Early Middle Ages Religion

I've read some things on Anglo-Saxons fighting the invading Norse and something odd strikes me. They seem to say that the English thought of the Norsemen's religion as evil while not a few hundred years ago practicing this same religion themselves. Did they believe that the Norse religion was evil? Did they believe that they themselves were evil?

At a total guess, a largely nonliterate population probably has a very compressed view of cultural time. 200 years ago is longer than anyone remembers, so those people whoight have been Norse pagans are largely forgotten about. They're not anything like decent people like yourself.

most back then didn't know history outside stories from their parents or grandparents

most people back then didn't even know what europe looked like

You telling me there weren't notes posted on the town noticeboards daily about how christcucks worship a dead kike on a stick etc?

Ireland and the UK were actually East Orthodox which is why the Pope gave William the Bastard permission to conquer England and why the first and only english Pope encouraged the invasion of Ireland

>implying
You faggot
They most fucking certainly weren't """eastern orthodox""" in any sense, they just weren't papist either
England appointed their own bishops and basically disregarded the papal see which didn't sit well with them of course

>They seem to say that the English thought of the Norsemen's religion as evil while not a few hundred years ago practicing this same religion themselves
Uigurs utterly refuse to believe their ancestors built all the buddhist monuments in their country, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

Arab muslims hate everything about ancient egypt, mesopotamia, and canaan.

Brainwashing is a hell of a drug.

Yeah its all just a pure coincidence that the papacy crowned him King of England before any battle took place and how they disposed of almost every bishop in England after they won.

this fucking kills me inside man

why can't you be content with your current religion and still be proud of your past?

I recall some french historian chit chatting with a mandinka hajji about the history of Timbuktu.

Everything went fine until he asked about his ancestry and the pagan origins of Mali.

Hajji got visibly annoyed and kept repeating himself about being descended from the Muezzin Bilal and dodging questions.

Before X religion came, this land was inhabited by ignorant, superstitious savages!

We're nothing like those ignorant fools!

Nothing but monuments to (insert evil spirit or god here) worship!

Even in modern egypt many tour guides will handwave the old civilization as being wrong or bad/foolish somehow

Abrahamic religion is a hell of a drug.

>Did they believe that they themselves were evil?

They saw their sin lad.

Ah religion, religion is a thing you believe.

Things you believe are very particular.

You believe them until you see they are true or untrue, which then changes into knowing them instead of believing them.

For instance one day you could believe in jesus, and the faggot liar tells you to raise the dead in his name, but the dead stay dead.

At this point, you know this is a lie.

Strange that the bible warns it was a lie all along and that laws and shit were changed but people insist on this lie instead of figuring out who knows these things, as such warnings are abundant in the book.

I for one, when I see people believing that to wash their face they have to use a flamethrower, this belief is discarded fast, not sure why jesus is still there.

Many ancient Christians in the Roman Empire thought pagans were evil, it's not exactly surprising.
For that matter, the first Christians thought Jews were evil.

Well considering that the earliest records we have of anglo-saxons talks about Jesus and God it would mean they were Christians for a long time.

That's not necessarily true, considering that they didn't have a system of writing until they were Christianized. If you're dealing with oral history and living memory, "forever" could easily be there generations or so.

>notes
>early middle ages

You know parchment is just really thin leather, right?

Plegmund
Æthelhelm
Wærwulf
Byrhthelm
Dunstan
>Eastern Orthodox
>nope

>Hate and deny your pre-Abrahamic past despite overwhelming evidence pointing to it
>Other ethnic groups appropriate your history despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary (Egypt in particular)

It's like poetry. Absolute poetry.

Most people tend to not like smelly tree worshiping pagans that suck dead mens' penises.

>the first Christians thought Jews were evil
Until 100 years ago, that was still the case. Atheists convinced everyone that egalitarianism was better, and here we are.

Eastern Orthodox at the was a little bit more defined as a split over theology and more so the role of the Pope then what it ended up as. The Anglo Saxons had the following that put them closer to the Eastern Orthodox camp then what you may think...
>Payers and services in the native langue
>Commonly read parts of the bible in the native langue
>free investment
> a lot of use of Saint George, a Greek saint that was very uncommon in western Europe outside of England before the start of the 12th century.
> a history of not doing what the Pope tells ( look at the early history of Canterbury )
> A number of marriage ties with Byzantine empire
> Anglo Saxon being large part of the make up of the Varangian Guard for the 80 years before the 1066 invasion, and a even larger part after when their noble to the Byzantine empire in exile.
> theosophy was some what popular and had a fairly wide ranging list of text from other areas put into the native langue ( that was a Big issue in the Papacy/Eastern Orthodox in the 11th century.)

It would be wrong to call them Eastern Orthodox sure. However the full effects of the Schism of 1054 would not really pan out till a bit later on when every figured out that things would not go back to the way they were before.

To add to this the flash point of the Schism of 1054 happed inside of a few southern Norman domains.

No, they had holes they defecated in, but it was essentially the same thing.

It's only the 8th or 9th century. Rome hasn't been gone all that long.

Rome was Christian as far as they remembered.

All cultured and technologically advanced people were Roman.

>Of course we are Christian and the holders of the glorious Roman legacy you disgusting barbarian dogs.

>Go worship a tree you fuck.

are you saying converting to Christianity was an attempt as WE WUZ?

If anything those facts would put them in the Celtic camp lad.

Okay, Turkodox, if the Anglo-Saxons were "Orthodox" then please explain to me why the Anglo-Saxons who settled in Crimea brought Hungarian Catholic priests with them rather than Greek Orthodox?

Additionally, if the Anglo-Saxons were really Orthodox, it seems a bit strange that the Saxon heir to the throne would have heeded the Pope's call for crusade and accompanied the new Norman overlords during the First Crusade.

They were orthodox, some English fled to byzantinum while harolds sister fled to rus. Why would they flee to eastern orthodox countries?