#Byzantine Priority

[kjvfactcheck]

Debunking Antioch vs. Alexandria: The Truth About Biblical Origins

The tradition of the New Testament does not simply stem from Alexandria and Antioch, and its textual origins go beyond just two traditions. Interpretation and copyist accuracy are not synonymous.

You might have heard the explanation before that all the modern versions come from corrupted Greek texts from Alexandria, Egypt, and therefore, no modern Bible versions should be trusted. Only the King James Version, should be accepted and read by Christians. The theory goes something like: because Alexandria, Egypt was a hotbed of allegorical or heretical interpretations, therefore we shouldn’t…

[1tbls]

some rambling thoughts on shivers (red bolding mine throughout):

so shivers says this to harry after he has a dance-induced seizure in the church, right:

YOU - But who am *I*? Why are you talking to me?

SHIVERS - YOU ARE AN OFFICER OF THE CITIZENS MILITIA. *AGENTES IN REBUS*, WHEN YOU WEAR YOUR COAT, YOU WEAR MY SOUL.

SHIVERS - YOU MOVE THROUGH MY STREETS FREELY IN MOTOR CARRIAGES AND ON FOOT. YOU HAVE ACCESS TO THE HIDDEN PLACES. YOU ALSO CIRCULATE AMONG THOSE WHO ARE HIDDEN.

here's wikipedia on "agentes in rebus":

"The agentes in rebus were the late Roman imperial and Byzantine courier service and general agents of the central government from the 4th to the 7th centuries."

"Being outside the control of the provincial governors, some agentes ... were appointed as inspectors ... for which they gained a reputation as a secret police force. As their routine assignments brought them into contact with matters of great concern to the court, and as they reported back to the court on everything they saw or heard on their varied missions, the agentes can be seen to have had an intelligence function ... This role, as well as their extraordinary power, made them feared: the 4th-century philosopher Libanius accused them of gross misconduct, terrorizing and extorting the provincials, "sheep-dogs who had joined the wolf pack". Nevertheless, the vast majority operated quite openly, and the claims of the agentes operating as a modern-day secret police are certainly exaggerated."

hey shivers. why are you invoking the RCM as your secret police, via a term not just associated with collection of information, but with corruption and manipulation of power.

and, if you fuck up the dance check and call kim a slur, she says:

"SHIVERS - BY THE WAY, APOLOGIZE TO YOUR PARTNER AT ONCE. UNITY AMONG THE RANKS IS PARAMOUNT."

which sticks out to me, because earlier we have this encyclopedia check with noid:

NOID - "A life is true if it's free from fear and internal division among oneself. And others -- mankind has seeds of greatness in it. A germinal will come, a return to trueness. It will be hard core."

YOU - "How would you go about *returning* to this true life?"

NOID - "Beats and bright lights to shatter falsehoods. Nerve impulses for the collective body. We are very much alike in basic structure. A hard enough beat would awaken everyone to a truer calling -- in unity!"

ENCYCLOPEDIA - Rejection of the right-left axis, emphasis on *unity*, appreciation of some primordial mode of being -- what does that remind you of?

YOU - "Sort of like fascism then?"

now, i don't think either noid or shivers are outright fascist :p but i do think the purpose of this encyclopedia line is to highlight how those criteria are flawed and damaging, how they are red flags, whatever the intention.

some comparisons:

1. return to trueness. le retour. the return of... what? in both cases, truly quite vague except for the idea of some dramatic upheaval of the current order, the idea of "returning" to some idealized past state or event.

2. nerve impulses. shivers. "appeal to nature" type fallacy, appeal to a baser instinct... invocation of physical reactions as metaphor for political reactionism, perhaps?

3. unity. on the surface, shivers telling harry to make things right with kim is touching, certainly. but specifically "unity among the ranks" is an interesting framing 🤨 as though the crucial thing is that their forces are not divided for what's to come, regardless of kim's feelings, regardless of harry's potential racism.

likewise, noid's call for unity addresses... nothing at all. simply that everyone would be awoken from their petty, false divisions into unity. neither this nor his criticisms of left vs. right acknowledge that the division is not equal, that one side in most social power conflicts is invested in stripping the rights of the other... because that is simply not on the radar when the priority is unity above all else. in its way, unity is authoritarian where it does not abide difference or dissent in the interest of the of the stasis/power of the institution.

this is all to say. hey. let's talk about the inherent nationalist nature of la revacholiere, my problematic wife ♥️

[howtomuslim]

Early Islamic Expansion- Colonialism or Conquest?

There’s a common narrative among many westerners of how Islam itself in its early days was a coloniser of many peoples and territories. How during its conquests of the 7th and 8th centuries, Islam suppressed the populations and forced upon them a new faith and language, echoing the narrative that its expansionism was strictly conducted by the sword. What was this earth-moving proof that had convinced those who hold this flawed and over-simplified view so deeply?

Firstly, let’s quickly summarise the zeitgeist of the times from a political perspective and then assess what this geographic expansion was and when it all happened. During the life of the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, Western Asia was dominated by two empires that were in a bloody and violent war that had lasted for over eight decades. These two empires were the Byzantine and Sassanian empires. In the Arabian Peninsula, a region that wasn’t included in either’s domain, both intertribal aggression and constant raids were also concurrently rampant. When the fledgling faith became threatened in Medina by its various enemies in the early 7th century, the necessity for defence and thereafter the protection of its believers had to take priority for the Muslim regional minority.

With the Battle of the Trench, the failed attack on Medina by the Quraysh clan and their allies against the Muslims, thus began the eventual conquest of Islam overtaking the entire Arabian Peninsula during the lifetime of the Prophet, peace be upon him, followed by the Rashidun Caliphate. This saw the expansion span from the eastern borders of Persia, Turkey to the north, and Libya to the west. Finally, during the Umayyad Caliphate came the crossing of Islam into Afghanistan and the Indian subcontinent, into the northwestern African lands of the Maghreb, and into the Iberian Peninsula. From 622 to 750 CE, over 120 years, Islam expanded rapidly across three continents.

Now, with this background, we can indulge in the confirmation or repudiation of the element of colonialism in Islam’s conquests. But one more quick digression: let’s define colonialism in simple terms. Colonialism is when one more powerful people invades and occupies another people, usurps their rights and natural resources for the sole purpose of self-interest, like what the British, French, and Spanish empires did to the world from the 15th to the 20th century, as well as what Israel is currently doing in Palestine during the supposedly civilised 20th century.

Beyond the facts, this foundation is how we must establish our conclusions and how we must compare the behaviour of Islam towards those conquered peoples relative to other nations of the time. We can’t expect Islam to behave as per 21st-century standards or even the 20th century. But even we should question that: was Islam actually more humane than even the colonialists of the 20th century?

One would note, when looking at the Islamic expansion and the short duration it took, the accomplishments suggest a speed of success unheard of. It was true that both the Byzantine and Sassanian Empires had fought their way to their eventual collapse over the decades, but still, the number of the Muslims paled in comparison. There are significant factors that played into this dynamic. These empires had shown extreme oppression towards the inhabitants of those occupied regions, while Islam exhibited a tolerance and relatively fair approach to those of other faiths. In general, in most of the conquered nations, the local inhabitants offered no resistance to the invading Muslims as they had little or nothing to lose by the changing of the guard. In some cases, such as in the Levant, Mesopotamia, and Egypt, Islam was a liberator and hence openly welcomed such was the case in the opening of Jerusalem and Jews being allowed to return.

One aspect that differentiated Islamic forces from other preceding victorious armies was that Islam had embedded within its belief system the rules of engagement during warfare, with humanitarian tenets that understood there was to be the protection of women and children and to respect the property and symbols of other faiths. Yes, there were occasions when individuals broke such tenets, but these should be regarded as exceptions.

Was spread by the sword?

This is a narrative originating at the time of the Crusades when the sole ambition was to discredit Islam and give it a barbaric and savage reputation. A common misrepresentation of this narrative was the supposed forced conversions of conquered peoples, whereas the facts suggest that even prior to any imminent military engagement, the Muslim generals would offer the options of conversion to Islam, acceptance of dhimmi status (meaning the payment of an annual jizya tax), or trying their chances at armed conflict. Even upon Muslim victory, the first two options remained available.

The widespread and well-documented dhimmi system that dealt with non-Muslim citizens is proof that no forced conversions took place. There was a structure in place that allowed for religious continuity while also protecting rights with a structure that maintained the retention of physical land and property. Property records show that in the varying lands conquered in the previous Byzantine and Sassanian Empires, Muslims were a small minority during the early Islamic reign, ranging between 10 to 20% of the population up until a century or two after the initial conquest. In certain cases, such as in Iran and Egypt, Muslims as a majority of the population only came into being well into the 9th century. How can that possibly be forced conversion?

Another powerful counterargument for the case against Islamic colonialism is the fact that there was never really any extraction of resources out of the conquered lands and shipped off to Mecca back in Arabia. In actuality, trade and commerce throughout the new Islamic territories blossomed further during Islam’s reign and created a series of powerful cosmopolitan cities across the empire that would eventually become some of the greatest and brightest cities on the planet within the next two centuries: Baghdad, Damascus, Cairo, and Cordoba. Meanwhile, Mecca and Medina, the supposed colonial centres, were humble in their expansion and prosperity for the next millennium and beyond.

A question that can always be asked to further prove this point: would the British ever have moved their capital from London to Delhi?

To exhibit the difference, the capital of the Muslim empire left the Arabian Peninsula with the coming of the Umayyad Caliphate, never to return. Such a decision only reflects that the Islamic empire wasn’t about the benefit of one people, nation, or territory over another, but that a new set of groups of united people, inclusive of those conquered, were now a new nation that had much larger collective aspirations.

One would think that the Islamisation of faith would result in the Arabisation of language, but the reality was the opposite. As the Islamisation of the populations took significant time to materialise, learning the language of the faith, Arabic, was never forced onto others. The fast-paced assimilation of Arabic was principally due to the fact that it was the primary language of trade, governance, and law within the Islamic empires, as well as being a language familiar to the populations of the Levant and Mesopotamia, who were mainly Aramaic speakers.

Arabisation wasn’t about the Muslim faith but was about integrating within a civilisation that was booming not just back in Arabia but everywhere. It became the common language for non-Arabs and non-Muslims to prosper. During the subsequent golden age, thinkers and scholars from across the empire wrote and relayed in Arabic, much in the same way that the English language spread all over the world during the 20th century due to globalisation and technology. Arabic achieved widespread acceptance for the sake of the transfer of knowledge and in aspiring to prosperity.

To learn more about Islam visit: Howtomuslim.org

[tanadrin]

re: that solar and batteries article: absolutely insane that Marist polled people on their priority, economy vs. climate, graphed the results as a bar chart, colored the bar chart blue (the color of capitalism) and green (the color of environmentalism) and then ASSIGNED GREEN TO THE ECONOMY AND BLUE TO THE CLIMATE. Absolutely bananas! (Which are yellow.) (Byzantine tangent goes here.)

i was not aware blue was the color of capitalism. surely it would be a nice classical-liberal/ancap yellow?

[tokenlauncher]

“The DeFi Game Changer on Solana: Unlocking Unprecedented Opportunities”

Introduction

In the dynamic world of decentralized finance (DeFi), new platforms and innovations are constantly reshaping the landscape. Among these, Solana has emerged as a game-changer, offering unparalleled speed, low costs, and robust scalability. This blog delves into how Solana is revolutionizing DeFi, why it stands out from other blockchain platforms, and what this means for investors, developers, and users.

What is Solana?

Solana is a high-performance blockchain designed to support decentralized applications and cryptocurrencies. Launched in 2020, it addresses some of the most significant challenges in blockchain technology, such as scalability, speed, and high transaction costs. Solana’s architecture allows it to process thousands of transactions per second (TPS) at a fraction of the cost of other platforms.

Why Solana is a DeFi Game Changer

1. High-Speed Transactions

One of Solana’s most remarkable features is its transaction speed. Solana can handle over 65,000 transactions per second (TPS), far exceeding the capabilities of many other blockchains, including Ethereum. This high throughput is achieved through its unique Proof of History (PoH) consensus mechanism, which timestamps transactions, allowing them to be processed quickly and efficiently.

2. Low Transaction Fees

Transaction fees on Solana are incredibly low, often less than a fraction of a cent. This affordability is crucial for DeFi applications, where high transaction volumes can lead to significant costs on other platforms. Low fees make Solana accessible to a broader range of users and developers, promoting more widespread adoption of DeFi solutions.

3. Scalability

Solana’s architecture is designed to scale without compromising performance. This scalability ensures that as the number of users and applications on the platform grows, Solana can handle the increased load without experiencing slowdowns or high fees. This feature is essential for DeFi projects that require reliable and consistent performance.

4. Robust Security

Security is a top priority for any blockchain platform, and Solana is no exception. It employs advanced cryptographic techniques to ensure that transactions are secure and tamper-proof. This high level of security is critical for DeFi applications, where the integrity of financial transactions is paramount.

Key Innovations Driving Solana’s Success in DeFi

Proof of History (PoH)

Solana’s Proof of History (PoH) is a novel consensus mechanism that timestamps transactions before they are processed. This method creates a historical record that proves that transactions have occurred in a specific sequence, enhancing the efficiency and speed of the network. PoH reduces the computational burden on validators, allowing Solana to achieve high throughput and low latency.

Tower BFT

Tower Byzantine Fault Tolerance (BFT) is Solana’s implementation of a consensus algorithm designed to maximize speed and security. Tower BFT leverages the synchronized clock provided by PoH to achieve consensus quickly and efficiently. This approach ensures that the network remains secure and resilient, even as it scales.

Sealevel

Sealevel is Solana’s parallel processing engine that enables the simultaneous execution of thousands of smart contracts. Unlike other blockchains, where smart contracts often face bottlenecks due to limited processing capacity, Sealevel ensures that Solana can handle multiple contracts concurrently. This capability is crucial for the development of complex DeFi applications that require high performance and reliability.

Gulf Stream

Gulf Stream is Solana’s mempool-less transaction forwarding protocol. It enables validators to forward transactions to the next set of validators before the current set of transactions is finalized. This feature reduces confirmation times, enhances the network’s efficiency, and supports high transaction throughput.

Solana’s DeFi Ecosystem

Leading DeFi Projects on Solana

Solana’s ecosystem is rapidly expanding, with numerous DeFi projects leveraging its unique features. Some of the leading DeFi projects on Solana include:

Serum: A decentralized exchange (DEX) that offers lightning-fast trading and low transaction fees. Serum is built on Solana and provides a fully on-chain order book, enabling users to trade assets efficiently and securely.

Raydium: An automated market maker (AMM) and liquidity provider built on Solana. Raydium integrates with Serum’s order book, allowing users to access deep liquidity and trade at competitive prices.

Saber: A cross-chain stablecoin exchange that facilitates seamless trading of stablecoins across different blockchains. Saber leverages Solana’s speed and low fees to provide an efficient and cost-effective stablecoin trading experience.

Mango Markets: A decentralized trading platform that combines the features of a DEX and a lending protocol. Mango Markets offers leverage trading, lending, and borrowing, all powered by Solana’s high-speed infrastructure.

The Future of DeFi on Solana

The future of DeFi on Solana looks incredibly promising, with several factors driving its continued growth and success:

Growing Developer Community: Solana’s developer-friendly environment and comprehensive resources attract a growing community of developers. This community is constantly innovating and creating new DeFi applications, contributing to the platform’s vibrant ecosystem.

Strategic Partnerships: Solana has established strategic partnerships with major players in the crypto and tech industries. These partnerships provide additional resources, support, and credibility, driving further adoption of Solana-based DeFi solutions.

Cross-Chain Interoperability: Solana is actively working on cross-chain interoperability, enabling seamless integration with other blockchain networks. This capability will enhance the utility of Solana-based DeFi applications and attract more users to the platform.

Institutional Adoption: As DeFi continues to gain mainstream acceptance, institutional investors are increasingly looking to platforms like Solana. Its high performance, low costs, and robust security make it an attractive option for institutional use cases.

How to Get Started with DeFi on Solana

Step-by-Step Guide

Set Up a Solana Wallet: To interact with DeFi applications on Solana, you’ll need a compatible wallet. Popular options include Phantom, Sollet, and Solflare. These wallets provide a user-friendly interface for managing your SOL tokens and interacting with DeFi protocols.

Purchase SOL Tokens: SOL is the native cryptocurrency of the Solana network. You’ll need SOL tokens to pay for transaction fees and interact with DeFi applications. You can purchase SOL on major cryptocurrency exchanges like Binance, Coinbase, and FTX.

Explore Solana DeFi Projects: Once you have SOL tokens in your wallet, you can start exploring the various DeFi projects on Solana. Visit platforms like Serum, Raydium, Saber, and Mango Markets to see what they offer and how you can benefit from their services.

Provide Liquidity: Many DeFi protocols on Solana offer opportunities to provide liquidity and earn rewards. By depositing your assets into liquidity pools, you can earn a share of the trading fees generated by the protocol.

Participate in Governance: Some Solana-based DeFi projects allow token holders to participate in governance decisions. By staking your tokens and voting on proposals, you can have a say in the future development and direction of the project.

Conclusion

Solana is undoubtedly a game-changer in the DeFi space, offering unparalleled speed, low costs, scalability, and security. Its innovative features and growing ecosystem make it an ideal platform for developers, investors, and users looking to leverage the benefits of decentralized finance. As the DeFi landscape continues to evolve, Solana is well-positioned to lead the charge, unlocking unprecedented opportunities for financial innovation and inclusion.

Whether you’re a developer looking to build the next big DeFi application or an investor seeking high-growth opportunities, Solana offers a compelling and exciting path forward. Dive into the world of Solana and discover how it’s transforming the future of decentralized finance.

[lovetransaction]

Hey Maggie happy DFF! Did John's leaving at the beginning of s1 have anything to do with his relationship with Dean?

Hello China hello!! <3

hmmm I haven't given that any thought before but: I would say yes and no.

I think by that point, John was so far off the road when it came to being a father that Dean was something of an afterthought. Dean was his hunting partner and his life partner -- no getting around that, neither of them really held out much hope for Dean having his own life so long as the YED was still out there -- but everything that said father-and-son was eroded and crumbled and crushed under the weight of the other two. Still there but it wasn't the foremost way that they related to each other except lip service. In fact it had become more convenient for them to downplay it when they were in their motel rooms, or facing down enemies, because the more secret and contained they kept everything, the less chance of it all going to shit.

And John had had twenty-two years of watching things to go shit. As isolated and nomadic as they were, and what with his own fucked-up childhood and the veteran PTSD and then Sam leaving, I'm sure John spent those years gradually locking down a pretty insane worldview and way to operate. Dean needs somebody to be psychotically codependent with and when Sam was gone, it was 100% Dad, and I think John was good with that (it kept Dean in line and kept him safe) until the moments where he wasn't good with it (it made Dean a weak spot).

So when John got a SOLID lead on Azazel, maybe he had a moment of clarity because he could see a potential end to this twenty-year shitshow of constant, endless, exhausting vigilance and failure. The reasons for ghosting Dean would I think be myriad and Byzantine but make sense for John Winchester because his methods of internal resolution pmuch centre Mission Avenge Mary:

Dean would be safer left behind (can also carry on hunting; also would not inconveniently attempt to stop/rescue John from facing down the YED)

This Is Between You and Me, Azazel

the signature JW arrogance in believing he could bring Azazel down best mano a mano without having to factor Dean in

Mary would hate him enough already for how he raised the boys without this final indignity and trespass

he's still raging mad at his own father for ditching but by now has resigned himself to being no better than Henry so hey, abandoning Dean is genetically preordained

at least this way if John died, Sam wouldn't be left alone (...and they could continue the mission)

--etc etc probably a bunch more. So while Dean was partially the reason -- especially if they were sleeping together -- I think John had a number of other reasons that contributed just as much. Dean at that point was a priority as a person in that John wanted to keep him alive, and had a buried rusty hope that Dean might go on living and be sorta happy somehow, but I don't think he was a priority specifically as a son. Not anymore, not till they were all reunited and Sam reminded John what it was like to be their father.

[swansuponledas]

well tell me did she make you cry? make you break down? shatter your illusions of love?

hazal filiz kucukkose, 30, she / her, ciswoman — dear all nations, HURREM NARONG NÈE AYDIN has crossed the city borders to edinburgh to the sound of GOLD DUST WOMAN by FLEETWOOD MAC. the SECOND WIFE OF THE KING of THE KHMER EMPIRE is known to be FOR making peace. SHE reminds me of EMERALD GREEN JEWELS and IDYLLIC DREAMS CRUSHED BY ROSE PETALS. however did you know that SHE MARRIED THE KING OF THE KHMER EMPIRE OUT OF SPITE?

BASICS.

name: hurrem narong nee aydin

age: thirty

birthdate: november 18th

titles: queen of the khmer empire

sexuality: bisexual , biromantic

family: mother , father , roxelana aydin ( sister ) , king of the khmer tribe ( husband ) , prince and princesses of the khmer tribe ( sibling in laws )

BIOGRAPHY.

you were born after your sister. the second born, the second daughter. that would become a cruel, ironic theme theme in your life. roxelana was the eldest, the first priority. you were given an equal education, but it always seemed to come after your sister. this is where the resentment started. you knew that it was tradition, what was expected of her.

you don't remember whether your father indulged this rivalry or not. you don't care. you and your sister were sent to the byzantine court, to rub shoulders with some of the most powerful people in the empire. you found your niche, mostly of fellow women and a few powerful men who were close to the emperor. your true goal was the emperor.

but he did not take to you the way that he took the sister. first, you were upset. sad. then you were angry. this only fueled the bitter rivalry that the two of you had. your father, thankfully, had a better offer. the king of the khmer empire, who had recently lost his first wife. you did not go through with the marriage because it was a good alliance, but because it was spite. if roxelana could be a mistress, you could be a queen.

[cherryhodrialsblog]

1.Jews in Israel mainly classify themselves along a fourfold axis, from least to most observant, hiloni (lit. 'secular'); masorti (lit. 'traditional'); dati (lit. 'religious' or 'orthodox', including religious zionist); and haredi (lit. 'ultra-religious' or 'ultra-orthodox').[6][7]

Israeli law guarantees considerable privileges and freedom to practice for the recognized communities,[8][9] but, in tandem, does not necessarily do so for other faiths. The Pew Research Center has identified Israel as one of the countries that place "high restrictions" on the free exercise of religion[10] and there have been limits placed on non-Orthodox Jewish religious movements, which are unrecognized.[11][12] Pew ranked Israel as fifth globally in terms of "inter-religious tension and violence".[13]

2

Most Jews across the religious spectrum agree in principle that Israel can be both a democracy and a Jewish state. But they are at odds about what should happen, in practice, if democratic decision-making collides with Jewish law (halakha). The vast majority of secular Jews say democratic principles should take precedence over religious law, while a similarly large share of ultra-Orthodox Jews say religious law should take priority.

Even more fundamentally, these groups disagree on what Jewish identity is mainly about: Most of the ultra-Orthodox say “being Jewish” is mainly a matter of religion, while secular Jews tend to say it is mainly a matter of ancestry and/or culture.

3,.Roughly eight-in-ten Israeli Arabs (79%) say there is a lot of discrimination in Israeli society against Muslims, who are by far the biggest of the religious minorities. On this issue, Jews take the opposite view; the vast majority (74%) say they do not see much discrimination against Muslims in Israel.

4.Founded in 1964, the Palestine Liberation Organization is an umbrella organization for groups that represent the Palestinian people before international states.[62] The Palestinian National Authority, officially established in 1994 as a result of the Oslo Accords, is an interim administrative body nominally responsible for governance in Palestinian population centres in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.[63] Since 1978, the United Nations has observed an annual International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People. According to British historian Perry Anderson, it is estimated that half of the population in the Palestinian territories are refugees, and that they have collectively suffered approximately US$300 billion in property losses due to Israeli confiscations, at 2008–2009 prices.[64]

5.The origins of Palestinians are complex and diverse. The region was not originally Arab – its Arabization was a consequence of the gradual inclusion of Palestine within the rapidly expanding Islamic Caliphates established by Arabian tribes and their local allies. Like in other "Arabized" Arab nations, the Arab identity of Palestinians, largely based on linguistic and cultural affiliation, is independent of the existence of any actual Arabian origins.[92]

6.In the 7th century, the Arab Rashiduns conquered the Levant; they were later succeeded by other Arabic-speaking Muslim dynasties, including the Umayyads, Abbasids and the Fatimids.[99] Over the following several centuries, the population of Palestine drastically decreased, from an estimated 1 million during the Roman and Byzantine periods to about 300,000 by the early Ottoman period.[100][101] Over time, much of the existing population adopted Arab culture and language and converted to Islam.[97] The settlement of Arabs before and after the Muslim conquest is thought to have played a role in accelerating the Islamization process.[102][103][104][105] Some scholars suggest that by the arrival of the Crusaders, Palestine was already overwhelmingly Muslim,[106][107] while others claim that it was only after the Crusades that the Christians lost their majority, and that the process of mass Islamization took place much later, perhaps during the Mamluk period.[102][108]

[that-starlit-wanderer]

I find it interesting that Treadgold says quite a few times how useless Italy was to the Byzantines from an economic pov, and that is was very likely a drag on the finances of the empire (and hence, that the loss of the Byzantine possessions there was really no big deal). The latter is understandable, because the few Byzantine footholds remaining in Italy in the 8th century were increasingly difficult to defend and far from a priority when Constantinople was under threat.

But just in general the idea that the former heartland of the Roman Empire had no economic value is still a little surprising to me. Of course even in the Pax Romana period Rome relied on food imports from Egypt and other places to keep itself fed, and my impression (not backed up by any specific reading) is that the eastern provinces of the empire were in general wealthier, more urban, more educated, and more connected to trade routes, so maybe in every way but political Italy was always kind of peripheral in the Mediterranean world of the first millenium BC/first millenium AD? Notwithstanding that Rome itself was a very large city for awhile. Not sure if that's too bold a conclusion to draw from this.

[wright21love]

Check out this listing I just added to my Poshmark closet: 925 Suarti Bali Graduated Square Byzantine Chain.

[thewholesalejeweler]

Check out this listing I just added to my Poshmark closet: Leslie's 14K Gold Byzantine Bracelet.

[davidanderson121]

Is The Moon Okay - andyokay

7 Moonlit Paintings To See In London This Summer With the warmer weather finally upon us, it’s time to start planning your summer vacation. And what better way to get started than by picking a destination and booking your tickets? If you’re looking for a place to explore outside of your usual destinations, why not consider London? Not only is the city full of culture and history, but it’s also home to some incredible artworks that you don’t want to miss. Here are seven moonlit paintings worth seeing in London this summer; enjoy! Is The Moon Okay

Why visit London in the summer? If you're looking for a relaxing summer vacation, London is the perfect destination. The city is Bustling with activity during the day, but at night it's incredibly peaceful and quiet. You can enjoy some of London's most popular attractions without having to worry about crowds. Here are five moonlit paintings to see in London this summer: 1. Turner Prize - The Tate Gallery The Turner Prize is one of the most prestigious awards in art, and this year's winner is American artist Kara Walker. Her painting "Byzantine Frescoes from the Monastery of Saint John on Patmos" is an intense depiction of religious icons set against a stark black background. It will be on exhibition at The Tate Gallery from July 10-September 23. The exhibition offers something for everyone - whether you're a devoted art lover or just curious about what all the fuss is about. If you're visiting London in the summer, make it a priority to see this amazing work of art. 2. Banksy - Mural on Shoreditch High Street One of the world's most famous street artists, Banksy, has been painting murals all over London since 2003. His latest mural can be found on Shoreditch High Street near Liverpool Road station - it's been vandalized several times, but it still looks incredible! If you're up for a little hunt (and some laughs), go check out this graffiti masterpiece for yourself! 3. Kensington Palace Gardens - 7 moonlit paintings to see in London this summer Looking to see some beautiful moonlit paintings in London this summer? Here are five of our favourites: 1. The Night Watch by Rembrandt van Rijn: This painting is a masterpiece and definitely worth a visit if you're in London this summer. It's located at the National Gallery in Trafalgar Square. 2. The Haywain by J.M.W. Turner: If you're a fan of bright, saturated colours, then this painting is for you! It's located at the Tate Britain Museum in London and is definitely worth a visit if you're looking for something different to see in London this summer. 3. Blue Poles by Vincent van Gogh: This painting is one of the most famous examples of Van Gogh's trademark bright blue colours and is located at the Hermitage Museum in St Petersburg, Russia. However, it can occasionally be seen on display at the National Gallery in London too. 4."The Haywain" (1892) by JMWT- Turner/Gemäldegalerie Berlin © ADAGP, Paris and DACS, UK/Bridgeman Images 5."Moonrise" (1916) by Wilfred Sisley/National Gallery of Art © ADAGP, Paris and DACS, UK/Bridgeman Images What to expect on a typical day in London during the summer Summer in London means one thing: the sun is shining, the temperature is warm, and the skies are blue. But that doesn't mean you have to stick to the indoors! There are plenty of activities and attractions to keep you entertained all summer long. When it comes to exploring London during the summer, there's just no beating a walk around Hyde Park or Kensington Gardens. If you're looking for something a little more active, take a swim at one of London's famous beaches like Battersea or Richmond. And if you're in the mood for some entertainment, head over to one of the city's many theaters or cinemas. Bottom line: there's always something to do in London during the summer!

[byzantinecatechumen]

I wanted to record some stuff that I, personally, had found trouble finding. I've been reading Pseudo-Dionysius for Lent and this was something I could not find in an unabridged, commentary-free source. I'll be uploading a higher-quality version, perhaps, to YouTube or somewhere, at some point.

It's not currently a high priority.

[galadhir]

I will say that I think fandom perceptions of the "faithfulness" of adaptations such as these are strongly impacted by our own personal fannish priorities.

This is absolutely true, and I freely admit that. I'm very much an elf-focused reader, and my favourite elf is Celeborn - which is probably 95% of why I am disappointed in ROP.

I had some very specific expectations of a series that was set in a time when Celeborn and Galadriel were the rulers of Eriador during the forging of the rings. When Celebrimbor, under Annatar's persuasion, staged a coup against them, leading to Galadriel, and their daughter Celebrian, leaving to settle in Lorien while Celeborn remained behind in Eriador and was therefore on hand to get at least some of the people out when it all went pair shaped.

(There are so many interesting, canon adjacent, things that could be explored with this set up. Galadriel's friendship with the dwarves of Eriador, for example. And Nimrodel in Lothlorien, who was something of a Silvan rights activist. How did she take the arrival of Noldor-related, Sindarin speaking Galadriel in a kingdom which had previously been mainly Silvan?) Argh, I would have written this all so differently!

Which is entirely my fault for writing a bunch of stories about an elf that nobody else likes (and his family and his cultural context)! I do get that. This is what I get for caring about an aspect of the background lore that I don't think the ROP folks even have rights to, but which I find interesting because it's got my fave in.

OTOH, I 100% agree with you about many of the things that annoy you about the movies. The way the ancient friendship between the elves and the Numenorians is reduced to 'Men are weak!' is part of that tone deafness I meant.

And yes, Aragorn was done dirty - he wants to be king! Of course he does. He's been trained to be king all his life, he's got the right and the duty and the skills and he's been proving himself over and over for decades. Him becoming king is a project he's been working toward all his life.

I too was annoyed with the treatment of the Dunedain of Gondor. I actually prefer the Byzantine kind of inspired look they have in ROP. I did love Queen Miriel's outfits very much, and I would have liked to see a more Byzantine or Ancient Egyptian look to them in the movies. (I mean how fascinating and amazing would that have been? It could have been so good!)

At that point I was too annoyed with the Army of the Dead being manifested as cascades of bones and green glowing ghosts, however. The Paths of the Dead part of the book was one of my favourites, and I freely admit that the way the book did it, with nothing at all happening except for everyone getting very very very scared over a long period of time, was probably unfilmable. But still.

Oh and I was also busy being annoyed by the caricature they had made of Denethor! I can't say I ever really liked Denethor, but he was supposed to at least be impressive and powerful and intelligent and you're supposed to mourn his descent into madness, as an example of how a great man was corrupted by the power of Sauron and his own fear and despair.

(I was annoyed with what they'd done to Theoden too. PJ does not know the meaning of subtlety.)

So yeah, if only Celeborn had been in ROP in something close to his canon existence, I would feel better about the whole thing.

I sadly can't deny that ROP brought a whole load of racists out of the woodwork too. That was an eyeopener for me. I hadn't seen it before, because I was a clueless white person when I watched the movies. I hope I have learned a bit since then.

ROP definitely is an improvement on the movies in that respect. Although imo, ROP should have had more characters of colour than it does - more of the named canon characters for example, instead of relegating actors of colour to OCs.

Maybe all the Noldor elves, or all the Sindar could have been elves of colour. In canon, Celeborn/Galadriel is a dark elf/light elf marriage. It would have been great if they had cast it that way.

And also (still banging on about elves, sorry) Tolkien said that the only thing that wasn't gender neutral in elvish society was making lembas. So there should have been so many extra female elves in army and council scenes, both in the movies *and* in ROP. Just there in the background. That could have been done so easily, and it would have made such a difference.

Next time, I guess!

thatinsufferableb-st-rd said:

@anghraine so i have read the books multiple times and am an avid fan of the movies. I enjoy both for what they are. I think the main difference is that Peter Jackson was very open about what they chose to cut and why from anything I've ever seen. They even have Sam give a nod to the book readers by saying "by rights we shouldn't even be here". No I'm not happy about what they did with Faramir and Glorfindel got jipped, and I would have lover to have seen Elronds sons but at the end of the day there were acknowledgments of what and why. Rings of Power to me has always come off as hiding from any criticism by using the shield of "well if you don't like it it's because you don't like POCs in it". To which I genuinely could not give a fuck less, like there are so many branches of elves that went different ways so that could make sense within what Tolkein established. But don't hide behind that when your writing is just "Sauron is evil. We know. And we know she knows. But we have to make it seem like she's the only one who Has A Clue so we must all try to shoo her off to make a plotline"

@lesbiansforboromir has already correctly and politely pointed out that you are doing the very thing we were criticizing in that post—intruding on ROP fan discussion to unfavorably contrast the show to the Peter Jackson films, while also applying a degree of scrutiny to ROP that the Jackson films are rarely subject to in a remotely comparable way and could not bear. Frankly, @lesbiansforboromir is nicer and more restrained than I am about this, but you chose to tag me as well, so I'll also respond.

We (lesbiansforboromir and I) were talking about being excited about costuming in S2 of ROP and disliking the fandom meltdowns over ROP's costuming looking (somewhat) different from the films' aesthetic. Since it had already come up in their discussion, I added that I'm not convinced by the anti-ROP contingent framing their seething hatred of the costuming and design as just caring so much about fidelity to Tolkien's vision. I pointed out that Tolkien fandom broadly cares far more about their preferred, film-influenced aesthetics than Tolkien's actual descriptions and gave some specific examples of this.

There's been a lot of talk, for instance, about how the universally long, flowing hair for Elves preferred by the fandom and used in the films is actually totally canon according to Tolkien even if it's rarely mentioned in LOTR proper. This is inaccurate. Galadriel's brother Aegnor is typically depicted in the fandom/film-preferred style rather than per Tolkien's description of his hair as "strong and stiff, rising upon his head like flames" (indeed, in general neither Aegnor nor anyone else is ever depicted this way, and this description rarely shows up in the lists of "no it's about ethics in adaptation" Tolkien hair quotes).

Tolkien repeatedly describes Elvish, peredhel, and Dúnadan women as wearing their hair bound up in braided coiffures with jeweled hair pieces/nets rather than loose and flowing à la the films and the fandom. Nobody cares, any more than they care about Tolkien's description of Arwen's clothing as soft, grey, and noticeably devoid of ornamentation apart from a belt and netted cap (i.e. the opposite of her highly elaborate film costuming and typically loose, unbound, uncovered hair in the films and most illustrations).

Meanwhile, my fave Faramir's hair is nowhere near long enough in the films or most art to mingle with Éowyn's as Tolkien describes. It's usually also depicted as blond, reddish, or brown rather than black as in the book; in Tolkien's LOTR, all described Gondorians have dark or black hair, with the only difference in coloring being that some Gondorians are dark-skinned and some are pale. Again, almost nobody in the fandom cares about this when they're going on about costume design and casting to reflect Tolkien's vision, and male Gondorians are overwhelmingly depicted with short or shoulder-length hair in the films and in Tolkien illustrations.

Popular depictions of Gondor, including the Gondor of the films, very rarely reflect Tolkien's description of Gondor's aesthetic as similar to ancient Egypt, the Byzantine Empire, and the Roman Empire. Film Gondor has, at most, extremely vague allusions to Byzantine architecture amidst the general and deliberate westernization of Gondor's design—as just one example among many, Tolkien's explicitly Egyptian-based design for the royal crown of Gondor is converted to a generically western European-style crown in the films and overwhelmingly in the fandom.

I then pointed out that it's been very noticeable that ROP haters tend to have a powerful double standard wrt fidelity when it comes to the Jackson films. For over 20 years, most film fans have been constitutionally incapable of tolerating even slight criticism of the films without jumping in to defend their greatness and condescendingly explain the most basic elements of adaptation. (Yes, we know film is not the same as text, we know changes are part of adaptation, we all know that, we all know that a word-for-word adaptation would suck and never be made, this is not new information and does not make the PJ films' every choice a good one.) Yet most film LOTR fans who vocally despise ROP display none of the charity towards ROP that they demand for the films (demand even from someone like Christopher Tolkien, a dead man the entire fandom is deeply indebted to, whose dislike of the films still leads to regular attacks on his character from Jackson film stans).

This hypercritical yet hyperdefensive tendency in the fandom is neatly illustrated by the fact that you responded to a conversation about the double standards in evaluations of ROP's costuming vs the films' to go on about how ROP is objectively bad for reasons entirely unrelated to costuming, how you're totally not racist (something nobody was talking about), and to quote you directly, "Like the show was just Bad." Truly, an incisive critique. Meanwhile, your concessions with regard to the Jackson films are mainly about extremely minor and defensible omissions like removing Glorfindel and the sons of Elrond rather than the serious and fundamental problems that lesbiansforboromir and I have with them, or even the ways they do pretty much the exact same things you're lambasting ROP for.

I mean, if we're going to talk about action hero Elves in ROP vs the Jackson films, what about the action hero-ification of Legolas in the films? He was described by Tolkien himself as the Fellowship member who accomplished the least, so super badass battle-skateboarding Legolas hardly represents fidelity to Tolkien's vision. Why should that get a pass while film-stanning ROP haters seethe about ROP!Galadriel being too special, even though Tolkien described her as one of the most special Elves to ever live and specifically as remarkably athletic and insightful?

Meanwhile, film Gimli is reduced to comic relief, the only dwarves taken seriously are conventionally hot ones in The Hobbit films, and Frodo's expressions of strength and fortitude are consistently removed to glorify other characters. Film Gondorians were deliberately designed to seem like useless tin soldiers (which they are in the films, as well as whiter and blonder than Tolkien wrote them) rather than the physically imposing and highly effective fighting force of the book. ROP imagining Elvish rituals upon approaching Valinor that aren't based in Tolkien canon but don't directly conflict with it is absolutely trivial compared to the films' handling of Denethor and Faramir.

The point is not that you, personally, are not allowed to like the films or dislike ROP despite all this. Many people do love the films, including most of my followers. They do have their strengths, though they are extremely racist and few film fans will acknowledge this without soft-pedaling it in some way (esp, since you brought it up, given the context of the truly unhinged degree of racism that has accompanied much of the broader discourse around ROP).

The point is that film fans who hate ROP are constantly showing up in our conversations to be "well actually ROP is just objectively bad, unlike the films, because the show has failings that are also in the films but it's totally different there because of the contents of Peter Jackson's soul" or whatever. The point is the absolutely glaring and obnoxiously hypocritical double standard of defensiveness about the films and obsessive nitpicking of ROP that leads to ROP haters continually going on rants to ROP fans that are unwelcome, uninvited, and usually (as in this case) irrelevant to what was even being discussed.

[coe-lilium]

Welp, It nice to see some byzantine empire representation in FGO (And not genderbent at that).

Yeah.

Through Constantine XI is a sobering figure and I would've preferred to see "the" Constantine or Justinian (or even Theodora) first, I *am* glad TM seem to have noticed that the Roman Empire went on for another millennium past the dissolution of its western part.

The event didn't paint him as a villain nor antagonist (at least not from what I've been able to gather?) and TM's take seems to go for a -legitimate, given the existing legends- Arthur/post-Fate Arturia-like figure, both of which are imo good things.

Now all that's left to hope is for a pleasant design and tasteful profile. The profile seems all but guaranteed, the design... I'll try to have low expectations and brace myself.

[blueiscoool]

Intact Ancient Tombstone Discovered on Riverbed in Greece

An intact ancient tombstone from the Hellenistic era is the latest discovery of archeologists working along the Arachthos river in Epirus in western Greece.

The heavy object was discovered in the river’s shallow waters, the Ephorate of Antiquities of Arta said in a Facebook announcement on Friday, providing a first glimpse of the rare find on-site before it was transferred to the Archaeological Museum of Arta.

“The river won’t stop pleasantly surprising us, as it reveals burial monuments, architectural parts and movable finds which add to our knowledge about Ambrakia, the ancient city that was developed by its shore, but also about origins in the area during the Byzantine times,” the post reads.

The tombstone’s embossed floral decoration was saved in excellent condition, and one can easily read the inscriptions featuring the names of two deceased citizens, accompanied by their mutual father’s name and national origin.

The announcement explains that the important finding is related to the burial monuments discovered at the same site the previous year.

Discovery traces ancient Greek cemetery

The first findings along the bed of the river were announced in May 2021 at which time archeologists discovered impressive remains of burial monuments from what appears to be an unknown cemetery of the ancient city of Ambrakia.

Using the latest technology, the local Ephorate of Antiquities, in collaboration with other competent authorities, has continued to search the shores for more ancient artifacts.

The aim is to include the findings in a study, which will serve in creating a complete proposal for the appropriate ways to preserve and showcase them.

The river Arachthos is closely linked to the founding and flourishing of the ancient city of Ambrakia in the 7th century B.C., as well as with the Byzantine and contemporary city of Arta.

Hence, the revelation of as many of Arachthos’s secrets as possible remains a high priority for local archeologists.

By Paula Tsoni.