mountainman

Hi Minimalist,

I have done some more thinking about your question. That is one of the interesting thing about discussion. Everyone looks at the evidence from different vantage places, and it is often challenging to try and stand in another's position, in order to be able appreciate the questions that may arise from this position.

I think we need to be able to distinguish saints and holy men, and by the latter I am bringing in the non academic ascetics. People like "The Yogis of Tibet", and people who keep to themselves on their path of ascetic practices. They have no externally motivated regious influences --- are you with me?

My thesis insists that the Roman empire, and especially down in Egypt, near Alexandria in the east, was a "little India" in terms of its acceptance of a collegiate and tolerant place for the ascetic monks and priests. In the period 500 BCE to at least the time of Philo (who describes them in detail) a number of these ascetic groups in Egypt (as distinct from the Essenes). Some stayed with the extant temples structures (Imhotep/Asclepius), some wandered away into remote solitary dwellings,some were more collegiate and had remote communal dwellings. All are associated with asceticism, and many are consistent of both female and male members.

In the field of ancient history, I believe that it is appropriate to delineate the role of the Holy Man in antiquity from those who are today in the Vatican Top 140 HOLY CHRISTIAN SAINTS List, flashing and advertising their wares for the children of the future.

Best wishes,


Pete Brown

Minimalist

I have to think about what you are saying here, Pete. Meanwhile, could you clairfy this statement for me?


How certain are we that there are no external influences? Chinese silk has been found in Egyptian tombs. More than trade goods would have moved along those trade routes.

yalla

In particular the power structure of the organized church and its priests.

mountainman

I recently saw a documentary about "The Yogis of Tibet" which included footage of the pre-1950 period, when the military of Mao fucked things up for the people of this land. I was impressed by the documentation of some of these ascetic yogis living year after year, decade after decade, in some remote location, in the act of "seeking one's salvation" .

My thesis certainly involved fraud and brutal imperial absolute power, and the progressing degrees of power that the christian church acquired during the period from 325 to the end of the fourth century.

However my research indicates that a great part of the history of this time has to do with the ascetics of the desert, which have also been fancifully painted as "christian hermits after Antony" was made famous by Athanasius biography in latin in the later fourth century. The entire ascetic movement was like a whole bunch of "yogis from Egypt" so-to-speak. Have a look at the four "Tall Brothers" and the "Origenist controversy".



The world was, and still is, a melting pot of all type of people. What path one person takes may be entirely different from the path taken by a seond person. We need to look at all paths, and not all paths are necessarily this or that, religious or irreligious, etc. Traders and merchants may never become ascetics. And ascetics may never become soldiers or merchants. And I am not saying all --- or indeed in general -- that ascetics are saints. It is just that the "ascetic authority" was well regarded by default in all cultures. The zulus would never accept a medicine man who was not an ascetic. See the Therapeutae via Philo, etc. IMO the ascetic practitioners were mainly regarded as having their authority, which was often sought. This is trying to differentiate the term "saint" and "(ascetic) holy man".

I hope this explains what you're after, If not fire away.
Best wishes,


Pete Brown

mountainman

Of which the christian church and its priesthood had no power (and very questionable historical existence) until the fourth century. In complete and total distinction, the pagan churches and temple structures and its priesthood which did have the ancient power until that time, used that power in a collegiate and tolerant manner. The fourth century is renown as the century of intolerance and persecution by the christian church, and as such is different from the preceeding centuries.

Minimalist

Perhaps that was where they failed? I am going to take some time to read up on the two topics you cited above and get back to you, Pete.

Minimalist

Okay, Pete. I certainly have no problem with your last line. Even today we see allegedly intelligent people falling for this "miracle" nonsense and, in typical bureaucratic fashion the Church requires two miracles for canonization but only one for beatification! That was the basis for my earlier comment about how, without fraud, there would be no saints.

Certainly the Romans were tolerant of local religion. As they expanded out of Italy in the 2d century BC and came into contact with the Greeks they must have noticed that their own pantheon was a bland copy of the Olympian gods. Perhaps that has something to do with their apparent willingness to accept foreign religious cults? Certainly Mithraism grew very rapidly from its earliest introduction to Pompey's army c. 67 BC.

It seems logical that remote regions would serve as "release valves" in much the same sense as the American frontier allowed disparate groups to move away, so would your gnostics have been able to distance themselves from the power of the church bureaucracy. Roman/Byzantine political authority was weakening by the 4th century which may well have been Constantine's idea for creating a single, unifying, religion.

I guess I would wonder if the unique climate of those desert regions and their virtually unparalled ability to preserve texts might not "overstate" the apparent importance of Egypt? All of the gnostic gospels that I know about have some link to Egypt. However, if there were similar monasteries in Gaul (for example) it is reasonable to assume that the wet climate there would mitigate against the survival of texts for 1500 years.

I suppose what I am asking is, are you restricting your inquiry to the East because that is where the texts have been found?

Clivedurdle

All roads lead to Rome....

What is this alleged Freedom of Religion under the Roman Empire when they have produced serious examples of attempts at destruction of certain religions?

Druidism was not just a British phenomena but a European religion.

Judaism and then Paganism are further examples.

The alleged persecution of Xianity is so small scale it does not register on the Richter Scale in comparison and must be seen as propaganda.

Is there something in the Roman Imperial mindset and psychology that reflects Darius?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darius_I_of_Persia

Look at the time and energy Rome has put into not only conquering people but beliefs. Do a timeline of religious wars in the Roman Empire.

Clivedurdle

And if we wish to discuss persecution, what of the death of Archimedes?

Toto

Archimedes was reportedly a casualty of war, not a victim of peacetime persecution for his beliefs.

Story - possibly apocryphal?