Modern humans have existed for 300,000 years but Abrahamic religions are only 3500 years old

Ish Gibor

Omnipresence
Joined
Jan 23, 2017
Messages
4,610
Reputation
734
Daps
6,017
:russell: You’re right at this point this is circular…
When you aren't answering we go into what is called a circularity.

I asked you to explain the history of the VOC and CIW. And what is called the Gouden Eeeuw.

What you do is take snippets out of history, explain nothing and want everyone to believe the narrative you created around those snippets you take from history.

The problem is that you leave out 99% of all the other recorded world history.

You now have to explain these:

g93ekdib2yef_acosta1.jpg


47381_copye1.jpg



18171_ceylon1.jpg

18171_ceylon2.jpg



45704_changuion1.jpg




45844_coutinho1.jpg



46824_usselincx1.jpg



47378_twee1.jpg



Moors not being subject to laws governing blacks and slaves is pretty clear. What’s there to explain? Earlier it was you who posted the Negro law and this act is in direct response to that law and states that the Moors specifically are exempt from the laws blacks were under. The only way this is necessary is if both were black (in appearance). You’ll just deflect from this by misdirecting
:yeshrug:
What is there to explain is jurisprudence. We have to go by different cases, in oder to understand the root cause of this Act. How it came about etc…

Basically you should be able to write an entire essays or book about this one particular subject.


“It’s not hidden” :mjlol:

The American public educational system teaches nothing about the Moors, let alone them once being exempt from laws black people were under. They never show any of the pictures of black people in Europe before slavery and never mention any of these “African” communities sprinkled all over Europe etc.. Everything is swept under the rug when it comes to what they actively teach the masses…
No public school system teaches any of that what you addressed here. But that doesn't mean it not available. They teach white historic representation, and white representation only. The same way they have not thought Peruvian history.

:dwillhuh:

Funny how someone that has been on their own intellectual high horse all thread still doesn’t understand that Charles is the English version of Carlos and V/the Fifth is the English version of Quinto? You’re literally asking me why he’s referred to by his name in English in some places and in other places his real name in the language he spoke? Do you not understand that the Carlos Quinto in that picture is this guy:


Inca_kings_small_4.jpg

OR

Charles-V-hunting-dog-wood-oil-Jakob.jpg

So, what can you tell about the Inca's and the implication why Carlos Quinto is portrayed as a person with dark skin who possible is an Inca, who you claim is Carlos V. But what is the symbology behind this transition of power of the region?

Who is Atahualpa and who are the other Inca emperors?


"Carlos V appears as the successor to Atahualpa, and Carlos IV – the last king represented – figures as the 25th Inca emperor of Peru."

How can one ethnicity go from one to the next, without any of further explanation? What type of pseudo intellectual circular babble is this?

You have not explained any of this, nor have you explained Inca history, of the genealogy of the “Inca family tree”. The clue is obviously in the “Inca family tree” and the colonization of the Inca region (which is called Peru now).

"The name Peru is derived from a Quechua word implying land of abundance, a reference to the economic wealth produced by the rich and highly organized Inca civilization that ruled the region for centuries."

If these are fake histories told by cac's you at least need to be able to tell what and when, by who to substantiate your arguments.

Genealogy of the Inca rulers and their Spanish successors from Manco Capac, the first Inca king, to Ferdinand VI of Spain, c.1750 (panel) (Genealogie der Inkaherrscher und ihre spanischen Nachfolger von Manco Capac, der erste Inka König, Ferdinand VI von Spanien, c.1750 (Platte))


Spanish%20School%20-%20Genealogy%20of%20the%20Inca%20rulers%20and%20their%20Spanish%20successors%20from%20Manco%20Capac%20the%20first%20Inca%20king%20to%20Ferdinand%20VI%20of%20Spain%20c1750%20%28panel%29%20-%20%28MeisterDrucke-68449%29.jpg


Now am I more inclined to believe cacs whitewashed a historical black person or Peruvians blackwashing or holding a black washed painting of a white person in their museum?
:patrice:
So now the images made by these cac's are no longer valid when we start to go deeper into the history of the meaning of these images? Simply because you are not deep ponderer, but a surface level thinker. What is it you know about the history of Peru and Pervians?



Conferencia Rocío Quispe-Agnoli: «Los Incas hablan en México: conversaciones indígenas hemisféricas en el siglo XVIII

Los-Reyes-Incas.jpeg


 
Last edited:

Everythingg

King-Over-Kingz
Bushed
Joined
Nov 21, 2013
Messages
9,100
Reputation
-2,418
Daps
16,728
When you aren't answering we go into what is called a circularity.

I asked you to explain the history of the VOC and CIW. And what is called the Gouden Eeeuw.

What you do is take snippets out of history, explain nothing and want everyone to believe the narrative you created around those snippets you take from history.

The problem is that you leave out 99% of all the other recorded world history.

You now have to explain these:
“You now have to explain these”:mjlol:


What is there to explain is jurisprudence. We have to go by different cases, in oder to understand the root cause of this Act. How it came about etc…

Basically you should be able to write an entire essays or book about this one particular subject.
:unimpressed:Everything is explained in the act itself:

On January 20, 1790, a petition was presented to the South Carolina House of Representatives from a group of four individuals who were subjects of the Moroccan emperor and residents of the state. They desired that if they happened to commit any fault amenable to be brought to justice, that as subjects to a prince allied with the United States through the Moroccan–American Treaty of Friendship, they would be tried as citizens instead of under the Negro Act of 1740.

The Free Moors, Francis, Daniel, Hammond and Samuel petitioned on behalf of themselves and their wives Fatima, Flora, Sarah and Clarinda.[1] They explained how some years ago while fighting in defense of their country, they and their wives were captured and made prisoners of war by an African king. After this a certain Captain Clark had them delivered to him, promising they would be redeemed by the Moroccan ambassador residing in England, and returned to their country. Instead, he transported them to South Carolina, and sold them for slaves. Since then, "by the greatest industry," they purchased freedom from their respective masters. They requested that as free born subjects of a Prince in alliance with the U.S., that they should not be considered subject to a state law (then in force) known as the negro law. If they be found guilty of any crime or misdemeanor, they would receive a fair trial by lawful jury.[2] The matter was referred to a committee consisting of Justice John Faucheraud Grimké, General Charles Cotesworth Pinckney and Edward Rutledge.

To avoid explaining why a people who were not black would have been in fear of being under the same laws blacks were you keep misdirecting.. slavery was about skin color and here comes some moors saying they shouldn’t be tried under the same laws blacks were. Why? Because they were black…

No public school system teaches any of that what you addressed here. But that doesn't mean it not available. They teach white historic representation, and white representation only. The same way they have not thought Peruvian history.
Semantics. Actively avoiding teaching certain parts of history (especially ones that paint black people in a positive light)is the definition of a coverup..
So, what can you tell about the Inca's and the implication why Carlos Quinto is portrayed as a person with dark skin who possible is an Inca, who you claim is Carlos V. But what is the symbology behind this transition of power of the region?

Who is Atahualpa and who are the other Inca emperors?


"Carlos V appears as the successor to Atahualpa, and Carlos IV – the last king represented – figures as the 25th Inca emperor of Peru."

How can one ethnicity go from one to the next, without any of further explanation? What type of pseudo intellectual circular babble is this?

You have not explained any of this, nor have you explained Inca history, of the genealogy of the “Inca family tree”. The clue is obviously in the “Inca family tree” and the colonization of the Inca region (which is called Peru now).

"The name Peru is derived from a Quechua word implying land of abundance, a reference to the economic wealth produced by the rich and highly organized Inca civilization that ruled the region for centuries."

If these are fake histories told by cac's you at least need to be able to tell what and when, by who to substantiate your arguments.

Peru Royal Chronology Nsuccession Of The Rulers Of Peru Beginning With The Inca Emperors From Manco Cpac To Atahualpa And Ending With The Spanish Kings Carlos V To Ferdinand Vi Spanish Painting 18Th C


So now the images made by these cac's are no longer valid when we start to go deeper into the history of the meaning of these images? Simply because you are not deep ponderer, but a surface level thinker. What is it you know about the history of Peru and Pervians?
More misdirections:mjlol:

And you’re still pretending that Charles V isnt the English translation of Carlos Quinto and insisting that it might be two different people
:mjlol::snoop:

The Incans were conquered by the Spanish and that is what represents the changeover from the Incan kings to Carlos Quinto. And the list from Carlos Quinto forward represents the succession of the Kings of Spain. The next guy after Carlos is his son, Philip II. After Philip II, comes his son, Philip III. After Philip III comes his son, Philip IV. After Philip IV comes his son, Carlos II. Carlos was not able to have children so after much wrangling around it fell on Philip V. It’s literally following the succession of The Kings of Spain

So what we have is a painting in Peru depicting the Hapsburgs as a people of color. You believe cacs and I don’t. You do you tho
:hubie:
 

Ish Gibor

Omnipresence
Joined
Jan 23, 2017
Messages
4,610
Reputation
734
Daps
6,017
“You now have to explain these”
As excepted you can't answer why those old Dutch documents exist, so you had to spew more gibber jabber. lol

That site has hundreds classical documents digitized and archived from the last 400 years. But oh well, let's ignore it. lol

So you are now claiming the VOC and WIC didn't exist? Although there is evidence of this in Africa, the Americas and Asia. You are basically trying to tell us Peter Stuyvesant didn't exist? Or what about Piet Heijn? You now have to be able to explain what Orange Nassua is and how this came into existence?







Colony-of-New-Netherland_1.png



Is all of this history false as well? lol smh

Everything is explained in the act itself:

On January 20, 1790, a petition was presented to the South Carolina House of Representatives from a group of four individuals who were subjects of the Moroccan emperor and residents of the state. They desired that if they happened to commit any fault amenable to be brought to justice, that as subjects to a prince allied with the United States through the Moroccan–American Treaty of Friendship, they would be tried as citizens instead of under the Negro Act of 1740.
Sad you have to retort to Wikipedia as a source as your "evidence", instead of a peer reviewed and or actual academic source, with actually historical jurisprudence.

Anyway, now we have to go by the four individuals who were subjects of the Moroccan emperor and residents of the state.

Who were these people and what was their lineage…

The Free Moors, Francis, Daniel, Hammond and Samuel petitioned on behalf of themselves and their wives Fatima, Flora, Sarah and Clarinda.[1] They explained how some years ago while fighting in defense of their country, they and their wives were captured and made prisoners of war by an African king.
An African king? What African king? Does this African king have a name? Where from Africa did this took place, if so? Why do these people have English names? We need more on these people is what I am saying...
 
Last edited:

Ish Gibor

Omnipresence
Joined
Jan 23, 2017
Messages
4,610
Reputation
734
Daps
6,017
To avoid explaining why a people who were not black would have been in fear of being under the same laws blacks were you keep misdirecting.. slavery was about skin color and here comes some moors saying they shouldn’t be tried under the same laws blacks were. Why? Because they were black…

Semantics. Actively avoiding teaching certain parts of history (especially ones that paint black people in a positive light)is the definition of a coverup..
Certain parts of history are attached to other parts of history. You can't take whatever part and make it into whatever you like. You've basically taken 1% of history and avoid to address the 99% of history, that is untold by you. And you’re voiding explanations.

That's problematic. lol smh

More misdirections

And you’re still pretending that Charles V isnt the English translation of Carlos Quinto and insisting that it might be two different people
I am not suggesting anything, it's you who has to backup these claims with solid data. If Carlos V appears as the successor to Atahualpa, you have to explain why he's depicted the same as the people in the new world. What is the symbology behind this?


The Incans were conquered by the Spanish and that is what represents the changeover from the Incan kings to Carlos Quinto. And the list from Carlos Quinto forward represents the succession of the Kings of Spain. The next guy after Carlos is his son, Philip II. After Philip II, comes his son, Philip III. After Philip III comes his son, Philip IV. After Philip IV comes his son, Carlos II. Carlos was not able to have children so after much wrangling around it fell on Philip V. It’s literally following the succession of The Kings of Spain
The Incas were indeed conquered by the Spanish, and the aristocrats in Peru still are the dominant class.

You fail to explain why these people who are now the ruling class still look the same as the Iberians from of hundreds years ago, as well as mixed mestizos.

It's up to you to show the evidence that Carlos Quinto is Carlos V, and why his name was changed. And why in the new world they depicted him different, if truly so.






So what we have is a painting in Peru depicting the Hapsburgs as a people of color. You believe cacs and I don’t. You do you tho
The Peru painting is not depicting the Habsburg, it's depicting the Genealogy of the Inca rulers and their Spanish successors.

In other words the colonization and the reason why there is now an aristocratic group (cac's) similar to those that colonized the region. You most likely have never read a book about the Inca, the history of Peru and Latin America as a whole. lol smh
This hiding behind if you don't believe me, you believe in cac's. Is a high school dropout argument. I presented to you facts that are challenging your pseudo claims. It this is just the beginning of the problems I am presenting to you. People in many countries have regional recorded histories that go against your claims. That it the issue you are dealing with.

If all this is fake, what is the purpose?

Arbol-borbon.gif
 
Last edited:

Everythingg

King-Over-Kingz
Bushed
Joined
Nov 21, 2013
Messages
9,100
Reputation
-2,418
Daps
16,728
As excepted you can't answer why those old Dutch documents exist, so you had to spew more gibber jabber. lol

That site has hundreds classical documents digitized and archived from the last 400 years. But oh well, let's ignore it. lol

So you are now claiming the VOC and WIC didn't exist? Although there is evidence of this in Africa, the Americas and Asia. You are basically trying to tell us Peter Stuyvesant didn't exist? Or what about Piet Heijn? You now have to be able to explain what Orange Nassua is and how this came into existence?
:russell: More tangents
Sad you have to retort to Wikipedia as a source as your "evidence", instead of a peer reviewed and or actual academic source, with actually historical jurisprudence.

Anyway, now we have to go by the four individuals who were subjects of the Moroccan emperor and residents of the state.

Who were these people and what was their lineage…


An African king? What African king? Does this African king have a name? Where from Africa did this took place, if so? Why do these people have English names? We need more on these people is what I am saying...
More tangents you’re trying to run off on? :mjlol:

I bring up the moors running with George Washington and you bring up an English name for the moor (William Lee). Yet now you’re asking me why moors have an English name lol

All you’re doing is moving the goalposts to avoid the obvious. The only people who would need a law absolving them from being under the same laws blacks were are people who also appeared to be black..

Certain parts of history are attached to other parts of history. You can't take whatever part and make it into whatever you like. You've basically taken 1% of history and avoid to address the 99% of history, that is untold by you. And you’re voiding explanations.

That's problematic. lol smh
juelz-talking.gif


Typing just to type at this point :unimpressed:
I am not suggesting anything, it's you who has to backup these claims with solid data. If Carlos V appears as the successor to Atahualpa, you have to explain why he's depicted the same as the people in the new world. What is the symbology behind this?
Why do I have to explain this when I’m the one claiming he’s black?
:dead:

Why aren’t you explaining why a European king is being depicted as black instead of pretending they were talking about someone else yet still following the same succession of Spanish kings that came after Carlos Quinto name by name?
The Incas were indeed conquered by the Spanish, and the aristocrats in Peru still are the dominant class.

You fail to explain why these people who are now the ruling class still look the same as the Iberians from of hundreds years ago, as well as mixed mestizos.

It's up to you to show the evidence that Carlos Quinto is Carlos V, and why his name was changed. And why in the new world they depicted him different, if truly so.



It's not Peru painting is not depicting the Habsburg, it's depicting the Genealogy of the Inca rulers and their Spanish successors. In other words the colonization and the reason why there is now an aristocratic group (cac's) similar to those that colonized the region. You most likely have never read a book on Inca, the history of Peru and Latin America as a whole. lol smh
:mjlol: This is what happens when dishonest people are backed into a corner. They put up hoop after hoop after hoop as a way to misdirect

Carlos is the Spanish name for Charles and Quinto means 5 yet you’re asking me to prove that they’re the same people? His successors name is Felipe Segundo. Felipe is the Spanish name for Philip and Segundo is spanish for second. Again, the list goes from following the Incan kings succession to the European Spanish successional line of kings after the Spanish colonized the Incans.

Carlos Quinto was a Hapsburg and the list depicts him as black. Period. No amount of goalpost moving will change that. That doesn’t mean someone has to look at that and automatically believe it but to deny it altogether? That’s cac shyt
:yeshrug:
If all this is fake, what is the purpose?
Whitewash black civilizations so as to take their achievements and accomplishments for themselves. And ultimately and most importantly, ownership over the lands :coffee:
 

Ish Gibor

Omnipresence
Joined
Jan 23, 2017
Messages
4,610
Reputation
734
Daps
6,017
:russell: More tangents

More tangents you’re trying to run off on?
So Willem Usselincx never existed? lol

Do you not understand that you are off? You can’t take a snippet from history and crate your own narrative around it, while leaving out 99% of the history attached to it.



“South Africa: Tracing South-African and Dutch history through the VOC”.

Where did the VOC operate?

“The VOC started operating in India and South Asia in general. Over the next century, it expanded its operations to Mauritius, South Africa, Indonesia, Taiwan, Japan, Malaysia, Thailand, and Vietnam.”


x46824_usselincx1.jpg.pagespeed.ic.2pAGsEuMRn.jpg


All these aren’t true? But your self doctored history is true? Ok.
 

Ish Gibor

Omnipresence
Joined
Jan 23, 2017
Messages
4,610
Reputation
734
Daps
6,017
I bring up the moors running with George Washington and you bring up an English name for the moor (William Lee). Yet now you’re asking me why moors have an English name lol
You didn’t bring up the Moors. You gave some names, without context and history. And it’s from a Wikipedia page. That is what you did. You spoke of an alleged captain named William who allegedly sold some people? Again, without context as usual. So I’m now left to do guesswork and fill in the blanks.

I’m asking for the jurisprudence. I’m most asking for a Wikipedia page. I’m asking for primary sources.

I wonder, do you yourself understand what you are posting?

If anything l posted about the Moors. I did, not you.
 
Last edited:

Ish Gibor

Omnipresence
Joined
Jan 23, 2017
Messages
4,610
Reputation
734
Daps
6,017
Why do I have to explain this when I’m the one claiming he’s black?
The image shows a person with dark skin, that’s all.

This is not enough and sufficient evidence.

Do you not understand that this isn’t solid proof of anything?
 

Ish Gibor

Omnipresence
Joined
Jan 23, 2017
Messages
4,610
Reputation
734
Daps
6,017
Why aren’t you explaining why a European king is being depicted as black instead of pretending they were talking about someone else yet still following the same succession of Spanish kings that came after Carlos Quinto name by name?
I have explained the history of Spain. You are making a claim that the lineage all of a sudden turned into Black, because you see a person with dark skin.

Earlier on I have posted people from the region, where the Inca empire was, until the Spaniards colonized it. These people have dark skin. They have their own unique phenotype and genotype.






oip-6.jpg
 
Last edited:

Ish Gibor

Omnipresence
Joined
Jan 23, 2017
Messages
4,610
Reputation
734
Daps
6,017
This is what happens when dishonest people are backed into a corner. They put up hoop after hoop after hoop as a way to misdirect.
It’s dishonest when you base your pseudo theories on a single picture, that has no further explanation.

Carlos is the Spanish name for Charles and Quinto means 5 yet you’re asking me to prove that they’re the same people? His successors name is Felipe Segundo. Felipe is the Spanish name for Philip and Segundo is spanish for second. Again, the list goes from following the Incan kings succession to the European Spanish successional line of kings after the Spanish colonized the Incans.
If these is a 5ft, it means there’s also a 4rd, 3rd, 2nd and 1st. That was and is the point I’m making.

And I’m not talking about Felipe (Philip).

And I know second is segundo on Spanish. But that’s not the point.

Carlos Quinto was a Hapsburg and the list depicts him as black. Period. No amount of goalpost moving will change that. That doesn’t mean someone has to look at that and automatically believe it but to deny it altogether? That’s cac shyt.
The person depicted has dark skin. In your delusional narrow minded mind this makes him a Black man. You avoid the actual argument, which is why was he depicted like that in the new world after the Spanish colonizers brought an end to the Inca empire. In my humble opinion this is a symbolic image.

Who was Carlos V?

"First of all", asks the curious traveller, "Who was Carlos Quinto?" Before answering the question, I must increase your confusion by specifying that in Spain, although he has always been known as Carlos Quinto (Charles the Fifth), his real title was King Charles I of Spain. He was the grandson of Isabel and Ferdinand, who expelled the Moors, masterminded of the Inquisition, and financed Christopher Columbus- voyages. Their daughter Juana married the Hapsburg prince Philip, whose home was in Ghent, where Charles was born in 1500. Philip came to live in Castile with his wife, Queen Juana, but many disliked the idea of a foreigner inheriting the throne, which may well have been the cause of his sudden death in 1506...”

Whether the handsome Philip was assassinated or not, Juana went mad with grief (she was known thereafter as "Juana La Loca") and had to be shut away for the rest of her long life. Her son Charles was brought up by his grandparents in Ghent, and when he reached the age to ascend to the throne, he was sent to Spain to take his mother's place as Charles I of Castile in 1516.

But, soon after, he also inherited from his grandfather the throne of the Holy Roman Empire (which was the rather pretentious name given to Germany), as Charles V, in Spanish "Carlos Quinto". Charles always used this title second, as in political terms it was inferior - Spain was then the first world power - since while his poor insane mother lived (even though she was hidden away in the cell of a monastery, sleeping on the floor in her own excrement) she continued to be the Queen. Charles, therefore, although recognized as King, was in reality the Regent until she died in 1555, just several months before his own abdication.”


Dum Diversas - June 18, 1452​

“Pope Nicholas V issued the papal bull Dum Diversas which authorised Alfonso V of Portugal to reduce any “Saracens (Muslims) and pagans and any other unbelievers” to perpetual slavery. This facilitated the Portuguese slave trade from West Africa.”

GLC04093_0.jpg



Whitewash black civilizations so as to take their achievements and accomplishments for themselves. And ultimately and most importantly, ownership over the lands :coffee:
Where is Black civilization whitewashed?

The closest this argument comes in to ancient Egypt. But the evidence is too overwhelming that it was a Black civilization. Moors were expelled from Spain and other parts of Europe. But somehow some Black king ruled over Spain and other parts of Europe? Make it make sense…

"Hispanicized black (ladinos) of Moorish descent were expelled from Spain and brought to Puerto Rico by the Spaniards in the early 1500s. Large numbers of enslaved black Africans were introduced to the island after 1519, mostly from several West African tribal regions."
Dr. Edna Acosta-Belen, Distinguished Professor in the Departments f Latin American, Caribbean, and U.S. Latino Studies (LACS) and Women's Studies at the University at Albany

“The digital archive connects the study of the past with controversies and debates that matter to the present. It provides a tool to learn more about the historical realities of enslaved people of African origin in c. 1450-1550, as well as to engage with the visible and invisible marks which they have left on the urban fabric of Lagos and Lisbon and the very different meanings that they have for the Portuguese society.”

chafariz_del-rey_c._1570-80_coleccao_berardo-1.png







African-civilizations-map-pre-colonial.svg


And there is by far more on African (Black) civilization. Such as:



 
Last edited:

Geordi

All Star
Joined
Jul 6, 2018
Messages
2,533
Reputation
536
Daps
12,204
The image shows a person with dark skin, that’s all.

This is not enough and sufficient evidence.

Do you not understand that this isn’t solid proof of anything?
He's white in the painting because he looks just like the next white king with red hair but from a different angle. It's a 300 year old painting with bad lighting, not a black king
 

boogers

cats rule, dogs drool
Supporter
Joined
Mar 11, 2022
Messages
6,862
Reputation
2,784
Daps
20,110
Reppin
#catset
great thread. i missed jebel irhoud in the news. i joined to talk about rap but i learned some cool shyt today. ty coli
 

Everythingg

King-Over-Kingz
Bushed
Joined
Nov 21, 2013
Messages
9,100
Reputation
-2,418
Daps
16,728
So Willem Usselincx never existed? lol

Do you not understand that you are off? You can’t take a snippet from history and crate your own narrative around it, while leaving out 99% of the history attached to it.
.

I just :russell: your nonsense away because you’re trying to get me to chase your tangents

How a convo works is you bring something, explain its connection to what we’re discussing, then maybe pose a question. What youre actually doing is posting 5 links with no explanation and demanding I explain it all lol. Pass
:camby:

You didn’t bring up the Moors. You gave some names, without context and history. And it’s from a Wikipedia page. That is what you did. You spoke of an alleged captain named William who allegedly sold some people? Again, without context as usual. So I’m now left to do guess work and fill in the blanks.

I’m asking for the jurisprudence. I’m most asking for a Wikipedia page. I’m asking for primary sources.

I wonder, do you yourself understand what you are posting?

If anything l posted about the Moors. I did, not you.
I was the first one in this thread that posted about the moors :unimpressed:

I brought them up and brought an act that exempted them from the same laws blacks were under and you’ve been moving goalposts ever since so you don’t have to acknowledge how certain blacks were under negro laws and others weren’t. I bring one moor and you call him “William Lee”. I bring 4 more moors and you ask me to explain why they have English names lol. Your whole schtick is to keep moving the goalposts or posting 5 different things demanding explanations to all of them. All so you can avoid acknowledging what’s right in front of you
:francis:

The image shows a person with dark skin, that’s all.
Yes so maybe this time you’ll explain why a supposed white Spanish king and his descendants are being depicted as dark skinned in a Peruvian museum.

And before you go there, I don’t care about your hangups on the term “black” vs “dark skinned” either. Carlos Quinto is supposed to be a pasty cac but they depict him as dark skinned. And the further down you go on the list after the European takeover the whiter they get…
If these is a 5ft, it means there’s also a 4rd, 3rd, 2nd and 1st. That was and is the point I’m making.

And I’m not talking about Felipe (Philip).

And I know second is segundo on Spanish. But that’s not the point.
You’re literally typing just to type :mjlol:

  • he has always been known as Carlos Quinto (Charles the Fifth), his real title was King Charles I of Spain. He was the grandson of Isabel and Ferdinand, who expelled the Moors,

This is what you brought despite you earlier trying to use this same thing as a way to misdirect. Earlier you were saying it might be two different people. Earlier it was “why the name change?” Now that’s what he was always known as but his real title was different.

The person depicted has dark skin. In your delusional narrow minded mind this makes him a Black man. You avoid the actual argument, which is why was he depicted like that in the new world after the Spanish colonizers brought an end to the Inca empire. In my humble opinion this is a symbolic image.
“It’s symbolic” :mjlol:

So “symbolically” they start off with Carlos Quinto being dark skinned then “symbolically” lighten the following emperors until they’re white?
:heh:
Where is Black civilization whitewashed?

The closest this argument comes in to ancient Egypt. But the evidence is too overwhelming that it was a Black civilization. Moors were expelled from Spain. But somehow some Black king ruled over Spain?

Dum Diversas - June 18, 1452​

“Pope Nicholas V issued the papal bull Dum Diversas which authorised Alfonso V of Portugal to reduce any “Saracens (Muslims) and pagans and any other unbelievers” to perpetual slavery. This facilitated the Portuguese slave trade from West Africa.”
Lets see who King Ferdinand and Isabel actually expelled:

The Alhambra Decree (also known as the Edict of Expulsion; Spanish: Decreto de la Alhambra, Edicto de Granada) was an edict issued on 31 March 1492, by the joint Catholic Monarchs of Spain (Isabella I of Castile and Ferdinand II of Aragon) ordering the expulsion of practising Jews from the Crowns of Castile and Aragon and its territories and possessions by 31 July of that year.

:coffee: It doesn’t say Moors were expelled now does it? Dum diversas wasn’t even about expelling anyone. It was about the exploration of the world and the enslavement of the people they found around the world who weren’t believers in their fake religion.. That’s why Carlos V is holding a Bible in the Incan kings list painting:

Inca_kings_small_4.jpg

They felt that because the Incans (in this example) didn’t believe in their fake god that it gave them the right to conquer, enslave, and take all their resources away. And going by this depiction it wasn’t cacs doing this to a “people of color” but a “people of color” doing this to another “people of color”. And the same year they made at decree of expelling Jews is the same year they sent Columbus to the Americas.. No coincidence
:coffee:
 
Last edited:

Ish Gibor

Omnipresence
Joined
Jan 23, 2017
Messages
4,610
Reputation
734
Daps
6,017
He's white in the painting because he looks just like the next white king with red hair but from a different angle. It's a 300 year old painting with bad lighting, not a black king
That's indeed a good argument. Not that this argument has no validation, because it does. But all the other individuals have darker skin as well, while some are indeed white.
 
Top