Head To Head
Log In
Register
The Modern Antiquarian Forum »
Stonehenge - dating the Y and Z holes
Log In to post a reply

56 messages
Topic View: Flat | Threaded
tiompan
tiompan
5758 posts

Re: Stonehenge - dating the Y and Z holes
Dec 12, 2014, 20:10
Dave1982 wrote:
'1) Whether cleaning took place or not it cannot impact on the RC dates of the antlers.'

Hi tiompan

I am sorry to have taken so long to reply - my health is poorly, and I'm aware that my dating query is contrary to current thinking, so it must be presented carefully and with caution... and fully justified if possible. I have not forgotten Blakeley Raise ! : )

1) Reindeer antlers carbon dating -
Yes, I do agree with the carbon dating, but there is no way of knowing how old the antlers were when placed in the hole, nor of knowing how old the holes were as previous organic material may have been cleaned out. It does seem unlikely that having dug these holes with their nice clean white chalk bedrock bottoms they would then be left to silt up from the winter storms.

Current beliefs did place the holes at around 1600 BC, but there appears to be other organic material found in Z29 that place the date earlier. (source Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Y_and_Z_Holes) So there are doubts about the dating methods.




Hello Dave ,

No rush ,good to see you back and hope you have recovered .
True you can't date anything from deposits if there is no stratigraphy to provide a context . Same applies to stone circles as well as pits .
But , the dates make sense when considered along with the factors like the Z8 , the cut into the ramp and the waywrdness of the circuit .
Yes , Z 29 was older (2030-1740 bc )than the others from Y30 which extended from 1880 to 1520 bc , but this was believed to have been because it had been curated . Even with the older date it still makes the hole or deposition much later than the sarsen monument .
Topic Outline:

The Modern Antiquarian Forum Index