Gilgamesh was not a Sumerian

[elgatovillano]

Gilgamesh was a Babilonian of Akkadian decend.

Also, Cleopatra was white as white can be. She a Macedonian of the Ptolemy bloodline (the most inbred family in Greek history).

[Exemplar]

Originally posted by elgatovillano:

Also, Cleopatra was white as white can be. She a Macedonian of the Ptolemy bloodline (the most inbred family in Greek history).

There's really no way to know what people looked like. What you say makes sense but you'd need more proof to make the statement, proof we cannot have.

[grognardgary]

Originally posted by colostmy4:

Who cares what color she was? Why is this even an issue? We can't know with 100% certainty what color she was because any one ancestor could have been black. We don't know every line of every ancestor. Was she likely light skinned, yes, because her Greek family was largely inbred, but we still don't know all every one of her ancestors because that's just impossible. I never could understand why so many people make a big deal against Cleopatra being portrayed as black, but the same people make no issue of Gandhi being portrayed as light skinned though we are quite certain he had very dark skin. Who cares? I find the whole issue getting old.

Exactly. Plus skin color changes to some extent with the environment and a couple hours out in the afternoon sun is all it takes.

[SLG]

This is not the only game hub that sees these types of topics. There was a big debate in the one for Stellaris.

[Catalytic]

Originally posted by Exemplar:

There's really no way to know what people looked like. What you say makes sense but you'd need more proof to make the statement, proof we cannot have.

We know Alexander the Great was Caucasian/white. There's ample evidence of this in contemporary art and historical descriptions of him. We know Mansa Musa was Subsaharan African/black. There's ample evidence of this in contemporary art and historical descriptions of him. We also have a pretty good idea what Cleopatra looked like... and for the same reasons. We have her genealogy. We have her family tree. We have a marble bust of her.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jRJe99IipC4

It's just under 10 minute video, with historical sources cited in the description, and includes a fair and honest impression based on what's known and what is not known. This particular artist is absolutely phenomenal and her work on other historical figures is also top notch.

[evertebrate]

Originally posted by SLGray:

This is not the only game hub that sees these types of topics. There was a big debate in the one for Stellaris.

Some people are unhealthily obsessed with skin color. And these culture warriors spend a lot of time communicating their issues. I hope one day this foolishness will be over.

[Exemplar]

Originally posted by Catalytic:

things...

I don't even understand how you're redressing my statement. I took the time to look at what your presented and I found Cleopatra's female ancestors don't have records. So it feels like you're telling me, "no, you're wrong, because these people don't know either".

There are a lot of ways a person can appear if they are Mediterranean. It was a crossroads of culture for thousands of years. Elizabeth Taylor (who did a great job portraying Cleopatra) does not look Mediterranean.

[Lemurian1972]

Originally posted by Catalytic:

Originally posted by Exemplar:

There's really no way to know what people looked like. What you say makes sense but you'd need more proof to make the statement, proof we cannot have.

We know Alexander the Great was Caucasian/white. There's ample evidence of this in contemporary art and historical descriptions of him.

Very little of the surviving evidence is contemporaneous. They were made decades or centuries later, or are copies of translations of copies. Even then, most of what we know as 'history' falls victim to the old adage '...is written by the victors' as in it was less interested in objective recording, and more about meeting whatever the goals and desires of the person paying the bills wanted. Even in today's hi-definition digital storage world, we're fighting a losing battle to record more accurate history than we lose to storage decay, distortion, and human shortsightedness.

[Exemplar]

Originally posted by Lemurian1972:

Originally posted by Catalytic:

We know Alexander the Great was Caucasian/white. There's ample evidence of this in contemporary art and historical descriptions of him.

Very little of the surviving evidence is contemporaneous. They were made decades or centuries later, or are copies of translations of copies. Even then, most of what we know as 'history' falls victim to the old adage '...is written by the victors' as in it was less interested in objective recording, and more about meeting whatever the goals and desires of the person paying the bills wanted. Even in today's hi-definition digital storage world, we're fighting a losing battle to record more accurate history than we lose to storage decay, distortion, and human shortsightedness.

yes.

is this the closest time period one around 120bc to 100bc?
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/69/Battle_of_Issus_mosaic_-_Museo_Archeologico_Nazionale_-_Naples_2013-05-16_16-25-06_BW.jpg

alexander is on the left.

also, supposedly he was at or just under 5 feet tall.