How do we know that Stonehenge was a Temple? Asked Steve this morning in a comment on my rant about a Garudian blog's oddly right-wing diatribe against the people celebrating the Solstice yesterday.
What a good question. Not least because the Altar Stone never was an altar. Or, at least, it wasn't. Not until Tess of the D'Urbervilles lay upon it awaiting her sacrifice to the Chief of the Immortals). It used to stand upright, making it awful difficult for sacrificing victims on. The High Priest, Archdruid or whoever would keep falling off. And the Beaker People who built at least part of the monument, and rearranged it for good measure, left no writing. The Celts, of course, had no part in it. They preferred to worship in Oak Groves like the savages they were. Or at least that's what the Romans tell us.
I suppose there's the following considerations.
It's in what is described as a "Ceremonial Landscape". It is surrounded by barrows in which are (or were, till scientists got there) buried hundreds of people. We can only draw analogies with what we know, but a wide-ranging burial landscape is likely to have had religious significance.
There's a "cursus" associated with it. Unfortunately, we don't know what a "cursus" is. To say it was "probably ceremonial" in Archaeological Language means "we don't know anything about it".
You can't ignore the solar alignment (feel free to ignore every other alignment, in my opinion - this doesn't meant that there weren't any, but over hundreds of years, as the angle of the inclination of the Earth's axis moved, almost any alignment could mean something). But like many stone circles around the British Isles, eg the lovely Rollrights, Stonehenge is aligned north-east to south-west - Summer Sunrise to Winter Sunset. That's not a coincidence. In a primitive society the sun was the most important thing - heralding a time to sow, a time to reap, a time to shear sheep and a time to batten down the hatches through the winter storms with a jug of mead. No wonder so many Indo-European religions (and others) had a sun god. Knowing, of a dark and frozen 21st December, that from now on the light is coming back - that would have been worth something. A day to thank the sun god for his/her kindness in returning, I reckon. By the way - there is another set of related buildings that share a rough alignment (approximately east-west in this case) and that's the historical churches of these islands. And they also appear to have a religious connection.
And the site was in use for thousands of years one way or another. Not during Celtic times - and not from then until relatively modern ones, when neo-paganism (or its great-uncle, dodgy Druidism) was invented. But those stones, set in their burial landscape, with their probable processional relationship via the Avenue down to the river Avon - they could be pomp and circumstance, they could be the Neolithic/Bronze Age equivalent of Crownhill Crematorium - but even Crownhill has its religious connotations. I reckon, however you look at it, it was a religious structure. And a religious structure that big has a right to be called a "temple".
Some have asked whether Stonehenge was a temple or a solar (or other astronomical) observatory. I suspect that in fact an original Beaker Person would answer by asking another question - what's the difference? A structure that regularised and predicted the movements of the heavens - that gave you confidence of where the Sun stopped every solstice - that meant you knew when the days were starting to get longer - that's going to have been both. A way for you to tap into the mind of the sun god, and join in with what he was up to.
Showing posts with label Stonehenge. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Stonehenge. Show all posts
Wednesday, 22 June 2011
Tuesday, 21 June 2011
Oppress Stonehenge's Neo-Pagan Hippies: Guardian
I was in such a good mood with the Guardian, as well. Comment is Free linked to this morning's post about the Pan in my kitchen. I was almost prepared to forgive them for Polly Toynbee.
But then I read a blog article that darkened my mood. "Save Stonehenge from Midsummer Madness", declares someone called Jonathan Jones.
Let's consider his argument -
"why is this daft festival even allowed?" he asks. Answer - because this is a free country and people, on the whole, are allowed to do what they like as long as they don't bother anyone else. And because English Heritage, quite rightly, allows it. If you don't like it, vote for the "Keep hippies out of Stonehenge" party at the next election. There isn't one - because there are no votes in it.
"In the 1980s hippies fought the police for their right to revel. So that is why it is permitted: because otherwise there would be public violence on Salisbury Plain," Mr Jones tells us. Well, if the reason for objecting to something is that people fought for their rights, then women wouldn't have the vote and the Poll Tax would still be with us. The actions of the authorities, particularly at the Battle of the Beanfield, strike me as intolerant and autocratic - picking a fight for no obvious reason. But perhaps the Guardian prefers the strong smack of authoritarianism from people in uniform?
And then to the crux of Mr Jones's argument - which has some force, in one way. He argues that (a) Stonehenge is aligned on the Midwinter, not Midsummer, Solstice and (b) The Druids never built Stonehenge.
In other words, people shouldn't be allowed to celebrate at Stonehenge because their history is bad.
To which I would respond - "So what?" I don't care if their history is bad, and the people at Stonehenge don't all claim to be Druids. They have come there in response to a sense of awe and wonder at things that they know are beyond them. The mere fact they're six months late (or early) and misinformed about Druids is neither here nor there.
Frankly if we were going to ban people from Stonehenge on the grounds that their history was bad, I'd start with certain (but not all - I wouldn't like to go in for blanket condemnations) American tourists. Apart from the one who, according to legend, thought it was due to some kind of eruption - I followed a group of them around last year and they reckoned Stonehenge must be "several hundred years old". Surely people so ignorant should be kept away from the stones, for fear they might accidentally walk straight into one and hurt themselves.
Mr Jones concludes with the following diatribe:
"The ancient stones should not be reduced to a stage for feeble pseudo-religious, pseudo-communal fantasies. There is something abusive and ugly about this annual festival of historical amnesia, a contemptuous lack of interest in the real people of past and their sublime creations."
Which, I think, can be summarised as "these people are not like us." On they other hand, they have "pseudo" community. And they have far more interest in the real people of the past than Mr Jones allows - because he produces no evidence, he is free from those most awkward of objects, facts. I know they have, because I've discussed what some of them actually do think about the "real people" of the past with them, and they're not ignorant of archaeology or history, They just like their history a little idealised of a Summer Solstice - a bit like most people's attitude to Christmas.
Mr Jones's argument, as best as I can tell, is that Stonehenge should be closed to neo-pagans because they lower the tone. To which I can only say - let us consider the people who, over the last 2 centuries, have really damaged the place.
In fourth place, I would put English Heritage themselves. They have built a crappy teahouse, ugly car park and nasty toilets just across the road.
In third place, I would put the old GPO, who nearly destroyed the Heel Stone with an automated trench-digging machine in 1979.
In second place, I would put the Army. They drove a mere 5 yards from the stones before the First World War, and trashed parts of the cursus. According to rumour, they wanted the whole thing flattened to make access to Lark Hill easier.
But the prize-winners for people who have wrecked most of Stonehenge are scientists. It was a group of archaeologists who, after the First World War, destroyed half the archaeology of the place and gained practically no knowledge. Not hippies, not pagans. Scientists. Who just kept digging, even when they knew there was nothing to find. Oh yes, I know that modern scientists disown their fore-runners - tell us that they aren't like they were then. These days they're more educated, more liberal - more understanding. But let nobody tell you that scientists aren't the biggest vandals that Stonehenge has ever known.
If you want to protect Stonehenge, I say - ban scientists not pagans.
And Heaven defend us if we ever allow Jonathan Jones to decide what religious practices he thinks should be allowed.
My history in this rant is mostly sourced from Christopher Chippindale's excellent, entertaining and learned Stonehenge Complete. I personally prefer the 2nd edition, which is less rushed in its later sections. However the 3rd is more up to date, obviously.
But then I read a blog article that darkened my mood. "Save Stonehenge from Midsummer Madness", declares someone called Jonathan Jones.
Let's consider his argument -
"why is this daft festival even allowed?" he asks. Answer - because this is a free country and people, on the whole, are allowed to do what they like as long as they don't bother anyone else. And because English Heritage, quite rightly, allows it. If you don't like it, vote for the "Keep hippies out of Stonehenge" party at the next election. There isn't one - because there are no votes in it.
"In the 1980s hippies fought the police for their right to revel. So that is why it is permitted: because otherwise there would be public violence on Salisbury Plain," Mr Jones tells us. Well, if the reason for objecting to something is that people fought for their rights, then women wouldn't have the vote and the Poll Tax would still be with us. The actions of the authorities, particularly at the Battle of the Beanfield, strike me as intolerant and autocratic - picking a fight for no obvious reason. But perhaps the Guardian prefers the strong smack of authoritarianism from people in uniform?
And then to the crux of Mr Jones's argument - which has some force, in one way. He argues that (a) Stonehenge is aligned on the Midwinter, not Midsummer, Solstice and (b) The Druids never built Stonehenge.
In other words, people shouldn't be allowed to celebrate at Stonehenge because their history is bad.
To which I would respond - "So what?" I don't care if their history is bad, and the people at Stonehenge don't all claim to be Druids. They have come there in response to a sense of awe and wonder at things that they know are beyond them. The mere fact they're six months late (or early) and misinformed about Druids is neither here nor there.
Frankly if we were going to ban people from Stonehenge on the grounds that their history was bad, I'd start with certain (but not all - I wouldn't like to go in for blanket condemnations) American tourists. Apart from the one who, according to legend, thought it was due to some kind of eruption - I followed a group of them around last year and they reckoned Stonehenge must be "several hundred years old". Surely people so ignorant should be kept away from the stones, for fear they might accidentally walk straight into one and hurt themselves.
Mr Jones concludes with the following diatribe:
"The ancient stones should not be reduced to a stage for feeble pseudo-religious, pseudo-communal fantasies. There is something abusive and ugly about this annual festival of historical amnesia, a contemptuous lack of interest in the real people of past and their sublime creations."
Which, I think, can be summarised as "these people are not like us." On they other hand, they have "pseudo" community. And they have far more interest in the real people of the past than Mr Jones allows - because he produces no evidence, he is free from those most awkward of objects, facts. I know they have, because I've discussed what some of them actually do think about the "real people" of the past with them, and they're not ignorant of archaeology or history, They just like their history a little idealised of a Summer Solstice - a bit like most people's attitude to Christmas.
Mr Jones's argument, as best as I can tell, is that Stonehenge should be closed to neo-pagans because they lower the tone. To which I can only say - let us consider the people who, over the last 2 centuries, have really damaged the place.
In fourth place, I would put English Heritage themselves. They have built a crappy teahouse, ugly car park and nasty toilets just across the road.
In third place, I would put the old GPO, who nearly destroyed the Heel Stone with an automated trench-digging machine in 1979.
In second place, I would put the Army. They drove a mere 5 yards from the stones before the First World War, and trashed parts of the cursus. According to rumour, they wanted the whole thing flattened to make access to Lark Hill easier.
But the prize-winners for people who have wrecked most of Stonehenge are scientists. It was a group of archaeologists who, after the First World War, destroyed half the archaeology of the place and gained practically no knowledge. Not hippies, not pagans. Scientists. Who just kept digging, even when they knew there was nothing to find. Oh yes, I know that modern scientists disown their fore-runners - tell us that they aren't like they were then. These days they're more educated, more liberal - more understanding. But let nobody tell you that scientists aren't the biggest vandals that Stonehenge has ever known.
If you want to protect Stonehenge, I say - ban scientists not pagans.
And Heaven defend us if we ever allow Jonathan Jones to decide what religious practices he thinks should be allowed.
My history in this rant is mostly sourced from Christopher Chippindale's excellent, entertaining and learned Stonehenge Complete. I personally prefer the 2nd edition, which is less rushed in its later sections. However the 3rd is more up to date, obviously.
Friday, 25 March 2011
How to build Stonehenge - by Ikea
I'd like to thank Simon Robinson for showing me the light on this one. A hat-tip, as they say. This is Ikea Instructions for Stonehenge. I'm impressed that the people who drew this cartoon knew about the mortice and tenon joints in the Sarsens. And the legends about Merlin helping with the construction. 9/10.
Wednesday, 23 December 2009
The case of the poorly-timed Druids
So far so ho-ho-ho. But I believe the Telegraph has missed an important aspect of modern-day druidism (and indeed much that passes for modern "Celtic" Christianity). Frankly it doesn't matter. In a highly unscientific movement based on wishful thinking and re-imagining of a past that never really existed, they could have turned up and celebrated the Solstice at Easter for all the difference it would have made. Particularly if, as in Husborne Crawley, the sun was hidden behind a great pile of snowcloud.
A couple more points of interest. The Telegraph refers to the druids turning up in "traditional dress". Yet the people they show round the stones appear to be wearing normal winter clothing for the English climate. Frankly they look like a bunch of carol-singers. But in my opinion, given all the unstable stones and lumps of rock laying on the ground, these people are inadequately supplied with PPE. They should all be wearing Hi-viz, hard hats and steel-toed trainers for their own safety.
And the smug get from the so-called "English Heritage" is quoted as saying "People always assume that because the Summer Solstice is the June 21st, the Winter Solstice will be the 21st December." Apart from the over-use of the word "the" in that sense, technically he is as wrong as they are. For the Summer Solstice can also move its date - indeed, it will be on 20 June in 2012. Or... surely not... is this another sign of the End of the World in 2012? No, checking a little more, the Summer Solstice was also on 20 June last year. And we're still here. Panic over. However - this is clearly the kind of misrepresentation we can expect from the agency that bought Stonehenge to protect it from people building cafes and car-parks nearby, and then built a car park with an attached cafe*. Personally I would turn the whole place over to Mr Arthur Pendragon. Except I am slightly concerned about his numeracy. He is quoted as saying that he conducted "about three handfastings". Surely he could be more accurate that kind of low number? I mean, it must be an integer - it's not like he has to worry about fractions. Or is this the origin of the old tradition that it's impossible to count the stones?
So God bless the poorly-timed Druids of Stonehenge. In this selfish, consumerist, cynical world they made the trip to Stonehenge to answer the call for some kind of spiritual experience. They recognised the emptiness of our politically correct, CRB'ed, cotton-wool-wrapped society and went to fill it with meaning. And by arriving for Monday morning, hopefully they missed all the travel problems they would have had on Monday night through Tuesday. Maybe their Goddess was looking after them after all.
And in case you're wondering why my image of Stonehenge looks so sunny and empty, it was taken about Michaelmas. Or the Autumnal Equinox, for those of a druidic persuasion.
* I refer you to the excellent "Stonehenge Complete" by the learned but very readable and often amusing Christopher Chippindale for details.
Thursday, 26 November 2009
Stonehedge - myth and legend
We loved this from the BT / Yahoo pages "Top 10 British Myths and Legends". According to which Stonehenge dates back "an amazing 50,000 years". Truly that is amazing. How the stones stood up over the successive glaciations of that period is indeed a miracle. However it's bad news for creationists.
But it's nice to see a valid use of the word "literally" - as in "it’s drawn visitors for literally millennia". Which is true.
The site that Yahoo links to spells out that Stonehenge dates back "an amazing 5,000" years - which is less amazing, but still amazing. And still wrong, as the very first use of the site was probably an amazing 10,000 years ago. And "Visit Britain" has issues of its own. Such as spelling "sarsen" as "sarson".
But "you can get a good view from outside the main enclosure", Visit Britain tells us. Indeed you can, as you dodge the traffic on the busy road by the Heel Stone and peer through the fence and past 10,000 American tourists debating whether it was somebody as unimaginable ancient (to Americans) as the Normans or the Tudors that built it. And where the roof went when it fell off.
All in all, it's this kind of pseudo-history and imaginary myth that gets on the nerves of us serious druids. Time to give Stonehenge back to those who can look after it, we say.
But it's nice to see a valid use of the word "literally" - as in "it’s drawn visitors for literally millennia". Which is true.
The site that Yahoo links to spells out that Stonehenge dates back "an amazing 5,000" years - which is less amazing, but still amazing. And still wrong, as the very first use of the site was probably an amazing 10,000 years ago. And "Visit Britain" has issues of its own. Such as spelling "sarsen" as "sarson".
But "you can get a good view from outside the main enclosure", Visit Britain tells us. Indeed you can, as you dodge the traffic on the busy road by the Heel Stone and peer through the fence and past 10,000 American tourists debating whether it was somebody as unimaginable ancient (to Americans) as the Normans or the Tudors that built it. And where the roof went when it fell off.
All in all, it's this kind of pseudo-history and imaginary myth that gets on the nerves of us serious druids. Time to give Stonehenge back to those who can look after it, we say.
Subscribe to:
Posts
(
Atom
)