DonFerrari said:
not out of context, the context of the OP is the same from the review. And even the full quote makes nothing... it just say that there were some places and events in europe that had participation of black people and that "perhaps in that specific area there may have been one that stayed overnight". The justification is total bullocks. |
Yes, it is taken out of context. Because, the first part of the historian's quote explains why specifically in that area there may have been different ethnic groups. The first half explains that because the town was located on a popular trade route, it is reasonable that there may have been people from other cultures and locales staying there.
You may still find that not very compelling, and that's fine. To be honest, I don't think it was an especially great argument. But, the way it was presented was deliberately misleading. It goes straight from " a historian I spoke to, who specialises (sic) in the area, disagrees" into the second half of the historian's quote.This gives the impression that this is the entirety of what the historian said, and it simply was not. The part that was omitted was entirely relevant to the point and it wasn't especially long to the point where it needed to be cut for length. Moreover, of the paragraphs quoted, the others were cut and pasted in their entirety. This paragraph, which is probably the most relevant to the argument the review was making, was the only one to be chopped up like that. There is literally no reason, other than to intentionally mislead, to cut the article like that.
