|
|
Post by megli on Dec 6, 2010 18:58:49 GMT -1
Makes the long winter nights just fly by!  |
|
|
|
Post by redraven on Dec 6, 2010 19:34:38 GMT -1
Sorry guys, some of your thinking seems quite rigid, along with being quite rude. I'm not entirely sure you would use such a stance to my face, not for long anyway. I too was at Flag Fen Stefan, as I'm sure you remember, and whatever I say on this site you can take it as a given, I would say it to your face. If that is rude, then so be it, but at least it'll be honest. This post was made on a theological conjecture page for the good reason that its not about proven facts but ideas. I remember this page was created for that very reason, so I thought that was a given. Which is fine, but you know how we work on Brython, foundations in facts before speculative conjecture.It's how things work around here and you have been on here enough to realise this. When you post on these sites you should do so with the foresight that one day you may meet the people your talking to. It may restrain any social ineptness and encourage more respect. See my first comment. Just because I'm brave enough to share thoughts that are not based on some in vogue historians book does not mean I've just got off the fucking boat. A little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing. Do you think I'm posting off the cuff? This thread could have been very multi layered and created a platform from which people could learn. Conjecture clashing with accepted truths to forge new ground. Rather than romantic attributes as you put it. Your way behind guy. I know the facts and as limited as they are, I'm now trying to see beyond them. So am I and the facts are that the early peoples incorporated their dead into the medium they lived on and into the structures they built. There is no evidence for the worship of Gods, that appears to be a later introduction fueled by population number increases. Aquisition of farming lands and methods, IMO, fueled the more individualistic approach because it offered gains unheard of before. In other words, the prizes got bigger. The warrior Gods were an inevitability because of these disproportunate gains, yet we see in later monuments, a continuing presence of human bones in the earth structures, suggestive that the earlier practices, practices you refer to as being represented by the farmer Gods, still present and at least in token form, being appeased by their inclusion. I can't see how Warrior Gods would have usurped farming Gods, they were almost symbiotic. RR. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 6, 2010 22:48:32 GMT -1
Where we have an example of one place being inhabited through the Mesolithic / Neolithic transition, the archaeological evidence is that there are not enough pollen or grain samples to suggest that the volume of cereals was enough to provide the populations with enough food to sustain them and their animals. This is specifically demonstrated at a site in Billown on the Isle of Man. This is backed up by palynological samples taken from the Isle of Arran from an earlier period in time, where this transition appears to have predated the general Mesolithic / Neolithic transition by quite a large period of time. Further, IIRC, the long barrow at Hambleton North shows cereal grains beneath the earliest structural constructions, suggestive that the Barrow was actually built upon an area used for limited cereal production previously, again pointing to a ritualistic use for the grain and not a major food producing area. This would be in keeping with the article you have quoted. RR Why does the fact that there wasn't enough grain to support the population and their animals suggest a ritual use, in particular? Hunter/gatherers are known for using a huge variety of different plants for their food - couldn't they have grown some cereals to use as part of their diet rather than as a staple? In transition they would presumably still be hunting and foraging as well and the concept of depending on one type of food would have been alien to them at first (in fact, it is a rather dangerous strategy). The Hambleton North example is very interesting though. It reminds me of the Rharian Fields, supposed to be the place where grain was first grown after Demeter had taught the people agriculture, and thereafter used as a dance site for the Eleusinian Mysteries... My interest in alcoholic drinks (mostly grain-based) - comes from the literature of a much later period where it weaves around themes of bonding and obligation, sovereignty, poetic intoxication and so on. This intrigues me and it's interesting to consider the evidence from archaelogy, scanty though it is, to give another perspective on the deeper story by showing us the genesis of some of the things we take for granted now, and the very different society that they grew out of. In some parts of medieval Wales there was a tradition of St Brigit's Ale distributed on Feb 1st. I'm planning to incorporate some aspect of this into my personal celebration of this day and it's good to delve into the deeper themes than the ones my 21st century self is aware of surrounding ale - though those were no doubt there too. The other morning I woke up after a disturbed night caused by a head cold. I had a bad headache and was desperate for a cup of tea which always works wonders for me in the morning. It was 9 o' clock and when I staggered into the kitchen to make it I discovered the electricity was off and remembered that I'd had a letter from the company to say it would be off from 9 - 12 that morning. Groaning I went to make a fire and heated a pan of water on the stove. It took about half an hour. When eventually I held a large round cup of steaming hot tea in my hands and drank it felt like a sacred thing and I gave thanks for it. It was qualitively different from the cup of tea I would have made at the flick of a switch in a couple of minutes, reminding me that we have gained something but we have also lost something. It was good to be reminded how food and drink can feel hard-won, can become a sacrament. |
|
|
|
Post by stefan on Dec 7, 2010 10:45:53 GMT -1
Let us first consider some priestess behaviour that is how should I put it, ecstatic/frenzied.
We will all be familiar with the island of priestesses off the coast of France no doubt who took the roof off their temple and re-thatched it in the same day. Whilst this work was being done a victim was forced to drop her bundle of thatch and became the chosen sacrifice. These preistesses are also said to journey to the mainland to copulate with the local males.
We have the Tacitus account of the wagon tour of Freyr or an earth mother called Nerthus. A wagon drawn by sacred cows with ether a goddess idol or a preistess embodying the godess sitting on a stool is conveyed across the land in a fertility rite led by a priest. The wagon is taken to a lake were the attendents are sacrificed so that they cannot speak of what they have seen. Any clues to what that might be? It does not take much working out does it.
Then let us consider for a moment the behaviour of the Dionysion Maenads, who during a crazed orgy no less, tore Orpheus limb from limb and in doing so created his oracle head which was laid within a cave. The behaviour of the Maenads was an outrage to the States of Greece.
The orgiastic Baccus rites may also add some flavor. Perhaps a more appropriate link may be made to the temple priestess prostitutes of the ancient world. However, we start to build a picture here that pagan priestesses did not behave like Chriatian nuns and that sex and death were their domain. Can we agree so far, or have I fallen at the first hurdle?
We also see evidence of strange sexual rites in the far east related to farming based religions humanising the cycle of the harvest crop symbolizing death and resurrection. At this point I would have to explain how the sun works with Venus and how this yearly cycle also plays a part in ancient religious theology and indeed religious ARCHITECTURE, but it would take too long. However I do think I will have to share this at some point, it is important pagan theology (indeed crucial) which I do not hear anyone comfirming they have knowledge of and again you wont get it from a history book.
These rites of sacrificial death and connubium are depicted in the gods of Sumeria, Egypt and India and people ether royal or religious play out the myth of these gods in the cycle of life and death, be they: Osiris/Isis, Tammuz/Inanna, Kali, Shakti/Shiva.
And of course last but by no means least you may choose to throw the baby out with the bath water, but you cannot totally dismiss every aspect of Frazers Golden Bough and it would be narrow minded to do so.
The final link to it all is to consider, did farming bring with it some of its spirituality when it arrived in Britain, these death and ressurection rituals. The clues that it did are various and knotted yet there for the eye to see but too massive to document here. And can it all be linked to the bog bodies and your precious evidence? I believe it can but thats another chapter to this story.
|
|
|
|
Post by potia on Dec 7, 2010 13:14:20 GMT -1
Slender threads to hang this on Stefan imo.
I'm not disputing that sex and death may well have been part of certain rites in the past as indeed they are today in some ways but just because there are myths linking sex with ritual sacrifice it doesn't mean that it did occur. The myths may have been some form of explanation of a symbolic experience and may not have involved actual sacrifice of a man a priestess has had sex with.
That priestesses may have had sex with a range of men I have no problem with. That in some cases that would have been linked with fertility rites I can also accept. I can even accept that on rare occasions the man may have been chosen as a sacrifice but I don't think it would have been a usual occurance. To do something like this for any but the most important reasons would have belittled such a rite and sacrifice in my opinion. Not least of which wasting a valuable resource to a local community - namely fit and healthy men!
|
|
|
|
Post by megli on Dec 7, 2010 14:12:49 GMT -1
Ok, let's try again, again. Let's take ONE of the things you mention above---'sex with priestesses'. Can you phrase this for us into a brief proposal, as specific to epoch and place as possible, about events that you believe to have occurred in the past? |
|
|
|
Post by dreamguardian on Dec 7, 2010 14:56:46 GMT -1
Slings are a very poor second best to the bow. This has something to do with taste and with a reason why the bow becomes out of favour? It has something to do with who used to use it and why others are refusing to use it. Logically abandoning the bow makes no sense whatsoever. And as we all know the bow came back with a vengeance. The sling however became a child's toy. Probably splitting hairs here but.... In a seige, with a skilled person, slings are just as deadly and as accurate as the bow. Much faster to load & resources are easier & closer to hand. |
|
|
|
Post by dreamguardian on Dec 7, 2010 15:03:47 GMT -1
Sorry guys, some of your thinking seems quite rigid, along with being quite rude. I'm not entirely sure you would use such a stance to my face, not for long anyway. This Deiniol character, you've really got a mouth on you sunshine. No one's been rude on this thread but I might be soon. I'm very confident that we would say exactly the same in person. Stefan, you know what us Brythons are about. We're direct and require evidence to substantiate any claims. We demand it of one another and anyone else on this forum. Deiniol character can be vouched by me. He's expressing his opinion which is always well founded. |
|
|
|
Post by deiniol on Dec 7, 2010 15:29:33 GMT -1
Deiniol character can be vouched by me. He's expressing his opinion which is always well founded. Thanks DG  |
|
|
|
Post by redraven on Dec 7, 2010 20:05:39 GMT -1
Why does the fact that there wasn't enough grain to support the population and their animals suggest a ritual use, in particular? Hunter/gatherers are known for using a huge variety of different plants for their food - couldn't they have grown some cereals to use as part of their diet rather than as a staple? The evidence suggests that it was a part of their diet. tooth analysis from cairns in Derbyshire from this period show though, that hard stone ground cereal grain made no impact on their tooth wear, unlike later iron and bronze age tooth samples whose wear patterns display large amounts of ingested cereals shaping tooth wear much differently. Therefore, cereal production was small scale and location specific. Which ticks two boxes for potential ritualistic use. Hambleton North shows subsequent identification of the area as significant enough to place a building to facilitate the transformation of the dead into the ancestors, I cannot think of a clearer marker from this period suggestive of a change into the ritualistic. Finally, we all know about the transformative properties of grain based alcohol, don't we? RR |
|
|
|
Post by redraven on Dec 7, 2010 20:31:47 GMT -1
Stefan,
It's entirely possible that some of the ideas you are attempting to bring here may well have some basis in fact. Unfortunately, there is only aneqdotal evidence to back any of this up. The use and dynamic interactivity of the favoured oral traditions meant that the "power" derived from these acts remained with the individual populations. It wasn't generally culturally available as evidenced by some of your examples. Remember, tribal conflicts in these islands were well established in fairly early times and this tribal ethos was probably more responsible for the warrior Gods. I don't believe there was enough shared ethos for the examples you present to have been universally used here. It's certainly possible individual populations may have held with some of the practices you highlight, but that would have been just that, individual. Therefore, IMO, I don't believe fertility rights here were represented by the examples you have taken the time and trouble to highlight. Would you wish to base a theology upon the speculated interactions of an individual group whose motivations are forever lost to history and have no means to qualify or quantify the conclusions?
RR
|
|
|
|
Post by stefan on Dec 7, 2010 22:03:28 GMT -1
Species will often gravitate towards each other for comfort and succor. They sense a familiarity, a kindred spirit. A powerful bond unites them with a common goal to strive towards.
But this is not always the case. Some species are destined to walk alone. They are just made that way, it is as if they have no choice. They like the idea of integrating but find to their surprise when they look closer nothing familiar with which to pledge an allegiance.
Dear Brython, I think we can all agree this is not my hearth and I do not wish to be the cause of any more discord. However I sincerely bow before your knowledge and do so with no bitterness, or grievance, or the desire for a 'but' and the 'final word'. If I have upset anyone here with an impulsive stab, please forgive my Hasty tongue.
A big thank you to Francis for confirming my fears about the trees. Of all the great knowledge here, there I sense is a knowledge that walks hand in hand with wisdom.
May the roads rise with you all, Hail and Farewell.
In Truth,
Stefan
|
|
|
|
Post by arth_frown on Dec 7, 2010 22:14:27 GMT -1
I don't see why you need to leave?
|
|
|
|
Post by Rion on Dec 8, 2010 0:44:20 GMT -1
That was the most flowery and polite flouncing off I have ever seen.
That being said, I agree with Arth. Just because we don't accept your conclusions doesn't mean you have to leave, just that you should show how you came to them!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 8, 2010 7:09:09 GMT -1
I'm not sure what's happening here.
I posted into this thread because I found it very interesting. The "Warrior Gods versus Farmer Gods" topic is very worth exploring. From the Hebrew myth of Cain and Abel to the question of local folk ways turning into a religion and what was the point at which one became the other, if it did. All these and more make for a very exciting and interesting platform. This thread offered a great deal of promise for discussion and I'm sure I could learn a lot from it.
But if it's just a private scrap I'll keep my nose out.
|
|
|
|
Post by dreamguardian on Dec 8, 2010 9:59:43 GMT -1
I'm not sure what's happening here. I posted into this thread because I found it very interestin .... But if it's just a private scrap I'll keep my nose out. Keep your nose in, mate. Put the thread back on track and explore the area your interested in. |
|
|
|
Post by arth_frown on Dec 8, 2010 14:05:26 GMT -1
Can it be that the warriors cults became more popular when Farming was introduced and tribes had more? The have and the have nots?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 8, 2010 15:44:59 GMT -1
The farmer's were the warriors. The reason that Rome and Greece were so successful was that they had standing well trained armies. They went up against tribes of farmers who had to leave their homes to defend the land. One of the factors involving 1066 was that Harold Godwinson's army was severely depleted at harvest time, by Oct' 14th a large portion of his army was back at the fields. Of course for those guys they had the same god on both sides.
Back to pre-conversion there does seem to have been a tendency to create a god in the image most needed much like today. We need a vegetation god at harvest and a warrior god when there's a burglar at the door so it seems to me that neither the warrior nor the farmer gods would be one more important than the other, just more valuable in the season. Looking back we might see a conflict but to the average Joe of those times woudn't it just be a matter of calling on whoever is most needed at the time?
|
|
|
|
Post by dreamguardian on Dec 8, 2010 16:29:51 GMT -1
... but to the average Joe of those times woudn't it just be a matter of calling on whoever is most needed at the time? Makes sense, especially in a polytheistic world view |
|
