|
Post by Adam on Dec 28, 2010 19:44:15 GMT -1
|
|
|
Post by megli on Dec 28, 2010 23:32:44 GMT -1
Ha! Peter Berresford Ellis is a romantic pan-Celticist, and his books (one tolerable little thing on Cornish aside) are full of basic errors and huge runnings-ahead of the facts. I get the strong impression he never checks anything he writes, and he is not taken seriously by any professional in the field. As 'Peter Tremayne' he does the Sister Fidelma mysteries, which take the cake for the 'least accurate portrait of early medieval Ireland EVAH!' in my book. That the 'dru' element in 'druid' means 'immersion' is a new one on me {raised eyebrow}....far more likely to be a prefix dru-- meaning 'through, thorough, complete', like Latin 'per-', so that a *dru-wid-s is 'one whose knowledge is full, complete.' Sorry to carp, but this is a classic example of why PBE is shit: 'The very name Druid is composed of two Celtic word roots which have parallels in Sanskrit.' Sounds like it's meant to be meaningful and impressive, doesn't it, hinting at an ancient kinship between east and west? But *of course* 'celtic root words' have bloody parallels in Sanskrit, because they are both I-E languages. The *-uid 'know' root is incredibly frequent in I-E descendant languages---including English---and he's just plain wrong about the dru-. So the Celtic knowledgeable class had the Celtic version of the I-E word for 'know' in their title! What do you expect?! Jesus Christ on a bike... 'Professor Calvert Watkins of Harvard, one of the leading linguistic experts in his field, has pointed out that of all the Celtic linguistic remains, Old Irish represents an extraordinarily archaic and conservative tradition within the Indo-European family. Its nominal and verbal systems are a far truer reflection of the hypothesized parent tongue, from which all Indo-European languages developed, than are Classical Greek or Latin. The structure of Old Irish, says Professor Watkins, can be compared only with that of Vedic Sanskrit or Hittite of the Old Kingdom.' This sounds impressive unless you actually know Old Irish and have read Watkins, in which case you recognise it as a distortion of his line and as a GROSS misrepresentation of the linguistic facts. All sorts of awful phonological and morphological things have happened to Old Irish which make it a long way from Common Celtic (its 'mother') let alone I-E (its 'grandmother'). Here is an ancient thing I wrote about Old Irish, for comparison: mvtabilitie.blogspot.com/2008/09/also-known-as-most-demanding.htmlAnd listing six words in Old Irish that have Sanskrit cognates is moronic if you are trying to argue for a particularly close cultural connection---you could just as well do the same with bloody Armenian, or Tocharian B, which no one would want to do because they don't have the New Age woo-woo cachet the Celts do. This whole meme has its roots in a kind of queasy romantic orientalism: the 'East' is ancient and mysterious and in touch with primal things, and so, according to this rather silly view, is the 'Celtic' west. Therefore, let's big up the 'archaism' of Celtic tradition and make some dubious and ahistorical comparisons. This was sort of in fashion in the academy until around 1975 (Myles Dillon's 'Celt and Hindu' of 1973 is the classic in this genre, and Dillon was a great scholar but he got a bit carried away with this one), but it's been blasted out of the water for decades, long before McCone's 'Pagan Past and Christian Present in Early Irish Literature' was published in 1990. The latter nevertheless represents a very amusing demonstration of how daft the idea was: after all, why read a poem---the 'song of Amairgin', for example---composed in c. 650 AD in Old Irish in terms of a poem composed in Sanskrit a millennium previously and FIVE THOUSAND MILES away??! When you put it like that (and McCone did), it all seems barmy. Incidentally the argument also depends on the idea that Irish is the 'most archaic' of the surviving 'Celtic' linguistic traditions...and that's not *necessarily* so. This is not to say that Irish tradition does not have archaic features; that it didn't have an I-E inheritance, especially as regards the ideological role of the poet; that there aren't common mythic themes to be found across various I-E mythologies. I've used Vedic elements myself to mortar fake Celtic neo-myths. But the Vedic-Celtic thing was exaggerated in the academy sixty years ago, and has been inflated to grotesque, preposterous porportions here by silly old Ellis who needs to get his head out of his asana. Might I note that he describes himself as a Celtic scholar and yet can't spell Túatha Dé Danann correctly, and that there if there were such things as 'ancient Celtic astrologers', *we know nothing at all about them*---a subject on which I have literally written the effing book, neatly skewering PBE in the process. AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHH.
|
|
|
Post by Tegernacus on Dec 29, 2010 6:13:41 GMT -1
even more pertinent (or impertient) because Phil Gromm is obsessed with the notion that druidry is some kind of offshoot of Tibetan religion, and that, even though he's made a good living off ye olde religion since the 60s, it's really quite boring and you should all be looking east for the true meaning of druidry. At least, that's the impression I get from reading his blog. Personally I've had a gut-full of bad academics, dodgy archaeological theory, twisted genetics, all of whom change to suit the zeitgeist and book contracts and hardly any of which just stick to the plain facts! Then again, that's why we are here. and then again, if it wasn't for proper academics like Megli then we wouldn't KNOW that it was dodgy. So hurrah and thank you and we love you lol
|
|
|
Post by redraven on Dec 29, 2010 6:22:13 GMT -1
We'll take it you're not impressed then Megli? RR
|
|
|
Post by megli on Dec 29, 2010 10:18:33 GMT -1
I LOATHE him.
|
|
|
Post by Adam on Dec 29, 2010 10:20:08 GMT -1
oops (reaches for blood pressure meds) :-)
|
|
|
Post by megli on Dec 29, 2010 10:30:30 GMT -1
*BOOM*
{short sharp shower of offal...}
|
|
|
Post by crowman on Dec 29, 2010 12:38:13 GMT -1
Thats the problem with modern druidry, when you scratch the surface its all down to one mans beliefs clouding the water (and judgement) of those that are trying to find a connection. Thats why i feel Brython are different to anything else ive encountered, theres an honest truth about what your trying to do here; its not just someones opinion... thanks for posting, this is one of the many threads that makes things clearer for me
|
|
|
Post by Adam on Dec 29, 2010 14:38:16 GMT -1
Thats the problem with modern druidry, when you scratch the surface its all down to one mans beliefs clouding the water (and judgement) of those that are trying to find a connection. Thats why i feel Brython are different to anything else ive encountered, theres an honest truth about what your trying to do here; its not just someones opinion... thanks for posting, this is one of the many threads that makes things clearer for me Aye Crowman, I know what you mean... I found here what I went looking for in Druidry and failed to find... a community not afraid to thrash out truth rather than rely on the blind assertion that all that matters is "my truth"... one need never feel afraid of being criticised here if one is posting ideas or suggestions... they may get ripped to shreds but it is in the spirit of honest intellectual and spiritual enquiry (though I do worry about poor megli's blood pressure sometimes ;D ;D ;D )
|
|
|
Post by megli on Dec 29, 2010 14:54:00 GMT -1
When it was checked in July it was 'worryingly high' according to the doctor! Now back to normal, I'm glad to say.
|
|
|
Post by redraven on Dec 29, 2010 15:40:16 GMT -1
When it was checked in July it was 'worryingly high' according to the doctor! Now back to normal, I'm glad to say. Playing with fire won't help!! ;D RR
|
|
|
Post by nellie on Dec 29, 2010 18:11:55 GMT -1
I think I've read this piece before... Since joining this forum I've started to realise how very stupid I am lol! The internet is a wonderful thing... but how do you (as a layperson) know what is bullshit and what is actually based on fact? (scratches head in an ape like fashion)
|
|
|
Post by Tegernacus on Dec 29, 2010 18:16:12 GMT -1
you've probably read this piece before because it is a standard Brython response lol. I think Megli should write a generic disclaimer to be posted up any time a book or piece of research is mentioned.
How do you know what is bullshit and based on fact? It's not easy. If you look in the library section of this forum, you will see a thread on recommended books, they are a good place to start. Outside that, on the general "internet", well... the good stuff is there, but you need a really good bullshit filter. Which is an acquired talent, and a skill that not all of us possess. (I don't... but if someone on this forum recommends something as worthwhile, then that's good enough for me)
|
|
|
Post by dreamguardian on Dec 29, 2010 18:21:54 GMT -1
even more pertinent (or impertient) because Phil Gromm is obsessed with the notion that druidry is some kind of offshoot of Tibetan religion, and that, even though he's made a good living off ye olde religion since the 60s, it's really quite boring and you should all be looking east for the true meaning of druidry. At least, that's the impression I get from reading his blog. No, you're quite right in your assessment, Teg. You would of thought a leader of a modern druid order would of looked closer to home Seconded
|
|
|
Post by potia on Dec 29, 2010 20:46:51 GMT -1
I think I've read this piece before... Since joining this forum I've started to realise how very stupid I am lol! The internet is a wonderful thing... but how do you (as a layperson) know what is bullshit and what is actually based on fact? (scratches head in an ape like fashion) Nellie I know how you feel. Some of these guys make me feel very stupid sometimes You learn through trial and error and asking questions. Keep an open mind about everything and question anything you read against the bits you know are reliable.
|
|
|
Post by Adam on Dec 29, 2010 21:13:38 GMT -1
I think I've read this piece before... Since joining this forum I've started to realise how very stupid I am lol! The internet is a wonderful thing... but how do you (as a layperson) know what is bullshit and what is actually based on fact? (scratches head in an ape like fashion) Nellie I know how you feel. Some of these guys make me feel very stupid sometimes You learn through trial and error and asking questions. Keep an open mind about everything and question anything you read against the bits you know are reliable. Hey, I regularly get megli'd... I'm getting to quite enjoy it... I might just start asking stupid questions intentionally ;D ;D ;D
|
|
|
Post by megli on Dec 29, 2010 21:17:53 GMT -1
Nellie I know how you feel. Some of these guys make me feel very stupid sometimes You learn through trial and error and asking questions. Keep an open mind about everything and question anything you read against the bits you know are reliable. Hey, I regularly get megli'd... I'm getting to quite enjoy it... I might just start asking stupid questions intentionally ;D ;D ;D I do do it *for a living* lol
|
|
|
Post by Rion on Dec 29, 2010 21:20:06 GMT -1
Ha! ... AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHH. ROFL.
|
|
|
Post by dreamguardian on Dec 29, 2010 21:40:12 GMT -1
... You learn through trial and error and asking questions. Keep an open mind about everything and question anything you read against the bits you know are reliable. Potia is right. When you realise that you've been in error, no matter how dear the ideas or concepts are to you, be prepared tp acknowledge it & let them go. It's very liberating and what I've had to do a great deal over time.
|
|