morfe
|
Re: Ritual Landscapes
Aug 01, 2003, 17:06
|
"Trouble is, 'ritual' is a word that people could disagree on the meaning of too...."
Oh give meee a hoooome, where the buffalo's roooooam, and the skies are..
*bang*!
|
Shestu
|
Re: Cursuses
Aug 01, 2003, 17:31
|
Brigante,
Do you plan to roll your theories into one document somewhere? Or should I be printing bits?
The money I am expecting will be a very tidy sum... guess I already paid taxes on it... so it is all free and clear.
The pilgrimage is definitely on!!
Not meaning to subvert this thread just simple yes or no will do 80)
|
BrigantesNation
|
Re: Cursuses
Aug 01, 2003, 18:07
|
I've started creating a document, but this is getting seriously iffy in places. What would you say if I said Britain (including Ireland) was divided into three major zones, these where divided into seven roghly triangular zones, each had a central major site? That's the way this theories cooking at the moment. I have two of the possible centres - Glastonbury and Thornborough - draw a line between them and you will see that the priddy circles are in direct alignment and are a four henge alignment in close proximity. I love testing out oddball theories - this one is Julians own, although I'm not sure he's taken it as far as I have.
On pages 42 and 43 of Julians book he shows a map of Britain. A line is drawn between Landsend and John O Groats. Then a compass point has been put into the middle of the Isle of Man and circle is drawn with Landsend and John O Groats touching its perimeter. Julian then go's on to lightheartedly look at the Legs of Man and the Brigit's Cross and kind of babbles on about Man being the centre and the legs echoing this. I have taken the triangle of the Legs of Man and put it in the Circle - with it's point at John O Groats, Then I've been playing with the Geometry. The first site I "discovered" was Thornborough, of course, but then with a bit more playing I found Glastonbury, which I thought was promising, but the Priddy circles kind of sealed the link. Now I'll think about it a bit more! Trouble is I don't know the Neolithic period at all, so I'm not sure if some of the areas I'm looking at are important.
Well there you have it, my first mystic theory - or at least the start of it :o)
Normally I would not bother with such thinking, it's the very reason I've avoided the Neolithic period so far - too much wooly thinking and no proof. But Thornborough needs me, she's in trouble.
|
BrigantesNation
|
Don't worry
Aug 01, 2003, 18:15
|
|
I gave up smoking 4 days ago!
|
Shestu
|
Re: Cursuses
Aug 01, 2003, 18:18
|
Yes, Brigante,
You must give the every day person a reason to love it! I don't have Julian's book yet...that reminds me to send this site an email... so I don't understand much of the Archaeological comment. However this does not preclude me from understanding the importance of it. Look at our society.... people support and pay for wooly and imaginative diversion. If you are a purist at heart, this may feel like some sort of prostitution. On a more practical note.... what else will cause people to care about your site?
|
Shestu
|
Re: Triangles
Aug 01, 2003, 18:30
|
|
BTW the three triangles spread out across the land, for me, has a massive and powerful feel to it. Could you imagine the immense amount of people on a pilgrimage.... say at Summer Solstice? Can't comment on the technical aspect 80)
|
TomBo
|
Well done!
Aug 01, 2003, 23:02
|
I wish I could...
A Slave
|
FourWinds
|
Re: Ritual Landscapes
Aug 01, 2003, 23:57
|
I think the error here is in the question. Ritual Landscapes Constructed?
I don't think you can do that ... except maybe with the exception of Silbury, but then that's not a landscape.
If such a thing existed then it was crafted with the highlighting of key points in the existing landscape. It wasn't a blank canvas. It's like staring at a hill and realising it looks like a sleeping giant, so you erect a temple to it. Add a cairn on those two hills and they becomes a pair of breasts.
I don't think one was ever created (not by man anyway :-). It's more a case of it being *realised*.
|
nigelswift
|
Re: Ritual Landscapes
Aug 02, 2003, 00:30
|
"Add a cairn on those two hills and they becomes a pair of breasts"
That prompts a question that has been puzzling me:
You and others often talk of female symbolism in the landscape. Obviously, that's a subjective judgement, but have you been prompted to think that often enough that you're pretty sure that the monument builders thought it sometimes? I mean, I could pick out such symbols, and perhaps complementary male ones in built structures, but I haven't seen enough to know whether I was simply seeing what I expected. Hills are mighty female, after all. I suppose the only way to know is to see a large number of sites, which you have. So what's your "feeling" about your feeling?
Additionally, "Add a cairn on those two hills and they becomes a pair of breasts" isn't just symbolism, it's very nearly representational as well. Have you seen many instances where you think that might have been done? And again, how would you judge your judgement on the issue (if you know what I mean)?
Thanks.
|
FourWinds
|
The Paps of Anu
Aug 02, 2003, 09:14
|
Well, there's the Paps of Anu for a start. Anu being Ainé, sister of Grainé the Celtic sun goddess.
The Paps are two wonderful hills in north Cork which, when you drive past, make you very uncomfortable. The actual Irish name for them is a more realistic version translating more to "Anu's Tits".
I believe there's the Paps in Scotland too.
Now this isn't a pair of jubblies, but have a look at this:
http://www.megalithomania.com/show_site.php?site_id=971&image=2929
Right on the false horizon created by the top of the hill is this:
http://www.megalithomania.com/show_site.php?site_id=970&image=2927
Amazingly I seem to be the first person to have spotted this wonderful alignment (for a few thousand years anyway).
I think this one is unmistakable.
|
