Page 11 of 12 FirstFirst ... 23456789101112 LastLast
Results 201 to 220 of 233

Thread: Black Hannibal?

  1. #201

    Default Re: Black Hannibal?

    Quote Originally Posted by Hresvelgr View Post
    History Channel isn't known for its rigorous research standards, these are the same people who run the Ancient Aliens program and if you believe in that stuff then I have a bridge to sell you. What we do know of Hannibal is that he was born in North Africa to an upper-class family of a colonial society set up by the Phoenicians from west Asia, which makes him about as African as I am Native-American, which isn't very much actually. This is also not even taking into account that people from coastal North Africa do not generally have the same features as West Africans. Incidentally, a recent BBC portrayal of the Hannibal story cast a prominent actor in the role who has a very similar background, Alexander Siddig being a Sudanese-born actor of Arabic ancestry. BBC generally has a much higher reputation for research and historical fidelity than the now infamous History Channel.


    Lets not encourage! That example may only fan the flames. Alexander Siddig has a white mother and the Arab Sudanese in his family (and generally) usually resemble this chap. An uncle of his.

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

  2. #202

    Default Re: Black Hannibal?

    I know this is a necro but some points to consider sincce no one seems to have pointed them out:

    In the video, was his race discussed or was it a merely a matter of choosing a black actor to be Hannibal in the dramatizations for the sake of a dichotomy portrayal? I'm not going to suffer five minutes listening to the episode just to find out if it's even a subject being discussed.

    Second, according to authors like Dexter Hoyos that specialize on the subject, Carthaginians often married with other peoples, including Greeks and Numidians (no record of Romans, though). Considering the number of interracial marriages both among Barcid family members and Carthaginians in general, Hannibal could either be part Phoenician and part Numidian, part Greek or even part Roman if you want to stretch the imagination. So from that perspective alone, a "black" Hannibal seems quite unlikely, because it would almost effectively require his father Hamilcar to also be black.

    So imagining him as "black" however presents two obvious problems: Hamilcar was not "black" so you have the problem of black at best being half of something, and you'd have to define "black" in order to advance the discussion in the first place. It's not exactly a social construct with a universal definition outside of the US. And in any event there are North African peoples that clearly don't have the stereotypical "black" look that are the most likely native candidates to Hannibal's biological heritage (barring the extremely unlikely event that Hamilcar married and bore children with someone from say the Sudan), so the best we can go for is "he's more African than black".

    And even if we want to racialize the discussion, then in actuality being black would be less likely given the amount of Greek influence (and education) the Carthaginians lived under. If we're to imagine the ancient world as racist as it is today, then it's pretty unlikely that a man of such high fame and influence in a Mediterranean power would be black. And boy, does that also include the much bigger question of whether Carthaginians as a whole are "black"...which again, demands the definition of that term.

    And before people start getting snarky, "someone who is not white" is not a proper definition.

  3. #203
    Kyriakos's Avatar Praeses
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Thessalonike, The Byzantine Empire
    Posts
    8,225

    Default Re: Black Hannibal?

    Maybe carths married with egyptians, who were also sub-saharan black?

    Anyway, black Hannibal pales ( ) in comparison with black Achilles.
    Λέων μεν ὄνυξι κρατεῖ, κέρασι δε βούς, ἄνθρωπος δε νῷι
    "While the lion prevails with its claws, and the ox through its horns, man does by his thinking"
    Anaxagoras of Klazomenae, 5th century BC










  4. #204
    Roma_Victrix's Avatar Gatorade, is it in you?
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Virginia, USA
    Posts
    13,502

    Default Re: Black Hannibal?

    Quote Originally Posted by daelin4 View Post
    Second, according to authors like Dexter Hoyos that specialize on the subject, Carthaginians often married with other peoples, including Greeks and Numidians (no record of Romans, though). Considering the number of interracial marriages both among Barcid family members and Carthaginians in general, Hannibal could either be part Phoenician and part Numidian, part Greek or even part Roman if you want to stretch the imagination. So from that perspective alone, a "black" Hannibal seems quite unlikely, because it would almost effectively require his father Hamilcar to also be black.
    Carthaginians certainly married into Roman families after the Roman conquest of Carthage. For instance, the mother of Roman emperor Septimius Severus (born in Libya) was of Romano-Italian descent, while his father was a local Punic Phoenician. At this point I think it's also kind of odd to depict North Africans and Southern Europeans as engaging in "interracial marriage", seeing how the differences were largely cultural. Yes, Asiatic and North African Semitic peoples like the Carthaginians/Phoenicians generally belonged to different population groups than the various Indo-European ones, but North Africans and Southern Europeans generally share the same genetic roots with the Neolithic-period farmers who populated the Mediterranean basin. By the 2nd millennium BC a wave of Indo-European peoples from the Caucuses, including the proto-speaking Greeks and Latin tribes (i.e. Romans), as well as the Hittites in Anatolia, populated Southern Europe and West Asia, where they tended to mix and marry within the local populations that were already present.

    Black sub-Saharan Africans were not a significant component in this admixture of populations, thanks to the massive geological barrier of the Sahara Desert. The only place in North Africa where there was significant intermarriage between black sub-Saharan Africans and Asiatic/North African peoples was in southern Egypt and today's Sudan, the lands of Nubia and home of the Kingdom of Kush. There's also the Horn of Africa to consider, with ancient Ethiopia, Eritrea, and Somalia, whose native peoples interacted constantly with Semitic peoples of southern Arabia such as the Himyarites and Sabaeans (indeed, ancient Ethiopians spoke and wrote in Ge'ez, a Semitic language). By the Hellenistic period, ancient Ethiopians and Eritreans were also strong trading partners with Macedonian/Greek powers, chief among them being the Ptolemaic Empire of Egypt. Ethiopians from Aksum, which eventually conquered Kush in Nubia, were regular traders and travelers in the later Roman Empire, and by some textual accounts they were recruited into the Roman army.

    None of this, however, has anything to do with Carthage or Punic colonists. The surrounding Berber tribes of Numidians could have had some black Sub-Saharan admixture, but I see no evidence for it, certainly not from numismatics, considering the rather Semitic/Caucasian features of their rulers from minted portraits.

    So imagining him as "black" however presents two obvious problems: Hamilcar was not "black" so you have the problem of black at best being half of something, and you'd have to define "black" in order to advance the discussion in the first place. It's not exactly a social construct with a universal definition outside of the US. And in any event there are North African peoples that clearly don't have the stereotypical "black" look that are the most likely native candidates to Hannibal's biological heritage (barring the extremely unlikely event that Hamilcar married and bore children with someone from say the Sudan), so the best we can go for is "he's more African than black".
    I'm not sure what this Prof. Dexter Hoyos (University of Sydney) has written on the subject, but I think you are severely overemphasizing the idea of Carthaginian citizens, especially ones of noble birth, intermarrying with various foreign people outside of their city-state. The Carthaginians were not just xenophobic in regards to looking down on other cultures; they were also very tribal, or racist for lack of a better term (since the concept of "race" did not exist then). This is clearly evidenced by the hierarchical and exclusionary nature of their military service and recruitment, with native Punic Carthaginians generally serving in command roles, while most of the soldiers weren't actual citizens of Carthage. They were usually mixed race children of Carthaginians and Libyans, or Carthaginians and Sardinians, or Carthaginians and Sicilian Greeks, or Carthaginians and Iberians, or Carthaginians and Balearic Islanders, etc. They also relied heavily on foreign mercenaries to do their fighting for them. Take a look at the general ethnic makeup of Hannibal's army, for starters, and you'll see quite clearly how Carthage viewed foreign peoples and their role versus that of native citizens.

    For that matter, it is the height of absurdity to depict most ancient or modern North Africans as "black" people from south of the Sahara. That's like saying there's no difference between the peoples of Iran, India and China, because they're all from the continent of Asia.

    And even if we want to racialize the discussion, then in actuality being black would be less likely given the amount of Greek influence (and education) the Carthaginians lived under. If we're to imagine the ancient world as racist as it is today, then it's pretty unlikely that a man of such high fame and influence in a Mediterranean power would be black. And boy, does that also include the much bigger question of whether Carthaginians as a whole are "black"...which again, demands the definition of that term.
    There is no demonstrable genetic link between Sub-Saharan African populations and West Asians from cities like Tyre, Lebanon, home of the original Phoenician colonists who founded Carthage in the first place.

    And before people start getting snarky, "someone who is not white" is not a proper definition.
    Okay, he was Caucasian by virtue of being a West Asian Semite. If you put Hannibal, his father Hamilcar, or most other Carthaginian men in a modern police line-up, you'd probably describe most of them as being Middle Eastern males, with brown or olive complexion typical of the Eastern Mediterranean.

  5. #205

    Default Re: Black Hannibal?

    Quote Originally Posted by Roma_Victrix View Post
    I'm not sure what this Prof. Dexter Hoyos (University of Sydney) has written on the subject, but I think you are severely overemphasizing the idea of Carthaginian citizens, especially ones of noble birth, intermarrying with various foreign people outside of their city-state. The Carthaginians were not just xenophobic in regards to looking down on other cultures; they were also very tribal, or racist for lack of a better term (since the concept of "race" did not exist then). This is clearly evidenced by the hierarchical and exclusionary nature of their military service and recruitment, with native Punic Carthaginians generally serving in command roles, while most of the soldiers weren't actual citizens of Carthage. They were usually mixed race children of Carthaginians and Libyans, or Carthaginians and Sardinians, or Carthaginians and Sicilian Greeks, or Carthaginians and Iberians, or Carthaginians and Balearic Islanders, etc. They also relied heavily on foreign mercenaries to do their fighting for them. Take a look at the general ethnic makeup of Hannibal's army, for starters, and you'll see quite clearly how Carthage viewed foreign peoples and their role versus that of native citizens.
    I don't consider the organization of an army along possibly linguistic lines as proof of segregation on the basis of established societal racism; if I were to take anything from Hoyos's book, it'd be that they were the opposite. But it must be noted that victors write the history books, and so it is reasonable to presume that any conclusions may be tainted because it was presented from a particular perspective, and from someone other than actual Carthaginians.
    Plus if you have such a diverse army it makes sense to divide them along such lines and having Carthaginian commanders act as the chain of command, but this speaks nothing of racism, in the same way that being part of a NATO force and having Canadians operating alongside Americans rather than Germans is a matter of practicality more so than we both hate Franz, or there is a confident amount of translation and cooperative effort at play.

    I'd have to read up on Polybius and other ancient accounts to get a hint of what attitudes Carthaginians had towards other peoples. But I'm sure that, even since you have not read Hoyos's book, you must have some very convincing sources to come to such conclusion.

    In any case the mixing of Carthaginians with others further present the problem of calling someone "black". So far the only definition I have ever gotten from anyone positing the argument (and after a great deal of resistant bickering, I might add, it really goes to show the educational background of most of these people), finally decided on the premise that Phoenicians were descendants of "Egyians Nubains" (sic), and that somehow this translate to Carthaginians "also" being black- the unstated presumption that said person considers anything from Africa should be considered black as well; the majority of his statements were more ranting about how he thinks most people depict such peoples as white.
    But of course, there's a huge difference between saying someone is not black, and saying someone is white. Or for that matter, just what these people consider black or white to begin with. I mean if you consider people living in North Africa as black as people from Sudanese or the Bantu then yes you'd have a case...but that's honestly a very stupid way of classifying people, and likely done so with a racist or provocative agenda.

  6. #206
    Lord Oda Nobunaga's Avatar 大信皇帝
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Azuchi-jō Tenshu
    Posts
    22,196

    Default Re: Black Hannibal?

    I can't remember the source but the cavalry commander Mutines was said to have been mistreated and ridiculed for having Libyan and Punic parents. That means he was essentially called a half breed by the Carthaginians.

    "Famous general without peer in any age, most superior in valor and inspired by the Way of Heaven; since the provinces are now subject to your will it is certain that you will increasingly mount in victory." - Ōgimachi-tennō

  7. #207

    Default Re: Black Hannibal?

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Oda Nobunaga View Post
    I can't remember the source but the cavalry commander Mutines was said to have been mistreated and ridiculed for having Libyan and Punic parents. That means he was essentially called a half breed by the Carthaginians.
    Being termed a liby phonecian carried no stigma in that age. Being an elite military formation rarely carries such terms as half breed.
    “Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote.” Benjamin Franklin

  8. #208
    Lord Oda Nobunaga's Avatar 大信皇帝
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Azuchi-jō Tenshu
    Posts
    22,196

    Default Re: Black Hannibal?

    If you say so, but that is what was written in the source.

    "Famous general without peer in any age, most superior in valor and inspired by the Way of Heaven; since the provinces are now subject to your will it is certain that you will increasingly mount in victory." - Ōgimachi-tennō

  9. #209
    Roma_Victrix's Avatar Gatorade, is it in you?
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Virginia, USA
    Posts
    13,502

    Default Re: Black Hannibal?

    Quote Originally Posted by daelin4 View Post
    I don't consider the organization of an army along possibly linguistic lines as proof of segregation on the basis of established societal racism; if I were to take anything from Hoyos's book, it'd be that they were the opposite. But it must be noted that victors write the history books, and so it is reasonable to presume that any conclusions may be tainted because it was presented from a particular perspective, and from someone other than actual Carthaginians.
    Plus if you have such a diverse army it makes sense to divide them along such lines and having Carthaginian commanders act as the chain of command, but this speaks nothing of racism, in the same way that being part of a NATO force and having Canadians operating alongside Americans rather than Germans is a matter of practicality more so than we both hate Franz, or there is a confident amount of translation and cooperative effort at play.

    I'd have to read up on Polybius and other ancient accounts to get a hint of what attitudes Carthaginians had towards other peoples. But I'm sure that, even since you have not read Hoyos's book, you must have some very convincing sources to come to such conclusion.
    LOL. This is going to be fun.

    You're positively correct! I actually do have a convincing source to have come to such a conclusion (at least partially).

    It just so happens to be Prof. Dexter ing Hoyos.

    From Dexter Hoyos' chapters/entries "Carthage, Carthaginians" and "Carthaginian Wars (409-367)" in Phang, Spence, Kelly, & Londey (2016), Conflict in Ancient Greece and Rome: Definitive Political, Social, and Military Encyclopedia, ABC-CLIO, pp 165-168:

    Quote Originally Posted by Dexter Hoyos, LOL
    Carthage's many wars are not always recorded in detail, but it is known that from the 550s on Carthage projected military and naval power well beyond North Africa, waging campaigns in Sardinia and Sicily to impose firm control over their areas of Phoenician settlement: in Sardinia chiefly the productive south and southwest, in Sicily the island's west with centers like Panormus, Motya, and Drepana. Carthage also controlled the coastlands of Lepcis Magna, Oca, and Sabratha, in today's Libya. In its own region, though, Carthage endured repeated revolts by its oppressed Libyan subjects; and in Sicily its position and ambitions frequently collided with those of powerful Greek states like Acragas and Syracuse.

    Carthaginian citizens normally did not fight in land wars, though for major expeditions and emergencies they did, and senior officers at all times were Carthaginian. Citizens manned the fleets, which could be large. In the fifth and fourth centuries, the regular warship was the trireme, requiring some 170 oarsmen and a body of marines... On land, Punic armies...were formed mainly of Libyan conscripts and overseas professional troops, notably Spaniards, Campanians from Italy, Gauls (from southern Gaul and northern Italy), Numidians (famous especially for hardy Cossack-like horsemen), and - from the 340s to the 240s - Greeks. They fought in their own units and with their own equipment, which made their generals' leadership tasks especially demanding.

    ...Dionysius rebuilt Syracuse's military strength to renew war in 398 with 83,000 troops and elaborate siege engines and artillery. An epic siege of Motya ended in the fall and ruin of the island city: Carthage replaced it with Lilybaeum on the nearby coast. In 396 Himilco struck back with more devastation - Messana destroyed, the Syracusan fleet beaten, Syracuse itself now besieged - only for his army again to disintegrate into plague so catastrophic that he fled home with his citizen troops, abandoning the rest to death or Dionysius. The debacle was so complete that he killed himself and the Magonids fell from power.
    Seems like the foreigners were pretty expendable compared to the citizens, weren't they?

    Again, I reiterate that this isn't exactly "racism" (an anachronism that doesn't belong in the ancient period) so much as Phoenician xenophobia and the desire for Carthage's citizens not to get their hands dirty in war. They had foreigners to do that for them! Their citizenry and nobility were far more engaged in agrarian and mercantile pursuits, after all.

    And Oda is absolutely right about the "half-breed" label as it was used against those of mixed Libyan and Phoenician descent, an ethnic group that formed the majority of troops in Carthage's land armies. See Richard Gabriel, Hannibal (2011), pp 22-24.

  10. #210

    Default Re: Black Hannibal?

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Oda Nobunaga View Post
    If you say so, but that is what was written in the source.
    Livy a roman wrote a high born phonecian disliked taking orders from a half breed, yet he took the orders.Carthage was a diverse employer of pop groups, all could rise to position of authority, the liby phonecian, who adopted Carthaginian culture etc, were no exception, providing much of the mil machine.
    “Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote.” Benjamin Franklin

  11. #211
    Praefectus
    Citizen

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    6,254

    Default Re: Black Hannibal?

    Sufetes and other magistracies and therefore membership of the Carthaginian "Senate" seems to have been in the hands of the richest of the Phoenician portion of the population. Military service was for mercenaries commanded by high ranking Carthaginians, almost certainly subject to the same restrictions ie most likely "pure" Punic blood.

    IIRC Aristotle mentions clubs or messes a bit like Sparta: this speaks of tight social groupings, possibly built around decent and likely culturally exclusive like Sparta: circles within circles of belonging, with a specific ethnic identity as the core.

    There were "democratic' elements at times in Carthage but the body of citizens seems to have been Punic and not Libo-Pheonecian AFAIK: this was a narrow democracy at best and definitely an oligarchy in terms of having restricted circles of political participation. The most concrete examples of military leadership is Hannibal's coterie in Spain all of whom have Punic names, and some of whom are his family members.

    This is a bit like Athens really, although Athens fielded citizen hoplites more often than Carthage. There's your wealthy types (Pericles, Alcibiades etc), who usually hold power, the odd more democratic leader (eg Conon) but they are all Athenians born of Athenians: metics don't vote or hold office. The army can include allies and mercenaries but the fleet is fairly solidly Attic too: its an Attic state for Attic citizens.
    Jatte lambastes Calico Rat

  12. #212
    conon394's Avatar hoi polloi
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Colfax WA, neat I have a barn and 49 acres - I have 2 horses, 15 chickens - but no more pigs
    Posts
    13,010

    Default Re: Black Hannibal?

    Quote Originally Posted by Hanny View Post
    Livy a roman wrote a high born phonecian disliked taking orders from a half breed, yet he took the orders.Carthage was a diverse employer of pop groups, all could rise to position of authority, the liby phonecian, who adopted Carthaginian culture etc, were no exception, providing much of the mil machine.
    Example please. I would say the bitterness of the Mercenary war/revolt tells the lie here. Livy wrote where exactly you know it is polite to cite your source beyond just name tossing you might as well say any name. But really find me a freed slave and son comparable to Pasion and Apollodorus of Acharnae in the History of Carthage and I bite this defense.

    ------------------

    but they are all Athenians born of Athenians: metics don't vote or hold office. The army can include allies and mercenaries but the fleet is fairly solidly Attic too: its an Attic state for Attic citizens.
    They certainly could become citizens and or get freedom from Metic status. In more careful readings of Athenian history show they slide into being sort of citizens pretty easy. What people forget is if you will Athens had 3 layers of government and slide into being a citizen and the first two where local and largely far out of the eye of history.
    In any case legally they had the same rights to the courts and what not, get the general protections Athens extended to everyone - because it not be sure everyone was.

    I really don't like the Comparison of Carthage to Athens (Think?). One has no prominent leaders in the City that are not Carthy, but for a rouge General up the river in the Heart of Darkness. One has lots of former slaves from well everywhere being the wealthiest people in town and seemed proud of it. I would say the Democracy is notable for having no slave revolts, no event like Argos in the 2/3rd century (lower class violent revolt), no demands for land reform, only just oligarchs wanting their rule back.

    Why Because they actually were I think a Nation. A little odd to modern eyes because a lot was left fluid, rather than some Roman or Carthage certainty or even some Pretend city on hill construct like the framers of the US liked to tell themselves they were making based on well Rome or Carthage.

    Re: Cohen

    http://press.princeton.edu/titles/6877.html
    Last edited by conon394; September 06, 2017 at 07:43 AM.
    IN PATROCINIVM SVB Dromikaites

    'One day when I fly with my hands - up down the sky, like a bird'

    But if the cause be not good, the king himself hath a heavy reckoning to make, when all those legs and arms and heads, chopped off in battle, shall join together at the latter day and cry all 'We died at such a place; some swearing, some crying for surgeon, some upon their wives left poor behind them, some upon the debts they owe, some upon their children rawly left.

    Hyperides of Athens: We know, replied he, that Antipater is good, but we (the Demos of Athens) have no need of a master at present, even a good one.

  13. #213

    Default Re: Black Hannibal?

    We know how Athens operated, because they couldn't shut up about it.

    Carthaginians seem almost shy in comparison, like they have something to hide.
    Eats, shoots, and leaves.

  14. #214

    Default Re: Black Hannibal?

    Quote Originally Posted by Roma_Victrix View Post
    LOL. This is going to be fun.

    You're positively correct! I actually do have a convincing source to have come to such a conclusion (at least partially).

    It just so happens to be Prof. Dexter ing Hoyos.

    From Dexter Hoyos' chapters/entries "Carthage, Carthaginians" and "Carthaginian Wars (409-367)" in Phang, Spence, Kelly, & Londey (2016), Conflict in Ancient Greece and Rome: Definitive Political, Social, and Military Encyclopedia, ABC-CLIO, pp 165-168:



    Seems like the foreigners were pretty expendable compared to the citizens, weren't they?

    Again, I reiterate that this isn't exactly "racism" (an anachronism that doesn't belong in the ancient period) so much as Phoenician xenophobia and the desire for Carthage's citizens not to get their hands dirty in war. They had foreigners to do that for them! Their citizenry and nobility were far more engaged in agrarian and mercantile pursuits, after all.

    And Oda is absolutely right about the "half-breed" label as it was used against those of mixed Libyan and Phoenician descent, an ethnic group that formed the majority of troops in Carthage's land armies. See Richard Gabriel, Hannibal (2011), pp 22-24.
    Nothing in Gabriel to support Oda or you for that matter, page 22 he references the Libyan infantry officered by phonicians, as Libyans who had acultured adopted CarthaginianPunic ways, which has zero to do with it, the liby phonicians were the elite heavy cav of hannys army.Muttines is not even referenced, he is given a top military command in Sicily, we know he is a Britain not a mixed race person but a southern Greek who adopts Punic ways. he gives two references to them as originally being phoncians who settled in Libya, and Libyans who adopted Punic culture, nowhere does he do as you wrote.
    As for the rest of your incorrect use of Cites, D Hoyos was not writing about the Hanninaliac wars period, by which time the Army was very more Hellenic in structure form and operation but centuries earlier.
    Last edited by Hanny; September 06, 2017 at 12:01 PM.
    “Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote.” Benjamin Franklin

  15. #215

    Default Re: Black Hannibal?

    Quote Originally Posted by daelin4 View Post
    I don't consider the organization of an army along possibly linguistic lines as proof of segregation on the basis of established societal racism; if I were to take anything from Hoyos's book, it'd be that they were the opposite. But it must be noted that victors write the history books, and so it is reasonable to presume that any conclusions may be tainted because it was presented from a particular perspective, and from someone other than actual Carthaginians.
    Plus if you have such a diverse army it makes sense to divide them along such lines and having Carthaginian commanders act as the chain of command, but this speaks nothing of racism, in the same way that being part of a NATO force and having Canadians operating alongside Americans rather than Germans is a matter of practicality more so than we both hate Franz, or there is a confident amount of translation and cooperative effort at play.

    I'd have to read up on Polybius and other ancient accounts to get a hint of what attitudes Carthaginians had towards other peoples. But I'm sure that, even since you have not read Hoyos's book, you must have some very convincing sources to come to such conclusion.

    In any case the mixing of Carthaginians with others further present the problem of calling someone "black". So far the only definition I have ever gotten from anyone positing the argument (and after a great deal of resistant bickering, I might add, it really goes to show the educational background of most of these people), finally decided on the premise that Phoenicians were descendants of "Egyians Nubains" (sic), and that somehow this translate to Carthaginians "also" being black- the unstated presumption that said person considers anything from Africa should be considered black as well; the majority of his statements were more ranting about how he thinks most people depict such peoples as white.
    But of course, there's a huge difference between saying someone is not black, and saying someone is white. Or for that matter, just what these people consider black or white to begin with. I mean if you consider people living in North Africa as black as people from Sudanese or the Bantu then yes you'd have a case...but that's honestly a very stupid way of classifying people, and likely done so with a racist or provocative agenda.
    Correct, we have examples of Punics marrying into every pop group there was except Roman. many rose to high office.
    “Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote.” Benjamin Franklin

  16. #216
    Roma_Victrix's Avatar Gatorade, is it in you?
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Virginia, USA
    Posts
    13,502

    Default Re: Black Hannibal?

    Quote Originally Posted by Hanny View Post
    As for the rest of your incorrect use of Cites, D Hoyos was not writing about the Hanninaliac wars period, by which time the Army was very more Hellenic in structure form and operation but centuries earlier.
    Nope, not exactly. Hoyos was referring to the Carthaginian army in general and actually began talking about the Punic Wars right after the first statement I mentioned. The part about the Sicilian Wars of the 4th century BC that I quoted actually belonged to the subsequent encyclopedic entry. He did not distinguish the Punic Army from one period to the other, although he did mention the state of the army when encountered by the Spartan mercenary commander Xanthippus in the 3rd century BC (and how he reformed it with updated standards).

    Quote Originally Posted by Hanny View Post
    Correct, we have examples of Punics marrying into every pop group there was except Roman. many rose to high office.
    High office, you say! Be specific please. Which offices? Were they exclusive to the military? I doubt any of them were civilian, given the exclusionary nature of the Carthaginian state as mentioned by Cyclops.

  17. #217

    Default Re: Black Hannibal?

    Quote Originally Posted by Roma_Victrix View Post
    Nope, not exactly. Hoyos was referring to the Carthaginian army in general and actually began talking about the Punic Wars right after the first statement I mentioned. The part about the Sicilian Wars of the 4th century BC that I quoted actually belonged to the subsequent encyclopedic entry. He did not distinguish the Punic Army from one period to the other, although he did mention the state of the army when encountered by the Spartan mercenary commander Xanthippus in the 3rd century BC (and how he reformed it with updated standards).



    High office, you say! Be specific please. Which offices? Were they exclusive to the military? I doubt any of them were civilian, given the exclusionary nature of the Carthaginian state as mentioned by Cyclops.
    It's very simple, the book you citied does not say what you say it says. And is only concerned up to the first punic war, in any event, and has nothing to do with Muttines in the second punic war, who commands punic forces, and answers your other question which you got wrong already, which you incorrectly think is referenced in it, to his genetic heritage, it's not.
    “Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote.” Benjamin Franklin

  18. #218

    Default Re: Black Hannibal?

    Quote Originally Posted by Spear Dog View Post
    I know plenty of Lebanese, the descendants of the Phoenicians, and they can be very dark-skinned - particularly those that work all day in the sun. It is more than likely that a Phoenician colony in North Africa, after mixing with the locals for a few generations would be as dark-skinned as any mixed heritage African person is today. The guy in the clip is totally believable for a North African Hannibal.
    This describes me, but I never get so dark that I could be mistaken as black. There's no doubt Hannibal was swarthy, just as there's no doubt Scipio, Fabius, Micunius, Varro or Paullus were somewhat swarthy. We shouldn't be seduced by the notion that Italians and Phoenicians and Greeks in the Classical age more closely resembled our favorite English actors that might portray them on screen. If anything they would look more like James Gandolfini than Peter O'toole.

  19. #219
    conon394's Avatar hoi polloi
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Colfax WA, neat I have a barn and 49 acres - I have 2 horses, 15 chickens - but no more pigs
    Posts
    13,010

    Default Re: Black Hannibal?

    Quote Originally Posted by Condottiere 40K View Post
    We know how Athens operated, because they couldn't shut up about it.

    Carthaginians seem almost shy in comparison, like they have something to hide.
    Victors don't write history, Its people who can't stop going to book club

    ----

    @hanny

    Correct, we have examples of Punics marrying into every pop group there was except Roman. many rose to high office.
    Will you do please document or provide examples - I assume you will ignore me but whatever why waste your time posting if you won't even mange a defense a drunk overworked public defender might after a 10 minute talk with his obviously guilty client. I mean really Even Utica would not stay loyal. I really can't think of any grand tradition of foreigners hanging about in Carthage. Find me an Athenian comparable to Clitomachus (living in a open and free school in Carthage with other foreigners) and I will bite on your line of non supported drivel
    Last edited by conon394; September 07, 2017 at 11:30 AM.
    IN PATROCINIVM SVB Dromikaites

    'One day when I fly with my hands - up down the sky, like a bird'

    But if the cause be not good, the king himself hath a heavy reckoning to make, when all those legs and arms and heads, chopped off in battle, shall join together at the latter day and cry all 'We died at such a place; some swearing, some crying for surgeon, some upon their wives left poor behind them, some upon the debts they owe, some upon their children rawly left.

    Hyperides of Athens: We know, replied he, that Antipater is good, but we (the Demos of Athens) have no need of a master at present, even a good one.

  20. #220
    Roma_Victrix's Avatar Gatorade, is it in you?
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Virginia, USA
    Posts
    13,502

    Default Re: Black Hannibal?

    Quote Originally Posted by conon394 View Post
    Will you do please document or provide examples - I assume you will ignore me but whatever why waste your time posting if you won't even mange a defense a drunk overworked public defender might after a 10 minute talk with his obviously guilty client. I mean really Even Utica would not stay loyal. I really can't think of any grand tradition of foreigners hanging about in Carthage. Find me an Athenian comparable to Clitomachus (living in a open and free school in Carthage with other foreigners) and I will bite on your line of non supported drivel
    My thoughts exactly. When he brings an academic source to the table with quotes like the ones I provided from Hoyos, then his argument can be taken seriously. Until then, [insert fart noise here]. When it came to earning citizenship, the Carthaginian state was not as inclusive as the Roman Republic, which granted citizenship to various non-Latin peoples well before they started conquering the Mediterranean outside of mainland Italy and Sicily. More on that below...

    Quote Originally Posted by Pontifex Maximus View Post
    This describes me, but I never get so dark that I could be mistaken as black. There's no doubt Hannibal was swarthy, just as there's no doubt Scipio, Fabius, Micunius, Varro or Paullus were somewhat swarthy. We shouldn't be seduced by the notion that Italians and Phoenicians and Greeks in the Classical age more closely resembled our favorite English actors that might portray them on screen. If anything they would look more like James Gandolfini than Peter O'toole.
    Yes and no. Ancient Italy contained a rich variety of different peoples/ethnic groups/population groups, with various languages including Indo-European and non-Indo-European being spoken. It was a true patchwork of peoples originating from the Caucuses mixed with the original inhabitants of the peninsula who were descended from Neolithic farmers from West Asia. Many Romans of northern Italy were descended from conquered and assimilated Celtic peoples and Ligurians, for instance, in addition to the Greeks of the south and the Etruscans, Umbrians, Oscans, and Samnites of central Italy, to say nothing of the other Latin tribes in Rome's vicinity. Well before the civil war of the 1st century BC that led to all of these diverse allied peoples of the Italian peninsula having Roman citizenship, the latter status had been granted to whole cities and tribes in formal pacts made with the city and republic of Rome. Hell, to this day northern Italians from places like Milan and Venice generally possess lighter features than their more southern compatriots.

    For instance, the actress Giorgia Marin from Venice (middle) with the (sisters) Valentina and Chiara Ferragni from Cremona, Italy at a Milan fashion show:

    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...aMarinMFW1.jpg


    Putting aside genetic analysis, Roman artwork of the late Republic, with its Hellenistic and Etruscan influences, was highly realistic in portraying the phenotypes, facial features, and even skin tones of the native peoples of Latium and Italy as a whole. Just look at the faces of some of the most prominent Romans of the 1st century BC, from old aristocratic lineages, as a mere example of how the Romans portrayed themselves (and generally how they looked):



    Octavian looks like a proper English schoolboy (lol), whereas Mark Antony looks like a total guido wop from The Jersey Shore or Goodfellas (or James Gandolfini from The Sopranos as you've suggested). Of course, these particular statues don't contain significant amount of paint traces like some other Roman statues (example: Tyche holding the infant Plutus, 2nd century AD), but Roman frescoes and mosaics also offer a view of average Romans. For instance, this fresco showing women dressing, from the Baths of Herculaneum, c. 79 AD:



    A rounded portrait of the mythological figures Heracles and his lover Omphale, from Pompeii, 45-79 AD:



    A 1st-century AD fresco of a seated Roman woman from the Villa Arianna, Stabiae, Italy:



    Or even this mosaic showing young Roman boys hunting a rabbit, from the Villa Romana del Casale, Roman Sicily, 4th century AD:



    I won't be exhaustive about this, but it's pretty clear that the Romans had a fairly diverse look about them, and some of them living in southern Europe were as pale and lightly-featured as the Romans who dwelt in northern Europe (after the conquest of Gaul, Britannia, the Alpine region, and southwestern Germania, of course).

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •