Matt is now working on the first illustration for my book on Athanasius, and we are discussing physical features. We don’t have many documents to help us with our decision. All paintings and orthodox icons portraying Athanasius were made many centuries later.
There is the common nickname of “black dwarf.” I was puzzled when I first found it, because I could not read this description in any original documents. Something else was strange. When I tried the search in other languages (“nano nero” or “nain noir”) I couldn’t find any results. I asked an Italian expert on that particular time period and on the early Fathers, and he had never heard of it.
Finally I found this site http://www.conorpdowling.com/803/chasing-the-black-dwarf with some explanations.
The fact that Emperor Julian had called Athanasius “a little man” does not necessarily mean that he was physically short, and apparently 20th-century American writers called him black just because he was African. I was later told by an African-American activist that the term “black” in America has a very wide meaning that goes beyond skin color. So an Egyptian could be called black just because he is African, and that could explain the “black dwarf” nickname.
I know this is a debatable subject and I am not interested in starting a discussion here. I just want to solve a practical problem: what did Athanasius look like?
We know that he lived in Egypt. His name is Greek, so he could have even come from a Greek family, which would make him Mediterranean but not dark. To avoid supposition, we can make him look as a typical 4th-century Egyptian. One of the best guidelines in this respect is the Fayum collection of portraits dated about the same time (1st-3rd century A.D.)
According to Philip Schaff (A Select Library of Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church), “later tradition adds a slight stoop, a hooked nose and small mouth, a short beard spreading into large whiskers, and light auburn hair.” This is, however, just tradition and not an accurate first-hand description.
I will let Matt decide what to do. His guess is as good as mine, and he is the artist. This post is
just an explanation to anyone who might ask me later why our Athanasius looks like he does
Athanasius is actually not a Greek name but a Coptic name. Coptic was the language of Egypt before the Arabs came in around the year 640. Arabic is now the official language of Egypt due to the Muslim Conquest. The name Athanasius and Cyril are commonly used in Greece today in honor of these saints but they are actually Coptic names. Coptic is similar to Greek in the same way French is similar to Spanish but very different. Egypt’s Nile people come in many colors. In Egypt, there are millions of people Westerners would consider to be “Black”. Athanasius’s old icons depict him as a short dark skinned man which is typical in Egypt. I would look at modern Egyptians like former president Anwar Sadat, singer Mohamed Ramadan, and soccer players like Shikabala and Mohamed El’neny to get a better idea of what he looked like.
Thank you for the feedback. This is exactly what I did in the images in my book (published in 2011).
There is not a single historical record of Athanasius being called “black dwarf.” This was an invention of Justo Gonzalez, “Story of Christianity: Volume 1,” Chapter 19, p.199. This is a quote from my own research on the matter:
“There are only two historical references to the physical attributes of Athanasius: one from the Emperor Julian, also known as Julian the Apostate, and a reference from Gregory Nanzianzen in his address celebrating the life of Athanasius.”
Neither refer to Athanasius as “black,” nor as necessarily short. You can find both historical citations in my article. It is sad when others cite works online which failed in the beginning to give any historical evidence. A search for “athanasius black dwarf” yields 69,000 results…all citing this ahistorical “fact.” If you do this search you can find my article on church history 101 dot com. Blessings to you. Al Baker, PhD.
Or u could accept it for what it is.
He was short (dwarf) and he was black. That he is named Athanasius means not much since the dominant culture was “Greco/Roman”. Much like a black man living in the US today would have an Anglo Saxon name: John…Robert.
He was African and so the presupposition must be that he was already dark to begin with unless clearly proven to the contrary. Furthermore there have always been blacks in all parts of Africa since forever and even today. They are the aboriginal people of the entire continent. There are black North Africans and original Egyptians are black especially prior to the Turkic invasions.
So, Athanasius was BLACK.
Why is this so hard for many whites to come to grips with ? Racial Intellectual greed perhaps. A desire to negate all black presence in ancient history ?
My point was simply that there is no proof that he was black or short, nor that anyone called him so. I contacted Justus Gonzales and he doesn’t remember where he ever heard this. I have also done research in several languages and there is no mention of his size or color. So apparently it was just a saying Gonzales heard and can’t trace any longer. I have absolutely no objection to stating that a person is black, white, short, or tall if there is actual proof of it. I just don’t want to spread misinformation.