|
Post by megli on Jan 18, 2011 15:42:48 GMT -1
Of course that's possible: but given that Irish Brigit goes etymologically straight back to *Briganti, IDENTICAL to the British one, I could observe that it's just as possible, indeed more so, that British Briganti could likewise have been associated with 'a festival of spring and/or ewe's milk'? We don't have ANY surviving pre-Christian records of ancient British festivals, so the fact such a festival isn't recorded means sod all in and of itself. The Irish evidence---a closely similar culture nearby---is precious in such circumstances like these when we have to work with fragments. Why bring in other completely hypothetical local deities? if there's a single British goddess you want to associate this festival with, then Briganti is she, for obvious reasons. And again, Briganti wasn't just a northern goddess, though she was clearly important up there. (And what do you think you're doing if not following a 'Celtic' tradition? ) In other words: Briganti was a real, genuine important British goddess, with a primarily northern cult-focus but also attested more widely---widely and familarly enough to have two rivers a long way from one another named after her! Old Irish Brigit goes back to an identically named goddess, Briganti, and the Irish Brigantes may have been a scion of the British ones. (This has been suggested by serious scholars). Irish Brigit, and presumably her older form, the ancient Irish goddess Briganti, was associated with a lactation/spring festival. Why shouldn't the British Briganti have been likewise?! We don;t know about any ancient British festivals, but absence of evidence is not evidence of absence---it was a pre-literate culture. Frankly reconstructionists swallow hypotheses far less plausible than that all the time.
|
|
|
Post by deiniol on Jan 18, 2011 15:43:27 GMT -1
Sorry, this is one of my main pet peeves. "Gaelic" and "Celtic" are not synonyms. "Celtic" does not mean "Irish". The Irish were Celts, but not all Celts were Irish. The Gauls were Celts. The Britons were Celts. The speakers of bloody Lepontic and Galatian were Celts. What unifies all of these groups of people is that they were not sodding Irish.
The whole point of Brython is to follow Celtic traditions as best we are able: British Celtic. Brigantī, being amply attested in Britain, with a robustly British name, is almost certainly indigenous. It's not about "accepting Bridget", but using what tools we have to investigate the British deity Brigantī. One of those tools happens to be examining cognate figures in other traditions.
|
|
|
Post by megli on Jan 18, 2011 15:52:35 GMT -1
Sorry, this is one of my main pet peeves. "Gaelic" and "Celtic" are not synonyms. "Celtic" does not mean "Irish". The Irish were Celts, but not all Celts were Irish. The Gauls were Celts. The Britons were Celts. The speakers of bloody Lepontic and Galatian were Celts. What unifies all of these groups of people is that they were not sodding Irish. The whole point of Brython is to follow Celtic traditions as best we are able: British Celtic. Brigantī, being amply attested in Britain, with a robustly British name, is almost certainly indigenous. It's not about "accepting Bridget", but using what tools we have to investigate the British deity Brigantī. One of those tools happens to be examining cognate figures in other traditions. Yes!! Took the words out of my mouth.
|
|
|
Post by crowman on Jan 18, 2011 16:03:36 GMT -1
Yep I get the fact we're following a Celtic tradition and I'm fully aware Gaelic and Celtic aren't synonymous however all I'm asking is why we're celebrating imbolc at all then? I don't want to fall out or cause a scene but I'm really not comfortable with bridget, I'm finding it really difficult to understand this concept. Some of the forum seem to follow their instincts while others seem to follow historical research... This is what I love about this forum, but at the moment you're asking me to put blind faith in an Irish or predominantly northern deity which at this moment means nothing to me without knowing the connection... Isn't that the biggest problem with mainstream neo-paganism? I can't compete intellectually with any of the cf members so please don't lambast me for this... Spring is important but Bridget and imbolc are gaelic
|
|
|
Post by megli on Jan 18, 2011 16:15:13 GMT -1
Briganti is both British and Irish---a deity found on both sides of the Irish sea, like Lugus, like Noudons. She is a well-attested British deity, worshipped by our British ancestors, here in Britain, who in a Romano-British way put up numerous Romano-British dedications to her and made lovely Romano-British carvings of her. She's as solid a Brythonic goddess as you can get. I don't get why this is hard? As for festivals: it is simply a sad accident of the survival of the evidence from Celtic and Roman Britain that we have no information about what festivals our ancient British forebears celebrated. That information just hasn't survived. That does not mean they did not celebrate any festivals. Of course they must have done. The medieval Welsh evidence suggests clearly that the beginning of May was important (as in Ireland) but was felt to be more uncanny here than there. So do we just celebrate Calan Mai? Since we do not have the luxury of knowing what festivals the ancient Brits (or particular groups of ancient Brits) celebrated, we have to reconstruct them tentatively and hypothetically using the best available parallels and cognates from related, nearby cultures. And for ancient Celtic Britain, that means a) Celtic Ireland and b) Celtic Gaul. As Deiniol has argued, you can interpret the Gallo-Roman Coligny calendar to suggest a beginning-of-winter festival related to Irish Samhain, which we might adopt; the Irish evidence also clearly suggests festivals dedicated to Briganti (Brigit) and Lugus (Lug) at the starts of February and August respectively. We know from good, solid, archaeological and literary evidence that both these gods were worshipped without any doubt by the ancient Britons, and it's perfectly possible---indeed, IMO very likely---that here in Britain they also had similar festivals dedicated to them at the same times. These festivals are hypothetical, as I say, but they are hypothesised on very good evidence. And as it happens you can't 'hypothetically' celebrate something---one imagines putting imaginary offerings out or whatever---you've just got to go for it. (Remember Rigantona is a 'hypothetical' goddess---there are no inscriptions to her or mentions of her in ancient texts; her name is simply reconstructed as the ancestor of Welsh Rhiannon via modern scientific linguistics. Briganti(a), on the other hand, has lots of inscriptions and some lovely carvings: we can see they revered her enough to spend hard cash on dedications to her. I get the impression you've fallen wonderfully in love with Rigantona and the idea of celebrating another deity is clouded with associations of unfaithfulness.
|
|
|
Post by crowman on Jan 18, 2011 16:20:36 GMT -1
Thanks, i'll try and get to know her more....
|
|
|
Post by deiniol on Jan 18, 2011 16:46:55 GMT -1
I think that crowman has stumbled on something of an underlying "tension" within the entire Brython project: to what degree is it reconstruction?
If we choose to limit ourselves solely to evidence which is unambigously both pre-Christian and British, we're left with little more than a list of deity names and what little archaeology can tell us. Filling in the blanks then basically comes down to personal feeling. Much like Restall-Orrism coupled with a catalogue of Romano-British inscriptions.
Alternately, we can look at related and descendant traditions where belief and practice is perhaps recorded or preserved in greater detail. We can examine these related and descendant traditions and then make an educated guess on what might have occurred in pre-Christian Britain. This is actually how we know about a number of major deities: Taranis is not attested in any inscription in Britain. However, we have a number of inscriptions to him from Gaul and the cognate Tuireann from Ireland: on this basis we can make the educated guess that he was also worshipped in Britain.
It is these educated guesses with which we can fill in the blanks, those areas not recoverable by archaeology or inscriptional evidence. In this case, we know that at least one tribe Britons worshipped a deity named Brigantī. That forms of her name are found all over the Celtic world, from Ireland to Switzerland, we can make the educated guess that she was worshipped by or at least known to all Britons rather than being a purely local divinity. A similar case here is Lugus: while we have little direct evidence of his worship in pre-Christian Britain, we have records of him all over the rest of the Celtic-speaking world, as well as literary evidence from Christian times (Lleu Llaw Gyffes)- from this we can assume that he was another "pan-Celtic" deity.
Now, there is one festival which we can be relatively certain was dedicated to Brigantī. The evidence for this festival is found in Ireland. However, it does not seem implausible that a similar festival was celebrated in Britain. After all, I think we can agree that in our climate the first signs of spring are certainly something to celebrate!
Perhaps we should stop calling the festival "Imbolc"? (While we're at it, we might as well forget about the "ewe-milk" thing: it's linguistically implausible.)
|
|
|
Post by dreamguardian on Jan 18, 2011 16:49:22 GMT -1
Just start completely all over again & forget past associations.
So ... quoting megli Briganti is both British and Irish---a deity found on both sides of the Irish sea, like Lugus, like Noudons. She is a well-attested British deity, worshipped by our British ancestors, here in Britain, who in a Romano-British way put up numerous Romano-British dedications to her and made lovely Romano-British carvings of her. She's as solid a Brythonic goddess as you can get.
and ....
the Irish evidence also clearly suggests festivals dedicated to Briganti (Brigit) and Lugus (Lug) at the starts of February and August respectively. We know from good, solid, archaeological and literary evidence that both these gods were worshipped without any doubt by the ancient Britons, and it's perfectly possible---indeed, IMO very likely---that here in Britain they also had similar festivals dedicated to them at the same times.
These festivals are hypothetical, as I say, but they are hypothesised on very good evidence. And as it happens you can't 'hypothetically' celebrate something---one imagines putting imaginary offerings out or whatever---you've just got to go for it.
Watch this space for a different take & experiment on when we brythons will celebrate imbolc this year!
|
|
|
Post by Lee on Jan 18, 2011 17:00:59 GMT -1
Nellie,
i would suggest that you do what you think is right in terms of honouring Rigantona/Rhiannon at this time BUT also include Briganti. You dont have a relationship as yet, but consider this the first steps towards that; not so much a hug in the street, more the shakeing hands and 'hello, how do you do' type of thing.
Brighid did nothing for me either, but since including her anyway she is becoming more central to my own practice.
|
|
|
Post by Lee on Jan 18, 2011 17:06:09 GMT -1
yes please.
Imbolc doesnt seem at all right to be used and february eve is a bit too secular sounding. is there a way to reconstruct a Briganti version of 'Eponalia'? Brigantalia?
*awaits the audible gasps and weeping at the sheer bloody butchery of linguistics*
|
|
|
Post by megli on Jan 18, 2011 17:08:56 GMT -1
Perhaps we should stop calling the festival "Imbolc"? (While we're at it, we might as well forget about the "ewe-milk" thing: it's linguistically implausible.) Quite. Why don't we call it 'Ambiwolkia' and be done with it?! (or the Utsmolgia...but they both sound like grim Hungarian spa-resorts.)
|
|
|
Post by megli on Jan 18, 2011 17:10:06 GMT -1
yes please. Imbolc doesnt seem at all right to be used and february eve is a bit too secular sounding. is there a way to reconstruct a Briganti version of 'Eponalia'? Brigantalia? *awaits the audible gasps and weeping at the sheer bloody butchery of linguistics* Lee, My eyeballs have just burst. I had to wipe the fluid off the screen to type.
|
|
|
Post by redraven on Jan 18, 2011 17:11:24 GMT -1
In a purely pragmatic approach, I tend to find a visit to the area associated with any deity tends to clear things for me. It's akin to traveling to someone to introduce yourself at their convenience, and it tends to set the intention off on in the right direction, I've never been left without some sort of interaction taking place.
RR
|
|
|
Post by crowman on Jan 18, 2011 17:16:27 GMT -1
Deinol you have magnificently put into words what i was trying, in my rubbish round the houses way, to get at, I wasn't trying to be obstructive towards the idea of briganti i was merely stating that for me at least Bridget (not briganti) is Irish and therefore I can't as yet connect with her. I experimented with rigatona at midwinter and enjoyed the experience, ok I made some mistakes along the way but I felt I was ritualising for a purpose. I was excited recently when I noticed the first green shoots in my garden and rightly (to me) felt that my ritual had worked. I'm not opposed to the concept of briganti or imbolc but just wanted to explore the suggestion that different tribes may have had a different focus deity that meant something to them
|
|
|
Post by megli on Jan 18, 2011 17:18:32 GMT -1
You could do worse than noχs Brigantiās, 'Briganti's Night'...
|
|
|
Post by crowman on Jan 18, 2011 17:19:39 GMT -1
And redraven without sounding sycophantic I totally agree about visiting her... I have walked in Yorkshire but didn't bump into her on that occasion
|
|
|
Post by arth_frown on Jan 18, 2011 17:39:52 GMT -1
The feast of Bridget works well for me or whatever that is in Brython.
This thread shows the ills of neo-paganism. Could you imagine people of a tribe started to say nah! I'm not celebrating this god or that goddess anymore. Picking and choosing what,where,why and how. What you end up with is neo paganism. Nothing in common, but the name of the tribe i.e pagan What bonds a community is it's common goals, it's commonality.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 18, 2011 18:09:57 GMT -1
the gods to me are a kind of real illusion (cf. Hindu 'maya') that emerges from the place where natural phenomena set up and are reinforced and haloed by ancient archetypal reverberations deep within the human psyche. Neatly put. That helps to clarify my own thinking.
|
|
|
Post by redraven on Jan 18, 2011 18:12:46 GMT -1
An examination of what we actually know about the Brigantes tribe may be instructive here. Tacitus described them as the most "populous" tribe in Britain. Dedications to Brigantia have been found as far north as as the Tyne Solway line in the north and down as far as the Peak district in the south. Stuart Laycock asserts that there may have been many regional sub-groups. the Carvetti from the area of Carlisle, the Setantii of the Fylde, speculatively the Gabranovices of east Yorkshire, the Tectoverdi and Lopocares in the region of Hadrian's wall and the Latenses in the area around Leeds. The fact that these groups chose to be grouped under the title of the Brigantes shows that the tuteledge of this patron Goddess was enough to allow them to share this title. Therefore, it would be reasonable to assume that such a large area to be described as Brigantian leads one to suspect that the neighbours around this vast area would have been well versed about this particular Goddess. Therefore the fact that she is not so well felt nowadays says more about modern culture than the actuality of those times. Brigantian territory contained large upland areas with many farmsteads located at between 200 and 300 metres above sea level. There is also a lot of evidence of arable farming at low level, with examples of possibly pre Roman beehive querns being found in North east Yorkshire. So the spread of living conditions at different levels of elevation leads one to speculate that the markers used as the indicators for seasonal change would not have been chronologically consistent. And therein lies a possible reason why festivals may not have been celebrated at specific times of the year. Growth at lower levels would almost certainly have preceeded growth at higher levels. Therefore, I would suggest that this discrepency would mean that a fixed date would not have been a logical or practical approach. My own UPG suggests that the festival would have been marked by evidented growth at both levels, thus allowing a certain flexibilty of actual dates. Of course, this is not condusive with the fixed calenders favoured by the Abrahamic religions, but that doesn't negate them as actually having happened. It just demonstrates that certain pragmatic approach some of us attribute to our Brythonic ancestors.
RR
|
|