Everythingg
King-Over-Kingz
You've fallen back to this stupid logic
Here is evidence from 1519 when Charles V was a teenager about what he looked like. This portrait was done when he was alive:
Iconoclasm: the social belief in the importance of the destruction of icons and other images or monuments, most frequently for religious or political reasons
When people in Peru and Europe present him as black, and then theres white people presenting him as white. I assume thats iconoclasm, i.e. white washing. The same way you do with Egypt right?
Since your logic says that anything from the time period it originated from is the best evidence, you must admit that Charles V is white.
Just like your Moor statue and your Peruvian manuscripts
Not really since I can think for myself while you need daddy to tell you which one you choose outta the two to believe...