https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_Spock

http://sequart.org/magazine/53115/bill-mauldin-cartoons-captured-the-truth-of-wwii/

https://twitter.com/HistoryTime_/status/1124568726706249728

our last "proper" Prime Minister

Atleast thatcher had them ladyballs

Aint cucking the iron lady

@Capitán Alatriste My point was, that during the Roman era, the people of North Africa were closer to the North side of the Mediterranean and more intertwined than they are today.

There's been a huge divergence in the last 1800 years after the fall of Rome and the spread of Islam.

So today's North African populations are not a great representation of historical populations

The North African population of today is mostly Arab, with the exception of Morocco and Algeria where they are berbers

i.e. historical Egypt was more Greek in the past than Arab like today

In Egypt, the rulers were Ptolemaic, however most of the peasantry were still native North Africans

Any way you put it, there were very few to no sub-Saharan Africans in Roman auxiliaries

ww2 US Army sled dog in Alaska

Very güd boi

Likely rather the opposite. That is to say the Ancient Greek were closer to the Mediterraneans they inherited civilization from. This seems clear from the timeline (civilization starting in river valleys in thee ME and NA, eventually moving to the ancient Minoans and finally Greece a couple thousand years in). The paleogenetics concurs although there is admixture along the way.....

Well your both wrong. They have found Roman forts deep into north africa

Still doesn't mean there's black Germans lol

Well of course not

I was just noting that the misnomer that the Romans kept relatively close to the shore is a falsity.

Oh, no. That wasn't my point lol

Someone earlier said that blacks had always been in Germany, and there's no native Germans.

@Fitzydog why do you think it's called `schwarzwald` ?

because of the niggers that lived there

<:pepe_smug:560207654207750154>

<:think_madpepe:378717098630971395>

@Goblin_Slayer_Floki

Yes they have found Roman forts in Africa. *How old were those forts?* What I am trying to get across is a sense of scale. In Sumer starting in 4100BC, in Egypt about 3000. We don't get to the *Greek Dark Ages* until 1200BC. Again for scale the Olmec had already happened at this point (1500BC) n the other side of the planet without other Med cultures to learn from. The city of Rome was founded in 800BC. So yess there are Roman forts in Africa. There are *American* forts in Aafrica too.......

So statements like "the Egyptians were more Greek" is kind of like telling your grandfather that he inherited your son's eyes......

https://twitter.com/Qafzeh/status/1125001045082427392

<:think_madpepe:378717098630971395>

That's a black man

he looks so kind

i love him

A time where you could drag a broad by the hair from the enemy cave into your own without having to listen to her bitch for the rest of your life

Inventig language was a mistake

@Jym that was a moronic take.

I was talking about the Roman empire. Not whatever bs revisionism insanity your after.

Oh btw China predates sumar. So get fucked.

So by your logic. Everyone is chinese.

I have completely lost track of this conversation

Yea it was stupid

By the little I gleamed just more of the we quiz kangz revisionism

@Goblin_Slayer_Floki

It's not revisionism to say the the historical record follows the rules of linear time chief.

It is when you invent new things that never happened and ignore other data champ.

Because per your "linear time" China was first. So everyone was chinese?

China was too distant to affect Med civilization. As were the Olmec. I kind of assumed everyone knew basic geography, my bad.....

Acktwually... Chinese silver imports in exchange for silk exports did affect the Mediterranean civilisation