Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Ian, post: 76058, member: 283&quot;]History is more likely to have been `adapted&#039; to meet the way the catholic church wanted it&nbsp; to be told it than anything else.</p><p><br /></p><p>In the absence of documented history, we are left with myths and legends from which we can but sift and filter for the possibility of `facts&#039;. I think we can discount the `angel&#039; and any divine annointment, but it is not so easy to discount the use of the lis. Even when dealing with `recorded&#039; history we should keep ourselves aware that sometimes we are dealing with the equivalence of the historical novel of the times. Facts liberally laced and blurred with fiction.</p><p><br /></p><p>If we accept that Clovis was crowned king on the death of his father, then this was before his conversion to christianity. He didn&#039;t convert to christianity until his marriage to whatsername (?) of Burgundy. Was the lis (or iris) used in crowning ceremonies or just allegedly used? If it was, was it part of a&nbsp; druidic rite that had been adopted by Clovis&#039;s tribe to consolidate his claim to the title ? or was it a rite imported to the region by them? That the lis apopears on early french coins (pre Clovis) is very apparent. The question (in relation to symbolry) is more a case of `why&#039; than`if&#039;. </p><p><br /></p><p>For me the catholic church version of history&nbsp; is somewhat lacking in&nbsp; facts to back up the story it tries to sell.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in