🧵: Here are four Ethiopians from a late-tenth century Old English manuscript, depicted as blue men in accordance with a tradition of black-skinned people being described as blue.
We can see the Old English description of them above the portrait.
They're called "Silhearwana," the Old English word for "Ethiopians." That there was a specific Old English word for this is a little unusual, since they usually just adopted Latin terms. JRR Tolkien thought the word meant "sun-burned," like the word "Ethiopian" did.
I kind of wonder if Old English had its own term for Black people, rather than borrowing a Latin term, because of the presence of Black people in England at the time.
As @Archaeofiend points out in his excellent article on the subject, there were certainly Black people living in turn-of-the-millennium England.
But if Black people really lived there, why would white English authors call them "blue" and depict them like this?
(yes, "Black" and "white" are more modern categories, but I use them here as a shorthand)
Well, other ppl did. The ninth-century Annals of Ireland claimed that the Vikings brought a great host of "fir gorma" [blue men] back from Morocco, which seemingly meant Black people. The Annals claimed these blue men lived in Ireland for a long time.
There's also the very confusing situation of Old English color words, which didn't always seem to indicate hue as much as they did things like reflectivity or intensity (this is why you get things like "brown swords" in OE poetry; "brun"[brown] meant shiny).
AND OE manuscript art plays very loose with color, so what we would think of as realism isn't really the aim of these artists, precisely. Here's Adam and God from the same MS, for instance, with blue hair.
(f. 6r)
A lot of work remains to be done on how we think about skin color (and color generally) in OE lit and manuscripts. Even more work remains to be done on figuring out how to move past racist paradigms that dismiss the presence of African ppl in early England.
I think @Archaeofiend and @ISASaxonists are doing the most interesting and important work rn on these racist paradigms and the dismissal of the presence and contributions of Africans in early medieval England.
There's still so much work to be done rethinking early medieval England and its interactions with the larger world, and the presence in pre-Conquest England of people whose ancestors came from outside western Europe.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Why are we not talking about Sir William Neville & Sir John Clanvowe, the two gay English knights buried together in a tomb with marriage motifs???
Who were friends with Chaucer and possibly the inspiration for his The Knight's Tale?
And also maybe SPIES? #MedievalTwitter
So the above image is the tombstone of Sir William Neville & Sir John Clanvowe, who died in Galata (outside Constantinople) in 1391 within days of each other. Their shields are "impaled"; that is, their coats of arms are merged. This really only happens with married couples.
The article about their tombstone tries SO hard not to say gay.
I want to highlight an example of the whitewashing & erasure of the work of scholars of color--particularly Black & Indigenous ones--in the work of white medievalists. I came across it yesterday, & it's such a clear demonstration of how their work gets credited to white people.
This isn't a critique of the article's claim or its contribution to the field of race studies in Old English.
This is about how white medievalists who start publishing on medieval race draw on the work of scholars of color while obscuring them.
So this article came out recently in PMLA, a journal that has notably blocked work on race by premodernists of colors (medium.com/the-sundial-ac…)
That matters, since this article will be highly visible and cited in a way that the work of scholars of color won't.
🧵: So several scholars of color are pointing out the problems with racists mad about the new LoTR series. I did the same. My tweet got tepid responses, while the scholars of color faced vicious racism immediately *often from the same people*
[CW: racism, misogyny, homophobia, transphobia]
Most the people disagreeing with me didn't make it an issue of my identity & didn't insult me. These are among the meanest ones.
Easily a third of the responses to the scholars of color were hateful.
Dr. Ramírez got six comments on his main tweet and two of those were immediately vicious insults.
🧵The AHA president's "scholarship on race is ahistorical and presentist" blog isn't an outlier view or a brave take in the face of "the woke mob" or the "radical Left". It's been the party line among many senior scholars for decades.
Take medieval studies. (Really. Take it).
Look at basically any "state of the field" forum in medieval studies from the last few decades, especially in Old English studies. A lot of the big names--Allen Frantzen springs to mind--made careers out of slamming new approaches as presentist and ahistorical.
Here's Frantzen in 1990, complaining about "revisionists" (who he calls "Professors of Otherness") rewriting the teaching of history.