Chris Weimer

Wow, that makes the two of us making these promises based on ad hominem attacks. I wonder who gets there first?

Juliana

I see no "ad hominems", but in case there were some, my apologies.

Juliana

Vorkosigan

Let's do it jointly!

Juliana

Mr. Carotta kindly thanks Vorkosigan for his urbane answer and will read his and Chris Weimer's review(s) with interest.

Juliana

I have been wondering for quite some time whether this is not one of the main obstacles for many people to even consider it possible that the earthly, historical Jesus was Caesar. It leads to the question: Did God make man or rather man make God? Since many of us are under the impression of two thousand years of Christian theology which we have learned in one form or another from childhood on the answer to the above question seems to be a matter of course. But prior to Christianity some ancients had a different opinion about this, e.g. Euhemeros of Messene who wrote a book stating that the gods had once been rulers who after their deaths were worshipped as gods because they had been benefactors. Why should this be different with the Christian god? Because the clerics say so or for that matter the "holy" scriptures as we have them now?

When looking at the case of Caesar the matter is clear, he became the highest god of the Roman Empire as Divus Julius (equated with Jupiter) not least because he was very popular with the common people, because it was their will that he become God.
As Suetonius (Divus Iulius 88) writes: […] in deorum numerum relatus est, non ore modo decernentium, sed et persuasione uolgi.
[...] he was numbered among the gods not only because of the proclamation of a decision, but also because of the deep conviction of the people.

So maybe religion is not only an invention of the clerics and powerful to oppress the people?
Just a little food for thought, it is not a topic for discussion in this forum.

Juliana

Casper

Is it really the device itself or is it the word that evolved?

In other words, can anything be a troepium without any spoils attached to it? Or does it simply revert to a tree, or a pillar, or a cross, or whatever?

I am honestly asking. As a non-linguist native-English speaker all I can really relate to is, say, a moose-head on the wall. Take away the animal and you no longer have a trophy, just a board (or, depending on the shape, a shield, a circle, etc).

Either way I am more interested in the claims of a huge Caesar cult that mysteriously vanished and a huge Chrestus cult that mysteriously appeared. That alone sounds fishy regarding early Christianity, although I don't know enough about Roman history to continue the criticism in that direction.

Amaleq13

As far as I can tell from the references discussed here, it is the presentation of the device that changed over time. I get the impression that it started as a battlefield practice and then became more formalized when transplanted to the city.

Casper

Fair enough, but I think what I am really searching for is the actual meaning of the word; a device to display spoils/commemorate victory, or the actual presentation or commemoration itself?

Like, is a tree normally called a troepium, or only if it is used as such? A pillar?

And that makes it even stickier for carotta, because on the one hand the wooden cross represents a tradition of celebrating victory (or the prior works of a martyr or hero) and on the other hand it represents a device specifically used to punish and/or mock, a criminal's end, something unworthy of any hero. I guess he could explain that away though.

Still, like i said, I find Carotta's main premise to be that there was a huge movement that virtually disappeared overnight, and a huge movement that virtually appeared the next day. I suppose an old temple or relic could be reused by a later cult, but an entire dogma?

I'll give Carotta and Atwill both points for interesting speculation. I do enjoy this, much like Gardner's Holy Blood/Holy Grail stuff. It actually got me interested enough to dig through things and learn a little bit. As did Eric Von Daniken, many years ago

Juliana

Well, as the Latinists say: suum cuique.
Just keep reading about Daenikenesk (btw, Daeniken is a fraud) stuff like UFOs, aliens, shadow people etc. pp.
In the meantime serious researchers are digging more and more into Carotta's discovery and keep being surprised by new findings...
But that's probably not exactly what so-called "Infidels" want to know, it would shatter their belief system.

Juliana

Vorkosigan

ROFL. Poor Juliania. Truth hurting book sales?

Vorkosigan