Safeguarding when contacting ancestors

[Briton]

Re: Safeguarding when contacting ancestors

I think your back to defining what an ancestor is Briton.

DragonsFriend has mentioned the Silver Thread concept of each time you touch a person you create a silver thread that connects you to them. Under that premise all of mankind potentially becomes an ancestor. Not sure of the specifics of his Pink Fire ceremony but it sounds like a typical thread cutting ritual / ceremony to remove unwanted threads which can be a good thing but also a bad thing I think.

In some areas the theory exists that people hold a connection to the grave and tombstone. Theoretically you could form connections by tapping into the ancestral memory and connections of those who've mourned at the grave. Not entirely different than some shamanic type practices that believe the land has a spirit itself and by contacting the land spirit you become one with the ancestry of the area.

Well, funny you should say that, I do believe upon death that any interment, whether a six foot earth burial, scattered ashes or lain in a tomb, your essence is united with that of the earth, joining a greater consciousness, and who dies where affects the local genius loci.

I'm not sure about ties stopping so soon though, as burial grounds here have been inhabited for thousands of years in some instances, the Red Lady at Paviland had items left with it long after the third generation, the cave had been used for 4,000 years after the burial. I also am aware that many stone circles were created to enshrine the home of an ancestor, and long barrows had intermittent use for thousands of years, sometimes undergoing extensions. Sorry I would have mentioned this earlier but I only just remembered and had to find it.

- - - Updated - - -

If you can knap ornate shapes than you are a better man than I Gunga Din ...

I am working on it, I live along the South Downs, so have access to some of the highest quality flint in Britain (flint mined from near here were manufactured on site into axe heads and exported at least 160km away to Cheddar Gorge, maybe further).

[monsno_leedra]

Re: Safeguarding when contacting ancestors

Well, funny you should say that, I do believe upon death that any interment, whether a six foot earth burial, scattered ashes or lain in a tomb, your essence is united with that of the earth, joining a greater consciousness, and who dies where affects the local genius loci.

I'm not sure about ties stopping so soon though, as burial grounds here have been inhabited for thousands of years in some instances, the Red Lady at Paviland had items left with it long after the third generation, the cave had been used for 4,000 years after the burial. I also am aware that many stone circles were created to enshrine the home of an ancestor, and long barrows had intermittent use for thousands of years, sometimes undergoing extensions. Sorry I would have mentioned this earlier but I only just remembered and had to find it. ..

I think the problem there though is that your not connected to the individual your connected to the stories about the individual. That's a major hurdle in genealogy, separating the story from the actual individual and the further back you go the harder it is. Humanity is great for making our heroes and ancestor's larger than life at the expense of who they actually were. Then the descendants continue to make them even greater and change the story even more while making homage and offerings at the graves, sites, etc.

Consider who was the Spartan King Leonidas actually? He's a hero to Greece because of the Hot Gates and his sacrifice. Yet who was he? We don't know because the man is lost to the legend and history that keeps getting rewritten and recreated about him. Was the father and husband the same as the king? Probably not if we compare it to the story of say Arthur and how the King in legend does not match the husband and father. Look to Richard the Lionheart same thing, we glorify the story and legend but is it really reflective of the man and the truth?

A great victory over some invader or someone who holds the people down becomes heroic. Then the person becomes heroic but who they actually were is often lost as the stories continue into the future. Even simply serving to call upon ancestry and history to rally the people. SO we honor the egregore and story while forgetting the actual person and who they actually were. Yet the story is not the person and calling upon the story does not bring forth the person who is ones ancestor. At best it simply calls upon the fantasy creation and its limits due to the restrictions of the story and looses it connection to the people.

[Briton]

Re: Safeguarding when contacting ancestors

I think the problem there though is that your not connected to the individual your connected to the stories about the individual. That's a major hurdle in genealogy, separating the story from the actual individual and the further back you go the harder it is. Humanity is great for making our heroes and ancestor's larger than life at the expense of who they actually were. Then the descendants continue to make them even greater and change the story even more while making homage and offerings at the graves, sites, etc.

Consider who was the Spartan King Leonidas actually? He's a hero to Greece because of the Hot Gates and his sacrifice. Yet who was he? We don't know because the man is lost to the legend and history that keeps getting rewritten and recreated about him. Was the father and husband the same as the king? Probably not if we compare it to the story of say Arthur and how the King in legend does not match the husband and father. Look to Richard the Lionheart same thing, we glorify the story and legend but is it really reflective of the man and the truth?

A great victory over some invader or someone who holds the people down becomes heroic. Then the person becomes heroic but who they actually were is often lost as the stories continue into the future. Even simply serving to call upon ancestry and history to rally the people. SO we honor the egregore and story while forgetting the actual person and who they actually were. Yet the story is not the person and calling upon the story does not bring forth the person who is ones ancestor. At best it simply calls upon the fantasy creation and its limits due to the restrictions of the story and looses it connection to the people.

I get what you mean, but my comment about kings was only to demonstrate that insular history has a tendency to make people closer related.

I would not be calling on these figures. My target era has no named individuals, so I would be reaching out into the unknown, rather than chasing a legend.

[thalassa]

Re: Safeguarding when contacting ancestors

I don't venerate bloodline ancestors as a rule--my ancestors would not appreciate it...and some of them were jerks. There are two exceptions to this, but I more remember them ritually than venerate them. I venerate specific historical individuals, as well as non-specific historical (in some cases prehistorical) unknown peoples.

[monsno_leedra]

Re: Safeguarding when contacting ancestors

Totally off the top of the head though but have you though of looking at old maps Briton? Doing genealogy I find I use a lot of older maps and at times you find some really interesting place names. Can be difficult to research them but sometimes interesting clues surface.

I wish you luck but in some ways I also think your starting to chase a will-o-wisp.

[Briton]

Re: Safeguarding when contacting ancestors

I understand your scepticism, and I don't doubt that even if it's successful, the journey will be hard. I intend to offer generally at first, seeking named ancestors in the meantime, doing as thalassa does seems very similar to my direction.

[monsno_leedra]

Re: Safeguarding when contacting ancestors

I understand your scepticism, and I don't doubt that even if it's successful, the journey will be hard. I intend to offer generally at first, seeking named ancestors in the meantime, doing as thalassa does seems very similar to my direction.

Not really skepticism as much as your chasing something that you really can't define and give identifiable parameters to. So it seems, to me anyway, it will always be just beyond your reach yet hanging there sort of luring you on. But the problem I think will be sometimes we can get so wrapped up in the chase we loose focus and never realize we've already passed what we sought. Yet the will-o-wisp keeps right on floating before you leading you deeper and deeper into who knows what.

[Briton]

Re: Safeguarding when contacting ancestors

Well, I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on how far back ancestors can be venerated. I just believe it was practiced differently in Britain and that you can't dogmatically state "only this far back" when the people here seem to do otherwise, but that is why I'm reading on the subject at the moment. I don't mean to dismiss your experience out of hand, just the extent to which I can go wasn't the aim of the thread so I will continue to research and find out what my people did. People across Britain, even in the Neolithic, have been well connected, travelling from as far as the north coast of Scotland to celebrate at Stonehenge. I see no reason to believe that it was unusual to practice veneration anywhere on this isle with the same intention, and that veneration went back further than just living memory.

[thalassa]

Re: Safeguarding when contacting ancestors

I think the problem there though is that your not connected to the individual your connected to the stories about the individual. That's a major hurdle in genealogy, separating the story from the actual individual and the further back you go the harder it is. Humanity is great for making our heroes and ancestor's larger than life at the expense of who they actually were. Then the descendants continue to make them even greater and change the story even more while making homage and offerings at the graves, sites, etc. (snip) Even simply serving to call upon ancestry and history to rally the people. SO we honor the egregore and story while forgetting the actual person and who they actually were. Yet the story is not the person and calling upon the story does not bring forth the person who is ones ancestor. At best it simply calls upon the fantasy creation and its limits due to the restrictions of the story and looses it connection to the people.

IMO, this isn't much different than calling upon your grandfather--sure, you knew him, but you knew him in a very specific role. You didn't know HIM in his entirety. Sure you might know stories, but you mostly know the good/ironic/funny ones. You only ever know what a person lets you see, you only ever see what you are exposed to. You only ever know the story of the person...and that story is no more the person than a historical profile of an individual would be.

[monsno_leedra]

Re: Safeguarding when contacting ancestors

IMO, this isn't much different than calling upon your grandfather--sure, you knew him, but you knew him in a very specific role. You didn't know HIM in his entirety. Sure you might know stories, but you mostly know the good/ironic/funny ones. You only ever know what a person lets you see, you only ever see what you are exposed to. You only ever know the story of the person...and that story is no more the person than a historical profile of an individual would be.

I don't disagree. I think that is why that is usually the furthest back you can go and still have them connected to you and have them care about you. Beyond that it's mostly stories and fables perhaps is what your dealing with. Yes there may still be some concern and connection based upon blood lineage but they know you no more than you will know them. In that regard they do not know if you are a good person, a person that carries on the lineage as they hope. Inversely, you do not know them and have to rely upon what others say to see if they are good, bad, etc.

[thalassa]

Re: Safeguarding when contacting ancestors

I don't disagree. I think that is why that is usually the furthest back you can go and still have them connected to you and have them care about you. Beyond that it's mostly stories and fables perhaps is what your dealing with. Yes there may still be some concern and connection based upon blood lineage but they know you no more than you will know them. In that regard they do not know if you are a good person, a person that carries on the lineage as they hope. Inversely, you do not know them and have to rely upon what others say to see if they are good, bad, etc.

I've never had this be an issue...but I don't expect people to be anything but good and bad and colored by their times, nor do I expect them to care about me or offer me assistance, etc (I don't ask for or expect this (except in a general amorphous "blessings" way) from deities either--IMO, that is the purpose of witchcraft/magic). It's one of many reasons why I find the traditional quid pro quo ancestor veneration to be irrelevant and unnecessary. When we recognize ancestors, we do so quite broadly and for a specific purpose--I don't care what their personality or their person did or was, except for the thing that is being honored.

[Briton]

Re: Safeguarding when contacting ancestors

I've never had this be an issue...but I don't expect people to be anything but good and bad and colored by their times, nor do I expect them to care about me or offer me assistance, etc (I don't ask for or expect this (except in a general amorphous "blessings" way) from deities either--IMO, that is the purpose of witchcraft/magic). It's one of many reasons why I find the traditional quid pro quo ancestor veneration to be irrelevant and unnecessary.

This is what I've been thinking but unable to articulate. Thank you.

When we recognize ancestors, we do so quite broadly and for a specific purpose--I don't care what their personality or their person did or was, except for the thing that is being honored.

Can you give an example? Not necessarily tell me something about your private life just a typical example.

[thalassa]

Re: Safeguarding when contacting ancestors

So, I 'm rereading Emma Restall Orr's Living With Honour: A Pagan Ethics, and I've gotten to a part that is maybe pertinent to my POV (this is part of a larger section on the value of life, and what that means in terms of our perspectives on euthenasia and medical triage):

"From a *Pagan perspective, this death is not an ending. Death doesn't bring the complete annihilation of consciouness. In thoughts, in memories andt sories, in the consciousness within each cell of our decaying physicality, in the waters of your body that drain into the oceans, in each relationship that was influenced by our living and dying, in everything which we have shared energy and intention, our existence continues. It may remain in the recognizable cohesion of our identity, or dissipate into the broader tides of emergence and release, but it is not gone.

Death is not binary, not a black or whice process.... Whether the spirit has flown or disappeared, the dualst percieves the body as no more than wasted. Moral obligations are transferred to any kin and their immediated sensitivities. In the natural philopophy of *Paganism, without need for proven and delineated categories, there is less uncertaintly, more acceptance. The focus on becoming, pivotal in existentialis and *Pagan understanding does not lose validity when we are speak
ing of death. At the most essential level we are consciouness, still moving within nature. Death does not remove us, because we continue as a member of the tribe**, albeit now as an ancestor, our motal statues continues."

To explain a few things regarding the authors's terminology, the "*Pagan/ism, is refering to a specific definition that the author has earlier given in the book, as opposed to the much wider Paganism as a general term. Her use of the word "tribe", is not meant to deliniate family or culture (but can include both), rather than a chosen tribe that can also include non-humans.

Can you give an example? Not necessarily tell me something about your private life just a typical example.

My husband I do (American) Civil War reenacting. Many of these take place at or near vast battlefields upon which thousands or even tens of thousands have died either in the violence of battle or the violence of the 19th century medical facilities on the battlefield or languishing on the field in scorching sun or freezing weather, alone and without solace. These men (a few women, as well as service animals, mostly horses) died tragically and often as draftees with no choice in their service. When we go to reenactiments at battlefields, we take the time at some point in the day to quietly honor their death. It does not matter whether their cause was just or not, whether they believed in their cause or not, whether they were good men or ill. It does not matter if they fought bravely or cowered in fear, it only matters that they died, spilling their blood into the soil of a land far from their homes. I don't need a personal connection to these men to honor their life and remember their death. These men were someone's child, father, brother, cousin, friend, lover. I know what it means to have a father, a son, a lover, a friend... In a religious philosopy that is focused on relationship, rather than right worship, I can honor thire lives (and the loss of life). I can honor what they meant to their loved ones. Perhaps not as individual names or faces, but as part of the river of life and death that makes up humanity.

[Briton]

Re: Safeguarding when contacting ancestors

Thanks for explaining. I totally get that and agree wholeheartedly. Maybe you see differences in my path but I see yours as being very similar to the one I'm pursuing. I don't feel I need to pretend I actually share their passed down DNA, or that they've done something specifically for me, to thank them for what they HAVE done, just as I don't have to personally know a stranger who calls 999 for me if they saw me collapse, I can be grateful to those I don't know nor ever knew personally. If it is possible for them to contact me in some way, if I can find a way to open the gate to them, then I would like to. But I am not intending to engage in a wild goose chase. I will venerate and give thanks to those unknown or forgotten souls who, in spite of the adversity of the world from the Neolithic onwards, these people, who were as human as I, pressed on to try and give their future the best chances in life, we wouldn't have what we do if they had given up.

- - - Updated - - -

I would add that this by no means suggests I worship them or the thought of them, nor do I romanticize them. I am not thanking individuals assuming they were all good and decent people, as there is dirt around every diamond. Also, not venerating on the basis that they are my ancestors. For a start they probably aren't. Like you said in another thread, not honouring their ability to do the underpants Charleston, rather the hard life they lived unaware that it would make mine easier.