jonmor
|
Re: Neolithic women
Mar 11, 2017, 07:03
|
|
tjj wrote:
But what about our own ancient Britons - nothing ever written down. I would imagine their role was .....
There is a possibility that women were largely responsible for developing very early Neolithic philosophical ideas in Northern Europe: There doesn't appear to be any direct evidence to show who did the thinking.
When we did the research into the geocentric hypothesis, one of the evidence trails appeared to suggest that women may have held central roles. That's why the 2011 novel describes women in the central authority roles and also why the 2013 non-fiction book features women performing the philosophical checking tasks.
But there wasn't enough interest in the central hypothesis, so nothing was done to develop the reasoning behind that secondary hypothesis.
|
tiompan
|
Re: Neolithic women
Mar 11, 2017, 10:09
|
"There is a possibility that women were largely responsible for developing very early Neolithic philosophical ideas in Northern Europe: "
I'd like to see the evidence for attributing gender to any ideas from any prehistoric period .
"There doesn't appear to be any direct evidence to show who did the thinking. "
How could there be ?
|
Littlestone
|
Re: Neolithic women
Mar 11, 2017, 10:35
|
|
tiompan wrote: Littlestone wrote: tiompan wrote:
Fwiw ,watch out for an “actually it's Rudston “ from those who have a problem with mis-spilling/typos .
Thank you Mr t - duly corrected. Perhaps you'd also like to do the same by making a little more effort scrutinising your own comments for punctuation, spelling and grammatical inaccuracies before posting them. Is a 'mis-spilling' something that happens between the milking parlour and the kitchen for example? :-)
I couldn't care less about your mis-spulling or typos , it was perfectly obvious what was intended . Although not everyone takes that attitude .
mis-spulling?
I’ve taken a leaf out of your book Mt t and Googled ‘spulling’ (but without much success I’m afraid). Looks like the word is up for grabs, so I’d like to respectfully suggest that it could be applied to those (students, forum uses etc) who ‘spull’ the internet for information and then present that info as their own. We could say to such people, “You’ve just spulled that, it’s not your own work at all.” Or, “Stop spulling, do your own research and give us some original thoughts.”
Not sure how we’d use mis-spulling though (other than perhaps as the misuse of spulling. :-)
|
tiompan
|
Re: Neolithic women
Mar 11, 2017, 11:02
|
What word do suggest for those that actually do their own work that can't be found on the net until presented in places like here . As for those that do actually spull we should out them as soon as possible , if you know of any examples please provide them .
Maybe we have another word for those that accuse others of spulling but can't back it up . I suggest Frouncers .
|
jonmor
|
Re: Neolithic women
Mar 11, 2017, 19:51
|
|
tiompan wrote:
I'd like to see the evidence for attributing gender to any ideas from any prehistoric period .
It's something I'll develop one day George. There's no direct evidence, so the other stuff related to other monuments should come first. In the meantime, I've done the novel and the non-fiction so that it doesn't conflict with what comes later.
|
tjj
|
Re: St Patrick and Sheelagh
Mar 17, 2017, 09:37
|
Post Neolithic ... but staying with the theme of duality.
http://blog.mythicalireland.com/2017/03/saint-patrick-was-married-his-wifes.html
(Quote)
Saint Patrick was married - his wife's name was Sheelah and St. Sheelah's Day was celebrated on March 18th
The revelation in today's Irish Times that Saint Patrick had a wife whose name was Sheelah is tremendously exciting for a number of reasons. Shane Lehane, a folklorist from University College Cork (UCC) has discovered pre-Famine references to a widespread belief that Saint Patrick had a wife and that St. Sheelah's Day was celebrated the day after St. Patrick's Day, on March 18th.
Lehane is quoted in the Irish Times as saying "Pre-Famine, if you go back to the newspapers in Ireland they talk not just about Patrick's Day but also Sheelah's Day. I came across numerous references that Sheelah was thought to be Patrick's wife. The fact that we have Patrick and Sheelah should be no surprise. Because that duality, that union of male and female together, is one of the strongest images that we have in our mythology." (end quote)
Happy St. Patrick's Day!
|
drewbhoy
|
Re: St Patrick and Sheelagh
Mar 17, 2017, 11:23
|
|
tjj wrote: Post Neolithic ... but staying with the theme of duality.
http://blog.mythicalireland.com/2017/03/saint-patrick-was-married-his-wifes.html
(Quote)
Saint Patrick was married - his wife's name was Sheelah and St. Sheelah's Day was celebrated on March 18th
The revelation in today's Irish Times that Saint Patrick had a wife whose name was Sheelah is tremendously exciting for a number of reasons. Shane Lehane, a folklorist from University College Cork (UCC) has discovered pre-Famine references to a widespread belief that Saint Patrick had a wife and that St. Sheelah's Day was celebrated the day after St. Patrick's Day, on March 18th.
Lehane is quoted in the Irish Times as saying "Pre-Famine, if you go back to the newspapers in Ireland they talk not just about Patrick's Day but also Sheelah's Day. I came across numerous references that Sheelah was thought to be Patrick's wife. The fact that we have Patrick and Sheelah should be no surprise. Because that duality, that union of male and female together, is one of the strongest images that we have in our mythology." (end quote)
Happy St. Patrick's Day!
And to you :-)
|
