|
Post by megli on Aug 25, 2009 22:09:01 GMT -1
Just looked at the Horace---nothing at all about trance possession. It's the standard witches-can-move-the-moon topos. (Horace ups the ante and adds the stars too!) Thessalian incantations just refers to the fact that Thessaly is where all the best witches were supposed to come from---a classically 'spooky' place like we associate transylvania with vampires---there's nothing about a special voice: spells from Thessaly just means very powerful witches' spells. No, it's not explicitly about trance possession, but then it's not talking about tidal effects either. The version I read specifically mentioned 'Thessalian voice'. Now granted this doesn't necessarily imply any kind of possession it's identifying something about the voice/words in association with the pactice. it says quae sidera excantata voce Thessala lunamque caelo deripit. 'who after chanting in a thessalian voice dragged the stars and moon down' This is just an idiom for 'chanted a thessalian spell'---it's not identifying anything about the timbre, apart from giving us a witchy frisson. her voice is thessalian cos the witch is from thessaly, not because she's doing overtone singing or something. Also no, nothing to do with tidal effects---she can LITERALLY drag the moon from its orbit. This is one of the standard repertoire of tricks of the classical literary witch. Note the literary. This is a hammy poem: it has nothing to do with real life, or with real ancient magic (no woman in the ancient world, no matter how deluded, actually thought she could knock the moon out of its orbit by magic) or with ancient religion. A parallel: witches in the early modern period were supposed in legend to sail in sieves. This tells us little about the practical seaworthiness of kitchen utensils.
|
|
|
Post by megli on Aug 25, 2009 22:12:30 GMT -1
Ding ding - rest in your corners now please gentlemen ) Seriously though if I am understanding this correctly so far we have not come across any evidence that suggests or even implies that ritual possesion by deities was a part of ancient Brythonic practice. Have I understood correctly that there are strong implications that trance states (without possession) that lead to poetic and prophetic utterances were a part of ancient Brythonic practice? I'm still a bit confused about the possibilty of invoking ancestral spirits within ancient Brythonic practices. What we eventually decide to do or not do in Brython today is another question entirely. So far it seems clear to me that some seem to like the idea of developing something along the lines of the Wiccan drawing down the moon ritual or Heathen Seidr techniques while others have serious reservations about these kinds of practices based on their considerable experiences of trance states in general. Does that seem like a fair summary of the discussion so far? beautifully summarised!
|
|
|
Post by Adam on Aug 25, 2009 22:40:40 GMT -1
Ding ding - rest in your corners now please gentlemen ) sorry, I was (as usual) enjoying the robustness ;D Particularly on a subject I can contribute to ;D Seriously though if I am understanding this correctly so far we have not come across any evidence that suggests or even implies that ritual possesion by deities was a part of ancient Brythonic practice. Have I understood correctly that there are strong implications that trance states (without possession) that lead to poetic and prophetic utterances were a part of ancient Brythonic practice? I'm still a bit confused about the possibilty of invoking ancestral spirits within ancient Brythonic practices. What we eventually decide to do or not do in Brython today is another question entirely. So far it seems clear to me that some seem to like the idea of developing something along the lines of the Wiccan drawing down the moon ritual or Heathen Seidr techniques while others have serious reservations about these kinds of practices based on their considerable experiences of trance states in general. Does that seem like a fair summary of the discussion so far? a fair summary indeed... but I do think the detail is worth going over... for one thing, I'm not yet convinced that such practice didn't exist and that we can't make a valid connection here... the fact that the Hindu practices are rural and the practice of the common folk rather than of organised religion seems potentially connected to the description of the awenyddion who seem somehow outside of orthodoxy (I do take megli's points about the question of the Hindu origins of such practices, but the reported widespread nature strikes me as significant)... tied in with the question of whether Gerald's description is a socially contextual one of a practice that predates Christianity... questions that cannot be answered directly but sifting through this range of evidence and having it challenged by megli's academic knowledge, although appearing adversarial, may move us on usefully. That may not be as coherent as I would have liked... strong painkillers and wine are great for bad teeth but not for coherence
|
|
|
Post by potia on Aug 26, 2009 7:55:48 GMT -1
Ding ding - rest in your corners now please gentlemen ) sorry, I was (as usual) enjoying the robustness ;D Particularly on a subject I can contribute to ;D Please don't misunderstand me I am enjoying this too but I need time to catch up properly and digest a bit more of this a fair summary indeed... but I do think the detail is worth going over... for one thing, I'm not yet convinced that such practice didn't exist and that we can't make a valid connection here... the fact that the Hindu practices are rural and the practice of the common folk rather than of organised religion seems potentially connected to the description of the awenyddion who seem somehow outside of orthodoxy (I do take megli's points about the question of the Hindu origins of such practices, but the reported widespread nature strikes me as significant)... tied in with the question of whether Gerald's description is a socially contextual one of a practice that predates Christianity... questions that cannot be answered directly but sifting through this range of evidence and having it challenged by megli's academic knowledge, although appearing adversarial, may move us on usefully. That may not be as coherent as I would have liked... strong painkillers and wine are great for bad teeth but not for coherence Coherent enough for me to understand so you're doing fine I totally agree that going into the detail and challenging each other is good. Like I say just a brief break for some of us to catch up a bit. Hope the teeth improve btw
|
|
|
Post by megli on Aug 26, 2009 7:58:42 GMT -1
Oh yes, that sounds awful! Clove oil is good for toothache, Adam. (Really works).
|
|
|
Post by littleraven on Aug 26, 2009 8:29:32 GMT -1
Ding ding - rest in your corners now please gentlemen ) sorry, I was (as usual) enjoying the robustness ;D Particularly on a subject I can contribute to ;D One of the things I like about here is the fact that you can be robust and people don't run off shouting stuff like 'It's my Awen, you can't say that'. For me, my understanding of paganism is very much forged in the late 80s so this is invaluable for deconstructing the fallacies that have become planted in my head. Luvvit.
|
|
|
Post by littleraven on Aug 26, 2009 9:05:56 GMT -1
No, it's not explicitly about trance possession, but then it's not talking about tidal effects either. The version I read specifically mentioned 'Thessalian voice'. Now granted this doesn't necessarily imply any kind of possession it's identifying something about the voice/words in association with the pactice. it says quae sidera excantata voce Thessala lunamque caelo deripit. 'who after chanting in a thessalian voice dragged the stars and moon down' This is just an idiom for 'chanted a thessalian spell'---it's not identifying anything about the timbre, apart from giving us a witchy frisson. her voice is thessalian cos the witch is from thessaly, not because she's doing overtone singing or something. Also no, nothing to do with tidal effects---she can LITERALLY drag the moon from its orbit. This is one of the standard repertoire of tricks of the classical literary witch. Note the literary. This is a hammy poem: it has nothing to do with real life, or with real ancient magic (no woman in the ancient world, no matter how deluded, actually thought she could knock the moon out of its orbit by magic) or with ancient religion. A parallel: witches in the early modern period were supposed in legend to sail in sieves. This tells us little about the practical seaworthiness of kitchen utensils. I just spat coffee over my keyboard when I read that ;D My reference to the tides was simply an attempt (perhaps a bad one) at illustrating that because something is not specifically mentioned does not mean it doesn't exist. Whilst I fully agree that ritual possession is not overtly discussed, to me this could simply mean it was rare or indeed some kind of taboo. We have demonic possession, we have necromancy, and ritual possession fills a hole missing from the texts. It's like astronomers looking at planets, they can't see them directly only the effects of their presence.
|
|
|
Post by Adam on Aug 26, 2009 10:46:50 GMT -1
Please don't misunderstand me I am enjoying this too but I need time to catch up properly and digest a bit more of this Hope the teeth improve btw Gotcha.... *goood* move... won't do me any harm to slow my thoughts down and consolidate and might do me a lot of good Where d'you learn to do that? ;D And the teeth are gradually improving thanks (I can generally trance most pains... not eliminate them, as I think thats daft, but modify them... tooth and ear pain always seem beyond me though... intoxicants the way to go )
|
|
|
Post by Adam on Aug 26, 2009 10:51:20 GMT -1
One of the things I like about here is the fact that you can be robust and people don't run off shouting stuff like 'It's my Awen, you can't say that'. For me, my understanding of paganism is very much forged in the late 80s so this is invaluable for deconstructing the fallacies that have become planted in my head. Luvvit. Hmmm... I have a bunch of books I want rid of (a few of the Matthews variety for example), but can't quite bring myself to foist them onto someone else... would seem somehow... dishonourable? Book burning? I can't help but feel that some form of formal adversarial debate has it's place in the Brythonic process of development of theology (why do I feel so uncomfortable with that word theology?)
|
|
|
Post by dreamguardian on Aug 26, 2009 12:00:42 GMT -1
One of the things I like about here is the fact that you can be robust and people don't run off shouting stuff like 'It's my Awen, you can't say that'. For me, my understanding of paganism is very much forged in the late 80s so this is invaluable for deconstructing the fallacies that have become planted in my head. Luvvit. Me too. It's ace!
|
|
|
Post by redraven on Aug 26, 2009 15:40:08 GMT -1
Whilst accepting Megli's well thought out assertion that there is no strong literal evidence for trance possession in Celtic societies, my own intuitive thoughts are having difficulty dismissing the idea. So, I may be guilty of applying 21st century social standards upon another earlier civilization. The word "trance" today would, at it's most basic level, suggest a "changed" perception. That changed perception would be easier to define today as the social standards of life are now very much regulated, probably more so than other point in history. There is, of course, also the question of more widely accepted "norms" of behaviour, applicable across greater area's of the Earth and regulated by, to some degree, international law. Therefore, it would be easier to define trance by a commonly held framework, probably not available in previous generations and certainly not as widespread as today. So, that leaves us with the possibility that trance would have been open to definition by more frameworks of belief / social structures than are available today. I would suggest, therefore, that what we would consider today to represent trance, may have been, for some societies, the norm. Now, if that was indeed the case, assuming that written literature in earlier times, being a somewhat costly, (in both financial and time respects) item to commission, why would they refer to what would possibly be viewed as everyday behaviour, which could be viewed at any moment of time in the communities they lived in, be seen as fit for inclusion? By my reasoning, that would not make any sense whatsoever. The commissioning of literature may have, in lot of cases, be more to do with a social statement about the patron and his position within that society, in an effort to appease the current popular Deity. So, we have one possible explanation as to why there is no reference to this kind of thing in early or even, late, medieval literature. However, we do have some cave paintings that would seem to suggest some form of trance work, especially trance that involves the human being depicted in the position of morphing into the animals being hunted. I would suggest that this form of hunting must have had some sort of success, otherwise, why would they have taken the trouble to depict the scenes? So, trance work may have been present in a more frequent dynamic way than is prevalent today. We know some societies made the animals around them into deities, so for them possession by deity may actually be depicted in the cave paintings, the deities being non-human in form. The idea of human like deities possessing biological forms, may be a hang over from the monotheistic religions, who tended to relate to deity in human form, as opposed to earlier civilizations who did not necessarily follow the same framework of reference.
RR
|
|
|
Post by Tegernacus on Aug 26, 2009 16:14:07 GMT -1
|
|
|
Post by megli on Aug 26, 2009 16:21:26 GMT -1
Actually, RR, the literature gives us a very good idea of what people did everday---my favourite bit in Culhwch is when we find that arthur's court's cooks will serve you 'hot peppered chops'!
The other thing is the medieval laws, which are rich and complex and give a wonderfully detailed impression of what everyday life and its tragicomic disputes were about. (As a result, medieval irish and welsh law is a major source for social history, for obvious reasons: people legislate about what occurs commonly.)
In my opinion the reason trance possession isn't mentioned is that they simply didn't do it: and anyway, why would they in a medieval Christian society? They had these wacky soothsayers though, the awenyddion, but that's not ancestor or deity possession, as I've argued.
As we have no literature or texts at all from Roman britain---with very minor exceptions like the Vindolanda letters---or from pre-Roman Britain, there's just no evidence at all to work with. As trance possession by a spirit is not mentioned by any classical writer talking about related Celtic peoples like the Gauls, the most logical thing to assume is that it just wasn't done. After all, there's no reason why it should be.
To play with your suggestion: imagine historians of religion in 2000 years' time discussing us, on some high tech message board:
person 1: 'Ah. Those pagans in Britain at the turn of the third millenium. They sacrificed goats in their rituals.' Person 2: 'How can you tell? is there any evidence?' Person 1: 'Well, not as such. there's no written or archaeological evidence that they did so. BUT they sacrificed goats in Cuba, and in calcutta goats got sacrificed to the goddess Kali!' Person 1: 'Ok. But how is that evidence that British pagans did the same?' Person 2: 'Well, it shows they could have done.' Person 1: 'But isn't it likely it would have been mentioned somewhere? After all, you don't hear anything about American pagans at that time doing it either, and we have some of their writings and some photographs of their rituals. No one mentions any goats.' Person 2: 'Ah. But perhaps it was so common, so much a part of everday religious life, that no one thought it worth mentioning? After all, books weren't cheap, and perhaps you wouldn't put things into a book if they were totally ordinary....'
|
|
|
Post by megli on Aug 26, 2009 16:37:01 GMT -1
And all this is a bit strange anyway, cos as the awenydd thing--not to mention things like the vates etc of classical accounts and their insular celtic cognates---shows, they deffo DID HAVE trances in which people prophesied, historically attested, in Wales. Why don't we give that a practical try before we start beggaring about with african-style possession?!
|
|
|
Post by Tegernacus on Aug 26, 2009 16:55:17 GMT -1
anthropologically, there is no reason they couldn't have done it, just no evidence that they actually did. Infact, the bronze-age custom of digging up your ancestor and bringing them, literally, into your ritual (maybe...), makes me think that they didn't need to do it. No need to channel someone who's sitting next to you.
Prophetic trance is a different matter, and since the druids liked a bit of fortune telling, I think that is absolutely something to look into.
|
|
|
Post by Adam on Aug 26, 2009 18:04:59 GMT -1
And all this is a bit strange anyway, cos as the awenydd thing--not to mention things like the vates etc of classical accounts and their insular celtic cognates---shows, they deffo DID HAVE trances in which people prophesied, historically attested, in Wales. Why don't we give that a practical try before we start beggaring about with african-style possession?! ;D I'm up for it if anyone else is... impersonal trance for divination and prophesy has a number of advantages as far as I can see, in that its validity or otherwise is attested by the community rather than the individual, and so doesn't run the same risks of self delusion and grandeur, nor does it carry the potential mental health risks of inviting spirit possession IMO (a task that I would understand as requiring significant training and selection) I've a few thoughts as to how it could be moved on, but I need food, so will post later
|
|
|
Post by littleraven on Aug 27, 2009 10:13:15 GMT -1
Actually, RR, the literature gives us a very good idea of what people did everday---my favourite bit in Culhwch is when we find that arthur's court's cooks will serve you 'hot peppered chops'! Is this referring to the pepper we know and use, ie black pepper? If so, it was an import and a very expensive one at that. I don't see them talking about an everyday item here, but a demonstration of the richness of the kitchens' lord.
|
|
|
Post by redraven on Aug 27, 2009 13:57:19 GMT -1
I thought "hot peppered chops" were a result of a blunt razor?!!!
RR
|
|
|
Post by megli on Aug 27, 2009 15:57:02 GMT -1
Actually, RR, the literature gives us a very good idea of what people did everday---my favourite bit in Culhwch is when we find that arthur's court's cooks will serve you 'hot peppered chops'! Is this referring to the pepper we know and use, ie black pepper? If so, it was an import and a very expensive one at that. I don't see them talking about an everyday item here, but a demonstration of the richness of the kitchens' lord. Exactly---but it's a lovely detail, and evocation oif life. And as for the laws---chock full of everday items. And the fact that they rcorded stories---fiction!---at all shows that vellum was not limited to solely utilitarian purposes.
|
|