Comments by "" (@artstation707) on "Queen Cleopatra - The Most Hated Show Of All Time?" video.
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@coling3957 And? It doesn't matter whether occupiers are welcomed or not. They're still occupiers. We know what the ancient Egyptians were like. They left images of themselves all over the place. Plus, scripture states that the Hebrews, who could easily pass for Egyptians, were similar to Ethiopians. This seals the debate right here. Arabs, the ancient kind, were kin folk of the Israelites, being sired by Ishmael, the Great half uncle of Jacob/Israel. The word Arab according to Strong's concordance 6148 actually means mixed. If we take this to mean the progenitor Ishmael was mixed on account of his being half Hebrew and half Egyptian, then there you have it. Arabs originally would have passed for Egyptian, and by extension they would resemble Ethiopians in some way. Where's the mystery in all of this? I don't see why there should be any confusion or controversy. Populations change over time as foreigners or other cultures intermingle with them. If we go back to the Middle East in biblical times, the populations would not resemble their modern counterparts. So, if someone produces a feature depicting a population as darker than their modern counterparts, there should be no complaints. Besides, there are still many dark Arabs. If the issue is about the complexion of the Greeks who usurped the throne of Egypt, I think common sense dictates that even the Greeks looked different 2,100 years ago. In some cases, individuals would represent the extremities of the range of phenotypes, and in others they'd just appear mixed.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@MaximusThrax So, Cleopatra was a white Greek? Let's go with that for now. We know the Romans and the Greeks had a kind of US / UK style relationship. Rome even adopted the Greek pantheon of pagan deities. The Romans had no problem intermingling with their Grecian cousins. Right? The lower part of the Italian Peninsular was ethnically Greek? They were very close. Noblemen, retired soldiers and the like all went on holiday or retired to their Greek villas. They even looked alike, I'm guessing.
So if, Cleopatra looked like a Roman, why did they find her so offensive?
She was white and Greek, you say.
Why then did they kill their greatest conqueror whose white offspring would have united Rome and Egypt (giving Romans perpetual access to Egyptian grain without spilling a drop of blood), even going as far as to kill said offspring?
All of this over someone who looked exactly like the Romans???
I don't know. It just makes very little sense, like it's missing a very basic, simple, honest detail.
1
-
@Raymoiful I didn't ask you to regurgitate all the excuses given to us to try to explain things away.
From this vantage point, I don't think there's a modern European would not be proud of a Queen Cleopatra the way she's depicted in every instance apart from this one. You don't believe that? Go back and read 99% of the comments above!
So because she wanted to be treated as the Queen she was, they elected to kill her and her child? Also, are we supposed to believe that noble born Romans did not engage in acts of adultery without giving it a second thought? Didn't some of the so-called high-born, desirous of new wives, order married women to get divorces and dispense with their husbands at the drop of a hat? Where was the public outcry then?
And what's wrong with one person rule? They accepted it eventually. Can you count how many Roman Emperors there were?
The Senate's indignation was provoked by Caesar's plan to offer representation to the darkies of Gaul and other negroid conquered lands.
Caesar expected Caesarion to rule only Egypt? If this was so, why then did Augustus feel threatened? He was an official heir, right? Why would he need to remove a non-citizen half brother by way of adoption? You're saying that Roman citizenship counted for naught???
Yes, Caesarion was the natural-born son of Caesar, but again, if the Egyptian child was meant to rule Egypt, (when he came of age decades after Augustus Caesar's rise to Princeps) where exactly was this threat? Augustus himself adopted or promoted candidates who were not his natural heirs, and posed a threat to the continuation of his own bloodline, as did many subsequent Emperors.
Perhaps Augustus did use the situation to his advantage, but would his plan work if Cleopatra was a stunning white rose, loved by the people for her Grecian Hellenic looks? These people deified each other. They loved their Greek cousins too. Some of them were of Greek ethnicity themselves. The whole lower end of the Italian Peninsular was a Greek enclave. Octavian would have had a far less difficult task to sway the population if this Queen looked different.
I'm sorry, but I don't buy the narrative that this was merely a political struggle. Octavian raised Anthony's children by his sister Octavia. He even considered making their offspring heirs to the throne at some point. Wouldn't that seem a tad hypocritical, if Anthony was officially disposed of for mistreating Octavia?
No.
The simple people were easily swayed because both Caesar and Anthony engaged in undeniable exogamy: undeniable because Cleopatra was black.
1
-
@Raymoiful Mark Anthony condemning his only Roman son by naming him heir, he did to conform to Roman law. It's a good point to raise, but these people (Antyllus and his mother) had been exiled to Greece, of all places.
The point being: Greece was considered an extension of Rome. Of all conquered lands (Italy notwithstanding), unless I am mistaken, only Greek deities were considered "indigenous" to the Romans. They had two pantheons: di indigetes, and di novensides. The first was for indigenous gods, and incorporated Greek deities. The second was for gods adopted from defeated nations.
Thus, Cleopatra wouldn't have been considered in a negative light, unless she was somewhat different. Neither would Greco-Roman Caesarion, son of a "god" whose murder would be sacrilege under any circumstance, apart from it being a matter of racial intolerance.
One suspects that the new Princeps didn't want to appear monstrous in killing all of Anthony's brood, and so he allowed his sister to raise them. Most everything he did it seems was based upon strategic expediency. Thus, (unless I'm mistaken also) none of Cleopatra's mulatto offspring sired Roman Emperors, but instead were utilized and ruled over Northern African Kingdoms.
Eventually, the throne was occupied by darkies, but that's a whole other issue.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1