Were Middle Ages Healthier? Yes.

I was Just Answering Sn Claiming That Life Expectancy has Been Around 30 · When I checked with "children of" it seems to be true · Were Middle Ages Healthier? Yes.

Citing wiki again, and again, we deal with "children of":

Otto I, Holy Roman Emperor

William (929 – 2 March 968) was Archbishop of Mainz from 17 December 954 until his death. He was the son of the Emperor Otto I the Great and a Slavic mother.

Liutgarde of Saxony (931 – 18 November 953), a member of the Ottonian dynasty, was Duchess consort of Lorraine from 947 until her death by her marriage with Duke Conrad the Red. She and Conrad became progenitors of the Salian dynasty.

Liudolf (c. 930 – 6 September 957), a member of the Ottonian dynasty, was Duke of Swabia from 950 until 954. His rebellion in 953/54 led to a major crisis of the rising German kingdom. ... He died unexpectedly of fever amidst his victorious campaign at Pombia, near Novara, on September 6 and was buried in St. Alban's Abbey, Mainz.

Henry (952–954)

Bruno (probably 954–957)

Matilda (December 955 – 999), also known as Mathilda and Mathilde, was the first Princess-Abbess of Quedlinburg. She was the daughter of Otto I, Holy Roman Emperor, and his second wife, Adelaide of Italy.

Otto II (955 – December 7, 983), called the Red (Rufus), was Holy Roman Emperor from 973 until his death in 983. A member of the Ottonian dynasty, Otto II was the youngest and sole surviving son of Otto the Great and Adelaide of Italy.

Otto II

Adelaide I (German: Adelheid; 973/74[a] – 14 January 1044 or 1045), a member of the royal Ottonian dynasty was the second Princess-abbess of Quedlinburg from 999 and Abbess of Gandersheim from 1039 until her death, as well as a highly influential kingmaker of medieval Germany.

Sophia I (September 975[1] – 30 January 1039), a member of the royal Ottonian dynasty, was Abbess of Gandersheim from 1002, and from 1011 also Abbess of Essen. The daughter of Emperor Otto II and his consort Theophanu, she was an important kingmaker in medieval Germany.

Matilda of Germany or Matilde of Saxony (Summer 979 - November 1025, Echtz[1]) was the third daughter of Otto II, Holy Roman Emperor and his wife, Empress Theophanu.

Shortly after her birth, Matilda was sent to Essen Abbey, where her older cousin Mathilde was abbess, Matilda was educated here. It was presumed that Matilda would stay in the Abbey and become an Abbess like her older sisters Adelheid I, Abbess of Quedlinburg and Sophia I, Abbess of Gandersheim.

However, Matilda lived a different life from her two sisters, she was to marry Ezzo, Count Palatine of Lotharingia. According to the Historian Thietmar of Merseburg Matilda's brother Otto III, Holy Roman Emperor did not like the idea of the marriage at first. The family gave the couple large gifts to secure an adequate standard of living. The Empress Theophanu had consented to the marriage. Ezzo then took Matilda out of the Abbey where she had lived. However, Abbess Mathilde had vainly refused to surrender the girl. Later romantic embellishments even claimed Ezzo had previously been secretly in love with the young Matilda. Ezzo took Matilda from the Abbey to marry her.

Matilda's mother Theophanu had always agreed to the wedding but Matilda's cousin and teacher Abbess Matilde did not agree to the marriage. Without the consent of Matilda's mother the marriage would not happen with certainty, it is even likely that this marriage was to ensure the power of Otto III. The family had extensive estates in the Lower Rhine and Mosel. Ezzo's mother came from the House of Swabia and so Ezzo laid claims to these lands. Matilda received them out of Ottonian possessions and gave them to her husband.

Otto III (June/July 980 – 23 January 1002) was Holy Roman Emperor from 996 until his early death in 1002. A member of the Ottonian dynasty, Otto III was the only son of the Emperor Otto II and his wife Theophanu.

Excursus

Matilda/Ezzo

Liudolf (c. 1000–10 April 1031), Count of Zutphen.

Otto I (died 1047), Count Palatine of Lotharingia and later Duke of Swabia as Otto II

Hermann II (995–1056), Archbishop of Cologne.

Theophanu (died 1056), Abbess of Essen and Gerresheim.

Richeza (died 21 March 1063), Queen of Poland

Adelheid (died c. 1030), Abbess of Nijvel (Nivelles).

Heylwig, Abbess of Neuss.

Mathilde, Abbess of Dietkirchen and Villich.

Sophie, Abbess of St. Maria, Mainz.

Ida (died 1060), Abbess of Cologne and Gandersheim Abbey (founded in 852 by her ancestor Liudolf, Duke of Saxony).

Excursus

Richeza of Lotharingia/Mieszko II Lambert

Casimir I the Restorer (Polish: Kazimierz I Odnowiciel; b. Kraków, 25 July 1016 – d. Poznań, 28 November 1058), was Duke of Poland of the Piast dynasty and the de jure monarch of the entire country from 1034 until his death.

Richeza of Poland, Queen of Hungary

Gertrude-Olisava (c. 1025[1] – 4 January 1108), princess of Poland, was the daughter of King Mieszko II of Poland and Queen Richeza of Lotharingia, and the great-granddaughter of German Emperor Otto II.

Excursus

Richeza of Poland, Queen of Hungary/King Béla I of Hungary

King Géza I of Hungary (c. 1040 – 25 April 1077)

King Ladislaus I of Hungary (c. 1040 – 29 July 1095)

Duke Lampert of Hungary (after 1050 – c. 1095)

Sophia (after 1050 – 18 June 1095), wife firstly of Markgraf Ulrich I of Carniola, and secondly of duke Magnus I of Saxony

Euphemia (after 1050 – 2 April 1111), wife of Prince Otto I of Olomouc

Helen I of Hungary (after 1050 – c. 1091), wife of Demetrius Zvonimir of Croatia

Otto III, Holy Roman Emperor

Otto III never married and never fathered any children due to his early death. At the time of his death, the Byzantine princess Zoe, second daughter of Emperor Constantine VIII was traveling to Italy to marry him.

Henry II, Holy Roman Emperor

the last member of the Ottonian dynasty of Emperors as he had no children.

Conrad II, Holy Roman Emperor

Henry III (28 October 1016 – 5 October 1056), called the Black or the Pious, was a member of the Salian Dynasty of Holy Roman Emperors. He was the eldest son of Conrad II of Germany and Gisela of Swabia.[1] His father made him Duke of Bavaria (as Henry VI) in 1026, after the death of Duke Henry V.

Beatrix b.1020c d.1036

Matilda of Franconia (c. 1027[1] – 1034) was a daughter of Emperor Conrad II and Gisela of Swabia from the Salian dynasty.[2] Matilda’s elder brother was Henry III, Holy Roman Emperor.

At a meeting with King Henry I of France in Deville in Lorraine in May 1033, Conrad agreed to marry five-year-old Matilda to Henry.[2] However, before she could marry, she died in early 1034. Her marriage was arranged to confirm a peace compact agreed between Henry and Conrad.

Henry III, Holy Roman Emperor

Beatrice (1037 – 13 July 1061), abbess of Quedlinburg and Gandersheim

Adelaide II (1045, Goslar – 11 January 1096), abbess of Gandersheim from 1061 and Quedlinburg from 1063

Gisela (1047, Ravenna – 6 May 1053)

Matilda (October 1048 – 12 May 1060, Pöhlde), married 1059 Rudolf of Rheinfelden, duke of Swabia and anti-king (1077)

Henry IV (German: Heinrich IV; 11 November 1050 – 7 August 1106) ascended to King of the Germans[1] in 1056.[2] From 1084 until his forced abdication in 1105, he was also referred to as the King of the Romans and Holy Roman Emperor. He was the third emperor of the Salian dynasty and one of the most powerful and important figures of the 11th century. His reign was marked by the Investiture Controversy with the Papacy, and he was excommunicated five times by three different popes. Several civil wars over his throne took place in both Italy and Germany. He died of illness, soon after defeating his son's army near Visé, in Lorraine, France.

Conrad (1052, Regensburg – 10 April 1055), duke of Bavaria (from 1054)

Judith (1054, Goslar – 14 March 1092 or 1096), married firstly 1063 Solomon of Hungary and secondly 1089 Ladislaus I Herman, duke of Poland.

Excursus

Judith of Swabia

w. Solomon, King of Hungary (1053 – 1087), m. in 1065-1066

Sophia (d. about 1100), married Count Poppo of Berg-Schelklingen

w. Duke Władysław I Herman (c. 1044 – 4 June 1102), m. in 1088

Sophia (b. c. 1089 – d. bef. 12 May 1112), married bef. 1108 to Yaroslav Sviatopolkovich, Prince of Volhynia, son of Sviatopolk II of Kiev.

Agnes (b. c. 1090 – d. 29 December 1127), Abbess of Quedlinburg (1110) and Gandersheim (1111).

Adelaide (b. c. 1091 – d. 25/26 March 1127), married bef. 1118 to Dietrich III, Count of Vohburg and Margrave of the Northern March.

a daughter (b. c. 1092 – d. bef. 1111), married c. 1111 with a Polish lord.

Henry IV, Holy Roman Emperor

First marriage

Adelheid (1070 – bef. 4 June 1079).

Henry (1/2 August 1071 – 2 August 1071).

Agnes (summer 1072/early 1073 – 24 September 1143), married firstly Frederick I, Duke of Swabia and secondly Leopold III, Margrave of Austria.

Conrad (12 February 1074 – 27 July 1101), later Roman-German King and King of Italy.

Mathilde [ref:] Morkinskinna records that Magnus III of Norway “was much smitten” with “the emperor's daughter…with whom he had exchanged messages…Matilda”. No other reference to this alleged daughter has been found. Andersson, T. M. and Gade, K. E. (trans.) (2000) Morkinskinna (Cornell), 58, p. 307. [Magnus III married a Swedish princess, Margaret, and so Matilda presumably died young.]

Henry V (11 August 1081/86 – 23 May 1125), later Roman-German King and Holy Roman Emperor.

Second marriage

no issue.

Excursus

Agnes of Waiblingen

First marriage, In 1079, aged seven, Agnes was betrothed to Frederick, a member of the Hohenstaufen dynasty; at the same time, Henry IV invested Frederick as the new duke of Swabia.[2] The couple married in 1086, when Agnes was fourteen. They had eleven children, named in a document found in the abbey of Lorsch:

Note:

Neben den Söhnen Herzog Friedrich II. und Konrad III. ist eine Tochter Gertrud nachweisbar, die Hermann von Stahleck heiratete. Eine weitere Tochter soll Bertrada (Berta von Boll) sein.[1] Diese und weitere Angaben über Kinder, die Hansmartin Decker-Hauff aufgrund von ihm gefälschter Lorcher Quellen machte, haben sich als Phantasieprodukte erwiesen.[2]

[The document from Lorch is by Klaus Graf considered as a forgery.
http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bsz:25-opus-52665 ]

Children:

Hedwig-Eilike (1088–1110), married Friedrich, Count of Legenfeld

Bertha-Bertrade (1089–1120), married Adalbert, Count of Elchingen

Frederick II (1090 – 6 April 1147), called the One-Eyed, was Duke of Swabia from 1105 until his death, the second from the Hohenstaufen dynasty.

Hildegard

Conrad III (1093 – 15 February 1152) was the first King of Germany of the Hohenstaufen dynasty. He was the son of Duke Frederick I of Swabia and Agnes, a daughter of the Salian Emperor Henry IV.

Gisihild-Gisela

Heinrich (1096–1105)

Beatrix (1098–1130), became an abbess

Kunigunde-Cuniza (1100–1120/1126), wife of Henry X, Duke of Bavaria (1108–1139)

Sophia, married a count Adalbert

Fides-Gertrude, married Hermann III, Count Palatine of the Rhine

Second marriage:

Following Frederick's death in 1105,[4] Agnes married Leopold III (1073-1136), the Margrave of Austria (1095-1136).[5] According to a legend, a veil lost by Agnes and found by Leopold years later while hunting was the instigation for him to found the Klosterneuburg Monastery.

Children:

Leopold (German: Luitpold, c. 1108 – 18 October 1141), known as Leopold the Generous (German: Luitpold der Freigiebige), was Margrave of Austria as Leopold IV from 1136, and Duke of Bavaria as Leopold I from 1139 until his death in 1141.

Henry II (German: Heinrich; 1112 – 13 January 1177), called Jasomirgott, a member of the House of Babenberg,[1] was Count Palatine of the Rhine from 1140 to 1141, Duke of Bavaria and Margrave of Austria from 1141 to 1156 (as Henry XI), and the first Duke of Austria from 1156 until his death.

Berta, married Heinrich of Regensburg

Agnes, "one of the most famous beauties of her time", married Wladyslaw II of Poland, Agnes of Babenberg (German: Agnes von Babenberg, Polish: Agnieszka Babenberg; b. ca. 1108/13 – d. 24/25 January 1163), was a German noblewoman, a scion of the Franconian House of Babenberg and by marriage High Duchess of Poland and Duchess of Silesia.

Ernst

Uta, wife of Liutpold von Plain

Otto of Freising (Otto Frisingensis) (c. 1114 – 22 September 1158) was a German churchman and chronicler. He was Otto I Bishop of Freising as from 1138.

Conrad I of Babenberg was Bishop of Passau from 1148/1149 - 1164. He was the son of Leopold III, Margrave of Austria and Agnes von Waiblingen and also Archbishop of Salzburg (as Conrad II) (* um 1115; † 28. September 1168 in Salzburg)

Elizabeth, married Hermann, Count of Winzenburg

Judith (or Jutta, sometimes called Julitta or Ita in Latin sources; c. 1115/1120 – after 1168), a member of the House of Babenberg, was Marchioness of Montferrat from 1135 until her death, by her marriage with Marquess William V.

Gertrude of Babenberg (Czech: Gertruda Babenberská; c. 1118 – 8 April 1150), a member of the House of Babenberg, was Duchess consort of Bohemia from 1140 until her death, by her marriage to the Přemyslid duke Vladislaus II.

[I have noted, Bohemian Queens tend to die young.]

Excursus

Judith of Babenberg

w. William V. of Montferrat

William of Montferrat (early 1140s – 1177), also called William Longsword (modern Italian Guglielmo Lungaspada; original Occitan Guilhem Longa-Espia), was the Count of Jaffa and Ascalon, the eldest son of William V, Marquess of Montferrat and Judith of Babenberg. He was the older brother of Conrad, Boniface, Azalaïs, and Renier, and a cousin of both Frederick I, Holy Roman Emperor and Louis VII of France.

Conrad of Montferrat (Italian: Corrado del Monferrato; Piedmontese: Conrà ëd Monfrà) (died 28 April 1192) was a north Italian nobleman, one of the major participants in the Third Crusade. He was the de facto King of Jerusalem (as Conrad I) by marriage from 24 November 1190, but officially elected only in 1192, days before his death. He was also marquis of Montferrat from 1191. (Monferrato, 1140 circa – Acri, 28 aprile 1192)

Boniface I, usually known as Boniface of Montferrat (Italian: Bonifacio del Monferrato; Greek: Βονιφάτιος Μομφερρατικός, Vonifatios Momferratikos) (c. 1150 – 4 September 1207), was Marquess of Montferrat (from 1192), the leader of the Fourth Crusade (1201–04) and the King of Thessalonica (from 1205).

Frederick of Montferrat, Bishop of Alba (Federico (†1180), che divenne vescovo di Alba;)

Renier of Montferrat (in Italian, Ranieri di Monferrato) (1162–1183) was the fifth son of William V of Montferrat and Judith of Babenberg. He became son-in-law of the Byzantine Emperor Manuel I Komnenos and Caesar in 1180, and was later murdered in a Byzantine power-struggle.

[Guess why it was not to Byzantium I was looking for a less murderlusty and healthier climate?]

Agnes of Montferrat (1202); married Count Guido Guerra III Guidi of Modigliana.[1] The marriage was annulled on grounds of childlessness before 1180, when Guido remarried, and Agnes entered the convent of Santa Maria di Rocca delle Donne.

Azalaïs of Montferrat (also Adelasia or Alasia) (1150–1232) was marchioness and regent of Saluzzo.

An unidentified daughter, who married Albert, Marquess of Malaspina.

Henry V, Holy Roman Emperor

the fourth and last ruler of the Salian dynasty. [No children? Wrong:]

Die Ehe mit Mathilde blieb ohne männliche Nachkommen. Eine einzige Quelle überliefert eine Tochter Bertha. Sie wurde 1117 mit dem Grafen Ptolemeo II. von Tusculum verheiratet.[93] Die Verbindung des Kaisers mit der führenden Adelsschicht Roms durch eine Heirat war einzigartig.[94] In der Auseinandersetzung mit dem Papst und im Kampf um die Vorherrschaft in Italien sollten die Tuskulaner als kaiserliche Parteigänger durch diese Ehebindung besonders geehrt werden.[95]

Lothair II/III, Holy Roman Emperor

Gertrude of Süpplingenburg (18 April 1115 – 18 April 1143) was Duchess consort of Bavaria from 1127 to 1138, Margravine consort of Tuscany from 1136 to 1139, and Duchess consort of Saxony from 1137 to 1138. From 1142 she was Margravine consort of Austria and again Duchess consort of Bavaria until her death. She was Regent of Saxony during the minority of her son in 1139-1142.

Excursus

Gertrude of Süpplingenburg

First marriage

w. Henry the Proud, Duke of Bavaria since 1126. The lavish wedding ceremony was held on 29 May 1127 on the Lech fields near Augsburg. [She was 12]

Henry the Lion (German: Heinrich der Löwe; 1129/1131[1] – 6 August 1195[1]) was a member of the Welf dynasty and Duke of Saxony, as Henry III, from 1142, and Duke of Bavaria, as Henry XII, from 1156, the duchies of which he held until 1180.

Second marriage

w. Gertrude and Henry II married on 1 May 1142 in Brunswick.

Richenza (b. 1143 - d. 1200), later wife of Landgrave Heinrich V of Steffling. The marriage produced no male heirs, as Gertrude died in childbirth at Klosterneuburg Monastery in Austria on 18 April 1143, which was her 28th birthday. She was buried at Schottenstift, Vienna.

Frederick I, Holy Roman Emperor

[First Stauffer, I leave off here for now.]

And after the generous citations from wiki [interspersed with own square brackets comments], here is the counting together:

Ladies : DY DY DY 06 07 09 12 16 18 20 22

Ladies : 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11

22 23 24 28 28 31 32 32 34 36 37 38 41 44 45

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

46 50 51 56 57 60 61 63 64 70 70 82 83

27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39

SV SV SV SV SV SV SV SV SV SV SV SV

40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51

DY : 9/51, chilbirth or similar age 7/51, to adult age 35/51, and here are known ages:

Ladies : 07 09 12 16 18 20

Ladies : 01 02 03 04 05 06

22 22 23 24 28 28 31 32 32 34 36

07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

37 38 41 44 45 46 50 51 56

18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

57 60 61 63 64 70 70 82 83

27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35

Median, 37 years, lower quartile 23/24, higher quartile 56/57.

Gentlemen : DY 00 02 03 03 09 21 21 27 27

Gentlemen : 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10

28 30 31 33 35 37 39 39 39 42 44

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

45 47 52 53 55 56 57 57 58 61 64 65 SV

22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34

DY : 6/34, to adult age 28/34. Here are known ages:

Gentlemen : 00 02 03 03 09 21 21 27 27 28

Gentlemen : 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10

30 31 33 35 37 39 39 39 42 44 45

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

47 52 53 55 56 57 57 58 61 64 65

22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32

Median 39, lower quartile 27, higher quartile 53/55.

Ladies, median of known ages was, between Caesar and Constantine, in the division between 27 and 35. It is in the pre-Stauffer dynasties of Holy Roman Empire on the 37th completed birthday or above.

Gentlemen, median of known ages was, between Caesar and Constantine, in the division between 27 and 29. It is in the pre-Stauffer dynasties of Holy Roman Empire on the 39th completed birthday or above.

Lower and higher quartiles, of known ages, in pre-Stauffer HRE, 50 % of ladies dies between 24 and 56, in between Julius Caesar and Constantine it was between 22 and 45. For Gentlemen, the 50 % were between 14 and 44 in between Julius Caesar and Constantine, now, in pre-Stauffer HRE it is between 27 and 53.

DY, ladies in Classical times, 5/26, in childbirth early marriage deaths, 3/26, remain as having lived an adult life 18/26. In early High Medieval times, this is 35/51. 69.23 % - > 68.63 %, a slight decrease.

DY, gentlemen in Classical times, 21/56, leaves for adult life 35/56. In Early High Medieval, the ratio is 28/34. 62.5 % -> 82.35 %. A considerable increase. And without modern antibiotics too, except penicilline, which is essentially bread mold.

Documentation is better too. With Romans, there were 6 persons where I had no idea if it was early death or lived as adults, here we have no such example (OK, I cheated, I counted some of the children in a document of Lorch as Died Young if neither marriage nor monastic status is shown - as I also, on diverging ages took the lower one, so as to disfavour my own bias). As to the ones where I was content with DY (Died Young) or SV (Sur-Vived), the decrease in bad documentation is radical: 15/26 ladies no years, becomes 15/51 = 57.69 % -> 29.41 %; 18/56 gentlemen, no years, become 2/34 = 32.14 % -> 5.88 %. Both sexes and including the six ? for Classical times, the decrease in bad documentation is from 39/82 to 17/85. Where the totals are so near, you can see the reduction is by half even if I don't calculate percentages. More women are documented, and probably more of them lived too.

Obviously, the use of contraceptives decreased with Christianity. The childless married people are fewer.

Hans Georg Lundahl
ut supra (vel in bloggo : ut infra)

When I checked with "children of" it seems to be true

I was Just Answering Sn Claiming That Life Expectancy has Been Around 30 · When I checked with "children of" it seems to be true · Were Middle Ages Healthier? Yes.

All of below from wikipedia, except [what I added in square brackets], until I say "stop".

Julius Caesar

Julia (Classical Latin: IVLIA•CAESARIS•FILIA), c. 76 BC–54 BC

Ptolemy XV Philopator Philometor Caesar[note 1] (Greek: Πτολεμαῖος Φιλοπάτωρ Φιλομήτωρ Καῖσαρ, Ptolemaĩos Philopátōr Philomḗtōr Kaĩsar "Ptolemy, Beloved of his Father, Beloved of his Mother, Caesar"; June 23, 47 BC – August 23, 30 BC)

Augustus (Latin: Imperātor Caesar Dīvī Fīlius Augustus;[note 1][note 2] 23 September 63 BC – 19 August 14 AD)

Augustus

Julia the Elder (30 October 39 BC – AD 14)

Tiberius

Drusus Julius Caesar (7 October 13 BC – 14 September AD 23)

Tiberillus

Germanicus (Latin: Germanicus Julius Caesar; 24 May 15 BC – 10 October AD 19)

Drusus Caesar (Latin: Drusus Iulius Caesar Germanicus, AD 7 – AD 33)

Caligula

Julia Drusilla (Classical Latin: IVLIA•DRVSILLA;[1] summer of AD 39 – 24 January 41)

Tiberius Julius Caesar Nero Gemellus, known as Tiberius Gemellus (10 October AD 19–AD 37 or 38)

? Gaius Nymphidius Sabinus (c. 35–68)

Claudius

Tiberius Claudius Drusus (Classical Latin: CLAVDIVS•DRVSVS or CLAVDIVS•DRVSVS•CLAVDII•FILIVS;[1] c. AD 16 – AD 20)

Claudia Antonia (Classical Latin: ANTONIA•CLAUDII•CAESARIS•FILIA[1]) (c. AD 30–AD 66)

Claudia Octavia (Classical Latin: CLAVDIA•OCTAVIA)[1] (late AD 39 or early AD 40 – 8 June AD 62)

Tiberius Claudius Caesar Britannicus (ca. 12 February AD 41 – 11 February AD 55)

Nero (/ˈnɪəroʊ/; Latin: Nerō Claudius Caesar Augustus Germanicus;[i] 15 December 37 AD – 9 June 68 AD)

Nero

Claudia Augusta (Classical Latin: [ˈklawdɪa]; January 63 – April 63)

Galba

no known children

Otho

no known children

Vitellius

no known children

Vespasian

Titus (Latin: Titus Flāvius Caesar Vespasiānus Augustus;[a] 30 December 39 AD – 13 September 81 AD)

Domitian (/dəˈmɪʃən, -iən/; Latin: Titus Flavius Caesar Domitianus Augustus;[2] 24 October 51 – 18 September 96)

Flavia Domitilla the Younger or Flavia Domitilla Minor (c. 45 – c. 66) was the only daughter of the Roman Emperor Vespasian and Flavia Domitilla the Elder. Her elder brother was Titus, and her younger brother Domitian. At the age of fifteen, she was married to Quintus Petillius Cerialis, with whom she had a daughter, the later Christian saint Flavia Domitilla.

Titus

Julia Flavia (13 September 64 – 91) was the daughter and only child to Roman Emperor Titus from his second marriage to the well-connected Marcia Furnilla.

Domitian

son (80–83)

Nerva

Trajan (/ˈtreɪdʒən/; Latin: Imperator Caesar Nerva Traianus Divi Nervae filius Augustus;[1] 18 September 53 – 8 August 117 AD)

Trajan

Hadrian (/ˈheɪdriən/; Latin: Publius Aelius Hadrianus Augustus;[note 1][2][note 2] 24 January 76 – 10 July 138)

Hadrian

Lucius Aelius Caesar (January 13, 101 – January 1, 138)

Antoninus Pius (Latin: Titus Aelius Hadrianus Antoninus Augustus Pius;[2][3] 19 September 86 – 7 March 161)

Antininus Pius

Annia Galeria Faustina Minor (Minor is Latin for the Younger), Faustina Minor or Faustina the Younger (born probably 21 September[1] c. 130 CE,[2] died in winter of 175 or spring of 176 CE[3])

one other daughter

and two sons

and two sons

Lucius Verus

Aurelia Lucilla (daughter, died young)

Lucius Verus (son, died young)

Plautia (daughter, died young)

Marcus Aurelius

Annia Aurelia Galeria Faustina (30 November 147[1]-after 165)

Gemellus Lucillae (died around 150), twin brother of Lucilla

Annia Aurelia Galeria Lucilla (148/150–182), twin sister of Gemellus, married her father's co-ruler Lucius Verus

Titus Aelius Antoninus (born after 150, died before 7 March 161)

Titus Aelius Aurelius (born after 150, died before 7 March 161)

Hadrianus (152–157)

Domitia Faustina (born after 150, died before 7 March 161)

Annia Aurelia Fadilla (159–after 211)

Annia Cornificia Faustina Minor (160–after 211)

Titus Aurelius Fulvus Antoninus (161–165), twin brother of Commodus

Lucius Aurelius Commodus Antoninus (Commodus) (161–192), twin brother of Titus Aurelius Fulvus Antoninus, later emperor

Marcus Annius Verus Caesar (162–169)

Vibia Aurelia Sabina (170–died before 217)

Commodus

no known children

Pertinax

no known children

Didius Julianus

Didia Clara (born about 153) ... Didia Clara was reputedly one of the most beautiful women in Rome, but virtually nothing is known about her life or her personality. In her younger years, she was betrothed to a paternal cousin; but in 193 she married Sextus Cornelius Repentinus, who served as prefect of Rome during the brief period that his father-in-law reigned, starting 28 March 193. When her father died on 1 June 193, the new emperor Septimius Severus removed her title. Within a month, her mother died. She survived her parents; however her fate afterwards is unknown.

Septimius Severus

Caracalla (/ˌkærəˈkælə/; Latin: Marcus Aurelius Severus Antoninus Augustus;[1] 4 April 188 – 8 April 217)

Geta (Publius, or Lucius, Septimius Geta Augustus;[note 1] 7 March 189 – 26 December 211)

Macrinus

Diadumenian (Latin: Marcus Opellius Antoninus Diadumenianus Augustus) (September 14/19, 208 – 218) ... When Macrinus was defeated on 8 June 218, at Antioch, Diadumenian's death followed his father's.

Elagabalus

Severus Alexander (Latin: Marcus Aurelius Severus Alexander Augustus;[1] 1 October 208 – 19 March 235)

Severus Alexander

Alexander did not father children with any of his wives.

Maximinus Thrax

Gaius Julius Verus Maximus (217/220 – May 238) ... Both were murdered by the Praetorian Guard in May 238, during the Siege of Aquileia in the Year of the Six Emperors.

Gordian I

Gordian II (Latin: Marcus Antonius Gordianus Sempronianus Romanus Africanus Augustus;[3] c. 192 – April 12, 238)

Antonia Gordiana (201 - ?) ... mother to Roman Emperor Gordian III.

Gordian II

no spouse

Gordian III

no known children

Pupienus

Tiberius Clodius Pupienus Pulcher Maximus (c. 195 – aft. 224/226 or aft. 235)

Marcus Pupienus Africanus Maximus (c. 200 – aft. 236)

Pupiena Sextia Paulina Cethegilla, wife of Marcus Ulpius Eubiotus Leurus.

Balbinus

nothing known

Philip the Arab

Marcus Julius Philippus Severus, also known as Philippus II, Philip II and Philip the Younger (238–249) His father was killed in battle by his successor Decius in 249. When news of this death reached Rome, Philip was murdered by the Praetorian Guard. He died in his mother's arms, aged twelve years.

Julia Severa or Severina,

?

?

Quintus Philippus Severus

Decius

Herennius Etruscus (Latin: Quintus Herennius Etruscus Messius Decius Augustus;[1] ca. 227 – June 251) ... both Herennius and Decius died in the Battle of Abrittus and became the first two emperors to be killed by a foreign army in battle.

Hostilian (Latin: Gaius Valens Hostilianus Messius Quintus Augustus;[1] 230? – 251) was Roman emperor in 251. ... But later in 251, the Plague of Cyprian broke out in the Empire and Hostilian died in the epidemic. He was the first emperor in 40 years to die of natural causes, one of only 13.

[Yes, the persecutors of the Church tend to perish miserably.]

Trebonianus Gallus

Volusianus (Latin: Gaius Vibius Volusianus Augustus;[1] died August 253), also known as Volusian, was a Roman Emperor from 251 to 253. ... Father and son were both killed in 253 by mutinous troops in Interamna. He is known to have had a sister:

Vibia Galla

Aemilianus

no known children

Valerian

Gallienus (/ˌɡæliˈɛnəs/; Latin: Publius Licinius Egnatius Gallienus Augustus;[1] c. 218 – 268)

Licinius Valerianus (also known as Valerianus Minor) (died 268 AD) ... He died in the wake of his brother's assassination in 268

Claudius Gothicus

no known children

Quintillus

2 sons

2 sons (surviving him)

Aurelian

no known children

Tacitus

no known children

Florianus

no known children

Probus

no known children

Carus

Carinus (Latin: Marcus Aurelius Carinus Augustus;[1] died 285)

Numerian (Latin: Marcus Aurelius Numerius Numerianus Augustus;[1] died 20 November 284)

Aurelia Paulina

Carinus

Marcus Aurelius Nigrinianus ... died in infancy in late 284 or early 285. After his death he was given divine status.

Numerian

no known children

Diocletian

Galeria Valeria (died 315) was the daughter of Roman Emperor Diocletian and wife of his co-emperor Galerius. Born as Valeria to Diocletian and Prisca, she married Galerius in 293, when her father elevated him to the position of Caesar. This marriage was clearly organized to strengthen the bonds between the two emperors.

Galeria was raised to the title of Augusta and Mater Castrorum in November 308. Since Galerius fathered no child with her, Galeria adopted her husband's illegitimate son, Candidianus, as her own.

When Galerius died, in 311, Licinius was entrusted with the care of Valeria and her mother Prisca. The two women, however, fled from Licinius to Maximinus Daia, whose daughter was betrothed to Candidianus. After a short time, Valeria refused the marriage proposal of Maximinus, who arrested and confined her in Syria and confiscated her properties. At the death of Maximinus, Licinius ordered the death of both women. Valeria fled, hiding for a year, until she was found in Thessaloniki. She was captured by the mob, beheaded in the central square of the city, and her body thrown in the sea.[1]

Galeria was sympathetic towards Christians, while Galerius persecuted them. She was canonized as a Christian saint with her mother (see Saint Alexandra).

[Have we seen a daughter of Stalin lately?]

Constantius Chlorus

Constantine the Great (Latin: Flavius Valerius Aurelius Constantinus Augustus;[2] Greek: Κωνσταντῖνος ὁ Μέγας; 27 February c. 272 AD[1] – 22 May 337 AD)

Flavius Dalmatius (died 337), also known as Dalmatius the Censor, was a censor (333), and a member of the Constantinian dynasty, which ruled over the Roman Empire at the beginning of the 4th century.

Julius Constantius (died September 337) was a politician of the Roman Empire and a member of the Constantinian dynasty, being a son of Emperor Constantius Chlorus and his second wife Flavia Maximiana Theodora, a younger half-brother of Emperor Constantine I and the father of Emperor Julian.

Flavia Julia Constantia (after 293 – c. 330) was the daughter of the Roman Emperor Constantius Chlorus and his second wife, Flavia Maximiana Theodora.

Eutropia (died 350) was the daughter of Emperor Constantius Chlorus and of Flavia Maximiana Theodora, ... She married Virius Nepotianus and bore him a son, Nepotianus, who later became a short-lived Roman usurper, when Magnentius was proclaimed emperor in 350; after a period of twenty-eight days in early June 350, Nepotianus was killed, and probably this led to the execution of Eutropia by order of Magnentius' magister officiorum Marcellinus. Virius Nepotianus was consul in 336.

Anastasia was associated with a plot to assassinate Constantine. Her husband, Bassianus, was found to be plotting against Constantine.

Galerius

[of himself:]

"He exhibited anti-Roman attitude as soon as he had attained the highest power, treating the Roman citizens with ruthless cruelty, like the conquerors treated the conquered, all in the name of the same treatment that the victorious Trajan had applied to the conquered Dacians, forefathers of Galerius, two centuries before."

[his] issue:

Candidianus

Valeria Maximilla ... married Maxentius around 293 (the exact date is unknown) in what was likely an attempt to forge an alliance between the families of Galerius and Maxentius' father Maximian, himself Emperor in the West. She bore two sons: the eldest, Valerius Romulus, was born c. 294; the other son's name is not recorded, but might be Aurelius Valerius, who was executed in 312. As an emperor's daughter, she was entitled nobilissima femina. ... Maximilla may be the nameless queen who appears in the hagiography of St. Catherine of Alexandria by Jacobus de Voragine (one of the fantastic stories in the "Golden Legend"). In this story, the queen converted to Christianity after meeting with Catherine, and the both of them were then tortured and executed by Maxentius, depicted here as a persecutor of Christians.

Maximinus Daia

no known children

Licinius

Licinius II or Licinius the Younger (full name: Valerius Licinianus Licinius) (approx. 315–326) was the son of Roman emperor Licinius. On the first of March 317, he was raised to the rank of Caesar at the age of 20 months; nominally serving as such in the eastern empire until 324 AD, while his father was Augustus. His mother was Licinius' wife Flavia Julia Constantia, who was also the half-sister of Constantine I.

After his defeat by Constantine at the Battle of Chrysopolis, Licinius the elder was initially spared and placed in captivity at Thessalonica. However, within a year Constantine seems to have regretted his leniency and the former Emperor was hanged.

The younger Licinius, who was Constantine's nephew, also fell victim to the emperor's suspicions and was killed, probably in the context of the execution of Crispus in 326.[1]

Other reports relate that Licinius the younger was forced into slavery in the imperial textile factories in Africa, where a "son of Licinianus" is noted in an imperial rescript dated 336. However, the rescript makes it clear that the "son of Licinianus" referred to was not likely to have been Licinius II, as the text contains a directive that the textile worker be reduced to the slave status of his birth. No son of Constantine's sister would have been referred to in this manner.

[Not sure the reference could not have been deliberate. See how The Last Emperor was treated by Mao.]

Constantine the Great

Constantina (also named Constantia and Constantiana; b. after 307/before 317 – d. 354), and later known as Saint Constance, was the eldest daughter of Roman emperor Constantine the Great and his second wife Fausta, daughter of Emperor Maximian.

Helena (died 360) was the wife of Julian, Roman Emperor in 360–363. She was briefly his Empress consort when Julian was proclaimed Augustus by his troops in 360. She died prior to the resolution of his conflict with Constantius II.

Gibbon notes that Helena's "pregnancy had been several times fruitless, and was at last fatal to herself." Gibbon used as his source another work by Libanius, "a very weak apology, to justify his hero [Julian] from a very absurd charge of poisoning his wife, and rewarding her physician with his mother's jewels."[27] An entry of the Liber Pontificalis, the one covering Pope Liberius, mentions Helena being a devout Christian and an adherent of the Nicene Creed. However, like Sozomen, the entry writer confused her with her sister and calls her "Constantia Augusta".

Flavius Julius Crispus (died 326), also known as Flavius Claudius Crispus and Flavius Valerius Crispus, was a Caesar of the Roman Empire. He was the first-born son of Constantine I and Minervina.

Crispus' year and place of birth are uncertain. He is considered likely to have been born between 299 and 305, possibly as early as 295, somewhere in the Eastern Roman Empire, probably the early date since he was being tutored already in 309-310 by Lactantius.

Constantine II (Latin: Flavius Claudius Constantinus Augustus;[1] January/February 316 – 340) was Roman Emperor from 337 to 340. Son of Constantine the Great and co-emperor alongside his brothers, his attempt to exert his perceived rights of primogeniture led to his death in a failed invasion of Italy in 340.

The eldest son of Constantine the Great and Fausta, after the death of his half-brother Crispus, Constantine II was born in Arles in February 316[2] and raised as a Christian.

Constantius II (Latin: Flavius Julius Constantius Augustus;[1][2] 7 August 317 – 3 November 361) was Roman Emperor from 337 to 361. The second son of Constantine I and Fausta, he ascended to the throne with his brothers Constantine II and Constans upon their father's death.

Constans (Latin: Flavius Iulius Constans Augustus;[1] c. 323[1][2] – 350) or Constans I was Roman Emperor from 337 to 350. He defeated his brother Constantine II in 340, but anger in the army over his personal life (homosexuality) and favouritism towards his barbarian bodyguards led the general Magnentius to rebel, resulting in the assassination of Constans in 350.

All of above from wikipedia, except [what I added in square brackets]. Now for counting together, and here we get going:

Ladies : DY DY DY 00 01 SV SV SV SV SV SV SV

Ladies : 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12

SV SV SV SV SV 22 22 27 35 36 45 45 45 53

13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

5/26 DY, 3/26 probably in childbirth, median of known ages 27/35 :

Ladies : 00 01 21 22 22 27 35 36 45 45 45 53

Ladies : 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12

Gents : DY DY DY DY DY DY DY DY 03 03 04 04

Gents : 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12

05 07 10 11 11 14 17 18 18 SV SV SV SV SV SV

13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27

SV SV SV SV 21 22 24 26 27 27 29 31 31 33 34

28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42

34 36 37 41 44 45 45 46 50 62 64 65 75 77

43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56

21/56 DY, including some murdered, median of known ages 27/29 :

Gents : 03 03 04 04 05 07 10 11 11 14 17 18

Gents : 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12

18 21 22 24 26 27 27 29 31 31 33 34 34 36

13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

37 41 44 45 45 46 50 62 64 65 75 77

27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38

Lower quartile, 14. Higher quartile, 44.

?????? 6 persons not known

It would seem, imperial palaces of Ancient Rome were very unhealthy places. Is it because it is before Antibiotics, or do we see some improvement in, for instance, Middle Ages? I mean, absence or reduction of murder tends to improve life expectancy.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Nanterre UL
St. Sosthenes
28.XI.2017

I was Just Answering Sn Claiming That Life Expectancy has Been Around 30

I was Just Answering Sn Claiming That Life Expectancy has Been Around 30 · When I checked with "children of" it seems to be true · Were Middle Ages Healthier? Yes.

He gave a link to an article on wikipedia, not the best one.

This article was, however, for Roman Antiquity somewhat documented : two links to academic works cited tied the modern estimates of this era to:

• Ulpian's Life Table - which is not directly concerned with Life Expectancy, but has become considered as reflecting it.
• some Egyptian fiscal or household document, which after a wiki search I suspect to be the Heroninos archive.
• Funerary samples, both tombstone inscriptions on age and anatomical investigation of skeleta.

Hmmmm ... sounds fairly - in a way reasonable, but insufficient, to use this. Both books actually state it is insufficient.

The material which I noted was lacking - in both works - was narrative biography material.

I took a look at Emperors from Julius Caesar to Constantine the Great.

[Gaius Julius Caesar (proconsul)

(ca. 130 BC – 85 BC)]

&[Aurelia Cotta

(May 21, 120 – July 31, 54 BC)]

[Julia Major

(102 - 68 BC)]

[Julia Minor

(101 – 51 BC)]

&[Marcus Atius Balbus

(105 – 51 BC)]

[Atia Balba II / major

(85 BC – 43 BC)]

&[Gaius Octavius[1]

(about 100 – 59 BC)]

Julius Caesar

Died 15 March 44 BC (aged 55) Rome

Augustus

Died 19 August AD 14 (aged 75) Nola, Italia, Roman Empire

Tiberius

Died 16 March AD 37 (aged 77) Misenum, Italy

Caligula

Died 24 January AD 41 (aged 28) Palatine Hill, Rome

Claudius

Died 13 October 54 AD (age 63) Rome, Italy

Nero

Died 9 June 68 (aged 30) Outside Rome

Galba

Died 15 January 69 (aged 70) Rome

Otho

Died 16 April 69 (aged 36) Rome

Vitellius

Died 22 December 69 (aged 54) Rome

Vespasian

Died 23 June 79 (aged 69)

Titus

Died 13 September 81 (aged 41) Rome

Domitian

Died 18 September 96 (aged 44) Rome

Nerva

Died 27 January 98 (aged 67) Gardens of Sallust, Rome

Trajan

Died 8 August 117 (aged 63) Selinus, Cilicia, now Gazipaşa, Antalya Province, Turkey

Hadrian

Died 10 July 138 (aged 62) Baiae

Antoninus Pius

Died 7 March 161 (aged 74) Lorium

Lucius Verus

Died 169 (aged 39) Rome

Marcus Aurelius

Died 17 March 180 (aged 58) Vindobona or Sirmium

Commodus

Died 31 December 192 (aged 31) Rome

Pertinax

Died 28 March 193 (aged 66) Rome, Italia

Didius Julianus

Died 1 June 193 (aged 56 or 60) Rome

Pescennius Niger

Died 194 (aged 53–59)

Clodius Albinus

Died 19 February 197 (aged 46–47) Lugdunum

Septimius Severus

Died 4 February 211 (aged 65)[2] Eboracum (today York, England)

Geta (emperor)

Died 26 December 211 (aged 22)

Caracalla

Died 8 April 217 (aged 29) On the road between Edessa and Carrhae

Macrinus

Died June 218 (aged 53) Cappadocia

Elagabalus

Died 11 March 222 (aged 18) Rome

Severus Alexander

Died 19 March 235 (aged 26) Moguntiacum, Germania Superior

Maximinus Thrax

Died May 238 (aged 65) Aquileia, Italy

Pupienus

Died 29 July 238 (aged 68 or 73) Rome

Balbinus

Died 29 July 238 (aged 60) Rome

Gordian I

Died 12 April 238 (aged 79) Carthage, Africa Proconsularis

Gordian II

Died 12 April 238 (aged 46) Carthage, Africa Proconsularis

Gordian III

Died 11 February 244 (aged 19) Zaitha

Philip the Arab

Died 249 (aged 45) Verona, Italia

Decius

Died June 251 (aged 50) Abrittus (Razgrad, Bulgaria)

Herennius Etruscus

Died June 251 (aged 24) Abrittus (Razgrad, Bulgaria)

Hostilian

Died 251 (age 21) Viminacium, Moesia (present-day Serbia)

Trebonianus Gallus

Died August 253 (aged 47) Interamna

Volusianus

Died August 253 Interamna

Aemilianus

Died 253 near Spoletium, Italia (aged 40 or 46)

Valerian (emperor)

Died After 260 or 264 AD (aged 60) Bishapur or Gundishapur

Gallienus

Died 268 (aged 50) Mediolanum, Italy

Claudius Gothicus

Died January 270 (aged 60) Sirmium, Pannonia Inferior (present-day Sremska Mitrovica, Serbia)

Quintillus

Died 270 (aged 58) Aquileia, Italia

Aurelian

Died September or October 275 (aged 60-61) Caenophrurium, Thrace (present-day Turkey)

Tacitus (emperor)

Died June 276 (aged 76) Antoniana Colonia Tyana, Cappadocia

Florianus

Died 276 Tarsus, Cilicia

Probus (emperor)

Died September/October 282 (aged 50) Sirmium, Pannonia Inferior (present-day Sremska Mitrovica, Serbia)

Carus (looks like El Caudillo!)

Died July or August 283 (aged 61) Beyond the River Tigris, Mesopotamia

Carinus

Died July 285 River Margus

Numerian

Died 20 November 284 Emesa

Diocletian

Died 3 December 312 (aged 67)[3] Aspalathos (now Split, Croatia)

Maximian

Died ca. July 310 (age 60)[7] Massilia (Marseille, France)

Constantius Chlorus

Died 25 July 306 (aged 56) Eboracum, Britannia

Galerius

Died Late April or early May 311 (aged 51)[9] Serdica (Sofia), Bulgaria

Maximinus II

Died August 313 (aged 42)

Constantine the Great

Died 22 May 337 (aged 65) Nicomedia, Bithynia, Roman Empire

Licinius (also somewhat close to El Caudillo)

Died Spring of 325 (aged 61-62) Thessalonica

???? = 4 died at unknown age. Not counted below.

18 19 21 22 24 26 28 29 30 31 34 36 39 40 (Lower Value)

01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 (Stat number)

18 19 21 22 24 26 28 29 30 31 34 36 39 41 (Higher Value)

41 41 42 42 44 45 45 46 46 47 50 50 50 50

15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

41 42 42 44 45 45 46 46 47 47 50 50 50 50

51 53 53 54 54 55 56 56 58 58 60 60 60 60 60 61 61

29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45

51 53 54 54 55 56 58 58 59 60 60 60 60 60 61 61 62

62 63 63 65 65 65 66 66 67 67 68 69 70 74 75 76 77 79

46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63

62 63 63 65 65 65 66 66 67 67 69 70 73 74 75 76 77 79

Median

(upper and lower values), at 32 of 63, 54 years.

Lower quartile,

between 16/17 of 63, lower value 41/42 years, upper value 42 years.

Higher quartile,

between 47/48 of 63, (upper and lower values), 63 years.

Half the Emperors

died 42 to 63 years old, one quarter 63 or older, up to 79, one quarter 18 to 41 or 42.

Emperors' wives?

Dynasties separately.

Julius Caesar:

Cornelia (wife of Caesar)

Died circa 69 BC (aged about 28) Rome

Pompeia (wife of Caesar)

Divorced, death date unknown

Calpurnia (wife of Caesar)

Widow, death date unknown

Augustus:

Clodia Pulchra (wife of Augustus)

Octavian divorced Clodia to marry Scribonia, Clodia Pulchra's subsequent fate is not known.

Scribonia (wife of Augustus)

(68 BC - 16 AD), divorce 38 BC

Livia Drusilla

(30 January 58 BC – 28 September 29 AD)

Died 28 September 29 AD (aged 86) Rome

Tiberius:

Vipsania Agrippina

36 BC – 20 AD

She was betrothed by Augustus and her father to Tiberius before her first birthday. They were married around 19 BC.[2] Their son Drusus Julius Caesar was born in 14 BC.

Augustus forced Tiberius to divorce Vipsania and marry Julia, despite his love for the former and disapproval of the latter. At the time of their divorce, Vipsania was pregnant with a second child, who did not survive.

Julia the Elder

Died 14 AD (aged 53) Rhegium

Caligula :

Junia Claudilla

She died in 34,[3] 36,[4] or early 37[5] while giving birth to Caligula's first child, which also did not survive.

Livia Orestilla

Livia Orestilla, or Cornelia Orestilla [1] was a Roman Empress as the second wife of the Emperor Caligula in AD 37 or 38. She was originally married to Gaius Calpurnius Piso (in particular the one involved in a conspiracy to overthrow the emperor Nero in AD 65),[2] who was persuaded or forced to annul the marriage so that Caligula could marry her.

Lollia Paulina,

also known as Lollia Paullina[1] (15-49[2]) was a Roman Empress for six months in 38 as the third wife and consort of the Roman emperor Caligula. Outside of her term as a Roman Empress, she was a noble Roman woman who lived in the Roman Empire of the 1st century.

Milonia Caesonia

Milonia Caesonia (d. AD 41) was a Roman empress, the fourth and last wife of the emperor Caligula. ... Little is written of Caesonia's life. Suetonius says that when Caligula married her, she was neither beautiful nor young, and was already the mother of three daughters by another man. He describes her as a woman of reckless extravagance and wantonness, whom Caligula nonetheless loved passionately and faithfully.[1] According to Cassius Dio, the two entered into an affair some time before their marriage, either late in AD 39 or early in 40, and that the emperor's choice of a bride was an unpopular one.[2] The satirist Juvenal suggests that Caligula's madness was the result of a love potion administered to him by Caesonia.[3]

Claudius :

Plautia Urgulanilla

Plautia Urgulanilla (fl. 1st century) was the first wife of the future Roman Emperor Claudius. They married sometime around the year 9 AD when Claudius was 18 years old. According to Suetonius, Claudius divorced her in 24 on grounds of adultery by Plautia and his suspicions of her involvement in the murder of her sister-in-law Apronia.

Aelia Paetina

Aelia Paetina or Paetina (fl. early 1st century CE) was the second wife of the Roman Emperor Claudius. Her biological father was a consul of 4 CE, Sextus Aelius Catus while her mother is unknown.

Messalina

Died 48 (aged 31 or 28) Gardens of Lucullus, Rome, Roman Empire

Valeria Messalina,[1] sometimes spelled Messallina, (c. 17/20–48) was the third wife of the Roman Emperor Claudius. She was a paternal cousin of the Emperor Nero, a second-cousin of the Emperor Caligula, and a great-grandniece of the Emperor Augustus. A powerful and influential woman with a reputation for promiscuity, she allegedly conspired against her husband and was executed on the discovery of the plot. Her notorious reputation arguably results from political bias, but works of art and literature have perpetuated it into modern times.

Agrippina the Younger

(Latin: Julia Agrippina; 6 November AD 15 – 23 March AD 59),

Nero :

Claudia Octavia

Died 8 June AD 62 (age c. 22) Pandateria

Nero and Poppaea then banished Octavia to the Campania region, and eventually to the island of Pandateria (modern Ventotene) on a false charge of adultery with Nero's former tutor Anicetus. When Octavia complained about this treatment, her maids were tortured to death.

Octavia's banishment became so unpopular that the citizens of Rome protested loudly, openly parading through the streets with statues of Octavia decked with flowers and calling for her return. Nero (badly frightened) nearly agreed to remarry Octavia, but instead he signed her death warrant.

A few days later, Octavia was bound and her veins were opened in a traditional Roman suicide ritual. She was suffocated in an exceedingly hot vapor bath. Octavia’s head was cut off and sent to Poppaea. Her death brought much sorrow to Rome. According to Suetonius, years later Nero would have nightmares about his mother and Octavia.

Poppaea Sabina

Died AD 65 (age 35) Rome

Poppaea Sabina (AD 30 – AD 65)—known as Poppaea Sabina the Younger (to differentiate her from her mother) and, after AD 63, as Poppaea Augusta Sabina—was a Roman Empress as the second wife of the Emperor Nero. She had also been wife to the future Emperor Otho. The historians of antiquity describe her as a beautiful woman who used intrigues to become empress.

Statilia Messalina

Statilia Messalina (c. AD 35 – after AD 68) was a Roman patrician woman, a Roman Empress and third wife to Roman Emperor Nero.

Sporus

was a young boy whom the Roman Emperor Nero supposedly favored, had castrated, and married.

Pythagoras was a freedman

of the Roman emperor Nero, who married in a public ceremony in which the emperor took the role of bride.

- - two non-wives (except to the taste of François Hollande ...?)

????????? 9 consorts age unknown at death

22 28 28 34 35 44 48 53 56 86

01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10

22 28 31 34 35 44 48 53 56 86

Were Romans

considering women as the equals of men ...?

Galba :

Aemilia Lepida (1st century), wife of Galba

When Lepida lived, Agrippina the Younger (a widow after Gnaeus Domitius Ahenobarbus' death) tried to make shameless advances to Galba who was devoted to his wife and thus completely uninterested. On one occasion Lepida’s mother gave Agrippina the Younger, while in the company of a whole bevy of married women, a public reprimand and slapped her in the face.

Otho :

Wife Poppaea Sabina (forced to divorce her by Nero) (see above, for lifespan)

Vitellius

Galeria Fundana

Galeria Fundana (c. 40 – aft. 69) was a Roman empress of the 1st century CE, the second wife of Roman emperor Vitellius.

Well, at least it seems that conjugal fidelity improved some after Julian Dynasty. But they are so much more into the shadow than Medieval Royal women. In the Middle Ages, c. 1200 - 1500, seeing so little female documentation is perhaps expected of a family of counts - not dukes, let alone kings or emperors. At least as far as England, Scotland, France, Germany (both Empire and Bohemian Kingdom) is concerned.

And note, while boys get "first names" (not really Christian ones, except Marc) where numerals are like used from Quintus on, girls are, as far as I found, numbered in, mostly, not, since only daughter, but sometimes "major" and "minor" and sometimes "prima", "secunda", "tertia" (it seems that the family with three named daughters had very little documentation on the first, so presumably she died very young.

In the Middle Ages, life expectancy for men and women is roughly equal, for the royalty I checked.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Nanterre UL
St. John of the Cross
24.XI.2017

Text from "[Gaius Julius Caesar (proconsul)" to "Died Spring of 325 (aged 61-62) Thessalonica" (of Licinius), except own comments on similarity to El Caudillo, and from "Cornelia (wife of Caesar)" to "in which the emperor took the role of bride", as well as the material on wives of Galba, Otho and Vitellius are from wikipedia.

Defending Jim Zeigler

Citing:

altmuslim : Cherry Picking Religion – Roy Moore’s Twisting of Faith
November 20, 2017 by Guest Contributor
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/altmuslim/2017/11/cherry-picking-religion-roy-moores-twisting-of-faith/

As has been widely reported, Alabama State Auditor Jim Zeigler excused Moore’s behavior by saying, “Take the Bible: …Joseph and Mary. Mary was a teenager and Joseph was an adult carpenter. They became parents of Jesus. There’s just nothing immoral or illegal here.”

...

Aside from the apparent Biblical inaccuracies (the Bible states that Jesus was conceived by the Holy Spirit, not the sexual congress of two mortals), Zeigler’s statement is troubling because it follows a trend of using cherry-picked religious texts or concepts to justify the exploitation or subjugation of a disadvantaged group to the benefit of the group in power. In this case, it was a powerful, professional white man and a 14 year-old girl, but it could have just easily been a Southern Baptist preacher in 1860 justifying slavery, or the council of clerics in Pakistan who dismissed a reform effort to raise the marriage age for women from 16 to 18 and curb child marriage as “blasphemous.”

Well, for the inaccuracy, supposed, Jim Ziegler said the Blessed Virgin as a teen ager and St Joseph the most chaste spouse as an adult (according to Proto-Gospel of St James, even an old adult, a widower) became parents of Our Lord.

"Became parents" is accurate. The Blessed Virgin was real and natural Mother of God. The most chaste spouse St Joseph was God's fosterfather. He was by neighbours taken to be the actual father, and God was leaving them in that misunderstanding without considering it blasphemous.

Luke 3: [23] And Jesus himself was beginning about the age of thirty years; being (as it was supposed) the son of Joseph, who was of Heli, who was of Mathat,

In other words, if God allowed anyone (back then, before the publishing of the Gospel) to think Our Lord was made the usual way, He was allowing them to take Joseph for the actual father.

In other words, God was not shocked by an actual marriage between a teen and a man definitely older than she. That was the relation between the parents of St Francis of Sales. He was pious because his young mother was pious. He managed to dismiss Calvinism rather easily, in the end (despite a doubt of his being among the foreknown in the Calvinistic sense), because his father was old enough to recall a world in which Calvinism did not yet exist.

As to defenses of slavery, no person whom Catholics revere as a saint or a patriarch was holding slaves captured in a far land. St Joseph was kept as such a one, is it a coincidence that the traders selling him to Potiphar were a mix of Ishmaelites and Madianites, the two half Hebrew nations of Arabian Peninsula North of Yemen? So, as Christians, we don't share that problem with Muslims.

As to Pakistani marriage law, I think it would be wrong to raise marital age to 18. It is indeed blasphemous, not just because of the Blessed Virgin and St Joseph, but because the medium age at which puberty occurs is not 18, 18 being instead an extremely high (as 9 is an extremley low) age for puberty.

We can credit God with punishing Adam by saying "some will be mentally ripe for marriage and still infertile and impotent" and "some will be genitally ripe (or half ripe, excepting the pelvis) for marriage before being mentally ripe for the choice", but we can not say He went as far as saying "nearly all will be genitally ripe for marriage while still mentally too young". Boys at 14 are about half of them physically ripe and other half not, boys at 16 are nearly all physically ripe, and we must imagine the mental ripeness is there from 14. Girls at 12 are about half of them physically ripe and other half not, girls at 14 are nearly all of them physically ripe, and we must imagine the mental ripeness is there from 12.

Imagining the opposite is claiming God is cruel, by tempting adolescents from 14/12 while refusing them the possibility of valid marriage up to 18.

No, it is certain evil states which are refusing them the possibility of legal marriage, legal recognistion of the validity, up to 18. They are usually leftist, like Italy which fought against the Pope in 1870, or like Soviet Union after the fall of the Czar. It is not God, but these states, who are tempting their youth to sin.

"Let no man, when he is tempted, say that he is tempted by God. For God is not a tempter of evils, and he tempteth no man."
[James 1:13]

It would have been better for England not to raise marital age to 16, both sexes, and it is certainly better for Pakistan not to raise marital age from 16 to 18. It was bad for France to raise marital age for girls from 15 to 18 under Chirac, had the old marriage law been there as to age, the old marriage law as to sexes would probably not have been altered about 7 years later as to configuration of sexes, French would not have allowed female teachers to marry 15 year old students and pervert them permanently to Lesbianism.

So, while it is sad that Roy Moore 40 years ago kissed a girl he didn't marry, a girl of 14 who was 16 years his junior and therefore not his wife, since his wife is 14 years his junior, and therefore another person, it is not sad that he found a girl of 14 attractive.

Someone said, only ignorant "liberals" take Moore for a paedophile. I would agree that it is a leftist thing to take that for "paedophilia". And there are Biblical considerations to prove that, Jim Zeigler said nothing wrong.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Nanterre University Library
St Clement I, Pope and Martyr
23.XI.2017

Were the Middle Ages that Terrible? (Quora)

Assorted retorts from yahoo boards and elsewhere : Medical Middle Ages : Cancer and Salerno Diet (quora) · Middle Ages on Quora (non Medical) · Φιλολoγικά/Philologica : Were the Middle Ages that Terrible? (Quora)

Seven answers out of ten:

Q

Why were the middle ages so terrible? How did people manage?
https://www.quora.com/Why-were-the-middle-ages-so-terrible-How-did-people-manage

A I

Kevin Chiu,

Learned history from reading and games

Answered Sat

Nope. That has to be one of the biggest misconceptions about European history still prevalent today.

The fall of the Western Roman Empire wasn’t a catastrophe which set technological and societal progress back by a thousand years. Life wasn’t worse in the Middle Ages compared to that during the Roman Empire. The Middle Ages were actually superior to Early Modern Europe in some ways. I’ll try to disprove some of the commonly held misconceptions about the Middle Ages.

Low life expectancy

Studies show that in the Middle Ages, the average life expectancy was 30–40 years. That piece of data is very misleading. The life expectancy was dragged down by high infant mortality rates caused by disease. The average adult life expectancy was in the 60s or 70s.

Terrible hygiene

A lot of people believe this because many hygiene facilities present in the Roman Empire such as aqueducts and baths were not present in the Middle Ages. That is incorrect. Most cities had public bathhouses which originated from or were inspired by Roman baths (they were called stewes in England). Everyone could afford to take at least a weekly bath. Smelling good and being clean was considered the correct etiquette. Everyone washed their hands before meals and brushed their teeth regularly. People did stop going to bathhouses during the Black Death because they rightly feared getting infected.



A medieval bathhouse

The Church burned thousands of women accused of being “witches” and suppressed science

This is very wrong. The mass witch-hunts occurred in the 16th-17th century, which is in Early Modern Europe, not in the Middle Ages. The Inquisition, though started in the mid-13th Century, did not inflict widespread persecution on Western European Jews and Muslims until after the Middle Ages. The Church normally did not suppress science. In fact, the Catholic Church was the main sponsor of scientific development and was valuable in preserving several Roman and Greek works. You can find a list of technological advancements from Medieval Europe in here:

Medieval technology - Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval_technology

People had to drink alcohol because water was dirty

No. Although beer and wine were the common beverage, it was because the common knowledge in the Middle Ages was that alcoholic beverages promoted good health. People still drank water from time to time. People also knew how to tell between clean water and dirty water. Water was added to wine to dilute it, disproving this myth entirely.

The Middle Ages were filled with famine

The Middle Ages actually produced much more food that the Roman Empire ever did in their western provinces. Agricultural innovations, warmer climate, and the rise of feudalism increased crop yields to levels never seen before. It was the Black Death and the Hundred Years’ War that decreased the peasant population to tend to farms, causing the myths of great famines in the Middle Ages.

Most of the terrible things that happened in the Middle Ages were outside of their control. The Black Death, Mongol invasion, Vikings, etc. Urban development stalled after the Fall of the Western Roman Empire because there simply wasn’t enough manpower or population to sustain the Roman urban culture. Feudalism also suddenly seemed to be the best idea. War was bad, but most periods of history were equally if not more violent. Massacres of heretics and non-Christians were not a normal occurrence. That is why events such as the massacre of the Jewish Rhineland population and the Albigensian Crusade are so unique and notable.

Eric Wang

Sat · 5 upvotes including Kevin Chiu

One little thing: most people didn’t know how to tell contaminated water from clean water until germ theory was fully accepted. This is best shown in the miasma theory of disease which persisted even long after the Renaissance. Often contamination and disease-causing water can’t be identified by looking at it.

Lawrence Caga

Sun

Medieval people knew how to distinguish between contaminated and clean water, they mostly smelled or tasted it. Look at the comments to this answer as well.

Tim O'Neill's answer to Did all of Europe during the Middle Ages really not realize that boiling water made it safe? Did an entire continent for hundreds of years really not realize that they could have just boiled the water and drank it?
https://www.quora.com/Did-all-of-Europe-during-the-Middle-Ages-really-not-realize-that-boiling-water-made-it-safe-Did-an-entire-continent-for-hundreds-of-years-really-not-realize-that-they-could-have-just-boiled-the-water-and-drank-it/answer/Tim-ONeill-1

Dennis O'Leary

Sat · 2 upvotes including Kevin Chiu

An excellent summary! We might also point out that, under Church auspices, the great European universities were established. The myth of rowdy, lecherous Medieval priests actually refers to typical college boys who joined the Dominican order to get a subsidized college education. The process of granting degrees at medieval colleges was substantially the same as today, with the sames grades of degree, culminating in doctor.

AJ Granderson

Sun

Your answer may be applicable to the Middle Ages. I don’t think it would apply to the Dark Ages, roughly 400–1000 AD. Yes, I know academics don’t like the term, but that was a DARK time. Nothing of permanence was built, the lack of Pax Romana meant free ground for the Vikings, the people forgot how to build roads of Roman quality, or aqueducts, etc.

Stuart Burgess

Sun

There is also a tendency to look at the 1000-year middle ages as one period, probably stemming from the dark ages perception of this period. It wasn’t and your messaging is anecdotal sometimes reserved for the late middle ages and sometimes relevant to the early middle ages, as modernisation spread and in some case adversely affected the people. For example, it is true that people benefited from better farming than the Roman period as the feudalism system got on a roll. It essentially meant the farmers in the country were producing more than they needed; however, this necessitated breaking the feast/famine cycle in the underlying crop management of the day, which changed with crop rotation strategies. This change didn’t happen until later in the middle ages and adaptation was even longer in coming. The industrial revolution was a result of the agriculture revolution of the 14th, 15th, and 16th centuries. The other point worth making is that the urbanisation, linked to people being able to do something other than farming for a livelihood, was very late in coming too. The average person from the 1000′s would agree with you some of your points on hygiene and health; however, as the population of towns became cities, without talking about the black death, urban dwellers had a much rougher life than their countryside equivalents once they hit a critical mass. The black death decimated the cities because they were unhealthy hovels (and beyond their control only out of ignorance) whilst the countryside was spared in comparison.

Sebastian J. Paez

Sat · 1 upvote from Kevin Chiu

I am so thankful for this answer, my lord!

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Just now

“Studies show that in the Middle Ages, the average life expectancy was 30–40 years. That piece of data is very misleading. The life expectancy was dragged down by high infant mortality rates caused by disease.”

While I independently agree for 60–70 for normal people and 50–60 for royalty, I wonder how the high child mortality dragging life expectancy down that far is documented.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Just now

“Everyone washed their hands before meals and brushed their teeth regularly.”

Medieval tooth brushes have been found?

Or descriptions of rubbing teeth with fingers and perhaps salt?

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Just now

"Although beer and wine were the common beverage, it was because the common knowledge in the Middle Ages was that alcoholic beverages promoted good health."

High calory intake and high proteine intake are good for avoiding or quickly curing infections.

And beer and wine and cider were more accessible than fresh apple juice the year round. (I was accidentally spelling it "apple Jews" ... an idea for a hieroglyphic or logo?)

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Just now

"War was bad, but most periods of history were equally if not more violent."

I saw a statistic of European death in % due to wars

1200-1300 c. 12 %
1300-1400 (don't recall, but higher than previous, lower than following)
1400-1500 even higher (25-30%?)
1500-1600 somewhat lower
1600-1700 c. 40 %?
1700-1800 somewhat lower
1800-1900 even lower
1900-2000 bloodier than any previous (45 % or just 40 and I misrecalled the one for 1600-1700?)

Mylène Truchon

Sat · 1 upvote

I know someone who completed a master degree in Medieval history, so I guess he was a reliable source (I hope so). He once published an article on Facebook about the fact most workers in the Middle Ages had more vacations than us. Funny.

A II

Helena Schrader

PhD History, University of Hamburg

Answered Sun

Kevin Chiu’s answer is excellent, I would simply like to add that there is also a popular misconception about women being “chattels” in the Middle Ages. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Women had a much higher status, as well as higher levels of education and economic empowerment in the Middle Ages than in the so-called “Renaissance” and thereafter right up to the 20th century. An excellent source, detailing and presented a wealth of specific examples, is Regine Pernoud’s book “Women in the Days of the Cathedrals,” originally published in French by the Univ. of Paris press, but now available in English.

For those who want a shorter summary see:

Chattels - Or What Medieval Women were NOT
http://defendingcrusaderkingdoms.blogspot.fr/2016/08/chattels-or-what-medieval-women-were-not.html

Nortobi

Sun

Good stuff here.

A III

Hector Mac

Strategy Consultant at Government of the United Kingdom (2003-present)

Answered Sun

The Middle Ages aren’t the worst epoch in modern history. The Dark Ages is a misnomer based on 19th Century historians painting this historical period as a time when the Roman armies retreated from European and Asian / African countries, and the civilising, unifying influence of the Pax Romana and the sophistication, technical prowess and trading empire of the Romans was on the wane before completely disappearing. These catastrophic events were said to undermine European economies and political systems, and were compounded by major outbreaks of the Black Death which disseminated the European social structure in the middle ages and ruined the economy by killing off one third of the European population.

The tragedy of the plague and its dramatic impact on the medieval world is an uncontested fact. However, the adverse effects of this series of outbreaks and the sudden and complete decline of Roman rule and civilisation have been grossly exaggerated.

The Roman Empire did decline and fall, but more gradually; and its influence and innovations lived on in various forms in the different royal courts and political systems that superseded the Empire. The influence of Roman civilisation and Latin culture did not suddenly disappear leaving barbaric regimes fighting violent battles amongst themselves for hegemony in Europe, and illiterate backward peasants eking out a living in an increasingly insecure and dangerous world.

I will list what I consider to be the main features of the European Middle Ages which demonstrate that it wasn’t such a terrible time to be alive.

• Whilst the Black Death did undoubtedly kill off one third of the European population and cause severe labour shortages resulting in much farmland reverting back to wilderness, it also created significant opportunities which shaped the modern world:
  
  
• The shortage of labour created a market for labour and a wage based economy on a large scale for the first time in Europe. Peasants were able for the first time to sell their labour and helped create a monetary economy. This was further developed by the evolution of feudalism, from a direct feudal relationship involving prescribed services in kind by clients to their overlord, patron, to a monetary based system where clients (knights, yeoman etc) were no longer in a position to offer their services to bring in their Lord’s harvest etc and instead compensated their Lord for their lack of service with money. As a result the first banks and widespread money supply appeared for the first time in Europe (initially in Northern Italy), which together with the nascent financial markets and monetarisation of the economy set the foundations for modern capitalism and our current financial systems.
  
  
• The Church retained a large part of the knowledge of the classical world. The Dark Ages were mistaken assumed to be a period when the light of the Ancient World’s knowledge was lost. This is plainly wrong. It continued to burn brightly in monasteries throughout Europe. The dramatic influence of the Renaissance, when supposedly Europe rediscovered the Ancient World’s knowledge, is inaccurate and overstated. There were at least two major Renaissance eras, the first being in the 12th Century right in the midst of the so-called Dark Ages.
  
  
• The Renaissance periods were informed as much by contact - through trade and the Moors in Spain - with the Arab world as it was by the Catholic Church. The Arab world in the 11th and 12th Centuries represented the medieval world’s great flowering of the liberal and humanist arts, with poets and artists from Persia, and scientists and engineers from Egypt, referencing the Ancient’s art forms and creating something new. More so than the Church, the flourishing of the Arts in the Arab world preserved the texts and treatises of the Ancient philosophers and kickstarted the 12th Century Renaissance.
  
  
• The Catholic Church and the monasteries were however responsible for the establishment of the world’s first universities in Paris and elsewhere. The theme of Courtly Love and Chivalry transformed medieval society and civilised and disciplined the world of warfare and politics. Certain notable women, such as Christine de Pisan, not only furthered the Arts but also documented for the first time the female perspective in Europe. Equality and human rights progressed further than they had under the Roman Empire; and industry and business not constrained by the use of slaves innovated and invented new technologies and processes. Notably the sophistication of trading ships and the improvements in Cartology expanded the known world and strengthened the influence of European civilisation and set the roots for late 16h Century birth of imperialism and colonialism. Improvements in glass grinding led to the first proper telescopes and the mapping of the cosmos. Medieval alchemy led to an understanding of chemical properties and directly contributed to the birth of the sciences.
  
  
• Not everything was great,… obviously. Aside from the Black Death, repeated incursions of Mongol Hordes disseminated the European countryside and peasantry. Barbarism, frequent social violence (it’s remarkable how social violence was been a major safety issue and cause of early death right up until the late 18th Century), tyranny and disease continued to afflict the medieval world. But equally it should be remembered that the growth in superstition and fear of witchcraft, the increase in torture and the growth in warcrimes following the abandonment of Chivalry, and the subjugation and mass killings of native peoples in the Americas and Africa, all happened not in the Middle Ages but in the Early Modern Period.
  
  
• I hope this goes some way to providing you with a true picture of the ‘awful’ Middle Ages.

Michael Jacobs

Mon

You at one point refer to, “the 12th Century right in the midst of the so-called Dark Ages.” If that’s how you’re defining “dark ages,” fine, but I have always considered the term “dark ages” to refer mostly to the FIRST millennium of the Common Era, as Rome’s influence receded from the areas of its former Western Empire, and as the gradual crumbling of the existing legal structure of Roman law left law enforcement in the hands of sometimes competent, sometimes feckless locals. By the time of Aquinas and the Scholastics (are they the instigator of that 12th-century First Renaissance you mentioned, re-discovering Aristotle from Islamic sources?), the “dark ages” had been over for quite some time, as I would define them — ending probably with the rise of Charlemagne, and the defeat of the Spanish Moors’ attempted invasion of what would become France, along with the first inklings of re-centralization of political power and resurgence of inter-city travel and trade which that permitted.

A IV

Morton Gelt

software architect, history buff

Answered Sep 16

Not really. There was a “golden” time in Western Europe (11th-mid 13th centuries) prior to plague and little ice age that lasted a couple of hundred years. Medieval universities were set up. Ideas of learning started to spread. Trade increased, agriculture yields jumped everywhere from England to France to Kievan Rus. Infection diseases were not as common as what would happen a bit later. It all brought in increase in population in the West that overrun the supplies and by the mid 13 century quality of life fall, which last until 1350s.

That golden age ended with the little ice age (1300), nomads (mongol and turk invasions), crops failure, and finally the great plague.

A V

Kjell Andersson

Answered Sat

The Middle Ages were followed by the Early Modern era, a period when modern nation states were founded. History has been written by people loyal to their nation states. They had good reasons to trash talk the Middle Ages. It was done to make to get their Nations States to look better. History has also been written be many atheists who hate Christianity. Some have been Protestant who hated Catholicism.

It all worked to give the Middle Ages a bad reputation. Do not believe them. Christianity, Catholicism and The Middle Ages are a lot better then they are depicted as by people who hate them.

Alan Sloan

Sat

Those BEAUTIFUL cathedrals took some making and the workmen must have been very intelligent. The wages of a carpenter for two/three days would cover the week's food (it's 25 years since I researched this) but I imagine tools and clothing were expensive. Housing was elementary for working people, mainly, thatch, mud and sticks. Thise houses dissolved and melted back into the landscape they came from. The big medieval houses typically found around the Cathedrals were for the very wealthy so their high quality was not typical.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Just now

“Housing was elementary for working people, mainly, thatch, mud and sticks.”

Possibly, but if it was warm, what’s bad with that?

A VI

Haitham Ali

Answered Sun

They were terribe in Europe. Not so in the Islamic world, maybe you haven't read much about it. While Europe was in its dark ages the Islamic world was in its golden age.



Islamic Golden Age - Wikipedia
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_Golden_Age

For an insight into this world, read about the travels of Ibn Battuta.

Ibn Battuta - Wikipedia
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ibn_Battuta

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Just now

“They were terribe in Europe.”

Where do you get that from?

“While Europe was in its dark ages”

Where do you get that from?

William Andersson

Sun

It really wasn’t all that horrible in Europe though, it’s been greatly exxagerated. Perhaps you should the other answers here, dispelling myths is always good.

Haitham Ali

Sun

What we learned in school was that sewage was running in the streets, sickness was rife, poverty, no tangible scientific advancement, witch-hunting….

I'll have a read

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Just now

"sewage was running in the streets"

It is called a gutter. You still have those between main part of road and trottoir and this means rain helps the cleaning.

In Paris it rains about 1 day in 2.

"sickness was rife,"

We actually got both plague and leprosy from the east. And apart from those, we were fairly healthy.

"poverty,"

Christ said, "the poor ye have always with/among you". There is poverty now.

If anything, the poor have a harder time now, since more looked down on (for instance, by immigrant Muslims)

"no tangible scientific advancement,"

If you or anyone in your family is wearing glasses, the irony is glaring. Glasses to correct eye-sight were invented by Roger Bacon in 1268 or before writing the book that year, after studying Al-Hazen (one of yours, btw).

"witch-hunting…."

More of it in Early Modern Age, actually.

And one witch cult in Germany seems to have practised Satanism and Abortion, Muslims would have killed them too.

Comment deleted

Mon

Haitham Ali

Mon

That's utterly ridiculous. Read man. I may not know about Europe during the “dark ages” except what I learned in school but even a simple Google search will show you the golden age lived in the Umayyad and Abbasid Islamic states, you can see in southern Spain until today the marvels of engineering that still stand, and you can thank the Islamic preservation and advancement of knowledge for sparking the Renaissance.

The islamic world was so powerful even English minted coins of the time bore the seal “no God but Allah, Mohammed his messenger”. Offa Rex, Anglo-Saxon King

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Just now

Looking up the Offa Rex reference:

"The coin shown in the image was minted by the Anglo-Saxon King Offa Rex (757-796 C.E.). It was discovered in 1841 C.E., and is displayed in the British Museum. This coin is an imitation of Muslim dinar in circulation during the eighth century."

There seems to have been found exactly one coin, it is in the British museum.

You have not shown any real evidence Offa of Mercia actually became a Muslim. Offa could have found a Muslim dinar, tried to remint it, and given up.

"Read man. I may not know about Europe during the “dark ages” except what I learned in school but even a simple Google search will show you the golden age lived in the Umayyad and Abbasid Islamic states, you can see in southern Spain until today the marvels of engineering that still stand,"

Not denying Muslims had technology.

"and you can thank the Islamic preservation and advancement of knowledge for sparking the Renaissance."

Which one of them?

A certain Medieval Renaissance started out with high reliance of Arabic texts of Aristotle, and it remained a student of Averroes, Avicenna, Al-Hazen even after getting access to good Greek texts of Aristotle, from Byzantium.

As to what you usually call "the Renaissance" it had very little to do with Arabic texts, more with even more Greek ones, and with indigenous ingenuity. By then some technology, in fine arts at least, had equalled and surpassed Muslim technology.

Steve Huck

Mon

The Islamic world is a psycho, mass murdering serial killer and sometimes Europe does stupid things to try and appease them, like minting coins, or today, accepting ISIS ‘refugees’.

A VII

Alex Richardson

studied at Bennington, NE

Answered Sep 16

Life had always sucked.

Ancient Rome had hundreds of thousands of people packed like sardines. Living conditions were accordingly not great.

The Romans enslaved people and burned entire cities to the ground.

Life had always sucked.

The main reason that the early medieval ages are so villainized is because they postponed Western centralization.

The western world had for some time been undergoing centralization that reached its apex with the Roman Empire:



Urbanization (see Ancient Rome) also reached a peak.

However, with the Migration Period, massive decentralization and deurbanization occurred.

It was no longer really safe to live in an open city anymore, with invasions and whatnot, which provided the impetus for manorialism, where people lived in rural fortified villages.

Usually, they made a deal with the land owner to live there. This evolved into feudalism.

This all caused a flight from the cities, where lots of trade happened. That and constant war caused trade and communication routes in the Empire to collapse.

In all, this meant that a 6th century Italian peasant was less in tune with regional happenings than a 2nd century one.

Eventually though, this deurbanization reversed, and here we are now:



So naturally the Early Medieval Ages are seen as a step back in terms of societal progress.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Just now

“However, with the Migration Period, massive decentralization and deurbanization occurred.”

Not so massive as to actually interrupt cities.

Jacob Bieker

Oct 1 · 1 upvote

True, but, as a Roman, at least you could take a good, safe bath in a communal bathhouse and go home to write a memoir without worrying about having your town razed by Muslim raiders or berserkers. At least if you were rich and/or lived well inside the borders of the Empire.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Just now

Most of the latter part of Middle Ages, you could that too.

In the manorial system, you probably took baths more privately.

Dennis James Slade

Oct 4

THE DESTRUCTION of the once great and powerful empire was devastating…..and the struggle for survival was in the forefront of the Romans at the time. Life and advantages began to disappear. The actual of fleeing from the city of Rome, was not completely understood…that life was totally vulnerable, and it continued for centuries. Therefore it is rightly named….Dark Ages as the beginning of the European Middle Ages. The struggle for survival will continue for throughout the Dark Ages. Somehow, and little by little—-Prosperity brought on the High Middle Ages….but that was about 500 years later.

Tom Guelcher

Oct 20

It doesn't matter the age you live in. Some will be unhappy and some won't. To say the Middle Ages were an unpleasant time is to say any age is an unpleasant time. Life is what you make it. Even if you were consigned as a slave and had to work 18 hours a day, it's what you make it. You could have a beautiful wife, lovely children, take pride in your duties and work, have a good relationship with your master, other workers. In short, it could be a happy life regardless of the circumstances.

Thomas Knowles

Sep 19

I’ve needed a word like ‘manorialism’ for a while now - thanks!

Haroun Lord

Sep 21 · 2 upvotes

“life had always sucked”

this would make a good title for History books.

Martin Lacika

Sep 22

or a youtube video

Lloyd Blunden

Sep 30

Love this answer. Vivid and concise. Wish it were 100 times longer.

John Bell

Oct 1

You're forgetting the influx/ importance of the topplers of the Roman Empire; a. Christianity b. The Vandals, Visigoths i.e. barbarians from the north. When i was in university, years ago, we were taught that the end of the Roman Empire was marked by the 1st emperor who was actually an adopted visigoth or barbarian who assimilated into the the Roman Senate or somehow into their political structure. I would guess about 400AD. Or 1617 BP.

Ancient times, but the Romans were great engineers, look at all their structures still standing, from the Midwest to Italy to England, and the coast of N.Africa , let alone the roads.

Thomas Berthil Lund Jørgensen

Sep 17 · 2 upvotes

Actually living standards for ordinary folks were by and large, better during the Medieval Ages, than during the height of the Roman Empire. This is implied by forensics of bones from said periods. Of course such methods are marked by a significant uncertainty, but it “seems” that the average living expectations during the Roman Empire, were as low as 25 years (huge child mortality, huge mortality among women giving birth) and even as low as 17 years for slaves. In the Medieval period, it has calculated (again of course with great uncertainty) that the average life span was around 35 years or more…! Better odds during the Medieval period for most people and better standards of living : Better nutrition, better clothing, better care of sick and elderly through the social network of the Church and its monasteries, better hygiene even…the Romans and Greeks were not as advanced in personal hygiene as they are often attributed…it was mostly only among the social elite, that hygiene was good ! The Medieval period were of course “tough living” compared to modern day society, but so were life in antiquity ! The Medieval period has a unfairly bad reputation !

Nicolas II et la Révolution

Le Duc d'Anga vaut bien un manga, le Duc d'Anguein le vaut très bien · Corrigeant Jean Sévillia sur quelques points · Nicolas II et la Révolution

Je commence ceci comme ébauche 667. Un rapport à Nicolas II? Oui.

N	78	070	8	620
I	73	140	11	+47
C	67	200	18	667
O	79	270	27
L	76	340	33
A	65	400	38
S	83	480	41
I	73	550	44
I	73	620	47

Et si quelque part le Communisme est "la bête" (quoique 100 ans ou plus avant "la bête finale"), Nicolas II était effectivement "voisin de la bête". Comme 667 est un nombre voisin de 666.

Revenons à 667, a Nicolas II. À une conférence le 9.XI, jeudi semaine dernière, j'avais posé la question si la politique de Dénikine aurait pu sauver le régime de Nicolas II.

Le conférencier n'avait pas tout à fait capté de quoi je parlais. Il pensait, peut-être la personne Dénikine comme général, et c'est très correct qu'il était encore trop jeune en 1905. Ou il pensait à la politique de réformes constitutionnelles, et il avait raison que celles-ci étaient insuffisantes, y compris celles qui se mettaient en place alors, et auraient peut-être eu un effet plutôt "centrifugue", d'accélérer les querelles et donc la dissolution de l'Empire, géographiquement et surtout constitutionnellement, comme l'autocratie de Nicolas II, et que celui-ci n'aurait pas voulu gerer ceci.

Non, la politique de Dénikine dont je parle est celle-ci:

La politique de Dénikine

Sur les territoires contrôlés par les Forces Armées du Sud de la Russie tous les pouvoirs revenaient à Dénikine en tant que commandant en chef. À ses côtés, le « conseil spécial » remplissait les rôles d'exécutif et de législatif. Investi de facto de pouvoirs dictatoriaux et partisan d'une monarchie constitutionnelle Dénikine ne se reconnaissait pas le droit de décider du régime d'un futur État russe avant la réunion d'une assemblée constituante. Il tenta de rassembler de larges couches de la population autour du mouvement blanc sous les devises « combattre le bolchévisme jusqu'à la fin », « une Russie grande, unie et indivisible », « libertés politiques ». Cette attitude était critiquée par les monarchistes ainsi que par les libéraux. L'appel à une Russie unie et indivisible rencontra l'opposition des gouvernements cosaques du Don et du Kouban qui recherchait une autonomie plus grande et une Russie fédérale, de même les nationalistes ukrainiens, caucasiens et baltes ne pouvaient s'y retrouver. En même temps, un semblant de vie normale s'installait à l'arrière du front. Là où les conditions le permettaient les usines et fabriques se remirent à fonctionner, le transport ferroviaire et fluvial repris, les banques et le commerce poursuivaient leurs activités. Le prix des produits de l'agriculture fut fixé, une loi contre la spéculation promulguée, les tribunaux et les institutions de gouvernement local réinstaurés, de nombreux partis existaient librement (y compris les socialistes révolutionnaires et les sociaux-démocrates), la presse était presque totalement libre. Le conseil spécial de Dénikine instaura une législation du travail progressiste (journées de travail de huit heures, sécurité du travail), toutefois la désorganisation de l'industrie fit que cette législation ne trouva que peu de domaines d'application.

Le gouvernement de Dénikine n'eut pas le temps de mettre en œuvre la réforme agraire qu'il avait préparée. Son objectif était de renforcer les petites et moyennes exploitations aux dépens de terres de l’État et des grands propriétaires fonciers. Une loi provisoire de Koltchak était en vigueur, spécifiant que jusqu'à la réunion d'une assemblée constituante la terre restait en possession de celui qui la possédait de facto. La reprise de force des terres par d'anciens propriétaires n'était pas tolérée.

La position de Dénikine sur la question linguistique en Ukraine est exposée dans le manifeste À la population de la Petite Russie (1919) : « Je déclare que la langue officielle sur tout le territoire de la Russie est le russe mais j'estime qu'il est inacceptable et j'interdis de réprimer la langue petit-russe. Chacun peut parler dans les institutions locales, zemstvo, lieux publics et tribunaux en petit-russe. Les écoles locales financées sur des fonds privés peuvent enseigner dans n'importe quelle langue. Les écoles publiques… peuvent instaurer des cours de la langue populaire petit-russe… Également il n'y aura pas de barrière pour la langue petit-russe dans la presse5 »…

De https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anton_D%C3%A9nikine

Conférons:

Nouveau général en chef

En mars 1920, l'Armée blanche subit de nouvelles défaites et est refoulée vers la Crimée. Dénikine n'a plus le choix ; il doit démissionner. Le 4 avril, à Sébastopol, Wrangel participe au grand Conseil des généraux blancs et reçoit les pleins pouvoirs. À la tête de l'Armée russe, il combat les bolcheviks au sud de la Russie.

Wrangel, tente de trouver une solution non seulement militaire mais aussi politique à la situation de son pays. Il croit à une république disposant d'un exécutif fort et d'une classe dirigeante compétente. En Crimée, il crée une république provisoire qui, selon lui, pourrait attirer les populations déçues du régime bolchévique. Son programme politique consiste à donner les terres à ceux qui y travaillent et à garantir la sécurité du travail aux plus défavorisés. Malgré l'avertissement des Britanniques lui annonçant qu'ils cessent leur assistance, il réorganise l'Armée blanche de Crimée, qui ne comprend que 25 000 hommes. Moscou est alors en guerre contre la Pologne de Pilsudski et il compte sur des victoires de ce dernier pour consolider son pouvoir.

Le 13 avril, une première attaque rouge sur l'isthme de Perekop est aisément repoussée. Il lance alors une contre-attaque et parvient à s'emparer de Melitopol et de la Tauride du Nord.

De : https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piotr_Nikola%C3%AFevitch_Wrangel

Ne croyez pas que la wikipédie ait oublié l'implication possible, éventuelle, en des pogromes (à peu près aussi soupçonnable que celle de Franco dans les malfaits de Badajoz ou Guernica, il absentait des ces lieux quand ça avait lieu), c'est juste que ce soupçon n'est pas mon propos. Qu'il ait pu être indirectement impliqué dans un pogrom est regrettable. Mais cette éventualité ne change pas la bonté "limité" ou "dans la domaine économique" que la politique évoqué dans les paragraphes cités a pu avoir malgré ça. Et cette bonté était bien-sûr plus générale là où il n'y avait pas de pogroms, et sa bonté personnelle à cette époque dépend aussi de ne pas avoir été impliqué en ça.

Donc, prenons les points un par un.

Sur les territoires contrôlés par les Forces Armées du Sud de la Russie tous les pouvoirs revenaient à Dénikine en tant que commandant en chef. À ses côtés, le « conseil spécial » remplissait les rôles d'exécutif et de législatif. Investi de facto de pouvoirs dictatoriaux ...

Ceci ne diffère pas grand'chose des pouvoirs de Nicolas II, et en lui ces pouvoirs étaient encore dorés de légitimité.

Dénikine ne se reconnaissait pas le droit de décider du régime d'un futur État russe avant la réunion d'une assemblée constituante.

Ceci étant une politique négative, une absence de politique, ce n'est pas ce que je voulais dire.

Il tenta de rassembler de larges couches de la population autour du mouvement blanc sous les devises « combattre le bolchévisme jusqu'à la fin », « une Russie grande, unie et indivisible », « libertés politiques ».

Pas trop différent des "Noirs Cents" ou "Noirs Centaines" sous le Czar, donc. Ceci en soi était insuffisant.

Cette attitude était critiquée par les monarchistes ainsi que par les libéraux.

Voilà pourquoi c'était insuffisant, comme l'avaient été les politiques du Czar dans ce sens (ou quelque part).

En même temps, un semblant de vie normale s'installait à l'arrière du front.

Ah, ce qu'il fallait un peu plus tôt pour avoir évité la Révolution d'Octobre ... comment, alors?

Là où les conditions le permettaient les usines et fabriques se remirent à fonctionner, le transport ferroviaire et fluvial repris, les banques et le commerce poursuivaient leurs activités.

Une non-implication à côté de la Serbie, une non-participation dans la guerre, aurait pu être bonne? Comme ça aurait été bien de François Joseph de ne pas faire un ultimatum à tout un pays pour permettre à la propre police de poursuivre un malfaiteur (quoique, la même chose fut faite par Bush contre les Talibans après le fameux Onze Novembre).

La guerre entre l'Empereur de l'Occident François Joseph et celui d'Orient Nicolas II, possiblement aussi de la continuer envers Charles I - aussi un homme très saint en plus de représenter un saint empire, c'était un désastre apocalyptique.

Sans la guerre, la vie normale aurait pu rester en place. Les perturber n'est pas toujours illicite, n'est pas toujours néfaste, mais cette fois, au moins ce devenait catastrophique.

Le prix des produits de l'agriculture fut fixé, une loi contre la spéculation promulguée, les tribunaux et les institutions de gouvernement local réinstaurés, de nombreux partis existaient librement (y compris les socialistes révolutionnaires et les sociaux-démocrates), la presse était presque totalement libre. Le conseil spécial de Dénikine instaura une législation du travail progressiste (journées de travail de huit heures, sécurité du travail), toutefois la désorganisation de l'industrie fit que cette législation ne trouva que peu de domaines d'application.

Passons sur le fonctionnement normal des institutions, déjà abordé. Passons un peu sur la partie libérale, la vaste majorité s'intéressaient peut-être plutôt à:

Le prix des produits de l'agriculture fut fixé, une loi contre la spéculation promulguée, ... Le conseil spécial de Dénikine instaura une législation du travail progressiste (journées de travail de huit heures, sécurité du travail), toutefois la désorganisation de l'industrie fit que cette législation ne trouva que peu de domaines d'application.

Ah ... avec ceci peut-être la déloyauté des Soviètes aurait pu être évité?

Le gouvernement de Dénikine n'eut pas le temps de mettre en œuvre la réforme agraire qu'il avait préparée. Son objectif était de renforcer les petites et moyennes exploitations aux dépens de terres de l’État et des grands propriétaires fonciers. Une loi provisoire de Koltchak était en vigueur, spécifiant que jusqu'à la réunion d'une assemblée constituante la terre restait en possession de celui qui la possédait de facto. La reprise de force des terres par d'anciens propriétaires n'était pas tolérée.

Ah, excellent. Si la classe ouvrière indistrielle était grande, la classe agraire l'était davantage. Et sa plainte, déjà en 1905, était, selon le conférencier, la terre. Ils rêvaient de distribuer la terre. Les Communistes prétendaient donner de la terre "aux paysans", mais, comme le conférencier précisait, pas vraiment individuellement, mais collectivement. Dénikine en ceci répondait davantage aux aspirations des paysans que ne le faisaient les Rouges.

La position de Dénikine sur la question linguistique en Ukraine est exposée dans le manifeste À la population de la Petite Russie (1919) : « Je déclare que la langue officielle sur tout le territoire de la Russie est le russe mais j'estime qu'il est inacceptable et j'interdis de réprimer la langue petit-russe. Chacun peut parler dans les institutions locales, zemstvo, lieux publics et tribunaux en petit-russe. Les écoles locales financées sur des fonds privés peuvent enseigner dans n'importe quelle langue. Les écoles publiques… peuvent instaurer des cours de la langue populaire petit-russe… Également il n'y aura pas de barrière pour la langue petit-russe dans la presse5 »…

Ah, encore excellent!

Les Czars s'étaient fait impopulaire en réprimant les nationalismes. Le conférencier notait que la langue polonaise était interdite. En études de l'histoire culturelle de la Lituanie, j'ai appris que le Lituanien était accepté - si imprimé en cyrillique, ce qui était en son tour inacceptable aux patriotes lituaniens : la langue est une langue de tradition écrite dans l'alphabet latin. Imaginez si on avait imposé aux Français ou aux Allemands ou aux Anglias de désormais écrire leur langue en cyrillique!

Les mesures étaient inefficaces, grâce à Dieu, car Henryk Sienkiewicz pouvait facilement se faire imprimer en Pologne prussienne ou en Pologne autrichienne, et Mikalojus Konstantinas Čiurlionis ou l'abbé "Maironis" en Petite Lituanie (Lituanie prussienne). Mais elles étaient vexatoires. Si comme Dénikine, les derniers Czars avaient évité cette mesure vexatoire un peu avant ...

Regardons Wrangel:

Il croit à une république disposant d'un exécutif fort et d'une classe dirigeante compétente. En Crimée, il crée une république provisoire qui, selon lui, pourrait attirer les populations déçues du régime bolchévique.

Là, moins importante pour la vaste majorité, et encore moins possible à réaliser pour les Czars dans les conditions de paix, sans la révolution.

Son programme politique consiste à donner les terres à ceux qui y travaillent et à garantir la sécurité du travail aux plus défavorisés.

Tout en ne pas étant communiste, toute en créant encore de koulaks, il est aussi pas capitaliste. Il ne se fige pas sur la propriété juridique d'un terrain (un peu comme l'abbé Sturzo en Italie, selon les dires de Chesterton), il ne garantit pas une pleine souveraineté de propriété sur les entreprises, car il dispose des entraves au licenciement.

Si les politiques ici-même citées avaient été appliquées dès 1905, ça aurait fait mieux que - au moins dans l'immédiat - le fameux pardon pour ceux qui avaient été dans le cortège qui cherchait de juste parler au Czar. Ceux qui disent que la Czar est un saint pourraient par contre dire que ce pardon était prophétique, un pardon pour les pauvres qui se faisaient rouler par les Communistes en faisant le sit-in révolutionnaire sans de savoir que les Communistes qu'ils mettaient en place étaient des fourbes qui allaient empirer les choses beaucoup après (et en Ukraine on dirait : y compris pour le pain).

Est-ce que le conférencier a précisé que même ça n'aurait pas suffi? Non. Il n'a pas compris que ceci était ce que je visais.

Ou peut-être a-t-il voulu dire que cette politique était impossible depuis l'assassinat sur Alexandre II?

Possible. Je crois qu'il évoquait ça. Ceci me mène à la question "de suite" que je posais en dialogue : les dékabristes, étaient-ils inspirés par les gens qui avaient en Suède:

• assassiné Gustave III en 1792
• et déposé, incarcéré et forcé à abdiquer, son fils, Gustave IV Adolphe en 1809?

Le conférencier semblait croire que la comparaison avec la Suède ne convenait pas. La Russie étant une autocratie sans beaucoup d'institutions démocratiques ou parlementaires. Au contraire, la Suède était autocratique entre 1771 et 1809, le parlementarisme qu'on avait eu entre 1718 et 1771 était banquerotte quand Gustave III faisait sa révolution, et cette constitution ne fut même pas copié en 1809, mais plutôt celle sous le temps de Gustave II Adolphe, de la Guerre de Trente ans - assez autocratique aussi, quoique moins que le Czarisme.

Je considère au contraire, que les décabristes étaient des homologues assez exactes du complot derrière Anckarström (qui fit exécuté comme un "lone wolf" tout en ne pas l'étant probablement) et celui qui déposa Gustave IV Adolphe après une guerre échouée. Il est assez sûr que les décabristes ne partageaient pas le mysticisme ... attendons ... les décabristes n'étaient pas les coupables derrière l'assassinat d'Alexandre II? Alors, le conférencier avait donné une impression un peu fausse. Les décabristes, c'était en 1825. L'assassinat du premier mars 1881, c'étaient les Pervomartovtsi et Narodnaïa Volia.

Là, ils s'agit de socialistes, pas trop loin de la révolution des Œillets (sauf que ceux-ci n'ont pas assassiné Salazar, il était mort, et parce qu'il avait avec son successeur Caetano quasi déjà perdu la guerre coloniale, renverser celui-ci était pas trop difficile. Perdre une guerre, pour un autocrate, ce n'est pas une bonne tactique pour rester en pouvoir, il y en a qui prennent le gouvernement pour responsable de la fortune de guerre, comme il y en a qui le prennent pour responsable des récoltes - et peut-être pas sans raisons. Ça, c'est un peu plus loin des parlemntaristes somme tout assez aristocrates des malfaits contre la monarchie suédoise.

Un autre homme, par contre, "vient de la Suède". Épélons son nom en suédois : Vladimir Iljitj Uljanov (oui, en suédois la lettre "j" s'utilise comme en français "ï tréma"). Il était suédois sur le côté de la grandmère maternelle, la mère de Maria Alexandrovna Blank. Et un peu plus en gématrie, omettons Vladimir parce qu'on peut l'appeler Ilïtch Oulianov, et abrégeons ceci en simple I, omettant le point et l'espace:

I	73	070	3	570
U	85	150	8	+46
L	76	220	14	616
J	74	290	18
A	65	350	23
N	78	420	31
O	79	490	40
V	86	570	46

Une gématrie qu'on trouve aussi pour Hitler (en prenant compte des minuscules). Et Vladimir a pour génitif et accusatif Vladimira ou en polonais orthographié Wladimira - ce qui donne 665 ou 666 (sans prendre en compte les minuscules, en les mettant en majuscules). Il était pour ainsi dire aussi Vladimir I de la Russie post-Czariste, ou Vladimir A (665, sans prendre en compte ni minuscules, ni espace).

Oui, les ennemis du Czar avaient sinon tôt, au moins tard, des racines suédoises. Si Ilia Oulianov, le père du révolutionnaire, s'obstinait pour éducation scolaire dans le peuple, sa femme avait une mère d'un pays ou le nouveau régime, Charles XIV (Jean-Baptiste Bernadotte) en 1842 avait proclamé l'éducation obligatoire universelle en 1842 (Folkskolestadgan). "Ab aquilone pandetur malum supra terram."*

"Et dixit Dominus ad me: Ab aquilone pandetur malum super omnes habitatores terrae:"
[Jeremias (Jeremiah) 1:14]

Revenons à ce que l'aïeul du Czar avait essayé à réaliser, avant l'assassinat. L'abolition du servage ... ceci était un peu plus abrupte que pendant le Moyen Âge en France. Les Capétiens le commencent avant St Louis IX, il y a encore quelques serfs en 1789. Mais les capétiens vont dans le même sens que l'abolition du servage, et que Dénikine et Wrangel (qui lui aussi a des racines suédoises, pas tout qui vient de là est mal).

Ensuite, l'industrialisation de Witte vient un peu trop abruptement avant que les réformes agraires font leur bon effet. Déjà des réformes capitalistes de Turgot et Necker, même si le paysannat français à l'époque était plus libre, plus capable de le supporter ...

Ici, par contre, j'arrête pour aujourd'hui, je reviens demain. Ou plus tard ... si je peux.** Disons juste à la fin, si on tient compte de l'espace entre Nicolas et II, ça ajoute 32 à la gématrie, et Nicolas II est donc aussi 699 - voisin de 700, d'une certaine perfection.***

Hans Georg Lundahl
BU de Nanterre
St Josaphat Kunczewyc
évêque de Polotsk, Martyr
14.XI.2017

Notes:

* Déjà vérifié par Gustave II Adolphe, non? ** Je ne suis pas le Panthère Rose dont le slogan en allemand rappelle la promesse de Jésus sur le mont des Olives, à la fin de chaque épisode : "ich komme wieder, keine Frage, heute ist nicht alle Tage". *** Quoique, 700 est aussi la gématrie pour VOLDEMORT - en enlevant T (qui rappelle une croix) ceci devient par contre 616 pour VOLDEMOR.