Harryshill
|
Re: Modern memorials as 'ancient monuments'
Dec 15, 2012, 18:14
|
|
And yet there are probably hundreds if not thousands of sites, where this doesn't apply..
|
dean dean
|
Re: Modern memorials as 'ancient monuments'
Dec 15, 2012, 19:41
|
|
sure...it 'looks nice' to have an enlarged rockery on a roundabout in the middle of a town centre. i presume this is the kind of thing you are referring to?
|
Harryshill
|
Re: Modern memorials as 'ancient monuments'
Dec 15, 2012, 20:08
|
I was thinking of the very much in the majority, prehistory sites that haven't been Christianised.
The church doesn't seem to have even noticed them.
It looks to me that they saw nothing of a threat in them at all.
|
Harryshill
|
Re: Modern memorials as 'ancient monuments'
Dec 15, 2012, 20:08
|
I was thinking of the very much in the majority, prehistory sites that haven't been Christianised.
The church doesn't seem to have even noticed them.
It looks to me that they saw nothing of a threat in them at all.
|
dean dean
|
Re: Modern memorials as 'ancient monuments'
Dec 15, 2012, 20:28
|
[quote="Harryshill"]I was thinking of the very much in the majority, prehistory sites that haven't been Christianised.
The church doesn't seem to have even noticed them.
It looks to me that they saw nothing of a threat in them at all
i certainly read somewhere, about a religious (christian, possibly even papal) decree calling for the eradication of all pagan monuments. unfortunately the knowledge is lost in time in the midst of my mind. maybe they realised they were fighting a losing battle?
|
Sanctuary
|
Re: Modern memorials as 'ancient monuments'
Dec 15, 2012, 20:38
|
|
dean dean wrote: [quote="Harryshill"]I was thinking of the very much in the majority, prehistory sites that haven't been Christianised.
The church doesn't seem to have even noticed them.
It looks to me that they saw nothing of a threat in them at all
i certainly read somewhere, about a religious (christian, possibly even papal) decree calling for the eradication of all pagan monuments. unfortunately the knowledge is lost in time in the midst of my mind. maybe they realised they were fighting a losing battle?
I agree with HH that in the main they were totally overlooked. I think it more a modern popular 'belief' that they were destroyed or built-over because they were supposedly seen as a threat. The odd few weren't proof that this was the case.
|
Harryshill
|
Re: Modern memorials as 'ancient monuments'
Dec 15, 2012, 20:41
|
No idea what happened before 1066.
There are thousands of prehistoric all sites in this country without a sign of church interference or influence.
I'm sure that they had influence in a few places, but over all, it does appear they didn't even notice them.
Conclusion. I will leave that up to others
|
Harryshill
|
Re: Modern memorials as 'ancient monuments'
Dec 15, 2012, 20:48
|
Sorry, just a thought, that decree about the destruction of all pagan temples.
If they saw prehistorical sites as such they didn't make a very good job of them.
Or maybe they did because what we have now was not considered a threat.
|
Harryshill
|
Re: Modern memorials as 'ancient monuments'
Dec 15, 2012, 20:49
|
Absolute Sanctuary.
It's just a very few that have been Christianised and some we can't be sure that was there intent.
|
Sanctuary
|
Re: Modern memorials as 'ancient monuments'
Dec 15, 2012, 20:53
|
|
Harryshill wrote: Sorry, just a thought, that decree about the destruction of all pagan temples.
If they saw prehistorical sites as such they didn't make a very good job of them.
Or maybe they did because what we have now was not considered a threat.
It may well be that it was the location of the site that was important to them not the fact that there was a pagan structure on it already. It could have been anything.
|
