#One of the other foreign dynasties that ruled Egypt that we know about

[rahabs]

Lots of people complaining about The Mummy vs the new Cleopatra documentary but therein lies the issue: Cleopatra is claiming to be a historically accurate documentary, it is claiming to tell the “real” truth and even put out a statement on how Cleopatra’s ethnicity has been long debated (which, among scholars, no it really hasn’t, y’all just keep ignoring us when we say Cleopatra wasn’t black), but now they’re here to tell the real story that Cleopatra was really black and so was everyone in Egypt, especially the ruling class, at a time where they definitely were not as they were being ruled over by the Ptolemaic Greeks, while The Mummy was not claiming any historical accuracy or to be a documentary of real events, and that’s where a lot of the backlash is coming from.

#The most annoying part is that if you wanted to make a documentary about like #Someone who actually was Nubian or Cushite or whatever as the Egyptians called it #YOU COULD. #There were dark-skinned pharaohs and queens we know this #Do something about Queen Tiye or whomever #One of the other foreign dynasties that ruled Egypt that we know about #Smh people keep bringing up Cleopatra’s ethnicity like it’s still open for debate when it’s really not #Because they just want her to be black so badly even though she most emphatically was not #And lbr it’s mostly Americans doing this #Because Americans can’t conceive that other countries have different racial dynamics or makeup #And they can’t conceive that sub-Saharan Africa isn’t actually indicative of the ethnic makeup of all of Africa #text

[rottenfox]

Genshin Theory from a noob: Language

Alright, well I'm in the middle of a 24 hour sleep reset so sorry if this makes no sense, but I've just got into Genshin and have recently caught up with the archon quests. One thing that I really enjoyed have been how each nation built their culture and government around the ideals of their nation. I'm sure those who are interested in this already know this but I'm still going to type it out for my sleep addled mind.

Mondstadt: Freedom- loose theocracy/police state w/ nomadic-like cells; based off the old Gemadic + Latin middle ages?

Liyue: Contracts- rigid capitalist structure w/ formal religious roots; based off China (though what dynasty, I don't know)

Inazuma: Eternity- rigid clan power w/ smaller clans controlling their own islands mush closer; Based off shogunat Japan

Sumaru: Wisdom- academic body w/ nomadic? Natives? Based off India and the middle east (mostly Egypt)

Fontaine: Justice- Judicial system w/ an oligarcical prison system?? (Idk how you would describe the fortress) Based off France.

Shneznia: ???- possibly also a theocracy w/ the God herself ruling; based of Russia.

I would put the Pyro nation but like I said, I'm new to Genshin and too tired to research properly. MOVING ON

We know these nations were built by the Archons to nurse their ideals but something that is only brought up a few times is the language barrier -or the lack of it. We know there are other languages, since is brought of a few times when something it written in "common" but it's surprising that EVERYONE can speak it. Despite the name, common as a language type, wouldn't make much sence. Which that got me thinking about how the languages would form and mix together.

Remember that language is never linear and alway mixes with the other languages around it. And for one language to be considered "Common" in the vast world known as Teyvat. So before we can ask what is Common, we have to analyze the other languages and see how they formed.

THE GOD LANGUAGE

And before we even start with the nation's, we have to start.... with their gods! Now, the gods of Teyvat grew their followers and mirrored their cultures to enhance their faith and spread their power. This also means that before the birth of Common there had to have been another universal language only the gods and immortal spirits spoke to communicate with each other. Personally, I like to think that it sounded like old Latin since the Lesser Key of Solomon was written in that language.

We can substantiate this with the fact that Morax had to make Mora instead of their being a currency that his people already used. The creation of currency is a sign of outward growth since it means foreigners can now enter the economy with only the minted coin and not, say, a herd of goats or bails of wheat.

As to what that language sounded like would entirely depend on how gods/ spirits are formed. I imagine it would be innate to them upon birth or manifestation since both seem to naturally come from the earth. Hell, each God might sound completely different but because their language is built off universal concepts and the elements, they just naturally understand eachother.

This would also mean that their people would most likely have a language that their respective god created, if Liyue and Sumaru/the desert dwellers have mean anything. As to what and how they formed I do have an... unfounded theory. I still have not finished all the story quests so forgive me if I get things wrong. I will also be using each nation's cultural stand-in as their language; ie German for Mondstadt, Manderin for Liyue, ect.

MONDSTADT

Starting with Mondstadt we have the King Decarabian, the small wind spirit Barbatos, and the minor gods/ elemental dragon of Mondstadt with would become the four winds. Since we don't know how long King Decarabian ruled and there is no mention of him having rivals, we can assume the majority of the humans in the area were his to rule. Especially since he didn't even regard the wolf god as a threat during the Archon war and the fact that the people made Venti as their god without him having to kill other gods to keep it. We can assume the rest of Four Winds didn't have humans to look after either during that time, being uninterested in them.

This would mean German is one of two of the most purest... base language. The indefinite isolation the Tyrant put them through meant that they most likely never spoke to foreigners before the rebellion, but with the freedom Barbatos gave them, they were quick to leave and explore past their nation. This would explain why the Adventure's Guild Headquarters is in Mondstadt instead of each nation having their own.

As for what it sounds like I think it would still have the harshness of German thanks to the origins with the God of Storms but has also gained a softer, rounder note with Barbatos's ascension. They also have a penchant for borrowing words from other languages as the people spread out through Teyvat. Tying that with their friendliness with foreigners and you quickly find yourself with the beginning of a mutt language, something we will bring up later. For now let's move on too...

LIYUE

Liyue is by far the most complicated when it comes to their language history, since it seems like the majority of old gods vyed for power and land there as well as the dozens of Adepti that roamed the land. It's to assume that it was more of a conglomerate of villages that spoke their own version of Common rather than each god exclusively influencing their followers language. Think how the Nordic languages interact with each other, that was basically how Liyue's former languages.

Soon, with Morax coming into power, that common language became Manderin and was probably about as complex as well. I imagine dialects are still very big their though, along with unique naming conventions based on region. I think that their would be a good amount of Teyvat's version of Latin in it because of the fact that gods and adepti were so close to humans.

Manderin would probably be one of the strongest languages in Teyvat, passing German and just behind Sumaru's language. Though there is an argument for it having the strongest influence with it's proximity to Teyvat's economy. As to what it sounds like, I think it would vary by region but would gave the bounciness of Manderin but with the rolling undercurrent of Latin- if that makes sense. It would also have quite a few loan words from Sumaru in particular and would be one of the wordiest language thanks to needing to state the parameters of a contract extensively. And while there is an honorific system, it's more modern and our next nation...

INAZUMA

I will start this section by saying, I really didn't read/ pay attention much to Inazuma. So this may all be wrong.

Inazuma being a collection of islands so far from the mainland gives it a lot of uniqueness compared to the other languages and cultures. Logically...it should be the most unique of the other nations... unfortunately, this is still a gacha game and so there has to be a Japantm. So I'm probably going to say that the original Baal separated the islands from the main land... or that the God of Vortex pushed them even farther away from Liyue.

Either way, I imagine they would actually have Two "languages": the common Japanese borm form the natural progression of being separated from Liyue we see mirrored in real life, and a more ancient language used exclusively in religious work and meetings with gods and spirits.

Compared to Liyue, Inazuma is even more devout to their gods, building so many shrines and interacting with spirits even more than those in Liyue thanks to the smaller amout of space. So while they had a similar situation as Liyue, the humans were at higher beings mercy even more. I imagine that the humans at that time kept an even stricter honorific language. With the politest version using so much Latin syntaxes a form of respect.

With the raise of Baal and Eternity taking power, I imagine that polite speech coming to a halt while the rest of the language evolved until they became two separate languages. If you thought Liyue's combination was weird then think of Japanese and Latin mixed together. It would probably be the most complex language with the honorific system being to strong there in particular.

SUMARU

Sumaru interested me the most, since it is thee nation of Wisdom, and I love the fact the modern Sumaru is based heavily on India! That being said, language-wise... I'm a bit at a loss. Because they have the Desert-dwellers (which I will now be calling Arabics because I hate that usage), they had a full blown language before the Dendro Archon. But it's very obvious that there was a major shift after King Desheret death.

It could be because of the Akademiya's push to worship Buer that they completely morphed the language, creating something of a class language where only the learned and elite can speak. It would be interesting, especially since I don't think such a thing has happened in the real world. It would help that the Arabics stayed in the desert, keeping not only their language, but their features as well while the academics became pale and evolved their language to reflect that of Buer. (Which you could say because they stayed inside all day studying but idk. Still wish they made them dark.)

Egyptian Arabic would probably be the oldest mortal language still spoken in Teyvat and may have moved far from any Latin tie before Buer came to power. I can also see modern Arabics wanting to separate their language from the academics because of rising tensions, as it to say "They are not us."

The academics on the other hand would probably be just as wordy as Liyue since they research. Though I think the Akademiya's disdain for lesser languages might lead to them never officially borrowing words. This, of course would lead to a casual speech that would use loan words and a formal speech that is used in papers and events would be 100% Hindi. Hindi would also be a major language since it would be the language of science/ alchemy with also being the only place of formal education in Teyvat. This Hindi probably has major roots in Latin in an effort to be like their god. But they aren't the most Latin. That would be...

FONTAINE

So Fontaine is fun because it is the only nation we know so far that IS a Latin based language irl and we can make several connections with the God Language being Latin with this.

So with the Nation of Justice being so tied with the idea of truth as well, it's pretty ironic that it was built on a falsity, with Fontainians being Oceanids. Specifically, they were the familiars of the Hydro Archon...

I hope you know where I'm going with this.

When the Oceanidss became human, the Latin they spoke had to be reformed, after all the "True Latin" can only spoken and understood between gods and spirits, so their now mortal use of Latin had to be tweaked. And slowly but surely, it became the Latin language we see their today: French!

It would be the youngest of the languages with soooooo many borrowed words; most of them from Liyue and Sumaru so it's more of a mutt than how our France likes to portray it's language.

There isn't much else to say (that won't insult the Franks) so let's skip the Nation of War and move on to what little we know about...

SNEZHNAYA... AND KHAENRI'AH

So, like I said, I'm new to the game and have not played through all of the story quests. So this is pure speculation though I did read just a bit wiki in my state to know about Khaenri'ah and the Abyss's tie to Latin. You would think that means my theory of Latin being the language of the divine but not really. In fact if "True Latin" was the language spoken by the gods and spirits, it would make sense that it would be the language of Alchemy, astrology and magic. And with Khaenri'ah being so old it would definitely have Latin-like text.... which brings me to my theory...

Khaenri'ah is Italian. HEAR ME OUT!

I always found it strange that the fatui harbingers had Italian titles despite their nation being Russian. But then I learned the the Fatui was started by a Khaenrian who have everyone their titles. And with Italian being so close to Latin it would make sense why so much of their text still reads Latin. Especially if they saw Latin as the script of the world. If anything Khaenrian's insistence on using Latin script could be seen as an insult to the gods, as if saything they were equals. The Abyss also speaks Latin most likely since it's another ancient force in Teyvat though I imagine it... gives off a feeling of dread for all who listens... unless they're already insane.

As for Snezhnaya. I still want to wait before giving a full analysis.

COMMON

alright I've spent 4 hours on this and I'm crashing so it's gonna be short. The basis of Teyvat's common language is mostly going to be German since Mondstadt were most likely the first to travel and interact with the other nations. It would then be mixed with Manderin as Liyue's financial power grew and their language formalized. Hindi probably had a bit of influence as well but since Sumaru is very elitist only a few borrowed words slipped in. I can see the same happening with the rise of technology in Fontaine though it will probably be on a much smaller scale.

I'm not editing this. Feel free to add your opinions and theories in the comments. I'm gonna suffer for 5 more hours now.

#genshin impact #genshin theory #languages #I really fucking love world building with language differences okay. #If I had more time and I though people would enjoy it #I would make my own Traveler OC story focusing on the different cultures and languages #it would be a harem because I'm feral for a lot of these men but it would be fun!

[a-d-nox]

Hello, could you tell us about the asteroid Cleopatra? I have this asteroid conjunct Venus and is in the 1st house. Thanks.

cleopatra, queen of kings (asteroid 216)

back by popular request - egyptian asteroids - history and myth (@safieblue this is for you too (i didn’t forget you ;) just a little behind in the ask department!)).

cleopatra :)

Cleopatra was a notable Queen of Egypt and historical woman. She was known for her logistical skills, cunning, power, and charisma. Many say that she had an irresistible personality. It was Julius Caesar that had her statue erected in the temple of Venus - this was because she herself was thought to be a goddess or goddess reincarnated (many believed she was Isis - who is most similar to Venus/Aphrodite (hence the temple selected)). Cleopatra had great strategic skills because she had knowledge on how to speak around eight languages - this allowed for more trade and diplomacy amongst those countries around Egypt. She was a very intelligent woman who was known to have studied philosophy, writing, politics, etc. It is likely that she gained all this knowledge based on living in Alexandria, which was a cultural hub and had a renowned library. Her reputation was what made two well known Roman generals fall in love with her: Julius Caesar and Marc Antony. Most references on her have been distorted with time - most at large being her looks. Many say that she was gorgeous like Venus herself but others say she was average (most trustworthy may be the statues and coins made in her image - you can debate her beauty amongst yourself, i for one say we are all pretty hot lol). Back to her story though - Cleopatra was made to marry her brother after her father died. Her brother had her exiled after learning that he could have all the fame and glory instead of sharing it. Rome’s involvement is due to Cleopatra's father, who had a large amount of debt incurred from Rome, as well as Cleopatra's connection to the Ptolemaic dynasty (Macedonian in origin - Greek). After a civil war in Greece, the general Pompey fled to Egypt knowing that there were people who most likely had to take him in - he was wrong, Cleopatra's brother killed him. When Caesar found out about what had occurred, he demanded that Egypt pay for this terrible deed. Cleopatra was able to settle this peacefully and sweet talk Caesar into placing her back on the throne. Caesar was inspired by Cleopatra and brought ideas back to his homeland after staying in Egypt for many months - sadly, Caesar was assassinated shortly after his homecoming. Octavian and Marc Antony came to Cleopatra asking for her help in avenging Caesar. Cleopatra quickly agreed for the sake of her and Caesar's son. Marc Antony and Cleopatra quickly became involved romantically - their honeymoon phase offended Octavian into annexing Egypt and claiming emperorship of Rome. He convinced Rome that Cleopatra was trying to ruin their traditions and corrupt their leaders which caused a fleet to attack Marc Antony and Egypt. The rest is a bit blurred due to popular culture having mostly Roman history available to work with - which is a bit biased as to what happened with Cleopatra or her reign in general. So I will end it on this note: at the age of seventeen she began ruling and it is said that the twenty plus years following that were prosperity and peaceful in the eyes of Egyptians'. IN MY OPINION Kleopatra in a chart represents a) how good you are at strategic thinking, b) how others see your beauty, c) how you are remembered, d) diplomacy and how well you interact with foreigners, e) love affairs, and/or f) your power of persuasion.

i encourage you to look into the aspects of kleopatra along with the sign, degree, and house placement. for the more advanced astrologers, take a look at the persona chart of kleopatra AND/OR add the other characters involved to see how they support or impede kleopatra!

OTHER RELATED ASTEROIDS/PLANETS: aphrodite (1388), VENUS, isis (42), and caesar (18458)!

like what you read? leave a tip and state what post it is for! please use my “suggest a post topic” button if you want to see a specific post or mythical asteroid next!

click here for the masterlist

click here for more egyptian myths & legends

want a personal reading? click here to check out my reading options and prices!

#astrology #persona chart #asteroid #asteroid astrology #astro chart #astro community #natal chart #astro placements #egyptian mythology #cleopatra #queen of egypt #aphrodite #asteroid1388

[darylelockhart]

Never mind Cleopatra – what about the forgotten queens of ancient Nubia?

by Yasmin Moll, University of Michigan

Jada Pinkett Smith’s new Netflix documentary series on Cleopatra aims to spotlight powerful African queens. “We don’t often get to see or hear stories about Black queens, and that was really important for me, as well as for my daughter, and just for my community to be able to know those stories because there are tons of them,” the Hollywood star and producer told a Netflix interviewer.

The show casts a biracial Black British actress as the famed queen, whose race has stirred debate for decades. Cleopatra descended from an ancient Greek-Macedonian ruling dynasty known as the Ptolemies, but some speculate that her mother may have been an Indigenous Egyptian. In the trailer, Black classics scholar Shelley Haley recalls her grandmother telling her, “I don’t care what they tell you in school, Cleopatra was Black.”

These ideas provoked commentary and even outrage in Egypt, Cleopatra’s birthplace. Some of the reactions have been unabashedly racist, mocking the actress’s curly hair and skin color.

Egyptian archaeologists like Monica Hanna have criticized this racism. Yet they also caution that projecting modern American racial categories onto Egypt’s ancient past is inaccurate. At worst, critics argue, U.S. discussions about Cleopatra’s identity overlook Egyptians entirely.

In Western media, she is commonly depicted as white – most famously, perhaps, by screen icon Elizabeth Taylor. Yet claims by American Afrocentrists that current-day Egyptians are descendants of “Arab invaders” also ignore the complicated histories that characterize this diverse part of the world. A relief depicting the Nubian Kandake Amanitore in the Egyptian Museum in Berlin. Sven-Steffen Arndt/Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA

Some U.S. scholars counter that ultimately what matters is to “recognize Cleopatra as culturally Black,” representing a long history of oppressing Black women. Portraying Cleopatra with a Black actress was a “political act,” as the show’s director put it.

Ironically, however, the show misses an opportunity to educate both American and Egyptian audiences about the unambiguously Black queens of ancient Nubia, a civilization whose history is intertwined with Egypt’s. As an anthropologist of Egypt who has Nubian heritage, I research how the stories of these queens continue to inspire Nubians, who creatively retell them for new generations today.

The one-eyed queen

Nubians in modern Egypt once lived mainly along the Nile but lost their villages when the Aswan High Dam was built in the 1960s. Today, members of the minority group live alongside other Egyptians all over the country, as well as in a resettlement district near the southern city of Aswan.

Growing up in Cairo’s Nubian community, we children didn’t hear about Cleopatra, but about Amanirenas: a warrior queen who ruled the Kingdom of Kush during the first century B.C.E. Queens in that ancient kingdom, encompassing what is now southern Egypt and northern Sudan, were referred to as “kandake” – the root of the English name “Candace.” A comic inspired by the story of Amanirenas. Chris Walker, Creative Director, Lymari Media/Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA

Like Cleopatra, Amanirenas knew Roman generals up close. But while Cleopatra romanced them – strategically – Amanirenas fought them. She led an army up the Nile about 25 B.C.E. to wage battle against Roman conquerors encroaching on her kingdom.

My own favorite part of this story of Indigenous struggle against foreign imperialism involves what can only be characterized as a power move. After beating back the invading Romans, Queen Amanirenas brought back the bronze head of a statue of the emperor Augustus and had it buried under a temple doorway. Each time they entered the temple, her people could literally walk over a symbol of Roman power.

That colorful tidbit illustrates those queens’ determination to defend their autonomy and territory. Amanirenas personally engaged in combat and earned the moniker “the one-eyed queen,” according to an ancient chronicler of the Roman Empire named Strabo. The kandakes were also spiritual leaders and patrons of the arts, and they supported the construction of grand monuments and temples, including pyramids. A pyramid of Kandake Amanitore amid the Nubian pyramids of Meroe. mtcurado/iStock via Getty Images Plus

Interwoven cultures and histories

When people today say “Nubia,” they are often referring to the Kingdom of Kush, one of several empires that emerged in ancient Nubia. Archaeologists have recently started to bring Kush to broader public attention, arguing that its achievements deserve as much attention as ancient Egypt’s.

Indeed, those two civilizations are entwined. Kushite royals adapted many Egyptian cultural and religious practices to their own ends. What’s more, a Kushite dynasty ruled Egypt itself for close to a century.

Contemporary Nubian heritage reflects that historical complexity and richness. While their traditions and languages remain distinctive, Nubians have been intermarrying with other communities in Egypt for generations. Nubians like my mother are proudly Egyptian, yet hurtful stereotypes persist. Hafsa Amberkab, right, and Fatma Addar, Nubian Egyptian women who compiled a dictionary, show off a Nubian lexical chart near Aswan in upper Egypt. Khaled Desouki/AFP via Getty Images

Today, some Black Americans embrace Cleopatra as a powerful symbol of Black pride. But the idea of ancient Nubia as a powerful African civilization also plays a symbolic role in contemporary Black culture, inspiring images in everything from cosmetics to comics.

Egyptian voices

Researchers do argue about Cleopatra’s heritage. U.S. conversations about her, however, sometimes reveal more about Western racial politics than about Egyptian history.

In the 19th century, for example, Western interest in ancient Egypt took off amid colonization – a fascination called “Egyptomania.” Americans’ fixation with the ancient civilization reflected their own culture’s anxieties about race in the decades after slavery was abolished, as scholar Scott Trafton has argued.

A century later, a 1990s advertisement for a pale-colored doll of queen Nefertiti sparked debate in the U.S. about how to represent her race.

Nefertiti’s bust – one of the most famous artifacts from ancient Egypt – is on display at a German museum. Egypt has called for the artifact’s return for close to a hundred years, to no avail. Even Hitler took a personal interest in the bust, declaring that he “will not renounce the queen’s head,” according to archaeologist Joyce Tyldesley. The famed and fought-over bust of Queen Nefertiti. Francis G. Mayer/Corbis/VCG via Getty Images

Even today, contemporary Egyptian perspectives are almost absent in Western depictions of ancient Egypt. Only one Egyptian scholar is interviewed in the new Netflix series’ four episodes, as he himself notes, and he is employed not by an Egyptian university, but by a British one.

For many Egyptians, this lack of representation rehashes troubling colonial dynamics about who is considered an “expert” about their past. The Netflix series “was made and produced without the involvement of the owners of this history,” argues the Egyptian journalist Sara Khorshed in a review of the series.

To be sure, there is anti-Black bias in Egyptian culture, and some of the social media reaction has been slur-filled and racist. Educating people about the stories of Nubian queens like Amarinenas might be a way to encourage a more inclusive understanding of who is Egyptian.

Yet I believe Egyptians’ frustrations about portrayals of Cleopatra also reflect long-standing concerns that their own understandings of their past are not taken seriously.

That includes Black Egyptians, like my mother. When I asked her if she planned to see the Cleopatra series, she shrugged. She already knows that queen’s story well from its many portrayals on screen, whether in Hollywood films or Egyptian ones.

“I will wait for the series on Amanirenas,” she said.

Yasmin Moll, Assistant Professor of Anthropology, University of Michigan

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

#media #television #anthropology #race #pop culture #egypt #netflix #ancient egypt #ancient civilizations #documentary film #film #TV #cleopatra #religion

[ploughradio5]

Relaksacja - Najlepsze I Wygodne Techniki Relaksacyjne

If the many details are actually historical, then the people all had to be close and this gathering point had to be close to the meeting headquarters of the King where Moses and Aaron went so often to speak with him. The Hyksos had an alliance with the Nubian Cush, which at times was part of Egypt, and later ruled Egypt for a time as a dynasty. This would mean that the people Joseph dealt with were not even "Egyptians" in the proper sense of the indigenous people of Egypt. Goshen is not very big. Because it speaks to the current pressures Judea was under in that precarious period, this work, as well as other "intertestamental" literature, is very helpful on the period of transition over the 1st century BCE and CE. The Exodus story is a great masterpiece of oral literature, now written down. On the contrary, this ancient literature is a masterpiece of affect - engaging us in the drama of the story and producing in the hearers (not primarily readers) the power of the personal and ethnic emotions involved!

It was not written in that framework. A reader referred me więc natomiast Youtube video called "The Exodus Decoded," asking if the claim of this video could be true, that the Hyksos of Egypt were, in fact, the Hebrews. Even so, in rozprawka of all other comments in the Genesis and Exodus text, it seems clear the descendants of Jacob lived and worked in the eastern delta area. The Genesis and Exodus texts are consistent in indicating that the Hebrews lived and were enslaved in the Goshen area. In addition, the dates of the Hyksos are considerably earlier than the dates traditionally proposed by biblical scholars for the Exodus as a historcal event. I am not concerned with the details of the Exodus or how many Israelites there were, or their particular route. Thus I have not addressed the details of military or geographical factors as presented by any particular archaeological or historical viewpoint. In fact, under the Hyksos and for much of continuing history, even the whole of Palestine was part of Egypt for most of its history. Jubilees offers some comments on several aspects of Jewish history, and one reason it was not accepted as scripture by the Hebrew scholars as they were considering the collection in the late 1st century and into the 2nd, was that it was written so late in their history (during the 100 years between the Greek and Roman dominations).

The text of the Exodus story was not written to meet the demands of rationalist, analytical literate westerners about 3000 years later. The Exodus story does appear to mean, however, that the descendants of Jacob were the dominant population in the Goshen area where the Hyksos king settled them. The king and ruling class would be Semitic people, likely with a similar speech to his. This also explains why "a pharaoh arose who did not know Joseph" - that is, this new king did not like or feel positive about Semite "foreigners." The Egyptians likely associated all the Semites with their foreign rulers. The term "Hebrew" (Habiru) is used in some ancient references to refer to i larger broad group of people, not the specific people we later think of as Abraham or Jacob and their descendants or relatives. The Hyksos were the first successful invaders from the east, largely due to their likely use of chariots, which were never used in Egypt prior to the Hyksos period.

I think the latter is less likely than the possibility that they were Semitic invaders. There is some evidence that supports the suggestion that the Hyksos were Semitic, though there are also some scholars who think the Hyksos were actually a group of native Egyptians, rather than foreigners. There are some indications leading to zaś proposal by several scholars that the Exodus story is symbolic. This book uses the Egyptian slavery and exodus story as a backdrop and symbol for the domination of Judea by the world powers - recently the Syrian Seleucid Greeks and the impending Roman domination. These uses and references are so vague and incidental that they are uncertain. If you are interested in more biblical details, you might also consider the other Exodus story in the Bible. These vagaries and slippery details are the edges of detail that modern historians and others with their approach try to probe to clarify the uncertainties. Details and stories in Jubilees and other contemporary texts reflect the perspectives of that late era, using the old stories to clarify current political trends pressing the Jews in that era. The whole Tanakh (Old Testament) is primarily a collection of deeply meaningful and moving stories, comprising a huge historical story.

#sprawdzian #kartkowka #rozprawka #wypracowanie #szkola

[esther-dot]

I dont even ship Jonsa, but it so funny to me that dany stans will try to relate it to targaryen incest. As if two cousins marrying in a feudal setting is the same as years and years of brother sister incest which has led to persistent madness, stillbirths and deformities

I read/watch way too much entertainment set before the 21st Century to be bothered by cousin-cest. Marrying cousins is a thing people did in America, even into the 1900s (it's still legal in like half the states although uncommon), so the freak out is funny. And in Westeros it's even more normal for cousin marriages to occur, so it isn't even noteworthy whereas Targcest is a whole thing. A thing that has connections to the fall of real world dynasties. I forget who has talked about this before, but I know others have mentioned The Royal House of Habsburg and there's some interesting stuff there:

Beginning in the early 12th century they quickly expanded their realm through a series of strategically executed marriages, from the mountains of Switzerland to a territory that included swaths of Austria, Hungary, Italy, France and Spain. The Spanish branch of the Habsburg dynasty helped create an empire that reached its apex in the 16th and 17th centuries, controlling land from the Phillippines to the Americas.

Yet the Habsburgs are known not only for controlling huge tracts of Europe, but also for maintaining control by rarely marrying outside the dynasty.

By the end of the 17th century, the results of their marital practices had become apparent in the form of a distinctive protruding lip, a high rate of infant mortality and a host of other health problems.

Could the same marital practices that helped bring the Habsburg dynasty to power also have led to its demise?

In the April 15 issue of PLoS One, scientists from Spain’s University of Santiago de Compostela argue that inbreeding so incapacitated the Habsburgs over the centuries that by the death of King Charles II of Spain in 1700, they were virtually unable to reproduce. (link)

and obviously, the Targ version is most closely aligned with the Ptolemaic Dynasty:

Incestuous relationships were so common in the Ptolemaic dynasty that Ptolemy II is often given the nickname “Philadelphus,” a word used to describe his marriage to his sister Arsinoe II. Almost every pharaoh of the dynasty thereafter was married to his or her brother or sister; Ptolemy II’s heir, Ptolemy III, along with his other children, was from a previous marriage and did not marry a sister, but he did marry his half-cousin Berenice II. It wasn’t until the next generation that we see another marriage between a full brother and sister: Ptolemy IV and Arsinoe III. Ptolemy V was the first offspring of a Ptolemaic sibling marriage. The trend continued within the family up to the birth of the famous Cleopatra VII. Her father was Ptolemy XII and her mother was her father’s sister, Cleopatra V.

Marrying within the royal family meant never having to dilute their Macedonian blood with that of the native Egyptians. It also meant that foreign powers couldn’t infiltrate Egypt. It seems as if the Ptolemys would have then produced a number of offspring with genetic disorders, but none appear to have significantly suffered from inbreeding. Nevertheless, inbreeding worked in their favor and helped keep the rule of Egypt in the hands of the Ptolemys for almost 300 years. (link)

The fact that they ignore the purpose of Targcest, and act like two people who are cousins falling in love is the same, uh, no. And attempting to compare the "incest" of Jonsa to generations of extreme inbreeding....I mean, there are reasons to not like Jonsa, but that's just a weird angle to attack from.

#ask dot

[evanescentjasmine]

Writing Egypt and Egyptian Characters: Rusty Quill Gaming Edition

I’ve finally caught up with the Cairo arc of Rusty Quill Gaming, which I was anticipating and dreading both. Fiction set in my country usually reduces it to a caricature of itself, especially when it takes place in the Victorian era, but considering everything they’ve said in their metacasts I was hoping Rusty Quill Gaming was the exception.

It wasn’t. 

I’m aware the game world plays fast and loose with history and setting, but the problems in this case are more than just inaccuracies. However, because I want to help fic writers and artists be able to portray Hamid and his family well, this resource will be split into two parts. The first part will tackle details I’ve been asked about with regard to the setting; it may touch on things RQG went wrong, but I’m writing it primarily as a resource for artists and writers. The second part will be my criticism of RQG, and why I found the Cairo arc actively harmful. This includes discussions of Orientalism and some racist text.

I should also preface this by saying I’m not a historian. Everything I say in this resource is a combination of what I grew up with and what I remember from school, supplemented by Google and guesswork. I’ll be explaining my thought process throughout, which can help you see what’s actual history and what’s my extrapolation.

Part One: On Egypt

Historical Context:

Figuring out the history of Egypt in RQG terms is a bit complicated, so bear with me because this will take a while. 

In real-world history, Egypt was a Roman then Byzantine province from 30 BC to around the mid 600s AD, at which point the Arab conquest swept through and Egypt became Muslim. 

What this means is that when the Meritocrats took down Rome and took over the world, Egypt was still a Roman province. That gives us a several hundred year gap before the Arabs that may have maintained the same culture? Or morphed a little back to some pre-Ptolemaic Ancient Egyptian, given their Meritocrat, Apophis, is named after a great Pharaonic serpent?

Either way, given Hamid’s name and the fact they live in Cairo, the city built by the Arabs, we can assume the Arab conquest still happened somehow, despite having a Meritocrat in Egypt. Maybe a Meritocrat out there is Arab and settled in Egypt for a bit with or before Apophis? Maybe it took a couple-hundred years for the Meritocrats to get all the previous Roman areas under control? Maybe there was a whole war and the Arabs won and settled and eventually they got to a truce or got absorbed into Meritocratic lands?

Many Muslim dynasties ruled throughout the period from the mid 600s to the 1500s. Given the lack of Islam in this world, probably the Arabs were unified by some Pre-Islamic deity/deities and brought them over as well, because I refuse to just sweep everything under the broad Greek God rug. 

In the 1500s, another Muslim dynasty took over--this time, from outside of the country, which is why it’s considered separate from all the rest. At this point, Egypt became part of the Ottoman Empire until the 1800s, which is when the Mohammed Ali dynasty started to try and secede and rule independently. And there was a brief blip of the French occupation for two years around then as well.

And, of course, we can’t forget about British colonisation, which started in the late 1800s with a veiled protectorate.

Presumably, since France and Britain are also Meritocratic and it seems like Apophis is currently ruling, we can disregard everything from the Ottomans onward. This changes, or should change, a ton, because Ottoman rule informed a lot of things from fashion to slang to nobility and so on. 

What we’re left with is most likely a Cairo that is still Arab but with much more Pharaonic influence, as Apophis is in charge, as well as continuing Greek influence due to the Gods. I am not a Coptic Christian, so I cannot speak to how these changes in history and religions would affect the Coptic language and culture, but no doubt it would still be around.

There would also be a bigger, more long-standing connection to other Meritocratic countries. This explains why Hamid was British-educated and so many people speak such good English without a British occupation to create the power disparity that would make that necessary to rise in Egypt and such a mark of status. 

However, this presents several confusing and contradictory aspects of the world building:

Why doesn’t this go both ways? Why aren’t there people in England and France who know Arabic or are influenced by Egypt? All we get is that the Tahan family are big. That’s it. If these countries are equals, it sure doesn’t look like it.

If Apophis is pharaonic and Ancient Egyptian culture and knowledge are so ubiquitous...why would they hollow out a pyramid to put a bank inside? It’s a tomb. It’s made to bury dead kings in a way that follows possibly still-existing cultural and religious beliefs. It’s the equivalent of someone building a bank inside a mausoleum. It’s bizarre.

Relatedly, if Ancient Egyptian culture and knowledge are so ubiquitous, why is Carter mentioning the Rosetta Stone? Why would the knowledge necessary to translate hieroglyphics have been lost? 

I mention these questions so fic writers can keep them in mind while writing and, of course, it’s entirely possible to create a workaround. For example, maybe the Rosetta Stone is supposed to be translating something else, like an ancient hidden magic?

Describing Cairo:

I want to make one thing very clear: Cairo is not, despite Alex’s description, like Vegas. While we do certainly have hotels and casinos, to reduce the city to only that is very harmful for reasons I’ll go into at the end of this resource.

Cairo is a very old city with a mix of architectural styles and is very heavily Muslim in real life. In Arabic, its tagline is often “city of a thousand minarets,” so clearly RQG Cairo will be fairly different. Given Apophis’ influence, Ancient Egyptian styles might be more prevalent in Cairo, but very likely not in the form of pyramids unless those pyramids were for the dead. In real life, some buildings do incorporate Ancient Egyptian flavour, usually just in the form of lotus columns or hieroglyphs. These would only be found in public institutions, however,  or, frankly, tourist-bait. 

Residential buildings tend to be clustered very close together and, since it’s an old city, streets are crowded and winding as the city keeps building on itself and spilling out of its previous bounds. Estates do, of course, exist, but I’d suggest against using Bryn’s example of Alhambra as a setting for the Tahan home. Alhambra is a palace fortress in Spain and, although it’s Andalusian and therefore influenced by Muslim architecture, it’s very different than anything in Egypt. It’s as absurd as saying a posh British character lives in a house that’s basically Versailles and leaving it there. I’ve included images of some Egyptian residential estates below, all from the 1800s to early 1900s.

And here are some photos of Cairo in the 1800s:

As you can see, not quite Vegas.

A fic set in Cairo can certainly still have the Cairo strip with all the casinos, since that’s an aspect of canon, but a place like that would probably be geared more to tourists and foreigners than locals. So long you’re aware of this while writing, and that Cairo would exist beyond it, you should be fine. It might also be worth having characters explore the actual city.

Weather:

The stereotype is that Egypt is just hot and sand year-round. It isn’t. The further south you go, the hotter it will get, so that Upper Egypt (which is in the south, yeah), is hotter than Lower Egypt, which is where Cairo and Alexandria are. Alexandria, by virtue of being on the Mediterranean, has fairly cold (for us) and rainy winters and mild, humid summers. Cairo gets very occasional rain and has harsher summers but is also dryer.

And, of course, a thing to remember is that even in the depths of the desert, the morning might be quite warm but the night will be quite cold as well.

Sandstorm season (called khamaseen) takes place from April - May but in the middle of Cairo it’s more of an annoyance than anything else.

Language:

Since they speak Arabic, it’s important to note that spoken Egyptian Arabic is very different from written Classical Arabic. Egyptian is a mishmash of Arabic, Coptic, a bit of Greek, and a bit of French (and, in the real world, some Turkish too) all smashed together. Accents differ from city to city, and Cairene Arabic is best known for the fact we pronounce the letter jeem as geem (so all soft Gs are turned into hard Gs) and tend to replace the letter qaf with a glottal stop.

This means that a Cairene wouldn’t be called Jamal, they’d be Gamal. A Cairene would pronounce burqa as bur’a.

Since religion plays a big part in language, RQG Egyptian Arabic may be a bit different. For instance, the greeting most people associate with Arabic is “Assalam alaykum” but that’s very specifically Muslim or at least associated with Islam, and might not have been as wide-spread given...y’know, that Islam doesn’t exist. I’m not saying it’s incorrect to use, just explaining the context.

Alternatives could include “Sabah/masa’ el-kheir” which means “Good morning/evening,” and “Naharak/Naharik saeed” which is, “May you have a good day.”

Fashion:

Although this didn’t really feature in RQG, I’ve received a lot of questions about the period’s fashion and honestly it’s my favourite thing ever so I probably would have touched on it anyway. I’ll only go into broad strokes, as there are plenty of regional variations and, again, I’m no expert 

Women

Egyptian women covered their heads and sometimes their faces not out of religiosity but out of a cultural expectation of modesty. This may well have come about as a result of the Arab/Muslim cultural majority, as to my knowledge this wasn’t the case in the Greek and Roman periods, but women of all religions covered their heads so that would likely still be the case in RQG’s Arab Egypt.

This isn’t with the hijab we know today. It may have been a cloth or kerchief tied over their heads and then the melaya laf (which is larger cloth, almost a sheet) that they wrap around themselves and over their head, as follows: 

The black face-covering was called a burqa or bur’a (not the same as a Muslim burqa, which serves similar modesty functions but is a separate thing) or a yashmak and may have been opaque black, white, or netted, such as in this picture:

Underneath the melaya they would be wearing a long, loose, patterned dress:

Upper class Egyptian women tended to wear Western dresses with a white yashmak that covered their faces and heads. A yashmak is Turkish, however, and without Ottoman influence this style and name might not have caught on in Egypt.

Men

While the melaya laf and yashmak have disappeared from Egypt, the traditional men’s gallabeya and ammama, or turban, are still seen widely today. The gallabeya (or jellabiya, outside of Cairene Arabic) is a long, loose garment with wide sleeves and no collar. It’s in muted, neutral colours, usually lighter ones like white or beige in the summer and navy blue or grey in the winter. You’ll have seen examples of it in the pictures of Cairo above, and here’s another one: 

Middle to upper class men and civil servants, however, tended to wear English suits with a tarboosh, or fez. Since fezzes were also a result of Ottoman rule, RQG Egyptians might not wear them.

And yes, impressive moustaches were also very much the fashion.

Names:

The running joke is that Hamid’s name is unnecessarily long, but my name is longer, and I don’t think that’s particularly unusual. We don’t usually go around introducing ourselves with all of them, admittedly, and I’m not sure whether Hamid does this as a way to indicate he’s overly fancy or because Bryn doesn’t realise it, but four names is not long. My ID boasts five, and I know of at least one more.

Arabic naming conventions use patronymics for all children, regardless of gender. What this means is that my name and my brother’s name is identical except for our first. 

Mine is Jasmine + Dad’s name + his dad’s name + his dad’s name + his dad’s name

And my brother is also First name + Dad’s name + his dad’s name + his dad’s name + his dad’s name.

Egyptians do not typically have last names, but an important family may all choose to identify under a name and use that as their last, such as the Tahans. In my case, I use my fifth name as my last name and introduce myself in everyday life as Jasmine Fifth Name. Notably, my brother does not, and goes by First name + Dad’s name instead. This isn’t unusual. On paperwork, however, we still have the same name.

Additionally, Egyptian women do not take their husbands’ last names in marriage, nor do children take any of her names. 

I’m not sure why, according to the wiki, Hamid’s sisters seem to have taken their mother’s name. Following Arabic naming conventions, they would all be First Name Saleh Haroun al Tahan, and their father would be Saleh Haroun al Tahan. A possible workaround might be that halflings have their own naming conventions that mean daughters have matronymics and sons patronymics. 

A note to podficcers: please google name pronunciations beforehand because Alex and Bryn’s are actually often wrong. Ishak, for instance, is not pronounced Ee-shak. It’s Iss-haaq or Iss-haa’, because of quirks of the Egyptian accent I mentioned earlier.

Part Two: Criticism

I understand it can be difficult to portray a country different from yours with accuracy. I understand the RQG crew will not have had the perspective on Egypt and Cairo that I do by virtue of living here. I do also acknowledge that I’m sure none of this was actively malicious or on purpose.

But it doesn’t have to be on purpose to hurt, frankly, and given how often the RQG crew have talked about their responsibility with a game that’s intended for an audience, I expected better. Bryn has spoken about not wanting to fall into stereotypes for Hamid and, to be fair, by being a non-religious fancyboy Hamid does neatly avoid the religious zealot and the noble (or ignoble) savage routes. Unfortunately, he falls into another, which was hammered home by the portrayal of Cairo and the Tahans as a whole.

Our first glimpse of Cairo, after the sandstorm clears, describes it as “basically Vegas,” with hotels and garish casinos catering to the rich all along the “Cairo strip.” From then on, our only other images of Cairo are vast estates and a pyramid in the desert. 

The only named Egyptians we meet are the Tahan family, who are introduced through an absurdly lavish estate compared to the palace fortress of Alhambra, a gambling problem that apparently runs in the family, murder, and corruption, as the head of the family who has already covered up a crime for one son then turns himself in to protect the other.

Then, to top it all off, Hamid is apparently utterly incapable of understanding why letting his brother get away with murder is an issue until the paladins point it out.

Do you see the pattern, here?

I understand this was aiming to be a criticism of the rich and powerful, but the fact remains that the Tahans are the only representation of Egyptians we get. While this may not be harems and hand-chopping levels of Orientalism, the image presented is of Cairo as a den of excessive wealth and vice, and Egyptians as corrupt and immoral.

This isn’t new.

The Middle East and North Africa (as well as India and China and everywhere else considered “the Orient”) has often been tied to images of wealth and overt splendour, usually hand-in-hand with the Oriental despot and corruption. This view went beyond just fiction and influenced the policies with which we were ruled. 

Cromer, Consul-General of Egypt, wrote books called Modern Egypt. He had this to say about us:

“The mind of the Oriental, on the other hand, like his picturesque streets, is eminently wanting in symmetry. His reasoning is of the most slipshod description. . . . They are often incapable of drawing the most obvious conclusions from any simple premises of which they may admit the truth.”

In his opinion, our inability to follow logical reason led to us being inherently untruthful and, therefore, immoral. Similarly, British statesman Balfour was of the belief that:

 “Lord Cromer’s services during the past quarter of a century have raised Egypt from the lowest pitch of social and economic degradation until it now stands among Oriental nations, I believe, absolutely alone in its prosperity, financial and moral.”

Egypt was under British colonial rule from 1882 - 1952.

You can see, I hope, why a storyline focused on an Egyptian family’s corruption in an Egypt characterised almost entirely by its casinos and one lavish mansion was very uncomfortable. The fact Azu was one of the people trying to explain morality to Hamid keeps it from sliding into a clear East vs West dichotomy, but the fact remains this is a British show featuring British players and this is the story they chose to tell. 

The rest was just salt in the wound, really. 

I expect mispronounced names and pyramids and jokes about camels in most media, but rarely do the makers of said media then go on to pat themselves on the back for doing their “due diligence” on a metacast about sensitivity.

I see weird naming conventions and mispronounced names and “basically Vegas” and “crocodile steak” and “camel’s milk froyo” and I do not see due diligence.  

I see a setting that barely looked past Cleopatra and I do not see due diligence.

I see a storyline that shows only excess and immorality and corruption and I do not see due diligence.

I see a disregard for me and mine, and I do not appreciate it. 

Literature I’ve referred to in writing this criticism:

Orientalism (1978), by Edward W. Said

Orientalism in the Victorian Era (2017), a paper by Valerie Kennedy

Orientalism in American Cinema: Providing an Historical and Geographical Context for PostColonial Theory (2010), a thesis by Samuel Scurry 

Popular Culture, Orientalism, and Edward Said (2012), an article by Robert Irwin

#rusty quill gaming #rqg #hamid saleh haroun al tahan #resource #criticism #orientalism #representation #long post

[yamayuandadu]

Rider of Clouds

A a loose adaptation of the Ugaritic Baal cycle of myths, with some changes and the holes patched up with other myths and historical trivia. It will probably go on and on as some sort of silly “myth crossover” thing. Mount Saphon, the spiritual center of a large but poorly defined area spanning from the Mediterranean Sea to the Euphrates and the residence of many gods, needs a new king. While the former king of the gods, El, favors his distant relative Yam, this decision is not popular with the other deities and would be a disaster for their human followers; however, few dare to question El decisions in public. The exception is Baal, the heir(ess) of El's popular but not very ambitious rival Dagan, determined to take Mount Saphon to the bright future of the late bronze age.

Protagonists

Baal (Hebat) – the eponymous Rider of Clouds (a real title used in myths and cult texts), a young weather deity born to Dagan and Shalash (not pictured), semi-retired agricultural gods who settled in Tuttul on the Euphrates shortly before Baal's birth. Dagan hails from Mesopotamia proper, while Shalash is Hurrian. While the mythical  Baal Hadad is male, my version is a woman – the idea started as a joke about conflating Baal from the Baal cycle with Baalat Gebal, a female figure associated with another levantine bronze age city (BG's actual identity is an object of much scholarly debate) being more valid than conflating him with much later Baal Hammon from Carthage (or rather with Roman hot takes about this deity), which happens a lot online, but I got attached to it o now here we are.   She nonetheless uses a male title inherited from her father, much like a few historical female rulers did. In my version “Hadad” is only a title (or rather a me, eg. divine attribute), and her real name is actually Hebat. Irl Hebat was, among other things, the name of a goddess mentioned in one inscription as Dagan's daughter, and thus a featureles sister of Baal. As the levantine/syrian Hebat lacks a defined character in real mythology (”another” Hebat was regarded as the Hurrian storm god's wife but was at times replaced in this role by the more interesting sun goddess of Arinna and that's about it; I'm not going to use that one in my story) it should be fine to conflate her with Dagan's best attested divine child, I think? Baal is impulsive and follows a moral code which, depending on the point of view, might be either naive or heroic, which means she's not exactly the optimal person to get involved in n-dimensional divine politics (the ideal person to be the protagonist of an Ugaritic epic poem, as evidenced by history), but that's not enough to stop her from trying; the popularity with humans helps, too. The story documents her rise to the position of the head god of the pantheon residing on Mount Saphon, ruling over Ugarit and other surrounding areas.

Astarte (it should be Ashtart for maximal accuracy but everyone knows the later form of the name better so...) – a goddess of humble origin and no particularly well defined attributes, who attaches herself to Baal initially in hopes of advancing own career, though the two eventually develop a more genuine relationship. She patterns herself after the much more famous Mesopotamian Inanna, seeing her as an ideal to strive for. While Baal has the name recognition and disposition fitting for a major deity, Astarte is the part of the duo actually capable of navigating politics, and takes the title of Face of Baal, negotiating support for Baal's bid with other gods. The image of Baal she projects differs slightly from reality, though not enough for most onlookers to notice. Astarte is also a connoisseur of foreign clothing (as pictured above) and art.

Anat (art courtesy of my girlfriend who sadly isn’t on tumblr but who helped a lot with figuring out a lot about this story) – the younger daughter of the ruling couple of Mount Saphon. Her philosophy differs greatly from her parents' and as a result she isn't really seriously considered for succession. Her hobbies include bladed weapons, gambling and heroic epics; in the past she attempted writing her own self insert one. Her temperament means she was never considered for succession, which she doesn't particularly mind. She's deeply invested in Baal's ascendance, and is probably the god Astarte wants to recruit for their cause the most.

Gupan and Ugar – two minor gods who might be some of the only allies Baal recruited herself rather than with Astarte's help. They play a minor role in the story as her messengers and heralds (just like in the real myth!). They're also a couple. The cuneiform on their coats says “Baal.”

Kothar-wa-Khasis – a craftsman god who, by own admission, only works part time in Ugarit and travels the world for the rest of it. He's kind and dependable and his wares are both affordable and of great quality, but his real motives are hard to ascertain. His real identity is likewise a subject of much speculation among other gods – while his preferred manner of clothing hints at an egyptian origin, nothing is known for sure. His true name is that of the god Ptah of Memphis; he spends most time outside it and incognito because he thinks smaller pantheons on the periphery of Egypt's influence offer more artistic freedom. He speaks in a very poetic pointlessly complex way (basically... imitating the style of ancient poem translations). While an architect first and foremost he a reneissance man - architect, sculptor, engineer, armorer, musician. He isn't very fond of Yam due to the latter's lack of aptitude for art and cost cutting suggestions.

There are actually two gods hiding behind the title “Kothar-wa-Khasis,” with the second one hailing from Caphtor (Crete) from where  Kothar arrives when commissioned to build Baal's palace in the real myth. She's shy and refuses to reveal her real name and hides behind the title “Mistress of the Labyrinth” and the labrys symbol. Her arrival is generally a sign of the duo taking a project particularly seriously.

Shapash – El's firstborn daughter, serving as “the torch of the gods”, a royal herald and solar deity. She also handles her parents' “foreign policy” on their behalf, which in practice means figuring out how to placate neighbors whose decisions aren't guided by the need to avoid angering various reviled figures.

Antagonists

Yam (right)  – a sea monster more than a god, presiding over the nearby section of the sea and all that dwells in it, including the commercially significant sea slugs. He's also the son of the formerly influential Anatolian god Kumarbi, banished to the underworld by the current head god Teshub due to his many past misdeeds. As a result of his father's past influence over the world (and current influence over the ruling couple), Yam gained El's support and received many titles, which de facto makes him the most likely to succeed El as the king of local pantheon.  He's capricious and inconsiderate, but maintains a larger than life public image meant to make him palatable to potential backers. The exact circumstances of his arrival in Ugarit are shrouded in mystery, and may or may not be responsible for his unusually strong hatred of Baal. Mot (left) – profoundly unpleasant and unsociable being kept around by Anat's parents for unclear reasons. He resides in the great offering pit in the abandoned city of Urkesh, formerly the center of Kumarbi's sphere of influence, reduced to a ghost town.   While his equivalents in neighboring areas generally view themselves as impartial or as a necessary evil, Mot gets his kicks from posing as a personification of death itself, and is notoriously corrupt. El and Athirat – the ruling couple of Mount Saphon and parents of Anat and Shapash, currently pondering retirement, which stirs many contenders to the throne into action. El is a lifelong opportunist changing views and allegiances as he sees fit, though he pretty consistently favors his distant relative Yam as his main underling ever since the latter arrived in the area.

El was originally Amurru, a courtier of the sky god Anu, overthrown by the nefarious Kumarbi. For unclear reasons Kumarbi made Amurru his vassal and bestowed the name Elkunirsa, or El for short, upon him.

Athirat is largely responsible for El maintaining his title for so long, and is a much craftier politician than he is. She comes from an influential dynasty of sea gods, but lacks dominion over the sea herself.

She and Yam are related, as seen here.

Abduyam – an attempt at developing an obscure figure from the original myth, Yam's nameless and seemingly rather rude and infuriating messenger, into a full blown character. The theophoric name he uses (there are real theophoric names invoking Yam, surprisingly) is just a pseudonym, and his real identity is a mystery. He interned under a variety of famous mythical villains in order to gain a greater understanding of their ways, and currently serves as Yam's messenger, adviser, doorkeeper and punching bag.

Ashtar – a feeble opportunist who sides with Yam, hoping to receive a share in the gains he's making thanks to El's blessings. He's pretty content with playing the role of a toady though his aspirations might be different, as Baal and Astarte suspect due to his love of gaudy imported textiles. Megalomania doesn't necessarily equal malevolence, though. He also loves sea slugs.

Foreign dignitaries

(ignore the ?, it’s just Baal) Marduk (right) – the tutelary deity of Babylon, a prominent and internationally renowned god. While technically the area encompassing Mount Saphon, where the events of the story take place, isn't directly under the control of the Babylonian pantheon, as one of the oldest in the world and the source of the writing it nonetheless has a tremendous impact on smaller neighbors. Formally Marduk is merely a representative of his father Enki and the assembly of the gods in Nippur, but as the old gods are not very mobile, he's the de facto acting head of the pantheon in foreign relations. He doesn't have a unified mythical narrative about himself yet at this point in time, despite his position, which is a source of insecurity for him. During travels, he's assisted by his personal aide and biographer, Nabu (not pictured), and his pet mushussu, Tishpak. Seth (left) – in real life, ancient Egyptians equated many gods of their neighbors with Seth; therefore in Rider of Clouds Seth serves as an ambassador of the Egyptian pantheon, usually residing in Gebal near Mount Saphon – a city whose gods (and human rulers) take pride in trying to be more Egyptian than the Egyptians themselves, and regard Seth as their spiritual liege (under the title “Lord of Lebanon”). While ultimately Marduk's judgment matters the most, Seth gets the right to veto his decisions when it comes to validating claims to local thrones. On good terms with Kothar-wa-Khasis, which is a subject of much gossip among other gods. Teshub (center) – the head of the Hurrian pantheon, technically capable of projecting the most power in Mount Saphon politics due to the Hurrian influence on huge number of other local pantheons, including that of the Hittites, thanks to his marriage to the Hittite sun goddess of Arinna; however, as the local gods for the most part share closer affinity with Mesopotamia than Hatti, he competes with Marduk for political influence. As he and Baal are a very similar type of god, he's the most outspoken supporter of Baal's ascension to the throne out of all 3 foreign dignitaries. El’s support for his nemesis is probably a factor, too.

Kubaba – the head goddess of Carchemish; much like the king of Carchemish served as a Hittite viceroy taking care of affairs of the vassals irl, she acts as Teshub's ambassador in the southeast, mediating between the Anatolian and Syrian gods. She hopes that Baal's rise will normalize foreign relations to the benefit of her human followers – El's erratic behavior and sympathy for a number of widely detested figures made that rather difficult. While she's not much older than Baal, she poses as an ancient deity and dresses like someone twice her age. She also seeks opportunities to insert herself into suitably ancient narratives. In another time and place she'll be known as Cybele, and eventually as the Roman Magna Mater, but this is not the story about it.

Plot-relevant but not present in the story physically

Inanna – the celebrity superstar of every pantheon from Hatti to Elam. After being elevated to one of the foremost positions among the gods she started a profitable franchising business, offering help with setting up own cult system and the right to use the title of “Ishtar” and the eight pointed star emblem in exchange for a share in potential profit and a spot in the franchisee' home pantheon. As her fame is unique even among the greatest of the gods, this isn't that bad of a deal. Other benefits of the franchising program include free tickets to the annual Ishtar meetup in Uruk and a 24/7 tech support line ran by her sukkal Ninshubur. Asides from Astarte, prominent members of the franchising program include the Hurrian Shaushka, the Elamite Pinikir, and the night goddess of Kizzuwatna.

Kumarbi: an agricultural god of the Hurrians who seized the kingship of their pantheon violently before being overthrown himself by Teshub and his allies. Now he resides in the underworld and plots, aided by a network of allies – some opportunistic, some stupid, some simply malevolent. His will is usually carried out by an unspecified number of identical fate goddesses, possible to differentiate only by the numerals on their veils. At the core he and Baal's father Dagan are very similar gods in function, but not in temperament.

#Rider of Clouds

[antiquitiesandlabyrinths]

Akhenaten

The name Akhenaten is rather well known as a Pharaoh of Egypt. Like Ramesses II, Hatshepsut, Cleopatra, and Tutankhamun, Akhenaten won the popularity contest of modern society through defining himself as far different from most other Pharaohs. With Akhenaten, however, he’s not even like the special Pharaohs.

Let’s look a little at his life and the history of the time period he ruled over. He was in the 18th Dynasty of the New Kingdom, from 1353-1336 BC. Like most Pharaohs there are a few different pronunciations of his name, including Akhenaton, Ikhnaton, Khuenaten, all meaning of great use to Aten, which leads into his conversion into the cult of Aten. Before the conversion his name was Amenhotep IV, son of Amenhotep III. His mother was named Tiye. Later on in life he married Queen Nefertiti, fathering two children, one from his wife Nefertiti and one from his lesser wife, Lady Kiya, having Ahnksenamun and Tutankhamun to each wife respectively.

Before we get into the whole mess of his religion and the ‘revamping’ he did of ancient Egypt, let’s recognize the other things he did for or to the country.

You’ll recognize the vastly different art style between Akhenaten’s rule and the history of most of Egypt. In art that depicts Akhenaten, he was shown as long and spindly, a style that carried into his family. Some people believe that this was because he and his family suffered from Marfan’s syndrome, a disease that caused the elongation of bones and skinniness. A more likely explanation stems from the Pharaoh’s religious beliefs, which as you know, was vastly different from other Pharaohs. This theory is a little more likely because there was no reason for the queen Nefertiti to have the same condition as her husband. Instead, it was probably because their status was far different from the other Pharaohs, as they were moved into a genuinely god-like status for their worship of Aten.

The part of Akhenaten and his rule that interests me the most is the way the royal family was presented in art, despite the style. Like many parts of Akhenaten, it’s entirely different from other Pharaohs (though, whether that’s good or bad is up to you).

Now, most Pharaohs presented themselves highly in art. They could do that, so why not? If I had the guts and the money I probably would too, but my point is that essentially all Pharaohs depicted themselves alone on stelas, engaging in hunting or other activities that strengthened the image of themselves that they wanted to show the world. Usually they were masculine tasks that could be done only by those with great strength and great riches. Akhenaten went in an entirely different direction; he depicted himself with his family. In the stele of Akhenaten, he is shown in a private way, the scene being him with his family, enjoying themselves together.

While we can’t say the definitive reason for him presenting himself as this, the most logical conclusion has to do with, again, his religious beliefs. In his mind, the Aten was held above all else, even the Pharaoh. With Aten as the highest consideration, the Pharaoh and his family enjoyed their lives under the influence of the Aten’s love and grace.

Now that we have a little insight, let’s get into the whole mess of his religion that died immediately after he did.

Akhenaten originally reigned as Amenhotep IV, a reign that lasted around five years before he switched religions. Changing his name, he converted to a cult that worshipped Amun to that of Aten, abolishing the ancient rites of those before him, and instituting what is believed as the first example of monotheism state religion in the world. His rule as Akhenaten lasted 12 years, during which he was labelled as the infamous ‘heretic king’, so that should give you some insight into how people felt about him. 

Before his rule, the cult of aten was a cult like all others in Egypt. It was a bit like choosing your favorite God – find the one you like most, and join that cult. For example if I were to join a cult, I would join the cult of my favorite God, Ma’at. I mention this because before the change, the Aten was shown in inscriptions of Akhenaten (Amenhotep IV at that point), represented by the sun disk. It’s also important to note cult doesn’t carry the same meaning as it did then, and each cult shared the same goal: balance and eternal harmony.

At the time of Amenhotep IV’s rule the Amun cult (where the Aten is from) held incredible power. Their power had been growing for a long while, and by the time of his rule, they held nearly as much power and riches as the Pharaoh himself, and actually owned more land than Amenhotep IV. The fifth year of his reign he switched everything; this was when he abolished the practices of the previous religion of Egypt, and proclaimed himself the “living incarnation of a single all-powerful deity known as Aten,” (Joshua J Mark), and by the ninth year, he closed every single temple, prohibiting all the old practices and devotion to the many Gods the people of Egypt worshipped.

Around then was when he moved the royal seat of Egypt from the traditional house of Thebes to a city of his own creation, a city named Akhetaten, and with that he changed his name to Akhenaten. Here he earned the name the Heretic King, earning the ire of some historians and the admiration of others.

Despite the fact that Akhenaten’s influence completely destroyed worship of the Gods many Egyptians loved, one of the main problems with his rule was that the Old Gods of Egypt instilled harmony and order in the citizens, ultimately helping to create a country that lasted over 4,000 years. Without these Gods, things got a little wonky.

Religious tolerance was allowed with the many Gods, emphasizing peace to the point where religious intolerance wasn’t even an issue. Unfortunately, for monotheism to work, there has to be something inherently wrong with the other side, which made Akhenaten’s work a lot harder, and its’ effects much stronger. It led to the intolerance of other beliefs and some severe suppression, and if you look at the monotheistic religions of today, you can see the same sort of pattern. With intolerance comes hatred and war.

“Dating to this point in Akhenaten’s reign was a campaign to excise the name of gods other than the Aten, especially Amun, from the monuments of Egypt. This was done with violence: hieroglyphs were brutally hacked from the walls of temples and tombs. This was probably carried out, at least in part, by illiterate iconoclasts, presumably following the orders of their king. [Akhenaten] carried out a religious revolution the like of which had never been seen before in Egypt.” (Zahi Hawass, 42-43).

There were priests of Atum who attempted to hide religious artifacts, storing statuary and texts away from the soldiers ordered to destroy them. The priests, with nothing left to do, were forced to abandon their temples. In response Akhenaten either hired new priests or forced the other ones to obey him, proclaiming him and his wife once more as Gods on earth.

Now you can see how Akhenaten kind of sucks. Let’s talk about how he sucks even more.

His foreign policy.

With his ego inflated to the size of the sun, Akhenaten thought himself above interactions with foreign powers. He left his duties to spend more time on himself and his family, ultimately leading to a severe neglect.

You might be asking, “didn’t every Pharaoh have a super-inflated ego?” and yes, you’d be right, but no Pharaoh before Akhenaten had genuinely claimed themselves to be a God. As a self-proclaimed incarnated God, he must’ve thought such affairs beneath him.

Discovered through letters of the time, several (former) allies of Egypt had asked for their help several times with various affairs. At the time Egypt was wealthy, prosperous, and strong, a state that had been slowly growing before halting at Queen Hatshepsut’s reign. Hatshepsut and her successors employed a strategy of actually doing work, by working out when to approach with diplomacy, and when military action was required. Akhenaten on the other hand, ignored everything outside of his palace at Akhetaten. 

The uncertainty of Akhenaten’s rule, along with letters of correspondence between the city of Amarna, the Pharaoh, and foreign nations, led to this era being called the Amarna period. These very letters were proof of the Pharaoh’s negligence. However, the letters also show his keen eye in foreign diplomacy, if the situation interested him so. It was a whole thing with the Hittites, but since this is chiefly about Akhenaten, I’ll leave that topic for later. All you really need to know is that he only tended to issues that affected him directly, and through the Amarna letters, historians can see how poor of a King he was, as well as how deeply many of his subjects disliked or despised him. 

Essentially, the main reason this mess didn’t work out was because it brought about something new: exclusivity. And the Egyptians did not like that, believing that the world needed to have a balance in order to stay away from slipping into chaos. In the end monotheism didn’t last; hell, it was ended basically the second Akhenaten’s son took the throne. Tutankhamun, originally named Tutankhaten, changed his name to reflect the return to polytheism. His successors tore down the reminders of Akhenaten’s reign, removing him and his adoration for the Aten, eradicating his name from the record.

There’s no saying he didn’t affect the world – he did, a lot. Whether that affect was good or bad is up to the interpreter (personally I don’t like it all that much). By Freud’s thinking (hear me out, I know he sucks) Akhenaten’s rule inspired the ancient world, leading others to copy his ideas and theology, eventually snowballing into our modern world, where there are essentially no polytheistic religions. You have to give him credit – he was the first person of the ancient world to dream up monotheism, changing what had defined humanity for so long.

With his name stricken from the books, historians only discovered him upon finding his city Akhetaten. In the records, Horemheb is labelled as Amenhotep III’s successor, skipping over both Akhenaten and Tutankhamun’s rule. Later when Tutankhamun’s tomb was found as one of the very few graves still filled with treasure, interest spiked in Tutankhamun’s life, eventually leading back to his father Akhenaten. 

#ahkenaten #ancient egypt #ancient history #egyptian history #amarna period #cult of aten

[bluekaddis]

Today is 11/11 which marks 101 years of Poland regaining independence and I thought it is a perfect time to publish a post that I’ve been working on for a while. 

Ferelden from Polish Perspective aka Why We Can Relate to Dog Lords So Much. 

This is a sort of compilation of my own thoughts I had while playing the games and various talks with my Polish friends. It is not supposed to force any ideas or teach others how to interpret the game. I just thought it could be entertaining for anyone interested in history and culture. I was trying not to elaborate too much on the subject here but it still ended up being A Very Long Post TM. To make this post a little neater to read, I divided this post into 4 sections:

1. History

2. Fashion and Food

3. Politics

4. Relationships with Other Countries

I will be very happy if you find a minute or two to read some of my points. If you have any additional questions or comments feel free to leave me a message :)

And once again - enormous thanks to @aeducanka​ for proofreading. I would be a poor mess without you. 

DISCLAIMERS

1. Yes, I know that Ferelden is based mostly on Anglo-Saxon England and I have no problem with that. True, I may be a little disappointed that the game includes references to so many European cultures and countries (France, Byzantine Empire, Venice, Roma culture etc.) and yet practically ignores Central and Eastern Europe completely, BUT this post is not meant to be a “Where is my representation?!” rant. If I wanted a game with Slavic culture vibes, I could always play the Witcher trilogy again. We are doing alright. 

2. I am in no way an academic specialist on culture or history, even these of my own country. I did some research, but most of facts and figures can be easily found on wikipedia. You can treat this as just some observations and headcanons of a 29 y/o Polish woman, who has grown up and lives in Poland. 

3. The main focus of this post is Poland in different moments of history. However, when talking about fashion and political system I will mostly refer to Polish culture between the 16th and 18th century. During that time Poland and Lithuania formed a dual state known as The Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth. So, whenever I refer to this particular period, I will use the term “Commonwealth” instead of “Poland”. 

PART 1 – HISTORY

The country’s name origin

Ferelden means „fertile valley” in Alamarri tongue [WoT vol. 1], Poland most probably comes from the Slavic word „pole” meaning „field”. They both refer to land that can be cultivated.

History of unification

Ferelden lands were divided between many tribes until they were unified by Calenhad Theirin. He fought and defeated other Alamarri tribes’ leaders, proclaimed Andrastianism as the new official religion of his kingdom and started the Theirin dynasty.  

A similar story can be told about Mieszko I of Poland – the leader of the Polans tribe (one of many Slavic tribes of that time) who, by means of war and diplomacy, united many Slavic tribes and created the Polish country in 965. In the same year he was baptised, abandoning native paganism in favour of Christianity. Mieszko started the Piast dynasty which ruled Poland for over 400 years. He never officially became a king, though – his son, Bolesław, was crowned king in 1025.

Also, Ferelden is a relatively young country compared to countries like Orlais or Tevinter. Even if Poland has over 1000 years of history as a country, it has to be noted that some Western European countries have a longer history (eg. the Carolingian Empire or the Visigothic Kingdom). Polish lands have also never been a part of the Roman Empire. 

Fun fact – the half-legendary sword of the first king of Poland, Szczerbiec, was stolen by Prussian troops during their invasion on Poland in 1795. Calenhad’s sword, Nemetos,was lost during the Orlesian invasion on Ferelden [WoT vol. 1].

Ostagar

Now, I will tell you a story. It is about a young king (in his twenties), a little reckless, wanting to be the leader who stood against the great invading threat to his country, a little blinded by the perspective of glorious victory. Just before the battle one of his allied forces betrayed him and did not provide the promised aid. The enemy army was too strong, too large. The king’s army was defeated, the king was killed in battle and his body was taken by the enemy. The king did not have children and his younger brother had succeeded him.

No, I’m not talking about Cailan, this is the story of Władysław III of Poland.

PART 2 – FASHION AND FOOD

Fashion

All cultures in Thedas have their own style and fashion. Ferelden is supposed to be this “We like fur and warm fabrics” culture, opposite to the extravagant Orlesian style. However, I have few problems with how Fereldan fashion is shown in the game.

1. It is too early-medieval looking. I know, it is a fantasy, you can mix ancient Egypt with steampunk and nobody should care. But we see, from cultural and technological perspective, that Thedas in Dragon Age is more renaissance/baroque than your typical medieval. Heck, some elements, like the infamous Formal Attire, look like clothes from 18th or even 19th century! In comparison, outfits like Arms of Mac Tir or Robes of the Pretender (though good looking) look like something from the Vikings era.

2.  We do not see many good looking Fereldan outfits in the games. I like Alistair’s royal outfit and some of Fereldan armors and clothes from DA:2 but remember this?

Or this?

Yeah, Dog Lords can do better :/

And that’s why I like to headcanon Fereldan fashion as something more resembling the Commonwealth fashion between the 16th and 18th century. It was an interesting mix of European and Asian influences and I think it would work perfectly with canon Ferelden because:

1. People LOVED fur elements in their clothing. Fur lining on coats, fur caps decorated with feathers, pelts of wild carnivores (lions, wolves, bears, etc.) on armour  - fur was everywhere.

2. It is simple but regal. The quality of materials and patterns were more important than volume and the number of layers. A typical male noble outfit consisted of a long garment (żupan), a long, ornate sash, one of two types of cloak (delia or kontusz) and a fur cap decorated with feathers and jewels. If you compare it with the baroque fashion from France it is less extravagant and more practical. No wigs, no flounces, no man tights. 

Compare these two dudes – the older one is dressed Commonwealth style, the younger – in French style. 

The Deluge, 1974

Of course some wealthy noblemen who spent a lot of time in France or other Western countries tended to adapt their style, but from what I know it was not that common. Women, on the other hand, tended to dress more similar to their Western counterparts (especially when they wanted to look fashionable) but their everyday dresses were not that much elaborate. They also wore kontusz (though the female version was shorter) and fur caps when outside. 

Below I post some more costumes to better illustrate my point. They all come from Polish movie adaptations of H. Sienkiewicz’s novels (I looove both the books and the movies).

With Fire and Sword, 1999

The Deluge, 1974

Fire in the Steppe, 1968

And I could not NOT to mention the wonderful interpretation of Fereldan armor and clothing for my OCs drawn by @ankalime​ - I still can’t get over how beautiful they look :3

Food

From what we know, Fereldan food is very similar to traditional English cuisine (lamb and pea anyone?), HOWEVER, I can totally see some traditional Polish dishes on Fereldan tables. Let us look at this part of Alistair’s banter with Leliana:

“Now here in Ferelden, we do things right. We take our ingredients, throw them into the largest pot we can find, and cook them for as long as possible until everything is a uniform grey color. As soon as it looks completely bland and unappetizing, that's when I know it's done.”

Dishes like bigos, flaki or goulash (mostly associated with Hungary but also present in various forms in Slavic countries) totally fit this description. Tasty and hearty but I know some foreigners see them as totally unappetizing :P

Poland is also culturally more into beer than wine  (high five, British Isles!), so Fereldan ale fits this image, too.

PART 3. POLITICS

When I first played DA:O and heard about choosing the new queen/king on Landsmeet I was like “omg, they have wolna elekcja!”

The canon Ferelden is a feudal country, however, there seems to be less focus on the king's absolute power – instead, the nobles can choose the king they like, the hierarchy inside this particular social class is also less striking than one can expect. 

And this brings me to the concept of Golden Liberty. (I will quote Wikipedia here, I am not that smart to explain this well in English on my own).

The Golden Liberty was a unique political system of the Commonwealth – a mixture of monarchy, oligarchy and democracy. The most distinctive elements of that systems were:

- All nobles regardless of rank or economic status, were considered to have equal legal rights (and you did not have to own a town or two to be considered a noble – a large part of the nobility owned nothing more than a farm, often little different from a peasant's dwelling, and some did not even have that much). The rights were, for example:

-  Neminem captivabimus ("We shall not arrest anyone without a court verdict").  

- right to vote – every nobleman, whether rich or poor, could vote. Of course if someone was rich, they could bribe others to gain more political influence, but it is the same as today. 

- religious freedom – unlike many other European countries of the time, people in Commonwealth were legally free to follow any religion. The Commonwealth became a common refuge for people who were persecuted for religion in their homelands. The religious freedom was not restricted to nobility but to all social classes. 

- rokosz - the right to form a legal rebellion against a king who violated nobility freedoms.

- the monarchy was elective, not hereditary, and the king was elected by the nobility. That “democracy” was not, of course, perfect, as only male noblemen had the right to vote and elect the king. However, it was still between 10-15% of the population who could vote. In comparison, “in 1831 in France only about 1% of the population had the right to vote”

The Landsmeet in DA:O is basically the free election (well, maybe minus the duel :D) and I would say the Fereldan nobility does not feel obliged to be obedient 100% of the time. 

PART 4. RELATIONSHIPS WITH OTHER COUNTRIES

Orlesian occupation

We know from the game that Orlais invaded Ferelden in 8:24 Blessed and occupied it for decades. The Fereldan forces were rebelling against the occupant and finally, under the command of Maric Theirin, they won their freedom.

Again, it is a huge topic, so to summarize: Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth suffered a similar fate in 1795 as it was conquered and divided between Habsburg Austria, the Kingdom of Prussia and the Russian Empire. For 123 years Poles have been trying to regain their country, have started several uprisings and lost many lives in their fight for independence. Finally, at the end of WW1, independent Poland reappeared on the map of the world. Then came the WW2, probably the most tragic event in Polish history – the cities were razed to the ground, a vast part of national heritage destroyed or stolen, and over 6 million people (1/5 of the pre-war population) were killed.

So yeah, a country invaded and occupied for decades by its neighbour sounds way too familiar to be ignored. 

Ferelden in the eyes of Orlesians

The Fereldans are a puzzle. As a people, they are one bad day away from reverting to barbarism. (...) They are the coarse, wilful, dirty, disorganized people [DA:O Codex Entry: Culture of Ferelden].

Yeah... this, unfortunately, sounds familiar. I fear that the stereotype of a drunk, stupid, poor, thieving Poles (and other Slavic nations), which originated from WW2 propaganda, is somehow still alive in the West. I will not dive deeper in this subject because I want to believe my followers have their own brain cells and I do not need to explain how hurtful and offensive those stereotypes are.

My point is – I could identify easily with a fantasy country that is located east from the “centre of culture and civilisation” and is unfairly believed to be more barbaric.

So – for all two of you who bothered to read the whole thing - thanks for coming to my TED talk.I really appreciate the time you spent here :)

#dragon age #my writing #ferelden #headcanon #heavy slavic breathing #finally! #it took so long #but i am really happy i can post it here

[rudjedet]

Hey! I'm not sure how to phrase this, but could you please indicate some trustworthy sources on the relationship between Kush and Ancient Egypt for a layperson? Like, how did the two countries saw each other (if you need a specific time, I'm thinking around the time Kush conquered Egypt)? Is there even any way to know that? Thank you very much.

We do have ways of knowing that, yes, generally through writings left from the period, and of course the study of cultural interaction. Since we’re dealing with a relatively long time frame, we have to keep in mind that the attitudes towards each other could and did shift. Before the 25th (Kushite) Dynasty, the first attested mention of the Kingdom of Kush is the 11th Dynasty under Mentuhotep II. In both the Middle and New Kingdoms, Egypt was stronger than Kush and eventually conquered this neighbour of theirs under Thutmose I. Eventually the tables turned, specifically when Egypt had already been under foreign rule for a while. The Kushites, however, were able to restore Egyptian power to almost-New Kingdom levels. There’s unfortunately not yet been made much of a study of Kush separately, but there are a number of Egyptologists who have specialised in this period and written some good works on it.

The attitudes towards each other weren’t much different from other attitudes between rival kingdoms. Either one was conquered by the other at some point, they engaged in warfare intermittently, but there was also trade and cultural exchange. Despite the latter, I don’t believe there was ever really a true equilibrium between the two where both had equal power to each other, and it wasn’t until other foreign invaders took over Egypt that Kush became more powerful than its erstwhile coloniser. 

I can’t attest to their value for a lay person because I don’t think there are many coffee table books about Kush (at least, I don’t know of any that I can unequivocally claim to be good), but there are a few books I can otherwise recommend:

Ikram, S., et al. (eds): Ancient Nubia: African Kingdoms on the Nile (2012) Shaw, I. (ed): The Oxford History of Ancient Egypt (2000/2002) Török, L.: The Kingdom of Kush: Handbook of the Napatan-Meriotic Civilization (1998)  Török, L.: The Kingdom of Kush: History and Civilization (1997) 

#ancient egypt #kush #anon asks

[rumaisa-tanveer]

Story of Cleopatra: How has history been unfair to her?

If someone is asked to name a few Egyptian figures, that person is likely to include Cleopatra in the list, who happens to be of Greek descent.  

We may not know much about her life but Cleopatra’s story is full of love, war, tragedy, betrayal, murder, seduction, and triumph. One can’t simply write a better drama than that. 

But…. It’s hard to understand the obsession that artists have with Cleopatra. Was she really as savage as she is perceived to be? 

For a better understanding, let travel back in time and get an insight into the life of the infamous queen of Egypt.

The Ptolemy Family:

After the death of Alexander the Great in 323 B.C, his general Ptolemy Soter I launched a Dynasty of Greek-speaking rulers in Egypt called the Ptolemaic Dynasty. 

Cleopatra was born a member of this family. Not the most ideal place to be born in since the family had a long history of blood and murder for the gain of power. 

Also, to preserve the purity of their bloodline, members were married to their cousins or siblings. Therefore, it’s likely that Cleopatra’s parents were brother and sister. 

Throughout her reign. Cleopatra married two of her brothers. Her father died when she was 18. As per the family tradition, Cleopatra was made the queen of Egypt alongside her 10-year-old brother, Ptolemy XIII.

The siblings ruled Egypt under the title of husband and wife. Cleopatra did not want to share the throne with his brother. Soon the two became enemies and a civil war broke out. 

Her first sibling-husband, Ptolemy XIII, ran her out of Egypt after the tensions between them for the sole possession of the throne.

Cleopatra and Julius Caesar: A love Story

At that time, Rome was the greatest power in the west. During the preceding century, Rome had exercised increasing control over the Egyptian kingdom.

Cleopatra knew that the only way to win back her throne was by winning the favor of Julius Caesar. Their meeting had to be a secret so she rolled herself into a carpet and smuggled in to meet Caesar. 

Of course, he was captivated by her charm. The two of them soon became allies and lovers, and he also agreed to intercede in the Egyptian civil war on her behalf. Ptolemy XIII was killed after a defeat against Caesar’s forces.

In June 47 B.C., Cleopatra gave birth to their son named Caesarian, meaning “little Caesar.”

She joined Caesar in Rome in 46 B.C. with their loved Child.

Her presence caused quite a stir. Many Romans were outraged when he erected a gilded statue of her in the temple of Venus Genitrix.  

Well, After the Assassination of Ceaser and the death of Ptolemy, she made her son Ptolemy XIV the co-ruler.

Cleopatra and Mark Anthony:

One of the three leaders that emerged in Rome after his death was Marc Anthony.

Cleopatra sought Antony. She arrived in Tarsus on a magnificent river barge dressed as Venus, the Roman god of love. After he set his eyes on her, his heart was hers. She was successful in her efforts and they began their legendary love affair in 41 B.C and eventually got married. 

One of Rome’s leaders, Octavian, was the legal heir of Caesar but Cleopatra attempted to have Caesarian ascend the throne and hoped that Anthony would help her achieve her goal. 

Whereas Octavian painted Cleopatra as an evil seductress who made  Anthony a traitor. The lovers were married, which violated the roman law restricting Romans from marrying foreigners. In 32 B.C, Octavian declared war on Cleopatra.

Cleopatra and Marc Anthony formed forces against Octavian. The two forces met at the battle of Actium. Unfortunately, this army was no match for the Romans and so they were defeated and had to retreat to Egypt. 

After fleeing to Egypt, Marc Anthony returned to the battle in the hope that he might be able to defeat Octavian but realized that he would rather be captured by him. Cleopatra and Anthony famously took their own lives in 30 B.C. Anthony committed suicide after being lied to that Cleopatra had killed herself. Legend has it that she killed herself by letting an Egyptian asp bite her breast. 

Her death brought an end to the Egyptian Empire. Soon Octavian took control of Egypt and it was annexed with Rome.

Cleopatra didn’t just form alliances with the powerful men during her time but also loved them to death. 

Cleopatra is a notable historical figure but unfortunately, she’s constantly portrayed as a woman who used her sex appeal as a political weapon and is also symbolized as the reason for the fall of men. 

Hollywood has popularized her as a woman capable solely of political manipulations. Yet, a careful review of her life shows that we have forgotten the true personality of Cleopatra and embraced the distorted version sold by distractors.  

Literature and media have contributed to this sexualized reputation of a queen who yielded authority over such a prosperous nation.  

Reality is quite the contrary, there’s plenty of evidence that shows that Cleopatra wasn’t even physically striking as she is believed to be. In simple words, she looked nothing like Elizabeth Taylor from the movie “Cleopatra”.

               Ceramic sculpture of Cleopatra…OUP Blog

Ancient writer Plutarch claimed that Cleopatra’s beauty was “not altogether incomparable,” and that it was instead her “irresistible charm” that made her so desirable.

She was a product of her own society and considering that she was born in a cold-hearted family where murdering other members for power wasn’t a big deal, she wasn’t as savage as to go on killing for pleasure and never resorted to cruelty over her people to maintain her power. She only resorted to murder only when it was for defense or proved to be necessary. Murdering was a norm of that society her siblings would just as easily have killed her if she hadn't gotten to them first. It’s clear that she never misuse her power, 

Many rulers in the past had concubines and sex slaves, but somehow they don’t share the same promiscuous status as Cleopatra. 

Not much is known about her prowess as a leader aside from the powerful men she’s associated with, Julius Caesar and Mark Anthony. 

Why don’t we remember her as a queen who ruled the country of Egypt and the entire Eastern Mediterranean coast? 

Not many people know that she spoke nine languages and was educated in Mathematics, philosophy, astronomy, and oratory. 

Cleopatra should be known as the queen built warehouses of food to combat famine, attempted to stabilize the economy by forming fixed exchange rates for foreign currency, and brought social progress. These are the attributes she should be known for. 

Cleopatra should be known and respected for her leadership qualities.  She should be known for her achievements in an ancient and dangerous society controlled by men. It stands in testimony to her character and courage.

[madewithonerib]

How to be Weaned | Jonathan Cahn [Daniel 7:1-10]

      Daniel 7:1-10 | ¹ In the 1st year of the reign of Belshazzar       over Babylon, Daniel had a dream, & visions passed       through his mind as he lay on his bed.

      He wrote down the dream, & this is the summary of his       account. ² Daniel declared:

            “In my vision in the night I looked, & suddenly the             4 winds of heaven were churning up the great sea.

            ³ Then 4 great beasts came up out of the sea, each             one different from the others:

            ⁴ The 1st beast was like a lion, & it had the wings of             an eagle. I watched until its wings were torn off & it             was lifted up from the ground & made to stand on 2             feet like a man, & given the mind of a man.

            ⁵ Suddenly another beast appeared, which looked             like a bear. It was raised up on one of its sides, &             it had 3 ribs in its mouth between its teeth.

            So it was told, ‘Get up & gorge yourself on flesh!’

      ⁶ Next, as I watched, another beast appeared.

            It was like a leopard, & on its back it had 4 wings like             those of a bird. The beast also had 4 heads, & it was             given authority to rule.

      ⁷ After this, as I watched in my vision in the night, suddenly         a 4th beast appeared, & it was terrifying—dreadful &         extremely strong—with large iron teeth. It devoured &         crushed; then it trampled underfoot whatever was left.

        It was different from all the beasts before it, & it had ten         horns. ⁸ While I was contemplating the horns, suddenly         another horn, a little one, came up among them, &         3 of the 1st horns were uprooted before it.

      This horn had eyes like those of a man & a mouth that       spoke words of arrogance. ⁹ As I continued to watch,       thrones were set in place, &

            the Ancient of Days took HIS seat. HIS clothing             was white as snow, & the hair of HIS head like             pure wool. HIS throne was flaming with fire, &             its wheels were all ablaze.

            ¹⁰ A river of fire was flowing, coming out from                HIS presence. Thousands upon thousands                attended HIM, & myriads upon myriads stood                before HIM.

      The court was convened, & the books were opened.

INTRODUCTION

      This is a picture of world history from the first great world empire       that took Jerusalem, to Rome the great world empire at the end.

            But first thing I’m going to do is get into             the nutshell of world history.

      This is the first part, there is going to be more than one on this.

      Today we’re going to go from a certain point in history, up to the       destruction of the Temple, up to Rome.

      But this principle, it’s going to take us ultimately before we finish       this series, it’s going to take us to the United States of America.

      This principle is so exact, it’s so amazing that it goes from the       time of the Pharaohs all the way to 2013.

      And it explains world history in an amazing way.

      The first thing I’m going to do, is give you a nutshell of ancient       history & secondly we’re going to start tying it into       what happened in the BIBLE linked to that world history.

      Third, after that, then we’re going to get into this secret or key of       world history that unlocks world history.

      So you will be understanding more of what’s going on       in the world more than renowned scholars of the age.

      See you know, I can’t go through every kingdom in this series       of course, there are many nations, & peoples, & kingdoms.

      And many very substantial ones, for instance China, India,       Latin America, all these things; but we’re going to follow the       center cord of world history.

      You know the focus, the vortex of world empires; & you’ll see       some amazing things; & we’ll see first the sweep.

1.] Start of Civilization

      Civilization begins as we know it in what is called Mesopotamia.

            We learned this, some of us in school,             called the cradle of civilization.

      The fertile crescent because it looks like a crescent, it’s the fertile       part of the Middle Eastern Desert.

            It surrounds the rivers of the Middle East.

      And that’s where these kingdoms arose.

      Particularly the land of Iraq, of all places.

      Beginning in the mountains of Armenia, flowing down to the       Persia Gulf. That’s where it all pretty much began.

      Particularly in the south of this region, which was called Sumer.

      More than any other people the Sumerians shaped the       Mesopotamian civilization.

      And they were living originally in kind of independent city states,       around 2K B.C. they united;

            writing as we know it came from Sumer.

      That in other words, you had hieroglyphics that were basically a       picture was what it was, but you had now symbols taking over       from pictures.

      Which is going to lead to writing. It began in Sumer.

      About 2150 B.C. they come under the leadership of a city named       Ur. Does that sound familiar & Ur which it just so happened, we’ve       done another called the D328 (the secret of world history) which       also deals with the centrality of GOD’s purposes.

      Notice Abram(ham) will end up right in the center of world history,       today it’s more like America, New York, Israel, & other places that       is where always the Jewish people—GOD keeps them there.

      But here, Ur of the Chaldees, they drive out foreign invaders.

      They reunite Sumer & the region called Akan, under their rule.

      The Sumerian independence is short lived around 2K B.C. they       are conquered by the Elamite. Around 1900 B.C. the Amorites       invade, you hear of all these people in the BIBLE.

      They establish a capital at the village called Babylon,       the kingdom of Babylon.

      And they have a famous king called, Hammurabi,       the code of Hammurabi. 1728-1686 B.C.

      It reaches it’s peak around 1900-1595 B.C. that’s the       first Babylonian Kingdom.

            The extent of the Babylonian Empire at the start &             end of Hammurabi's reign, located in what today is             modern day Kuwait and Iraq. [1895-539 BC]

            Official languages:  Akkadian Sumerian Aramaic

2.] Egyptian Civilization

      Then you come to another kingdom developing, another great       center of the world, ancient civilization & that is called in Hebrew       Mizraim מִצְרַ֔יִם (miṣ·ra·yim), & in English it’s called Egypt.

      The first or old kingdom, it has three periods:

       ●  The Egypt Old Kingdom,        ●  The Middle Kingdom,        ●  The New Kingdom/Empire,

      And so it comes around, you know, in the late middle kingdom       the pharaohs extended their power to the land of Israel.

      But around 1750 B.C. something happened they are invaded by       a people called the Hyksos, who are the Hyksos?

            The Hyksos period marks the first in which             Egypt was ruled by foreign rulers.

            Ancient Greek: Ὑκσώς, Ὑξώς) is a term which, in             modern Egyptology, designates the kings of the             Fifteenth Dynasty of Egypt [1650–1550 BC].

            The term Hyksos is used ethnically to designate people             of probable West Semitic, Levantine origin.

      It’s a Greek version of an Egyptian word, it literally means       foreign ruler. Now most likely the Hyksos were actually Semitic       people, linked to the Jewish people.

      And they ruled around 1648-1540 B.C., so the 1500s the       Egyptians drove them out & they ushered in the last big       empire of Egypt.

      Called the empire, it reached its peak under pharaoh       Thutmose III [Reign: 1479–1425 BC], & Ramesses II the Great       [reigned 1279–1213 BC] who you know about.

      Ramesses built all these things.

      There’s a question about how they linked up with the Exodus,       we’ll get to that after.

3.] Period of Decline

      And after that big kingdom comes, a long decline for Egypt.

      By 1200 BC Egypt is stripped of all its foreign territory.       It becomes pretty much isolated, in may ways, to the Nile.

      Egypt would never again be a great world power after that,       & around 1200 BC there’s this invasion across the Middle East       called the sea peoples.

      And here are these sea peoples, some of the sea peoples are       called the Philistines, they most likely were Greek-based people.

      And they are sailing, they are coming by the sea.

      They sweep over Egypt, they sweep over this whole region.       It’s unstable, Egypt deteriorates & continues to deteriorate.

4.] Kingdom of Israel

      Next another great civilization, that arises around the year       1K BC around there.

      Is a little kingdom, it really would never have risen up unless       there was a big power vacuum. There was a power vacuum.

      So this, a little brief moment, this kingdom rises up in the center       or world history, or as a peak in some ways..

      That’s called the little kingdom of Israel.

      And here it is ruled by a, first a king named Shaul (Saul of course)       & then David. I mean it shows you how much there was this big       power vacuum, when a little shepherd boy could become just       about the most powerful man in the world.

      After the death of Solomon, it splits into two.

      On the top are the Northern 10 tribes.       On the South are the Southern 2 tribes (Judah & Benjamin)

5.] Assyrian Empire

      Then comes the next great empire of the Ashur, or the Assyrians.

      The Assyrians are another Semitic people.

      They move into the Mesopotamian valley, & they basically are       this huge war machine. They were known for their sadistic cruelty.

      They made the most feared people, the most hated people       of the ancient world. Enemy soldiers were skinned alive, impaled       on stakes, or severely mutilated, so were citizens.

      Entire citizens were slaughtered, or they would mutilate them &       put them in cages & bring them to the walls of the cities that       they were going to attack.

      And the city would just surrender to them, rather than fall into the       hands of the Assyrians. Around 883 BC, Ashurnasirpal II rises in       Assyria & begins a western conquest.

            Ashurnasirpal II (flourished 9th century BC) king of Assyria             883–859 BC, whose major accomplishment was the             consolidation of the conquests of his father, Tukulti-Ninurta II,             leading to the establishment of the New Assyrian empire.

      It’s as if it were drawn to Israel all these great powers, in some       way are drawn to Israel.

      It would become the major power of the world around this time.

      Assyrian empire reaches its peak under the king named Sargon       in 722 BC, then Sennacherib in 705 BC, &  Ashurbanipal...etc.

            In 722 BC, ten to twenty years after the initial deportations,             the ruling city of the Northern Kingdom of Israel, Samaria,             was finally taken by Sargon II after a 3-year siege star ted             by Shalmaneser V.

            Sargon II was the king of the Neo-Assyrian Empire from             the downfall of his predecessor Shalmaneser V in 722 BC             to his death in battle in 705 BC.

            Sennacherib, 705–681 BC             Esarhaddon, 681–669 BC             Ashurbanipal, 668–631 BC

      You see all these names in the BIBLE.

      They conquered much of the known world back then.

      Egypt, Phoenicia, everything fell to them; & they were ultimately       going to sweep across Egypt at that time; joining the entire region       together.

6.] The Revival of Babylon

      But then comes the next kingdom that rises.

      This is where Daniel sees the creatures.

      The kingdom is again called: Babylon.

      It is in some history books called Neo-Babylon.       It’s the new Babylonian kingdom.

      It’s the revival of Babylon.

      And so after the death of the Assyrian king Ashurbanipal, the       Assyrian empire goes into rapid decline.

      And so here a Semitic people, the Babylonians or the       Chaldeans, they rebel & are led by a king whose name is       Nabopolassar.

            After dealing with the revolt of the general Sin-shumu-lishir,             Sinsharishkun faced a much larger threat. His Babylonian             vassal state had taken advantage of the upheavals in             Assyria & rebelled under the previously unknown             Nabopolassar, a member of the Chaldean tribe, in 625 BC.

            What followed was a long war fought in the Babylonian             heartland. Nabopolassar tried to capture Nippur, the main             Assyrian center of power in Babylonia, but was defeated             by Sinsharishkun.

            However, Nabopolassar did take the actual city of Babylon             after a popular uprising there, & was crowned king of the             city in 625 BC.

      He had served the Assyrians as a governor, but now he rises       up against them. He senses weakness & he captures the       Assyrian capital of Nineveh.

      In 612 BC he destroys them.

      The new Babylonian empire rises under king Nabopolassar,       & then under his son who was called Nebuchadnezzar.

      Or you know this in the BIBLE, Nebuchadnezzar who then       joins the Middle East, he sweeps across Egypt, & Mesopotamia

      ..becomes the great Babylonian empire of Daniel.

      This is the background to understand the BIBLE!

7.] Biblical Symbols

      The next world power that rises up in Daniel’s vision was       the bear, in 559 BC, Cyrus becomes king of the Persian (Iran)

      And he rises up, Cyrus overthrows the Babylonians ~539 BC       conquers Babylon. Persia now the great Persian empire       dominates the ancient world.

      It’s the largest empire ever known: From the Nile to India

      When you read about porum, you read about that at the very       beginning: How big his empire was. At it’s height, I mean       it had conquered all these things;

      & then under Darius, it conquers Northern Greece, but as it       starts coming in contact with Greece, it starts getting drained.

      And this new empire starts rising.

      In Daniel’s vision, it is the leopard, its fast, its ferocious.

            Its not big, or its not weighty rather.             Its light, but its fast.

            And this is the Greek empire.

      Under Philip of Macedon & his son Alexander the Great; he       defeats the Persians & he sweeps across with his men.

      He sweeps across the Middle East, sweeps across Israel,       sweeps across even up to around India.

            When he dies, his kingdom splits as in Daniel, it becomes             there are four heads that will rise up.

            It splits into 4 kingdoms among his generals.

      The two most prominent kingdoms of these four is the       Seleucid Empire & the Ptolemaic empire.

            When he was asked who should succeed him,             Alexander said, “the strongest”, which answer             led to his empire being divided between four of             his generals:

            Cassander, Ptolemy, Antigonus, and Seleucus             (known as the Diadochi or 'successors').

      And one is Ptolemaic is Egypt, & the Seleucid is Syria       around there. It’s divided-up & now the fact is it’s a Greek       empire, they seek to make everyone Greek.

      They seek to be a universal empire that everybody will       be drawn into Greek culture.

8.] Final Beast: Roman Empire

      Then comes another, the last of the ancient powers, or       the great powers; & of Daniel’s creatures.

      In the 2nd century BC, a new power makes it ways known       to the West. From the Italian peninsula, Rome!

      Expanding under general Pompeo, & then the next Julius Caesar.

      Then after Caesar’s death comes the power struggle with       Marc Anthony, Cleopatra, of the Ptolemaic empire       [we just spoke about Alexander], & Octavius who was adopted       as the son of Julius Caesar, who will then later become known       as Augustin.

            He will be hailed as the first emperor of Rome,             the New Empire..

      A few decades before the 1st century, Rome becomes the       empire of empires. The GOSPEL begins under Rome.

            It says in the year Caesar Augustin reigns,             the birth of the MESSIAH

      That is the backdrop, now that is a sweep!

      Right now I just gave you, in I don’t know what: 10 minutes?

      I gave you the whole sweep of ancient history that’s the       background of the BIBLE.

9.] Connect Four

      But now let’s go back & let’s kind of lift a veil a little bit,       to see how what you read in the BIBLE goes together       with what I just said.

      And then we’re going to open up this key of world history.

      You have what started with Mesopotamia.

      Now it’s interesting because the BIBLE starts out with the       Garden of Eden & in Eden you have 4 rivers.

      And two of those rivers are the Tigress & the Euphrates.

      Another one maybe the Nile.

      And so it’s interesting where the BIBLE says everything started       is the same place where historians say civilization started.

      In the same area of the rivers.

            In fact, Mesopotamia (you know what it means?)             Mesopotamia - Meso means in the middle of, &             potamia (like the potamic) means the river..

            It means it’s in-between the rivers.

      Which rivers?

      The same rivers that are mentioned in the Garden of Eden!

      It all happens around there.

      Then when you look at Egypt, you have this great center, which       is by the Nile (the other river); & we said that around a certain       time (1750 B.C.) these invaders come in (the Hyksos),

      which is interesting because when you look at the names of       these invaders, who took over Egypt (at the time), their names       are Semitic. They have names like Baal or one name has       Jacob in it.

      And so it kind of makes sense that they would be more open       to the Hebrews (Joseph) when he came in, but once the       Egyptians drove them out, it makes sense that there arose       a pharaoh who did not know Joseph

      (who are now against the Hebrews)

      Because the Hebrews are seen as similar to these people.

      So it kind of makes sense that then they would enslave, or       they would come against (in fear) the Israelites.

      Then you have the invasion of the sea peoples I talked       about, as Egypt starts falling apart.

      And this again was linked to the Philistines (David & Goliath       Samson & Delilah) all that is part of this backdrop.

      Or all backed up by it.

      Around 1K BC as I said, “You have Israel just comes out of the       powerful vacuum & it’s GOD’s plans. It’s amazing that when       they are ruling, David & Solomon are ruling at the height of       world power.

            I mean it’s amazing from nothing to suddenly this high

      And it’s interesting because if they had stayed following GOD       if Israel had followed GOD, the whole history of the world       could have been different.

      I mean GOD is sovereign, we’re not getting into that but       the fact is: As they started falling away from GOD then       their enemies started rising up.

      So the thing is, if they had stayed (under GOD) there’s a       chance that GOD would have kept everybody there because       that’s what HE did. (I mean it)

      But then HE allows Assyria to rise up.

      And yet you could say that all history centers around GOD       of course, & all history also centers around GOD’s people!

      And GOD’s plans.

      As they turned away from GOD, that’s when quote the       Gentile world kingdoms began to rise & threaten them.

      And that’s what happens.

      Assyria is the empire of Nineveh.

      That’s Jonah! That’s the whole background of Jonah, so when       Jonah when he’s (you can under Jonah a little bit more); you       know it would be like GOD calling you to go to Nazi Germany       that they could get saved!

      And so if you’re Jewish & you went through that, you might not       want to do that, so Jonah did not want to go to Nineveh       because of how horrible these people were!

      But he did.

      The north kingdom, which is really the backdrop of the       Harbinger, the north kingdom, Hosea had warned them,       Amos had warned them, but by 722 BC the Assyrian empire       sweeps in & judgment finally falls on them thru Assyria!

      The Assyrians are the fathers of terrorism.

      Every terrorist comes in some way is descended spiritually       from the Assyrians. Follow their, they invented terror as we       know it.

      And they come in & they wipe it away & then you have, that’s       where you begin with the 10 lost tribes. They were taken       by Assyria!

      So you see the whole BIBLE goes right in how the BIBLE goes.       Here you have the story of king Hezekiah & when the Assyrians       come to him in the South in Judah & they surround Jerusalem       he instead comes to GOD & says:

            GOD, YOU have to help us,

      And what happens is, you don’t understand how fearful they       are, with the Assyrians, how awful the Assyrians were

            Surround all the walls of Jerusalem & the people know             if they get in those walls they are finished they’re going             to be devoured & terror.

            So you can understand more what that was like for             Hezekiah. He goes & he brings it to GOD & says:

            GOD help us!

      And what happens? As he does that, it says, the BIBLE says       GOD sent one angel to help.

      And that angel struck down thousands & thousands, the       entire Assyrian army in one night!

      And the amazing thing is if you look back in history & a map       the Assyrian empire went all across but it didn’t get Judah.

      Something stopped it from getting Judah.

      And there is actually (as I mentioned) in Greek history,       they got something, they got an echo of this cause

      They wrote about a time when the Assyrian empire was       outside a city & suddenly it was struck by a plague.

      But it matches what it says about Israel.

Rise of Babylon

      Then you have the rise of Babylon, we spoke about:

      How does that link with the BIBLE?

      Well this is the backdrop of Daniel, Jeremiah, & Ezekiel,       that Babylon is rising up & Jeremiah rises to warn Judah       of the Judgment coming through Babylon.

      And he tells the king of Judah submit to Babylon.

      But all the false prophets are saying,

          “No, no. GOD’s going to bless you; prosperity don’t worry.”

      And they are all false, the people will reject Jeremiah but       the king will be taken captive to Babylon & blinded.

      And his sons will be killed.

            And Babylon will be the kingdom that             destroys Judah & Jerusalem & the Temple             & brings GOD’s people into captivity.

      The Babylonian captivity, 70 years they destroy Israel.

      When Jeremiah (we believe) is writing Lamentations, he’s       weeping over Jerusalem, that’s the work of Babylon.

Rise of Persia

      So they go, as Daniel saw the Lion with wings of an eagle,       & then the next power we saw was Persia. 

      So the BIBLE speaks in Daniel of Persia taking over Babylon!

      And it’s this massive bear. It’s big, it’s cumbersome.

      Then you have Ezra & Nehemiah & Cyrus, that’s all under       Persia because the Persian empire actually did something       good, they let the Jewish people return to Israel & rebuild       Jerusalem. SO they actually blessed Israel.

      And that’s when you have Ester & Modecia.

      And the Persian empire almost destroys the Jewish people       but it doesn’t happen.

      Now the OT ends with a Persian empire.

Rise of Greeks

      But then between the OT & NT you’ve got the Greeks.

      And that’s when you have Alexander, the leopard with the       4 heads & the wings. that’s where you have the Greek or       the generals of Alexander. (the Seleucid Empire)

      That’s how you have Hannukah.

#Greek Empire #Alexander the Great #Seleucid is Syria #Ptolemaic is Egypt #superpower #world super power

[discountalien-pancake]

Re: Cleopatra. I am an archaeologist and it's true that she was a ruler from a Ptolemaic dynasty (a Macedonian one.) It is also true that we don't know much about her mother or her physical appearance, really. Hey, we don't know much about how people of Ancient Greece would be seen today in terms of race; the Mediterranean are was connected, with influx of people from all sides, etc. Very connected to what we today know as Middle East and Africa (this is getting long; I am sending part 2).

(Part 2 about Cleopatra): All in all, it is NOT historically accurate (even if Hollywood would care about that for once) to assume that Cleopatra was white. (Although we do know that she's had some European ancestry, unlike most of the other Egyptian rulers in the past.) This could be a great role for a WOC. The only thing I feel conflicted about is the fact that Ptolemaic rulers were foreigners; their rule a result of a conquest of Egypt. I would like to see this dynamic explored.

Hi anon! Thank you for the info. I think the general consensus of the people I’ve talked to about Cleopatra is that she was definitely not white, but the other details are hard to know for certain because there just isn’t enough information about her ancestry and the role of race in the Mediterranean at the time. I would also love to see an exploration of the tensions between the Ptolemies and the people.

#cleopatra #pancake answers #Anonymous

[urfavmurtad]

What is your opinion on arguments that claim the islamic golden age proves islam isn't anti-science or "problematic"?

I read this article a year ago and I’m glad I bookmarked it bc it says pretty much my exact thoughts on this topic. First lemme just get this part out of the way:

Like many other concepts that shape our understanding of medieval history, the idea of a “Muslim Golden Age” is a historiographical construct. It promotes the notion that, until at least the early thirteenth century, the Muslim world experienced an era of unprecedented stability, prosperity, and cultural production. … Putting aside the fact that it imposes an anachronistic framework on medieval Muslim history, its main argument that the period between the eighth century and the thirteenth century can be characterized mainly by tolerance, cultural efflorescence, political unity, and religious harmony is contrary to many of the facts that one encounters upon reading the history of the various civilizations which are subsumed under the category of “Islamic civilization,” a phrase which conceals the linguistic, cultural, intellectual, theological, and political diversity of the lands in which Muslims resided during the medieval and early modern periods. This is to say nothing of the fact that the narratives promoted by these “Golden Age” perspectives are usually a reworking of official histories that do not take into account the realities of marginalized groups during the same period. The “Golden Age” perspective is also problematic because it is in many ways reactionary and a response to the many political, religious, and intellectual challenges faced by the Muslim world in the modern period. History, or rather particular historical narratives about a “Golden Age,” therefore becomes an important repository for the “greatness of Islamic civilization” and a refuge in which Muslims can seek solace in order to refute the idea–promoted mainly by those hostile to Islam–that Muslim civilization was, is, and always will be characterized by death, destruction and chaos.…

In other words, the nuances of Muslim history and civilization are completely obscured in the face of broad, sweeping statements geared towards emphasizing not only the uprightness, but even the absolute supremacy of Muslim civilization, as it was believed to have manifested between the ninth century and the eighteenth century. It is at this point where history ceases to be a critical intellectual endeavor and instead becomes polemic and apologetics.  

The “Golden Age” is one of those abstract things that exists more as an idea than as a reality, like all other “ages” (“Dark Ages” etc). It’s important to point out that this is an Orientalist idea that was created to give the impression that Muslims in the distant past were productive and peaceful, versus “modern Muslims” (in the 1800s) who suck and must be brought back to their ancestors’ values by Ye Olde Hwhite People. It was not a term used by Muslims or Arabs themselves until the permanent inferiority/superiority complex (we r the Sasuke Uchihas of the world tbh) kicked in last century and people started using it.

No one can agree on when the “Golden Age” exactly took place. In the earliest usages of the term, it was just meant to refer to some vague past period of glory, to differentiate the past from the present squalor. The people using it did not have a damn clue about Arab history. In its modern-day usage, there is an enormous range from like… 700 AD to 1300 AD. Or even longer. That time period involved multiple civil wars, plagues that destroyed a huge portion of the population, genocides, invasions, ethnic cleansings, famines, breakdowns of society–as is expected of such a huge time period, of course. There were plenty of periods of stability and progress within that time period in some regions, interspersed by various issues… so where exactly is the line drawn? Was there really one “Golden Age”, or did Muslim lands, like literally every other civilization on earth, just go through periodic growth and collapse eras, up until the present?

No one can agree on where the “Golden Age” took place, either. Every single place where Islam was practiced? The lands of the Abbasid Caliphate, in general? The remains of the Umayyads in Spain? Fatimid Cairo?  Khorasan? Mughal India? Ottoman Anatolia? What? By the 1000s AD, Muslim lands were ruled by dozens of different empires. They had different laws, different populations, different levels of development and urbanization. Some were more built-up and wealthier than others, again like every other civilization on earth. Some areas were largely rural and illiterate, others were urbanized and better-educated. Some empires attacked others and absorbed them; dynasties rose and fell all the damn time. Throughout the “Golden Age”, non-Muslim lands were invaded and absorbed into larger empires, growing the area governed by Muslims even larger. Parts of the Middle East/North Africa/Andalus/India remained poor and isolated, other parts of it became wealthy and connected to trade routes. I mean… of course?

Like… I don’t think ppl realize what a large area of land we’re talking about here. Are people under the impression that every inch of land conquered by some Muslim dynasty was not only urbanized, well-developed, wealthy, and tolerant, but also homogeneous? Not all of these places had the same conditions!! Not all were even majority-Muslim throughout this period! Many had virtually nothing in common beyond the fact that their rulers were all Muslims of various sects–and many of those rulers were only nominally religious, again just like every other civilization in the world. There were different ethnicities being ruled over by different ethnicities–I mean by the 1000s the Turks were already running amok. This whole Orientalist idea that the Abbasids were in complete control of their peaceful happy lands until the Mongols destroyed them or whatever is nonsense.

It’s all a bit like saying that Europe had a “golden age” after the Italians took over Constantinople while rural French villagers had finally realized how to wipe their asses. Hell, it’s like saying that Europe already had a “golden age” during Byzantium’s peak centuries earlier while the western half of the continent was enjoying a Germanic Rave Party. You can’t assign one label to hundreds of years of history encompassing thousands of different tribes and dozens of empires on different continents.

No one can even say what they mean by “Golden Age”. Usually it’s referred to as some combination of scientific development and “tolerance”. It goes without saying that when you’re talking about like 600 years spread over parts of Europe, North Africa, the Middle East, and Southeast Asia, the idea that all of these areas were happy, peaceful, and productive places for that time span is insane. Not to mention that there were plenty of eras outside the “Golden Age” that had just as much development. Why exactly are the Ottomans or Safavids or Mughals not considered part of this age? What measure of goldenness are we using rn, is there a table I can consult to see how many gold units are necessary to become Golden or some shit? What does “tolerance” mean when we’re talking about eras in which religious minorities were almost universally discriminated against, even in the best-case scenarios? Are we supposed to just ignore those laws, the mass slavery, conquests, etc? Is “golden age” code for when we were the ones oppressing the people of foreign lands?

But typically, when people (this includes not just Muslims btw) talk about the “Golden Age”, I think they are picturing one of three vague areas, in different continents and eras. One is al-Andalus in what is now Spain/Portugal. Plenty of people have heard of Cordoba and its “tolerance”. The second is the Syria-Iraq-Iran region (as though they’re all one place???) and especially Baghdad at some point before the Mongol invasion of the city, like 800s-1100s or something. Again, even when people know very little about Islamic history, they often know of the completely-misrepresented “House of Wisdom”. (In my experience, the focus is almost always on the Arab parts of that area, while places like modern-day Iran are basically ignored, despite the fact that this is where many Muslim literary traditions, architecture, and research kicked off. I think it’s because the “Golden Age” is usually billed as an era of peaceful coexistence, and there weren’t many happy religious minorities in Iran. There’s also doubtlessly some Arab-centrism thrown in there.) The third and imo less well-known one is Fatimid Egypt. Fewer people have heard of the Fatimids themselves, but many institutions and ideas associated with Arab science and learning are from their time.

These are… uhh different dynasties on three different continents in different eras. But let’s roll with it for the sake of argument. The article I linked to sums up my thoughts on al-Andalus (side note: I know someone who calls Spain “occupied al-Andalus” in 100% seriousness and it makes me laugh every time. “No wait only WE’RE allowed to be imperialists!!!” - ancient Islamic proverb):

Another myth that Islamic Golden Age writers like to promote is the idea of medieval Islamic Spain (al-Andalus) as a haven of tolerance and coexistence. Although it is certainly true that there was a large degree of coexistence of faiths in medieval Spain and some important examples of toleration, there was also a great deal of intolerance. In fact, some of the most brutal episodes in Islamic history occurred in al-Andalus. In 1066 a Muslim mob murdered nearly 4000 Jews in Granada (the first major pogrom to occur in Europe), while in the twelfth century the Almohad dynasty forced all Jews and Christians in al-Andalus and North Africa to convert to Islam (or choose exile); among the most important of these exiles was the Jewish philosopher Moses Maimonides (d. 1204). The works of various Muslim philosophers and theologians, including both al-Ghazali (d. 1111) and Ibn Rushd (d. 1198), were publicly burned in the courtyard of the Great Mosque of Cordoba. Other episodes, such as the Martyrs of Cordoba (851-859) and destruction of Santiago de Compostela (999), also show that al-Andalus cannot simply be reduced to a paradise of tolerance. The existence of oppressive institutions, such as slavery and the social stratification of Andalusi society also underscores this point. However, just as we should not claim that al-Andalus was a haven of tolerance based on several examples and anecdotes, we should also not reduce Andalusi history to a sequence of ravages and massacres, as some anti-Islamic thinkers have done.

Al-Andalus was, for its early history, ruled by a remainder of the Umayyads, who had been overtaken by the Abbasids almost everywhere else. By necessity, they had to negotiate with their (mostly Christian) population to avoid unrest that would make them weak to enemies coming north from Morocco. While non-Muslims were discriminated against on a level that would cause Nazi accusations if it were implemented against Muslims in the West today, there were in fact plenty of decades in which development thrived and both Muslim and non-Muslim scientists and researchers made important progress, and there were times in which people lived in peace, even if it wasn’t an equal peace. After the collapse of the Umayyads, there was a period of unrest, followed by domination by the Almoravids and then the Almohads, the latter of whom were one of the nastiest Muslim dynasties to get into Europe prior to the Ottomans. People reacted somewhat negatively to the convert-or-die order and the “Reconquista” restarted not long after. The history of the territory is more complicated than “science and peace then iron maidens and Catholics :(((”.

The Fatimids were an Arab Ismaili dynasty that ruled parts of the ME and NA from Egypt for a couple hundred years starting in the 900s AD. During the first century of Fatimid rule it is absolutely true that Egypt, and especially Cairo, developed a sophisticated and wealthy culture that gave rise to all sorts of authors and scholars. But like every other long-lasting empire on earth, in terms of tolerance and peace, it was a mixed bag, and some leaders were better than others. Some Fatimid caliphs were out of their god damned minds, the most notable of whom was al-Hakim, who facilitated both an increase in scholarship and learning and a campaign of terrible religious persecution, against both Sunnis and Christians and Jews at different points of his lifetime. He was like the Arab Louis XIV or something. Nonetheless, many educational institutions did flourish in this era. Al-Azhar, which today puts out fatwas about how Shia people are devils, was in fact founded by the Shia Fatimids…

The Syria-Iraq-Iran trio, by which I mostly mean Baghdad bc 99% of the time that’s what people focus on, was one of the Muslim world’s most urbanized and educated cities for quite a while. The Mutazilites are usually credited as the ones to kickstart this, and this was a school of early Islamic theology that incorporated a lot of Greek/Hellenized Christian ideas into their works, to the chagrin of most other Muslims at the time. The Mutazilites shouldn’t be seen as hippies or harmless–they did often persecute other Muslims (and non-Muslims) and attacked non-Muslim lands in order to subjugate them. Eventually they went too far and triggered a backlash. But they saw themselves as “rationalists” I guess the word would be, and that is what drew them to the creation of learning institutions. These are some of the first places that commissioned the translations of Indian texts after the first Arab conquests of parts of India, and those texts included many important mathematical concepts that were expanded upon by (or sometimes wrongly attributed to) Arabs. Even as this school began to fade, it left an imprint on what is now Iraq, and huge numbers of scholars from the surrounding area did visit its large cities to further their education at various points. Again–world history is really long!! Starting in the 900s AD, it was ruled by all sorts of Iranian empires, then the Turks came to town, then the Mongols came in and wrecked shit. Periods of progress existed before, during, and after that era, interspersed by periods in which progress stalled. Tolerance went from ehh to really bad depending on the particular ruler and dynasty in charge of the area, which is completely expected.

To sum it up: there was no one “Islamic Golden Age”. There were many different eras of relative progress/tolerance interspersed with less-happy eras all throughout the Muslim areas of Europe, North Africa, the Middle East, and Asia from Islam’s creation to the modern day. And of course there were! This was a huge area and a huge time span. How much of that is due to Islam itself is, uh, debatable, to put it gently–certainly the enormous wealth that came from conquest and domination of trade and slave routes didn’t hurt, and not all major figures of this “age” were even religious. I don’t think many people would call the 1500s-1800s the “Christian Golden Age”. But whatever factors you want to attribute it to, it is at least true that multiple Muslim empires, at various points in time, did contribute a lot to the development of science and medicine. Granted, it wasn’t even close to every area ruled by Muslims in every time period from 700 to 1300, and to say that these areas were tolerant or progressive by modern standards is lunacy, but still.

The idea that there was one singular chunk of time in which “Islam” as a whole was tolerant, peaceful, progressive, wealthy, and scientifically knowledgeable–after which something (Mongols, imperialism, ??? we just don’t know) happened to reverse all of that–is a modern idea mostly promoted by Orientalists, and it’s been adopted as a magical Lost Age by Muslims who feel bad about the admittedly shitty situations that many currently find themselves in. But past Muslims dealt with war, poverty, dictators, destruction, and intolerance too. Sometimes people in the “Golden Age” were ruled by horrible leaders and influenced by terrible, intolerant, anti-science movements; other eras saw a backlash to that and facilitated better conditions and people rebuilt. Then there would be some disaster that set people back again, on and on. Just like today. And just like every other part of the world, including Europe. Things move in waves, man. timeisaflatcircle.gif

(Also if I see that “Muslims invented MATH. There was NO MATH before goddamn 610 AD” post with like 5000000 notes one more time imma cry tbh)

#golden age #islam #history #ask

[nova0000scotia]

BRILLIANT... Keys to Understanding Violence in the Old TestamentPosted on July 22, 2013 by Lawson Stone It’s hard to imagine anyone today who is familiar with the Bible not being concerned about the violence in the Old Testament. It’s a fashionable bomb tossed by the so-called new atheists, and the easiest way for critics of Christianity to dismiss the Bible. To hear them talk, on every page of the Old Testament cities are burned to the ground, whole populations annihilated. Yahweh, the God of Israel, is in turn portrayed as a wrathful tribal deity constantly calling his people to commit atrocities in his name.The problem of violence in the Old Testament centers mainly around the stories of Israel’s struggle to settle the land of Canaan. These stories center on the books of Joshua and Judges. So establish some starting points by looking in a general way at the question of violence and war in the Old Testament. Then in the installments to follow, we’ll turn specifically to Joshua and Judges.All these presentations will share one important conviction: central to getting the Bible right is hearing it in its own cultural and historical setting. This is not just good scholarship; it’s good listening. That’s why I’m excited to be sharing with you from a place called Bedhat es-Sha’ab, a little-known and infrequently visited site just west of the Jordan river that is possibly one of the earliest places where Israelites assembled and worshiped as they settled in the land of Canaan. Being an outsider in this barren, desolate place reminds me that the biblical characters didn’t live in a world of civilian police, ambulance and 9-1-1 service. Nor did they have 2000 years of reflection on the whole Bible. The Old Testament characters need to be seen and heard in their own time, not dismissed from the perspective of our time.With that in mind, here are seven facts to to help focus the question of violence in the Old Testament:FACT ONE:Jesus and the NT writers never complain about the violence in the Old Testament. That should flash at least a yellow, caution-light on our hasty dismissal of the Old Testament. Are WE more morally sensitive than Jesus and the New Testament writers? Did they see something in the Old Testament that we miss?FACT TWOSecular historians and the Bible itself tell us that the land of Canaan at the time of the Israelite settlement was not inhabited by a uniform, indigenous population. Canaan was a crossroads and a diverse culture of many different groups: You know, all the “-ites”-Canaanites, Amorites, Perizites, stalactites, stalagmites… If you’d asked a random inhabitant of Canaan “Whose land is this?” You’d have gotten different answers. It was a no-mans-land.FACT THREEGenesis 12-50 tells us the Israelites’ ancestors had actually lived in Canaan for centuries before their sojourn in Egypt. They were not outsiders trying to take a land from its original owners. In fact, the Pharaohs of Egypt would have seen no real difference between Canaanites and Israelites. They came from the same place, spoke the same language, had the same physical anthropology, i.e. they looked alike. So there is no parallel between the book of Joshua and, say, the European settlers in North America displacing the earlier inhabitants.FACT FOURThis a biggee. By Joshua’s day, Canaan had long suffered under a harsh political system. Canaan in the time of Moses and Joshua had been ruled for centuries by Egypt. Egypt had been ruled by foreign kings known as the Hyksos, who possibly came from Syria-Palestine. A native Egyptian dynasty expelled these foreign kings, pursuing them into Canaan. To insure they never came back, Egypt annexed Canaan and ruled it with two aims: first, never-ever would Canaan be a corridor for anyone attacking Egypt!Second, Pharaoh exploited Canaan economically. He administered Canaan by appointing rulers in the top 30 or so towns. They managed the country like a giant agricultural plantation, a kind of “factory farm.” They focused on producing a small number of crops valued by the Egyptian upper classes, mainly olives and a type of grape that thrived only in Canaan.This reality had serious consequences.The focus on massive production of a few crops not only risked depleting the land, it also destroyed the locally integrated, self-sustaining economies of small villages and towns throughout the hill country. These  communities needed mix of farming and herding just to survive. The Egyptians also yanked the best of the work force out of these towns and villages to toil as forced labor, emptying the rural hill country of Canaan. Many people from Canaan, not just future Israelites, wound up slaves in Egypt. Settlement patterns in Canaan about 1300 B.C., just before the exodus and conquest, show the central hill country of Canaan was largely emptied out.Under this kind of regime, Canaan was unstable and violent. The city rulers fought each other, hired mercenaries, sometimes cruelly treated the local populace. Bandits terrorized the highways. Men stripped of their land and living gathered around warlords, some of whom were good men, others just thugs or gangsters.So, by the time Joshua led the Israelites into Canaan, the place was dark and bloody ground. It’s just possible that, far from being seen as invaders, Joshua and the Israelites represented the arrival of order, justice, and even peace.FACT FIVEThe Old Testament shows us that, even in the conquest stories, the Israelites were not a militarized nation. While other nations boasted of their weapons and crack troops, the Israelites were not a professional army.  Likewise, the Israelites were not a huge group. The idea found in some textbooks that there were at least 2.5 million Israelites comes from a  misunderstanding of the Hebrew terminology for numbers. Archaeologists tell us that likely weren’t 2.5 million people living in all of Canaan and Syria combined!The books of Deuteronomy, Joshua & Judges stress that, from a military perspective, the Israelites were out-numbered, out-maneuvered and out-gunned. After Joshua, they had no central authority. They were only a coalition of tribes, often divided, often untrue to their own religion. The Bible says they needed miraculous divine intervention just to survive. Hardly the profile of a nation of bloodthirsty, imperialists!FACT SIXWarlike nations, and all of Israel’s ancient neighbors, gloried in their superior weapons and firepower. Images of Pharaoh portray him holding his hapless enemies by the hair and smiting them with a mace or battle axe. Or, we see Pharaoh thundering along in his war chariot, horses’ reins tied around his waist, unleashing arrows at cringing, fleeing foes. The Old Testament, in contrast,  stresses that the Israelites were poorly armed, confronting fortified cities or huge chariot forces on foot. The Old Testament also emphasizes Israel’s lack of metal workers. Again, not exactly a warrior nation.FACT SEVENFinally, the world of Moses, Joshua, Gideon and David was a world of unspeakable violence perpetrated by massive, well-armed professional armies. The kings of Egypt, Asia Minor and Mesopotamia gloried in their brutality and savagery. In countless inscriptions throughout the history of the ancient Near East, the great kings boasted of  boring through their enemies’ bodies, ripping their entrails out, galloping their horses and chariots through the gore of enemy bodies, splashing through enemy blood as if crossing a river, impaling thousands of “rebels” on stakes around conquered cities, flaying the skin off of their defeated enemies in full view of their families, and hideously mutilating the dead. And you know, almost nobody in the ancient Near East found this shocking. Rather, most thought it glorious proof that the gods had favored the king. Compared to the graphic detail, intensity, and sheer mass of these ancient descriptions, the Old Testament looks rather tame, even modest.Whatever problems we might have with the violence in the Old Testament, it was One who claimed to be the fulfillment of the entire Old Testament, Jesus, whose Hebrew name was Joshua, who appealed constantly to the OT witness. Schooled in the Old Testament, Jesus called his people to love their enemies and to be peacemakers, not in spite of his Old Testament heritage, but because of it.That’s something to think about.