I don't want to trash the fellow who did this interesting project, but I think he needs to rethink some of the skin-tone choices.

We have a lot of frescos which give us a good sense of what the Romans thought the range of Italian skin color, and it's mostly darker than this. 1/7 https://twitter.com/ticiaverveer/status/1287450651807670272

Like, *all* of this. Now, it's true that women in Roman fresco are often drawn with very light skin - that was part of the beauty standard (complete with whitening cosmetics). But men did not generally avoid tans (the sun in Italy not being avoidable) and are darker. 2/7

I'm also struck by Septimius Severus here. We have period artwork of him ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Septimius_Severus#/media/File:Carole_Raddato_(13543792233).jpg) and he's way darker than this.

This fits into a broader problem where the popular imagination of Rome is defined by English BBC actors. That's not accurate. 3/7

And I know the question is "why does this matter" - but the study of the ancient Mediterranean has a real diversity problem and this is part of the reason - the Roman past gets literally white-washed and many students feel they cannot see themselves in it. 4/7

But they absolutely can, if we present it accurately!

Rome was a fusion society and a Mediterranean one at that; Romans had a wide range of skin-tones. Most of them had dark hair (though light hair was prized). And the empire was diverse by definition. 5/7

Septimius Severus was North African, with Levantine heritage - as in he openly claimed Punic descent through his mother's side. Hadrian's mother was Spanish. Elagabalus was Syrian on his mother's side and by upbringing.

Rome was not a 'white guy club.' 6/7

So again, not to trash this wonderful project - it is really impressive. But some of the assumptions need to be rethought. The reflexive tendency to think Rome in 50 CE looked like the cast of I Claudius needs to be pushed against. end/7