What the fuck?

What the fuck?

Other urls found in this thread:

telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1464209/Borders-folk-may-be-descended-from-Africans.html
imdb.com/title/tt1020558
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Septimius_Severus
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Severan_dynasty#/media/File:Portrait_of_family_of_Septimius_Severus_-_Altes_Museum_-_Berlin_-_Germany_2017.jpg
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

What's the matter? Don't like black people being forcefully injected into history where they don't belong?

:thinking:

During the empire there’s no reason not to believe brown/black people served in the legions

Obviously they were hugely outnumbered by the Gauls and Italians but they were probably there

Fucking shut up omg like sweetie just ignore it you're literally just being racist fucking Sup Forums evil drumpfkin orange monkey lol xd

i like how they still couldn't make that black roman soldier's wife a white woman. instead, they make her mixed.

reminder racism against black didn't exist back than so no it wasn't that awkward to find nubians and egyptians amongst white civilizations

in the unlikely event that a sub-saharan african would travel to rome, he wouldn't be allowed in a legion, which was made up of citizens.

You have no idea how the Legions worked let alone how the Empire operated. Pick up a book.

-t. historylet.
The line between auxillia and legionary faded over time in the principate. What's more, for at least 1/2 the existence of the empire, all people within the border were granted citizenship. Don't forget the armies by the 4th century was beginning to be composed of damn G*rmans, who were most definitely more foreign than some numidian

This is true. Though my guess is every character acts like it's perfectly normal, fitting the standard the writers want their audience to follow. If they actually wanted to make a statement about racism, other characters might initially react with a mixture of fear and confusion over his skin color, but quickly accept him as a comrade in arms. Thus showing that individual behavior matters more than appearance.

Then there's shit like which does it to a degree of historical revisionism that destroys the audience's immersion.

yeah, because historically people have always been really inclusive and have never persecuted and ostracized people who looked and acted differently from themselves.

>over time

Entire post discarded. Well done dummy.

Why not explain it then?

i literally just got that from a book, you gigantic faggot.

African soldiers were posted at Hadrian's Wall, just fyi

telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1464209/Borders-folk-may-be-descended-from-Africans.html

in the unlikely event that a poor sub-saharan traveled to rome, he'd be blamed for and killed over something he didn't do because he's always be the easiest target for that in any room he was in. and nobody would care. and that's extremely generously assuming zero overt racism.

desu I'm only bothered by this due to killing my immersion

There was actually history of 2 black people being in England so we can make 50 black knights ok sweetheart....

that doesn't apply to the time in which the film takes place.

romans who colonized north africa, you retard, not africans as we see them.

This is what Romans called Africa, your implication ranges from disingenuous to propaganda.

What show?

hol up

FORM RANKS YOU DOGS

imdb.com/title/tt1020558

And yet I bet y'all had no problem with Christian Bale playing Moses

>they probably settled down
>it makes no sense and there's zero evidence of this but it probably happened
sounds about as true as the repeated claims about female viking warriors being found in graves all over the place in spite of how that's not true

..Lord Baelish?

>brainlets in this thread don't know who Lucius Quietus is
A black man was Trajan's most trusted general, as well as being the governor of Judea.

The fact that you're outraged by a black guy shown as a rank and file legionnaire is fucking hilarious.

>auxiliaries and legionaries are the same
k

sorry, this is what an african looks like.

>a governer of Judea was an auxiliary
Holy shit, you don't know much about Roman history, do you? His family was given citizenship due to his father's exploits during the previous wars, before Lucius rose to esteem fighting at Trajan's side in the Dacian Wars. He had already attained equestrian status but rose higher after becoming the Optimus Princeps' most trustworthy commander.
Pic related, faggot. This is from Trajan's column, depicting the Dacian Wars. Boy, these Berber cavalry sure look white with their dreadlocks and nappy beards.

That's how greek and romans have always been depicted, you fucking idiot.

>Pic related, faggot.
>clearly shows a bunch of the same ethnicity of auxiliaries operating as their own unit in their regional flair, as you would expect; not as legionaries
what's your point bitch? yeah you'd see them in whole units. you wouldn't see random lone assholes ported from half way across the empire to be the one token black guy stationed in britain or wherever

>Don't like black people
I think you could have reduced your post to that.

>egyptians

hmmmm

i shoupose

Could you possibly be more in denial? Spiraled beards were common when depicting Greeks, but on Trajan's column there is an obvious difference between Romans, Dacians, and the Berbers serving under Quietus.
>you wouldn't see random lone assholes ported from half way across the empire to be the one token black guy stationed in britain or wherever
Again, BEFORE the time of Hadrian, Quietus was serving as a fucking governor under Trajan. If a black guy could attain citizenship, become an equestrian, rise to the posting of governor in the Roman hierarchy, you really doubt that one lone black guy might be serving as a fucking legionnaire in Britain 30 years later? Could've been the son of one of Quietus' Berbers given citizenship by Trajan after the Dacian Wars.

Roman troops were never stationed where they were recruited, to prevent them from possibly siding with their people in times of insurrection. It was a common thing to find men from Syria or Numidia in Britain, and vice versa.

>nigger legionnaire

The fact you're not outraged by some dipshit pretending niggers were legionnaires is fucking hilarious.

>doesn't know they found a black centurions bones left over from when the romans tried taming the UK
>even came out in a documentary
>movie is loosely based around that

Almost forgot, we're talking to barbarians ITT

...

>black

you mean african?

The fact that you are outraged is hilarious. Triggered little crybabies.

Where else would a black man originate from, numbnuts

CIA?

>crying because people think niggers playing Romans is stupid
>not triggered
Choose one, crybaby.

You've already been BTFO. Just leave the thread and piece your retarded world view back together.

those are not blacks, but welsh

I'm not the one crying here though. I literally don't give a shit.

>seething with rage
Face it, we don't like seeing monkeys on our film screens pretending their humans. If that's too much for you to take, then I suggest you go back to >>>>>/reddit/ or >>>>/wuhlstah/.

>doesn't realize he's being BTFO by more than one person
>wahh reddit wahhh
I know that you came for the presidential election, but why didn't you leave? Did they ban r/the_donald?

Australia

I can taste the salt from here...

>television should cater to my rare sensibilities about race

Go back to your hugbox, faggot.

it's a nubian warrior

>let me just double down on my rage and see how that works
Nope. It failed too.

throughout history all conquerors used the simple tactic of integrating lesser tribermen/military units/advisors into their own ranks. from the ancient Greeks to the Romans to the Brits in India to Hitler's war machine, every army included members of conquered tribes/city states/nations.

HOWEVER, those units were under-equipped and often used as fodder. When it came to advisors to the locally installed governor, their usefulness was measured based on their wealth and influence (i.e. mostly the upper echelons, priests or merchants made it through)

What is being fed systematically here to us is an attempt to present said "conquered slaves" as literal equals. No, a black legionnaire would in no way be an equal to a Roman citizen. A Spartan auxiliary slave in the army is by no means equal to a Spartan son. Because pic related, you know, Wallace had a black cousin who was invaluable to him.

This is just pure madness, from OP's example to whichever film tries to portray these examples as equals to the protagonists. Completely disregards to socio-political dimensions of the ancient era.

There is literally no verisimilitude at all in these attempts and the more you examine them, the more you feel the need to put your tin foil hat on and looking for an agenda behind it.

Great, you just reminded me for the first time in months that CIA got killed off in the dumbeset way possible in GoT and a great character is once again written off for no reason other than to move along the plot. Thanks D&D.

>television should inject niggers into roles to make them feel better about being pieces of human garbage that were enslaved by everybody and contributed practically nothing to human history

Explain this then
>literally called Africanus
>statue is made black instead of white like all the other statues

That really doesn't look like a lord in the third picture based on his getup.

there were black people back in rome days and there was ships to travel too

HOL UP

the concept of "black" didnt exist back then, Romans were chiefly concerned with whether you were a citizen of the Empire or not. Your skin color did not matter. They even had "black" emperors entirely without controversy, whereas America has knocked itself off sole superpower status because it got so mad at having a black man in power

Look at that blue faced heathen, what a pile of white trash

trips confirm but listen....

working in a coal mine can do that to a man

>salt
>...
reddit

>No, a black legionnaire would in no way be an equal to a Roman citizen
Except that in this time period, said black legionnaire would have to be a Roman citizen to serve as a legionnaire, you fucking moron. That was a nice flowery rant containing zero historical facts, though. Read up in the thread and feel free to refute the points about Lusius Quietus.

Anyway, the real irony in this thread is that the "white people" posting here (I'd love to see flags enabled to know how many Brazilians and south Americans are chiming in) have more in common with the modern niggers they despise than they do with the Romans they worship.

who cares

HBO Rome had a cast composed of barbarian anglo-saxon savages

what an insult to romans

>called Africanus
Conquered one of the most powerful nations in the region at the time...which was in (wait for it) Africa.
>made black
That's what happens when the medium you use to create art is black....or white, red, whatever.

Dipshit.

This is so fucking stupid and nonsensical I have no other choice but to assume this is bait

t. barbarian

>concept of "black" didnt exist back then, Romans were chiefly concerned with whether you were a citizen of the Empire or not.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!
>whiteknighting for niggers
reddit

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Septimius_Severus

Nigga no one even saw that movie

Daily reminder ancient Romans and Greeks weren't white either, so you're literally arguing about whether these browner people serves as equals to these other brown people.

Does the fucker on the right of the text you linked look like a sub-saharan African?

oh wow a black roman who died in scotland? and he was emperor? really jogs my nog

You have not made an argument this whole thread just u mad shit

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Severan_dynasty#/media/File:Portrait_of_family_of_Septimius_Severus_-_Altes_Museum_-_Berlin_-_Germany_2017.jpg

>Septimius Severus came from a wealthy and distinguished family of equestrian rank. He had Italian Roman ancestry on his mother's side and descended from Punic - and perhaps also Berber - forebears on his father's side.

he was african, not black. he wouldnt even be considered black today i dont think.

Again, does that look like a sub-saharan African?

you realize "black" people in America are very whitewashed right? They look completely different from native Africans

>MUH SUB-SAHARAN QUALIFIER OUT OF NOWHERE

>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Septimius_Severus
He was born in the geographical region located in Africa, that is not evidence at all whatsoever that he had black skin or was African himself, ethnically. If he was born into nobility chances are his ethnicity was European (or Roman, to be more precise). Are Afrikaaners black? Are Rhodesians black? Surely they are, they come from the Southernmost regions of the African continent. Either I'm responding to bait, or I'm responding to yet another nu-Sup Forums numale revisionist cuck faggot. Either way, I will no longer waste my fucking time with you faggot.

>a brown north african is black

i mean really this just calls into question how the term black is nebulous as fuck. he probably did have some black admixture back in his family tree but he looks solidly north african. looks closer to an arab or a morrocan than a west african which is what people traditionally when you say black. do north africans consider themselves black? shit, do east africans?

maybe we should retire the term.

>Out of nowhere.

You're arguing that a nigger was a Roman Emperor. An italian/Punic is not a nigger.

...

are you black? you seem seriously triggered here

even if a black slave during Roman times was for whatever insane reason given Roman citizenship and was allowed to join the army and be paid for it etc, he would still not be an equal to a Roman born man.

Let me re-phrase this so it does not trigger anyone as much (not being sarcastic here).
Would said black legionnaire be able to head for Rome and become on of the "elite"? Run for the Senate? Establish his own dynasty and raise a family in ancient Rome as an equal to other Romans?

Highly unlikely, would be exceptions to the rule in the real sense.

My point was that this is not the only example of glorifying and/or equalizing the conquered, because by no means based on historical evidence do we have proof of such wonderful integration and acceptance in ancient times.

Looking around you, you will find so many examples of deliberately inserting black characters in historical shows and instead of portraying them in an accurate way, they are shown as being equals.

Also this is just an observation, there is no need to be upset, this is the internet after all.

>I'll keep posting until they stop, and then I win.
Just like how the niggers just keep running their mouth to "win" their "arguments".

Pathetic. We're done here, niggerlover.

seems plausible except for the black roman emperor in scotland part, boy history sure is inconvenient

>some egyptians were black
>others were arab
>others were coptic

its not hard to understand, north africa was an extremely diverse place

The fuck are you talking about?
Make an argument like everyone else or fuck off.

Keep in mind; while you're trying to figure out what shades of brown determines black..
A barbarian is most definitely 100% white.

that's the actual problem!

there is nothing wrong with history here and it is not inconvenient at all.

your example just now is what I meant, the exceptions. you cannot use that exception to literally describe the whole past. that is what I meant in my previous post.

these are extremely rare examples in thousands of years of history. they exists yes, but they are not the rule. the way these shows are coming across is as if it IS the norm, which is insane.

even going beyond the ideas of scripts and shows etc, there is a thing called Willing Suspension of Disbelief. If somethings is completely out of line and lacks verisimilitude (i.e. a WW2 film where suddenly the Brazilians attack, with lasers), then you cannot take it seriously even in the actual context of watching it purely for entertainment.

you know when they make movies about 2008-2016, I hope they cast Obama as a white man, because he's an extremely rare example in thousands of years of history, best just to ignore all black people in power, there's no way romans had totally different ideas of race or a massive empire that regularly moved people thousands of miles

Poor Noel Clarke. Instead of being used for “muh diversity” shit he could do more roadman kino.

>Would said black legionnaire be able to head for Rome and become on of the "elite"? Run for the Senate? Establish his own dynasty and raise a family in ancient Rome as an equal to other Romans?
I've already pointed out that Lusius Quietus was a governor of Judea. He rose as high as an equestrian could rise. And an equestrian governor is as far above a rank and file legionnaire as a the average person is to an ant. And that's what we're talking about here: a black legionnaire.

I'm not triggered. I'm trying to edify retards who are attempting to speak on history without having any idea what they're talking about. Obviously, there are plenty of examples of SJWs inserting black characters in historical roles where they don't belong, but this thread was made on a false premise: it illustrates one of the few examples where the presence of a black actor in a certain historical role is perfectly fine in the context of the period and his depicted position.

I don't like the SJW insertion thing, but what's happening in this thread is exactly the same fucking thing: people ignoring the historical record and going with fantasy over fact in a shallow attempt to validate their own ignorant beliefs.

And no, I'm not black. I'm a fat white history teacher from rural Tennessee.