At 03:52 PM 2/22/96 -0500, Raghnall Toma/s O/g O/ Cearbhaill wrote:
>> I didn't claim that *anything* produced in France should be considered
>> I only wish that people keep in mind that not only The British Isles can be
>> considered as Celtic.
>> Allow me to say that I do think that a Celtic substrat remained in France
>> even after the Roman Conquest, etc..
>> But... if you prefer to think that only Ireland, Scotland and Wales are
>> truly Celtic...well who am I to try and change that.
>> I only find it sectarian and sad when some of us are involved in Celtic
>> Unity or Pan-Celtic Gathering.
>> What is Mark point of view about that?
>I'm sorry. I must have missed part of this argument. Here is what I
>1. Mark argued that Lancelot is not a Celtic creation.
>2. You said that Lancelot is a Celtic creation, whether Mark wants to
>believe it or not.
>3. I asked why you say that Lancelot is a Celtic creation; I have no
>strong thoughts either way, as I know too little about the topic.
>4. You replied "I didn't think I needed reasons to argue that
>Continental Europe may be as Celtic as the Isles when we consider The
>Matter of Britain."
>I am confused by your reply to this, and I presume that it is my own
>fault. I've missed something in the argument, or have perhaps
>misinterpreted something. At any rate, please reorient me.
>As for Pan-Celtic Gathering, I fully support it as encompassed by
>Pan-Human Gathering. The various Celtic cultures are not threatened by a
>lack of Celtic unity, but rather by the general lack of concern for other
>cultures that permeates most of our world.
1: Lancelot is a Celtic creation because it is a character that can be
considered as an avatar of a Celtic God, and at any rate, in the whole
Matter of Britain, he is now indisociable from Arthur. Some scholars think
that Lancelot is the Breton version of a former character of the primitive
texts : Llenleawg the Gael in the welsh texts. RS Loomis has proved the
indentification between Lancelot and Lug. See also Jean Markale in 'Les
Celtes et la civilisation celtique' pp396-398. Is it Celtic enough?
2: On you opinion who created Lancelot and when ?
3: Chretien de Troyes wrote circa 1160-1180.
Geoffrey de Monmouth wrote his History of the King of Britain c1136.
>5. As it is my understanding that this work was produced in the second
>millenium of this era, I asked how the products of contemporary French
>aristocratic culture could still be considered Celtic.
4: The first mention of Arthur was in a poem : 'Gododin' written down in the
13th century. The poem itself seems older c: 7th century. This is to show
that something old can be written down much later. So how can we say that
the legends written down in
the *beginning* of the second millenium are contemporary French.
Anyway I think that we will dwell on and on the same old problem : the
definition of what is Celtic.
I still regret that Mark didn't take on with his assertion himself.
[log in to unmask]
Dia Dhuit uile
A wolf can act but like a wolf