4 ms·

It should be clear to anyone who has read this article by Dr. Beard (or her phenomenal book SPQR) that it isn't really up for debate whether there were Roman so

It should be clear to anyone who has read this article by Dr. Beard (or her phenomenal book SPQR) that it isn't really up for debate whether there were Roman soldiers and civilians in Britain who came from the far reaches of the Empire and beyond. Yes, including from Africa. Whether we would have looked at these people and said they were "black" is, as Dr. Beard explains, pretty unanswerable (not to mention a vain attempt to view the ancient world in terms of group identities that are very modern indeed). Dr. Taleb and others show a massive ignorance of how the studies of history, archaeology, and biology work when they assert that we can just "look in the genes" for an unambiguous record of every damn person who has ever set foot on the British Isles. But a misguided desire to hold history to the same evidentiary standards as, say, physics or mathematics - including by physicists and mathematicians - is nothing new. What's more worrisome is the determination of some to willfully ignore historical evidence that might challenge their worldview. Look around the Internet - there is a new revisionist history of the Western world that is being pushed, one that holds a shared "white" or "European" identity as paramount. These are the people who came after Dr. Beard as they come after anyone who challenges their views. These people are undoubtedly far less numerous than they appear; they use bots and multiple accounts to make themselves appear more legitimate. This itself is dangerous, as it may cause bystanders to view these people as more mainstream than they truly are (and it's no secret that people ascribe more credulity to an idea when it seems widely accepted). This is not going to get better as neural networks improve at writing tweets that sound human.

zpergs 9y ago
You're making it sound more complex than it is. If Roman Britain was ethnically diverse then what happened to the diversity? It's just not represented in the modern population. Furthermore, a study is probably incorrect if it can't withstand sanity checking from simple population models based on data we do have from the time (e.g. Roman garrison sizes). > Look around the Internet - there is a new revisionist history of the Western world that is being pushed.. The revisionism is actually that Roman Britain was ethnically diverse. To paraphrase the source of this controversy, Paul Joseph Watson: If Roman Britain was diverse then modern day Japan is ethnically diverse. The "we are all immigrants" narrative is pushed to justify mass immigration and open borders. This might make academics like Beard feel cosmopolitan and P.C. views might draw the attention of the Guardian and boost her book sales, but tens of millions of people are suffering from the consequences of these policies and feel alienated by an elite that they feel is working against their will and best interests. > These people are undoubtedly far less numerous than they appear; they use bots Paul Joseph Watson has over 1m subscribers on YouTube and his videos have hundreds of thousands of views. This places his daily circulation higher than most newspapers. While only a small percentage of those people may agree with his views enough to push them online, that is still a lot of people. Anyway, I'm looking forward to reading "Skin in the Game" and wonder whether this story will become another anecdote of Taleb's "Intellectual Yet Idiot" social class.
- neffy 9y ago
  It is there, you just have to know what to look for, it helps to get out to the country. Down in deepest, darkest Devon - one of my Uncles married into a family who have a) been in Devon for centuries (as had his side of the family), and b) generally about the same shade as northern Indians. Friends at university had similarly ancient pedigrees, and tight, curly hair. etc. Modern day Japan, btw. is ethnically "Japanese". Which is to say the entire country are migrants from various parts of the Asian mainland over the last 4000 or so years, again, obvious when you know what to look for. (And don't mention Korea...) Concern over the problems of the modern era, overpopulation and refugees, are real, valid and deserve respect. But they don't need to be mixed up with the convenient stupidities of racism.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- panzagl 9y ago
  How many Polish genes do you think will be in Afghanistan in 2000 years- after all, Polish units have served in Afghanistan. I have an acquaintance whose Russian family lived in Azerbaijan during the fall of the Soviet Union- they figured things were about to go south, so they packed their genes and moved. Maybe an African living in Britain felt the same way when the the legions left and the Scots were coming over the wall...
- laretluval 9y ago
  > If Roman Britain was diverse then modern day Japan is ethnically diverse. I don't understand the argument this is making. Could you clarify?
  - Radim 9y ago
    East Asian countries, Japan included, see ethnic and cultural homogeneity as a good and desirable thing (and are quite openly racist and xenophobic as a result). OP is making a joke -- if you want to call Romain Britain ethnically diverse, you might as well call Japan ethnically diverse. The term becomes meaningless.
- 9y ago
ta871263 9y ago
There were Roman soldiers from all over the Empire in Britain because the Romans invaded Britain. It was not exactly a consensual exchange. "The past had diversity too" triumphalism should be evaluated at least partially in that light.
cabalamat 9y ago
> there is a new revisionist history of the Western world that is being pushed, one that holds a shared "white" or "European" identity as paramount I don't think it's either new or revisionist -- the vast majority of European have been white, going back millenia. And very many Europeans, particularly educated ones, have considered themselves as European, both in geographical terms, and in civilisational terms -- e.g. they thought of them selves as Romans, or as part of Christendom, or as part of the West. > it isn't really up for debate whether there were Roman soldiers and civilians in Britain who came from the far reaches of the Empire and beyond. Yes, including from Africa. Indeed so. > Whether we would have looked at these people and said they were "black" is, as Dr. Beard explains, pretty unanswerable In terms of what they looked like, most Romans were of Mediterranean appearance.

zpergs 9y ago

You're making it sound more complex than it is. If Roman Britain was ethnically diverse then what happened to the diversity? It's just not represented in the modern population. Furthermore, a study is probably incorrect if it can't withstand sanity checking from simple population models based on data we do have from the time (e.g. Roman garrison sizes). > Look around the Internet - there is a new revisionist history of the Western world that is being pushed.. The revisionism is actually that Roman Britain was ethnically diverse. To paraphrase the source of this controversy, Paul Joseph Watson: If Roman Britain was diverse then modern day Japan is ethnically diverse. The "we are all immigrants" narrative is pushed to justify mass immigration and open borders. This might make academics like Beard feel cosmopolitan and P.C. views might draw the attention of the Guardian and boost her book sales, but tens of millions of people are suffering from the consequences of these policies and feel alienated by an elite that they feel is working against their will and best interests. > These people are undoubtedly far less numerous than they appear; they use bots Paul Joseph Watson has over 1m subscribers on YouTube and his videos have hundreds of thousands of views. This places his daily circulation higher than most newspapers. While only a small percentage of those people may agree with his views enough to push them online, that is still a lot of people. Anyway, I'm looking forward to reading "Skin in the Game" and wonder whether this story will become another anecdote of Taleb's "Intellectual Yet Idiot" social class.

neffy 9y ago
It is there, you just have to know what to look for, it helps to get out to the country. Down in deepest, darkest Devon - one of my Uncles married into a family who have a) been in Devon for centuries (as had his side of the family), and b) generally about the same shade as northern Indians. Friends at university had similarly ancient pedigrees, and tight, curly hair. etc. Modern day Japan, btw. is ethnically "Japanese". Which is to say the entire country are migrants from various parts of the Asian mainland over the last 4000 or so years, again, obvious when you know what to look for. (And don't mention Korea...) Concern over the problems of the modern era, overpopulation and refugees, are real, valid and deserve respect. But they don't need to be mixed up with the convenient stupidities of racism.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
panzagl 9y ago
How many Polish genes do you think will be in Afghanistan in 2000 years- after all, Polish units have served in Afghanistan. I have an acquaintance whose Russian family lived in Azerbaijan during the fall of the Soviet Union- they figured things were about to go south, so they packed their genes and moved. Maybe an African living in Britain felt the same way when the the legions left and the Scots were coming over the wall...
laretluval 9y ago
> If Roman Britain was diverse then modern day Japan is ethnically diverse. I don't understand the argument this is making. Could you clarify?
- Radim 9y ago
  East Asian countries, Japan included, see ethnic and cultural homogeneity as a good and desirable thing (and are quite openly racist and xenophobic as a result). OP is making a joke -- if you want to call Romain Britain ethnically diverse, you might as well call Japan ethnically diverse. The term becomes meaningless.
9y ago

ta871263 9y ago

There were Roman soldiers from all over the Empire in Britain because the Romans invaded Britain. It was not exactly a consensual exchange. "The past had diversity too" triumphalism should be evaluated at least partially in that light.

cabalamat 9y ago

> there is a new revisionist history of the Western world that is being pushed, one that holds a shared "white" or "European" identity as paramount I don't think it's either new or revisionist -- the vast majority of European have been white, going back millenia. And very many Europeans, particularly educated ones, have considered themselves as European, both in geographical terms, and in civilisational terms -- e.g. they thought of them selves as Romans, or as part of Christendom, or as part of the West. > it isn't really up for debate whether there were Roman soldiers and civilians in Britain who came from the far reaches of the Empire and beyond. Yes, including from Africa. Indeed so. > Whether we would have looked at these people and said they were "black" is, as Dr. Beard explains, pretty unanswerable In terms of what they looked like, most Romans were of Mediterranean appearance.