According to "history" channel, carthage was black. Is there any truth to this at all or is it just revisionism?

The natives were lybian, not berber.

Your b8's not that gr8 m8

Well I tried, but I could use some constructive criticism to better bait in the future

I think if you stuck to calling
/pol/ you could've gotten away with it, but saying
are /pol/ just makes you sound like you're trying too hard.

Y'all need to learn real history!
realhistoryww.com/world_history/ancient/Misc/True_Negros/The_True_Negro_2a.htm

Thanks, maybe I'll see if this works on /int/ later

>The city also had to deal with potentially hostileBerbers, the indigenous inhabitants of the area where Carthage was built.[5]

The area specifically where Carthage was located was Berber territory.

Yet you have zero proof, just theory.

Here is a good place to start.

amazon.com/Carthage-Must-Be-Destroyed-Civilization/dp/0143121294/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1473454108&sr=8-1&keywords=Carthage Must Be Destroyed The Rise And Fall Of An Ancient Civilization

He would have been this kind of black at max, not Nigerian black.

>History Channel
>making a show about history
I don't believe it. Unless they also said he was an alien.

They're getting really into "dramatic historical recreations" as of late, little miniseries with historic themes presented as some kind of show instead of a documentary. They did something similar with the Texan war of independence.

It helps the tards pay attention it seems.

I felt really bad for him seeing everything he went through why the fuck did they lump him in with the barbarians i'll never know considering they probably did this to make blacks look better

Who the fuck cares
Be happy we have a show about Hannibal.
The does it matter if he was black or purple or red?

Yes, as silly as it may seem the History Channel should at least try to be historically accurate.

You cannot prove Hannibal was not black, so he was black.

Do you get your history from movies and TV? Especially from dramatized miniseries?
Hannibal is admired for his achievements not his skin color. There is a reason why books about Hannibal make no mention of his skin color.
It doesnt. Fucking. Matter.
Im sick of this thread in Veeky Forums.

WEWUZism

Yes i can

>A history show shouldn't be historically accurate
Im sick of people like you in Veeky Forums.

Watch Gladiator, or the eagle, or any other historic movie and tell me its historically accurate. The point of a movie is not to teach you all your history, its mean to give you the spirit of the times. If youre trying to learn your history from movies, you need to pick up a book for once.

>A historical show about historical figures on the history channel doesn't have a need to be historically accurate

If you want fantasy, throw some tits in and put it on HBO.

Yes a great deal of people learn about history from television. That's specifically what the history channel is for. At least thats what it used to be for.

Not from a dramatized miniseries.
Nobody watched Spartacus so that they could research the life of Marcus Crassus. Theyre not made to be historical.
Documentaries are different from movies/ shows based on historical events.
Furthermore, complaining about Hannibal being portrayed black is exactly the same as complaining if they had portrayed him without a beard. It literally makes no difference to what he did or his accomplishments.
I say this because I for one really like Hannibal. Hes my favorite charachter from history, and yet the only thing ever discussed about him on this board is whether he was black or olive. It doesnt. Fucking. Matter.
Why dont you talk about whether he had the means to besiege Rome? Or how about the reasons why he was overwhelmed at Zama?

Oh you consider Gladiator a historical movie? That explains a lot.

That's exactly my point you Cretan.

>he's my favorite character from history

I see you have difficulty differentiating reality from fiction. Obviously this isn't an issue for you then.

That Hannibal shit on the history channel wasn't like a movie. It presented itself as a documentary.

this is the major problem with the "history" channel
it presents itself as historical and documentary and people start thinking all their shit is real, and then you start to see threads like "i want this meme to end"

How? I dislike the historical inaccuracy in Gladiator as much as I dislike the historical inaccuracy of a black Hannibal. Why would you be content with that? Do you think it's impossible to make a interesting yet historically accurate movie?

Bashir is the best Hannibal.

Why is he wearing a Chi-Rho on the helm?

Is that based Siddig? If so, yea that's actually fucking awesome casting.

Odd. I know that the Phoenicians mingles with Lybians and Numidians but never berbers.

The Chi-Ro was around long before Constantine painted it on his solder's shields. Still, it shouldn't be there.

>there actually is a chi-ro

The History Channel was a big fat mistake.

Soldier's*. Fuck my phone.

It's like those German soldiers using Enfields in that one docudrama.

Because it's just a dramatized mini-series? Why does historical accuracy matter?

>Chartage was in Africa
>Africans = blacks
>Therefore Hannibal was black
t. American.

Seriously, Americans should be banned from making films about history apart from stuff like the civil war and the old west, anything that doesn't involve other countries,

The black Egyptian theory is also literally based on Americans being terrible at geography, believing that all of Africa is black.

Because the show claims to be somewhat historical, it airs on History Channel after all. People will believe what they see, and if they already know history then it will ruin their immersion.

Ye. He doesn't play racketball though.

>dude warpaint, shaved armpits and weird scale armour lmao

Imagine if Americans weren't idiots that needed shitty action scenes in order to learn.

It's that supposed to Boudicca or something?

I was being facetious m8.

yea shes accidently portrayed as a retard after getting a sympathy boost

>There is a reason why books about Hannibal make no mention of his skin color.
Yes, because it's pretty well known he was white. They also never mention the skin of Caesar or Cicero, but we can guess they were not negroes.

>it will ruin their immersion.
Srsly.

I still remember watching the tudors and in season 1, there's a scene where Henry VII is leaning over and you can see that the necklace he's wearing is held at the shoulder by a very modern looking stainless steel spring lock, like the kind found on dog leashes.

At that point I became very aware that what I was watching was a grown man playing pretend on camera.

Ruined the scene for me tbqh.

Revison, the head families of Carthage were pure blood Phoenicians.

Phoenicians have more in common with Mediterranean peoples then Jews. Pretty sure they'd look more like Italians, Greeks, Anatolians, or Iranians then Israelites. Not saying their white, but their Caucasoids.

Probably had some SSA admixture, but that actor looks West African. It's unlikely Hannibal would have looked like that.

...Levantines are Mediterranean, my dude. Moreso than Iranians.

The leather army and plastic helmet bother me a lot more than the casting. Literally Party City tier.

>be Carthagan noble of phonecian decent. Some "it's a current year"fagot makes you black. No wonder everything going to shit.

You're an idiot, take a look at where the Nile begins, and if you actually studied Egyptian culture you'd know they themselves say their origins are in the south. Plus any serious scholar wouldn't spend their time debating whether they were black or not, it's common sense.

>pure blood Phoenicians
If only you knew how idiotic you sound, that's like saying pure blood American, there's no such thing dingus.

>Pretty sure
That wouldn't hold up in any scholarly work. You people just have theories about Phoenicians, you don't know what they looked like, you're imposing your own imagination onto something you have no real knowledge of.

I know /pol/ wants to attack anything they don't agree with, but you idiots are the real revisionists.

>Iranians are Mediterranean
>Moreso than Israelites
>Israel is located on the Mediterranean sea

If Egyptians were black, why didn't they depict themselves as black? Or depict themselves with black features?

They were clearly capable of it.

WE

That guy is black?

American television is all about entertainment. They don't give a shit about telling the truth or having even a minimum degree of accuracy. Everything must be dramatic and over the top, with fast camera movements, lion roars in the background and close ups of burly, sweaty men flexing their shoulders, sexy women, or animals flashing their teeth and lunging at the camera. Actors are either black or white, maybe a random Asian where and there, because that's what Americans expect to see.

>That armor
>That helmet

Jfc that gave me cancer

It's just illiterate ghetto people thinking ALL of africa is black.

No serious historian thinks Egypt was black, only afrocentrist pseudohistorians think that Egypt was black. Therefore people who think Egypt was any race besides brown are revisionists.

No DNA evidence points to the dominant ethnic group of Egypt being black. What we do know is that it was conquered by black Nubians for a very short amount time but not enough to change the ethnic or cultural make up significantly.

>Hes my favorite charachter from history

I don't understand. History Channel has been a literal joke for years, bullshit about mysterious Nazi super weapons, Nostradamus, Ancient Aliens which was fine and good fun to meme about. It's only when a nigger gets a role he shouldn't in a historical drama that the smiles turn sour and it's time for po-faced umbrage.

Carthage is North African not black.

Oh shut the fuck up. People have been talking shit about the history channel for years now for the exact reasons you listed. This isn't some recent phenomena.

possible but unlikely

Sho nuff whitey, you tryna steal our history? As if stealing our women and rights wuddnt enough.

>Hes my favorite charachter from history
you have OC? a fuking waifu too?
i just started the medieval season, you dipshit
dont forget to suppor the autor in patron jesus fuking christ

eight post best post

The fact that the history channel is utter shit and now plays "ancient aliens" has made my "smile turn sour" for a long time.

I'm not arguing for the case that Egyptians were black (im not who you replied to) but most cultures have an skin color stylization, often gender or class specific. For example the Mycenaean always depicted men as bronze and the women as white. If I remember correctly many cultures depicted their kings with lighter skin than other figures in contemporary art, and Egypt may have been one of them during some periods. The picture that you show indicates to me that Egyptians were lighter than nubians, and that Nubians were black african as we know it.

Pardon?

So this is what a retard looks like.

Egyptian artists depicted ancient Libyans as pale white though.

Be glad. The stupidity of our countrymen is the only thing that saves the rest of the world.

>Israel
>Med

Any opinion that disagrees with you is /pol/ now?

There were black people there and there was some amount of racial mixture there as in Rome but not much at all. It sure as shit wasn't Black.

Lybian is the ancient name of the Berbers. Like Gaul for France.

That's how do you cast hannibal.

American obsession with making everything about blacks and whites, not even about races, is so weird for me as an outsider.

Is that a Tuareg?

Mycenaeans were a PIE people, so the men at least would be just a little darker than "bronze". As for the women, women are usually lighter skinned than men, especially if they stay inside a lot.

>some of the Nubians are the same skin color as the Egyptians but the darkest depiction of a native Egyptian is a dark reddish brown and not nearly jet black like most Nubians

Why doesn't anyone point that out?

"history" channel is a business and have to cater to it's audience.

Carthaginian were the same color than Romans.

Roman historians described germanics tribes are pale skinned people with light eyes and hair. Nothing was said about the skin color or the physical aspects of carthaginians which probably means they weren't much different from Romans.

Revisionism to accomplish an agenda.
The Carthaginians most likely looked like the people who inhabit that area today. Pic related. They were, after all, descendants of Phoenicians.

>leather scale armor

The Phoenician language was literally mutually intelligible with Hebrew.