Paulus
|
Re: BNP are using our megalithic heritage as th...
Jul 26, 2005, 16:44
|
< Firstly, the Swastika Stone isn't a swastika, is it? >
Certainly is! It was called a 'swastika' as early as 1885 in an article by J. Horsfall Turner on the prehistoric remains of Ilkley Moor, who related it to another near-identical design in Sweden, also known as a swastika at that time.
Swastikas come in varied forms thanks to the morphing effect of history, as well as different cultures giving it their own tribal touch, so to speak. And to me, the sooner the symbol is returned to its archaic nature in the collective social consciousness, the better.
|
fitzcoraldo
|
Re: Another naive question
Jul 26, 2005, 16:48
|
Hopefully you'll not be needing your flameproof jacket.
I can only speak for myself but I guess that most people here are appalled by the BNP latching onto something we really love.
As for "Is there any proof that magalithic man was particualrly open to foreigners, or that there was mass migration at the time?"
There is a lot of evidence to show that Our islands and the mainland of Europe maintained good communications and maintained a sophisticated trade network.
As for migrations, I don't really know. People had to get here somehow, so we all originally came from somewhere else. It's just a case of some of us arrived a little later than others.
We know that there are certain common threads in British, Irish & European prehistory, threads that extend well past the borders of Europe, which would also imply that good communications were being maintained between our island and continental Europe.
Of course there was no real notion of Englishness until around the time of Alfred.
|
baza
|
Re: Another naive question
Jul 26, 2005, 17:25
|
>Is there any proof that magalithic man was particualrly open to foreigners, or that there was mass migration at the time?
Not much.
Genetic analysis of Ireland's smallest mammal, the pygmy shrew, suggests it was introduced from the Pyrennees by man in the Mesolithic.
I'm not aware of any proof of openness or migration during the neolithic, apart from similarities in style of some megalithic structures with those of the Iberian peninsular, Brittany and spreading right across Europe and beyond.
Come the Bronze Age, it's assumed that Cornwall was the major supplier of tin to Western Europe and Phoenicia, simply because very little tin can be found anywhere else in this part of the world.
The Amesbury Archer, who lived in the Early Bronze Age and whose grave was recently discovered 3 miles from Stonehenge, was a settler from the Alps.
So, there probably was much trade and comings-and-goings in prehistoric times, we just don't have much hard evidence.
Baz
|
baza
|
Re: BNP are using our megalithic heritage as th...
Jul 26, 2005, 17:28
|
Paulus, you have your opinion and I have mine.
I'm sticking to mine.
:o)
Baz
|
Paulus
|
Re: BNP are using our megalithic heritage as th...
Jul 26, 2005, 20:55
|
|
That's fair enough Baz. I respect your opinions...
|
andygreyweather
|
Re: BNP are using our megalithic heritage as th...
Jul 26, 2005, 22:59
|
|
I heard Trinny and Suzanna were going to give 'em a make over and that's why their old leader topped 'imself.
|
morfe
|
|
"Our kids don't respect their elders because their elders are arseholes."
No thanks for speaking out of turn for 'our kids' and us 'elders.'
"In fact the swastika is the most powerful symbol known"
I don't know if that is true. And if it does have power, it is because of the millions dead beneath its shadow.
Now please stop. I'm asking nicely. You ego isn't the only 'truth' in this world, there are a billion little truths in my one street where I live, and you don't appear to have a handle on any of them. So please, why are you self-aggrandising and preaching to the people on this forum? All it seems that you are doing is 'displaying a need to be noticed.'
|
Moth
|
Re: Mike
Jul 27, 2005, 00:14
|
>All it seems that you are doing is 'displaying a need to be noticed.'
Not aimed specifically at you Morfe, but all we're doing is noticing him. Every time Mike spouts a bit of piffle that particularly gets under the skin of one of us, there we go. He's very good at getting under skin, but the only way to even vaguely stand a chance of getting him to stop is by not doing it. At all. (Except possibly on the rare occasions when he actually says something not designed to get under someone's skin....)
I've pretty much managed for a while now. I don't read Mike's posts any more - I only read the replies in case anyone's talking about summat else. Think I'll haveta start avoiding reading the replies too, coz they're just the same old circular stuff. (I really only read yours coz I always find what you have to say interesting.)
I wish I could make meself read only the bits of the forum that he doesn't post to at all, but there are so few. :^(
love
Moth
|
doktoratomik
|
Re: Mike
Jul 27, 2005, 08:05
|
> He's very good at getting under skin
It also seems to feed his ego when he manages to annoy people. I just find him amusing, so his posts just serve to entertain me. There's really no point getting wound up by the wibbling of some mentally ill bloke on an public message board.
|
juamei
|
Re: Mike
Jul 27, 2005, 09:27
|
Well said that man.
Stop feeding the troll and the troll will die...
|
