7 ms·

Could you please substantiate those claims? One obvious counterexample is that Alexander the Great's empire reached northwest India. The idea that Greek societ

Could you please substantiate those claims? One obvious counterexample is that Alexander the Great's empire reached northwest India. The idea that Greek society would be so isolated from the world – not coming into contact with travelers or traders or captives from beyond the Mediterranean – seems ridiculous to me.

ng12 8y ago
But the overwhelming majority of Greeks would have never seen a Indian or Ethiopian person in their lifetime. Why would they define themselves based on the differences between them, especially superficial ones?
- GavinMcG 8y ago
  Again: can you please substantiate that? Speculation isn't worth much. Your intuition is clearly that someone wouldn't define themselves along those lines, but intuitions are often wrong. And it's not obviously and unequivocally true that the overwhelming majority of Greeks would never see someone distinctly foreign looking.
  - ng12 8y ago
    How does one substantiate something that didn't happen? The Greeks made very little discussion of their own skin color and we have no archaeological or literary evidence of Ethiopian or Indian people actually living in Greece. Look at the stretches the author had to make when discussing skin color.
- HarryHirsch 8y ago
  That's frankly rubbish. Chapter 2 of the Acts of the Apostles tells how the Apostles speak in tongues and Acts 2,9-10 lists the nations that were in Jerusalem for Shavuot: Parthians and Medes and Elamites and residents of Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia, 10 Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the parts of Libya belonging to Cyrene, and visitors from Rome. Given, this is early 1st century AD Jerusalem, not Greece, but classical Athens was no less cosmopolitan, and the gymnosophists were well attested in Alexander the Great's time.
  - ng12 8y ago
    I'm not sure I understand. The places listed are all parts of the Mediterranean, Asia Minor, and the Middle East which were largely white by some definition -- at least more-so than people from Sub-Saharan Africa or South Asia. > but classical Athens was no less cosmopolitan Now this is actually rubbish. The Roman Empire was orders of magnitude more diverse than Ancient Greece ever was. > the gymnosophists were well attested in Alexander the Great's time. Sure, they were -- as people who lived in India. There's a huge gulf between knowing of the existence of the outside world and developing modern conceptions of race. Here's an overly simple example: if I told you there was a race of three-legged Martians would you immediately start defining yourself by your bipedal nature? Probably not. What if a small number of Martians moved to your country and you saw one on the subway one time? Still, probably no. It's not until you're faced with a deeply-connected universal society that includes bipedal, tripedal, and quadrupedal humanoids that you might start thinking that way.

ng12 8y ago

But the overwhelming majority of Greeks would have never seen a Indian or Ethiopian person in their lifetime. Why would they define themselves based on the differences between them, especially superficial ones?

GavinMcG 8y ago
Again: can you please substantiate that? Speculation isn't worth much. Your intuition is clearly that someone wouldn't define themselves along those lines, but intuitions are often wrong. And it's not obviously and unequivocally true that the overwhelming majority of Greeks would never see someone distinctly foreign looking.
- ng12 8y ago
  How does one substantiate something that didn't happen? The Greeks made very little discussion of their own skin color and we have no archaeological or literary evidence of Ethiopian or Indian people actually living in Greece. Look at the stretches the author had to make when discussing skin color.
HarryHirsch 8y ago
That's frankly rubbish. Chapter 2 of the Acts of the Apostles tells how the Apostles speak in tongues and Acts 2,9-10 lists the nations that were in Jerusalem for Shavuot: Parthians and Medes and Elamites and residents of Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia, 10 Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the parts of Libya belonging to Cyrene, and visitors from Rome. Given, this is early 1st century AD Jerusalem, not Greece, but classical Athens was no less cosmopolitan, and the gymnosophists were well attested in Alexander the Great's time.
- ng12 8y ago
  I'm not sure I understand. The places listed are all parts of the Mediterranean, Asia Minor, and the Middle East which were largely white by some definition -- at least more-so than people from Sub-Saharan Africa or South Asia. > but classical Athens was no less cosmopolitan Now this is actually rubbish. The Roman Empire was orders of magnitude more diverse than Ancient Greece ever was. > the gymnosophists were well attested in Alexander the Great's time. Sure, they were -- as people who lived in India. There's a huge gulf between knowing of the existence of the outside world and developing modern conceptions of race. Here's an overly simple example: if I told you there was a race of three-legged Martians would you immediately start defining yourself by your bipedal nature? Probably not. What if a small number of Martians moved to your country and you saw one on the subway one time? Still, probably no. It's not until you're faced with a deeply-connected universal society that includes bipedal, tripedal, and quadrupedal humanoids that you might start thinking that way.