It would be interesting to test Sheldrake's theories - and proofs
- against a flat assertion of what is or isn't possibly transmitted
At 03:03 PM 9/14/2004, you wrote:
> > The presence of Romans and even of a later Roman
> > influence in the
> > manufacture of certain articles does not, for me,
> > indicate invasion as the
> > evidence lacks the adoption of the identity and
> > customs that one might
> > expect. It might all only indicate that Roman, or
> > Roman trained artisans
> > set up a successful workshop or two.
>F/|\ Yes- they could have been exploring new markets,
>or they could have been "criminals" in their area of
>origin, looking for a place to disappear, and in the
>meantime, had to support themselves. Pure speculation
>on my part, but, some things which motivate human
>behavior never change ie Nazis who went to Argentina
>and the like are a good example of ppl who needed to
>"disappear", to make an analogy.
> > As for influence through external trade, this is a
> > scapegoat often used
> > without a shred of evidence. While one can import an
> > article, the knowledge
> > of its manufacture and of its stylistic affinities
> > does not go with it. I
> > prefer the idea that designs arrived with artisans
> > rather than with traders
> > and this is the view that Jope stresses in tyhe case
> > of La Tene art in
> > Britain. I think that the same applies to
> > Ireland.nthere is a continuation
> > of some some British styles in some later Irish La
> > Tene art and I am
> > convinced that British artisans, finding a shrinking
> > market for their
> > skills in an ever increasingly Romanized Britain,
> > would have gone to
> > Ireland where there was no Roman influence among the
> > elite at all.
>F/|\That could be as well- or conversely, Irish
>mercenaries in Britain, took designs home with them,
>and either improved them, or varied them, using the
>designs as a jumping off point, or as an inspiration
>in their own creativity.
>People tend to forget that the Celts were great
>innovators. They could take an idea, and make it
>better, or take it in directions as yet unconceived-
>and this would be a valuable marketing edge in a
>society that seems to have valued "one upmanship".
> > There is far too much emphasis on genetics when it
> > comes to Celtic culture
> > and despite its scientic apparency, it is entirely
> > un-scientific. The idea
> > that material and habitual culture can be passed
> > through genetics is false.
>F/|\ I have not heard that theory, but based on what
>you are saying, it seems ridiculous.
> > Learned, or habitual activities are just not
> > incorporated into dna.
>F/|\ Nope. Nature vs nurture,...and one that
>researchers tend to forget- necessity.
>Necessity is the mother of invention afterall. Perhaps
>the largest problem is that we try to simplify a
>complex process, which may have been influenced by
>many factors, as well as by individual genius.
>Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca