Religion

[amyntoros]

I think you're probably right about Cassander - even Alexander and the Companions wouldn't have had *any* respect for him and I suspect we would have heard more about it, although ancient sources could have been afraid to comment after Alexander's death and Cassander's rise to prominence.As for the *end* of the relgion, I'm sorry about the confusion. I was talking here about the eventual rise of Christianity and the death of paganism. It's a very complicated topic and there isn't one "single" reason for Christianity's success. The changes in the old pagan beliefs most probably contributed, i.e., loss of confidence in the old gods especially because of the constant wars and conquests after Alexander's death, along with the new willingness to accept a human being as a god.Best regards,Amyntoros

[abm]

There were of course a lot of historians at other courts who had no reason whatsoever to fear Kassandros.Sorry for taking you too literal on the end of religion. The death of paganism seems more like a late fourth century AD phenomenon to me though, so I would be very careful in linking it with AtG, Euhemerus and the likes. I know you did not mean any direct link, but I really don't know enough about this topic to say something which makes more sense :-)regards,abm

[amyntoros]

Hi Alexander,
***There were of course a lot of historians at other courts who had no reason whatsoever to fear Kassandros.***
You're right, of course; I realized a little while after I posted that it was a rather silly comment of mine, but that's what you get when I write a response before I've even had my morning coffee!
The death of paganism can't be simplified by viewing it as a late fourth century AD phenomenon - there were so many factors at play and even scholars of the subject still argue about all the underlying causes. However, there is an understanding that the number of apotheoses of kings and emperors, both Greek and Roman, definitely contributed to a weakening of the old religion, and although there were a few other examples before Alexander, his was the one which began the major "trend," so to speak. Obviously, the end of paganism is not a direct effect of Alexander's reign, but it can be seen in this way as a contributing factor. In fact, the wonderful (in my opinion) syncretism of religions which was vastly increased after, and in part, because of Alexander, is also considered to be one of the causes of the decline. I find this rather sad as I consider religion during the Hellenistic period to be the most fascinating and delightful of subjects. I'm certainly no expert either, but I have a great interest in the beliefs and practices of the time. Best regards,
Amyntoros

[marcus]

I'll let you do the WCD piece - I'll stick to "Classical" religion :-)ATBMarcus

[marcus]

And, of course, paganism existed in more rural areas for centuries longer, even if the people were nominally Christian ... and as Christianity had to borrow so many pagan festivals, symbols, etc. can it really be said that paganism *ever* "ended"?ATBMarcus

[amyntoros]

***and as Christianity had to borrow so many pagan festivals, symbols, etc. can it really be said that paganism *ever* "ended"?***That's one of the arguments in the book I'm reading, but I'm not sure I'm buying it. Survival in this context means "continuing to live", but any religion is all about faith and if there's no actual belief in the gods then the religion is no more. Now I've been told that Shelley was a believer and I know that there are reconstructionist Hellenic pagans who practice today, but that still doesn't change what happened long ago. But you know this is a provocative argument anyway - a bit like saying that Thebes wasn't really destroyed because there were still people around who called themselves Thebans! :-)All the best,Amyntoros

[marcus]

The extent to which early Christianity depended on belief is, of course, a good debating point. While it will have been very much dependent on belief and faith in its earliest form - thanks to the message that people latched on to - during the later periods of conversion (particularly during the 'Dark Ages') it is much more difficult to establish how far any real belief existed, among hoi polloi, at least. If an Anglo-Saxon king was baptised, then his people were baptised, like it or not ... hence it was easy for pagan practices and beliefs to sit alongside Christian 'beliefs'.An excellent book (which I never finished, but not 'cos I didn't want to) is "The Conversion of Europe" by Richard Fletcher - superb! Er ... what was the original question? :-)All the bestMarcus

[Efstathios]

There is a big discussion going on on greek forums about this matter and a lot of fuzz.Two sides, one are the greek christians and the other the greek "dodekatheistes" paganists,or in general people that oppose to christianity in greece.("dodekatheistes" coming from the words dodeka=twelve and theos=god meaning those who believe in the greek pantheon of the 12 gods. Not many people actually really believe in the ancient greek religion but they mainly oppose christianity and the priests here in greece because they think they are corrupted and christianity destroyed the ancient religion by force.There are a few people though that actually believe in the pantheon of Olympus.One of them "Sarris" has written a very interesting book about the philosophy and the inner teachings of the ancient religion.Anyway,It is true that the early byzantine emperors and especially Theodosios have destroyed the ancient temples and by force tried to "burry" the 12 gods in order for christianity to spread widely over paganism. In my oppinion the passage between the old religion and the new(christianity) had already began long ago the byzantine empire and even before Jesus Christ was born.I do not know in what extent Alexander contributed to this.But it is possible that people (the common people) were divided seeing Alexander being called son of a god.But i think in the end this must have acted negatively in the minds of the greeks. Anyway, there is an interesting site that i came across that quotes phrases from philosophers such as Socrates and from poets and writers such as Aeschylus that are supposed to have prophesised the coming of Christ.Actually the quoted phrases are very interesting but unfortunately the site is all in greek,but i will give the link to whoever is interested.(unfortunately half of this site is dedicated to the modern battle between christians and paganists) The truth is that Socrates and other philosophers actually took part in this passage of the ancient greek religion to christianity.There was even a temple in Athens,the temple of the unknown God.The greeks started to lose faith in the 12 gods after the hellenistic period gradually.When the apostols came to greece to teach Jesus' words in the beggining they were mocked.But as they were teaching on and on people started to see some resemblence with things they already knew.From Socrates,from Aeschylus e.t.c.And due to the the fact that many greeks were dissapointed from the revengefull god

[Efstathios]

And due to the the fact that many greeks were dissapointed from the revengefull gods of Olympus, they embraced this god that talked about love e.t.c.
Of course many kept faith in the pantheon.Plutarch for example became a priest of Demetra.It was in the Byzantine era when christianity became the official religion but accompanied with all the massacres and burnings in order for that to happen.We dont know what would have happened otherwise.This matter is a field of controversion though.And it is endless.

[abm]

I cannot really add more to this discussion as you two clearly are better informed on this aspect of history, but to be honest, i just don't think these religions (and all others) are as different as their practitioners would have it.regards,abm

[marcus]

Hi Efstathios,Thanks for that. It's interesting that such disputes should be going on today - perhaps not a surprise that some elements of society should mistrust the priesthood, because that happens all the time, everywhere; but I was intrigued about the dodekatheists - an interesting angle to take.I was aware that questions were starting to emerge at least during Socrates' time - wasn't that one of the things that led to his charge of corrupting the youth? All the bestMarcus

[amyntoros]

Efstathios - is it not the dodekatheistes who are featured in the "I Still Worship Zeus" video which I've heard much about but haven't seen as yet? All good points in your post by the way - as I said before, there are so many cumulative reasons for the success of Christianity versus pagan worship. Alexander made a comment that the religions aren't all that different, and in some ways he's right, but there are some fundamental differences. By mentioning one of them I can actually take the thread back to Alexander - something I probably should do as I'm the reason it diverted in the first place! One of the foremost differences is that in a monotheistic religion, one can't blame the god when something goes wrong - say that a battle is lost, for instance. Although people could make various excuses depending upon the extent of their belief. . . we did something to offend him. . . he has his reasons for wanting us to lose. . .he had nothing to do with it and we lost because we made mistakes, etc.; . . .what they *won't* do is turn to another god - monotheism just doesn't allow for that. In ancient times, if one lost a battle it was quite easy to fault the god and believe that you had asked the wrong one for assistance. An example of choosing the right god to be on your side is in lovely little passage from Plutarch's Eumenes. Now *all* of the Successors believed that Alexander was on their side, so there had to be other ways to weigh the odds. (I knew that the Dreams file would come in handy one day, Marcus!) "And at night, having resolved on marching, he fell asleep, and had an extraordinary dream. For he thought he saw two Alexanders ready to engage, each commanding his several phalanx, the one assisted by Minerva, the other by Ceres; and that after a hot dispute, he on whose side Minerva was, was beaten, and Ceres, gathering ears of corn, wove them into a crown for the victor. This vision Eumenes interpreted at once as boding success to himself, who was to fight for a fruitful country, and at that very time covered with the young ears, the whole being sown with corn, and the fields so thick with it that they made a beautiful show of a long peace. continued. . .

[amyntoros]

"And he was further emboldened when he understood that the enemy's password was "Minerva and Alexander." Accordingly he also gave out as his "Ceres and Alexander," and gave his men orders to make garlands for themselves, and to dress their arms with wreaths of corn. He found himself under many temptations to discover to his captains and officers whom they were to engage with, and not to conceal a secret of such moment in his own breast alone, yet he kept to his first resolutions, and ventured to run the hazard of his own judgment."Best regards,Amyntoros

[Efstathios]

I havent seen the video.But probably yes the people taking part in it are modern greek paganists.Although i do not like to use the word paganists.

Marcus: Yes Socrates touched "touchy" matters.We cannot know for sure the real reason that was behind the accusations.They wanted his death.Maybe because he was an innovator in the matter of religion.He spoke of the unknown god "the one" god.Philosophers many times reached "danger zones" with their teachings.While trying to explain the world and with their creative thinking they would often become enemy targets to the "conservatives" point of view,whoever those conservatives were.(Priests,politicians e.t.c). Socrates also was against politicians.He didnt like them.And that surely contributed to his death because many people liked Socrates' teachings. They officialy accused him that he corrupted the youth, meaning that he was actually a child lover.The actual words were that he "offered empty demons" to the youth.Meaning that his teachings were "hollow" and the purpose was to actually feeble the minds of the youngsters in order to take advantage of them.
But Socrates was innocent of that.At least from the knowledge that we now have we can see that "sex" did not have a place in his thoughts.We can see that in the ending of "Plato's symposium".Quite the opposite, he mocked homosexual behaviours (Critias) and body contacts with the youngsters (Alkiviades).

[abm]

Hi Linda,i'm afraid you did not really succeed in taking it back to Alexander, because my reply to your argument is: what with all those saints of christianty? In some cases they are almost worshipped as gods in their own right. But, of course, a lot depends on how strict one is concerning the theology. In my view however, few people really are strict in that respect.regards,abm