@Innovator said:

@OddRob said:

@Innovator said:

@OddRob said:

@Innovator said:

@OddRob said:

@Innovator said:

@OddRob said:

@Innovator said:

@OddRob said: Or when they do a race swap for no reason at all. Like a black King Arthur or Achillies.

Let me add (from my statements above), the Greeks never described people by race as they themselves were multi-ethnic due to people from all races travelling to and from Greece constantly, and their terms for color often meant very different things. For instance, when they did describe or depict men as black-skinned (like they did with Odysseus), they meant they were tough, manly, and rugged. When they described or depicted men as white-skinned, they meant they were weak, pussies, or like a woman. As for Homer describing Achillies with blond hair, he actually said xanthē, which could mean ‘golden’ or a variety of words, so no one really knows what the Greek heroes looked like.

During the Hellenistic period (323-31 BC) especially, due to Alexander's conquests, there were many black people who lived and worked in Greece. They (called Ethiopians by the Greeks) were said to have worked as entertainers, athletes, and soldiers (some of which became slaves like most soldiers captured in battle), and lived among all classes of people. In fact, there were a lot less said about blacks in Greece during this period solely because they were so common place (as opposed to earlier periods when they were considered exotic).

So King Arthur was black and so was Achillies? Dont think so. Thanks for the history lesson. But your making it seem like black people were running around all over the place. Im sure there was a very small population in Europe and more in the Roman empire since they conquered everything, but not as many as you are making it seem. Especially if people were still shocked to see one. Throwing in POC in the background, as side characters, or race swapping is a shit practice and should be stopped. Requiring a certain quota to be met is ridicules. I want to see original characters and original stories with POC, not some token shit that Hollywood likes to push. I never once watched Blade, Spawn, or Black Panther and thought, you know what we need here, some more white people. Just like I never watched anyother film and said the opposite. Casting should go according to needs first and not political virtue signaling points IMO.

You could see in the painting of Lisbon I linked to black people in Medieval Europe weren't rare.

I just dont think they were very common in Med Europe. At least not enough to be forced into period pieces. And the ones that actually were around Im sure didnt hold high rank at courts, of course like you said some were Knights. But that was probably pretty rare. Now in Greek/Roman/Greece pieces, I can def see more POC as main characters. Since that whole area was basically a melting pot.

Where do you think the black people in the Roman Empire went to when it fell?

Depends where they were located at the time. Im sure most tried to get back home, if they remembered where home was. Some integrated into the population if they were not killed. I think the Romans were masters at integrating a conquered population into their ranks. Im not really sure what would happen to a Legion in foreign lands if the local population got word that the Empire has fallen and knew no help would come to the soldiers. I guess it would depend on how the local people were treated by the soldiers. But I dont have much knowledge on this subject. Side not, looking forward to Netflix new series Barbarians coming out at the end of the month.

Yeah...exactly what happened in the U.S. right? 😂

Well in the US we brought over slaves, not professional soldiers trained by the Empire and free to go or stay if the Empire has fallen.

And you believe that no one else would think that having professional soldiers trained by the Empire without any fealty to the fallen empire would be useful to them in their kingdoms?

I think the treatment of the subjugated locals would be the deciding factor when it came to that question. Im not sure how the Empire ruled its territories, iron fist or lose with the rules to get along better with the locals. Im sure it all came down to the guy in charge and not necessarily the 'official' rules.

@OddRob said: I think the treatment of the subjugated locals would be the deciding factor when it came to that question. Im not sure how the Empire ruled its territories, iron fist or lose with the rules to get along better with the locals. Im sure it all came down to the guy in charge and not necessarily the 'official' rules.

Hence why black knights weren't unheard of. As for the rest of the black populous in the Roman Empire. They pretty much got assimilated into where they were already when the Empire fell (instead of going back). Remember the Roman Empire lasted hundreds of years and spanned most of Europe and parts of Asia. The chance of people going back to somewhere they've never been is pretty much slim to none. Thus why some also remained in England when the Romans left there too. Blacks in Medieval England likely weren't common (genetics of Europeans showed they didn't always breed with just other blacks), but they weren't rare either.

@Innovator said:

@OddRob said: I think the treatment of the subjugated locals would be the deciding factor when it came to that question. Im not sure how the Empire ruled its territories, iron fist or lose with the rules to get along better with the locals. Im sure it all came down to the guy in charge and not necessarily the 'official' rules.

Hence why black knights weren't unheard of. As for the rest of the black populous in the Roman Empire. They pretty much got assimilated into where they were already when the Empire fell (instead of going back). Remember the Roman Empire lasted thousands of years. The chance of people going back to somewhere they've never been is pretty much slim to none. Thus why some also remained in England when the Romans left there too.

I agree. But I dont think they were as prolific as some people seem to think. But I also dont think POC didnt exist in that area during that time. As some people seem to think. I really would like to see a series or film that centers on a black Knight or Roman soldier. I think it would be interesting and best of all not forced tokenism.

@OddRob said:

@Innovator said:

@OddRob said: I think the treatment of the subjugated locals would be the deciding factor when it came to that question. Im not sure how the Empire ruled its territories, iron fist or lose with the rules to get along better with the locals. Im sure it all came down to the guy in charge and not necessarily the 'official' rules.

Hence why black knights weren't unheard of. As for the rest of the black populous in the Roman Empire. They pretty much got assimilated into where they were already when the Empire fell (instead of going back). Remember the Roman Empire lasted hundreds of years. The chance of people going back to somewhere they've never been is pretty much slim to none. Thus why some also remained in England when the Romans left there too.

I agree. But I dont think they were as prolific as some people seem to think. But I also dont think POC didnt exist in that area during that time. As some people seem to think. I really would like to see a series or film that centers on a black Knight or Roman soldier. I think it would be interesting and best of all not forced tokenism.

They did. THE HISTORY OF BLACK BRITAIN: ROMAN AFRICANS

@Innovator said:

@OddRob said:

@Innovator said:

@OddRob said: I think the treatment of the subjugated locals would be the deciding factor when it came to that question. Im not sure how the Empire ruled its territories, iron fist or lose with the rules to get along better with the locals. Im sure it all came down to the guy in charge and not necessarily the 'official' rules.

Hence why black knights weren't unheard of. As for the rest of the black populous in the Roman Empire. They pretty much got assimilated into where they were already when the Empire fell (instead of going back). Remember the Roman Empire lasted thousands of years. The chance of people going back to somewhere they've never been is pretty much slim to none. Thus why some also remained in England when the Romans left there too.

I agree. But I dont think they were as prolific as some people seem to think. But I also dont think POC didnt exist in that area during that time. As some people seem to think. I really would like to see a series or film that centers on a black Knight or Roman soldier. I think it would be interesting and best of all not forced tokenism.

They did. THE HISTORY OF BLACK BRITAIN: ROMAN AFRICANS

That was a interesting read, thanks for that.

Sorry, not got time to attribute quotes, but (though there have been some interesting points made) the point still remains that in the "historic past" in the UK (I can't speak as to Greece or Portugal) there were next to none of what we see today as the "minority ethnic" in movies and shows: Black, Asian and Oriental. (These are probably not the acceptable phrases for today). I make the distinction between the latter two as I don't know anyone from either group who thinks they're the same as the other apart from having suffered racism. Also, when most people in the UK refer to "Asians" it seems to mean people from the Indian sub-continent. Take a look at https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/live:bbc_asian_network; AFAIK K-Pop is still huge with the youngsters, but apparently isn't "Asian".

Yes, there have been Black people in the past (AFAIK basically everyone comes from Black stock, though I thought I'd read something recently suggesting that Oriental people may have had a different background). There have been a few Black people in the UK in the time since recorded history, but as there won't have been enough to have a "Black" community they will have intermingled with the existing population and their offspring increasingly unlikely to stand out. They certainly won't have been integrated/as everyday as (say) the lady in the Plague Village in Ghosts. If they were that integrated, why are there films like https://www.themoviedb.org/movie/205601-belle ? (Great film, btw). How come as recently as the 1970s the infamous "No Blacks, No Irish, No Dogs" sign wasn't uncommon?

As recently as the end of the last millennium, outside of major cities, a walk through a small town or city might have you see a few Asians (though far less than the amount of Asian-owned businesses would suggest there should be) a handful of Orientals (similar principle) and probably no Black people. It would be pretty rare to see any non-white face in a village. At the turn of the century onwards you could say that you would see more Polish than Blacks outside of major cities (and that's only the ones who were dressing "Eastern European" so that you knew they weren't locals). It's only been in the last few years that refugees have managed to make Black people a fairly common sight in small towns, despite our government trying to get rid of many Black people who have every right to be here. This is why it always ticks me off that the "We've cast some ethnics" pecking order always favours Black people; if it was really trying to reflect the current population spread it should be: Asian, Oriental, Black. Even using the last (2011) census figures I can find, it should be Asian first, then Black, Oriental. If they're trying to be "historically accurate" there shouldn't be anything like the amount that is used these days, and they should probably be "outsiders".

If anything this making the UK look like it was always well integrated racially between Black and White denigrates the :censored: that Black people have had to suffer. I can imagine a kid in ten years time asking why the fuss about Black History Month when it's obvious from the telly that Black people have been well-integrated throughout history.

I also tend to find "colour blind casting" annoying in fantasy. Remember "HobbitGate"? How come no-one was appalled that all the Black Panther extras were Black? I did find "token white" (Martin Freeman) cast member an amusing counterpoint though. Occasionally it works, such as in "The New Legends of Monkey" with a multi-ethnic cast - though mainly because that one is pretty silly (one of the Demons appears to be French!). Otherwise there is no reason for a couple of cast members to look a different ethnicity when there is no mention of their homeland or why.

@M.LeMarchand said: Yes, there have been Black people in the past (AFAIK basically everyone comes from Black stock, though I thought I'd read something recently suggesting that Oriental people may have had a different background). There have been a few Black people in the UK in the time since recorded history, but as there won't have been enough to have a "Black" community they will have intermingled with the existing population and their offspring increasingly unlikely to stand out. They certainly won't have been integrated/as everyday as (say) the lady in the Plague Village in Ghosts. If they were that integrated, why are there films like https://www.themoviedb.org/movie/205601-belle ? (Great film, btw). How come as recently as the 1970s the infamous "No Blacks, No Irish, No Dogs" sign wasn't uncommon?

I haven't seen Ghosts so I don't know what time frame it would have been in (or which plague it was referring to). If it's the plague that struck the UK in 1348, then yes it may have been possible for a single black lady to be in a village in the UK. If it's about the 1666 plague in London, then it would have been probable as the number of people of color living in the UK increased dramatically starting in 1600. Britain's first black community in Elizabethan London

Dido Elizabeth Belle lived 1793–1804, and was born during the slave trade. By then there were over 20,000 black slaves living in London alone. The negative outlook against blacks in the UK didn't really happen until Queen Elizabeth I's time (due to the sudden large influx into London by freed slaves from captured Spanish ships), and got worse when UK themselves got into the slave trade.

@M.LeMarchand said: As recently as the end of the last millennium, outside of major cities, a walk through a small town or city might have you see a few Asians (though far less than the amount of Asian-owned businesses would suggest there should be) a handful of Orientals (similar principle) and probably no Black people. It would be pretty rare to see any non-white face in a village. At the turn of the century onwards you could say that you would see more Polish than Blacks outside of major cities (and that's only the ones who were dressing "Eastern European" so that you knew they weren't locals). It's only been in the last few years that refugees have managed to make Black people a fairly common sight in small towns, despite our government trying to get rid of many Black people who have every right to be here. This is why it always ticks me off that the "We've cast some ethnics" pecking order always favours Black people; if it was really trying to reflect the current population spread it should be: Asian, Oriental, Black. Even using the last (2011) census figures I can find, it should be Asian first, then Black, Oriental. If they're trying to be "historically accurate" there shouldn't be anything like the amount that is used these days, and they should probably be "outsiders".

History would disagree with you.

@Innovator said:

I haven't seen Ghosts so I don't know what time frame it would have been in (or which plague it was referring to). If it's the plague that struck the UK in 1348, then yes it may have been possible for a single black lady to be in a village in the UK. If it's about the 1666 plague in London, then it would have been definitely possible as the number of people of color living in the UK increased dramatically starting in 1600. Britain's first black community in Elizabethan London

Dido Elizabeth Belle lived 1793–1804, and was born during the slave trade. By then there were over 20,000 black slaves living in London alone. The negative outlook against blacks in the UK didn't really happen until Queen Elizabeth I's time (due to the sudden large influx into London by freed slaves from captured Spanish ships), and got worse when UK themselves got into the slave trade.

1st plague, so not absolutely impossible to be there, not possible to be "just a villager".

20,000 Black slaves. Again, not members of the "public". Belle herself was barely accepted in society.

Here's a Frost Fair in Victorian London in "Doctor Who": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4VOr-2K9PN4. Lots of Black people, only a couple of blink-and-you'll miss 'em Asians and Orientals (I'd expect many more given the Indian connection and the fact that laundries and, of course, opium dens were "Chinese" trades). White British seem to be the ethnic minority. Especially as some of the Caucasian extras appear to be more European than British. I'd lay money that a Victorian gent or lady would wonder where it was supposed to be set. The extras are generally to well dressed to be servants/slaves.

@M.LeMarchand said: 1st plague, so not absolutely impossible to be there, not possible to be "just a villager".

I said may have been possible. There's anthropological evidence of Roman blacks remaining in England. The mystery of Beachy Head Lady: A Roman African from Eastbourne

@M.LeMarchand said: 20,000 Black slaves. Again, not members of the "public". Belle herself was barely accepted in society.

But that would mean you would see them around. Slaves didn't stay at home, they did errands and jobs.

@M.LeMarchand said Here's a Frost Fair in Victorian London in "Doctor Who": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4VOr-2K9PN4. Lots of Black people, only a couple of blink-and-you'll miss 'em Asians and Orientals (I'd expect many more given the Indian connection and the fact that laundries and. of course, opium dens were "Chinese" trades). White British seem to be the ethnic minority. Especially as some of the caucasian extras appear to be more European than British. I'd lay money that a Victorian gent or lady would wonder where it was supposed to be set. The extras are generally to well dressed to be servants/slaves.

No one knows how many blacks lived in England at that time as the census didn't divide people by race, though estimates put at 10,000 in London (5,000 more over the rest of England), many London blacks (4,000) were also shipped of to a colony in Sierra Leone. Slavery at that time was also less tolerated in England, and free blacks earned wages (though very low ones).

@Innovator said:

I said may have been possible. There's anthropological evidence of Roman blacks remaining in England. The mystery of Beachy Head Lady: A Roman African from Eastbourne

The Roman era ended at the start of the 5th Century, the Black Plague was mid-14th. Nine centuries is a lot of generations (especially in those days) for peoples genes to get diluted.

@Innovator said:

But that would mean you would see them around. Slaves didn't stay at home, they did errands and jobs.

But you wouldn't see them at society events. The Bennet sisters wouldn't have Blacks, Asians and Orientals (especially not representatives of each) at their parties.

@M.LeMarchand said:

@Innovator said:

I said may have been possible. There's anthropological evidence of Roman blacks remaining in England. The mystery of Beachy Head Lady: A Roman African from Eastbourne

The Roman era ended at the start of the 5th Century, the Black Plague was mid-14th. Nine centuries is a lot of generations (especially in those days) for peoples genes to get diluted.

I could only say they were definitely present by the 16th Century, and members of the royal courts. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/oct/29/tudor-english-black-not-slave-in-sight-miranda-kaufmann-history

However, it's still possible as they were present everywhere else in Europe at that time (I linked already to a 13th century statue of a Black Knight). Also blacks started getting adopted into religious iconography in Europe around 1346.

@Innovator said:

I could only say they were definitely present by the 16th Century, and members of the royal courts. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/oct/29/tudor-english-black-not-slave-in-sight-miranda-kaufmann-history

However, it's still possible as they were present everywhere else in Europe at that time (I linked already to a 13th century statue of a Black Knight). Also blacks started getting adopted into religious iconography in Europe around 1346.

Interesting article, but 360 is a piddling amount - especially if this is reasonably accurate of the Black population over a period of 150 years. Even if it's way low, it's still a fraction of a percent. If they were widely accepted there should be more pictures of them. Neither of the pictures are from British artists. The top one does support your Portuguese theory, though.

As for religious iconography, I don't think that it should be trusted for historical accuracy. Pretty sure Jesus wasn't white.

P.S. Read the "Doctor Who" article linked off yours. I think Mark Gatiss' gut instinct was right (though his facts were wrong). Maybe it was mentioned in the show (I doubt it) but featuring the sole black soldier in the Victorian army would have been acceptable if there had been a line to that effect.

@M.LeMarchand said:

@Innovator said:

I could only say they were definitely present by the 16th Century, and members of the royal courts. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/oct/29/tudor-english-black-not-slave-in-sight-miranda-kaufmann-history

However, it's still possible as they were present everywhere else in Europe at that time (I linked already to a 13th century statue of a Black Knight). Also blacks started getting adopted into religious iconography in Europe around 1346.

Interesting article, but 360 is a piddling amount - especially if this is reasonably accurate of the Black population over a period of 150 years. Even if it's way low, it's still a fraction of a percent. If they were widely accepted there should be more pictures of them. Neither of the pictures are from British artists. The top one does support your Portuguese theory, though.

Still shows that not all blacks were slaves who lived in England during the 17th-18th century (Victorian England). They didn't try to enslave people that were already living free in the UK.

I did find a reference to a thirteenth century African man whose skeleton was found at Ipswich in Suffolk, where he probably lived as a friar (due to strict regulations by the Pope at the time about the location he was buried). https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1275339/He-African-strong-jaw-bad--So-doing-Ipswich-year-1190.html

@M.LeMarchand said: As for religious iconography, I don't think that it should be trusted for historical accuracy. Pretty sure Jesus wasn't white.

Black people appearing in religious iconography in the 14th century means that the church was recognizing the growing number of Christian blacks in Europe and Christian black pilgrims that were travelling to Europe who many settled in Rome around the 15th century, enough for the Vatican to build a church for them (the Santo Stefano degli Abissini).

@Innovator said:

Still shows that not all blacks were slaves who lived in England during that time. They didn't try to enslave people that were already living free in the UK.

I did find a reference to a thirteenth century African man whose skeleton was found at Ipswich in Suffolk, where he probably lived as a friar (due to strict regulations by the Pope at the time about the location he was buried). https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1275339/He-African-strong-jaw-bad--So-doing-Ipswich-year-1190.html

Also shows that it was not common and so films and shows that put random Black villagers etc in are not historically accurate. As I said above, this may even lead to later misunderstandings about the real difficulties suffered by many Black people.

@Innovator said:

Black people appearing in religious iconography in the 14th century means that the church was recognizing the growing number of Christian blacks in Europe and Christian black pilgrims that were travelling to Europe who many settled in Rome around the 15th century, enough for the Vatican to build a church for them (the Santo Stefano degli Abissini).

Again, not the UK and the fact that a separate church was built suggests not accepted as part of society.

Anyway, it's time for bed here. So it's good night from me.

@M.LeMarchand said:

@Innovator said:

Still shows that not all blacks were slaves who lived in England during that time. They didn't try to enslave people that were already living free in the UK.

I did find a reference to a thirteenth century African man whose skeleton was found at Ipswich in Suffolk, where he probably lived as a friar (due to strict regulations by the Pope at the time about the location he was buried). https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1275339/He-African-strong-jaw-bad--So-doing-Ipswich-year-1190.html

Also shows that it was not common and so films and shows that put random Black villagers etc in are not historically accurate. As I said above, this may even lead to later misunderstandings about the real difficulties suffered by many Black people.

@Innovator said:

Black people appearing in religious iconography in the 14th century means that the church was recognizing the growing number of Christian blacks in Europe and Christian black pilgrims that were travelling to Europe who many settled in Rome around the 15th century, enough for the Vatican to build a church for them (the Santo Stefano degli Abissini).

Again, not the UK and the fact that a separate church was built suggests not accepted as part of society.

Anyway, it's time for bed here. So it's good night from me.

My whole point was to show that it was possible, not prove that it was accurate. If you're looking for accurate, you're not going to find that in any movie ever.