Arcadia Discussion Zone

Sandy sez...Flipping 'eck ... dont you READ french wikipedia?????


Its a JOKE! I thought you were supposed to be a funny guy?

Uh Sandy, the Swedish translated Wiki entries are the same as the anglo written entries. If that was an actually accepted Wiki entry, regardless of language originally written in, there will be a translated into Swedish variant of it as well as an anglo variant. Have ya come across the anglo version yet?

Actually, i disagree with that.

Sometimes you read an english entry, but if you go to a french entry i have sometimes found more information.

But anyway, thats got nothing to do with nothing, and wikipedia is a good guiding place for quick look up of stuff, but it is NOT a good source to quote, if you havent checked the information for yourself!

That is my opinion. Usng wikipedia with no further proper research and checking of sources is a waste of time.

I'm sorry, but is there a reference to DRUIDS here that I'm not seeing? And I'm not seeing any references to the labarum either.

What, are you now suggesting that these Gallo Roman tribes you dont think have a Druid history because the word Druid hasnt been used?

In my interest in the Aedui - this tribe moved their capital to Autun, where there was a great Druid sanctaury (cited in contemporary sources) and where the remains of that sanctuary remain? And where it is said Constantine went? And saw a vision of Apollo?

As for the aedui having the Labarum, read what i said earlier, i am tracing the work of Paul Le Cour and the Heiron du Val D'or.
People here said the aedui had the Labarum.

I dont know whether it is right or wrong, i am just following the trail of Cherisey.

I have already explained, or at least I thought I had, I don’t believe that the Labarum and by that I mean the whole contraption, looked anything like the one described by Eusebius with the usual description known as the chi rho with a vexillium or anything else attached when Constantine first acquired it. I personally believe that the labarum was originally a pagan object of great veneration that was later taken by Constantine and transformed into both a pagan and Christian object. Sozomen who wrote his narrative about a hundred years after the event even alludes to this when he says….

The emperor, amazed at the prophecies concerning Christ which were expounded to him by the priests, sent for some skillful artisans, and commanded them to remodel the standard called by the Romans Labarum, to convert it into a representation of the cross, and to adorn it with gold and precious stones. This warlike trophy was valued beyond all others; for it was always wont to be carried before the emperor, and was worshiped by the soldiery. I think that Constantine changed the most honorable symbol of the Roman power into the sign of Christ, chiefly that by the habit of having it always in view, and of worshiping it, the soldiers might be induced to abandon their ancient forms of superstition, and to recognize the true God.

So along came Eusebius, the spin master and hey presto we get the Chi Rho or the staurogram, it became a symbol useful to both Christians and pagans alike BUT the original object was still visible as the pagan object it originally was ( because it has other components) and that suited Constantine fine because he always kept his feet in both camps and I personally don’t think he ever properly converted, he was a brilliant politician our Constantine and that’s why he became sole ruler of the Roman Empire.
So….the LABARUM was a one off contraption, an archetype that was later copied and Christianised to serve a purpose but was never a Christian object

edited to say...
Constantine might not have been what anyone could call a true christian and he never abandoned his pagan ways completely but he did have an affinity for the arch angel Michael and anyone that was interested in an earlier discussion about healing springs might find this article interesting .....or not

http://www.ni.rs/byzantium/doc/zbornik6 ... Graham.pdf

So….the LABARUM was a one off contraption

That would be my view.

The object/relic as original ...

But how this turned into the Gold Cross of Solomon, or Toledo or anyones Cross ..... when it couldnt possibly have looked like that!!!!!

No, I would suggest that it's a bit of stretch for anyone to posit an influence that had been wiped out three centuries earlier, that's all.



Correction - where there HAD been a great Druid sanctuary centuries before, upon the ruins of which the Romans had built a massive temple to Apollo, one of their own gods. So Constantine, who aspired to become not just "Emperor of the West" but AUGUSTUS over all, goes up to the city of AUGUSTODUNUM (i.e. Autun) to sacrifice at Apollo's temple wherein he has a vision of the god handing him a laurel wreath signifying his destiny. A "miracle" he would repeat nine years later at the Milvian Bridge to lay claim to the Christian god's favor. Do you not see a pattern here? Nothing to do with Druids, the Romans had wiped them out three centuries prior.



Le Cour's syncretic word association games notwithstanding, who else in the Hiéron ascribed to this belief?

TCP

So, essentially, to conform to your view we are compelled to (a) see the original labarum as something quite different in design and not of Christian origin; (b) that the name "labarum" refers to the entire contraption and is not derived from the distinctive crest that distinguished it from other Imperial military standards with different crests; (c) that Roman standards up to that time did not hang on cross-shaped poles with crossbars; (d) that Sozomen must have been mistaken when he wrote that Constantine caused this contraption to be made because in reality he "acquired" it from a non-Christian source; and (e) Eusebius came along later and falsified information to turn this pagan relic "acquired" by Constantine into a Christian symbol.

Sorry, Tina - not buying it.

I suppose one could make the argument that the symbol (i.e. the crest, not the entire assembly of pole, crossbar, crest and banner) is comprised of the Christian "chrism" (XP) encircled by the laurel wreath "given" to Constantine by Apollo at Autun, thus signifying some sort of melding of Pagan and Christian symbolism; but then this would be a new and original design and not something "acquired", would it not?

Was it "acquired" or was it "made" by Constantine? It can't be both. And if it was "made" from something "acquired", what was it before Constantine "acquired" it?

TCP

who else in the Hiéron ascribed to this belief?

Jean Lépine-Authelain.
Lépine-Authelain refers to the Labarum of the Eduen ...i am making the assumption that it is the same Labarum. But who knows .... maybe the Eduen had a copy?

Do you not see a pattern here? Nothing to do with Druids, the Romans had wiped them out three centuries prior.

Well, the Druids worshipped Apollo.
And no i dont see a pattern.
Why not?

Because Constantine had the Labarum, and no one can say what it is, and no one has seen it.

That makes Constantine unique.

So, why is Cherisey obsessed with the Labarum, a gold cross of Toledo/Solomon and relics obtained by Childebert.
The question is why would he mention this in the context of the Sauniere story?

Its no good saying 'Cherisey was a joker', and he was a surrealist. Those answers are too easy and lazy.

Cherisey spent alot of his life immersed in this story, he researched the landscape around RLC, and presumably RLB.

He searched with Plantard.

What were they doing and why? What is it to do with Sauniere?

Maybe if they hadnt have been such 'jokers' the answers would be easier.
But perhaps that was the point????

And if it was "made" from something "acquired", what was it before Constantine "acquired" it?

Well, if you were asking Roger, he would tell you not to look at this question because:

1) it cannot be explained how it got to Lendit
2) the origin of the whole relic and its history isnt precisely known etc etc

Might as well say the Druids fashioned it : )

Pity they left no records ....

thats fine Tim, thats just how i see it

So, essentially, to conform to your view we are compelled to (a) see the original labarum as something quite different in design and not of Christian origin;

YES but as you say, that’s just my view.

(b) that the name "labarum" refers to the entire contraption and is not derived from the distinctive crest that distinguished it from other Imperial military standards with different crests;

YES

(c) that Roman standards up to that time did not hang on cross-shaped poles with crossbars;

I never said that, I said the original archetype labarum was not like that.

(d) that Sozomen must have been mistaken when he wrote that Constantine caused this contraption to be made because in reality he "acquired" it from a non-Christian source;

No…I pointed out that Sozomen wrote about the labarum being changed from a pagan object of veneration to a Christian object of veneration, read it again.

(e) Eusebius came along later and falsified information to turn this pagan relic "acquired" by Constantine into a Christian symbol.

He didn’t falsify information, or at least not in the way you mean. He Christianised a pagan object by adding the chi rho symbol to the description and relating the story about the vision and dream about Christ etc etc etc. Eusebius doesn’t mention it at all in his Ecclesiastical History apart from stating that the battle was won because of Gods help, the other stuff doesn’t come into play until In his later Life of Constantine, where he gives a detailed account of a vision and states that he had heard the story from the emperor himself and he then goes on to describe the Labarum….his Labarum.

Was it "acquired" or was it "made" by Constantine? It can't be both. And if it was "made" from something "acquired", what was it before Constantine "acquired" it?

Constantine acquires a revered object from a temple of Apollo, a pagan object that was recognisable as such by the roman army and native gaulls and he used this object as a kind of standard/symbol of his power or authority, this same object was later Christianised by the addition of a chi rho or staurogramme which was both a pagan and Christian symbol that appeased both pagans and Christians alike.

p.s...how do you do that mutiple highlighted quotes thing?

Lépine-Authelain also posited that the Aedui were Hebrews. Oh come now.



Later forced Roman associations of their own deities with Gallic gods notwithstanding - no, the Druids most certainly did NOT worship Apollo!

So you don't see a pattern in an ambitious ruler seeking to consolidate his personal power by claiming divine right and favor?



That's only true if we choose to ignore the many graphic representations of the labarum dating from his reign because it isn't what we need or want it to be in order to further "new and improved" hypotheses.



That's a very good question - but is it remotely possible that Chérisey was merely curious and trying to work these concepts posited by Le Cour into his own hypothesis specifically related to RLC? It seems as though we're always a little too willing to assume that Chérisey had all the answers and was dropping breadcrumbs for us to find.



How about just a fellow traveler with his own preconceived ideas who we tend to give more credit to than perhaps might be warranted?



And, I'm sure, formed his own selective opinions and conclusions to solve an "enigma" he may not have understood well at all. People do become fiercely attached to their own agendas, discarding whatever pieces of the puzzle don't fit in favor of fashioning new ones out of whole cloth that do.



Well if we knew that, we would all have other hobbies! Where should we draw the line between honest inquiry and intentional fabrication? I, for one, hope there's a pot of gold or at least a cash prize at the end of this rainbow.

TCP

PRECISELY.

TCP

The so called "cross" of Toledo that isnt really a cross in the way we see a cross + is the Labarum....in its new clothes

But thats for later, i havent finished with the labarum yet and it could take a while and i dont have a lot of time

The so called "cross" of Toledo that isnt really a cross in the way we see a cross + is the Labarum....in its new clothes

This is obvious.

But how to document it through history?

One has to link the Constantine relic, with this sudden Cross of Toledo.

Isnt really enough to say Childebert collected it from there. If it was Visigothic booty, why isnt it listed in Visigothic annals?

Without knowin' it, Sandy solved Ben's accumulated puzzle bits...

,,,Its no good saying 'Cherisey was a joker', and he was a surrealist. Those answers are too easy and lazy.

Cherisey spent alot of his life immersed in this story, he researched the landscape around RLC, and presumably RLB.

He searched with Plantard.

What were they doing and why? What is it to do with Sauniere?

Maybe if they hadnt have been such 'jokers' the answers would be easier.
But perhaps that was the point????

The point is they planted clues to reinforce their agenda Sandy. Only a Frenchman didn't get the clues chain worked out in their proper sequence, a UK'y dude did.

To the victor goes the 'spoils, yes? Well, Ben has his treasure trove, no?

If ya look at the trinkets Ben un-earthed, how many could be inserted into the crista myth? There is an ampoule of sorts, some ancient coins for dating this accumulation, we have to leave out the modern trendy wine bottles 'cuz they don't reek with antiquity. The parchments are not zakly a flag-banner remnant, but they allude to sum fing along those lines, if Ben's guessin' is up to par.

Is this the closest Cherisey could conjure up to convince folk 'boot the crista? It had to have a Sauniere connection as if Sauniere planted those clues, yes?

I know that and i have a long way to go before i get to that bit.

*

*

When the "golden cross" was taken to Poitiers by Radegonde and Fortunatus the church of St Croix and St Vincent

Have you a reference for the looted Gold Cross of 'Toledo' being taken by Radegonde.

A historical documentation, not a poem ; )

*

OK.



So, then, it would be fair to say that in your estimation, the term "labarum" would be applicable to any Roman military standard regardless of what sort of crest it had (i.e. the Roman imperial eagle, a laurel torse, enemy trophies, a likeness of the emperor) or what was emblazoned on its vexillum (i.e. the name or numeric designation of its legion) even a century before Constantine?



OK, but you've also said that the term "labarum" refers to the entire contraption and not just the distinctive decoration of it. So, if Roman legions long before Constantine carried these "labarum" fashioned in very much the same representative manner (albeit with different crests and banners) how then is Constantine's version in any way distinctive if not for the crest and banner decoration? Surely Constantine's "archetype" was not that different in construction than those of earlier generations. What specifically did he change?



I did. So I ask again, what was "acquired" by Constantine and what "changed"...? A Roman military banner venerated by Roman legions as a sacred object for centuries before Constantine would have been in and of itself "pagan" because the Romans were pagan. If Constantine "acquired" a relic from a "pagan" source, how and/or why would he re-fashion this article into a Christian symbol? What would be the point? Or, more to your point (i.e. that Constantine's symbol wasn't Christian and this was the result of a later gloss by Eusebius) then what was this article?



But we don't know for a fact that "his" labarum (Eusebius) was in fact different from Constantine's - as depicted on coinage from the time as well as from graphic representations.



But wait - Constantine goes to the Roman city of Augustodunum (Autun), presents himself at a Roman temple dedicated to the worship of Apollo, a Roman god, and comes away with (or is given, according to legend, by Apollo himself) a wreath of laurels which is in and of itself a thoroughly Roman (and pagan) symbol of the very power and authority he seeks and ultimately obtains - the Roman Crown of Augustus. This would have indeed have been a completely unambiguous "sign" to Roman soldiers and Gallo-Roman citizens alike, there's not much "mystery" to it, and the fact that this Roman temple stood on what had, centuries prior, been a Druid oppidum does not have the slightest bearing on the item itself or its ultimate significance. Constantine claims the Crown of Augustus for himself, Apollo hands it to him, and some years later, by way of appeal to the large Christian minority who had recently been put through the wringer by Diocletian, his ambition becomes reality. Indeed, the story speaks to the consolidation of power through the manipulation of symbols, but there's not a lot here that has yet to be explained. Not much of a mystery, anyway.



When you reply you hit "quote" and then you've got to manually manipulate the tags on the toolbar.

TCP

Shouldn't be that difficult around here, we've got a lot of creative talent...

TCP

No no no no NO…..how many more times….

I believe that original object that Constantine acquired at the Apollonian temple became what is now known as the labarum after it was Christianised.

Depends - what's the resale value on dessicated corpses these days?



As many as can be bought cheaply on the Internet from sites like holylandartifacts.com...

TCP

I know, that's what you keep saying but then you contradict yourself repeatedly. How many more re-writes are you budgeted for before this starts to make sense?

TCP

Ok, so what was the object?