History Channel To Portray Hannibal Accurately

[bullwinkle]

Why does this matter to anyone?

For the same reason it mattered to whoever chose to lie and claim he was a white guy for centuries.

You mean the Romans and other Carthaginians? His brother was called Hasdrubal the Fair. Does that sound like he was black?

You are starting to sound desperate, bripat. Why is it so important to you to prove Hannibal was lily-white amid all the doubts? BTW, did you see the photo of what it is thought Jesus probably looked like if he was an average Judean of his day?

 

[bripat9643]

Why does this matter to anyone?

For the same reason it mattered to whoever chose to lie and claim he was a white guy for centuries.

You mean the Romans and other Carthaginians? His brother was called Hasdrubal the Fair. Does that sound like he was black?

You are starting to sound desperate, bripat. Why is it so important to you to prove Hannibal was lily-white amid all the doubts? BTW, did you see the photo of what it is thought Jesus probably looked like if he was an average Judean of his day?

You sound like a douche bag and a jack ass.

 

[bullwinkle]

Why does this matter to anyone?

For the same reason it mattered to whoever chose to lie and claim he was a white guy for centuries.

You mean the Romans and other Carthaginians? His brother was called Hasdrubal the Fair. Does that sound like he was black?

You are starting to sound desperate, bripat. Why is it so important to you to prove Hannibal was lily-white amid all the doubts? BTW, did you see the photo of what it is thought Jesus probably looked like if he was an average Judean of his day?

You sound like a douche bag and a jack ass.

non-sequitur answer, bripat. You are very good at that. Very Trump-ish!

 

[Asclepias]

Kudos to the History Channel for accurately portraying Hannibal as who he really was. A Black African.

Who says he was a black African? The Carthaginians were originally from Phoenicia. They were Semitic.

I did. The History Channel did. Archealogical evidence does. The bible does and so does science. The Phoenicians are descended from Canaan who's father is Ham. Sorry but they Hamitic not Semitic.

 

[Asclepias]

or this.....

Or this.

Thats the Punic god Melqart. Someone already got busted trying to use that one. Try another desperate denial.

History Channel To Portray Hannibal Accurately

 

[bripat9643]

Kudos to the History Channel for accurately portraying Hannibal as who he really was. A Black African.

Who says he was a black African? The Carthaginians were originally from Phoenicia. They were Semitic.

I did. The History Channel did. Archealogical evidence does. The bible does and so does science. The Phoenicians are descended from Canaan who's father is Ham. Sorry but they Hamitic not Semitic.

The Canaanites were Semitic according to historians. Who cares what the History Channel says? They have shows about crab boats and naked survival trips. That's real serious history, isn't it?

Nothing in the Bible indicates the Canaanites were black. According to the Table of Nations in Genesis 10 (verses 15-19), Canaan was the ancestor of the tribes who originally occupied the ancient Land of Canaan: all the territory from Sidon or Hamath in the north to Gaza in the southwest and Lasha in the southeast. This territory is roughly the areas of modern day Israel, Palestine, Lebanon, westernJordan, and western Syria. Historians say the people living in this area were Semites, just like the Israelites.

Science doesn't say a thing about Hannibal's ethnicity. The term "Hamitic" is meaningless in historical or anthropological terms.

 

[Asclepias]

Kudos to the History Channel for accurately portraying Hannibal as who he really was. A Black African.

Who says he was a black African? The Carthaginians were originally from Phoenicia. They were Semitic.

I did. The History Channel did. Archealogical evidence does. The bible does and so does science. The Phoenicians are descended from Canaan who's father is Ham. Sorry but they Hamitic not Semitic.

The Canaanites were Semitic according to historians. Who cares what the History Channel says? They have shows about crab boats and naked survival trips. That's real serious history, isn't it?

Nothing in the Bible indicates the Canaanites were black. According to the Table of Nations in Genesis 10 (verses 15-19), Canaan was the ancestor of the tribes who originally occupied the ancient Land of Canaan: all the territory from Sidon or Hamath in the north to Gaza in the southwest and Lasha in the southeast. This territory is roughly the areas of modern day Israel, Palestine, Lebanon, westernJordan, and western Syria. Historians say the people living in this area were Semites, just like the Israelites.

Science doesn't say a thing about Hannibal's ethnicity. The term "Hamitic" is meaningless in historical or anthropological terms.

The Canaanites are not Semitic according to anyone. I think you are getting confused because they spoke a Semitic langauge.

The bible shows the Canaanites were Black on many occasions The first being that Ham is the father of Canaan. If you know your bible Ham is father of all Blacks that populated what we now call the African continent and parts of whats now called the ME.

"The Nations Descending from Ham:
First on the list, as being the darkest, is Cush or Ethiopia (Genesis 10:6), after which comes Mitsrayim, or Egypt, then PuT or Libyia, and Canaan last. The sons or descendants of each of these are then taken in turn, and it is noteworthy that some of them, like the Ethiopians and the Canaanites, spoke Semitic, and not Hamitic, languages"

 

[bripat9643]

or this.....

Or this.

Thats the Punic god Melqart. Someone already got busted trying to use that one. Try another desperate denial.

History Channel To Portray Hannibal Accurately

Sorry, it's not that cut and dried. You chose the understanding you want to believe.

The following example is a silver half shekel from in the Enna hoard and other Sicilian hoards indicating that this coin was struck in Carthage for use in the Sicilian campaign of 213 - 210 BC. Experts disagree on the identity of the portrait; many identifying it as the god Melquarth, others as Hannibal or his father, Hamilcar. The elephant is clearly African.



Here are some more coins depicting Hannibal:


Coin attributed to Hannibal (as Hercules)

Coin attributed to Hannibal


Silver Half-Shekel said to represent Hannibal c.220 BC


Carthaginian shekel from the time of Hannibal (ca221-201BC)

 

[Asclepias]

or this.....

Or this.

Thats the Punic god Melqart. Someone already got busted trying to use that one. Try another desperate denial.

History Channel To Portray Hannibal Accurately

Sorry, it's not that cut and dried. You chose the understanding you want to believe.

The following example is a silver half shekel from in the Enna hoard and other Sicilian hoards indicating that this coin was struck in Carthage for use in the Sicilian campaign of 213 - 210 BC. Experts disagree on the identity of the portrait; many identifying it as the god Melquarth, others as Hannibal or his father, Hamilcar. The elephant is clearly African.



Here are some more coins depicting Hannibal:


Coin attributed to Hannibal (as Hercules)

Coin attributed to Hannibal


Silver Half-Shekel said to represent Hannibal c.220 BC


Carthaginian shekel from the time of Hannibal (ca221-201BC)

Actually it is that cut and dried. Those coins are not of Hannibal. People can claim they are but the proof is sitting the British museum and shows a Black man.

 

[bripat9643]

Kudos to the History Channel for accurately portraying Hannibal as who he really was. A Black African.

Who says he was a black African? The Carthaginians were originally from Phoenicia. They were Semitic.

I did. The History Channel did. Archealogical evidence does. The bible does and so does science. The Phoenicians are descended from Canaan who's father is Ham. Sorry but they Hamitic not Semitic.

The Canaanites were Semitic according to historians. Who cares what the History Channel says? They have shows about crab boats and naked survival trips. That's real serious history, isn't it?

Nothing in the Bible indicates the Canaanites were black. According to the Table of Nations in Genesis 10 (verses 15-19), Canaan was the ancestor of the tribes who originally occupied the ancient Land of Canaan: all the territory from Sidon or Hamath in the north to Gaza in the southwest and Lasha in the southeast. This territory is roughly the areas of modern day Israel, Palestine, Lebanon, westernJordan, and western Syria. Historians say the people living in this area were Semites, just like the Israelites.

Science doesn't say a thing about Hannibal's ethnicity. The term "Hamitic" is meaningless in historical or anthropological terms.

The Canaanites are not Semitic according to anyone. I think you are getting confused because they spoke a Semitic langauge.

The bible shows the Canaanites were Black on many occasions The first being that Ham is the father of Canaan. If you know your bible Ham is father of all Blacks that populated what we now call the African continent and parts ot the middle east.

"The Nations Descending from Ham:
First on the list, as being the darkest, is Cush or Ethiopia (Genesis 10:6), after which comes Mitsrayim, or Egypt, then PuT or Libyia, and Canaan last. The sons or descendants of each of these are then taken in turn, and it is noteworthy that some of them, like the Ethiopians and the Canaanites, spoke Semitic, and not Hamitic, languages"

The Egyptians weren't black, and neither were the Libyans. Ethiopians are black now, but who knows what their ethnicity was 3000 years ago. What the Egyptians called "Ethiopia" doesn't even coincide with the borders of modern Ethiopia. According to archaeologists and historians the people living in the area of Israel, Lebanon, Jordan and Syria at the time were Semitic. There is no evidence that they were black. Otherwise, why isn't there a trace of their black genes in modern populations?

Ham | Free online library at BiblicalTraining.org
The youngest son of Noah, born probably about ninety-six years before the Flood, and one of the eight persons to live through the Flood. He became the progenitor of the dark races—not the Blacks, but the Egyptians, Ethiopians, Libyans, and Canaanites (Gen.10.6-Gen.10.20).

 

[bripat9643]

or this.....

Or this.

Thats the Punic god Melqart. Someone already got busted trying to use that one. Try another desperate denial.

History Channel To Portray Hannibal Accurately

Sorry, it's not that cut and dried. You chose the understanding you want to believe.

The following example is a silver half shekel from in the Enna hoard and other Sicilian hoards indicating that this coin was struck in Carthage for use in the Sicilian campaign of 213 - 210 BC. Experts disagree on the identity of the portrait; many identifying it as the god Melquarth, others as Hannibal or his father, Hamilcar. The elephant is clearly African.



Here are some more coins depicting Hannibal:


Coin attributed to Hannibal (as Hercules)

Coin attributed to Hannibal


Silver Half-Shekel said to represent Hannibal c.220 BC


Carthaginian shekel from the time of Hannibal (ca221-201BC)

Actually it is that cut and dried. Those coins are not of Hannibal. People can claim they are but the proof is sitting the British museum and shows a Black man.

How is that coin any more relevant than the others? Even the author of your article admits there is no proof the coin depicts Hannibal.

 

[Asclepias]

Or this.

Thats the Punic god Melqart. Someone already got busted trying to use that one. Try another desperate denial.

History Channel To Portray Hannibal Accurately

Sorry, it's not that cut and dried. You chose the understanding you want to believe.

The following example is a silver half shekel from in the Enna hoard and other Sicilian hoards indicating that this coin was struck in Carthage for use in the Sicilian campaign of 213 - 210 BC. Experts disagree on the identity of the portrait; many identifying it as the god Melquarth, others as Hannibal or his father, Hamilcar. The elephant is clearly African.



Here are some more coins depicting Hannibal:


Coin attributed to Hannibal (as Hercules)

Coin attributed to Hannibal


Silver Half-Shekel said to represent Hannibal c.220 BC


Carthaginian shekel from the time of Hannibal (ca221-201BC)

Actually it is that cut and dried. Those coins are not of Hannibal. People can claim they are but the proof is sitting the British museum and shows a Black man.

How is that coin any more relevant than the others? Even the author of your article admits there is no proof the coin depicts Hannibal.

Its more relevant for a couple of reasons. The first being that there is a Black person on the coin. The second being that its in the British museum ID'd as Hannibal.

 

[Asclepias]

Kudos to the History Channel for accurately portraying Hannibal as who he really was. A Black African.

Who says he was a black African? The Carthaginians were originally from Phoenicia. They were Semitic.

I did. The History Channel did. Archealogical evidence does. The bible does and so does science. The Phoenicians are descended from Canaan who's father is Ham. Sorry but they Hamitic not Semitic.

The Canaanites were Semitic according to historians. Who cares what the History Channel says? They have shows about crab boats and naked survival trips. That's real serious history, isn't it?

Nothing in the Bible indicates the Canaanites were black. According to the Table of Nations in Genesis 10 (verses 15-19), Canaan was the ancestor of the tribes who originally occupied the ancient Land of Canaan: all the territory from Sidon or Hamath in the north to Gaza in the southwest and Lasha in the southeast. This territory is roughly the areas of modern day Israel, Palestine, Lebanon, westernJordan, and western Syria. Historians say the people living in this area were Semites, just like the Israelites.

Science doesn't say a thing about Hannibal's ethnicity. The term "Hamitic" is meaningless in historical or anthropological terms.

The Canaanites are not Semitic according to anyone. I think you are getting confused because they spoke a Semitic langauge.

The bible shows the Canaanites were Black on many occasions The first being that Ham is the father of Canaan. If you know your bible Ham is father of all Blacks that populated what we now call the African continent and parts ot the middle east.

"The Nations Descending from Ham:
First on the list, as being the darkest, is Cush or Ethiopia (Genesis 10:6), after which comes Mitsrayim, or Egypt, then PuT or Libyia, and Canaan last. The sons or descendants of each of these are then taken in turn, and it is noteworthy that some of them, like the Ethiopians and the Canaanites, spoke Semitic, and not Hamitic, languages"

The Egyptians weren't black, and neither were the Libyans. Ethiopians are black now, but who knows what their ethnicity was 3000 years ago. What the Egyptians called "Ethiopia" doesn't even coincide with the borders of modern Ethiopia. According to archaeologists and historians the people living in the area of Israel, Lebanon, Jordan and Syria at the time were Semitic. There is no evidence that they were black. Otherwise, why isn't there a trace of their black genes in modern populations?

Ham | Free online library at BiblicalTraining.org
The youngest son of Noah, born probably about ninety-six years before the Flood, and one of the eight persons to live through the Flood. He became the progenitor of the dark races—not the Blacks, but the Egyptians, Ethiopians, Libyans, and Canaanites (Gen.10.6-Gen.10.20).

Yes the Egyptians and Libyans were Black. Please provide some proof they were not. Ethiopia is where the eldest remains of homo sapiens has been found and we know for a fact that white people didnt appear until 7k years ago. Yes there is scientific evidence these people were Black. Any course in genetics of humans should educate you on that point. The mutation for light skin should let you know they were Black for thousands of years prior to whites appearing. You cant get Black people from white people.

 

[bripat9643]

Thats the Punic god Melqart. Someone already got busted trying to use that one. Try another desperate denial.

History Channel To Portray Hannibal Accurately

Sorry, it's not that cut and dried. You chose the understanding you want to believe.

The following example is a silver half shekel from in the Enna hoard and other Sicilian hoards indicating that this coin was struck in Carthage for use in the Sicilian campaign of 213 - 210 BC. Experts disagree on the identity of the portrait; many identifying it as the god Melquarth, others as Hannibal or his father, Hamilcar. The elephant is clearly African.



Here are some more coins depicting Hannibal:


Coin attributed to Hannibal (as Hercules)

Coin attributed to Hannibal


Silver Half-Shekel said to represent Hannibal c.220 BC


Carthaginian shekel from the time of Hannibal (ca221-201BC)

Actually it is that cut and dried. Those coins are not of Hannibal. People can claim they are but the proof is sitting the British museum and shows a Black man.

How is that coin any more relevant than the others? Even the author of your article admits there is no proof the coin depicts Hannibal.

Its more relevant for a couple of reasons. The first being that there is a Black person on the coin. The second being that its in the British museum ID'd as Hannibal.

"ID'd" by whom? The persons on the other coins were also all "ID'd" as Hannibal or his father.

 

[Asclepias]

Thats the Punic god Melqart. Someone already got busted trying to use that one. Try another desperate denial.

History Channel To Portray Hannibal Accurately

Sorry, it's not that cut and dried. You chose the understanding you want to believe.

The following example is a silver half shekel from in the Enna hoard and other Sicilian hoards indicating that this coin was struck in Carthage for use in the Sicilian campaign of 213 - 210 BC. Experts disagree on the identity of the portrait; many identifying it as the god Melquarth, others as Hannibal or his father, Hamilcar. The elephant is clearly African.



Here are some more coins depicting Hannibal:


Coin attributed to Hannibal (as Hercules)

Coin attributed to Hannibal


Silver Half-Shekel said to represent Hannibal c.220 BC


Carthaginian shekel from the time of Hannibal (ca221-201BC)

Actually it is that cut and dried. Those coins are not of Hannibal. People can claim they are but the proof is sitting the British museum and shows a Black man.

How is that coin any more relevant than the others? Even the author of your article admits there is no proof the coin depicts Hannibal.

Its more relevant for a couple of reasons. The first being that there is a Black person on the coin. The second being that its in the British museum ID'd as Hannibal.

"ID'd" by whom? The persons on the other coins were also all "ID'd" as Hannibal or his father.

The British museum. No the British museum didnt ID the other people as Hannibal. They ID'd those coins as the god Merqal.

 

[bripat9643]

Who says he was a black African? The Carthaginians were originally from Phoenicia. They were Semitic.

I did. The History Channel did. Archealogical evidence does. The bible does and so does science. The Phoenicians are descended from Canaan who's father is Ham. Sorry but they Hamitic not Semitic.

The Canaanites were Semitic according to historians. Who cares what the History Channel says? They have shows about crab boats and naked survival trips. That's real serious history, isn't it?

Nothing in the Bible indicates the Canaanites were black. According to the Table of Nations in Genesis 10 (verses 15-19), Canaan was the ancestor of the tribes who originally occupied the ancient Land of Canaan: all the territory from Sidon or Hamath in the north to Gaza in the southwest and Lasha in the southeast. This territory is roughly the areas of modern day Israel, Palestine, Lebanon, westernJordan, and western Syria. Historians say the people living in this area were Semites, just like the Israelites.

Science doesn't say a thing about Hannibal's ethnicity. The term "Hamitic" is meaningless in historical or anthropological terms.

The Canaanites are not Semitic according to anyone. I think you are getting confused because they spoke a Semitic langauge.

The bible shows the Canaanites were Black on many occasions The first being that Ham is the father of Canaan. If you know your bible Ham is father of all Blacks that populated what we now call the African continent and parts ot the middle east.

"The Nations Descending from Ham:
First on the list, as being the darkest, is Cush or Ethiopia (Genesis 10:6), after which comes Mitsrayim, or Egypt, then PuT or Libyia, and Canaan last. The sons or descendants of each of these are then taken in turn, and it is noteworthy that some of them, like the Ethiopians and the Canaanites, spoke Semitic, and not Hamitic, languages"

The Egyptians weren't black, and neither were the Libyans. Ethiopians are black now, but who knows what their ethnicity was 3000 years ago. What the Egyptians called "Ethiopia" doesn't even coincide with the borders of modern Ethiopia. According to archaeologists and historians the people living in the area of Israel, Lebanon, Jordan and Syria at the time were Semitic. There is no evidence that they were black. Otherwise, why isn't there a trace of their black genes in modern populations?

Ham | Free online library at BiblicalTraining.org
The youngest son of Noah, born probably about ninety-six years before the Flood, and one of the eight persons to live through the Flood. He became the progenitor of the dark races—not the Blacks, but the Egyptians, Ethiopians, Libyans, and Canaanites (Gen.10.6-Gen.10.20).

Yes the Egyptians and Libyans were Black. Please provide some proof they were not. Ethiopia is where the eldest remains of homo sapiens has been found and we know for a fact that white people didnt appear until 7k years ago.

The Egyptians were not black. Do these people look black to you?

 

[bripat9643]

Sorry, it's not that cut and dried. You chose the understanding you want to believe.

The following example is a silver half shekel from in the Enna hoard and other Sicilian hoards indicating that this coin was struck in Carthage for use in the Sicilian campaign of 213 - 210 BC. Experts disagree on the identity of the portrait; many identifying it as the god Melquarth, others as Hannibal or his father, Hamilcar. The elephant is clearly African.



Here are some more coins depicting Hannibal:


Coin attributed to Hannibal (as Hercules)

Coin attributed to Hannibal


Silver Half-Shekel said to represent Hannibal c.220 BC


Carthaginian shekel from the time of Hannibal (ca221-201BC)

Actually it is that cut and dried. Those coins are not of Hannibal. People can claim they are but the proof is sitting the British museum and shows a Black man.

How is that coin any more relevant than the others? Even the author of your article admits there is no proof the coin depicts Hannibal.

Its more relevant for a couple of reasons. The first being that there is a Black person on the coin. The second being that its in the British museum ID'd as Hannibal.

"ID'd" by whom? The persons on the other coins were also all "ID'd" as Hannibal or his father.

The British museum. No the British museum didnt ID the other people as Hannibal. They ID'd those coins as the god Merqal.

What a douche bag. Other experts identified the persons on the other coins as Hannibal.

 

[Asclepias]

I did. The History Channel did. Archealogical evidence does. The bible does and so does science. The Phoenicians are descended from Canaan who's father is Ham. Sorry but they Hamitic not Semitic.

The Canaanites were Semitic according to historians. Who cares what the History Channel says? They have shows about crab boats and naked survival trips. That's real serious history, isn't it?

Nothing in the Bible indicates the Canaanites were black. According to the Table of Nations in Genesis 10 (verses 15-19), Canaan was the ancestor of the tribes who originally occupied the ancient Land of Canaan: all the territory from Sidon or Hamath in the north to Gaza in the southwest and Lasha in the southeast. This territory is roughly the areas of modern day Israel, Palestine, Lebanon, westernJordan, and western Syria. Historians say the people living in this area were Semites, just like the Israelites.

Science doesn't say a thing about Hannibal's ethnicity. The term "Hamitic" is meaningless in historical or anthropological terms.

The Canaanites are not Semitic according to anyone. I think you are getting confused because they spoke a Semitic langauge.

The bible shows the Canaanites were Black on many occasions The first being that Ham is the father of Canaan. If you know your bible Ham is father of all Blacks that populated what we now call the African continent and parts ot the middle east.

"The Nations Descending from Ham:
First on the list, as being the darkest, is Cush or Ethiopia (Genesis 10:6), after which comes Mitsrayim, or Egypt, then PuT or Libyia, and Canaan last. The sons or descendants of each of these are then taken in turn, and it is noteworthy that some of them, like the Ethiopians and the Canaanites, spoke Semitic, and not Hamitic, languages"

The Egyptians weren't black, and neither were the Libyans. Ethiopians are black now, but who knows what their ethnicity was 3000 years ago. What the Egyptians called "Ethiopia" doesn't even coincide with the borders of modern Ethiopia. According to archaeologists and historians the people living in the area of Israel, Lebanon, Jordan and Syria at the time were Semitic. There is no evidence that they were black. Otherwise, why isn't there a trace of their black genes in modern populations?

Ham | Free online library at BiblicalTraining.org
The youngest son of Noah, born probably about ninety-six years before the Flood, and one of the eight persons to live through the Flood. He became the progenitor of the dark races—not the Blacks, but the Egyptians, Ethiopians, Libyans, and Canaanites (Gen.10.6-Gen.10.20).

Yes the Egyptians and Libyans were Black. Please provide some proof they were not. Ethiopia is where the eldest remains of homo sapiens has been found and we know for a fact that white people didnt appear until 7k years ago.

The Egyptians were not black. Do these people look black to you?

Yes they look Black to me even after some of them have been altered.

 

[Asclepias]

Actually it is that cut and dried. Those coins are not of Hannibal. People can claim they are but the proof is sitting the British museum and shows a Black man.

How is that coin any more relevant than the others? Even the author of your article admits there is no proof the coin depicts Hannibal.

Its more relevant for a couple of reasons. The first being that there is a Black person on the coin. The second being that its in the British museum ID'd as Hannibal.

"ID'd" by whom? The persons on the other coins were also all "ID'd" as Hannibal or his father.

The British museum. No the British museum didnt ID the other people as Hannibal. They ID'd those coins as the god Merqal.

What a douche bag. Other experts identified the persons on the other coins as Hannibal.

Give me a credible quote from a credible source to prove it.

 

[bripat9643]

The Canaanites were Semitic according to historians. Who cares what the History Channel says? They have shows about crab boats and naked survival trips. That's real serious history, isn't it?

Nothing in the Bible indicates the Canaanites were black. According to the Table of Nations in Genesis 10 (verses 15-19), Canaan was the ancestor of the tribes who originally occupied the ancient Land of Canaan: all the territory from Sidon or Hamath in the north to Gaza in the southwest and Lasha in the southeast. This territory is roughly the areas of modern day Israel, Palestine, Lebanon, westernJordan, and western Syria. Historians say the people living in this area were Semites, just like the Israelites.

Science doesn't say a thing about Hannibal's ethnicity. The term "Hamitic" is meaningless in historical or anthropological terms.

The Canaanites are not Semitic according to anyone. I think you are getting confused because they spoke a Semitic langauge.

The bible shows the Canaanites were Black on many occasions The first being that Ham is the father of Canaan. If you know your bible Ham is father of all Blacks that populated what we now call the African continent and parts ot the middle east.

"The Nations Descending from Ham:
First on the list, as being the darkest, is Cush or Ethiopia (Genesis 10:6), after which comes Mitsrayim, or Egypt, then PuT or Libyia, and Canaan last. The sons or descendants of each of these are then taken in turn, and it is noteworthy that some of them, like the Ethiopians and the Canaanites, spoke Semitic, and not Hamitic, languages"

The Egyptians weren't black, and neither were the Libyans. Ethiopians are black now, but who knows what their ethnicity was 3000 years ago. What the Egyptians called "Ethiopia" doesn't even coincide with the borders of modern Ethiopia. According to archaeologists and historians the people living in the area of Israel, Lebanon, Jordan and Syria at the time were Semitic. There is no evidence that they were black. Otherwise, why isn't there a trace of their black genes in modern populations?

Ham | Free online library at BiblicalTraining.org
The youngest son of Noah, born probably about ninety-six years before the Flood, and one of the eight persons to live through the Flood. He became the progenitor of the dark races—not the Blacks, but the Egyptians, Ethiopians, Libyans, and Canaanites (Gen.10.6-Gen.10.20).

Yes the Egyptians and Libyans were Black. Please provide some proof they were not. Ethiopia is where the eldest remains of homo sapiens has been found and we know for a fact that white people didnt appear until 7k years ago.

The Egyptians were not black. Do these people look black to you?

Yes they look Black to me even after some of them have been altered.

They haven't been altered and they don't look a bit black. The statue of Nefertiti, in particular, shows none of the classic features of blacks. She doesn't have a flat nose. She doesn't have thick lips, she doesn't have frizzy hair and she doesn't have dark skin, so how does she look black?