Can I jump in again here and ask if you consider it a tomb at all.. or that a tomb is just part of it?
If just part of it, then what role do your findings play with regard to the remains that would have been in the chamber or intended to be in the chamber?
I think those are a couple of sensible questions that shouldn't create much of a problem answering.[/quote]
Whether or not the quoit was ever used as a tomb is not of any specific relevance to our research at this point. It may well become relevant at some later stage, when and if we are able to conduct archeological surveys underneath the fallen stone 7.
Our ongoing investigations and observations with regard to Solar, Lunar and Stellar alignments, and to the optical dynamics of light and shade on nearly all of the surfaces, both inner and outer, would almost certainly preclude the likelihood of the quoit having been constructed 'primarily' for funereal purposes. This would have necessitated open aspects of the structure being covered to prevent incursions and this would also have rendered the entire structure unuseable for the purposes we propose.[/quote]
Does the 'fallen' sloping stone and the gap supposedly left by it not effect the light diffusion and 'patterns' observed? Would they be different if the gap was filled and the fallen stone not there?