Zin wrote:Magnolia, I for one would love to hear more about some of the texts you've collected on this and similar subjects. O.O

creepyhollows wrote:

I do agree about the loss and manipulation of information during the Christian era however, the first mention of the Leprechaun in written form was in the story called 'The Death of Fergus Mac Leite' written about 1100 A.D.

I don't know about that being the first mention of them, but we can all agree they were around much longer than the last 1,000 year! :lol:

It is also important to mention that there were never any Burning of Books in Ireland because of two important fact: 1) Pre Christian Irish Mythology was a purely Oral tradition kept by the Bard and Druids of ancient Ireland and they never commited anything about their religion or mythology in written form (Ogham although a writing medium originating in Ireland was only used for barter transactions and boundry tracement)

I think you mean that there weren't any public demands of burning, certainly not that there were any burnings of books Not everything was oral, either. Though, there certainly are more oral traditions than written due to the fact most weren't educated enough to have written records. And, myths & legends are localized. While some characteristics remain the same throughout a vast region, there are local versions of the stories. The most noted were the ones that survived, such as The Grimm Brothers recordings. By no means does that mean the Grimm Brothers versions were the only versions that existed, they were just the ones recorded.

and 2) the only "book burning" in Ireland occured in the city of Cork in 1921 and only the census records were destoyed. England did book burning during the Tudor Dynasty but this book burning of any literature written in Irish Gaelic and it occured in England not Ireland.

Again, you're talking about publicly recorded events in recent history. I assure you that books have been burned, and literature has been burned in Scotland, Ireland, and England at various times in history. Unfortunately.

[

quote]Also, there are only two mythologycal creatures in Irish stories that are gender specific, and those are the Leprechaun and the Beansidhe, the latter meaning exactly that Bean(woman) Sidhe (Fae or Spirit). The rest of the creatures in Irish Mythology have appeared as either male and female unlike the two previously mentioned. (Jenny Greentooth is actually Scottish original transported later into Ireland).

Out of curiosity, are we discussing modern legends? Such as, legends from the last 200-300 years? Or, are we discussing overall?

Never heard of the monogamy or polygame of Leprechauns but since my uncles still live in Ireland in County Kerry I will ask them to find out more on this; I'm sure they can find out some information on this matter at least for my own erudition which I will be more than happy to share.

AngelDust wrote:

As for your last statement: But if a leprechaun is a subcategory of a fae, then there is really no argument. A female leprechaun is merely a bearded fae with no wings. That's like saying that a Tiger is a Lion with stripes. Not enough for me.

See the thing is you cannot quanitfy this argument for leprechauns in our current physical world way. Let's remove science. Everyone who went to a zoo can see tiger and lions. We went to school where a collective group of people agreed this is how we should label it and teach our children how to recognize it. How do we know? We seen it and read about it. But not everyone sees or hears a leprachaun. So you can't make an apples to apples comparison.

We can argue whether there is female wind or male wind. But if there is no agreed way to quantify, you are literally arguing with the wind. There are three people on this thread who have supporting reasons to believe there are female leprechauns. (By the way, I did not get mine from CH, so it was way before CH talked about there being females). And if that is not good enough for you, then that is the reality you chose. No one is going to or wants to change that.

I say we settle this with a duel. Just kidding. Really, why not search ebay for female leprachauns and ask the seller why he/she believes this is a female. It may just be their way of classifying or....it maybe because this is what the spirit told them. 2cents

I already experienced a female leprechaun so there is no way to go backwards.

You are using what is know as "Argument of Abscence" to rationalize your argument. It asserts that a proposition is true because it has not yet been proven false, it is "generally accepted" (or vice versa). I really hope you look this up online; your smarter than that!! We cannot see the air or our emotions yet Science has proven they exist. All the available objective data point to the non-existance of Female Leprechauns dating back to prior the Pre-Christian era. Not once has it been recorded. Apparently I am the only one here who takes time to back my theory up with empirical data as opposed to feelings, heresay, or belief.

AngelDust wrote:

You are using what is know as "Argument of Abscence" to rationalize your argument. It asserts that a proposition is true because it has not yet been proven false, it is "generally accepted" (or vice versa). I really hope you look this up online; your smarter than that!! We cannot see the air or our emotions yet Science has proven they exist. All the available objective data point to the non-existance of Female Leprechauns dating back to prior the Pre-Christian era. Not once has it been recorded. Apparently I am the only one here who takes time to back my theory up with empirical data as opposed to feelings, heresay, or belief.

That last argument wasn't to say female leps are real. My argument is to say this argument is a waste of time. I'm sure your smart enough to get that. You're in the minority now because we have many spirit keepers who keep and can communicate with their leprechaun and many who are in the keep of female and male leps. Proof is in the pudding? Proof is in their pudding, your pudding just doesn't have a female leprechaun. You're too dependent on official text someone else writes, rather than observing collective experience. A teacher said you can do a report of fish behavior by reading books, or you can sit in front of a fish tank and observe for yourself.

Why beat a dead horse?

Falicea272 wrote:

AngelDust wrote:

You are using what is know as "Argument of Abscence" to rationalize your argument. It asserts that a proposition is true because it has not yet been proven false, it is "generally accepted" (or vice versa). I really hope you look this up online; your smarter than that!! We cannot see the air or our emotions yet Science has proven they exist. All the available objective data point to the non-existance of Female Leprechauns dating back to prior the Pre-Christian era. Not once has it been recorded. Apparently I am the only one here who takes time to back my theory up with empirical data as opposed to feelings, heresay, or belief.

That last argument wasn't to say female leps are real. My argument is to say this argument is a waste of time. I'm sure your smart enough to get that. You're in the minority now because we have many spirit keepers who keep and can communicate with their leprechaun and many who are in the keep of female and male leps. Proof is in the pudding? Proof is in their pudding, your pudding just doesn't have a female leprechaun. You're too dependent on official text someone else writes, rather than observing collective experience. A teacher said you can do a report of fish behavior by reading books, or you can sit in front of a fish tank and observe for yourself.

Why beat a dead horse?

You realize you just proved my point, right? It asserts that a proposition is true because it has not yet been proven false, it is "generally accepted" (or vice versa)

Thanks!

AngelDust wrote:

Falicea272 wrote:

AngelDust wrote:

You are using what is know as "Argument of Abscence" to rationalize your argument. It asserts that a proposition is true because it has not yet been proven false, it is "generally accepted" (or vice versa). I really hope you look this up online; your smarter than that!! We cannot see the air or our emotions yet Science has proven they exist. All the available objective data point to the non-existance of Female Leprechauns dating back to prior the Pre-Christian era. Not once has it been recorded. Apparently I am the only one here who takes time to back my theory up with empirical data as opposed to feelings, heresay, or belief.

That last argument wasn't to say female leps are real. My argument is to say this argument is a waste of time. I'm sure your smart enough to get that. You're in the minority now because we have many spirit keepers who keep and can communicate with their leprechaun and many who are in the keep of female and male leps. Proof is in the pudding? Proof is in their pudding, your pudding just doesn't have a female leprechaun. You're too dependent on official text someone else writes, rather than observing collective experience. A teacher said you can do a report of fish behavior by reading books, or you can sit in front of a fish tank and observe for yourself.

Why beat a dead horse?

You realize you just proved my point, right? It asserts that a proposition is true because it has not yet been proven false, it is "generally accepted" (or vice versa)

Thanks!

No it has been proven false, because at least 5 members here have female leprechauns. Proof is in witness account. If you go to court and have 5 witnesses, that does stand for something.

Falicea272 wrote:
Only after the credibility of said witnesses have been proven and only if it proves empirical evidence and NOT heresay. You can all agree that Female Leprechauns exist but none of you have yet proven or found objective data that backs up your claims. I on the other hand have made mention of copious historical and verifiable data that proves the non existance of Female Leprechauns.