Is this accurate? Was half of England's population black

>>3302695
Nope.

>>3302695
>Jesus
>Black
Why are nords like this? How many more years must the Med people suffer?

File: 1408284595004.jpg (9KB, 261x217px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 261x217px

>>3302695
I fucking hate these smug lefties who take afrocentrist nonsense as facts.

Pretty depressing desu white people are being erased from history to make their erasure from Europe more easier to accept

>>3302695
>half
That's obviously an exaggeration but it's true that black characters are often left in the background.

>>3302695
Half of England? No.

Half of London? Yeah.

>>3302695
No, three fourths of British population were black back then.

what show is this

>>3302695
Nope. There are thousands of photos from 19th century England and you'd be very hard pressed to find any that include black people. Jesus wasn't black either.

>>3302956
Dr Who

>>3302956
Doctor Who

Low budget British show that stopped being good long ago and just became SJW bullshit

>>3302695
No. It's the BBC and their diversity requirements.

>>3302695
I enjoy the lack of subtlety

File: pol buys a car.png (802KB, 993x534px) Image search: [Google]

802KB, 993x534px

>>3302695
>that episode

>the doctor won't even do physical harm to the daleks if he can avoid it
>but he will punch a man who says mean words to negroids

>>3302695
>is doctor who accurate
What do you think? The show's gotten fucking terrible because Capaldi is cleary a terrible fit for the role, but don't pretend as if anyone in Britain is actually watching for historical accuracy.

>>3302695
No.

>>3302695
So are you telling me that Doctor Who became a low-quality SJW propaganda? Good that I stopped watching it after Matt Smith left...

File: Dr.-Who.gif (448KB, 500x275px) Image search: [Google]

448KB, 500x275px

>>3302695
What the fuck has happened to my precious Doctor Who? I remember staying late nights as a kid just to see single episodes of that show. It was one of main things that kicked up my history interest.

And now BBC decides to kill off historical accuracy in the name of political correctness. And if that's not enough, it openly lies to our faces, that this is the truth, it tries to convince viewer to a fat lie, and why? Becasue this is what current political agenda tries to push.

I'd wish BBC to suck a bunch of dicks, but these fuckers would probably enjoy it

>>3302695
I don't like /pol/ but I also don't like this kind of historical revisionism.

File: BBC.jpg (19KB, 361x400px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 361x400px

No. This is just cultural imperialism and appropriation.

>>3303352

nice pic. gonna use that as a stencil tonight.

>>3302695
>>>/tv/

>>3303050
Big Black Cock ?

>Boo hoo hoo Dr Who isn't historically accurate and has poorly written episodes.

No shit a tv series that started in an era of black and white tv is going to have shitty episodes.

Also, why the hell are people demanding historical accuracy from a show that had William Shakespeare saving the Earth by quoting Harry Potter?

How do people lie like this so freely?

Really, it's factually bankrupt of them, what are they doing?

>>3303442

I suppose it's less that, than the fact that this scene goes beyond and claims in its own words that Britain was racially diverse and full of black people at the time, did you even open the webm? Or maybe you're just a stupid foreigner that can't glean meaning from a sentence.

>>3303442
we demand it because we pay for it

File: 1503100032442.gif (2MB, 448x252px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 448x252px

>>3302695
What the fuck

>>3303378
Not my OC, but I'm glad you like it.

>>3303454
The show has also said that Queen Victoria was also saved from a freaking alien werewolf. Never planned to take anything it says about history to be accurate.

>>3303337
why mention /pol/?
historic revisionism is never a good thing

We're da Brits nao whitey

>>3303477

in the realm of science fiction you can have things like that, however, it has a backdrop of reality to respect as well, it may well be alternate universe who if it's going to make claims about the make up of the populace that are daft lunacy

Several seasons ago there were some black soldiers in medieval England. It's idiotic and weird, the historical episodes are like one-third of all the episodes, is it really that hard for the producers to have white people in them?

>>3303442

Are you retarded? Its literally makes the claim that they are presenting real history and that other sources have whitewashed history.

It is CLEARLY intentional propaganda of a political agenda, paid for with taxpayer money.

>>3303502
>the fictional show tells its viewers that it is historical and that the historical sources are fictional
now THIS is shilling!

>>3303488
When in the hell has Dr Who had respect for reality? I remember an alien race that was literally evolved to carry it's brains in their hands. The whole godamn show is looney to all hell.

No. At least 7/10th of the population during Regency was black or directly descended from Christ.

>>3302722
Jesus was obviously a nazzeriean. At was most probably olive. It's incredibly unlikely he was black.

>>3303515

get thee gone BBC

>>3303519
>7/10th of the population during Regency was black or directly descended from Christ.
that is redundant you ignorant nazi

>>3303502
Not as retarded as the anon who thinks that the show about a nutter with a time machine who abducts people to go on adventures is something that people would use as a source for learning history.

File: 1471972613699.png (440KB, 633x758px) Image search: [Google]

440KB, 633x758px

>>3302695
>we have to pay taxes on this shit

>>3302695
Why black? Why couldn't they say "little less white"? What's this obsession with black people that anglos love to import?

>>3303511
Stop misusing words, Becky.

>>3303528
And definitely not as retarded as that anon who thinks kids don't pick up on this stuff, and that it 100% wasn't included in it for that reason.

>>3303528

you're the only prat to make the claim that anyone would use it as a source of learning from history

I would love to glass you

>>3303544
t. shill

>>3303546
A kid picks up a lot of stupid shit that thwy learn is now true as they grow older. We got entire holidays dedicated to telling kids that a rabbit leaves them eggs to find and an old guy breaks into their house to leave toys behind.

>>3303548
Go choke on your Yorkshire pudding, Nigel.

>>3303567
Not true*

>>3303567
And a lot of kids don't ever learn better, hence why you've got people believing in le dark ages and what not.

But I did like your reddit snark, you'll go far

>>3303567
>We got entire holidays dedicated to telling kids that a rabbit leaves them eggs to find and an old guy breaks into their house to leave toys behind.
right but what is the reason we tell children those stories? because they are a tradition and they are fun. now can you tell me why the bbc is telling children that the regency was black and history is a whitewash?

>>3303576
And we call those people dipshits, we have had them for generations. We still got holdovers from when people thought the Earth was flat. Only difference now is that they got a new flavor of shit to eat now.

>>3303586
Because the BBC has poor hiring practices and currently has talentless hacks on staff.

>>3303590
ok but why do the talentless hacks that the bbc employs want to tell children these things?

>>3303588
Yes, but stuff like a flat earth and other such retarded conspiracies aren't a hot button topic. People are now whining that Cleopatra has been played by white people instead of blacks, and you can't speak against it without being branded racist

>>3302722
>Anglos
>Nords
They're your Semitic kin, Abdul.

File: Happy-Smiling-Girl.jpg (251KB, 849x565px) Image search: [Google]

251KB, 849x565px

>>3303337
Imagine the western world being so engulfed in propaganda that before saying it is too much you also have to post a disclaimer stating you're not a neo nazi.

>>3303549
Fat

>>3303599
The ACLU removed a post with an image of a white baby with an American flag because people whined that it was racist.

Welcome to hell.

>>3303599
>>3303482
Because even though /pol/ is shit I can still find some common ground with them.

>>3303442

You are a cͬoͤoͭlͣgͬuͩy

File: 1498262341706.jpg (132KB, 1024x789px) Image search: [Google]

132KB, 1024x789px

>Tfw at some past point in my life I would have laughed believing it's just absurd humour and moved on.
The cynicism is killing me bros.

>>3303592
Because morons when given a modicum of power or a platform to be heard will say moronic things.

>>3303593
People will whine about literally anything, the internet just gives it the illusion of importance because some popular website had one of those whiners writing a faggy article about it.

>>3302695
Should be london.webm

>>3303615
/pol/ is bad because they don't have any rigor or honesty and 90% of content are outright shitposts, but I appreciate that they care about topics academia and the media are refusing to even touch.

Why haven't you gotten rid of the BBC already in the UK? It isn't even needed in the 21st century

>>3303446
Not half. But there were more black people than they show in movies and television.

>>3303032
>the doctor won't even do physical harm to the daleks if he can avoid it
what show have you been watching

>>3302695
Pathetic. They're literally trying to rewrite history and are succeeding for the most part.

>>3303647
Not exactly : http://www.historytoday.com/paul-edwards/black-personalities-georgian-england

>>3303643
Dr is kinda schitzo about that sort of thing, some episodes he is this pacifist type of guy who will not hurt a fly. Other episodes he will throw an alium into a collapsing galaxy so she will live forever in agony.

>>3303647
They aren't succeeding. What do you think motivates all those right wing rallies now a days? People are tired, and the backlash is so intense they're going to the deep end

>>3303641

oh yes, excuse me, all of history is a whitewash conspiracy and such

why is /his/ so ahistoric and racist?

>>3303660
You just love punching hornets nests, don't you?

[spoiler]So do I[/spoiler]

>>3303672
Well sheeit, there goes the surprise.

>>3303672

fear not, I won't be replying to his ignorant bait comment

>>3303654
He's never been strictly one or the other. Yes, he abhors violence, and views it as a last resort, but part of the reason he hates it so much is because he knows and fears what he's capable of. It's a bit more complex than "kinda schitzo."

>>3303658
Minority. Most children and a large part of the millennials do believe that blacks took an active part in European history.

>>3303678
Do it, it's funny to me, DANCE MONKEY!

why are "certain" people so triggered by this fact? is it because it shatters their meme about minorities being the blame for everything?

>>3303696
>Jesus was black
>fact

>>3303696
>(((fact)))

>>3303696
They got egos and persecution complexes that are inflated to high heaven. So when someone isn't kissing the ground that white people walk on they think it is an act of genocide.

File: nigel-farage_3160716c.jpg (19KB, 460x287px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 460x287px

>>3303703
>Oooga Booga muhdik we wuz English n sheeit

Go be 52% somewhere else.

>>3303659
Not a conspiracy. Since white people overall make the entertainment produced and are still overall the acting population, they understandably end up casting white people in historical roles where black people would be. Also, historical education tends to be hilariously basic. There were black people in history, but they're never mentioned, so we never know they're there. There's mentions of black people in Celtic stories. Were they everywhere in London? No. But they were around, in moderate numbers.

It goes the other way, too. Did you know that the Byzantine empereor had an elite set of Viking guards? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Varangian_Guard.

In the context of this ep in the header, this is the Great Frost Fair, so all the classes and races who would normally not mingle are mixing. That's why there is so many black people at that moment.

>>3303689
DANCE WATER, DANCE!

>>3303698
Jesus wasn't black...but he was blacker (as in, darker-skinned) than he's often depicted.

>>3303724

You're a nut.

>>3303711
See what I mean? Anon is also acting as if he knows everything he needs to about me from one gay ass post I made.

>>3303730
What did you disagree with about my points? I can probably provide sources, if you wish.

>>3303643
Through the Keyhole, why?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OA611ZHTsYQ

>>3303724
>There's mentions of black people in Celtic stories
Only they didn't mean black as in negroid, they meant black as in pitch fucking black.

Lemme guess, these black folks are all supernatural in some way

>>3303724
>There were black people in history, but they're never mentioned
They're mentioned constantly and often exaggerated.

>>3303747
He's probably referring to macritchie or some other weird folklorist hogwash like that. Afronuts love him for some reason.

File: 1400930219265.gif (1MB, 160x192px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 160x192px

>>3303352
>BBC

Like poetry.

WE WUZ ENGLISHMEN N SHEEEIT

>>3303752
>mentioned constantly
Only in very recent years.

>exaggerated
How do you know historical records don't actually under-represent the presence of black people? You can read all the first-hand accounts you like, nobody can actually know the truth of things unless they could go back in time. All those books and paintings and documents in general... They didn't make those things free of any bias. Nowadays, there's a lot of focus on a lack of that in documentation of events, but it wasn't like that back then. Given the hatred for black people we see even nowadays, do you honestly think they would've been fairly represented in historical documents throughout history?

Nobody fucking knows what's the truth or not. Half the things we think we know about history could turn out to be untrue, if we ever got our hands on a time machine. Perceptions of history that not only include black people, but do so in abundance... There's nothing out there that inherently proves those views wrong. Just like there's nothing out there that proves it right. The same applies to versions of history that are unequivocally white. So why the fuck is the latter accept as fact, but the former is angrily rejected? (Oh, we all know why.)

>>3303789
>historical documents throughout history
Eh, fuck it. Despite the stupid typos, you know what I mean.

>>3303789

Western civilization was founded by pink flamingos, you can't disprove it D:

>>3303789
Because of logic you dumb nigger.

>A sizable population of sub-saharans somehow getting themselves to England in the Medieval Ages

File: Christ Pantocrator.jpg (267KB, 851x1600px) Image search: [Google]

267KB, 851x1600px

>>3303729
No, he probably looked exactly like he's often depicted.

>>3303789
Totally. Also king James was black yo.

>>3303789
>yuh cant kno nuthin xD
Why are you even on the history board?

>>3303352
that hammer and sickle.

George III was black and the real reason the americans rebelled was because they didnt want a black king.

File: lol.jpg (246KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

246KB, 500x500px

>>3303729

>>3303729
Unlikely. Jesus was a Canaanite and as such he was most likely a slightly darker version of European white.

>>3302695
There were tens of thousands of black people in Victorian London a few years later, but nowhere near that proportion and they probably couldn't afford that kind of nice clothing.

>>3303836
Whoops, meant for>>3303813

>>3303051
I liked him better as Malcolm Tucker and the dad from Skins.

>>3303813
He probably looked like this. There's zero difference between a Med and a Middle Easterner.

>>3303833
King George really was black.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EBdk5hDadYE&t=3m

>>3303789
>How do you know historical records don't actually under-represent the presence of black people?
There are thousands of photographs of the 19th and 20th centuries in western Europe with zero (0) black in sight.
3 theories:
_ the blacks were elsewhere each time a picture was taken.
_ the blacks have disapeared from western Europe between the invention of photography and the late 20th century.
_ there was no black in western Europe before late 20th century.

mmh, I wonder which theory is correct.

>>3303747
Upon further research, I think you're correct. I might conflating two seperate things.

On even further research, I was talking about when Irish mythology refers to people as "blue-skinned", which is how black people are referred to today in the Irish language. Specifically, Róimit Rígónmit, who is described in one story as having a 'smooth-blue Ethiopian countenance.' IIn general, where they said "blue", they meant our version of "dark-skinned." And there is the occasional "blue man" in the stories. Not enough to form a group, but still.

>>3303789
Actually, historians have a fair account of much of this stuff. Black people weren't in every street corner, but on a day like the Frost fair, which that Who episode was depicting, it's not farfetched for white people to meet black people.
>>3303752
>mentioned constantly

Really? I disagree. Tell me five prominent black people in Regency England.


>>3303838
The whole episode doesn't have that proportion, I believe.

>>3303836
Yeah...

>>3303837
Hmm..You might be correct.

>>3303876
THAS RITE NIGGUH

File: samaritans praying.jpg (723KB, 3072x2048px) Image search: [Google]

723KB, 3072x2048px

>>3303837
>slightly darker version of European white
So exactly like the picture I posted? Moron.

File: file.png (221KB, 439x400px) Image search: [Google]

221KB, 439x400px

>>3303886
>search for this Róimit Rígónmit with a smooth-blue Ethiopian countenance
>Literally the only (and I mean THE only) result is from a reddit badhistory thread, with no source

>>3303885
>there was no black in western Europe before late 20th century

Now, that's provably untrue.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignatius_Sancho

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olaudah_Equiano

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ottobah_Cugoano

>>3303903
>no source

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Intoxication_of_the_Ulstermen

>"Here before them, to the east, outside," said Crom Deroil, "I saw a band of their rabble. One man in their midst, with a black, pointed thick head of hair, having large, subtle, all-white eyes in his head, and a smooth-blue Ethiopian countenance; a ribbed garment in folds about him; a brazen clasp in his garment, over his breast; a large bronze wand in his hand, and a melodious little bell beside him, which he touches with his wand before the host, so that it gives pleasure and delight to the High-King and to the whole host."

>"Laughable and amusing is the description," said Medb.

>"Laughable is the person whose description it is," said Cu Roi.

>"Who is he?" said Ailill.

>"Not hard to tell," said Cu Roi. "That is the royal fool Roimid, Conchobar's fool. There never was fatigue or sorrow on any man of the Ulstermen that he would heed, if only he saw the royal fool, Roimid."

>people think the m25 shouldn't be converted into a containment wall

Its literally the best option

>>3303886
George IV, Jane Austen, William Blake, John Keats, Henry Addington.

>>3303903
It's a fictional story.

>>3303885
Also, I know you literally didn't think

>>3303932
I can't tell if this is a joke or not. Either way, I was thinking more along the lines of: >>3303927 the names up there. I'd never heard those names before researching them.

>>3303927
>Now, that's provably untrue.
You perfectly know what I meant. exceptions are far from the norm.

>>3303927
hmmm intriguing.

But that does not mean blacks were present in more than a dozen numbers in Ireland.

>>3303952
All nobles were black but the cave dwelling albinos from central Asia invaded with the Huns and ruined everything.

>>3303954
True, I was being flippant, perhaps too flippant. However, I do think that part of the reason you saw so few black people was because they often kept to their own communities.

Was half the population of Georgian England black? No.

Were there no black people in England at all? No.

I think the answer is in between.

>>3303966
I doubt there were more than a few dozen in Celtic Ireland. But they did exist.

Fun fact: One of the knights of the Round Table was a black Moor: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moriaen

>>3303973
That's extremely wrong. The albinos lived under the sea with flying sea dragons.

>>3302731
>Anglos
>White

File: 14.jpg (429KB, 1097x1384px) Image search: [Google]

429KB, 1097x1384px

>>3302695
There's nothing funnier than triggering /pol/ cucks

>>3304014
>stabbing yourself in the back and actively helping revisionists just to lord it over 13 year olds

I wonder, if you knew you were going to turn into this a few years ago, would you have killed yourself?

What are you even doing on a history board?

Months after this fucking show aired we still have e-niggers from /pol/ trying to ghettoize this board by posting screencaps from tumblr tv

File: Olaudah_Equiano.png (180KB, 459x584px) Image search: [Google]

180KB, 459x584px

>>3304018
I just posted a historical image relevant to the topic asked, friend :^)
Why do you seem so triggered ;^)

>>3303952
>Also, I know you literally didn't think

inshallah you are either a very dedicated shitposter trying to act like a redditor or actually mentally mute

>>3302695
How many times must you make this thread before you're satisfied? Find something new to whine about, for fuck's sake.

>>3304127
>when will people who are interested enough in history to visit a history board stop being irritated by historical inaccuracies?

>>3304276

much less inaccuracy, and more the dubious claims made by these characters that has me riled

File: 1501264450545.png (2MB, 800x3857px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 800x3857px

>>3302695

OF COURSE IT WAS YOU FUCKING NAZI

File: 1501088542546.jpg (184KB, 960x720px) Image search: [Google]

184KB, 960x720px

>>3304127

>deliberate lies about history are ok as long as it promotes muh retarded utopian dogshit political views!

File: 1502386197356.jpg (1008KB, 1536x2048px) Image search: [Google]

1008KB, 1536x2048px

>>3304294
>(You)

>>3304298

good job admitting you are only here to shitpost your politics instead of actually discussing history. And you faggots wonder why everyone hates you.

>>3303985
>the reason you saw so few black people was because they often kept to their own communities.

There's no mention of such communities anywhere in Europe for a good reason. In fact the few blacks were so rare they couldn't gather in communities, they were paradoxaly perfectly integrated (even if a bit marginalized, as were giants, midgets etc).

>>3302940
>Half of London? Yeah.
half of one tiny area of London at a stretch

File: Enoch-Powell_2154287b.jpg (23KB, 620x620px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 620x620px

>why didnt you listen to me?

>>3304294
No one is lying about history, it's just a scene from some dumb TV show. You are just being butthurt over a non-issue.

>>3304327

he didn't know the rivers of blood would take the form of historical revision

>>3304330

it is part and parcel of the wider stance of the bbc and those in the liberal bent that our history is some evil white lie

File: 1490238188570.jpg (95KB, 600x540px) Image search: [Google]

95KB, 600x540px

>>3304330

Sure thing leftypol, historical revinonism with the very obvious purpose of promoting a modern day political agenda is totally a non issue for the history board at all. Come to think of it, why does everyone here freak the fuck out over /pol/tards who make holocaust denial threads?

>>3304345
>muh """""/leftypol/"""""
Fucking newfags.

>>3304348

youre not fooling anyone asshole, youre blatant shitpost is extremely transparent

>dude only newfags care about historical revisionist lies on /his/. the board dedicated to the discussion of history!

kill yourself

>>3304345
I hope you realize that Doctor Who is a science-fiction program, not a BBC historical documentary.

File: 1501351439950.png (115KB, 1281x562px) Image search: [Google]

115KB, 1281x562px

>>3304351
>Doctor Who is a science-fiction program,

no shit, but they are presenting this as "the REAL history" anon. Or is part of the plot of that episode that the doctor lied about there being black people all over the place and history being "whitewashed"?

I find it interesting that /his/ will usually call out shitty history in movies and call out blatant revisionist lies, yet when it comes to shit like this, a certain group of people always seems to have an excuse and just starts yelling at everyone else to ignore it.

>>3304350
Im not the guy you were arguing with. I don't even know what you're arguing about. You simply reek of someone who didnt start browsing 4chan until 2014 at the earliest. Feel free to believe im the same guy, it doesnt matter. All that matters is your newfaggotry.

File: 1503368990573.png (345KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

345KB, 640x480px

>>3303789

>You can read all the first-hand accounts you like, nobody can actually know the truth of things unless they could go back in time.
>saying this on a history board

just stop

>>3304356
I'll never understand why leftists are such negrophiliacs.

>>3304366
>Im not the guy you were arguing with.

I never even implied you were. Are you really so stupid and lacking of any actual argument that this petty shit is all you can pull? Keep defending revisionist historical lies while calling other people newfags, youre totally not a leftypol shill at all!

>>3304371
Americans in general. They're obsessed with blacks.

File: 1501871110463.jpg (34KB, 657x527px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 657x527px

>>3303789

>sure I have no proof, but Einstein was black, they just never wrote it down! how do you know anyway unless you were there, huh?!

what in the FUCK is wrong with leftist? Is shilling this black nationalist retardation some epic trolling thing?

File: 147076362983.jpg (57KB, 604x610px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 604x610px

>>3304351
>It's a sci-fi program, so you can't criticise it for bad writing and blackwashing

File: 8652456.jpg.png (218KB, 235x200px) Image search: [Google]

218KB, 235x200px

>>3304372
>he still thinks im the same guy

File: 1502036076576.jpg (273KB, 770x1080px) Image search: [Google]

273KB, 770x1080px

>>3304392

ok, so you literally have no argument at all now and are deciding to shitpost your way out of getting called out. And you wonder why you are universally hated

>>3304410
Lol

>>3304378
But the show is British.

>>3303289
>And now BBC decides to kill off historical accuracy in the name of political correctness.
Yeah, like Charles Dickens fighting ghosts, Queen Victoria founding Torchwood, aliens being behind Vesuvius and a giant bee killing Agatha Christie is historically accurate.
Doctor Who was never meant to be accurate, it was supposed to be entertaining.

>>3304480
>Doctor Who was never meant to be accurate, it was supposed to be entertaining.


>Doctor Who first appeared on BBC TV at 17:16:20 GMT on Saturday, 23 November 1963; this was eighty seconds later than the scheduled programme time, due to the assassination of John F. Kennedy the previous day.[7][8] It was to be a regular weekly programme, each episode 25 minutes of transmission length. Discussions and plans for the programme had been in progress for a year. The head of drama Sydney Newman was mainly responsible for developing the programme, with the first format document for the series being written by Newman along with the head of the script department (later head of serials) Donald Wilson and staff writer C. E. Webber. Writer Anthony Coburn, story editor David Whitaker and initial producer Verity Lambert also heavily contributed to the development of the series.[9][note 1] The programme was originally intended to appeal to a family audience,[10] as an educational programme using time travel as a means to explore scientific ideas and famous moments in history

go fuck yourself faggot

There were about 20000 slaves and ex-slaves and they would likely all be in the same communities in cities like London and Liverpool, so it is possible at a stretch.

File: 1427703429522.jpg (120KB, 720x960px) Image search: [Google]

120KB, 720x960px

>>3304501
>the longest running TV in history hasn't changed at all over more than fifty years

>>3304501
>originally intended
Doctor Who got a reboot in 2006 that focused on more entertainment, Doctor Who's always been sci-fi with a gimmick that allows for historic episodes.

>>3304576

>moving the goalpost after you got BTFO

lol

>>3304583
>BTFO
Doctor who has never been realistic in it's depiction of history, you fucking faggot, you haven't even watched the damn show.

>>3304605
>The programme was originally intended to appeal to a family audience,[10] as an educational programme using time travel as a means to explore scientific ideas and famous moments in history

looks like you lose again virgin lol

>>3304614
epic, post it to reddit as quickly as you can for sick upboats

File: 1498462529302.png (223KB, 375x389px) Image search: [Google]

223KB, 375x389px

>it's another "Wikipedia Warrior has a breakdown and keeps spamming the same shit while trying to convince himself and others that he didn't just lose the argument."
Geh.

File: BBC knight.png (740KB, 861x589px) Image search: [Google]

740KB, 861x589px

I'm surprised this thread is still up, the black medieval knight thread got deleted really fast last time.

I recall reading in a book about Elizabethan science and medicine that there was real quack, a purveyor or ridiculous pseudoscience (like most of medicine back then, tbqh). He had an entourage of black guys follow him around like a sultan or something. This was back in the mid to late 1500s. I wish I could remember his name.

>>3304480
It's not about the plot, the first plan. It is obvious where are the fantasy elements there. The problem starts in the background, because regardless of sci-fi plot, it is supposed to be taken seriously in logical case.
For example
>A story of a talking dog living in Rome, Spain
>A story of laser-boob granny, living with Pigmey tribe from China
>A story of a flying carrot from Soviet Union in 1789

This is so very very clearly an attempt to fuck with people's conceptions of historical Europe. It's CLEARLY a politically-motivated move to put in this show.
Like it or not, it's shit like this that your average pleb gets his ideas from.

Why would anyone here defend it? It's the history board, we should be screeching over the slightest inaccuracy like God intended for this board. There is clearly a political bias haunting this board.

>>3304645
WE
E

>>3304833
They defend it because people they dont like support it.

No one has a problem when we laugh about nordic wewuzzers but mention one thing about blacks, whether it be in egypt or carthage or britain and suddenly everyone gets upset

>>3302955
kek

>>3304628

yeah I get it, you got BTFO like the dumb bitch you are, so now you cry about reddit.

>scifi/fantasy show where they travel through time and to other worlds

>has to be 100% historically accurate, but only in regards to race or else I am extremely triggered

I'm guessing no one here had a problem with any of the other episodes where they went back in time: Van Gough, etc.

Back to /pol/

>>3304645

oh wow, that's a right propa knigga that is

>>3303635
Most of the oregano /pol/acks went to 8/pol/, that's why discussion's a little low-quality here

>>3305112
actually when they say "wow its a bit blacker than the movies show" they are positing that their depiction is more accurate than mainstream shows/tv when it isn't, whats upsetting is how disingenuous this is

>>3305112
No, they are clearly making the claim that THEY are accurately depicting England back then and ACCURATE depictions are "whitewashed." Stop being fucking obtuse.

It's such "we were always at war with eastasia" fucking tone to these things.
Spooky desu.

>>3303528
Imagine being this intellectually dishonest.

>>3305636

I feel the same way, it makes me want to be sure my child reads 1984

>British """people""" pay their sweat, blood, and taxes for this

File: Fig. 6.jpg (12KB, 411x283px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 411x283px

>>3305636

>>3303729
Call an Arab black IRL, see where that gets you.

>>3304287
The black Roman soldier is at least possible, since Rome controlled areas that black people may have lived, and soldiers really did get around.
The others are just disgusting revisionism, though.

>>3304330
TV that British taxes pay for.

>>3305636
I liken it more to the passage where Smith explains how the Party systematically rolls back its role in history. At first they claimed they built the Airplane, then the Steamboat, and so on.

>>3303528
Mass media has a huge effect on popular conception of the past. How many people think the Middle Ages were a stagnant age of ignorant peasants, wading knee deep in their own shit because of TV and Film?

>>3302695
How is a poorfag district of a country's capital representative for the whole country's demographics?

>>3306212

>taxes

>>3306283
>if we call it a license it's not a tax

>>3304298
There's so much wrong things in this pic.

You will also all be shocked to learn that Queen Victoria didn't set up a secret organisation called Torchwood, dedicated to fighting aliens and the supernatural. British taxpayers money was spent on this shit.

>>3306285

>you only pay it in exchange for a completely optional service, but it's still a tax

>>3302695
No but this is
>>>/a/161662563

>>3304276
>>3304294
>pretending it's not one autist making the exact same thread over and over again

>>3304298
Dash is a fucking bottom tier waifu, what a fucking manchild.

This is 1984 Tier rewriting of history.

What the fuck.

>>3303599
I'd rather be called a neo-nazi than a fucking /pol/tard.

File: 1491168449706.jpg (397KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

397KB, 1920x1080px

>>3303738
Not that guy, but you're probably just an asshole if you're gonna shitpost on /his/. People not being okay with historical revisionism is acceptable. I'm one of them. I think the BBC is wrong to shoehorn black people into the history of the British Isles where they obviously weren't involved.

I think the BBC is mildly racist, actually. They claim to have projections of minority inclusion, but all I see is black people. Why are there no asians included? Why no Pakistanis and Indians? Why no Arabs? It's almost lying for them to say they're being inclusive, but refuse to add more than one minority group into the mix.

If you're going to be inclusive, fucking include everyone you twats.

I yearn for a day where people can get their feelings hurt again and have no recourse but to get the fuck over it and grow up. Fuck political correctness. Fuck protectionism. Fuck state nannying. Let me walk down a road that doesn't lead to thought crimes, god damn you.

>>3306306
Jews trying to destroy Europeans.

File: 1447297547650.png (96KB, 277x296px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 277x296px

>>3304053
>Implying that there were no black people in Europe is retarded
Well now, that's an informed opinion. Kudos.
>Turning around and claiming they were everywhere and white people are just whitewashing everything instead of a probably single-digit minority
You just had to go full retard, didn't you?

t. a black American who thinks revisionism in the name of modern boo-hooing about inclusion is wrong on a lot of levels

>>3304330
Except when you allow shit like this to just go without saying a single word, people get misinformed, and then militant about what they think they know. Dumb and uninformed people can't tell the difference between what's true and not, only that they were told something by a credible source. The BBC is not making a disclaimer that there were NO Africans in iron-age Britain and Celtic Britain. Beyond a shadow of a doubt, until the Romans imported people from as far as Egypt and Syria, there were no Africans there at all and never had been. The BBC is not lying, per se, but they are trying to pas black people in iron age Britain as fact. Mix truth and fiction and people just take them both as truth.

>>3304348
>newfags
>implying oldfags can't adopt new hip lingo from the kids
>implying you're not a 2(X)y/o wanting old 4chan back and just having to deal with /pol/ and reddit being a thing here.

Dude, it's okay. Not everyone is a newfag. Some people are just people.

>>3304645
Let's just make George Washington black in the next BBC documentary about the American Revolution. There's already a black guy named George Washington Carver! There's basically already a black George Washington. It wouldn't even matter.

>>3306426
Or better yet, make a movie set in Mali or the Zulu Kingdom (would actually be pretty intersting desu) but make half the actors white for no reason and, when blacks get rightfully pissed off, claim history has been 'blackwashed'. Progressivism really is a mental illness.

>>3306434
You are directly referencing the new Troy series and that still pisses me off.

>B-But it's a reimagining of the conflict! We can do what we want!
Then why are there no Asians/Indians/Arabs/Literally anyone else besides Black people? Do you not know of any other minority actors to play important roles?
>Shut up! You're just racist! You hate black people!
I want fairness and equality. If you're going to re-imagine the Trojan war, actually re-imagine it. Don't just use one minority and then bitch when you get called out on it.

WE HAVE ALWAYS BEEN AT PEACE WITH EASTASIA

File: 1491798777656.gif (2MB, 540x501px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 540x501px

>>3306451
The thing I like about that Troy show is that there are no Black Women in it. All the women are white. It's like something you'd see on /tv/ as a joke.
Also, you're right, I went through the cast on IMDB, and there don't seem to be any Middle Easterns or Indians, whom I'd assume out number Blacks in the UK.

>>3306470
And the BBC will still deny everything about inequality because they're firm supporters of hiring minorities/disabled people/LGBTQ people, and literally anything that isn't a WASP. It's just disappointing. They're clearly just aimed at black people and it makes me upset that they're so dishonest about it and start shouting that any opposition is trying to incite a race war or is inherently a nazi or white supremacist.

>>3306224
This. Just look how Soviet troops started being perceived after Enemy at the Gates.

File: 1432704864706.jpg (50KB, 655x269px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 655x269px

>>3306470
Jihadis even outnumber the blacks in Britain. It's all just a fucking sham, anyhow.

>>3306474
Probably because if you're straight pissed, you might mistake one of the browns for a white, and not notice that there's diversity.
Hollywood is also guilty of this, they pander to the Black audience, while neglecting peoples like Hispanics who largely outnumber them.

It makes a bit of sense here in the US, since our legacy of Black Slavery is so entrenched and domestic. Blacks thusly have the largest sympathy quotient to most Whites.

>>3302729
Speaking as a smug leftist: me too!

>>3302967
Pretty much this. I'm waiting to see what Chibnall's run is like but knowing the BBC I'm not holding my breath. I just want my shitty autistic kids show back.

>>3302695
lmao this triggers /pol/. i hope that blackwashing will spread even further, the reactions and tears sustain me.

>>3302695
We wuz empires 'n shieet

>>3304614
>originally
>ORIGINALLY

I bet you think the Democrats of today and the Democrats of Lincoln's era are identical, eh? /his/ is a place to study the past, not stay in it, moron.

File: 1498794803733.jpg (69KB, 306x331px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 306x331px

>>3306516
*constituency shifts further right*
>Haha, at least Doctor Who got BLACKED, right?
>Take that, /pol/!

>>3306296
How accurate is The Phantom Blood's depiction of Victorian England?

>>3303635
>/pol/ is bad because they don't have any rigor or honesty and 90% of content are outright shitposts
Tbh, when it comes to /pol/, 1/3 of what they say is true(yes, political corectness has become an insane satire of itself, and must be stopped, and there is a disproportionate amount of jews in high places doing shady shit), 1/3 is exaggerating to get an emotional response(think how they added some guy getting beat at some random unrelated protest, and presented it as "leftists and blacks are openly beating people in the street for being white" in their "gates wide open" vid and how everyone is a jew), and 1/3 are drug-addled Nation of Islam tier conspiracy rants, massive we wuzzery, and fake studies.

WE
WUZ
JEZUS

>>3306202
>The black Roman soldier is at least possible
It's actually fact.
There is some random english village where most of the population is descended from some black centurion that was stationed there 2000 years ago.

It's still insanely rare.

File: britbong_daily_struggle.png (545KB, 600x908px) Image search: [Google]

545KB, 600x908px

>>3302695

>>3306202
the black roman soldier is possible but still improbable, an educational video showing the family life in Roman Britain just happening to show the least common scenario clearly has a disingenuous political intent

the other examples were just the cherry on top

Can /his/ please stop trying to be so contrarian out of butthurt for /pol/ that you dogmatically defend blatant SJW propaganda?

>>3306689
I don't know what thread you're reading but people have been pretty reasonable

>>3306607
I don't think it's really even possible for a large movement to be wrong on every count.
But if you ask literally anyone who is even moderately involved in politics they'll tell you that the other guys have no arguments or legitimate concerns at all, that all the sources confirm their position, and that their side wins every argument. Every fucking side says this and it's a cancer on the world, i look at some people's twitter feeds and it's like some sort of infection has taken over their mind, they can barely put politics down for even one second.
I don't know what i'm saying but the human mind is fucking scary.

>>3306749
>I don't know what i'm saying but the human mind is fucking scary.
The biggest mystery for The Man is The Man himself.


God I feel intelligent today.

How can you acknowledge historical racism if you don't acknowledge that it existed?

>HURR FUCKING DURR

>>3306769
How can you acknowledge historical racism by blatantly lying?

Racism is a social construct

>>3304480
Except black people being presented as making up a huge percentage of Victorian England was presented as literal fact whereas all of those weren't

>>3306804

>literal fact
>time travelling phonebox

>>3306804

Where? Where does it say "these background characters are 100% accurate representatives of 19th century Britain. Please ignore all the othervstuff"?

>>3306806
You have to be trolling

>>3306806
>>3306813
The claim is made by the context of the scene. Dr Who having wacky time travelling powers and ahistorical things are claims only made within the internal context of the show. As in those things only exist within the show itself. But the portrayal of Victorian England as majority black had no bearing to the story. Unlike other scenarios the show has presented such as 'what if the eruption of Vesuvius was caused by aliens' or 'what if Van Gough came to the future' this one was simply presented and then the episode moved on. It wasn't presented as a fantastical scenario but instead as one which was accurate to the period in which the episode took place. It was clearly an attempted subversion of history in an attempt to alter people's perceptions of the ethnic makeup of 19th century England. I really don't understand how you don't understand this.

>>3306859
Excellent post

>>3306806
>Implying mainstream media have no influence in educating about history
>Braveheart
>Till today people will associate blue tattoo on face with fucking Scots
>Shooting into your own ranks with archers

>Enemy at the gates
>Soviet army was severely under-equipped
>human wave tactics
Good no one believes in above things, right? Because those movies were just work of fiction, right?

>>3306883

Those things were specific plotpoints, not random background extras.

>>3306891
Are you serious? I just checked again webm to be sure. It wasn't just background extras. If it was, no one would probably think about it. But they specifically told
>Bit more black than they show in the movies
>Whitewashed history

>>3304833
>This is so very very clearly an attempt to fuck with people's conceptions of historical Europe. It's CLEARLY a politically-motivated move to put in this show.

Please explain your reasoning for this without delving into /pol/tard conspiracies.

>>3307375

the words "history is a whitwash" issuing forth from the lips of the good doctor

>>3307375
Because many parts of the establishment want to push a more multicultural society.
They want to make this seem more comfortable/natural/with a historical precedent.
See >>3307385

>>3302955
KANGZ

>>3303724

>There were black people in history, but they're never mentioned, so we never know they're there

You're an absolute moron, they're mentioned constantly in European history precisely because they were rare and looked so different. Frederick II's chamberlain Johannes Maurus has been posited to have been the reason why there was such a shift in positive depiction of black people in art, because he was the first 'good' black guy people knew.

>There's mentions of black people in Celtic stories.

As supernatural beings you retard, not actual Africans.

There's a reason why 'black man' in Irish is literally 'blue man', because 'black people' in the language is traditionally connected to a shitton of superstitions and taboos.

>>3306202
>The black Roman soldier is at least possible
No it's not actually.
The man in question wasn't just a soldier but clearly a general equivalent as well. Roman upper ranks were drawn from the Roman nobility, they weren't a position you could advance to through merit in a single life-time or even over generations. You were the son of a wealthy Roman citizen and wanted to advance yourself in politics so you did a stint in the Roman army as commanding officer to gain fame and network with the aim of becoming a senator.

To put a black man there requires you to claim there was a black family which
>gained citizenship
>became wealthy
>bought their way into the nobility
>were powerful and well connected enough to have an idle heir that felt comfortable enough in Roman high society that he felt he could try his hand at Roman politics

Maybe it's not impossible but it's incredibly unlikely and certainly an odd enough figure that he would have been famous in his own right and not just some anonymous figure in a "historical" cartoon.

>>3307502
Rome generally stationed its soldiers as far away from their homeland as possible. A black guy in Britain would not have been out of place.
Non-italic officers however are pretty much fiction in any region.

>>3304501
Doctor Who stopped being educational the moment The Daleks aired and that's literally the second fucking serial.

>>3304451
Modern Britain is America-lite.

>>3307545

Pray tell, what black homeland within the Roman Empire could he possibly have come from?

>>3307545
>Non-italic officers however are pretty much fiction in any region.
Septimus Severus was the non-italic and an emperor.

>>3307637
Egypt, for example.

>>3306859
>portrayal of Victorian England as majority black
Where does the scene make a claim about majorities? The WebM scene just says that there are more than that person expected, not that that >50% of them were. They aren't even the majority of the people shown in the scene, not that that would even mean much, because you'd be generalizing based on a sample of less than a dozen people when social clustering can account for that. Would need more context about the scene, but then again, frankly, I don't care about Dr. Who or whatever that is.

>>3303541
Because they are so oppress

>>3307642
Septimus Severus was half Italic.

>>3307545
>black
Didn't MENA get blacked (more like lightly browned) during the Islamic age?

>>3307684
I didn't know that.

Okay, what about Diocletian or Galerius? Constantine and thereby Julian?

>>3307696
If for blacked you mean the moors imported female black slaves from Mauritania and those palce they let they spawn thrive then yeah. They (using an army made from Andalucians, Iberian renegades and other Moorish mercs) destroyed the strongest black kingdom (the Songhay in that era) using gunpowder and cattle. The Arma people still exist, and are the descendents from those guys.

File: 1500906838472.png (31KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 1000x1000px

>>3307655

>>3303873
We don't fuck goats

>>3307655
That's a long way to Britain and not feasible.

>>3306859
> I really don't understand how you don't understand this.
This. WTF with this people, they are literraly looking at it and saying it doesn't exist

>>3307907
Denial.

Lefties are worms

>>3307914
I am scare now.

File: jswxMum_d.jpg (131KB, 640x800px) Image search: [Google]

131KB, 640x800px

>>3307907

People do not share the same truth. They do not share the same facts, and the reality of modern life is that a person can go an entire lifetime without once having their core ideas challenged. Everyone neatly sorting arguments and opinions that they disagree with into catagorized stereotypes. "Oh this person said a nazi word, into the nazi bin him and his argument go", "that's a word those liberals use, into the trash with you". No one has to engage with opposing ideas, so they dont.

>>3303812
Well, turkish farmers founded Ireland so...

>>3307666
I was wrong in the use of the word majority. But that the writers described the presence of blacks in Victorian England as 'more than you would expect' and showing several blacks on screen is what's so subversive about it. No one can know the EXACT quantitative amount of blacks living in regency England at the time but the writers use this as an excuse to inflate the numbers and infer that there was more than what most people think and then declare history to be a whitewash. They imply that blacks made up a considerable portion of England's population without specifying that portion and without evidence and then defend that claim by inferring that anyone who disagrees with them is whitewashing history.

File: 1471491708116.png (60KB, 288x288px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 288x288px

>>3302695
who watches this shit

>ITT: /pol/ getting buttmad at an episode of fucking Dr. Who

When was Dr. Who ever considered to be a reputable source of historical facts anyways?

>>3303352
Bolshevik Broadcasting Company

I wish i could find the Penny Dreadfull clip where Dr.Jekyll, played by an indian in the series, is walking in the English slums and literally everyone that sees him start calling him a curryshit, shitskin, subhuman and telling him to go back to India. I think a show about Vampires, monsters and the devil has a more accurate represantation of England than a show about a time travelling Doctor.

>>3308528

you're conflating the average man with pol

a dangerous precedent

>>3308505
Nurdy liberul XD

>>3307655
There were very few blacks in Egypt and it was the far end of the empire. Do you realise the distance, and the probability for a black to become officer and being send to fucking Britania?

>>3303635
Pol has gone to complete shit since the shills took over

>>3302771
this

>>3308505
Not it's original target audience (kids and autistic british nerds). Not any more, anyway. Kind of sad to watch this show become the Anglo version of Zombie Simpsons after 54 years.

>>3302729
>who take afrocentrist nonsense as facts.

Who the fuck does this

>>3302695
Yes.

>>3308931
From south of Egypt all to way to East Brittania , yeah not likely

>>3308505
Fat college-aged American women

>>3308486
But how anyone disagree completely without knowing the exact number themselves as you said so yourself? At best they can doubt the BBC but can't denounce them as wrong. This shit is basically a Rorsach test for liberals and alt right to out themselves. People will use this issue as a dog whistle to validate their beliefs

>>3309344
Look at op's webm m8

>>3302695
Who was the fuckwit that produced this video?

>>3304317
Fair enough desu

>>3303696
because its pure unadulterated bullshit

>>3309344
the BBC for one.

>>3304287
Why is CIA there?

>>3302731
wtf are yoy talking about? History in schools is really Eurocentric. Because of the european dominance in the past 3 centuries.

>>3302695
Not all movies have to be historically accurate
Only the ones who want an authentic portayal of the setting have to be

My Londoner grandma didn't see a black person until she was in her 20s, and it was so shocking to her that it was a story shed tell

File: alas.png (6KB, 227x191px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 227x191px

>>3309942
>European countries teach you European history

wow what a shocker!!!!

meanwhile amerishart schools will teach you everything EXCEPT European history - even going so far as to cover West Africa but never Antiquity Europe.

>>3306487
>while neglecting peoples like Hispanics
How do you pander to hispanics if most of them pass as white anyway?

File: David_Avery_Kill_Your_Friends_premiere.jpg (47KB, 413x600px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 413x600px

>>3306470
>Middle Easterns
I think this guy might qualify. I'm not sure what Alex Lanipekun looks like in the show but he's played a convening indian/ middle easterner character

>>3306349
This is what passes for """""middle eastern""""" in america
http://www.imdb.com/list/ls066799973/

>>3306654
Bidwell don't talk fucking shit, that's completely false

>>3310082
In public school?
Yes we do cover it, albeit, like every other history chapter, we skim over it and try to push more recent history in the kids faces.
I was pretty bumbed especially when the only time we even talked about Rome and Greece was for 4 days in a tiny chapter in the school textbook.
American schools suck, but only because we are severely underfunded, and the teachers csnt get those rowdy niggers in the back of class to shut the hell up.

File: 1500285943960.jpg (120KB, 311x376px) Image search: [Google]

120KB, 311x376px

>>3310254
>Pass
Indios do not pass for white.
>>3310291
As far as I can tell, this guy is just British. There's no minority background evident. Brits can be swarthy, like John Oliver.
>>3310301
F Murray Abraham is like an Assyrian who sometimes self identify as "Arabs" because they come from the Arab sphere.

>>3310301
They look middle eastern to me and I'm a middle easterner.

>>3309506
The BBC. It's from Doctor Who.

>>3309411
But that's exactly what's so subversive about it. They don't give exact numbers, instead they imply that blacks in regency England made more than a little. They make a claim that history's a whitewash and then offer no evidence for this except for putting several blacks in the background and then claiming it's correct. It's circular reasoning.

>>3310082
We never even touched Africa except for Egypt

>>3310369
This is what I like about the British school system. During the time when American kids would be in Senior high-school Brits are in either 6th form or a separate college . Meaning when I was taking my A-levels (entrance exams to university or ) I chose to study, amongst others, Ancient Greece/ Rome and Classics.

I find it crazy that Americans aren't allowed to specialise until they're majors

>>3302695
Nah dude, this is as anti-white as it gets.

>>3303836

Chinese Jesus is the only true Jesus

Does anyone have any concrete statistics of the racial demographics back then?

>>3312731
Wasn't accurately recorded. First census that took birth place into account were either the 1841 or 1851 census. Of course you have to pay for them and so you gotta do all the data yourself.