2022 reads // twitter thread    

Wrath Goddess Sing

adult fantasy

reimagining of the trojan war where achilles is a trans woman, living on an island safe for trans people until she is recruited for the war.

greek & egyptian gods

monstrous gods!!

MARTHA NUSSBAUM: I wake up at night thinking about Euripides’ Hecuba. That to me is a story that says so much about what it is to be a human being in the middle of a world of unreliable things and people. Do you know the story?

BILL MOYERS: Well, from a long time ago. She was the queen of Troy, whose country was destroyed by war, and her whole life was changed. She fell from here to here.

MARTHA NUSSBAUM: Right, right. She lost her husband, she’s lost most of her children, she’s lost her political power. She’s been made a slave. But up to that point, she remains absolutely firm morally. And she even says she believes that human good character is something extremely stable in adversity and can’t be shaken. But then, her one deepest hope is pulled away from her. She left her youngest child with her best friend, who was supposed to watch over him and watch his money, too, and then bring him back when the war was over. And when she gets to the shore of Thrace, she sees a naked body that’s been washed up on the beach. And she looks at it more closely, and then she notices that it’s the body of her child.

And she realizes right away that what this friend has done is to murder the child for his money, and to do it in a callous, heedless way, without even taking thought for burying the child, just has tossed it out into the waves. And all of a sudden, the roots of her moral life are undone. She looks around, and she says, “Everything is untrustworthy. Everything that I see is untrustworthy,” because her moral life had been based on the ability to trust things and people that were not under her own control. And if this deepest and best friendship proves untrustworthy, then it seems to her that nothing can be trusted, and she bas to turn to a life of solitary revenge.

BILL MOYERS: Against the friend.

MARTHA NUSSBAUM: And we see her at the end of the play putting out the eyes of this former best friend, and turning herself into, what the chorus says is in effect, a dog. I mean, they predict that she will literally turn into a dog. But we know that the story of metamorphosis from the human to something less than human has really taken place before our very eyes.

No, I think it’s pretty clear that this comes about not because she’s a bad person, but in a sense because she’s a good person, because she has had deep friendships on which she staked her moral life. And So what this play says that’s so disturbing, is that the condition of being good is such that it should always possible for you to be morally destroyed by something that you couldn’t prevent. To be a good human being is to have a kind of openness to the world, an ability to trust certain things beyond your own control that can lead you to be shattered in very extreme circumstances, in circumstances for which you are not yourself to blame.

And I think that says something very important about the condition of the ethical life. That it is based on a trust in the uncertain, a willingness to be exposed. It’s based on being more like a plant than like a jewel, something rather fragile, but whose very particular beauty is inseparable from that fragility.

Martha Nussbaum: Applying the Lessons of Ancient Greece

Do you think Felix would love curvy women or girl who look like bella since he flirted with her multiple times and tried to call dibs on her

//CW: We are discussing historical views of sex/sexuality/beauty standards. Be warned there is some incredibly uncomfortable topics touched on briefly -- many of which involve consent that is dubious at best.

First things first: we are operating purely in HC territory

First, let's establish that we have exactly nothing as far as a canon backstory for Felix is concerned, we just know that he is really old.

Reasonably, based on Felix's unknown but incredibly old age, his rank in the Volturi despite lacking a gift, his physique and height, and his role as an executioner, enforcer, and strategist; many have headcannoned him to have been a Roman gladiator or soldier in his human life.

The historical context that may have influenced Felix’s preferences

I have discussed before how I do think a Vampire’s human life may have some influence on their preferences concerning physical attractiveness.

Without knowing exactly when/where in Rome Felix was born, it is impossible to pinpoint the exact beauty standards he would have been conditioned into appreciating. 

That being said, it is a common misconception that Romans were largely interested in curvier women. This was definitely a much more prominent beauty standard in ancient Greece. In Rome, a particular physique was not as emphasized as other standards of beauty were and the appreciation of curves varied in different places and times. Other beauty standards were generally more emphasized. For example, paleness, smelling nice, and generally speaking: athleticism was appreciated amongst Roman women. 

Here is a more extensive article on Roman beauty standards if you’re interested.

It is very common that in one way or another, most people’s preferences somewhat differ from those that are popular. This is for a plethora of reasons, however, much like today, it was very difficult for women who were not rich or nobility to fully attain these standards. 

As far as how much Felix’s own preferences matched these standards? Frankly, if he was a gladiator in his human life, that would not have mattered.

As a gladiator, Felix would have been a slave with no actual bodily autonomy.

That being said gladiators did have sex, however, they definitely couldn’t be as choosey as say, a free nobleman. Most of his sexual encounters would have either been with prostitutes that would have been paid for by his keepers or with female slaves (who were often forced to participate by their owners). 

Some scholarship even suggests that certain gladiators themselves were sex trafficked, and if this was the case, it was likely the strongest, most successful, or famous ones. Which is along the lines of how people headcanon Felix. I’ll leave it at that.

And Frankly, I don’t want to get into Felix’s potential exploits if he had been a soldier *cough cough* pederasty *cough cough*

Okay so let’s inch closer to twilight canon: we know he was probably there for the Volturi golden age in the Renaissance

As far as a time period that I think would have had an immense impact on Felix’s sexual preferences in which he was probably the most sexually liberated and autonomous he’s ever been? The Italian Renaissance bay-by!

From the context clues you can reasonably gather the Volturi and Volterra particularly thrived during the Renaissance and on into the Enlightenment.

Italy’s city-states were massive cultural centers.I can imagine that this is where the Volturi’s appreciation for the arts and sciences was reignited – much like how it was in actual history, this return to ancient heritage reignited these in Italy generally. World maps from the renaissance even place the Mediterranean as the exact center of the world. Even though the Volturi kept themselves a secret in the time, I do believe this would have been something of a golden age for them. The architecture of Volterra even suggests this and so does their rather Machiavellian style of rulership (Caius read The Prince and quotes it to win arguments with Aro now). 

As far as renaissance beauty standards are concerned, we do have many more exact depictions and articulations of what was prized. Things like curves, long, flowing hair, and dark brown eyes were preferred. 

Think of the works of Botticelli for example. 

On Bella and these standards

Other than being bigger, Bella does fit some of these beauty standards, so I don’t think it’s entirely fair to discount her being attractive to Felix if we’re assuming that Roman and Italian Renaissance standards played a role in his personal preferences. Bella still has long, beautiful hair, dark brown eyes, pale skin, and soft features.

But also, immortality and general worldliness

I do also find it difficult to believe that when one’s as old, worldly, and couth as members of the Volturi are portrayed as being that one maintains a myopic view of physical beauty. 

Now, this gets really nerdy but at that time (Renaissance into Enlightenment), contemplating and questioning beauty as a concept was very popular amongst the enlightened crowd (you bet Marcus was all over that shit). Even if you don’t think Felix is as interested in art, philosophy, and the sciences as the kings (I do), he was at the very least exposed to them and is decently well-versed in them. What well-off renaissance man wouldn’t have been?

Also, Vampires are on average significantly hotter than the average person. Which means regardless, Felix has met beautiful vampires from all walks of life, people he would maybe not have considered beautiful before meeting them. To put it simply: when you have access to the worlds hottest people, how much more picky are you really gonna be?

I also think that generally speaking, Felix probably isn’t all that interested in sexual relationships with humans unless under very specific circumstances. 

This all means two things: Felix’s dating pool is incredibly small and incredibly hot. 

Why he really flirts with Bella 

If I’m being honest, I think the reason Felix flirts with Bella is likely the same reason he winks at the secretary – because he can. 

It’s probably particularly gratifying to goad Edward by doing this. 

He’s the biggest, strongest person in the room and has a very high status in polite vampire society – what’s Edward really gonna do if he flirts with Bella? 

I think also with SMeyer it’s entirely possible that she was like “hot evil Italian vampires? Gotta make them flirty.”

The Volturi and sex on the job

This also brings me to one more point I wanna make: I don’t think the guard actually sleeps around as much as many others do, so Felix talks a big game for fun but doesn’t typically act on it. So who he’s flirting with isn’t a precise indication of who he’s attracted to.

There’s a few reasons for this but this post is already getting incredibly long. So to make it quick: Aro likes to maintain a professional standard, which means nothing that can be construed as coercive or an abuse of power is allowed – a standard which Felix has clearly maintained for over two millennia

TLDR; While examining the evolution of his preferences is fascinating, I don’t think Felix has many body type preferences and mostly flirts with Bella to be an ass. At the end of the day he’s a professional so sleeping around with secretaries and other vampires without rhyme and reason, potentially risking the wrath of the kings, probably isn’t something he’s doing. 

PS. In looking at it again, it seems like when he calls dibs on her it’s to kill her. Nonetheless, he does get to flirting with her — mostly after she’s turned tho.

Hera nickname possibilities part 2

Still focusing on Aimsey sorry, I have decided to delay the Guqqie one until we know what the hell is going on with A! Guqqie.

So... Some stuff happened, and it caused me to rethink several of the names and the importance of some themes, so here are a few I think things have changed for.

Required traits

Knowledge(curiosity as a fatal flaw preferably)- this is difficult, because it's actually surprisingly rare in myths, and often in different contexts as to what we're after.

Violence- this is self explanatory and fortunately very common in myths (in fact in even gcse level Greek and Latin there are at least 7 words for kill/die)

Space association- preferably with the moon, but that's a bit specific, and as most nicknames for Aimsey variants are masculine a bit difficult with Artemis/Diana's whole mainly female hunter group

Asterion

I still quite like this one, though for different reasons.

As I mentioned last time, Asterion is the Minotaur's birth name giving him an obvious link to violence, and as the stepson of king Minos he would have been a prince. There is also perhaps a knowledge connection with the labyrinth, although that one is perhaps a bit of a stretch. Also as the most popular translation of Asterion is literally " little star we have a convenient space connection as well.

Similarly, many people ( even in ancient Greece) felt that the Minotaur may have started off innocent but was warped by his father's rage and his imprisonment in the labyrinth. Which could perhaps mirror how little control A! Aimsey seems to have even in their own curiosity, which instead of reclaiming their own past and fate appears to be amounting to little more than a desperate grab for understanding and control.

Penthius

I hate Penthius.

He is such a a fucking perverted tyrannical foolish asshole and he deserved every bit of what he got " slave to my slaves" (δουλεύοντα δουλείαις ἐμαῖς) Penthius dear those are your people, as king caring for them is your duty you little shit.

But anyways

Firstly, as the main - mortal- character in the bachea he is part of a literal tragedy and we all know these idiots are doomed in every universe so unless they feel like being nice to us for once that's perfect.

If you don't know the story of the bachea I shall leave a summary of the plot at the bottom.

Despite Penthius's overall shittyness the themes fit perfectly. Firstly, as the cousin of Acteon he has a lovely little link with the moon - a very negative one, Artemis killed him, but so what- and with his constant war-mongering with violence as well. He is also royalty, and if you reinterpret his all around pervyness as curiosity that fits too.

He sought knowledge, and it killed him

Narcissus

This is a bit of a stretch here and I know it, but doesn't it just seem like the perfect, very derisive nickname for an alternate universe version of your ex who stabbed you?

Firstly, oh my God the knowledge association, Narcissus was cursed to die when he truly " knew himself" (A! Aimsey's urge to find out what happened to them?) and let's be honest that's probably the best case scenario for our lovely prince. He was literally killed by knowing too much, in this case about himself. Also, as much as we go on and on about the whole " narcissus rejected echo and she died because of his selfishness boo hoo!" Their deaths were very similar, if anything being simply an extension of the cycle of suffering cause by Zeus fucking around and someone else finding out. Oooh cycles... Could be parallel with A!Aimsey following in Tud's footsteps perhaps.

Again a bit of a stretch but I still kinda like it.

Bachea summary

First Dionysus arrives in Thebes and asks everybody to accept and worship him. Nearly everybody is fine with this but the king- Penthius- objects and refuses to believe in his godly power. In response, Dionysus mind controls all of the women of Thebes and they run off to the mountains and literally just sit there, not being a problem or anything.

Dionysus comes to talk to Penthius who tries repeatedly to threaten and insult the completely calm Dionysus. And reveals his preoccupation with sex and completely unfounded belief that the women are having a giant orgy on the mountain.

Penthius decides to attack the women but Dionysus "convinces" him otherwise ( oh look it's our good friend mind control again ) using his desire to be a voyeur to the non-existent mountain orgy. Dionysus then dresses Penthius for slaughter and parades him to the mountain where he is torn apart by his family.

Yay! I love happy endings.

What was Alexander's relationship, if there was enough interaction that he would remember, with Lanike like (I don't know if that's how her name was spelled)? Would it be different or similar, or nothing at all, to what someone feels for their mother? Was Alexander the type to form lasting bonds with people? Mary Renault wrote him as affectionate and loving with people, but I honestly don't really know what to believe when I read about him. Things are usually conflicting, or as I've come to realize, made up entirely.

Thanks!

There are really two questions here, so let me deal with the larger one first: Alexander’s ability to feel real affection.

I don’t think his reputation for forming intense bonds with people is false, or even much exaggerated. Nor is his tendency to fly off the handle in a rage. These are, really, two sides of one coin.*

In general, the Greeks were (and still are) more emotionally expressive than most Anglophone societies. Furthermore, in ancient Greece, to help one’s friends and hurt one’s enemies was considered model ethical behavior. Both Alexander and his father Philip were actively competitive in displays of generosity. The times they act uncharacteristically like a bull in a China shop are part of constructed narratives meant to make them conform to ideas about barbarian tyrants, particularly in the hands of later Roman authors such as Curtius, but also Plutarch of the Second Sophistic. Or with Philip, Demosthenes’ and Theopompos’ need to portray Philip as a despot who Tyche (Fortune) allowed to beat the Truly Hellenic Athens/South Greece. So, when they seem to act weirdly against their own diplomatic interests, perhaps consider the source. (Literally. Consider the source, and when he was writing.)

Macedonia, in contrast to (some of) the cities to the south such as Athens who had sumptuary laws, was a gift-exchange society. For that matter, so was earlier (Archaic and prior) Greece, as well as other city-states (not-Athens). One achieved more honor and fame for how much one gave away, not necessarily how much one had.

Generosity made the Man. It also made the Woman. An important social function of the wives of Macedonian kings, as well as of other wealthy citizens in Macedonia and elsewhere (including into the Hellenistic and later Roman eras), was to give donations to this or that city project, temple, building, etc.

Eurgetism.

By all accounts, Alexander took real joy in giving things away. Sometimes lavishly. This cemented his status as The Bestest King in the Whole Wide World. Certainly the richest. Near the end of his life, he spent ridiculous amounts of money every evening just on royal suppers.

ALL of this is about Display as Status. As well as rules of hospitality.

I explain all that to help give some cultural context to Alexander’s fabled generosity. Yes, I think it was very real. It was also absolutely culturally expected of him.

So his reputation for honoring friends and allies in lavish ways shouldn’t be unexpected. He also appears to have been affectionate and even thoughtful towards those he considered friends and allies. Ergo, I think his affection for his childhood nurse would be quite genuine.

Now to the second question, which involves the role a nurse had in an infant’s life…. In cultures that strongly emphasize the nuclear family, and for those of us who didn’t grow up wealthy enough to have “house staff,” it may feel unclear how to understand the role of a wetnurse. So let’s quickly frame that role in traditional Greek (and Macedonian) society.

Wetnurses were typically either slave women or from poor families who needed to supplement income. That Alexander had a noblewoman as a wetnurse was extraordinary. (Just as it was to have a prince [of Epiros] as a lesson-master.)

Ancient Greece had two “house-slave” categories devoted to the caretaking of children: the wet-nurse and the paidogogos (pedagogue). The former was, for wealthier families, the caretaker of children of both genders while the mother saw to the business of running an estate (or at least a larger farm). The paidogogos, however, was exclusively for male children old enough to leave the home (go to school, to the gymnasion, etc.), largely as a baby-sitter, to keep the kid out of trouble. There appears to have been genuine affection between some children and their slave caretakers. But also examples of wetnurses and paidogogoi who just didn’t give two figs. No doubt this reflected how they were, themselves, treated by their owners. (And that could devolve into a complicated discussion about slavery in antiquity, but… go and read my friend and colleague, Peter Hunt’s book, Ancient Greek and Roman Slavery.)

In Alexander’s case, these individuals weren’t slaves, which simplified (and complicated) his relationships with them. On the one hand, it removed the utter dependence/lack of autonomy any slave (however well-treated) would have experienced. But—as with the institution of the Pages, who were nobility doing slave work as body-servants to the king—it involved the “reduction” of elites to unfree occupations. That hovered between honor and humiliation. It’s an honor because he's royalty, but….

For most of us, who, again, didn’t grow up wealthy, having “house staff” is unfamiliar. Ergo, the complicated dynamics of such is equally unfamiliar. That said, I think seeing the wetnurse as another mother may not be the best analogy (except in cases where the mother might really have been distant/absent).

I’d compare it to AUNTIES. A lot of societies have aunties (both literal and honorary) who play super-important roles in children’s lives. Those aunties may even have children of their own (cousins, again literal and honorary), but that doesn’t lessen their impact on their nieces and nephews. Or how they can be loved in a way similar to, but different than a mother. (Or how they can be exasperating in a way similar to, but different than a mother!)

So, for many of us, probably the best analogy for Lanike’s role in Alexander’s life would be a beloved auntie.

* This is also why I find attempts to paint him as a psychopath/sociopath or megalomaniac (e.g., narcissistic personality disorder) unfounded. A characteristic of both is inability to empathize or have strong emotions for people outside the self (and occasionally a very few select others). If he were any of those, he’d manipulate the hell out of people, but not feel much himself. His affections and rages seem far too spontaneous for that.

I have wanted to give out my very own Ancestry of the Main SpongeBob Characters since we've seen some BC, Medieval, and Western Counterparts. This time, these are Ancient Greco-Roman Ancestors of SpongeBob and his Friends as you can tell by the Similar characters wearing some Greek/Roman Clothing that I gave them. So let's meet our Main Characters that will soon have their Families' Future of their Current Descendants in the Present Time Earwyn (Parody of Pegasus, Ancestor of Gary) Earwyn is a Winged Snail, born from Winged Snails. He was once one of King Poseidon's slaves until Neptune nursed the Poor Snail into his Palace where he took Earwyn for Shelter for awhile. But when Earwyn chases a small urchin throughout the Hall and then outside, he becomes lost again as Earwyn was then later found by Spongeus and now became his current pet towards the Heroic Sponge. Plus, he even learns to fly and loves to eat food like his Descendant, Gary. Spongeus (Parody of Perseus, Ancestor of SpongeBob) One of the Most Famous Ancient Heroes, the Son the Sponge Princess, Danae. After when Danae met with One Random Fling, Spongeus and his Mother were once drifted off through the ocean and on to the shore of the Island of the Land, "Káto Méros" as they were rescued by a Fisherman and his Wife. Spongeus grew up in the City as the Sponge had many adventures involving around Heroic Training and even his Wild Bizzare Adventures involved around mostly the Roman Gods that is Neptune and his Family. Much like his Descendant, his very over the top Fun-Loving, Kind, Joyful, and Optimistic but also has a little deep mature side despite his silly behavior. Patcarus (Parody of Icarus, Ancestor of Patrick) A Dimiwitted Starfish that always runs through the Family. Patcarus is the most closest Best Friend of Spongeus and is the Son of a Glorius Craftsman Inventor who had to build up a Labyrinth for the Minotaur. Patcarus even dreams to one day have Wings so that way he'll be able to fly, fortunately that always gets ruined since he doesn't proberbly know how to fly in a proper way. Like his Descendant, he's very Lazy with a sense of Humor as he would end up serving himself as one of the Prisets of Bacchus, the Roman God of Wine. Squidymede (Parody of Ganymede, Ancestor of Squidward) Tenderly Handsome Squid fellow who moved from Troy to Káto Méros around Greece when he was a Child. Squidymede is often very grumpy with a dry sense of humor of his own but has his own beliefs of Music and Art. Sadly, runs in the Squid Family, Squidymede always gets the Shit throughout the Years for No Reason whatsoever for he wishes a life where he can have all the happiness and love that he deserves. Spongeus usually loves Squidymede but Squidymede, much like his Future Descendant, gets repeatedly annoyed by Spongeus' surroundings, especially if he's sometimes with Patcarus (Another Annoying Person that Squidymede can't stand). King Krabas (Parody of King Midas, Ancestor of Eugene Krabs) Greedy, Cheap, Hypocritical, Selfish but rather Kind and Friendly King he is, Spongeus and Squidymede are the King's servants. King Krabas is really obessessed with Gold since Childhood, in fact, he wanted everything around in his Kingdom to turn into Gold as his Servants would sell some Krabby Patties to the Customers in exechange for Gold. Krabas has a huge obessession with Gold, he cares less about his Servants, his People, and even his own Family. However, the only thing that he does truly love his Daughter, Pearlen. Krabas has even gone through many journies and adventures digging for Gold with his Old and New Serveants throughout his years. Plankthon (Parody of Erysichthon, Ancestor of Plankton) The Most Envious with Cruel and Malicious Jealousy of Tricks who's also the Arch-Enemy of King Krabas. Plankthon wanted to be the Main Ruler of King around Káto Méros but the Citizens of Káto Méros thought that Plankthon wouldn't work mainly because he was too small so that's why they chose Krabas instead. Long-time arch-rivals between Plankton and Crabs throughout Plankton and Krabs' Families, Plankthon kept on sworing for revenge as he even once tried to have all the food and the gold he could have but Ceres cursed him with replacements of Gold and Food into nothing but Chum. Sandlanta (Parody of Atalanta, Ancestor of Sandy) An Extreme Tough and Tomboyish Squirrel Girl who happens to be a Warrior around from Land to Sea. Sandlanta knew the Greek Gods, especially Zeus, in her Childhood back then as Animals around the Forest and even Humans upon Surface land would worship Greek Gods similar to how most of the Bikini Bottom Mortals would worship Roman Gods around their own religous beliefs. Sandlanta moved into the Sea where she discovered and learn the boundaries of the Ocean which made it into her Brand New Home. Sandlanta is one of Spongeus' Heroic Friends as she would go down hunting down Wild Beasts with Other Hunters as well as being one of the major allies of Diana. Kardea (Parody of Medea, Ancestor of Karen) The Mirror Wife of Plankthon who is his only company to keep him. After when Ceres cursed Plankton's life, Trivia once made a Magic Mirror for Good to teach each of the Fish Mortals how to be good with education. However, as it turns out, Kardea is not what she truly seems as she would often brainwashed Fish people into maing them do Bad Things. Trivia didn't know what might this come, so the Roman Goddess of Witchcraft decided to lock up the Mirror behind an Abandoned Kingdom where Plankthon currently lives now. Kardea helpd on Plankthon to get his own revenge on Krabas with Smart and Clever ideas. But...Much like towards Karen and Plankton's Marriage, they love/hate each other. Princess Pearlen (Parody of Helen of Troy, Ancestor of Pearl Krabs) The One and Only Daughter of King Krabas and Daddy's Little Girl. Pearlen is a very Naive, Dreamy, Sweet, and Free-Spirited Princess. Despite her Spoiled Behavior of a Typical Teenage Girl, she's often excited to taken her Father's Place one day when she becomes the Next Ruler of Káto Méros. Krabas even lets his own Daughter be with a Group of Girls around her own Age but she's also very Popular because she's the Daughter of a King. Sometimes, she gets tired of being Princess and would dream of nothing more but becoming more than just a Royal-Blood. Mrs. Puffpis ((Her Last Name is a reference to an Ancient Greek Poet by the name, "Thespis"), Ancestor of Mrs. Puff) Spongeus' Main Teacher in the School that he goes to, "Neptune Academy". Mrs. Puffpis teaches Spongeus the eductional learning ways behind History but also Math and Science as well as learning to how to write things. She becomes very paranoid when Spongeus does at least done mistakes in his own ways around School, which is quite similar is to how their descendants have that sort of kind of Relationships. Mrs. Puffpis would often suffer from stress and anxiety, especially if it's from too much work. Krabas even wanted to marry her to have her as his own Queen and even Stepmom to Pearlen but Puffpis is already married to her own Husband. Larseus (Parody of Theseus, Ancestor of Larry) Possibly one of the most popular heroes of all, Larseus seems to be a Nice Guy but he's also arrogant and inconsiderate. He's considered to be like a Jock who loves to play Sports as well as fighting down some Monsters and Beasts. He was mostly famous for slaying down the Minotaur with the help of Spongeus. Pretty much, he's a real famous guy as all the ladies around Greece in Káto Méros adored him very well. Though he's not really the Demigod Son of Neptune cause he's not really a demigod as some people assume but he is willingly to take down the hearts of Monsters with the help of his own cunning strength. Sorry if Spongeus looks kinda derpy in this Pic, usually I'm more focused on MS Paint than just Paper (though Paper is sometimes more easier than drawing in MS Paint XP SpongeBob SquarePants (c) Stephen Hillenburg

Mal's ramblings/sources for TGOE Ch 4

PRAYING TO HERMES

Supplication

I bumped this one from the very last note to the very first, because it was my MOST heavily used source. I mentioned it back in chapter 1, and subsequently read all of it, but it turns out The Nature of the Act of Supplication is only Chapter 1 of Gaye McSweeney's masters thesis Acts of Supplication in Ancient Greece, which I will find the time to read, because holy cow it's fantastic!

I used so much from it, I can't even list it all. It's the backbone of the whole chapter. That said, all of this focuses on what's seen in the epics unless otherwise stated. I wanted to focus on Mycenaean traditions, but there's very little information available.

Suppliants bough

I mentioned in chapter 1 about an olive branch being used as a suppliants bough, but hair may be used in its place in certain circumstances. Supplication to a chthonic deity is one. (See Acts of Supplication in Ancient Greece.)

Self-abasement and mutilation

Self-abasement means to lower oneself, and there are various things you can do to achieve this depending on your need. In this chapter, it's done three times. Once when Patroclus dons the only thing he owns; again when he kneels before the hearth; and lastly when he tears the tunic, lacerates his chest, and laments.

During the prothesis (lying in state) part of a funeral, mourners cry, prostrate over the body, tear their clothing, lacerate their flesh, tear out their hair, and cover themselves with dirt or ash.

During supplication, the supplicant must abandon their dignity and honor, and behave in the "manner of a slave."

For both, the goal is to achieve pity, but funereal self-abasement has special meaning on top of this; McSweeney mentions theories on these acts mimicking violence used to protect the living. And since you can no longer protect the dead, the mourners turn the acts on themselves. (I took this a step further in the narrative.)

I did look for specific words for the different acts, or for the practice as a whole, but couldn't find any. Self-abasement, self-effacement, self-mutilation, disfigurement, etc. are the closest words, it seems, and these first three are the words used by McSweeney. For all I know, there are words, only I can't read them, but I've chosen to imagine there are no words for it in the old language because they didn't think of it like we do. I'd love to be corrected if someone does know!

All About Hermes

The chapter is named after the two forms of Hermes, his Ouranic (Olympic) form and his Chthonic (Underworld) form.

Hermes is called Cyllenius because he was born on Mt. Cyllene in the most common story. In his Chthonic form, the story goes that he was born of Dionysis and Aphrodite. But I am sticking with Zeus/Maia, since that seems to be what Hades (game) did.

Again I use Theoi (Hermes section) a LOT for this, and use Neokoroi for the offerings.

For both prayers, the Orphic Hymn 28 to Hermes and Hymn 57 to Chthonian Hermes were models, especially the last line of 28, but all 5 hymns on Theoi were inspirational in some way. So was Aeschylus' Libation Bearers.

I also looked into how current Hellenic worshipers structure their prayers. Interestingly, it seemed to mostly align with the Orphic hymns. Still, it was more inspirational than a guide.

Statue of Hermes

It's just called the Statue of Hermes. I really tried to find something more significant for the scene, but gentle Hermes with his hand on a tortoise (which he used to create a lyre so "gentle" might be a stretch) seemed appropriate.

Fumigation

The Orphic hymn mentions which herbs to fumigate with. The why I made up. Maybe it's in my head from somewhere (pagan practices or something), so if I did steal it from somewhere specific, sorry?

Barley

I legitimately wondered "what about barley meal?? Should they just throw flour?" (Do not throw flour at a fire! It turns into a cloud of flame!) While, yes, you can use alternatives when you don't have barley meal, Odysseus did, it's really only necessary for animal sacrifices, I guess.

GRIEF AND MOURNING

I cribbed heavily from Aeschylus' Libation Bearers, which takes place not long after the Iliad, so the funerary practices would align, even if Aeschylus wasn't a peer of Homer. (They both lived long after the Bronze Age anyway!)

As for research, Portraits of Grief: Death, Mourning and the Expression of Sorrow on White-Ground Lêkythoi [PDF] by Molly Evangeline Allen was the biggest help, though I only read the section on Male Mourning.

Gendered behaviors

Men and women had specific roles when it came to funerals, and specific behaviors tended to be more feminine or more masculine, though there were shifts throughout the centuries.

That said, similar to how we used to (or maybe still do) view crying as a womanly thing to do, men were not unknown to express themselves in ways that weren't particularly manly. There are examples of male laments, hair cutting, and skin lacerating (at least in the epics and plays).

McSweeney and Allen (authors of Acts of Supplication in Ancient Greece and Portraits of Grief... respectively) both discuss gendered differences in the varied acts of mourning (and supplication). I also found a paper discussing Male Lament, but only the abstract. Link below in the section on lamentation.

Tearing the breast/chest/cheeks/hair

From my 21st century, American perspective, this is a significant act of grief. Either it's just dramatic enough to find its way into many stories, or it was more common than I would expect. Though, it was significant enough for Solon to make a law about it, so I guess it could be both.

Still, it is a prescribed act, as McSweeney references in The Nature of the Act of Supplication. Meaning it's expected, and there are rules around it. It's not, necessarily, a spontaneous act of grief.

Cutting the hair

When I read that a character cuts their hair for the dead, I read it as them going full Mulan.

However, there is precedent for using locks rather than chopping off all of a mourner's hair. I direct you to Aeschylus' tragedy, Libation Bearers. As it opens, Orestes, son of Agamemnon, cuts 2 locks from his hair, and sets them on his father's tumulus (grave mound).

Lamentations

Briseis, Helen, Achilles, and so many other characters lament within the Iliad, but it's not in a way I would think of as lyrical, probably because I have trouble reading lyrics in song. (It was annoying whenever there was singing in LOTR, ngl.)

But, I made an effort to express grief in song, since it's a huge part of funeral rites. Even men sing.

Men and women (according to the above source) do lament differently, though. So I did a fair amount of looking into lamentations.

First, I read and re-read many of the lamentations within the Iliad. External sources include An Ancient Greek Lament Form by Charles H. Cosgrove (though I could only read that first page), Athenaeus' The Learned Banqueters, Drowning Sorrows: Archilochus fr.13 W. in its Performance Context [PDF] by Deborah Steiner, Aeschylus' Libation Bearers, the previously mentioned abstract from Male Lament and the Symposium by Gregory Jones, Portraits of Grief... [PDF] by Molly Evangeline Allen (which had a small quote from Euripides' Alcestis), and one actual recorded lament I couldn't find in my YouTube history, but was definitely in one of these documents… I didn't use it to compose anything though.

I felt awkward writing a song when I'm a terrible songwriter, especially when it's supposedly coming from a culture where songs and singing are so important. Or at least seems to be important. But I pushed through and came up with something, even if there's only 1 ½ lines in the actual narrative.

Nico's chant

This is straight up pulled from Greek Orthodox funeral rites. It's really just the Trisagion (a specific chant).

OTHER THINGS!

Hippodameia Briseis

I've thought a lot about whether to use the name Hippodameia or Briseis. It's easy to say "Briseis means Daughter of Brises" and that her first name, Hippodameia, is found in Homer's scholia (notes, basically), and call it a day. But it's not nearly that clean.

While I've read this information all over the place, I'd like to direct you to the book Homeric Variations on the Lament by Briseis by Casey Dué. It's intensely fascinating, but I'm using it for the only source here because the content and footnotes aggregate the information I'd read elsewhere. And it has an argument to make on compressed stories within the epic that I like.

Long-story-short, we have 3 origin stories for Briseis, which Dué illustrates are all intertwined in the narrative of the Iliad. Only one of the origins calls her Hippodameia, daughter of Brises, King of Pedasos.

There are arguments to be made that Briseis may be her given name, and that Briseus doesn't exist. Or that she and her father both are named for their home town of Brisa, a town on Lesbos, which pairs poetically with Chryseis, daughter of Chryses, both from the town of Chryse.

As for me, I chose my route. It'll have nice poetry itself later. Though, I must admit, it's a knee-jerk reaction that I don't want to call a woman exclusively by her father's name, like she has no existence outside a man (very Western of me, I know), and that definitely played into my decision to even look into this. But I digress.

PS Hippodameia means "horse tamer" (Briseis means "martial strength") and Deidameia (Achilles' first wife) means "she who is patient in battle." The word "dameia" in both names means "tamer", so I'm curious to know how "Deidameia" reached such a non-literal meaning, unlike Hippodameia, which is extremely literal.

Patroclus "related" to the gods

t/w: incest (Should this be a t/w? It's mythology, I just assume there's incest.)

All this came from hunting through Wikipedia. There are variations on who got with who and who had which baby, so where there was disagreement I went with either the more popular, the one that was the least confusing, and/or the one I liked better.

We're going to skip the 5 potential mothers of Patroclus and only look at his paternal lineage.

Patroclus' grandmother was the naiad Aegina, daughter of the river god Asopus and the naiad Metope, herself daughter of the river god Landon. And according to Hesiod's Theogony, rivers were all born of Oceanus and Tethys, so both Asopus and Landon would be their get. That puts Patroclus 4 generations removed from titans (and Zeus on his grandfather's side), and 2 from gods (nymphs are minor deities, after all).

So, yeah. Godly relations.

Nyx not Persephone

In the chthonian prayer, I explicitly name Nyx as the empress of the underworld, not Persephone. This comes from Hades, the game.

(Mild spoilers? It's all set-up info.) At the start of the game, Persephone is not known to be the Queen of the Underworld. Instead, Nyx is known as the other half of the partnership, though her relationship with Hades himself is ambiguous. The gods are told, at some point, that she and Hades had a son together, but I don't assume the mortals know about Zagreus.

Polytheism Banned in Greece

The spread of Christianity killed polytheism in the Roman empire. In Greece, it was made legal again in 2006.

Cutting condoms

They still teach this in sex ed, right? You can cut the tip and bottom off a condom, and cut it up the side to create a dental dam.

Hercules and the Tyrants of Babylon

So the last few entries have been, for various reasons, pretty depressing.  I was determined to find something a little bit lighter, so I thought I'd offer you a nice colourful slab of My Cheese Steak. Our Hercules of the Week is a man named Peter Lupus, who looks a lot like Sylvester Stallone and uses the ridiculously David Ryder screen name of Rock Stevens.

The Babylonians used to take slaves from Greece all the time, but it's getting harder and harder now that Hercules is in town. Apparently on one of their raids, the slavers captured his girlfriend Queen Asperia, and now he's pissed.  King Vaneek of Assyria has also learned that Asperia is among the slaves, and has decided to buy her and marry her in order to be king of Greece, too.  Queen Taneal of Babylon drugs him and wheedles the secret out of him, and her two brothers, King Salmanazar and King Azul, agree with her that Asperia has to die... but secretly each is plotting to marry Asperia himself and murder his siblings to claim the throne!  Meanwhile, Hercules and King Vaneek find themselves in an 'enemy of my enemy' sort of situation, but that doesn't mean they like each other, either. We all know that the only ones leaving this movie alive are Hercules and Asperia, we're only watching to find out how they get there.

As Hercules and Maciste movies go, Hercules and the Tyrants of Babylon is pretty entertaining, honestly.  Costumes and sets never look real but they're very pretty and do their job of placing us in an ancient, semi-mythical past.  There's not a lot of subtlety to the characterizations – Hercules is heroic, Asperia is willing to suffer to save her people, Salmanazar is belligerent, Azul is shrewd, and Taneal is ambitious.  I might complain about this, but it's about as much characterization as people in mythology usually get and so it works.  There's lots of backstabbing (some of it literal) and machinating going on, but never so much that we can lose track of it all.

Both the plot and the visuals are full of wonderful b-movie bullshit.  We've got Hercules throwing around sytrofoam rocks and trees – the people these hit know they're supposed to act as if they're very heavy, but sadly nobody was able to tell the horses. There's a bit where a guy in the Babylonian marketplace puts a snake on his head for no particular reason, which is the clear front-runner for episode stinger.  Plot points hinge on people rasping out messages to Hercules as they're dying, always expiring before they can finish.  Characters stand around arguing about who betrayed who first.  Hercules arrives in Babylon in disguise and then immediately blows his own cover when he sees some injustice he can interfere in.

My very favourite of all these bits of nonsense is the completely inexplicable fact that Babylon has a self-destruct button. This takes the form of a giant wheel in a cave beneath the city.  It has all these chains attached to it, and when the wheel is turned they will wind up and tear down all the buildings!  Taneal tells us that it was built by Daedalus, who created the Labyrinth, but she never tells us why it exists.  I guess it's supposed to destroy the city so that an enemy can't capture it?  But in the last moments of a siege, who the hell has time to get a hundred slaves down there to very slowly tear the place apart?  It makes no sense!  I love it!

Hercules and the Tyrants of Babylon also stands apart from the crowd of such films in a number of ways – specifically, Herc never bends prison bars or drinks a love potion!  Going into the movie I was sure we were going to get the usual thing where Taneal, having fallen for Herc's rippling pecs and rock-hard ass, would feed him a tincture and then be all smug about having stolen him from Asperia.  To my surprise, the movie never even entertained the idea!  Taneal is not above using her looks to manipulate men, but she has a lover and never even considers dumping him, not even for King Vaneek.  Movies like this are so fond of using promiscuity as a shorthand for evil in female characters that it's kind of shocking.

(On a considerably less shocking note... do I even need to mention that all these Mesopotamians are played by white actors? Didn't think so.)

There's even a couple of really nice moments here.  King Vaneek brings gifts to the rulers of Babylon, praising Salmanazar for his skills in war and Azul for his in politics... and then tells Taneal how beautiful she is and basically propositions her in front of the entire court.  He, a sexist jerk, doesn't see anything wrong with this behaviour, but Taneal, already annoyed with her brothers for going behind her back, definitely does and you can see it on her face.  This scene isn't referenced openly again but it lurks in the back of your mind throughout the rest of the film, as Taneal seeks to be rid of these foolish men who think they're above her.  Her boyfriend is subservient to her as his queen and while the movie wants us to consider this a form of weakness on his part, Taneal clearly considers it appropriate and even sexy.  This makes her the only one of the four royal villains who comes near to being sympathetic, and made it even more surprising that she never develops a crush on Hercules.

The other is in Salmanazar's attempt to find Asperia among the captive Greek women.  He ties them all to poles in the middle of the desert and says the first to tell him who the queen is will be rewarded.  After a couple of days Asperia decides to reveal herself in order to end everybody else's suffering, but the other women take a page from Spartacus and all join in declaring that they are the Queen of Greece!  In a way this succeeds, as Salmanazar gives up on this tactic in disgust and has them all released, but it's also a moment of tragedy, as Asperia despairingly realizes the people she's trying to protect are too loyal for their own good.

The only thing that kind of ruined the movie for me was that the climax seemed to come on way too fast.  The rising action is fairly sedate, and so when everything suddenly comes to a head, it feels like it's just not time yet.  This sorts itself out pretty fast, though.  Once you realize that the dominoes are falling, it only takes a moment to get back into the rhythm of it.

There are several things I find myself thinking about while watching this movie, but the main one is that the Hercules and Maciste films are basically superhero movies with a coat of ancient Greek paint, and it's interesting to compare them to their modern counterparts. The general formula of a lone hero versus odds that would be insurmountable to anybody else is intact.  Multiple villains and a woman in need of rescue are standard.  One of the things superhero stories have become somewhat infamous for in recent years, though, is the 'twist' ending, to the point of writers altering the story if they think the fans are close to figuring it out.

A lot of keys have been tapped about why this is poor storytelling and how it grew out of the 'no spoilers' culture online.  My own main complaint about it is that a story isn't even about its end. Stories are about their middles – the beginning and the end are just that, but the part we enjoy is the journey from the one to the other.  Hercules and the Tyrants of Babylon is a perfect example.  There's never a moment when we're not absolutely sure that Salmanazar, Azul, and Taneal are all doomed and probably Vaneek too, and that Hercules and Asperia will save the Greek slaves and walk off into the sunset.  The movie's job is not to subvert these expectations, but to fulfill them in an entertaining fashion.

This doesn't even mean the movie can't surprise us.  We're not at all surprised that the three co-rulers are plotting against each other.  Taneal tells us that their father wanted his three children to rule in concert – anybody who's even tried to order a pizza with siblings could have predicted how that would turn out!  Nor are we particularly shocked that Vaneek orders his followers to kill Hercules once they've secured Asperia.  The surprises come in the form these various plots take and how they're thwarted.  We certainly didn't expect Taneal to try to murder her brothers by pulling the whole city down on top of them!  Then the ending, when everything turns out exactly the way we expected it to, is not disappointing at all.  It's satisfying and reassuring to see good triumph over evil.

Although, it must be said that in a lot of these films, evil ends up destroying itself – this is one of those, as the siblings all end up killing each other before Hercules can bring the city down on their heads.  Rather than defeating the three tyrants, Hercules defeats thousands of ordinary Babylonians who were just going about their day and probably didn't know what kind of shit their rulers were up to.  Nor, despite the title, does the movie bother to establish whether the three are particularly tyrannical... although they can be cruel to their slaves, so maybe we're supposed to assume they're not much nicer to the free citizens.

We're not supposed to think about any of that, of course, and one of the movie's successes is that for the most part, we don't.  Hercules and the Tyrants of Babylon isn't a good movie, but it never pissed me off, its badness made me laugh, and I enjoyed it for as long as it lasted.

I've been drafting and redrafting this meta post for weeks now. It's about to be 5781 and my country that was founded on settler colonial genocide and slavery and a deeply flawed but fierce attachment to democracy might go full dictatorship in about 6 weeks and it's time for me to post this thing.

All our immortals are warriors, all have been traumatized by war. But only three of them died their first deaths as soldiers in imperial armies. This fandom has already produced gallons of meta on Nicky dealing with his shit, because Joe would not fuck with an unapologetic Crusader. But there's very rich stuff in Booker and Nile's experiences and the parallels and distinctions between them.

Nile was 11 when her dad was killed in action - that was 2005, meaning she and her dad both died in the same war that George W Bush started in very tenuous response to 9/11. Sure, Nile's dad could have died in either Iraq or Afghanistan, or in a training accident or in an off-the-books mission we won't know about for a hundred more years, but he died in the War on Terror all the same. I had to look it up to be sure because Obama "drew down" the Afghanistan war in his second term, but nope, we're still in this fucking thing that never should've happened in the first place. The US war in Afghanistan just turned 19 years old. A lot of real-life Americans have experiences like the Freemans, parents and children both dying in the same war we shouldn't be in.

I know a lot of people like Nile who join the US military not just because it's the only realistic way for them to pay for college or afford decent healthcare, but also because they have a family history of military service that's a genuine source of pride. Military service has been a way for Americans of color to be accepted by white Americans as "true Americans" - from today's Dreamers who Obama promised would earn protection from deportation by enlisting, to Filipino veterans of WW2 earning US citizenship that Congress then denied them for several decades, to slaves "earning" their freedom through service in the Union Army and in the Continental Army before it. As if freedom is a thing one should have to earn. Lots of Black Americans have the last name Freeman for lots of different escaping-slavery reasons, but it's possible that this specific reason is how Nile got her last name.

Dying in a war you know your country chose to instigate unnecessarily and that maybe you believe it shouldn't be waging is a very particular kind of trauma. It is a much deeper trauma when your military service, and your father's, and maybe generations of your ancestors', is a source of pride and access to resources for you but your sacrifice is nearly meaningless to the white supremacist system that deploys you. That kind of cognitive dissonance encourages a person to ignore their own feelings just so they can function. How do you wake up in the morning, how do you risk your life every day, how do you *kill other people* in a war that shouldn't be happening and that you shouldn't have to serve in just so that your country sees you as human?

We see Nile do her best to be a kind and well-mannered invader. Depending on your experience with US imperialism, Nile giving candy to kids and reminding her squad to be respectful is either heartwarming or very disturbing propaganda. We also see Nile clutching her cross necklace and praying. From the second Christianity arrived on this land it's been a tool of white supremacist assimilation and control, but like military service, it's a fucked-up but genuine source of pride and access to resources for many Americans whose pre-Columbian ancestors were not Christian, and it's a powerful source of comfort and resilience. This Jew who's had a lot of Spanish Inquisition nightmares would like to say for the record that it's not Jesus's fault that his big name fans are such shitty people.

Nile is a good person trying to do her best in a fucked-up world. "Her best" just radically changed. Her access to information on just how fucked up the world is has also just radically changed, because everything's so fucked up a person needs a lot of time to learn about it all and not only does she have centuries but she won't have to spend that time worrying about rent and healthcare and taxes, and because she now has Joe and Nicky and Andy's stories, and because she now has Copley's inside scoop on just what the fuck the CIA has been up to. Like, I want a fic where Copley tells Nile what was really behind the brass's decisions that led to her experiences on the ground in Afghanistan, that led to her father's death, but also I Do Not Want That.

Nile was 19 when Alicia Garza posted on Facebook that Black Lives Matter. She grew up in Chicago well before white people on Twitter were saying maybe police violence against Black people is a problem. She knows this is a deeply fucked up country, and she put on her Marine uniform and deployed with her team of mostly fellow women of color, and maybe she and Dizzy and Jay marched in the streets between deployments, maybe they texted each other when a white manarchist at a protest sneered at one of them for being a Marine. Nile's been busy surviving, and she knows some shit and she's seen some shit but she hasn't had much time to think about what it all means. Now she's got time. And Joe, Nicky, and Andy are willing to listen. (Is Copley willing to listen? I could see that going either way.)

Booker might also be willing to listen. The brilliant idea of cleaning up the rat Frenchman so that Nile can have millennia of emotional support and orgasms sent me down a Wikipedia rabbit hole, and holy shit do Booker and Nile have a lot of shared life experience as pawns of imperial wars. Obviously Booker is white and a man and that makes a very big difference. (Though G-d help me, Booker could be Jewish and France was knocking its Jews around like ping-pong balls in the 18th-19th centuries. Jewish Booker wouldn't make him any less white but it does add a shit ton of depth of common experience: military service as a way for your country to see you as a full member of society who matters, because who you are means that's not guaranteed.)

Booker was hanged for desertion from the army Napoleon sent to invade Russia as part of his quest to control all of Europe. We learn in the comics / this YouTube video that Booker was on his way to prison for forgery when he was offered military service instead of jail time. While we don't know how he felt about the choice beyond that he did choose soldier over inmate, it's unlikely he thought invading Russia was a great idea, given he tried to desert because Napoleon like a true imperialist dumbass didn't plan for how he was going to feed his army or keep them from freezing to death in fucking Russian winter.

I find it very interesting that the French Empire was at its largest right before invading Russia and fell apart completely within a few years. My country has been falling the fuck apart for a while now - see aforementioned War on Terror, growing extremes of economic stratification in the richest country in the world, abject refusal to meaningfully deal with climate change that US-based corporations hold the lion's share of blame for - but between Trump's abject refusal to meaningfully deal with the coronavirus and strong likelihood that he'll refuse to leave office even if a certain pathetic moderate I will hold my nose and vote for does manage to earn a majority of votes, ~y~i~k~e~s.

Our only immortals who have never known a world before modernity and nationalism happen to have been born of wars that were the beginning of the end for the imperialist democracies that raised them, and I think in the centuries to come that's going to give them some very interesting shit to talk about.

Nile's a Young Millennial, a digital native born in the United States after the collapse of the USSR left her country as the world's only superpower. She's used to a pace of technological change that human brains are not evolved to handle.

Napoleon trying to make all of Europe into the French Empire was a leading cause of the growth of European nationalism and the establishment of liberal democracies both in Europe and in many places that Europeans had colonized. Booker's first war produced the only geopolitical world order Nile has ever known and I just have so many feelings ok. Nile the art history nerd is probably not aware of this, and why would she be? This humble meta author is, like Nile, a product of US public schools, and all they taught me about world history was Ancient Greece/Rome/Egypt/Mesopotamia and then World War 2. Being raised in The World's Only Superpower is WEIRD.

Nile the Young Millennial is used to the devastating volume of bad news the internet makes possible. But she has absolutely no concept of a world where the United States of America is not The World's Only Superpower. In order to get up in the morning and put on her gear and point guns at civilians in Afghanistan, she can only let herself think so much about whether that American exceptionalism thing is a good idea.

She's about to spend many, many years where the only people who she can truly trust are people who are older than not only her country but the IDEA of countries.

She's got time, and she's got a lot of new information at her disposal. But there comes a point where my obsession with her friendship and eventual very hot sex life with Booker just isn't about sex at all. Nile needs someone to talk to about the United States who Gets It. Booker the rat Frenchman coerced into Napoleon's army, and Copley the Black dual citizen of the US and UK who's retired from a CIA career that he half understands as deeply problematic but half still believes in hence his mind-bogglingly stupid partnership with Merrick, are the only people on the planet Nile can talk to honestly about, and really be understood in, all the thoughts and feelings and fears and hopes of her experience as a US Marine.

And one more thing before I go get ready for Rosh Hashanah: Orientalism was a defining element of the Crusades and that legacy is painfully clear in current US-led Western military activity in Afghanistan, Syria, Israel/Palestine, you name it. Turns out memoirs by French veterans of the Napoleonic Wars are full of Orientalist language about Russia as well. I am maybe/definitely writing a fic where Booker spends his exile reading critical race theory and decolonial feminism and trauma studies monographs because he can't be honest with a therapist but maybe he can heal this way and become the team therapist his own damn self. I just really need him to read Edward Said and Gloria Anzaldúa and then go down on Nile, ok?

Mercy and Pity are important themes to tolkien but I think it’s important to think about aboyt what groups tolkien writes are deserving of pity and mercy and who are not.

Especially in regards to humanity, especially non-dunedain humanity. Orcs are more pitable than the Haradrim and Easterlings. Half the time the dunedain are the ones brutalizing them when they aren’t directly fighting under Sauron’s orders, through imperialism and colonialism. Numenor took them as slaves, the faithful settle comfortably into colonies numenoreans made to set up their new empire in midddle earth, and the Gondorians repeated would expand into their lands and take them (a habit that DOES NOT STOP WITH ARAGORN, he does it too. He goes pass the sea of rhun and sets up shop with Eomer). So many humans don’t get second chances like other characters do, kinslayers in the first age get a chance for forgiveness but the bulk of humanity is just left out to dry, no Valar come and “help them” (though help in terms of the dunedain is the Valar changing their entire philology and going “I can’t understand it so I’m gonna make it more like me” with dissterous results), Morgoth and Sauron are the ONLY ones who ever reach out to them from the ainur (we know nothing about what the blue wizards did). Their “crimes” are basically “some Easterlings in the first age betrayed the elves so all humans expect the edain are bad now” and how is that even fair? How can you even blamed for that? It feels like an in universe excuse to brutalize the Easterlings and Haradrim and all other men (really sus how Rohan goes from treasured friend to SPAWNS OF SATAN when they are suspected to not be on Gondor’s side anymore Huh?) by the dunedain at the council of elrond, they aren’t deserving of pity and mercy because that would mean viewing them as a fellow and equal human, on the same level of you (a good noble dunedian, a king among other men), which cannot be when you need to find an excuse to take their things but don’t wanna seem like the bad guy and it feels really explicit to me that is the case.

The dunedian are just a small group of elites in one small part of middle earth, what they call the middle-men and men of darkness make up 80-97 percent of MOST of middle earth’s population. It would make almost all of humanity evil expect this elfy group and the special cases of men they happen to like, it’s a pretty selective and small club to be in and everyone else is not worthy to be in. Hell there are probably places in middle earth full of humans who don’t know what a morgoth, sauron, or elf is, middle earth is a big place even bigger once eru reshaped the world (some drafts say he made new land masses and oceans to fill the new rounded earth) are they guilty too? How is that fair?

It feels reductive and infuriating to have it this way sometimes, to act as if these easterling and Haradrim soldiers don’t have families, people’s, kin, langues beliefs, and value and are worthy of slaughter just because they didn’t get what the edain got so many years ago. There is a very sad and real narrative of sauron galavanizing and using the Haradrim and Easterlings righteous anger aganist Gondor at what they did to them to his evil schemes. All we get is ONE line from Sam of all people, pondering the humanity of Haradrim man who dies. That’s all the nuance we get. Homer in the iliad managed to humanize the Trojans better despite being the enemies in Ancient Greece than tolkien managed to do. I always felt it was intresting that in all his talks about Gondor has become to currupted, Faramair never once brings up Gondor own very xenophobic history (the biggest civil war in gondorian history was because a gondorian king had a non dunedian mother and people were so mad about they went and tried to depose him murdering that king’s son in cold blood and it dissolved into a bloody civil war!) and their shared humanity with the people they fighting never comes up.

I think personally a intresting way to view the fourth age is less of a “golden age” sorta speak and more of a very long complex series of gondorians kings following Aragorn trying to fix and make relationships with other mannish kingdoms that fucking HATE Gondor, for actually pretty valid reasons. If this is gonna be the age of men, like go for it, commit, they are gonna finally have to forge some kind relationship with other men. Also to think about it a lot of these Haradrim and Easterlings have probably been probably built up, sorta speak, by sauron, and probably much richer and more militarized than Gondor since Gondor has been in a state of constant war and decline for the better half of century and probably realistically gonna have to do a lot of politicking to stay alive? Frankly. Since I can’t imagine many of their non vassal neighbors like them much. I think the fourth age is a really good opprunity to go death to the author and just create your own mannish kingdoms or empires, go nuts, the world is your sandbox, tolkien can’t stop you. The age of men is upon us, so many OCs could be created. Speaking of that, mannish history is such a blank slate we should be thinking more about the wacky hildorien acentures early men got up too. I think it’s a little boring to imagine the only kingdoms of men belonged to Gondor and Rohan, like Dale is an example of a (to my knowledge) non edian mannish kingdoms who is just vibing? Who is to say there is not more? If I know anything about history humans will see a river valley and go free real estate and set up shop for centuries.

I wanna conclude with a qoute by someone much more eluquent and smarter than me @warrioreowynofrohan “The Kinslayers recieved mercy. The Easterlings recieved annihilation,” and that really is one sentence that explains the sadness of it all. The non-edain and non-dunedian deserve so much better (and Im the biggest edain fan) than what tolkien gave them.

(Seriously, read their meta on Easterlings in the silm, it’s really good.)

Hi! I see you posting all this stuff about the Queen's Thief series and it really looks like my type of literature, but I can't keep up with all the names and locations. Would it be okay to ask for a non-spoilery rundown of who, what, and where?

Hell yeah [at a delay]. So, most of the series takes place on the Attolian Peninsula, which comprises of 3 countries: Sounis, Eddis, and Attolia. There are also a scattering of small islands generally associated with the peninsula. Eddis is a narrow country in the mountains between Sounis and Attolia and only has, like, 1 small port; Sounis and Attolia both have substantial coastlines. All are monarchies. The basic geopolitical plot of the books is these three countries making peace with one another so that together they can hold off hte encroaching Mede Empire. 

It’s very low fantasy. Rifles and cannons exist, but they’re not that good yet; complex clockwork exists; steam engines do not. The Attolian Peninsua are heavily Ancient Greece-inspired, and the Mede are Persian-ish. Most importantly, there’s an entire made-up Greek-flavored mythology, as well as a Gilgamesh remix, stories of which are scattered through the books. Not only is this very neat, but the mythological figures often mirror the characters and are often vital to the plot. In fact, one of my favorite things about the series is how the whole thing feels very much like a myth in its own right, which some modern-day-in-that-world author has delved into and expanded on with fleshed-out characters and complex politics.

But you wanted a cast list. Most significant characters, in (probably) order of introduction, spoiler-free:

Eugenides, aka Gen, the central character of the series - though only the protagonist for the first couple books. Book and a half, really (the second is shared). Gen is a young progessional thief who is very good at calculating and carrying out complex and implausibly possible plans, and not always good at considering in advance consequences like “I will spend 6 months in jail” “I will have to move countries and take up a job I will hate”, “people might unironically admire and respect me, even though I don’t think I deserve it.” A wildly endearing manipulative asshole. Iconic quote: “I CAN DO ANYTHING I WANT!”

the Magus (never named), a chief advisor to the King of Sounis. Canny old soldier-turned-scholar/politician who is the first person to hold a braincell re: “we need to unite or die.” Iconic quote: “I meant convince your queen to sue for peace, not burn our navy in its own harbor!”

Sophos, later Sounis*, the Nicest Young Man to ever be a Nice Young Man. Sweet muffin. Canonical bunny. Also canonical mankiller. Iconic line: “Not on the first vote.”

Attolia* Irene, Queen of Attolia. Her people love her and fear her; her barons, for the most part, just fear her; she kicks and screams (non-literally) and throws inkpots (literally), but she does relearn how to both be loved and give love in return.  Iconic line [narration]: And she believed him.

Eddis* Helen, Queen of Eddis. There’s a mild running joke over the course of the series of mentioning that there’s nothing to do during Eddisian winters but [X], the 3 things mentioned are weapons training, threadcraft, and seducing one another’s spouses. The only one Eddis is suggested to be good at is weapons, but she’s the beloved and (almost entirely) undisputed queen of her country anyway. Iconic quote: “War, then.”

Nahuseresh, Medean ambassador, a mansplainer but competent as sneakily taking over someone else’s country while pretending to help them. More or less. Does not get an iconic line bc fuck him.

Kamet, later called Kamet Kingnamer, Nahuseresh’s slave and personal secretary. Nearsighted, translates poetry for fun, does NOT want to go on a multi-month (b)romance-building roadtrip. Does not have much choice in the matter, because he wants to be free and, more importantly, to survive. Iconic line [narration]: I noticed that a man on the dock with a duffel on one shoulder was very like Costis in poise and gait. The man turned onto the gangplank to board the ship, and my heart lifted, though I tried to squash what I thought was a ridiculous hope.**

 Costis Ormentides, a lieutenant in the Attolian palace guard. Not remotely prepared for the political snakepit he’s thrown into through very little fault of his own, oh god this poor man, he just wants to serve his queen and have a little spare money to go out for wine with friends. Why are people trying to kill him. Why is he third wheeling his monarchs making out in the courtyard. Why is he being passive-aggressively forced to learn a foreign language.  Iconic line action: *punches the king in the face*

Pheris Mostrus Erondites, second grandson of Baron Erondites of Attolia; historian and narrator of the last book in the series. Severely physically disabled, purposefully overlooked for all his life until particularly bitchy politics had him sent to the Attolian royal court (purposely on his part and on everyone else’s), very observant and twice as clever. Writes humanity beautifully. Iconic line [narration]: If I cannot record exactly what words were spoken at every moment, I can say with confidence what those words might have been, and in some cases what they must as been, as I saw what resulted from them being spoken, and can we not derive the words when we know the consequences of their utterance? *proceeds to write a historical account/novel more full of small moments of personhood and love both dramatic and casual than almost the rest of the series combined*

Relius, Attolian Master of the Archives (spymaster), trusted first within reason and then beyond it. Has many, many lovers.***

Teleus, Attolian Captain of the Palace Guard, A bit staid, but loyal, reliable, and entirely excellent at his job. Has only one lover.***

the Eddisian Minister of War, unnamed until the very end, fights with his youngest son a great deal in multiple senses of the word. 

* It’s possible that some of your confusion may stem from people taking the names of their countries as titles upon ascending to the thrones. ** Yes I chose this quote bc it’s sweet but also bc it’s SUCH a nearsighted mood. *** Direct quotes from the character list at the end of the last book.

I don't know if somebody already did this specifically. But yh the heck let's go.

WARNING 1: THIS IS NOT A POST FOR SENSITIVE PEOPLE AND/OR MINORS. (it contains gore and sexual themes and more).

And yes, SALT. Lots of salt.

WARNING 2: this has nothing to do with Christianity specifically. Atheism isn't hate towards your god(s) and/or its believers. Although there are many forms of atheism (some of which are so strong and violent they make me furious) think about mine as a general form of indifference. I hate the Church state, yes, but sorry I have that "at home" so please don't blame me. I don't like Abrahamic religions in general, but I've grown up with one.

I'm thankfully not a cult survivor, but I can understand some things.

WARNING 3: living in a very religious contest I have many beloved friends and relatives (starting with my mother) who believe in their god a lot. So if my words are too disrespectful tell me, I really don't want to hurt anybody.

Okay.

So.

I've seen many similarities between the cult Horde Prime put his clones in and your very average, very white, very western idea of Christianity.

1) Theophagy:

First of all, I really don't know much how this thing is lived in other Christian countries, but in mine they put a lot of emphasis on the Eucharist.

As far as I've seen I think it's pretty obvious how much in ancient cultures there's a very carnal and very grounded idea of the spirit. That can result in believing the soul to be the "psyche", so literally "the breath of life", the coordination of your sinapsis togheter (to me a very poetic definition of how our whole being ourselves is just us being our central nervous system) or it can lead to you eating the ashes of your granpa so you get his good qualities (something some cultures still do today). They said that the head of Orpheus was buried in the island of Lesbo and that's why its land was filled with amazing poets like Sappho. There's this very, sorry, brutal idea of the embodyment of the soul, the talents of a person, that even a piece of corpse is considered a magic thingy.

This is no different in the very old, very ancient, very rural Christian religion (at least in the most common version of it, we have many flavours of one truth apperentely).

When I was in High School we studied a lot Bacchus and the Baccanalia, because there are several commedies about it. My teacher, being very religious, was almost ashamed to admit that a lot of acts of those festivities (let's say that the most normal thing was for women to give their milk to animal cubs) were actually not very dissimilar in their rawness to certain habits of the religion.

So, what about Horde Prime? (me *yh, what about it, stupid ADHD?*). I have seen a post in the past explaining that yes, even though spacebats have the dentition of a frugivore bat and not haematophagus bat, the scene of Prime recharging in his throne with all those disgusting cables filled with green liquid referred as "the life force" of his clones...well, it's surely something.

Looks like a sort of sci-fi vampire thing. Which is very cool and I love this headcanon. So again I kept thinking...what is THAT amniotic fluid? I am a student, so correct me if I say something wrong.

Amniotic fluid is a combination of water 99%, proteins, glucids, fats and some salts (...it's even effective for electric conduction...the heck is that pool).

The most similar body fluid is plasma, so blood less cells. Even the serum, so plasma less proteins, is very similar.

Now, stated that Prime is a manipulative jerk, stated that I don't know much about aliens' physiology, stated that that fluid can come from blood potentially, in Church they say this:

*and Jesus said: "This is my body/blood which I offer in sacrifice for you"*

Apart from it being very creepy, there's this idea in the whole religion-thingy: if you are human you are a selfish monster, so monstrous you made our Lord and Savior die for your sins for how messed up you were.

So basically you don't become a sinner, you are concived as one. Humanity is sin itself, it can never lead to something good.

So are the clones. That's why Prime, in his benevolence, feeds them with himself. To make them pure, to protect them from the outside world. To make them remember who their strenght comes from.

If you don't want to read all of this just go for the Futurama soda episode, it's basically the same thing. Bleah.

2) Corpse feticism and more.

Again, don't know you guys, but here we are filled with mummies. I went in a place in Palermo and ...my gosh why did I do that.

We have everything here, hands, heads, feet, teeth so many of them, dead babies, dead virgins, dead popes, dead elders, all of them for half the prize, but only if you call today.

We are. Filled. With these atrocities. At least we don't touch them anymore.

Sometimes I wonder if, apart from the "hygene", people in Middle Ages used to die at the honorable age of 13 also because they kissed those... thingies there.

So, can we please talk about Horde Prime collection of "previous selves"?

This man has a whole room filled with corpses of himself. In the Vatican you can find corpses of dead popes as well, preserved and even dressed in a very good way. In Italy in general we have these, I remember a whole room in a town near my city filled with skeletons of "saints". Personally I find it very disturbing because you are basically not allowing that body to rest and serve its last biological purpose, especially if you consider that most of these "saints" were mentally impared young kids who were killed brutally and died as "martyrs". In ancient Greece the WORST thing you could do to a corpse was to leave it unburied, without dignity.

It's getting darker now.

I like both headcanons for Prime, that of a spoiled (maybe even sexist) royal of a lost culture who wanted to conquer the universe and that of him being a sort of ancient evil spirit, but I personally like to stick with the latter.

Imagine the old bodies of the clones Prime used for himself. Pushed to their limits. Clones dying young is horrific as well, but like these people were forced to go on. Not to die. Not to age as much as possible. And now that they are dead they can't even rest. They are a show off for anyone to see. Their brains preserved and their literal dead flesh still tormented for reading.

One may ask me, then what about corpses in formalin for medical use? Well, one thing is a donor or a dead fetus or a corpse nobody claims. That's the story of the skeleton in my university, a young male who didn't eat much. A very lonely man. Well at least now he is well loved and appreciated, ah if only he knew that.

The point is, we respect them. We are grateful for the informations they give us. Gosh, I know I'm creepy, but I even cuddled one bone once. We know they probably suffered. Like, search for HeLa cells. That lady has my highest respect.

But Prime? Those are. Vessels. Just that.

Anyways, apart for the "respect the deads thing" I found Hordak's behaviour in that room that of high distress. Like, ehm, any normal person? Search for "Convento Dei Cappuccini", that place I was talking about in Palermo. The fact that I heard kids cry and "MEMENTO MORI" everywhere.

Everyone and everything is afraid of death, I just accepted that fear because it's normal. That doesn't mean I want to be reminded of it every week, especially if I'm a 7 yo kid.

Honorable mentions: that horrible art collection.

3) Double standards

When I went to catechism my teacher used a very feather hand on males and an iron fist on us ladies. We weren't allowed to wear trousers, to play football, to raise our voice. We were forced to be very clean, to sit with our legs as closed as possible. I heard it was worse before, at least we could play volleyball and weren't forced to knit.

We were however "encouraged" to sing and bake stupid cakes for Sundays. Mind you, I'm very feminine, but one thing is liking ribbons one thing is being a slave.

The boys...well, they could literally do anything. They broke things, used petards, beat each other. They were NEVER reproached, the teachers would say "oh, they are just boys". Like once I was so engrossed. I remember I had to sit behind a guy with his butt almost uncovered (because the lower you put the helm of your trousers the cooler you were) while I had to stay still with my head high, chest out, belly in and legs closed for 2h. The problem was: I almost pitied him. I was like "poor thing he doesn't know how to behave properly". That's so crazy, I was piting a free soul while I had my hands handcuffed because I truly believed the bullshit they put into my mind.

Now, imagine how did Horde Prime's clones feel about Catra and Glimmer.

They can dress as they please. Eat non amniotic fluid. Catra can even go wherever she wants.

To me, they didn't feel envious. As they should! That's how far an indoctrination can go.

Take Yudi interaction with Catra, he believes everything he is saying.

But I think deep down he knows, they all know, the truth, juding by his bitter reaction after being possesed. He knows he is the slave here, not the free man. But he wants to believe the other way round.

I think that yes, of course Prime kept Glimmer and Catra (and Hordak) because he needed them to conquer Etheria. But that is also a good way to show to the poor clones of how lost people far away from Prime's light can be. Slaves of their bodly needs and slaves of their individuality.

4) Sexual abuse

Do I need to explain this? Plus all those sick touches Prime gives not only to Hordak, but to Glimmer, Catra and Adora as well?

I don't know much about other countries, again, but here the Church is a real cancer. If a priest gets accoused of raping children he just gets put into another Church far away, and generally he keeps being a pedo even there and the game goes on.

I wouldn't exately say that Prime is a pedophile but clones are pretty innocent and neotenic to me so...idk.

Of course, Prime is his own state and his own rules, so yh. Raping all day. That's why I don't like to ship him with anything rather than a 100 m fall. Not even with his clones, sorry I know its kinky maybe but he is a monster.

Also, the way the clones feel like...honored to be raped. That's so sad. Maybe he convinced them this is the only right way they could experience sex and intimacy. I really don't know.

One thing I'm sure of is that Christian religion likes to often put shame on some "impure" acts. That's the name. The most impure of all is masturbation. If you are a male ...mmm well it's okay dear, it's not your fault you are male and so a sex starved animal. But if you are a girl? Ihhh oh dare you bitch.

Mind you, I fall in the ace spectrum but I did too have puberty and needs, and these thoughts in my head made me only conflicted.

Last thing. More of an asking. And more irriverent, so please stay away if you don't want to read.

So basically I understood I was atheist at 5 yo, just because I read two different versions of the birth of the Universe, one in my science book and one in my Bible (MY Bible, I still have it, was a gift of my aunt) and preferred the science version. I still felt conflicted, like once during a religion lesson at School (well...I don't blame Mussolini much in this case, I mean the Vatican wasn't still recognizing country indipendence and we needed a compromise) the teacher told me to stop drawing dinosaurs with Adam and Eve because they never existed. I mean...yes that's anachronistic but still I felt very sad, dinosaurs were cooler than that story. I remember I even made an experiment "if I say I don't believe in god will I get thunderstruck?". It didn't happen so I was like "oh cool, science wins". But then CATECHISM ecc ecc. The fun fact is that they think atheists are those who don't study religion, while I was the most zelous of the class.

So.

I just wonder...my baby boy Hordak is a man of science, what were his thoughts after his separation from Prime. I mean of course he still believed, but also not as much after some time. Entrapta is a support system for him of course, but he accepts her affection quite easily on canon. Which is amazing, still... maybe he was already doubting his devotion?

Hello professor !

I was wondering how children were raised in general in Macedon.. and if Alexandros had a daughter how would she be raised (educated? Would he treat her differently than most might since he was such a mammas boy?) Or what about if he survived to raise his son, I know the general stuff about his childhood but would the child be raised in pella or would he stay on the road with Alexandros?

Your answers are always very fun to read!! Thank you for taking the time to answer them!! :)

First, let me point to Mark Golden’s 2015 second edition of his original 1990 Children and Childhood in Classical Athens. It’s an important revision to a classic and includes new evidence, an updated discussion and bibliography. You can get it used for c. $20.

The obvious caveat applies, right there in the title: …in Classical Athens. This reflects a problem for studies of ancient Greek to which I’ve referred before: we’re prisoners of our evidence and the bulk of our evidence is Athenian. Ergo, too often, discussion of “ancient Greek culture” is really “ancient Athenian culture.”

Why does that matter? Greece was a patchwork of different-but-related linguistic and religious groups. Ionic-Attic populations (which includes Athens) were different from Doric (which includes Sparta), who were different again from Aeolic, and then you have oddballs like Macedon. And Epiros. And Thessaly. And Crete. And Cyprus (areas on the perimeter).

You get the idea.

So general assumptions would apply, but specifics might not, such as specific religious festivals or dedications to this or that god. Nonetheless, broad characteristics of childhood and the family seem to have been pretty universal in Magna Graecae. When did newborns become persons (not at conception or even at birth, but a few days after). What was family life like? When did boys separate from their mothers to be raised as little men? What sorts of toys were available? When did childhood end?

Given those broad brushstrokes we can say a few things.

Pregnancy, childbirth, and infancy were very much the purview of women. Male physicians were brought in only for a problem. At a child’s birth, the midwife presented the baby to the father to acknowledge; if he turned his back, that was the cue to expose it. Fathers didn’t have a great deal of hands-on experience with infants, who stayed in the nursery, but especially in normal households, they'd have been exposed to them regularly. (The scene between Hektor, Andromake, and Astyanax in the Iliad is heartbreaking, but demonstrates that even elite fathers interacted with their children.) The birth of a son, especially the first, was a cause for celebration. The birth of a daughter, less so; she might be more celebrated if a son (or two) were already on deck. That’s not to say fathers didn’t love their daughters. We’ve plenty of evidence to the contrary. But excitement at the birth of a girl depended on other factors.

Infant mortality rates were relatively high, so there was a lot of “wait and see” following birth. Around day 7 or 10, the baby was brought into the family (i.e., became a person), and after the first year, more interest was taken in their future, including by the father.

Life for children (even elite children like Alexander) would have been a “whole family affair.” The Greeks had nuclear families but modified by several factors. The father’s elderly parents might live with them, especially when children were young. A widowed/unmarried sister (with no children) possibly also, but rarer. The family might also have a slave, possibly two. (Three+ tended to be a sign of wealth.) If two slaves, the second was probably a woman to help the mother with housework and childcare. Upper-class families would also have a nurse for young children, and a paidogogos (pedagogue, an elderly male slave who’d aged out of fieldwork), who kept an eye on boys outside the home (especially between 7-12/13). Children could become very fond of these non-relatives. Alexander reportedly loved his nurse, Lanikē, and his pedagogue, Lysimakos, although neither were slaves.

The notion that childcare is the mother’s primary or sole job is absurdly recent (and patently ridiculous). Even non-elite children would have had people in their lives besides parents and siblings; if the oikia (house) was occupied by Mama, Papa, and the kids, all around in the village or hamlet lived relatives. By-in-large, Greeks stayed where they were born, connected to land ownership and polis citizenship. Urban centers were a tad different, but not that much. Uncles and aunts lived nearby. “Distant” relatives were often sisters or nieces married to a man in a different town. Ergo, one grew up not only with siblings, but also cousins and other extended family. Given the rate of childhood death from disease, plus the dangers of warfare, most men wanted to have 2-3 boys, and 1-2 daughters. So 4-5 children was an ideal number. In a lot of fictional portrayals of Alexander, the fact he was 1 of 5 kids not that far apart in age (plus his cousin Amyntas), is often overlooked. He reads almost like an only child. He was anything but. (One reason I was keen to include his siblings in Dancing with the Lion.)

In any case, I think it important to keep in mind that children growing up had siblings, cousins, second- and third-cousins, maybe even the children of their slaves—all as playmates, babysitters, partners-in-crime, and sometimes antagonists. If gender divisions certainly existed, perhaps (in childhood) less than we might imagine.*

Until about the age of seven, all children remained with their mothers, living in the nursery and women’s rooms, although boys may have been taken out during the day to begin acquiring basic skills such as horsemanship, if the family were wealthy enough to own horses. And even young boys were encouraged to play with appropriately manly toys (miniature swords and armor, etc.)

In a boy’s seventh year, he left the women’s quarters to sleep with the men and, depending on his social status, to undergo basic education. If not elite, he’d have begun to work the farm with his father or learn his father’s craft. If he got any education (not free), it would have been what the family could afford and spare him for. Literacy among farmers, fisherman, and non-elite others was spotty, but the quantity of inscriptions by the 4th century argues for a rudimentary ability to read even among the lower classes (if not the abject poor).

After 12, non-elite boys would graduate to work with their fathers full time. In cities, they might have some free time for jobs on the side to get spending coin (fetch-and-carry, act as torch boys at night to lead home tipsy revelers: all the ancient version of lawn-mowing)—but this is pretty exclusively urban. In farming villages and hamlets, boys were working with Papa early. If they lived near enough to a large town with a gymnasion, they might engage in sports in late afternoon. A non-elite boy who showed promise in a sport might (like today) find a sponsor and be trained for a career in it on the Circuit (the Games).

Elite boys had a different path. They also left the nursery at 7 but were then carefully groomed to take their place as city leaders as well as to run their estates. They’d travel their properties with their fathers to learn the business, attend school, and the gymnasion to train physically. Once that initial schooling ended c. 12, they might attend lectures by sophists for some years, if in a sizable enough city—or be sent to one for such an education. This was less formal, the goal to train elite boys in rhetoric (giving speeches) and eristics (the art of argument), for a career in politics. (Sparta had their own system, but the training of elite Spartans bore commonalities with that of other elite boys around Greece.)

Girls never left the women’s rooms but began to learn skills quite young. That doesn’t mean they never played, or had pets, or had fun. Like boys, their education in wifely skills intensified after 10/11/12. Elite women almost certainly learned some letters, but it’s dubious how much farmer-class girls acquired. Reading wasn’t a necessary skill. Arithmatic was, to keep track of the larder, for counting in weaving patterns, etc. But they’d have been taught this by their mothers. Girls had no formal education (Sparta being something of an exception).

After a girl’s first menses, she occupied liminal space, considered “dangerous”: wild and emotional, so it was important to marry her off as soon as seemly and get her pregnant to anchor her wombs and thus ground her. First menses in antiquity occurred c. 13-14. She might then be betrothed at 14-15, and married at 15-16. Elite girls could be promised even earlier as those marriages were political and for business, but she wasn’t usually married until after her first menarch.

Ergo, except for elite boys (who might experience an “adolescent moratorium”), for most Greeks, “childhood” ended c. 12/13/14.

This basic pattern would not have been hugely different in Macedonia, certainly by Philip’s day when education was more readily available, especially in the few, large lowland cities such as Pella. Rural and highland areas probably didn’t have much education and a child’s development would mirror that of the rural poor in the rest of Greece: start working with Papa in the fields or with Mama in the women’s rooms quite young. Yet Philip ushered in long-term campaigning. Ergo, for Macedonian children, Papa might be gone for months on end. But uncle, or grandpa, might not be. Neither Philip nor Alexander ever took all men of fighting age out of Macedonia; it was neither practical nor safe. Plenty of family members remained to help raise children. Father would return home periodically, probably with loot. Their fathers may not have been terribly significant figures in these children’s lives, except (maybe) as a “hero” to aspire to be like.

Once Alexander took men to Asia, the chance to see one’s father even occasionally evaporated. About a year-and-a-half in, Alexander did send newlyweds home for some months to “make babies,” but once he left the coast to turn inland, that stopped. This translated into a population drop, back in Macedonia. If perhaps not as bad as Brian Bosworth presumed, it remained noticeable. Both Philip and Alexander realized that taking men out of Macedonia for years had a detrimental effect, but their ambition led them to do it anyway.

Most of Alexander’s men on campaign actually formed unions with local women along the road. In 324, in Susa, he had these unions recognized, at least for men not already married. Slightly later, when he discharged the older men to return home, he kept their half-Asian children (and mistresses) in Asia, promising to raise them in Macedonian fashion, feed, clothe, and train them. The reason given was to avoid causing problems in their families back home (with prior wives and legitimate children). If this was useful to Alexander, providing him with a large number of ethnically mixed recruits, dependent on him, to build future armies, it was also compassionate. Such children in most armies were ignored, their mothers dumped when the men went home. Alexander had money to burn, but this wasn’t a small undertaking. (Zeus alone knows what happened to those children after he died; his Successors weren’t either interested or obligated.)

Anyway, Alexander’s treatment of own children, if he’d lived long enough to concern himself with them, would not have been radically different from his father’s approach with him. In fact, he’d probably have seen them even less, especially in their early years, given his penchant to campaign far afield. He’d assume the babies would be raised in Susa or Babylon. I expect Alexander would have wanted them to learn not only Macedonian and Greek ways, but also Persian. Girls would probably have been taught according to the Persian traditions of their mothers, although he might have insisted they learn to weave (not a skill upper-class Persian women pursued, but important to Greek women of all classes).

Boys, I expect, he’d assume to follow a similar experience as his own: with their mothers for the first 7 years, then given a basic education, including physical, just as he’d been, all in the palaces/capitals. I doubt he’d have had any more inclination to take them on the road than Philip had with him.

Around the age of 12/13/14, then he might have had sons brought to join him on campaign, where they’d serve in the Pages, or have other, age-appropriate assignments to give them proper military exposure, including early officer assignments, etc.

So while I don’t think Alexander would have been a bad father—probably rather doting—he almost certainly would have been a distant father, at least for his children’s early years, largely due to his own ambition. Maybe he’d have slowed down as he approached forty, but Philip didn’t. I don’t think he was capable of staying put for long unless you nailed his feet to the floor. So, I doubt his kids would have seen much of him until they were approaching teen years, and then largely the boys.

———————————

*My father was the eldest of 13 children, most of whom had 2+ in turn themselves. I grew up at a distance from most, but summers brought family reunions over weeks where literally dozens of us would run wild on some aunt or uncle’s farm, or at Grandpa’s house, fishing from the pier on Carbon Lake. It’s a wonder none of us drowned or were otherwise seriously hurt, but the older cousins always had a watchful eye on the younger. We had very little contact during the day with our parents, dashing in to eat when called, but it was mostly infants and toddlers who spent time with mothers, and these were passed around. The oldest female cousins also wandered about with a toddler in arms, especially when it was time for our mothers to make dinner or they had other duties requiring free hands. For the toddlers, to “get out with the big kids” was incentive to leave the kitchen as soon as their mothers permitted it.

The Captive Prince Trilogy

The Captive Prince Trilogy Book Review by C.S. Pacat 

Now, one of my absolute favorite things to do is to re-read. 

Many people find this strange. 

How do you enjoy a book you’ve already read? They say. You already know what happens, isn’t it boring?

In short, the very simple, very concise answer is: no. 

I adore re-reading my favorite books for several reasons. 

One, it’s comfortable. I love slipping back into a world flush full of characters I cherish. It’s like slipping back into a warm bed on a cold morning. Re-reading the Harry Potter series for me, for example, is the same sort of reasoning people watch Friends over and over again or whatever amenable show of their choice. 

It’s easy, it's familiar, and it’s beloved. 

Second, often with re-reads you are able to pick up on things that you missed the first time you read through, or even the second. There is symbolism, foreshadowing, and minute details that become glaringly obvious in retrospect and whenever I discover one of these tidbits I become overwhelmingly jubilant. 

Third, sometimes nothing else sounds good. If I’m having a book lull and nothing seems to catch my attention, I know I can return to a treasured novel or series and that it’ll satiate whatever reading needs I have at the time. 

This happened to me very recently. As my to-read pile dwindled down to books given to me by others that I held trivial interest in, I resorted to re-reading a book series that I love to death: All for the Game trilogy. You can find my review of this series here. 

More commonly known as the first book in the series, The Foxhole Court, these books have continually given me merriment and joy every time I’ve read them, including this time. I read all three novels in about four days and I enjoyed every single second of it, even though this is the third time I’ve read the series start to finish. 

After finishing The King’s Men, I was once again bereft of reading material and woefully bored. Hence, as any normal person does, I resorted to fanfiction and to looking up books that people found were similar to The Foxhole Court. 

To my surprise, on every list was a trilogy I had never heard of called The Captive Prince. Scoffing in skepticism-how could something even compare to my beloved foxes? I decided with circumspect that I would “try” out this series. 

I was very much right. The Captive Prince trilogy almost had nothing in common with Nora Sakavics’s The Foxhole Court other than the hate-to-love trope (but it’s not like Nora invented that by any means) and slow-burn romance. 

That being said, I very much enjoyed the series. 

The trilogy was first self-published by author C.S. Pacat in 2013, the same year that Nora Sakavic self-published The Foxhole Court. What a good year for literature. In all candor, the authors and their backgrounds seem to have more in common then their series do. 

The Captive Prince revolves around Damen, the true and rightful heir to the throne of Akielos, being sold as a slave to the prince of Vere, Laurent, by his own brother who has usurped the throne after the untimely death of their father. 

Thus unfolds a truly complex and intriguing series involving intricate world-building, political machinations, Damen’s lofty goal of trying to go back home and take his rightful place on the throne, Laurent’s ongoing war with his uncle, the current Regent of Vere until Laurent comes of age, and some truly surprising twists and turns. 

This trilogy took me blissfully by surprise. 

Is this trilogy a romance? Yes, it is. Very slow burn and with the aforementioned enemies-to friends-to lovers trope that we’re all enamored with (don’t even pretend otherwise). I saw the synopsis, caught wind of the word “slave” and almost gave in and tossed this book away permanently. 

I don’t like relationships with unbalanced hierarchies of power. In truth, it makes me uncomfortable because I truly think the relationship can’t be mutual, equal, or consensual when one person in the relationship inherently has more influence and control over the other. 

I thought Captive Prince was going to be another smutty, cheesy, poorly written rendition of a “slave” being given to a prince and low and behold, they fall in love anyway despite the numerous and lengthy immoral implications within that framework. 

Much to my surprise, the Captive Prince took its own turn. 

Number one, while Damen is sold as a slave to Laurent, there is nothing explicitly sexual in nature that occurs between them (much) until further later on in the series. This is mostly because of Laurent himself, who loathes Damen for reasons that I won’t get into. 

The society they live in, however, does not have the same chaste control that the Prince of Vere does, but instead of coming across as lascivious and self-serving, the gratuitous display of sex and sex slaves in the novel actually serves more of a commentary of being toxic and something that Laurent wants to change once he is properly king. I appreciated this commentary. 

Secondly, Damen and Laurent’s relationship was genuinely good to me. Often with books of this romantic and superfluous nature, the relationship seems fake, forced, or like I said before, inherently unbalanced and therefore coerced. 

However, Pacat does a very good job of insisting that while Damen is technically Laurent’s slave in status, he is never actually Laurent’s slave in action, belief, or treatment. It was very refreshing to see how much power Damen amassed, even with his slave status, and the control he was able to wield and hone. 

Laurent and Damen also authentically compliment each other. Where Laurent is cold and calculating, Damen is warm and trusting. Where one is manipulative with mind games another is strategic on the battlefield. They meshed well together. A fact that Pacat showed time and time again. They made each other better. And in the end, they both realized this as well. 

Thirdly, this series was truly well written and didn’t focus solely on the romance. For a trilogy found under the romance section at Barnes & Noble, I was chagrined to find that for the most part, politics, war, scheming, and an overall plot heavy series dominated most of the pages. 

While Laurent and Damen’s relationship does have focus, it wasn’t the only focus, and if anything, their relationship played well and clearly into the events that were going on around them. 

That being said, similar to The Foxhole Court, please be warned that there are triggering aspects of this book. Namely rape, slavery, prostitution, drugs, violence, torture, etc. If this is something that is concerning to you, please research the warnings and risks attributed to this novel before diving head first. 

Lastly, people, the sheer vocabulary of this series was astonishing. I had to look up so many words that I didn’t know. Instead of being annoying, I loved this. I love learning new words. 

However, reading YA most of the time does not stretch my vocabulary limits. This book certainly did and I wholeheartedly appreciated it. Some words included: chamois, dishabille, chicanery, sobriquet, nascent and damascened. I will be very impressed if you know all these words without having to google them like I did. 

I know I should have probably written separate reviews for all three books in the trilogy, but because I read them one after another and in such a short amount of time, the whole series kind of blended together for me in one gargantuan novel. 

I can’t say that I hated that. Lengthy books are an absolute prize when you’re enjoying them. In addition, Pacat released short stories with differing material, one is an epilogue type of deal and most of the others show insights into side characters from throughout the series. They’re all very fun to read if you needed something more like I did once I was finished. 

Recommendation: The trilogy as a whole was really fun and surprisingly well-written. Damen, Laurent and other characters were continuously fleshed out and the writing itself was nuanced, symbolic, and just fun to read. The world-building, while not the most incredibly original thing that’s ever surfaced, was still gripping and entertaining. 

It was almost like a fantasy take on Ancient Rome or Greece, which is very much up my alley anyway. The romance wasn’t cheesy, but was instead fluid, dynamic, and situated well within the plot as a whole. It wasn’t the Foxhole Court, but that’s okay, because what can be? Better off to be something new and distinct than trying to copy something or someone else. 

As Oscar Wilde once said, “Be yourself, everyone else is already taken.”

Indeed, Mr. Wilde. 

Score: 8/10

The Werewolves of Arcadia

This is my contribution to @adri-le-chat 's Halloween "Haunting Pagan Lore" event. As you can see from the title, I've chosen a classic of horror and folklore tales for which many have forgotten the ancient origins. This will be long, so let's get into it.

The myth of King Lycaon While the earliest known example of man-to-wolf shifting dates back to the Epic of Gilgamesh (c. 2100 BC), the Greek case is considered the second oldest, and the one scholars consider as the root of werewolf belief in Europe, as the myth got carried over to the Romans. However, one should note that lycanthropy and human-to-animal transformation beliefs also arose independently in other cultures around the world.

In Greece, the first werewolf is King Lycaon of Arcadia. The story is said to go this way, though with several variants: King Lycaon ruled over the region of Arcadia, Pan's homeland. A wild, lush and mountainous region of Greece. Lycaon had several children, mainly Kallisto, Keteus and Nyktimos. After seducing Kallisto, Zeus is invited to a feast by Lycaon. The issue is, Lycaon serves him human flesh:

"After Zeus had seduced Kallisto, Lykaon, pretending not to know of the matter, entertained Zeus, as Hesiod says, and set before him on the table the babe which he had cut up.”

- Hesiod, Astronomica Fragment 3 (from Comm. Supplem. on Aratus)

"Two lesser known Athenian playwrights, Xenokles the Elder and Astydamas the Younger, produced plays entitled Lykaon. Presumably these told the story of the sacrifice of the child."

- Xenocles the Elder & Astydamas the Younger, Lycaon (lost plays) (c. 5th to 4th BC.)

The general idea is that Zeus is deeply offended by the act and turns King Lycaon into a wolf. However, there are many versions to the myth. Pausanias, in the 2nd century AD, explains it this way:

" Lykaon brought a human baby to the altar of Zeus Lykaios, and sacrificed it, pouring out its blood upon the altar, and according to the legend immediately after the sacrifice he was changed from a man to a wolf (lykos) . . . All through the ages, many events that have occurred in the past, and even some that occur to-day, have been generally discredited because of the lies built up on a foundation of fact. It is said, for instance, that ever since the time of Lykaon a man has changed into a wolf at the sacrifice to Zeus Lykaios, but that the change is not for life; if, when he is a wolf, he abstains from human flesh, after nine years he becomes a man again, but if he tastes human flesh he remains a beast for ever."

- Pausanias, Description of Greece 8. 2. 1 - 6

Ovid, when rewritting the myth in the 1st century AD, decided to turn the narrative to Lycaon doubting the divinity of Zeus when the god visited Arcadia. In order to test Zeus’s divinity, Lycaon attempts to feed him cooked human flesh and have him assassinated in the night. When Zeus realizes what Lycaon is doing, Lycaon tries to flee in fear. But as he runs into the fields of Arcadia, Lycaon is transformed into a wolf.

The cult of Zeus Lykaios

The transformation of King Lycaon is a punishment for human sacrifice and cannibalism, sometimes permanent or, as we saw above, for a certain amount of time under the condition of not eating human flesh.

The myth is said to have inspired the cult of Zeus Lykaios in Arcadia (or perhaps the opposite), for which, human sacrifices have been rumored to occur. The sanctuary of Zeus Lykaios was on one of the three crests of Mt. Lykaion, where the festival of the Lykaia was celebrated approximately once every four years. We owe the earliest reference to human sacrifices on this mountain to Plato:

"What then is the beginning of the transformation from protector to tyrant? Is it not clearly when the protector begins to do the same as the man in the story which is told concerning the sanctuary of Zeus Lykaios in Arcadia?’ ‘What story?’ he said. ‘How the man who has tasted of the piece of human entrails—one of these having been cut up along with the entrails of the other victims—it is necessary for this man to be turned into a wolf. Or haven’t you heard the story?’ ‘I have." -Plato, Republic 8, 565D–E

Pausanias, who visited the location in the 2nd century AD, also mentions the story:

“For they say that after Lycaon someone would always be turned from a man into a wolf at the sacrifice of Zeus Lykaios, but that he would not become a wolf for all his life. Rather, if while he was a wolf he refrained from human flesh, they say that afterwards in the tenth year he turned back from a wolf into a man. But if he had tasted human flesh he remained a beast forever.” 

-Pausanias, Description of Greece, 8.2.6

Later, he goes on to mention the sacrifices are still performed on the moutain, subtly implying that he thinks those are human sacrifices:

"they sacrifice in secret; I did not wish to inquire further into the details of the sacrifice: let it be as it has been from the beginning”

-Pausanias, Description of Greece, 8.38.7

Both Plato and Pausanias are skeptics on the existence of the transformation from man to wolf. Pausanias, especially, makes it very clear when giving account of the story of Damarchus:

"But concerning the boxer named Damarchus, who was by birth an Arcadian of Parrhasia, except for his victory at Olympia I do not believe the other things said by pretentious men, namely that he was changed from a man to a wolf at the sacrifice of Zeus Lykaios and that ten years later he again became a man. Nor did it seem to me that this was said about him by the Arcadians, for in this case it would also be said in the inscription at Olympia, which runs as follows: Damarchus son of Dinyttas set up this statue, a Parrhasian by birth from Arcadia.”

-Pausanias, Description of Greece, 6.8.2

Archeaological search has not confirmed human sacrifices to be taking place, despite the legends. The numerous bones found were mostly ones from small animals, with the occasional bigger cattle or pig. Thus there are strong doubts on the reality of infant sacrifices. If they did exist, the absence of remains would indicate either that the victims were so young their remains didn't survive time, or that the remains were removed for a separate burial. 

Other instances of werewolf tales

It is very clear now that the region of Arcadia is linked for the Ancients to the trope of man to wolf transformation, and probably taking root in both tale and cult. However, this while this is the most documented story, there are other mentions of wolf-shifting in ancient literature. 

Herodotus, for instance, tells us this when describing the Neuri: 

"It may be that these people are wizards; for the Scythians, and the Greeks settled in Scythia, say that once a year every one of the Neuri becomes a wolf for a few days and changes back again to his former shape. Those who tell this tale do not convince me; but they tell it nonetheless, and swear to its truth." - Herodotus, Histories, IV.105

Much later, in the late first century AD, Petronius includes a werewolf story in his Satyricon, which goes as follows: 

"I seized my opportunity, and persuaded a guest in our house to come with me as far as the fifth milestone. He was a soldier, and as brave as Hell. So we trotted off about cockcrow; the moon shone like high noon. We got among the tombstones: my man went aside to look at the epitaphs, I sat down with my heart full of song and began to count the graves. Then when I looked round at my friend, he stripped himself and put all his clothes by the roadside. My heart was in my mouth, but I stood like a dead man. He made a ring of water round his clothes and suddenly turned into a wolf. Please do not think I am joking; I would not lie about this for any fortune in the world. But as I was saying, after he had turned into a wolf, he began to howl, and ran off into the woods. At first I hardly knew where I was, then I went up to take his clothes; but they had all turned into stone. No one could be nearer dead with terror than I was. But I drew my sword and went slaying shadows all the way till I came to my love's house. I went in like a corpse, and nearly gave up the ghost, the sweat ran down my legs, my eyes were dull, I could hardly be revived. My dear Melissa was surprised at my being out so late, and said, 'If you had come earlier you might at least have helped us; a wolf got into the house and worried all our sheep, and let their blood like a butcher. But he did not make fools of us, even though he got off; for our slave made a hole in his neck with a spear.' When I heard this, I could not keep my eyes shut any longer, but at break of day I rushed back to my master Gaius's house like a defrauded publican, and when I came to the place where the clothes were turned into stone, I found nothing but a pool of blood. But when I reached home, my soldier was lying in bed like an ox, with a doctor looking after his neck. I realized that he was a werewolf, and I never could sit down to a meal with him afterwards, not if you had killed me first. Other people may think what they like about this; but may all your guardian angels [genius] punish me if I am lying.”

-Petronius, Satyricon, 62 (tr. Michael Heseltine)

Final words

Despite being present in literature, there seems to be a common disbelief amongst the Ancients when it comes to the veracity of werewolves, but it is also possible that the explicit disbelief shown by the authors cited there is meant to differiate them with the popular folk beliefs of their time. With this, I wish you all a Spooky Halloween. 

weird opinion but christians aren't religious.

ok so like, jews generally follow god's rules, muslims follow allah's rules, hindus probably follow their gods rules, so on and so forth. and overall they do it out of faith; they do it because they want to honor the deity who loves them rather than because society forces them to.

granted the zionists and the radical extremists and the zealots do exist but as loud minorities and thus are statistical outliers & don't matter.

christians are... a different breed.

"if you aren't x branch and dont obey y rules you'll go to hell so we'll fucking murder you" is pretty much the main driving force behind a significant portion of christianity in history. the catholics, the protestants, the orthodoxy, all are built on a foundation of fear, anger, and hatred. it's shaped the way society developed; in the 4 nations that did the most genocidal imperialist colonialism- England, France, Spain, and Italy- a combination of convenient coastal locations, naval prowess, military tendency, christianity, and ultranationalism lead them down a path of missionaries, holding bibles in one hand and bloodstained knives in the other. the religion is inseparable from the culture and inseparable from the horrible things done in the name of their god, and the resulting cancers of society we feel today from the campaigns of slaughter. xenophobia. capitalism. savage barbarism via sensationalized capitol punishment. misogyny. queerphobia. gender fascism. classism. racism. all of these issues in the "civilized world" stem predominantly from those four nations and the disease ridden pestilent filth some call pilgrims.

here's something interesting:

there are less than 1 million rastafari in the world.

there are less than 5 million shinto in the world.

there are less than 25 million jews in the world.

there are less than 30 million sikhs in the world.

there are roughly 100 million african cultural religious adherents in the world.

there are less than 400 million chinese cultural religious adherents in the world.

there are about 500 million buddhists in the world.

there are about 1.1 billion hindus in the world.

there are about 1.2 billion nonreligious people in the world.

there are 1.6 billion muslims in the world.

and one final statistic

there are over 2.1 billion christians in the world.

the jewish count is a highball, rounded up, and includes several different definitions of jewish including people who are only one quarter. so for every single person who is even remotely jewish, there are more than 8 christians. for every hindu, there are 4 christians. for every atheist, agnostic, or "other", 2 christians. this frightening statistic should set off warning bells for everyone who is involved in a discussion about religion. and anyone who knows BASIC world history and can correlate data at all can probably piece together what I'm putting down.

now, I may be slightly biased here considering my eclectic religious beliefs. now, I personally believe that there is some primary force of energy that may or may not manifest itself as a humanoid being, that engineered the most basic laws of physics in the universe: atomic magnetism. as can be inferred by planck's constant and its implications, our universe is digital, written in binary. an electron either moves or doesn't move. there are no other options. so I genuinely believe in some form of intelligent design; whether it's a bearded guy on a cloud, some dude with six arms and an elephant for a face, just a big swirling pool of ectoplasm, or a big ol' plate of spaghetti and meatballs, something is out there that we are physically incapable of contacting from our plane of existence, just as a drawing on a piece of paper cannot reach out to interact with the world: a gif will move on its own but it will never acknowledge our existence, even if it could think by itself. and all the different mythologies of the world- egyptian, greek, norse, shinto, whatever- very well could be the agents of that unknown "god". perhaps anubis, ra, and bastet are just angels with animal heads that all of the peoples of ancient egypt saw and were like oh I guess this must be a god. maybe zeus and loki were the same person with a magic dick who fucked a bunch of animals in both greece and the scandinavian countries and spawned all of the horrible half-animal monstrosities that, idk, made vishnu think "well I have to kill that" and caused the biblical flood or something. maybe the jewish god gifted wisdom to siddhartha for sitting under a fig tree for 6 years through the angel pomona [roman goddess of fruit, had to google that one], so buddha gets his wisdom from demeter and is in nirvana right now right a step up from hades on yggdrasil the world tree keeping an eye on his charge persephone. any theory could theoretically be true but we ants of humans will never fucking know because we can't just point a telescope at the magellanic clouds and say "look, there's amaterasu with russell's teapot, and she's having tea with... *rubs eyes* lemmy kilmister??? wow I guess gods are real after all!" it's impossible to know the secrets of our universe because of the very restrictive nature of the universe itself. is it a circle? is it a donut? WE DONT FUCKIN KNOW.

we cannot know what religion is truthful.

""anyone who says that any one religion is more or less true than any other is a fucking moron, and if they're suggesting that White Western European Colonial Imperialist Protestantism is the one true faith, they're probably a fucking racist colonizer who beats his wife/sister and burns gays at the stake. and considering how that exact demographic is typically the one that murdered people for not converting to their religion, I don't think they have the intellectual non-deranged ability to make those logical connections.

again, I'm not saying that there AREN'T a lot of people of every religion who are evil assholes who contributed to mass genocide. israelites killed palestinians. shiites killed sunnis. hutus killed tutsis. danes killed geats. turks killed armenians. the ottoman empire has as much blood on its hands as the holy roman empire. germans who called themselves aryans but weren't actually aryan killed jews. but all of these tragedies were isolated incidents rather than repeated patterns over the course of two thousand years. not like christianity was and is.

just look at the United States, Canada, Mexico, Hong Kong, South Africa, Australia, & India's British Raj. Britain, France, Spain, and Italy, by extension Protestantism and Catholicism, are the shared factor between the long and bloody history fraught with massacring indigenous populations who wouldn't convert religions. native americans, indigenous canadians, latin americans but predominantly mexicans, the eastern chinese, coastal africans, aborigine aussies, indians- coastal coastal coastal. true the western chinese and the mongols/hunnu and xinjiang muslims haven't exactly been on civil terms and the silk road has always been a battleground and the middle east was already tenuous before murrica bombed them for oil but those happened in such a spread out area among asia which is FUCKING HUGE, MIND YOU! but also that's three high traffic places with massive diversity, it's human nature to have conflict, but not nearly to the same level as all of the shit christianity has done to the world. it's impossible to separate the religion from the cultures; victorian england without protestantism is just dirty people who die at 15 from having their 3rd child. italy without the catholicism is just grass and cheese. france and spain without religion are just kingdoms that fought wars with england for forever and now just make food that's one part delicious and three parts horrifying. religion is directly responsible for a significant portion of the evils those countries committed. one religion in particular.

they don't practice religion the same way as the rest do. they aren't faithful to their god. they don't follow his rules out of love but out of fear. they execute dissenters without a second thought, heresy they cry. they execute women and little girls for being free thinking or having sickness associated with mercury poisoning in the water, witch they cry. they slaughter men women and kids alike in the name of cramming their beliefs down the natives throats, we're chasing out the snakes they cry, we're bringing god to your godless people they cry, we're just civilizing you they cry. they shit in the streets and proudly display rotting corpses and leave the impoverished disabled and starving to die alone and whip their slaves and rape teenage girls and scrap in the streets while sopping wet with spilled ale over insignificant insults and stab people to death in the night and never even fucking BATHE, and they have the nerve to say the natives were uncivilized. the nerve. because hey. they read a magic book they stole from a culture who stole from another culture who stole from another culture, mistranslating each time from hebrew to greek to italian to english, and they think they're better because their skin is white.

christians never evolved. their mentalities have stayed the same. all thatms advanced has been technology. that's it. they're still the same evil disgusting degenerate bastards they always were. they just have the money they stole to buy stained glass windows, rosary beads, giant tacky metal statues, bigass robes, leather, and printing presses. and as time passed they used the money they continued to steal to buy cars and websites and radio stations and commit felony tax evasion and secretly molest children and line the pockets of the politicians.

all of their holidays are stolen from pagans anyway.

so fuck christmas. fuck easter. fuck lent. fuck the golden calf christian holidays that the tiny minded fragile snowflake conservatives lose their collective shit over because the pandemic response common sense stipulations won't let them buy the shit they can't afford with money they shouldn't have for people they don't even LIKE, all in the name of tradition, tradition! the rituals that worship something so much worse than satan or baphomet or pan or whatever: the dollar. they buy all the new shiny shit they can, at the expense of the chinese kids that the corporate pigs outsource to, buy the pine trees and the coca cola vunderbar and the fake mint corn syrup Js and watch the same shitty cookie cutter white supremacist hallmark fash movies and stuff their kids full of enough sugar to go into a goddamn coma when the african slaves who pick the cocoa beans will never get to know what actually being a kid will ever feel like because they're gonna die from falling into a combine harvester and be eternally forgotten to history and no christian will ever give a shit because they don't fucking care about what they don't see on their safe space news or hear on their safe space radio or read on their safe space social media. they think their worst sin is eating cheeseburgers so instead they'll go eat a mcchicken or chick fil a or an arby's chicken sandwich instead but not at popeyes because "that place is sketchy" and by that they mean they don't wanna eat where black people eat, that's why cracker barrel was so popular for so many white christians for so long because it had racially segregated seating until barely 20 years ago.

they don't love jesus. they love a paper doll they shove into their back pockets until every other sunday where they go to a fucking mall with a baptism waterslide and raise their hands like a bunch of dumbass weirdos and away to adult contemporary indie schlock with the word jesus pasted into a boring-ass hetero romance song, pat themselves on the back, then go to starbucks to scream slurs and misgenderings at 14 year old starbucks baristas who give them a cappamochalattechino instead of a fucking carmamochalattechino because you mumbled under the mask you didn't even fucking cover your nose with because you don't give a shit about the virus beyond how it inconveniences you.

they are horrible people who pretend to be good. until you suggest the slightest infinitely small inconvenience to them that would alter their holiday plans even the littlest smidge. then they would kill you if not for the police. don't get me started on them because you know by now what I'd say about those fuckers. but they'll gladly wear shirts about how they'll kill you. how they'll go back 200 years. how they'll murder you and watch you slowly suffer because their primate brains shoot a million endorphins when they watch things die by their hands because they never evolved a sense of empathy, compassion, or morality beyond how wearing a cross necklace will remove any of the consequences they will face in their afterlife.

they are horrible people who pretend to be good. unless you're gay or black or trans or Not Christian™ or mexican or disagree with them about politics economics sociology science technology music or movies. assimilate or die. assimilate or die. assimilate or die.

they don't deserve special treatment for their false idols.

they aren't better than jews or muslims.

they're worse.

so much worse.

and they should be stopped.""

-Nightingale Quietioca

save as draft arch draft bookmark draft where did I put my keys contra code kontra kode I need to remember this and copy it buzzwords keywords find it later please god tumblr don't bork on me this is good stream of consciousness repackage repackage change the words this is a great character study if I do say so myself thanks 3am me you're welcome 3am me