The most noticeable element of the cross - which is greatly weathered today and difficult to make out - is the occurrence of a swastika on the upper part. The swastika was the symbol of St Bridget and today some of the Bridget's crosses made from rushes take the form of a fylfot, another word for the swastika.
Until the Nazis used this symbol from the 1920s, the swastika was used by many cultures throughout the past 3,000 years to represent life, sun, strength, and good luck.
Even in the early twentieth century, the swastika was still a symbol with positive connotations. During World War I, the swastika could even be found on the shoulder patches of the American 45th Division.
So because the Nazis hijacked an ancient symbol for their own agenda, everything bearing the symbol today should be covered up or destroyed???? That's ridiculous.
+1
The swastika symbol is used decoratively in many buildings in Dublin, some of them with great historical significance that pre-dates 1930s Germany.
Like the Swastika Laundry.
I remember the swastika on the chimney and I'm not that old.There's little, if any, remnants of that business. I remember some class of smoke chimney with their logo over the Dodder at Ballsbridge. The chimney seems to still be there but subsumed into a modern building.
Is it this, or a replica?:
http://www.askaboutireland.ie/readi...cal-landscape/the-wakeman-drawings/cliffoney/
Yes. That’s it.
But it’s fanciful at the least to suggest that the St Brigid’s cross is some sort of early Christian or even Tuatha De Danann swastika. And even if it were, so what? As I said in my initial post the swastika was used in the past by the early Christians. And how it was used or what it symbolized in the distant past is not the issue.
Yes. That’s it.
But it’s fanciful at the least to suggest that the St Brigid’s cross is some sort of early Christian or even Tuatha De Danann swastika. And even if it were, so what? As I said in my initial post the swastika was used in the past by the early Christians. And how it was used or what it symbolized in the distant past is not the issue.
We are not now living in the past. In the modern world the swastika is a Nazi symbol; a symbol of intolerance and of man’s inhumanity to man. It’s public display is insensitive, to say the least.
Yes. That’s it.
But it’s fanciful at the least to suggest that the St Brigid’s cross is some sort of early Christian or even Tuatha De Danann swastika. And even if it were, so what? As I said in my initial post the swastika was used in the past by the early Christians. And how it was used or what it symbolized in the distant past is not the issue.
We are not now living in the past. In the modern world the swastika is a Nazi symbol; a symbol of intolerance and of man’s inhumanity to man. It’s public display is insensitive, to say the least.
Yes. That’s it.
But it’s fanciful at the least to suggest that the St Brigid’s cross is some sort of early Christian or even Tuatha De Danann swastika. And even if it were, so what? As I said in my initial post the swastika was used in the past by the early Christians. And how it was used or what it symbolized in the distant past is not the issue.
We are not now living in the past. In the modern world the swastika is a Nazi symbol; a symbol of intolerance and of man’s inhumanity to man. It’s public display is insensitive, to say the least.
There are numerous examples of things like this. I really can't see how you would find it offensive. Check out what outfits some people wear in Valencia and other parts of Spain at Easter. Remind you of anything?
I can remember that too. I think you are getting upset about noting really...and we didn't even take sides in WW2 anyway.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?