Can Sup Forums debunk the Afro-centric argument of black vikings without using any memes? I'm serious. I've showed this to some who used to laugh at the "we wuz" memes until they actually looked at the evidence. So there is this viking called Thorhall. He is a swarthy tall viking that ruled Vinland until his death. He most likely was an African.
>but muh Thorhall was just a race-mixed viking with Mediterranean stock!
Nope! Vikings did not race-mix. In fact one Germanic tribe did, the Bastarnae. It was very unpopular and to this day we still name the act after this tribe, bastardization.
>but muh Thorhall was just a tanned skinned viking, not dark skinned like an african
Ok, where would the genes come from to make him swarthy? It's not like in the middle of no-where a swarthy viking would just pop out of nowhere. The genes to make someone darker is dominant so if there was one dark viking there would be many. There would either be a lot of tanned skin Scandinavians today, or none, and there is none so we can assume Thorhall wasn't just an exception. What we can assume is that he was foreign to Scandinavia and most likely did come from Africa.
So please actually try to debunk this argument. You guys always mock blacks for claiming they were kings but when they supply actual evidence you guys usually scoff at it and mock it with memes. If Sup Forums can debunk this argument that even historians can't then I will be very impressed.
