Julian Cope presents Head Heritage | The Modern Antiquarian Forum | Conclusions...Stone circles, are we learning much?

The Modern Antiquarian Forum » Conclusions...Stone circles, are we learning much?	This topic is locked

253 messages	Topic View: Flat \| Threaded

jonmor

150 posts

Re: Conclusions...Stone circles, are we learning much?

Nov 06, 2013, 09:16

Thanks George. I agree: It needs to be spelt out in a lot of detail. Time consuming process to get it to a state where the intro would be easy to grasp because you have to forget everything that we know and every assumption we take for granted: Start from scratch and go in a different direction. Normally with intros you're expanding on existing knowledge.

I've used Eogan and O'Kelly's work to check the initial data (as well as the site check): No inconsistencies so far but it's not like Stonehenge where everything is accessible, so everything could fall apart on entry to the inaccessible bits. The astronomical and calendrical theories seem over-complex to me, but there might be some secondary or dual purpose: There's one complex motif that seems overly developed to my eyes.

Will let you know what response I get!

In reply to:
Re: Conclusions...Stone circles, are we learning much? (tiompan)

Replies:
Re: Conclusions...Stone circles, are we learning much? (Evergreen Dazed)
Re: Conclusions...Stone circles, are we learning much? (tiompan)

Topic Outline:

Conclusions...Stone circles, are we learning much? – Sanctuary, Oct 14, 2013, 11:27


The Modern Antiquarian Forum Index