Subject: Re: antiquity of oghams (was: about Micmac script From: email@example.com (Yuri Kuchinsky) Date: 1997/07/13 Message-ID: <firstname.lastname@example.org> Newsgroups: sci.archaeology,alt.pagan,alt.mythology Alex Kashko (email@example.com) wrote: ... : Well I just finished reading it again after several years and : find it a fascinating book but I am not sure what if anything is to be : believed. Well, Alex, I'm sure some things are definitely to be believed there. But which ones? This is the big question. Let's look at the two big historical/literary puzzles in the bardic poems about the "battle of the trees" that provided the frame for the book, for instance. Graves claimed to have solved them. It's a big claim. Suppose he was wrong about his solution. So what? Even if he was wrong, the main themes of the book, and his exploration of them will still remain very valid. As far as I know, the only _obvious_ factual inaccuracies that have been pointed out by his critics so far have been rather few and trivial ones. I believe Graves was actually quite proud of the research that he's done and included in this book. He makes plenty of big interpretative claims, often unsubstantiated, true. But this is not the same as obvious factual errors... I don't think there are many of those. : He seems to be takiong Frazer far too seriously Sure does. But perhaps Frazer needs to be taken a lot more seriously than he's taken at this time. Frazer is often misunderstood and swept under the rug currently. He's unfashionable, true. But academic fashions come and go. Important works remain. : ( all the talk : of ritual deathj and resurrection could aalso be a shamanic reference : for example) They don't have to contradict each other. We know that both phenomena are well documented. : and his etymology is more like lexilinking. This is the most obvious weak spot that many critics zeroed in onto. We should see all this as speculative and leave it at that. : The central premise, that the Druids and Bards loved riddles is : plausible. I am more than a little skeptical about the idea that the : triple Goddess was worshipped as universally as he seems to make out. The triple goddess is problematic in some respects. But the idea that various goddesses were very important during Bronze Age and previously isn't really. Regards, Yuri. Yuri Kuchinsky | "Where there is the Tree of Knowledge, there -=- | is always Paradise: so say the most ancient in Toronto | and the most modern serpents." F. Nietzsche ----- my webpage is for now at: http://www.io.org/~yuku ----- _________________________________________________________________Click here to go one level up in the directory.