Crops pillaged. Houses and barns burned. Captives taken, bystanders scattered and killed. The stuff that went on regularly at the English Scottish border makes the vikings look like a bunch of secular humanists.
You can look at any place really. Carolingian wars commonly entailed slaughter of local populations as examples or just because, and of course pillaging and looting was the norm. Enslaving people. The Frankish wars among themselves had villages and towns burned .
Pepin the Short massacred and enslaved the population of Frisia. Carloman wiped out the Alamanni via treachery, killing all the leading families off in a slaughter of thousands. Charlemagne had every Saxon taller than his sword killed, according to some chronicles.
The campaigns against the Lombards and in Spain were also very violent affairs with all the same stuff I mentioned before. Looting, pillaging, burning, killing people and taking captives.
But the difference is these guys had mostly favorable biographers.
All this time the Franks were regularly hitting Slavic peoples with raids meant to plunder and take slaves. Many slaves ended up in Islamic Spain, some became slave soldiers and powerful political players(a famous Muslim general was a Slav sold there to Muslims)
I could come up with countless examples. Edward I campaigning in Scotland and Wales perpetrated many local massacres. Sometimes as fear and reprisal and sometimes beyond his control.
The northern crusades saw entire populations like the old Prussians wiped out.
The Teutonic knights carried out regular raids for captives, plunder, and terror. They even attacked orthodox Christian Russians.
Crusader massacres all over the middle east too.
Some particular cruel acts were done by crusaders, mostly French, in the leadup to the disaster at Nikopolis against the Ottomans. By cruel, I mean torturing prisoners and random Muslims to death. Killing everyone they found.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
The Grihya Sutras are about the domestic side of vedic rites. They are honestly more relevant to us than puzzling out the Yajurveda or Rigveda. Plenty of parallels with other religions.
I've never yet seen a jew reflect on how they sowed religious intolerance into the world as a memeplex. No total tolerance didn't exist before but the old framework of paganism didn't call for total conversion or destruction of all others. Partly because people aren't fungible.
One man's ancestral obligations can't be another's and so on.
Judaism called for rejection of these differences in favor of total intolerance. Destroy the other.
This is where the persecution they whine about from Christians and Muslims came from. They sowed and they reaped it.
Islam and Christianity destroy by imposing their memeplex over other societies rather than the physical destruction the Torah teaches. Though remember, Judaism also developed this idea before Christianity by a century or two. Eliminate the other by making everyone the same.
Mormon theology has Jesus, the Father, and holy ghost as three separate entities.
There's also nothing about the three degrees of glory, or the plan of salvation(as fully explained) or spirit prison in the Book of Mormon. It's pretty standard Christian stuff.
These American Israelites from millennia ago are all just protestant Christians(priestcraft is commonly attacked in the book).
There's a lot about eternal damnation and the lake of fire, which isn't big in mormon theology. Brigham Young was almost a universalist.
Hiranyakashipu seems to be consistently depicted like a man. Asuras vary between being ogre like, animal like, "demon" like, something combining all those, and being human like. Even beautiful rather than ugly looking monsters. Part of the issue I think...
....is that in later development of Hinduism asuras and rakshasas got conflated. Asura was originally a general term for deity, then got a context leaning toward the "bad deities" that oppose the vedic order deities. Then they are framed as more demonic and monstrous.
Rakshasas are there in early vedic religion too, they are night stalkers, hate the sun, can change shapes and create illusions, and eat human flesh. Both appear in puranic literature and itihasa, but asura and rakshasa start to combine, it's often hard to see a difference.
It's surface level accurate. Christianity did spawn liberalism, egalitarianism, feminism. It also indirectly made communism. The western assumption ultimately is that class is determined purely by how much money you have. This has been the case since the bourgeois rose in power.
It's horrifying to most that you can't simply buy status as a brahmin. A problem this leads to though, is that society needs those roles we deem lesser or menial. Instead of telling people those roles are divinely ordained, in western society they are considered your failure.
Especially true in America where there's a lingering idea that everyone can be a rich manager or stock player. Ignore all the work that needs done, we can import Mexicans for that.
It sounds like something later Christians backdated to justify their gentile focus. The fact that we see remains of an early conflict over gentile converts and Jewish law tells me that the founders didn't teach ditching the Torah and Jewish custom, and didn't focus on gentiles
If Jesus or whoever had went around preaching this clearly we wouldn't have seen a problem with it early on.
The epistle of James is a point for point attack on Pauline ideas. We later see attempts to have it both ways
The centurion story is probably an addition to make it look like the movement was always accepting of gentiles. But then, Jesus also called a gentile woman a dog and ignored her requests for an exorcism in another example