History Channel Portrays Hannibal as Black, White People Cry Foul Over ‘Historical Revisionism’

[714562]

You are going to pretend that you didn't ask me why the Romans would lie?

Well, why would a Roman historian lie to preserve a thoroughly modern conception of race that he wouldn't be familiar with?

As if the Romans are the only ones who can verify this information for you.

They're not. Non-Roman sources also trace the history of Carthage to Phoenician settlers from the Levant. For example, Greek Sicilian sources. That doesn't necessarily tell us what Hannibal looked like, for reasons I already posted. He may well have looked black to a modern American. We don't know. In fact, we don't know what pretty much anyone from that time looked like, regardless of "race."

As if the Romans have never distorted the racial history of its Empire.

What you're saying doesn't make sense. What "racial history" did Romans distort if they didn't understand the modern, nonscientific concept of race? What racial distortion, specifically, are you referring to? You're calling the credibility of Roman historians into question, based entirely on biases that didn't exist at the time, with no clear examples. That's not to say that all Roman historians are equally credible, but not for the reasons you're describing.

As if the Romans didn't intentionally delete all information about Carthage from their known world.

They didn't. They destroyed the city of Carthage and later rebuilt it. They did not "delete all information about Carthage from their known world." That's demonstrably false. We have sources, both Roman and non-Roman, located in the "known Roman world," who talk about Carthage. So you clearly have no idea what you're talking about.

But at this point, it's pretty obvious that you're not going to allow history to overcome the narrative in your head.

 

[Londilon]

Ok lets try to pretend their argument is worth a cent..

Ok cacs, if Hannibal was white, how the fukk did he get elephants?

the African elephant(Loxodonta africana) and the Asian elephant (Elephas maximus), although some evidence suggests that African bush elephants and African forest elephants are separate species (L. africana and L. cyclotis respectively). Elephants are scattered throughout sub-Saharan Africa, South Asia, andSoutheast Asia.

I've never heard of a Euro Elephant and no other European army used elephants, so why does Hannibal use them and how the fukk did he have access to them if he was a cac?

 

[3rdWorld]

Its quite obvious that the people that live there today aren't the people who live there then. The world changes, and sometimes populations get moved. Remember, there use to be a time when America was filled with nothing but native tribes

Africans visited the America's too for trade..Columbus who they revere so much notes admit to it too..

 

[Londilon]

Africans visited the America's too for trade..Columbus who they revere so much notes admit to it too..

They act like black people never traveled, they just stayed in one location their entire life.

 

[2stainz]

 

[NO-BadAzz]

Cacs will naturally outright claim anything and anyone of significance, and sadly that is why their societies are so wealthy but they're poor socially ..

If they can claim Rock Music and Techno in our face, what then of shyt from 100s to 1000s of years ago..

What's the back history of Rock, (I somewhat know that we created Rock but what about techno)

 

[K.O.N.Y]

What's the back history of Rock, (I somewhat know that we created Rock but what about techno)

yes

Detroit michigan
Juan Atkins - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Unknown Poster]

He wasn't no pasty mayo looking fukker either, Cacs think anyone of historical importance was a cac. These fukkers one day might claim Shaka Zulu was white and that he was adopted by the Zulus.

Even when anthropologically it doesn't make a lick of sense for certain historical figures to be white.

Hannibal was Black..he raided Europe with Elephants, an animal not known to Arab North Africa. Someone needs to remind these Arabs and Cacs we've been here a long ass time and they should bow down to us. Hell, even the Sumerians were Black but cacs dont want to hear that.

we've technically been here longer than arabs, asians, and whites...if you want to be specific in talking about the history of mankind...

 

[...o3]

i stopped messing with hitler chan......i mean history channel years and years ago. they did waaay too many hitler specials.

...but if they're taking a break from that and getting back to real history, i'll fux with this.

 

[3rdWorld]

What's the back history of Rock, (I somewhat know that we created Rock but what about techno)

In short, only music white folks created is square dancing..
Techno is a Black artform from Detroit. Ill go deeper, but have to run for now.

 

[Mr.Big Meat McGee]

No one really knows what Hannibal looked like because multiple groups had different depictions of him.

If anything I'm guessing he looked racially Ambiguous.

 

[Leasy]

hannibal was def of phonecian descent, and the carthiginians were likely a mixed multitude of people, but def not indo european, mostly either negroid african, and semetic african.

hannibal however was def of pure african origin. the coins and the writings attest to that. there are still african villages today that honor the legacy of hannibal.

The Egyptian Pharoahs are the same way with their heirtage was embedded in their original name which can be traced back to their African region of birth.

 

[ahdsend]

 

[Oceanicpuppy]

Ok lets try to pretend their argument is worth a cent..

Ok cacs, if Hannibal was white, how the fukk did he get elephants?



I've never heard of a Euro Elephant and no other European army used elephants, so why does Hannibal use them and how the fukk did he have access to them if he was a cac?

The punics were known for there trading. Africans or Indians could've trading with them. Now if this is true it leaves white nay Sayers in a conundrum because they would have to acknowledge that people in Carthage were actively trading and building with groups in the interior of Africa and dispels there notion that subsaharans were backwards people living in huts. They also said once Carthage was destroyed they tried to rebuild further in the interior of Africa. So cacs can claim them but if they do would have to accept them trading with "negros" down south and that they moved into the interior of Africa not to the "Middle East" .

 

[Hiphoplives4eva]

Well, why would a Roman historian lie to preserve a thoroughly modern conception of race that he wouldn't be familiar with?



They're not. Non-Roman sources also trace the history of Carthage to Phoenician settlers from the Levant. For example, Greek Sicilian sources. That doesn't necessarily tell us what Hannibal looked like, for reasons I already posted. He may well have looked black to a modern American. We don't know. In fact, we don't know what pretty much anyone from that time looked like, regardless of "race."



What you're saying doesn't make sense. What "racial history" did Romans distort if they didn't understand the modern, nonscientific concept of race? What racial distortion, specifically, are you referring to? You're calling the credibility of Roman historians into question, based entirely on biases that didn't exist at the time, with no clear examples. That's not to say that all Roman historians are equally credible, but not for the reasons you're describing.



They didn't. They destroyed the city of Carthage and later rebuilt it. They did not "delete all information about Carthage from their known world." That's demonstrably false. We have sources, both Roman and non-Roman, located in the "known Roman world," who talk about Carthage. So you clearly have no idea what you're talking about.

But at this point, it's pretty obvious that you're not going to allow history to overcome the narrative in your head.

This is a fukking lie. They destroyed the original Carthage and poured salt into ground to ensure that no life form existed on that land ever again. The new so called Roman Carthage was in no way shape or form similar to the old school carthage, and they damn sure weren't erecting accurate statues celebrating the heroes of old Carthage in this new Roman CACarthage.

The Romans destroyed the old carthage and the vast majority of the relevant historical documents. That was no accident.