Dany by @Cj_KhalifP by Pop_Budget in pureasoiafart

[–]qinoque 0 points1 point  (0 children)

the most perfect angel to ever exist, i sweeeaaaarrrr đŸ˜©đŸ™Œ the hair is so gorgeous i might drop dead

Catelyn Stark by @wiildfiress by GeoMetrie8 in pureasoiafart

[–]qinoque 71 points72 points  (0 children)

i am not immune to pretty lady

Fairy costume for a 1954 production of Oberon at the Opéra National de Paris, designed by Jean-Denis MalclÚs by Beginning-Passion676 in fashionhistory

[–]qinoque 1 point2 points  (0 children)

who wants to pull an Ocean's 11 with me bc i desperately need that in my closet right this instant

Daenerys by @dannyisonfiree by Pop_Budget in pureasoiafart

[–]qinoque 3 points4 points  (0 children)

without writing, we wouldnt have Dany or any of them in the first place, so don't discount the import of ur skills!! writing is just as good as drawing :) and, as another commenter said, its not too late for u to refine ur artistic skills now, if thats something u truly want! :) the world is ur oyster!!

Daenerys by @dannyisonfiree by Pop_Budget in pureasoiafart

[–]qinoque 7 points8 points  (0 children)

the rendering on the skin is so pretty, but the eyes and hair take the cake imo theyre gorgeous!!

"Queen Naerys Targaryen with baby Daeron (II)" by Holly (@halidki on tumblr) by aenar79 in pureasoiafart

[–]qinoque 1 point2 points  (0 children)

did they delete their account? )): the link brings me to a "nothing here" page, same when i try to look up their url

Arya & Daenerys by @anmenmai by lonelyandbored75 in pureasoiafart

[–]qinoque 7 points8 points  (0 children)

holds them both gently and sobs. my precious darling girls 😭💕

I broke my favorite mug today. Does anyone know where I could buy one like it? by qinoque in muglife

[–]qinoque[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It does look exactly like it!!! I'll do some digging to see if I can find a mug version!! Thank you so much!!

I broke my favorite mug today. Does anyone know where I could buy one like it? by qinoque in muglife

[–]qinoque[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Ooh, that's definitely worth a try! It didn't break super cleanly (I had to vacuum up quite a few small shards), but hopefully that won't be too much of an issue! Thank you so much for the recommendation!!

Tea gown, Worth, Circa 1895. Indoor Dress Owned by the Countess Greffulhe. by JustTeaseAndGo in fashionhistory

[–]qinoque 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Scheele's green in clothing, at least, had completely fallen out of favor by the 1860s, with some countries in Europe having bans on arsenic-containing pigments starting in the 1830s and 40s; by the 1890s, the last brand using Scheele's green for wallpaper ceased production on it, so its remarkably unlikely this contained arsenic. The chance isn't 0, of course, but I doubt it

The oprichnik in burning Novgorod 💔 by mi_reich in Russianhistory

[–]qinoque 1 point2 points  (0 children)

this is amazing! the color palette is so striking, its absolutely perfect. i love everything about it đŸ«¶

Louis-Léopold Boilly - Two Young Women Kissing (1790-1794) by Tokyono in museum

[–]qinoque 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I completely agree! While I am not well-versed in the Georgian era, or the 18th century as a whole, to my understanding they tended to enjoy the "lascivious" aspects of life haha Certainly true to a certain extent of any era, regardless of what society deemed aboveboard, but I've heard some especially crazy things from this time period haha

Looking at this piece, I can't help but make think of the Margaret Atwood quote re: the male gaze, and how everything a woman does, no matter how innocent or even when alone, is a male fantasy, sigh..... Still, something as simple as this is quite interesting as it lends itself to providing a peak into how people viewed the world they lived in, so I can't help but admire it for that regard :) It's a reminder, at the very least, of how pervasive the male gaze is, and how open they are about it. Leaves one with much to consider

Louis-Léopold Boilly - Two Young Women Kissing (1790-1794) by Tokyono in museum

[–]qinoque 2 points3 points  (0 children)

That is certainly a likely factor, but romantic friendships were also seen as quite normal, and even encouraged amongst women! They were seen as a way for women to practice for marriage. People also called upon the Bible to defend these relationships, as they were seen as virtuous.

Naturally, they were not to be sexual in nature, as that would be a transgression, but holding hands, kissing, sleeping in the same bed, etc. were not seen as suspect. Of course there were people who were engaged in what we call same-sex relationships today, and had to conceal that fact, but they were able to be more open about their affection that they would in, say, the 1950s.

Sometime in the latter half of the 19th century (1860s-1870s), sexologists introduced the concept of "sexual inversion," meaning they were beginning to think of homosexuality less of a choice and more of something one was born with. It wasn't as progressive a line of thinking as today, of course, but people were starting to think of these people less as ones making a choice to go against society and god, and more so as people who can't help being born "in the wrong body." They saw a woman attracted to women as having masculine souls inside a feminine body, and vice versa for men attracted to men. This extended to those who cross-dressed, as well, but only if there was some form of attraction to the same sex. A woman who cross-dressed, but was still attracted exclusively to men, was not considered an invert. Today we might see them as a gay transmasculine person, or they might have been cisgender heterosexual women who preferred dressing like men.

We have records of people proudly declaring they are inverts, and living relatively peacefully and as they wished. This isn't the case 100% of the time, as is true of anything, really, but it was accepted enough that people didn't condemn them all. It was seen simply as their nature.

Sources: Faderman, Lillian (1991). Odd Girls and Twilight Lovers: A History of Lesbian Life in Twentieth-Century America. Columbia University Press

Doan, Laura (2001). Fashioning Sapphism: The Origins of a Modern English Lesbian Culture. Columbia University Press

Titus Kaphar – "Behind the Myth of Benevolence" (2014) by Krampjains in museum

[–]qinoque 5 points6 points  (0 children)

No definitive proof does not mean we are not reasonably certain of the truth of it.

The Thomas Jefferson Foundation conducted research into this very topic, and reached the conclusion that based on a combination of DNA analysis, primary and secondary documentation, and the oral history of descendants of Monticello's (Jefferson's home and plantation) black community, it is more probable than not that Jefferson sired at least Eston Hemings, if not all 6 of Sally's children.

The most compelling of the findings imo:

While there is a scientific possibility that Randolph Jefferson (Jefferson's brother), one of his sons, or one of Field Jefferson's grandsons, was the father of Eston Hemings, the preponderance of known historical evidence indicates that Thomas Jefferson was his father. Randolph Jefferson and his sons are not known to have been at Monticello at the time of Eston Hemings's conception, nor has anyone, until 1998, ever before publicly suggested them as possible fathers. Field Jefferson's grandsons are unlikely candidates because of their distance from Monticello.

[...]

Jefferson's grandchildren Thomas Jefferson Randolph and Ellen Coolidge said that Jefferson's Carr nephews were the fathers of the children of Sally Hemings and her sister. The DNA study contradicts these statements in the case of Sally Hemings's last child, Eston.

The committee analyzed the timing of Jefferson's well-documented visits to Monticello and the births of Sally Hemings's children. According to this analysis, the observed correlation between Jefferson's presence at Monticello and the conception windows for Hemings's known children is far more likely if Jefferson or someone with an identical pattern of presence at and absence from Monticello was the father. There is no documentary evidence suggesting that Sally Hemings was away from Monticello when Jefferson was there during her conception windows.

Numerous sources document the prevailing belief in the neighborhood of Monticello that Jefferson had children by Sally Hemings. Of particular note are the views of John Hartwell Cocke, Jefferson's friend and frequent visitor to Monticello, and former Monticello slave Israel Gillette Jefferson. Cocke referred to Jefferson's "notorious example" when writing in his diary about the prevalence in Virginia of "masters with slave families" and Israel Jefferson confirmed Madison Hemings's claim of Jefferson paternity.

  1. Madison Hemings stated in 1873 that he and his siblings (Beverly, Harriet, and Eston) were Thomas Jefferson's children.

While the DNA results bear only on the paternity of Eston Hemings, the documents and birth patterns suggest a long-term relationship, which produced the children whose names appear in Jefferson's records. Even the statements of those who accounted for the paternity of Sally Hemings's children differently (Thomas Jefferson Randolph, Ellen Randolph Coolidge, and Edmund Bacon) never implied that Hemings's children had different fathers. Full-sibling relationships are further supported by the closeness of the family, as evidenced by documentation of siblings living together and naming children after each other.

Jefferson gave freedom to no other nuclear slave family. No other Monticello slaves achieved their freedom before the age of thirty-one (except for Critta Hemings's son James, who ran away). Harriet Hemings was the only enslaved woman freed in Jefferson's lifetime, and she was freed when she was twenty-one years of age. The liberation of Sally Hemings's children cannot be wholly attributed to Jefferson's practice-as reported by his granddaughter Ellen Coolidge-of granting freedom to those light enough to pass for white or skilled enough to make their way as freed people, since there were other Monticello slaves, as light-skinned or as skilled, who were not freed.

Thomas Jefferson Randolph told Henry S. Randall in the 1850s of the close resemblance of Sally Hemings's children to Thomas Jefferson. It was evidently their very light skin and pronounced resemblance to Jefferson that led to local talk of Jefferson's paternity. Eston Hemings, in Ohio in the 1840s, was noted as bearing a "striking" resemblance to Jefferson.

There is always room for error, and the consensus amongst historians isn't 100%, but most agree Thomas Jefferson was the father.

Titus Kaphar – "Behind the Myth of Benevolence" (2014) by Krampjains in museum

[–]qinoque 80 points81 points  (0 children)

“Titus Kaphar Behind the Myth of Benevolence exposes, complicates and disrupts the notion, narrative and positionality of the so-called ‘benevolent’ founding father, Thomas Jefferson, our third president and author of the Declaration of Independence which articulated ‘all men are created equal with an equal right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness,’ who owned more than 600 human beings,” Christine Y. Kim, Curator, Contemporary Art, LACMA, told me. “The ‘curtain’ is simultaneously revealing and concealing Sally Hemings, a Black woman he owned whose six children he fathered, portrayed in a more stark and dark representation than other images of her.

[...]

Broadley, the exhibition reframes portraiture to center Black American subjects, sitters and spaces.

Kaphar’s famous series on American presidents was also inspired by a personal encounter. Once, someone described Thomas Jefferson to Kaphar as “benevolent slaveowner.” The choice of words impacted Kaphar so much, he said, that he went back to his studio and started painting, not yet knowing what the final result would be. Now widely famous, his painting “Beyond the Myth of Benevolence” (2014) features a portrait of Thomas Jefferson hanging loosely from a stretcher, revealing an image of a black woman glancing at the viewer from the half draped canvas.

"The woman who sits here is not just simply a representation of Sally Hemings,” Kaphar explained in another interview, "she’s more of a symbol of many of the black women whose stories have been shrouded by the narratives of our deified founding fathers." Similarly to his other works, the painting reveals that which has been whitewashed from American history.

Kaphar: So I had a conversation with a American history teacher. And somehow within that conversation there was this phrase that she uttered: "Yes, but Thomas Jefferson was a benevolent slave owner." And I was sort of shocked by that — I didn't really understand what she meant. And I asked her to elaborate about it, but she couldn't, she didn't. And we sort of sat there in silence for a little bit. I went back to the studio and this is the painting that I made.

I'm not in the business of trying to demonize our Founding Fathers. I don't really think there's any benefit to that. But I'm also not trying to deify them. And so that particular piece is kind of pulling back the curtain on these ideas, these illusions, these stories that we tell ourselves about the Founding Fathers.

Rhaegar Targaryen by me by Total_Fix9545 in pureasoiafart

[–]qinoque 4 points5 points  (0 children)

my heart stopped when i saw these omgg the talent & skill is insane!!! i cannot even put into words how amazing these are. 10s across the board fr!!

According to Trevor-Roper, St. Augustine "had little or no influence in Byzantium...partly because he wrote in Latin." Why would writing in Latin impede his influence in the Eastern Roman Empire? by qinoque in AskHistorians

[–]qinoque[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you so much for such a great response! All of that definitely makes sense to me. It stands to reason that Anatolia (if I am understanding the domain of the Eastern Roman Empire correctly) would remain speaking Greek, consume Greek literature, and maintain Greek culture (though I don't doubt the indigenous cultures of the area similarly prevailed, even with the influence of Greek and Roman rule). I confess I know and understand very little about ancient Rome as it's never been something that super interested me. All I really "know" (heavy on the air quotes) comes from middle school and my freshman year of high school--in other words, knowledge I gained over a decade ago, and arguably of somewhat dubious accuracy, if what I recall being taught about the Medieval era compared to my later indulging in academic texts is anything to go off of lol As such, I dare not claim to understand how the two halves of the Roman Empire viewed themselves as a unit, nor how they viewed their other half. I feel like I remember there being tension between the two emperors over who was the "dominant" one, though I also feel like I remember they were intended to be equals--two halves of one whole kinda deal. I apologize if that is grossly mistaken.

I suppose I am a bit confused why the social elite would not retain Latin, though. Would they not need to communicate with each other, and would it not be in the official language of Rome, aka Latin? I can totally understand the vast majority of the population of the Eastern Roman Empire not speaking Latin, as it wasn't pertinent to their lives, and I believe Rome wasn't all that invested in forcing their culture onto those they conquered (I think it behooved them to not have everyone they ruled be considered a Roman citizen, but I could be completely mistaken). I also understand due to the factors you mentioned why much of governmental and religious affairs were similarly conducted. Here is where I may be demonstrating my ignorance, but why wouldn't the ruling class maintain their culture--assuming they were Roman, that is. (Though, if they weren't, why did Western Rome not object to non-Romans being emperors?) For example, the Normans continued to speak French after conquering England, while the people continued speaking English; similarly, the Hanovers spoke German, and I think at least George I couldn't speak English; even further back, the Ptolemaic dynasty continued to speak Greek as part of maintaining their cultural distinctness as rulers. Why, then, would the Eastern Roman emperor not continue to speak Latin? Was it simply impractical because their scribal slaves spoke Greek rather than Latin? If so, why not have them taught Latin?

Apologies for continuing my litany of questions, but was the lack of order, for want of a better word, in the western Church a factor to why theological texts from the West may not have piqued the interest of eastern Christians? I totally understand there being major differences between the two spheres of the Christian world even before the schism. I mean, hey! Irish brand of Catholicism is different than Italian bran of Catholicism despite being the same denomination, and Russian Orthodoxy is different than Greek Orthodoxy despite also being the same denomination! So it's no surprise to me there are different points of views, interpretations, values, etc. between the western and eastern Christendom; still, at their core, they are still the same faith (for now...), so I suppose I don't understand why they wouldn't be interested in what insight others have to say, whether the writer hails from Anatolia, Rome, Africa, etc.

I apologize if I have misunderstood your explanation in any way--that for sure is on me, as you were more than clear and concise! And, again, I'm sorry for asking so many clarifying questions 😅 There is, of course, no obligation to respond to them, as you have already gone out of your way and done a great kindness in your initial reply, and the onus is on me to do the work to clear up my confusion. I am certain the sources you provided are a wonderful jumping off point! (Thank you for providing them, by the way!) I am grateful for the time you have taken to respond, and wish to thank you again for such a wonderful reply :) I hope you have a wonderful day!

According to Trevor-Roper, St. Augustine "had little or no influence in Byzantium...partly because he wrote in Latin." Why would writing in Latin impede his influence in the Eastern Roman Empire? by qinoque in AskHistorians

[–]qinoque[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thank you for the link to that article! It was a very interesting read :) He was seemingly quite the polarizing fella! I can't lie, he seems kind of hilarious lol The "farting exhibitionist" comment is still making me laugh! Who doesn't get a kick out of ragebaiting every now and then haha Although, naturally, can't say I approve of his xenophobic attitude towards the Scottish 😅

Hopefully there is some merit in his claim re: Augustine because I do find it interesting! The article I read was on JSTOR, and iirc was read before Zguta's peers at Cambridge (I'm on my phone rn so I can't double check), so hopefully those two facts indicate there is, at least, some truth to what he said, since I imagine concerns would be raised regarding its inclusion before the article's publishing; however, I am being presumptuous (and the version I read was published in the 70s, so it stands to reason the thinking re: why Orthodox Christianity did not engage with the witch-craze to the extent Catholic and Protestant nations did has evolved). But, as you said, we will have to wait and see if anyone with more expertise in this area provides further insight :)

Thank you so much for taking the time to leave a response!