The Modern Antiquarian Forum » Books of possible interest |
Log In to post a reply
|
|
|
Topic View: Flat | Threaded |
tiompan 5758 posts |
Jun 15, 2011, 08:11
|
||
Littlestone wrote: SOLVING STONEHENGE: The New Key to an Ancient Enigma by Anthony Johnson. Not at all wacky and a good read despite the use of "solving , key and "enigma " in the title , which are usually good BS signifiers .
|
|||
Littlestone 5386 posts |
Jun 15, 2011, 08:16
|
||
tiompan wrote: Littlestone wrote: SOLVING STONEHENGE: The New Key to an Ancient Enigma by Anthony Johnson. Not at all wacky and a good read despite the use of "solving , key and "enigma " in the title , which are usually good BS signifiers . Yes, must get a copy. Ronald Hutton has some nice things to say about it as well - “Echoing much earlier approaches Johnson focuses his attention on the placement of the stones themselves, but offers quite new conclusions. Using documentation and results from the last 250 years of surveying at Stonehenge he shows that the stones were laid out to a premeditated design, and that the symmetry and geometry involved were extremely complex, so much so that it must have been geometrical considerations which played the leading role in the design of the structure. A fascinating and well argued work, which is bound to re-ignite old debates and start new ones."
|
|||
nigelswift 8112 posts |
Jun 15, 2011, 08:30
|
||
Not a book but a fascinating research report, available online here - http://services.english-heritage.org.uk/ResearchReportsPdfs/109_2010WEB.pdf By David Field and Trevor Pearson. What EH excels at. Let's hope they'll still have prehistory and research capabilities left in future after the cuts kick in, but it's not looking hopeful.
|
|||
tiompan 5758 posts |
Jun 15, 2011, 08:38
|
||
nigelswift wrote: Not a book but a fascinating research report, available online here - http://services.english-heritage.org.uk/ResearchReportsPdfs/109_2010WEB.pdf By David Field and Trevor Pearson. What EH excels at. Let's hope they'll still have prehistory and research capabilities left in future after the cuts kick in, but it's not looking hopeful. Yep it's a goodie . They also disagree with Johnson re. completion .
|
|||
Littlestone 5386 posts |
Jun 16, 2011, 06:31
|
||
Bit more here - http://www.responsesource.com/releases/rel_display.php?relid=65363
|
|||
nigelswift 8112 posts |
Jun 16, 2011, 07:22
|
||
He should tell his publishers to sharpen up on their press releases. "Watched in ore" indeed! ;) Stone me! (Saves VBB the trouble!) What's this though? "Little do they know they have turned up prematurely at Britain's most ancient prehistoric historical event. For Stonehenge was ORIGINALLY built NOT to observe the midsummer solstice sunrise as commonly believed, but more significantly the midsummer SUNSET and MOON SET occurring some 17 hours later in the opposite direction!" Not for Winter Solstice then? Julian Richards recently blogged he was sick of reading "no it's winter not summer" revelations. This'll be a relief for him.
|
|||
tiompan 5758 posts |
Edited Jun 16, 2011, 09:34
Jun 16, 2011, 08:32
|
||
nigelswift wrote: He should tell his publishers to sharpen up on their press releases. "Watched in ore" indeed! ;) Stone me! (Saves VBB the trouble!) What's this though? "Little do they know they have turned up prematurely at Britain's most ancient prehistoric historical event. For Stonehenge was ORIGINALLY built NOT to observe the midsummer solstice sunrise as commonly believed, but more significantly the midsummer SUNSET and MOON SET occurring some 17 hours later in the opposite direction!" Not for Winter Solstice then? Julian Richards recently blogged he was sick of reading "no it's winter not summer" revelations. This'll be a relief for him. When making daft claims it doesn't make sense to include falsifiable info . You can find anything you like at Stonehenge re astro events but if he really did say that he clearly doesn't understand the lunar cycle .The moon , unlike the sun , doesn't set in the same place , or same time at a given date , and setting in the opposite direction to sun set ? eh ? . There are good cases for the winter solstice , i don't see what J.R. is bothered about , these proponents could equally claim they are sick of reading about the summer solstice .
|
|||
VBB 558 posts |
Jun 16, 2011, 08:41
|
||
nigelswift wrote: He should tell his publishers to sharpen up on their press releases. "Watched in ore" indeed! ;) Stone me! (Saves VBB the trouble!) Our grampy watched the 1966 World Cup final in Oare!
|
|||
Littlestone 5386 posts |
Jun 16, 2011, 08:45
|
||
Killjoys ;-) Where’s your sense of adventure... Plato was right – it all started here :-)
|
|||
nigelswift 8112 posts |
Jun 16, 2011, 09:18
|
||
"i don't see what J.R. is bothered about" I think/assume he was getting tired not of the Winter theory but it being said to be a "new" theory.
|
Pages: 47 – [ Previous | 1 … 26 27 28 29 30 31 | Next ] | Add a reply to this topic |
|
|
The Modern Antiquarian Forum Index |