Review of Gannibal: The Moor of Petersburg’ by Hugh Barnes By O. A. LADIMEJI African-Century Journal : March 2018 Introduction I started reading this book with high hopes. Returning from the London Library with what I expected would be new found treasure. In many ways this book reveals more about the author than about Gannibal. The traces of GannibalǠs life act like a Rorschach Test to the author allowing him to revel in his own fantasies and project his own preconceptions. Let start with some hard facts about prejudice and misunderstanding. The book opens:Ǡ Alexander Pushkin was not only RussiaǠs greatest poet. He was also the great grandson of an African slave.Ǡ What on earth does this statement mean? Many Europeans were captured and sold into slavery, then escaped or became free but are not described merely so. Let us compare how HoraceǠs life is treated. In the Wikipedia entry his ancestorǠs slave origins are not the first matter to be brought to oneǠs attention and his ancestor is not described merely as a ǟslaveǠ but as someone captured and later freed. ǣHorace's father was probably a Venutian taken captive by Romans in the Social War, or possibly he was descended from a Sabine captured in the Samnite Wars . Either way, he was a slave for at least part of his life. He was evidently a man of strong abilities however and managed to gain his freedom and improve his social position. Thus Horace claimed to be the free-born son of a prosperous 'coactor'Ǥ ( Note 1) Barnes general view of Gannibal falls into the stereotype of European historians writing about freed Roman slaves: ǟMary Beard expresses this thus: ǟWe think we know about slavery; but the ex-slave is much harder. In a desperate search for a useful equivalent, we tend to reach for the caricature of the arriviste, the stereotype of the ǣman on the makeǤ, with more money than taste. ǟ(Note 2) In keeping with this stereotype Barnes describes Gannibal as an ǟinterloperǠ, though the word has no bearing on GannibalǠs life as he never chose to enter or intrude upon the world he was brought up in. This is not a phrase usually used of Horace. Clearly what Barnes is implying is that Gannibal should have known his place even if the Czar had other ideas. He then states: ǟIt was the ultimate irony in a bizarre life: the African slave had become a Russian slaveowner.Ǡ(p.5) This is a strange choice of words. If a Roman freedman became an owner of slaves/serfs would