The TRUTH About Black Africans In Ancient Rome
Vložit
- čas přidán 10. 09. 2024
- Let's examine what the ancient sources actually say, without any filters nor weird agenda.
Were there black people in Ancient Rome and Greece? How integrated were they? Were there
black soldiers? Officers? What do the Romans and Greek themselves actually say?
Link to Evropantiqva channel / @evropantiqva
Link to Scorpio Martianus channel / scorpiomartianus
Link to Polymathy channel / @polymathy_luke
Link to the video about the Lucian Pronunciation
• Lucian Pronunciation o...
Link to the video about Africans in Rome by Evropantiqva
• C'erano Cittadini Roma...
"It's not racist if you enslave everyone equally"
-Romans
"You're below us if you lose against us!"
- everyone in history
this
indeed :^)
True egalitarians
@@arya31ful Vae Victis
He’s not afraid against controversy because he’s wearing armor all the time
A man who responsibly prepares against the consequences of his actions
Or maybe because it's not even a remotely controversial topic.
@@ep6600 and it shouldn’t be.
The only people who would be offended by this or find it controversial are those afraid of history because it could damage their narrative.
@@StanlocoInc No one will find this controversial. At least no one who'd be interested in the topic to begin with
People like to pat themselves on the back by thinking that they're saying something controversial.
@@ep6600 🤣
" What do the Romans and Greek themselves actually say?"
This attitude towards history is so needed and has never been so ignored.
I see that you have a massive chip on your shoulder, but most of what you used were legends (we didn’t even know Troy actually existed until recently) but if you watched the video, he said that there were possibly black officers, but the chance of a black legion (as in a full unit) would be unlikely because, as you said, Roman were pretty xenophobic against non-Romans
@TheSkyWhale You can respect other people and still be xenophobic. Also Rome existed for a long time and feelings change. Rome in 250bc isn't the same as 250ad.
@@CarrotConsumer No, you actually cannot. You literally contradicted yourself with 1 sentence...
@@CarrotConsumer You really need to explain how you can respect others and still be xenophobic. Because that’s almost exactly what a white nationalist would say. And minus a context, someone might make that assumption about you.
I’m not saying you’re a nationalist. People quote the poem “Mending Wall” without having read it. “Good fences make good neighbors,” they’ll say as though they’ve spouted some deep philosophical truth. Never realizing that they’re expressing almost the exact opposite idea to the meaning of the poem.
I suspect you mean something like what those who misunderstand Robert Frost mean when they quote his poem. But like that line taken out of context, I can’t know without more to go on.
@TheSkyWhale
True, Rome expanded and realized the other Ethnic groups and cultures were in many ways pretty cool and effective, and so this multicultural mix, all placed under a standard law was unprecedented for most Empire's of the time.
Cooperation truly is key.
What a novel concept: Interpreting history through historical context.
Classic
I hope it sets a new trend.
So to sum up. Black Centurion. Unlikely but possible. Entire Black legionary cohorts ....nope.
Precisely
@@metatronyt we really appreciate that you are not afraid of speaking what u think no one’s right of speech shouldn’t be suppressed..but sadly people nowadays think talking about history is racist,stating scientific studies racist
If I remember correctly there was a Black Auxiliary but Auxiliary are made up of local troops
@@mizukage_josh9125 Or from allies and client states. Gallic and Germanic cavalrys are used extensively in roman military campaign.
Ain't ya never heard of Nero's African Brigades ? The most feared
Roman soldiers of that time !
If you want to discuss an even more controversial subject, you could cover slavery in Ancient Rome. I feel like people would be surprised how different it was from the more modern concept of slavery.
I'd love a video on that. It would help out big time with fleshing out the Ancient Roman world. I mostly just know about Collars and would be curious what could even get a slave punished or even executed back then in Rome.
It gets darker when you find out the life expectancy of slaves in Rome.
You mean because hard core slavery in agriculture was balanced by at least as hard core slavery in mines, plus comparatively soft-core slavery in households plus even softer core slavery for intellectuals as tutors? That last was a bit different from more recent slaveries, at least.
yea back then slavery had nothing to do with ethnicities
yeah, it was kinda worse. but not different but worse but also not but very much yes.
‘Facts are not facts _only_ if they align with someone’s political ideology’
Now **that** is a statement for the ages!
Except it's not true, not in some contexts.
@@TimberWulfIsHere You think facts stop being facts if they contradict your political ideology?
Propagandist detected.
@@TimberWulfIsHere Explain a context where political ideology affects the truth of a fact. I'm waiting.
you only have principes when they suit you.
@@cortster12 why? OP is stating that facts are not facts if they are part of a political ideology.
This simply isnt true as facts are still facts regardless if a politician or a politician group states them. If conservatives say that a man is a man due to biology, well that is simply a fact.
If a libertarian/centrist states that someone's affective state can be as important as the fact at hand, that too, can be a fact.
As an African descent man, I respect this research.
Thank you 🙏
What does African decent even mean? Isn’t everyone of African decent.
@Illuminated by The Most High no African decent literally a stupid statement. Anyone can claim to be of African decent.
@@kylewhittle6565 wrong iam African American the DNA and genetics matters
@@jbone9900 many African Americans have some white DNA too. A lot of them found that out when they took those ancestry tests. That's why pure Africans look different and are usually darker.
I don't think the modern concept of racism can really be applied to the ancient world. Back then, ANY strong civilization thought that ANYBODY who wasn't part of their civilization was beneath them. So it wasn't exactly racism, and was more of a cultural elitism that was practiced by more or less everybody.
This is true, even if there were only Europeans, Asians, or Africans there would still be discrimination based on nationality and other minor differences that vary across groups. Doesn’t make it right or mean people should stop fighting it…just like inevitable crime but it should put things into perspective. At some point most groups have faced forms of discrimination although maybe not to the same degree, but this is a direct result of insecurity, ignorance, and fear.
This is true and was the case across the globe. Did ancient South American tribes slaughter and enslave each other? Yes. Did native tribes in Canada kill each other? Yes. Did your Europeans kill and enslave other Europeans? Absolutely. Tribalism. You're different from me so I am wary of you. I
Exactly
@@Doooooooooooood And yet, in the case of most North American nations at any rate, there was very little documented notion of race. Generally, once you learned a nation's language well enough to understand and be understood - even if you came from a sworn enemy, even if you were a captive of war - you were a citizen of that nation, with all the rights that implies. At contact this not only applied to individuals from other First Nations, even white, black, and Asian individuals were absorbed into native nations as fully participating members who suffered no restrictions based on their origin, accent, or physical appearance. That's very different from societies in, say, Europe and Asia, where if you were born in another nation, and especially if you looked different, you would always be trapped in a permanent underclass, even if given a sort of perfunctory "citizenship".
It is and was. Damn you ppl are so brainwashed, start by reading what aristole said about skin colour , then go from there!
The balls on this man, most wouldn't touch this subject but you clearly understand history can't be bent as a tool for political agendas, it's just not okay. As a Nigerian who loves history, seeing that BBC show and the black Achilles I felt so insulted. Is our history not good enough, why take those of others? Historians must be unbiased and fact based and your video was just that. Gratias tibi ago, amicus
But bending it for 21st century racist agendas is fine. do you think black scots give a fig for Nigeria? Why should they? The illiad is part of their culture. Having a black skin does not make you Nigerian or African does it genius
@@SimonOBrien-be8qt I don't see metatron bending history for racist agendas, no history channels I follow do such a thing. I very clearly don't give a damn what a black Scot thinks about my nation, but it's a fact most African Americans are of west African descent, same with blacks in Britain and France, if they want history to be proud of Africa has plenty of those. If you are black then yes you have African heritage you are part of African history
The illiad is European history
Shaka is one of my favorite historical figures and I'll be pissed if a white guy played him, because that would be absurd. The history of African civilizations belongs to Africans and their descendants around the world and they shouldn't belittle it by chasing the history of others. They only make it seem like our people have no history worth claiming
Do you agree with that?
@@chideraalexanderdex547 Oh so you accept not all black people are africans then. The hairy loon doesn't. FYI many Americans are of Irish descent. That does not make them Irish eh.
American history isn't just for white people is it genius, neither is ancient Greek history is it.
Ho ho Shaka. Couldn't find any Nigerian heroes then? Over 100 million people in Nigeria and a Zulu from SA is the only black hero you can find?
The only african in a continent populated since human time began. Shaka. No writers, no other leaders, no politicians, freedom fighters. How suspicious
And the history of Africa is for anyone who studies it whether they are white jewish, gay etc. You think only jews can study biblical history? Really.
Deeply racist sorry
@@SimonOBrien-be8qt you seem to purposely misinterpret my points, it kind of sucks because I'm not at all saying what you think I'm saying. I only mentioned Shaka because he is my favorite but if it's Nigerian heroes you want fine
Tafawa balewa
Nnamdi azikiwe
Olusegun obasanjo
Chinua Achebe
Wole soyinka
Aguiyi ironsi
Ken Saro wiwa
Chukwuemeka ojukwu
Alvan ikoku
Babangida
And many others
The man isn't saying all black people are Africans but that's where all black people originally come from, is that so hard to believe? Irish is a nationality not a race, all white people originate in Europe, isn't that a fact? History is for everyone, I agree but the history of your people is your birth right and shouldn't be appropriated
And Irish Americans often take pride in their Irish heritage, so do Italian Americans etc
And you saying I'm implying that only Jews can study history or only whites can study Greek history is just a logical fallacy, I never said that. I just think it's wrong to claim someone else's history, you can study it but don't go claiming they were part of your race or your people when they weren't. It's bending history and it does great disservice
Also don't call me racist, don't insult me, I didn't insult you
I know it's nice to call anyone who disagrees with you a racist in your eyes but I don't enjoy being insulted like that. Your tone is condescending
You really think I don't know the heroes of my own people, I just prefer Shaka because he was very revolutionary and I love Zulu culture and language.
@@chideraalexanderdex547 These people are just nuts, and yeah they would freak out if african characters gets race swapped. Not only Achilles is ancient greek hero so most likely not black based on that alone, but his looks are described in source material. Nobody is saying other people cant enjoy greek mythology than greeks, but race swapping one of the main characters is clearly done for political agenda, shock value, and is damn condescending IMHO
'Ominous' means to do with omens, so the man's skin colour could have been an omen of something, Similarly, an eagle was often seen as an omen of something, and fearing that the appearance of an eagle might be an omen does not mean that people hated eagles or thought eagles to be inferior.
Why was dark skin an omen of though in Roman culture do we know? Or was this a unique incident in relation to this emperor and his circumstances during that time?
Your presence is a surprise, but a welcome one.
I mean did the Romans try to hunt down eagles or scare them away when they appeared like how that Emperor ordered the black auxiliary to be removed from his sight?
I'd, personally, interpret that as that black people could be seen as a bad omen in certain situations. But I'm no historian or anything of the sort so meh
@@admirekashiri9879
By his reaction it was probably a bad omen.
There were probably a lot of occasions where army leaders looked for an omen and there were efforts to produce a favorable omen.
Livy writing about the battle of Philippi (42 BC):
"When the (Roman) soldiers were going out to the fight, an Ethiopian met them in front of the gates, and as they considered this a bad omen they immediately cut him in pieces."
Trying to imply the blacks were in important positions in ancient Rome, is not right, but just wishful thinking from the woke brigade. They also claim Septimius Severus was black, while the guy was not only not black, but quite racist against blacks as shown from that quote of Metatron.
I'm no expert on Ancient Greek but I'm an amateur historian and I agree with this perspective and like those translations and the logic behind it. It makes perfect sense.
It's also important to note that discrimination in ancient times even extended to a tribal level. People of the same ethnicity often hated and had rivalries with other nearby tribes. On a national/imperial level, people of the primary cultural and ethnic group always thought themselves superior to outsiders.
This is why racism is stupid. When there are no more races against eachother, people will just make up shit and start fighting between themselves.
Which is why i think people will always be racist in the US, because people will always find another tribe to hate and it's likely some of those people have or will immigrate here. It's why we need to meet aliens already so people stop hating other humans
Ancient Greek history confirms what you say. The different cities were at war with each other and did not admit as citizens those of another city qualified as metics!
The Roman Empire be like: RACE DOES NOT MATTER YOU ARE ALL EXPENDABLE FOR THE GLORY OF THE EMPIRE
Race was different back then wasn't do do with skin colour it was to do whare you where from
You're not wrong.
LONG LIVE THE EMPIRE!!!
@@schotscarface18ssf75 that's nationality and or ethnicity, still relevant today
@@303TAG303 Not as much or as omnipresent as it was in the past.
Oh man I just got that 3 year old video about the black Achilles and the BBC comic recommended yesterday and this is the new video? Truly ominous.
Same here I re-watched it yesterday
same
Me too!
Well there is a "black" Achilles in the Illiad. He was the Ethiopian half god king Memnon, and Homer himself wrote him as an only warrior equal to Achilles.
@@piotrjeske4599 yep, but instead of adding him, they just made Achilles black, because he's famous.
Are Romans Racist?
Actual Romans: "You're not family"
Y'all gettin outta hand wit these Dom Memes lol
Ethnicity and then race are extended kinship groups. They equate to family but on a greater scale; ancestrally, culturally, and spacially.
@@Miquelalalaa On the greater scale of natural history we are all closely related. Some populations you would never guess were as closely related to each other as they are. Conversely some populations that if looked at them you'd think they were closely related are actually relatively genetically distant.
@@iivin4233 fine but BLOOD AND SOIL
@@Miquelalalaa All humans come from Africa.
Stumbled across this video while studying for playing a character in a movie, and it's quite enlightening. You've managed to answer some of my questions, and in a very documented manner. Thank you for that :)
I hope you do well!
Man sitting in full armor says I am not afraid of discussing controversial topics.. kinda funny
hes not afraid because he wars armor
@@alpharius4966 gotta buy those armors
Well, the man is well-prepared, so...
He’s immune to physical and ideological attacks
Roman military gear comes with a Gladius. It's just off screen.
It makes more sense to see an African Legionary, than an African Viking in 10th C Britain, I’m looking at u AC Valhalla. Great one as always, Metatron.
An African Viking wouldn't be impossible; they could be a volunteer sailor or freed thrall captured in Spain. Still, Rome had the ability to mobilize thousands of men from all over the Mediterranean, so yeah, that would be very rare.
Or a Chinese merchant...
@@petersparacino6445 chinese merchant in this timeline will be possibule but maybe only in eastern Europe and even then rare
@@wilkogniawilkwody3434 if the game were set in Greece or the middle east, that would be plausible enough too
Just finished the game. Evior's visions of Valhalla are basically her brain interpreting forerunner events. Which is why Etzio, coming from an Italian background saw events from the same era with a combo of Catholic and classical Roman imagery.
Thanks so much for the shoutout, my friend! An absolutely fascinating topic and excellent production, as always. Very informative.
Grazie very much my tomodachi!
I could listen to you talk all day long. Not only are you knowledgeable and inquisitive - an excellent combination in any historian - but your accent brings back so many warm memories of my Latin studies for my Classic Humanities certification in college.
History being simplified and not taken serious has been the cause for a lot issue today.
The "black versus white"-ification of history.
@@alfuriusstraut8721 some of those weirdoes, actualy think that there are only those 2 races, the rest dont count, unless they can be used to hit the other, real creepy,and stupid...but reeeall creepy
@@brenokv I describe it as A Red vs Blue thing.
They refuse to be Purple. And even when they pretend to, they immediately try to make it Dark Purple or Violet.
@@brenokv or it can not be about race, we can take it up to Marx, and hed say all of history can be summarized as the oppressed struggling against their oppressor class.
@@brenokv
Yeah, I'm getting real sick of the word black, and everyone wanting to play the 🎻 for them because no one else suffered, just them.
Roman's also had this odd idea that skin and eye color was related to the amount of moisture in the air. that being the father north the lighter skin, braver, and dimmer the people, the further south the darker, timid, and more cunning. they thought because they were in the middle of the world that they were the best of both, and lacked in nothing. Something's never change.
The source is the invicta video, what did the Roman's think about race.
It would have been hard to contradict back in the day, considering what the civilizations of the "middle-earth" achieved in antiquity compared to all the others.
''Goddamn, we are the best''
- Every dominant people that has ever existed, probably
source?
Lol that was just one nut job(what was his name?) who wrote that in a book where he also claimed there was a two headed people in Africa who walked around on their hands and lot's of other loony stuff. I doubt many Romans actually took that seriously. At least i hope not XD
That sounds hilarious and I kind of hope you didn't just pull that out of your ass.
Period costume makes everything 200% more accurate.
If I was born in antiquity I'd be rocking a helmet alone in my room making videos talking to the people scrawled on my chamber pot for sure!
In 10:30 the tunic changes from blue to red
That beard tho, pretty barbaric for a roman
@@MisterCynic18 Marcus Aurelius would like to talk to you.
Except when he talks about bones, which can NOT be used for detecing race.
This is by far the finest video I have seen on not just ancient Rome, but also on the definition and explanation of racism during the ancient world. I cannot wait to explore more of your video's. Oh by the way, you sir are an excellent orator as well. Please please keep posting these awesome video's.
I have learned two things from history. The first is that more lies have been told by omission and the second that the pursuit of truth can be frightening and deeply upsetting for everyone.
No kidding! I learned last year George Washington owned over 100 men, women and children. He was also a slave owner who beat and mutilated his black slaves. He also put a bounty out on his favorite cook Hercules who escaped slavery into New York State. I’ve been told throughout my whole life George Washington was this great guy.
Most recently I heard right wing pundit and college drop out Charlie Kirk tell the world George Washington was anti-slavery 🤨.
@@majorlazor5058 It was common back than, it'd be an interesting subject to explore. The man still did a lot of incredible things that changed the course of history for the better. We cannot erase every flawed man from history less we'd have no history at all.
Look at an example like Gandhi. He was known to have inappropriately "touched" his female family members. Gandhi was also really racist, yet, despite that, Martin Luther King used Ghandi's teachings as his "guiding light to nonviolent social change." MLK had marital issues, but he also changed the course of history for the better.
Plenty of heroes like this throughout history that had "skeletons in the closest."
@@majorlazor5058 the Man who made sure he could keep on being a slaver by moving them every few monthes because having them stay in the place he was living at meant they would have been freed? That Washington?
@IN REGENERATIONE you can't meet dead people. So you are not going to believe anything outside of the present?
The truth no human ever mentions is that truth is only painful to liars and conniving personalities, not everyone. Whereas at the same time truth is actually a relief to good and noble personalities. Your reaction to truth could give an indication of what sort of person you really are.
Bending history to satisfy one’s political agenda is like giving a middle finger to all the historical figures
Agreed .
That is pretty much most history texts books in the South of the US when it comes to the subject of the Civil War and slavery. Facts don't matter we have a past to cover up. Or Japanese text books when it's time to talk about WWII. Nothing happened in China, the Philippines, Korea, Vietnam,etc...
Gokith Yet you people have no problem with the white washing of ancient Egypt who were blacks
Well they wanna tear down Frederick Douglas to fight muh racism so I don't think they really care.
@@titanmode3888 ahahaha we built the pyramidz n shiet
Dude’s nerd enough about the topic to have a whole outfit. That increases credibility to me.
@@The_Book_of_Obadiah oh yea? Make a video debunking what he said, since it was all wrong
@@The_Book_of_Obadiah can't say he's wrong and not explain why he's wrong chief. Where the video at?
💀💀🤣🤣⚰️⚰️🪦🪦
@@The_Book_of_Obadiah shut up then you're just making baseless accusation and your opinion helps NO ONE
@@The_Book_of_Obadiah depends. If you can actually debunk a lot of what he said, the majority of people will side with you.
As of right now, I think you're full of sh*t though :)
I took Latin for four years in high school and we studied a great deal of Greek and Roman history. From what we studied, the Romans encountered and dealt with Africans with black features, in North Africa. That doesn't mean that the majority were black, but they were present along with the other groups. People moved over time, and North Africa, like Southern Europe was colonized, so some areas where multi-ethnic. It just seems a stretch to assume that there were huge numbers of "Black" African soldiers for Rome.
It would be an amazing April Fools joke if you did an entire video just talking in Latin while wearing that armour.
he just did one in latin talking about it called lorica segmentata
"Lōrīca segmentāta legiōnāriī Rōmānī VIDEO IN LATIN - (Classical)" - exact title
@@Tuvok_Shakurl
English is Dog Latin
😆😆
Well done.
By the way, the word Ethiopia as used in classical times did not necessarily mean people from the country now known as Ethiopia but the term Ethiopian was generally used to describe black people and Ethiopia generally used to refer to Africa before the word Africa was created.
interesting, thanks
Afric
And the spongy sourdough bread
The author is a two faced liar! Racism is based on renaissance/enlightenment age with literature classifying men into species.
Ancient people were not racist. The European respected the blacks that Some blacks were made roman emperors. Remember Egypt were a world power while much of Europeans were barbaric. Even Greek intellectuals had to leave europe to Egypt and other parts of the world to learn
At that time how do you want to justify your white racism when other races were superior? Romans had respect for hannibal who took over 100 hundred elephants to war. Greek learnt mathematics from the Egypt africA. Mali empire had one of the oldest universities. Benin City in West Africa was cleaner than London. Gun powder was bought from china.
@Metratron is a liar and It will shock him! Romans and Africans use same public toilets. Haha so who invented racism if not mordern Europeans . Lol
Neat, can't wait for the one titled "The TRUTH About Jews In Ancient Rome". That comment section is gonna be lit.
lmao yes
Well Metatron is jewish (hence his channel name) so I'd be interested in his take.
@@Greenfeld13 What? He's italian, no? Metatron is a christian thing anyway. (Ye, I know that christianity came from jews, but jesus fans prefer not to acknowledge it generally)
@@AAAAAAAA-vd6zv Metatron is much important in Jewish mysticism than it is in Christian mysticism. Plus cabalistic symbolism is not very christian.
@@TheoEvian Hard to say for sure, wont argue
As amateur historian of world history and cultures, I’m quite delighted that your channel found me! New Sub, playing catch up binge watching during free time. For Me, Refreshing perspectives on world history and cultures. Thank You!👍🏽👍🏽👍🏽🥰🇺🇸
Yellow being associated with hair reminds me...the phrase "Dark" or "Black" man had also been used to describe hair color as well in some old literature from Anglo-Saxon and later poems and literature...
They also called people with black hair in Ireland "black Irish", some of my ancestors were black Irish.
Well yeah. Modern people tend to forget that many of these cultures did not know of blacks or only from rumors, so it makes sense they would use these colors to describe hair instead.
@@ww-oi4vw no, thats just how the Irish language works.
@@steakslapn9724 - Black hair and blue or grey eyes. or so I understand.
@@julietfischer5056 yeah, they were decendants from early Spanish settlers and sailors who took Irish wives.
Mad respect for a man who stands by his principles! Keep going!
This is how I belive history should be taught.
absolutely. that would resolve many many issues (mostly) progressives have created. most sane people have zero issues when people that looked different to themselves where kings and leaders. IF they actually where in those posititions.
changing history is dangerous. those that it is supposed to benefit might still live in a one bedroom apartment and those that have been pushed aside in retrospect might grow resentful
@@cirescythe The irony of claiming "PrOGrESsIvEs" are trying to change history is so thick you'd need a spoon to walk through it.
@@cirescythe omg stfu
@@cirescythe LOL Conservatives in USA get pissy if you teach about slavery, they claim its about makeing white kids being ashamed for being white, mate there is video evidence how some white lady thought the teachings about Saint Oscar Romero as a waste of time because no one know who he was, so the school board agreed and USA erased Romero a second time.
Many Afrocentrics claim Septimius Severus as black simply for his curly hair. Same for Hannibal and St Augustine just bc they're from Africa.
@@user-mu1ig3wn5s I met people from Morocco and Algeria and they look Caucasian to me.
This vidéo channel look like an hotep channel .
Hé want to look smart but hé is full of modern américan views of ethnicity.
Hé don't know that thé général pictured here is Numidian berber,
Quintus Lollius Urbicus was a Numidian Berber governor of Roman Britain between the years 139 and 142, during the reign of the Emperor Antoninus Pius.
not black .
No black berbers existed, just later 'berberized' blacks because slavery.
Dna wise, a 'North African' is a caucasoid and 'white'. No way it could be confused with SSA.
This vidéo is full of shit confirming afrocentrism.
@@rififienforce What "hotep" channel?? Hotep means afrocentric-blacksupremacist. Where did you see Metatron was validated them???
As an East African, I like your approach and facts you presented in this video. I respect your honesty.
This dude needs a history lesson on Africa and the world. Racism is about 600-500 years old. Further more over thousands and of years people migrated out of Africa all over the world. Through ice ages and other phenomena other shades of colors formed.
@@dominictoretto9645 Fr, we know that mass genocides happened all across Europe in prehistory, especially in Britain to the point that modern British Whites have less than a 1% heritage of the people that made the Stonehenge
@@bryanthornton6294 There is some place named India, ya know...
@@dominictoretto9645 skin color based racism is a recent phenomenon. Racism before that was quite different. Trying to apply modern racism to the ancient world is an anachronism
@@SussyAmogusImpostor huh? what?
keep in mind that the children of former auxiliaries, who would be born with Roman citizenship and therefore be allowed to join a legion, would already be of mixed descend. This is because auxiliaries stationed in, for example, Gallia or Germania ( auxiliaries were mostly stationed as far away from home as possible ) would usually marry local women and stay in the province they served in. While legionaries with visibly dark skin are definitely possible, the practicalities and circumstances of living in the Roman empire and serving in its armies would have made them a rare curiosity.
Yup rare but not a majority
@@dlastkatipunero2185 That is the defination of minority...
@@dlastkatipunero2185 If you are rare you can't be a majority by definition.
Auxiliary units would have been deployed near their native lands, would they? Best translators you'd could ask for to monitor local activity.
@@EpochUnlocked I thought you'd want them to be as far away as reasonably possible to decrease the chances of them rebelling/mutinying against you?
I am reminded of John Adams "Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence."
He didn’t know modern science, with its untold ways to manipulate facts.
@@lorenzolozzigallo2589 prove it
He didn't witness the power of modern propaganda 😃
"Facts don't lie, but partial facts certainly don't bring the truth"
- Myself
@@En_theo noice
A rational, well-informed analysis. It is interesting that some feel compelled to revise history to their liking, as opposed to seeking to understand it for what it actually was. It is important to remember that people with this emotion-driven compulsion come from all racial backgrounds. As do people who prefer to understand history as it actually was.
Oh, you mean like saying a European "discovered" a country that was already inhabited?
@@prettyboy1970The "Discovery" IS basicly we Found and put on map that we Gonna show to other people. Because no natives in The Americas had a fucking map to Say, " HEY , where IS Europa".
@@prettyboy1970 Obviously no. It's taken for granted that it was already discovered by the people who lived there.
As a black person, I can tell you that lies told for political purposes is stupid and perpetuates issues that will ultimately cause more harm than good. Thanks for clearing up history.
Edit: how did you guys manage to turn a simple and agreeable message like this into a political war in the replies?
My very pleasure Brother!
@@metatronyt replying to comments 4 days after uploads? You just earned yourself a new sub
@@metatronyt Oh pretending to use black US slang!!!
Yes and constructing 21st racist theory and trying to apply it to the Ancient World is the biggest lie of all. And sorry to tell you there were black romans, there were jewish Romans there were arab Romans
@@dr.diggle5157 Welcome to the community of noble ones
My big probelm was the netlix show that made Achilles black...there are a lot of awesome black historical and mythological characters, Achilles was NOT one of them, he was Greek.
@TRUTH CENSORED Oh dear ...
@Ernest Khalimov can't? We could...they just don't.
@Ernest Khalimov Yep...lazy Hollywood
In fairness, it's not so much a question of whether Achilles was black, but that he most likely didn't exist in the first place. Remember the Iliad is not actually a historical text, it is a work of historical fiction, as it were, where perhaps some broad facts were used, such as the occurrence of a war between a city named Troy and an alliance of other city states, but otherwise, as with modern historical dramas, the body of the work is made up.
As such I tend to be a little more forgiving of liberties such as casting someone like Achilles, who would have been ethnically Greek if he'd even existed, as black. More worrying and insidious is where the fact that it would be possible for a black person to hold high rank, gets portrayed as the norm, because then it's no longer a question of artistic liberties when interpreting fiction, but an active attempt to promote a false historical account.
@TRUTH CENSORED “communism is when you make a white fictional character black” -Karl Marx
Regarding racism, just read any account of the Romans talking about Germans. Skin so pale like ghosts, eyes blue like they're possessed corpses, hair so bright like monsters.... Etc
If anything, the Romans were equally racist to literally everyone.
That was pretty common then. It is not really uncommon even now.
@@Alexanderrr3r I'd say everybody was like that, you would trust your people and maybe some neighbouring countries but that was it, everybody else was wierd or even freakish. And when you need to motivate your people in a war of course you'll talk about them in a negative way and focus on the differences, basically it was never about race but more about being bias towards your own
Still german blond and ginger concubines with blue/green eyes were considered the most beautifull women by roman men and roman women tried to copy their look.
We should keep in mind that 'white' is being used relative to the Ethiopian dark skin. Romans were most likely Caucasian but not 'white' per say like the idiots in the comment section who accuse the media of blackwashing certain culture (true to some extent) due to the current political climate but at the same time unironically believe their version of history is not whitewashed and equally political and stupid as well. Romans viewed Western Europe as stinky pale barbarians.
@@killerqueen9113 All that and they were all still white. Europeans are white.
I learn so much from you professor Metatron. I wish you had been a teacher of mine when I was younger and maybe I would have enjoyed school more.
2:42 Speaking of which, could you do more videos about Bronze Age Greece? Minoan Crete or Mycenaean Greece? I would love to hear you discuss those
But of course my friend
I second this.. thank you Metatron!
Definitely would like this
@@metatronyt This humble barbarian thanks you in advance.
@Metatron , what resources did you use for evidence in Minoan and Mycenean Greece? I was under the impression from my own studies that depictions of dark skinned individuals in Minoan frescos were artistic representations and not accurate portrayals of skin color.
Great video! It's nice to see someone tackling the complexity of how skin color was considered in the ancient world, and the differences from our modern ideas about race. When the video started, I thought "you could easily make the same video asking this question about northern Europeans, whom the Greeks and Romans considered as distinct from themselves as black people." and then you hit on that very point! Well done.
Quick clarification: λευκός is the one that means 'white', and ξᾰνθός means 'yellow', 'tawny', or 'blonde'. I think you switch them the first time you define those terms at around 8 minutes in, and then use the terms correctly afterwards. But your point about them is very well taken!
But really what's the evidence for that assumption? Just because those two attributes are mentioned doesn't mean they are equally valued.
The comment was about describing something alien to an Ethiopian. Light skin is that. Meanwhile there are many people with light and dark hair similar to black people. So blonde hair would be and additional difference to the black appearance that may be additionally mentioned.
Also the mention of an attribute doesn't mean that this attributes waw even considered relevant in the sense of ethnic identity in a society. I may just be relevant to this given situation.
Well, the Greeks would be incorrect, genetically.
Your unbiased research confirms what most people already thought, that black people were a tiny minority in Europe in classical times
Why do American Subsaharan African blacks insist on placing themselves in every possible geographical location throughout the world BUT Subsaharan Africa 😂
Well...remember when the Germans were taught to hate the Jews because Jews were stealing German culture? Its like like. They were taught plus they have so little cultural heritage of their own so they need to grasp at straws like statues of cave paintings of braids. They were shamed for so long in America. They still mimic their abusers generations later
@@monkeydavefraudit wasn’t due to germans thinking jews were stealing their culture and your last statement has no meaning as no one attempted to steal AA history.
I appreciate just the facts of accurate history being discussed in this video. History classes in schools don’t inform you of these things
@Christian probably shape
Historical literature written by ppl at that time proves this fact. It has been proven by multiple historians over many decades that historical facts have been edited in publications to cover historical facts. Researching the ethnicity of a skulls does not prove anything as bodies could have been moved, and so on. History is confirmed through historical literature and artifacts, not science.
History in public schools these days are more about indoctrinating children into a selected world-view than teaching them about the full spectrum of facts of what happened in the past.
@Dominic Toretto yes mordern European invented race. Romans never saw themselves as white but as Romans. If you black but roman you could be am emperor if you are germania and not roman you could a slave
@@goodman4093 That is a strawman. Whenever you think that someone is this way or that way because he or she was born a member of this nation or tribe or another, it is in essence racism. I'm not talking about assumptions one makes based on socialisation, but about stuff like "oh, these people are just naturally aggressive, it's in their blood." You don't have to think of yourself as white or whatever to think like that. Romans, and even more so the Greeks were obsessed with that sort of thing. Also, you did not become a Roman Emperor by election. Most of the time you became Emperor because you had the strongest army. So, that people who were not descended from a Roman or Italian family but from other parts of the Empire does not prove that Romans weren't racist. They just were in a different way from today.
As a black person, i literally don't care at all about having black people being represented in european history, I prefer focusing on traditional african culture itself when looking for representation, it's like being mad because there are no native americans being represented in arab culture
Exactly!
Perfect reply mate
Very lucid and well presented discussion.
As a person of southern Italian descent my DNA is dominated by Italian and Greek, with a hint of North Africa. No sub-sahara DNA. SO this is all BS with the chatter about blacks being dominant in ancient Rome.
such a well thought out and well researched video babe! Well done!
Congrats on your recent engagement
Congratulations!
I didn't see you in this video... I am suprised xD
@@masonclark9110 thank you! :D
@@nikcantsnipe Thank you!
Oh, on the bones in England. I remember seeing this in a BBC documentary. Being wise to this sort of thing I noticed that they said African, not Black. I did more research and surprise surprise, they were North African. That would be Olive Skinned people. The Med was in no way a barrier, it was the Roman highway.
You've clearly never been to North Africa. Where do you think the "very black" Moors came from? There were black people in Britain from very early times, whether racists like it or not.
There was a genetic study that came out in 2019, talking about the sub-Saharan presence in Spain 4000 years ago. So there is evidence of sub-Saharan Africans being in southern Europe thousands of years ago.
royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rspb.2018.2288
Research the *Beachy Head Lady:*
It has been identified that she originated from *Sub-Saharan Africa* and that she lived somewhere between 200 and 245 AD in the middle of the Roman British era.
@@helenwood8482 I lived in southern Italy for 2 years and Cyprus for 3, I spent time in Egypt and Israel. I would saw more black people in Southern Italy than Egypt. The Wikipedia for Moors shows numerous depictions and includes a modern photograph of their descendants. Not a black face among them. Racists may want to believe that sub Saharan Africans widely populated North Africa, Europe and Britain pre 1950 but the facts don't support it.
@@amberwilliams3558 Nobody is disputing that some sub Saharan Africans got around. Just that they didn't do so in significant numbers. Sadly academia is tainted. Mary Beard waxed lyrical about how Rome just loved free movement as though she had never heard of Diocletian. Not only were Roman citizens not allowed to leave their town of birth, but they had by law to take up their fathers profession and no other. Another pointed out were people in the Roman Fire service had come from within Europe (and the Roman Empire) as if a London fire brigade comprised of a man from Lands End and another from Jon o'groats demonstrated our love for immigration.
I think it's important to understand that racism was a thing back in ancient times, but not the way we know it today. They obviously were able to look at the color of any individual's skin and, as you said, many were racists just by that matter. However, greeks and romans were more racists towards people who weren't citizens despite the color of their skin. An example of that is the relationship between romans and barbarians. Most of them where white, and even with that, they despised barbarians because they were uncivilised and not a part of the empire. The color of their skin had little to no importance on that matter.
Exactly. This very important fact was missing from the video. While it is very likely different looking people did experience a varied ammount of racism/discrimination/fear/etc., the persons status would have been far more important. Also it would have made a difference whether a foreign looking person dressed, behaved, had the same customs and worshipped the same gods or not.
But as mentioned in the video, they did not view most barbarians as white, in the sense we understand that term today. They made a clear distinction between the people we'd today associate with Northern Europeans and Southern Europeans. The barbarian vs civilized dimension was indeed the most important, but it would have correlated to a degree with their preconceived racial theories. They did not think of Europeans as belonging to a single racial category as we do today.
That's nationalism, more so than racism.
Our understanding of racism is based on social darwinism non sense
Well that’s called xenophobia, not racism
Now, this is a great video addressing the topic. Thank you for working hard on sharing accurate historical facts. I have seen many videos on this very topic, this one is by far the best.
Generally speaking, when trying to figure out of people of the past were, two importants things are essential to keep in mind:
- They would act with decent level of logic and pragmatism in their respective context (that's why, for example, the idea of medieval people being dirty all the time makes no sense: no one like to stink)
- Human behavior, needs and basic ways of thinking are roughly the same across History and cultures
What's missing in the video I think is a reminder that racist ideas are a bit like homosexuality : it's wasn't a concept until the XIXth century.
That's when we started thinking in terms of categories of humans, just as we developed the idea of "species" in biology.
Can we back-pedal and say that an Ancient with a distaste for black skin is a racist? I don't think so because racism is that pseudo-scientifically justified categorising different people that was born in the modern age.
I think the Ancients were well aware of obvious differences between humans, but they weren't categorizing humans in races. That black legionary in Britain was seen as a man who was black because he was from Mauritania, just as his colleague was a red head because he was from Germania or whatever... Yes he was weird and a bad omen for the general, but he wasn't considered an "untermensch", an inferior. People probably judged and found black people sometimes weird or ugly or ominous, but they didn't have that poisonous idea of a hierarchy of races.
@@sylvain7277 I disagree, based on the sources mentioned, they clearly categorized people. It wasn't scientifically backed but was a visual observation. The only part I can agree with is that the past lacked any concept of a racial hierarchy.
@@neurofiedyamato8763 Yes you're right I didn't write that well but that's what I meant really.
I just wanted to remind people that races are a modern idea (used to justify slavery, colonialism, etc...).
Obviously when you observe that several people from a village or region have the same skin tone, you're going to categorize them based on that. That doesn't make you a racist even if you use the modern racism idea in retrospect.
@@sylvain7277 Yes and no, races are a very old idea, but the parameters and what they encompassed shifted greatly over time. As did the value placed on them, as they were generally tied to a specific ancestor or as a category of being (the race of man in comparison to beasts or things like satyrs or nymphs or the like). As for gender and homosexuality, I've seen people say this a lot lately, but if you read any historical documents, they clearly had the concepts and categories in mind, they just had different values and in many cases more categories than later peoples. The spectrum was often more broad, but, in the case of gender and sexuality the end points on that spectrum, or in the case of race, the branches were pretty clearly labelled. The problem people today (and to be honest every era has this issue) is that when we consider the conclusions people of the past come to, we somehow conflate the meanings they'd have with some of our own.
Humans have, like comedians with stale material, been making the same observations for thousands of years (we also always seem to simultaneously think we're the first people to observe these things, and use any discoveries of the past observing the same thing as evidence of our own brilliance), but each era comes to their own conclusions about what those observations mean, given the context they live in, and mutations based on the longevity of the contexts of older eras. Right now, we're living in the wake of 19th century contexts, and everything before that gets very fuzzy. And those old contexts, and the new ones we find ourselves in are clashing, and mutating into something new (which in some cases, may resemble something very old). The Romans had the same thing happen with the Greek contexts that lingered as they came to their own discoveries, as did the people of the middle ages, as the contexts of the Romans lingered, but stopped being strictly applicable. It's always fascinating to me when we stumble onto some historical record, that is examining an even older record, and contextualizing everything with such incredibly obvious bias towards their own era (this is especially evident as more scholars became religious officials and they tried to contextualize everything as secretly Christian). We do this all the time.
@@sylvain7277 You are correct in modern models of racism were not used in Antiquity, but there was very much ample evidence of bigotry or 'racism' as they saw race. For example many Roman writers during the late Republic and early Principate had truly dire things to say of the Celts & Germanics, both of whom they saw as barbarians and in our modern terms, another race.
As a long time subscriber, and As a Black man who appreciates diversity in media and representation in general, I appreciate the nuance that you bring to this video. The answer is, as always, that it's complicated, and history doesn't always fit into our ideological categories. Thank you for the thoughtful and nuanced and (not surprisingly) inclusive and sensitive video.
@Miles why do you feel like this is the appropriate place to proselytize
@@Bobby-ud4xk lol right?
@@Bobby-ud4xk and why on this comment of all comments? There are clearly some folks in this comment section that need Jesus more than I do.
@@burner27 maybe they are hopeless and you look like the one who could be "saved" after all? *joke.
@@burner27 It's the racist Son of Ham talking point.
“Every record has been destroyed or falsified, every book rewritten, every picture has been repainted, every statue and street building has been renamed, every date has been altered. And the process is continuing day by day and minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Party is always right.”
― George Orwell, 1984
That is not really applicable to our world though. The book 1984 takes place in a world ruled by all encompassing ultra-authoritarian surveilance states, which isn't the case in our world.
@@utzius8003 Have you been living under a stone??
@@MrChintaro If we were living in 1984 I'd dragged off to a labor camp just for talking about the book 1984. We don't live in Oceania.
Literally 1849
“Seeing black people is literally 1984.”
Excellent, unbiased, balanced, and nonagenda-driven. Great job
Historians: The Roman Empire contained populations of Black people particularity in the African Provinces. Some of these people may have attained high rank or office.
Most People: That's really interesting.
BBC: Romans were all Black Yo.
Lmao
BBC and British general education: "bRiTaIn hAs AlWaYs bEEn DiVeRsE"
And by diverse they don't mean Anglo, Saxon, Jute, Celtic, etc.
*BBC: Romans in Britain had diverse origins, from all over Her Majesty's Overseas Territories, such as African, Indian and Pakistani.
@@MoreEvilThanYahweh I've always found it amusing that British people are forced to pay their taxes towards this propaganda.
Black people werent even common in the african provinces, which were in antiquity, white and middle eastern looking
You're one of the best CZcamsrs on the site. Thanks for the insight, Metatron.
Thank you very much for your kind words
@@metatronyt Hi Metatron! I wholeheartedly agree with Chadical that you are one of the very best and most informative youtubers out there. But please revisit some of your information, especially the claim that about 20-30% of bodies in some Romano-British cemeteries were black - this is nothing but propaganda from archaeologists spinning information for political reasons - I think you'll find if you dig deeper that the data suggests Mediterranean origins and the term "black" is bandied around only to appease multicultural ideology. Even so, using bone shape analysis for race in this way is discredited (the Bangle Lady from York) but isotopes are a guide to regions of origin.
Dude!...this vid was like soothing rain for all the anger I feel towards history benders...even if it`s uncomfortable, you got to respect history. Keep on fighting the good fight!
Hi Enrico. The video is not accurate unfortunately, although Metatron is an excellent youtuber and usually very good.
@@jamesevans1890 please elaborate
@@Enrico_Palazzo_opera_singer Hi Enrico. I listed these elsewhere, but they are the ones that jumped out for me:
(1) note 5:05 the claims about large numbers of 'black' people at cemeteries in Britain are just archaeologists wishful thinking to propagandise multiculturalism. What they really find from bone analysis (not DNA) is that people likely came from the Mediterranean, POTENTIALLY including North Africa, and not northern Europe, they just like to word the results so people assume they were black for ideological reasons (in the UK and US "African" is often assumed to mean "black").
On top of the isotope analysis which helps identify possible regions where individuals grew up and is very useful, archaeologists have sometimes used skull shape to suggest individuals were black but this is discredited as a scientific method - it was used for example for the so called Ivory Bangle lady in York.
(2) The limited DNA studies from Middle Egypt in the Roman period have found next to no sub-Saharan DNA, compared to 20% sub-Saharan DNA in the current Egyptian population - if there is no real trace of black DNA in Ancient Egypt in spite of Nubian mercenaries and dynasties, there's no guarantee the rest of North Africa had a large number of black people either.
Unlike Nubians the Ethiopians are not black Africans, they are a mixed black/Middle Eastern population, so by "black" the ancients were talking dark skinned rather that what we would consider pure black Africans today. The Romans also seemed to have used "Ethiopian" to describe Indians sometimes.
(3) As regards Minoan or Mycenaean art, court artists would tend to portray the exotic, it's certainly not an indication there were more than a very few black Africans in those places. It is often also a convention to paint males very dark and women lighter. I was surprised to see Attic black-figure pottery behind Metatron when he discusses this as that certainly is an artistic convention and never never intended to suggest black subjects.
(4) Septimius Severus is ironic as a demonstration of racism when he's often referred to as the African emperor, with the false supposition that he was black (he is often referred to as black today).
I think you need 30 days of forced critical race theory to straiten out your mind.
fascists will always try to re-write history to hide their shame
I love this guy. No agenda, just facts.
Thank You Metatron! As an African American I enjoy your channel and the historical facts you teach that many people needed to hear. Keep up the great work
@ThxGod It'sOver As an active member of the Christian faith myself, The Bible is not a necessarily a historical record of the people, their ethnicity or race from that period, I believe that's one of the points Metatron was trying to make. It is however a record of the coming of Christ and his life and ministry while on the Earth. (Metatron did an excellent video on that as well) The human race has always migrated from one area to another, which is why I took a DNA test my root spring from a verity of places such as the Middle East, the UK, Ethiopia, West Coast of Africa and Native American.
The human race has been migrating for thousands of years.
Here's another little fact that people forget or simply don't know, the Bible as we know it today, specifically the King James version, was abridged and translated a little of 400 years ago in England. (I been fortunate enough to have lived in the UK for the 400th anniversary of the King James version).
When you abridge, translate and rewrite, written material things change, the meaning of one word can take on a whole new meaning, somethings are lost in the translation process. With all that said I do believe that we have the most important points from the bible, namely the coming of the Messiah and his teachings and ministry.
@ThxGod It'sOver You are obviously not dealing in reality or historical facts and theirs not much point in communicating with you. You are going to believe what you want regardless of proven historical facts or reality.
Just for the record, here are some facts you should know.
King James was a white Englishman (born in Edinburgh Castle in 1566 who served as King of England from 1603 to 1625, he commissioned the translation and abridgement of the scriptures back in 1604 and published it in 1611, before this, each section was it's own book. The gospel of Jesus Christ was divided amount several books written by different prophets and apostles. Some people would have one but not other, which is why King James of England commission this work. There were other people such as William Tyndale, a protestant scholar who first printed the Bible from latin to English around 1528. (Also an Englishman)
Further more, you are in no position to judge anyone. You certainly can't call anyone antichrist when your own behavior is anything but Christ like. "Judge no lest ye be judge, Sermon on the Mount, Mathew 5 - 7."
If you truly want to call yourself a follower of Jesus Christ then learn not only the bible but about the history that lead up to this great work, don't drown yourself in ignorance.
@ThxGod It'sOver Listen to yourself yelling and screaming bible passages, to bad you don't apply them to your own life. How pitiful you sound, in all that noise, you said nothing except to show you really don't understand the bible at all.
@ThxGod It'sOver
It appears you have some demons of your own. 😜
@@michaelbrown7142 how are you supposedly a Christian and claiming that the modern day Bible isn’t accurate in its translations, etymology and contextual understanding? You’re essentially saying; you don’t believe the Bible, you believe the whitewashed excuses European indoctrination (Christianity) invented through THOUSANDS OF YEARS of cultural appropriation and identity theft. I guess you also don’t believe in the Ten Commandments….? Smh.
Exodus 20:13,15,17 KJV
[13] Thou shalt not kill.
[15] Thou shalt not steal.
[17] Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour's.
Do you know who European/Eurasian people are in the Bible? Of course you don’t! Do you understand the Bible goes into great detail about how they slaughtered “black people”, stole and colonized our former lands in the Middle East, drove us out, subjugated the remnant, wiped out our histories as much as they could and made themselves the authority on spirituality while stealing various black identities? Of course you don’t! But you’re going to tell us translations and definitions completely changes the contextual understanding of terrorism, destruction and persecution but race doesn’t matter to Jesus?!? Which one; the idealized white one your religious beliefs are based on or the biblical Christ that said don’t go into Gentile ways?!?!
2 Corinthians 11:4 KJV
[4] For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him.
Because modern day Christianity would be completely unrecognizable and heartbreaking to real BIBLICAL Christians!
You definitely do not have a solid grasp on biblical ethnology and don’t know that Christianity is a Eurocentric THEORETICAL explanation of the gospel of Christ that’s historically inaccurate and quite frankly, unbridled stupidity designed to keep Eurocentrism alive and Europeans in full control of our spirit. But you don’t even know what the word “spirit” actually meant in ancient times.
psy·che1
/ˈsīkē/
noun
the human soul, mind, or spirit.
Therefore that makes your “spiritual beliefs” psychologically manipulated brainwashed delusions. What’s even more crazy is the apostle Paul explains the corrupted version of religion you adhere to would become the overwhelming deluded world religion of salvation by belief pushed by ecclesiastical European corruption.
1 Corinthians 1:21 KJV
[21] For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.
fool·ish·ness
/ˈfo͞oliSHnəs/
noun
lack of good sense or judgment; stupidity.
So do us favour and use the Bible to show us what Christ and the Hebrew people looked like because his description is in scripture but your Eurocentric based theology has fed you the lie that it isn’t and you believe their theology and the cosplay dude that made this video over the Bible and some common sense.
And if you are a real BIBLICAL Christian, you’re commissioned to give PROVABLE explanations supported by the Word of God and supportive history. Using Matthew 10:14 as your reason to disengage is not only contextually incongruent to the disciples (who were ALL black….) evangelizing while black people were being slaughtered by the Romans, it shows that you truly do not have the spirit of the real Christ!
1 Peter 3:15 KJV
[15] But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear:
Do a video on the byzantine/HR empires and how they ACTUALLY relate to the Roman Empire. Starting from the time it was divided if you could :)
What is a Byzantine?
@@ChristianAuditore14 A person from the Byzantine empire (Eastern Roman Empire), the capital of which was Constantinople (later Istanbul after the Ottoman conquest) which was built out of the old Greek city Byzantium because it was effectively impenetrable.
@@human3745 quite literally so, it took the invention of gunpowder and the largest cannon ever constructed to break those walls
@@human3745 if it is the Roman empire why do you call it Byzantine?
Just remember - The Holy Roman empire was neither Holy, nor Roman, nor an empire.
Thank you for discussing controversial topics. The Metatron has spread his wings!
I never understood why people call asians yellow._.
It's always my pleasure
Now, What IS asian? Nowadays we always think that asia is east of the.. umm... Western world. So asian must be people living there. But that seems not to be the case: for modern western world, when they hear "asian", they automatically think of sino-japon-korean-mongols.
Indians, arabs, jews, austronesians, melanesians, are rarely thought as "asian" even though these people lived east of western world.
However, i would like to hear your opinion about what they were called in the antiquity, since the trade route between ancient western world all the way to sumatra and beyond did exist, and what people do the ancient european called "asian"?
Their skin has a slightly yellow tint. By direct observation I've seen this to be true. As the classic definition of asian, not the semantic drift of every single person within the border of Asia now being "asian" to facilitate gaslighting when someone says "They're not asian". We should refer to Russians as "asian" but I haven't heard that nomenclature, ever.
Although pale in complexion East Asians tend to have a very subtle yellowish undertone to their skin. For another example white people are also of a pale complexion like Asians but with a redish or pink undertone to their skin.
East Asians and Eurasians have different genes expressing pale skin.
Excellent discourse, well reasoned and fully supported by original sources and physical evidence!
Whites, blacks, and . . . blondes 🤣 as a blonde I find that part particularly funny.
Keep up with the terrific content, Metatron. Been a fan for a while now.
Remember when neonazis used to say that "Mediterraneans aren't white?"
Mediterraneans in the year 500 BC: Germanics aren't white
Mediterranean, Nordic and Sub-Saharan ;)
@@riograndedosulball248 Not Neonazis only, the "Mediterraneans aren't white" meme was older than Nazism. Napoleonic French used to say that Europe ends at the Pyrenees and stuff like that. To be fair, the Brits at that age said that Asia started in Calais.
@@TheBayzent True. Benjamin Franklin referred to essentially all continentals including northern and western Europe as "swarthy," a similar racial belief in British supremacy to H. P. Lovecraft's.
Blond kids are Just as Bright as White and black Kids
~ Consul Justinius Bidentius
Just like in all history things are not black and white. Things are shades of grey.
And blonde
@@nfo1776 or ginger
you mean shades of brown surely?
you need a new TV bud
Exactly
Rome assimilated every culture it conquered. They were "The Borg" of their day.
Pretty much. That is why many liken the US to modern Rome given the similarities in ideology and government
Except for Greek culture
@@gundabalf nah, they absorbed that too
@@gundabalf Ever heard of Greco-Roman culture? They were one and the same in many areas, sort of like modern US, Canada and Britain. The two traded beliefs and god worship amongst other things regularly and just like how the US and China film industry remake each others films and change the name slightlyZ
@@gundabalf Didn't conquer because Greece was on the decline by the time Rome was rising and they didn't have to. The Romans revered the Greeks for their education, philosophy, government and considered them the first truely civilized society. Rome even copied much of the Greek Pantheon when developing their own. They frankly absorbed more from Greece than many other cultures because most others were considered barbarians.
Thanks for putting this out bro
The one who controll the present controll the future.
The one who controlls the past controlls the present.
The one who Angers a Italian man in full armor, lives not to controll anything.
-Sun Tzulini. The Art of Pasta.
I thaught that was Tony Soprano😄
It's odd that leukos is translated as "yellow" and xanthos as "white" in the video, when the inverse is the case in scientific nomenclature. Consider "leukocyte" (white blood cell) and xanthophyll (a yellow pigment found in leaves).
I’m really confused about this too. It’s the same in modern Greek. I’m afraid this might be an oversight not noticed during editing... maybe he meant to switch them?
It seems like a mistake on Raff's part.
He mentioned they could be used that way.
Color was a little nebulous in Ancient Greece, to a point where people have posited they hadn’t developed a modern sense of color. I hope that helps!
Ξανθός definitely means blond, and λευκός means white... I think he got them mixed up.
@@megarakadmea But well... From what i remeber from my ancient greek course (attic dialect) Ξανθός was translated to yellow. And so my ancient greek dictonary confirms that Ksanthos means "yellow" and Leukos "white". But well, i see your nick is greek so probably you might know more.
You are a brilliant historian and researcher. Love from Scotland
Thank you very much
Wow I really enjoyed this video. Thank you 👏🏾
It is a shame that we project problems from our time and history back into old history, where many of our modern ideas and concepts did not even exist.Rewriting history ...
I was reading BBC History magazine a few months back and one article said that because some male Vikings were buried wearing female jewelry, they had a different 'gender identity'. It didn't even consider other possibilities.
@@Hosker25 Sexism: "Whoever is the woman does the dishes"
WOKE PROGRESSIVISM: "Whoever does the dishes is the woman"
While I certainly agree that we should not try to rewrite history, you can definitely use modern concepts to interpret and analyze the past. The job of a historian isn't to just state what happened, it's also to use their understanding of history to provide an analysis that puts the historical facts into a context to further its understanding.
@@TK2692 Rule Number One in studying and interpreting history is to *never* , ever apply anachronistic ideologies to different eras.
History has always and will forever be rewritten.
Speaking of North Africa and current day Morocco. I'd love to see a video how the relations between these Berber tribes and the Vandals were, and later how they fared with the Umayyad expansion and Islamic rule.
Berbers got significantly lightened with Turkish admixture, especially after the 1500s
They used to be darker than Egyptians on average, and now are lighter.
@@BoqPrecision False, Berbers are considered to be an indigenous Caucasian group in North Africa.
@@MacHamish you haven't listened to anything Metatron presented here did you? LOL
They are the vandals... Lol
@@MacHamish You have no comprehension skills. He read Roman accounts that described different types of Berbers indigenous to North Africa. Some were Black or they referred to them as "Ethiopian" and some were more wt. I'm sure there were others who were many versions of the two combined. LISTEN 👂🏾
"ominous color"
Lmao I'm gonna use that to describe myself now
i, for one, welcome our new PoOC overlords.
@@jrs4516 i smell barbarian cooperator. The cross awaits you
No please don't use that to describe yourself.
Ominous time
@@TheVictorianAmi Ominous time
Fantastic work! Knowledgeable for all who watch.
Metatron:Sorry if my pronunciation sounds different than modern greek.This is the ancient one
Me a greek:This sounds the same.
It's soooooo nice to have a balanced analysis of this.
Glad you took a nuanced view for this topic unlike that awful BBC cartoon. Keep up the good work!
My pleasure!
@@metatronyt anything the BBC produce is biast now anyway and would not be factually, historically, accurate. They have a diversity charter and take the view that the likes of the Anne Boleyn series is acceptable so pack historical series with "diverse" people and supposed documentaries too.
I agree that it was nuanced and well composed, but I have one major quibble: in this video @Metatron uses the word 'racism' a bit looser than is historically appropriate. The term itself only came into regular usage in English the mid 20th century basically alongside anti-colonialist and civil rights struggles. It's very much married to modern notions of race, and modern structures of oppression shaped by modern cultural constructs like Christianity, nationalism, rationalism, the enlightenment, capitalism, classism, chattel slavery, colonialism, white-supremacy and more.
'Racism' as a word has a lot of baggage that inclines it towards unintended projection of modern complexes when applied to historical contexts. Diverse phenotypes obviously existed, and people weren't blind, but this does *not* equate to cultural conception 'race' as we understand it (which rest upon a bunch of modern ideas, as well as the implicit notion of hierarchy). The attestations in the video indicate a kind of colourism for sure, but not racism in the full sense of the word.
It'd be like describing an ancient economy as socialist - like, we'd get what you're saying, but socialism emerged as a critique of capitalism and is laden with baggage tied to this context. Similarly, I would say it's accurate to say that both socialism and racism are modern phenomena - whilst not at all meaning that communal economies or xenophobia and discrimination on the basis of phenotype didn't exist. The Romans didn't have a racialised system of privilege and oppression.
@@metatronyt I really, really hope you singled out this comment because of its praise for your presentation and not for its condemnation of the BBC cartoon. Really, really hope. I would think such an extreme view as 'that awful BBC cartoon' would make this one pretty questionable when it comes to a creator's 'love', seeing as how the whole point of your video was that it wasn't awful.
@@joshuapray I hearted the comment because It's a compliment on my work and approach, which I appreciated very much. I don't like the BBC cartoon, I have said that pubblically, I find It to be an inappropriate Teaching tool for the youth, as It depicts unhistorical things, but as I said on this video, the black officer Is plausibile. I wouldn't use the term "awful", but I do find It misleading.
Fascinating my friend. Wonderful work, please keep the videos coming!
Thank you metatron.
Sometimes it's better to swallow your pride, tell people we aren't perfect, and study without agenda so that we might never make the same mistakes.
It becomes increasingly difficult to do that as time progresses.
That's one of my biggest fears about a digital centralized information depository such as the internet, from alterations.
Love your channel along with all the other history buffs.
@M W don't feed the troll.
I speak 12 languages and I can tell you for a fact that Italian is the same language as native African languages. Word for word.
@@nicolepaloms3509 ce que vous dites m'intéresse beaucoup. Je voudrais vous parler seul à seul.
Makes you think what information the RCC is hiding in their vaults. They are the Mother of Harlots and Abominations in Revelation 13 and 17.
I'm pretty sure it gets EASIER.
Very much respect to you sir for diving into these topics despite the controversial issues.
My very pleasure
Thank you for presenting the real history with scholarship and nuance. Far to many modern people, especially in America, have ideological axes to grind on all sides of the political spectrum. And they often distort the facts.
I love your videos. Well researched, beautifully presented, extremely informative, very entertaining and enjoyable.
This video is one of the most informed examinations of the ancient world, including the use and importance of language, culture, relationships between cultures and races I have seen. I commend you for your knowledge and presentation.
It’s not a surprise with how wide ranging and lengthy the Roman Empire was that there were black populations present.
My real issue is pushing modern politics into the historical arena.
i agree. people pushing modern concepts of race, culture, identity, and politics on ancient people are stupid.
its kind of like when people try to frame ancient societies as "tolerant" when they allowed homosexuality, when in reality the type of homosexuality often practiced was far removed from the modern concept.
I see why people would want to draw historical parallels and maybe argue from that basis on certain issues, but modern politics should always stay away from history.
@@aresgood1 I believe the main problem is that most people believe that ancient people must have thought about things exactly the way they do
@@boarfaceswinejaw4516 i kinda agree with you. but isn't "pushing modern politics into history " kinda the norm in nationalism? nationalist always argue the people of the nation existed in that place for millennia, and they have an unified culture/ language/ ethnicity etc.
@@boarfaceswinejaw4516 And for example greek homosexuality would, today, probably be considered to include a major part of grooming.
Black vikings, ancient Norse/Germanic/British is also an annoying trend. I'm from Sweden and there where almost no blacks at all until the 60's
Where are you seeing such a trend?
@@admirekashiri9879 usually western media. It's the same as common blackwashing of characters but slightly worse, since it might give people the wrong idea about history
@The censored Racist well said!
There must have been some before 1960's. Because the first member of Mannerheim family came to Finland from Sweden in 1700's and according to Finnish TV marshal Mannerheim was black.
@@JanoTuotanto sure, there where exceptions. I'm generalising. I've heard stories from a lot of older people alive today being surprised or shocked to see a black person in their towns and villages as kids. Some say the whole town showed up just to get a look at the guy lol
Incredibly well documented, sincere congrats
0:35 I don't know why, but seeing you armored up right at that opening caught me off guard lol.
It was like waking up after sleeping on my desk in class, and seeing my history teacher fully armored.
and instructing the class like nothing has changed. I've never seen someone so casual in armor.
Its like you're just wearing a tee shirt. Just amazing to see someone so natural in armor.
Well there we have it folks. Not surprising. When you look at any great Empire throughout history, they are all varying degrees of multiethnic almost by definition. Thanks Metatron!
My pleasure!
And that's exactly why they fall.
@@halafradrimx not really, there are always several factors. Nothing lasts forever.
@@halafradrimx
extreme internal corruption, military too expensive, military stretched thin, too much power to generals resulting in civil wars, crazy emperors, further decrease of democracy, enemies reaching equal level of military technology and strategy.
must be that multiculturalism.
@@boarfaceswinejaw4516 And lastly I would argue the era of decadence. An empire drunk on its power and influence too long that it throws its culture and class to the wind.
Thanks for this one. Just one note: Of course Rome was multiethnic long before they established Africa consularis. Their population comprised the Gauls of Northern Italy, the Greeks from Magna Graecia, of course Latins and Etruscans. All of them were distinct ethnicities or we could even say nationalities. Ethnicity is not just a synonym for skin color. Mainly, ethnicities are distinguished from one another by language and culture.
There were already Africans within the Republic before Gauls even became a problem that needed to be dealt with. So there werent Gauls in the early daya
@@giannis_toupolemou Where are those Africans supposed to have come from? Celts/Gauls sacked Rome in 390 BCE. The first Celtic/Gaul settlements fell under Roman control around 300 BCE. Roman soldiers hadn't even set foot on African soil by then. The First Punic War started in 261 BCE and when it ended in 241 BCE, there wouldn't have been too many black Africans among the captives. There were certainly some, but not many. Cisalpine Gaul was conquered in 222 BCE. Carthage was sacked in 147 BCE and its entire population was sold into slavery. This is probably the first time a relevant number of black Africans came into the territory of the Roman Republic - and they would have been a minority among the Carthaginian slaves. Northern Africa only fell under Roman sovereignty the year later - roughly 160 years after the first Celtic/Gaul settlements had been conquered.
Sidonius says nothing about his Goths' hair and eye color, so we can believe that it has been the usual in Gaul at this time. Maybe their hair had different medium and dark blonde shades, as is the case with many of today's Scandinavians. It is not because Sidonius was not interested in eye colors, it can be seen from one of his poems. But maybe he did not find it opportune to irritate the king by dwelling too much by the fact that many Goths had this unattractive blue eye color.
The Romans did not think that it was nice to have blue eyes. They often used the term "threatening blue eyes".
Sidonius was allowed to keep his estates after the Western Goths had taken over the South of France. In gratitude, he wrote a little poem to King Euric. He wrote it allegedly for his friend Lampridius, but certainly with the ulterior motive that he would show the poem to the King: "We see in his courts the blue-eyed Saxon, lord of the seas, but a timid landsman here. - We see thee, aged Sygambrian (poetic name for the Franks) warrior, the back of the head shaven in sign of thy defeat - Here strolls the Herulian with his glaucous cheeks, inhabitant of Ocean's furthest shore, and of a complexion with its weedy deeps. Here the Burgundian bends his seven feet of stature on suppliant knee, imploring peace. - And here, O Roman, thou also seekest thy protection - ".
@@michaelbernard7402 Interesting. I had no idea that Romans were intimidated by blue eyes. But then again, it may have only been one shade of blue eyes. There is that piercing look some blue eyed people have - and I've only ever noticed that in people with blue eyes, among whom it is also an exception.
Well done. Very informative and fact based treatise on the subject. People today tend to get their feelings hurt when facts are placed in front of them that disagree with their fantasies.
Nordic type people are still called "yellow" in Turkey :D
Maybe because blond hair is mostly yellowish.
@@mgx9383 well, yeah! obviously...
@@mgx9383 I mean, the Irish called people from Africa "blue men," due to the color of their clothing, so it's not THAT strange.
Are any non Turkish people called "white" in Turkey ?
@@christosgiannopoulos828
many Turkish peoples can have fair skin...., they are in the same latitudes than south Europa.
FYI, The notion that Asians are "yellow" did not originate with Blumenbach. It likely came from Portuguese missionaries who reported about the people's living along the Yellow River. I am a historian who studies Blumenbach race and may I say you did a pretty good job of presenting the nuances that are often not reported. You should check out the book "The invention of Race in Classical Antiquity" by Isaac and "Before Color Prejudice" by Snowdon. "Becoming Yellow" by Keevack is also good. I don't agree with everything they say, but they are thorough.
Before Color Prejudice" by Snowdon thumbs up
why proclaim you are a historian? does it change your arguments?
@@u235u235u235 Well, it is true... so, why not proclaim it?
@@MermaidsandGenies did he proclaim he's under 7 feet tall?
Just by chance I came across this video today. I love to hear more about Africans in history it's so limited today. You're not really giving all the information upfront you have to dig for it like a diamond and that's exactly what this video is a diamond thank you. Awesome job!
Check out Hometeam History, From Nothing and Hidden History then. These channels cover many areas of African history.
@@Shtf132 there are actually books that look to Kush as well as Mali and Kanem Bornu and other cultures
Black Africans traditionally passed down their history orally, which is why it is not as documented. In West Africa in particular (modern day Mali, Senegal, Burkina Faso etc), the "griots" were a specific caste whose purpose was to basically be the keepers of the memory, they would start memorizing the history of their people from childhood.
But now, the internet has a lot of information on the former African kingdoms and empires, not that hard to find anymore 😉
Colonization disorganized the old African societies a great deal and you can barely find griots nowadays, but some African writers like Amadou Hampate Ba (he died in 1991) toured around West Africa to meet the remaining ones and write down as much of the history as they could.
HomeTeam on CZcams is a really good channel, he breaks down all of Africa from the different black ethnic groups all over the continent.
Nammu
I knew I was going to enjoy this video. Thanks for all the great research