|
BrianWilly posted:Doing some research for a story~ Sounds like a modern fantasy. Islam and pre-Christian religions don’t really overlap much in the central Mediterranean — until the late 7th century the Lombard nobility of Italy still maintained some of its traditional pagan rituals, but by the 8th century this had ceased, and Muslims wouldn’t begin to enter Italy in force until the 9th. I guess it’s just about possible that an early Muslim Arab might have made his way there and met a non-Christian Lombard among the many Christian Lombards and Italians, but they would both have had to dig pretty deep to find anyone who still followed traditional Greco-Roman religious observances: they would probably have had better luck looking in the back country of Greece than in Italy. Pre-Christian Rome could be pretty tolerant of other religions, since their own religion was pretty unlimited and expansive...unless you were part of something seditious like Christianity or Manichaeism, then you might get fed to wild animals alive with your family for the public entertainment. Islam absolutely would have fallen foul of pre-Christian Rome for the same reason though, but the two never coexisted. One Italian thing that sometimes gets talked about in a context of religious tolerance is the Sicilian kingdom under the 13th century Holy Roman Emperor Frederick II Hohenstaufen. Frederick inherited the kingdom of Sicily from Norman rulers who had conquered it from Muslim rulers, and there were still quite many Muslims in the land. Frederick could also speak Arabic and was capable of developing rapport with Islamic leaders, and in general had a fascinatingly relative and cynical approach to religious belief that moderns often find more relatable than the approaches of his contemporaries. He gave Jews and Muslims places in his administration and didn’t hesitate to argue with/make war against the pope. Some of his biographers have gotten quite carried away with this, and it’s at least true if you were looking for somewhere in the 13th century that had a truly cosmopolitan feel, Frederick’s capital at Palermo would have been a pretty good choice. However, he also went on crusade (while excommunicated!) and didn’t scruple to deport tens of thousands of Muslims from Sicily and settle them as a colony on the Italian mainland so he could better keep them under control and exploit their deracination for an organized tax farming/army recruitment operation. So basically what I’m saying here is that modern ideas of religious tolerance are, precisely, modern, and we should not assume historical persons shared our values on this topic, even if it sometimes (rarely) seems like they did. skasion fucked around with this message at 18:47 on Jul 30, 2020 |
#
?
Jul 30, 2020 18:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 13:18 |
|
|
Catholicism definitely was a thing because it defined itself in contrast to the Arians and other christian movements that were branded as heresy as well as there being significant differences between western and eastern christian groups that there was friction over. I don't know much about pagans being in italy. I feel like there was a lot of pressure to at least publicly be christian, but people could probably get away with a fair amount in private. I've heard things about slavs getting around and I know that the Romani came from way outside of Europe and some of them might not have converted. Maybe you could spin the Normans as being a little pagan-ish, but they proclaimed themselves christian during the crusades at least. My favorite bit of weird trivia of nonchristians around Italy is Fraxinet, a little muslim fortress that was either pirates, an independent state, an enclave of a larger empire, or whatever from 889 to 973. Grand Fromage posted:If my choices are suffer for six months or 40 years, I know what I'm picking. Especially after I've spent the last two years watching my dad slowly suffering and dying. Dying fast is the way to go. I feel like most people when forced into that situation will instinctively find within them the will to live because that's one of the basic aspects of human nature. And even in the darkest times, people will find some light. Which some slavery apologists try to spin the fact that slaves were not outwardly miserable 100% of the time into the idea that they were living happily.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2020 18:46
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:What do you mean by northern and southern pagans? Sucks to hear that it's not really a thing. So there was never any actual melting pot societies, worship-wise, in Europe? My impression was that a lot of temples, churches, and mosques took a lot of cues from each other at the time, but is that just a case of conquest and appropriation, then?
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2020 21:44
|
|
|
BrianWilly posted:Basically pagans who were already in Italy and those who came from up north, I guess. Muslim Spain/Al Andalus is maybe what’re you’re thinking of? Although I don’t know if they had that many pagans. Or if they did mixing of religious practice rather than just coexistence.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2020 21:46
|
|
|
BrianWilly posted:Basically pagans who were already in Italy and those who came from up north, I guess. The toleration of non-Christian religions is not strictly compatible with a belief that Christianity is the sole and exclusive way of avoiding burning in hell for eternity beyond death. If you DO have this belief, and many pre-modern Christian leaders either did or claimed they did, then tolerating other religious sects is just saying “yeah I’m cool with those guys suffering godless torment for ever and ever, world without end, amen”. Which, again assuming you have this belief, would be even more hosed up than the alternative. The idea that it really isn’t that important and the state should just tell everyone to live and let live is a very modern idea. The idea is based in the fact that the breakup of the European church in the 16th & 17th centuries left a bunch of nations with multiple religious communities within their borders who all abominated one another on technical grounds. The point was hammered home when rulers insisted on taking too hard a line on this issue and the resulting political fractures bubbled up into a great power conflict and decades of war that killed about 10 million people. skasion fucked around with this message at 22:25 on Jul 30, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2020 22:10
|
|
|
BrianWilly posted:Basically pagans who were already in Italy and those who came from up north, I guess. The society you're looking for is probably pre-Christian Rome, as religions go it was very syncretic. As for the post-Christian Mediterranean there certainly was that sort of cross pollination, but more of it was happening in the Eastern Mediterranean than it was in western Europe. Islamic architecture in particular borrows heavily from Roman and Persian styles in their respective former territories. Muslims were big on the whole tolerance front as well, so that's where you will see large numbers of Christians and Muslims and older faiths living together. Which is not to say that western Europe was languishing in backwardness for centuries, it's just that the source and destination of those ideas were Christian societies. And then once the Crusades kick off western Europe is more connected to the Islamic world, but that's a whole other thing.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2020 22:18
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
Syncretism is a thing in a lot of Europe to this day. Many of the Mari in Russia mention Mary and Christ in the same breath as they do the wind god or the sky god and a lot of the house spirits like the Nordic Nisse/Tomte and the Slavic Kikimora are just vestiges of ancestor worship. See also: 90% of Christian holidays which are just repurposed Pagan holidays.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2020 22:21
|
|
|
I don't know if that specific belief was particularly the reason. Christian-controlled Europe was pretty adamant about not allowing other religions most of the time, but Muslims had similar beliefs but pretty much allowed other faiths to persist. Non-muslims had to pay higher taxes and may have had less opportunities, but they didn't face the same trouble as pagans in Europe. I think maybe the Christian response had something to do with how the Pope became the power broker of Europe so trying to take slices off your neighbor was hard to justify, but against pagans or heretics the Pope would just give you a green light, and that evolved into a stronger belief that the presence of nonchristians was an anathema. It probably didn't hurt that there were points where pagans and muslims were genuine threats to major christian kingdoms. Prechristian Europe could be more of a melting pot of religion, but it wasn't really the same as a modern organized religion, and there was some degree to which various religious faiths wouldn't even see themselves as wholly apart or in disagreement unless they were specifically some weirdos who would die to make the point that all gods except for theirs were some kind of demons.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2020 22:37
|
|
|
skasion posted:The toleration of non-Christian religions is not strictly compatible with a belief that Christianity is the sole and exclusive way of avoiding burning in hell for eternity beyond death. If you DO have this belief, and many pre-modern Christian leaders either did or claimed they did, then tolerating other religious sects is just saying “yeah I’m cool with those guys suffering godless torment for ever and ever, world without end, amen”. Which, again assuming you have this belief, would be even more hosed up than the alternative. The idea that it really isn’t that important and the state should just tell everyone to live and let live is a very modern idea. The idea is based in the fact that the breakup of the European church in the 16th & 17th centuries left a bunch of nations with multiple religious communities within their borders who all abominated one another on technical grounds. The point was hammered home when rulers insisted on taking too hard a line on this issue and the resulting political fractures bubbled up into a great power conflict and decades of war that killed about 10 million people. lots of modern christians still believe this though? "non-believers will go to hell" and "religion should not be compelled" turn out to be compatible beliefs in practice
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2020 22:39
|
|
|
Jeb Bush 2012 posted:lots of modern christians still believe this though? "non-believers will go to hell" and "religion should not be compelled" turn out to be compatible beliefs in practice This mode of thought took the realization that the non-believers had as many guns as you do and are just across the river.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2020 23:03
|
|
|
Lol if you're a Christian and think there is any form of afterlife prior to judgement day.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2020 23:10
|
|
|
lol if you're a christian and think sacraments administered by a priest who handed over the scriptures to the roman authorities are valid
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2020 23:13
|
|
|
FreudianSlippers posted:Lol if you're a Christian and think there is any form of afterlife prior to judgement day. nah god realized there was no way he could go through billions in a day so he just takes applications on a rolling basis.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2020 23:18
|
|
|
Jeb Bush 2012 posted:lots of modern christians still believe this though? "non-believers will go to hell" and "religion should not be compelled" turn out to be compatible beliefs in practice Plenty of people think plenty of things, but post-Westphalian European states have generally not considered it an appropriate tool of statecraft to make war upon infidels, smash up their religious sites, and annihilate them as a community of separate belief. Though they often enough have done these things anyway in some other cause.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2020 23:27
|
|
|
I'm still mad about Big Chuck burning the Irminsul.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2020 23:30
|
|
|
I feel like there are two different things being discussed here, at least. On the one hand tolerance, the cultural melting pot and so on. I think that is associated with economic boom times, ancient Rome or modern New York, if you're where it's happening and making cash money, you care much more where the wine is from than where the people you're celebrating with are from. Being actively hostile to others, cracking down on other religious practices happening nearby, might as well be for the same reason. Borrow money from the Jews, then persecute them because they did devilish things. Don't cancel the debt though, take over as bondholder m'Lord, ka-ching! It's not that people don't have anti-other-people feelings without economic motivations, it's just that economic motivations seems a tremendously potent fertilizer, just like boom times did the opposite. If you can think of a workable reason to gently caress someone over, and you're in bad need of loving someone over... But of course, "to persecute" wouldn't exist as a concept if there wasn't religious antipathy regardless of economics. On the other hand, the making of religious practices by mixing up previous ones, perhaps add some contemporary spice. That's the only way I know of to make a religious practice. Even the Spaghetti Monster is thoroughly rooted in Christianity. I would be surprised to find any present religious practice you couldn't trace back to something else historically documented. I'm sure the paleolithic Lion Man came from some previous iteration of "higher being withing nature", and it even manifested itself as art, which is so important in religion still. The anti-art protestants would rip out the gaudy kitsch from a cathedral, but they still did their business in a cathedral. They just wanted minimal architectural art I guess. Perhaps the academic understanding of syncretism is different from the previous paragraph, but maybe that's more in terms of quantity rather than quality. A tiny bit is invented every now and then, then it is mixed in with whatever fits. It's power dynamics and economics, history bread and butter, that mostly dictate what actually fits. I also think that understanding past religious practices is made difficult if you think that everyone believed in the same way Christians believe. Persecuting someone else for their beliefs is a very Christian thing, or late Roman if you will. The expanding empire Romans didn't kill you for that, they killed you for resisting political submission. Sacrifice to whatever god you want, but do it at our temples. There's economic and political side effects associated with sacrificing at a temple, and it ain't happening up in the sky.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2020 23:31
|
|
|
FreudianSlippers posted:I'm still mad about Big Chuck burning the Irminsul. No man may erect greater wood than Charles the Large
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2020 23:34
|
|
|
skasion posted:No man may erect greater wood than Charles the Large Txt me. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2020 23:53
|
|
|
Ola posted:On the other hand, the making of religious practices by mixing up previous ones, perhaps add some contemporary spice. That's the only way I know of to make a religious practice. Even the Spaghetti Monster is thoroughly rooted in Christianity. ...
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2020 00:52
|
|
|
Nessus posted:I imagine most Americans are just as ignorant of religious matters as medieval peasants, just in a slightly different way - more aware that there are other sects beyond The Church (if not always much more aware), and probably the peasant knew the lore a little better if only due to lack of other entertainment. I don't think that Americans are ignorant. Medieval peasants were ignorant of other nations' practices, but their own practices got beaten into them at an early age. But there's a difference in not having heard of something and not respecting something.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2020 01:18
|
|
|
Ola posted:I don't think that Americans are ignorant. Medieval peasants were ignorant of other nations' practices, but their own practices got beaten into them at an early age. But there's a difference in not having heard of something and not respecting something.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2020 01:27
|
|
|
Medieval peasants were mostly illiterate, Americans are mostly literate. As much as Americans are ignorant it's mostly willful/trained/indifference.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2020 01:28
|
|
|
Stringent posted:Medieval peasants were mostly illiterate, Americans are mostly literate. As much as Americans are ignorant it's mostly willful/trained/indifference. This is a poor argument. The volume of information for the modern person is vastly larger, and of much less comparative value. It also ignores that it's very possible to teach the illiterate. The average American is probably just as well versed in the knowledge pertaining to their own lives of the medieval man. It's just a different set of useful knowledge
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2020 01:34
|
|
|
I mean .. there wasn’t any books until mid 15th century Widely available books
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2020 01:36
|
|
|
euphronius posted:I mean .. there wasn’t any books until mid 15th century The Bible?
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2020 01:37
|
|
|
Was teh book called “How to fuuuuck real good”, OP?
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2020 01:37
|
|
|
Gaius Marius posted:The Bible? poo poo was in Latin on sheepskin lmao
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2020 01:38
|
|
|
euphronius posted:poo poo was in Latin on sheepskin lmao If it's in every church in every town that's drat good market penetration for those days
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2020 01:39
|
|
|
Gaius Marius posted:If it's in every church in every town that's drat good market penetration for those days I don’t know what point you are trying to make
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2020 01:40
|
|
|
Gaius Marius posted:This is a poor argument. The volume of information for the modern person is vastly larger, and of much less comparative value. It also ignores that it's very possible to teach the illiterate. The average American is probably just as well versed in the knowledge pertaining to their own lives of the medieval man. It's just a different set of useful knowledge I think the average American having an encyclopedic knowledge of baseball stats, but being abysmally ignorant of politics or whatever is pretty comparable. The difference is that information is realistically available to an American.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2020 01:43
|
|
|
https://www.theonion.com/scientists-locate-impact-crater-from-asteroid-that-dest-1844545503
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2020 01:44
|
|
|
Pontius Pilate posted:https://www.theonion.com/scientists-locate-impact-crater-from-asteroid-that-dest-1844545503 In it, voted 1.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2020 01:48
|
|
|
Anyway medieval Europe is a weird place. There were lots of way literate pre modern cultures
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2020 01:48
|
|
|
Pontius Pilate posted:https://www.theonion.com/scientists-locate-impact-crater-from-asteroid-that-dest-1844545503 How important was Athens to the Roman Empire?
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2020 01:49
|
|
|
SlothfulCobra posted:How important was Athens to the Roman Empire? As far as I know. Little more than a tourist trap like sparta. Thessaloniki was the large city there until Constantinople was founded.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2020 01:51
|
|
|
insofar as being "ignorant" in a general sense means anything at all, modern americans are obviously far less ignorant than medieval peasants, even if they aren't as politically informed as you think they should be or whatever. the hyper-particular knowledge is a push and on more general knowledge the modern american comes out leagues ahead also, remember, 
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2020 01:51
|
|
|
Jeb Bush 2012 posted:insofar as being "ignorant" in a general sense means anything at all, modern americans are obviously far less ignorant than medieval peasants, even if they aren't as politically informed as you think they should be or whatever. the hyper-particular knowledge is a push and on more general knowledge the modern american comes out leagues ahead In it, voted 5.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2020 01:52
|
|
|
I rescind my argument completely. I hadn't considered the Doritos argument.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2020 01:52
|
|
|
Jeb Bush 2012 posted:insofar as being "ignorant" in a general sense means anything at all, modern americans are obviously far less ignorant than medieval peasants, even if they aren't as politically informed as you think they should be or whatever. the hyper-particular knowledge is a push and on more general knowledge the modern american comes out leagues ahead If I needed a chair fixed or a potato grown I know who I'd be asking and it isn't the american.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2020 01:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 13:18 |
|
|
Did Greece suffer some sort of depopulation or have we just always given it outsized importance? The romans valued greek culture but by then it's all about Thrace, Sicily, the hellenized east, etc and they pretty much stomped the classical heartland as an afterthought. And by the time Constantinople is founded it seems like Greece is already a total backwater. It kinda seems like the actual classical greeks living in Greece were the only ones who really gave a poo poo about Greece proper.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2020 01:53
|
|