Re: New book identifies Ireland as Atlantis
From: WCB (republican_at_email.com)
Date: 08/12/04
- Next message: George: "Re: 1520's white men living in northeastern US"
- Previous message: Doug Weller: "Re: 1520's white men living in northeastern US"
- In reply to:(deleted message) Féachadóir: "Re: New book identifies Ireland as Atlantis"
- Next in thread: Diarmid Logan: "Re: New book identifies Ireland as Atlantis"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 07:37:29 +1200
On Thu, 12 Aug 2004 13:08:11 +0100, FŽachad—ir <FŽach@d.—ir> wrote:
>Scr’obh "Searles O'Dubhain"
>
>>What you've presented is essentially true with the following
>>qualifications:
>>
>>The O'Neill achieved power in Ireland around the 7th century
>
>Given that Colmcille was a 6th century member of the dynasty, we can
>say with some certainty that they were powerful before the 7th century
>
>>and rewrote
>>the histories to include Niall of the Nine Hostages as the first high
>>king of Ireland.
>
>Did they? I had the impression that Niall was portrayed not just as an
>Ard R’, but as the descendant of Ard R’anna. Wasn't Conn Cetcathach
>claimed as one of his more illustrious predecessors?
>
>It seems to me most likely Niall was an ambitious king from the
>Connachta who expanded to take advantage of a declining Uladh. In the
>succeeding centuries, his dynasty consolidated their grip on Ulster
>and Mide.
>
>>The same can be said for the Eoghanacta.
>
>The Eoghanachta were Munster kings,
Hurrah!
> but Munster didn't become
>significant in Irish politics until after the Norsemen disrupted the
>power structure.
My understanding is that the 4th Century was a time of strength, also,
for Na Eoghanachta.
>If you really want to mess with L*g*n's head, point out to him that
>the early annalists restricted the term 'Goidel' to the Connachta, Ua
>Niall and Eoghanachta, who by virtue of their status as superior
>*invaders*, claimed a divine right to rule the other peoples of
>Ireland.
>
>>In Gaelic
>>Irish society family was considered to be the primary political
>>grouping.
>
>I would have said the Tuath. The fine was the primary social
>grouping, but the tuath was political.
>
>>Generally, Irish annals and histories are considered to be
>>historical from about the 5th century onward (they were "synchronized"
>>to connect with Biblical history during the Middle Ages and hence go
>>back to what is said to be the beginning of the world).
>
>And with the proviso that each generation fictionalised the past to
>reflect the present political set-up, so that figuring out what was
>going on gets murkier the further away from the event you move.
>
>>Before that they
>>are at best "traditional." Even before that, they are mainly
>>mythological.
>
>What's the difference?
>
>> A very important factor to consider is that until the 20th
>>century many Irish scholars and people considered *ALL* of the annals
>>and histories to be factual (even the mythological portions though
>>outwardly Christian). This influenced their attitudes and their
>>reactions to almost everything.
>>
>>Even though Brian Boru won the battle of Clontarf, he was said to have
>>been killed then.
>
>its pretty well documented that he died at Clontarf.
>
>>The Normans moved in the 12th century CE. The Tudors
>>warred with the O'Neills and other families until the "Flight of the
>>Earls" in 1603 CE.
>
>The Tudors (and others) warred with everyone in Ireland
>
>>Cromwell came in during the mid 1600's to overthrow
>>and O'Neill inspired uprising.
>
>Eoin Rua doesn't deserve that much credit. There was the
>Confederation after all, and the meddling of the Nuncio. There was
>also an element of popular revolt from unlanded Irish
>
>>After that, Gaelic Irish society was
>>finished off through things like the Ulster Plantation,
>
>The plantation of Ulster preceded Cromwell by 30 years
>
>>the Laws of
>>Kilkenny,
>
>Likewise, the Statutes of Kilkenny were three centuries before
>Cromwells time, and aimed at the English in Ireland rather than the
>Gaelic Irish
>
>>the Irish Penal Laws and exportation, a few more uprisings,
>>and the Irish Potato Famine, An G—rta.
>
>In fairness to the perfidious Albions, I don't think you can lay the
>entire blame for phytophthora infestans at their doorstep.
One can lay the blame at perfidious Albion for Ireland's dependance on
the potato at the time of the famine. If Catholic farmers weren't
compelled, by the British enacted Penal laws, to split their farms
equally amongst their children at their death, only allowed to buy
land off other Catholics then the farms wouldn't have got so small
that potatos were the only economically viable crop to grow...
Indeed it wasn't Albion's fault that the blight arrived but the
vulenerability to potato crop failure is.
WCB
- Next message: George: "Re: 1520's white men living in northeastern US"
- Previous message: Doug Weller: "Re: 1520's white men living in northeastern US"
- In reply to:(deleted message) Féachadóir: "Re: New book identifies Ireland as Atlantis"
- Next in thread: Diarmid Logan: "Re: New book identifies Ireland as Atlantis"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|