Bias and bigotry do not prevail even in an area where one might most readily expect to find them: Roman attitudes toward blacks. Evidence is slim from the Republic. Acquaintance with the peoples south of Egypt expanded notably only with the advent of the Empire. But the later testimony allows for some extrapolation. And it makes clear that even the most conspicuous ‘‘otherness’’ did not issue in hostility and alienation.
Aithiops or ‘‘Ethiopian,’’ a Greek concoction meaning ‘‘sunburnt face,’’ became the conventional designation for a black man, adopted by Romans in the Latinized form of Aethiops. The description itself carried no negative connotation. Indeed Ethiopians enjoyed a favorable reputation in Greek literature. Homer famously has Zeus, accompanied by the rest of the gods, sup with the ‘‘blameless Ethiopians’’ on a 12-day holiday (Hom. II. 1.423-4; cf. 23.205-7). Herodotus holds the Ethiopians and their ancient rulers in high regard as people of piety and integrity (Hdt. 2.137, 2.139, 3.20-2). More striking still, the Greek historian reported that Ethiopians were said to be the tallest and most attractive of all men (Hdt. 3.20). Not that the Greeks were color blind. The Danaids of Aeschylus’ Suppliant Maidens are ‘‘black and burnt by the sun’’ and the Ethiopians of his Prometheus Bound are a nation of black men living by the fountain of the sun (Aesch. Supp. 154-5; PV807-12). Herodotus indeed notes that the Ethiopians of Libya have the curliest hair in the world (Hdt. 7.70). These and other Greek allusions were accompanied by no negative judgment.38 The high repute of the Ethiopians emerges with clarity in the work of Diodorus, the Sicilian historian writing in the age of Augustus. For Diodorus their piety was proverbial, the first of men who learned to honor the gods with sacrifices, festivals, and processions, and were blessed in turn by the gods who granted them an enduring state of freedom and internal peace, as well as protection from foreign domination. Indeed, so Diodorus reports, the Ethiopians have a history that antedates the Egyptians themselves and are responsible for most of Egypt’s social and religious institutions, even the use of hieroglyphics (Diod. Sic. 3.2-4). This idealized image of Ethiopians, particularly those from the capital at Meroe, as pious, generous, and righteous was picked up and perpetuated by numerous writers of the Roman Empire (e. g., Sen. Ira 3.20.2; Paus. 1.33.4; Lucian Iupp. Trag. 37; Philostr. VA 6.4.21).39
Romans, of course, were not oblivious to the physical characteristics of the Ethiopians. The black skin, woolly hair, flat noses, and thick lips were frequently commented upon (Moretum 31-5; Vitr. 6.1.3-4; Petron. 102; Pliny HN 2.189). Nor did they regard those characteristics as especially desirable. A white/black contrast, then as now, gave advantage to the former in popular imagination and conventional language.4 Moreover, a strong strain in ancient thinking traced physical features to environmental circumstances. Northern peoples, braced by cold, were stereotyped as blond, whiteskinned, fierce, and bold, but also reckless and stupid. Southerners, by contrast, in warm climes, swarthy of complexion, with curly hair, were more intelligent and quickwitted, but cowardly, fickle, unreliable, greedy, and mendacious. The classic contrast held between Scythians in the north and Egyptians and Ethiopians in the south (e. g., Strabo 1.1.13, 1.2.27). On this scale, Greeks and Romans, of course, had the advantage of dwelling in the Mediterranean environment, a moderate middle way, that not only combined intelligence with courage but produced the pale brown complexion and hair that struck just the right balance.41 That outlook had a broad following but had more to do with establishing the superiority of Mediterranean peoples than with excoriating others. It contained no overtones of anti-black sentiment.
The degree to which blacks were assimilated into Roman society cannot be determined. Most entered Italy as slaves, whether through war or the mart. But it is essential to note that slavery and blackness had no connection per se. The vast majority of slaves in Italy were white. And the practice of manumission, with concomitant Roman citizenship, applied to all races and ethnicities alike. Nothing suggests that black freedmen suffered any liability by virtue of their skin. To be sure, most will have entered the ranks of laborers and joined the less privileged members of society. But their complexion did not put them at the bottom of the ladder. Literary texts, in addition to the material evidence of statuettes and ceramic representations, disclose blacks in a wide range of occupations as soldiers, cooks, construction workers, actors, entertainers, assistants in the baths, and personal attendants. None of these, of course, were high-status positions, but blackness itself carried no handicap to further mobility. Some of the entertainers could capture considerable acclaim and renown, and soldiers might attain officer rank.
Miscegenation occurred without stigma. Growing familiarity with blacks who served in the same households with whites or labored side by side with them in the workplace must have increased the number of cross-racial unions. Adultery, of course, was frowned on. And sexual liaisons that involved persons of quite different social stations would naturally draw scorn. But race mixture as such did not engender opprobrium, a fact of notable significance for the Roman mentality.
In at least one area, blacks held positions of some importance. The cult of Isis spread around the Mediterranean, with Meroe as one of its principal centers, and made considerable headway in Rome itself. There, Ethiopians played a major role as ministers to the cult, their expertise in the ritual in demand and respected.4
In exceptional cases, a rise to prominence could be quite notable. The ancient biography of the celebrated comic dramatist Terence, ascribed to Suetonius, claims that he was born in Carthage of African stock and dark color, brought to Rome as a slave, and freed because of his talent and good looks (Suet. Vita Ter. 1,5; see also Chapter 25). That Terence, in fact, was black, cannot be confirmed. The biographer may simply have made an inference, erroneous or guesswork, from his cognomen, P. Terentius Afer. But, even if it lacks foundation, the inference implies that such a career was open to talented slaves of dark complexion from Africa. The existence of bronze and marble heads of personages with Negroid features indicates clearly enough that these were men who had reached positions of some stature and wealth.44 Notions of innate inferiority make no appearance here. Blacks had access to integration in Roman society.
World History
