I definitely won't post this link by the way...
The Romans weren't idiots, dark does not equal light. The patrician class were not Swedes, but it appears they were lighter than modern Italians. I stand by my theory of elites marrying lighter women resulting in enrichment of light features amongst the patrician class. It's true even today - someone like Tom Hiddleston oozes upper class in a uniquely British way. Most British people of the lower classes look like something between Arya from GoT and Jamie Vardy, a footballer.
I'm being contrarian on purpose, but I'd like to see somebody in favour of the Italian-looking Emperors theory explain the contents of that link. I'd also like to ask whether the modern Northern Italian upper class is lighter pigmented - I don't know any names so I can't check.
Is it so impossible?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beatrice_Borromeo#/media/File:Beatrice_Borromeo_2017.jpg
Her ancestors seem to be fully Italian going back at least 4 generations
Renaissance Italian ideals of beauty are chock-full of blondes - blondes might even be more common than brunettes, and definitely so among angels. Why would Renaissance elites not prioritise marrying natural blondes? Is Augustus having blonde hair such an insult to the world view of Italians on this forum? I don't know why, but even posting something like this below seems to physically pull at the soul of Italians on anthroforums. Augustus would have been genetically no or barely different to modern (perhaps Northern) Italians, so why is his pigmentation such a fundamental issue?
I can't win for losing.
One day I'm a racist who doesn't want Romans to be southern Italian like, and the next day I'm a racist who doesn't want Romans to be northern like. I must be doing something right.
I don't pollute my mind with the idiocy that is posted on theapricity. If you find the level of discourse there so appealing, perhaps you ought to concentrate on posting there.
Like a lot of people with an agenda, you, and they, or maybe you are they, cherry pick your examples. Yes, the imperial family had quite a few lighter pigmented people, but that's primarily, in my opinion, because of all the intermarriage with the Claudians, who were known as a gens to be quite fair. Julius Caesar, on the other hand, a Julii (and Cotta), had dark hair and "black" eyes. Or doesn't he count?
At any rate, rather than relying on the stories which have survived, we'll soon have actual dna, and then we'll know.
It's incredible to me that you think the noble families of Italy descend from the ancient Romans. The ones whom the Goths and Langobards didn't kill lost their land and status. The modern "noble" families are descended from Germanic war lords, although there's been a lot of intermarriage.
If you knew Italy you'd know that having lighter hair and eyes in Italy has nothing necessarily to do with being "noble". Nor do you have to be from some isolated village up in the Apennines like my father's family, where they're all fair or red haired, but it might be as a result of drift.
See:
https://www.eupedia.com/forum/threa...n-Eastern-Liguria-NW-Toscana?highlight=Spezia
A hero and mentor from the Lunigiana: Loris Bononi
[/IMG]
These are Italians too:
And another batch:
[/IMG]
[/IMG]
[/IMG]
[/IMG]
[/IMG]
My father's sisters had hair this color:
[/IMG]
- 17-03-18, 13:21[RIG[/
Final batch for now:
[/IMG]
[/IMG]
[/IMG]
As to Renaissance portraits, first of all a lot of them are of members of noble families who were indeed descendants of Germanic lords. However, if you and they weren't cherry picking you would notice all the dark haired people being depicted as well.
The Medici, whom I posted on another thread.
Giuliano
Lorenzo
Ludovico Sforza
Even the scions of the oldest "noble" Italian families were by no means all fair.
According to tradition, the Colonna family is a branch of the Counts of Tusculum — by Peter (1099–1151) son of Gregory III, called Peter "de Columna" from his property the Columna Castle in Colonna, Alban Hills. Further back, they trace their lineage past the Counts of Tusculum via Lombard and Italo-Roman nobles, merchants, and clergy through the Early Middle Ages — ultimately claiming origins from the Julio-Claudian dynasty. (I think we can discount the latter claim.)
Prince Colonna:
Federico Gonzaga
Maria Beatrice d'Este who married James II of England and Scotland.
Italian "noble" family of today forced to turn their castle into a tourist destination:
[/IMG]
Perhaps no one has explained it to you, but cherry picking examples is a dead give away of a dishonest argument.
Another thing as to the blondes depicted in Renaissance art. The preference for blonde coloring for women was European wide. In my opinion, that was a manifestation of the fact that in any society the phenotype of the elites is preferred. It sort of percolates down to the common people. In the medieval era, the elites were the descendants of the Germanic invaders. The logic should be inescapable. Hence, all the formulas for bleaching hair which can be found in documents of the time. Prostitutes, in particular, were known to bleach their hair either blonde, or red, which is the first stage in the bleaching process. Some of the women who were painted nude, who would often have been prostitutes, have what seems to me clearly "altered" hair. Maybe you have to have spent a lot of time in salons to notice it.
Carpaccio's Two Courtesans: It's very obvious, as only part of the hair is bleached.