Julian Cope presents Head Heritage | The Modern Antiquarian Forum

Sanctuary

4670 posts

Re: For Ceremonial purposes?

Aug 18, 2013, 13:11

woolybaque wrote:

I'd say, without proof or evidence, that stone circles were for matters of greater importance than only ceremony, based on the massive undertaking required to construct them.

Well, the huge circles such as Avebury (as it's been mentioned) certainly were a huge undertaking that's for sure, but not so surely some of the (many more) lesser ones.
The thing is...were the smaller 'everyday' circles just a smaller representation of the larger ones...or the larger ones just a representation of the smaller ones, just larger? Did sheer size indicate their importance?
There must be a good chance that they were because like Avebury, they were just not circles, but Complexes.
Sticking with Avebury, you have a vast ditch and bank and two vast Avenues, one with yet another circle on the end of it. Then of course there's Silbury Hill that surely is connected with it all.This I can certainly appreciate as being for a possible ceremonial/ritualistic or 'religious' purpose although of course no positive proof for. I'm not at all sure that the smaller ones were there for the same reason though, but again no proof.

In reply to:
Re: For Ceremonial purposes? (woolybaque)

Replies:
Re: For Ceremonial purposes? (woolybaque)

The Modern Antiquarian Forum » For Ceremonial purposes?	Log In to post a reply

127 messages	Topic View: Flat \| Threaded