Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > World History Forum > General History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

General History General History Forum - General history questions and discussions


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old January 4th, 2017, 10:41 PM   #1001
Academician
 
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 69

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yezdigerd View Post
Perhaps you could offer some sources for your claim then. Meanwhile lets lets examine how they describe themselves.

Xenophanes the 6th century philosopher, remarked how peculiar it was that the Gods looked like the people that worshipped them. "Ethiopians say the their gods are flat-nosed and dark,Thracians that theirs are blue-eyed and red-haired"
Funnily enough in the Illiad both Homer and Pindar describe most of the Olympian gods and goddesses as fair haired and “bright eyed,” meaning blue, grey or green. Homer in the Illiad describes Achilles, having “red-gold hair,” Odysseus, has “chestnut hair,” his wife Penelope has “white cheeks the color of pure snow,” Agamede, a healer and expert on medicinal plants, is “blonde,” and King Menelaus of Sparta, the husband of Helen, has “red hair.” Helen, likewise, has “fair hair,” and even slave girls are light-skinned: “fair-tressed Hecamede,” “fair-cheeked Chryseis,” and “blonde Briseis.”
Pindar, the Theban lyric poet, refers to the Greeks as “the fair-haired Danaoi,” using a poetical name for the Hellenes. Likewise, in his Partheneia, or “Maiden Songs,” the seventh century BC poet Alcman, praised the beauty of Spartan female athletes, with their “golden hair” and “violet eyes.”
According to the Roman historian Diodorus Sicilus, who lived in the first century BC, the Egyptian god Set had “reddish hair,” a color that was “rare in Egypt, but common among the Hellenes.”
Adamantius, an Alexandrian physician and scientist, wrote in 4th century AD, his Physiognominica, that “of all the nations the Greeks have the fairest eyes,” adding, that “wherever the Hellenic and Ionic race has been kept pure, we see tall men of fairly broad and straight build,… of fairly light skin, and blond.”

This is how Plutarch describes Alexander :

"The outward appearance of Alexander is best represented by the statues of him which Lysippus made, and it was by this artist alone that Alexander himself thought it fit that he should be modeled. For those peculiarities which many of his successors and friends afterwards tried to imitate, namely, the poise of the neck, which was bent slightly to the left, and the melting glance of his eyes, this artist has accurately observed. Apelles, however, in painting him as wielder of the thunder-bolt, did not reproduce his complexion, but made it too dark and swarthy. Whereas he was of a fair colour, as they say, and his fairness passed into ruddiness on his breast particularly, and in his face."

As for the Romans Suetonious describe Nero as :

"He was about the average height, his body marked with spots and malodorous, his hair light blond, his features regular rather than attractive, his eyes blue and somewhat weak, his neck over thick, his belly prominent, and his legs very slender. "


If you think this is unrepresentative you might note that common Roman nicknames (cognomina) included Ahenobarbus ("Redbeard"), Canus ("Whitey"), Flavus ("Blondie"), Rufus ("Ginger") and Albus ("Pale").


Looked down on sure, disgust and contempt? I don't think so. Ovid noted that the increased contact with Celtic and Germanic people made Roman women dye their hair blonde or using blond wigs. He castigated Roman women for “using rinses” and dangerous “concoctions” in their quest for blondeness "“The praise (like the hair) has been bought. Once you really deserved it. Now each compliment belongs to some Rhine maiden, not to you.” All while he readily admits “I’m crazy for girls who are fair-haired and pale-complexioned,” he writes in his Amores of 15 BC, He admires the contrast of “dark-tresses against a snow-white neck,” One of his favorite lovers is “tall” with a “peaches-and-cream complexion,” “ivory cheeks.” Another was a “smart Greek blonde.”
Tertullian, a Carthaginian Christian theologian, 2th century, complained that Roman women “are even ashamed of their country, sorry that they were not born in Germany or in Gaul.
I'll just translate a part of my thesis to respond to this ignorant blob of text:

Even though the categories of "white" and "black" are central in our modern racial thinking, this was not the case during antiquity. It's important to note, like Mccoskey observes, that Greeks and Romans did not view themselves as white. (Mccoskey, 2012, page 24)

In the Satyricon, a picaresque novel, written by the Roman author Petronius (first century AD), two characters are contemplating about disguising themselves; they remark that they can make themselves darker to look like Aethiopians or they can make themselves look paler to look like Gauls. (Petronius, Satyricon, 102)

Bérard describes the Greek somatic ideal as follows: "... or in the case of men lightly tanned skin, skin the color of honey like the patina of bronze statues". (Bérard, The Image of the Other and the Foreign Hero, page 390).

Thompson correctly observes that having a white skin color has no racial value in the Roman self-perception because in their world view most of the white people were considered "barbaric". (Thompson, 1989, page 10)

To illustrate this with an example: during his description of Ierna (called Hibernia by Caesar), an island in the neighborhood of Britain, Strabo mentions that the inhabitants are more barbaric than the British because they eat human flesh and have incestuous relationships with their mothers and sisters. Subsequently he also mentions that cannibalism was a habit of the Scythians and that even Celts and Iberians have made themselves guilty of cannibalism during heavy sieges. (Strabo, Geograpika, 4.5.4)

The Romans placed themselves in between the pale barbarians of the north and the black people from the south. (Thompson, 1989, page 30).

James Dee, however, disagrees with Thompson's notion about the Greek-Roman somatic norm. According to Dee the ancient evidence doesn't correspond with Thompson's "light brown Mediterranean somatic norm". Dee is also of the opinion that Thompson misinterprets the relation between leukos (λευκός) and albus. He claims that Thompson only uses one source to prove the existence of a Roman trichotomy of mankind in the categories λευκός (Mediterranean), ξανθούς (Middle- and North-Europeans) and μέλανας (black people). The source in question is a work called Hermotimus and it was written by Lucianus. (Dee, 2004, page 159)

Lucianus claims the following:

"εἰ τις Αἰθίοψ μηδεπώποτε ἄλλους ἀνθρώπους ἰδών, οἷοι ἡμεῖς ἐσμεν, διὰ τὸ μὴ ἀποδεδημηκέναι τὸ παράπιν, ἔν τινι συλλόγῳ τῶν Αἰθιόπων διισχυρίζοιτο καὶ λέγοι μηδαμόθι τῆς γῆς ἀνθρώπους εἶναι λευκοὺς ἢ ξανθοὺς μηδὲ ἄλλο τι ἢ μέλανας, ἆρα πιστεύοιτ᾽ ἂν ὑπ᾽ αὐτῶν; ἢ εἴποι τις ἂν πρὸς αὐτὸν τῶν πρεσβυτέρων Αἰθιόπων, Σὺ δὲ δὴ πόθεν ταῦτα, ὦ θρασύτατε, οἶσθα; οὐ γὰρ ἀπεδήμησας παρ᾽ ἡμῶν οὐδαμόσε οὐδὲ εἶδες νὴ Δία τὰ παρὰ τοῖς ἄλλοις ὁποῖά ἐστι. φαίην ἂν ἔγωγε δίκαια ἐρωτῆσαι τὸν πρεσβύτην; ἢ πῶς, ὦ Ἑρμότιμε, συμβουλεύεις" (Lucianus, Hermotimus, 31)

Dee is of the opinion that the terms λευκός, ξανθούς and μέλανας don't encompass all of mankind. It is however clear that mankind is divided in racial categories in this passage. Dee also disagrees with Thompson's interpretation of λευκός and ξανθούς. Dee correctly observes that λευκός refers to a white skin color and not the Mediterranean somatic norm. (Dee, 2004, page 159-162). He agrees with Thompson that ξανθούς refers to blond hair-color and not a yellow skin color. (H.W. Fowler and F.G Fowler erroneously translate ξανθούς as yellow skin).

He doubts however that ξανθούς refers to Middle- and North-Europeans. (Dee, 2004, 159). Both scholars however ignore that ξανθούς can also mean "brown" or "red brown". (Parker, 1917, page 76). Translating ξανθούς as brown makes more sense in the context of the passage because λευκός (white) and μέλανας (black) are also terms that denote skin colors.

Tristan Samuels translates the passage as follows:

"If an Ethiopian who had never seen other men, such as we are, because he had never left home, were to affirm and say, in an assembly of Ethiopians, that nowhere on earth are there white or brown men or anything else besides black men, would he appeal to their reason?" (Samuels, page 76)

This adjustment reveals a black-brown-white trichotomy of mankind. ξανθούς refers to the Romans and Greeks. Provided that we make a few adjustments, this passage confirms Thompson's notion about the Greek-Roman somatic norm. As Thompson put it: "No concept of 'white' people as a meaningful socio-cultural category could arise in Roman society... The 'developed world' of the Roman world view was definitely the world of pale-brown Mediterraneans." (Thompson, 1989, page 10-11).

Haley elaborates on Thompson's claim by claiming that albus corresponds with light brown and not the white skin color of the northern people. (Haley, page 31-32). Hereby our interpretations of the other terms that denote a skin color changes. Albus (pale brown), Candidus (bright brown), and ater (dark brown) become gradations of brown and niger becomes a fierce black. This shift has substantial consequences for the interpretation of a text. Ater is often contrasted with albus. Cicero, for example, says the following against Marcus Antonius in the Philippica:

"Vide quam te amarit is qui albus aterne fuerit ignoras. Fratis filium praeterit. " (Cicero, Philippica, 2.16)

Haley translates this as follows:

"See, how much that man loved you, a man about whom you do not know whether he was pale brown or dark brown. He passed over his nephew. (Haley, page 32).

Or like in Catallus' Carmina:

"Nil nimium studeo, Caesar, tibi velle placere, nec scire utrum sis albus an ater homo." (Catallus, Carmina, 93)

Haley translates this as follows:

"I'm not terribly eager to please you, Caesar, nor do I care to know if you are pale-brown or dark brown." (Haley, page 32-33)

Haley's terminology shifts the somatic point of reference from "white" to "light brown" and she observes that Romans viewed skin color from their own perspective of "brown". In other words, it's anachronistic to speak about "white" Greeks and Romans like Dee does.

As for the part about red hair, Romans viewed that as a Germanic trait. Perhaps you should read the following article:

http://www.themythsandhistoryofredha...ientworld.html

Who says Rufus refers to red-hair instead of being ruddy?

And here's an online version of Haley's work in case you're interested:

http://store.fortresspress.com/media...pter%20one.pdf

Last edited by Taharqa; January 4th, 2017 at 11:04 PM.
Taharqa is offline  
Remove Ads
Old January 4th, 2017, 11:17 PM   #1002

johnincornwall's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Nov 2010
From: Cornwall
Posts: 6,622

Quote:
Originally Posted by Taharqa View Post

I think it's funny that a lot of white people get angry at black people "stealing" their history when they claim certain people were black. Completely unaware that they're doing the exact same thing by calling the Romans or Greeks white. I'll gladly inform you that if you have Germanic, Nordic or Celtic ancestry that the Romans looked down upon you with utter disgust and contempt.
I think you'll find any anger is directed at those claiming that olive/tan/whatever people EG greeks, Romans and especially arabs, 'moors' and berbers are 'Black' and then posting numerous pictures of black sub-saharan Africans. By wholly misunderstanding such texts, deliberately or by extreme prejudice.
johnincornwall is offline  
Old January 5th, 2017, 07:28 AM   #1003
Scholar
 
Joined: Jun 2013
From: Agraphur
Posts: 717

Quote:
Originally Posted by Taharqa View Post
I'll just translate a part of my thesis to respond to this ignorant blob of text:
I just directly quoted how the Greek and Roman viewed colour are you saying they were ignorant or are the quotes wrong?

Quote:
It's important to note, like Mccoskey observes, that Greeks and Romans did not view themselves as white. (Mccoskey, 2012, page 24)
Based on what? albus and candidus are the word they refer to themselves with.

Quote:
In the Satyricon, a picaresque novel, written by the Roman author Petronius (first century AD), two characters are contemplating about disguising themselves; they remark that they can make themselves darker to look like Aethiopians or they can make themselves look paler to look like Gauls. (Petronius, Satyricon, 102)
Actually this passage makes fun of the idea that mere skin colour could fool anyone into believing their were Ethiopians or Gauls.
"Then in the role of Ethiopian slaves we'll attend you cheerfully without risk of the lash and delude our enemies with our false complexions." Gito sneered: "Why not circumcise us as well, so that they'll take us for Jews ; pierce the lobes of our ears, and we'll look like Arabs ; chalk our faces, and Gaul will greet us as her offspring? As though the mere colour would make a complete disguise."

Quote:
Thompson correctly observes that having a white skin color has no racial value in the Roman self-perception because in their world view most of the white people were considered "barbaric". (Thompson, 1989, page 10)

To illustrate this with an example: during his description of Ierna (called Hibernia by Caesar), an island in the neighborhood of Britain, Strabo mentions that the inhabitants are more barbaric than the British because they eat human flesh and have incestuous relationships with their mothers and sisters. Subsequently he also mentions that cannibalism was a habit of the Scythians and that even Celts and Iberians have made themselves guilty of cannibalism during heavy sieges. (Strabo, Geograpika, 4.5.4)
And the Roman considered most if not all other people more barbaric then themselves what has this to do with skin colour?

Quote:
Lucianus claims the following:

Tristan Samuels translates the passage as follows:

"If an Ethiopian who had never seen other men, such as we are, because he had never left home, were to affirm and say, in an assembly of Ethiopians, that nowhere on earth are there white or brown men or anything else besides black men, would he appeal to their reason?" (Samuels, page 76)
So if you define albus as brown it becomes brown:

Suppose, Lycinus, that an Ethiopian who had never been abroad in his life, nor seen other men like us, were to state categorically in an Ethiopian assembly that there did not exist on earth any white or yellow men--nothing but blacks--, would his statement be accepted? or would some Ethiopian elder remark, How do you know, my confident friend? you have never been in foreign parts, nor had any experience of other nations.

Works of Lucian, Vol. II: Hermotimus, Or The Rival Philosophies

Quote:
Haley elaborates on Thompson's claim by claiming that albus corresponds with light brown and not the white skin color of the northern people.
Any particular reason why? The ancient Romans had two words for white; albus, a plain white, (the source of the word albino); and candidus, a brighter white. in opposition to ater lusterless black and niger shiny black.

They defined themselves as albus despite their brownish hue.
Quote:
Haley's terminology shifts the somatic point of reference from "white" to "light brown" and she observes that Romans viewed skin color from their own perspective of "brown". In other words, it's anachronistic to speak about "white" Greeks and Romans like Dee does.
Any particular reason why?



Quote:
Who says Rufus refers to red-hair instead of being ruddy?
The guy who wrote this :

https://www.quora.com/Were-the-Ancie...d-Romans-white

I notice that you didn't even try to reconcile the sources I quoted with your brown narrative. Relying on other people's interpretations of ancient source material rather then the material itself.

Last edited by Yezdigerd; January 5th, 2017 at 07:30 AM.
Yezdigerd is offline  
Old January 5th, 2017, 11:18 AM   #1004

Ancientgeezer's Avatar
Revisionist
 
Joined: Nov 2011
From: The Dustbin, formerly, Garden of England
Posts: 8,685

I suppose deciding what colour you are is really influenced by your starting point. I remember an English girl who rather ruined her relationship with a terribly handsome and rich Italian boyfriend when she suggested that Italians aren't really white "well", she said "not white like us".
I would often tease a Greek-Cypriot girlfriend of mine who lived in South Africa that if she spent too long sunbathing she'd get re-classified and have to move to an African township.
Strange how black people are so obsessed with skin colour with a pecking order based on skin tone--it's as bad as the cash spent on ambre solaire and fake yellow tan by politicians.
Ancientgeezer is offline  
Old January 5th, 2017, 11:22 AM   #1005

Tulius's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: May 2016
From: Portugal
Posts: 3,810

Quote:
Originally Posted by Taharqa View Post
It's in Dutch sadly, and only people that go to the University of Ghent have access to it. But if I have some free time I can post some examples of how Romans viewed themselves with regard to skin color.
Is it here?

Ghent University Library
Tulius is offline  
Old January 5th, 2017, 02:59 PM   #1006

History Chick's Avatar
Genealogist
 
Joined: Jun 2010
From: Colorado Springs (PA at heart)
Posts: 3,250

Quote:
Originally Posted by Taharqa View Post
The ancient Greeks viewed themselves as brown, not white.
Perhaps, but that's not an official racial category and they certainly are NOT black. My point is that there's this misconception out there that Cleopatra was African, because Egypt is, after all, in Africa. They wrongly assume she must have been black/African. Which she wasn't. Even if she hadn't been Greek, she still likely wouldn't have been black/African but more Middle Eastern in skin tone. But try telling that to people with a racial agenda.

I know there was somewhat recently a discovery that one of her sister's was half African, and there's all this suggestion that if they shared a mother, it mean Cleopatra was half black too. But there's no conclusive proof that they had the same mother... so she's still considered Greek, not black.
History Chick is online now  
Old January 5th, 2017, 03:20 PM   #1007

Tulius's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: May 2016
From: Portugal
Posts: 3,810

Brown, black, white… boring! “Orange is the new black”!

Maybe we can use a “RAL colour standard”:

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

I used it when I painted my house.
Tulius is offline  
Old January 5th, 2017, 04:10 PM   #1008
Historian
 
Joined: Aug 2014
From: Portugal
Posts: 1,165

It is a little irritating to see how people try to give a modern social identity to ancient people who didn't have that.

White and black is social identity of our times. There is not even a consensus on who is or is not Black/White.

I think it is more important how they saw themselves and how their society saw them. Their identity is more important than the modern identities we want them to have.
Pict is offline  
Old January 5th, 2017, 04:14 PM   #1009
Historian
 
Joined: Jul 2013
From: San Antonio, Tx
Posts: 9,149

Quote:
Originally Posted by grey fox View Post
Neither mentioned the primary reason that most antebellum non-slaveholding southern whites supported the institution of slavery: white supremacy. The newspaper owners of the antebellum South made all types of wild prophecies about all types of calamities that would happen if the slaves were freed. The newspaper owners said that the former slaves would attempt to murder all whites, and they said that the male former slaves would rape white women. The newspaper owners often said that the freeing of the slaves would harm poor southern whites more than the southern aristocrats because the southern aristocrats could afford to move away and escape the former slaves while the poor southern whites would be stuck in the South.
I'm sure both were true: slavery underpinned the wealth of the south and southerners in general believed in white supremacy. I read somewhere - can't recall the specific source at the moment - that the biggest and most valuable economic asset in the country before the Civl War was the total value of American slaves. It may have been a natural consequence of the institution of slavery among the white populace (a generalization) to regard slaves as inferiors to whites. This might have been rather comforting to the majority of non-Slave owning whites on the lower rungs of the social-economic totem pole that there was always going to be a class of people who would be below them on that scale. No doubt, many non-slave owning whites aspired to one day to be slave owners no matter how remote the chance of that might be.

One way to perpetuate the subjugation of blacks would, of course, be to instill fear of them among the white population. Still, more than 300,000 white southerners fled north during the Cvil War to enlist in the Union Army, so clearly, not every one was on board. And many of the North's senior officers throughout the war were Southerners.

I believe there are still powerful residues from the Ante-Bellum period afoot in the South today.

Last edited by royal744; January 5th, 2017 at 04:18 PM.
royal744 is offline  
Old January 5th, 2017, 04:29 PM   #1010
Historian
 
Joined: Jul 2013
From: San Antonio, Tx
Posts: 9,149

Quote:
Originally Posted by Poly View Post
The Anglican church is a Protestant church and therefore is derived (at least in part) from Luther

[ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_largest_Protestant_churches]List of the largest Protestant churches - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]


"...encompassing more than 800 million adherents, Protestantism is present on all populated continents...the majority of Protestants are members of just a handful of denominational families, i.e. Adventists, Anglicans, Baptists, Reformed, Lutherans, Methodists and Pentecostals..."

[ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protestantism"]Protestantism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]
I remember seeing a sign on an Episcopalian church in South Texas that read, "English Catholic Church" or words to that effect. Luther was nowhere to be found in the vicinity.
royal744 is offline  
Reply

  Historum > World History Forum > General History

Tags
irritating, misconceptions



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
your historical misconceptions oshron General History 105 May 14th, 2018 09:05 AM
Common Historical Misconceptions/Myths Alex III General History 120 February 25th, 2017 05:46 PM
Historical misconceptions created by the media Naomasa298 Art and Cultural History 35 February 26th, 2015 04:33 PM
5 historical misconceptions rundown Emperor Trajan Learning History 6 November 15th, 2013 06:14 PM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.