| Author |
Modern crap or spiritual links |
sem
Joined:
12-11-2003
Messages: 1722
from Bridgend,S.Wales
 OFF-Line
|  Posted 09-04-2004 at 22:30
At Tim Prevett's very enjoyable recent tour of Angelsey we visited Barclodiad-yr-Gawres burial chamber.People visiting before us had left "offerings" which varied from money to seashells & flowers.Some members of the group described these as "Neo-Pagan crap" and cleared them from the site.As we have no idea what the original occupants of the site intended should not people be allowed to pay their respects to our ancestors in their own way?
 Profile
 Reply
|
kelpie
Joined:
15-02-2001
Messages: 284
from Pickering, North Yorks
OFF-Line
| Posted 09-04-2004 at 22:51
Yes and no.
As we don't know the original intentions how do we know that leaving the 'neo-pagan crap' (or anything else) would not be offensive to them? In my opionion it is 'safer' to leave nothing but your thoughts.
Profile
Reply
|
Robc
Joined:
04-01-2003
Messages: 12
from Porthcawl, South Wales
OFF-Line
| Posted 14-04-2004 at 15:27
Let the children play.. I was little more concerned with the graffiti.. But perhaps the stone carving is graffitti too!!!
Profile
Reply
|
ocifant
Joined:
13-10-2002
Messages: 186
from London
OFF-Line
| Posted 14-04-2004 at 19:20
Quote:
|
should not people be allowed to pay their respects to our ancestors in their own way?
|
|
Definitely not, if that way could cause possible damage to the site. I've seen too many tealights, rotting flowers, coins jammed into stones etc and the damage they do to entertain any thoughts that people should be allowed to do what they like to sites.
You won't convince me.
Profile
Reply
|
sem
Joined:
12-11-2003
Messages: 1722
from Bridgend,S.Wales
OFF-Line
| Posted 14-04-2004 at 20:56
Yes Ocifant
I've seen lots of rotting flowers,especially in graveyards.I've seen 200yr old churches built on sites infinately older with no reference in records to the older sites apart from the inevitable "look at the medieval stone." I love many of the sites I visit and don't leave offerings,but I feel it wrong to deny people their individual way of communicating with the past.
We are human and so were they.
Profile
Reply
|
sem
Joined:
12-11-2003
Messages: 1722
from Bridgend,S.Wales
OFF-Line
| Posted 26-08-2004 at 00:23
As an update on this I've recently had the opportunity to visit a few sites on the Gower and in W Wales.Two of these had what seemed to be professionally arranged bunches of flowers placed there.Would Neolithic peoples have craftsmen/women who made a living,just like our monumental masons,out of this activity? And if so would they approve of our offerings?
Profile
Reply
|
kooljeff
Joined:
21-03-2002
Messages: 40
from Hampshire
OFF-Line
| Posted 30-08-2004 at 14:35
Equally we don't know if they would appreciate these things. It is conceivable that they would have left offerngs at sites like this.
As a rule of thumb I live by that old hippy credo "Do what you like as long as it doesn't hurt anyone (or anything) else" In this case don't leave anything or do anything that would damge the site.
 kooljeff
Profile
Reply
|
sem
Joined:
12-11-2003
Messages: 1722
from Bridgend,S.Wales
OFF-Line
| Posted 30-08-2004 at 22:13
Take nothing but photos and leave nothing but footprints.It's a pretty good rule,don't you think?
Profile
Reply
|
wayland
Joined:
08-09-2004
Messages: 34
from Lancashire
OFF-Line
| Posted 10-09-2004 at 12:00
Hi, I’m new here so I hope you’ll forgive me if I put my foot in it anywhere.
I couldn’t help being intrigued by this thread. I come at this interest from perhaps a slightly different angle to many other visitors to this forum. Although I have a very keen interest in archeology and hisory, I would have to say that what really drags me out of bed in the middle of the night to see a pile of stones at five am. is most often the fantastic photographic opportunities they present
I have as a result been faced many times with the dilemma of how much do I tidy up before taking pictures. Litter is of course a must and I usually carry a black bag in the van for just such occasions. But then there are the offerings?
As a historian and archeologist I tend to feel that details of the rites of our pre-historic ancestors are for the large part unknown and quite possibly unknowable. On a personal level I have no firm belief in anything outside my own experience (but that is of course a philosophical matter we could argue about all day). However, what is quite clear is that a certain section of society does have strong beliefs that they associate with various ancient sites and these should be treated with as much respect as any organized faith issue.
I have on numerous occasions waited half an hour or more for a person in a multi colored kaftan to hug each stone of a circle in turn before being able to take a photograph. I have no real problem with that, I do not perhaps understand their particular form of worship but I could say exactly the same about the Archbishop of Canterbury.
My point (finally you might say) is this, there are written accounts of many ancient societies, such as the Vikings for example, who left offerings to their gods in much the same way as modern neo-pagans often do. Many offerings were of food, which was subsequently devoured by the local dogs or wildlife. This was accepted as the god’s way of receiving the sacrifice. In fact sacrifice is the important point. The important part was not that the gift remains in place but that the gift was given in the first place. Most sacrificial sites involve putting the object beyond the use of the donor. Water is a classic example but so is the deliberate destruction of many articles before burial.
If people choose to leave offerings at ancient sites in the fashion of ancient societies then they surely cannot really complain when such offerings are removed so that others can enjoy the site in their own equally legitimate ways.
Profile
Reply
|
Thorgrim
Joined:
25-06-2003
Messages: 794
OFF-Line
| Posted 10-09-2004 at 13:34
Welcome Wayland and looking forward to seeing some of your photographs. I'm in total agreement with your views on offerings etc. I always remove litter. Sometimes I leave an offering in place if it adds something to the picture - flowers don't bother me at all. On other occassions, I frame things so that eyesores are hidden. When not possible, I remove them for the photo and replace them afterwards. I don't share their religious views, but do respect them unless they harm the ancient place in any way. There have been times when I could do nothing, but remove the offending objects digitally back home. 
Profile
Reply
|
wayland
Joined:
08-09-2004
Messages: 34
from Lancashire
OFF-Line
| Posted 10-09-2004 at 14:26
Yes Digital has really opened up some of these sites for me. Now I can remove all sorts of pesky things like fences, interpretation boards, visitors etc.
There are a couple of old photos in the monochrome gallery on my site (http://www.lore-and-saga.co.uk/html/photography.html) but there are a bunch more that I'm intending to upload as soon as I get around to editing the tour of the South West we made for a holiday this year.
Profile
Reply
|
Andy B
Joined:
13-02-2001
Messages: 7043
from Surrey, UK
OFF-Line
| Posted 10-09-2004 at 23:49
Seconded on the photography, the clearing up, and the welcome. I too look forward to seeing more of your excellent work.
Cheers,
Andy
Profile
 Email
Reply
|
coldrum
Joined:
17-09-2002
Messages: 780
OFF-Line
|  Posted 11-09-2004 at 14:43
Hello
Being pagan I do sometimes leave a few flowers at a site.
Never used candles at all,or materials that not biodegradable.
Thats what I do anyway.
Offerings are left because this feels right to the people concerned.
And if you want to see something thats a real mess,what about some of the cloutie wells in Scotland.
The trees are covered in rags some not of natural fibres but nobody takes them down because of the significance of the place.
Maybe it's just a case of leaving something small and natural that nature can take awy.
Coldrum
Profile
Reply
|
Thorgrim
Joined:
25-06-2003
Messages: 794
OFF-Line
| Posted 11-09-2004 at 14:59
Yes - leaving rags, underwear, manmade fibres and other tat is not only unsightly, it is an insult to whatever spirit of the wells the cloutie hangers believe in. In days of yore, a bright ribbon was a luxury item bought at the fair or from a pedlar at great relative expense. It was hung on a cloutie tree to gain a cure for an ill or perhaps to win a lover. The point was that the clouite was a sacrifice of something of value - what does it say about the sincerity of today's cloutie hangers if they just give unwanted litter? 
Profile
Reply
|
Partlow
Joined:
09-02-2005
Messages: 57
from Alabama, U.S.
OFF-Line
| Posted 10-02-2005 at 15:54
By having the luxury of visiting sites few people are aware of, the absence or presence of offerings, etc, is useful in determining the popularity of the site. You can also guage what kind of interest there is for the obscure sites. Of course this is quite different from sites that attract a good number of tourists & pilgrims. But these are hard, difficult times for people and they need places holding the quality that m. sites possess in order to regain some semblance of balance. Litter and disrespect are one thing; but offerings by a "pilgrim" serve to reassure others that there is at least one person not going over the edge (hopefully).
Profile
Reply
|
Anonymous
User not Registered |  Posted 13-02-2005 at 09:30
Leaving your thoughts can be far more powerful if accompanied by gifts. What harm can leaving flowers do?
Reply
|
Anonymous
User not Registered | Posted 13-02-2005 at 15:59
Quote:
|
On 2004-09-11 14:59, Thorgrim wrote:
what does it say about the sincerity of today's cloutie hangers if they just give unwanted litter?
|
|
What may constitute as litter to one may not resemble litter to another! True?
Decaying flowers, candles or runes are all litter to most people. Not until you understand the intent can you even begin to judge anothers acts.
Reply
|
Anonymous
User not Registered | Posted 14-02-2005 at 18:12
Quote:
|
On 2004-09-11 14:43, coldrum wrote:
Maybe it's just a case of leaving something small and natural that nature can take awy.
Coldrum
|
|
Like chalk markings that will wash away in time?
Reply
|
wayland
Joined:
08-09-2004
Messages: 34
from Lancashire
OFF-Line
| Posted 16-02-2005 at 06:47
Quote:
|
Like chalk markings that will wash away in time?
|
|
The problem is that one persons chalk marks are another persons graffiti.
As a photographer and an archaeologist of sorts I have to object strongly to marking stones.
Even chalk takes a long time to disappear naturally, this places one persons interpretation of what is acceptable behaviour above that of hundreds of visitors who follow, a grossly selfish act.
Such actions often result in the stones having to be cleaned to some degree which increases wear and wastes time that could be better used preserving these sites for future generations.
Profile
Reply
|
Anonymous
User not Registered |  Posted 18-02-2005 at 22:58
I'm more p*ssed off with the individuals who raised the stones in the first place. Talk about desecration of a naturally balanced energy source, criminal behaviour. I wonder how many 'In tunies' would be in tune without these markers to inspire their imaginations.
Reply
|
Main News