03-02-2016, 06:44 AM
Paul,
Thanks for all of the in-line note, I will make good use of them, as you asked the following somewhat as a question, I will try and explain my thinking.
In terms of Genevieve not knowing about Zeus, there is no reason to suspect that she would not as she would have been raised Roman. Although a concession could be made to use Jupiter instead. I also considered some of the Welsh gods, but they are obscure and do not really make the point, it is also an echo back to the Exodus and also to Herod at the time of Christ birth. Herod would have been the best choice, except he was not a god. In terms of the royal houses being aware and in fact being educated in Roman education, see the notes below. Ambrosius and Uther were at the tail end of the Roman occupation of Britain.
" the island of Great Britain that were governed by the Roman Empire, from AD 43 to 409 or 410"
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Britain)
"Uther's family is based on some historical figures; Constantine on the historical usurper Constantine III, a claimant to the Roman throne from 407–411, and Constans on his son. Aurelius Ambrosius is Ambrosius Aurelianus"
˙ ˙ ˙
"Uther and his other brother Aurelius Ambrosius, still children, flee to Brittany. Vortigern makes an alliance with the Saxons under Hengist, but it goes disastrously wrong. Aurelius and Uther return, now adults. Aurelius burns Vortigern in his castle and becomes king."
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uther_Pendragon)
So you see the lingering effects of a Roman Britain would still be very much in force at the time of Arthur. Not only that Christianity would still be fairly knew as:
" On 27 February 380, Emperor Theodosius I enacted a law establishing Nicene Christianity as the state church of the Roman Empire."
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christiani...l_Councils)
So by the time of Arthur, the Greek and Roman gods would still be very much a part of a Romans education in terms of history, as their history and mythology is so intermixed. Simply think of the "Aeneid" and all the gods and goddesses that are involved and they would have certainly been instructed in the "Iliad" at the very least, so these people would be very much familiar with these gods.
I am using wiki for the reference, but I have written several papers on the subject and I see no errors in the wiki accounts. One paper was quite lengthy and involved tracing out the history of Merlin. Evidently the "Merlin" of legend was actually three different men combined into one. In this, wiki has it wrong. The Roman Merlin, Merlinus Ambrosius, was Roman educated in a number of things, but as it hinges on the story, he was very adapt with construction equipment, being able to set of hoist and other tools to lift large loads such as large stones. Thus was born the story that Merlin built Stonehenge, which we know is not the case, however, it would probably not have been beyond his ability.
I never did like the idea of "vampire" I was thinking more along of succubus, which would have been more than familiar, it would have been part of the folk lore. In fact One of the Merlins, "Myrddin Wyllt", or "Myrddin the Wild" was said to be born when his mother had sex with an incubus, which is why he was wild and had magical powers. of if not that "leech" as I think you suggested. I'll have to consider as I work back though it.
Again, thanks for all the good suggestions,
dale
just mercedes,
Thanks for your comments, much appreciated.
dale
Thanks for all of the in-line note, I will make good use of them, as you asked the following somewhat as a question, I will try and explain my thinking.
Quote:Paul wrote: "There is a thematic glitch, though, in using both Zeus and God in this soliloquy. G. may be using Zeus as a metaphor while [the Pelagian-Christian] God is her actual belief system. Perhaps Zeus could be tagged as "the pagan Zeus" to clear this up? Is she suggesting that the British people were pagans while she and A. were Christian? It's not a *bad* glitch, but could even add some power if the contrasting belief systems were placed more in opposition. The sacrifice on the altar is also pagan, same mixed message which could be repaired in the same way."
In terms of Genevieve not knowing about Zeus, there is no reason to suspect that she would not as she would have been raised Roman. Although a concession could be made to use Jupiter instead. I also considered some of the Welsh gods, but they are obscure and do not really make the point, it is also an echo back to the Exodus and also to Herod at the time of Christ birth. Herod would have been the best choice, except he was not a god. In terms of the royal houses being aware and in fact being educated in Roman education, see the notes below. Ambrosius and Uther were at the tail end of the Roman occupation of Britain.
" the island of Great Britain that were governed by the Roman Empire, from AD 43 to 409 or 410"
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Britain)
"Uther's family is based on some historical figures; Constantine on the historical usurper Constantine III, a claimant to the Roman throne from 407–411, and Constans on his son. Aurelius Ambrosius is Ambrosius Aurelianus"
˙ ˙ ˙
"Uther and his other brother Aurelius Ambrosius, still children, flee to Brittany. Vortigern makes an alliance with the Saxons under Hengist, but it goes disastrously wrong. Aurelius and Uther return, now adults. Aurelius burns Vortigern in his castle and becomes king."
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uther_Pendragon)
So you see the lingering effects of a Roman Britain would still be very much in force at the time of Arthur. Not only that Christianity would still be fairly knew as:
" On 27 February 380, Emperor Theodosius I enacted a law establishing Nicene Christianity as the state church of the Roman Empire."
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christiani...l_Councils)
So by the time of Arthur, the Greek and Roman gods would still be very much a part of a Romans education in terms of history, as their history and mythology is so intermixed. Simply think of the "Aeneid" and all the gods and goddesses that are involved and they would have certainly been instructed in the "Iliad" at the very least, so these people would be very much familiar with these gods.
I am using wiki for the reference, but I have written several papers on the subject and I see no errors in the wiki accounts. One paper was quite lengthy and involved tracing out the history of Merlin. Evidently the "Merlin" of legend was actually three different men combined into one. In this, wiki has it wrong. The Roman Merlin, Merlinus Ambrosius, was Roman educated in a number of things, but as it hinges on the story, he was very adapt with construction equipment, being able to set of hoist and other tools to lift large loads such as large stones. Thus was born the story that Merlin built Stonehenge, which we know is not the case, however, it would probably not have been beyond his ability.
I never did like the idea of "vampire" I was thinking more along of succubus, which would have been more than familiar, it would have been part of the folk lore. In fact One of the Merlins, "Myrddin Wyllt", or "Myrddin the Wild" was said to be born when his mother had sex with an incubus, which is why he was wild and had magical powers. of if not that "leech" as I think you suggested. I'll have to consider as I work back though it.
Again, thanks for all the good suggestions,
dale
just mercedes,
Thanks for your comments, much appreciated.
dale
How long after picking up the brush, the first masterpiece?
The goal is not to obfuscate that which is clear, but make clear that which isn't.
The goal is not to obfuscate that which is clear, but make clear that which isn't.