History Channel To Portray Hannibal Accurately

[Asclepias]

No one ever claimed you were Hannibal. I cant help it if you sweep dung for a living. Now stop the monkey chatter and get back on topic boy.

I'm sorry. I thought you were black. Whatever you are, be proud of your heritage. Being a Greek-American and familiar with my USN Captain father, I am not at a lose for heroes and people of great accomplishment.

Your situation is unfortunately different. Solve those issues with coming to terms with those of yours and their humble accomplishments. It is far more of what you make of yourself than those who could not inspire you.

We've all got daddy issues, some more than others. Knowing who he is goes a long way.

Good luck\1

Youre not at a "lose" for heroes? I guess you are at a loss for education though.

I know lots of white guys that dont even know that the person they think is their daddy really isnt. Mom was getting banged out of both panty legs while the dad was getting his swerve on with paid for hookers.

I know it pains you to have to recognize Blacks are your superior but cheer up. I'm pretty sure plenty of Black guys took advantage of the absence of some of the service men you know.

 

[Asclepias]

Not the facial features of an African by any stretch. Thanks.

It appears that black racists only consider melanin content and geographical location in determining who is black and who is not. They're the flip-side of those white racists who claim similar silly ideas.

It appears you white racists think you define what are Black traits and what are white traits. Fact check. You dont.

There ya go again, puttin' people in boxes just like a racist.

I was just trying to see if the box you created for me fit you and i found out it fits you way better than it fits me.

 

[AvgGuyIA]

Yes they were Black. They were totally Black up until about 10K years ago. Before that there were no white people because thats when the gene for light skin mutated and appeared among humans. Thats a scient

Maybe they were white and a gene mutated black.

 

[Asclepias]

Yes they were Black. They were totally Black up until about 10K years ago. Before that there were no white people because thats when the gene for light skin mutated and appeared among humans. Thats a scient

Maybe they were white and a gene mutated black.

Science has long determined that not to be the case. You do realize that saying the gene mutation for light skin appeared 10k years ago means white skin didnt appear until 10k years ago in the human race dont you?

 

[westwall]

Asclips is desperately trying to find a black man he can admire. Could well be a Freudian daddy issue.

"Hannibal is usually depicted as a white man, but his coins in the British Museum and the Museo Kercheriano, Rome, show him to have been an African of purest type with rings in his ears. Col. Hennebert, perhaps the leading authority on Hannibal, declares that none of the several differing portraits now exhibited as Hannibal is he, "We do not possess any authentic portrait of Hannibal," he says. (Histoire d'Annibal, Vol. I, p. 495, Paris, 1870). These coins were struck by Hannibal while he was in Italy. In the absence of other information the most logical argument is that they bore his own effigy, the more so, as the several kinds of them bear the same likeness. Above all, let us remember that he was an African."

How about a link to your quote. It isn't perchance from Race and History is it? That paragon of black supremacy?

You dont need a link. I cited the source in the quote.

Histoire d'Annibal, Vol. I, p. 495, Paris, 1870

"African of purest type" is not a quote from the History of Hannibal. I wish to know who it was that said that.

You should have just said that instead of attempting to "poison the well".

Joel Augustus Rogers - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Rogers was a meticulous researcher, astute scholar and concise writer. He traveled tirelessly on his quest for knowledge, which often took him directly to the source. While traveling in Europe, he frequented libraries, museums, and castles, finding sources that helped him prove African ancestry and history. He challenged the biased viewpoint of Eurocentric historians and anthropologists."

I figured he was your source. To claim he is an unbiased source would be stretching it a bit. Don't you think? I do commend him for the excellent research that he has done however, his use of art in the explaining of Black African culture is extensive and quite good. However, the further attempts to usurp Semitic history does neither him, nor the cause, any good at all. It just represents one class abusing a lower class.....yet again.

 

[Asclepias]

"Hannibal is usually depicted as a white man, but his coins in the British Museum and the Museo Kercheriano, Rome, show him to have been an African of purest type with rings in his ears. Col. Hennebert, perhaps the leading authority on Hannibal, declares that none of the several differing portraits now exhibited as Hannibal is he, "We do not possess any authentic portrait of Hannibal," he says. (Histoire d'Annibal, Vol. I, p. 495, Paris, 1870). These coins were struck by Hannibal while he was in Italy. In the absence of other information the most logical argument is that they bore his own effigy, the more so, as the several kinds of them bear the same likeness. Above all, let us remember that he was an African."

How about a link to your quote. It isn't perchance from Race and History is it? That paragon of black supremacy?

You dont need a link. I cited the source in the quote.

Histoire d'Annibal, Vol. I, p. 495, Paris, 1870

"African of purest type" is not a quote from the History of Hannibal. I wish to know who it was that said that.

You should have just said that instead of attempting to "poison the well".

Joel Augustus Rogers - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Rogers was a meticulous researcher, astute scholar and concise writer. He traveled tirelessly on his quest for knowledge, which often took him directly to the source. While traveling in Europe, he frequented libraries, museums, and castles, finding sources that helped him prove African ancestry and history. He challenged the biased viewpoint of Eurocentric historians and anthropologists."

I figured he was your source. To claim he is an unbiased source would be stretching it a bit. Don't you think? I do commend him for the excellent research that he has done however, his use of art in the explaining of Black African culture is extensive and quite good. However, the further attempts to usurp Semitic history does neither him, nor the cause, any good at all. It just represents one class abusing a lower class.....yet again.

Please elaborate. How was he not unbiased? He is just as unbiased as any white person claiming Hannibal was white. He cant usurp Semetic history because we all know the Semitic people are Black in origin. That being said Hannibal was not Semitic. He was Hamitic.

 

[westwall]

How about a link to your quote. It isn't perchance from Race and History is it? That paragon of black supremacy?

You dont need a link. I cited the source in the quote.

Histoire d'Annibal, Vol. I, p. 495, Paris, 1870

"African of purest type" is not a quote from the History of Hannibal. I wish to know who it was that said that.

You should have just said that instead of attempting to "poison the well".

Joel Augustus Rogers - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Rogers was a meticulous researcher, astute scholar and concise writer. He traveled tirelessly on his quest for knowledge, which often took him directly to the source. While traveling in Europe, he frequented libraries, museums, and castles, finding sources that helped him prove African ancestry and history. He challenged the biased viewpoint of Eurocentric historians and anthropologists."

I figured he was your source. To claim he is an unbiased source would be stretching it a bit. Don't you think? I do commend him for the excellent research that he has done however, his use of art in the explaining of Black African culture is extensive and quite good. However, the further attempts to usurp Semitic history does neither him, nor the cause, any good at all. It just represents one class abusing a lower class.....yet again.

Please elaborate. How was he not unbiased? He is just as unbiased as any white person claiming Hannibal was white. He cant usurp Semetic history because we all know the Semitic people are Black in origin.

No legitimate researcher claims Hannibal was white. They ALL claim he was "unknown ethnicity". They point to his family history as evidence that he is most likely of Semitic origin but they are very quick to state that it is not known for certain. The ONLY people who claim he is either white or black are politically motivated.

 

[Asclepias]

You dont need a link. I cited the source in the quote.

Histoire d'Annibal, Vol. I, p. 495, Paris, 1870

"African of purest type" is not a quote from the History of Hannibal. I wish to know who it was that said that.

You should have just said that instead of attempting to "poison the well".

Joel Augustus Rogers - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Rogers was a meticulous researcher, astute scholar and concise writer. He traveled tirelessly on his quest for knowledge, which often took him directly to the source. While traveling in Europe, he frequented libraries, museums, and castles, finding sources that helped him prove African ancestry and history. He challenged the biased viewpoint of Eurocentric historians and anthropologists."

I figured he was your source. To claim he is an unbiased source would be stretching it a bit. Don't you think? I do commend him for the excellent research that he has done however, his use of art in the explaining of Black African culture is extensive and quite good. However, the further attempts to usurp Semitic history does neither him, nor the cause, any good at all. It just represents one class abusing a lower class.....yet again.

Please elaborate. How was he not unbiased? He is just as unbiased as any white person claiming Hannibal was white. He cant usurp Semetic history because we all know the Semitic people are Black in origin.

No legitimate researcher claims Hannibal was white. They ALL claim he was "unknown ethnicity". They point to his family history as evidence that he is most likely of Semitic origin but they are very quick to state that it is not known for certain. The ONLY people who claim he is either white or black are politically motivated.

Who says they are legitimate? If they are claiming that the Canaanites were Semitic then they obviously are not legitimate.

 

[Divine Wind]

Nice selfie. We are talking about Hannibal though.

I post links to websites containing facts and data from geneticists, you post photoshopped pictures. LOL

There are other faces on coins associated with elephants and no definitive evidence on what Hannibal looked like. However, if it makes you sleep happier at night, believe what you want.



Hannibal Barca of Carthage: The War Elephant

Hannibal Barca of Carthage: Portraits of Hannibal

The Carthaginians in Sicily, 213 BC. Silver 1/2 Shekel. Hannibal. Elephant. Rare

CNG: Search Results


Was Hannibal Black?
.....Frank M. Snowden explains this in his article "Misconceptions about African Blacks in the Ancient Mediterranean World: Specialists and Afrocentrists" (Frank M. Snowden Jr.; ArionThird Series, Vol. 4, No. 3 (Winter, 1997), pp. 28-50). Compared with a Mediterranean person, someone from Scythia or Ireland was noticeably white and someone from Africa was noticeably black. Generally, to depict someone we would think of as African "Black," a Roman would use the term Ethiopian to describe the appearance of a (sun) burned face -- not the nation we call Ethiopia. In Egypt, as in other areas of northern Africa, there were other colors that could be used to describe complexions. There was also a good deal of intermarriage between the lighter skinned people in northern Africa and the darker skinned people called Ethiopians or Nubians.


Hannibal may have been darker skinned than a Roman, but he would not have been described as Ethiopian.

Was Hannibal black? Not according to the Romans, and it's through them that we know about Hannibal. Your answer may be different.

 

[Meathead]

No one ever claimed you were Hannibal. I cant help it if you sweep dung for a living. Now stop the monkey chatter and get back on topic boy.

I'm sorry. I thought you were black. Whatever you are, be proud of your heritage. Being a Greek-American and familiar with my USN Captain father, I am not at a lose for heroes and people of great accomplishment.

Your situation is unfortunately different. Solve those issues with coming to terms with those of yours and their humble accomplishments. It is far more of what you make of yourself than those who could not inspire you.

We've all got daddy issues, some more than others. Knowing who he is goes a long way.

Good luck\1

Youre not at a "lose" for heroes? I guess you are at a loss for education though.

I know lots of white guys that dont even know that the person they think is their daddy really isnt. Mom was getting banged out of both panty legs while the dad was getting his swerve on with paid for hookers.

I know it pains you to have to recognize Blacks are your superior but cheer up. I'm pretty sure plenty of Black guys took advantage of the absence of some of the service men you know.

Your flights of fantasy does not resolve your daddy issues. Someday you may have a real hero beyond Sharpton and Jackson.

Still, whatever the black race thinks it can do, they are losers. We can go on forever, but the end-game will still be same.

 

[Divine Wind]

No one ever claimed you were Hannibal. I cant help it if you sweep dung for a living. Now stop the monkey chatter and get back on topic boy.

I'm sorry. I thought you were black. Whatever you are, be proud of your heritage. Being a Greek-American and familiar with my USN Captain father, I am not at a lose for heroes and people of great accomplishment.

Your situation is unfortunately different. Solve those issues with coming to terms with those of yours and their humble accomplishments. It is far more of what you make of yourself than those who could not inspire you.

We've all got daddy issues, some more than others. Knowing who he is goes a long way.

Good luck\1

Youre not at a "lose" for heroes? I guess you are at a loss for education though.

I know lots of white guys that dont even know that the person they think is their daddy really isnt. Mom was getting banged out of both panty legs while the dad was getting his swerve on with paid for hookers.

I know it pains you to have to recognize Blacks are your superior but cheer up. I'm pretty sure plenty of Black guys took advantage of the absence of some of the service men you know.

It's good that you met a fellow racist to tell lies to and bullshit each other.

 

[Asclepias]

Nice selfie. We are talking about Hannibal though.

I post links to websites containing facts and data from geneticists, you post photoshopped pictures. LOL

There are other faces on coins associated with elephants and no definitive evidence on what Hannibal looked like. However, if it makes you sleep happier at night, believe what you want.



Hannibal Barca of Carthage: The War Elephant

Hannibal Barca of Carthage: Portraits of Hannibal

The Carthaginians in Sicily, 213 BC. Silver 1/2 Shekel. Hannibal. Elephant. Rare

CNG: Search Results


Was Hannibal Black?
.....Frank M. Snowden explains this in his article "Misconceptions about African Blacks in the Ancient Mediterranean World: Specialists and Afrocentrists" (Frank M. Snowden Jr.; ArionThird Series, Vol. 4, No. 3 (Winter, 1997), pp. 28-50). Compared with a Mediterranean person, someone from Scythia or Ireland was noticeably white and someone from Africa was noticeably black. Generally, to depict someone we would think of as African "Black," a Roman would use the term Ethiopian to describe the appearance of a (sun) burned face -- not the nation we call Ethiopia. In Egypt, as in other areas of northern Africa, there were other colors that could be used to describe complexions. There was also a good deal of intermarriage between the lighter skinned people in northern Africa and the darker skinned people called Ethiopians or Nubians.


Hannibal may have been darker skinned than a Roman, but he would not have been described as Ethiopian.

Was Hannibal black? Not according to the Romans, and it's through them that we know about Hannibal. Your answer may be different.

Come on man. That isnt Hannibal. Thats the god Melqart. You have to do better than that.

Mythology

"Carthage silver double shekel circa 230 BCE. The Punic (Carthaginian) god Melqart is shown on the left of the coin. He is depicted resembling the Greek hero Herakles with a club over his shoulder. On the reverse is a war elephant, as used by Hannibal in his great campaign against Rome."

Melqart coins - Google Search

 

[Divine Wind]

Nice selfie. We are talking about Hannibal though.

I post links to websites containing facts and data from geneticists, you post photoshopped pictures. LOL

There are other faces on coins associated with elephants and no definitive evidence on what Hannibal looked like. However, if it makes you sleep happier at night, believe what you want.



Hannibal Barca of Carthage: The War Elephant

Hannibal Barca of Carthage: Portraits of Hannibal

The Carthaginians in Sicily, 213 BC. Silver 1/2 Shekel. Hannibal. Elephant. Rare

CNG: Search Results


Was Hannibal Black?
.....Frank M. Snowden explains this in his article "Misconceptions about African Blacks in the Ancient Mediterranean World: Specialists and Afrocentrists" (Frank M. Snowden Jr.; ArionThird Series, Vol. 4, No. 3 (Winter, 1997), pp. 28-50). Compared with a Mediterranean person, someone from Scythia or Ireland was noticeably white and someone from Africa was noticeably black. Generally, to depict someone we would think of as African "Black," a Roman would use the term Ethiopian to describe the appearance of a (sun) burned face -- not the nation we call Ethiopia. In Egypt, as in other areas of northern Africa, there were other colors that could be used to describe complexions. There was also a good deal of intermarriage between the lighter skinned people in northern Africa and the darker skinned people called Ethiopians or Nubians.


Hannibal may have been darker skinned than a Roman, but he would not have been described as Ethiopian.

Was Hannibal black? Not according to the Romans, and it's through them that we know about Hannibal. Your answer may be different.

Come on man. That isnt Hannibal. Thats the god Melqart. You have to do better than that.

Mythology

"Carthage silver double shekel circa 230 BCE. The Punic (Carthaginian) god Melqart is shown on the left of the coin. He is depicted resembling the Greek hero Herakles with a club over his shoulder. On the reverse is a war elephant, as used by Hannibal in his great campaign against Rome."

Melqart coins - Google Search

Not my problem if you want to cherry pick history, kid. Do whatever helps you sleep at night.

 

[Asclepias]

Nice selfie. We are talking about Hannibal though.

I post links to websites containing facts and data from geneticists, you post photoshopped pictures. LOL

There are other faces on coins associated with elephants and no definitive evidence on what Hannibal looked like. However, if it makes you sleep happier at night, believe what you want.



Hannibal Barca of Carthage: The War Elephant

Hannibal Barca of Carthage: Portraits of Hannibal

The Carthaginians in Sicily, 213 BC. Silver 1/2 Shekel. Hannibal. Elephant. Rare

CNG: Search Results


Was Hannibal Black?
.....Frank M. Snowden explains this in his article "Misconceptions about African Blacks in the Ancient Mediterranean World: Specialists and Afrocentrists" (Frank M. Snowden Jr.; ArionThird Series, Vol. 4, No. 3 (Winter, 1997), pp. 28-50). Compared with a Mediterranean person, someone from Scythia or Ireland was noticeably white and someone from Africa was noticeably black. Generally, to depict someone we would think of as African "Black," a Roman would use the term Ethiopian to describe the appearance of a (sun) burned face -- not the nation we call Ethiopia. In Egypt, as in other areas of northern Africa, there were other colors that could be used to describe complexions. There was also a good deal of intermarriage between the lighter skinned people in northern Africa and the darker skinned people called Ethiopians or Nubians.


Hannibal may have been darker skinned than a Roman, but he would not have been described as Ethiopian.

Was Hannibal black? Not according to the Romans, and it's through them that we know about Hannibal. Your answer may be different.

Come on man. That isnt Hannibal. Thats the god Melqart. You have to do better than that.

Mythology

"Carthage silver double shekel circa 230 BCE. The Punic (Carthaginian) god Melqart is shown on the left of the coin. He is depicted resembling the Greek hero Herakles with a club over his shoulder. On the reverse is a war elephant, as used by Hannibal in his great campaign against Rome."

Melqart coins - Google Search

Not my problem if you want to cherry pick history, kid. Do whatever helps you sleep at night.

How embarrassing! May I ask why did you try to pass off Melqart coins as Hannibal? Were you that desperate to say Hannibal wasnt Black? Face it dude. Youre a racist.

 

[Divine Wind]

Nice selfie. We are talking about Hannibal though.

I post links to websites containing facts and data from geneticists, you post photoshopped pictures. LOL

There are other faces on coins associated with elephants and no definitive evidence on what Hannibal looked like. However, if it makes you sleep happier at night, believe what you want.



Hannibal Barca of Carthage: The War Elephant

Hannibal Barca of Carthage: Portraits of Hannibal

The Carthaginians in Sicily, 213 BC. Silver 1/2 Shekel. Hannibal. Elephant. Rare

CNG: Search Results


Was Hannibal Black?
.....Frank M. Snowden explains this in his article "Misconceptions about African Blacks in the Ancient Mediterranean World: Specialists and Afrocentrists" (Frank M. Snowden Jr.; ArionThird Series, Vol. 4, No. 3 (Winter, 1997), pp. 28-50). Compared with a Mediterranean person, someone from Scythia or Ireland was noticeably white and someone from Africa was noticeably black. Generally, to depict someone we would think of as African "Black," a Roman would use the term Ethiopian to describe the appearance of a (sun) burned face -- not the nation we call Ethiopia. In Egypt, as in other areas of northern Africa, there were other colors that could be used to describe complexions. There was also a good deal of intermarriage between the lighter skinned people in northern Africa and the darker skinned people called Ethiopians or Nubians.


Hannibal may have been darker skinned than a Roman, but he would not have been described as Ethiopian.

Was Hannibal black? Not according to the Romans, and it's through them that we know about Hannibal. Your answer may be different.

Come on man. That isnt Hannibal. Thats the god Melqart. You have to do better than that.

Mythology

"Carthage silver double shekel circa 230 BCE. The Punic (Carthaginian) god Melqart is shown on the left of the coin. He is depicted resembling the Greek hero Herakles with a club over his shoulder. On the reverse is a war elephant, as used by Hannibal in his great campaign against Rome."

Melqart coins - Google Search

Not my problem if you want to cherry pick history, kid. Do whatever helps you sleep at night.

How embarrassing! May I ask why did you try to pass off Melqart coins as Hannibal? Were you that desperate to say Hannibal wasnt Black? Face it dude. Youre a racist.

You obviously didn't read the links I provided. My point is there are plenty of coins with faces and elephants. NONE have been confirmed to be Hannibal. You, OTOH, like to cherry-pick history to fix your box. Go for it. Sleep well, kid.

 

[Asclepias]

Nice selfie. We are talking about Hannibal though.

I post links to websites containing facts and data from geneticists, you post photoshopped pictures. LOL

There are other faces on coins associated with elephants and no definitive evidence on what Hannibal looked like. However, if it makes you sleep happier at night, believe what you want.



Hannibal Barca of Carthage: The War Elephant

Hannibal Barca of Carthage: Portraits of Hannibal

The Carthaginians in Sicily, 213 BC. Silver 1/2 Shekel. Hannibal. Elephant. Rare

CNG: Search Results


Was Hannibal Black?
.....Frank M. Snowden explains this in his article "Misconceptions about African Blacks in the Ancient Mediterranean World: Specialists and Afrocentrists" (Frank M. Snowden Jr.; ArionThird Series, Vol. 4, No. 3 (Winter, 1997), pp. 28-50). Compared with a Mediterranean person, someone from Scythia or Ireland was noticeably white and someone from Africa was noticeably black. Generally, to depict someone we would think of as African "Black," a Roman would use the term Ethiopian to describe the appearance of a (sun) burned face -- not the nation we call Ethiopia. In Egypt, as in other areas of northern Africa, there were other colors that could be used to describe complexions. There was also a good deal of intermarriage between the lighter skinned people in northern Africa and the darker skinned people called Ethiopians or Nubians.


Hannibal may have been darker skinned than a Roman, but he would not have been described as Ethiopian.

Was Hannibal black? Not according to the Romans, and it's through them that we know about Hannibal. Your answer may be different.

Come on man. That isnt Hannibal. Thats the god Melqart. You have to do better than that.

Mythology

"Carthage silver double shekel circa 230 BCE. The Punic (Carthaginian) god Melqart is shown on the left of the coin. He is depicted resembling the Greek hero Herakles with a club over his shoulder. On the reverse is a war elephant, as used by Hannibal in his great campaign against Rome."

Melqart coins - Google Search

Not my problem if you want to cherry pick history, kid. Do whatever helps you sleep at night.

How embarrassing! May I ask why did you try to pass off Melqart coins as Hannibal? Were you that desperate to say Hannibal wasnt Black? Face it dude. Youre a racist.

You didn't read the link. My point is there are plenty of coins with faces and elephants. NONE have been confirmed to be Hannibal. You, OTOH, like to cherry-pick history to fix your box. Go for it. Sleep well, kid.

The British museum called and told me to tell you thats not true. The coins that I posted with Hannibal on it were confirmed to be authentic. If you really expect me to believe that now you suddenly believe NONE have been confirmed to be Hannibal then I have to ask why you tried to pass Melqart off as Hannibal?

 

[westwall]

"African of purest type" is not a quote from the History of Hannibal. I wish to know who it was that said that.

You should have just said that instead of attempting to "poison the well".

Joel Augustus Rogers - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Rogers was a meticulous researcher, astute scholar and concise writer. He traveled tirelessly on his quest for knowledge, which often took him directly to the source. While traveling in Europe, he frequented libraries, museums, and castles, finding sources that helped him prove African ancestry and history. He challenged the biased viewpoint of Eurocentric historians and anthropologists."

I figured he was your source. To claim he is an unbiased source would be stretching it a bit. Don't you think? I do commend him for the excellent research that he has done however, his use of art in the explaining of Black African culture is extensive and quite good. However, the further attempts to usurp Semitic history does neither him, nor the cause, any good at all. It just represents one class abusing a lower class.....yet again.

Please elaborate. How was he not unbiased? He is just as unbiased as any white person claiming Hannibal was white. He cant usurp Semetic history because we all know the Semitic people are Black in origin.

No legitimate researcher claims Hannibal was white. They ALL claim he was "unknown ethnicity". They point to his family history as evidence that he is most likely of Semitic origin but they are very quick to state that it is not known for certain. The ONLY people who claim he is either white or black are politically motivated.

Who says they are legitimate? If they are claiming that the Canaanites were Semitic then they obviously are not legitimate.

Canaanites WERE Semitic. They're STILL there! The Bible, while an interesting source of history, is not a legitimate source for the description of the ethnicity of the people described. To base a whole belief system on a book that was written by men, decades, and even centuries after the events described, is not only silly, it is ridiculous.

 

[Asclepias]

You should have just said that instead of attempting to "poison the well".

Joel Augustus Rogers - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Rogers was a meticulous researcher, astute scholar and concise writer. He traveled tirelessly on his quest for knowledge, which often took him directly to the source. While traveling in Europe, he frequented libraries, museums, and castles, finding sources that helped him prove African ancestry and history. He challenged the biased viewpoint of Eurocentric historians and anthropologists."

I figured he was your source. To claim he is an unbiased source would be stretching it a bit. Don't you think? I do commend him for the excellent research that he has done however, his use of art in the explaining of Black African culture is extensive and quite good. However, the further attempts to usurp Semitic history does neither him, nor the cause, any good at all. It just represents one class abusing a lower class.....yet again.

Please elaborate. How was he not unbiased? He is just as unbiased as any white person claiming Hannibal was white. He cant usurp Semetic history because we all know the Semitic people are Black in origin.

No legitimate researcher claims Hannibal was white. They ALL claim he was "unknown ethnicity". They point to his family history as evidence that he is most likely of Semitic origin but they are very quick to state that it is not known for certain. The ONLY people who claim he is either white or black are politically motivated.

Who says they are legitimate? If they are claiming that the Canaanites were Semitic then they obviously are not legitimate.

Canaanites WERE Semitic. They're STILL there! The Bible, while an interesting source of history, is not a legitimate source for the description of the ethnicity of the people described. To base a whole belief system on a book that was written by men, decades, and even centuries after the events described, is not only silly, it is ridiculous.

Canaanites were Hamitic. I know they are still there. They are Black and they are the aboriginal people of the land. The bible is just as legitimate source as any. It was written much closer to the time than anything else. Even if you write a fiction book like say Harry Potter you still describe the people as they appear currently. Even still I am not relying just on the bible. I already posted the coin of Hannibal as a Black African. Between science, the bible, and archaeology I pretty much have it covered.

 

[L.K.Eder]

hannibal lost, and his empire was destroyed, by italians. nuff said

 

[Liberty777]

If Hannibal was black makes no difference, he was a great leader n a hell of a warrior. Traits lacking in most black males today.

Yeah it makes a difference showing history accurately. When you dont show history accurately you end up with white people playing ancient Egyptians and other weird things.

What do u exspect from those weirdos in Hollywood

Accuracy and erring on the side of the evidence.

Some do some don't. Anyways I will give the history channel props because it was a good show way better than the usual reAlity bullcrap