(October 14, 2019 at 4:23 am)Grandizer Wrote: @Belaqua:
How would a story like Baucis and Philemon fit into the narrative of "the weak and poor are better than the strong and rich" being Christian? Clearly, the work itself was not Christian and most probably was not influenced by Christian thinking (I think it was written before any of the earliest Christian writings, but could be wrong).
Interestingly, I remember reading this story as a kid and thinking to myself this sounds like a story that could have easily been included in the Bible, considering it was a story about morality rather than a story about the achievements of gods and heroes and wars and such. This brings me to another question.
Interesting example. Baucis and Philemon are presented positively, yet are certainly not Homeric hero types.
First, I think we have to be careful not to claim too much. As I said before, everything is made out of prior elements, nothing is entirely new, so if we can point to various atypical examples it won't be too surprising.
It may be that Holland has exaggerated the change, since a dramatic presentation is bound to sell more books. Or it may be that while there were pointers here and there before, Christianity really did re-order values -- say it was 90/10 in favor of tough heroes before, and then it was 10/90. That would count as a big deal, I think.
So yes, I agree with you that Ovid's story is a good example of poor people behaving well. And it is a good example of the widespread belief that treating strangers well is a moral thing to do. In the end they are saved by the gods for their goodness, if I remember right.
One small thing to keep in mind -- Ovid has a reputation as an ironist or a smart-aleck. His book on the arts of love, for example, are completely tongue-in-cheek and were never meant to be read as real advice. So I'd want to back off slightly before I concluded that any of his stories is meant as a straightforward moral tale, along the lines of Aesop. Augustus exiled him, after all.
Quote:Is it possible that, rather than Christianity influencing this kind of thinking, it was the circumstances of the time in which Ovid's Baucis and Philemon and the earliest Christian writings were written that, gradually emerging from prior times and following some natural progression in resources and understanding (leading to progression in ethical thinking and such) stimulated the sort of thinking that is apparent in the New Testament?
A quick Google indicates that the story wasn't known before Ovid. Is that what you've heard? So it makes sense to think that there might have been a fairly widespread change in values in the area. Something that people in the year 1AD are able to think, while Homer wouldn't. It is certainly believable that Christianity reflected a more general change in the Roman world. If it turned out that things were headed that way, more or less anyway, but Christianity happened to be the system that rode the wave, that wouldn't surprise me. If Christianity had been TOO alien of a system, it couldn't have caught on.
