|
The Modern Antiquarian Forum » Ritual Landscapes |
Log In to post a reply
|
|
|
|
| Topic View: Flat | Threaded | |
|
nigelswift 8112 posts |
Aug 02, 2003, 09:56
|
||
|
Yes, I can see those might well be seen the same way by local people in ancient times. But what do you feel about the wider landscape – was it’s femaleness strong enough to power a whole religion? I realize this may seem a bit naïve and clodhopping to many people, blasphemous even to some, especially in a site infused with the thoughts of Cope, Gambutas, Dames et al. My forthrightness arises from not having read them, so I have only my own eyes to look through, and on that basis I find it hard to see the female in the landscape with the same degree of clarity or intensity that people suggest ancient people did. Here’s a rather extreme example (from an otherwise pretty sober article) of stuff that leaves me completely cold: “The connection of the goddess to the moon has also prompted the idea of her "three ages" since the moon passes through three distinct phases - new (white), full (red), and waning (black) - corresponding to the three ages of womanhood - virgin, mother, and matriarch/crone. This is also connected to birth, death, and rebirth, which appears prevalent in the belief system [e.g. McLean 1989]. The aforementioned view from the top of Brent Knoll is interesting when this idea is considered. To the northeast is Brean Down, clearly displaying a recumbent figure, with Steep and Flat Holm as 'her' satellites. Across from this first Goddess's feet, is Bleadon Hill, a second, larger, but less marked possible figure lying with her feet to those of Brean Down's. Lying almost head-to-head with Bleadon Hill is the third and largest figure formed by Crook Peak (head and perfect nose), Wavering Down (chest), and the Mendip Hills (body) which appears to fill the rest of the distant horizon going all the way back around to the sea near Bridgwater. Thus the three ages are seen. Glastonbury Tor is away to the east, protected in the curve of the Mendip Goddess, itself a well-known and much revered conical hill. The Black mountains of south Wales are seen to the west, the edge of Exmoor to the far south. Crook Peak is also prominent when viewed from the Cotswold-Severn tomb at Redhill over the Wrington Vale. Here Crook Peak forms the (nippled) chest of a recumbent female whose head is formed by Wavering Down and body/legs by Bleadon Hill. Moreover Banwell Hill can be seen as an arm and Benthills Wood a hand. That the possible natural lunar alignments were influential in the design of Stanton Drew mentioned above can be seen to be supported when the Mother Earth landscape religion is considered. As noted in Section 4, the northeast ring is constructed of the largest, darkest stones over which the midwinter risings are seen. Hence this is the "crone" circle, a megalithic representation of the Crook Peak et al. hills. The enormous main circle contains the second largest stones, perhaps representing the "mother" age. Whether the Cove represents the "virgin", after Brean Down, implying its chambered tomb inspirations were seen as places of rebirth, or whether the south-southwest circle assumed this role over that of one akin to Brent Knoll is unclear. This is of course highly speculative but currently under investigation by the author.” http://www.cems.uwe.ac.uk/~lbull/stanton.html I can’t help thinking that’s all a speculation too far, but when does “too far” start? A simple question really! (Not!) I thought maybe, since you’d seen zillions of sites, you might have a feel for the answer.
|
|||
Moth 5236 posts |
Aug 02, 2003, 10:09
|
||
|
This isn't exactly an answer (makes a change!), but I was always fairly skeptical about these 'ere lanscape figures. Then going to Lewis and seeing 'Sleeping Beauty', I had to modify my thinking! I'm not necessarily saying that the landscape is littered with 'em, just that I'm now convinced that they can sometimes be significant. I've got what most people that have seen it seem to regard as a particularly 'clear' photo of 'Sleeping Beauty' and I hope to borrow a friend's scanner soon so that I can put up a few of my less recent photies. It will certainly be one of them. Actually, if you're interested I'll see if I can do it tonight.... love Moth
|
|||
|
nigelswift 8112 posts |
Aug 02, 2003, 10:11
|
||
|
Naah. Not interested. :)
|
|||
|
Moth 5236 posts |
Aug 02, 2003, 10:21
|
||
|
:-) Sod ya then. I'll do it just to spite ya. love Moth
|
|||
|
Moth 5236 posts |
Aug 02, 2003, 10:24
|
||
|
I'll even put little arrows & stuff on it if your not careful. love M
|
|||
FourWinds 10943 posts |
Aug 02, 2003, 10:30
|
||
|
I agree. Bollox innit (possibly). I can't accept the 'total mother landscape'. I rarely have my flabber as gasted as I did when I saw the slepping lady that I linked to above. I often see *very significant* hills, but they rarely have a truly female apsect. But thten you are playing with *imagery* vs *symbolism*. The imagery one are obvious (by definition) and the symbolic ones speculative. That they probably symbolise(d) something is often plain, but I am not going to say what. How can I? How can anyone do so with authority. This is where I think Julian falls down, just as Dames and everyone else does. They assert the *truth* when they should just suggest ... but I suppose that wouldn't sell books - ooh! Cynical! I use phrases such as 'Mother Hill' purely because people will accept and understand the metaphor, because that's what they're used to. <makes mental note - use "Significant Hill" from now on>
|
|||
|
BrigantesNation 1733 posts |
Aug 02, 2003, 10:37
|
||
Yes, this is how I'm coming to see it, the ritual landscape was there - recognised as having suitable qualities to perform ritual (or even just there) and ancient man therefore built the first ritual structure. As time went by, other ritual structures were built, either with or without a relationship to the first and so on, until you get a significant concentration of such creations, which we are calling here a ritual landscape. It therefore follows that perhaps some of the most ritualised or sacred of landscapes may have been left untouched, and the areas where ritual structures were created may have been on the periphery.
|
|||
|
nigelswift 8112 posts |
Aug 02, 2003, 10:42
|
||
|
Whew, thank goodness it's not just me that thinks that sometimes the emperor has no clothes. And I'm so glad it was you that said it out loud first, as you'll get the heat. This game is plagued by speculation peddlars out to make a quick buck, and some of them get a bit close to fakery... http://www.themodernantiquarian.com/image.php?image_id=687
|
|||
|
nigelswift 8112 posts |
Aug 02, 2003, 10:44
|
||
|
That bloke is highly respectable. I meant this: http://www.themodernantiquarian.com/image.php?image_id=13198
|
|||
|
nigelswift 8112 posts |
Aug 02, 2003, 10:57
|
||
|
"I use phrases such as 'Mother Hill' purely because people will accept and understand the metaphor, because that's what they're used to. <makes mental note - use "Significant Hill" from now on>" I've got to say, that has been totally confusing to me. Everyone talks like that, so I've assumed that everyone thought like that. Actually, it runs through the whole site, giving it the impression that everyone is on the same side of the fence about the issue, and Julian is received wisdom, whereas clearly it's not so cut and dried. If you talk about "significant" hills then I'm totally on message. They're everywhere. In fact they probably all were.
|
| Pages: 14 – [ Previous | 1 … 4 5 6 7 8 9 | Next ] | Add a reply to this topic |
|
|
|
| The Modern Antiquarian Forum Index | |
