right here on ES to be found nowhere else on the Web.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Punos_Rey: Just a question, are there *any* contemporary accounts describing what Hannibal may have looked like? Can't find anything and it would seem none of the statues said to be him are definitively him *shrugs*
From what I have read, no surviving accounts bothered to describe him.
@ BlessedbyHorus
Whatever made be said of the actor's ancestry, all I meant to convey was that his appearance doesn't look out of the range for an African/Phoenician mix (in my opinion anyway). So the people complaining his appearance is inaccurate or unrealistic are probably in the wrong.
Posts: 7069 | From: Fallbrook, CA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
History Channel Portrays Hannibal as Black, White People Cry Foul Over ‘Historical Revisionism
quote:History Channel‘s newest documentary series, Barbarians Rising, tackles the fall of Rome over the course of 700 years of invasions. However, the most recent episode that aired Monday depicts Hannibal of Carthage as a Black man, and many white history buffs are crying foul over the “historical inaccuracy.” In the series, Hannibal is portrayed by Black British actor Nicholas Pinnock. The famous Carthaginian was a thorn in the empire’s side. He became a general at the age of 26 and managed to unite barbarian tribes to stop Rome’s imperial rise. The military genius was famous for climbing the Alps with war elephants whose sole purpose was to stomp the Roman army. Hannibal ultimately wanted to invade Rome, but he failed to do so. There have been debates over the race of Hannibal. This debate still continues till this day.
who financed this?
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Please clarify.
Africa is a huge continent. Phoenicia was a tiny state.
quote:Originally posted by Nodnarb: ... pass for an African/Phoenician mix.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Why are you posting beduin sheikh Abisha when hundreds of urban ancient Lebanese manufactured images abound?
Time to abandon stereotypes and wishful thinking of a single so-called typical phenotype supposing to rep a whole continent, a vast region or even a relatively smaller locality.
quote:Originally posted by Nodnarb:
quote:Originally posted by BlessedbyHorus:
quote:Originally posted by Nodnarb: I know Keita found in his studies of Northern African crania that ancient Carthaginian and other Maghrebi samples were "heterogeneous", showing a mix of African, European-like, and intermediate types. And I think it very likely that Saharan and West Africans were present in the region alongside people of Iberian and Phoenician heritage. Besides, the actor in that Hannibal video isn't even that dark-skinned, but could pass for an African/Phoenician mix. So I would say the video's depiction isn't out of the question.
What does an African/Phoenician mix look like? The guy in the video looks like a typical "black" person to me. Hannibal in that past History Channel doc looked more like a African/Near Eastern mix.
I meant to say he doesn't look that dark-skinned to me, so the odds are great he's carrying some light-skin allele that isn't of African origin. I would think that an African/Phoenician mix would possess an allele like that too.
That is of course assuming the founding Phoenicians from the Lebanese region mostly looked like this:
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
"'The Phoenician civilization flourished along the eastern coastlines of the Mediterranean Sea (the present-day coasts of Syria, Lebanon, and northern Israel) from approximately 2000 BC to 500 BC
"The Phoenicians likely referred to themselves as Canaanites."
The ancient Greeks were the originators of the term “Phoenicia,” which derives from an ancient Greek word (phoinikes) for the color purple."
Etymology[edit] The name Phoenicians, like Latin Poenī (adj. poenicus, later pūnicus), comes from Greek Φοίνικες (Phoínikes), attested since Homer and influenced by phoînix "Tyrian purple, crimson; murex" (itself from φοινός phoinós "blood red",[8] of uncertain etymology; R.S.P. Beekes has suggested a Pre-Greek origin of the ethnonym).[9] The oldest attested form of the word is the Mycenaean po-ni-ki-jo, po-ni-ki, ultimately borrowed from Ancient Egyptian fnḫw (fenkhu)[10] "Asiatics, Semites". In the Amarna tablets of the 14th century BC, people from the region called themselves Kenaani or Kinaani.[11] Much later, in the 6th century BC, Hecataeus of Miletus writes that Phoenicia was formerly called χνα (Latinized: khna), a name that Philo of Byblos later adopted into his mythology as his eponym for the Phoenicians: "Khna who was afterwards called Phoinix".[12]
The folk-etymological association of phoiniki with phoînix mirrors that in Akkadian which tied kinaḫni, kinaḫḫi "Canaan; Phoenicia" to kinaḫḫu "red-dyed wool".[13][14] The land was natively known as knʿn (cf. Eblaite ca-na-na-um, ca-na-na), remembered in the 6th century BC by Hecataeus under the Greek form Chna, and its people as the knʿny (cf. Punic. They called themselves Kn'n, a name that survived until the 4th century AD, in North Africa.
Origins: 3200–1200 BC[edit]
Sarcophagus of Eshmunazor II, Phoenician King of Sidon found near Sidon, in southern Lebanon Herodotus' account (written c. 440 BC) refers to the myths of Io and Europa. (History, I:1):
According to the Persians best informed in history, the Phoenicians began the quarrel. These people, who had formerly dwelt on the shores of the Erythraean Sea, having migrated to the Mediterranean and settled in the parts which they now inhabit, began at once, they say, to adventure on long voyages, freighting their vessels with the wares of Egypt and Assyria ...[15]
The Greek historian Strabo believed that the Phoenicians originated from Bahrain.[16] Herodotus also believed that the homeland of the Phoenicians was Bahrain.[17][18] This theory was accepted by the 19th-century German classicist Arnold Heeren who said that: "In the Greek geographers, for instance, we read of two islands, named Tyrus or Tylos, and Arad, Bahrain, which boasted that they were the mother country of the Phoenicians, and exhibited relics of Phoenician temples."[19] The people of Tyre in South Lebanon in particular have long maintained Persian Gulf origins, and the similarity in the words "Tylos" and "Tyre" has been commented upon.[20] However, there is little evidence of occupation at all in Bahrain during the time when such migration had supposedly taken place.[21]
Culturally, they appear to have derived uninterrupted from the chalcolithic cultures of the region. Byblos is attested as an archaeological site from the Old Kingdom of Egypt.
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Keita had a blurb on Carthage in Studies of ancient crania..
Furthermore, the blacks of the ancient Maghreb were apparently not foreign or a caste. Pittard (1924) notes with surprise the race of the remains found in the Sarcophagus of the Priestess of’ Tanit in Carthage, noting them to be Negroid (see also Bertholon and Chantre, 1913). --Keita 1990. Studies of Ancient Crania
"“Black Africa,” as usually presented, also is a problematic cultural and biological construct, and a product of philosophical idealism, with an associated set of fixed ideas about phenotypes, culture, and geography. “Black African,” biologically speaking, has been frequently restricted to the extreme “Negro” morphotype, as though this were a biological unit, and below a certain latitude; this would be analogous to “White European” being restricted to the “Nordic” or “East Baltic” phenotype above a certain latitude.
Modern biology, ancient Saharan art and remains, classical European writers and artifacts, and ancient Maghrebian and Nile Valley remains and archaeology make problematic the boundaries of a “Black African” entity in terms of geography, culture, or biological characteristics in the ancient period (see reviews in Snowden, 1970; Hiernaux, 1975; Keita, 1990). “Subsaharan” is not a terminological improvement, since “Blacks” were not confined below any particular latitude. For example, there is morphological continuity of Negroid traits from the later Paleolithic through early dynastic periods in southern Egypt & Nubia (see descriptions in Thoma, 1984; Stewart, 1985; Anderson, 1968; Stoessiger, 1927; Strouhal, 1968; Morant, 1925). Moreover, as Snowden (1970) notes, “Blacks” were described in ancient Carthage and on the southern slopes of the Atlas mountains, all at the latitude of northern Egypt." --Keita 1992. Further studies of ancient crania from North Africa. AJPA 87:245-254
Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: The presence of African individuals in Punic populations from the Island of Ibiza (Spain): contributions from physical anthropology
posted
I dont get the Ebonics and "smaking lips" its not like they're saying he's an African American. Further HAnnibal and the Phonecians had nothing to do with Modern Europeans anyway. Hell at least they traded with Africans.
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
' I dont get the Ebonics and "smaking lips" its not like they're saying he's an African American. Further HAnnibal and the Phonecians had nothing to do with Modern Europeans anyway. Hell at least they traded with Africans.'
If u dont have something constructive or semi intelligent to say, then please shut up.
-------------------- Keldal Posts: 2818 | From: new york | Registered: Apr 2014
| IP: Logged |
posted
This sums it up well, its sad that these people think they or their Northern/Western European Ancestors had anything to do with the Phonecians. These are the same people that dont say a word when Australians and English/White Americans play Moses and the Egyptians.
quote:Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova: Keita had a blurb on Carthage in Studies of ancient crania..
Furthermore, the blacks of the ancient Maghreb were apparently not foreign or a caste. Pittard (1924) notes with surprise the race of the remains found in the Sarcophagus of the Priestess of’ Tanit in Carthage, noting them to be Negroid (see also Bertholon and Chantre, 1913). --Keita 1990. Studies of Ancient Crania
"“Black Africa,” as usually presented, also is a problematic cultural and biological construct, and a product of philosophical idealism, with an associated set of fixed ideas about phenotypes, culture, and geography. “Black African,” biologically speaking, has been frequently restricted to the extreme “Negro” morphotype, as though this were a biological unit, and below a certain latitude; this would be analogous to “White European” being restricted to the “Nordic” or “East Baltic” phenotype above a certain latitude.
Modern biology, ancient Saharan art and remains, classical European writers and artifacts, and ancient Maghrebian and Nile Valley remains and archaeology make problematic the boundaries of a “Black African” entity in terms of geography, culture, or biological characteristics in the ancient period (see reviews in Snowden, 1970; Hiernaux, 1975; Keita, 1990). “Subsaharan” is not a terminological improvement, since “Blacks” were not confined below any particular latitude. For example, there is morphological continuity of Negroid traits from the later Paleolithic through early dynastic periods in southern Egypt & Nubia (see descriptions in Thoma, 1984; Stewart, 1985; Anderson, 1968; Stoessiger, 1927; Strouhal, 1968; Morant, 1925). Moreover, as Snowden (1970) notes, “Blacks” were described in ancient Carthage and on the southern slopes of the Atlas mountains, all at the latitude of northern Egypt." --Keita 1992. Further studies of ancient crania from North Africa. AJPA 87:245-254
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by kdolo: ' I dont get the Ebonics and "smaking lips" its not like they're saying he's an African American. Further HAnnibal and the Phonecians had nothing to do with Modern Europeans anyway. Hell at least they traded with Africans.'
If u dont have something constructive or semi intelligent to say, then please shut up.
This ISN'T YOUR thread for you to enforcing things. Jari did not say anything wrong...
Posts: 1891 | From: NY | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
posted
Its sad, its like these people expect every significant Empire/Culture to be shown as not just "Kakazoid" but clearly White in a western Sense, as some of the comments claim Hannibal was not "Arab" or "Berber" but white as in North West European. Its mind boggling then they turn around and pretend like they care about North Africans. 99% of North Africans would stick out like a sore thumb among Europeans and white Americans including Berbers like Zidane and the late Gadaffi. Plus these are the same people who will bemoan Immigration from the same North Africans they claim as white when it comes to **** like Hannibal...
Also this is nothing new, these are the same people who protest any black lead or black person shown in a positive light in non black mrketed Movies..
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: Don't confuse ethnicity with race.
There's no question of Hannibal's ethnicity. He was Punic Carthaginian.
By Hannibal's time the ancient Lebanese founders of Khart Haddas were absorbed into the region's population as Doc Ben points out in his The Blackman's North and East Africa.
However, Carthge was cosmopolitan and neither 'pennies' of mahouts nor 'dollars' of Melkhart are likely to have Hannibal's living image.
This thread may present info not seen before but please don't neglect all the foregoing Hannibal threads posted on ES over the past decade.
There's a wealth of info right here on ES to be found nowhere else on the Web.
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
History Channel Portrays Hannibal as Black, White People Cry Foul Over ‘Historical Revisionism
quote:History Channel‘s newest documentary series, Barbarians Rising, tackles the fall of Rome over the course of 700 years of invasions. However, the most recent episode that aired Monday depicts Hannibal of Carthage as a Black man, and many white history buffs are crying foul over the “historical inaccuracy.” In the series, Hannibal is portrayed by Black British actor Nicholas Pinnock. The famous Carthaginian was a thorn in the empire’s side. He became a general at the age of 26 and managed to unite barbarian tribes to stop Rome’s imperial rise. The military genius was famous for climbing the Alps with war elephants whose sole purpose was to stomp the Roman army. Hannibal ultimately wanted to invade Rome, but he failed to do so. There have been debates over the race of Hannibal. This debate still continues till this day.
Some random fools put up comments on a youtube video and the Atalanta Blackstar deems that worthy of an article. as if there aren't 10 million comments a day on these videos from all points of view.
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Wow History Channel make a documentary showing Carthaginian General Hannibal as a Black man. I think the Phoenicians, Carthaginians, Jews and Babylonians were a mixture Black and Brown people. The ruling political, economic, religious and intellectual elite of those people were probably Black people. I think the Roman were a mixture of Brown, Black and White people. The Roman elite was a mixture of Brown, Black and maybe White people. The Black Phoenicians probably recruited the White people as mercenary and soldier for their army.
There was a previous History Channel video that show Hannibal was a Black man. I cant find the Ancient Egyptsearch Forum thread about the previous Black Hannibal.
Carthaginian general Hannibal of the Barca ruling family.
Black or Brown Roman general Scipio Africanus who defeated General Hannibal Barca. It was a war between the Black and Brown elite family of the Mediterranean world to dominate the sea trade of the Mediterranean sea.
Posts: 5374 | From: sepedat/sirius | Registered: Jul 2012
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
OK try replying the L S PM now.
quote:Originally posted by BlessedbyHorus: ^I know, but its still saying your inbox is full.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
You dont think History Channel isnt noticing this, You think it stops at youtube comments?? You dont think these racists arent on Twitter and even writing letters. These are the same people and offspring of the people who were upset when time showed Adam and eve as black(based on evidence btw) Anytime a Person of color is shown in a positive light white people tend to be upset...why?
History Channel Portrays Hannibal as Black, White People Cry Foul Over ‘Historical Revisionism
quote:History Channel‘s newest documentary series, Barbarians Rising, tackles the fall of Rome over the course of 700 years of invasions. However, the most recent episode that aired Monday depicts Hannibal of Carthage as a Black man, and many white history buffs are crying foul over the “historical inaccuracy.” In the series, Hannibal is portrayed by Black British actor Nicholas Pinnock. The famous Carthaginian was a thorn in the empire’s side. He became a general at the age of 26 and managed to unite barbarian tribes to stop Rome’s imperial rise. The military genius was famous for climbing the Alps with war elephants whose sole purpose was to stomp the Roman army. Hannibal ultimately wanted to invade Rome, but he failed to do so. There have been debates over the race of Hannibal. This debate still continues till this day.
Some random fools put up comments on a youtube video and the Atalanta Blackstar deems that worthy of an article. as if there aren't 10 million comments a day on these videos from all points of view.
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
Anyways, going onto something different, one should note that Phoenician settlements were quite small. More smaller compared to Greek settlements and their numbers only numbered in the hundreds.
quote:Material of about the same date comes from Utica, and of seventh-or sixth century date from Leptis Magna (Lebda),Hadrumetum(Sousse, Tipasa, Siga (Rachgoun), Lixus( on the Oued Loukkos) and Mogador, the last being the most distant Phoenician settlement so far known. Finds of parallel date have been made at Motya in Sicily,Nora(Nuri), Sulcis and Tharros (Torre di S. Giovanni) in Sardinia and at Cadiz and Almunecar in Spain. It must be emphasized that, unlike the settlements which the Greeks were making in Sicily,Italy and elsewhere in the 8th and 7th centuries, all the Phoenician settlements including Carthage itself,remained small places, with perhaps no more than a few hundred settlers at most, for generations. Furthermore,they long remained political subordinate to Tyre as was to be expected having regard to their prime function as anchorages and supply points.
General History of Africa, II Ancient Civilizations of Africa, James Currey, p.247
This seems to confirm that the original Phoenician settlers were absorbed by the native Carthaginians. But lets not forget other non-black settlers like those from Europe...
Posts: 1891 | From: NY | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: The presence of African individuals in Punic populations from the Island of Ibiza (Spain): contributions from physical anthropology