Littlestone
|
Re: Henge corrals?
Dec 18, 2005, 22:08
|
>I am going to map all of the East Anglian henges plus the cursus monuments, long barrows and causewayed enclosures.<
Sounds like a very interesting and exciting venture Peter. I have a feeling that the cursus may also have had a predominately utilitarian function - ie as a semi-protected avenue for livestock from settlement to river (or between two other utilitarian points). The Chelmer (Springfield) cursus suggests just that.
|
PeterH
|
Re: Henge corrals?
Dec 18, 2005, 22:11
|
I certainly accept that the apparent lack of consistent alignments does not prove that henges did not have a ritual purpose. The rituals may have had nothing to do with sun rises, sets or alignment to a hill etc.
Yet this further increases my unease when you say that the entrances to tombs face many different directions also. Could it be that we have been conditioned to see solar alignments where they do not exist simply because they do exist elsewhere. Perhaps the majority of henges and chambered tombs were built with entrances where convenient because sunrises and sunsets were of no importance to the builders. Clearly there are solar alignments that work and we can see that they do. Does that mean that all are aligned to stages of the solar cycle?
|
tiompan
|
Re: Henge corrals?
Dec 18, 2005, 22:17
|
"Fair points, Nigel and that is why I am thinking that different sized henges in different parts of the country might have had diferent purposes. Sure - if you look at the big Wessex henges and those up north like Mayburgh - you get an impression of thing on the grand scale. You even get that feeling down south with the henge at Maxey, but when you see the little ones of Essex it does seem different. Smaller, no stones at all, no hills to align to. Can't help thinking stock markets ;o)"
Keep getting smaller Peter , Wormy Hillock , a henge in Aberdeenshire has an internal diamter of 6.2 m , not an awful lot to sell there .
|
PeterH
|
Re: Henge corrals?
Dec 18, 2005, 22:23
|
|
Cursus? I don't know. My findings so far are that they vary greatly in length and they often don't seem to go anywhere. The Neolithic was such a weird place that I wonder if they didn't suffer from collective insanity! Nothing seems to make any sense at all - and that is why I'm putting the books aside for awhile and trying to clear other 20th century views from my head. We know nothing for certain do we? Why Silbury Hill? Why are long barrows long with all the bodies up at the front? Why the horns and the false entrances? Why circles? Why sausage shaped trenches in circular causewayed camps? The Neolithic is just one big WHY? It really comes down to a question of practicality or religion. Did they build to mange their lives better or were they driven by mad priests, kings or magicians? Reason or unreason?
|
fitzcoraldo
|
Re: Henge corrals?
Dec 18, 2005, 22:27
|
|
I would be keen to read any evidence or follow up any references for henges being anything but ritual monuments.
|
PeterH
|
Re: Henge corrals?
Dec 18, 2005, 22:31
|
|
6.2 m? Hmm - well that is either a chapel sized ritual henge or a very small sheep pen! Not a bad size for one of Littlestone's pig pens though.
|
Littlestone
|
Re: Henge corrals?
Dec 18, 2005, 22:35
|
>Wormy Hillock , a henge in Aberdeenshire has an internal diamter of 6.2 m , not an awful lot to sell there .<
A pen for a pig or a goat might be even smaller :-)
I think what Peter is saying here (and I have been saying the same thing elsewhere for sometime now) that we really <i>do</i> have to move away from seeing every little (or even every big) circle as a structure for religious or ceremonial functions. I have no evidence for that of course (other than common sense) but it would seem to me that the protection of livestock would have been of primary consideration back in the Neolithic just as it is today. Trying to find religious/ceremonial reasons for all megalithic structures is actually just pampering to our 21st century need for the 'spiritual' - and in so doing denies the practical (and in my opinion) far more interesting problems our ancestors were faced with on a day-to-day basis.
|
Littlestone
|
Re: Henge corrals?
Dec 18, 2005, 22:46
|
>Nothing seems to make any sense at all - and that is why I'm putting the books aside for awhile and trying to clear other 20th century views from my head. We know nothing for certain do we?<
Sounds like you're about to do a FourWinds exit on us there Peter ;-) Hang on matey, it'll all make some kind of sense one day - and even if it doesn't a mystery or two makes the world go around ;-)
Look forward to arguing the toss with you over cursuses though - not enough work has been done on those :-)
|
Littlestone
|
Re: Henge corrals?
Dec 18, 2005, 22:54
|
>I would be keen to read any evidence or follow up any references for henges being anything but ritual monuments.<
Isn't that a bit like saying to the 16th century Church that you'd be interested in reading any evidence for creation being the result of something other than the handiwork of god? With the greatest respect fiz, the time has come to look at 'circles' from perspectives other than those of the religious and ceremonial.
|
fitzcoraldo
|
Re: Henge corrals?
Dec 18, 2005, 23:07
|
Surely the common sense approach to stock management is not to spent thousands of man hours creating huge ditch and bank structures which you then periodically refill with clean material and the re-dig the ditch. The common sense approach would be to gather up a bunch of brushwood e.g. gorse and enclose an area that you want to pen your animal in. This would keep the animals in and the predators out.
Common sense would dictate that a circle isn't the most practical of shapes to choose as a stock pen. It's very difficult to catch a beast within a circular structure, corners are far more practical.
Surely a common sense approach would indicate that megalithic structures are not practical structures for day to day use. They involved a massive investment of time and labour - much more time than, for example, was invested in the building of houses and other domestic structures.
Then there is the archaeological evidence. Henges were not maintained as domestic structures. They were cleaned, maintained, they contain burials and objects and been placed within them. Henges have orientations and relationships with other monuments both natural and man-made.
None of this is a quest for spirtituality in the 21st century it is based on observation, excavation and common sense.
|
