Druids and Stone Circles

close
more_vert
Amberlady A
Amberlady Oct 15, 2009 22:22:19
Replying to tiompan

tiompan wrote:
[quote="Branwen"][quote="Littlestone"] It's a epochal problem , druids are historical and the stone circles are prehistoric which doesn't mean to say there was never a onnection but impossible to prove either way .
Maybe not but the 2,500 year gap between the erection of stone circles and the appearance of Druids is something of a hint.

T tjj
tjj Oct 15, 2009 22:33:57
Replying to Amberlady

Amberlady wrote:
tiompan wrote:
[quote="Branwen"][quote="Littlestone"] It's a epochal problem , druids are historical and the stone circles are prehistoric which doesn't mean to say there was never a onnection but impossible to prove either way .
Maybe not but the 2,500 year gap between the erection of stone circles and the appearance of Druids is something of a hint.
Amberlady, please forgive for challenging this statement but how do you know there was a 2,500 year gap. That sort of assumes that the Druids appeared at a certain point in prehistory and the reality is we just don't know.
(The probably ancient poem ' Song of Amergin' taken from White Goddess by Robert Graves)

I am the stag of seven tines
I am the wide flood on the plain
I am the wind on deep waters
I am the shining tear of the sun
I am a hawk on the cliff
I am fair among flowers
I am a god who sets the head afire with smoke
I am a battle-waging spear
I am a salmon in the pool
I am the hill of poetry
I am a ruthless boar
I am a threatening noise
I am a wave of the sea
Who but I knows the secrets of the unhewn dolmen?

T tiompan
tiompan Oct 16, 2009 08:53:34
Replying to Amberlady

Amberlady wrote:
tiompan wrote:
[quote="Branwen"][quote="Littlestone"] It's a epochal problem , druids are historical and the stone circles are prehistoric which doesn't mean to say there was never a onnection but impossible to prove either way .
Maybe not but the 2,500 year gap between the erection of stone circles and the appearance of Druids is something of a hint.
The reply was to the problems inherent in the question " How many circles actually have any real connections to Druid's? " rather than a answer to that question .
The boggy area between archaeology and history/folk- lore produces plenty of discussion not much of which is enlightening . In this case the two sides would need to come to some agreement about the terminology i.e. what is a druid ? the pros would say that surely the description would fit the "architects " the cons "should we expect continuity " ,as you hint at .
Either way nothing conclusive is likely to come of it .