View allAll Photos Tagged deity
A very Happy St. Brigids day to you all! This, the feast day of Irelands female deity/saint is the herald of Spring and a day for women to celebrate. Labelled in the catalogue as "Antrim, possibly County Glen village, Co. Antrim", we begin the week with a stereo-pairs shot showing a village from on high - possibly with a canal nearby(?)
With thanks to today's commenters, we have confirmation that this is indeed County Antrim, and the village of Cushendall. The village was renamed by an 18th and 19th century estate to Newtown Glens, but later reverted to Cushendall - this may perhaps explain the unusual name applied to the image in our catalogue...
Photographers: Frederick Holland Mares, James Simonton
Contributor: John Fortune Lawrence
Collection: The Stereo Pairs Photograph Collection
Date: between ca. 1860-1883
NLI Ref: STP_0477
You can also view this image, and many thousands of others, on the NLI’s catalogue at catalogue.nli.ie
Visited Narmada Park during a day trip to explore Lombok, Indonesia.
Vacation with me in my blog: @Lombok, Indonesia
Lambayeque Culture
Ca. 700-1300 A.D. North Coast, Peru.
Archeological Museum, Belén Cultural Complex (Conjunto Monumental Belén), Cajamarca, Peru.
THEME: www.youtube.com/watch?v=0nlk19DZr5k
--------------------------------------------
A sword. One half of the Scorpio Armament: Samsara.
--------------------------------------------
One of the thirteen Zodiarchs, powerful Great Beings/deities who represent the star signs and their constellations, chosen by a powerful and mysterious being known as the First.
Nyctoria represents Scorpio, the eighth star sign, having ascended from her mortal form as a being of pure shadow by confronting her inner darkness in destroying her progenitor, Makuta Teridax.
The First granted Nyctoria the powers of the Red Star and stewardship of the cycle of death and rebirth.
--------------------------------------------
The extra title by her name is a reference to Hyperion, the Titan who fathered Helios (Sun), Selene (Moon), and Eos (Dawn) in Greek mythology. And, of course, astrology and space stuff are themes here as well.
-------------------------------------------
NB: Credit to Kemzal for inspiring the upper chest design: www.youtube.com/watch?v=pEYgJrLD0xg
The antechamber of TT218, also the entrance to the tombs TT218, TT219 and TT220.
The TT218 belongs to Amennakht who was the father, to Nebenmaat (TT219) and Khaemteri (TT220).
19th dynasty, Deir el Medina
LeLUTKA Lillith Head
Izzie's - Eyebags
Izzie's - Face Pores & Capillaries
Izzie's - Forehead Lines
Bring to light - Moles V2
Gloom. - Artemis v2 Collection Eyes
[Simple Bloom] (EvoX) Sin, Victoria, Vel 01 Frost
[Simple Bloom] Brows: Teresa, LowTail, Diamond
KILLJOY Chaos Lipstick
FORMME. Double Moon Septum
^^Swallow^^ Gauged XL lel Evo X Ears
False Deity - Crescent Star
TRUTH VIP Bliss
eBODY - REBORN
itGirls & VELOUR x Picasso Babe "Juicy Muse"
Bring to light - Body Moles
Izzie's - Body Imperfections
PANIQ - Crescent Choker II
DAPPA - Luna Tattoo
pecheresse, ai tattoo (lower edition)
KILLJOY Attitude Top
KILLJOY Viper Pants
: CULT : Nathy
. Infinity . - Crisp
FOXCITY. Photo Booth - Bad Girl - Backdrop City
IWOR-UN-PASE-KAMUY
(Revered deity who protects each person's sacred spaces)
2019 - Kaizawa Toru (Ainu - Nibutani)
Sapporo Underground Walkway (chikaho)
The last time I visited Kaizawa-san, in winter of 2019 this piece was still in progress in his workshop. The completed piece is amazing and stands in Sapporo Underground Walkway (chikaho) near the Sapporo Station entrance as part of an the Minapa (“many people laugh”) plaza. The plaza features Ainu art exhibit and information.
Gate guardian from the realm of the Underworld, a detail of the 3rd shrine of Tutankhamun. This second smallest of the shrines is mainly decorated with scenes from the Book of the Duat to aid the king's journey after death.
Tutankhamun's burial chamber was almost entirely filled by the golden shrines that surrounded the sarcophagus of the king, the outer shrine containing three more successively smaller gilded wooden boxes adorned with reliefs of underworld deities to inform the king's journey into the afterlife.
Every royal burial chamber from the New Kingdom must have contained a similar set of shrines to Tutankhamun's, but only mere fragments of one other have survived.
The most celebrated part of the Cairo Museum's collection has for the best part of a century been the incomparable treasures of Tutankhamun's tomb housed in two long galleries on the upper floor. The greatest archaeological discovery of all time, the virtually intact tomb of the young pharaoh was discovered in 1922 in the Valley of the Kings, undisturbed since antiquity owing to the King's relative obscurity.
Tutankhamun was born Tutankhaten, son and successor of the 'heretic' pharaoh Akhenaten who dispensed with Egypt's centuries old religion in favour of his new god, the sun disk he called Aten. At Akhenaten's death Tutankhaten was only nine years old and early in his reign was persuaded to restore Egypt's religion and traditions, abandoning the cult of Aten and restoring the prominence of Amun, god of Thebes, thus changing his name to Tutankhamun. His early death barely a decade later and association with his reviled father led to the young pharaoh sharing his fate in being struck from the records and lists of Kings (an act of damnatio memoriae), thus his tomb itself was quickly forgotten and hidden beneath later structures whilst those of more famous rulers were stripped bare, probably within decades.
Howard Carter's discovery of the still sealed tomb in 1922 caused a sensation, nothing so complete had ever been found before. The tomb itself was small by pharaonic standards, prepared in a hurry as the king died in his late teens with two main chambers and a further two side chambers crammed with artworks, treasures and furnishings, along with the king's body sealed within four gilded-wooden shrines, three superbly rich coffins and the incomparable golden mask upon his head. Better still, the pharaoh's reign in the 18th Dynasty coincided with a particularly high period for artistic achievement, meaning that so much was of the highest quality. One can only imagine the riches that must have disappeared from the much larger tombs of the more famous rulers, compared to this tiny treasure-trove!
Tutankhamun's collection has resided in Cairo's Egyptian Museum ever since its discovery, but by the end of 2018 will have moved again to the new Grand Egyptian Museum in Giza (currently being prepared for partial opening later this year). The treasures will be displayed in their entirety for the first time, and many pieces have already been transferred. This visit offered us a last opportunity to view most of the major pieces in their central Cairo home for one last time.
For more on the 'obscure' pharaoh who millennia later became Egypt's most celebrated, see the link below:-
P1120959
What is found in the holy scriptures of Hinduism:
Garuda is known as the vahana or vehicle of Vishnu. Garuda and Hanuman , the monkey god are the strongest of the strong powers in the universe. Both have dedicated their lives to service instead of using their powers to rule over the cosmos. Hanuman's reward is that he will preside over the next cycle of creation as its Manu, Adam Kadamon, the First Man. Garuda's reward is immortality.
Garuda is also the name of the Airline of Indonesia.
28/365
Jeff brought back these souvenirs for me and Szemun. They are regarded as guardian deities of Jeju Island and is one of the most unique symbol of Jeju Island.
These are miniature-magnet-replicas of the Tolharubang aka the great grandfather of Jeju. The statue of Tolharubang was sculptured from black lava rock and commonly seen everywhere on the island.
Love it.
EugeneWang
Dualism in cosmology is the moral, or spiritual belief that two fundamental concepts exist, which often oppose each other. It is an umbrella term that covers a diversity of views from various religions, including both traditional religions and scriptural religions.
Moral dualism is the belief of the great complement of, or conflict between, the benevolent and the malevolent. It simply implies that there are two moral opposites at work, independent of any interpretation of what might be "moral" and independent of how these may be represented. Moral opposites might, for example, exist in a worldview which has one god, more than one god, or none. By contrast, duotheism, bitheism or ditheism implies (at least) two gods. While bitheism implies harmony, ditheism implies rivalry and opposition, such as between good and evil, or light and dark, or summer and winter. For example, a ditheistic system could be one in which one god is a creator, and the other a destroyer. In theology, dualism can also refer to the relationship between the deity and creation or the deity and the universe (see theistic dualism). This form of dualism is a belief shared in certain traditions of Christianity and Hinduism.[1] Alternatively, in ontological dualism, the world is divided into two overarching categories. The opposition and combination of the universe's two basic principles of yin and yang is a large part of Chinese philosophy, and is an important feature of Taoism. It is also discussed in Confucianism.
Many myths and creation motifs with dualistic cosmologies have been described in ethnographic and anthropological literature. These motifs conceive the world as being created, organized, or influenced by two demiurges, culture heroes, or other mythological beings, who either compete with each other or have a complementary function in creating, arranging or influencing the world. There is a huge diversity of such cosmologies. In some cases, such as among the Chukchi, the beings collaborate rather than competing, and contribute to the creation in a coequal way. In many other instances the two beings are not of the same importance or power (sometimes, one of them is even characterized as gullible). Sometimes they can be contrasted as good versus evil.[2] They may be often believed to be twins or at least brothers.[3][4] Dualistic motifs in mythologies can be observed in all inhabited continents. Zolotaryov concludes that they cannot be explained by diffusion or borrowing, but are rather of convergent origin: they are related to a dualistic organization of society (moieties); in some cultures, this social organization may have ceased to exist, but mythology preserves the memory in more and more disguised ways.[5]
Moral dualism[edit]
This section does not cite any sources. Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed.
Find sources: "Dualistic cosmology" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR (October 2017) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)
Moral dualism is the belief of the great complement or conflict between the benevolent and the malevolent. Like ditheism/bitheism (see below), moral dualism does not imply the absence of monist or monotheistic principles. Moral dualism simply implies that there are two moral opposites at work, independent of any interpretation of what might be "moral" and—unlike ditheism/bitheism—independent of how these may be represented.
For example, Mazdaism (Mazdean Zoroastrianism) is both dualistic and monotheistic (but not monist by definition) since in that philosophy God—the Creator—is purely good, and the antithesis—which is also uncreated–is an absolute one. Zurvanism (Zurvanite Zoroastrianism), Manichaeism, and Mandaeism are representative of dualistic and monist philosophies since each has a supreme and transcendental First Principle from which the two equal-but-opposite entities then emanate. This is also true for the lesser-known Christian gnostic religions, such as Bogomils, Catharism, and so on. More complex forms of monist dualism also exist, for instance in Hermeticism, where Nous "thought"—that is described to have created man—brings forth both good and evil, dependent on interpretation, whether it receives prompting from the God or from the Demon. Duality with pluralism is considered a logical fallacy.
History[edit]
Moral dualism began as a theological belief. Dualism was first seen implicitly in Egyptian religious beliefs by the contrast of the gods Set (disorder, death) and Osiris (order, life).[6] The first explicit conception of dualism came from the Ancient Persian religion of Zoroastrianism around the mid-fifth century BC. Zoroastrianism is a monotheistic religion that believes that Ahura Mazda is the eternal creator of all good things. Any violations of Ahura Mazda's order arise from druj, which is everything uncreated. From this comes a significant choice for humans to make. Either they fully participate in human life for Ahura Mazda or they do not and give druj power. Personal dualism is even more distinct in the beliefs of later religions.
The religious dualism of Christianity between good and evil is not a perfect dualism as God (good) will inevitably destroy Satan (evil). Early Christian dualism is largely based on Platonic Dualism (See: Neoplatonism and Christianity). There is also a personal dualism in Christianity with a soul-body distinction based on the idea of an immaterial Christian soul.[7]
Duotheism, bitheism, ditheism[edit]
When used with regards to multiple gods, dualism may refer to duotheism, bitheism, or ditheism. Although ditheism/bitheism imply moral dualism, they are not equivalent: ditheism/bitheism implies (at least) two gods, while moral dualism does not necessarily imply theism (theos = god) at all.
Both bitheism and ditheism imply a belief in two equally powerful gods with complementary or antonymous properties; however, while bitheism implies harmony, ditheism implies rivalry and opposition, such as between good and evil, bright and dark, or summer and winter. For example, a ditheistic system would be one in which one god is creative, the other is destructive (cf. theodicy). In the original conception of Zoroastrianism, for example, Ahura Mazda was the spirit of ultimate good, while Ahriman (Angra Mainyu) was the spirit of ultimate evil.
In a bitheistic system, by contrast, where the two deities are not in conflict or opposition, one could be male and the other female (cf. duotheism[clarification needed]). One well-known example of a bitheistic or duotheistic theology based on gender polarity is found in the neopagan religion of Wicca. In Wicca, dualism is represented in the belief of a god and a goddess as a dual partnership in ruling the universe. This is centered on the worship of a divine couple, the Moon Goddess and the Horned God, who are regarded as lovers. However, there is also a ditheistic theme within traditional Wicca, as the Horned God has dual aspects of bright and dark - relating to day/night, summer/winter - expressed as the Oak King and the Holly King, who in Wiccan myth and ritual are said to engage in battle twice a year for the hand of the Goddess, resulting in the changing seasons. (Within Wicca, bright and dark do not correspond to notions of "good" and "evil" but are aspects of the natural world, much like yin and yang in Taoism.)
Radical and mitigated dualism[edit]
Radical Dualism – or absolute Dualism which posits two co-equal divine forces.[8] Manichaeism conceives of two previously coexistent realms of light and darkness which become embroiled in conflict, owing to the chaotic actions of the latter. Subsequently, certain elements of the light became entrapped within darkness; the purpose of material creation is to enact the slow process of extraction of these individual elements, at the end of which the kingdom of light will prevail over darkness. Manicheanism likely inherits this dualistic mythology from Zoroastrianism, in which the eternal spirit Ahura Mazda is opposed by his antithesis, Angra Mainyu; the two are engaged in a cosmic struggle, the conclusion of which will likewise see Ahura Mazda triumphant. 'The Hymn of the Pearl' included the belief that the material world corresponds to some sort of malevolent intoxication brought about by the powers of darkness to keep elements of the light trapped inside it in a state of drunken distraction.
Mitigated Dualism – is where one of the two principles is in some way inferior to the other. Such classical Gnostic movements as the Sethians conceived of the material world as being created by a lesser divinity than the true God that was the object of their devotion. The spiritual world is conceived of as being radically different from the material world, co-extensive with the true God, and the true home of certain enlightened members of humanity; thus, these systems were expressive of a feeling of acute alienation within the world, and their resultant aim was to allow the soul to escape the constraints presented by the physical realm.[8]
However, bitheistic and ditheistic principles are not always so easily contrastable, for instance in a system where one god is the representative of summer and drought and the other of winter and rain/fertility (cf. the mythology of Persephone). Marcionism, an early Christian sect, held that the Old and New Testaments were the work of two opposing gods: both were First Principles, but of different religions.[9]
Theistic dualism[edit]
In theology, dualism can refer to the relationship between God and creation or God and the universe. This form of dualism is a belief shared in certain traditions of Christianity and Hinduism.[10][1]
In Christianity[edit]
The Cathars being expelled from Carcassonne in 1209. The Cathars were denounced as heretics by the Roman Catholic Church for their dualist beliefs.
The dualism between God and Creation has existed as a central belief in multiple historical sects and traditions of Christianity, including Marcionism, Catharism, Paulicianism, and other forms of Gnostic Christianity. Christian dualism refers to the belief that God and creation are distinct, but interrelated through an indivisible bond.[1] However, Gnosticism is a diverse, syncretistic religious movement consisting of various belief systems generally united in a belief in a distinction between a supreme, transcendent God and a blind, evil demiurge responsible for creating the material universe, thereby trapping the divine spark within matter.[11]
In sects like the Cathars and the Paulicians, this is a dualism between the material world, created by an evil god, and a moral god. Historians divide Christian dualism into absolute dualism, which held that the good and evil gods were equally powerful, and mitigated dualism, which held that material evil was subordinate to the spiritual good.[12] The belief, by Christian theologians who adhere to a libertarian or compatibilist view of free will, that free will separates humankind from God has also been characterized as a form of dualism.[1] The theologian Leroy Stephens Rouner compares the dualism of Christianity with the dualism that exists in Zoroastrianism and the Samkhya tradition of Hinduism. The theological use of the word dualism dates back to 1700, in a book that describes the dualism between good and evil.[1]
The tolerance of dualism ranges widely among the different Christian traditions. As a monotheistic religion, the conflict between dualism and monism has existed in Christianity since its inception.[13] The 1912 Catholic Encyclopedia describes that, in the Catholic Church, "the dualistic hypothesis of an eternal world existing side by side with God was of course rejected" by the thirteenth century, but mind–body dualism was not.[14] The problem of evil is difficult to reconcile with absolute monism, and has prompted some Christian sects to veer towards dualism. Gnostic forms of Christianity were more dualistic, and some Gnostic traditions posited that the Devil was separate from God as an independent deity.[13] The Christian dualists of the Byzantine Empire, the Paulicians, were seen as Manichean heretics by Byzantine theologians. This tradition of Christian dualism, founded by Constantine-Silvanus, argued that the universe was created through evil and separate from a moral God.[15]
The Cathars, a Christian sect in southern France, believed that there was a dualism between two gods, one representing good and the other representing evil. Whether or not the Cathari possessed direct historical influence from ancient Gnosticism is a matter of dispute, as the basic conceptions of Gnostic cosmology are to be found in Cathar beliefs (most distinctly in their notion of a lesser creator god), though unlike the second century Gnostics, they did not apparently place any special relevance upon knowledge (gnosis) as an effective salvific force. In any case, the Roman Catholic Church denounced the Cathars as heretics, and sought to crush the movement in the 13th century. The Albigensian Crusade was initiated by Pope Innocent III in 1208 to remove the Cathars from Languedoc in France, where they were known as Albigesians. The Inquisition, which began in 1233 under Pope Gregory IX, also targeted the Cathars.[16]
In Hinduism[edit]
The Dvaita Vedanta school of Indian philosophy espouses a dualism between God and the universe by theorizing the existence of two separate realities. The first and the more important reality is that of Shiva or Shakti or Vishnu or Brahman. Shiva or Shakti or Vishnu is the supreme Self, God, the absolute truth of the universe, the independent reality. The second reality is that of dependent but equally real universe that exists with its own separate essence. Everything that is composed of the second reality, such as individual soul (Jiva), matter, etc. exist with their own separate reality. The distinguishing factor of this philosophy as opposed to Advaita Vedanta (monistic conclusion of Vedas) is that God takes on a personal role and is seen as a real eternal entity that governs and controls the universe.[17][better source needed] Because the existence of individuals is grounded in the divine, they are depicted as reflections, images or even shadows of the divine, but never in any way identical with the divine. Salvation therefore is described as the realization that all finite reality is essentially dependent on the Supreme.[18]
Ontological dualism[edit]
The yin and yang symbolizes the duality in nature and all things in the Taoist religion.
Alternatively, dualism can mean the tendency of humans to perceive and understand the world as being divided into two overarching categories. In this sense, it is dualistic when one perceives a tree as a thing separate from everything surrounding it. This form of ontological dualism exists in Taoism and Confucianism, beliefs that divide the universe into the complementary oppositions of yin and yang.[19] In traditions such as classical Hinduism (Samkhya, Yoga, Vaisheshika and the later Vedanta schools, which accepted the theory of Gunas), Zen Buddhism or Islamic Sufism, a key to enlightenment is "transcending" this sort of dualistic thinking, without merely substituting dualism with monism or pluralism.
In Chinese philosophy[edit]
This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed.
Find sources: "Dualistic cosmology" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR (March 2017) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)
The opposition and combination of the universe's two basic principles of yin and yang is a large part of Chinese philosophy, and is an important feature of Taoism, both as a philosophy and as a religion, although the concept developed much earlier. Some argue that yin and yang were originally an earth and sky god, respectively.[20] As one of the oldest principles in Chinese philosophy, yin and yang are also discussed in Confucianism, but to a lesser extent.
Some of the common associations with yang and yin, respectively, are: male and female, light and dark, active and passive, motion and stillness. Some scholars believe that the two ideas may have originally referred to two opposite sides of a mountain, facing towards and away from the sun.[20] The yin and yang symbol in actuality has very little to do with Western dualism; instead it represents the philosophy of balance, where two opposites co-exist in harmony and are able to transmute into each other. In the yin-yang symbol there is a dot of yin in yang and a dot of yang in yin. In Taoism, this symbolizes the inter-connectedness of the opposite forces as different aspects of Tao, the First Principle. Contrast is needed to create a distinguishable reality, without which we would experience nothingness. Therefore, the independent principles of yin and yang are actually dependent on one another for each other's distinguishable existence.
The complementary dualistic concept seen in yin and yang represent the reciprocal interaction throughout nature, related to a feedback loop, where opposing forces do not exchange in opposition but instead exchange reciprocally to promote stabilization similar to homeostasis. An underlying principle in Taoism states that within every independent entity lies a part of its opposite. Within sickness lies health and vice versa. This is because all opposites are manifestations of the single Tao, and are therefore not independent from one another, but rather a variation of the same unifying force throughout all of nature.
In traditional religions[edit]
Samoyed peoples[edit]
In a Nenets myth, Num and Nga collaborate and compete with each other, creating land,[21] there are also other myths about competing-collaborating demiurges.[22]
Comparative studies of Kets and neighboring peoples[edit]
Among others, also dualistic myths were investigated in researches which tried to compare the mythologies of Siberian peoples and settle the problem of their origins. Vyacheslav Ivanov and Vladimir Toporov compared the mythology of Ket people with those of speakers of Uralic languages, assuming in the studies, that there are modelling semiotic systems in the compared mythologies; and they have also made typological comparisons.[23][24] Among others, from possibly Uralic mythological analogies, those of Ob-Ugric peoples[25] and Samoyedic peoples[26] are mentioned. Some other discussed analogies (similar folklore motifs, and purely typological considerations, certain binary pairs in symbolics) may be related to dualistic organization of society—some of such dualistic features can be found at these compared peoples.[27] It must be admitted that, for Kets, neither dualistic organization of society[28] nor cosmological dualism[29] has been researched thoroughly: if such features existed at all, they have either weakened or remained largely undiscovered;[28] although there are some reports on division into two exogamous patrilinear moieties,[30] folklore on conflicts of mythological figures, and also on cooperation of two beings in creating the land:[29] the diving of the water fowl.[31] If we include dualistic cosmologies meant in broad sense, not restricted to certain concrete motifs, then we find that they are much more widespread, they exist not only among some Siberian peoples, but there are examples in each inhabited continent.[32]
Chukchi[edit]
A Chukchi myth and its variations report the creation of the world; in some variations, it is achieved by the collaboration of several beings (birds, collaborating in a coequal way; or the creator and the raven, collaborating in a coequal way; or the creator alone, using the birds only as assistants).[33][34]
Fuegians[edit]
See also: Fuegians § Spiritual culture
All three Fuegian tribes had dualistic myths about culture heros.[35] The Yámana have dualistic myths about the two [joalox] brothers. They act as culture heroes, and sometimes stand in an antagonistic relation with each other, introducing opposite laws. Their figures can be compared to the Kwanyip-brothers of the Selk'nam.[36] In general, the presence of dualistic myths in two compared cultures does not imply relatedness or diffusion necessarily.[32]
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dualistic_cosmology
In spirituality, nondualism, also called non-duality, means "not two" or "one undivided without a second".[1][2] Nondualism primarily refers to a mature state of consciousness, in which the dichotomy of I-other is "transcended", and awareness is described as "centerless" and "without dichotomies". Although this state of consciousness may seem to appear spontaneous,[note 1] it usually follows prolonged preparation through ascetic or meditative/contemplative practice, which may include ethical injunctions. While the term "nondualism" is derived from Advaita Vedanta, descriptions of nondual consciousness can be found within Hinduism (Turiya, sahaja), Buddhism (emptiness, pariniṣpanna, nature of mind, rigpa), Islam (Wahdat al Wujud, Fanaa, and Haqiqah) and western Christian and neo-Platonic traditions (henosis, mystical union).
The Asian ideas of nondualism developed in the Vedic and post-Vedic Upanishadic philosophies around 800 BCE,[3] as well as in the Buddhist traditions.[4] The oldest traces of nondualism in Indian thought are found in the earlier Hindu Upanishads such as Brihadaranyaka Upanishad, as well as other pre-Buddhist Upanishads such as the Chandogya Upanishad, which emphasizes the unity of individual soul called Atman and the Supreme called Brahman. In Hinduism, nondualism has more commonly become associated with the Advaita Vedanta tradition of Adi Shankara.[5]
In the Buddhist tradition non-duality is associated with the teachings of emptiness (śūnyatā) and the two truths doctrine, particularly the Madhyamaka teaching of the non-duality of absolute and relative truth,[6][7] and the Yogachara notion of "mind/thought only" (citta-matra) or "representation-only" (vijñaptimātra).[5] These teachings, coupled with the doctrine of Buddha-nature have been influential concepts in the subsequent development of Mahayana Buddhism, not only in India, but also in East Asian and Tibetan Buddhism, most notably in Chán (Zen) and Vajrayana.
Western Neo-Platonism is an essential element of both Christian contemplation and mysticism, and of Western esotericism and modern spirituality, especially Unitarianism, Transcendentalism, Universalism and Perennialism.Etymology[edit]
When referring to nondualism, Hinduism generally uses the Sanskrit term Advaita, while Buddhism uses Advaya (Tibetan: gNis-med, Chinese: pu-erh, Japanese: fu-ni).[8]
"Advaita" (अद्वैत) is from Sanskrit roots a, not; dvaita, dual, and is usually translated as "nondualism", "nonduality" and "nondual". The term "nondualism" and the term "advaita" from which it originates are polyvalent terms. The English word's origin is the Latin duo meaning "two" prefixed with "non-" meaning "not".
"Advaya" (अद्वय) is also a Sanskrit word that means "identity, unique, not two, without a second," and typically refers to the two truths doctrine of Mahayana Buddhism, especially Madhyamaka.
One of the earliest uses of the word Advaita is found in verse 4.3.32 of the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad (~800 BCE), and in verses 7 and 12 of the Mandukya Upanishad (variously dated to have been composed between 500 BCE to 200 CE).[9] The term appears in the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad in the section with a discourse of the oneness of Atman (individual soul) and Brahman (universal consciousness), as follows:[10]
An ocean is that one seer, without any duality [Advaita]; this is the Brahma-world, O King. Thus did Yajnavalkya teach him. This is his highest goal, this is his highest success, this is his highest world, this is his highest bliss. All other creatures live on a small portion of that bliss.
— Brihadaranyaka Upanishad 4.3.32, [11][12][13]
The English term "nondual" was also informed by early translations of the Upanishads in Western languages other than English from 1775. These terms have entered the English language from literal English renderings of "advaita" subsequent to the first wave of English translations of the Upanishads. These translations commenced with the work of Müller (1823–1900), in the monumental Sacred Books of the East (1879).
Max Müller rendered "advaita" as "Monism", as have many recent scholars.[14][15][16] However, some scholars state that "advaita" is not really monism.[17]
Definitions[edit]
See also: Monism, Mind-body dualism, Dualistic cosmology, and Pluralism (philosophy)
Nondualism is a fuzzy concept, for which many definitions can be found.[note 2]
According to Espín and Nickoloff, "nondualism" is the thought in some Hindu, Buddhist and Taoist schools, which, generally speaking:
... teaches that the multiplicity of the universe is reducible to one essential reality."[18]
However, since there are similar ideas and terms in a wide variety of spiritualities and religions, ancient and modern, no single definition for the English word "nonduality" can suffice, and perhaps it is best to speak of various "nondualities" or theories of nonduality.[19]
David Loy, who sees non-duality between subject and object as a common thread in Taoism, Mahayana Buddhism, and Advaita Vedanta,[20][note 3] distinguishes "Five Flavors Of Nonduality":[web 1]
The negation of dualistic thinking in pairs of opposites. The Yin-Yang symbol of Taoism symbolises the transcendence of this dualistic way of thinking.[web 1]
Monism, the nonplurality of the world. Although the phenomenal world appears as a plurality of "things", in reality they are "of a single cloth".[web 1]
Advaita, the nondifference of subject and object, or nonduality between subject and object.[web 1]
Advaya, the identity of phenomena and the Absolute, the "nonduality of duality and nonduality",[web 1] c.q. the nonduality of relative and ultimate truth as found in Madhyamaka Buddhism and the two truths doctrine.
Mysticism, a mystical unity between God and man.[web 1]
The idea of nondualism is typically contrasted with dualism, with dualism defined as the view that the universe and the nature of existence consists of two realities, such as the God and the world, or as God and Devil, or as mind and matter, and so on.[23][24]
Ideas of nonduality are also taught in some western religions and philosophies, and it has gained attraction and popularity in modern western spirituality and New Age-thinking.[25]
Different theories and concepts which can be linked to nonduality are taught in a wide variety of religious traditions. These include:
Hinduism:
In the Upanishads, which teach a doctrine that has been interpreted in a nondualistic way, mainly tat tvam asi.[26]
The Advaita Vedanta of Shankara[27][26] which teaches that a single pure consciousness is the only reality, and that the world is unreal (Maya).
Non-dual forms of Hindu Tantra[28] including Kashmira Shaivism[29][28] and the goddess centered Shaktism. Their view is similar to Advaita, but they teach that the world is not unreal, but it is the real manifestation of consciousness.[30]
Forms of Hindu Modernism which mainly teach Advaita and modern Indian saints like Ramana Maharshi and Swami Vivekananda.
Buddhism:
"Shūnyavāda (emptiness view) or the Mādhyamaka school",[31][32] which holds that there is a non-dual relationship (that is, there is no true separation) between conventional truth and ultimate truth, as well as between samsara and nirvana.
"Vijnānavāda (consciousness view) or the Yogācāra school",[31][33] which holds that there is no ultimate perceptual and conceptual division between a subject and its objects, or a cognizer and that which is cognized. It also argues against mind-body dualism, holding that there is only consciousness.
Tathagatagarbha-thought,[33] which holds that all beings have the potential to become Buddhas.
Vajrayana-buddhism,[34] including Tibetan Buddhist traditions of Dzogchen[35] and Mahamudra.[36]
East Asian Buddhist traditions like Zen[37] and Huayan, particularly their concept of interpenetration.
Sikhism,[38] which usually teaches a duality between God and humans, but was given a nondual interpretation by Bhai Vir Singh.
Taoism,[39] which teaches the idea of a single subtle universal force or cosmic creative power called Tao (literally "way").
Subud[25]
Abrahamic traditions:
Christian mystics who promote a "nondual experience", such as Meister Eckhart and Julian of Norwich. The focus of this Christian nondualism is on bringing the worshiper closer to God and realizing a "oneness" with the Divine.[40]
Sufism[39]
Jewish Kabbalah
Western traditions:
Neo-platonism [41] which teaches there is a single source of all reality, The One.
Western philosophers like Hegel, Spinoza and Schopenhauer.[41] They defended different forms of philosophical monism or Idealism.
Transcendentalism, which was influenced by German Idealism and Indian religions.
Theosophy
New age
Hinduism[edit]
"Advaita" refers to nondualism, non-distinction between realities, the oneness of Atman (individual self) and Brahman (the single universal existence), as in Vedanta, Shaktism and Shaivism.[42] Although the term is best known from the Advaita Vedanta school of Adi Shankara, "advaita" is used in treatises by numerous medieval era Indian scholars, as well as modern schools and teachers.[note 4]
The Hindu concept of Advaita refers to the idea that all of the universe is one essential reality, and that all facets and aspects of the universe is ultimately an expression or appearance of that one reality.[42] According to Dasgupta and Mohanta, non-dualism developed in various strands of Indian thought, both Vedic and Buddhist, from the Upanishadic period onward.[4] The oldest traces of nondualism in Indian thought may be found in the Chandogya Upanishad, which pre-dates the earliest Buddhism. Pre-sectarian Buddhism may also have been responding to the teachings of the Chandogya Upanishad, rejecting some of its Atman-Brahman related metaphysics.[43][note 5]
Advaita appears in different shades in various schools of Hinduism such as in Advaita Vedanta, Vishishtadvaita Vedanta (Vaishnavism), Suddhadvaita Vedanta (Vaishnavism), non-dual Shaivism and Shaktism.[42][46][47] In the Advaita Vedanta of Adi Shankara, advaita implies that all of reality is one with Brahman,[42] that the Atman (soul, self) and Brahman (ultimate unchanging reality) are one.[48][49] The advaita ideas of some Hindu traditions contrasts with the schools that defend dualism or Dvaita, such as that of Madhvacharya who stated that the experienced reality and God are two (dual) and distinct.[50][51]
Vedanta[edit]
Main article: Vedanta
Several schools of Vedanta teach a form of nondualism. The best-known is Advaita Vedanta, but other nondual Vedanta schools also have a significant influence and following, such as Vishishtadvaita Vedanta and Shuddhadvaita,[42] both of which are bhedabheda.
Advaita Vedanta[edit]
Main article: Advaita Vedanta
Swans are important figures in Advaita
The nonduality of the Advaita Vedanta is of the identity of Brahman and the Atman.[52] Advaita has become a broad current in Indian culture and religions, influencing subsequent traditions like Kashmir Shaivism.
The oldest surviving manuscript on Advaita Vedanta is by Gauḍapāda (6th century CE),[5] who has traditionally been regarded as the teacher of Govinda bhagavatpāda and the grandteacher of Adi Shankara. Advaita is best known from the Advaita Vedanta tradition of Adi Shankara (788-820 CE), who states that Brahman, the single unified eternal truth, is pure Being, Consciousness and Bliss (Sat-cit-ananda).[53]
Advaita, states Murti, is the knowledge of Brahman and self-consciousness (Vijnana) without differences.[54] The goal of Vedanta is to know the "truly real" and thus become one with it.[55] According to Advaita Vedanta, Brahman is the highest Reality,[56][57][58] The universe, according to Advaita philosophy, does not simply come from Brahman, it is Brahman. Brahman is the single binding unity behind the diversity in all that exists in the universe.[57] Brahman is also that which is the cause of all changes.[57][59][60] Brahman is the "creative principle which lies realized in the whole world".[61]
The nondualism of Advaita, relies on the Hindu concept of Ātman which is a Sanskrit word that means "real self" of the individual,[62][63] "essence",[web 3] and soul.[62][64] Ātman is the first principle,[65] the true self of an individual beyond identification with phenomena, the essence of an individual. Atman is the Universal Principle, one eternal undifferentiated self-luminous consciousness, asserts Advaita Vedanta school of Hinduism.[66][67]
Advaita Vedanta philosophy considers Atman as self-existent awareness, limitless, non-dual and same as Brahman.[68] Advaita school asserts that there is "soul, self" within each living entity which is fully identical with Brahman.[69][70] This identity holds that there is One Soul that connects and exists in all living beings, regardless of their shapes or forms, there is no distinction, no superior, no inferior, no separate devotee soul (Atman), no separate God soul (Brahman).[69] The Oneness unifies all beings, there is the divine in every being, and all existence is a single Reality, state the Advaita Vedantins.[71] The nondualism concept of Advaita Vedanta asserts that each soul is non-different from the infinite Brahman.[72]
Advaita Vedanta – Three levels of reality[edit]
Advaita Vedanta adopts sublation as the criterion to postulate three levels of ontological reality:[73][74]
Pāramārthika (paramartha, absolute), the Reality that is metaphysically true and ontologically accurate. It is the state of experiencing that "which is absolutely real and into which both other reality levels can be resolved". This experience can't be sublated (exceeded) by any other experience.[73][74]
Vyāvahārika (vyavahara), or samvriti-saya,[75] consisting of the empirical or pragmatic reality. It is ever-changing over time, thus empirically true at a given time and context but not metaphysically true. It is "our world of experience, the phenomenal world that we handle every day when we are awake". It is the level in which both jiva (living creatures or individual souls) and Iswara are true; here, the material world is also true.[74]
Prāthibhāsika (pratibhasika, apparent reality, unreality), "reality based on imagination alone". It is the level of experience in which the mind constructs its own reality. A well-known example is the perception of a rope in the dark as being a snake.[74]
Similarities and differences with Buddhism[edit]
Scholars state that Advaita Vedanta was influenced by Mahayana Buddhism, given the common terminology and methodology and some common doctrines.[76][77] Eliot Deutsch and Rohit Dalvi state:
In any event a close relationship between the Mahayana schools and Vedanta did exist, with the latter borrowing some of the dialectical techniques, if not the specific doctrines, of the former.[78]
Advaita Vedanta is related to Buddhist philosophy, which promotes ideas like the two truths doctrine and the doctrine that there is only consciousness (vijñapti-mātra). It is possible that the Advaita philosopher Gaudapada was influenced by Buddhist ideas.[5] Shankara harmonised Gaudapada's ideas with the Upanishadic texts, and developed a very influential school of orthodox Hinduism.[79][80]
The Buddhist term vijñapti-mātra is often used interchangeably with the term citta-mātra, but they have different meanings. The standard translation of both terms is "consciousness-only" or "mind-only." Advaita Vedanta has been called "idealistic monism" by scholars, but some disagree with this label.[81][82] Another concept found in both Madhyamaka Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta is Ajativada ("ajāta"), which Gaudapada adopted from Nagarjuna's philosophy.[83][84][note 6] Gaudapada "wove [both doctrines] into a philosophy of the Mandukaya Upanisad, which was further developed by Shankara.[86][note 7]
Michael Comans states there is a fundamental difference between Buddhist thought and that of Gaudapada, in that Buddhism has as its philosophical basis the doctrine of Dependent Origination according to which "everything is without an essential nature (nissvabhava), and everything is empty of essential nature (svabhava-sunya)", while Gaudapada does not rely on this principle at all. Gaudapada's Ajativada is an outcome of reasoning applied to an unchanging nondual reality according to which "there exists a Reality (sat) that is unborn (aja)" that has essential nature (svabhava), and this is the "eternal, fearless, undecaying Self (Atman) and Brahman".[88] Thus, Gaudapada differs from Buddhist scholars such as Nagarjuna, states Comans, by accepting the premises and relying on the fundamental teaching of the Upanishads.[88] Among other things, Vedanta school of Hinduism holds the premise, "Atman exists, as self evident truth", a concept it uses in its theory of nondualism. Buddhism, in contrast, holds the premise, "Atman does not exist (or, An-atman) as self evident".[89][90][91]
Mahadevan suggests that Gaudapada adopted Buddhist terminology and adapted its doctrines to his Vedantic goals, much like early Buddhism adopted Upanishadic terminology and adapted its doctrines to Buddhist goals; both used pre-existing concepts and ideas to convey new meanings.[92] Dasgupta and Mohanta note that Buddhism and Shankara's Advaita Vedanta are not opposing systems, but "different phases of development of the same non-dualistic metaphysics from the Upanishadic period to the time of Sankara."[4]
Vishishtadvaita Vedanta[edit]
Ramanuja, founder of Vishishtadvaita Vedanta, taught 'qualified nondualism' doctrine.
See also: Bhedabheda
Vishishtadvaita Vedanta is another main school of Vedanta and teaches the nonduality of the qualified whole, in which Brahman alone exists, but is characterized by multiplicity. It can be described as "qualified monism," or "qualified non-dualism," or "attributive monism."
According to this school, the world is real, yet underlying all the differences is an all-embracing unity, of which all "things" are an "attribute." Ramanuja, the main proponent of Vishishtadvaita philosophy contends that the Prasthana Traya ("The three courses") – namely the Upanishads, the Bhagavad Gita, and the Brahma Sutras – are to be interpreted in a way that shows this unity in diversity, for any other way would violate their consistency.
Vedanta Desika defines Vishishtadvaita using the statement: Asesha Chit-Achit Prakaaram Brahmaikameva Tatvam – "Brahman, as qualified by the sentient and insentient modes (or attributes), is the only reality."
Neo-Vedanta[edit]
Main articles: Neo-Vedanta, Swami Vivekananda, and Ramakrishna Mission
Neo-Vedanta, also called "neo-Hinduism"[93] is a modern interpretation of Hinduism which developed in response to western colonialism and orientalism, and aims to present Hinduism as a "homogenized ideal of Hinduism"[94] with Advaita Vedanta as its central doctrine.[95]
Neo-Vedanta, as represented by Vivekananda and Radhakrishnan, is indebted to Advaita vedanta, but also reflects Advaya-philosophy. A main influence on neo-Advaita was Ramakrishna, himself a bhakta and tantrika, and the guru of Vivekananda. According to Michael Taft, Ramakrishna reconciled the dualism of formlessness and form.[96] Ramakrishna regarded the Supreme Being to be both Personal and Impersonal, active and inactive:
When I think of the Supreme Being as inactive – neither creating nor preserving nor destroying – I call Him Brahman or Purusha, the Impersonal God. When I think of Him as active – creating, preserving and destroying – I call Him Sakti or Maya or Prakriti, the Personal God. But the distinction between them does not mean a difference. The Personal and Impersonal are the same thing, like milk and its whiteness, the diamond and its lustre, the snake and its wriggling motion. It is impossible to conceive of the one without the other. The Divine Mother and Brahman are one.[97]
Radhakrishnan acknowledged the reality and diversity of the world of experience, which he saw as grounded in and supported by the absolute or Brahman.[web 4][note 8] According to Anil Sooklal, Vivekananda's neo-Advaita "reconciles Dvaita or dualism and Advaita or non-dualism":[99]
The Neo-Vedanta is also Advaitic inasmuch as it holds that Brahman, the Ultimate Reality, is one without a second, ekamevadvitiyam. But as distinguished from the traditional Advaita of Sankara, it is a synthetic Vedanta which reconciles Dvaita or dualism and Advaita or non-dualism and also other theories of reality. In this sense it may also be called concrete monism in so far as it holds that Brahman is both qualified, saguna, and qualityless, nirguna.[99]
Radhakrishnan also reinterpreted Shankara's notion of maya. According to Radhakrishnan, maya is not a strict absolute idealism, but "a subjective misperception of the world as ultimately real."[web 4] According to Sarma, standing in the tradition of Nisargadatta Maharaj, Advaitavāda means "spiritual non-dualism or absolutism",[100] in which opposites are manifestations of the Absolute, which itself is immanent and transcendent:[101]
All opposites like being and non-being, life and death, good and evil, light and darkness, gods and men, soul and nature are viewed as manifestations of the Absolute which is immanent in the universe and yet transcends it.[102]
Kashmir Shaivism[edit]
Main articles: Shaivism and Kashmir Shaivism
Part of a series on
Shaivism
SaivismFlag.svg
Deities[show]
Scriptures and texts[show]
Philosophy[show]
Practices[show]
Schools[show]
Scholars[show]
Related[show]
vte
Advaita is also a central concept in various schools of Shaivism, such as Kashmir Shaivism[42] and Shiva Advaita.
Kashmir Shaivism is a school of Śaivism, described by Abhinavagupta[note 9] as "paradvaita", meaning "the supreme and absolute non-dualism".[web 5] It is categorized by various scholars as monistic[103] idealism (absolute idealism, theistic monism,[104] realistic idealism,[105] transcendental physicalism or concrete monism[105]).
Kashmir Saivism is based on a strong monistic interpretation of the Bhairava Tantras and its subcategory the Kaula Tantras, which were tantras written by the Kapalikas.[106] There was additionally a revelation of the Siva Sutras to Vasugupta.[106] Kashmir Saivism claimed to supersede the dualistic Shaiva Siddhanta.[107] Somananda, the first theologian of monistic Saivism, was the teacher of Utpaladeva, who was the grand-teacher of Abhinavagupta, who in turn was the teacher of Ksemaraja.[106][108]
The philosophy of Kashmir Shaivism can be seen in contrast to Shankara's Advaita.[109] Advaita Vedanta holds that Brahman is inactive (niṣkriya) and the phenomenal world is an illusion (māyā). In Kashmir Shavisim, all things are a manifestation of the Universal Consciousness, Chit or Brahman.[110][111] Kashmir Shavisim sees the phenomenal world (Śakti) as real: it exists, and has its being in Consciousness (Chit).[112]
Kashmir Shaivism was influenced by, and took over doctrines from, several orthodox and heterodox Indian religious and philosophical traditions.[113] These include Vedanta, Samkhya, Patanjali Yoga and Nyayas, and various Buddhist schools, including Yogacara and Madhyamika,[113] but also Tantra and the Nath-tradition.[114]
Contemporary vernacular Advaita[edit]
Advaita is also part of other Indian traditions, which are less strongly, or not all, organised in monastic and institutional organisations. Although often called "Advaita Vedanta," these traditions have their origins in vernacular movements and "householder" traditions, and have close ties to the Nath, Nayanars and Sant Mat traditions.
Ramana Maharshi[edit]
Ramana Maharshi (1879–1950) explained his insight using Shaiva Siddhanta, Advaita Vedanta and Yoga teachings.
Main article: Ramana Maharshi
Ramana Maharshi (30 December 1879 – 14 April 1950) is widely acknowledged as one of the outstanding Indian gurus of modern times.[115] Ramana's teachings are often interpreted as Advaita Vedanta, though Ramana Maharshi never "received diksha (initiation) from any recognised authority".[web 6] Ramana himself did not call his insights advaita:
D. Does Sri Bhagavan advocate advaita?
M. Dvaita and advaita are relative terms. They are based on the sense of duality. The Self is as it is. There is neither dvaita nor advaita. "I Am that I Am."[note 10] Simple Being is the Self.[117]
Neo-Advaita[edit]
Main article: Neo-Advaita
Neo-Advaita is a New Religious Movement based on a modern, western interpretation of Advaita Vedanta, especially the teachings of Ramana Maharshi.[118] According to Arthur Versluis, neo-Advaita is part of a larger religious current which he calls immediatism,[119][web 9] "the assertion of immediate spiritual illumination without much if any preparatory practice within a particular religious tradition."[web 9] Neo-Advaita is criticized for this immediatism and its lack of preparatory practices.[120][note 11][122][note 12] Notable neo-advaita teachers are H. W. L. Poonja[123][118] and his students Gangaji,[124] Andrew Cohen,[note 13], and Eckhart Tolle.[118]
According to a modern western spiritual teacher of nonduality, Jeff Foster, nonduality is:
the essential oneness (wholeness, completeness, unity) of life, a wholeness which exists here and now, prior to any apparent separation [...] despite the compelling appearance of separation and diversity there is only one universal essence, one reality. Oneness is all there is – and we are included.[126]
Natha Sampradaya and Inchegeri Sampradaya[edit]
Main articles: Nath, Sahaja, and Inchegeri Sampradaya
The Natha Sampradaya, with Nath yogis such as Gorakhnath, introduced Sahaja, the concept of a spontaneous spirituality. Sahaja means "spontaneous, natural, simple, or easy".[web 13] According to Ken Wilber, this state reflects nonduality.[127]
Buddhism[edit]
There are different Buddhist views which resonate with the concepts and experiences of non-duality or "not two" (advaya). The Buddha does not use the term advaya in the earliest Buddhist texts, but it does appear in some of the Mahayana sutras, such as the Vimalakīrti.[128] While the Buddha taught unified states of mental focus (samadhi) and meditative absorption (dhyana) which were commonly taught in Upanishadic thought, he also rejected the metaphysical doctrines of the Upanishads, particularly ideas which are often associated with Hindu nonduality, such as the doctrine that "this cosmos is the self" and "everything is a Oneness" (cf. SN 12.48 and MN 22).[129][130] Because of this, Buddhist views of nonduality are particularly different than Hindu conceptions, which tend towards idealistic monism.
In Indian Buddhism[edit]
The layman Vimalakīrti Debates Manjusri, Dunhuang Mogao Caves
According to Kameshwar Nath Mishra, one connotation of advaya in Indic Sanskrit Buddhist texts is that it refers to the middle way between two opposite extremes (such as eternalism and annihilationism), and thus it is "not two".[131]
One of these Sanskrit Mahayana sutras, the Vimalakīrti Nirdeśa Sūtra contains a chapter on the "Dharma gate of non-duality" (advaya dharma dvara pravesa) which is said to be entered once one understands how numerous pairs of opposite extremes are to be rejected as forms of grasping. These extremes which must be avoided in order to understand ultimate reality are described by various characters in the text, and include: Birth and extinction, 'I' and 'Mine', Perception and non-perception, defilement and purity, good and not-good, created and uncreated, worldly and unworldly, samsara and nirvana, enlightenment and ignorance, form and emptiness and so on.[132] The final character to attempt to describe ultimate reality is the bodhisattva Manjushri, who states:
It is in all beings wordless, speechless, shows no signs, is not possible of cognizance, and is above all questioning and answering.[133]
Vimalakīrti responds to this statement by maintaining completely silent, therefore expressing that the nature of ultimate reality is ineffable (anabhilāpyatva) and inconceivable (acintyatā), beyond verbal designation (prapañca) or thought constructs (vikalpa).[133] The Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra, a text associated with Yogācāra Buddhism, also uses the term "advaya" extensively.[134]
In the Mahayana Buddhist philosophy of Madhyamaka, the two truths or ways of understanding reality, are said to be advaya (not two). As explained by the Indian philosopher Nagarjuna, there is a non-dual relationship, that is, there is no absolute separation, between conventional and ultimate truth, as well as between samsara and nirvana.[135][136] The concept of nonduality is also important in the other major Indian Mahayana tradition, the Yogacara school, where it is seen as the absence of duality between the perceiving subject (or "grasper") and the object (or "grasped"). It is also seen as an explanation of emptiness and as an explanation of the content of the awakened mind which sees through the illusion of subject-object duality. However, it is important to note that in this conception of non-dualism, there are still a multiplicity of individual mind streams (citta santana) and thus Yogacara does not teach an idealistic monism.[137]
These basic ideas have continued to influence Mahayana Buddhist doctrinal interpretations of Buddhist traditions such as Dzogchen, Mahamudra, Zen, Huayan and Tiantai as well as concepts such as Buddha-nature, luminous mind, Indra's net, rigpa and shentong.
Madhyamaka[edit]
Main articles: Madhyamika, Shunyata, and Two truths doctrine
Nagarjuna (right), Aryadeva (middle) and the Tenth Karmapa (left).
Madhyamaka, also known as Śūnyavāda (the emptiness teaching), refers primarily to a Mahāyāna Buddhist school of philosophy [138] founded by Nāgārjuna. In Madhyamaka, Advaya refers to the fact that the two truths are not separate or different.,[139] as well as the non-dual relationship of saṃsāra (the round of rebirth and suffering) and nirvāṇa (cessation of suffering, liberation).[42] According to Murti, in Madhyamaka, "Advaya" is an epistemological theory, unlike the metaphysical view of Hindu Advaita.[54] Madhyamaka advaya is closely related to the classical Buddhist understanding that all things are impermanent (anicca) and devoid of "self" (anatta) or "essenceless" (niḥsvabhāvavā),[140][141][142] and that this emptiness does not constitute an "absolute" reality in itself.[note 14].
In Madhyamaka, the two "truths" (satya) refer to conventional (saṃvṛti) and ultimate (paramārtha) truth.[143] The ultimate truth is "emptiness", or non-existence of inherently existing "things",[144] and the "emptiness of emptiness": emptiness does not in itself constitute an absolute reality. Conventionally, "things" exist, but ultimately, they are "empty" of any existence on their own, as described in Nagarjuna's magnum opus, the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā (MMK):
The Buddha's teaching of the Dharma is based on two truths: a truth of worldly convention and an ultimate truth. Those who do not understand the distinction drawn between these two truths do not understand the Buddha's profound truth. Without a foundation in the conventional truth the significance of the ultimate cannot be taught. Without understanding the significance of the ultimate, liberation is not achieved.[note 15]
As Jay Garfield notes, for Nagarjuna, to understand the two truths as totally different from each other is to reify and confuse the purpose of this doctrine, since it would either destroy conventional realities such as the Buddha's teachings and the empirical reality of the world (making Madhyamaka a form of nihilism) or deny the dependent origination of phenomena (by positing eternal essences). Thus the non-dual doctrine of the middle way lies beyond these two extremes.[146]
"Emptiness" is a consequence of pratītyasamutpāda (dependent arising),[147] the teaching that no dharma ("thing", "phenomena") has an existence of its own, but always comes into existence in dependence on other dharmas. According to Madhyamaka all phenomena are empty of "substance" or "essence" (Sanskrit: svabhāva) because they are dependently co-arisen. Likewise it is because they are dependently co-arisen that they have no intrinsic, independent reality of their own. Madhyamaka also rejects the existence of absolute realities or beings such as Brahman or Self.[148] In the highest sense, "ultimate reality" is not an ontological Absolute reality that lies beneath an unreal world, nor is it the non-duality of a personal self (atman) and an absolute Self (cf. Purusha). Instead, it is the knowledge which is based on a deconstruction of such reifications and Conceptual proliferations.[149] It also means that there is no "transcendental ground," and that "ultimate reality" has no existence of its own, but is the negation of such a transcendental reality, and the impossibility of any statement on such an ultimately existing transcendental reality: it is no more than a fabrication of the mind.[web 14][note 16] Susan Kahn further explains:
Ultimate truth does not point to a transcendent reality, but to the transcendence of deception. It is critical to emphasize that the ultimate truth of emptiness is a negational truth. In looking for inherently existent phenomena it is revealed that it cannot be found. This absence is not findable because it is not an entity, just as a room without an elephant in it does not contain an elephantless substance. Even conventionally, elephantlessness does not exist. Ultimate truth or emptiness does not point to an essence or nature, however subtle, that everything is made of.[web 15]
However, according to Nagarjuna, even the very schema of ultimate and conventional, samsara and nirvana, is not a final reality, and he thus famously deconstructs even these teachings as being empty and not different from each other in the MMK where he writes:[41]
The limit (koti) of nirvāṇa is that of saṃsāra
The subtlest difference is not found between the two.
According to Nancy McCagney, what this refers to is that the two truths depend on each other; without emptiness, conventional reality cannot work, and vice versa. It does not mean that samsara and nirvana are the same, or that they are one single thing, as in Advaita Vedanta, but rather that they are both empty, open, without limits, and merely exist for the conventional purpose of teaching the Buddha Dharma.[41] Referring to this verse, Jay Garfield writes that:
to distinguish between samsara and nirvana would be to suppose that each had a nature and that they were different natures. But each is empty, and so there can be no inherent difference. Moreover, since nirvana is by definition the cessation of delusion and of grasping and, hence, of the reification of self and other and of confusing imputed phenomena for inherently real phenomena, it is by definition the recognition of the ultimate nature of things. But if, as Nagarjuna argued in Chapter XXIV, this is simply to see conventional things as empty, not to see some separate emptiness behind them, then nirvana must be ontologically grounded in the conventional. To be in samsara is to see things as they appear to deluded consciousness and to interact with them accordingly. To be in nirvana, then, is to see those things as they are - as merely empty, dependent, impermanent, and nonsubstantial, not to be somewhere else, seeing something else.[150]
It is important to note however that the actual Sanskrit term "advaya" does not appear in the MMK, and only appears in one single work by Nagarjuna, the Bodhicittavivarana.[151]
The later Madhyamikas, states Yuichi Kajiyama, developed the Advaya definition as a means to Nirvikalpa-Samadhi by suggesting that "things arise neither from their own selves nor from other things, and that when subject and object are unreal, the mind, being not different, cannot be true either; thereby one must abandon attachment to cognition of nonduality as well, and understand the lack of intrinsic nature of everything". Thus, the Buddhist nondualism or Advaya concept became a means to realizing absolute emptiness.[152]
Yogācāra tradition[edit]
Asaṅga (fl. 4th century C.E.), a Mahayana scholar who wrote numerous works which discuss the Yogacara view and practice.
Main article: Yogacara
In the Mahayana tradition of Yogācāra (Skt; "yoga practice"), adyava (Tibetan: gnyis med) refers to overcoming the conceptual and perceptual dichotomies of cognizer and cognized, or subject and object.[42][153][154][155] The concept of adyava in Yogācāra is an epistemological stance on the nature of experience and knowledge, as well as a phenomenological exposition of yogic cognitive transformation. Early Buddhism schools such as Sarvastivada and Sautrāntika, that thrived through the early centuries of the common era, postulated a dualism (dvaya) between the mental activity of grasping (grāhaka, "cognition", "subjectivity") and that which is grasped (grāhya, "cognitum", intentional object).[156][152][156][157] Yogacara postulates that this dualistic relationship is a false illusion or superimposition (samaropa).[152]
Yogācāra also taught the doctrine which held that only mental cognitions really exist (vijñapti-mātra),[158][note 17] instead of the mind-body dualism of other Indian Buddhist schools.[152][156][158] This is another sense in which reality can be said to be non-dual, because it is "consciousness-only".[159] There are several interpretations of this main theory, which has been widely translated as representation-only, ideation-only, impressions-only and perception-only.[160][158][161][162] Some scholars see it as a kind of subjective or epistemic Idealism (similar to Kant's theory) while others argue that it is closer to a kind of phenomenology or representationalism. According to Mark Siderits the main idea of this doctrine is that we are only ever aware of mental images or impressions which manifest themselves as external objects, but "there is actually no such thing outside the mind."[163] For Alex Wayman, this doctrine means that "the mind has only a report or representation of what the sense organ had sensed."[161] Jay Garfield and Paul Williams both see the doctrine as a kind of Idealism in which only mentality exists.[164][165]
However, it is important to note that even the idealistic interpretation of Yogācāra is not an absolute monistic idealism like Advaita Vedanta or Hegelianism, since in Yogācāra, even consciousness "enjoys no transcendent status" and is just a conventional reality.[166] Indeed, according to Jonathan Gold, for Yogācāra, the ultimate truth is not consciousness, but an ineffable and inconceivable "thusness" or "thatness" (tathatā).[153] Also, Yogācāra affirms the existence of individual mindstreams, and thus Kochumuttom also calls it a realistic pluralism.[82]
The Yogācārins defined three basic modes by which we perceive our world. These are referred to in Yogācāra as the three natures (trisvabhāva) of experience. They are:[167][168]
Parikalpita (literally, "fully conceptualized"): "imaginary nature", wherein things are incorrectly comprehended based on conceptual and linguistic construction, attachment and the subject object duality. It is thus equivalent to samsara.
Paratantra (literally, "other dependent"): "dependent nature", by which the dependently originated nature of things, their causal relatedness or flow of conditionality. It is the basis which gets erroneously conceptualized,
Pariniṣpanna (literally, "fully accomplished"): "absolute nature", through which one comprehends things as they are in themselves, that is, empty of subject-object and thus is a type of non-dual cognition. This experience of "thatness" (tathatā) is uninfluenced by any conceptualization at all.
To move from the duality of the Parikalpita to the non-dual consciousness of the Pariniṣpanna, Yogācāra teaches that there must be a transformation of consciousness, which is called the "revolution of the basis" (āśraya-parāvṛtti). According to Dan Lusthaus, this transformation which characterizes awakening is a "radical psycho-cognitive change" and a removal of false "interpretive projections" on reality (such as ideas of a self, external objects, etc).[169]
The Mahāyānasūtrālamkāra, a Yogācāra text, also associates this transformation with the concept of non-abiding nirvana and the non-duality of samsara and nirvana. Regarding this state of Buddhahood, it states:
Its operation is nondual (advaya vrtti) because of its abiding neither in samsara nor in nirvana (samsaranirvana-apratisthitatvat), through its being both conditioned and unconditioned (samskrta-asamskrtatvena).[170]
This refers to the Yogācāra teaching that even though a Buddha has entered nirvana, they do no "abide" in some quiescent state separate from the world but continue to give rise to extensive activity on behalf of others.[170] This is also called the non-duality between the compounded (samskrta, referring to samsaric existence) and the uncompounded (asamskrta, referring to nirvana). It is also described as a "not turning back" from both samsara and nirvana.[171]
For the later thinker Dignaga, non-dual knowledge or advayajñāna is also a synonym for prajñaparamita (transcendent wisdom) which liberates one from samsara.[172]
Other Indian traditions[edit]
Buddha nature or tathagata-garbha (literally "Buddha womb") is that which allows sentient beings to become Buddhas.[173] Various Mahayana texts such as the Tathāgatagarbha sūtras focus on this idea and over time it became a very influential doctrine in Indian Buddhism, as well in East Asian and Tibetan Buddhism. The Buddha nature teachings may be regarded as a form of nondualism. According to Sally B King, all beings are said to be or possess tathagata-garbha, which is nondual Thusness or Dharmakaya. This reality, states King, transcends the "duality of self and not-self", the "duality of form and emptiness" and the "two poles of being and non being".[174]
There various interpretations and views on Buddha nature and the concept became very influential in India, China and Tibet, where it also became a source of much debate. In later Indian Yogācāra, a new sub-school developed which adopted the doctrine of tathagata-garbha into the Yogācāra system.[166] The influence of this hybrid school can be seen in texts like the Lankavatara Sutra and the Ratnagotravibhaga. This synthesis of Yogācāra tathagata-garbha became very influential in later Buddhist traditions, such as Indian Vajrayana, Chinese Buddhism and Tibetan Buddhism.[175][166] Yet another development in late Indian Buddhism was the synthesis of Madhymaka and Yogacara philosophies into a single system, by figures such as Śāntarakṣita (8th century). Buddhist Tantra, also known as Vajrayana, Mantrayana or Esoteric Buddhism, drew upon all these previous Indian Buddhist ideas and nondual philosophies to develop innovative new traditions of Buddhist practice and new religious texts called the Buddhist tantras (from the 6th century onwards).[176] Tantric Buddhism was influential in China and is the main form of Buddhism in the Himalayan regions, especially Tibetan Buddhism.
Gate guardian from the realm of the Underworld, a detail of the 3rd shrine of Tutankhamun. This second smallest of the shrines is mainly decorated with scenes from the Book of the Duat to aid the king's journey after death.
Tutankhamun's burial chamber was almost entirely filled by the golden shrines that surrounded the sarcophagus of the king, the outer shrine containing three more successively smaller gilded wooden boxes adorned with reliefs of underworld deities to inform the king's journey into the afterlife.
Every royal burial chamber from the New Kingdom must have contained a similar set of shrines to Tutankhamun's, but only mere fragments of one other have survived.
The most celebrated part of the Cairo Museum's collection has for the best part of a century been the incomparable treasures of Tutankhamun's tomb housed in two long galleries on the upper floor. The greatest archaeological discovery of all time, the virtually intact tomb of the young pharaoh was discovered in 1922 in the Valley of the Kings, undisturbed since antiquity owing to the King's relative obscurity.
Tutankhamun was born Tutankhaten, son and successor of the 'heretic' pharaoh Akhenaten who dispensed with Egypt's centuries old religion in favour of his new god, the sun disk he called Aten. At Akhenaten's death Tutankhaten was only nine years old and early in his reign was persuaded to restore Egypt's religion and traditions, abandoning the cult of Aten and restoring the prominence of Amun, god of Thebes, thus changing his name to Tutankhamun. His early death barely a decade later and association with his reviled father led to the young pharaoh sharing his fate in being struck from the records and lists of Kings (an act of damnatio memoriae), thus his tomb itself was quickly forgotten and hidden beneath later structures whilst those of more famous rulers were stripped bare, probably within decades.
Howard Carter's discovery of the still sealed tomb in 1922 caused a sensation, nothing so complete had ever been found before. The tomb itself was small by pharaonic standards, prepared in a hurry as the king died in his late teens with two main chambers and a further two side chambers crammed with artworks, treasures and furnishings, along with the king's body sealed within four gilded-wooden shrines, three superbly rich coffins and the incomparable golden mask upon his head. Better still, the pharaoh's reign in the 18th Dynasty coincided with a particularly high period for artistic achievement, meaning that so much was of the highest quality. One can only imagine the riches that must have disappeared from the much larger tombs of the more famous rulers, compared to this tiny treasure-trove!
Tutankhamun's collection has resided in Cairo's Egyptian Museum ever since its discovery, but by the end of 2018 will have moved again to the new Grand Egyptian Museum in Giza (currently being prepared for partial opening later this year). The treasures will be displayed in their entirety for the first time, and many pieces have already been transferred. This visit offered us a last opportunity to view most of the major pieces in their central Cairo home for one last time.
For more on the 'obscure' pharaoh who millennia later became Egypt's most celebrated, see the link below:-
Some of the many beautiful gilded and inlaid wooden figures found in Tutankhamun's tomb.
The most celebrated part of the Cairo Museum's collection has for the best part of a century been the incomparable treasures of Tutankhamun's tomb housed in two long galleries on the upper floor. The greatest archaeological discovery of all time, the virtually intact tomb of the young pharaoh was discovered in 1922 in the Valley of the Kings, undisturbed since antiquity owing to the King's relative obscurity.
Tutankhamun was born Tutankhaten, son and successor of the 'heretic' pharaoh Akhenaten who dispensed with Egypt's centuries old religion in favour of his new god, the sun disk he called Aten. At Akhenaten's death Tutankhaten was only nine years old and early in his reign was persuaded to restore Egypt's religion and traditions, abandoning the cult of Aten and restoring the prominence of Amun, god of Thebes, thus changing his name to Tutankhamun. His early death barely a decade later and association with his reviled father led to the young pharaoh sharing his fate in being struck from the records and lists of Kings (an act of damnatio memoriae), thus his tomb itself was quickly forgotten and hidden beneath later structures whilst those of more famous rulers were stripped bare, probably within decades.
Howard Carter's discovery of the still sealed tomb in 1922 caused a sensation, nothing so complete had ever been found before. The tomb itself was small by pharaonic standards, prepared in a hurry as the king died in his late teens with two main chambers and a further two side chambers crammed with artworks, treasures and furnishings, along with the king's body sealed within four gilded-wooden shrines, three superbly rich coffins and the incomparable golden mask upon his head. Better still, the pharaoh's reign in the 18th Dynasty coincided with a particularly high period for artistic achievement, meaning that so much was of the highest quality. One can only imagine the riches that must have disappeared from the much larger tombs of the more famous rulers, compared to this tiny treasure-trove!
Tutankhamun's collection has resided in Cairo's Egyptian Museum ever since its discovery, but by the end of 2018 will have moved again to the new Grand Egyptian Museum in Giza (currently being prepared for partial opening later this year). The treasures will be displayed in their entirety for the first time, and many pieces have already been transferred. This visit offered us a last opportunity to view most of the major pieces in their central Cairo home for one last time.
For more on the 'obscure' pharaoh who millennia later became Egypt's most celebrated, see the link below:-
This krater with lid, or “Krater-psykter”, is decorated with images of Dionysiac cults.
On the main body, the wine god is sitting on a stool; he wears a himation and a mantel and holds a kantharos with his left hand, and a vine branch with the right. A vine leafs wreath embellishes his hair. Dancing satyrs and maenads surround him.
In the lower band, Dionysiac parade (thiasos): the god reading a mule and holding a drinking horn moves to right; in front and behind him dancing satyrs and maenads.
Attic black-figured krater-psykter
Dimensions: H. 36.2 cm; Diam. 40.5 cm.
About 525-505 BC
Near Antimenes Painter
Paris, Musée du Louvre
Antimenes antimene Pittore Painter Dioniso Dionysos Dionysus “Dionysiac Thiasos” ”Tiaso Dionisico” satiri Satyrs Maenads Menadi “black figure” “Figure Nere” Krater cratere attic attica Athens atene greek ceramic pottery vases ceramica greca “vasi greci” Paris Parigi “Musée du Louvre” Louvre
Fresco fragment depicting an enhaloed deity in the center of a portico with large golden doors open in the background. A polished gold or bronze oscillum hung with a ribbon is suspended over the deity's head. Oscilla were votive discs, frequently made from painted marble, that hung in porticoes and swung in the wind. Very colorful architecture.
Villa Arianna, atrium, Stabia (ancient Stabiae), first half of the 1st century CE.
Museo Archeologico di Stabia Libero D'Orsi (inv. 63846)
Detail of the 2nd shrine of Tutankhamun. This second largest of the shrines is mainly decorated with scenes from the Book of the Duat to aid the king's journey after death.
Tutankhamun's burial chamber was almost entirely filled by the golden shrines that surrounded the sarcophagus of the king, the outer shrine containing three more successively smaller gilded wooden boxes adorned with reliefs of underworld deities to inform the king's journey into the afterlife.
Every royal burial chamber from the New Kingdom must have contained a similar set of shrines to Tutankhamun's, but only mere fragments of one other have survived.
The most celebrated part of the Cairo Museum's collection has for the best part of a century been the incomparable treasures of Tutankhamun's tomb housed in two long galleries on the upper floor. The greatest archaeological discovery of all time, the virtually intact tomb of the young pharaoh was discovered in 1922 in the Valley of the Kings, undisturbed since antiquity owing to the King's relative obscurity.
Tutankhamun was born Tutankhaten, son and successor of the 'heretic' pharaoh Akhenaten who dispensed with Egypt's centuries old religion in favour of his new god, the sun disk he called Aten. At Akhenaten's death Tutankhaten was only nine years old and early in his reign was persuaded to restore Egypt's religion and traditions, abandoning the cult of Aten and restoring the prominence of Amun, god of Thebes, thus changing his name to Tutankhamun. His early death barely a decade later and association with his reviled father led to the young pharaoh sharing his fate in being struck from the records and lists of Kings (an act of damnatio memoriae), thus his tomb itself was quickly forgotten and hidden beneath later structures whilst those of more famous rulers were stripped bare, probably within decades.
Howard Carter's discovery of the still sealed tomb in 1922 caused a sensation, nothing so complete had ever been found before. The tomb itself was small by pharaonic standards, prepared in a hurry as the king died in his late teens with two main chambers and a further two side chambers crammed with artworks, treasures and furnishings, along with the king's body sealed within four gilded-wooden shrines, three superbly rich coffins and the incomparable golden mask upon his head. Better still, the pharaoh's reign in the 18th Dynasty coincided with a particularly high period for artistic achievement, meaning that so much was of the highest quality. One can only imagine the riches that must have disappeared from the much larger tombs of the more famous rulers, compared to this tiny treasure-trove!
Tutankhamun's collection has resided in Cairo's Egyptian Museum ever since its discovery, but by the end of 2018 will have moved again to the new Grand Egyptian Museum in Giza (currently being prepared for partial opening later this year). The treasures will be displayed in their entirety for the first time, and many pieces have already been transferred. This visit offered us a last opportunity to view most of the major pieces in their central Cairo home for one last time.
For more on the 'obscure' pharaoh who millennia later became Egypt's most celebrated, see the link below:-
Condercum was a Roman fort on the site of the modern-day Condercum Estate in Benwell, a suburb of Newcastle upon Tyne, England. It was the third fort on Hadrian's Wall, after Segedunum (Wallsend) and Pons Aelius (Newcastle), and was situated on a hilltop 2 miles (3 km) to the west of the city.
Today, nothing can be seen of the fort or its adjoining wall, as the site is covered by a modern reservoir and housing estate, bisected by the A186 Newcastle to Carlisle road, which follows the line of Hadrian's Wall. The remains of a small temple dedicated to Antenociticus, a local deity, can be seen nearby, and the original causeway over the vallum, or rear ditch, can also be seen. A modern-day Condercum Road marks the site.
The remains of the fort lie on Hadrian's Wall to the west of Newcastle. The fort contained a commandant's house, headquarters, two granaries, workshops, barracks, stables and a hospital. The fort measured 570 feet (170 m) from north to south by 400 feet (120 m) east to west and the defences enclosed an area of just over 5 acres (2.0 ha). It was a cavalry fort, and had three gates leading to the north of the wall. There were two side gates, facing east and west, through which the Roman military road, running along the south side of the wall, entered and exited. There was also a south-facing gate that led to a causeway that crossed the vallum. The Vallum was a ditch 20 ft wide and 10 ft deep with the spoil placed in a mound either side of the ditch.
The causeway had a monumental non-military gateway with a large entrance and with some of the best dressed stone on Hadrian's Wall. It was located halfway across the vallum and was closed by doors.
The fort was excavated in the 1920s to 1930s where a dedication table was found that suggested the origin date of 122 AD. Also, pottery was found that dated to the 2nd century indicating the time of the rebuild. Other finds from the site include altars dedicated to the gods, square-head and cruciform brooches, a strong room or treasure vault, and a silver spoon.
In 2017, excavations on a building site in Dorcas Avenue found substantial walls of the vicus.
Excavations in 2020 revealed sections of the fort's foundations in several house gardens.
Construction and garrison
It is known from several building inscriptions that the defences of the fort at Benwell were built by soldiers from the Second Augustan Legion (Legio II Augusta). It is believed that it was built between 122 AD and 124 AD. Soldiers from the Twentieth Legion (Legio XX Valeria Victrix) were apparently responsible for some additional building or repair work at Benwell in the late-2nd century.
The Vallum was built shortly after 130 AD to the south of the fort to protect the wall from attack from this side. The vallum could therefore only be crossed at the forts and at Benwell a causeway and a gate provided this access between the Wall and Vallum. At Benwell the gate was about 100 ft south of the fort’s southern gate. The Vallum makes a detour around the fort.
In the 2nd century Condercum was garrisoned by the Cohors I Vangionum Milliaria Equitata, which was a part-mounted unit from Upper Germany. This had a nominal strength of one thousand men, but it is likely that only half of this number occupied the fort. It is thought that from AD 205 to AD 367, a five-hundred-strong auxiliary cavalry unit (Ala I Hispanorum Asturum), from the Astures tribe in northern Spain, was stationed at the fort.
The fort contained two granaries, and it is known that these were built by a detachment from the British Fleet, probably because the legionaries responsible for construction of the fort had been called away. It is likely that the detachment was sent from nearby Arbeia, in modern-day South Shields.
A vicus, or civilian settlement, grew up around the fort, lying to the north and south of the vallum. The remains of several notable buildings were found near the fort indicating that the vicus was extensive.
The remains of a temple dedicated to Antenociticus can still be seen a hundred yards to the east of the fort. The building, which was discovered in 1862, measures 15 feet (4.6 m) from east to west and 20 feet (6.1 m) from north to south, with an apse extending a further six feet on the south end. It is believed that the apse contained a life-size statue of the god, as a full size head was found, together with the fragments of an arm and a leg. The head was adorned with a Celtic neck torc. A number of altar-stones were found, three of which were dedicated to Antenociticus, who is believed to be a Celtic deity. Another dedication to the "three lamiae" may likewise refer to local Celtic deities.
Three hundred yards to the southwest of the fort, a bathhouse was discovered in 1751. The building had several rooms, which were probably the hot and cold rooms and dressing rooms normally found in such bathhouses.
Just south of the vallum causeway, a third building was found. This was a large domestic building, believed to be a mansio, or resthouse for official travellers.
Roman Britain was the territory that became the Roman province of Britannia after the Roman conquest of Britain, consisting of a large part of the island of Great Britain. The occupation lasted from AD 43 to AD 410.
Julius Caesar invaded Britain in 55 and 54 BC as part of his Gallic Wars. According to Caesar, the Britons had been overrun or culturally assimilated by the Belgae during the British Iron Age and had been aiding Caesar's enemies. The Belgae were the only Celtic tribe to cross the sea into Britain, for to all other Celtic tribes this land was unknown. He received tribute, installed the friendly king Mandubracius over the Trinovantes, and returned to Gaul. Planned invasions under Augustus were called off in 34, 27, and 25 BC. In 40 AD, Caligula assembled 200,000 men at the Channel on the continent, only to have them gather seashells (musculi) according to Suetonius, perhaps as a symbolic gesture to proclaim Caligula's victory over the sea. Three years later, Claudius directed four legions to invade Britain and restore the exiled king Verica over the Atrebates. The Romans defeated the Catuvellauni, and then organized their conquests as the province of Britain. By 47 AD, the Romans held the lands southeast of the Fosse Way. Control over Wales was delayed by reverses and the effects of Boudica's uprising, but the Romans expanded steadily northward.
The conquest of Britain continued under command of Gnaeus Julius Agricola (77–84), who expanded the Roman Empire as far as Caledonia. In mid-84 AD, Agricola faced the armies of the Caledonians, led by Calgacus, at the Battle of Mons Graupius. Battle casualties were estimated by Tacitus to be upwards of 10,000 on the Caledonian side and about 360 on the Roman side. The bloodbath at Mons Graupius concluded the forty-year conquest of Britain, a period that possibly saw between 100,000 and 250,000 Britons killed. In the context of pre-industrial warfare and of a total population of Britain of c. 2 million, these are very high figures.
Under the 2nd-century emperors Hadrian and Antoninus Pius, two walls were built to defend the Roman province from the Caledonians, whose realms in the Scottish Highlands were never controlled. Around 197 AD, the Severan Reforms divided Britain into two provinces: Britannia Superior and Britannia Inferior. During the Diocletian Reforms, at the end of the 3rd century, Britannia was divided into four provinces under the direction of a vicarius, who administered the Diocese of the Britains. A fifth province, Valentia, is attested in the later 4th century. For much of the later period of the Roman occupation, Britannia was subject to barbarian invasions and often came under the control of imperial usurpers and imperial pretenders. The final Roman withdrawal from Britain occurred around 410; the native kingdoms are considered to have formed Sub-Roman Britain after that.
Following the conquest of the Britons, a distinctive Romano-British culture emerged as the Romans introduced improved agriculture, urban planning, industrial production, and architecture. The Roman goddess Britannia became the female personification of Britain. After the initial invasions, Roman historians generally only mention Britain in passing. Thus, most present knowledge derives from archaeological investigations and occasional epigraphic evidence lauding the Britannic achievements of an emperor. Roman citizens settled in Britain from many parts of the Empire.
History
Britain was known to the Classical world. The Greeks, the Phoenicians and the Carthaginians traded for Cornish tin in the 4th century BC. The Greeks referred to the Cassiterides, or "tin islands", and placed them near the west coast of Europe. The Carthaginian sailor Himilco is said to have visited the island in the 6th or 5th century BC and the Greek explorer Pytheas in the 4th. It was regarded as a place of mystery, with some writers refusing to believe it existed.
The first direct Roman contact was when Julius Caesar undertook two expeditions in 55 and 54 BC, as part of his conquest of Gaul, believing the Britons were helping the Gallic resistance. The first expedition was more a reconnaissance than a full invasion and gained a foothold on the coast of Kent but was unable to advance further because of storm damage to the ships and a lack of cavalry. Despite the military failure, it was a political success, with the Roman Senate declaring a 20-day public holiday in Rome to honour the unprecedented achievement of obtaining hostages from Britain and defeating Belgic tribes on returning to the continent.
The second invasion involved a substantially larger force and Caesar coerced or invited many of the native Celtic tribes to pay tribute and give hostages in return for peace. A friendly local king, Mandubracius, was installed, and his rival, Cassivellaunus, was brought to terms. Hostages were taken, but historians disagree over whether any tribute was paid after Caesar returned to Gaul.
Caesar conquered no territory and left no troops behind, but he established clients and brought Britain into Rome's sphere of influence. Augustus planned invasions in 34, 27 and 25 BC, but circumstances were never favourable, and the relationship between Britain and Rome settled into one of diplomacy and trade. Strabo, writing late in Augustus's reign, claimed that taxes on trade brought in more annual revenue than any conquest could. Archaeology shows that there was an increase in imported luxury goods in southeastern Britain. Strabo also mentions British kings who sent embassies to Augustus, and Augustus's own Res Gestae refers to two British kings he received as refugees. When some of Tiberius's ships were carried to Britain in a storm during his campaigns in Germany in 16 AD, they came back with tales of monsters.
Rome appears to have encouraged a balance of power in southern Britain, supporting two powerful kingdoms: the Catuvellauni, ruled by the descendants of Tasciovanus, and the Atrebates, ruled by the descendants of Commius. This policy was followed until 39 or 40 AD, when Caligula received an exiled member of the Catuvellaunian dynasty and planned an invasion of Britain that collapsed in farcical circumstances before it left Gaul. When Claudius successfully invaded in 43 AD, it was in aid of another fugitive British ruler, Verica of the Atrebates.
Roman invasion
The invasion force in 43 AD was led by Aulus Plautius,[26] but it is unclear how many legions were sent. The Legio II Augusta, commanded by future emperor Vespasian, was the only one directly attested to have taken part. The Legio IX Hispana, the XIV Gemina (later styled Martia Victrix) and the XX (later styled Valeria Victrix) are known to have served during the Boudican Revolt of 60/61, and were probably there since the initial invasion. This is not certain because the Roman army was flexible, with units being moved around whenever necessary. The IX Hispana may have been permanently stationed, with records showing it at Eboracum (York) in 71 and on a building inscription there dated 108, before being destroyed in the east of the Empire, possibly during the Bar Kokhba revolt.
The invasion was delayed by a troop mutiny until an imperial freedman persuaded them to overcome their fear of crossing the Ocean and campaigning beyond the limits of the known world. They sailed in three divisions, and probably landed at Richborough in Kent; at least part of the force may have landed near Fishbourne, West Sussex.
The Catuvellauni and their allies were defeated in two battles: the first, assuming a Richborough landing, on the river Medway, the second on the river Thames. One of their leaders, Togodumnus, was killed, but his brother Caratacus survived to continue resistance elsewhere. Plautius halted at the Thames and sent for Claudius, who arrived with reinforcements, including artillery and elephants, for the final march to the Catuvellaunian capital, Camulodunum (Colchester). Vespasian subdued the southwest, Cogidubnus was set up as a friendly king of several territories, and treaties were made with tribes outside direct Roman control.
Establishment of Roman rule
After capturing the south of the island, the Romans turned their attention to what is now Wales. The Silures, Ordovices and Deceangli remained implacably opposed to the invaders and for the first few decades were the focus of Roman military attention, despite occasional minor revolts among Roman allies like the Brigantes and the Iceni. The Silures were led by Caratacus, and he carried out an effective guerrilla campaign against Governor Publius Ostorius Scapula. Finally, in 51, Ostorius lured Caratacus into a set-piece battle and defeated him. The British leader sought refuge among the Brigantes, but their queen, Cartimandua, proved her loyalty by surrendering him to the Romans. He was brought as a captive to Rome, where a dignified speech he made during Claudius's triumph persuaded the emperor to spare his life. The Silures were still not pacified, and Cartimandua's ex-husband Venutius replaced Caratacus as the most prominent leader of British resistance.
On Nero's accession, Roman Britain extended as far north as Lindum. Gaius Suetonius Paulinus, the conqueror of Mauretania (modern day Algeria and Morocco), then became governor of Britain, and in 60 and 61 he moved against Mona (Anglesey) to settle accounts with Druidism once and for all. Paulinus led his army across the Menai Strait and massacred the Druids and burnt their sacred groves.
While Paulinus was campaigning in Mona, the southeast of Britain rose in revolt under the leadership of Boudica. She was the widow of the recently deceased king of the Iceni, Prasutagus. The Roman historian Tacitus reports that Prasutagus had left a will leaving half his kingdom to Nero in the hope that the remainder would be left untouched. He was wrong. When his will was enforced, Rome[clarification needed] responded by violently seizing the tribe's lands in full. Boudica protested. In consequence, Rome[clarification needed] punished her and her daughters by flogging and rape. In response, the Iceni, joined by the Trinovantes, destroyed the Roman colony at Camulodunum (Colchester) and routed the part of the IXth Legion that was sent to relieve it. Paulinus rode to London (then called Londinium), the rebels' next target, but concluded it could not be defended. Abandoned, it was destroyed, as was Verulamium (St. Albans). Between seventy and eighty thousand people are said to have been killed in the three cities. But Paulinus regrouped with two of the three legions still available to him, chose a battlefield, and, despite being outnumbered by more than twenty to one, defeated the rebels in the Battle of Watling Street. Boudica died not long afterwards, by self-administered poison or by illness. During this time, the Emperor Nero considered withdrawing Roman forces from Britain altogether.
There was further turmoil in 69, the "Year of the Four Emperors". As civil war raged in Rome, weak governors were unable to control the legions in Britain, and Venutius of the Brigantes seized his chance. The Romans had previously defended Cartimandua against him, but this time were unable to do so. Cartimandua was evacuated, and Venutius was left in control of the north of the country. After Vespasian secured the empire, his first two appointments as governor, Quintus Petillius Cerialis and Sextus Julius Frontinus, took on the task of subduing the Brigantes and Silures respectively.[38] Frontinus extended Roman rule to all of South Wales, and initiated exploitation of the mineral resources, such as the gold mines at Dolaucothi.
In the following years, the Romans conquered more of the island, increasing the size of Roman Britain. Governor Gnaeus Julius Agricola, father-in-law to the historian Tacitus, conquered the Ordovices in 78. With the XX Valeria Victrix legion, Agricola defeated the Caledonians in 84 at the Battle of Mons Graupius, in north-east Scotland. This was the high-water mark of Roman territory in Britain: shortly after his victory, Agricola was recalled from Britain back to Rome, and the Romans initially retired to a more defensible line along the Forth–Clyde isthmus, freeing soldiers badly needed along other frontiers.
For much of the history of Roman Britain, a large number of soldiers were garrisoned on the island. This required that the emperor station a trusted senior man as governor of the province. As a result, many future emperors served as governors or legates in this province, including Vespasian, Pertinax, and Gordian I.
Roman military organisation in the north
In 84 AD
In 84 AD
In 155 AD
In 155 AD
Hadrian's Wall, and Antonine Wall
There is no historical source describing the decades that followed Agricola's recall. Even the name of his replacement is unknown. Archaeology has shown that some Roman forts south of the Forth–Clyde isthmus were rebuilt and enlarged; others appear to have been abandoned. By 87 the frontier had been consolidated on the Stanegate. Roman coins and pottery have been found circulating at native settlement sites in the Scottish Lowlands in the years before 100, indicating growing Romanisation. Some of the most important sources for this era are the writing tablets from the fort at Vindolanda in Northumberland, mostly dating to 90–110. These tablets provide evidence for the operation of a Roman fort at the edge of the Roman Empire, where officers' wives maintained polite society while merchants, hauliers and military personnel kept the fort operational and supplied.
Around 105 there appears to have been a serious setback at the hands of the tribes of the Picts: several Roman forts were destroyed by fire, with human remains and damaged armour at Trimontium (at modern Newstead, in SE Scotland) indicating hostilities at least at that site.[citation needed] There is also circumstantial evidence that auxiliary reinforcements were sent from Germany, and an unnamed British war of the period is mentioned on the gravestone of a tribune of Cyrene. Trajan's Dacian Wars may have led to troop reductions in the area or even total withdrawal followed by slighting of the forts by the Picts rather than an unrecorded military defeat. The Romans were also in the habit of destroying their own forts during an orderly withdrawal, in order to deny resources to an enemy. In either case, the frontier probably moved south to the line of the Stanegate at the Solway–Tyne isthmus around this time.
A new crisis occurred at the beginning of Hadrian's reign): a rising in the north which was suppressed by Quintus Pompeius Falco. When Hadrian reached Britannia on his famous tour of the Roman provinces around 120, he directed an extensive defensive wall, known to posterity as Hadrian's Wall, to be built close to the line of the Stanegate frontier. Hadrian appointed Aulus Platorius Nepos as governor to undertake this work who brought the Legio VI Victrix legion with him from Germania Inferior. This replaced the famous Legio IX Hispana, whose disappearance has been much discussed. Archaeology indicates considerable political instability in Scotland during the first half of the 2nd century, and the shifting frontier at this time should be seen in this context.
In the reign of Antoninus Pius (138–161) the Hadrianic border was briefly extended north to the Forth–Clyde isthmus, where the Antonine Wall was built around 142 following the military reoccupation of the Scottish lowlands by a new governor, Quintus Lollius Urbicus.
The first Antonine occupation of Scotland ended as a result of a further crisis in 155–157, when the Brigantes revolted. With limited options to despatch reinforcements, the Romans moved their troops south, and this rising was suppressed by Governor Gnaeus Julius Verus. Within a year the Antonine Wall was recaptured, but by 163 or 164 it was abandoned. The second occupation was probably connected with Antoninus's undertakings to protect the Votadini or his pride in enlarging the empire, since the retreat to the Hadrianic frontier occurred not long after his death when a more objective strategic assessment of the benefits of the Antonine Wall could be made. The Romans did not entirely withdraw from Scotland at this time: the large fort at Newstead was maintained along with seven smaller outposts until at least 180.
During the twenty-year period following the reversion of the frontier to Hadrian's Wall in 163/4, Rome was concerned with continental issues, primarily problems in the Danubian provinces. Increasing numbers of hoards of buried coins in Britain at this time indicate that peace was not entirely achieved. Sufficient Roman silver has been found in Scotland to suggest more than ordinary trade, and it is likely that the Romans were reinforcing treaty agreements by paying tribute to their implacable enemies, the Picts.
In 175, a large force of Sarmatian cavalry, consisting of 5,500 men, arrived in Britannia, probably to reinforce troops fighting unrecorded uprisings. In 180, Hadrian's Wall was breached by the Picts and the commanding officer or governor was killed there in what Cassius Dio described as the most serious war of the reign of Commodus. Ulpius Marcellus was sent as replacement governor and by 184 he had won a new peace, only to be faced with a mutiny from his own troops. Unhappy with Marcellus's strictness, they tried to elect a legate named Priscus as usurper governor; he refused, but Marcellus was lucky to leave the province alive. The Roman army in Britannia continued its insubordination: they sent a delegation of 1,500 to Rome to demand the execution of Tigidius Perennis, a Praetorian prefect who they felt had earlier wronged them by posting lowly equites to legate ranks in Britannia. Commodus met the party outside Rome and agreed to have Perennis killed, but this only made them feel more secure in their mutiny.
The future emperor Pertinax (lived 126–193) was sent to Britannia to quell the mutiny and was initially successful in regaining control, but a riot broke out among the troops. Pertinax was attacked and left for dead, and asked to be recalled to Rome, where he briefly succeeded Commodus as emperor in 192.
3rd century
The death of Commodus put into motion a series of events which eventually led to civil war. Following the short reign of Pertinax, several rivals for the emperorship emerged, including Septimius Severus and Clodius Albinus. The latter was the new governor of Britannia, and had seemingly won the natives over after their earlier rebellions; he also controlled three legions, making him a potentially significant claimant. His sometime rival Severus promised him the title of Caesar in return for Albinus's support against Pescennius Niger in the east. Once Niger was neutralised, Severus turned on his ally in Britannia; it is likely that Albinus saw he would be the next target and was already preparing for war.
Albinus crossed to Gaul in 195, where the provinces were also sympathetic to him, and set up at Lugdunum. Severus arrived in February 196, and the ensuing battle was decisive. Albinus came close to victory, but Severus's reinforcements won the day, and the British governor committed suicide. Severus soon purged Albinus's sympathisers and perhaps confiscated large tracts of land in Britain as punishment. Albinus had demonstrated the major problem posed by Roman Britain. In order to maintain security, the province required the presence of three legions, but command of these forces provided an ideal power base for ambitious rivals. Deploying those legions elsewhere would strip the island of its garrison, leaving the province defenceless against uprisings by the native Celtic tribes and against invasion by the Picts and Scots.
The traditional view is that northern Britain descended into anarchy during Albinus's absence. Cassius Dio records that the new Governor, Virius Lupus, was obliged to buy peace from a fractious northern tribe known as the Maeatae. The succession of militarily distinguished governors who were subsequently appointed suggests that enemies of Rome were posing a difficult challenge, and Lucius Alfenus Senecio's report to Rome in 207 describes barbarians "rebelling, over-running the land, taking loot and creating destruction". In order to rebel, of course, one must be a subject – the Maeatae clearly did not consider themselves such. Senecio requested either reinforcements or an Imperial expedition, and Severus chose the latter, despite being 62 years old. Archaeological evidence shows that Senecio had been rebuilding the defences of Hadrian's Wall and the forts beyond it, and Severus's arrival in Britain prompted the enemy tribes to sue for peace immediately. The emperor had not come all that way to leave without a victory, and it is likely that he wished to provide his teenage sons Caracalla and Geta with first-hand experience of controlling a hostile barbarian land.
Northern campaigns, 208–211
An invasion of Caledonia led by Severus and probably numbering around 20,000 troops moved north in 208 or 209, crossing the Wall and passing through eastern Scotland on a route similar to that used by Agricola. Harried by punishing guerrilla raids by the northern tribes and slowed by an unforgiving terrain, Severus was unable to meet the Caledonians on a battlefield. The emperor's forces pushed north as far as the River Tay, but little appears to have been achieved by the invasion, as peace treaties were signed with the Caledonians. By 210 Severus had returned to York, and the frontier had once again become Hadrian's Wall. He assumed the title Britannicus but the title meant little with regard to the unconquered north, which clearly remained outside the authority of the Empire. Almost immediately, another northern tribe, the Maeatae, went to war. Caracalla left with a punitive expedition, but by the following year his ailing father had died and he and his brother left the province to press their claim to the throne.
As one of his last acts, Severus tried to solve the problem of powerful and rebellious governors in Britain by dividing the province into Britannia Superior and Britannia Inferior. This kept the potential for rebellion in check for almost a century. Historical sources provide little information on the following decades, a period known as the Long Peace. Even so, the number of buried hoards found from this period rises, suggesting continuing unrest. A string of forts were built along the coast of southern Britain to control piracy; and over the following hundred years they increased in number, becoming the Saxon Shore Forts.
During the middle of the 3rd century, the Roman Empire was convulsed by barbarian invasions, rebellions and new imperial pretenders. Britannia apparently avoided these troubles, but increasing inflation had its economic effect. In 259 a so-called Gallic Empire was established when Postumus rebelled against Gallienus. Britannia was part of this until 274 when Aurelian reunited the empire.
Around the year 280, a half-British officer named Bonosus was in command of the Roman's Rhenish fleet when the Germans managed to burn it at anchor. To avoid punishment, he proclaimed himself emperor at Colonia Agrippina (Cologne) but was crushed by Marcus Aurelius Probus. Soon afterwards, an unnamed governor of one of the British provinces also attempted an uprising. Probus put it down by sending irregular troops of Vandals and Burgundians across the Channel.
The Carausian Revolt led to a short-lived Britannic Empire from 286 to 296. Carausius was a Menapian naval commander of the Britannic fleet; he revolted upon learning of a death sentence ordered by the emperor Maximian on charges of having abetted Frankish and Saxon pirates and having embezzled recovered treasure. He consolidated control over all the provinces of Britain and some of northern Gaul while Maximian dealt with other uprisings. An invasion in 288 failed to unseat him and an uneasy peace ensued, with Carausius issuing coins and inviting official recognition. In 293, the junior emperor Constantius Chlorus launched a second offensive, besieging the rebel port of Gesoriacum (Boulogne-sur-Mer) by land and sea. After it fell, Constantius attacked Carausius's other Gallic holdings and Frankish allies and Carausius was usurped by his treasurer, Allectus. Julius Asclepiodotus landed an invasion fleet near Southampton and defeated Allectus in a land battle.
Diocletian's reforms
As part of Diocletian's reforms, the provinces of Roman Britain were organized as a diocese governed by a vicarius under a praetorian prefect who, from 318 to 331, was Junius Bassus who was based at Augusta Treverorum (Trier).
The vicarius was based at Londinium as the principal city of the diocese. Londinium and Eboracum continued as provincial capitals and the territory was divided up into smaller provinces for administrative efficiency.
Civilian and military authority of a province was no longer exercised by one official and the governor was stripped of military command which was handed over to the Dux Britanniarum by 314. The governor of a province assumed more financial duties (the procurators of the Treasury ministry were slowly phased out in the first three decades of the 4th century). The Dux was commander of the troops of the Northern Region, primarily along Hadrian's Wall and his responsibilities included protection of the frontier. He had significant autonomy due in part to the distance from his superiors.
The tasks of the vicarius were to control and coordinate the activities of governors; monitor but not interfere with the daily functioning of the Treasury and Crown Estates, which had their own administrative infrastructure; and act as the regional quartermaster-general of the armed forces. In short, as the sole civilian official with superior authority, he had general oversight of the administration, as well as direct control, while not absolute, over governors who were part of the prefecture; the other two fiscal departments were not.
The early-4th-century Verona List, the late-4th-century work of Sextus Rufus, and the early-5th-century List of Offices and work of Polemius Silvius all list four provinces by some variation of the names Britannia I, Britannia II, Maxima Caesariensis, and Flavia Caesariensis; all of these seem to have initially been directed by a governor (praeses) of equestrian rank. The 5th-century sources list a fifth province named Valentia and give its governor and Maxima's a consular rank. Ammianus mentions Valentia as well, describing its creation by Count Theodosius in 369 after the quelling of the Great Conspiracy. Ammianus considered it a re-creation of a formerly lost province, leading some to think there had been an earlier fifth province under another name (may be the enigmatic "Vespasiana"), and leading others to place Valentia beyond Hadrian's Wall, in the territory abandoned south of the Antonine Wall.
Reconstructions of the provinces and provincial capitals during this period partially rely on ecclesiastical records. On the assumption that the early bishoprics mimicked the imperial hierarchy, scholars use the list of bishops for the 314 Council of Arles. The list is patently corrupt: the British delegation is given as including a Bishop "Eborius" of Eboracum and two bishops "from Londinium" (one de civitate Londinensi and the other de civitate colonia Londinensium). The error is variously emended: Bishop Ussher proposed Colonia, Selden Col. or Colon. Camalodun., and Spelman Colonia Cameloduni (all various names of Colchester); Gale and Bingham offered colonia Lindi and Henry Colonia Lindum (both Lincoln); and Bishop Stillingfleet and Francis Thackeray read it as a scribal error of Civ. Col. Londin. for an original Civ. Col. Leg. II (Caerleon). On the basis of the Verona List, the priest and deacon who accompanied the bishops in some manuscripts are ascribed to the fourth province.
In the 12th century, Gerald of Wales described the supposedly metropolitan sees of the early British church established by the legendary SS Fagan and "Duvian". He placed Britannia Prima in Wales and western England with its capital at "Urbs Legionum" (Caerleon); Britannia Secunda in Kent and southern England with its capital at "Dorobernia" (Canterbury); Flavia in Mercia and central England with its capital at "Lundonia" (London); "Maximia" in northern England with its capital at Eboracum (York); and Valentia in "Albania which is now Scotland" with its capital at St Andrews. Modern scholars generally dispute the last: some place Valentia at or beyond Hadrian's Wall but St Andrews is beyond even the Antonine Wall and Gerald seems to have simply been supporting the antiquity of its church for political reasons.
A common modern reconstruction places the consular province of Maxima at Londinium, on the basis of its status as the seat of the diocesan vicarius; places Prima in the west according to Gerald's traditional account but moves its capital to Corinium of the Dobunni (Cirencester) on the basis of an artifact recovered there referring to Lucius Septimius, a provincial rector; places Flavia north of Maxima, with its capital placed at Lindum Colonia (Lincoln) to match one emendation of the bishops list from Arles;[d] and places Secunda in the north with its capital at Eboracum (York). Valentia is placed variously in northern Wales around Deva (Chester); beside Hadrian's Wall around Luguvalium (Carlisle); and between the walls along Dere Street.
4th century
Emperor Constantius returned to Britain in 306, despite his poor health, with an army aiming to invade northern Britain, the provincial defences having been rebuilt in the preceding years. Little is known of his campaigns with scant archaeological evidence, but fragmentary historical sources suggest he reached the far north of Britain and won a major battle in early summer before returning south. His son Constantine (later Constantine the Great) spent a year in northern Britain at his father's side, campaigning against the Picts beyond Hadrian's Wall in the summer and autumn. Constantius died in York in July 306 with his son at his side. Constantine then successfully used Britain as the starting point of his march to the imperial throne, unlike the earlier usurper, Albinus.
In the middle of the century, the province was loyal for a few years to the usurper Magnentius, who succeeded Constans following the latter's death. After the defeat and death of Magnentius in the Battle of Mons Seleucus in 353, Constantius II dispatched his chief imperial notary Paulus Catena to Britain to hunt down Magnentius's supporters. The investigation deteriorated into a witch-hunt, which forced the vicarius Flavius Martinus to intervene. When Paulus retaliated by accusing Martinus of treason, the vicarius attacked Paulus with a sword, with the aim of assassinating him, but in the end he committed suicide.
As the 4th century progressed, there were increasing attacks from the Saxons in the east and the Scoti (Irish) in the west. A series of forts had been built, starting around 280, to defend the coasts, but these preparations were not enough when, in 367, a general assault of Saxons, Picts, Scoti and Attacotti, combined with apparent dissension in the garrison on Hadrian's Wall, left Roman Britain prostrate. The invaders overwhelmed the entire western and northern regions of Britannia and the cities were sacked. This crisis, sometimes called the Barbarian Conspiracy or the Great Conspiracy, was settled by Count Theodosius from 368 with a string of military and civil reforms. Theodosius crossed from Bononia (Boulogne-sur-Mer) and marched on Londinium where he began to deal with the invaders and made his base.[ An amnesty was promised to deserters which enabled Theodosius to regarrison abandoned forts. By the end of the year Hadrian's Wall was retaken and order returned. Considerable reorganization was undertaken in Britain, including the creation of a new province named Valentia, probably to better address the state of the far north. A new Dux Britanniarum was appointed, Dulcitius, with Civilis to head a new civilian administration.
Another imperial usurper, Magnus Maximus, raised the standard of revolt at Segontium (Caernarfon) in north Wales in 383, and crossed the English Channel. Maximus held much of the western empire, and fought a successful campaign against the Picts and Scots around 384. His continental exploits required troops from Britain, and it appears that forts at Chester and elsewhere were abandoned in this period, triggering raids and settlement in north Wales by the Irish. His rule was ended in 388, but not all the British troops may have returned: the Empire's military resources were stretched to the limit along the Rhine and Danube. Around 396 there were more barbarian incursions into Britain. Stilicho led a punitive expedition. It seems peace was restored by 399, and it is likely that no further garrisoning was ordered; by 401 more troops were withdrawn, to assist in the war against Alaric I.
End of Roman rule
The traditional view of historians, informed by the work of Michael Rostovtzeff, was of a widespread economic decline at the beginning of the 5th century. Consistent archaeological evidence has told another story, and the accepted view is undergoing re-evaluation. Some features are agreed: more opulent but fewer urban houses, an end to new public building and some abandonment of existing ones, with the exception of defensive structures, and the widespread formation of "dark earth" deposits indicating increased horticulture within urban precincts. Turning over the basilica at Silchester to industrial uses in the late 3rd century, doubtless officially condoned, marks an early stage in the de-urbanisation of Roman Britain.
The abandonment of some sites is now believed to be later than had been thought. Many buildings changed use but were not destroyed. There was a growing number of barbarian attacks, but these targeted vulnerable rural settlements rather than towns. Some villas such as Chedworth, Great Casterton in Rutland and Hucclecote in Gloucestershire had new mosaic floors laid around this time, suggesting that economic problems may have been limited and patchy. Many suffered some decay before being abandoned in the 5th century; the story of Saint Patrick indicates that villas were still occupied until at least 430. Exceptionally, new buildings were still going up in this period in Verulamium and Cirencester. Some urban centres, for example Canterbury, Cirencester, Wroxeter, Winchester and Gloucester, remained active during the 5th and 6th centuries, surrounded by large farming estates.
Urban life had generally grown less intense by the fourth quarter of the 4th century, and coins minted between 378 and 388 are very rare, indicating a likely combination of economic decline, diminishing numbers of troops, problems with the payment of soldiers and officials or with unstable conditions during the usurpation of Magnus Maximus 383–87. Coinage circulation increased during the 390s, but never attained the levels of earlier decades. Copper coins are very rare after 402, though minted silver and gold coins from hoards indicate they were still present in the province even if they were not being spent. By 407 there were very few new Roman coins going into circulation, and by 430 it is likely that coinage as a medium of exchange had been abandoned. Mass-produced wheel thrown pottery ended at approximately the same time; the rich continued to use metal and glass vessels, while the poor made do with humble "grey ware" or resorted to leather or wooden containers.
Sub-Roman Britain
Towards the end of the 4th century Roman rule in Britain came under increasing pressure from barbarian attacks. Apparently, there were not enough troops to mount an effective defence. After elevating two disappointing usurpers, the army chose a soldier, Constantine III, to become emperor in 407. He crossed to Gaul but was defeated by Honorius; it is unclear how many troops remained or ever returned, or whether a commander-in-chief in Britain was ever reappointed. A Saxon incursion in 408 was apparently repelled by the Britons, and in 409 Zosimus records that the natives expelled the Roman civilian administration. Zosimus may be referring to the Bacaudic rebellion of the Breton inhabitants of Armorica since he describes how, in the aftermath of the revolt, all of Armorica and the rest of Gaul followed the example of the Brettaniai. A letter from Emperor Honorius in 410 has traditionally been seen as rejecting a British appeal for help, but it may have been addressed to Bruttium or Bologna. With the imperial layers of the military and civil government gone, administration and justice fell to municipal authorities, and local warlords gradually emerged all over Britain, still utilizing Romano-British ideals and conventions. Historian Stuart Laycock has investigated this process and emphasised elements of continuity from the British tribes in the pre-Roman and Roman periods, through to the native post-Roman kingdoms.
In British tradition, pagan Saxons were invited by Vortigern to assist in fighting the Picts, Scoti, and Déisi. (Germanic migration into Roman Britannia may have begun much earlier. There is recorded evidence, for example, of Germanic auxiliaries supporting the legions in Britain in the 1st and 2nd centuries.) The new arrivals rebelled, plunging the country into a series of wars that eventually led to the Saxon occupation of Lowland Britain by 600. Around this time, many Britons fled to Brittany (hence its name), Galicia and probably Ireland. A significant date in sub-Roman Britain is the Groans of the Britons, an unanswered appeal to Aetius, leading general of the western Empire, for assistance against Saxon invasion in 446. Another is the Battle of Deorham in 577, after which the significant cities of Bath, Cirencester and Gloucester fell and the Saxons reached the western sea.
Historians generally reject the historicity of King Arthur, who is supposed to have resisted the Anglo-Saxon conquest according to later medieval legends.
Trade
During the Roman period Britain's continental trade was principally directed across the Southern North Sea and Eastern Channel, focusing on the narrow Strait of Dover, with more limited links via the Atlantic seaways. The most important British ports were London and Richborough, whilst the continental ports most heavily engaged in trade with Britain were Boulogne and the sites of Domburg and Colijnsplaat at the mouth of the river Scheldt. During the Late Roman period it is likely that the shore forts played some role in continental trade alongside their defensive functions.
Exports to Britain included: coin; pottery, particularly red-gloss terra sigillata (samian ware) from southern, central and eastern Gaul, as well as various other wares from Gaul and the Rhine provinces; olive oil from southern Spain in amphorae; wine from Gaul in amphorae and barrels; salted fish products from the western Mediterranean and Brittany in barrels and amphorae; preserved olives from southern Spain in amphorae; lava quern-stones from Mayen on the middle Rhine; glass; and some agricultural products. Britain's exports are harder to detect archaeologically, but will have included metals, such as silver and gold and some lead, iron and copper. Other exports probably included agricultural products, oysters and salt, whilst large quantities of coin would have been re-exported back to the continent as well.
These products moved as a result of private trade and also through payments and contracts established by the Roman state to support its military forces and officials on the island, as well as through state taxation and extraction of resources. Up until the mid-3rd century, the Roman state's payments appear to have been unbalanced, with far more products sent to Britain, to support its large military force (which had reached c. 53,000 by the mid-2nd century), than were extracted from the island.
It has been argued that Roman Britain's continental trade peaked in the late 1st century AD and thereafter declined as a result of an increasing reliance on local products by the population of Britain, caused by economic development on the island and by the Roman state's desire to save money by shifting away from expensive long-distance imports. Evidence has been outlined that suggests that the principal decline in Roman Britain's continental trade may have occurred in the late 2nd century AD, from c. 165 AD onwards. This has been linked to the economic impact of contemporary Empire-wide crises: the Antonine Plague and the Marcomannic Wars.
From the mid-3rd century onwards, Britain no longer received such a wide range and extensive quantity of foreign imports as it did during the earlier part of the Roman period; vast quantities of coin from continental mints reached the island, whilst there is historical evidence for the export of large amounts of British grain to the continent during the mid-4th century. During the latter part of the Roman period British agricultural products, paid for by both the Roman state and by private consumers, clearly played an important role in supporting the military garrisons and urban centres of the northwestern continental Empire. This came about as a result of the rapid decline in the size of the British garrison from the mid-3rd century onwards (thus freeing up more goods for export), and because of 'Germanic' incursions across the Rhine, which appear to have reduced rural settlement and agricultural output in northern Gaul.
Economy
Mineral extraction sites such as the Dolaucothi gold mine were probably first worked by the Roman army from c. 75, and at some later stage passed to civilian operators. The mine developed as a series of opencast workings, mainly by the use of hydraulic mining methods. They are described by Pliny the Elder in his Natural History in great detail. Essentially, water supplied by aqueducts was used to prospect for ore veins by stripping away soil to reveal the bedrock. If veins were present, they were attacked using fire-setting and the ore removed for comminution. The dust was washed in a small stream of water and the heavy gold dust and gold nuggets collected in riffles. The diagram at right shows how Dolaucothi developed from c. 75 through to the 1st century. When opencast work was no longer feasible, tunnels were driven to follow the veins. The evidence from the site shows advanced technology probably under the control of army engineers.
The Wealden ironworking zone, the lead and silver mines of the Mendip Hills and the tin mines of Cornwall seem to have been private enterprises leased from the government for a fee. Mining had long been practised in Britain (see Grimes Graves), but the Romans introduced new technical knowledge and large-scale industrial production to revolutionise the industry. It included hydraulic mining to prospect for ore by removing overburden as well as work alluvial deposits. The water needed for such large-scale operations was supplied by one or more aqueducts, those surviving at Dolaucothi being especially impressive. Many prospecting areas were in dangerous, upland country, and, although mineral exploitation was presumably one of the main reasons for the Roman invasion, it had to wait until these areas were subdued.
By the 3rd and 4th centuries, small towns could often be found near villas. In these towns, villa owners and small-scale farmers could obtain specialist tools. Lowland Britain in the 4th century was agriculturally prosperous enough to export grain to the continent. This prosperity lay behind the blossoming of villa building and decoration that occurred between AD 300 and 350.
Britain's cities also consumed Roman-style pottery and other goods, and were centres through which goods could be distributed elsewhere. At Wroxeter in Shropshire, stock smashed into a gutter during a 2nd-century fire reveals that Gaulish samian ware was being sold alongside mixing bowls from the Mancetter-Hartshill industry of the West Midlands. Roman designs were most popular, but rural craftsmen still produced items derived from the Iron Age La Tène artistic traditions. Britain was home to much gold, which attracted Roman invaders. By the 3rd century, Britain's economy was diverse and well established, with commerce extending into the non-Romanised north.
Government
Further information: Governors of Roman Britain, Roman client kingdoms in Britain, and Roman auxiliaries in Britain
Under the Roman Empire, administration of peaceful provinces was ultimately the remit of the Senate, but those, like Britain, that required permanent garrisons, were placed under the Emperor's control. In practice imperial provinces were run by resident governors who were members of the Senate and had held the consulship. These men were carefully selected, often having strong records of military success and administrative ability. In Britain, a governor's role was primarily military, but numerous other tasks were also his responsibility, such as maintaining diplomatic relations with local client kings, building roads, ensuring the public courier system functioned, supervising the civitates and acting as a judge in important legal cases. When not campaigning, he would travel the province hearing complaints and recruiting new troops.
To assist him in legal matters he had an adviser, the legatus juridicus, and those in Britain appear to have been distinguished lawyers perhaps because of the challenge of incorporating tribes into the imperial system and devising a workable method of taxing them. Financial administration was dealt with by a procurator with junior posts for each tax-raising power. Each legion in Britain had a commander who answered to the governor and, in time of war, probably directly ruled troublesome districts. Each of these commands carried a tour of duty of two to three years in different provinces. Below these posts was a network of administrative managers covering intelligence gathering, sending reports to Rome, organising military supplies and dealing with prisoners. A staff of seconded soldiers provided clerical services.
Colchester was probably the earliest capital of Roman Britain, but it was soon eclipsed by London with its strong mercantile connections. The different forms of municipal organisation in Britannia were known as civitas (which were subdivided, amongst other forms, into colonies such as York, Colchester, Gloucester and Lincoln and municipalities such as Verulamium), and were each governed by a senate of local landowners, whether Brythonic or Roman, who elected magistrates concerning judicial and civic affairs. The various civitates sent representatives to a yearly provincial council in order to profess loyalty to the Roman state, to send direct petitions to the Emperor in times of extraordinary need, and to worship the imperial cult.
Demographics
Roman Britain had an estimated population between 2.8 million and 3 million people at the end of the second century. At the end of the fourth century, it had an estimated population of 3.6 million people, of whom 125,000 consisted of the Roman army and their families and dependents.[80] The urban population of Roman Britain was about 240,000 people at the end of the fourth century. The capital city of Londinium is estimated to have had a population of about 60,000 people. Londinium was an ethnically diverse city with inhabitants from the Roman Empire, including natives of Britannia, continental Europe, the Middle East, and North Africa. There was also cultural diversity in other Roman-British towns, which were sustained by considerable migration, from Britannia and other Roman territories, including continental Europe, Roman Syria, the Eastern Mediterranean and North Africa. In a study conducted in 2012, around 45 percent of sites investigated dating from the Roman period had at least one individual of North African origin.
Town and country
During their occupation of Britain the Romans founded a number of important settlements, many of which survive. The towns suffered attrition in the later 4th century, when public building ceased and some were abandoned to private uses. Place names survived the deurbanised Sub-Roman and early Anglo-Saxon periods, and historiography has been at pains to signal the expected survivals, but archaeology shows that a bare handful of Roman towns were continuously occupied. According to S.T. Loseby, the very idea of a town as a centre of power and administration was reintroduced to England by the Roman Christianising mission to Canterbury, and its urban revival was delayed to the 10th century.
Roman towns can be broadly grouped in two categories. Civitates, "public towns" were formally laid out on a grid plan, and their role in imperial administration occasioned the construction of public buildings. The much more numerous category of vici, "small towns" grew on informal plans, often round a camp or at a ford or crossroads; some were not small, others were scarcely urban, some not even defended by a wall, the characteristic feature of a place of any importance.
Cities and towns which have Roman origins, or were extensively developed by them are listed with their Latin names in brackets; civitates are marked C
Alcester (Alauna)
Alchester
Aldborough, North Yorkshire (Isurium Brigantum) C
Bath (Aquae Sulis) C
Brough (Petuaria) C
Buxton (Aquae Arnemetiae)
Caerleon (Isca Augusta) C
Caernarfon (Segontium) C
Caerwent (Venta Silurum) C
Caister-on-Sea C
Canterbury (Durovernum Cantiacorum) C
Carlisle (Luguvalium) C
Carmarthen (Moridunum) C
Chelmsford (Caesaromagus)
Chester (Deva Victrix) C
Chester-le-Street (Concangis)
Chichester (Noviomagus Reginorum) C
Cirencester (Corinium) C
Colchester (Camulodunum) C
Corbridge (Coria) C
Dorchester (Durnovaria) C
Dover (Portus Dubris)
Exeter (Isca Dumnoniorum) C
Gloucester (Glevum) C
Great Chesterford (the name of this vicus is unknown)
Ilchester (Lindinis) C
Leicester (Ratae Corieltauvorum) C
Lincoln (Lindum Colonia) C
London (Londinium) C
Manchester (Mamucium) C
Newcastle upon Tyne (Pons Aelius)
Northwich (Condate)
St Albans (Verulamium) C
Silchester (Calleva Atrebatum) C
Towcester (Lactodurum)
Whitchurch (Mediolanum) C
Winchester (Venta Belgarum) C
Wroxeter (Viroconium Cornoviorum) C
York (Eboracum) C
Religion
The druids, the Celtic priestly caste who were believed to originate in Britain, were outlawed by Claudius, and in 61 they vainly defended their sacred groves from destruction by the Romans on the island of Mona (Anglesey). Under Roman rule the Britons continued to worship native Celtic deities, such as Ancasta, but often conflated with their Roman equivalents, like Mars Rigonemetos at Nettleham.
The degree to which earlier native beliefs survived is difficult to gauge precisely. Certain European ritual traits such as the significance of the number 3, the importance of the head and of water sources such as springs remain in the archaeological record, but the differences in the votive offerings made at the baths at Bath, Somerset, before and after the Roman conquest suggest that continuity was only partial. Worship of the Roman emperor is widely recorded, especially at military sites. The founding of a Roman temple to Claudius at Camulodunum was one of the impositions that led to the revolt of Boudica. By the 3rd century, Pagans Hill Roman Temple in Somerset was able to exist peaceably and it did so into the 5th century.
Pagan religious practices were supported by priests, represented in Britain by votive deposits of priestly regalia such as chain crowns from West Stow and Willingham Fen.
Eastern cults such as Mithraism also grew in popularity towards the end of the occupation. The London Mithraeum is one example of the popularity of mystery religions among the soldiery. Temples to Mithras also exist in military contexts at Vindobala on Hadrian's Wall (the Rudchester Mithraeum) and at Segontium in Roman Wales (the Caernarfon Mithraeum).
Christianity
It is not clear when or how Christianity came to Britain. A 2nd-century "word square" has been discovered in Mamucium, the Roman settlement of Manchester. It consists of an anagram of PATER NOSTER carved on a piece of amphora. There has been discussion by academics whether the "word square" is a Christian artefact, but if it is, it is one of the earliest examples of early Christianity in Britain. The earliest confirmed written evidence for Christianity in Britain is a statement by Tertullian, c. 200 AD, in which he described "all the limits of the Spains, and the diverse nations of the Gauls, and the haunts of the Britons, inaccessible to the Romans, but subjugated to Christ". Archaeological evidence for Christian communities begins to appear in the 3rd and 4th centuries. Small timber churches are suggested at Lincoln and Silchester and baptismal fonts have been found at Icklingham and the Saxon Shore Fort at Richborough. The Icklingham font is made of lead, and visible in the British Museum. A Roman Christian graveyard exists at the same site in Icklingham. A possible Roman 4th-century church and associated burial ground was also discovered at Butt Road on the south-west outskirts of Colchester during the construction of the new police station there, overlying an earlier pagan cemetery. The Water Newton Treasure is a hoard of Christian silver church plate from the early 4th century and the Roman villas at Lullingstone and Hinton St Mary contained Christian wall paintings and mosaics respectively. A large 4th-century cemetery at Poundbury with its east–west oriented burials and lack of grave goods has been interpreted as an early Christian burial ground, although such burial rites were also becoming increasingly common in pagan contexts during the period.
The Church in Britain seems to have developed the customary diocesan system, as evidenced from the records of the Council of Arles in Gaul in 314: represented at the council were bishops from thirty-five sees from Europe and North Africa, including three bishops from Britain, Eborius of York, Restitutus of London, and Adelphius, possibly a bishop of Lincoln. No other early sees are documented, and the material remains of early church structures are far to seek. The existence of a church in the forum courtyard of Lincoln and the martyrium of Saint Alban on the outskirts of Roman Verulamium are exceptional. Alban, the first British Christian martyr and by far the most prominent, is believed to have died in the early 4th century (some date him in the middle 3rd century), followed by Saints Julius and Aaron of Isca Augusta. Christianity was legalised in the Roman Empire by Constantine I in 313. Theodosius I made Christianity the state religion of the empire in 391, and by the 5th century it was well established. One belief labelled a heresy by the church authorities — Pelagianism — was originated by a British monk teaching in Rome: Pelagius lived c. 354 to c. 420/440.
A letter found on a lead tablet in Bath, Somerset, datable to c. 363, had been widely publicised as documentary evidence regarding the state of Christianity in Britain during Roman times. According to its first translator, it was written in Wroxeter by a Christian man called Vinisius to a Christian woman called Nigra, and was claimed as the first epigraphic record of Christianity in Britain. This translation of the letter was apparently based on grave paleographical errors, and the text has nothing to do with Christianity, and in fact relates to pagan rituals.
Environmental changes
The Romans introduced a number of species to Britain, including possibly the now-rare Roman nettle (Urtica pilulifera), said to have been used by soldiers to warm their arms and legs, and the edible snail Helix pomatia. There is also some evidence they may have introduced rabbits, but of the smaller southern mediterranean type. The European rabbit (Oryctolagus cuniculus) prevalent in modern Britain is assumed to have been introduced from the continent after the Norman invasion of 1066. Box (Buxus sempervirens) is rarely recorded before the Roman period, but becomes a common find in towns and villas
Legacy
During their occupation of Britain the Romans built an extensive network of roads which continued to be used in later centuries and many are still followed today. The Romans also built water supply, sanitation and wastewater systems. Many of Britain's major cities, such as London (Londinium), Manchester (Mamucium) and York (Eboracum), were founded by the Romans, but the original Roman settlements were abandoned not long after the Romans left.
Unlike many other areas of the Western Roman Empire, the current majority language is not a Romance language, or a language descended from the pre-Roman inhabitants. The British language at the time of the invasion was Common Brittonic, and remained so after the Romans withdrew. It later split into regional languages, notably Cumbric, Cornish, Breton and Welsh. Examination of these languages suggests some 800 Latin words were incorporated into Common Brittonic (see Brittonic languages). The current majority language, English, is based on the languages of the Germanic tribes who migrated to the island from continental Europe
Newcastle upon Tyne, or simply Newcastle is a cathedral city and metropolitan borough in Tyne and Wear, England. It is located on the River Tyne's northern bank, opposite Gateshead to the south. It is the most populous settlement in the Tyneside conurbation and North East England.
Newcastle developed around a Roman settlement called Pons Aelius, the settlement became known as Monkchester before taking on the name of a castle built in 1080 by William the Conqueror's eldest son, Robert Curthose. It was one of the world's largest ship building and repair centres during the industrial revolution. Newcastle was part of the county of Northumberland until 1400, when it separated and formed a county of itself. In 1974, Newcastle became part of Tyne and Wear. Since 2018, the city council has been part of the North of Tyne Combined Authority.
The history of Newcastle upon Tyne dates back almost 2,000 years, during which it has been controlled by the Romans, the Angles and the Norsemen amongst others. Newcastle upon Tyne was originally known by its Roman name Pons Aelius. The name "Newcastle" has been used since the Norman conquest of England. Due to its prime location on the River Tyne, the town developed greatly during the Middle Ages and it was to play a major role in the Industrial Revolution, being granted city status in 1882. Today, the city is a major retail, commercial and cultural centre.
Roman settlement
The history of Newcastle dates from AD 122, when the Romans built the first bridge to cross the River Tyne at that point. The bridge was called Pons Aelius or 'Bridge of Aelius', Aelius being the family name of Roman Emperor Hadrian, who was responsible for the Roman wall built across northern England along the Tyne–Solway gap. Hadrian's Wall ran through present-day Newcastle, with stretches of wall and turrets visible along the West Road, and at a temple in Benwell. Traces of a milecastle were found on Westgate Road, midway between Clayton Street and Grainger Street, and it is likely that the course of the wall corresponded to present-day Westgate Road. The course of the wall can be traced eastwards to the Segedunum Roman fort at Wallsend, with the fort of Arbeia down-river at the mouth of the Tyne, on the south bank in what is now South Shields. The Tyne was then a wider, shallower river at this point and it is thought that the bridge was probably about 700 feet (210 m) long, made of wood and supported on stone piers. It is probable that it was sited near the current Swing Bridge, due to the fact that Roman artefacts were found there during the building of the latter bridge. Hadrian himself pro
Falcon-headed and Ibis-headed deities. Depictions on the walls of tombs show a similar pair of figures grasping knives and accompanied by a single large sekhem-sceptre. The gods may be identified with some of the guardians who watch over the gates of the Underworld, as depicted in Chapter 144 of the Book of the Dead. The construction of these figures is identical ; the bodies are made from tamarisk and the bases from cedarwood. Both have been black-varnished over gessoed linen.
18th dynasty, perhaps from the tomb of Horemheb KV57.
EA50700 and EA50701
British Museum
Freeing God’s Slaves: The Emperor Wears No Clothes ~
“Is anything god’s work? God doesn’t do any work – he just gets his peasants to do it for him.”
- Wonder Boy, Aged 8
Humans (domesticated primates) have long been trained to worship externalised gods – a dangerous addiction humankind has carried forth from its primat-ive childhood; a merely imagined need that usually serves to only impede progressive change and unfolding evolution. Protective and instructive deities are nothing more nor less than the parent figures all children crave. All wise kids eventually learn that obeying the often arbitrary dictates of others who are actually just overblown, overgrown, adulterated children is a dumb idea.
Respect must be earned. Most elders in modern societies have far less of value to impart to subsequent generations than did their more ‘primitive’ tribal counterparts. Many older people are the same simpletons and ignoramuses they were when they were young. Those who claim to be today’s authority figures are almost all control freaks at best, and clinical psychopaths at worst. Almost all conspire to fatten themselves on poisonous excesses at the expense of the ecosystem that truly nourishes their children; mindlessly slaving away at tasks which destroy the planet and alienate them from their loved ones, with the idiot excuse that they’re ‘supporting their families’.
In the modern world ‘bosses’ are actually parasites, sucking life from the host of workers who labour under their dictates. CEOs are nothing more than common enemy overlords. The further up the ‘ladder of success’ one progresses, the more excesses and crimes of omission are committed. And everyone who toils on that ladder is equally culpable, supporting and maintaining a loathsome system with their precious time and effort.
Many ‘bosses’ earn fantastically higher wages than those who toil at much harder jobs – as intrinsically unfair, untrue and unjust as any racist dictate of classic caste or class systems. Those who crave power are those who deserve it the least. Anyone who sucks and arse-kisses their way up the totem pole is best pitied and avoided – not praised. Independent contractors and others who are their own bosses are the freest workers in the modern feudal wage slave era.
Those who remain inside institutions beyond their maturity are insecure timeservers who are happiest locked inside a comfortably familiar prison. Anyone with a PhD is automatically suspect as an institutionalised ignoramus. Most are overeducated buffoons who never realised that throwing away all the best years of their lives to conform and confirm the lies and misapprehensions of other fossilised brainwashed academics is a stupid idea. Most are just insecure kiddies afraid of stepping out into the great wide world – afraid of nature and their own unexamined nature; afraid of their own shadow.
Most people are carefully convinced by society to show more respect – and give more money – to a domesticated primate with the word ‘doctor’ (or some other aggrandising title) in front of their name than to anyone else. We’re trained to think that the work done by someone who has spent many years ‘studying’ is somehow more worthwhile – and worth more – than work that’s considered more ‘common’, such as planting and nurturing trees, growing organic food, building homes or educating young children. We’re entrained to believe that one person’s time can be worth more than another’s.
A cogent way to remove this classic conditioning can be to avoid calling anyone ‘sir’, ‘doctor’ or (heaven forfend) reverend. Such aggrandising titles are far too damaging for any egocentric wannabe leader to hear and only serve to establish subservience. If you always refer to so-called doctors as ‘docturds’, and discourage anyone from trusting the words of such moneygrubbing, authoritarian, self-inflating egotists, you can train yourself to stop supporting an intrinsically unethical system. Avoid using made-up titles entirely; why not simply call a person by their name?
Almost all docturds are only in it for the money – shamelessly rorting medical insurance systems to squeeze every drop from society. The rest is hopeful confabulation on the part of their desperate victims. In most cases, people actually heal themselves (there are exceptions – see below).
They target the most helpless and vulnerable groups of humankind above others, foisting their theoretical practices on women and children in particular. Female humans are thoroughly entrained to entrust their bodies (and minds) to paternalistic authority figures. From a very young age they’re taught to visit docturds regularly, and to trust them with every intimate detail of their lives. Women (in particular) are trained to have ‘regular tests’ for ‘abnormalities’ – tests which actually cause the very ‘abnormalities’ they purportedly search for – and to enrich the coffers of white coated professionals with ‘preventative’ and ‘elective’ surgery and toxic chemical intervention. Pap smears, mammography and the treatment of ‘abnormal’ cells produce more false positives (fake results) than accurate ones and the docturds and their pathological host of pathologists apologise all the way to the bank after each mistimed misstep and misanthropic mistake.
‘You know them by their fruits’ – and most of the fruits of ‘medical professionals’ are rotten and poisonous. More people die from medical (t)errors than from any other cause. Pill-pushing salesmen for chemical industries deserve the OPPOSITE to respect, as do ‘scientists’ who lend their time to the industrious military establishment, or to corporations of ignorant savages who randomly interfere with healthy biological processes to make money from poisoning the food chain and planetary ecosystem with pesticides or genetically modified ‘products’.
Surely we all know better than to show any respect to banksters by now. The most lame offenders of all are probably so-called ‘economists’ who peddle a pseudoscience that every taxpayer is brainwashed into believing, even though their ‘forecasts’ are even less accurate than those of the average 20th Century weatherman. So-called news reports overflow with their senseless, tedious effluvia, drowning out any meaningful news or information beneath their hazy bullshit and babble.
The biggest (and potentially most dangerous) liars of all are ‘religious’ people – conmen and women who peddle superstitious pernicious sexism, racism and utter bald faced balderdash to the most ignorant and insecure people on the planet, offering filthy lies to those suffering from the greatest terror on Earth – the fear of death; just like docturds.
Those who profit from other people’s misery deserve no respect whatsoever.
photo Motive is everything
This writer now observes the world from a remote forest, but once lived directly opposite the medical school of a major metropolitan university, with the opportunity to meet many up and coming young docturds. Whenever the chance arrived to converse with a medical student in private I asked each of them the same innocuous question; ‘Why did you decide to become a medical professional?’
Over the course of several years literally scores of these young professionals had the same opportunity to present their case. Not a single one replied; ‘Because I wanted to help the sick’ or ‘to be a healer.’ Not one claimed to have a particular interest in anatomy or biology. None even bothered to feign any real interest in medicine. Without exception their replies were almost identical; “Well, I was going to be a lawyer but my mother/father thought there’d be more money in medicine.’
When I asked if they’d taken the Hippocratic Oath (which simply requires medical practitioners to ‘do no harm’ and to help the sick and suffering regardless of payment), they all simply stared at me with an expression that seemed to say, ‘Are you really that naïve?” I never allow a docturd to come anywhere near me. I’ve set my own bones, healed internal bleeding and cancerous conditions without subjecting myself to their ignorant meddling (and am still alive and healthy as a result).
Surgeons who capably repair damaged individuals and those who genuinely care for and look after the sick and injured – like nurses – naturally deserve respect. But most docturds are self aggrandising arseholes at best, and outright dangerous nincompoops at worst. Few include things like diet and lifestyle in their diagnoses and routinely prescribe inappropriate but profitable poisons to desperate people.
Those who profit from people’s misery are nothing short of despicable.
Like many or most purveyors of ‘professionalism’ a large number cheated their way through school. They don’t deserve your trust or respect. Don’t take my word for it. Just ask virtually any nurse you happen to meet; they know what’s going on!
Those who can, do
‘Those who can, do. Those who can’t, teach.’ This old truism needs to be revived and spread far and wide. Very few ‘teachers’ are anything but institutionalized time servers who’ve been trained to brainwash others with gormless mind control served up as ‘education’. They have no life experience and know nothing but what they’ve been told to believe. All their textbooks were hopelessly outdated even when they were newly published.
The great technological and social advances of humankind have all been brought about by people without doctorates – in many cases without any formal ‘education’ at all. Tesla, Einstein, Edison and most celebrated creative thinkers achieved the improbable despite the ‘education’ institutions they were subjected to (and escaped while still young), not because of them.
Creative thinking suffers from regimentation. Authority poisons it. Once a child can read, write and understand basic mathematics they are capable of choosing their own path to knowledge and remain individual enough to have unique creative insights. As all teaching institutions are automatically outdated and operated by superannuated time servers, all a person can really expect to learn in ‘higher education’ institutions is conformity – and how to babble to other cocooned minds in obscurantist jargonese.
Don’t put off living your life until later! There’s no time BUT the present. What do you really want to do with your precious time? Do you really want to serve the obnoxious dweebs who are destroying the planet with their ‘efficient’ industries and ‘profitable’ pastimes? Start something new, fresh and original instead – away from their pernicious influence, where you can’t feed them with your efforts.
Around two generations ago people in advanced nations were informed that by the 21st Century they’d have to learn how to make use of their coming abundance of ‘leisure time’. Automation would ensure that fewer and fewer people would be able to ‘earn a living’ by toiling their lives away and an era of plenty and freedom was dawning. The need for anyone to work full time would soon be redundant. People were told they’d have to learn how to share the shrinking pool of jobs that remain – and to learn to share everything else as a result.
Everyone needed to learn how to best use their newfound freedoms. Guess what? It’s the 21st Century! Wake up and smell the flowers.
Me? This time of year I shovel clean dry horseshit by day to provide healthy, honest, wholesome food for myself and those around me. You can’t buy clean manure – almost all animals are filled with poisons and only the ones you feed and look after can be trusted to provide clean fertiliser. By night I shovel bullshit out of the way on the worldwideweb to make way for the growth of truth. The evolution of the internet is doing away with any need for the fossilized ivory towers of ‘education’ institutions.
Every time someone uses anything fuelled by poisonous fossil fuels – every time you turn on a light, drive in vehicle, borrow money, use anything made of plastic or almost anything created by this toxic civilisation – you are as culpable and destructive as any oil company executive or bankster. Every person who works in an office tower, factory or mine is as bad as the executive who squats atop the totem pole. Every worker who props up the totem deserves to go down in the tower along with their boss. Those who serve pain and death deserve it.
Changing the system is a good idea, in the long run. Yet in today’s world you can only do anything of real worth for yourself and your family by leaving the old workaday system behind and helping it to wither on the vine with your absence. The only real way to succeed is by abandoning the dominant paradigm and creating, living and loving a new way of life – preferably with likeminded change agents.
Turn off your TV and get rid of it (if you refuse to read much watch my Youtube channel instead)! The internet is a great alternative – if you use it for something other than supporting the system with your time and energy.
If you like to learn, become one of the New Illuminati in this new Enlightenment @ nexusilluminati.blogspot.com . Learn how to plant and nurture living things; learn about something worthwhile, such as Permaculture. Ally yourself with life through your thoughts and actions, and object out loud to slaves and bosses who want you to help them saw off the limb you’re perched on. Let them know what you really think of them!
If you want to actually save the world, join any group that’s actively stopping loggers or miners or chemical factories/farmers/poisoners or other corporate slaves from destroying the planet, and get out into the real living world, to experience its actual glorious splendour while you stop the moronic workers from filthying their own nests and yours. Stand in front of a bulldozer driver with other wise souls – and stop them in their tracks.
Above all, take time out to examine your mind and motives. Your thoughts create the world! See where your thoughts/programs/memes actually come from and decide whether you want to own them. Enjoy life (without shopping or spending money). That’s why you’re here. Don’t put it off. Do it now!
Turn on. Tune in. OPT OUT!
Time appears to flow onward…
- R. Ayana
“Before enlightenment, chop wood and carry water. After enlightenment, chop wood and carry water.”
- Buddhist Saying
For more by R. Ayana see nexusilluminati.blogspot.com/search/label/r.%20 ayana
Ceto was a primary deity of the sea in Greek mythology, the daughter of the Titans Pontus and Gaea, and personification of all the dangers that the sea posed, more sea-monsters specifically, whales and large sharks. As beautiful as horrible, legend tells she had the torso of a gorgeous woman followed by a long serpent tail ending in a poisonous stinger. She swims placidly at sea waiting for unwary vessels to appear. After spy them, she asks for help hiding her serpent tail. As soon as the ship gets close enough envelops the boat with her tail, crushing the hull and dragging it to the depths. She doesn't devour the surviving sailors, but remains near them watching their useless struggles until they drowned.
Now, mythology and fashion belong together in this wonderful recreation of the ancient Greek Goddess. Featuring fantastical hand-painted green skin, shimmering wavy hair, and snake-like skirt, reminiscent of her truly nature. Iridescent dark teal accessories include sculpted bodice, headdress and coral staff. Out-of-this-world reptile eyes and dramatic face paint add the final touches to this deliciously evil creature.
Photo credit: Lorenzo Ortiz
This painted relief of an ithyphallic leonid deity is in chapel in the temple of Khonsu, Karnak. It was restored by an Italian team which used a technique of infilling missing parts of the wall decoration with modern paint. When viewed close-up, it's obvious what is ancient and what is modern restoration, but from a distance, it gives the viewer a reasonable impression of what the reliefs would have looked like when new (or at least complete).
Karnak, Luxor, Egypt.
Detail of the 3rd shrine of Tutankhamun. This second smallest of the shrines is mainly decorated with scenes from the Book of the Duat to aid the king's journey after death.
Tutankhamun's burial chamber was almost entirely filled by the golden shrines that surrounded the sarcophagus of the king, the outer shrine containing three more successively smaller gilded wooden boxes adorned with reliefs of underworld deities to inform the king's journey into the afterlife.
Every royal burial chamber from the New Kingdom must have contained a similar set of shrines to Tutankhamun's, but only mere fragments of one other have survived.
The most celebrated part of the Cairo Museum's collection has for the best part of a century been the incomparable treasures of Tutankhamun's tomb housed in two long galleries on the upper floor. The greatest archaeological discovery of all time, the virtually intact tomb of the young pharaoh was discovered in 1922 in the Valley of the Kings, undisturbed since antiquity owing to the King's relative obscurity.
Tutankhamun was born Tutankhaten, son and successor of the 'heretic' pharaoh Akhenaten who dispensed with Egypt's centuries old religion in favour of his new god, the sun disk he called Aten. At Akhenaten's death Tutankhaten was only nine years old and early in his reign was persuaded to restore Egypt's religion and traditions, abandoning the cult of Aten and restoring the prominence of Amun, god of Thebes, thus changing his name to Tutankhamun. His early death barely a decade later and association with his reviled father led to the young pharaoh sharing his fate in being struck from the records and lists of Kings (an act of damnatio memoriae), thus his tomb itself was quickly forgotten and hidden beneath later structures whilst those of more famous rulers were stripped bare, probably within decades.
Howard Carter's discovery of the still sealed tomb in 1922 caused a sensation, nothing so complete had ever been found before. The tomb itself was small by pharaonic standards, prepared in a hurry as the king died in his late teens with two main chambers and a further two side chambers crammed with artworks, treasures and furnishings, along with the king's body sealed within four gilded-wooden shrines, three superbly rich coffins and the incomparable golden mask upon his head. Better still, the pharaoh's reign in the 18th Dynasty coincided with a particularly high period for artistic achievement, meaning that so much was of the highest quality. One can only imagine the riches that must have disappeared from the much larger tombs of the more famous rulers, compared to this tiny treasure-trove!
Tutankhamun's collection has resided in Cairo's Egyptian Museum ever since its discovery, but by the end of 2018 will have moved again to the new Grand Egyptian Museum in Giza (currently being prepared for partial opening later this year). The treasures will be displayed in their entirety for the first time, and many pieces have already been transferred. This visit offered us a last opportunity to view most of the major pieces in their central Cairo home for one last time.
For more on the 'obscure' pharaoh who millennia later became Egypt's most celebrated, see the link below:-
Detail of the 3rd shrine of Tutankhamun. This second smallest of the shrines is mainly decorated with scenes from the Book of the Duat to aid the king's journey after death.
Tutankhamun's burial chamber was almost entirely filled by the golden shrines that surrounded the sarcophagus of the king, the outer shrine containing three more successively smaller gilded wooden boxes adorned with reliefs of underworld deities to inform the king's journey into the afterlife.
Every royal burial chamber from the New Kingdom must have contained a similar set of shrines to Tutankhamun's, but only mere fragments of one other have survived.
The most celebrated part of the Cairo Museum's collection has for the best part of a century been the incomparable treasures of Tutankhamun's tomb housed in two long galleries on the upper floor. The greatest archaeological discovery of all time, the virtually intact tomb of the young pharaoh was discovered in 1922 in the Valley of the Kings, undisturbed since antiquity owing to the King's relative obscurity.
Tutankhamun was born Tutankhaten, son and successor of the 'heretic' pharaoh Akhenaten who dispensed with Egypt's centuries old religion in favour of his new god, the sun disk he called Aten. At Akhenaten's death Tutankhaten was only nine years old and early in his reign was persuaded to restore Egypt's religion and traditions, abandoning the cult of Aten and restoring the prominence of Amun, god of Thebes, thus changing his name to Tutankhamun. His early death barely a decade later and association with his reviled father led to the young pharaoh sharing his fate in being struck from the records and lists of Kings (an act of damnatio memoriae), thus his tomb itself was quickly forgotten and hidden beneath later structures whilst those of more famous rulers were stripped bare, probably within decades.
Howard Carter's discovery of the still sealed tomb in 1922 caused a sensation, nothing so complete had ever been found before. The tomb itself was small by pharaonic standards, prepared in a hurry as the king died in his late teens with two main chambers and a further two side chambers crammed with artworks, treasures and furnishings, along with the king's body sealed within four gilded-wooden shrines, three superbly rich coffins and the incomparable golden mask upon his head. Better still, the pharaoh's reign in the 18th Dynasty coincided with a particularly high period for artistic achievement, meaning that so much was of the highest quality. One can only imagine the riches that must have disappeared from the much larger tombs of the more famous rulers, compared to this tiny treasure-trove!
Tutankhamun's collection has resided in Cairo's Egyptian Museum ever since its discovery, but by the end of 2018 will have moved again to the new Grand Egyptian Museum in Giza (currently being prepared for partial opening later this year). The treasures will be displayed in their entirety for the first time, and many pieces have already been transferred. This visit offered us a last opportunity to view most of the major pieces in their central Cairo home for one last time.
For more on the 'obscure' pharaoh who millennia later became Egypt's most celebrated, see the link below:-
One of the many beautiful painted, gilded and inlaid wooden furnishings found in Tutankhamun's tomb.
The most celebrated part of the Cairo Museum's collection has for the best part of a century been the incomparable treasures of Tutankhamun's tomb housed in two long galleries on the upper floor. The greatest archaeological discovery of all time, the virtually intact tomb of the young pharaoh was discovered in 1922 in the Valley of the Kings, undisturbed since antiquity owing to the King's relative obscurity.
Tutankhamun was born Tutankhaten, son and successor of the 'heretic' pharaoh Akhenaten who dispensed with Egypt's centuries old religion in favour of his new god, the sun disk he called Aten. At Akhenaten's death Tutankhaten was only nine years old and early in his reign was persuaded to restore Egypt's religion and traditions, abandoning the cult of Aten and restoring the prominence of Amun, god of Thebes, thus changing his name to Tutankhamun. His early death barely a decade later and association with his reviled father led to the young pharaoh sharing his fate in being struck from the records and lists of Kings (an act of damnatio memoriae), thus his tomb itself was quickly forgotten and hidden beneath later structures whilst those of more famous rulers were stripped bare, probably within decades.
Howard Carter's discovery of the still sealed tomb in 1922 caused a sensation, nothing so complete had ever been found before. The tomb itself was small by pharaonic standards, prepared in a hurry as the king died in his late teens with two main chambers and a further two side chambers crammed with artworks, treasures and furnishings, along with the king's body sealed within four gilded-wooden shrines, three superbly rich coffins and the incomparable golden mask upon his head. Better still, the pharaoh's reign in the 18th Dynasty coincided with a particularly high period for artistic achievement, meaning that so much was of the highest quality. One can only imagine the riches that must have disappeared from the much larger tombs of the more famous rulers, compared to this tiny treasure-trove!
Tutankhamun's collection has resided in Cairo's Egyptian Museum ever since its discovery, but by the end of 2018 will have moved again to the new Grand Egyptian Museum in Giza (currently being prepared for partial opening later this year). The treasures will be displayed in their entirety for the first time, and many pieces have already been transferred. This visit offered us a last opportunity to view most of the major pieces in their central Cairo home for one last time.
For more on the 'obscure' pharaoh who millennia later became Egypt's most celebrated, see the link below:-
Detail from the coffin of Khonsu.
Made from wood lined with stucco and painted, this sarcophagus was found among the grave goods in the intact Tomb of Sennedjem (Tomb TT 1) in Deir el Medina. Found in 1886 , this sarcophagus was identified to date back to the 19th Dynasty, during the reign of King Ramses II. This sarcophagus (coffin) belongs to Khonsu, the son of Sennedjem. Richly decorated, it is embellished with scenes on walls of royal burials which workers used to paint in royal funerary tombs and complexes. The scenes involve depictions from Chapter 17 of the Book of the Dead and the protective deities, such as Anubis , the god of mummification. He is shown preparing the deceased for embalmment . Attending this revered procedures are goddesses Isis, and her sister, Nephthys.
19th dynasty, from Deir el-Medina - Tomb TT1 Sennedjem.
SR4277
Upper floor, room 17
Cairo Museum