[Stones] Secrets of Stonehenge

[The Wissers]

Thank you, Ric. As you may know, I am a lover of Hindu culture (with a 
leaning toward Vaisnavism). I also own and have read Celtic Heritage, 
and was familiar with some of the ways the two cultures mirror one 
another, but I still found the Campbell article interesting. I had never 
connected that connection with megaliths, as they precede 'Celtic' 
cultures by thousands of years. On the other hand, I have often thought 
that anyone interested in megaliths and how they may have been regarded 
in ancient times would do well to look into the practises still current, 
especially in rural India, connected with certain stones that are 
regarded as ceremonial. A few examples were posted to the Portal by 
someone whose name presently escapes me. Many ancient practises that 
have been abandoned elsewhere have continued in an unbroken line since 
ancient times on the subcontinent.

In the article by Campbell he mentions the yaksas or Hindu little 
people. A friend of mine who often works with people from other 
countries told me of walking in the woods here in Pennsylvania with a 
couple if interns from India and how they spoke matter-of-factly of the 
little people who lived there as if they assumed she was aware of them, 
too. She's an environmental teacher who has spent many hours in 
woodlands over the years and it intrigued her so that she came baack to 
it several times, musing at how certain they were of it.

As for the more general topic of sexual interpretation of landscape and 
sites, I feel that if anything it is underemphasised in the public's 
understanding of ancient man's relationship with the landscape, although 
there is certainly a better grasp of it on our side of the ocean than 
there is here in the land of puritanism and porn.

Cheers,
Nancy



Ric wrote:

>Hi Nancy,
>
>this is a 'mega' subject and the ancient colossus
>which is Hinduism is historically, partially
>understood only - but all 3 of the contemporary major
>Hindu schools of thought represented by Vishnu
>(Krishna), Shiva, Brahma are basically - if not
>especially - Tantric / of the 'Sacred Marriage' in
>nature, since all three godheads possess their female
>counterparts, 'shakti' or "wisdom" - so it seems to
>cycle back to the symbol of the male upright within a
>female circle -  templates for Stonehenge, Avebury's
>south inner circle, and many other stone circles [and
>'sea henges'] as well. 
>
>The modern name for this design in India is the
>'Shivling'
>
>http://jalore.nic.in/.%5Cimage%5Cshivling%20in%20fort.JPG
>
>as an object of devotional worship the stoneage
>'bullaun' from Ireland may be a direct parallel?
>
>http://www.megalithomania.com/hires/800x600/feaghna.jpg
>
>*IF* the theory is correct - a major preoccupation of
>the Neolithic Age could have been the worship of a
>divine couple, whose eternal embrace, represented by
>monolith-centred stone circles, ensured the earth's
>fertility and was connected with the cyclic behaviour
>of sun, moon and other heavenly bodies?
>
>Terry Meaden broaches this, in his 'Secrets of the
>Avebury Stones' (1999) and other authors have noticed
>similarities between the [later] European Iron Age
>belief systems and those of India,  for example Alwyn
>and Brinley Rees 'Celtic Heritage' (1961), and Neil
>Campbell's article at -
>
>http://www.geocities.com/indianpaganism/celticvedic.html
>
>oh yes, i do seriously believe there are "Secrets of
>Stonehenge" but i do not believe we have even begun to
>round the corner on what those secrets actually are,
>yet?
>
>;)
>
>Ric
>  
>