In college, for an archaeology class, I wrote a paper suggesting that the King Arthur legend has its origins long before the Dark Ages. All the way back, in fact, to the dawning of the bronze age and the building of Stonehenge. I drew connections between certain key elements of the King Arthur myth, and what we know about the megalithic monument on England's Salisbury Plain.
In brief, the earliest surviving written reference to Arthur is in a Welsh poem from around 594 AD. Another early reference to Arthur is in the Historia Britonum, attributed to the Welsh monk Nennius, who is said to have written this compilation of early Welsh history around the year 830 AD. In this work, Arthur is referred to as a "leader of battles" rather than as a king. Nennius is also the first to mention Merlin.
It's in the 11th and 12th centuries that several more references to Arthur pop up in Welsh tales and stories about the lives of saints. Also, Geoffrey of Monmouth's fictional Historia Regum Britanniae, c. 1138, was a medieval "bestseller" that attracted other writers to expand upon the tales of Arthur. Over the centuries, chivalry, knights, Celtic mythos, magic, fairies, and other elements were added.
I suggested that the story -- the seeds of the story -- were in fact much older. Just as the tale of Arthur has remained popular for the past 15 centuries, perhaps it goes back even further? Perhaps 2000 years or more before being referenced by that Welsh poet Aneirin? After all, people didn't write much down back then, and oral tradition was to them what the internet is to us.
The area where Stonehenge is located has been used as a sacred or special area since about 4000 BCE. Neolithic farmers built long barrow communal burial chambers in the vicinity. They also built circular enclosures and causeways, which are forerunners of the Stonehenge monument.
Between 3000 and 2000 BCE, however, long barrows went out of use (the use of long barrows without grave goods gave way to individual burials accompanied by wealth - or what would have been wealth to the people of the time). The first phase of construction on Stonehenge itself began c. 2800 BCE, and Silbury Hill was also built (the largest man-made mound in Europe).
The appearance of grave goods/individual burials and this mobilization of resources/manpower is interpreted as the shift from an egalitarian farming community to a chieftain society.
My idea: The "once and future king" of British legend may be an ancient king, the first "king" in England, the chieftain who set himself apart as a leader among men. A leader who was the first to wield metal weapons, the first Excaliburs, at the dawn of the Bronze Age. This magic of pulling a sword from a stone may be an echo of the wonder felt by those first farmer folks who witnessed this forging of a metal tool on a stone anvil (aha! the "sword in the stone"?). Such a power may have enabled a man to become chief, to mobilize the moving of even larger stones into what is sometimes called "The Giants' Round" - the earliest Round Table, perhaps?
The prosperity of this golden age went on for centuries, and perhaps left its mythic mark in the oral traditions of those first residents of the Neolithic Camelot, then passed on to the Celtic bards and druids who came later.
Having proposed all this about 10 years ago, I was so excited to read in Smithsonian magazine that in 2002 archaeologists found the graves of two men just a few miles from Stonehenge. This find turned out to be the richest Bronze Age burial ever discovered in Great Britain.
One of the men, dubbed the "Amesbury Archer" or "King of Stonehenge," was buried with a wrist guard, arrows, and almost 100 other artifacts, including tiny copper knives and a cushion stone - a hand-sized piece of rock used as an anvil.
And, interestingly, this King of Stonehenge did not come from the locals. Based on a tooth enamel analysis (I know, isn't it amazing what we can do, nowadays?) they think the Archer (the Arthur?) grew up in Central Europe.
"The archers would have been at the vanguard of the flashy new trade," says the Smithsonian article. "Carbon dating, and the absence of metal objects from earier graves, suggest the archer's arrival roughly coincides with the arrival of metalworking to the British Isles."
"The knowledge in his hands and in his head," archaeologist Andrew Fitzpatrick said, "was the key to his status. He brought a unique or exceptionally rare skill. You can think of the archer as a kind of magician."
OK, so maybe they didn't find Arthur, just Merlin.
The archer's arrival not only coincided with the bronze age arriving in Britain, but also of the erection of 20- and 30-ton stones at Stonehenge. "And it's even possible the archer may have provided the catalyst to get the project started... Perhaps he exploited his position as a charismatic outsider... to forge alliances among the region's cheiftains." (Smithsonian)
It's as if they found the very person I suggested in my paper. Isn't that wild?
Another interesting bit of info: My Welsh dictionary tells me that "arth" means "bear," and most name lists will say that Arthur means "bear" or derives from the Latin name Artorius. But, I just discovered that in Old Irish art means stone. Hmmm...
Mystery Man of Stonehenge article in Smithsonian Magazine
Wikipedia King Arthur article
Saturday, January 07, 2006
Tuesday, August 23, 2005
Two moms? That's nothing new...
"SAN FRANCISCO - In the latest ruling to recognize rights of same-sex couples, the California Supreme Court has said gay and lesbian couples who raise children are lawful parents and must provide for their children if they break up."
Good! A responsible parent is a responsible parent, regardless of sex.
" 'Today's ruling defies logic and common sense by saying that children can have two moms,' said attorney Mathew Staver of Liberty Counsel. 'That policy establishes that moms and dads as a unit are irrelevant when it comes to raising children.' "
The policy establishes that having both a mom and a dad is irrelevent? I thought society had established that on its own, several decades ago. Single moms and single dads, grandparents, extended family and unrelated custodians have been raising children for quite awhile now - where's this guy been?
And the ruling says that children can have two moms? That's nothing new. There have been children with two moms for decades, if you count stepmoms and grandmoms, aunties, adoptive moms and close family friends. Centuries, if you count all of the cultures which have practiced (and still practice) polygamy.
"Several child-advocacy organizations filed friend-of-the-court briefs taking the same side."
Exactly. This has much less to do with the "rights" of same-sex parents than it has to do with the rights of the children to be cared and provided for.
Good! A responsible parent is a responsible parent, regardless of sex.
" 'Today's ruling defies logic and common sense by saying that children can have two moms,' said attorney Mathew Staver of Liberty Counsel. 'That policy establishes that moms and dads as a unit are irrelevant when it comes to raising children.' "
The policy establishes that having both a mom and a dad is irrelevent? I thought society had established that on its own, several decades ago. Single moms and single dads, grandparents, extended family and unrelated custodians have been raising children for quite awhile now - where's this guy been?
And the ruling says that children can have two moms? That's nothing new. There have been children with two moms for decades, if you count stepmoms and grandmoms, aunties, adoptive moms and close family friends. Centuries, if you count all of the cultures which have practiced (and still practice) polygamy.
"Several child-advocacy organizations filed friend-of-the-court briefs taking the same side."
Exactly. This has much less to do with the "rights" of same-sex parents than it has to do with the rights of the children to be cared and provided for.
Friday, April 01, 2005
The Tao of Poo
We have a variety of words to describe my baby girl's poo. "Like the Eskimo and snow," my husband said.
There are the Poop Cookies. These are the most common. Look like little flattened pancakes o' poo.
Not quite as common are the Poop Cakes. These are larger versions of the Poop Cookies, not quite as flat.
Depending on what she eats, there may be the Peanut Butter Poop. Or the Vegetable Soup Poop. I don't think I need to explain those.
Once in awhile we get a Baby Ruth Poop. Which looks just like the Halloween-size candy bar of the same name.
And finally, my favorite, the Poobles. These are little marbles of poop that like to roll out of the diaper during changings. I once found one of my younger sister's Poobles outside her playpen when we were kids. I thought it was Play Doh, at the time. Which was not such an odd mistake to make, considering I had just been playing with the clay in the livingroom the day before and mixing up all the colors of the rainbow. Fortunately, I just put the Pooble on the end table by the couch, rather than in the jar with the clay. I'm sure my parents wondered how a tiny turd got there where my dad set his Pepsi, and now they know.
I have a college education and I'm spending my days classifying poo. Sometimes I think there's something wrong with that. Then other times I think that, in the vast expanse of the universe, perhaps ambition and ego are no more nor less significant than the flapping of a butterfly's wing or the falling of a sparrow. Perhaps they are illusions, and it is only necessary to do what is necessary. Like changing a diaper.
There are the Poop Cookies. These are the most common. Look like little flattened pancakes o' poo.
Not quite as common are the Poop Cakes. These are larger versions of the Poop Cookies, not quite as flat.
Depending on what she eats, there may be the Peanut Butter Poop. Or the Vegetable Soup Poop. I don't think I need to explain those.
Once in awhile we get a Baby Ruth Poop. Which looks just like the Halloween-size candy bar of the same name.
And finally, my favorite, the Poobles. These are little marbles of poop that like to roll out of the diaper during changings. I once found one of my younger sister's Poobles outside her playpen when we were kids. I thought it was Play Doh, at the time. Which was not such an odd mistake to make, considering I had just been playing with the clay in the livingroom the day before and mixing up all the colors of the rainbow. Fortunately, I just put the Pooble on the end table by the couch, rather than in the jar with the clay. I'm sure my parents wondered how a tiny turd got there where my dad set his Pepsi, and now they know.
I have a college education and I'm spending my days classifying poo. Sometimes I think there's something wrong with that. Then other times I think that, in the vast expanse of the universe, perhaps ambition and ego are no more nor less significant than the flapping of a butterfly's wing or the falling of a sparrow. Perhaps they are illusions, and it is only necessary to do what is necessary. Like changing a diaper.
Monday, March 14, 2005
The Terrifying Peace of Motherhood
I thought I knew everything there was to know about Motherhood.
After all, I had a mother. I had several grandmothers. I had friends who were mothers.
But no one ever told me... not only would I subsist, but I would grow fat on the dregs of my children's meals: burnt french fries, PB&J crusts, the last spoonful of yogurt, the grape that fell on the floor.
No one told me... that my shirt would be used as kleenex, and I might even go to the store afterward without changing it.
I never knew... that I could love so much and want to kill at the same time.
I never imagined... that I would suddenly understand why the cult of the Holy Mother persists amongst the estimated 1 billion Catholics on the planet today. I am god to my children. If they are sick, they want my comfort. If they are hungry, they want my body. When I lift them from their beds, they look at me with ecstatic faces. When they are scared, hurt, sad, they want only me. They shower me with kisses and little pictures of hearts and flowers.
A friend without children recently said that having the girls must bring a "wonderful peace" to my life. Should I tell her?
Should I tell her that it's actually a terrifying peace. It's terrifying to think of all the things that could happen to these little people, no matter what I do. That every time I read a newspaper article or see a TV report about a child being hurt or killed, I cry. That my mind constantly invents all of the things that could go wrong in the course of a day - falling and hitting their heads, accidentally poking their eyes out with their spoons or pencils, car accidents, choking on food, kidnapping, wars, a meteor hitting the Earth...
It's a sense of peace only in that it's a sense of perspective. You change enough diapers, clean up enough barf, have your tits gnawed on enough, kiss enough soft baby cheeks, and nothing else really seems all that important, anymore. Pretenses disappear. As do vanity and modesty. Which is a sort of peace.
After all, I had a mother. I had several grandmothers. I had friends who were mothers.
But no one ever told me... not only would I subsist, but I would grow fat on the dregs of my children's meals: burnt french fries, PB&J crusts, the last spoonful of yogurt, the grape that fell on the floor.
No one told me... that my shirt would be used as kleenex, and I might even go to the store afterward without changing it.
I never knew... that I could love so much and want to kill at the same time.
I never imagined... that I would suddenly understand why the cult of the Holy Mother persists amongst the estimated 1 billion Catholics on the planet today. I am god to my children. If they are sick, they want my comfort. If they are hungry, they want my body. When I lift them from their beds, they look at me with ecstatic faces. When they are scared, hurt, sad, they want only me. They shower me with kisses and little pictures of hearts and flowers.
A friend without children recently said that having the girls must bring a "wonderful peace" to my life. Should I tell her?
Should I tell her that it's actually a terrifying peace. It's terrifying to think of all the things that could happen to these little people, no matter what I do. That every time I read a newspaper article or see a TV report about a child being hurt or killed, I cry. That my mind constantly invents all of the things that could go wrong in the course of a day - falling and hitting their heads, accidentally poking their eyes out with their spoons or pencils, car accidents, choking on food, kidnapping, wars, a meteor hitting the Earth...
It's a sense of peace only in that it's a sense of perspective. You change enough diapers, clean up enough barf, have your tits gnawed on enough, kiss enough soft baby cheeks, and nothing else really seems all that important, anymore. Pretenses disappear. As do vanity and modesty. Which is a sort of peace.
Friday, February 18, 2005
Viagra sales limp
The Chicago Tribune reports that sales of erectile dysfunction drugs did not rise as anticipated between 2003 and 2004. In fact, Viagra saw its US performance drop 20% in 2004.
But what disturbed me most was the quote from David Pernock, senior vice president of sales and marketing for Glaxo. "It takes a while before you can re-establish your brand as the 'it' product to take."
"It" product?
I thought drugs were created to treat health problems, not to be trendy. I thought that drugs were for chronic or moderate-to-severe health problems which don't respond to other treatments/therapy/lifestyle modification - not for fashion statements.
But, apparently, I was wrong. It's amazing to me that a country which sends people to prison and confiscates their property for a little pot is doing...
* Hormone replacements (invasive breast cancer, blood clots, and heart attacks),
* Pain killers (heart attacks, stroke, cardiovascular injuries, addiction, ulcers, liver and kidney problems and more)
* Diet pills (heart problems, stroke, headaches and more)
* Alcohol (more than 17,000 driving-related deaths per year in the US, its related health problems - trauma, cirrhosis, pancreatitis, high blood pressure, irregular heartbeat, cancer, heart disease and brain damage - also cost the country billions of dollars)
* Heartburn pills (headache, diarrhea, abdominal pain and more)
* Antidepressants (anxiety, insomnia, impotence, nausea, diarrhea, suicide and more)
* Antibiotics (longterm use linked to breast cancer and drug-resistant strains of bacteria)
Why are pills so popular? Because "everyone is doing it"?
But what disturbed me most was the quote from David Pernock, senior vice president of sales and marketing for Glaxo. "It takes a while before you can re-establish your brand as the 'it' product to take."
"It" product?
I thought drugs were created to treat health problems, not to be trendy. I thought that drugs were for chronic or moderate-to-severe health problems which don't respond to other treatments/therapy/lifestyle modification - not for fashion statements.
But, apparently, I was wrong. It's amazing to me that a country which sends people to prison and confiscates their property for a little pot is doing...
* Hormone replacements (invasive breast cancer, blood clots, and heart attacks),
* Pain killers (heart attacks, stroke, cardiovascular injuries, addiction, ulcers, liver and kidney problems and more)
* Diet pills (heart problems, stroke, headaches and more)
* Alcohol (more than 17,000 driving-related deaths per year in the US, its related health problems - trauma, cirrhosis, pancreatitis, high blood pressure, irregular heartbeat, cancer, heart disease and brain damage - also cost the country billions of dollars)
* Heartburn pills (headache, diarrhea, abdominal pain and more)
* Antidepressants (anxiety, insomnia, impotence, nausea, diarrhea, suicide and more)
* Antibiotics (longterm use linked to breast cancer and drug-resistant strains of bacteria)
Why are pills so popular? Because "everyone is doing it"?
Sunday, February 13, 2005
If it was really the first time...
I'm sitting here listening to Foreigner's "Feels Like the First Time" and thinking, if it were really the first time, the song would be over in about 45 seconds.
Tuesday, February 08, 2005
Spongebob is gay?
A sweet little innocent yellow sponge holds hands with his best friend (an even more innocent, dopey pink starfish) and suddenly they're sending our children straight to hell in a butt-banging handbasket?
What is with the sexuality witch-hunt in this country? When did I stop being able to hold hands with my sister, mother or best friends? Yeah, I'm foisting my deviant lifestyle on you because I'M A MARRIED STRAIGHT WOMAN HOLDING HANDS WITH MY SISTER. Oh, the little children will be gouging their eyes out with hot pokers! What the hell?
Martin Luther King Jr. had a dream that one day "... little black boys and black girls will be able to join hands with little white boys and white girls and walk together as sisters and brothers." Did he have a homosexual agenda, too?
Back in 1990, I had a penpal who was in Desert Storm. He sent me several little "souvenirs" - including a Coke can in Arabic, a Hard Rock Cafe Al-Khobar t-shirt, and an instruction manual that briefed military personnel on the culture in Saudi Arabia.
The manual says (on page II-5, under the heading "Physical Closeness"), "You may see local men (including soldiers) walking hand in hand - this indicates nothing more than the fact that they are good friends (not homosexuals)." Maybe we need to send a similar manual to James Dobson?
The manual goes on: "Touching during conversation is also common and is often done for emphasis. A local male touching another male's knee or hand during conversation indicates what he is about to tell him is something of the utmost seriousness, importance, or to be held in confidence.
"Conversational distance is based on the greeting distance. For two American men it would be handshake distance. For two Arab men, however, it would be closer, since they cheek kiss upon greeting - same for two Arab women."
And Arabs aren't the only ones. David S. Clark, president of the U.S. Institute of Languages, writes:
As I was living in Latin America, I became friends with a local man and we would have conversations about the difference between Greetings in the Latin culture and Greetings in the English speaking culture. He thought it was so funny and so unnatural to see two Americans that were close friends greet each other. He described it in this way. "It's funny to see two American friends approach each other and then just sort of stop a few feet away and say 'Hi', or maybe even wave their hands and say 'hi', or even give each other a 'high five'". He said that for him, "It seems much more natural to have contact with each other either through a hug or a kiss on the cheek."
In fact, "Men in Eastern Europe, Portugal, Spain and Italy will often kiss male friends on the cheek," writes Susan Dunn, a business writer for webpronews.com.
Dear God! Vast swathes of humanity actually touching each other! What's next?
Spongebob has been singled out due to his alleged popularity with homosexual men. But the rightwing nutjobs are also taking issue with the Tolerance Pledge at the We Are Family Foundation website, which ends with the line: "I pledge to have respect for people whose ... sexual identity or other characteristics are different from my own."
The We Are Family Foundation's children's video coming out March 11, 2005, has not only Spongebob but characters from Arthur, Barney, Bear in the Big Blue House, Between the Lions, Blue's Clues, Bob the Builder, The Book of Pooh, Clifford the Big Red Dog, Dora the Explorer, Jimmy Neutron, JoJo's Circus, Kim Possible, Lilo & Stitch: The Series, Madeline, The Magic School Bus, The Muppet Show, The Proud Family, Rugrats, Sesame Street and Zoom.
Yes, every popular kids cartoon on the planet is in on it - that "gay agenda" already outed by Congressman Barney Frank (D-Mass.) at the Democratic National Convention in 2004 ...
... the one which suggests we should all just play nice.
Like Spongebob and Patrick.
What is with the sexuality witch-hunt in this country? When did I stop being able to hold hands with my sister, mother or best friends? Yeah, I'm foisting my deviant lifestyle on you because I'M A MARRIED STRAIGHT WOMAN HOLDING HANDS WITH MY SISTER. Oh, the little children will be gouging their eyes out with hot pokers! What the hell?
Martin Luther King Jr. had a dream that one day "... little black boys and black girls will be able to join hands with little white boys and white girls and walk together as sisters and brothers." Did he have a homosexual agenda, too?
Back in 1990, I had a penpal who was in Desert Storm. He sent me several little "souvenirs" - including a Coke can in Arabic, a Hard Rock Cafe Al-Khobar t-shirt, and an instruction manual that briefed military personnel on the culture in Saudi Arabia.
The manual says (on page II-5, under the heading "Physical Closeness"), "You may see local men (including soldiers) walking hand in hand - this indicates nothing more than the fact that they are good friends (not homosexuals)." Maybe we need to send a similar manual to James Dobson?
The manual goes on: "Touching during conversation is also common and is often done for emphasis. A local male touching another male's knee or hand during conversation indicates what he is about to tell him is something of the utmost seriousness, importance, or to be held in confidence.
"Conversational distance is based on the greeting distance. For two American men it would be handshake distance. For two Arab men, however, it would be closer, since they cheek kiss upon greeting - same for two Arab women."
And Arabs aren't the only ones. David S. Clark, president of the U.S. Institute of Languages, writes:
As I was living in Latin America, I became friends with a local man and we would have conversations about the difference between Greetings in the Latin culture and Greetings in the English speaking culture. He thought it was so funny and so unnatural to see two Americans that were close friends greet each other. He described it in this way. "It's funny to see two American friends approach each other and then just sort of stop a few feet away and say 'Hi', or maybe even wave their hands and say 'hi', or even give each other a 'high five'". He said that for him, "It seems much more natural to have contact with each other either through a hug or a kiss on the cheek."
In fact, "Men in Eastern Europe, Portugal, Spain and Italy will often kiss male friends on the cheek," writes Susan Dunn, a business writer for webpronews.com.
Dear God! Vast swathes of humanity actually touching each other! What's next?
Spongebob has been singled out due to his alleged popularity with homosexual men. But the rightwing nutjobs are also taking issue with the Tolerance Pledge at the We Are Family Foundation website, which ends with the line: "I pledge to have respect for people whose ... sexual identity or other characteristics are different from my own."
The We Are Family Foundation's children's video coming out March 11, 2005, has not only Spongebob but characters from Arthur, Barney, Bear in the Big Blue House, Between the Lions, Blue's Clues, Bob the Builder, The Book of Pooh, Clifford the Big Red Dog, Dora the Explorer, Jimmy Neutron, JoJo's Circus, Kim Possible, Lilo & Stitch: The Series, Madeline, The Magic School Bus, The Muppet Show, The Proud Family, Rugrats, Sesame Street and Zoom.
Yes, every popular kids cartoon on the planet is in on it - that "gay agenda" already outed by Congressman Barney Frank (D-Mass.) at the Democratic National Convention in 2004 ...
... the one which suggests we should all just play nice.
Like Spongebob and Patrick.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)