I chose not to, but what happens if you do? Just curious.
So, I was walking around talking to the villagers, and I got to Guthrum of the Isles, the priest. You can ask him what isles his name is reference to and he gets a bit evasive and just says some small islands off the coast of Skyrim, near Hammerfell...Well, the only island or islands I know of that fit that description is home to Castle Volkihar of the vampire lords...Wonder if he's a vamp, thrall, or former thrall, or was one of the human cattle they kept there who escaped...Could be interesting if they decide to flesh him out later. Or I could be reading into nothing. Who knows.
"849, was born Alfred, king of the Β Β Anglo-Saxons, at the royal village of Wanating, in Berkshire, which country Β Β has its name from the wood of Berroc, where the box-tree grows most abundantly. Β Β His genealogy is traced in the following order. King Alfred was the son of king Β Β Ethelwulf, who was the son of Egbert, who was the son of Elmund, was the son of Β Β Eafa, who was the son of Eoppa, who the son of Ingild. Ingild, and Ina, the famous Β Β king of the West-Saxons, were two brothers. Ina went to Rome, and there ending Β Β this life honourably, entered the heavenly kingdom, to reign there for ever with Β Β Christ. Ingild and Ina were the sons of Coenred, who was the son of Ceolwald, Β Β who was the son of Cudam, who was the son of Cuthwin, who was the son of Β Β Ceawlin, who was the son of Cynric, who was the son of Creoda, who was the Β Β son of Cerdic, who was the son of Elesa, who was the son of Gewis, from whom Β Β the Britons name all that nation Gegwis, Β who was the son of Brond, who was Β Β the son of Beldeg, who was the son of Woden,"
----- Asser's 'Life of King Alfred'
(NB: "Woden" is the Anglo-Saxon name for Odin, for those who didn't know).
Just posted this because I thought its interesting how Alfred claimed to be directly decended from Odin, just as all the pagan Anglo-Saxon kings did. Thought I'd see if anyone has any thoughts or knowledge on this subject?
I have heard some people suggest that even late Catholic Anglo-Saxon kings still held on to a significant amount of pagan views and beliefs. Almost as if, although they were definitely pious Catholics, they weren't quite "Christian" in the way the continent were or how we would understand it. There was still a prevalent pagan belief system amongst them.
We know some of the first Christian Anglo-Saxon kings seemed to be a mix of Catholicism and paganism: eg King Rædwald of East Anglia was reported to have converted to Catholicism but still had personal pagan temples.
Other kings such as Γthelberht of Kent also could have converted for trade or power.
When you look into Bede's writing and the Anglo-Saxon conversions it really does seem very muddled and mixed: not at all like other conversions on the continent. For example there are times of kings being either pagan or Christian but their spouse being the opposite religion. There are also examples of paganism coming back supposedly after they converted. (To get a very rough, basic idea see: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/
... keep reading on reddit β‘
What is the Open Skies Treaty? The treaty allows 34 countries to conduct unarmed surveillance flights over one another's territories -- including the US and Russia. It was signed in 1992 and went into effect in 2002.
Why is it in the news now? Officials are reporting that Trump is intending to withdraw from the 34 nation treaty.
Why is it a big deal? Trump's critics claim that the treaty allows us to monitor Russian military movements, and a withdrawal from the treaty would only benefit Russia.
The White House has so far not confirmed the expected withdrawal or reasons for it. However, a State Department spokesman's comment did hint at dissatisfaction with the treaty. "We continue to implement the treaty and are in full compliance with our obligations under this Treaty, unlike Russia," the spokesperson said.
What are the objective benefits of withdrawal vs the negative implications of withdrawal?
I find myself thinking about that line often. It's really a huge moment and not something that has ever really been realized in previous films.
Small details and moments like that are what made me appreciate Zack Snyder and this version of the character.
https://archive.org/details/NietzscheDerPhilosophUndPolitiker
Preface
This volume will present Nietzsche as a thinker of European rank on a par with Descartes, Leibniz and Kant.
He didn't really read any of them, he considered their importance primarily in relation to the christian tradition and confronted them.
It's not just his precision and the richness of his historical knowledge that are critical; but the greatness and import of his historical existence, which concerned itself with such systems.
You will miss, in my account, the colourful play that you know from others. But we are not talking about a poet and writer here, but about the philosopher and politician Nietzsche.
Whoever takes the changing ideas of the writer and interprets them without the full picture has a one dimensional view; this is done by making Nietzsche divisible. The real unity behind this well hidden person and his works is only available to those who consider both the foreground and the background, and knows how to separate polemic from philosophy.
β¦ modest self-praise
β¦. SNIPPED...
Introduction:
Nietzsche has always been understood from the foundation of Christianity - and misunderstood.
He was taken for the culmination of the tradition of Master Eckhart or Luther; he was received as a prophet, as one of the faithful, or at least as one striving for faith.
Even his atheism and his enmity to Christianity were only seen from that perspective: he was one of the fallen, an apostate.
The more sternly he railed against everything Christian, the more certain people became of his inner confession of belief in the Father; from whom he wanted to escape, but simply could not.
The faithful interpreted his life as the passion of a godless man; his suffering the consequence of his unfaith.
The worldly on the other hand were inspired by this suffering, and found the outbursts of the lonely man intoxicating.
β¦.Scoping - SNIPPED....
The reason for the improbable scope of these misinterpretations may be found in the peculiar nature of his works.
His published writings do indeed show a variety of faces, and for the observer who knows only these, it is difficult if not impossible to see the unity of his life's work.
If one takes his unpublished works into account - then the unity of Nietzschean production becomes readily apparent. One sees a writer who treads his path carefully right
... keep reading on reddit β‘
