• Dragon@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    43
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    I recently visited a church with a painting of John the Baptist and Jesus and, well…

  • pelespirit@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    32
    ·
    1 day ago

    I had someone on reddit argue that the icons show “white” people on their gravestones, so he was probably white. I think he really believed it and it was pretty hilarious to see them do brain exercises to get Jesus to be white. Never mind that the coloring was probably adjusted on the screen, the pigment was falling off and they were 2000 years old. Also, it’s encaustic, which is painting with wax and has a sheen.

    This is the one. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Encaustic_painting#/media/File:EncausticPortraitWoman.jpg

  • fxomt@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    Wdym? Of course everyone named jesus here is white, blond and blue-eyed. Don’t you know how the middle east works?

  • Barley_Man@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 day ago

    The United States government does officially consider Middle Eastern people to be white for census purposes. However this does not mean that is what everyone else considers to be white. Benjamin Franklin famously considered only English and northern German people to be white, even excluding Scandinavians from white status. In the end it’s totally arbitrary where you draw the line. What is totally clear is that Jesus was not blond and blue eyed. Those traits were incredibly rare in the middle east both then and today. There is a chance however that Jesus was white passing as many people from the levant are today and probably were back then as well.

    Here is a picture of modern day Samaritans who are a sister group to the Jews. They never left their homeland of northern isreal and are therefore probably close to the genetic makeup of ancient Jews.

    Here is a picture of a modern day Lebanese classroom.

    So it may be that Jesus looked like an Italian, could also be that he was one of the less white passing ones. But in the end does it really matter? The message of Jesus is the same no matter the case.

    • Tar_Alcaran@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      So it may be that Jesus looked like an Italian

      Who were, incidentally, also not white untill very recently. Even a hundred years ago, a lot of people didn’t consider Italians to be white people.

    • voodooattack@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      Except that theory is flawed if you consider the ramifications of the Islamic conquest followed by European crusades, and then you have the Ottoman, French, British, and most recently, Israeli occupation. A lot of rape/interbreeding happened throughout.

      I live in Egypt and whole providences here are full of green/blue eyes and blonde/ginger hair as a consequence.

      Edit: also forgot the Mongolian hordes. It’s the Middle East, a lot of shit went down tbh

      • Barley_Man@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        18 hours ago

        Even if one claims that there are white passing people there today only because of foreign conquests, then it’s important to remember those were also going on before Jesus was born. Most notably Jesus was born in the Palestine province of the Roman Empire. There is even a myth that his dad was a Roman soldier (there is no real evidence of this however). Before the Romans the Greeks ruled isreal after Alexander the greats conquest. So the flow of “white genes” to isreal did not start only after Jesus was born. So I don’t think it’s a good argument to say everyone was uniformly brown there back then but are all mixed today. That’s not true. You could argue however the procentage of white passing people have gone up since then.

      • Barley_Man@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        18 hours ago

        A lot of the Palestinians who live in northern isreal descend at least partly if not chiefly from Samaritans who converted to Islam and started speaking Arabic instead of Samaritan Hebrew. The modern Samaritans wouldn’t call themselves Palestinians however. They have their own identity and many of them don’t speak Arabic.

        • shaserlark@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          15 hours ago

          Sorry what? Palestinian Arabic is what people no matter if Jewish, Christian, Druze, Muslim, … have been speaking in Palestine. People haven’t been speaking Hebrew there since some thousands of years save for religious purposes. This is equivalent to Italians not speaking Latin, Orthodox people not speaking Old Church Slavonic in every day life. This got only changed in the course of the colonization of Palestine. I recommend Israeli historian Ilan Pappe who wrote a very informative book The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine where the language topic and demographics before Zionist colonialism are also discussed.

          • Barley_Man@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            6 hours ago

            That’s correct. The Samaritans used to speak Samaritan Hebrew, then Samaritan Aramaic and then Palestinian Arabic which was then the main language for at least 800 years. However as I understand they have now mostly switched to Hebrew as they have integrated into the isreali state. This is however a very modern phenomenon.

  • Kidplayer_666@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    13
    ·
    1 day ago

    Just to be annoying, first you could argue that Jews were a separate ethnic group with distinct characteristics, or that modern people in the Middle East are descendants of Turkic tribes that came to occupy Anatolia after the fall of the eastern Roman empire

    • zout@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 day ago

      So, you’re saying the people in the middle east were a lot more brown in the year 0 right?

      • Kidplayer_666@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 day ago

        I’m saying I have no idea what the Romans found when they conquered that part of the world. Wonder if there are any historical Roman records

        • zout@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 day ago

          There probably are records, but I would be very suspicious if they mentioned skin colour.

          • floo@retrolemmy.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            1 day ago

            Oh, no, the Romans were quite prolific in their criticism of anyone who wasn’t also Roman. Especially when it came to both their language and their physical characteristics. The shit they said about the Gauls was absurd.

            And from pretty much every area they conquered, they took a gigantic amount of slaves.

            • MudMan@fedia.io
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              18 hours ago

              Everybody took slaves from prisoners of war in any conflict, not just the Romans. Slavery was ius commune, it had nothing to do with ethnicity and it fit in very different social and anthropological functions across all societies of the period. Everybody stop it with the application of modern, anglocentric concepts to ancient Mediterranean cultures. It was cute when you were just building a whole bunch of anachronistic white marble columns, but that’s as much as I can tolerate.

          • Kidplayer_666@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            1 day ago

            Idk about the Romans, but pretty sure the Portuguese did report with surprise the existence of dark brown people in sub Saharan Africa during the age of discovery

    • MudMan@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 day ago

      Frankly, way less annoying than Americans trying to apply a concept of “whiteness” to first century social dynamics.