Remove ads

What's the most Cringeworthy take on Actual History/Archeology you've ever read?

Astrid Fornhoff said:
I have also defamed no people, besmirched no land nor stolen from any culture. Nor will I suffer the insult of such an accusation. Everything I do, I do with the utmost respect given to the ghosts of long dead peoples and as much as I can give to their descendants without being told the racist bullshit of drinking from one's own wellspring, thank you very much.

and to address the conversation that brought about what you're responding to: Nor do I owe Christians anything. Their irrational hatred of my people has ended in tragedy and murder time after time, which continues to this very day. So forgive me for doubting in their supposed benevolence and inherent goodness.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Not sure what this is in response to, exactly? I don't believe anyone's accused you of anything?

From the sound of it you're a essentially a Hellenic Reconstructionist.
 
If it is in reference to part of my post, then I apologise. I was referring to certain individuals within the Scandinavian folk music and historical reenactment scenes that I've interacted with. I bear no ill will towards neopagans as a group. I should have been more clear.
I'm sorry if I caused any offense.
 
"Of course, the primitives of the 18th century could not have built a city like St. Petersburg! It was an Atlantean colony, and Peter just dug it out of the ground!"
 
Balmung1 said:
Eh I take it as more of a spiritual thing than like an actual unbroken chain.Pope fights are an extremely Roman Catholic thing to do
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I dunno about that, FWIK of Apostolic Succession it is supposed to be an "unbroken chain." At least with Catholicism, the requirement seems to be that it takes a Bishop to consecrate a Bishop, like how in GOT a Knight (and only a knight) can make a Knight.

Of course given several periods where there aren't exactly (reliable, if at all) records, I don't think a positive claim of "we have a clear unbroken chain of bishop-to-bishop" holds up. on the other hand there wasn't really an 'extinction event' where the entire pool of Bishops was wiped out and propagation was impossible, AFAIK. So it's not as clear cut as with the Druids where a total wipe out is said to have happened.

(Some of the Celtic Recons I know get *really* mad if anyone tries to claim the title of Druid, since by their reckoning, only a Druid can make a Druid and the Druids all died.)

Lineage (tracing who taught who taught who) is still really important to some Neo-Pagan Trads.

IIRC one of the major (within neo-pagan circles) criticisms of Silver Ravenwolf is that the lineage she claimed in one of her books is hilariously nonsensical, claiming transmission between people who never were on the same continent (in a tradition-context where transmission is *much* more involved than just "I dub thee Sir Justin") [1]. But then, SR tends to be seen as basically a scam artist.

(Don't get your Neo-Paganism literature from Llewelyn Press.)

[1] this probably counts as a cringeworthy claim about real history.
 
K von Carstein said:
…No? At least not at the beginning. The Christianisation of the Roman Empire was largely peaceful, just like those of the German tribes, Irish, British, and a lot of Eastern Christians like the Nestorians.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

That "largely" is putting in some work there. I mean, let's not beat around the bush, the traditional cults in the Empire were in fact ended by force.

Amidatelion said:
Not in Europe.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

The Saxons may want to have a word with you. Or the original Prussians. Those were wiped out altogether in a "Christianization" attempt. Ultimately, how racially open Christianity was is irrelevant - a genocide is a genocide, regardless if done out of racial or religious hatred.

Balmung1 said:
And I specified it to those European Paganist who mainly LARP as pagans instead of groups like native Americans in north america who are genuinely trying to rebuild their previous cultural and religious identity and practices because of European colonization and genocide.I also included other abrahamic faiths because they contributed greatly to our modern world too and to Christianity with things like arabic numerals,a loving god,medicine,mathmatics and rosaries to name a few from just Islam.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

The very idea that all European neo-pagans are just "LARPers" and inherently less authentic for some reason is pretty bigotted. I grant there are some varieties that will inevitably car less about historic accuracy than others, but then those old traditions were themseleves very varied and dynamic, so developing them further on is exactly what adherents did back then. And even in the Americas, neopagans have a problem with transmission and often have to use pretty Christianized variants of theology and rituals and so on. So not all that different.
 
Susano said:
The Saxons may want to have a word with you. Or the original Prussians. Those were wiped out altogether in a "Christianization" attempt. Ultimately, how racially open Christianity was is irrelevant - a genocide is a genocide, regardless if done out of racial or religious hatred.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

The Saxon Wars and the Prussian Crusade did happen and were genocides and thus very bad, yes. Not trying to argue otherwise.

That said, they belong firmly to the medieval period, and I was looking at early/ancient Christianity specifically.
 
Hmm, the 33 years Saxon wars between the Franks and Saxons were a very brutal affair on both sides though I would have to note that the Saxons were not in fact wiped out by it given they apparently were still in great enough numbers to provide troops to the Carolingians along with the Sorbs and Wends.

The Saxon nobility also wasn't wiped out by the wars and eventually a Saxon duke, Henry the Fowler would eventually end up ruling east Francia becoming its first non-Frankish King in 919.

Yet another Saxon King, Otto the first would end up ending the 38 year Imperial interregnum that followed the death of Berengar I of Italy in 924 and became emperor in 962 and formed what we think of the HRE.
 
Alane1 said:
Hmm, the 33 years Saxon wars between the Franks and Saxons were a very brutal affair on both sides though I would have to note that the Saxons were not in fact wiped out by it
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
That's not a requirement for genocide, as you probably well know. And the methods Charles the Great used in his conquest/conversion attempts were in fact pretty genocidal.
 
Amidatelion said:
The Saxon Wars and the Prussian Crusade did happen and were genocides and thus very bad, yes. Not trying to argue otherwise.

That said, they belong firmly to the medieval period, and I was looking at early/ancient Christianity specifically.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
If by ancient you mean Pre-Constantine? You have a decent point. 50 years after his death... it was not social pressure or desire for theological certainty that made the old faiths vanish.
 
Stop: Violation of Rule Two: Don't be Hateful
  • Staff Post
    • Balmung1 said:
    I dislik

    I fucking hate european paganists. I understand and support native american groups and other indigenous people's in practicing their pre columbian religious rites and cultures since Catholicism and European colonialism hurt them deeply and they deserve to reconnect with their pat.European paganists I have nothing but disdain for because they recieved all the good stuff that came with christianity,base most of their rituals on christian accounts of pagans,tend to be very hyporitical regarding Christianity and religious rites and have far to many associations to antisemitic of fascist groups for my liking.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...
    violation of rule two: don't be hateful
    This post is a violation of Rule Two: Don't Be Hateful, which has a number of nuances - but the first line of the rule speaks for itself here:

    Sufficient Velocity said:
    We want to build a welcoming community. You can't post anything that is hateful or advocates harassment or violence, even against fictional or historical people. Be mindful in everything that you post.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...

    Declaring that you "fucking hate" another religion is hateful, and against the ideal of a welcoming community.

    @Balmung1 has been infracted for 50 points and a three day threadban has been issued.
     
  • Staff Post
    • Do we have a neopagan thread on this site? I'd love to chat more about it though I imagine this thread is not the place for it.

    and for my thread tax: I was raised Mormon so you can imagine how cringeworthy attempts to "find the ancient civilizations of the Nephites and Lamanites" have been for the faith of my fathers over the years. Especially as archaeological knowledge improves and the potential area where the Book of Mormon could have taken place shrinks. At this point, apologetics for said church are pretty much left with "...it happened on the Yucatan, maybe?" Specifically, claiming that Mayans or at least some faction of them were actually ancient Jews.
     
    Zioneer said:
    Do we have a neopagan thread on this site? I'd love to chat more about it though I imagine this thread is not the place for it.

    and for my thread tax: I was raised Mormon so you can imagine how cringeworthy attempts to "find the ancient civilizations of the Nephites and Lamanites" have been for the faith of my fathers over the years. Especially as archaeological knowledge improves and the potential area where the Book of Mormon could have taken place shrinks. At this point, apologetics for said church are pretty much left with "...it happened on the Yucatan, maybe?" Specifically, claiming that Mayans or at least some faction of them were actually ancient Jews.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...

    I'll never understand the obsession with claiming Jewishness.

    Well no, I get it, being the chosen people is attractive, but it's always so disconnected from reality.
     
    And it's not like being the chosen people has ever been much fun for the actual Jews anyway.

    Although if this was true it would provide a neat justification for the fact that Kronk from The Emperor's New Groove is portrayed as being Jewish in a one-off gag from the spin-off series.
     
    Chehrazad said:
    We used to have a religion thread and it was quite cool, sadly it died. Though more out of inactivity than anything else.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...
    You have a link handy? Might be interesting to read through, and possibly revive. Though my own beliefs are a bit too muddy to really be worth stating.
     
    Yeah. It's super fun. In the same way having teeth pulled without anesthesia is fun.
     
    Not essentially "cringe-worthy history" but a recent (and fairly hot) thread on AH.com poses the interesting counter-factual question: "How would non-Western colonizers have treated Indigenous groups?"

    (Personally, I fall into the "humans are broadly similiar" thesis, and that colonization is fundamentally disastrous and deracinating done wherever and by whomever, but it is telling that while certain comments put forward the idea that the West was the best native Americas could have got, the opposite - that perhaps certain non-Western groups could have done better, or at least less worse, in the Soviets vs Nazis style - seems almost automatically shut down.)
     
    FurthestBorealia said:
    Not essentially "cringe-worthy history" but a recent (and fairly hot) thread on AH.com poses the interesting counter-factual question: "How would non-Western colonizers have treated Indigenous groups?"

    (Personally, I fall into the "humans are broadly similiar" thesis, and that colonization is fundamentally disastrous and deracinating done wherever and by whomever, but it is telling that while certain comments put forward the idea that the West was the best native Americas could have got, the opposite - that perhaps certain non-Western groups could have done better, or at least less worse, in the Soviets vs Nazis style - seems almost automatically shut down.)
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...
    Totally agree with you, especially on that last part.
    While non-Western groups could (and probably would) treat the natives the same way, I think there's a certain Western bias by thinking that being colonized by the West was the best possible outcome (Adding to this, I don't think colonization was inevitable. Some regions could be conquered simply due to geography but, being honest, OTL was one of the worst-case scenarios for the native empires.)
     
    You must login or register to reply here.
    Remove ads
    Back
    Top