Earliest known biography of an African woman translated to English for the first time

rejectedprincesses:

angryafricangirlsunited:

The earliest known book-length biography of an African woman, a 17th-century text detailing the life of the Ethiopian saint Walatta Petros, has been translated into English for the first time.

Walatta Petros was an Ethiopian religious leader who lived from 1592 to 1642. A noblewoman, she left her husband to lead the struggle against the Jesuits’ mission to convert Ethiopian Christians to Roman Catholicism. It was for this that the Ethiopian Orthodox Täwaḥədo Church elevated her to sainthood.

Walatta Petros’s story was written by her disciples in the Gəˁəz language in 1672, after her death. Translator and editor Wendy Laura Belcher, an associate professor at Princeton University, came across the biography while she was studying Samuel Johnson’s translation, A Voyage to Abyssinia. “I saw that Johnson was fascinated by the powerful noble Ethiopian women in the text,” said Belcher. “I was speaking with an Ethiopian priest about this admiration and he told me that the women were admired in Ethiopia as well, where some of them had become saints in the Ethiopian church and had had hagiographies written about them.”

Ten years later, Belcher still remembers how “thrilling” this revelation was. “What? Biographies of powerful African women written by Africans in an African language? And to be able to pair European and African texts about the same encounter? I knew then I wouldn’t rest until I had translated this priceless work into English.”

Belcher learned Gəˁəz in order to translate Walatta Petros’s biography, working first with the Ethiopian priest, and then with the translator Michael Kleiner. “As a biography, it is full of human interest, being an extraordinary account of early modern African women’s lives — full of vivid dialogue, heartbreak, and triumph. For many, it will be the first time they can learn about a pre-colonial African woman on her own terms,” she said.

The biography has now been published in English by Princeton University Press as The Life and Struggles of Our Mother Walatta Petros. It has only been translated into two other languages before: Amharic and Italian, the latter in the 1970s.

While researching the text, Belcher discovered that the biography contained the earliest known depiction of same-sex desire among women in sub-Saharan Africa, an element she said was “censored” from the manuscript that the 1970s Italian edition was based on.

Belcher writes in the book’s preface that while she and Kleiner were translating the story from the Italian edition, they came across a “perplexing anecdote about a number of community members dying because some nuns had pushed each other around”. Kleiner suspected the manuscript had “been miscopied, perhaps deliberately, in order to censor the original, or merely by accident”, and speculated that “the nuns were not fighting but flirting with each other”.

After consulting with several Ethiopian scholars and looking at digitised copies of the original manuscripts, Kleiner and Belcher found the uncensored manuscript concurred. They translated the line as Petros seeing “some young nuns pressing against each other and being lustful with each other, each with a female companion.”

“This is the earliest anecdote we know of in which African women express desire for other women,” writes Belcher.

The academic also pointed to Walatta Petros’s relationship with her fellow nun Eheta Kristos, describing their first encounter with each other as “rapturous”. The text says that “love was infused into both their hearts, love for one another, and… they were like people who had known each other” their whole lives. Walatta Petros and Kristos “lived together in mutual love, like soul and body. From that day onward the two did not separate, neither in times of tribulation and persecution, nor in those of tranquillity, but only in death”.

“There is no doubt that the two women were involved in a lifelong partnership of deep, romantic friendship,” Belcher writes.

Identifying them as lesbians would be “anachronistic” partly because Walatta Petros was “deeply committed to celibacy”, she told the Guardian.

“Many Ethiopians are quite upset about my comments about the saint, my interpretations of her relationship with Eheta Kristos,” she said. “Part of this upset is due to not understanding my point. I think she was a sincere, celibate nun, but that she also felt desire for other women and that she was in a life-long celibate partnership with Eheta Kristos.”

I just kept smiling wider and wider the more I read.

Earliest known biography of an African woman translated to English for the first time

digivolvin:

libby-doe-mods-denofiniquity:

digivolvin:

person of color: hey wouldn’t it be cool if angels were represented as brown or black more often–

edgy whites who went to a week of bible study 15 yrs ago and regurgitate all their Superior Knowledge from textually inaccurate all-caps tumblr posts written by supernatural fans: um…… ACTUALLY 🙂 angels don’t look like HUMANS they look like ELDRITCH NIGHTMARES™ that MELT YOUR BRAIN OUT so stop giving them skin colors 🙂 try a few animal heads instead 🙂 don’t forget the eyeballs 🙂 

But it’s true?? That’s why they’re always saying “do not be afraid”. Some of them have three faces on one head?? It’s in both Old Testament and Revelations.

i mean, this is my favorite of all subjects so why not chat about it a little. sorry in advance for the essay you didn’t ask for, but i’m getting a lot of smartasses on this post telling me the Edgy Whites aren’t wrong. so let’s go:

1) even if it was true (which it’s not, i will get to that) this wouldn’t be an adequate reason for criticizing or derailing poc who are trying to subvert the association of divinity/purity & whiteness. you know the idea of the aryan race came from the myth of divine whiteness? you know how all fantasy elves are pale slender & white, thanks to j.r.r. tolkein’s prevailing white/christian influence? so if you see poc trying to reframe this, let them!

2) it isn’t true. don’t get me wrong, you can envision, interpret, and portray angels however you want, that’s part of the fun of art and writing and fantasy. i know that a certain post influenced how a lot of people on tumblr imagine angels (again, because people like subverting popularized imagery) but if we’re talking about biblical accuracy, then let’s be biblically accurate. 

more specifically, if someone is going to condescend to poc (or anyone!) about the “factual” appearances of angels in the bible, then they damn better get it right. 

to start with– angels as winged messengers were popularized after the roman catholic church began co-opting greco-roman imagery, and modeled much of their depictions of angels after hermes and eros. so yeah, the image of pale white angels is tiresome and not technically accurate to the bible.

that said, the majority of angels in the bible very likely appeared as wingless humans with occasional supernatural attributes. 

biblical angels are understood by theologists & angelologists to exist in a celestial hierarchy, de coelesti hierarchia, which accounts for nine distinct types. they’re organized in tiers, so to speak. within the first sphere are seraphim, cherubim, and ophanim. this first choir resides within the inner sanctum of heaven; they are the lovecraftian ones tumblr is so big on. 

the seraphim (isaiah 6:1-8 and revelations 4:8, the burning ones, sometimes interpreted as a mass of serpents, multiple eyes, etc.) the cherubim (isaiah 1:5-11 and ezekiel 1:5-13, multiple wings, multiple faces) and ophanim (ezekial 1:15-21′s iconic Wheels™) are all witnessed by prophets. not in visitations, but in visions of heaven. these are THE scary angels, the angels of the guillermo del toro persuasion. 

but, they exist outside of sight from humans, which is why it was exclusively prophets who could describe them. they do not come down to earth to chat with random civilians. they’re too busy with the tasks of the omniscient, and their proximity to god is what makes them so powerful and so otherworldly. (and no, you won’t drop dead just looking at them: only god is said to be that powerful.) 

the second choir– the dominions, virtues, and powers– are typically interpreted to remain unseen and work on the spiritual plane, tasked with more menial things than the first choir, keeping the nonphysical realm in working order. 

the third choir are the ones who move between heaven and earth to serve humans: the principalities, archangels and angels. these are the ones most regularly described in the bible as messengers, guides, and guardians who take on the form of man in order to serve and aide them. almost every mention of angelic messengers or apparitions in the bible is an angel of the third choir. 

(side note: the only angels not accounted for in the celestial hierarchy are the nephilim: the fallen ones who had children by humans, referenced in genesis 6:1–4 and often considered to be demons.)

so if the angels appearing to humans aren’t abominations, why do they scare people so badly? 

the phrase “do not be afraid/be not afraid” is said in variations over 100 times in the bible, not exclusively by angels. most often it’s spoken as an assurance of god’s love and protection. yes, a handful of times it’s said by angels. (matthew 1:20, matthew 28:5, luke 1:13, luke 1:30, luke 2:10, to name some prominent instances.) almost every single one of these, the angel in question is doing just that– assuring vulnerable or frightened people that god is protecting them. 

most notable of these angels is gabriel, the archangel and messenger who appears to mary to tell her she will conceive jesus. let’s look at the context at play: mary was a young unwed woman who would not have been accustomed to spending time alone with young man outside her family. when gabriel appears to her, a strange man in her home, she has every reason to be frightened. gabriel goes on to tell her that she’s going to be the mother of god, and this is when he reassures her not to be afraid, because it will be done through god’s workings. gabriel ≠ an eldritch horroterror. 

the second instance is that of the messenger angel who tells the women of jerusalem not to be afraid, but jesus has been raised from the dead. this angel is described as unearthly, and tbqh he’s dope as hell: “his appearance was like lightning, and his clothing white as snow.” (matthew 28:5) there’s reason to believe this angel is of the same countenance as the one described in a vision in the book of daniel: “then i lifted up mine eyes, and looked, and beheld a certain man clothed in linen (…) his body also was like the beryl, and his face as the appearance of lightning, and his eyes as lamps of fire, and his arms and his feet like in colour to polished brass, and the voice of his words like the voice of a multitude.” (daniel 10:5-7) my fave description of an angel in the bible by far, but… still not an eldritch horrorterror. 

in a third instance (luke 2:10), the angelic heralds who inform the sleeping shepherds of jesus’ birth do startle the men, and they do tell them not to fear. but it’s said its the glory of god emanating from them that scares the shepherds, not a monstrous appearance. 

the cosmic fear attributed to visits from the divine is called numinous dread, the terror that fills us when we’re approached by something we have no capacity to understand. numinous dread is akin to what makes people quiver at the thought of ghosts, or the size of distant planets, or the expanse of the universe– something incalculable and unknowable to the point of being frightening. this to me is by far the coolest aspect of angels. the fact that the very scope of their existence can tug and distort the fabric of our dimension, to the point that humans are bowled over by the merest whiff of their presence? it’s why angels who appear human but still frighten people is such an underrated concept.

you know the phrase “every angel is terrifying”? the author, rainer maria rilke, wrote endlessly on the nature of the human and divine, especially in his work the duino elegies. in the full quote from the first elegy, he mused on the vastness of angels in comparison to mortals:

“For beauty is nothing but the beginning of terror, which we are still just able to endure, and we are so awed because it serenely disdains to annihilate us. Every angel is terrifying.”

this, to me, is the most succinct and lovely illustration of angels, which doesn’t define them either as monsters or humans– he’s fixed on the feeling of awe that’s inherent to the divine, however it manifests. 

none of this invalidates creative interpretations of biblical angels! it just means you should not be talking down to anyone about their level of accuracy, especially in regards to race.

in summary: YES, some angels are scary looking in the bible. NO, not every single one looks like edgy white tumblr wants to believe. YES, everybody is allowed to have fun with their interpretations and portrayals, go wild. NO, it’s not even remotely acceptable to condescend to people who want to envision them as people of color because, textually, they manifest as humans in the bible, and everyone in the bible was brown and black. 

yugiohno:

Me quietly to myself: I wonder what Jewish ethics surround stuff like…… unicorns or fairies or some shit…….
Rabbi #1 *popping out of the cupboard*: Well according to the great Rabbi Akiva!
Rabbi #2 *enters from the next room*: Actually if you look at 14th century Talmudic interpretation
Rabbi #3 *descends the stairs*: but if you want the real answer you must look at the work of Rabbi Joshua
Me: how did you get into my house

narandzhasta:

keshetchai:

shut-up-hippie:

asksecularwitch:

shut-up-hippie:

asksecularwitch:

shut-up-hippie:

traegorn:

shut-up-hippie:

asksecularwitch:

cannibalcoalition:

traegorn:

fzygal:

zarpaulus:

traegorn:

consecsuallyreading:

“However, most of us do lead an unchristian life because most Wiccans are not Christian, but then again neither was Jesus. We follow the moral axioms that were set forth by Jesus in the most fundamental way. Most Wiccans that I know follow the way of Jesus better than some Christians I know. the interpreters of the Bible and other holy documents, have confused and made complex the idea of achieving peace and joy in the world. Wiccans try to lead a life of tolerance and understanding but our ways and customs are not what a Modern Christian might call ‘Christian.’“

(p. 120,Of Witches, Janet Thompson)

What. In. The. Actual. Ass?

It’s 1993 and welcome to the Satanic Panic, where authors took one of two routes to try to calm people down:

1. We’re unrelated to Judeochristian mythos, and therefore don’t believe in “Satan” or the devil.

2. We’re actually, like, waaay more Christian than you are when you think about it? Like, we’re all about tolerance and love, while you know how those Chiiiistians aren’t? Jesus would really be a Wiccan, I just FEEL that would be true. Like, if you look at it hard enough, aren’t Christians the REAL Satanists?

Guess which path shitty writers chose.

For all their faults, I can respect the Church of Satan for doubling down during the Panic.

@traegorn calls it shitty writing. I call it the truth.

It’s shitty writing because Wiccans and Witches don’t need to justify their moral structure in the frame and context of the Judeochristian faiths.

It litetally delegitimizes Wicca while trying to defend it.

It’s shitty writing.

There is absolutely no reason to discredit a religion as a means to uplift another. Most people who pick up a book on Wicca are already jaded by the Christian culture, at least in America. So there’s no need to make comments like that- the author is already going to be interpreted as being on the reader’s side. 

So saying that Wiccans make better Christians than Christians is kind of like going to an open-mic night after watching a Comedy Central stand-up special and just going on a rant about how awful married life is. 

Lazy. It’s lazy. 

Are there Christians who don’t follow the teachings of Jesus even if that should be like… the one thing they’re doing? Yes. Absolutely. But an informational book about Wicca is not the place for that. You got something to say about it, write another book. Now is not the time. 

Wicca does not explicitly follow the teachings of Jesus. It follows the general rule of ‘don’t be a jerk.’ That should be about as far as the comparison goes. 

And comments like the one the author is making here really twig me because it makes it sound like Wicca and other occult practices don’t have their own shit to fucking examine. 

So instead of taking pot-shots at a religion, it would be significantly more effective to draw comparisons between the two and outline the differences. Because comparative religious studies are an important dynamic to discuss in a 101 book. 

Love yall for saying what I didnt have the energy to say. It literally exhausted me to read that.

Feeling superior and that you are better at the religion not being in it than actual practitioners of a religion because you meet some random criteria* of that religion is just beyond laughable. Especially when that religion is closed (wrt the mysteries, baptism universally, but also all the other ones included especially in all forms of catholicism [notice all forms of, not just roman]).

Though thats par for the course in the occult communities, “i do it better than them ACTUAL practitioners even though I am not a practitioner!”

These reindeer games gotta stop. We are too old to be doing this.

*(charity work and respecting others btw, for those in the back that dont know the context, the author really fucked up on that with their examples of it but ok then. If you want to join the author is degrading homeless people as being a better Christian way you go right ahead with that one.)

… Judeochristian ain’t a fucking thing except to the Christians who wanted to force the two together.

For those of us who have never belonged to either, it’s a useful term to describe monotheistic faiths that derive moral authority from a god and the ten commandments. I mean, there are shared religious texts – it’s not weird to group them.

But you’re right in one respect – it was the wrong term to use. I probably should have said Abrahamic Faiths,

It was wrong to exclude Islam.

And Judaism and Islam treat Satan differently from how Christianity does. It’s not a useful term.

May I ask a question for my own knowledge?

I tried googling, but I was getting a lot of non answers or lumping Satanism with Judaism and Islam.

My question is how did Judaism and Islam deal with the Satanic Panic of the 1970s through the 1990? Given what you just said there, did it even bleep on the radar?

… Not really even sure. Depends on the person doing the preaching, but tmu Judaism has a VERY wide variety of views on Satan, but not as an opponent of G-d. The scriptures actually treat Satan as one of G-d’s aides (Job) and a prosecutor (Zechariah). Christian understandings of Satan come more from their scriptures treating him as anti-Jesus and anti-G-d. Islam’s equivalent of Satan, Iblis, isn’t considered an adversary (Islam is strictly monotheist). 

The vast majority, if not all, of those trying to jump on the concept of Satanic ritual abuse (Satanic Panic) as a true and real thing are Christians. 

I otherwise have a NUMBER of objections to Judeochristian being used in the first place by non-Christian gentiles, most of them connecting to “Judaism and Christianity only have scriptures in common and even that is a tenuous connection.”

Interesting! I was wondering then, at that point if it wasn’t even a thing for Judaism or Islam to be really that worried about Satanism, let alone Satanic Ritual abuse. So then the conversation should be directed in a strictly Christian route, rather than including more than that. 

Also, I am not here to argue the merits of whether or not Islam, Judaism, or Christianity should be lumped together in a particular term. I know that there are some forms of Christianity that view themselves to be specifically more like Judaism than others – not just that they have scriptures which I could include examples of here but it’s a moot point because I’m not going to argue it. But I know that much of Christianity (including those examples listed above), for example, does not like to be associated with Islam (even pre-9/11) and does not agree that Islam is (my wording) “a continuation” of Christianity. 

So the argument that they should not be lumped together, to me, seems valid and correct. 

I would understand that a focus purely on Satan and a worship of Satan would instead be considered idolatry in all of the Abrahamic religions, but, with regards to SRA, that was first and foremost Christians doing the panicking. 

Given how CLOSELY Satanic Panic mirrors antisemitic blood libel accusations (“they’re sacrificing children! They drink their blood!”) I cannot seriously imagine the Jewish community at large taking part in the same rhetoric that was often used to kill them.

Just like much of the witch hunts and burning times were actually ways to hunt and kill crypto-Jews.

I have no idea what Islam thinks about satanic ritual but Judaism is chiefly concerned with no idol worship, and probably avoiding any and all panic or hysteria about Satan mostly because that used to end up in dead Jewish people.

Actually I’d argue this is DIRECTLY linked – Satanic Panic was a new wave of old hysteria that usually was blatantly antisemitic.

“As Christian theology generally focuses on a dichotomy of heaven and hell, positioning an outsider on the side of demonic supernatural forces has always been a favored tactic.

And so we’ve seen the likes of blood libel in the 12th century and beyond, when Christians accused Jews of using blood from kidnapped Christian children in their rituals. The 1475 Simon of Trent blood libel even saw an entire Jewish community tortured and 15 men executed over the death of a 2-year-old in Trento, Italy. Anti-Semitic violence and moral panic spread across Europe in its wake.”

history.howstuffworks.com/historical-events/satanic-panic1.htm

I’m not the only one who guessed this is the historical precedent and I’m sure I’d find even more sources linking the two if I searched further.

Also there’s the fact that the guy who built the TST temple in Salem is Jewish himself, so double the hysteria there! timesofisrael.com/in-haunted-salem-a-jewish-church-founder-preaches-the-art-of-satanic-social-change/amp/

My mother is a psychiatrist and a Christian who did a lot of community work that was interfaith, because Judaism is big on helping the community and my mom wouldn’t darken the door of a Christian church that wasn’t also. (There were not enough Muslims in her part of West Virginia during the Satanic Panic for them to have a mosque in the area, though some did work with the charity organization my mom was a part of.) So I asked her, and she told me that the big difference between the Jewish and Christian response (in semi-urban Appalachia, an area not known for measured responses) was pretty clear.

There were Jewish children who got talked into thinking they’d been victims of Satanic ritual abuse, just like there were Christian kids. Jewish kids were talked into it by Christian adults they knew, usually teachers and daycare workers, and here, the similarity stops. Christians during the Panic believed their kids and often provided suggestions that furthered the depth, details and perceived reality of the abuse. They took their kids to anyone who claimed to be able to do hypnosis, with or without a degree, and informed people in their churches about the tragedy that had befallen their family, thus keeping the hysteria growing.

Jewish people got actual psychiatrists like my mom, who specialized in working with children, to talk to their children. And eventually the kids would admit they were saying those things because adults really wanted them to, but in the meantime Jewish people didn’t freak out their congregations or make baseless speculation about Satanic cults. They were more reserved and private about the whole thing, which in turn helped their kids snap out of the delusion or admit it was a lie, because their children had no incentive to keep going and didn’t feel pressured to believe an outlandish thing.

TL;DR from what I know of the Jewish reaction to the Panic it was ‘get thee to therapy so we can figure out what’s going on’ instead of ‘I believe you and will not for a second consider that this might not be legit’.

lesbeet:

lesbeet:

lesbeet:

listen i know a lot of you think that judaism is just like….christianity but with some cool more ~ethnique~ holidays or whatever but if you’re approaching your interpretation of judaism within any sort of framework related to xtianity you’re doing it entirely wrong

“the torah says [x]” doesn’t mean “the torah says this and so this is what everyone does bc that’s the torah”

“the torah says [x]” means “for the next several thousand years people are going to argue about what exactly this means, what the loopholes are, how many different ways this can be interpreted, whether we should even follow it, and hey maybe gd isn’t even real so maybe the question is how this impacts us and our society, what are the implications, etc”

judaism is not “the torah says sodomy is an abhorrence therefore the entire religion is intrinsically homophobic and gd hates gays and is gonna send us to hell for being gay” because that is not how judaism works AT ALL

if you’re a prospective convert, if you’re someone who’s interested in theology, if you’re someone who thinks you know enough about judaism to talk about it on the internet, it is ESSENTIAL to understand these things.

judaism is not, and has never been, xtianity. not just because of our holidays. not just because we don’t believe that jesus is the messiah. but because we have a fundamentally different philosophy about gd, the torah, and how we should live our lives.

this is ok to rb btw

ykw goyim can reblog this too just don’t be stupid

systlin:

lewd-plants:

captainoftheseaqueen:

iguana-america:

systlin:

lewd-plants:

systlin:

jedifish81:

systlin:

lewd-plants:

systlin:

lewd-plants:

New goddess idea: She’s an earth goddess of the new age who’s domain is spinning and weaving, but specifically spinning and weaving gigantic structural steel cables for construction and other industrial purposes. Her skin is steel grey and hard to the touch and her hair is like long dredlocks of woven steel. She laughs at shitty architecture deigns that will fall apart if actually built and protects well-made bridges and buildings she likes. She might warn you of unforseen danger if you always wear your proper PPE.

Okay now what do I name her

O’sha. 

Obviously 

THAT’S PERFECT

I AM ALWAYS HERE FOR QUALITY WORKPLACE SAFETY REGULATION PUNS

That’s my goddess. 👍🏻

May O’sha bless you with earplugs that are comfortable and respirators that fit perfectly. 

And good steel. Always good steel.

May your steel deliveries be always on time and your rebar strong

what does O’sha mean? :O

OSHA is the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. It’s part of the department of labor and who sets up the workplace safety stuff, does inspections, etc, and is who you call when your employer is practicing unsafe techniques.

I’m in love with using the name O’sha as a goddess’s name for such a being.

Praise O’sha and may you never be told to go up a ladder on your own. Or work with sub-grade materials.

Mind your MSDS or O’sha gonna come after your ass with steel whips and a gajillion lawsuits

Those who displease Her are struck down with the dreaded Fines and Liability Lawsuits. 

May her steel be forever strong. 

Ramadan for non-Muslims: An etiquette guide

somaperies:

actjustly:

Read this & be mindful of those partaking in Ramadan. 

I would rather everyone read and shared this instead of “remember to tag your food/nsfw/etc!” post that’s going around every year. (None of these things actually break your fast and if you’re fasting and worried about seeing them, you shouldn’t be on tumblr).

Being considerate and kind goes a long way, so I’d appreciate if this post went around instead.

Ramadan for non-Muslims: An etiquette guide

jumpingjacktrash:

blueeyeddl:

I found this really excellent thread on Twitter that pretty much nails why Pence’s Holocaust Remembrance Day tweet was so gross and offensive.

‘the rapture’ is not anywhere supported by the actual scripture, btw. i don’t usually go “your religion is wrong” to anyone, but rapture-believing evangelicals are a doomsday cult. a literal fucking doomsday cult. they are deliberately destroying the earth, trying to make the end times come faster.