Comments by "" (@neutronalchemist3241) on "Black Washing History? Troy \u0026 BBC Cartoon Debunking" video.

Achilles can be a mytical figure, but it's a mithical figure that belongs to a specific etnic group (he was a Mycenean Greek). Homer provides a description of Achilles, saying he was blonde, and blonde was his son Pirrhus (that's the meaning of his name).
2
Actually north-Africans in classic times were a little paler than modern day ones.
1
To make Achilles black is surely not a black guy idea, but to be vocal about the lack of black people in BBC series is. BBC doesn't want to be called racist, so what it does? A series about the Mali Empire? They know it would be a fiasco. For the average BBC viewer it's not interesting, because they are not history buffs, and they are culturally European, so they like "Iliad" (or Victorian age, or 100 years war period...) more. So they do the European history/mith series putting some black guy in one of the main roles and their conscience is clean. It's the problem of having a relevant part of your actual population, that didn't had a part in it's history (apart from subjects of the colonization) until about the last 50 years.
1
Many of those would probably be good ideas BUT it seems that BBC thinks there needs to be at least a black actor in one of the main positive roles in every historical drama (so not black Hitler, sorry, a black villain downgrades you on the racistometer. Maybe we'll have a black Churchill). They already put a black actress (Sophie Okonedo) to play the part of queen Margaret of Anjou in "The hollow crown", so a black Churchill is just in the way. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W0kO-pVsc3E (notice the magistral "two birds with one stone". Black AND badass woman fighting in armor. I can imagine the high five at BBC when someone came up with the idea).
1
Never heard of the "lost legion" of Crassus, that reched China and settled there? (I'm jocking. It's almost certainly a modern forgery).
1
We know of Achilles from the Iliad, and in the same Iliad he's described as "blonde". Real or fictional, he belonged to a well defined culture (Acheans were not fictional) whose members were not black. If nowadays a white European would be chosen to interpret a fictional subsaharian African (IE the main character of an African legend), you'll hear the outcries even on the Moon.
1
+Troy Jimmerson At what point?
1
Yeah, Whites had played all those, until it happened that, any time a white tried to play them, the production had been accused of "whitewashing". It happened, IE, even in "Avatar the last airbender", even if the story is not even supposed to be set on our world, or to depict real human ethnic groups.
1
@ericjade So what you understood of my post is that " is acceptable to appropriate or symbolize other cultures as long as you're white?" It's an interesting case of study on how someone can understand what he wants. No. What I said is that, as long as is acceptable to cry foul and accuse of "whitewashing" because a white interprets someone of ATLA's "water tribe" (that had been described as having an inuit-like culture, but had NEVER been etnically identified as Inuits. IE they are supposed to have blue eyes), then EVEN MORE SO to let a black man interpret Achilles IS "blackwashing", BECAUSE maybe Achilles never existed, and the Iliad is a complete work of fantasy BUT Achaeans EXISTED, and were not subsaharian Africans.
1
@ericjade You are still failing to comprehend simple terms. A case of study is you apparently being able to write. MAYBE Achilles is not a real historical figure, but ACHAEANS really existed, and were not subsaharian Africans. Achilles fictionally or not, was one of them, so not a subsaharian African. If, in a modern day fiction, a fictional character belonging to a REAL African population had been played by a white (or a Chinese, or a native American for that matter) you would hear the complains and the accusations of "whitewashing", reaching the sky. INFACT it happened even for whites interpreting FICTIONAL populations that were only vaguely inspired by real ones (as in ATLA).
1
@ericjade Sorry, but you didn't explain anything (maybe because you didn't understand anything). Reality is that whites playing parts of non-white people became a problem long ago, but apparently is not a problem if non-white people play parts intended for whites.
1
Actually we don't know what colour humans were when they left Africa (in all likelyhood they were not "white" like modern day north-Europeans, but they could have very well had the colour of modern day north-Africans). Several modern theories stated that skin colour have more to do with sexual preference than vitamin D production. ;)
1
We know of Achilles from the Iliad, and in the same Iliad he 's described as "blonde", that's how we know.
1
@BrotherKnowtheledge Oh yeah, He was one in a billion statistic anomaly. A black born in a population of white europeans, and with blonde hair. It would be more credible he was an alien. "Caucasian" is a word that didn't exist at the time. The Iliad clearly says he was an Achean, and Acheans were caucasians.
1
@BrotherKnowtheledge 1) What in the world has Jesus to do with the iliad? You don't have other arguments, so you resort to your favorite one, regardless how related is to the question? 2) Why should he "hide" once in Egypt? Egypt was not under the control of Herod. And in Egypt, at the time, there was people coming from all the Roman empire. 3) Egyptians and Israelites were both middle eastern. their physical traits were almost indistinguishable. Even if some Pharaons had been of Numidian origin, there had never been a "black Egypt". 4) Acheans were caucasians that spoke an indo-european language. 5) Please, study more.
1
@BrotherKnowtheledge Sorry, but those are delusional tales. Worse, they, other than being false and scientifically quite ridiculous, makes the blacks that believe them seem like desperately trying to steal someone's other history, because they don't like their own.
1
@BrotherKnowtheledge Sorry, but "possibility" is not "reality". Theories have to be proven, and in this case, there is nothing backing what you like to believe. As already said, it's only a delusional fantasy.
1
Hannibal was a Phoenician, so ethnically a Middle Eastern. Chartage was a pretty close oligarchy, so it's improbable he had African blood in his veins, but even having it, it would have been North-African, so similar to current days Tunisians.
1