Extend another_on_animagus (and some updates).

1 files changed, 61 insertions, 16 deletions

diff --git a/faith/thou_shalt_not_suffer_witch_live.rst b/faith/thou_shalt_not_suffer_witch_live.rst
index 5872ff4..461289a 100644
--- a/faith/thou_shalt_not_suffer_witch_live.rst
+++ b/faith/thou_shalt_not_suffer_witch_live.rst
@@ -22,8 +22,8 @@ them from Africa, even they are a way more affordable?), but then
 there are verses which nobody disputes but they are for most of
 us not part of The Bible Verseparade. I expect most of my readers
 to be Muggles, so I don’t think Exodus 22:18 KJV (“Thou shalt not
-suffer a witch to live.”) is up there in those most popular
-verses of your life.
+suffer a witch to live.”) is up there in those most important
+Biblical verses of your life.
 
 However, I think that even for us, Muggles, this verse can bring
 a very important lesson, and this is not the one I hear usually
@@ -31,14 +31,14 @@ when it comes to be the subject of Christian talk.
 
 First of all, let me add here disclaimer: whatever I say in the
 following paragraphs should not be understood as approval of
-occultism in any shape or form. Even if I claim this verse to be
+occult in any shape or form. Even if I claim this verse to be
 more complicated and less useful that it usually is thought to
 be, I still fully believe that Bible stands very clearly against
-any form of occultism, divination or wiccan practices. Not only
-they are usually sin against the First Commandment, but they are
-quite certainly always a sin against the Eleventh One (“Thou
-shall not be stupid.”). Discussion of occultism is not subject of
-this article.
+any form of occult, divination or wiccan practices. Not only they
+are usually sin against the First Commandment, but they are quite
+certainly always a sin against the Eleventh One (“Thou shall not
+be stupid.”). Discussion of occult is not subject of this
+article.
 
 Let me start with a short historian’s exercise. Czech polymath,
 universal artist, overall genius, and gynaecologist amateur, Jára
@@ -61,14 +61,59 @@ all, what do you know about that year in the history (of course,
 you know that Holy Roman Empire was founded, but something else).
 What happened here in the are of the current Czechia?
 
-So, for example when we think what happened eight hundred years
-ago (1220), we considered such event to happen really long time
-ago, so long time ago, that anything is hardly known about it.
-Well, Christianity was that old in that year.
-
-Or we can use 1200 hundred years which separate us (roughly) from
-that year as a measurement with which we can consider the flow of
-time.
+No, Saint Wenceslaus is hundred years later (died most likely in
+year 935). And no, Great Moravia and Saint Cyril and Methodius
+are fifty years later (that is truly the beginning of the history
+of these lands). And for comparison from other countries with
+better documented history, no, Alfred the Great is fifty years
+later as well. For Czech lands we really know almost nothing.
+Some German chronicles barely mentioned that the area exists, and
+there are some rumours about Charlemagne going through Bohemia
+around 805, but that’s basically all we know about this place in
+that time.
+
+Let me put here few notes about year 800 AD. First one is really
+brief: when we think what happened eight hundred years ago
+(1220), we considered such event to happen really long time ago,
+so long time ago, that anything is hardly known about it. Well,
+Christianity was that old in that year. Because it was long time
+ago from our point of view, it doesn’t mean it wasn’t long time
+from the beginning of the Church as well.
+
+Next one is by Chesterton: we have tendency to always view
+history as the $$$
+
+Second note is substantially longer. We can use those twelve
+hundred years which separate us (roughly) from that year as
+a measurement with which we can consider the flow of time. One
+step from us is year 800, second step is 800 AD - 1200 = 400 BC.
+It is one year from the death of Socrates, and it is roughly what
+could be declared the beginning of the Classical Antiquity.
+I heard this example originally from a historical podcast about
+philosophy, where they wanted to stress that although the history
+of that era is compressed in our high-school history textbooks to
+few chapters, and just after the chapter on Socrates, Plato, and
+Aristotle, the next chapter is about the Golden Roman era, Jesus,
+and Seneca. Except there was four hundred years between those two
+points in time, like from us to Descartes (to keep ourselves in
+the history of philosophy; and yes, exactly four hundred years
+ago, in 1620, Descartes was one of the French mercenaries who
+fought and was wounded on the Protestant side in the Battle of
+White Mountain next to Prague, which started the Thirty-years
+War). We are missing the true depth of the various eras in our
+history.
+
+However, year 400 BC may be the beginning of the Classical
+Antiquity, but in the biblical history it is still too late. All
+canonical history of the Old Testament already happened, Jews
+were back from the Babylonian captivity, and even the majority of
+the Old Testament itself was already written. So, if we want to
+get to the beginning of the Biblical time, we need to take our
+historical measure and make one more step. 400 BC - 1200
+= 1600 BC (exact years, or even centuries, are not that
+important, chronology of that era is really vague and uncertain).
+And somewhere there we finally get to the times the Old Testament
+writes about. That is how really far away we are.
 
 * Exodus 22:18 (LXX) “φαρμακοὺς οὐ περιποιήσετε.” : “You shall
   not permit a female sorcerer to live.”