XPost: alt.religion.druid, alt.traditional.witchcraft, soc.culture.celtic   
   From: laighleas@nospam.yahoo.co.uk   
      
   "flink"  wrote in message   
   news:cjht3c$2oe$1@hercules.btinternet.com...   
   > You have to remember that the pagan Roman authorities suppressed both   
   > Christianity and Druidism, in addition the insularity of Britain was such   
   > that the later edict suppressing polytheism were not recognised in   
   Britain,   
   > which stuck to Constantine's original edict of religious toleration.   
      
    I've gone over Romans vs druids god knows how many times over the   
   years - it's probably in Google.   
      
   The best analysis would suggest that what was suppressed was not druidism,   
   but the practice of human sacrifice. There's actually one hell of a lot of   
   continuity at religious sites between the Celtic Iron Age and the   
   Romano-Celtic period. Furthermore, you get mention of druids in the later   
   period - one prominent mention is in Ausonius, but its not the only one.   
   They were seen as quite respectable by then.   
      
   Forget about Anglesey being the last battle of the druids, or that there was   
   a druid army there, or that the reason for the attack was anything to do   
   with druids. Actually the idea that Anglesey was the most sacred of druid   
   sites is no older than the 17th century AD. There's a difference between   
   popular historical myth and academic history. In fact the former frequently   
   shows bugger all connection with the latter. And none of the above is   
   particularly controversial - sit in on an undergrad lecture and you'll   
   probably hear all of the popular myth shot down in flames.   
      
   Britain was not that isolated. Have a look at the various pottery   
   assemblages to see what trade routes Britain was involved in - Cornwall was   
   still trading with North Africa and Turkey after Britain had left the Roman   
   world.   
      
   Britain was, as a Roman province, also a major part of the trade axis direct   
   to the army on the Rhine. Furthermore, Britain was fairly heavily garrisoned   
   throughout the Roman period by comparison to some other provinces, the army   
   was the principle consumer of agricultural surpluses, was also responsible   
   for maintaining the money supply, and helped collect taxes. One didn't   
   decide to just not recognise an imperial order from Constantine's   
   successors, some of whom were religious fanatics. If a Roman emperor wanted   
   things enforced in Britain, they would be - by the army if need be. In those   
   circumstances one might hope that the emperor didn't turn his attention your   
   way - but you kept your head down rather than saying "we're going to ignore   
   this" and carrying on as if nothing happened.   
      
   Of course, there were times when the emperor wasn't going to be able to do   
   anything, like the occasion when Carausius seceded from the empire, or   
   because the Gaulish empire was in the way. Military matters might also keep   
   him preoccupied, although there were several occasions when those military   
   matters involved Britain. Still, just because the emperor was occupied   
   elsewhere didn't mean that local Christians wouldn't demolish pagan temples   
   if they felt it was a good idea, or even that local landowners or the   
   provincial government wouldn't decide that they needed the stone from a   
   temple to build a church. In fact you do get the destruction of some pagan   
   monuments in Britain after Constantine, plus the dilapidation of temples,   
   followed by a brief period of reconstruction in the period of Julian the   
   Apostate. It's a slow decline, true - but then Britain was rather less   
   urbanised, and more rural, than other parts of the western empire, and there   
   had been a drift away from the cities. Suppression moved faster in urban   
   environments, for obvious reasons. In fact many rural temples went into a   
   terminal decline largely because the elite stopped supporting them and   
   people stopped coming.   
      
   That's some very general background. Specifics. You don't get the final   
   prohibition of paganism, by Theodosius, until 391 - after that all pagan   
   temples are closed by law. However, by 392 Theodosius was on a threshold of   
   a war in the Balkans and Italy, which he won in 394 and died in January 395.   
   He therefore didn't have time to do anything in Britain. Theodosius was   
   succeeded by Honorius - although Stilicho acted as regent in his minority.   
   Stilicho did come to Britain in 396 and 397, but he was more concerned with   
   military matters than religious issues. Of course, by 410 Britain was no   
   longer part of the empire.   
      
   Kevin   
      
   > "Kevin Jones"  wrote in message   
   > news:cig1ej$rtm$1@ngspool-d02.news.aol.com...   
   > > "allan connochie"  wrote in message   
   > > news:414b9a19@news.greennet.net...   
   > > >   
   > > > "Kevin Jones"  wrote in message   
   > > > news:cifmog$ok8$1@ngspool-d02.news.aol.com...   
   > > > > "allan connochie"  wrote in message   
   > > > > news:414ae741@news.greennet.net...   
   > > > > >   
   > > > > > "Bogman"  wrote in message   
   > > > > > news:cidc5g$7g8$1@titan.btinternet.com...   
   > > > > > >   
   > > > > > > "Searles O'Dubhain"  wrote in message   
   > > > > > > news:4u6dnYMweriDot_cRVn-qA@giganews.com...   
   > > > > > > >   
   > > > > > > > "flink"  wrote in message   
   > > > > > > > news:chtave$6e6$1@hercules.btinternet.com...   
   > > > > > > > > Absolute crap. Celtic crosses were first manufactured at   
   > > Chester,   
   > > > > and   
   > > > > > > > are a   
   > > > > > > > > variant of XP, the Greek for Chi Rho, the first two letters   
   of   
   > > > > Christ.   
   > > > > > > >   
   > > > > > > > How was this information verified?  Are you claiming Chester   
   as   
   > > the   
   > > > > > > > point of origin for all Celtic crosses?   
   > > > > > > >   
   > > > > > > > Searles   
   > > > > > > >   
   > > > > > > Verified by archeology old fruit! Chester, like Carlisle, was a   
   > > great   
   > > > > > > Romano-British and Christian city, both these two cities guarded   
   > the   
   > > > > > > corridor between Acotland and Wales, i.e. Strathclyde or   
   > Ystradclwyd   
   > > > and   
   > > > > > > Powys.   
   > > > > >   
   > > > > > I don't think he's asking for evidence that Chester and Carlisle   
   > > > existed.   
   > > > > > He's asking for evidence that 'Celtic crosses were first   
   > manufactured   
   > > at   
   > > > > > Chester' which is what you claimed.  If it is so and is verified   
   by   
   > > > > > archaeology then why don't you just give the references?   
   > > > >   
   > > > > It isn't verified by archaeology.   
   > > >   
   > > > I suspected not.  Not much of what Boggie writes is verified by   
   > anything.   
   > >   
   > > :-)   
   > >   
   > > > Thanks for the interesting post Kevin.   
   > >   
   > > You're welcome. I've occasionally grumbled about the rather artificial   
   > > division between wheel symbols and Celtic crosses - I suspect that   
   Celtic   
   > > Christians just continued to use an indigenous symbol, which is probably   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)