4 ms·

The use of "Lesbian" to refer to female homosexuality is a 19th century construction. And lots of text from antiquity have been preserved even though they repre

by olavk 9y ago

The use of "Lesbian" to refer to female homosexuality is a 19th century construction. And lots of text from antiquity have been preserved even though they represent values counter to Christian morals.

acqq 9y ago
Oh, so you do agree with me now that her songs "represented values counter to Christian morals"? And that before Christians ruled, for centuries her works were copied and known and weren't considered as problematic as later? And that she was so widely known not only in antiquity but even 25 centuries later as the most famous female homosexual ever, even to influence the much more modern languages? What's the dispute then? My claim that started this all is, in full: "it was still simple and pure religious fundamentalism that preferred her work disappearing (or at least not being saved), in charge once the Christianity started to dominate the Empire." Do you really claim the Christians were so "tolerant" then to not preferring her work disappearing, or at least not being saved? I think you'd have to provide some extraordinary evidence, as there are even less controversial writings that haven't survived. Remember, for some work to survive, somebody had to copy every letter by hand, or to take some other very special measures, like hiding the scrolls in the cave or in the desert sand (and that it doesn't deteriorate and that it eventually is found only by us moderns and not by somebody before who'd use the old paper simply to start the fire or something). And as I've shown, the Christian writing against lesbians is older than the Gospels writing about what Jesus did. Moreover and once again, we also have the claim from the article about the narration which is already certainly at least 5 centuries old: "the 16th-century scholar Pietro Alcionio" (c. 1487 – 1527, op. accq) describes "a Greek class by a Constantinople refugee, Demetrios Calkokondylas. He remembers his teacher describing how the Greek Church authorities, supported by the Byzantine emperors, burnt eminent classical Greek poetry, including Sappho’s works, and replaced the burnt poems with those of Gregory of Nazianzus." It was obviously a long tradition, not something Calkokondylas would invent after taking refuge from Constantinople. Note, until the "Fall of Constantinople" in 1453 ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fall_of_Constantinople https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fall_of_Constantinople ) Constantinople was the capital of the Christian Roman empire (only in the West called the Byzantine). The city was named after Constantine the Great, the Emperor who enabled Christianity becoming official religion in the Empire. So the people there had their stories about their own Emperors, and there was surely some basis for these stories. What's "not coherent" then (as you claim in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15897264 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15897264 )?
- olavk 9y ago
  > Oh, so you do agree with me now... Please lay off the strawmen and just argue your point. Thank you. We don't know the content of the lost texts, but the few poems we have does not indicate anything heretical or immoral to Christian sensibilities. Calling her "a homosexual" is grossly anachronistic since this is 19th century concept. On the other hand, many texts which clearly are counter to Christian morality have been preserved. A vast array of texts from antiquity is lost, even something as highly valued as works by Aristotle. So that texts are lost does not in itself indicate a deliberate act of destruction.
  - acqq 9y ago
    The name can come from the 19th century, but the practices are obviously very old and not widely "officially" condemned until the Christianity became the official religion, that much is clear. As it is clear that the awareness of Sappho and the topics of her poems was always there, in spite of her poems not surviving. And you still ignore the whole context of Constantinople from where we have the very report mentioned in the article. The article also never mentions why it should be doubted, given the whole context, nor you do. Also note that the artistic depictions of something what the Christians considered "ungodly" at some given time were traditionally under much higher pressure than some other topics, let's see even more context: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byzantine_Iconoclasm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byzantine_Iconoclasm The art, compared to some other mediums, was always more probable to induce wishes of its destruction, as it communicates on the emotional level, independently of other cognitive capabilities of the consumers. One man was first often heard saying that John Lennon shouldn't have said that the Beatles are more popular than Jesus because "there should be nobody more popular than the Lord Jesus Christ." Later the same man did kill John Lennon, and recalled "I would listen to this music and I would get angry at him, for saying that he didn't believe in God... and that he didn't believe in the Beatles." Note, the fanaticism doesn't have to be (and often isn't) rational. Note that your responses also actually don't contain any historically usable arguments. But I surely can imagine you having the "feeling" that I'm wrong. That's how it starts.
    - olavk 9y ago

by olavk 9y ago

acqq 9y ago

Oh, so you do agree with me now that her songs "represented values counter to Christian morals"? And that before Christians ruled, for centuries her works were copied and known and weren't considered as problematic as later? And that she was so widely known not only in antiquity but even 25 centuries later as the most famous female homosexual ever, even to influence the much more modern languages? What's the dispute then? My claim that started this all is, in full: "it was still simple and pure religious fundamentalism that preferred her work disappearing (or at least not being saved), in charge once the Christianity started to dominate the Empire." Do you really claim the Christians were so "tolerant" then to not preferring her work disappearing, or at least not being saved? I think you'd have to provide some extraordinary evidence, as there are even less controversial writings that haven't survived. Remember, for some work to survive, somebody had to copy every letter by hand, or to take some other very special measures, like hiding the scrolls in the cave or in the desert sand (and that it doesn't deteriorate and that it eventually is found only by us moderns and not by somebody before who'd use the old paper simply to start the fire or something). And as I've shown, the Christian writing against lesbians is older than the Gospels writing about what Jesus did. Moreover and once again, we also have the claim from the article about the narration which is already certainly at least 5 centuries old: "the 16th-century scholar Pietro Alcionio" (c. 1487 – 1527, op. accq) describes "a Greek class by a Constantinople refugee, Demetrios Calkokondylas. He remembers his teacher describing how the Greek Church authorities, supported by the Byzantine emperors, burnt eminent classical Greek poetry, including Sappho’s works, and replaced the burnt poems with those of Gregory of Nazianzus." It was obviously a long tradition, not something Calkokondylas would invent after taking refuge from Constantinople. Note, until the "Fall of Constantinople" in 1453 ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fall_of_Constantinople https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fall_of_Constantinople ) Constantinople was the capital of the Christian Roman empire (only in the West called the Byzantine). The city was named after Constantine the Great, the Emperor who enabled Christianity becoming official religion in the Empire. So the people there had their stories about their own Emperors, and there was surely some basis for these stories. What's "not coherent" then (as you claim in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15897264 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15897264 )?

olavk 9y ago
> Oh, so you do agree with me now... Please lay off the strawmen and just argue your point. Thank you. We don't know the content of the lost texts, but the few poems we have does not indicate anything heretical or immoral to Christian sensibilities. Calling her "a homosexual" is grossly anachronistic since this is 19th century concept. On the other hand, many texts which clearly are counter to Christian morality have been preserved. A vast array of texts from antiquity is lost, even something as highly valued as works by Aristotle. So that texts are lost does not in itself indicate a deliberate act of destruction.
- acqq 9y ago
  The name can come from the 19th century, but the practices are obviously very old and not widely "officially" condemned until the Christianity became the official religion, that much is clear. As it is clear that the awareness of Sappho and the topics of her poems was always there, in spite of her poems not surviving. And you still ignore the whole context of Constantinople from where we have the very report mentioned in the article. The article also never mentions why it should be doubted, given the whole context, nor you do. Also note that the artistic depictions of something what the Christians considered "ungodly" at some given time were traditionally under much higher pressure than some other topics, let's see even more context: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byzantine_Iconoclasm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byzantine_Iconoclasm The art, compared to some other mediums, was always more probable to induce wishes of its destruction, as it communicates on the emotional level, independently of other cognitive capabilities of the consumers. One man was first often heard saying that John Lennon shouldn't have said that the Beatles are more popular than Jesus because "there should be nobody more popular than the Lord Jesus Christ." Later the same man did kill John Lennon, and recalled "I would listen to this music and I would get angry at him, for saying that he didn't believe in God... and that he didn't believe in the Beatles." Note, the fanaticism doesn't have to be (and often isn't) rational. Note that your responses also actually don't contain any historically usable arguments. But I surely can imagine you having the "feeling" that I'm wrong. That's how it starts.
  - olavk 9y ago