REL 205 Zoroastrianism

Cosmogony

Creation of the universe

According to the Zoroastrian story of creation, Ahura Mazda existed in light in goodness above, while Angra Mainyu existed in darkness and ignorance below. They have existed independently of each other for all time, and manifest contrary substances. Ahura Mazda first created seven abstract heavenly beings called Amesha Spentas, who support him and represent beneficent aspects, along with numerous yazads, lesser beings worthy of worship. He then created the universe itself in order to ensnare evil. Ahura Mazda created the floating, egg-shaped universe in two parts: first the spiritual (menog) and 3,000 years later, the physical (getig). Ahura Mazda then created Gayomard, the archetypical perfect man, and the first bull.

While Ahura Mazda created the universe and humankind, Angra Mainyu, whose instinct is to destroy, miscreated demons, evil yazads, and noxious creatures (khrafstar) such as snakes, ants, and flies. Angra Mainyu created an opposite, evil being for each good being, except for humans, which he found he could not match. Angra Mainyu invaded the universe through the base of the sky, inflicting Gayomard and the bull with suffering and death. However, the evil forces were trapped in the universe and could not retreat. The dying primordial man and bull emitted seeds. From the bull's seed grew all beneficial plants and animals of the world, and from the man's seed grew a plant whose leaves became the first human couple. Humans thus struggle in a two-fold universe trapped with evil. The evils of this physical world are not products of an inherent weakness, but are the fault of Angra Mainyu's assault on creation. This assault turned the perfectly flat, peaceful, and ever day-lit world into a mountainous, violent place that is half night.

Zorostrianism Creation Story, 1:32

https://youtu.be/TgPlkg6N8ok



What Is? 1:33

https://youtu.be/xsWvxIE649U



Zoroastrianism,[n 1] or more natively Mazdayasna,[1] is one of the world's oldest religions, "combining a cosmogonic dualism and eschatological monotheism in a manner unique... among the major religions of the world."[2] Ascribed to the teachings of the Iranian Prophet Zoroaster (or Zarathustra),[3] he exalted their deity of wisdom, Ahura Mazda, (Wise Lord) as its Supreme Being.

Leading characteristics, such as messianism, heaven and hell, and free will influenced other religious systems, including Second Temple Judaism, Gnosticism, Christianity, and Islam.[5] With possible roots dating back to the second millennium BCE, Zoroastrianism enters recorded history in the 5th-century BCE,[4] and including a Mithraic Median prototype and Zurvanist Sassanid successor it served as the state religion of the pre-Islamic Iranian empires from around 600 BCE to 650 CE.



Zoroastrianism was suppressed from the 7th century onwards following the Muslim conquest of Persia.[6] Recent estimates place the current number of Zoroastrians at around 2.6 million, with most living in India and Iran.[7][8][n 2] Besides the Zoroastrian diaspora, the older Mithraic faith Yazdânism is still practised amongst the Kurds.[n 3]



The religious philosophy of Zoroaster divided the early Iranian gods. The most important texts of the religion are those of the Avesta. In Zoroastrianism, the creator Ahura Mazda, through the Spenta Mainyu (Good Spirit, "Bounteous Immortals") is an all-good "father" of Asha (Truth, “order, justice,") in opposition to Druj (“falsehood, deceit”) and no evil originates from "him". "He" and his works are evident to humanity through the six primary Amesha Spentas and the host of other Yazatas, through whom worship of Mazda is ultimately directed. Spenta Mainyu adjoined unto "truth" oppose the Spirit's opposite,] Angra Mainyu and its forces born of Akəm Manah (“evil thinking”).

What Do Zoroastrians Believe? 5:36

Who are the Zoroastrians and what do they believe? Their faith is one of the oldest surviving religions on Earth, predating Judaism, Christianity, and Islam - and is actually (some say) the inspiration for all three... MUSIC: Lord Taylor - Until There's More Many thanks to artist Mitchell Nolte for his kind permission to use his Zarathustra (Zoroaster) artwork.

https://youtu.be/kLzsXLBD2rI





Zoroastrianism has no major theological divisions, though it is not uniform; modern-era influences having a significant impact on individual and local beliefs, practices, values and vocabulary, sometimes merging with tradition and in other cases displacing it. In Zoroastrianism, the purpose in life is to "be among those who renew the world...to make the world progress towards perfection". Its basic maxims include:


Humata, Hukhta, Huvarshta, which mean: Good Thoughts, Good Words, Good Deeds.


There is only one path and that is the path of Truth.



Do the right thing because it is the right thing to do, and then all beneficial rewards will come to you also.


The most important texts of the religion are those of the Avesta, which includes the writings of Zoroaster known as the Gathas, enigmatic poems that define the religion's precepts, and the Yasna, the scripture. The full name by which Zoroaster addressed the deity is: Ahura, The Lord Creator, and Mazda, Supremely Wise.


He proclaimed that there is only one God, the singularly creative and sustaining force of the Universe. He also stated that human beings are given a right of choice, and because of cause and effect are also responsible for the consequences of their choices.



Zoroaster's teachings focused on responsibility, and did not introduce a devil, per se. The contesting force to Ahura Mazda was called Angra Mainyu, or angry spirit. Post-Zoroastrian scripture introduced the concept of Ahriman, the Devil, which was effectively a personification of Angra Mainyu.[23]




Biography, 1:22



https://youtu.be/NXCMpXqh2vU











Zoroaster



Zoroastrianism was founded by Zoroaster (or Zarathustra), later deemed a prophet, in ancient Iran. The precise date of the founding of Zoroastrianism is uncertain. Zoroaster was born in either Northeast Iran or Southwest Afghanistan. He was born into a culture with a polytheistic religion, which included animal sacrifice[69] and the ritual use of intoxicants, quite similar to early forms of Hinduism in India. Zoroaster's birth and early life are little documented. What is known is recorded in the Gathas—the core of the Avesta, which contains hymns thought to be composed by Zoroaster himself. Born into the Spitama clan, he worked as a priest. He had a wife, three sons, and three daughters.



Zoroaster rejected the religion of the Bronze Age Iranians, with their many gods and oppressive class structure, in which the Karvis and Karapans (princes and priests) controlled the ordinary people. He also opposed animal sacrifices and the use of the hallucinogenic Haoma plant (possibly a species of ephedra) in rituals, but held the rooster as a "symbol of light"[70] and associated it with "good against evil"[71] because of his heraldic actions.
Vision of Zoroaster



According to Zoroastrian belief, when Zoroaster was 30 years old, he went into the Daiti river to draw water for a Haoma ceremony; when he emerged, he received a vision of Vohu Manah. After this, Vohu Manah took him to the other six Amesha Spentas, where he received the completion of his vision.[72] This vision radically transformed his view of the world, and he tried to teach this view to others. Zoroaster believed in one creator God, teaching that only one God was worthy of worship. Some of the deities of the old religion, the Daevas (Devas in Sanskrit), appeared to delight in war and strife. Zoroaster said these were evil spirits, workers of Angra Mainyu.



Zoroaster's ideas were not taken up quickly; he originally only had one convert: his cousin Maidhyoimanha.[73] The local religious authorities opposed his ideas, considering that their faith, power, and particularly their rituals, were threatened by Zoroaster's teaching against over-ritualising religious ceremonies. Many did not like Zoroaster's downgrading of the Daevas to evil spirits. After 12 years of little success, Zoroaster left his home.



In the country of King Vishtaspa in Bactria, the king and queen heard Zoroaster debating with the religious leaders of the land and decided to accept Zoroaster's ideas as the official religion of their kingdom. Zoroaster died in his late 70s. Very little is known of the time between Zoroaster and the Achaemenian period, except that Zoroastrianism spread to Western Iran. By the time of the founding of the Achaemenid Empire, Zoroastrianism was already a well-established religion.




6:33



Cartoon Zoroastrianism




A video that the life of the Iranian prophet Zoroaster and the essence of his teachings.



This is a product of Mexus Education Pvt. Ltd., an education innovations company based in Mumbai, India.
http://www.mexuseducation.com, http://www.ikenstore.in



https://youtu.be/oIEmmndKRSs











Brief History of Zoroastrianism, 3:28





https://youtu.be/6y8BZONPmiM











The roots of Zoroastrianism are thought to have emerged from a common prehistoric Indo-Iranian religious system dating back to the early 2nd millennium BCE.[33] The prophet Zoroaster himself, though traditionally dated to the 6th century BC, is thought by many modern historians to have been a reformer of the polytheistic Iranian religion who lived in the 10th century BC.[34] Zoroastrianism as a religion was not firmly established until several centuries later. Zoroastrianism enters recorded history in the mid-5th century BCE. Herodotus' The Histories (completed c. 440 BCE) includes a description of Greater Iranian society with what may be recognizably Zoroastrian features, including exposure of the dead.



The Histories is a primary source of information on the early period of the Achaemenid era (648–330 BCE), in particular with respect to the role of the Magi. According to Herodotus i.101, the Magi were the sixth tribe of the Medians (until the unification of the Persian empire under Cyrus the Great, all Iranians were referred to as "Mede" or "Mada" by the peoples of the Ancient World), who appear to have been the priestly caste of the Mesopotamian-influenced branch of Zoroastrianism today known as Zurvanism, and who wielded considerable influence at the courts of the Median emperors.



The Zoroastrian Achaemenid Empire at its greatest extent was the largest ancient empire in recorded history at 8.0 million km2 (480 BCE).[35]



Following the unification of the Median and Persian empires in 550 BCE, Cyrus the Great and, later, his son Cambyses II curtailed the powers of the Magi after they had attempted to sow dissent following their loss of influence. In 522 BCE, the Magi revolted and set up a rival claimant to the throne. The usurper, pretending to be Cyrus' younger son Smerdis, took power shortly thereafter.[36] Owing to the despotic rule of Cambyses and his long absence in Egypt, "the whole people, Persians, Medes and all the other nations" acknowledged the usurper, especially as he granted a remission of taxes for three years (Herodotus iii. 68).



Darius I and later Achaemenid emperors acknowledged their devotion to Ahura Mazda in inscriptions, as attested to several times in the Behistun inscription, and appear to have continued the model of coexistence with other religions. Whether Darius was a follower of Zoroaster has not been conclusively established, since devotion to Ahura Mazda was (at the time) not necessarily an indication of an adherence to Zoroaster's teaching. A number of the Zoroastrian texts that today are part of the greater compendium of the Avesta have been attributed to that period. This calendar attributed to the Achaemenid period is still in use today. Additionally, the divinities, or yazatas, are present-day Zoroastrian angels (Dhalla, 1938).



According to later Zoroastrian legend (Denkard and the Book of Arda Viraf), many sacred texts were lost when Alexander the Great's troops invaded Persepolis and subsequently destroyed the royal library there. Diodorus Siculus's Bibliotheca historica, which was completed circa 60 BCE, appears to substantiate this Zoroastrian legend (Diod. 17.72.2–17.72.6). According to one archaeological examination, the ruins of the palace of Xerxes bear traces of having been burned (Stolze, 1882). Whether a vast collection of (semi-)religious texts "written on parchment in gold ink", as suggested by the Denkard, actually existed remains a matter of speculation, but is unlikely. Given that many of the Denkards statements-as-fact have since been refuted among scholars, the tale of the library is widely accepted to be fictional (Kellens, 2002).



The religion would be professed many centuries following the demise of the Achaemenids in mainland Persia and the core regions of the former Achaemenid Empire, most notably Anatolia, Mesopotamia, and the Caucasus. In the Cappadocian kingdom, whose territory was formerly an Achaemenid possession, Persian colonists, cut off from their co-religionists in Iran proper, continued to practice the faith [Zoroastrianism] of their forefathers; and there Strabo, observing in the first century B.C., records (XV.3.15) that these "fire kindlers" possessed many "holy places of the Persian Gods", as well as fire temples.[37] Strabo furthermore relates, were "noteworthy enclosures; and in their midst there is an altar, on which there is a large quantity of ashes and where the magi keep the fire ever burning."[37] Through and after the Hellenistic periods in the aforementioned regions, the religion would be strongly revived as a major thing.



Most of the Sassanid Empire was overthrown by the Arabs over the course of 16 years in the 7th century. Although the administration of the state was rapidly Islamicized and subsumed under the Umayyad Caliphate, in the beginning "there was little serious pressure" exerted on newly subjected people to adopt Islam.[43]



Because of their sheer numbers, the conquered Zoroastrians had to be treated as dhimmis (despite doubts of the validity of this identification that persisted down the centuries),[44] which made them eligible for protection. Islamic jurists took the stance that only Muslims could be perfectly moral, but "unbelievers might as well be left to their iniquities, so long as these did not vex their overlords."[44]



The Arabs adopted the Sassanid tax-system, both the land-tax levied on land owners and the poll-tax levied on individuals,[44] called jizya, a tax levied on non-Muslims (i.e., the dhimmis). In time, this poll-tax came to be used as a means to humble the non-Muslims, and a number of laws and restrictions evolved to emphasize their inferior status.



Under Abbasid rule, Muslim Iranians (who by then were in the majority) increasingly found ways to taunt Zoroastrians, and distressing them became a popular sport. For example, in the 9th century, a deeply venerated cypress tree in Khorasan (which Parthian-era legend supposed had been planted by Zoroaster himself) was felled for the construction of a palace in Baghdad, 2,000 miles (3,200 km) away.



In the 10th century, on the day that a Tower of Silence had been completed at much trouble and expense, a Muslim official contrived to get up onto it, and to call the adhan (the Muslim call to prayer) from its walls. This was made a pretext to annex the building.[45]



Another popular means to distress Zoroastrians was to maltreat dogs, as these animals are sacred in Zoroastrianism. Such baiting, which was to continue down the centuries, was indulged in by all; not only by high officials, but by the general uneducated population as well.



The first edict, adapted from an Arsacid and Sassanid one (but in those to the advantage of Zoroastrians), was that only a Muslim could own Muslim slaves or indentured servants. Thus, a bonded individual owned by a Zoroastrian could automatically become a freeman by converting to Islam. The other edict was that if one male member of a Zoroastrian family converted to Islam, he instantly inherited all its property.



Despite economic and social incentives to convert, Zoroastrianism remained strong in some regions, particularly in those furthest away from the Caliphate capital at Baghdad. In Bukhara (in present-day Uzbekistan), resistance to Islam required the 9th-century Arab commander Qutaiba to convert his province four times. The first three times the citizens reverted to their old religion. Finally, the governor made their religion "difficult for them in every way", turned the local fire temple into a mosque, and encouraged the local population to attend Friday prayers by paying each attendee two dirhams.[48] The cities where Arab governors resided were particularly vulnerable to such pressures, and in these cases the Zoroastrians were left with no choice but to either conform or migrate to regions that had a more amicable administration.[48]


Due to Islamic oppression and bigotry, Zoroastrians have fled to India, Central Asia, the Caucasus, and Persia, and an expatriate community has formed in the United States (some from India), and to a lesser extent in the United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia.




Spread, 1:26 (watch)



See the spread of the religion known as Zoroastrianism. It also includes Manichaeism but not any of the other religions that are associated with Zoroastrianism.



https://youtu.be/CuEGCNw3S_8



Zoroastrianism is often compared with the Manichaeism. Nominally an Iranian religion, it has its origins in the Middle-Eastern Gnosticism. Superficially such a comparison seem apt, as both are dualistic and Manichaeism adopted many of the Yazatas for its own pantheon. Gherardo Gnoli, in The Encyclopaedia of Religion, says that "we can assert that Manichaeism has its roots in the Iranian religious tradition and that its relationship to Mazdaism, or Zoroastrianism, is more or less like that of Christianity to Judaism".[66]



They are however quite different.[67] Manichaeism equated evil with matter and good with spirit, and was therefore particularly suitable as a doctrinal basis for every form of asceticism and many forms of mysticism. Zoroastrianism, on the other hand, rejects every form of asceticism, has no dualism of matter and spirit (only of good and evil), and sees the spiritual world as not very different from the natural one (the word "paradise", or pairi.daeza, applies equally to both.)



Manichaeism's basic doctrine was that the world and all corporeal bodies were constructed from the substance of Satan, an idea that is fundamentally at odds with the Zoroastrian notion of a world that was created by God and that is all good, and any corruption of it is an effect of the bad. From what may be inferred from many Manichean texts and a few Zoroastrian sources, the adherents of the two religions (or at least their respective priesthoods) despised each other intensely.











Morgan Freeman's Story of God, 6:42



Zoroastrians believe that there is one universal, transcendent, supreme god, Ahura Mazda, or the "Wise Lord". (Ahura means "Being" and Mazda means "Mind" in Avestan language).[25] Zoroaster keeps the two attributes separate as two different concepts in most of the Gathas and also consciously uses a masculine word for one concept and a feminine for the other, as if to distract from an anthropomorphism of his divinity. Zoroaster claimed that Ahura Mazda is almighty, though not omnipotent.



Other scholars assert that since Zoroastrianism's divinity covers both being and mind as immanent entities, it is better described as a belief in an immanent self-creating universe with consciousness as its special attribute, thereby putting Zoroastranism in the pantheistic fold where it can be easily traced to its shared origin with Indian Brahmanism.[26][27] In any case, Ahura Mazda's creation—evident is widely agreed as asha, truth and order—is the antithesis of chaos, which is evident as druj, falsehood and disorder. The resulting conflict involves the entire universe, including humanity, which has an active role to play in the conflict.[28]



In Zoroastrian tradition, the "chaotic" is represented by Angra Mainyu (also referred to as "Ahriman"), the "Destructive Principle", while the benevolent is represented through Ahura Mazda's Spenta Mainyu, the instrument or "Bounteous Principle" of the act of creation. It is through Spenta Mainyu that transcendental Ahura Mazda is immanent in humankind, and through which the Creator interacts with the world. According to Zoroastrian cosmology, in articulating the Ahuna Vairya formula, Ahura Mazda made His ultimate triumph evident to Angra Mainyu. As expressions and aspects of Creation, Ahura Mazda emanated the Amesha Spentas ("Bounteous Immortals"), that are each the hypostasis and representative of one aspect of that Creation. These Amesha Spenta are in turn assisted by a league of lesser principles, the Yazatas, each "Worthy of Worship" and each again a hypostasis of a moral or physical aspect of creation.



Zoroastrian theology includes a duty to protect nature. This has led some to proclaim it as the "world's first ecological religion." Scholars have argued that, since the protections are part of a ritual, they stem from theology rather than ecology. Others have responded that, since the scripture calls for the protection of water, earth, fire, air, as once of its strongest precepts, it is, in effect, an ecological religion: "It is not surprising that Mazdaism (another term for Zoroastrianism) is called the first ecological religion. The reverence for Yazatas (divine spirits) emphasizes the preservation of nature (Avesta: Yasnas 1.19, 3.4, 16.9; Yashts 6.3-4, 10.13)." [29]



https://youtu.be/s0K3vEBG3sk











Towers of Silence Trailer, 4:55



https://youtu.be/dMXvsg1bN-s











Selects from Zoroastrian Rituals (Towers of Silence): Rituals, 2:22



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rtAFDN3I0oQ



https://youtu.be/rtAFDN3I0oQ







YASNA CEREMONY & ITS MEANING (©PARZOR), 3:34

A Persian Offering. The Yasna: a Zoroastrian High Liturgy

https://youtu.be/xS53HpX1De0



TOWER OF SILENCE (ZOROASTRIANISM FUNERAL & DISPOSAL), Ritual Funeral, 4:04

https://youtu.be/opSPc44s9_o





Zoroastrians Celebrate Fire Festival in Iran: Fire Festival, 2:31

One of the worlds last and largest communities of Zoroastrians celebrates its annual fire festival in Iran, where the government has recently been more accepting of its pre-Islamic Persian heritage. WSJ's Bill Spindle reports.

https://youtu.be/pB78CnYJfIY









Prayer, 2:31



"Zoroastrian rituals and prayers are solemnized in the presence of a Fire, which is scrupulously tended with sandalwood and frankincence and kept buning in a silver urn in the inner sanctum of every Zoroastrian "fire-temple" also called a Darbe Mehr (door of devotion). Fire is revered as a visual symbol of the Inner Light, the devine spark, that burns in each and every heart; a physical representation of the Illuminated Mind, Enlightenment and Truth. It is important to note that Zoroastirans do not "worship fire" as the religion denounces the worship of any idols or dieties." The mobed (priest) wears a mouth veil to prevent contamination of the fire.
"Ashem Vohu, vahishtem asti, Ushta asti, ushta ahmai Hyat ashai, vahishtai ashem
-To think a good thought, to speak a good word, to do a good deed, is the best. Everlasting happiness to those who follow the Path of Asha"
The World Religions class observing this prayer are wearing hats and head coverings as a sign of respect to the sanctity of the place of worship. It is very special and rare for nonpractitioners to be allowed into the inner sanctum.



https://youtu.be/EoZ1nFfUUpQ











Saving the Zoroastrians (The Feed): Saving 3:53





https://youtu.be/TePcJ6v5fpg











BBC News Keeping Zoroastrianism alive after 3,000 years: Keep Alive, 2:52



BBC News Keeping Zoroastrianism alive after 3,000 years



https://youtu.be/a4ezRTvDrqw









Zarathustra on Self Enquiry by Thinking (Zoroaster) Quotations, 2:36

https://youtu.be/tZUOdLy53tY





Puppet Show about Zoroastrian Mythology Judgement and Renovation, 8:33

https://youtu.be/NjVMr5H0pv0



Zoroastrianism Music, 14:37



Music from Feza Radio - http://fezaeu.net.
Fire loop by Michael Edwards - http://vimeo.com/53193776



https://youtu.be/2pKwrgw-PWk

PHI 101Free Will, Determinism, Libertarianism, Compatibilism

Do We Have Free Will? Does it Matter?

What makes us morally responsible? The answer most people would give is that we have free will. We are free to choose what we do, and that is why we can rightly be praised or blamed. Our actions are up to us. But are they? Some philosophers have argued that we are not in control of what we do, that we do not have free will.

In this lecture, we will look at the problem of free will and determinism. This is the problem that we cannot make sense of free will in a natural universe, because a natural universe must work in a deterministic way. Everything in it, including us, must be determined. I will start by explaining what determinism is and why many philosophers are convinced that we live in a deterministic world, and how it implies that we could not possibly have free will in the sense that we ordinarily think we do. We will then look at various philosophical responses to the puzzle. According to one philosophical camp, ‘libertarianism’, we do have free will after all. A second approach, compatibilism, argues that although we do not have free will, it does not affect whether we should hold people responsible for their actions. Compatibilists (so called because they think that moral responsibility is compatible with determinism) argue that we can make sense of moral responsibility without free will. The last group argues that we do not have free will, and we do not have moral responsibility either. These philosophers call themselves ‘hard incompatibilists’, or ‘hard determinists’. 

Additional Resources

Introductory

Beebee, Helen (2013) Free Will: An Introduction, Palgrave. (Opinionated Introduction to both compatibilism and incompatibilism).

Mason, Elinor (2005) ‘Recent work on Moral Responsibility’, Philosophical Books 46, 343-353. (Introductory survey of recent work on moral responsibility).

Talbert, Matthew (2016). Moral Responsibility: An Introduction. Polity. (Opinionated introduction, focussed mainly on compatibilist views).

Advanced

Pereboom, Derk, (2001) Living Without Free Will, Cambridge University Press. (A very clear defense of a hard determinist view).

Watson, Gary (ed.) (2003) Free Will, Oxford University Press. (Collection of essential readings on the topic, including the articles mentioned above by Strawson and Frankfurt).

Wolf, Susan (1990) Freedom Within Reason, Oxford University Press. (Influential defence of a compatibilist view).

Internet Resources

The Determinism and Freedom Philosophy Website, edited by Ted Honderich.

(Many useful articles, including the relevant sections from Hobbes, Hume and Kant can be found here).

In the Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy (edited by Tim Crane):

Duff, R.A. ‘Responsibility’.

Strawson, G. ‘Free Will’.

In the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (edited by Ed Zalta):

McKenna, M. and Coates, J. ‘Compatibilism’.

O’Connor, T. ‘Free Will’.

PHI 101 Hilary Putnam Computers & Functionalism

Finally, here is a clip of Hilary Putnam in (rather one-sided) conversation with Bryan Magee on computers and functionalism.

The mind as a function, 2:04

Brian Magee

PHI 101 Mind, Brains, Computers, Cartesian, Turing, Searle

What is it to have a mind? We are certain that anyone reading this text has a mind. But what are the special properties that beings with minds have? What sorts of things have those properties: animals? Infants? Computers? We will discuss some of the approaches contemporary philosophers have taken to the question of what it is to have a mind. We begin our discussion with Cartesian dualism, which claims that mind is immaterial, continue to identity theory, a view that mind is identifiable with physical matter, and finish with functionalism, according to which a mental state is essentially identifiable with what it does. Secondly, we concentrate on the problems that thought experiments of Alan Turing and John Searle pose to the functionalist account of mind.

PHI 101 Hume vs. Reid

David Hume's argument is that you

should never believe that a miracle has occurred on the basis of testimony.

Lots of ways you can challenge Hume's argument.

One way you could challenge it, you could challenge his definition of miracle.

You could say he's got that wrong.

But I think there's another interesting way to challenge the argument.

Challenge the assumption.

You should only trust testimony when you've got evidence.

Testifier is likely to be right.

And that's the premise of Hume's argument that his most important contemporary

critic, Thomas Reid took issue with.

So, Reid was a minister in the Church of Scotland and

a professor at the University of Aberdeen in Glasgow.

And he challenged this assumption of Hume's in a book called Inquiry into

the Human Mind on the Principles of Common Sense which was first published in 1764.

And the challenge comes in a section that Reid entitled,

of the analogy between perception and the credit we give human testimony.

So, Reid argued that trusting testimony is just like trusting your senses,

trusting what you see around you.

To believing something on the basis of what someone else says is just like

believing something on the basis of seeing it with your own eyes, Reid thought.

So, here's the interesting thing.

We don't only trust our senses when we've got evidence that they're likely

to be right.

Hume and Reid, one of the few things they agreed on was that we don't have any

kind of good evidence that our senses are likely to be right.

So, Hume and Reid both thought,

we don't trust our senses on the basis of evidence that they're likely to be right.

So, what Reid's gonna challenge is Hume's assumption that we should only trust

testimony on the basis of evidence of the testifier is likely to be right.

So, why does he think, you know, why does he think that?

What's his argument?

Well, Hume and Reid both thought,

there were innate principles that governed how we think and how we feel.

They wouldn't put it this way, but

they both thought that we were hard wired to think in certain ways.

So, they both thought, for example, that we were hard wired to trust our senses.

We're hard wired to believe what we see before our eyes, but

here's what Reid thought that Hume didn't think.

Reid thought that we're also hard wired to trust testimony.

He said there's a innate principle of credulity, he called it, and

here's what that principle was.

It's a disposition to confide in the veracity of others and

to believe what they tell us.

PHI 101 Gettier Problems

/gettier

PHI 210 PHI 101 Eryca Part 3 Knowledge

Eryca 

5:25

https://youtu.be/87heidlFqG4

New Books in Religion Podcast: Shinto, Buddhist, Kami, Japan

In her recent monograph, Assembling Shinto: Buddhist Approaches to Kami Worship in Medieval Japan (Harvard University Asia Center, 2017), Anna Andreeva focuses on a complex network of religious sites, figures, and texts to help us better understand the way in which Japanese deities were worshipped in medieval Japan. In so doing, she illuminates the medieval stages of a process that led to what was later called Shinto, and adds to the growing body of scholarship that challenges the relatively recent idea that Shinto is simply the native religion of Japan, unchanged since ancient times.

To tackle such a grand undertaking, Andreeva focuses on a mountain in central Japan called Mt. Miwa as well as on Ise, the location of the Ise shrines and the abode of the most important imperial deity. Beginning with the significance of Mt. Miwa as a religious site for pre-ninth-century Japanese rulers, Andreeva charts the decline of this mountain’s importance during the eighth-to-twelfth centuries and the subsequent revival of the site during the thirteenth century by non-elite practitioners of esoteric Buddhism stationed at small Miwa temples and by the Saidaiji lineage under the direction of the Buddhist monk Eison and his disciples. Continuing chronologically, she then shows how the thirteenth-century revival led some time later to the emergence of the so-called Miwa-ryu Shinto, an eclectic tradition which spread to different regions of Japan and whose influence continued until the early nineteenth century.

Central to Andreeva’s project is the world of Japanese esoteric Buddhist thought and ritual, for it was in this setting that the Japanese deities could be transformed from beings characterized by ignorance and desire into embodiments of Buddhist awakening. Throughout the book Andreeva addresses many religious elements, Japanese and not, that were incorporated into esoteric Buddhist traditions active at Mt. Miwa and Ise. These include the incorporation of deities from ancient Japanese mythology into medieval legends and esoteric ritual, serpentine and dragon imagery, initiation rites modeled on the enthronement of a king, pilgrimage, and the use of royal symbolism. In addition, she provides a number of detailed descriptions of rituals and translations of liturgical and exegetical works.

The book’s topic is very complex: Andreeva has opted out of the usual approach, which would be to trace the development of a single figure, text, idea, or institution. This makes the project far more difficult for the researcher, but has the invaluable advantage that it allows the reader to perceive and appreciate the fascinating networks that show how medieval Japanese religion actually existed and developed on the ground. Beyond its importance for understanding Japanese Buddhist intellectual history, esoteric Buddhist thought and ritual, and the development of Shinto, the book also serves as an example of how to study the intricate social, economic, and geographical networks that lie behind the development of religious ideas, practices, and institutions.

February 7, 2018 at 6:00 AM

36.1 MB (Audio)

HUM 111 Holy Roman Empire

When the various Germanic tribes found that they could settle on the lands once occupied by the Romans and their vassals, they were elated. Before the highly symbolic victory of Alaric, wandering tribesmen were in danger of being slaughtered by Roman border garrisons should they find themselves inextricably deep into Roman territory and without hope of withdrawal and retreat.

With the increasing incursions of the Huns into German lands, and the panic this caused, the tribes became ever more incautious, and in some cases the ancient councils decided on uprooting and migrating into Roman franchises defended by Roman forces, with all the risks that entailed.

The so-called Visigoths, or Western Goths were among the first of the Germanic peoples to survive for a prolonged period of time within Roman borders. After being confronted with the reality of annihilation through some unrecorded massacre of their tribal brethren by Hunnic invaders, the Visigothic warriors hoisted Alaric on their shields, and decided to enter Italy.

The great Vandal general Stilichus was charged by the Roman Senate with pursuing and destroying Alaric and his army, however in a whirlwind of military strategy Alaric saved his people and his soldiers sacked Rome, before the group escaped to first Aquitania and then Iberia.

Similar stories were repeated elsewhere, until all the major parts of the Western Roman Empire hosted substantial Germanic populations, such as the Franks, the Burgundians, the Suebi, the Vandals and others. These quickly learned to speak the dialects that the locals had created from proper Latin, and called themselves Romans, as well.

There is no evidence that these new Romans, who might be Christians, had any idea of the pagan and sometimes hedonistic Roman Imperial life-style that had been the unchallenged norm before Emperor Constantine embraced Christianity. They grew increasingly conscious that the Catholic religion, as led by the Pope of Rome, was extremely important in their new lives on Roman lands, and those who still followed traditional religious beliefs, whether Christian or not, would be persuaded to embrace Catholicism wholeheartedly before long.

When these new Roman citizens first came together for battle against an enemy of Rome, and Mohammad had declared himself such at an early date, it was natural that they should style themselves as Holy Romans, rather that simply Roman.

The label stuck, and the entire Gallo-German-Roman culture became an intertwinement of religious and military duties, where some of the Imperial Roman institutions (titles and duties) were preserved in one form, or another, but other things were done strictly through the offices of the Church, the Bishops, Priests and other Clerics.

In some senses the entire Holy Roman establishment was more unified, not less, than the Roman Empire that preceded it. This was because Clerics could keep accurate marriage records of the noble landowners, and advise marriages based upon these records, strengthening ties between the ruling families. It was even said on some occasion or other that all the nobles of Europe were related to Jesus Christ to some degree. Holding such a belief in these days might entitle you to an extended stay in a mental institution, and imitation of the religious fervor and depth of belief of those times is generally discouraged, much as would have had the “enlightened” instructors in the ages that followed.

Both the ancient Roman families and the Germanic newcomers were more or less satisfied with this system, which allowed some of the old Romans an excessive amount of influence in the distribution of entitlements through their long residency in the city of Rome, itself, while giving the Germanic settlers a chance to work the land and prove themselves through service to their feudal overlords, whether they be Roman or German.

The Medieval Age and the Holy Roman Empire are denigrated by the thinkers, or philosophers of the Enlightenment as “Dark Ages,” but they were as much a part of European History as the Renaissance and the Age of Discovery and might have been a fortunate way that the newcomers from the North were spared immersion in the greatest excesses of the pagan Roman world, including the gratuitous violence and blood-sport of the gladiatorial arenas, the prostitution of slaves and servants, as well as other exploitative and abusive practices known to have been ordinary business in the dark places and shadows of Ancient Rome, the Rome that existed as a pagan construct, replete with witches and their magic, gods and demi-gods and auguries of all sorts.

Mahattan Catholic Islamist College

manhattan-islamic-balkan

PHI 212 PHI 101 Robot Olympics

Olympics

HUM 111 Collapse and Fall of the Roman Empire

At-what-point-of-history-did-the-Roman-Empire-start-to-fall-apart

HUM 112 HIS 105 American Literature Mark Twain

American Lit

PHI 212 Stoic Philosophy for Moderns

/9-stoic-practices-that-will-help-you-thrive-in-the-madness-of-modernity

REL 212 HUM 111 Roman Jerusalem

Jerusalem

REL 212 World Religions Hinduism

What do Hindus believe? How do they see the world? What do Christians and Hindus have in common, and what are the major differences?

January 16, 2013 at 1:00 AM

70.9 MB (Audio)

https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/hinduism/id592632558?i=1000331995894&mt=2


Beaver Creek Nazarene Church

REL 212 Hora, Jewish Wedding Dance

Hora

what-gift-do-you-give-at-a-jewish-wedding

REL 212 Diwali

Hinduism Festivals Module for HUM 111

Learning Objective:

The student in the Hinduism Festivals module will understand Diwali and the Festival of Lights by answering the six prompts during the video.

Assessment:

The professor will verify the learning objective by responding individually to the student, correcting if necessary, and answering any additional questions the student has about Diwali.

REL 212 Zoroastrian

/culturalinstitute/beta/exhibit

REL 212 Hinduism: Rama, A God Among Humans

The story of “ Rama, A God Among Humans” is about a prince named Rama who was favored to reign on the throne of his father Dasaratha; but was banished to our world when his evil stepmother Kaikeyi wished that her son Bharata would rein in his place . His father could not refuse the request of his wife because he was a righteous king and this transgression would have looked bad in the eyes of his citizens. Dasaratha died of a broken heart after banishing Rama. Rama was sent to the forest of Dandaka where he was estimated to have killed fourteen thousand demons in battle. His brother Laksmana accompanied him along with Sita, “the model of a devout Hindu Wife.” Ravana, the king of demons, hearing about the slaughter of his kin, kidnapped Rama’s wife Sita and fled to his Kingdom of Linka. Hanuman the great monkey joined Rama in his quest to find Sita in the Kingdom of Linka. Hanuman burned the city down, but spared Sita in his fierce attack. Rama defeated Ravana when he travelled to the city and named Vibhisana as the lord of the demons in Lanka after. Sadly, Rama had to banish Sita from his kingdom because people began questioning if she had remained pure and faithful to him while staying in the castle of Ravana. This broke Ramas heart because he knew that she was faithful, but in order to maintain his reputation as a righteous kind he banished his wife.

REL 212 Hindu Response to Muslim Aggression

hindu-response-muslim

REL 212 HUM 112 Palestinian Lies: Jewish Colonialism

rewriting-history-abbas-calls-israel-a-colonial-project-unrelated-to-judaism

REL 212 Sufism

Sufism, like many terms in the study of Islam, can be difficult to define and even more difficult to handle, but Alexander Knysh, in Sufism: A New History (Princeton University Press, 2017), has produced a primer that will both challenge and reinforce many of the assumptions we’ve made in the study of Islamic mysticism. Knysh walks us through how to define Sufism, the origins of Sufism (including the influence of the Hellenic world), how texts fit into our consideration of Sufism, contemporary developments in Sufism, and more. He places this within the framework of outsiders and insiders (to Sufism), challenging us to understand better how the study of Sufism itself came into being. The entire book itself is in conversation, not simply with theoretical debates in Islamic studies and the study of religion, but also the greater field of history. Nadirah Mansour is a graduate student at Princeton University’s Department of Near Eastern Studies working on the global intellectual history of the Arabic-language press. She tweets @NAMansour26 and produces another Middle-East and North Africa-related podcast: Reintroducing.

alexander-knysh-sufism-a-new-history-princeton-up-2017 Podcast

HUM 111 Mayan Complex Discovered

Mayans

How I Stayed Roman Catholic at Harvard

/How-Stayed-Catholic-Harvard-Faithful

aurora-griffin-on-being-catholic-at-harvard

Top Training Resources

/80-training-resources-to-help-you-take-your-businesses-training-to-the-next-level

Learning Innovation Conversation with Melina Uncapher

Learning Innovation Conversation with Melina Uncapher

 ExCITe welcomes Dr. Melina Uncapher for a Learning Innovation Conversation moderated by ExCITe Director Youngmoo Kim on Tuesday, January 30th at 6pm at the Study Hotel at Drexel University. Dr. Uncapher will speak to innovations in neuroscience and solving real-world problems in education and technology. About Melina Uncapher: Dr. Melina Uncapher is an Assistant Professor in the Dept of Neurology at UC San Francisco, and Director of Education for Neuroscape, a new center that aims to bridge neuroscience and technology. Dr. Uncapher has spent 16 yrs at the forefront of learning neuroscience, and now applies research to solve real-world problems in education and technology. Dr. Uncapher leads a multi-university National Science Foundation-funded network studying how executive function contributes to academic achievement, and is leading a initiative to launch Learning Engineering as a new way to build research-practice partnerships. She co-founded and is CEO of a nonprofit that arms educators and students with practical tools based on learning science, Institute for Applied Neuroscience TDr. Uncapher also runs a NIH-funded research program that investigates whether technology use is associated with neurocognitive changes. She co-chaired a 2015 National Academy of Sciences conference on children and technology, and sits on the board of the Institute of Digital Media and Child Development. She also holds an affiliation with Stanford’s Psychology Department and is a MacArthur Scholar. Her work has been highlighted in media outlets such as the New York Times, PBS, and Frontline. Her science outreach work includes serving as Script Supervisor on the Emmy-nominated PBS TV series The Brain with David Eagleman, and as scientific advisor on an award-winning short film about the brain.

REL 205 Religion and Conflict

Religion and Conflict

HIS 105 HUM 112 Dinesh D'Souza on Alinsky, KKK, the Left

Alinsky, KKK, the Left

HUM 111 Great Wall

China

HUM 111 Goths

Goths

HUM 111 Teenage Wasteland Rome

Rome

REL 212 Unification Church Moonies

Moonie

HIS 105 HUM 112 Hollywood Babylon vs. WASP America, Buffalo Springfield

For What Its Worth, 5:38

HUM 111 Julius Caesar, Veni, Vidi, Vici

Arguably Caesar’s most well-known quote, “veni, vidi, vici” is just another example of Caesar’s superb statesmanship.

One could argue that a good knowledge of PR was the most important skill a Roman politician had to master, seeing as they needed the votes of the people to obtain power. (Whether or not they obtained these votes without bribing the people is another discussion, and such a thing was commonplace, if not legal, in ancient Rome.)

Caesar was perhaps the best Roman statesman throughout Ancient Roman period, as seen by his accomplishments in political and social reform during his period as consul and, later, dictator of Rome. Caesar knew how to form strong bonds with the people and maintain them. The best way to do this while he was away on campaign was to write letters back to Rome, letting the public know what he was doing and informing them of the battles he won for Rome. Doing this, he assured his people that he was off fighting (and winning, for the Romans only cared for a general that won his battles), for the glory of Rome.

While Caesar was away, his legions came under attack from Pharnaces II of Pontus in what is known as the Battle of Zela. After managing to rally his legions and defeat the enemy army after they took Caesar by surprise, Caesar writes his iconic “catch-phrase” of “veni, vidi,vici”, in a letter back to Rome.

This let the Roman people believe that Caesar won a quick and decisive victory in his short war against Pontus, implying Caesar’s great ability as a general.

So, to summarise, Caesar used this phrase to imply a short and decisive victory to inform the Roman people that he was still winning battles quickly and effectively for the glory of Rome for the purpose of keeping a good relation with the Roman people who would later vote him into political power.

HUM 111 112 Renaissance Map 1587

the-largest-early-world-map-is-unveiled-for-the-first-time

HUM 111 Rome & China

Rome and China knew about one another. Or, at least, each one knew that there was another large empire across the great expanse of what we now know as Eurasia, even if they were sparse on further details. Rome knew China as Seres, the land from which silk came (at ruinous expense). China knew Rome as Daqin, and perhaps recognized it as the source of glass. However, no Roman that we know of ever got as far as east as China, nor did anyone from China get as far as the Roman empire. There were a couple of near misses on each side (one Chinese ambassador got to Persia but was misled about the remaining distance to Rome and gave up in despair, while a Roman merchant got only a few days’ journey from Chinese-controlled Kashgar), and it’s at least plausible that Byzantine dignitaries visited China (though, since the accounts of such visitors only exist as brief mentions in Chinese records, it’s unclear if they were real Romans/Byzantines, natives of client states claiming to represent the empire, or simply con men), but China and the classical Roman empire never directly contacted one another.

Obsolete Car Audio: Cassettes

/obsolete-car-audio-part-4

HUM 112 Chopin and Jimmy Page

 At Chopin’s request this was played at his funeral. Hans von Bülow called the prelude "suffocation", due to its sense of despair. In fact, Chopin's last dynamic marking in the piece is smorzando, which means "dying away". But the prelude may have once been given a title. According to George Sand's daughter Solange, who stayed with the composer at the monastery in Majorca when the preludes were written, "My mother gave a title to each of Chopin’s wonderful Preludes; these titles have been preserved on a score he gave to us." ^[1] That titled score is lost. But Solange did record the names of the preludes, apparently without assigning the names to the prelude numbers. It is believed that the title "Quelles larmes au fond du cloître humide?" ("What tears [are shed] from the depths of the damp monastery?") corresponds to Prelude No. 4.  In any case it is clear that this was intended as a mournful piece. 



Prelude No. 4

Prelude No 4 in E minor, Op 28

REL 212 Gen Z Least Christian Generation in American History

/gen-z-is-the-least-christian-generation-in-american-history-barna-finds

REL 212 Google Home Not Jesus

/people-outraged-as-google-home-identifies-buddha-muhammad-and-satan-but-not-jesus-christ

HUM 112 Ritchie Blackmore Ode to Joy

Richard Hugh Blackmore (born 14 April 1945) is an English guitarist and songwriter. He was one of the founder members of Deep Purple in 1968, playing jam-style hard-rock music which mixed guitar riffs and organ sounds. During his solo career, he established a heavy metal band called Rainbow which fused baroque music influences and elements of hard rock. Rainbow steadily moved to catchy pop-style mainstream rock. Later in life, he formed the traditional folk rock project, Blackmore's Night, transitioning to vocalist-centred sounds. As a member of Deep Purple, Blackmore was inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame in April 2016.

Deep Purple are an English rock band formed in Hertford in 1968. The band is considered to be among the pioneers of heavy metal and modern hard rock, although their musical approach changed over the years. Originally formed as a progressive rock band, the band shifted to a heavier sound in 1970. Deep Purple, together with Led Zeppelin and Black Sabbath, have been referred to as the "unholy trinity of British hard rock and heavy metal in the early to mid-seventies". They were listed in the 1975 Guinness Book of World Recordsas "the globe's loudest band" for a 1972 concert at London's Rainbow Theatre, and have sold over 100 million albums worldwide.

Blackmore

HUM 111: Martin Luther Social Networks

Social Networks

HUM 111: Roman auxilia Provincial Society Augustus to the Severans

Bryn Mawr Classical Review 2018.01.34

---

Ian P. Haynes, Blood of the Provinces: The Roman 'auxilia' and the Making of Provincial Society from Augustus to the Severans.   Oxford; New York:  Oxford University Press, 2016.  Pp. xviii, 430.  ISBN 9780198795445.  $50.00 (pb).  

Reviewed by François Gauthier, McGill University (francois.gauthier3@mcgill.ca)

Publisher's Preview

Ian Haynes’ monograph is a much-needed update on The Auxilia of the Roman Imperial Army published by G. L. Cheesman in 1914. It is an ambitious work that looks at the structure, recruitment, religions, and equipment of the auxilia as well as its impact on provincial society. The book is organized into seven sections and twenty-two chapters.

The first part looks at the establishment of auxiliary forces and their incorporation into the professional army created by Augustus. While late Republican auxiliary units were sometimes named after their commander, this practice was gradually abandoned and replaced by tribal, provincial, or ethnic titles. Haynes argues that this reflects a more ordered and formal inclusion of the auxilia into the Roman army. By the time of the Year of the Four Emperors (AD 69) the auxilia were a well-established and essential part of the Roman military system. Over the course of the second century there was a gradual erosion of the status difference that originally existed between legions and auxilia in part because of the growing numbers of Roman citizens in cohorts and alae. The Constitutio Antoniniana effectively removed the distinction between legionaries and auxiliaries. Moreover, by the end of the Severan period, the difference in dress and equipment between legions and auxiliary formations had largely disappeared. The main distinction in unit types was now between infantry and cavalry.

Recruitment is the focus of the second part of the book. Haynes shows the Romans’ remarkable ability to use existing military structures to their own advantage. For example, the forces of former ‘client kingdoms’ were incorporated into the auxilia after the absorption of these kingdoms into the empire. There was no empire-wide pattern of auxiliary recruitment but rather a diversity of methods to recruit and reinforce units. In some areas such as Pannonia, recruitment came from the vicinity of military bases whereas in Africa and Britannia, local recruitment can be discerned. There was no general effort to maintain ethnic stock in any given unit. Recruitment more commonly chose the most convenient source. Haynes thus takes a position against the modern idea that certain units, especially those comprising eastern archers, kept recruiting there because of the existence of ‘natural’ archery skills in this area.

The third section deals with the daily life of the soldiers. Haynes emphasizes the point that military service essentially meant urban life. Since most recruits were drawn from rural communities, this meant they were exposed to styles of living and habits often alien to them. Time was measured according to the Roman calendar; bathing became standard practice as forts were equipped with baths. Mediterranean staple foodstuffs uncommon in northern areas such as olive oil and wine were consumed in garrisons throughout the empire. Despite these common habits, some regional preferences remained, for instance Batavian units drank beer rather than wine.

Religion is the object of the book’s fourth part. Haynes argues that there was no ‘military religion’ particular to the army and distinct from that of the civilian inhabitants of the provinces. The imperial cult, although attested throughout the empire, included important variations of worship from unit to unit and it does not seem to have been rigidly imposed by the state. In some units deities originating from several different areas of the empire were worshipped. For example, the cohors I milliaria Hemenesorum sagittariorum built a temple at Intercisa in Pannonia Inferior for the Syrian god Elagabalus, while several other deities such as Diana Tifana, Isis, Liber Pater, and Jupiter were also worshipped in the same unit.1 Haynes criticises the theory that Mithraism was particularly prevalent in the auxilia, stating that most followers of this mystery cult were actually civilians.

Equipment and tactics are treated in part five. Haynes makes use of the convenient concept of bricolage, coined by Lévi-Strauss, to propose that the armament of the auxilia was a mix of Roman and various other traditions. In the absence of centralized arm factories (not attested until the later empire), there was no single authority to standardize military equipment, even though many similarities were present. Auxiliary soldiers thus had a certain leeway to personalize their weapons and armour. There was an increased tendency towards uniformity in the third century as a result of the movement of units from province to province. There is no evidence for empire-wide reforms of equipment and it is unlikely that one took place as most emperors did not show much interest for these matters.

Haynes proposes that the clear differences in tombstones between foot soldiers and cavalrymen served as status symbols in provincial communities. The depiction of horses on tombstones was a symbol of prestige and a reminder that cavalrymen were better paid and enjoyed a higher status then infantrymen. This may have been a way for provincial tribal elites to reassert their status through service in alae.

Regarding auxiliaries on the battlefield, Haynes re-examines the famous passage from Tacitus (Agric. 35.2) on the battle of Mons Graupius in which the Roman historian credits his father-in-law Agricola for winning the battle using only auxiliary units rather than legionaries and thus sparing Roman blood. Haynes points out that many soldiers of the Batavians and Tungrians cohorts would actually have been Roman citizens. Moreover, auxiliaries regularly played a prominent role in other battles and often fulfilled the same tasks given to legionaries. The adoption of the spear, long sword, and oval shield for both legionary and auxiliary units over the course of the third century is described as a cultural rather than technological change. To be sure, such equipment had been used for a long time by auxiliary units. However, as Haynes recognized in an earlier chapter, armies tend to adopt the best weaponry and tactics irrespective of its cultural associations.1 The change in equipment may in fact reflect that it was simply better suited for the various missions that the Roman army had to perform in the third century.2 The last chapter of part five convincingly argues that most units of particular ethnic origins did not perpetuate distinctive dress and weaponry over time.

Part six examines the role and influence of language and writing in the auxilia. Haynes argues that the army was a powerful factor in the spread of Latin and Greek as auxiliary soldiers needed some knowledge of at least one of these two languages to understand orders and communicate with officers. This does not mean that auxiliaries ceased to speak their native languages. Rather, the auxilia were precisely characterized by the presence of many multilingual individuals. The military was an environment in which one was continually exposed to writing. Of course not all auxiliary soldiers were literate but levels of literacy were more likely to be higher than among the civilian population. For example, a list of receipts for the ala Veterana Gallica shows that twenty-two of the sixty-four soldiers registered could sign their own names. 3 Haynes also shows that military Latin was marked by regional variations and by the occasional mishandling of cases by auxiliary soldiers.
The seventh and last section covers auxiliary veterans. Haynes argues against the idea that veterans were agents of cultural change in their community after discharge. Their small numbers limited their impact and they would thus blend in with what existed rather than create something different. Moreover, there was no central policy of auxiliary veteran settlement.

Overall, Haynes shows an impressive command of the epigraphical, papyrological, and archaeological evidence. His study highlights the problems involved in making the auxilia a systematic agent of ‘Romanization’ (that word itself is controversial in scholarship). Indeed, Haynes’ study shows without a doubt that auxiliary soldiers did not acquire a common ‘Roman’ identity. Rather, their response to contact with the Roman army created various identities, reflecting the diversity of peoples that lived inside the empire. To be sure, service in the auxilia exposed men from all across the empire to a variety of habits and a life style that was markedly different from their own. However it does not follow that they became beacons of ‘Roman civilization’ after the end of their service.

While I certainly understand the basic need to establish boundaries to one’s historical enquiry, I nonetheless think that there could have been more about the evolution of auxiliary units over the course of the third century. Haynes argues that they basically became indistinguishable from legions. How did that play out? How did unit nomenclature evolve in the third century? Maybe this is where the modern divide between early and late empire comes into play, for specialists of the early Roman army are sometimes unwilling to go beyond the mid-third century while those studying the late Roman army would tend to consider anything past that period to be their preserve.

In summary this is a high quality book of tremendous importance for the study of the auxilia in the early empire. The extensive bibliography of some thirty-seven pages is exhaustive and there are a limited number of typographical errors. 4 The work is certain to become the new reference for any study on that topic.

---

Notes:
1.   p. 241.
2.   Military equipment did end up being produced by state-owned fabricae in the late third century, see James, S. “The Fabricae: State Arms Factories of the Late Roman Empire”, in J. C. Coulson (ed.) Military Equipment and the Identity of Roman Soldiers, pp. 257-331, Oxford, 1988.
3.   p. 323.
4.   For example: p. 86 muncipia for municipia, p. 157 and 307 solders for soldiers. This is not an exhaustive list.

HUM 112 Week 5 Dich, Teure halle, Marxism

Tannhauser: 'Dich, Teure halle' - Deborah Voigt, 3:44

Deborah Voigt sings Elisabeth's Aria 'Dich, teure halle' from Act 2 of Wagner's 'Tannhauser'. James Levine Conducts The Metropolitan Opera Orchestra.

https://youtu.be/-sSjRvaty0U



Marxism Explained in 2 Minutes, with Deirdre McCloskey - Learn Liberty, 2:39

“Marx was the greatest social scientist of the 19th century…” says Professor Deirdre McCloskey. “But he got everything wrong.”

https://youtu.be/-np-3g3_Mg0