# No "Blue" in the ancient world? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [September 1, 2016, 1:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-blue-in-the-ancient-world/764653 "2016-09-01T13:39:40Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2016, 1:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-blue-in-the-ancient-world/764653/1 "2016-09-01T13:39:40Z")
The other day I heard bits of [this RadioLab](http://www.radiolab.org/story/211213-sky-isnt-blue/) bit while during errands in the car on the lack of the concept “blue” in the ancient world. I was skeptical. But it [does](http://clarkesworldmagazine.com/hoffman_01_13/) [seem](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue%E2%80%93green_distinction_in_language) [that](http://www.businessinsider.com/what-is-blue-and-how-do-we-see-color-2015-2) there is rarely a word for blue in ancient languages and primitive societies. There is instead a word for the concept that is green and blue -“grue”. Blue sky commonly around … so why not? I think this is GQ but could be IMHO so please move if appropriate, but my guess is that this is culture impacting actual perception, as happens with language sounds. Discriminating the sky from anything else is _unimportant_ in the hunter-gatherer societies and was in the ancient world, no word, no practice, decreased _actual perception_. Thoughts? ---
**Author:** ![Amateur\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/59ef9b/32.png) [@Amateur\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Amateur_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2016, 1:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-blue-in-the-ancient-world/764653/2 "2016-09-01T13:47:16Z")
As someone who just had reason to do an extensive lookup on “blue” and related words in Egyptian, I call bullshit. The word ‘khesbed’ means blue in a number of contexts and when paired with the “strong/powerful” ideogram, means “blue like the heavens.” ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2016, 1:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-blue-in-the-ancient-world/764653/3 "2016-09-01T13:57:50Z")
Didn’t Cecil address this? ---
**Author:** ![GreenWyvern](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/greenwyvern/32/2834_2.png) [@GreenWyvern](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GreenWyvern)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2016, 2:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-blue-in-the-ancient-world/764653/4 "2016-09-01T14:01:29Z")
This is a large subject. You might think that every language has a word for red, a word for blue, a word for yellow, a word for green, etc. - but this is not the case. In essence, all human beings (who are not colourblind) see colours the same, but different languages may have different terminologies for colour which cannot necessary be easily translated from one language to another. Different ranges of different spectra of colour can have terms, or lack terms, in different languages. Some links: > **[Linguistic Facts About Color](https://thecolorlanguageproject.wordpress.com/2016/07/24/linguistic-facts-about-color/)** > > We tend to think of colors as ideas which all humans agree on – grass is green, flames are orange, the sky is light blue – even if different languages have different names for these colors. As Engl… > **[Linguistic relativity and the color naming debate](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_relativity_and_the_color_naming_debate)** > > The concept of linguistic relativity concerns the relationship between language and thought, specifically whether language influences thought, and, if so, how. This question has led to research in multiple disciplines—including anthropology, cognitive science, linguistics, and philosophy. Among the most debated theories in this area of work is the Sapir–Whorf hypothesis. This theory states that the language a person speaks will affect the way that this person thinks. The theory varies between > **[Blue–green distinction in language](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue%E2%80%93green_distinction_in_language)** > > In many languages, the colors described in English as "blue" and "green" are colexified, i.e. expressed using a single cover term. To describe this English lexical gap, linguists use the blend word grue, from green and blue, a term coined by the philosopher Nelson Goodman—with a rather different meaning—in his 1955 Fact, Fiction, and Forecast to illustrate his "new riddle of induction". > The exact definition of "blue" and "green" may be complicated by the speakers not primarily distinguishing ... ---
**Author:** ![watchwolf49](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/e9c0ed/32.png) [@watchwolf49](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/watchwolf49)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2016, 2:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-blue-in-the-ancient-world/764653/5 "2016-09-01T14:19:38Z")
Yet another Wikipedia link to add to **GreenWyvern’s** : [“_Basic Color Terms: Their Universality and Evolution_”](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_Color_Terms:_Their_Universality_and_Evolution). As a culture advances in sophistication, this can be measured by how many color terms their language has. So early language (and early cultures) would have just Light and Dark. Whereas England today names 11 colors, thus a far more advanced culture. Of course the good ol’ USA has millions of words for different colors; �C578, &#FF569D, 󊁽, etc etc etc … ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2016, 2:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-blue-in-the-ancient-world/764653/6 "2016-09-01T14:23:39Z")
But as any Russian can tell you, the word for the color of the sky is different from the word for “blue”. An example from closer to home might help. In English, we can recognize and describe the distinction between, say, “blue” and “light blue”, or “green” and “light green”. But we still consider “blue” and “light blue” to be different shades of what’s fundamentally the same color. We do _not_, however, do the same thing with “light red”. Nobody ever calls “light red” by that name; we instead call it “pink” and think of it as a different color. Similarly, Homer would never actually mistake the color of wine for the color of the ocean. But he might say that they’re basically two different shades of the same fundamental color. ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2016, 2:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-blue-in-the-ancient-world/764653/7 "2016-09-01T14:26:45Z")
Here’s one of Cecil’s columns that touches on this subject: [Could Early Man Only See Three Colors](http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/449/could-early-man-only-see-three-colors) ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2016, 2:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-blue-in-the-ancient-world/764653/8 "2016-09-01T14:30:00Z")
> [@GreenWyvern](#): > > Different ranges of different spectra of colour can have terms, or lack terms, in different languages. That’s right. The spectrum is continuous - and different cultures break it up different ways. It seems absurd to me that green and blue could be thought of as the same thing, but there’s really no natural dividing line between the two. ---
**Author:** ![Peter\_Morris](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/peter_morris/32/359_2.png) [@Peter\_Morris](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peter_Morris)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2016, 2:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-blue-in-the-ancient-world/764653/9 "2016-09-01T14:30:25Z")
> [@TriPolar](#): > > Didn’t Cecil address this? [Yes.](http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/449/could-early-man-only-see-three-colors) Edit - Ninja’d ---
**Author:** ![Amateur\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/59ef9b/32.png) [@Amateur\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Amateur_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2016, 2:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-blue-in-the-ancient-world/764653/10 "2016-09-01T14:34:13Z")
> [@Mangetout](#): > > That’s right. The spectrum is continuous - and different cultures break it up different ways. It seems absurd to me that green and blue could be thought of as the same thing, but there’s really no natural dividing line between the two. Green trees against a blue sky clearly register as different things; looking at a prism spectrum, which few if any ancient humans would have ever seen, is a distortion of the setting. A lot of early cultures lack words for colors because they simply used the colors instead - if they saw a blue ox, they drew an image of an ox in blue, or colored the ideogram blue. Only when you reduce written language to character/ideogram shapes do you start needing descriptive colors for most things. (A converse: oxen are brown, so there’s not a lot of need to include color value when writing or drawing “ox” or “steer” or “bull” or “cow.”) ---
**Author:** ![Horatius](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/horatius/32/3572_2.png) [@Horatius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Horatius)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2016, 2:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-blue-in-the-ancient-world/764653/11 "2016-09-01T14:34:54Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > We do _not_, however, do the same thing with “light red”. Nobody ever calls “light red” by that name; we instead call it “pink” and think of it as a different color. [Ahem.](http://rvb.wikia.com/wiki/Franklin_Delano_Donut) ---
**Author:** ![pulykamell](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pulykamell/32/3166_2.png) [@pulykamell](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pulykamell)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2016, 2:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-blue-in-the-ancient-world/764653/12 "2016-09-01T14:43:54Z")
I don’t call it “light red,” but I definitely think of it as a shade of red (or purple, if it’s a bluish pink), not a different color. ---
**Author:** ![Horatio\_Hellpop](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e5b9ba/32.png) [@Horatio\_Hellpop](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Horatio_Hellpop)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2016, 2:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-blue-in-the-ancient-world/764653/13 "2016-09-01T14:57:27Z")
On the same clickbait meme level, I see stuff about how Greek/Roman statues were painted with lots of bright vivid colors, including blue. ---
**Author:** ![Tom\_Tildrum](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e95f7d/32.png) [@Tom\_Tildrum](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tom_Tildrum)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2016, 3:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-blue-in-the-ancient-world/764653/14 "2016-09-01T15:08:52Z")
> [@GreenWyvern](#): > > This is a large subject. You might think that every language has a word for red, a word for blue, a word for yellow, a word for green, etc. - but this is not the case. > > In essence, all human beings (who are not colourblind) see colours the same, but different languages may have different terminologies for colour which cannot necessary be easily translated from one language to another. > > Different ranges of different spectra of colour can have terms, or lack terms, in different languages. > > Some links: > > [Linguistic Facts About Color – Alan S. Kennedy's Color/Language Project](https://thecolorlanguageproject.wordpress.com/2016/07/24/linguistic-facts-about-color/) > > [Linguistic relativity and the color naming debate - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_relativity_and_the_color_naming_debate) > > [Blue–green distinction in language - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue%E2%80%93green_distinction_in_language) Further to **BlueWyvern** ’s links, color-naming can lead down a serious [philosophical](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_riddle_of_induction) rabbit hole. ---
**Author:** ![John\_DiFool](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_difool/32/19543_2.png) [@John\_DiFool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_DiFool)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2016, 3:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-blue-in-the-ancient-world/764653/15 "2016-09-01T15:24:21Z")
I read an anthropological anecdote, about a researcher who was in contact with some isolated tribe, and asked them what the color of the sky was “in between the clouds.” The native person looked at her like she was crazy and declared that there was “no color” at all there. ---
**Author:** ![ftg](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ftg/32/2801_2.png) [@ftg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ftg)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2016, 3:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-blue-in-the-ancient-world/764653/16 "2016-09-01T15:24:40Z")
The fact that the sky is blue doesn’t mean one needs a word for blue. Think about someone per-civilized\* person in central Europe, on a savanna in Africa, central Asia, etc. How many blue-like-the-sky things are there that are important enough that there’s a need for a color name? A. There has to be several such things. B. The common color of such things is important enough to talk about. - Once civilization kicks in and people starting making a _bunch_ of dyed/colored stuff, then color naming takes off. To me, ancient Rome, ancient Egypt, etc., aren’t ancient enough for this topic. ---
**Author:** ![Ornery\_Bob](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/da6949/32.png) [@Ornery\_Bob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ornery_Bob)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2016, 3:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-blue-in-the-ancient-world/764653/17 "2016-09-01T15:31:45Z")
Just for the sake of current pedantry - the _hue_ would be red, the _chroma_ would be the intensity or saturation. When it comes to value or brightness, we have tints and shades - a tint is the color + white and a shade is the color + black. Pink is really a tint of red and something like burgundy would be a shade of red. Technically, “light red” would be a low intensity red, not pink. ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2016, 3:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-blue-in-the-ancient-world/764653/18 "2016-09-01T15:36:07Z")
> [@ftg](#): > > How many blue-like-the-sky things are there that are important enough that there’s a need for a color name? A. There has to be several such things. B. The common color of such things is important enough to talk about. This part makes a lot of sense. There’s not much of any shade of blue in nature. The sky, some waters, gems, some people’s eyes, some birds, not many people ever see a mandrill, some berries. Most of those blues are pretty dark too. There are a lot of reds and greens in nature in varying shades. Then as mentioned in various ways, we understand how colors combine now, without that knowledge I wouldn’t understand pink and red and orange to have that much in common, or purple and blue. My eyes are somewhat insensitive to blue so I see the sky to be more like gray than distinctively blue. I think it’s difficult from our modern perspective to understand how people long ago perceived colors. ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2016, 3:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-blue-in-the-ancient-world/764653/19 "2016-09-01T15:52:25Z")
> [@Amateur\_Barbarian](#): > > Green trees against a blue sky clearly register as different things; looking at a prism spectrum, which few if any ancient humans would have ever seen, is a distortion of the setting. Sure, barring rainbows, ancient humans wouldn’t have contemplated the spectrum a lot, but the colour gamut is still continuous - so even if ancients were only looking at a collection of ‘blue’ things such as the sea, blueberries, the sky (on a clear day, in England?), and the wing feathers of a jay, the decision to group these colours together or apart is a decision, not an observation of some natural boundary. ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2016, 3:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-blue-in-the-ancient-world/764653/20 "2016-09-01T15:55:55Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > We do _not_, however, do the same thing with “light red”. Nobody ever calls “light red” by that name; we instead call it “pink” and think of it as a different color. Interestingly, we \*\*\*did \*\*\*though. The colour pink is named after a flower called Pinks. Before we started calling pink ‘Pink’, people called it ‘light reddish’ or ‘white flushed with red’ [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-blue-in-the-ancient-world/764653.md?page=2)