=
×

Julian Cope presents Head Heritage

Head To Head
Log In
Register
The Modern Antiquarian Forum »
National Geographic and Celts
Log In to post a reply
137 messages
Topic View: Flat | Threaded
gorseddphungus
185 posts

Hoskin
Mar 13, 2006, 00:19
those are really healthy and excellent doubts which I also share:

- pathways & intervisibility ,
- complex motifs being on the higher ground ,
- complexity itself being considered from the purely visual i.e. numbers of rings and uncommon motifs highlight certain sites when the vast majority of cases are quite simple and rarely get considered in the equation
- the importance attached to drawings (which I almost prefer to pics ) which priveleges a certain viewpoint and doesn't consider the immediate texture , colour and gradations of the surface and wider landsape (difficult to do ) but the end result is concentrated on the motifs .

There is so far no definitive study on the 'patterns' of rock art. But I dont think there ever will be. As if prehistoric populations all acted the same! And rock art is possibly the most complex section of prehistory. However, I tend to accept some of the generalizations, not only at least for personal appeasement but also as a board for later research. I am sure that is what is happening in archaeology. One study always denies another but much has been achieved in the last few decades.

Related to your last point, the motifs that remain are the ones that are considered whereas paint or other engravings are now invisible. It was only until recently that paint in dolmens was not even considered. Imagine the information this would mean for rock art. Problem with rock art is that paint can hardly ever remain in the open unlike grave art unless it has been covered by chance.

Some people do pay attention to landscape archaeology in rock art though maybe not enough as they concentrate on the motifs.

As for Pastora, I got the hoskin story straight from the caretaker at hte grave, recalling his meeting with Hoskin himself and the latter’s initial cynicism when being told there was at least ONE passage grave which did not conform to the rule. Once he checked it himself, his surprise became legend.

Mind you, I think Hoskin’s work is laudable and it is tremendously important that orientations in some areas have been checked ‘officially’ and all follow that famous certain pattern. You or me may have always supported that after years of field work, but the fact that a well known British archaeologist is claiming that and proving it publicly is always important.

Hoskin’s published studies are these:

Hoskin, M. (1997): Tombs, temples and orientations. En O Neolítico Atlántico e as orixes do Megalitismo. Universidad de Santiago de Compostela, (Coruña).

Hoskin, M. (2001): Tombs, Temples and their orientations. A new perspective on Mediterranean Prhistory

You can alternatvely focus your attention on this short paper:
http://www.us.es/dpreyarq/web/archaeoastronomy.pdf

And for an overview on Pastora and the rest of the passage and gallery graves in the area around Seville:
http://www.us.es/dpreyarq/web/almaden11.htm

Enjoy.
XXX
GP
In reply to:
Re: Galloway (tiompan)
Topic Outline:
The Modern Antiquarian Forum Index