Indo-European Chronology - Countries and Peoples

[Nemesis]

Originally Posted by Manji

Of course Ancient Greece was the birthplace of philosophy and modern politics, not to mention art and religion. But it was also the place which didn't condone homosexuality and paedophilia, dionisical rituals in which women cut man and children to pieces and ate them raw and had massive orgies.... Go check you History books if you doubt my word. Anyway, mind your tongue before trying to be funny/sarcastic. It suits you bad and is offensive to all the other forum members.

First I think you need to clear something for me.
Doesn't "condone" mean to "excuse, forgive, be lenient with"??
And if so, by saying

didn't condone

are you accusing the ancient Hellines of being homophobic, racist, what exactly are you aiming at?(sorry but I simply do not understand).

As for these "rituals" where allegedly a "women cut men and children to pieces and ate them raw and had massive orgies".
Honestly where did you ever see this?
I would like not many but one single myth or text (I do mean ancient) that will support this drivel.
Someone is obviously giving too much credit to TV series like Zena.

[Gil]

Condone: indirectly support, look the other way, be leninent with. My mistake. Seriously, you got the point, right? Obviously the ancient greeks supported homosexual behaviour, paedophilia and other practices which are abhorrent. My mistake was to use my language to form the word structure (in portuguese two negative/self negating sentences are not contradictory but serve the purpose of indication importance).

Series like Zena? Ok...

(Euripides, 'The Bacchae,' 677-775)

According to the ancient authorities, the cult of Dionysus came to Greece from Thrace or from Phrygia (the Phrygians were a Thracian tribe). The cult was of a frenetic and ecstatic character, as this passage from Euripides' Bacchae so strikingly illustrates.

One of the herdsmen describes to Pentheus, the king of Thebes, an attack of the maenads (bacchae) upon the royal herd.

About that hour

when the sun lets loose its light to warm the earth
our grazing herds of cows had just begun to climb
the path along the mountain ridge. Suddenly
I saw three companies of dancing women,
one led by Autonoe the second captained
by your mother Agave, while Ino led the third.
There they lay in the deep sleep of exhaustion,
some resting on boughs of fir, others sleeping
where they fell, here and there among the oak leaves
but all modestly and soberly, -not, as you think,
drunk with wine nor wandering, led astray
by the music of the flute, to hunt their Aphrodite
through the woods.

But your mother heard the lowing
of our horned herds, and springing to her feet,
gave a great cry to waken them from sleep.
And they too, rubbing the bloom of the sleep
from their eyes, rose up lightly and straight
a lovely sight to see: all as one,
the old women and the young and the unmarried girls.
First they let the hair fall loose, down over their shoulders,
and those whose straps had slipped
fastened their skins of fawn with writhing snakes
that licked their cheeks. Breasts swollen with milk,
new mothers who had left their babies behind at home
nestled gazelles and young wolves in their arms,
suckling them. Then they crowned their hair with leaves,
ivy and oak and flowering bryony. One woman
struck her thyrsus against a rock and a fountain
of cool water came bubbling up. Another drove
her fennel in the ground, and where it struck the earth,
at the touch of god, a spring of wine poured out.
Those who wanted milk scratched at the soil
with bare fingers and the white milk came welling up.
Pure honey spurted, streaming, from their wands.
If you had been there and seen these wonders for yourself,
you would have gone down on your knees and prayed
to the god you now deny.

We cowherds and shepherds
gathered in small groups, wondering and arguing
among ourselves at these fantastic things,
the awful miracles those women did.
But then a city fellow with the knack of words
rose to his feet and said: 'All you who live
upon the pastures of the mountain, what do you say?
Shall we earn a little favour with King Pentheus
by hunting his mother Agave out of the revels?'
Falling in with his suggestion, we withdrew
and set ourselves in ambush, hidden by the leaves
among the undergrowth. Then at a signal
all the Bacchae whirled their wands for the revels to begin.
With one voice they cried aloud:
'O lacchus! Son of Zeus!' 'O Bromius!'
they cried until the beasts and all the mountain seemed
wild with divinity. And when they ran,
everything ran with them.
It happened, however,
that Agave ran near the ambush where I lay concealed.
Leaping up, I tried to seize her,
but she gave a cry: 'Hounds who run with me,
men are hunting us down! Follow, follow me!
Use your hands for weapons.'
At this we fled
and barely missed being torn to pieces by the women.
Unarmed, they swooped down upon the herds of cattle
grazing there on the green of the meadow. And then
you could have seen a single woman with bare hands
tear a fat calf, still bellowing with fright, in two,
while others clawed the heifers to pieces.
There were ribs and cloven hooves scattered everywhere,
and scraps smeared with blood hung from the fig trees.
And bulls, their raging fury gathered in their horns,
lowered their heads to charge, then fell, stumbling
to the earth, pulled down by hordes of women
and stripped of flesh and skin more quickly, sire,
than you could blink royal eyes. Then,
carried up by their own speed, they flew like birds
across the spreading fields along Asopus' stream
where most of all the ground is good for harvesting.
Like invaders they swooped on Hysiae
and on Erythrae in the foothills of Cithaeron.
Everything in sight they pillaged and destroyed.
They snatched the children from their homes.
And when they piled their plunder on their backs,
it stayed in place, untied. Nothing, neither bronze nor iron,
fell to the dark earth. Flames flickered
in their curls and did not burn them. Then the villagers,
furious at what the women did, took to arms.
And there, sire, was something terrible to see.
For the men's spears were pointed and sharp,
and yet drew no blood, whereas the wands the women
threw inflicted wounds. And then the men ran,
routed by women! Some god, I say, was with them.
The Bacchae then returned where they had started,
by the springs the god had made, and washed their hands
while the snakes licked away the drops of blood
that dabbled their checks.

Whoever this god may be, sire,
welcome him to Thebes. For he is great
in many other ways as well. It was he,
or so they say, who gave to mortal men
the gift of lovely wine by which our suffering
is stopped. And if there is no god of wine,
there is no love, no Aphrodite either,
nor other pleasure left to men.

On the Maenads:

In Greek mythology, Maenads [MEE-nads] were female worshippers of Dionysus, the Greek god of mystery, wine and intoxication. The word literally translates as "raving ones". They were known as wild, insane women who could not be reasoned with. The mysteries of Dionysus inspired the women to ecstatic frenzy; they indulged in copious amounts of violence, bloodletting, sex and self-intoxication and mutilation. They were usually pictured as crowned with vine leaves, clothed in fawnskins and carrying the thyrsus, and dancing with the wild abandonment of complete union with primeval nature.

The Maenads were also known as Bassarids (or Bacchae or Bacchantes) in Roman mythology, after the penchant for the equivalent Roman god, Bacchus, to wear a fox-skin, a bassaris.


There, now I guess you are going to say that it's a play (theather) and as such it has no face value....

Also, I think your behaviour speaks for itself, you are simply yet another moron who should keep his mouth shut before making accusations.

[Carnyx]

Originally Posted by Milesian

Ah, interesting.
My guess had been that Louis was derived from the Celtic name "Lugh" (not sure what the Gaulish variation would have been, but likely the same or similar.)
Thanks for correcting me

YW In Gaulish it was Lug I guess (if the God is concerned). On the other hand, a lot of cities were named after Lug.

[Theobald]

Originally Posted by Duchemin

Yes, I have. You're right, it's Clovis. From germanic "Hlodvig" (glorious combatant) -or also "Hlodowecus"-, then Clovis which gave later "Ludovic" or "Ludwig" in Germany and "Louis" in France.

Thanks, indeed.

LOUIS
French form of LUDWIG. This was the name of 18 kings of France.

LUDWIG
From the Germanic name Hludwig which meant "famous warrior", composed of the elements hlud "fame" and wig "warrior". This was the name of three Merovingian kings of the Franks, though their names are usually spelled in the Latinized form Clovis, and three kings of Bavaria.

Source : 1, 2

Originally Posted by Duchemin

On the other hand, a lot of cities were named after Lug.

Such as Leiden (in the Netherlands, Lugdunum Batavorum), Lyon of course (Lugdunum, capital of the Gauls), Laon (Picardy), Loudun (Poitou), Lion-en-Beauce (Loire), ... and even Liegnitz in Silesia.

[Carnyx]

Originally Posted by Der Elsasser

Thanks, indeed.

If I can help.

Such as Leiden (in the Netherlands, Lugdunum Batavorum), Lyon of course (Lugdunum, capital of the Gauls), Laon (Picardy), Loudun (Poitou), Lion-en-Beauce (Loire), ... and even Liegnitz in Silesia.

There's also Lugo in Spain (Galicia) (lugoni tribe). I've also read something about Lutecia but it's not sure. (look for... "Lutecia" )

[Archangelos]

Manji,

Your mistaken, Ancient Greeks never supported homosexual behaviour, this is a misconception in todays modern world. Fade from thephora, if i remember correctly was always posting information to support that Ancient Greeks actually looked down upon such behavior. All one must to, is do alittle research and you will see that you are wrong about this.

"This is the myth that Adonis Georgiades so successfully and convincingly demolishes in his book Debunking the Myth of Homosexuality in Ancient Greece.

Georgiades manages, in just over 200 easy-to-read and well-documented pages, to cite a multitude of ancient sources which shed the light of truth upon the question of just how homosexuals and homosexuality were regarded in the Hellas of the 9th to the 4th century B.C. His thesis is simple: "Of course homosexuality existed in Greece, just as it has existed, and will continue to exist, everywhere and at all times in human history. However, while it did exist, it was never legally sanctioned, thought to be a cultural norm, or engaged in without risk of serious punishment, including exile and death." A pitiful creature like Barney Frank, for instance, would have -- upon his particular "proclivity" being discovered -- been executed or sent into exile. After which, his living quarters would have been fumigated and ritually purified by a priest. Unless, of course, he had previously "gone public" with his homosexual lifestyle. In that case, though he would have been permitted to live, he would, under Athenian law (grafí etairísios), not be permitted to

become one of the nine archons, nor to discharge the office of priest, nor to

act as an advocate for the state, nor shall he hold any office whatsoever, at home

or abroad, whether filled by lot or by election; he shall not be sent as a herald;

he shall not take part in debate, nor be present at the public sacrifices; when the

citizens are wearing garlands, he shall wear none; and he shall not enter within the

limits of the place that has been purified for the assembling of the people. Any

man who has been convicted of defying these prohibitions pertaining to sexual

conduct shall be put to death (Aeschines. "Contra Timarchus," as cited in

Georgiades, p. 69).



We learn as well that "Athens had the strictest laws pertaining to homosexuality of any democracy that has ever existed" (62). In non-democratic Sparta, as well as in democratic Crete and the rest of democratic Hellas, there were similar prohibitions with similar punishments as that meted out in Athens, and Georgiades gives us citations galore to prove his main thesis: "At no time, and in no place, was this practice considered normal behavior, or those engaged in it allowed to go unpunished" (passim). In order to remove any doubt whatsoever, he draws on such ancient luminaries as Aeschylus, Aristophanes, Diodorus Seculus, Euripides, Homer, Lysias, Plato, Plutarch and Xenophon, all of whom have left a written record as to what the prevailing norms were concerning this behavior. He also covers Greek vase painting, Mythology and Lesbianism, while not neglecting to reveal the truth about such much-maligned personalities from Hellas' glorious past as Achilles and Patroclus, Alcibiades and Socrates, Alexander the Great and Hephaestion, and the woman that the later Greeks regarded as "the greatest of the lyric poets," Sappho.



Greek vase painting has been a favorite source for the distorters of Greek culture and civilization. Georgiades points out that, of the tens of thousands of vases unearthed so far (the count for just the province of Attica, where Athens is located, is over 80,000), only 30 or so have an overtly homosexual theme; representing, in other words, just .01% of the total (127). When one compares this small percentage to what we see today on TV, in ads, books, magazines, the cinema, etc., one can just imagine what future generations will think of us. There is more, much more, but the purpose of this review is to stimulate the reader to order the book to see for himself just how Georgiades has managed to shed the light of truth on this important aspect of Greek history.



There is one more thing, however, that must be said. Georgiades has -- in a clear and easy-to-comprehend manner -- delineated the difference between what the ancients meant when they used the words "Erastis" and "Eromenos," and the way these words are translated and used in our time. This alone is worth the price of the book. Briefly, to the ancient Greeks, the term Erastis denoted a man who mentored, in a non-physical way, an Eromenos. The Eromenos was in all cases a beardless youth who looked up to and respected his mentor, and who had been commissioned by the boy's parents to take on the vital chore of preparing him to assume the roles of husband, father, soldier, and active citizen in the affairs of his community. Georgiades delves deeply into this relationship, and explains how and why these terms have come today to be confused with the "dominant" and "passive" partners in an homosexual union.



We can only be grateful that there are still young men around like Adonis Georgiades who want only to see that the truth is told about the country they love. This book is highly recommended, and though it has been published only in Greek to date, we sincerely hope to see an English language edition in the near future.


Adonis Georgiades, Debunking the Myth of Homosexuality in Ancient Greece (Omofilofilía Stín Archéa Ellátha: O Mýthos Katareëi). Georgiades Publishing Co. Academias 84, Athens 106 78. 2002. Tel: (+ 302 10) 38 36 231. Or http://www.georgiadesbooks.gr "

[Nemesis]

@Manji


Hidden behind your screen makes it quite easy to insult anyone and say things you obviously wouldn't if we were face to face.
So you either stop posting insults and have a mature discussion based on arguments or we just screw this topic up by posting insults towards eachother and spoil it for everyone.

Anyway,

As you correctly said

I guess you are going to say that it's a play (theather) and as such it has no face value....

The Maenads or Agamamnon, Ifigeneia, Medea, Jason,(to mention a few) might well have never existed as historical personnas. They are just personified symblizations on historical facts that indeed took place.

Concerning Euripides and other drama or Comedy creators, it is completely wrong and inapropriate to use theatre plays as hitorical sources. A play is just a play, it servers the need of learning together with entertainment. The most accurate sources are the myths themselves. Your example, is equivalent to being a historian of he 41st century and study history of our times bases upon comedy shows.

But I still failed to see exactly how this play supports your claims of

women cut man and children to pieces and ate them raw

You see, there is no such reference in the play, unless you think that the calf and heifers are a symblization for men and children.


Now let's continue with this joke

Obviously the ancient greeks supported homosexual behaviour, paedophilia and other practices which are abhorrent

You obviously lack knowledge of the real facts, which is quite common among those that have studied Hellinic history abroad. I suggest you take advantage of this opportunity and learn the real version.

This homo theory began by Walter Pater (1890's a poet and tutor) he and his band of homos originally began this fiasco theory in Oxford.
We find them introducing a totally new "theory" that Platonic Love has nothing to do with "phyche" but is totally based on phisical attraction.

Later we find a list of wanna-be "historians" of Hellinic sexuality, see: Michel Foucault, John Boswell, John Winkler and David Halperin that were or are all HOMOS striving to make some connection between homos and Hellinism.

The reason, of course, is simple. The Hellines have always been viewed as a model of civilisation. So what better way to justify their "sick nature" than by connecting it to the greatness of the Hellinic civilization and thus legitimise same-sex?

Of course homosexuality existed in Hellas, just as it has existed, and will continue to exist, everywhere and at all times in human history. However, while it did exist, it was never legally sanctioned, thought to be a cultural norm, or engaged in without risk of serious punishment, including exile and death. Unless, of course, he had previously "gone public" with his homosexual lifestyle. In that case, though he would have been permitted to live, he would, under Athenian law (grafí etairísios), not be permitted to
become one of the nine archons, nor to discharge the office of priest, nor to act as an advocate for the state, nor shall he hold any office whatsoever, at home or abroad, whether filled by lot or by election; he shall not be sent as a herald; he shall not take part in debate, nor be present at the public sacrifices; when the citizens are wearing garlands, he shall wear none; and he shall not enter within the limits of the place that has been purified for the assembling of the people. Any man who has been convicted of defying these prohibitions pertaining to sexual conduct shall be put to death (Aeschines. "Contra Timarchus," )
( so basicaly he didn`t even exist, easy to understand if you`ve read anything about ancient Athens )

Now let's see the mistranslation of the "terms" erastes-erwmenos"

If we are to see the meaning of "eromenos" we find that once again has nothing to do with any kind of sexual intercourse :
Just some examples

Plato, Euthydemus 282b
“there is no disgrace, Cleinias, or reprobation in making this a reason for serving and being a slave to either one's lover or any man, and being ready to perform any service that is honorable in one's eagerness to become wise.”

Plato’s Symposium, 184b

“it is our rule that, just as in the case of the lovers it was counted no flattery or scandal for them to be willingly and utterly enslaved to their favorites, so there is left one sort of voluntary thraldom which is not scandalous; I mean, in the cause of virtue.
It is our settled tradition that when a man freely devotes his service to another in the belief that his friend will make him better in point of wisdom, it may be, or in any of the other parts of virtue, this willing bondage also is no sort of baseness or flattery. Let us compare the two rules”

Xenophon Symposium 8.8
[8]“Now, I have always felt an admiration for your character, but at the present time I feel a much keener one, for I see that you are in love with a person who is not marked by dainty elegance nor wanton effeminacy, but shows to the world physical strength and stamina, virile courage and sobriety. Setting one's heart on such traits gives an insight into the lover's character.”

If we continue:
Xenophon Symposium
[26] Furthermore, the favourite who realizes that he who lavishes physical charms will be the lover's sovereign will in all likelihood be loose in his general conduct; but the one who feels that he cannot keep his lover faithful without nobility of character will more probably give heed to virtue. [27] But the greatest blessing that befalls the man who yearns to render his favourite a good friend is the necessity of himself making virtue his habitual practice. For one cannot produce goodness in his companion while his own conduct is evil, nor can he himself exhibit shamelessness and incontinence and at the same time render his beloved self-controlled and reverent"

Plato’s Republic 403b
“may not come nigh, nor may lover and beloved who rightly love and are loved have anything to do with it?” “No, by heaven, Socrates,” he said, “it must not come nigh them.” “Thus, then, as it seems, you will lay down the law in the city that we are founding, that the lover may kiss1 and pass the time with and touch the beloved as a father would a son, for honorable ends, if he persuade him.”

All of these texts give a meaning of obtaining knowledge and virtue, none of them refer to anything sexual as anyone can see.


There are many that claim that Aeschynes' Against Timarchus, makes no reference to homosexuality but is only about prostitution.

We know of the the law of "grafi eterisios" that banned these people from their "polical rights" as mentioned before.
.
"etairisios" from "etairos" or as seen in translated texts "hetairos"= comrade, companion.

We also find the well known "hetaires", what we concider today, thanks to all this mistranslation as whores, but the word clearly gives a different meaning, so they should actually be concidered companions or I think the more apropriate meaning would be something similar to mistress.

If the argument was only about his selling his body (as a whore does) then the law should have used the term "porni" (with hetta) from "pernimi"= "to sell" and has the meaning of whore, prostitute.

It's a FACT that in 1.29 Aeschynes uses the words
"H peporneumenos, phusin, H etairikos:”=
"either prostituted or has became a "comrade/companion/mistress" (in short, his bitch)

As I said, we find Aeschynes mentioning both prostitution and companionship. (interesting) and we know for a fact that homos were called “kinaidos”= shameless.

If we are to brake the word down, we find that it is nothing more than
“he who “kinei thn aido” = “kineo”= ” to move , to meddle with things sacred” and
“aidos” = “the personification of a conscience, of shame”
(it is well known that whoever provoked “Aidos” was always paid a visit from Nemesis.)

So when he mentions “companionship” he is clearly talking about homo relations. For he that has “sold out” his dignity “shame” has nothing left, so why not also sell out his city.

I think we should also see the meaning of the word “etaira”, as seen in the Liddle Scott dictionary just to cross-check what I support:

courtesan, Hdt.2.134, Ar.Pl.149, Ath.13.567a,571d, etc.; opp. porne (a common prostitute), Anaxil.22.1 ; opp. gametκ, Philetaer.5 ; Aphroditκ he. Apollod.Hist.17.

note that “opp” does mean opposite
(source : perseus.tuft)

We could continue this if you'd like to learn more about it.

[Gil]

Originally Posted by Nemesis

@Manji


Hidden behind your screen makes it quite easy to insult anyone and say things you obviously wouldn't if we were face to face. Perhaps if we someday meet we can settle this matter in a proper way, civilized or not, but not thru flaming and insulting.

You seem to be trying to state that i'm being imature and indeed a coward who wouldn't have the same attitute in a face to face conversation. THe same applies to you, specially since you were the one starting all this mess by stating your "superiority" over other's cultures.

Originally Posted by Nemesis

So you either stop posting insults and have a mature discussion based on arguments or we just screw this topic up by posting insults towards eachother and spoil it for everyone.

I would prefer the insult-free discussion, no doubt about that.

Originally Posted by Nemesis

Anyway,

As you correctly said The Maenads or Agamamnon, Ifigeneia, Medea, Jason,(to mention a few) might well have never existed as historical personnas. They are just personified symblizations on historical facts that indeed took place.

Concerning Euripides and other drama or Comedy creators, it is completely wrong and inapropriate to use theatre plays as hitorical sources. A play is just a play, it servers the need of learning together with entertainment. The most accurate sources are the myths themselves. Your example, is equivalent to being a historian of he 41st century and study history of our times bases upon comedy shows.

Well, I can give you other examples of "man to man love" (as it is translated from greek to english) specially in the works of Plutarch, Xenophon and Plato, I did use the above play because it referenced the myth of the maenads, which is infact a myth but based on reality (as all myths are).

Originally Posted by Nemesis

Now let's continue with this joke

Obviously you are the one making the sarcastic comments, not me.

Originally Posted by Nemesis

You obviously lack knowledge of the real facts, which is quite common among those that have studied Hellinic history abroad. I suggest you take advantage of this opportunity and learn the real version.

Funny how "hellenic" history has been studied and researched for centuries by non-greeks and you immediately state that the out-of-greece curriculae are wrong.

Originally Posted by Nemesis

This homo theory began by Walter Pater (1890's a poet and tutor) he and his band of homos originally began this fiasco theory in Oxford.
We find them introducing a totally new "theory" that Platonic Love has nothing to do with "phyche" but is totally based on phisical attraction.

Later we find a list of wanna-be "historians" of Hellinic sexuality, see: Michel Foucault, John Boswell, John Winkler and David Halperin that were or are all HOMOS striving to make some connection between homos and Hellinism.
....

I've been browsing the work of Mr A. Georgiades (Debunking the Myth of Homosexuality in Ancient Greece), published in 2002. I must say that that man, and indeed even you, might be more capable of answering the questions and debunking that what seems to be a myth, and that his study seems to be very acurate.
I've got no problem is saying that if indeed that is the case, well mate, you are right and I am wrong, the whole "hype" about Ancient Greece/homosexuality is just a construct based on erroneous assumptions and that has been lectured in schools throughout the globe. The matter of fact is that in the same way that the ancient texts might be misinterpreted than the text you pointed out (the account by Gerald of Wales) is also a text which must be looked upon as biased version (the man was a christian describing pagan acts) and even the word-by-word interpretation must be taken into account (not to mention the enourmous amouont of lies that authors in all the history of Mankind have told).

Originally Posted by Nemesis

We could continue this if you'd like to learn more about it.

Sure mate, it's a board, it's supposed to be all about learning/talking. My point initially was that you shouldn't attack other members based on their ethnicity/culture or overtly express you cultures' superiority.

Cheers

[Nemesis]

Manji

This whole thing had ended since my 3rd or 4th post where I apologized if I had offended anyone and it had untill you went on calling me a moron etc.
Anyway, let's say it ended there and make no further reference to it.

Well, I can give you other examples of "man to man love" (as it is translated from greek to english) specially in the works of Plutarch, Xenophon and Plato, I did use the above play because it referenced the myth of the maenads, which is infact a myth but based on reality (as all myths are).

Well, that is my point, the translations obviously aren't accurate.
Why would we find these alleged scholars claiming some prevelent homosexuality in Hellas, when the very texts obviously prove otherwise, why would they use the Symposium for example, to support this myth when the text when carefully read obviously gives totally different meanings as seen in my previous post?


As for the myth you used, the correct process is to "analyze it first.

See these examples that actually give a totally different meaning to a different myth.

The name "Agamemnon" is synthetical, from "ago" (or one of the verb's deriving nouns) + "memnimai" (possibly having to do with the unity of the Hellinic history and the significance of historical memory as an integral part of unity among people of he same blood).
The name "Ifigeneia" is also synthetical, from "ifis" + "genos" and it clearly symbolizes the unity of the "genos" (=the Hellines") which was to be sacrificed, since the tribes of the mainland of Hellas started a war against the also Hellinic colony of Troy.
Agamemnon, is mentioned to have killed a deer in hunting, without noticing that this deer belonged to Artemis, which is why Artemis should be mad with Agamemnon; so mad as to provoke the sacrifice of Ifigeneia (=the unity of the Hellines), by making Agamemnon set sails against the Trojans.

But this would rather be another historical symbolization, since the war of Troy was actually a war betwen priesthoods and had nothing to do with Helen. It is possible that Agamemnon, who represents the Hellinic unity (or more accurately the memories of the Hellinic historical continuum) did something realy nasty to the priestesses of Artemis (the deer could symbolize pureness), so there was a conflict between priesthoods (Artemis and Zeus), which led to the sacrifice of Ifigeneia (=the unity of the Hellines), with the civil war between the Hellines and Trojans.
In the same myth also notice the name of the king of Sparta: Menelaos: from "minis" + "laos", which is in plain words "tha rage of the people".

In the myth of Cronos eating his children we have the symbolization of time ("Hronos" in Hellinic) eating his "children", days, months and years, without the earth ("Gaia") and the sky ("Ouranos") noticing it. Probably having to do with the (false?) anticipated time linearity in our 3d-dimensional timespace. Or, if this is too much, it could have to do with the eradication of the memories of the early Hellinic civilization (dates back to 38,000 B.C.) after the glaciers melted at about 9,500 b.C. and the Aegan Sea flooded. Zeus (possibly from the verb "Zeugnyo"=create a link), comes as a link between the past and the known to us ancient Hellinic civilization putting a link between time and between people,


So before we use your example, the correct "process" would be to "analyze" Dionysus, Maenads, Cadmus etc....

Almost forgot to ask, what happened to the women eating men and children part of the play?

Funny how "hellenic" history has been studied and researched for centuries by non-greeks and you immediately state that the out-of-greece curriculae are wrong.

Let me present another example.

During the 6th International Symposium on Ancient Macedonia in Thessaloniki, Hellas, concluded that King Philip II of Macedonia was bisexual!!!

Now the interesting part:
During this "symposium" these alleged historians were comfronted by the well known (in Hellas that is) Hellin researcher Kyriakos Velopoulos.
What he managed to uncover is very interesting.

The two main speakers were Kate Modersen and Mandian (spl?), both well respected historians and professors at New England University.
He argued with them on the topic, his arguments were based on the original texts, by original I mean in ancient Hellinic, not translated.
These "historians" couldn't read a word in ancient Hellinic and of course had no idea on how to translate the text.
It was all over the Hellinic news how they were ridiculed and left, long before it even ended.

Honestly would you trust anything these people would claim?
Don't get me wrong, I'm sure there are many respected historians that do know what they are talking about, but today, where we find anyone publishing and strongly supporting literally anything they fund him/her to write, sorry but I just can't accept their views so easily.

[Gil]

If you read my posts I didn't say that part was included in the play, it was included in the myth.

According to greek mythology, the maenads, in their frenzy, would tear apart any males that came in their way, animal or human. For example, Orpheus died in this way.

Shattered by grief (for not saving Eurydice), Orpheus wandered the forests of Thrace, singing his wife's lament, and was attacked by the maenads (Dionysus orgiastic women) who tore him to pieces. His singing head floated down the river, and all was lost. Eventually the head floated ashore on Lesbos, and that's how the island became the centre of poetry.

Mythology also associates the maenads with other unconventional behaviour, including eating the raw flesh (omophagia) of their victims, animals and humans.

Core Ritual of Dionysus: The core ritual associated with the worship of Dionysus was orgiastic, meaning that it involved states of trance-like ecstasy, “outside-of-oneselfness,” merging with and possession by the god. It was celebrated every two years, at mid-winter near the time of the solstice, on barren mountain tops, especially Mt. Parnassus overlooking Delphi. There were three parts to this ritual:

* oreibasia (“mountain dancing”): To the accompaniment of flutes, drums, and cymbals, the worshippers, particularly women, danced themselves into ecstatic trances.
* sparagmos (“tearing to pieces”): In these trances they caught snakes and small animals and dismembered them with their bare hands. This vase painting shows Dionysus himself participating in the ritual.
* omophagia (“eating raw flesh”): By eating the bloody flesh of these animals, the worshippers became one with the god and with the wild natural forces that he represented.

Of course I wouldn't trust them per se but regardless of that History in itself is self-renovating, and each year, each month, new discoveries are made which enable us to better understand what really happened.

Just a question, why do you say "Hellinic" and "Hellin"? Is that the correct pronouciation/spelling for the most common "Hellenic"?

[Nemesis]

Your example of Orpheus' death isn't from the Hellinic version but from Ovid's Metamorphoses.
In Aeschylus' lost play quoted by Eratosthenes, we find that the Dionysus in order to punish Orpheus for regarding Apollo as the Sun god sent the Meaneds to kill him.

But in either version we find no account of him being eaten, just killed.

* sparagmos (“tearing to pieces”): In these trances they caught snakes and small animals and dismembered them with their bare hands. This vase painting shows Dionysus himself participating in the ritual.
* omophagia (“eating raw flesh”): By eating the bloody flesh of these animals, the worshippers became one with the god and with the wild natural forces that he represented.

Not sure what this proves. You probably didn't notice that you mention in your post.

caught snakes and small animals

and

By eating the bloody flesh of these animals

So again there is no reference to eating humans.
Even if we look at Euripides' Bacchae again, we find that Dionysus actually tricks the Maenads into eating Pentheus out of revenge. Which is the tragic part of the whole play, since one of the Maenads, Agave, was his mother.

Just a question, why do you say "Hellinic" and "Hellin"? Is that the correct pronouciation/spelling for the most common "Hellenic"?

I know that most spell it Hellenic, but it I find Hell(i)nic the correct "form", since the Η (hetta) in ΕΛΛ(Η)ΝΙΚΟΣ gives the (I) sound we find in the word "in". Not really sure if that's how it's pronounced when written Hellenic, I always believed it would sound like the "e" in "lend"

[Savorgnan]

The reason why Greece was Europe