Re: Roman DNA
Posted: Sat Jul 14, 2018 8:24 am
by Simon21
Unfortunately our serial troll has tried to distract from his own disgusting interests one of which appears to be porn.
Those interested in the conversion (catholic) will know that Bede is the authority here. Needless to say Bede, like every other source from this period makes no references to meteors or aliens.
Re: Roman DNA
Posted: Sun Jul 15, 2018 3:11 am
by Simon21
Like most Anglo Saxon grave good deposits,
something stolen, something imitation and poorly made, something old, something new
That is not what the article says though does it. So you are lying about having read it - this continued mendacity just adds to the fact that you must go. You have been banned on two boards and locked out of one stream here.
Decoding Anglo-Saxon art
The intricate designs of Anglo-Saxon brooches, buckles, and other pieces of decorative metalwork are not just pretty decoration, they have multi-layered symbolic meanings and tell stories. Curator Rosie Weetch and Illustrator Craig Williams team up to decode some key Anglo-Saxon objects.
Turning the brooch upside-down reveals four heads in profile on the rectangular head of the brooch, highlighted in purple. Click on the image for larger version.
Craig Williams, Illustrator and Rosie Weetch, Curator 28 May 2014
One of the most enjoyable things about working with the British Museum’s Anglo-Saxon collection is having the opportunity to study the intricate designs of the many brooches, buckles, and other pieces of decorative metalwork. This is because in Anglo-Saxon art there is always more than meets the eye.
The objects invite careful contemplation, and you can find yourself spending hours puzzling over their designs, finding new beasts and images. The dense animal patterns that cover many Anglo-Saxon objects are not just pretty decoration, they have multi-layered symbolic meanings and tell stories. Anglo-Saxons, who had a love of riddles and puzzles of all kinds, would have been able to ‘read’ the stories embedded in the decoration. But for us it is trickier as we are not fluent in the language of Anglo-Saxon art.
Anglo-Saxon art went through many changes between the 5th and 11th centuries, but puzzles and storytelling remained central. The early art style of the Anglo-Saxon period is known as Style I and was popular in the late 5th and 6th centuries. It is characterised by what seems to be a dizzying jumble of animal limbs and face masks, which has led some scholars to describe the style as an ‘animal salad’. Close scrutiny shows that Style I is not as abstract as first appears, and through carefully following the decoration in stages we can unpick the details and begin to get a sense for what the design might mean.
Decoding the square-headed brooch.
Decoding the square-headed brooch. Click on the image for a larger version.
One of the most exquisite examples of Style I animal art is a silver-gilt square-headed brooch from a female grave on the Isle of Wight. Its surface is covered with at least 24 different beasts: a mix of birds’ heads, human masks, animals and hybrids. Some of them are quite clear, like the faces in the circular lobes projecting from the bottom of the brooch. Others are harder to spot, such as the faces in profile that only emerge when the brooch is turned upside-down. Some of the images can be read in multiple ways, and this ambiguity is central to Style I art.
Turning the brooch upside-down reveals four heads in profile on the rectangular head of the brooch, highlighted in purple. Click on the image for larger version.
Turning the brooch upside-down reveals four heads in profile on the rectangular head of the brooch, highlighted in purple. Click on the image for larger version.
Once we have identified the creatures on the brooch, we can begin to decode its meaning. In the lozenge-shaped field at the foot of the brooch is a bearded face with a helmet underneath two birds that may represent the Germanic god Woden/Odin with his two companion ravens. The image of a god alongside other powerful animals may have offered symbolic protection to the wearer like a talisman or amulet.
Decoding the great gold buckle from Sutton Hoo. Click on the image for larger version.
Gold belt buckle. Sutton Hoo, Suffolk, early 7th century AD. Click on the image for a larger version.
Style I was superseded by Style II in the late 6th century. This later style has more fluid and graceful animals, but these still writhe and interlace together and require patient untangling. The great gold buckle from Sutton Hoo is decorated in this style. From the thicket of interlace that fills the buckle’s surface 13 different animals emerge. These animals are easier to spot: the ring-and-dot eyes, the birds’ hooked beaks, and the four-toed feet of the animals are good starting points. At the tip of the buckle, two animals grip a small dog-like creature in their jaws and on the circular plate, two snakes intertwine and bite their own bodies. Such designs reveal the importance of the natural world, and it is likely that different animals were thought to hold different properties and characteristics that could be transferred to the objects they decorated. The fearsome snakes, with their shape-shifting qualities, demand respect and confer authority, and were suitable symbols for a buckle that adorned a high-status man, or even an Anglo-Saxon king.
The five senses on the Fuller Brooch. Click on the image for a larger version
The five senses on the Fuller Brooch. Anglo-Saxon, late 9th century AD. Click on the image for a larger version.
Animal art continued to be popular on Anglo-Saxon metalwork throughout the later period, when it went through further transformations into the Mercian Style (defined by sinuous animal interlace) in the 8th century and then into the lively Trewhiddle Style in the 9th century. Trewhiddle-style animals feature in the roundels of the Fuller Brooch, but all other aspects of its decoration are unique within Anglo-Saxon art. Again, through a careful unpicking of its complex imagery we can understand its visual messages. At the centre is a man with staring eyes holding two plants. Around him are four other men striking poses: one, with his hands behind his back, sniffs a leaf; another rubs his two hands together; the third holds his hand up to his ear; and the final one has his whole hand inserted into his mouth. Together these strange poses form the earliest personification of the five senses: Sight, Smell, Touch, Hearing, and Taste. Surrounding these central motifs are roundels depicting animals, humans, and plants that perhaps represent God’s creation.
This iconography can best be understood in the context of the scholarly writings of King Alfred the Great (d. AD 899), which emphasised sight and the ‘mind’s eye’ as the principal way in which wisdom was acquired along with the other senses. Given this connection, perhaps it was made at Alfred the Great’s court workshop and designed to be worn by one of his courtiers?
Throughout the period, the Anglo-Saxons expressed a love of riddles and puzzles in their metalwork. Behind the non-reflective glass in the newly opened Sir Paul and Lady Ruddock Gallery of Sutton Hoo and Europe AD 300–1100, you can do like the Anglo-Saxons and get up close to these and many other objects to decode the messages yourself.
A leading authority of the British Museum blows your idiotic non theory out of the water. Completely. More reason to have you removed.
Note the Coptic Interlace in this item, usually seen in "insular" manuscripts.
There were no Egyptian community in Scotland (Copts)in the sixth century. According to you they were edged out by the Martians and Russians
I am waiting for you to claim that that the Book of Kells was written by Anglo Saxons, simon.
I will give you a lesson on the Book of Kells when you tell me what a book created in the 9th century has to do with the Anglo Saxon acculturisation of Roman Britain in the fifth and sixth. 500 years out
Total non-sequitur and attempt by someone who doesn't even know basic dating to find something to say. These supposed books this person claiims to have written must be like reading Monty Python scripts no coherent structure.
One of the problems you face, simon,
is that there is abundant evidence of jewelry workshops from this period in the areas I pointed you to,
{which I pointed you to several pages of your insults ago)
while you have no evidence of any early anglo saxon jewelry workshops.
You have not produced a single shred of evidence for anything you have said.
You have lied about producing sources, the only credible one contradicted you.
As Tiompan said this is what youo do make irrelevant silly statements, then failing to produce anything to back them up.
I have produced accredited authorities.
Now I am waiting for you to produce material of a similar nature.
Not incoherent maps which show Scotland in Denmark,
Not screeds of Latin from books written long after the adventus which actually contradict you.
Evidence, facts, data a single credited article where a historian states the anglo Saxons British
people produced no metal ware for 500 years.
If you took such bigoted atitudes towards the Shawnee people it is not surprising they held you in such contempt
I would wager your views do not make you popular with jewish people either
.
Re: Roman DNA
Posted: Sun Jul 15, 2018 5:29 am
by Simon21
Game, set, match
In This Article
Anglo-Saxon Metalwork
Introduction
General Overviews
Introduction
Interest in the design and structure of objects of metalwork of the pre-Conquest period can already be seen in the pioneering work of Brian Faussett between 1769 and 1773, exemplified in his detailed drawings and notes on, for example, the Kingston Down brooch in his surviving notebooks, published long after his death (Charles Roach Smith, Inventorium Sepulchrale, an Account of Some Antiquities Dug Up at Gilton, Kingston, Sibertswold, Barfriston, Beakesbourne, Chartham, and Crundale, in the County of Kent, from 1757 to 1773, London: privately printed, 1856). Although Faussett did not recognize his excavated material as Anglo-Saxon, thinking that he was investigating Romano-British graves, nevertheless his work (especially in his detailed recording of all finds, and therefore all metalwork objects, including toilet implements, weapons, and tools, as well as the gold jewelry) is in many ways a true starting point for two trends still working themselves out in the literature: the refining of work defining styles and dating the material, and the study of the full range of metalwork and its associated crafts. It is true, however, that objects of fine metalwork have excited the greatest interest, encouraged by spectacular finds from early sites such as Sutton Hoo and of hoards such as that from Trewhiddle, Cornwall (see Specific Sites). More recently, the 7th-century “Staffordshire hoard,” with its collection of gold and jeweled fragments, many from weapons and armor, has reinforced interest in the spectacular and also in the emphasis on the early period. It is likely that as studies of this new material come out, the history of early Anglo-Saxon fine metalworking (and its design and iconography) will be rewritten, although this process is already well on its way, with the huge increase in numbers brought about by the popularity of metal detecting and the working of the Treasure Act 1996 and the development of the Portable Antiquities scheme (for a short explanation of these, see Leahy and Bland 2009, cited under Staffordshire Hoard). The bias toward fine metalwork is therefore reflected here: nevertheless, the overall story of scholarly work on Anglo-Saxon metalwork has actually been more balanced, with studies of ferrous metalworking and other humbler metals such as lead appearing from early in the 20th century, and with the archaeology of early settlements, middle Saxon estates, and later towns showing the importance of metalwork studies in social and economic development. Much of the best of recent work has looked at the context in which the metalwork was made: its makers and their role in society, and the techniques and technology involved (including documentary and literary as well as archaeological sources). Evidence of comparative material and sites from Scandinavia and western Europe, and from Celtic and Viking sites within Ireland and the British Isles, has often proved illuminating for contemporary Anglo-Saxon practice, and the study of Style in particular requires knowledge of Germanic and Viking Age styles. Arising from all this work, the meaning of metalwork objects within the developing society—whether as treasure, functional objects (e.g., dress fasteners, tools, or armor), personal adornment, signifiers of ethnicity or personal status, or carrying in its iconography some deeper meaning (e.g., relating to religious beliefs or royal power)—has come to be seen as of equal importance to dating.
General Overviews
There are very few works that can be classified as overviews of Anglo-Saxon metalwork, as distinct from surveys of Anglo-Saxon art more generally. One that provides such an overview, however, is Brown 1986, a dissertation (cited under Reference Works). There are some textbooks, however, such as Jessup 1950 and Leahy 2003, that also provide a broad introduction to the area. The best overviews published since the late 1990s are those contained within two encyclopedias. All relevant entries in the Blackwell Encyclopaedia of Anglo-Saxon England (see Blackburn 1999a, Blackburn 1999b, Brown 1999a, Brown 1999b, and Dickinson 1999) still have something to contribute, in spite of the recent publication of the authoritative Oxford Handbook of Anglo-Saxon Archaeology. This latter work includes a section on “Craft Production and Technology” (Thomas 2011), in which each subsection has material relevant to metalwork studies, and concludes with a useful bibliography. Some entries from this handbook, however, are represented under other sections of this bibliography (see Production, Techniques, and Tools and the Ideological Significance of “Treasure”). Other books, for example Wilson 1986, are more-general surveys of Anglo-Saxon art or archaeology but are useful in putting the metalwork (in these objects that are usually viewed as artistic rather than utilitarian) into the context of other media. See also Webster 2012 (cited under Style).
Blackburn, Mark A. S. “Mints and Minting.” In The Blackwell Encyclopaedia of Anglo-Saxon England. Edited by Michael Lapidge, John Blair, Simon Keynes, and Donald Scragg, 317–318. Oxford and Malden, MA: Blackwell, 1999a.
E-mail Citation »
Briefly discusses the evidence for mints and the changing politico-economic contexts in which mints developed. Also the relationship between these and sources of bullion. Minting processes are not touched on.
Blackburn, Mark A. S. “Moneyers.” In The Blackwell Encyclopaedia of Anglo-Saxon England. Edited by Michael Lapidge, John Blair, Simon Keynes, and Donald Scragg, 324–325. Oxford and Malden, MA: Blackwell, 1999b.
E-mail Citation »
Discusses mainly late and post-Conquest evidence for the high status of moneyers.
Brown, Kevin B. “Metalworking.” In The Blackwell Encyclopaedia of Anglo-Saxon England. Edited by Michael Lapidge, John Blair, Simon Keynes, and Donald Scragg, 309–310. Oxford and Malden, MA: Blackwell, 1999a.
E-mail Citation »
Recounts the main technological processes observable in the archaeological record and the surviving material; briefly introduces the related topics of itinerant specialists, permanent workshops, and domestic production.
Brown, Kevin B. “Mining and Quarrying.” In The Blackwell Encyclopaedia of Anglo-Saxon England. Edited by Michael Lapidge, John Blair, Simon Keynes, and Donald Scragg, 315–317. Oxford and Malden, MA: Blackwell, 1999b.
E-mail Citation »
Notes that the areas of iron-ore extraction were the same from Roman times but that lead mining revived only in the 9th century, and that there is little evidence for extraction of other nonferrous metals, for which smiths relied on the recycling of scrap, including coins. Within the early medieval period, increasing specialization reflecting a change from domestic to workshop production is observable.
Dickinson, Tania M. “Jewellery.” In The Blackwell Encyclopaedia of Anglo-Saxon England. Edited by Michael Lapidge, John Blair, Simon Keynes, and Donald Scragg, 258–262. Oxford and Malden, MA: Blackwell, 1999.
E-mail Citation »
A broad chronological survey of Anglo-Saxon jewelry types from the 5th to the 11th centuries, with some attention to societal and dress changes reflected in the forms. Supported by figures with drawings illustrating thirty-five items.
Thomas, Gabor. “Overview: Craft Production and Technology.” In The Oxford Handbook of Anglo-Saxon Archaeology. Edited by Helena Hamerow, David A. Hinton, and Sally Crawford, 405–422. Oxford Handbooks. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 2011.
E-mail Citation »
Useful analysis of sources of evidence and their limitations, and a chronological survey tracing the move of production from the domestic level (with the production of nonutilitarian goods with meaning for personal and group identity) to a relatively small group of itinerant specialists, and then to a developing degree of craft specialization allied to increasing political centralization, and a shift from countryside to town.
Wilson, David M. Anglo-Saxon Art from the Seventh Century to the Norman Conquest. London: Thames and Hudson, 1986.
E-mail Citation »
A broad, handsomely illustrated, chronological overview of all aspects of Anglo-Saxon art, including jewelry and fine metalwork. Still of value because it places the metalwork in the wider art context. Originally published in 1984.
Re: Roman DNA
Posted: Sun Jul 15, 2018 11:21 am
by circumspice
EP didn't use to be this bad in the fairly recent past. He was more or less coherent. I think that we can look back & see that he began to behave oddly around the same time he got fixated on giants in the Americas. Perhaps this is the onset of senile dementia?