This is inaccurate on so many levels.Again- you are not catching the meaning.
There is no evidence from Roman writings that they gave much thought to the color of anyone's skin.
Rather- they saw the distinctions between the peoples they came across as purely cultural. If you could build stone temples... you were considered civilized- just like them.
This is not to say they did not economically exploit people- it is to say they did not do so on the basis of skin color.
If you got conquered- you might end up a slave- but to the Roman way of thinking this did not make you less than human. You fought... you lost. The penalty for losing was slavery.
Like the feudal Europeans- they had to invent Other distinctions they used to justify their exploitation of others.
The notion that people were LESSER than you- based upon nothing but an aspect of their appearance- did not manifest until the colonial exploitation by europe of people's with less advance technology.
And it was not based upon any valid objective criteria- you exploited people to make money from them. And if you transhipped people who were immediately identifiable as being NOT like your people... you could justify your cruelties by making them defacto subhuman in your own mind.
try and find instances of racial enslavement prior to the era of European Colonialism...
It is a relative NEW idea- and it was borne of capitalist opportunism and persisted as a result of capitalist opportunism.
Just because you didn't have the New York post bellowing race from the towers, doesn't mean it didn't exist back then.
What do you think colonialism did to cause racism? especially when Africans had been taken as slaves by Arabians etc centuries before?
You are right in one way, the Romans didn't have an obsession with skin colour, because no one bothered to talk about it, they didn't need the reasons or excuses to think low of people that we do today.
.......... but that's completely the same reason that the Romans conquered and massacred and no one said anything, it was for the glory of Rome and that was it, why do you think a group of people who'd take anyone's lands and slaughter them felt they needed skin colour as an excuse? ............ Roman or barbarian, if you were the latter they didn't need skin colour to put you down, you were already there in their eyes.
But to act like people were blind to colour or features before colonialism is ridiculous.