FourWinds
|
World Hills
May 09, 2003, 10:29
|
Do we need a category for "World Hills"? Or some such similar thang?
Although Knocknarea has a large cairn on the top (Meave's cairn ... and it's a whopper!) and the ruins of many more, as well as hut sites the hill is important in its own right. This is true of many other hills as well (Silbury for instance - describing Silbury as an Artificial Mound doesn't really do it justice does it!?). These others (Croagh Patrick) is another are massively influential on their surroundings and the lives of the people that live/lived nearby.
Surely they deserve some *big* recognition!
What do y'all think?
|
nigelswift
|
Re: World Hills
May 09, 2003, 13:00
|
Shouldn't the name be related to use, so far as is known....
say, Ceremonial...
and distinguish them from other, smaller ceremonial mounds...
say, Hills...
so, Ceremonial Hills...
?
|
Chris Collyer
|
Re: World Hills
May 09, 2003, 15:53
|
Well there's a 'sacred hill' category already - although of course whether any particular hill was sacred or not is a matter of opinion.
-Chris
|
Chris Collyer
|
Re: World Hills
May 09, 2003, 15:58
|
sorry, that sounded a bit blunt - it wasn't meant to :-)
-Chris
(note to self - must remember to use smileys more often)
|
FourWinds
|
Re: World Hills
May 09, 2003, 18:00
|
Indeed there is, but "Sacred Hill" doesn't cut it for me. Who are we to say what was sacred in antiquity?
Although Silbury could be a 'Ceremonial Hill' that doesn't do either really. The classification of 'World Hill' covers a much broader range of hills that were part of the landscape of many sites, but not necessarily a site themselves or their importance is only betrayed by other sites refering to it.
|
notjamesbond
|
Re: World Hills
May 09, 2003, 18:15
|
|
These places would be landmarks in any time or place. Take for example somewhere like The Wrekin in Shropshire, it's a natural hill on it's own but has been for years a place of importance in that region. The amount of folklore around it certinaly hints at that. I think a world hill section would be a good addition ;-)
|
no_neck
|
Re: World Hills
May 09, 2003, 18:23
|
|
At Discover Odin, Julian referred to a lot of sacred mountains as World Hills but I've never been able to find them called that in any books. He also called Silbury 'the great world hill that spies us' in that new Sunn track. I presume it comes from the concept of the world tree Yggdrassil that he's always on about. So it could be a good idea. But would they have to have monuments around them, or else it could come across a bit Michael Dames.
|
no_neck
|
Re: World Hills
May 09, 2003, 18:24
|
|
Sorry, all you Michael Dames fans. I didn't mean it like that. he's excellent.
|
nigelswift
|
Re: World Hills
May 09, 2003, 18:51
|
Shouldn't there be a distinction between man-made (best described as "mounds") and natural but significant, best described as hills)?
But if so, mound isn't a big enough word to describe the likes of Silbury.
|
FourWinds
|
Re: World Hills
May 09, 2003, 19:38
|
Slag Dames off all you like :-) I can't stand his cods-wallop personally.
No, they don't *have* to have monuments around them, but they are a useful indicator as to the antiquity of the importancethat a hill was held in.
Obviously folklore comes in big time too.
Having just spent two days skirting Knocknarea in Co. Sligo (which has over 100 passage tombs within site of it) I feel the need to distinguish it as a separate thing.
The fact that Silbury is actually a mound is of great improtance and perhaps it shouldn't necessarily be clumped in with the natural ones.
|
