"In Search of Ancient Ireland"

[Theres]

part one of a three part series starts tonight (June 12) on PBS at 8:00(Pacific).
according the TV weekly in the local paper, this first hour ('Heroes') will deal with such figures as Cu Chulainn and Queen Maeve. also, archaeologists discuss whether the Irish are truly Celtic, and the influence of the Roman Empire in Ireland's history.
this looks good!
check your local listings.

[Mithrea]

Oh Wow! I'm glad I saw this in time to go and buy VCR tapes! :)

[Danustouch]

AKKKKKKKKKKKKK..oh man am i upset now! Our TV is dead at the moment. It's a really long story, but we can watch DVD's, but we can't watch television or cable. We had the tv rigged to run through the VCR to change the channels, and during an electric storm, something happened, and now we can't access the channel controls at all. So our TV is dead and I can't watch this. Anyone want to volunteer to tape this for me?

[Mithrea]

Danustouch, I can't tape it at my house (don't have cable) and I found out I can't tape it tonight. But it will air again on the 19th and the 26th. If you still can't watch on either of those dates, I will try and tape it then and make a copy for you at work.

[Theres]

i think those dates are for parts two and three, but i know it'll be on again.

[Mithrea]

Oh! Duuuuuh! You are right. Usually they replay these really really late on Saturday nights . . . sorry :(

[Danustouch]

:( thanks anyway, for volunteering.

[Theres]

well D, i tried to record it for you. but my second machine won't record from the cable for some reason ( it used to! alas, it's pretty old).
anyway, i know that $24.95 + s&h is alot of money, but that's what they're selling it for here...

"In Search of Ancient Ireland"
P.O. Box 2284
South Burlington, Vt.
05407

it was very well done, with lots of stone circles and barrows and such. part two will be "Saints".

[Danustouch]

Thanks for the address, Greenman. I will ask John to buy it for me :)

[Cinnamon Girl]

Well, I watched the first part and it seemed somewhat ... superficial ... to me. I know it's a TV program and they can't go in-depth, but they just seemed to skip from one place to another, from one time period, to another, without much cohesion.

Another thing I question was the stance that much of what we know as Irish history and the pagan religious epics were really invented by Christian monks in the early centuries C.E. I know that they did indeed record much of the history, but I'm not so ready to believe they made it up. :confused:

That being said, I loved the images and footage they showed. It rekindles my longing to go there.

And I will watch the remaining episodes - even if some of the theories are questionable, it's still fascinating stuff!

:)

[Theres]

i think they were trying to make the point that there is NO archeaological evidence to support the 'history' that is generally accepted as fact. and (to the chagrin of many, i'm sure) this is probably true of ALOT of Pagan history.
and yes, three hours is a rather short time to condense thousands of years of history into.

[Cinnamon Girl]

"i think they were trying to make the point that there is NO archeaological evidence to support the 'history' that is generally accepted as fact. and (to the chagrin of many, i'm sure) this is probably true of ALOT of Pagan history."

Then why not just state that rather than making other unproven claims that the monks made it up? I would much rather hear an honest 'we don't really know' than a pat lie.

"and yes, three hours is a rather short time to condense thousands of years of history into."

Yeah, I realize that, but I just think they could have done a better job of integrating the parts into a whole. I'm not saying it was a horrible show, just that it had it's faults, as does everything.

:)

[Mnemosyne]

The first part was "superficial", Moon Owl? I'm surprised, since I always find those documentaries so informative. Also, it is a nice change to learn history with visuals instead of just reading the material from a book.

Agghhh!! I can't believe that I forget to watch the documentary also. My mind was so forgetful on Wednesday though. hmm. Maybe Mnemosyne, the goddess of memory, needs to give me a few more blessings.

[Cinnamon Girl]

Hi Mnemosyne,

I think covering as much ground as they did in one hour, they didn't have much choice than to gloss over things, but like I've said, I think it could have been more cohesive.

Have you checked out their site yet? Go to pbs.org and I think there's a link.

[Mnemosyne]

A million thanks for the suggestion about going to the site, Moon Owl. I was a little :( that I forgot to watch the show. The history of ancient Ireland has always been fascinating to me. Actually, I simply love ancient history in general.

[Theres]

i don't think i would say that their version was 'a pat lie'!
when you trace a story back as far as it will go, chances are that that might be the source. and when there is no archeaological evidence to support the story, it's not that far of a leap to suggest that the story was embellished, enhanced, or even made up. this wouldn't be the first instance of a religion writing it's own interpretation of a myth or legend.

[Cinnamon Girl]

Hi Greenman,

Well, would you venture to agree that it's not a proven fact? It's common in non-literate societies to pass stories, myths, etc. orally and yes, it is the nature of an oral tradition that these things are altered as the time passes. But like 'Beowulf' was an oral story long before it was written down, I think things like 'The Tain' were already present in the culture when the monks put pen to paper. They may have embellished or altered aspects of it, but I don't think they made it up on their own from scratch, which is the implication I took from the narrator's statements.

[Cinnamon Girl]

They will likely rebroadcast it again, Mnemosyne :) And I'll probably watch it again! Did you ever catch 'A History of Britain' when it was on a while back on The History Channel? That was on quite a few times and had several parts to it. I think it was 5 or 6 hours long, but covered a greater time span than the Ireland series. It was quite interesting as well!

I also enjoy history, particularly European. One of the next books I'm planning to read is 'A History of Pagan Europe' by Jones and Pennick. I've heard great things about it. Have you read it?

[Theres]

yeah MoonOwl, i'll concede that (unproven, that is). i'm not sure that i took that as the narrator's implication though.
and the 'History of Britain' was good, and a little less 'editorial' perhaps. that was on in two segments, about ten+ hours total i think (i have it on video somewhere around here).
i only wish they had spent more time on British prehistory. after the first hour, we were already well into medieval times.

[Cinnamon Girl]

Hi Greenman,

I quite liked the Britain series, even if as you said, the majority of time was spent of relatively modern times (I guess that stems from what we were discussing - the lack of concrete knowledge the further back we go). Unfortunately, I never got to watch it in one linear path - I kept tuning into different episodes, different time periods, so one day I'd be watching the Battle of the Bulge and the next the Protestant Reformation! I envy you having it on video (the History Channel sells the video package on its site, only $39.95 [$69.95 if you want the accompanying book] but that's still out of my budget right now. Looking up this, I also saw that they have 'Elizabeth' for $31.95 on DVD! Oh, I want! I want!).

One of the best things I liked about the Britain series was the narrator's pithy yet humorous commentary! :D

[Theres]

yeah, i believe he was the author too. a great voice, he reminded me of Eric Idle as the narrator in 'The Rutles'.
it was a very good show. i'm a history buff, and English to boot! and i was ashamed at how little of this stuff i knew as well as i should!

[Cinnamon Girl]

Yeah, his name is Simon ... something - can't remember his last name.

I'd never heard of him before this. Have you? I'd be interested in seeing more of his work.

Myself, I'm Canadian - I think everyone's always surprised at how little they know of their own history! Of course, some are more interesting than others. I've never really been much interested in my own country's past, probably since it's so young, beyond a cursory familiarity. Horrible, I know. :eek:

Although that is starting to change, at least in relation to my home province, Newfoundland. I think as the older I get, the more intrigued I am by my roots.

[Danustouch]

I think that Simon whateverhislastname Fellow also did one on Egypt..but am not sure.