On the names of Christians point, I think Stone is over-reading what the chart proves. Two minor issues. 1) Using number of names as a proxy for social status is ok - it more or less works - but it is a proxy. Worth being a little cautious about, especially before you make big conclusions from it (e.g. very wealthy people more likely to commission a verse epitaph, but verse epitaphs much more likely to use single names). 2) The number of names people used decreased from the first to the fourth century A.D. as the number of Christians increased. This must explain some of what looks like disproportionate use of single names by Christians.
The more significant problem is that the thesis on which he is drawing is a study specifically of the Greek inscriptions at Rome. For cultural/social/historical/legal reasons single names were much more common in the Greek world, even after Caracalla's universal grant of citizenship in A.D. 212 (which theoretically entitled all free adult males to the tria nomina). So, of course you see loads of single names in a corpus of Greek inscriptions from Rome! That is probably telling you less about social status than (say) a comparable study of Latin epitaphs would.
(I am agnostic on the broader issue of Christian social status before Constantine, but I think we do have to acknowledge what the evidence does and does not help us with).
Really fascinating round-up! I spend rather more of yesterday afternoon than I expected following those links. The paper on cousin marriage is extremely detailed and persuasive. I look forward to your take on the theme!
Does anyone claim early Christians were actually elite? Stark's argument is not that they were upper class, hobnobbing with emperors and senators, but that they were the equivalent of middle class (small businessmen and the like) and skilled proletariat. And just the fact that they lived in cities puts them up the social ladder a ways, as the great majority of people were rural peasants.
On the Orthodox/Catholic split, the historical religious status of the non-Orthodox Warsaw Pact members was a lot more mixed than just "Catholic". Even Poland was, due to a remarkable degree of religious tolerance up until the 18th century partition. Czechoslovakia and Hungary too had long history of Protestantism-- the former was where the Hussites originated and in the latter Calvinism is still a presence today.
On cousin marriage are they talking first cousins or cousins at more distant remove too? From what I've read, first cousin marriages (or, well, matings) are at higher risk of passing on genetic defects, but more distant cousin pairings are not.
I don't think anyone is suggesting going full Innocent III in banning sixth-cousin marriages.
The health risks of repeated cousin marriage within a family are real but I think the major problem is the association with clannishness, which is having a real impact on British politics and society.
cousin marriage was fairly common among the English upper class, around 5-10% maybe, and mostly for financial/dynastic reasons. but it died out after WW1, partly because their estates were ruined, and so proposals to ban it never came to anything.
Re: Orthodoxy I wouldn’t rely on self-identification statistics since, as I was told by people who know better “religion in Russia is not about which church you belong to, it’s about the ones which you do not belong to.” Can’t say much about Ukraine although they apparently have been more religious in terms of actually practicing their faith (and which is why the Moscow Patriarchate has been so dead-set against an independent Ukrainian church: can’t let all those sweet donations slip away).
Re: elites under Communism. A bit of a family story: my ancestral village had an orphanage for children whose parents were declared “enemies of the people.” One of my great aunts had many friends among those kids and, according to her, all of them managed to make something of themselves later on. That’s why I have always found Gregory Clark’s theories quite persuasive
I know there is also data from Hungary showing that under communism the same elite families also ended up at the top.
Clark's book is very compelling. When I researched my own family tree I found that the Wests had been at pretty much a similar station of life forever.
I may have mentioned before but the earliest West ancestor I found was basically a 19th century culture warrior, for the Methodists (again the low status side)
I've got the Eric Kaufman book on order and I'm looking forward to receiving it. Also (is this comment allowed?) I have nearly finished "Noticing" by Steve Sailer - banned by Amazon because the truth is far right apparently - and can very much recommend that,
it is very much allowed - I even gave him a blurb and will write about The Most Influential Right-winger Know One Dares to Admit to Reading when I have time. (one of the great benefit of substack is that these things can be written freely)
At a guess the book was selling well enough Amazon realized it was missing out on $$$. Corporate wokeness may be a mile wide, but when it gets in the way of profit it's dumped faster than radioactive poo.
"Amusing watching this debate and the reaction of one panellist to Briahna Joy Gray saying that Hamas just want ‘a state more like what we have in the United States of America.’ Do people actually believe this? I’m never sure."
The UN's "special rapporteur" says the mission to rescue 4 hostages was "genocidal."
An understatement at best. If one's "reasoning" starts with, "The Jews are always evil," there are many possible conclusions, including that Hamas really wants Gaza to be New Jersey. The really sad part is that, having been given a great location, complete control, and zillions of dollars, Hamas could have made Gaza into a free society and a prime resort destination.
"Scarplands" sounds like a state of the nation book by a young journalist that The Guardian tells us explains Brexit/the Red Wall crumbling/the resurgence of Labour.
17. I think the most the most generous interpretation of people with the “one state solution” who think it will be a peaceful multiethnic state, is that what they really want is a return to Ottoman rule. An overseer who generally doesn’t care as long as taxes are levied on time and will intervene if ethnic violence gets too hot.
Of course they are usually idiots who don’t know anything about the Levant pre 1948, so this is my VERY generous interpretation.
The trouble with being a Conservative Party, is that you have to conserve.
When you are drowning Britain and its coastline in sewage, it has become clear to all that you are conserving nothing at all; and thus have no more relevance to the modern world than the Holy Roman Empire.
On the names of Christians point, I think Stone is over-reading what the chart proves. Two minor issues. 1) Using number of names as a proxy for social status is ok - it more or less works - but it is a proxy. Worth being a little cautious about, especially before you make big conclusions from it (e.g. very wealthy people more likely to commission a verse epitaph, but verse epitaphs much more likely to use single names). 2) The number of names people used decreased from the first to the fourth century A.D. as the number of Christians increased. This must explain some of what looks like disproportionate use of single names by Christians.
The more significant problem is that the thesis on which he is drawing is a study specifically of the Greek inscriptions at Rome. For cultural/social/historical/legal reasons single names were much more common in the Greek world, even after Caracalla's universal grant of citizenship in A.D. 212 (which theoretically entitled all free adult males to the tria nomina). So, of course you see loads of single names in a corpus of Greek inscriptions from Rome! That is probably telling you less about social status than (say) a comparable study of Latin epitaphs would.
(I am agnostic on the broader issue of Christian social status before Constantine, but I think we do have to acknowledge what the evidence does and does not help us with).
Really fascinating round-up! I spend rather more of yesterday afternoon than I expected following those links. The paper on cousin marriage is extremely detailed and persuasive. I look forward to your take on the theme!
Thank you!
Does anyone claim early Christians were actually elite? Stark's argument is not that they were upper class, hobnobbing with emperors and senators, but that they were the equivalent of middle class (small businessmen and the like) and skilled proletariat. And just the fact that they lived in cities puts them up the social ladder a ways, as the great majority of people were rural peasants.
On the Orthodox/Catholic split, the historical religious status of the non-Orthodox Warsaw Pact members was a lot more mixed than just "Catholic". Even Poland was, due to a remarkable degree of religious tolerance up until the 18th century partition. Czechoslovakia and Hungary too had long history of Protestantism-- the former was where the Hussites originated and in the latter Calvinism is still a presence today.
On cousin marriage are they talking first cousins or cousins at more distant remove too? From what I've read, first cousin marriages (or, well, matings) are at higher risk of passing on genetic defects, but more distant cousin pairings are not.
I don't think anyone is suggesting going full Innocent III in banning sixth-cousin marriages.
The health risks of repeated cousin marriage within a family are real but I think the major problem is the association with clannishness, which is having a real impact on British politics and society.
Darwin married his cousin? I have interest in marrying my aunties children
But people did and do
Essentially something is being taken away because of a small minority
cousin marriage was fairly common among the English upper class, around 5-10% maybe, and mostly for financial/dynastic reasons. but it died out after WW1, partly because their estates were ruined, and so proposals to ban it never came to anything.
Interesting - with regard the toffs
A world where only fans performers are acceptable but marrying your first cousin from Australia -who you never met as a child is odd
I have no interest in marrying my aunties childrens sorry
I did wonder but didnt want to press the issue :)
Queen Victoria and Prince Albert were first cousins too.
A couple of points.
Re: Orthodoxy I wouldn’t rely on self-identification statistics since, as I was told by people who know better “religion in Russia is not about which church you belong to, it’s about the ones which you do not belong to.” Can’t say much about Ukraine although they apparently have been more religious in terms of actually practicing their faith (and which is why the Moscow Patriarchate has been so dead-set against an independent Ukrainian church: can’t let all those sweet donations slip away).
Re: elites under Communism. A bit of a family story: my ancestral village had an orphanage for children whose parents were declared “enemies of the people.” One of my great aunts had many friends among those kids and, according to her, all of them managed to make something of themselves later on. That’s why I have always found Gregory Clark’s theories quite persuasive
I know there is also data from Hungary showing that under communism the same elite families also ended up at the top.
Clark's book is very compelling. When I researched my own family tree I found that the Wests had been at pretty much a similar station of life forever.
I may have mentioned before but the earliest West ancestor I found was basically a 19th century culture warrior, for the Methodists (again the low status side)
https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/term/BIOG167274
So in Sharpe you would have been the young methodist telling the rank and file not to drink
ha ha
I've got the Eric Kaufman book on order and I'm looking forward to receiving it. Also (is this comment allowed?) I have nearly finished "Noticing" by Steve Sailer - banned by Amazon because the truth is far right apparently - and can very much recommend that,
it is very much allowed - I even gave him a blurb and will write about The Most Influential Right-winger Know One Dares to Admit to Reading when I have time. (one of the great benefit of substack is that these things can be written freely)
I look forward to reading your take on him, Ed.
Steve Sailer's book is available on Amazon.com and Amazon UK.
It wasn't when I ordered it about 3 months back - the book cost £25 and the postage £24!
At a guess the book was selling well enough Amazon realized it was missing out on $$$. Corporate wokeness may be a mile wide, but when it gets in the way of profit it's dumped faster than radioactive poo.
"Amusing watching this debate and the reaction of one panellist to Briahna Joy Gray saying that Hamas just want ‘a state more like what we have in the United States of America.’ Do people actually believe this? I’m never sure."
The UN's "special rapporteur" says the mission to rescue 4 hostages was "genocidal."
https://www.israelnationalnews.com/news/391292
"Objective" news outlets like CNN are saying the hostages were "released," getting the agency completely backwards.
In summary, either they actually believe it, or they hate Jews so much that any false story is worth putting out there.
seem to be lacking a theory of mind when it comes to understanding what Hamas want, and what they quite openly say they want.
An understatement at best. If one's "reasoning" starts with, "The Jews are always evil," there are many possible conclusions, including that Hamas really wants Gaza to be New Jersey. The really sad part is that, having been given a great location, complete control, and zillions of dollars, Hamas could have made Gaza into a free society and a prime resort destination.
"Scarplands" sounds like a state of the nation book by a young journalist that The Guardian tells us explains Brexit/the Red Wall crumbling/the resurgence of Labour.
'As I walked down the crumbling high streets of the Scarplands, and spoke to people left behind by the Westminster system...'
17. I think the most the most generous interpretation of people with the “one state solution” who think it will be a peaceful multiethnic state, is that what they really want is a return to Ottoman rule. An overseer who generally doesn’t care as long as taxes are levied on time and will intervene if ethnic violence gets too hot.
Of course they are usually idiots who don’t know anything about the Levant pre 1948, so this is my VERY generous interpretation.
The trouble with being a Conservative Party, is that you have to conserve.
When you are drowning Britain and its coastline in sewage, it has become clear to all that you are conserving nothing at all; and thus have no more relevance to the modern world than the Holy Roman Empire.
"people who scan the world for vulnerability"
My vote for the best phrase!
People in the sheltered West have forgotten that there are even more predators out there than in the days of the Huns, Goths and Vandals.
And that predators can scent weakness and senescence from half a world away.
Burkele is wearing a diplomatic uniform
https://images.app.goo.gl/RN7W316gBfJC1ZpY9
President of Ireland and the Peruvian Ambassador
that’s some ‘cold drip’ right there