# Population Genetics > Autosomal Genetics >  Greece was emptied a few timεs because of plagues, who was imported to replace them?

## bigsnake49

I know that there was a plague during the reign of Justinian and then again during the Black Death epidemic. There was also systematic cleansing of pagan Greeks or Greek speakers by the Christian Byzantine Emperors. Since the emperors depended mostly on imported mercenaries for the defense of the empire they imposed heavy taxes on the citizens of the empire. We know that they imported people from inside and outside the empire to replace the lost tax revenue. Do we know where the replacements came from? Can we trace the movement genetically?

----------


## bicicleur

the language didn't change and there is no obvious replacement of DNA, so I guess there was always continuity

but maybe some older mercenairies were rewarded with land and an estate in Greece where they could retire
and pay taxes on the revenue of their estate, of course

----------


## Ygorcs

The Justinian Plague was very destructive in the entire Mediterranean Basin and even beyond, and it certainly didn't depopulate only Greece. I'm sure other parts of the Byzantine Empire weren't thriving with a numerous population to be able to "replenish" the depopulated areas of Greece, as they had themselves lost a huge percentage of their population. I would also doubt the Byzantines would care so much about that population transfer if the population they'd have used for that replacement was also already subject to their crown, that is, they would be just transferring a source of tax revenues from one place to another. 

I wasn't aware the Christian and Greek-speaking Byzantine Emperors made a "systematic" (that's the word) cleansing of Greek speakers at a time when Greece had been one of the first heavily Christian regions of the Roman Empire. What are your sources to affirm that?

----------


## Yetos

> The Justinian Plague was very destructive in the entire Mediterranean Basin and even beyond, and it certainly didn't depopulate only Greece. I'm sure other parts of the Byzantine Empire weren't thriving with a numerous population to be able to "replenish" the depopulated areas of Greece, as they had themselves lost a huge percentage of their population. I would also doubt the Byzantines would care so much about that population transfer if the population they'd have used for that replacement was also already subject to their crown, that is, they would be just transferring a source of tax revenues from one place to another. 
> 
> I wasn't aware the Christian and Greek-speaking Byzantine Emperors made a "systematic" (that's the word) cleansing of Greek speakers at a time when Greece had been one of the first heavily Christian regions of the Roman Empire. What are your sources to affirm that?



it is true,
Ροιδης who search the subject gave more than 19 000 000 Greek nobles from Sicily to Parthia and from Egypt to Crimaia,
Nazi camps were nothing to that happened at Scythopolis Ephessos etc etc.

only Ιωαννης of Ephessus, an archbishop slain 14 000 pagans to convert 36 000 (44 to others) to christianity
outside of Ephessos

and not only Greeks offcourse, 
Romans also, but in a lesser degree.
they needed Roman army, so they do not hurt Roman pagans the way they do with Greek nobles.

Just read codex Theodosianus.

----------


## bigsnake49

> The Justinian Plague was very destructive in the entire Mediterranean Basin and even beyond, and it certainly didn't depopulate only Greece. I'm sure other parts of the Byzantine Empire weren't thriving with a numerous population to be able to "replenish" the depopulated areas of Greece, as they had themselves lost a huge percentage of their population. I would also doubt the Byzantines would care so much about that population transfer if the population they'd have used for that replacement was also already subject to their crown, that is, they would be just transferring a source of tax revenues from one place to another. 
> 
> I wasn't aware the Christian and Greek-speaking Byzantine Emperors made a "systematic" (that's the word) cleansing of Greek speakers at a time when Greece had been one of the first heavily Christian regions of the Roman Empire. What are your sources to affirm that?


Pagan Greek and Greek speakers.

----------


## Yetos

> Pagan Greek and Greek speakers.


not simple people,
just nobles, philosophers, army men etc,
what ever could opose the status of christinity as prime imperial religion.

the slain of peasants was after, a kind of witch hunt,

----------


## Ygorcs

> it is true,
> Ροιδης who search the subject gave more than 19 000 000 Greek nobles from Sicily to Parthia and from Egypt to Crimaia,
> Nazi camps were nothing to that happened at Scythopolis Ephessos etc etc.
> 
> only Ιωαννης of Ephessus, an archbishop slain 14 000 pagans to convert 36 000 (44 to others) to christianity
> outside of Ephessos
> 
> and not only Greeks offcourse, 
> Romans also, but in a lesser degree.
> ...


19,000,000 you meant? That numbers sounds very hyperbolic. The entire population of Greece during the appex of the Roman Era (not after the significant depopulation after the 3rd century crisis and especially the 6th century pandemics) is estimated at circa 3 million. That of Italy at circa 8 million. And nobles of course were not any more than 5% of the population (and that's already an exaggeration of mine!).

Anyway, I meant that I'm not aware of persecution against anyone only for being a "Greek speaker". The Christians were also overwhelmingly Greek speakers (even their holy scriptures had been written in Greek).

----------


## bigsnake49

> 19,000,000 you meant? That numbers sounds very hyperbolic. The entire population of Greece during the appex of the Roman Era (not after the significant depopulation after the 3rd century crisis and especially the 6th century pandemics) is estimated at circa 3 million. That of Italy at circa 8 million. And nobles of course were not any more than 5% of the population (and that's already an exaggeration of mine!).
> 
> Anyway, I meant that I'm not aware of persecution against anyone only for being a "Greek speaker". The Christians were also overwhelmingly Greek speakers (even their holy scriptures had been written in Greek).


Again, the hate was directed against the pagans (non-Christian Greeks and people of other regions). They also ransacked and vandalized temples, burned libraries and closed philosophical schools. They don't teach the Christian on pagan violence in school or in the churches.

----------


## bigsnake49

> 19,000,000 you meant? That numbers sounds very hyperbolic. The entire population of Greece during the appex of the Roman Era (not after the significant depopulation after the 3rd century crisis and especially the 6th century pandemics) is estimated at circa 3 million. That of Italy at circa 8 million. And nobles of course were not any more than 5% of the population (and that's already an exaggeration of mine!).
> 
> Anyway, I meant that I'm not aware of persecution against anyone only for being a "Greek speaker". The Christians were also overwhelmingly Greek speakers (even their holy scriptures had been written in Greek).


Again, the hate was directed against the pagans (non-Christian Greeks and people of other religions). They also ransacked and vandalized temples, burned libraries and closed philosophical schools. They don't teach the Christian on pagan violence in school or in the churches. They also don't teach you that the Crusades helped bring down the Byzantine Empire rather than liberate the Holy Land. They also don't teach you that in 1100 years not one book was produced that was worth reading. No plays, no philosophy, no advancement of science or music or sculpture or painting other than icons and religious mosaics. No beautiful pottery. Our dark ages in Greece lasted for 1500 years. There has been more literature, art and music produced in the last 200 years in Greece than in the 1500 years before.

----------


## LABERIA

> The Justinian Plague was very destructive in the entire Mediterranean Basin and even beyond, and it certainly didn't depopulate only Greece. I'm sure other parts of the Byzantine Empire weren't thriving with a numerous population to be able to "replenish" the depopulated areas of Greece, as they had themselves lost a huge percentage of their population. I would also doubt the Byzantines would care so much about that population transfer if the population they'd have used for that replacement was also already subject to their crown, that is, they would be just transferring a source of tax revenues from one place to another.


You forget the Slavic invasion and later the replacement of these people with others from Asia Minor, Sicily, etc.

----------


## bigsnake49

> You forget the Slavic invasion and later the replacement of these people with others from Asia Minor, Sicily, etc.


The slavic invasion left a really minuscule genetic imprint. For as much as it is advertised by the Slavs, it left minimal imprint. So did the Celts and even the Bulgarians. The only ones that have actually had any impact are the Arvanites.

----------


## Piro Ilir

> 19,000,000 you meant? That numbers sounds very hyperbolic. The entire population of Greece during the appex of the Roman Era (not after the significant depopulation after the 3rd century crisis and especially the 6th century pandemics) is estimated at circa 3 million. That of Italy at circa 8 million. And nobles of course were not any more than 5% of the population (and that's already an exaggeration of mine!).
> 
> Anyway, I meant that I'm not aware of persecution against anyone only for being a "Greek speaker". The Christians were also overwhelmingly Greek speakers (even their holy scriptures had been written in Greek).


Well, if you ever heard about Hypatia, whose assassination is a very well-known subject. If they killed such a famous great woman philosopher, then, did they really care slaughtering some common pagan citizens!! 
Monotheistic religions are too dangerous.

----------


## Yetos

> 19,000,000 you meant? That numbers sounds very hyperbolic. The entire population of Greece during the appex of the Roman Era (not after the significant depopulation after the 3rd century crisis and especially the 6th century pandemics) is estimated at circa 3 million. That of Italy at circa 8 million. And nobles of course were not any more than 5% of the population (and that's already an exaggeration of mine!).
> 
> Anyway, I meant that I'm not aware of persecution against anyone only for being a "Greek speaker". The Christians were also overwhelmingly Greek speakers (even their holy scriptures had been written in Greek).


Ι said greeks from sicily to Parthia, and from Egypt to Crimaia,
and from 313 AD to almost 900 AD.

and No the numbers might not been smaller,

consider the Greek world, even in Roman era expanded even in areas that Romans did not conquer,,

anyway, i had wrote characteristic chronicles, writers etc in another post,
the estimation was done by Ροιδης for 10 years,

And offcourse not only Greeks,
but also Romans and others,

Mediolanum Italy was once a slaughterhouse of pagan philosophers and is known.

@ Ygorcs,

just find out why Ambrosios of Mediolanum (archbishop) kick away Theodosios 1rst from his church,
it is known here in Makedonia as the slain Makedonians who resit against the Goths (Makedonians, slavs did not enter south of Balkans yet)
yet later at 380 he start a total anihilation of temples, and builds basilicas above

*even at 961 AD* the last true pagans with heratage and nobility were hiden in Crete,
Βριγγας Emperror Ρωμανος even ignored the incoming Arabs and send 2400ships to 3300 to some to erase the last nobles of Greek sacred religion,
it is estimated by most that in one night they slain 40 000 Cretans, while to some others to 270 000, 

Κλεαγατη and Ζηνοκλεια are for most neo-pagans considered the last true priestress of the 'true ancient Greeks'

yet paganism survived in the dark era, and you can see that in some fiestas, or some dogmas, or believes,
the last 2 decades some of us try to organise some happenings, reconstruct some events, or gather in certain places.

The Roman law
*Justinianus Codex 1 10 10
*After that all Greeks hide our identity under the term Roman Ρωμιος (citizen follower and ethnicity as Roman)

so the number might not been big, but small.

it was not only in Greece Ygorcs, it was all over the empire and even outside ot it,

and there starts the big strange, the tottaly odd,
the best and the most educated and wise in Greek philosophy move to the desert 
and they all learn by heart ancient greek poetry and philosophy, hidden and alone,
but they also learn christian liturgy so to pass easily the wrath,
living with almost nothing except their mind.
the first monks who chose their followers to continue the ancient knowledge,
while in big cities christian monks erase with lemon juice Archimedes palimpsista to write their 'wise' prayers
some others in the deserts and mountains under the skin and shape of a lonely monk transmit the knowledge to generations.
offcourse christianity as state religion and state law prevailed even to them. and they dissapear today

*at 536 AD they burned all the Forests that had oak trees in Greece Cyprus and minor Asia, because Zeus was hidden in the forest, and they had to kill him, vanish him.
*
at 400 AD at Cyrenaike and Carhedonia they made a congress and at 401 they slain everyone who had a Greek or a Roman book outside christian ones, Πορφυριος porfyrius

he become a saint
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikon_the_Metanoeite

yet most historians agree that the last pagans were around Sparta,
i believe they were in Crete.
*
EVEN AT 1700 AD THEY ATTACK OLD RELIGION*
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michel_Fourmont

As for the West?

the burn of Fortuna
the Elvira illiberis
the bayeux
the 370 when Pope Damasos kills a rich old religion merchant,
Valentinianus starts a massive attack with the term, 
Pope can not be judged by a mortal
the most possible is the assasination of Agorius Vettus and the reconstruction of Olympian Gods in Rome.
St Martiinos and the extremination of the Druids 
376 AD, the transformation of Roman Legions,
the Slain of Mithras followers, very favorite in Roman military,
the ones left are forced to follow Christianity, it is not coincidence that pope decides Christmas at 25 December, (23 is the Day of Mithras)

enough

I would end with this,

Cesset *mathematicorum* tractatus. Nam si qui publice aut privatim in die noctuque deprehensus fuerit in cohibito errore versari, capitali sententia feriatur uterque. Neque enim culpa dissimilis est prohibita discere quam docere


I hope you understand now that from 300 to 961 AD 19 000 000 all over the empire might not be enough.


if someone want to study about that,
there is a book by Karlheinz Deschner


at Lugdunum the last pagans raise a new Roman emperror, the Eugenios Flavios,
same time is written the epistole 'to Roufinos' 
after that old Religion Romans loose even their properties, a total anihilation of souls, things, land, etc, that filled up the empire with many riches.


the city of Harran in Greek Καρρες Καρρυες is the last place where pagan medicine resist the Christian one,
they are the only ones that Justinian plaque did not hit them
REMEMBER BY JUSTINIAN LAWS THE ONLY MEDICINE ALLOWED WAS lyches, pray and EXORCISM,
even Aristotle was denied as pagan.

----------


## Ygorcs

> Well, if you ever heard about Hypatia, whose assassination is a very well-known subject. If they killed such a famous great woman philosopher, then, did they really care slaughtering some common pagan citizens!! 
> Monotheistic religions are too dangerous.


None of that has anything to do with the obviously wildly inflated numbers estimated above. Greece could never have a population of Greek pagans (especially not in a time when it already had a Christian majority) much larger than Greece's entire population now in 2018. That's understandable, because most ancient sources tended to overestimate numbers like that (for the sake of a more emphatic narrative, propaganda or glory), but it's still fantasy though it suggests that real massive slaughters did happen. 

And no, as anyone who has read the real history of Hypatia's murder knows they had a lot more business killing a famous woman like her because her murder had a lot to do with politics and elite rivalries in Alexandria, it was not merely a religious affair caused by Christian intolerace (though this issue made the rival political faction provoking against her and spacegoating her much easier). She was killed not despite, but exactly because of her fame and clout.

That said, it is unquestionable that there was a lot of religious persecution against pagans in Greece and elsewhere. Now that does not lead automatically to the categorical statement that that caused a wholesale depopulation and massive population replacement within the Greek territory, especially when Greece was not under particularly different political, social and religious conditions in comparison with the rest of the Mediterranean (especially Byzantine Empire, which ruled not just in Greece). Strong claims need to have strong evidences to back them up.

_________________

@ Yetos 

I wasn't aware of this Michel Fourmont and his delirious destructive work (not to speak of his forgeries). To destroy inscriptions and manuscripts so that other people couldn't find and study them too, and to brag openly that the places would somehow become more famous again if and when he destroyed them, and he'd be the one making that happen, and so on... That's really insane, maniac even, much more than anything about religious zealotry (as far as I've read, he became an uncontrollable all-purpose destroyer obsessed with exclusive accumulation, i.e. he didn't focus particularly more on religious pagan objects). Thanks for all the information you provided in your post.

----------


## Ygorcs

> You forget the Slavic invasion and later the replacement of these people with others from Asia Minor, Sicily, etc.


I didnt' forget it. It's just that it is not impactful and relevant enough to the issue under discussion now, especially as early as the mid 6th century AD.  :Wink:

----------


## Yetos

> None of that has anything to do with the obviously wildly inflated numbers estimated above. Greece could never have a population of Greek pagans (especially not in a time when it already had a Christian majority) much larger than Greece's entire population now in 2018. That's understandable, because most ancient sources tended to overestimate numbers like that (for the sake of a more emphatic narrative, propaganda or glory), but it's still fantasy though it suggests that real massive slaughters did happen. 
> 
> And no, as anyone who has read the real history of Hypatia's murder knows they had a lot more business killing a famous woman like her because her murder had a lot to do with politics and elite rivalries in Alexandria, it was not merely a religious affair caused by Christian intolerace (though this issue made the rival political faction provoking against her and spacegoating her much easier). She was killed not despite, but exactly because of her fame and clout.
> 
> That said, it is unquestionable that there was a lot of religious persecution against pagans in Greece and elsewhere. Now that does not lead automatically to the categorical statement that that caused a wholesale depopulation and massive population replacement within the Greek territory, especially when Greece was not under particularly different political, social and religious conditions in comparison with the rest of the Mediterranean (especially Byzantine Empire, which ruled not just in Greece). Strong claims need to have strong evidences to back them up.
> 
> _________________
> 
> @ Yetos 
> ...


Υπατια was a mathematician and a woman,
according the Codex theodosianus she commited crimes,
according Apostole Paul she also commited crime,

1rst crime she was a woman who teached, that is forbiden by Paul
2nd crime she study mathematics and was daughter of Θεων-ας a great mathematician,

remember Παπου of Alexandreia was re-discovered at 18 century.

----------


## Ygorcs

> Υπατια was a mathematician and a woman,
> according the Codex theodosianus she commited crimes,
> according Apostole Paul she also commited crime,
> 
> 1rst crime she was a woman who teached, that is forbiden by Paul
> 2nd crime she study mathematics and was daughter of Θεων-ας a great mathematician,
> 
> remember Παπου of Alexandreia was re-discovered at 18 century.


How come if the Apostle Paul lived more than 300 years before Hypatia was even born? (also, AFAIK Paul did frown upon women teaching _religious_ mysteries and doctrines, not anything at all)? What you claim does not fit the evidences. Instead, Hypatia's death had a lot to do with the Alexandrian bishop Cyril (nephew of bishop Theophilus, who not only tolerated, but seems to have made alliances to Hypatia) and not _just_ his (fanatical) religious, but particularly his political ambitions and interests, too, and Hypatia likewise was not just a philosopher and mathematician, she also had clout and interests in the social and political matters of Alexandria. Hypatia and Cyril saw themselves in opposing, rival sides in an eminently political dispute and civil conflict between factions, and the religious issue was only another catalyst (and manipulation tool). Hypatia's life history, like most other famous and now somewhat idealized stories (looking more like moral fables than history), seems to have been much more nuanced and complex than the "inspiring" but a bit simplistic narrative of "free-thinking scientist woman persecuted by evil Christian fundamentalists". That isn't but a partial truth.

----------


## ihype02

> The slavic invasion left a really minuscule genetic imprint. For as much as it is advertised by the Slavs, it left minimal imprint. So did the Celts and even the Bulgarians. The only ones that have actually had any impact are the Arvanites.


A quarter of Mainland Greece Y-DNA frequencies are of proto-Slavic origin. Something similar about Albanians too.

----------


## Yetos

> How come if the Apostle Paul lived more than 300 years before Hypatia was even born? (also, AFAIK Paul did frown upon women teaching _religious_ mysteries and doctrines, not anything at all)? What you claim does not fit the evidences. Instead, Hypatia's death had a lot to do with the Alexandrian bishop Cyril (nephew of bishop Theophilus, who not only tolerated, but seems to have made alliances to Hypatia) and not _just_ his (fanatical) religious, but particularly his political ambitions and interests, too, and Hypatia likewise was not just a philosopher and mathematician, she also had clout and interests in the social and political matters of Alexandria. Hypatia and Cyril saw themselves in opposing, rival sides in an eminently political dispute and civil conflict between factions, and the religious issue was only another catalyst (and manipulation tool). Hypatia's life history, like most other famous and now somewhat idealized stories (looking more like moral fables than history), seems to have been much more nuanced and complex than the "inspiring" but a bit simplistic narrative of "free-thinking scientist woman persecuted by evil Christian fundamentalists". That isn't but a partial truth.


hmm

plz tell me one woman that teach after Ypateia till Jean d'arc
and if remember correct jean d'arc was also ex-comunicated?
When Paulos says to Timotheos A' chapter 2
_8_ βουλομαι ουν προσευχεσθαι τους ανδρας εν παντι τοπω επαιροντας οσιους χειρας χωρις οργης και διαλογισμου
_9_ ωσαυτως και τας γυναικας εν καταστολη κοσμιω μετα αιδους και σωφροσυνης κοσμειν εαυτας μη εν πλεγμασιν η χρυσω η μαργαριταις η ιματισμω πολυτελει 
_10_ αλλ ο πρεπει γυναιξιν επαγγελλομεναις θεοσεβειαν δι εργων αγαθων 
_11_ γυνη εν ησυχια μανθανετω εν παση υποταγη 
*12 γυναικι δε διδασκειν ουκ επιτρεπω ουδε αυθεντειν ανδρος αλλ ειναι εν ησυχια* 
_13_ αδαμ γαρ πρωτος επλασθη ειτα ευα
_14_ και αδαμ ουκ ηπατηθη η δε γυνη απατηθεισα εν παραβασει γεγονεν 
_15_ σωθησεται δε δια της τεκνογονιας εαν μεινωσιν εν πιστει και αγαπη και αγιασμω μετα σωφροσυνης








He surely does mean only religious affairs
''I do not allow woman to teach, neither to αυθεντειν (correction, mastery, etc) to a man, *but only to keep silence*

only by that Ypateia has no chance,
considering that she was a mathematician, daughter of Theon of Alexandreia Bibliotheque supreme teacher.
she was doomed by hand,
and was not only Cyril, or Nitra monks, 
there were also others in the game,

«_Ο Αλεξανδέων Δήμος, πλέον τών άλλων Δήμων, χαίρει ταίς στάσεσι. Δίχα αίματος δέ, ού παύεται ή ορμή_.» 

for Ypateia 


to cover the mess and the shame, Christians invented St Catherine Αγ Αικατερινη
Συνεσιος who was student of Ypateia and later Bishop of Ptolemais
says that Ypateia and Catherine are the same person,,
as always for every crime was done, church found a new martyr,

The Ypateia as Holy and Saint Catherine



REMEMBER EMPERROR JUSTINIANUS MARRIED THEODORA AND NOT KASSIANE for the last just reply to him with authentic speech

----------


## Ygorcs

> hmm
> 
> plz tell me one woman that teach after Ypateia till Jean d'arc
> and if remember correct jean d'arc was also ex-comunicated?


There were several, but the most famous I remember now was Hildegard von Bingen, by the way a Catholic abbess, but also a philosopher, magister, composer, polymath, writer and more. Jean d'Arc was not a teacher, she was just a charismatic illiterate peasant girl devoted to a war and the defense of her nation, which she regarded as a "divine mission". And as is clear nowadays to all serious historiography about her, she was arrested and killed by the English to get rid of her for political and military reasons, the religious trial was just the excuse used for that (after all they couldn't find any secular reason to imprison her). The French by her side were just as Catholic as the rest and admired her, she just happened to become a prisoner to the enemies of her country and their allies. The English, for obvious reasons in the context of the 100 Years War and her stimulating role to the French soldiers, wanted to portray her as a threat that needed to be annihilated, as simple as that.

----------


## Ygorcs

> When Paulos says to Timotheos A' chapter 2
> _8_ βουλομαι ουν προσευχεσθαι τους ανδρας εν παντι τοπω επαιροντας οσιους χειρας χωρις οργης και διαλογισμου
> _9_ ωσαυτως και τας γυναικας εν καταστολη κοσμιω μετα αιδους και σωφροσυνης κοσμειν εαυτας μη εν πλεγμασιν η χρυσω η μαργαριταις η ιματισμω πολυτελει 
> _10_ αλλ ο πρεπει γυναιξιν επαγγελλομεναις θεοσεβειαν δι εργων αγαθων 
> _11_ γυνη εν ησυχια μανθανετω εν παση υποταγη 
> *12 γυναικι δε διδασκειν ουκ επιτρεπω ουδε αυθεντειν ανδρος αλλ ειναι εν ησυχια* 
> _13_ αδαμ γαρ πρωτος επλασθη ειτα ευα
> _14_ και αδαμ ουκ ηπατηθη η δε γυνη απατηθεισα εν παραβασει γεγονεν 
> _15_ σωθησεται δε δια της τεκνογονιας εαν μεινωσιν εν πιστει και αγαπη και αγιασμω μετα σωφροσυνης
> ...


That's a really unfortunate text, but I must say the prevailing opinion among historian and theologian experts about this (and several other) letters attributed to Paul in the Bible are that they are false attributions, because their language don't match the language of earlier letters arguably written by Paul himself, and it's probable that they were in fact written in the end of the 1st century, when Paul had already died decades earlier. Some of these latters are nowadays called _Pseudo-Paul__'s letters_ because they are under sensible suspicion that they represent letters of later leaders of primitive churches, not Paul himself. 

That said, the context in which that instruction is given is clearly about religious affairs. The sentence alone means nothing if you don't read the text entirely and the context that motivated the writing of the letter. He's instructing pastors on how to behave and lead the services and prayers of the congregation, on what is permissible or not, desirable or not in the community of believers' meetings. In the end of the letter the author (whether it's Paul or a later leader) says explicitly that his instructions refer to the proper behavior in the "household of God", that is, during ceremonies and liturgies in a sacred place/occasion: 




> 14 I am writing these things to you, hoping to come to you before long; 15 but [k]in case I am delayed, *I write so that you will know how [l]one ought to conduct himself in the household of God, which is the church of the living God*, the pillar and support of the truth.

----------


## Yetos

I found it in English

1 timothy chapter 2 verb 12

_12_ _I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man;_ 


the most possible is that Ypateia rejected the Nitra monks as anti-social,
and they attacked Orestes.
then by permission of Cyrilos they attacked Ypateia her shelf.
revenging the death of one of them, the one who almost crushed the head of Orestes.
Anyway, 
Both 
1. by Christtian law (Paulism, New testament epistoles)
2. by Imperial state law,
she was doomed, for being a woman, and a scientist,
Dark ages, the 'death' of the old religions.

_12 Docere autem mulieri non permitto, neque dominari in virum: sed esse in silentio.

_Anyway,
have you ever thought that Justinian plague might be due to the medicine laws/codexes
and the burn of the forests?

yet I do not know how Roides calculate 19 000 000 
but the number is not big considering the Hellenistic world,
the long time of 6 centuries (20 generations)
just imagine only 10 % for each generation,
in Ephessos was about 1/3 > 33% in one generation.

And I do not think is only in Liturchy or Hierarchy
Paul describes them almost as Devils, especially the widows,
SO I THINK, PAUL SPEAKS ABOUT HIS 'NEW' SOCIETY, TO A NEW PRIEST.
AND IN HIS SOCIETY, WOMEN MUST SILENCED,
NOT ONLY IN TEMPLE, BUT GENERALLY,

----------


## Ygorcs

> _
> _Anyway,
> have you ever thought that Justinian plague might be due to the medicine laws/codexes
> and the burn of the forests?


I don't. The ancient medicine (heck, even the 19th century medicine even after the development of the scientific method) was too primitive to avoid diseases as virulent and unprecedented as the Justinian plague. They didn't even understand the mechanisms by which such diseases spread and what exactly caused them (viruses and bacteria). 

Also, the Justinian Plague was notoriously preceded by the horrible Antonine Plague and Cyprian Plague during the late 2nd and 3rd centuries AD, still in decidedly pagan and much more prosperous times of the Roman Empire (not to mention the catastrophic Plague of Athens in the late apogee of Classical Greece), which demonstrates that the Justinian Plague was just a more destructive pandemic after many, many others, both big and minor outbreaks. 

However, I agree that the climate crisis and conflicts leading to massive displacements and migrations not only in the Christian realms, but also and even more intensely to its north and east, must've hastened the arrival and rapid expansion of new strains of disease to which people had not built up immunity.

----------


## Ygorcs

> Paul describes them almost as Devils, especially the widows,
> SO I THINK, PAUL SPEAKS ABOUT HIS 'NEW' SOCIETY, TO A NEW PRIEST.
> AND IN HIS SOCIETY, WOMEN MUST SILENCED,
> NOT ONLY IN TEMPLE, BUT GENERALLY,


Well, then it was a kind of society pretty much like that of the much admired Classical Greece, which was orders of magnitude more mysoginistic and sexist than the already admittedly sexist Roman Era. You people fetishize the Antiquity and overestimate its social advances too much, my friends. It was not an easy and free world for women with or without Christianity, though initially it may have gotten even worse, if only compared to the cosmopolitan Roman world (I'm not sure about later time during the High Middle Ages, where at least thousands of women could and did live mostly independent lives with lots of access to intellectual activities and learning via the excuse of religious monasticism).

----------


## Angela

By the standards of modern feminism, all societies up to very recently were very sexist. We've only gotten anything approaching equal rights in the last 100 years.

So, by modern standards, Roman society was sexist, Greek society was even more sexist, but all earlier societies were "sexist", and today huge numbers of women live in societies far more sexist and oppressive and brutal to women than anything in antiquity.

I don't know about the Middle Ages: it's complicated. Yes, a few women were able to express their minds and spirits through monasticism, but a lot just got tossed in to get rid of them when they had neither a religious nor intellectual bent for that type of life. As for daily life, perhaps you could say at least there was no slavery, but how much better was the life of a serf tied to the land?

In terms of Christianity and Paul in particular, I think we have to remember that Paul was a Pharisee, a member of a very strict Jewish sect. I've been to Orthodox Jewish services, and to this day the women have to sit upstairs, totally separate from the men. The women actually do no praying, or at least most of them don't. They gossip and play with their young children. There is literally no role for women at all in Orthodox Judaism, other than in the home. 

Paul is speaking out of his own experience. Whether or not those disputed passages are genuine or not, Paul's was not the only voice in the Church. As Ygorcs has pointed out, there was definitely a role for women in the Church, certainly much more of a role than there was in Judaism. In fact, I've seen papers proposing that women were over-represented among the early Christian converts, and that this was a major factor in the extraordinary growth of Christianity.

It's more complicated and nuanced when you compare the role of women in pagan religion versus the role of women in Christianity. Perhaps in the earlier periods of the Classical World women had some role as priestesses, and there were some educated women, but the cult of the Vestals, for example, was debased. In Classical Greece,there were the oracles, but did they control themselves or were they controlled by priests? I don't think there's much to choose between the role of women in the Classical World and the Middle Ages, frankly.

----------


## Yetos

In classical hellenistic world Woman was different than man,
but woman was not forbiden to speak,

the most favorite role for woman was to stay at home at γυναικωνιτης chambers,
to raise their children,
but that did not stop them to become even high priests. political persons etc,
and nobody force them in silence.
yet until their children become 7-8 years old they should stay at home,

just think that at themost typical of polytheistic religion
Deities were 12 and 6 were women,
and women had their own temples,
tottaly different than men,

just find out how many women play a political role in old testament.

----------


## Piro Ilir

That's really sad when people deny such historical facts. Just mentioning that in antiquity they had priestesses everywhere. This was an important and powerful position in the society.

----------


## Angela

> That's really sad when people deny such historical facts. Just mentioning that in antiquity they had priestesses everywhere. This was an important and powerful position in the society.



Who said otherwise? It doesn’t change the fact that for most women in Ancient Greece, unlike in Rome, women basically didn’t leave their homes, could’t run their husband’s business even as a widow and on and on. Not that Ancient Rome was any picnic either.

Is it too much to expect people to be objective about these things regardless of their national origin?

----------


## Yetos

ok

Ηραια, Εστιαδες, Παλλαδες etc etc.

Come on guys, do not hide behind your finger.
half deity was women,
and in most Women deities the priest were women, at least in a high analogy,

plz guys,

----------


## Ygorcs

> In classical hellenistic world Woman was different than man,
> but woman was not forbiden to speak,
> 
> the most favorite role for woman was to stay at home at γυναικωνιτης chambers,
> to raise their children,
> but that did not stop them to become even high priests. political persons etc,
> and nobody force them in silence.
> yet until their children become 7-8 years old they should stay at home,
> 
> ...


That means nothing when we know that the ordinary flesh and blood women were secluded in their homes under a huge amount of restrictions and basically were second worse only to slaves. They were sometimes even mocked as little more than factories of sex and birth-giving. No, come on you. You shouln't confuse your appreciation for your modern ethnicity with an objective, down-to-earth evaluaton of the practices and customs of an ancient people to whom you're related 2500 years ago. Classical Greece was notoriously mysoginistic even for the standards of the Mediterranean Antiquity.That's just a statement, it has nothing to do even with whether it was better or worse than Christian Greece. Women's lot was in fact surprisingly similar to that reserved for women in the Arabian peninsula in the modern era. They usually didn't even leave their home without a good reason or a male authorization, and they had virtually no accepted role in the economic managament and trade businesses, unlike in later Rome and even, yes, many medieval women in parts of later Christendom (women famously were usually expected to be partners of their husbands not only in the homely activities, but in their public businesses, too) and even in early Islam (e.g. Khadija).The Roman era was much better, but still pretty sexist. There must've been some _rational_ reason for women to have been disproportionately represented among early Christian converts (early, not later, when the religion became much more institutionalized - and harsher, absorbing and legitimizing the customs of the societies around).

In the Old Testament, yes, there are some women with an important political and social role (even if unofficially), like Judith, Esther and Ruth. But that's not the point, especially because we've all asserted here that the ancient Jewish society was very mysoginistic, mcuh more strongly than Christianity in fact, so it's no use comparing Jewish society with Classical Greeek one, they don't contrast a lot. You can't judge the real life of ancient societies based on their mythology. Name some women who were important political leaders in the appex of Classical Greece, for instance. Not Greek deities, flesh and blood important women from the heyday of the Classical Greek city states. There are too few for a reason, maybe even fewer than in parts of medieval Christian Europe (where's the Eleanor of Aquitaine ofclassical, pre-Roman Greece?). It baffles me that you people really want to derive a supposedly "pro-women" society out of ancient societies like Classical Greece, basing your arguments not on historic evidence about real people, real women, but on their religious mythology (that's like evaluating the medieval Christendom based only on their supposedly revered New Testament, as if people were actually so consistent with their faith). As for their having priestesses, the average priestess were in practice not much more relevant politically and economically, but just as revered and culturally relevant and admired, as the nuns and abbesses of the Middle Ages. Many of them even lived in cloisters (o half-cloisters) like medieval Christian nuns. Again, they don't represent the average women of their society.

----------


## Ygorcs

> the most favorite role for woman was to stay at home at γυναικωνιτης chambers,
> to raise their children,
> but that did not stop them to become even high priests. political persons etc,
> and nobody force them in silence.
> yet until their children become 7-8 years old they should stay at home,
> [...]
> and women had their own temples,
> tottaly different than men,


So let us see: Classical Greece women _must_ stay at home until their children are a bit more grown up, they are rendered even _their own_ secluded chamber inside their homes to be hidden from sight and have their own segregated "feminine space", and their temples were totally different and segregated from that of men. They were not silenced... but couldn't participate in politics as voting citizens, nor even become partners, let alone the owners of trade/service businesses outside their home.

So, it's basically strict gender segregation in a society where supposedly women can have "lots" of important roles (as priestesses, what else? That's notoriously the only space in society where women mattered in Greek society, religious affairs - _not_ really different from medieval Christendom, even though even there they sometimes had their powerful queens and widow businesswomen). And do you really want us to believe that society was not extremely mysoginistic in a way that even the mature (High Middle Ages) Christian societies wouldn't have think of? Come on, guy! LOL 

By that token, Saudi Arabia and other hellish mysoginistic places for women are in fact quite fair. I mean, women have their own separate space in the mosques different from that of the men, they can leave their home even when their children are babies as long as that's permitted by her male guardian, inside their home they have no restrictions at all (not even the veil is compulsory) with their male relatives, they can now even work (within or even outside their home) provided that the husband agrees with that. Maybe fundamentalist Islam is not that bad after all.

________________________

P.S.: By the way, I found this interesting article on a book about priestesses of Classical Greece: https://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/01/b.../Coates-t.html

----------


## Ygorcs

> That's really sad when people deny such historical facts. Just mentioning that in antiquity they had priestesses everywhere. This was an important and powerful position in the society.


That's good evidence that they were not completely oppressed, but much like in other eras it's not a good sign when the one only important social role available to women in a society is as full-time religious leaders.

----------


## LABERIA

> *The slavic invasion left a really minuscule genetic imprint.* For as much as it is advertised by the Slavs, it left minimal imprint. So did the Celts and even the Bulgarians. The only ones that have actually had any impact are the Arvanites.


If the genetic data confirm this hypothesis, then this can be explained because Greece was emptied few times as the title of the thread suggest.
Regarding Arvanites, in my opinion they can be considered the native population of Greece.

----------


## Yetos

To all of you, with the respect to the right of opinion.
the believe that ancient world, and especially ancient Greece was misogynistic, is wrong.
there is an answer,

Read correct the ancient theatrical works,
at least Λυσιστρατη Εκκλησιαζουσες
And then why in Makedonia were helmets.

then come back to tell me about misogynistic or the rest.

*I think the readers of classical literature, know exactly what I mean.
*
and even if you still believe so,
after reading the classical works,
compare how many women existed as deities, priestress, or even primary heroes at literature,
and compare it with old and new testament.

as for the power women have,
I SUGGEST READ THE OLDEST ONE, THE HOMER ODYSSEY THE CHAPTER OF NAYSIKA,
not to mention Kirke or kalypso.
*
plz guys, ancient pagan or polytheistic literature
DOES SHOW WOMEN TO BE SILENCED.

*@ Angela
on contradictory, I believe that in Greece women had more power than in Rome.

*as for slavery, in Greek there are 2 words, Δουλος and Σκλαβος,*
tottaly different in meaning, for δουλοι we are all of us, who work for salary, all working class payed by hour or amount of a work (job done)
σκλαβοι are the ones who work to save their lives, prisoners etc,
and also were the convicts to work for public benefit,

*In ancient Greece
WOMEN HAD THE RIGHT TO SPEAK AT COUNSILS, ECCLESIA, APELLA.
BUT NOT TO VOTE, CAUSE THEY DID NOT GO TO WAR.
vote was a man's right, cause he would go fight for the city.
*SOmething that did not exist in old and new Testament except maybe the case of Judith.
and I do not think existed even in Rome's Senatus.

----------


## bigsnake49

> A quarter of Mainland Greece Y-DNA frequencies are of proto-Slavic origin. Something similar about Albanians too.


R1a1 is not a slavic haplogroup.

----------

