Ultraviolet light reveals how ancient Greek statues really looked

reply to post by Wolfenz


As I sourced before, I said that the first people in the Americas were aboriginal Australians. Then Asians over the Straights, then Europeans from the ice age. Over time they became the single race known as Native Americans.

news.bbc.co.uk...

Now as I said here, the first Romans were red head celts

In time, they became part of every race and created what we now call the Mediterraneans race.

www.timesonline.co.uk...

In fact most of the early emperors had celtic traits. They were not the black haired large nose Italian people imagine them to be.

www.white-history.com...

Likelihood is that, like most imperial families, they interbred from their original group of people, who were celtic. Eventually this created genetic break down and insane people like Nero. Over time Emperors married outside the family and the inbreeding effects stopped, so you end up with dark haired large nose Italian emperors.


Romans and Greeks hated each other and yet loved each other. So it makes sense that Greeks called blue eyes and blond hair a sign of animalistic qualities and barbarianism, and the early Romans called it beauty and themselves.

www.greektexts.com...

Tacitus flat out says that Romans are German in origin and that the indigenous people of Italy are Germans. Which again makes sense considering that the tribe that became Romans basically saw the Greeks settling and copied their culture. They had sticks and stones, the Greeks had marvels of technology and architecture. Only a food would hold onto his primitive Celtic culture over the glory of Greece. Rome made the wise decision. Of course over time they merged with the Etruscan and eventually became subjugated and that angered them, so they rebelled and founded the republic.

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by Wolfenz

 

As I sourced before, I said that the first people in the Americas were aboriginal Australians. Then Asians over the Straights, then Europeans from the ice age. Over time they became the single race known as Native Americans.

news.bbc.co.uk...

Now as I said here, the first Romans were red head celts

In time, they became part of every race and created what we now call the Mediterraneans race.

www.timesonline.co.uk...

In fact most of the early emperors had celtic traits. They were not the black haired large nose Italian people imagine them to be.

www.white-history.com...

Likelihood is that, like most imperial families, they interbred from their original group of people, who were celtic. Eventually this created genetic break down and insane people like Nero. Over time Emperors married outside the family and the inbreeding effects stopped, so you end up with dark haired large nose Italian emperors.


Romans and Greeks hated each other and yet loved each other. So it makes sense that Greeks called blue eyes and blond hair a sign of animalistic qualities and barbarianism, and the early Romans called it beauty and themselves.

www.greektexts.com...

Tacitus flat out says that Romans are German in origin and that the indigenous people of Italy are Germans. Which again makes sense considering that the tribe that became Romans basically saw the Greeks settling and copied their culture. They had sticks and stones, the Greeks had marvels of technology and architecture. Only a food would hold onto his primitive Celtic culture over the glory of Greece. Rome made the wise decision. Of course over time they merged with the Etruscan and eventually became subjugated and that angered them, so they rebelled and founded the republic.

I SAY BS

The Mohawks have been recording time for more than 33,000 Years
The Mohawk Calender


The Bering Strait Theory
nativeamericanresources.blogspot.com...

First - Many Indigenous Nations have calendars that have been counting the years for a very long time. I am aware that the calendar of the Mohawk Indian Nation has been counting the winters for over 33,120 years. This pre-dates the so-called 'ice-bridge' of the Bering Strait theory, unless, of course, the Bering Strait scientists decide to move the interestingly illusive time period of our early migration back to 40,000 years!

Hey its your Opinion not mine ...

Still you have not proved your self that the Romans are Originally Celtic
as you just show a Multicultural Rome as I Already knew that..
you need to start backing up what you claim seriously Australians the First
People of the New World

i SAY BS maybe a handful that was found ! probably Slaves 9,000 to 10,000 years ago ! and you think they are the First your Kidding right and you believe that !! I could almost Guarantee those Australians were Slaves
or they would not last long In south America against the people of Tiwanaku as the City was claim to be 17,000 years old against your Australians

Stick any Native American of North America in Asia , Europe to Even Africa
and they will Stick Out like a Sore Thumb !!!!
Native Americans (Mix of Old and New Photos)
www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...

ohh dont forget the Chinese that landed in South America also ... and the Polynesians and the Vikings landed in the North America Leif Erickson
you would call these people first also ... and saying Native Americans is a Mixture well you can say that in the present day but before Columbus
I Say BS please make a thread and we can discuss more in the matter

this is a Thread about Roman Art finding traces of Paint (color) within it !!
Though Ultra Violet light ...
and i NOT going to rant and rave about this discussion of Celts are Roman and Where Native American Origins is from .... it is not Fair to the OP

The people of the time loved colors. I have heard that all the colors at the time would be very garish and tacky to us today. This includes women makeup. According to modern tastes, everyone would look like clowns.

And because of my modern taste, thank heavens the paint came off those statues.

reply to post by TrueAmerican


Sorry to be fastidious but that statue is of Augustus and in no way Greek.
(I do realize it's not the OP's fault but rather the author's. However, it's not a minor error.)

Doubly sorry if this has been mentioned elsewhere in the thread.

reply to post by pavil


Thank you Pavil for showing me the vid

as i love movies i remember the intro of the Mummy with Brenden Fraser
the intro sequence of Ancient Egypt

The Mummy Intro ( the city and the Annubis statue Aging loosing the Paint)
www.video.janyug.com...

[edit on 22-8-2010 by Wolfenz]

[edit on 22-8-2010 by Wolfenz]

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by Wolfenz

 

Romans and Greeks hated each other and yet loved each other. So it makes sense that Greeks called blue eyes and blond hair a sign of animalistic qualities and barbarianism, and the early Romans called it beauty and themselves.

That is certainly NOT the reason the Keltoi were viewed as barbarians by the Romans.

Ancient Italy was separated, on the north, by the Alps, from Germany. It was bounded by the Adriatic Sea, by a part of the Mediterranean and on the south, by the strait of Messina. The south of Italy, was peopled by a colony from Greece. The middle of Italy contained several states or confederacies, under the denominations of Etrurians, Samnites, Latins, Volsci, Campanians and Sabines. The north was peopled by a race of Gauls. Romulus and Remus the first rulers of the Romans originated from ancient city of Latium, Italy, in the Alban Hills about 12 miles southeast of Rome which was under the dominion of the Etrurians.
www.roman-colosseum.info...

www.imninalu.net...

reply to post by Wolfenz


I never did buy into the Bering Strait theory. Why? Because wind usually travels east to west or west to east. For nature to pick up all that water and move it south to north doesn't make sense. The Earths rotation would have to be totally different than what we know today.

As we know, billions of tons of water was supposedly picked up and traveled south to north to form the Bering Strait.

Not to mention it doesn't make sense anyways. Are we to believe white folk crossed the bering strait then left eskimoes and other brown humans in the area.

Let's not forget this. I heard theories from lack of fish to moving away from the equator that caused white skin. This planet is too close to the sun to have white skin period. White skinned people can't even go in the sun for very long. Seems odd nature excludes them from evolution but includes everyone else.

To the OP; thank you, thank you, THANK YOU!!! S&F for you my friend! We need to realize that human beings have loved color since the dawn!

I think we have always loved color and music and dance and entertainment. We need the distraction from the day-to-day "drama" that is the Human Experience! Think about it, in the early 50's we all gravitated to the tiny black and white picture boxes in our living rooms. These weren't enough so the COLOR TV was developed post-haste!! Now, 60 short years later we have HDTV, BluRay, and even 3D right in our own homes. Not to mention all the advances in video games and computer screens and even our cell phones are straight out of SciFi comics and books.

Back on topic; this really is a very cool thing to see! Even though I had already known that these ancient statues were most likely painted, seeing the actual colors is magnificent! So, thank you again for posting this here at ATS!!!

reply to post by Wolfenz


And how, may I ask, is a group of tree dwellers expected to record for that long? What proof? A blog?

What proof does the blog have?

Native Americans come from three groups of people and DNA evidence proves it. I could hardly give a damn what modern cultures of these people practice. This was thousands of years ago. Cultures and behavior change. So unless you have a time machine to conclusively prove this theory, I take DNA fact over your theory.

Native Americans came from Australian groups, Northern European groups, and Asian groups. In addition to that, there were several crashed landings by Romans Greeks and Egyptians. So all and all, there is a host of proof against your theory. If you can find fact to support your theory, other than a blog, be my guest.

I provided hard fact via sources. You provided soft opinion.

Do us both a favor. Come back when you have solid proof for your theory. Or maybe you just ignored my sources because you are hard of heart and stuck in your beliefs and ways.

Not my problem. Your opinion, not fact.

reply to post by Come Clean


Snow.

[edit on 22-8-2010 by Gorman91]

reply to post by TrueAmerican


Nice Frock, tacky but not to gaudy

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by Macdon

 

Actually the Romans were Celtic people that migrated south. The painting even shows a very Celtic colored man with red hair. Rome did not have a single origin. The City of Rome was founded by Celts who adopted Greek culture. However, Rome herself, in Italy, was mixed with many peoples. By the time of the emperors Italy had created its own unique race. Almost all Celtic traits were dead. Red hair found today in Italians comes from Vikings who occupied Sicily. Ironic. By the time the nation fell the people who founded it were nonexistent.

Actually the Romans were not and are not a Celtic people

I’m not concerned about red-haired Italians not being Italian as that is not true. Celts and Nordics do not have a monopoly on red or blonde hair. Negroes have such hair and so do many Australian aboriginals.

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by Wolfenz

 

www.timesonline.co.uk...

In fact most of the early emperors had celtic traits. They were not the black haired large nose Italian people imagine them to be.

www.white-history.com...

Likelihood is that, like most imperial families, they interbred from their original group of people, who were celtic. Eventually this created genetic break down and insane people like Nero. Over time Emperors married outside the family and the inbreeding effects stopped, so you end up with dark haired large nose Italian emperors.

Originally posted by Gorman91
Romans and Greeks hated each other and yet loved each other. So it makes sense that Greeks called blue eyes and blond hair a sign of animalistic qualities and barbarianism, and the early Romans called it beauty and themselves.

www.greektexts.com...

Rubbish Look at the eye colour and hair colour map of Europe and see note that Greeks considered the “happy medium” to be the correct colouring of a person. Disparaging blue eyes is not disparaging Italians or Romans as they have a darker profile.
www.davidduke.com...
Anyway, it appears that Aristotle is only referring to the multi-coloured eyes of Greeks (which is true of all Europeans and some Middle Eastern peoples) and trying to infer which are better suited for what purpose – a reasonable study I might add.

Originally posted by Gorman91
Tacitus flat out says that Romans are German in origin and that the indigenous people of Italy are Germans. Which again makes sense considering that the tribe that became Romans basically saw the Greeks settling and copied their culture. They had sticks and stones, the Greeks had marvels of technology and architecture. Only a food would hold onto his primitive Celtic culture over the glory of Greece. Rome made the wise decision. Of course over time they merged with the Etruscan and eventually became subjugated and that angered them, so they rebelled and founded the republic.

Why no Celtic language but a Latin language which is closely related to Greek, which is what the Romans were racially?

I said it before and I’ll say it again. The Romans are a mixture of Trojan refugees (very probably Hitite), Latin tribes and Greeks from Asia Minor. May I suggest reading Virgil’s the Aeneid to get a better understanding of Graeco-Roman reality. This pseudo-scientific Nordic-supermen Roman (and Greeks) has to got to stop.

reply to post by Macdon


Yea and they are called albino and often have a host of negatives with it including bad eye sight and such things that would not be proper for a eugenics believing nation.

The fact remains that the original Romans had celtic and northern origins, adopted Greek culture, and eventually died off as often happens with ruling parties, and the fact that Italy was overwhelmingly dark haired big nosed Italian. Those traits were removed to only the royal families, and in time none at all. It is very much so true that they do not have a monopoly on it. But in terms of villages full of entire genetic pools of it, they do.

Rubbish Look at the eye colour and hair colour map of Europe and see note that Greeks considered the “happy medium” to be the correct colouring of a person. Disparaging blue eyes is not disparaging Italians or Romans as they have a darker profile. www.davidduke.com... Anyway, it appears that Aristotle is only referring to the multi-coloured eyes of Greeks (which is true of all Europeans and some Middle Eastern peoples) and trying to infer which are better suited for what purpose – a reasonable study I might add.

It was traditional amongst Roman and Greek people to view Blond hair and blue eyes combined with light skin on men to be a sign of barbarians. Rome started out with those traits but in time were gone because of that very reason. The fact still remains that the paint and drawings of the time show this shift. Most later works by the Romans do not show the same people that were earlier.

Why no Celtic language but a Latin language which is closely related to Greek, which is what the Romans were racially? I said it before and I’ll say it again. The Romans are a mixture of Trojan refugees (very probably Hitite), Latin tribes and Greeks from Asia Minor. May I suggest reading Virgil’s the Aeneid to get a better understanding of Graeco-Roman reality. This pseudo-scientific Nordic-supermen Roman (and Greeks) has to got to stop.

Rome was that, indeed. But the founders of the city of Rome and the imperial family were celtic. Within a few centuries it was gone. They were weeded out genetically. But the fact remains that Rome was built and founded by northern European barbarians who adopted Greek culture, very likely due to the fact that Greek culture was superior. This is not Nordic superman Romans. This is poor useless farmers who were conquered and adopted the culture and ways of their conquerers when they declared independence. There is no superman involved. Rome quickly expanded and took over those Trojan refugees you mentioned, as well as all the numerous people of the Latin tribes. As mentioned, this was the founding of a new race. The Mediterranean race. In time they would become Caucasian looking dark skinned black hair and eyed people with blue eyes seen mainly in the women because the men liked that trait.

In fact the link you posted proves this fact very well. So really I fail to see how it is rubbish and wrong. One group founded the city, they took over or joined with the other groups of people, and in time all the races there became a new distinctively unique race. This would not be the first time nor the last time either.

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
Hey thanks all for the good replies and history lessons. If you will re read the OP, I simply used that picture as an example of the technology, not as an example of GREEK statues, because it was my favorite from the pictures offered at link. But thanks for clearing that up, no harm done.

Dazzling, thanks for the pics.

Without highlights and shading they are NEVER gonna win a Golden Daemon

As a miniature painter that comment cracked me up.

This miniature is 28mm:
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/dcca93e6714f.jpg[/atsimg]

They could have done a better job on life-sized statues.
Ancient greeks, ancient schmeeks..

Just joking, I liked the pictures(except the first one), I even liked the fact that they were gaudy.
Just wish they were a little bigger.

Cool thread, cool technology.