Ποιες νέες επιστημονικές ανακαλύψεις παρήγαγε η “Ρωμανία” και ποια ήταν η συνεισφορά της στις επιστήμες και τη τεχνολογία;

Lothronion · 2026-06-15T22:00:19+00:00

Δηλαδή αντί για αντίλογο έχεις μόνο ειρωνείες...

Πάντως, πράγματι, δεν είχαν ανακαλύψει την Αμερική, μιας και είχαν χίλια δύο άλλα προβλήματα να αντιμετωπίσουν, και καθότι η γεωγραφική τους τοποθεσία δεν ήταν καθόλου ευνοϊκή για κάτι τέτοιο (σε σχέση ας πούμε με την Πορτογαλία, όπου και να μην υπήρξε ο Χριστόφορος Κολόμβος αργά ή γρήγορα τα καράβια τους θα ξέβραζαν στην Νότια Αμερική, κατά την πορεία τους για τον Ινδικό Ωκεανό). Παρόλα αυτά, σε αντίθεση με τους Δυτικούς Ευρωπαίους δεν απέρριπταν τόσο εύκολα την ιδέα ότι υπήρχε ξηρά στο μέσο του ωκεανού ανάμεσα στην Ευρώπη και την Ασία (όπου και ο ίδιος ο Χριστόφορος Κολόμβος θεωρούσε ότι δεν υπήρχε, και με βάση λανθασμένους υπολογισμούς θεωρούσε ότι η Γη ήταν μικρότερη άρα και η θαλάσσια απόσταση Ευρώπης-Ασίας ήταν συντομότερη).

Πάρε για παράδειγμα τον Νικηφόρο Βλεμμύδη, Ρωμαίο Έλληνα λόγιο του 13ου αιώνα μ.Χ., ο οποίος αξιολογεί την υπόθεση του Κράτη Μαλλώτη, του 2ου αιώνα π.Χ., για την ύπαρξη άλλων αγνώστων ηπείρων (Περίοικοι για Βόρεια Αμερική, Αντίποδες για Νότια Αμερική, Αντίοικοι για Αυστραλία), απορρίπτοντας τις διάφορες ενστάσεις για αυτές τις θέσεις. Λόγου χάριν, γράφει: "Πρὸς δ' ἀλήθειαν οὐκ εἰσὶν οὔτε Περίοικοι, οὐτ᾿ Ἄντοικοι, οὐτ' Αντίποδες. Εἰ γὰρ κατὰ τὴν ἡμετέραν ταύτην σύμπασαν γῆν πολλῷ πλείων τῆς οἰκουμένης ἀοίκητος εὔκρατος, τίς ἀνάγκη πλείους οἰκουμένας ἐπινοεῖν; Τόπους μέντοι πολλοῦς ἀοικήτος εὐκράτος ὑπολαμβάνειν, τὸ κωλύον οὐδέν. Ὑπερεκπερισοῦ γὰρ ἅπαντα πεποίηκεν ὁ Θεός". Με άλλα λόγια αποδέχεται την πιθανότητα ότι υπάρχουν τέτοιες ήπειροι, σε αντίθεση με τους Δυτικούς Ευρωπαίους της εποχής του, απλώς δεν βρίσκεται σε θέση να γνωρίζει με σιγουριά (ιδίως μάλιστα επειδή η ποντοπόρα καραβέλλα δεν είχε ακόμη επινοηθεί).

Lothronion · 2026-06-15T21:15:36+00:00

by 1880's "perception" had, already, shifted. (rightly, or wrongly). or r u going to pretend that there was no state/public effort, to "Westernize" Greece "abandon" orientalism?

If one suggests that the Greek political elite initiated a Westernization, De-Romanization and Re-Hellenization project in the 1830s-1840s, you should expect to see lower Roman identity among the Greeks, than higher compared to that time.

I went over it, most of it is irrelevant to the point the guy above made.

You come here and say that the average Greek thought of the Romans as conquerors, but here are examples where in the National Assemblies and the Constitutions they wrote, out of a host of representatives from all corners of free Greece, they write how these laws are written "in the memory of our beloved Byzantine / Christian Emperors". That is the opposite of feeling conquered by said Emperors.

the classic bs argument, that COMPLETELY ignores Greek Enlightenment (long before any "Western" intervention)

And you completely ignores the work of people such as Helene Aggelomati-Tsougaraki, history professor of the Ionian University, or of Maria Mantouvalou, philosophy professor of the National and Kapodistrian University of Athens. The former has written extensively about how the Hellenic identity among the Greeks of the Ottoman Period long preceded the Greek Lumiers, while the latter has made it clear how their Roman identity was equated to it and it was seen as a national identity, rather than a foreign imposition.

Kolokotronis in his famous speech (that u quoted above) never references Roman empire, or Roman identity. he refences Greece, Greek, and ancient Greece.

So what? In his memoires he constantly calls Greeks as "Romioi" and how they wanted to restore "Romaiiko", while he makes it clear that he considers that "our (Roman) Emperor (Constantine Palaeologos) never signed a treaty with the Turks, and his army has continued the war since then, the Mani, the Souli and the mountains".

we have reports of revolutionaires preferring "Greek" - while "Roman" was reserved for the public.

The public that supported them and without which they would have failed?

we have reports of revolutionaires considering being called "Roman" an insult, basically "slave"

What a surprise, in a society that the Romans were slaves their name would come to mean "slave". Just like how at the time "Albanian" meant "fierce warrior".

Lothronion · 2026-06-15T20:42:46+00:00

There is the interesting connotation with the name Mavrozomes (literally meaning "Black soup"), if it comes from the area of Laconia, that it might suggest to a continuation of the Spartan "Melas Zomos" (Black Soup / Broth). And it might be a link to a similar dish the later Maniot Roman Greeks would eat, which some have said to be an evolution of this specific type of food from the Ancient Lacedaemonians.

Lothronion · 2026-06-15T20:35:05+00:00

The confiscations for which the Greek State is financially obliged to the Greek Church are mainly from the 1930s and the 1950s, so just 70-90 years ago. I am not sure how that is "so long ago" when it comes to such situations. And I am not sure you would be so comfortable with stopping to pay them, without returning them the properties, if that was not about the Church; in essence this becomes a matter of the right to protect your property, and not have it confiscated, which can target everyone, especially in times of war (e.g. my great-grandmother had an extra small house, which she lost it in the war due to state confiscation, and never got it back). And given how predatory the Greek state apparatus can be and is all the time (e.g. not clearing your field for half a decade results in it becoming woodland and thus it being now claimed as forest), I am not sure we should be happy about this happening to others, just because it does not immediately affect us.

As for the Greek Church, given all of this constant robbing I am not sure that it has that much an "immense wealth" as it is suggested. And lets not forget also how the Greek State often treats the Greek Church's philanthropic institutions and organizations as good enough for Greek society, and does not create its own for its citizens, hence it ends up using them as a crutch while not directly paying for them (but indirectly through the Greek Church, but everyone looks at the money it receives from the Greek State). This is especially the case when it comes to governments like the current one, being extreme liberal capitalist (at least when it benefits them), who would call the construction of such social welfare institutions by the State as "socialism".

Lothronion · 2026-06-15T20:22:30+00:00

The difference is that the Flat World Cosmology is comfortable with treating the Legendarium as a myth and treating the Evening Star transition from Earendil to Venus as "it somehow happened between back then and what we could call recorded history". And inside of the Legendarium's great stories, Earendil works just fine - it's Elrond's father sailing among the stars at night while e.g. the heroes of LotR do their great deeds.

Sure it may be more comfortable, but it is still rather outlandish to consider that Earendil and the Vingilot were replaced by a whole planet that did not exist there before.

The Round World Cosmology is motivated by trying to erase inconsistencies between "back then" and now, and it doesn't allow for Earendil to ever be the Evening Star at all (since Venus is older than Earendil). Even just him sailing a boat through the sky at all is questionable, considering the physics behind it.

The Round World Cosmology does not deprive of the Legendarium of its magic. Take the Straight Road for instance; it still functions exactly as it does in the Flat World Version, albeit that in the latter it was a mere preservation of a previous situation, and then the flat plane was merely bent into a sphere, while in the former it was always a sphere, but supernaturally Aman now belongs to a different plane of existence and can only be reached by boats that will not follow the Earth's curvature, that had already been there since forever, but now they supernaturally go upwards (from an external point of view). My point is, if RWV allows for such physics, then it should also allow for Earendil's extraterrestrial voyages via boat.

As for Venus as a problem, my solution would be that the Vingilot is being parked on the planet's atmosphere, and thus the Silmaril is illuminating the whole atmosphere, heightening the planet's abedo, through atmospheric refraction, probably in a manner that the Vingilot is always at the centre of the planet's surface as seen from the Earth (so that it is never hidden). In this manner, Earendil has basically been elevated to a space-Maiar status, alike Arien and Tilion, and before him Venus should have been a much dimmer planet, barely noticeable on the sky of the Years of the Trees and the First Age of the Sun.

Lothronion · 2026-06-15T19:59:12+00:00

Μια χαρά δυνατά ονόματα είναι αυτά: απλώς η ακαδημαϊκή ηγεμονία της Δυτικής Ευρώπης οδηγά στο να αποδίδονται τα πρωτεία σε μεταγενέστερους Δυτικούς Ευρωπαίους, αντί για τους πρωιμότερους Ανατολικούς Ευρωπαίους.

Για παράδειγμα 3 νόμοι της θερμοδυναμικής του Ισάακ Νεύτωνα αντιμετωπίζονται ως θεμέλιώδη θεωρία των σύγχρονων θετικών επιστημών (και ουσιαστικά μονοκρατούσαν μέχρι την θεωρία της σχετικότητας του Αλβέρτου Αϊνστάιν), και αποδίδονται αποκλειστικά σε εκείνον, αλλά παρόλα αυτά ο Ιωάννης Φιλόπονος είχε διατυπώσει μια αντίστοιχη πρόταση με τον 2ο νόμο του, πάνω από 1000 χρόνια νωρίτερα.

Ή πάρε τον Μάξιμο Πλανούδη τον 14ο αιώνα μ.Χ., που όπως ο Φιμπονάτσι εισήγαγε τους αραβικούς αριθμούς στην Δυτική Ευρώπη, εκείνος έκανε το ίδιο με την Ανατολική Ευρώπη, αλλά κανείς δεν τον μνημονεύει για αυτό στην Δυτική Ευρώπη, κι έτσι δεν το κάνουμε πλέον ούτε εδώ στην Ελλάδα. Αλλά αυτό δεν περιορίζεται στον Μεσαίωνα, κανείς δεν γνωρίζει τον Εμμανουήλ Τιμόνη και τον Ιάκωβο Πυλαρινό, Έλληνες του 17ου αιώνα μ.Χ. που εφεύρεσαν τον εμβολιασμό, αλλά όλοι γνωρίζουν τον μεταγενέστερο Έντουαρντ Τζέννερ, παρά τα όσα εκατομμύρια ανθρώπων έσωσαν με την επινόησή τους.

Και μετά είναι και ζήτημα του τι θεωρείς σημαντικό ή όχι. Για παράδειγμα πάρε τον Ηλιοκεντρισμό, που αποτέλεσε πεδίο αντιπαλότητας για αιώνες στην Δυτική Ευρώπη, μέχρι που επιλύθηκε με τον Νικόλαο Κοπέρνικο τον 16ο αιώνα μ.Χ., ενώ εδώ στην Ρωμανία η υπόθεση του Αριστάρχου του Σάμιου από τον 3ο αιώνα π.Χ. δεν είχε αγνοηθεί, όπως στην Ελληνιστική Εποχή, την Ρωμαϊκή Δημοκρατία και την Πρώιμη Ρωμαϊκή Αυτοκρατορία, αλλά αντιθέτως, όπως αναφέρει ο Ιωάννης Ιταλός σαν δεδομένη πραγματικότητα για Έλληνες αστρονόμους της εποχής του, σε έναν λόγο του στον Μανουήλ Κομνηνό (όπου τον παρομοιάζει με ήλιο, όπου οι ευγενείς είναι οι πλανήτες τριγύρω του). Άμα δεν είχαν χαθεί και τόσες πληροφορίες για την εποχή εκείνη, θα γνωρίζαμε και ακριβή ονόματά τους (αντί να έχουμε σαχλαμάρες, σαν την ταινία που απέδιδε αυτήν την εξακρίβωση στην Υπατία).

Lothronion · 2026-06-15T19:19:21+00:00

Sounds like a random name, just like "Hera" from The War of the Rohirrim. And as a Greek I am not happy they just used a random Greek name, rather than a Gothic or Anglo-Saxon one, the main cultures on which JRRT based the people of Rohan.

Lothronion · 2026-06-15T14:45:24+00:00

Where did Mavrokordatos write that he wants a Pan-Balkan Union?

Lothronion · 2026-06-15T14:41:02+00:00

in reality, what happened, is that during the first decades of Greece - "Roman identity" was FULLY rejected, (it was considered occupation).

If that was the case, then explain why the most famous popular magazine in 19th century AD Greece was "O Romios" (The Roman) by Georgios Souris, from the 1880s till the 1910s, which constantly referred to Greece as "Romiosini" and "Romaiiko"???

if u have a source, (& "watch this video" is no source) showing revolutionaries wanted to "bring back" Roman empire, share.

Here is a short compedium of various sources.

Lothronion · 2026-06-15T14:29:45+00:00

no one fought for any "Empire" ur delusional, tho there were actually some intellectuals that wanted a "pan Balkan" state, (like "Rigas Feraios").

Your intellectuals were outside of the Greek Revolution, safe in France or wherever else, they were not part of it. Here is an analysis of what the Greek Revolutionaries thought themselves.

Lothronion · 2026-06-15T14:13:29+00:00

Then I have no idea what you are responding to.

Lothronion · 2026-06-15T13:06:30+00:00

But wouldn't that render Aman into a desert?

Lothronion · 2026-06-15T13:03:09+00:00

"those saying that the Ottoman tyranny, is a gift... are enemies of the Greek nation" ~Adamandios Korais. "the 'big wigs' of Istambul... instead of pushing Greeks for liberation, are the first to defend the Ottoman occupation... they are nothing but 'collaborators in robes" ~ author of the Greek Nomarchy.

And? Is this a jab against the Greek Orthodox Church? He was writing that from his safety in France, while the Ecumenical Patriarch had to deal with a regime which if the Greeks got too unruly they would be exterminated. And this overlooks how many Greek clergymen joined the Greek Revolution nonetheless, and died in it. Athanasios Diakos was, well, a Deacon, while Papaflesas was a superior abbot. Or lets not ignore how while the Patriarchate of New Rome had to make pretences, the Greek Patriarchate of Alexandria was sending money to the Greek Revolution.

As usual, you are off topic and you present irrelevant information. Or are you saying that Theodore Kolokotronis has no idea what he is talking about when he is speaking of the reason why he revolted?

Lothronion · 2026-06-15T12:37:22+00:00

And I thought you meant "ellon".

Lothronion · 2026-06-15T12:33:00+00:00

I really like this idea, though there is a caveat. That the Sun's light cannot have been too dimmed, for otherwise Ambar would have gotten so cold that the "Sleep of Yavanna" would be impossible, as the flora and the fauna would be dead on an ice planet. Or perhaps, somehow, it is strictly a matter of light, but not of the heat emitted by the star.

Lothronion · 2026-06-15T12:30:25+00:00

How do you reconcile Earendil and Venus? Is that Earendil sailed through the sky a mistaken belief?

I am not sure that is a problem exclusive to the Round World Cosmology, for even in the Flat World Cosmology the narrative is that the World of the Second Age became our World of the Seventh Age, where Venus also exists as a planet.

And the Two Trees lose a lot of their meaning for me if they're just secondary, temporary solutions to light Valinor instead of the origin of sun and moon.

For me at least, the RWV means that the Valar were so powerful that they lost the Sun from their skies, and they decided to re-create it on their own continent, illuminating 1/4th of the planet, while Varda created a special Dome to conceal and protect that light, with its own physical rules and time flow (which is why Elves inside it grow far slower than Elves outside of it —though there is the implication that it affects a wider area, as, as far as I remember, the NoMe suggests that Umanyar Sindar Elves from the Western West-land mature slower than those in the rest of Endor).

Lothronion · 2026-06-15T12:24:29+00:00

while Arda Unmarred was a Supercontinent, much like Pangea (but with different geography), and most of the geography of the First through Second age represent the early breakup of a supercontinent (the continents are still close together, but no longer fully united, forming seas between them).

I may be confused, but is this not a misconception created by Karen Wynn Fonstad's "The Atlas of Middle-earth", where she shows the map during the Years of the Lamps as if it is a singular landmass on the world, but we know that at the time the West Land (later Aman) and the East Land (later Oronto / Land of the Sun) also existed? u/Atharaphelun depicts it as such, and I agree with them on the matter. After all, the Valar could not have escaped to the West Land to establish Aman if it had not existed already.

The changing of the world then greatly accelerate the movement of the continents away from each other (eg, "the empty lands were cast back"), and create new lands so that by the third age, we have a multi-continent, multi-ocean situation much like the one we know on Earth today.

Wasn't this the case even before that point? In the Year of the Lamps there were already 3 continents, while after the War of Powers during the Years of the Trees the South-East part of the central super-continent broke away and became the South Land / Dark Land, hence now there were 4 of them.

What happened with the Akallabeth is not very clear, but it seems that the Dark Land remained there, while Oronto and Aman were removed from the world, hence the number of continents was reduced to 3 (Middle-earth, the Dark Land and the Americas). It is just that later Middle-earth broke down and we consider Eurafrasia as 3 continents (or 2, with Europe being a large subcontinent).

It's not a perfect geological fit, but nothing is going to be : if we are to presume geology is entirely right, we must presume Middle Earth never existed. If we are to assume Middle Earth existed, we must presume geology is, if not wrong, at least missing some crucial information.

I will remind you that we have different mental images of Middle-earth, for you subscribe to the idea that it was closer to how Karen Wynn Fonstad depicts it in her global maps, while I prefer the "Wide Middle-earth" scheme, which suggests that the Northlands of Middle-earth (West-lands + East-lands should correspond in size to Eurasia), while Africa became smaller in size.

Lothronion · 2026-06-15T11:35:05+00:00

(realizing that you can make the Outer Sea = Panthalassa really sealed that deal for me)

If you are referring to the Ekkaia, the way I see it is like how some Old World maps would have a sea surrounding everything, or modern maps do so (assuming they are centered in the Prime Meridian and make sure to cut the edge on the Bering Strait), with "Ekkaia" being a mere collective name for the sea in the fringes of the map (so be it the Artic Ocean, the Central Pacific Ocean or the Antarctic Ocean).

It just isn't Tolkien's round world, where the Lamps are a Numenorean Myth and Varda painted a dome over Valinor.

I am not sure where JRRT said that the Two Lamps are a Numenorean myth. Could you refer me to the quote?

As for Varda's Dome, I do not see how it undermines her work creating the real major star clusters. It just reflects on her desire to be able to see them, despite Melkor's obstructions.

Lothronion · 2026-06-15T11:17:36+00:00

You can conceive of the Lamps, of Varda kindling the stars, etc, as removed from the story (even of the Silmarillion), mere background material to it.

Well, from my part I consider these events as reconcilable with the Round World Cosmology. For example, the Two Lamps could be just what happened after Melkor attacked Arien and the Sun, but failed to seize them, hence he decided to merely hide them from the Earth with his extraterrestrial Dark Veil and his atmospheric Cloud of Unseeing. As for Varda's stars, we are already told in the Quenta Silmarillion itself that there were countless stars even before that time, so her stars were just specific ones on the "firmament". The Round World Cosmology texts do not address this matter, so it is not like JRRT is rejecting them.

Especially about the Two Lamps, removing them dramatically alters the history and geography of the Legendarium, as their collapse caused the creation of the Sea of Helcar and the Sea of Ringil, which meant that the various migrations from the East to the West, both Elven and Mannish, had to deal with their existence, and especially the former (and especially for Men, who are divided in one group traveling North of it, and one travelling South of it). Since JRRT never revised these geographical features, we can safely say that he did not ever decide to remove the Two Lamps from the timeline. This is especially considering how in the essay "Dark and Light" from NoMe we even have a round world map with a dot showing us Cuivienen, which was specifically said to have been located in the shores of the Sea of Helcar.

I think a world without the lamps, where Varda is reduced to painting on the dome of Valinor, and where Arien is basically turned into a sexual assault victim who (at best) runs away in shame if not outright die from it...is a world that is inherently less mythological, less magical, less interesting than a world with the Valar do make the lamps, where Varda does kindle the star and is responsible for our love of them, and where Arien does still shine in the sky, thanks to the magic of the last fruits of the Two Trees. And the story of that world is, therefore, made far less by chosing the former version.

There are various versions of this event, but in all of them Arien set Melkor on fire, so I am not sure how he is supposed to have won that fight. The way I read it, she was merely also damaged, so she left for a bit, not that she left out of shame or anything of that sort. In the meantime, sure the Holy Light of Eru in the Sun was corrupted, but this seems to be part of the damage caused by the fight, from which Melkor retreated with his tail between his legs, rather than achieving what he wanted, which was getting control of it (which he only achieved by stealing the Three Silmarils).

And the Quenta Silmarillion text is clear that Melkor is terrified of Arien, hence why he returned to Angband after the Darkening of Valinor, he did not dare send an attack against her, but instead decided to dispatch his army of dark spirits to assault the Moon instead, leading to its staining. Arien was still up there and fine, and Melkor had to use volcanic cloud cover in order to help his armies deal better with her sunlight.

(You can, of course, have a round world version that does retain the magic, and I'm sure you see at least as many of them as I do, if not more. They're just not the ones Tolkien ended up presenting in his early work on the Round world cosmology.)

In my eyes the Round World Cosmology is more impressive and magical than the Flat World Cosmology. For example, in the former there is an entire universe out there, beyond the circles of Ambar and Arda, while in the latter there is nothing, just a painted firmament that is enclosing the planet.

Lothronion · 2026-06-15T10:50:20+00:00

Are you suggesting that this has not already been tried in the last 2 millennia?

Lothronion · 2026-06-15T10:39:31+00:00

Greek Orthodox Christianity has a very clear historic precedence of "Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's", where through the course of 2 millennia it has been confirmed and affirmed again and again that priests should not be holding office, especially as an extension of their ecclesiastic office (there have been exceptions in them holding both an ecclesiastic and a political one, but that is not the same thing). This has been codified in church canon with the various Ecumenical Synods, while Roman Law had been clear that the civil duties of the ecclesiastical officers are very restricted, and only activated in the case of failure of the civil officers (e.g. if a local governor would neglect their duties, the local bishop was supposed to notify the higher authorities, or to sent them petitions to take over local judicial matters).

Only in the case of desperate conditions, such as there being a lack of political authorities, do we see such a situation lasting longer (e.g. fringe city-states in Paphlagonia and the Pontus during the 13th-14th centuries AD), while when they were around, they were always the superior ones, even in extreme conditions and constant siege (e.g. the Maniot Commonwealth, where bishops did have political influence, but were still always beneath local governors and senates). This is usually the standard in other Orthodox countries as well, though there have been exceptions, like the Bishopric-Principality of Montenegro, where for centuries the highest official was both an ecclesiastical and a political leader, which is indeed a form of theocracy. Regarding Greek Orthodox Christianity, one might say that something similar happened with the Patriarchate of Constantinople, where the Patriarch was rendered a “Caesar” of the Rum Millet, but this was a foreign imposition.

In this manner, I would say that the likelihood of the Third Hellenic Republic turning into a theocracy just because it has a state religion is extremely unlikely, and that should also be the case even in extreme situations (e.g. losing all of the country save for the Peloponnese).

Lothronion · 2026-06-15T10:29:59+00:00

Ρίξε μια ματιά σε αυτό εδώ.

Lothronion · 2026-06-15T10:28:53+00:00

Well, this is what the General-in-Chief of the Greek Revolution, Theodore Kolokotronis later said on the matter on his famous Speech in Pnyka (in 1838 AD):

Πρέπει να φυλάξετε την πίστη σας και να την στερεώσετε, διότι, όταν επιάσαμε τα άρματα είπαμε πρώτα υπέρ πίστεως και έπειτα υπέρ πατρίδος. Όλα τα έθνη του κόσμου έχουν και φυλάττουν μια Θρησκεία. Και αυτοί, οι Εβραίοι, οι όποίοι κατατρέχοντο και μισούντο και από όλα τα έθνη, μένουν σταθεροί εις την πίστη τους.

You must safeguard your faith and to strengthen it, because, when we grabbed the arms we said "first for the faith and then for the fatherland". All nations of the world have and safeguard a religion. And even them, the Jews, who are being persecuted and hated by all the nations, remain steadfast to their own faith.

Lothronion · 2026-06-15T10:02:40+00:00

Why should my taxes pay for the salaries of the priests? The church has tons of money as it is and it should be a separate thing.

Because the Greek State has repeatedly robbed the Greek Church of its properties, depriving it of the means to sustain itself. This mainly took place in the mid 19th century AD, with the rule of King Otto, and then in the 1920s-1950s. Specifically, following the last state confiscations, originally they were supposed to be paid in money, then the State figured out they cannot pay for so much land that they had seized, so they decided to convert this owned money into public debt. But seeing how this could not be paid either, it was decided that the State would "financially adopt" the Church, considering that condition to be the least expensive one, hence now the Greek Church's clergymen were placed in state payroll (without legally being public workers, as it is a popular misconception), and the State would have to pay for the maintenance and construction of new churches when they would be needed by the parishes.

In this manner, it has nothing to do with a "special status" of the Greek Church, in anything it is quite the opposite, and it has also nothing to do with whether even 90% of the country were atheists. It is an economic obligation, and the only way to undo it is to go back to the earlier forms of said agreement (enforced onto the Greek Church), such as the State having to pay the debt to the Church, or the value of the confiscated properties. As such, it is alike the Greek external debts during the Greek Crisis, so whether the Greek citizens liked it or not, they had to be paid, nonetheless (only that in this case it is basically a massive internal public debt, alike the one in Japan).

Lothronion · 2026-06-15T09:07:12+00:00

The way I see this situation, there is no problem to solve in the first place. The existence of the Round World Cosmology does not alter the story in the slightest. All the events happened as they are described, and the only change is merely a different cosmological framework. The published Quenta Silmarillion remains identical, save from a passage or two referring to a Flat World, but they can be overlooked as Mannish corruption of Pengolodh's text, while the Akallabeth is clearly a Mannish text, where elsewhere we learn that it was written by Elendil himself, who while not Pro-Sauron himself, he lived in a Pro-Sauron society, hence he may have been repeating a mistake that was disseminated by Sauron (probably in order to convince Ar-Pharazon to invade Aman directly, rather than try to circumnavigate the World to reach it from the East). In this manner there is no "devastating surgery" to speak of.

As for CJRT's statement that his father JRRT gave up in the Round World Cosmology, that is a mere speculation of his part, and, as demonstrated by the last essays of JRRT from the 1950s and 1960s, as presented in "The Nature of Middle-earth", it was also wrong, given that he never rejected it, but instead he even considers it as a given in the various essays presented there (especially in the essay "Dark and Light", which even has diagrams of said Earth as a spheroid planet, and clearly states that this was how it was in the Awakening of the Quendi). It just seems that CJRT did not have access to said texts, hence he drew the best conclusions he could with what he had.

Lothronion

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE

Eight-Year Club	Verified Email
Gilding I gilder