Christians' destructive rage against Paganism

[Estro Felino]

Another temple destroyed by the Christian emperors.
The symbol of Ancient Rome: the temple of Jupiter Capitolinus. It was on the top of Capitolium aka Capitoline Hill.

the temple in the republican period

Capitol Hill in the Imperial period

with a large stairway allowing the priest and the Pontifex Maximus to come up the hill.

Now Capitol Hill is like this.

 

[Bear Wild]

1. 
   
2. 
   

Where is the "Christians' destructive rage against Paganism"?

Its all over Europe. Where there were pagan groves there are no trees left, where there were sacred sites there are churches in their place. The Christianity of Europe emerging from Rome intentionally removed almost everything pagan.

 

[1213]

It's the ancient source who reveal us it was a Christian archbishop. In the meantime, the Roman Empire had been split in two. In the Eastern part, where Byzantium is, they were incredibly intolerant towards all that was considered pagan and polytheistic.
Destroying temples was some sort of purification rite.

Temple of Artemis: Destruction of the Temple - Ephesian

Delve into the tragic history of the Temple of Artemis and its destruction. Learn about the ancient events that led to the downfall of this masterpiece.

ephesiantourism.com

Thanks, interesting article. Do you think it was the prayer that destroyed the temple?

The Acts of John, an apocryphal tale from the 2nd century, recounts a story in which the apostle John prayed in the temple, resulting in the splitting of its altar and the collapse of a portion of the temple.

And by what I know, goths, who allegedly destroyed the temple of Diana were not Christians.

 

[Bear Wild]

Thanks, interesting article. Do you think it was the prayer that destroyed the temple?

How did a prayer destroy the temple?

 

[Estro Felino]

Thanks, interesting article. Do you think it was the prayer that destroyed the temple?

The Acts of John, an apocryphal tale from the 2nd century, recounts a story in which the apostle John prayed in the temple, resulting in the splitting of its altar and the collapse of a portion of the temple.

Very interesting.
I don't know. Maybe.

And by what I know, goths, who allegedly destroyed the temple of Diana were not Christians.

The Goths just set the temple on fire. A fire cannot damage marble or limestone in any way.

 

[Augustus]

This thread is dedicated to all the damages done by the iconoclasm and the destructive rage that early Christians developped against all that was pagan and polytheistic.
It was something that destroyed, I guess the 80% of the cultural heritage of that time, if we think of statues, temples, shrines.

1. The most fulgid example was the temple of Artemis in Ephesus. Ephesus was one of the very first Christian communities and had this magnificent temple, with high columns. It was destroyed by the Eastern Roman Empire, which enabled a zero tolerance towards Paganism, in the V century.
This is the before and after:

People seem to assume everything that no longer exists must have been "destroyed". The opposite is more true, most ancient things that exist have been specifically saved in one way or the other. The default is for things to no longer exist.

We can see the exact same process in every Western country today when we look at the closure and sometimes repurposing of Churches.

It would make little sense to paint this as the 'destruction' of churches by non-Christians, as it is just the social and economic reality of the decline in numbers of people attending church. The same thing happened in the past, pagan temples that were not being used were not economically viable and fell into disrepair. Often their stone would be repurposed to build city walls, houses or churches as it was a valuable resource.

Even in the 18th C, much of Hadrian's Wall was used to build roads to improve logistics and help defeat the Jacobite Uprising. We find this awful today, but people back then had different priorities and you can't really blame them.

We might like to think of ancient people spending lots of money preserving buildings and treasures for the benefit of modern tourists and aesthetes, but we save what we value and allow the decline of that which we do not. We can't expect all societies throughout history to have the same preferences as we do.

Throughout history people have valued some things for their historical value, but a lot for the drive to preserve "cultural heritage" in general is a more modern thing.

Some pagan temples were destroyed (mostly in a small number of locations like Syria), although the phenomenon is massively overstated, and the vast majority of pagan buildings and artefacts just died a natural death, like many Churches are doing today as there are no benefactors to pay for their preservation.

 

[Augustus]

It was John Chrysostom that destroyed the temple, and only a huge pile of debris remained.

It's always worth remembering that hagiographic religious literature is often not the most accurate recollection of factual history.

Exaggerated piety is a key feature and common tropes involve miracles, spreading the Gospel, defeating evil, triumph over pagans or infidels, asceticism, etc. that should be taken with a pinch of salt. Just because a hagiographer said something happened doesn't mean it definitely did, we would look at all the evidence available.

 

[Estro Felino]

It's always worth remembering that hagiographic religious literature is often not the most accurate recollection of factual history.

Exaggerated piety is a key feature and common tropes involve miracles, spreading the Gospel, defeating evil, triumph over pagans or infidels, asceticism, etc. that should be taken with a pinch of salt. Just because a hagiographer said something happened doesn't mean it definitely did, we would look at all the evidence available.

I won't consider a saint someone who deliberately destroyed one of the seven wonders of the ancient world...honestly.
Destructive rage doesn't come from God.

 

[Estro Felino]

People seem to assume everything that no longer exists must have been "destroyed". The opposite is more true, most ancient things that exist have been specifically saved in one way or the other. The default is for things to no longer exist.

We can see the exact same process in every Western country today when we look at the closure and sometimes repurposing of Churches.

It would make little sense to paint this as the 'destruction' of churches by non-Christians, as it is just the social and economic reality of the decline in numbers of people attending church. The same thing happened in the past, pagan temples that were not being used were not economically viable and fell into disrepair. Often their stone would be repurposed to build city walls, houses or churches as it was a valuable resource.

Even in the 18th C, much of Hadrian's Wall was used to build roads to improve logistics and help defeat the Jacobite Uprising. We find this awful today, but people back then had different priorities and you can't really blame them.

We might like to think of ancient people spending lots of money preserving buildings and treasures for the benefit of modern tourists and aesthetes, but we save what we value and allow the decline of that which we do not. We can't expect all societies throughout history to have the same preferences as we do.

Throughout history people have valued some things for their historical value, but a lot for the drive to preserve "cultural heritage" in general is a more modern thing.

Some pagan temples were destroyed (mostly in a small number of locations like Syria), although the phenomenon is massively overstated, and the vast majority of pagan buildings and artefacts just died a natural death, like many Churches are doing today as there are no benefactors to pay for their preservation.

Yes...I can also post all the pagan temples which are preserved because they were turned into churches.
I can mention the most emblematic example: the Pantheon of Rome.
Or the temple of Athena in Syracuse, turned into cathedral.
Or the Parthenos in Athens.

 

[Augustus]

I won't consider a saint someone who deliberately destroyed one of the seven wonders of the ancient world...honestly.
Destructive rage doesn't come from God.

The point being it is not clear that he actually "destroyed" it at all.

 

[Estro Felino]

The point being it is not clear that he actually "destroyed" it at all.

Someone must have done it.
There is a source.
Who else did it?

 

[1213]

The Goths just set the temple on fire. A fire cannot damage marble or limestone in any way.

By what I know, it can harm it, make it fragile and so cause it to collapse. Limestone is not very strong material.

 

[1213]

How did a prayer destroy the temple?

That is a good question. I don't know, but, if that is the way Christians are accused for the destruction, would it mean that it was actually by God?

 

[Rival]

Someone must have done it.
There is a source.
Who else did it?

Time and nature.

 

[Eddi]

The old gods live on in the names given to the days of the week

 

[Estro Felino]

Time and nature.

The Parthenon still stands and it's more ancient than the final Artemision which was re-built by Alexander the Great.
So I believe there was the firm intention to demolish the megalithic structure and to use the demolition site as quarry to get building material.
Those pieces of columns and marbles were absolutely valuable and precious building material that was re-used to build houses and walls by the Ottomans.

 

[Bear Wild]

The old gods live on in the names given to the days of the week

I had a wonderful Woden's day today. Looking forward to Thor's day but most of all thank the goddess when it is Freya's day!

 

[Bear Wild]

That is a good question. I don't know, but, if that is the way Christians are accused for the destruction, would it mean that it was actually by God?

Of course, If the Christians were responsible could just say the devil made me do it.

 

[Augustus]

Someone must have done it.
There is a source.
Who else did it?

Often we just don't really know.

Some temples were destroyed in a "destructive rage", most were just repurposed as they were no longer viable as temples, occupied valuable land and were built of valuable materials. Many that were "destroyed" had long fallen into disrepair.

The assumption that pagan heritage disappeared primarily due to "destructive rage" is false though, it primarily disappeared for the same reason that most heritage of any kind no longer exists, people preferred to invest their limited resources in doing something else.

The same thing has happened with building of all kinds since time immemorial and is happening today with churches.

So I believe there was the firm intention to demolish the megalithic structure and to use the demolition site as quarry to get building material.
Those pieces of columns and marbles were absolutely valuable and precious building material that was re-used to build houses and walls by the Ottomans.

How does that match with "destructive rage" any more than the conversion of a derelict church into a cafe or apartments would qualify as "destructive rage"?

It is the standard economics described above. Just like how much of Hadrian's Wall became roads and the Rosetta Stone had been used to build a fort wall.

I certainly wish more stuff did survive from the past, but seems a bit silly to blame folk in the past for having different priorities to us regarding the best use of their limited resources.

 

[Augustus]

Its all over Europe. Where there were pagan groves there are no trees left, where there were sacred sites there are churches in their place. The Christianity of Europe emerging from Rome intentionally removed almost everything pagan.

How much would you expect to survive had there been no attempt to deliberately remove anything for being pagan and decisions had been made purely on social utility and economic grounds as happens today with churches and other buildings that no longer fulfil their original purpose?