The Burning Times: fascinating docu on women's power before Christianity

[sakura]

[[

#at=380 youtube]]

ANd why women are feared to the extent that they are accused of witchcraft and killed for it

I think many of you are projecting your own desire to portray women as the perennial victims of oppression onto an era of history. Many undoubtedly were victims of male bigotry but you have allowed that aspect to colour your view of a much more widespread phenomena. The results are rather cartoonish, to say the least. Some of the posts on this thread are informed more by blatant misandry ("daddy's girl?") than rational perspective
In some countries, Iceland in particular, the overwhelming majority of "witches" burned were male (up to 90% according to some authorities)
The most noted persecutions were of organised heretics; Templar Knights, Cathars, Bulgars; predominately male- in the case of the Templars, exclusively so.
Oh, and women make and enjoy pornography too.

So, Dittany, what you are saying is that bad history is better than no history?

From the BBC website:
"It was the Norman Conquest that really cemented the power of the church in England. William the Conqueror implemented a colossal building project at both monastic and parish level. In Winchester, for example, the old Saxon Minster made way for a new Norman building. These new stone churches continued to play a central role in community life: they acted as schools, market places and entertainment venues."

I guess they are refering to this, when the church became established and accepted by most people.

The White Goddess is a fascinting book about this subject. I suspect Graves is a hideous mysoginist and the book was written by his girlfriend....but still a wonderful book. He hated it later but who cares.

'But then given that you're pretty ignorant about feminism LRD so you proabably won't understand that'

There seems to be so many different varieties of feminism though Dittany, I missed the Second wave altogether, and the Third wave seems to be what I was fighting against in the First wave.

So, who can tell me the date of the Norman Conquest?

Well I disagree with that.

The devil is very often in the detail.

Otherwise, anybody can rewrite history to suit themselves. That way lies propaganda and dogmatism.

I laugh at your Norman Conquest and raise you the Whitby Synod...

I am genuinely surprised that people from the UK might not already know about any of this, and have been trying to work out how I know what I know and how my children know what they know (not sure how accurate this is) - which is that the overwhelming majority of those persecuted were women, how it tied in with the rise of Protestantism and that tension/power struggle thing with Rome, medicalisation of childbirth with midwives and healing traditions coming under suspicion; and as I alluded to earlier, that today's sort of Halloween witches are portrayed with green lumpen faces because of being tortured, facial injuries etc. before being paraded through towns and villages. Maybe because it also happened in East Anglia? A mums netter grazes her ponies on Matthew Hopkins supposed grave for example.

If this is somehow not common knowledge then perhaps yes, this documentary is a start. I think it's important to point out again that this is still happening to women in parts of the world today.

So, are we disregarding the Anglo-Saxon church in England altogether?
Oh, and 28th September 1066. We go to the re-enactment of the battle of Hastings every year. They try and be accurate about the battle tactics and weaponry. But they don't actually kill people.

HH, Trier isn't in England though.

'However I'm a feminist, so I think understanding of the situation of women is more important than errors in detail and background.'

Why, then, was it ok to pretend that a culture that felt a raped woman should blame and kill herself, was some kind of pre-Christian epitome of woman power?

How can you possibly square that?

'Why, then, was it ok to pretend that a culture that felt a raped woman should blame and kill herself, was some kind of pre-Christian epitome of woman power?'

That is precisely why the documentary got off to such a bad start with me. I don't understand, other than for the promotion of whatever neo-pagan beliefs the filmmakers hold dear, why they did this. Why not tell the truth about the state of things before Christianity?

www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-13082240

Good times for women in Iron Age (not sodding "celtic") Derbyshire.

'today's sort of Halloween witches are portrayed with green lumpen faces because of being tortured,'

Green has always been the colour of magic in folklore, and the supernatural. Another theory is the links to paganism and the forest spirits like the Green man.
Or the wizard of Oz's Esmarelda AKA the Wicked Witch of the West.
I've never seen a dressing up witch made up with signs of injury or torture, they are usually free and powerful with a broomstick or a cauldron for a prop.

SGM - and I smirk at the venerable Bede and give you Constantine the Great.

the witchcraze has been covered up, almost completely

... that's just not true! It was comprehensively covered at my schools - the Black Country has good records going back to the Domesday Book, and many of the places are named for wiccan icons. Plus, every old cathedral and large church I've visited in England features a panel somewhere about the witch trials, naming any notable witches burned locally.

As others have been saying: it's great that the film alerted you to a phenomenon you'd been under-informed about, Dittany. But that doesn't mean everyone else was unaware of it, nor that the film's points were good or well-made.

I think it's pretty obvious there are no documentaries of the Witch Trials from a feminist perspective, though.

this is a extreemly interesting thread-thankyou Sakura.