|
The Modern Antiquarian Forum » Stonehenge TV programme |
Log In to post a reply
|
|
|
|
| Topic View: Flat | Threaded | |
|
CARL 511 posts |
Sep 08, 2014, 07:34
|
||
|
A 'heads up' about a two part programme about what lies underneath Stonehenge. I think the first episode is on Thursday - Ch4 - 8/9pm? Bit vague I know but I left my TV guide at home!
|
|||
Sanctuary 4670 posts |
Sep 08, 2014, 07:37
|
||
|
CARL wrote: A 'heads up' about a two part programme about what lies underneath Stonehenge. I think the first episode is on Thursday - Ch4 - 8/9pm? Bit vague I know but I left my TV guide at home! Thanks Carl....they don't even know yet what they have above ground, let alone underneath it :-)
|
|||
|
Evergreen Dazed 1881 posts |
Edited Sep 09, 2014, 12:45
Sep 09, 2014, 12:42
|
||
|
CARL wrote: A 'heads up' about a two part programme about what lies underneath Stonehenge. I think the first episode is on Thursday - Ch4 - 8/9pm? Bit vague I know but I left my TV guide at home! Hi Carl, heres the BBC link. Looks good, will be watching! http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b04hc5v7 Perhaps they will be revealing more detail about those cursus pits mentioned some time ago?
|
|||
tiompan 5758 posts |
Edited Sep 09, 2014, 13:42
Sep 09, 2014, 13:08
|
||
|
Evergreen Dazed wrote: CARL wrote: A 'heads up' about a two part programme about what lies underneath Stonehenge. I think the first episode is on Thursday - Ch4 - 8/9pm? Bit vague I know but I left my TV guide at home! Hi Carl, heres the BBC link. Looks good, will be watching! http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b04hc5v7 Perhaps they will be revealing more detail about those cursus pits mentioned some time ago? Interesting that there was no mention of the Heel stone in the clip , as this was considered as the the observing point of the alignment over the sites of the pits (despite one being unsighted from the monument ) to the solstices when the idea was first mooted .One of these was correct the other ,the unsighted western pit , wrong . Have they accepted the mistake and now changing the "alignments" to a far less accurate "Stonehenge " . The pits have never been excavated , never mind dated yet the are mentioned as being part of the reason for the building of the monument " 400 years later " . Then there was mention of "proof of a day long ceremony " .The procession nonsense is even more risible and the basis for the suggestion has been shown to be wrong .It gets worse .
|
|||
|
Evergreen Dazed 1881 posts |
Sep 09, 2014, 13:52
|
||
|
tiompan wrote: Interesting that there was no mention of the Heel stone in the clip , as this was considered as the the observing point of the alignment over the sites of the pits (despite one being unsighted from the monument ) to the solstices when the idea was first mooted .One of these was correct the other ,the unsighted western pit , wrong . Have they accepted the mistake and now changing the "alignments" to a far less accurate "Stonehenge " . The pits have never been excavated , never mind dated yet the are mentioned as being part of the reason for the building of the monument " 400 years later " .It gets worse . I remember reading the discussion on the portal some time ago. If the criticisms made at that time regarding the heel stone as observation point have been addressed by moving to 'stonehenge' in general, as you suggest as a possiblity, then we are looking at a pretty desperate situation. Add to that unexcavated, undated pits(!) what is there left to say?
|
|||
|
Evergreen Dazed 1881 posts |
Sep 09, 2014, 14:18
|
||
|
tiompan wrote: Then there was mention of "proof of a day long ceremony " .The procession nonsense is even more risible and the basis for the suggestion has been shown to be wrong . Just had a quick glance at some of the stuff from the time, was this the idea of a procession from the eastern pit to a mid-point along the cursus, then south which missed the centre of stonehenge by some margin?!
|
|||
|
tiompan 5758 posts |
Sep 09, 2014, 14:24
|
||
|
Evergreen Dazed wrote: tiompan wrote: Interesting that there was no mention of the Heel stone in the clip , as this was considered as the the observing point of the alignment over the sites of the pits (despite one being unsighted from the monument ) to the solstices when the idea was first mooted .One of these was correct the other ,the unsighted western pit , wrong . Have they accepted the mistake and now changing the "alignments" to a far less accurate "Stonehenge " . The pits have never been excavated , never mind dated yet the are mentioned as being part of the reason for the building of the monument " 400 years later " .It gets worse . I remember reading the discussion on the portal some time ago. If the criticisms made at that time regarding the heel stone as observation point have been addressed by moving to 'stonehenge' in general, as you suggest as a possiblity, then we are looking at a pretty desperate situation. Add to that unexcavated, undated pits(!) what is there left to say? It seems like the old story of gilding the lily . They have done lot of geofizz got the results ,and not only the pits , great . If and when some of the sites are excavated we could maybe have something really interesting .But they had to add the fantasy interpretation , and got it wrong . To get notice ? to help with further funding ?
|
|||
|
tiompan 5758 posts |
Edited Sep 09, 2014, 14:33
Sep 09, 2014, 14:31
|
||
|
Evergreen Dazed wrote: tiompan wrote: Then there was mention of "proof of a day long ceremony " .The procession nonsense is even more risible and the basis for the suggestion has been shown to be wrong . Just had a quick glance at some of the stuff from the time, was this the idea of a procession from the eastern pit to a mid-point along the cursus, then south which missed the centre of stonehenge by some margin?! Yes . A quote from that time ""When viewed from the Heel Stone, a rather enigmatic stone which stands just outside the entrance to Stonehenge, the pits effectively mark the raising and setting of the sun at midsummer days," .The graphics had the alignment to the monument and no mention of the Heel Stone and the western pit is not on the alignment of the solstice as seen from the Heel stone , it's also unsighted . Another from Henry Chapman ,part of the team "If you measure the walking distance between the two pits, the procession would reach exactly half-way at midday, when the sun would be directly on top of Stonehenge. This is more than just a coincidence, indicating that the exact length of the Cursus and the positioning of the pits are of significance." This is easily shown to be wrong from all counts/points and involves an incredibly leisurely procession of which there is absolutey no evidence in any direction never mind tempo .
|
|||
|
Evergreen Dazed 1881 posts |
Sep 09, 2014, 15:41
|
||
|
tiompan wrote: Evergreen Dazed wrote: tiompan wrote: Interesting that there was no mention of the Heel stone in the clip , as this was considered as the the observing point of the alignment over the sites of the pits (despite one being unsighted from the monument ) to the solstices when the idea was first mooted .One of these was correct the other ,the unsighted western pit , wrong . Have they accepted the mistake and now changing the "alignments" to a far less accurate "Stonehenge " . The pits have never been excavated , never mind dated yet the are mentioned as being part of the reason for the building of the monument " 400 years later " .It gets worse . I remember reading the discussion on the portal some time ago. If the criticisms made at that time regarding the heel stone as observation point have been addressed by moving to 'stonehenge' in general, as you suggest as a possiblity, then we are looking at a pretty desperate situation. Add to that unexcavated, undated pits(!) what is there left to say? It seems like the old story of gilding the lily . They have done lot of geofizz got the results ,and not only the pits , great . If and when some of the sites are excavated we could maybe have something really interesting .But they had to add the fantasy interpretation , and got it wrong . To get notice ? to help with further funding ? I suppose the reason for throwing in the sensational depends upon on whose attention you are trying to grab, and for what purpose. I'm sure the mechanisms involved with funding via media companies can be pretty jaundiced, but as you say, there is incredible potential in the work carried out so far. Why not wait a bit for the excavations, dates etc build upon those and produce something with real integrity?
|
|||
|
Evergreen Dazed 1881 posts |
Sep 09, 2014, 15:50
|
||
|
tiompan wrote: Another from Henry Chapman ,part of the team "If you measure the walking distance between the two pits, the procession would reach exactly half-way at midday, when the sun would be directly on top of Stonehenge. This is more than just a coincidence, indicating that the exact length of the Cursus and the positioning of the pits are of significance." This is easily shown to be wrong from all counts/points and involves an incredibly leisurely procession of which there is absolutey no evidence in any direction never mind tempo . It's incredible. I mean, really, in the true meaning of that word. How did this idea manage to find life beyond the first 10 minutes of those on the project discussing it? Tempo - classic. Perhaps snails were leading the ceremonies?
|
| Pages: 7 – [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 | Next ] | Add a reply to this topic |
|
|
|
| The Modern Antiquarian Forum Index | |
