Ancient British Spirituality

[Vicfirth12]

for some of us maybe. but some of us are taking the more logical route. i.e. believing what can be categorically proven. not in hearsay and communal good vibes

edit- these ancient edifice's are a reaction to our inbuilt superstitions and paranoia in an effort to explain/validate our exsitance before we had a better understanding of how things work imo.

I think that most need both. Having everything categorically proven sounds impossible do to in a lifetime and there is nothing wrong with harmless speculation

Edited July 5, 2013 by VicFirth12

[Sancho Panza]

I think that most need both. Having everything categorically proven sounds impossible do to in a lifetime and there is nothing wrong with harmless speculation

youll forgive me but combined with mans propensity to dislike difference and a covetous nature the last 2000 years an more of "harmless speculation" has lead to more wars and strife and death than almost any thing else.

so i like the definitive i find comfort in it.

guess work and speculation of divinity have lead to some very rash actions in the past. so unless the divine is going to appear and do some serious smiting i cant believe, too many lies, to much hate.

ask your self this - on a hospital bed would you put you put all your faith in the divine to help? or are you gonna trust in the science and medicine to help you?

screw fairys! ill stick with test tubes, calculators and stop watches thanks very much

Edited July 5, 2013 by Sancho Panza

[Vicfirth12]

If i was in that situation i would be putting all my energy in wishing myself well as well as having the help of medical science. The harmless speculation i was refering to was my own speculation about spirtuality rather than an organised religion. I don't disagree with what your saying sancho, i too need proof when being told something from an external source but there is so much more going on in life than what has been proven and i like to keep an open mind

Edited July 5, 2013 by VicFirth12

[Boojum]

Whatever Stonehenge was built for/as I think it's fairly safe to say it had little to do with what is commonly called 'Druidism' nowadays by its practitioners, which is an entirely modern invention.

[JimmyPage]

Whatever Stonehenge was built for/as I think it's fairly safe to say it had little to do with what is commonly called 'Druidism' nowadays by its practitioners, which is an entirely modern invention.

Stonehenge was already 2,000 years old when the original Druids showed up. And since those Druids left nothing behind, all we know is what some Roman "historians" wrote about them decades, and in some cases centuries after the Romans had annihilated them - which means the present day shower littering Stonehenge every solstice are just dressing up.

[Reggie]

"hewn...

into the living rock...

of Stone'enge"

They are compelling though these ancient monuments, particularly because so little is known about them.

Some things are known though. Did you see the programme about the rock 'striations'? There a huge 'processional' way leading up to stonehenge, the cursus, aligned as stonehenge is with summer and winter solstice sunrise and sunset or whatever, and they found out it was older than the stones, and on the bank that stonehenge faces, along the cursus, there are huge natural features in the chalk, like deep gashes, that are also aligned in the same way. These would have been exposed at the time. So it looks as though the landscape there would have become sacred because of these natural features which would have seemed guides to the passage of time and the change of the seasons, perhaps guaranteeing the return of summer, as naturally there would be a fear each winter that life-giving summer would never return.

I recall a rather out-there theory that stonehenge was once roofed, making a huge conical structure, the horizontal tops of the stone structures being supports for rafters. Probably bollocks but it does give an explanation, probably only attractive to modern scientific minds, of why you'd go to the immense effort of raising those lintels. But I guess the real answer is more like the reason medieval cathedrals were so unnecessarily tall - ie for the greater glory of whatever god, gods or natural forces were being thus communicated with or glorified.

Yes! That cursus - a misnomer if there ever was one for pre-Roman landscape features - was caused by a glacier. At some point during one of the preceding ice ages, a huge club f frozen water rubbed against the natural bedrock and created that faint gash. It's only recently we've discovered that it's on the same alignment as the winter and summer solstices, and only natural that, predating the stone circle, let alone the wood circles, Stonehenge was placed in Salisbury due to its proximity to that 'cursus'.

The fact that other monuments rely on the solstices hardens back to an earlier realisation, and one inherent with the ease with which Mesolithic peoples moved into the Neolithic, or at least accepted the ideas in some guise.

[Flobalobalobalot]

for decades the sceptically conscious 'me' has 'knowingly' communed with countless

. .'FORMS of THE spirit' . .

. . during almost every woken moment. . .

.. . .& oddly anough, i've never once had an urge to arrange big stones, precariously or otherwise .. . .

.. . . . strange hu? ..

my paradigm must be all messed up & just plain wrong . .ehh?

[FunkyJazzJesus]

it's intriguing to think people were more interested in the properties of materials rather than the mental value that later came after the findings of the use, much like searching for god, what happens when you think you've found god or even something to replace it?

[willowisp]

Stop calling everything "Celtic"! That cross dates from around 1000, so it's a fair assumption that it may well be Christian in intent. Pagan ways persisted amongst us common folk for centuries after the general conversion of the races of what we call Britain but something that complex would have cost a fortune to make, it could only have been commisioned by the church surely?

The knotwork style of decoration was entirely English Anglo saxon in origin and then appropriated by the Brythonic peoples later. It's not a huge leap of faith or logic to think that the famous Tara brooch was made by an Englishman for a wealthy Irishman! If you need any evidence for this, take a look at the Lindisfarne gospels.

I follow my heart when it comes to spirituality, I definitely lean towards nature, it's all connected. The trouble is, I've always felt something is missing with the ancient ways of the British, and that is borne out by the fact that we barely know anything about it. Nobody knows what Stonehenge was to this day, nobody knows what the druids did because the Romans killed them all, Wicca is just a modern romantic vision of what it's followers would like to believe the British did. There is NO evidence that it has any link at all to the druids or anyone else.

For me, I drift towards the ways of my Anglo Saxon ancestors. Their paganism held out against missionairies a lot longer than the British pagans in Wales and Ireland. A version of the better known Norse paganism, the English held Woden and Thunor as their symbols of strength and ingenuity. No stone circles needed, the forest was their church.

Woden was basically Odin, but seen as a different beast to the Norse god. Not so much obsessed with gathering souls for his army in his hall, this deity wandered the woods and rivers of the land keeping an eye (one eye!) on his people, if someone was lucky enough to encounter him, or rather think they did, it was seen as a turning point in their life. A Gandalf like figure, Tolkien used Woden as the basis of his character. Likewise Thor was Thunor, "friend of the common man", lending strength to hard workers, and Tyr led men into battle.