|
The Modern Antiquarian Forum » Wirral Megalithic Sites |
Log In to post a reply
|
|
|
|
| Topic View: Flat | Threaded | |
|
david gregg 15 posts |
Nov 20, 2017, 12:41
|
||
|
Hello and thanks. The excellent MvIvor paper started me off on this track along with other local observers. All the 3 sites he mentions are potentially Neolithic. I have just sent a paper on Fender Lane Array to the Charles Close Society chairman for comments. Professor D P Gregg
|
|||
|
david gregg 15 posts |
Nov 20, 2017, 12:49
|
||
|
Hello. I am pleased you find my brief material amusing. If you read my book, on that basis, you may have a mirth induced heart attack! But why not address the evidence...although I suspect that this would be a novel act in your case. Professor D P Gregg
|
|||
|
Evergreen Dazed 1881 posts |
Edited Nov 22, 2017, 06:00
Nov 20, 2017, 13:40
|
||
**
|
|||
thesweetcheat 6209 posts |
Nov 20, 2017, 17:46
|
||
|
It's an interesting area for a discussion. One thing the early OS maps are particularly good for is place names, many of which hadn't been recorded anywhere until the OS surveyors went out and asked the locals what they called lanes, fields, woods. Quite a lot of "barrow" etc names were recorded where there was no barrow to be seen, so presumably a persistent oral tradition that may indicate a barrow had been there once. Sadly I've also remembered why I stopped posting on the forum though, so I'll leave it there.
|
|||
Sanctuary 4670 posts |
Nov 20, 2017, 20:13
|
||
|
thesweetcheat wrote: It's an interesting area for a discussion. One thing the early OS maps are particularly good for is place names, many of which hadn't been recorded anywhere until the OS surveyors went out and asked the locals what they called lanes, fields, woods. Quite a lot of "barrow" etc names were recorded where there was no barrow to be seen, so presumably a persistent oral tradition that may indicate a barrow had been there once. Sadly I've also remembered why I stopped posting on the forum though, so I'll leave it there. Don't do that tsc as your contributions are too valuable. We've lost far too many members already. Here's more from the Charles Close Society that may interest you. https://www.charlesclosesociety.org/othertopics
|
|||
tjj 3606 posts |
Edited Nov 21, 2017, 10:23
Nov 20, 2017, 22:47
|
||
|
thesweetcheat wrote: It's an interesting area for a discussion. One thing the early OS maps are particularly good for is place names, many of which hadn't been recorded anywhere until the OS surveyors went out and asked the locals what they called lanes, fields, woods. Quite a lot of "barrow" etc names were recorded where there was no barrow to be seen, so presumably a persistent oral tradition that may indicate a barrow had been there once. Sadly I've also remembered why I stopped posting on the forum though, so I'll leave it there. You are right thesweetcheat a very interesting topic for discussion although the specifics of this particular discussion i.e. Wirral, are over my head. I was glad to see you back on the forum, albeit briefly as it turned out. You shouldn't let sarcasm from someone who has contributed just that (no fieldnotes, photos or even news items) affect you. You are the one who posts photos, fieldnotes, and who encourages other people, myself included. Just laugh it off x
|
|||
|
david gregg 15 posts |
Nov 21, 2017, 16:24
|
||
|
Hello. Thanks. This is a valid point about stone identification. At Arrowe Park one stone still there is clearly ancient and still standing and on the old OS maps. This is used in my analysis. A second was not on the maps but clearly a dressed modern (i.e. Victorian) stone post complete with iron fittings. Four very similar dressed posts line an old forest pathway to the golf course nearby. They too were omitted from the OS maps. A third roughly shaped old stone (by its condition) but with a piece of iron attached was also recorded on the OS maps and I used it in my analysis. I agree that given the uncertainties about the age of now missing stones other evidence is needed. That comes from pattern analysis and statistics. At Arrowe Park 8 stones forming two concentric circles is extremely improbable. At Overchurch 7 stones forming a good circle (allowing as you said for errors -6 of +/- several feet) by chance has a probability of ~ 4 x 10. Prof. Dave Gregg
|
|||
|
Sanctuary 4670 posts |
Nov 21, 2017, 19:07
|
||
|
david gregg wrote: Hello. Thanks. This is a valid point about stone identification. At Arrowe Park one stone still there is clearly ancient and still standing and on the old OS maps. This is used in my analysis. A second was not on the maps but clearly a dressed modern (i.e. Victorian) stone post complete with iron fittings. Four very similar dressed posts line an old forest pathway to the golf course nearby. They too were omitted from the OS maps. A third roughly shaped old stone (by its condition) but with a piece of iron attached was also recorded on the OS maps and I used it in my analysis. I agree that given the uncertainties about the age of now missing stones other evidence is needed. That comes from pattern analysis and statistics. At Arrowe Park 8 stones forming two concentric circles is extremely improbable. At Overchurch 7 stones forming a good circle (allowing as you said for errors -6 of +/- several feet) by chance has a probability of ~ 4 x 10. Prof. Dave Gregg Hello Dave Just wondering if any geophysical surveys have ever been carried out or maybe some local dowsers have shown an interest? Welcome to the forum BTW. Do stay around. Cheers, Roy
|
|||
|
thelonious 330 posts |
Edited Nov 21, 2017, 19:15
Nov 21, 2017, 19:12
|
||
|
Just wanted to say hi David. Always good to see new folk on TMA. Where would we be without wonderful OS maps. Makes me wonder just how many folk's interest in prehistory has started or been further fuelled by looking over a map and thinking I wonder... I just love them (interesting subject by the way thanks).
|
|||
|
GLADMAN 950 posts |
Nov 22, 2017, 07:09
|
||
|
thelonious wrote: Just wanted to say hi David. Always good to see new folk on TMA. Where would we be without wonderful OS maps. Makes me wonder just how many folk's interest in prehistory has started or been further fuelled by looking over a map and thinking I wonder... I just love them (interesting subject by the way thanks). Maps? Sometimes hate them when I can't figure out where I am on them. My fault, obviously. But where would we be without them. Particularly the torn, personalised ones with red route lines smeared by rain.... so many memories.
|
| Pages: 3 – [ Previous | 1 2 3 | Next ] | Add a reply to this topic |
|
|
|
| The Modern Antiquarian Forum Index | |
