Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 03:39, 28 December 2005

As pagan culture faded, so did the chance of another African pope.

Huh? Pagan culture was somehow an antidote against racism, or Christianity was/is somehow inherintly racist, or both? -- Khym Chanur 04:09, Nov 1, 2003 (UTC)

If I am not mistaken, the popes listed were all North African and therefore not what is normally known as "black", which usually refers to the race of sub-Saharan Africans. Maximus Rex 05:55, 1 Nov 2003 (UTC)

The first edit by Warlockgruffles (18:23, 19 Apr 2005) adds a particularly non-neutral POV. --213.84.212.97 21:39, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)

According to the dictionary.com and marrian websters dictionary black is :Of or belonging to a ethnic group descended from African peoples having dark skin; eg African-American If I am not mistaken one of the popes was from mauretania which is more west african than north african even today. I find nothing that supports your claims of black meaning sub-saharan african cause there are blacks outside of africa (eg micronesia, melanesia, some polynesians, half of yemenis have one black grandparent or parent, etc) Also what about people from Sudan(which means black in Arabic, Niger(which means black in many latin languages), Chad and most of Southern Egypt today all have majorily black populations and none of these places are sub-saharan. Also many places like Algeria, Tunisia, Libya, and Morocco present black populations today and in the past so how can we say with certainty that they were white, black, mid-eastern etc. I don't even have a problem with so much as you provide no evidence that even suggest or asserts that these popes were not black in the modern or past sense. You simply say they aren't. I'm going to remove your claim until you provide a link that at least claims they were not black and explains why they were not black. I hope you understand that here at wikipedia we simply can't claim or dis-claim people were or were not of a certain race without no links or sources

No one has to "prove" that these popes weren't black because it's assumed, their being from North Africa (i.e. the region including Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, Algeria and Morocco; seldom any others), the indigines of which are white, and sub-Saharan meaning south of these countries. Do more reading if you find nothing to support the black = sub-Saharan notion, because sub-Saharan is always understood to mean black African, and black Africans are consistently refered to as sub-Saharan. There are black populations in the North African countries because the Arabic slave trade took them there. Blacks are found indiginously outside of sub-Saharan countries outside of Africa, but not within Africa, except in the southernmost parts of the modern states of Egypt (in Nubia), Libya, and Algeria, but not on the Algerian and Libyan coasts, where people have historically settled. Black Americans are described as being descended from Africans because they are (most of them, anyway), but it's inaccurate to say that Africans are descended from blacks because this is not always true. There are native white Africans. None of these African popes are from Mauretania, which, at this time, was the northern coast of what is now Algeria, not the modern state of Mauritania further south. Victor was born in Rome, his father was from what is now Tunisia. It's not even positively known if Miltiades was African or not, but he was described as "not dark-skinned". Since the only African pope listed here that does not have an historical image on his page is Gelasius, I'll assume you're refering to him, and wanting "proof" that he wasn't black. He was Kabyle, Berbers who are particularly noted for their European features . Here is an historic depiction of Gelasius , just to eradicate any residual belief you may retain that there was ever a black pope: . I'm removing the link to the National Black Catholic Congress page because it contradicts fact. --Jugbo

While I'll agree that it's unlikelyl that Gelasius was "black" in the sense that we mean it today, you should *not* use that picture as a guide. Anyone who's taken an art history class can tell that that picture was not painted while Gelasius was alive -- it's probably 15th century or later. --Jfruh 17:19, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

I apologize, I didn't know. It seems to be used so much as an official representation of him; but still, if Gelasius had been black, then would it have been likely than posterity had forgotten what a pope looked like and painted him as a white man? --Jugbo 19:16, 27 December 2005 (UTC)