|
The Modern Antiquarian Forum » Stonehenge and its Environs » The Secrets of Stonehenge |
Log In to post a reply
|
|
|
|
| Topic View: Flat | Threaded | |
Littlestone 5386 posts |
May 28, 2009, 17:49
|
||
|
Gwass has already posted this under General News but it may also make for an interesting discussion - "A team of archaeologists have been digging up the entire prehistoric landscape of the famous monument over the last six summers to crack its secrets. During their excavation they discovered the biggest Neolithic settlement in Northern Europe and found evidence that Stonehenge was a resting place for the remains of the departed as they pass into the afterworld. Then a pivotal excavation reveals not only when the ancient stones were built, but, perhaps more importantly, why."* The Secrets of Stonehenge: A Time Team Special. C4. Monday, 1 June from 9:00-10:35. * From the RadioTimes. 30 May - 5 June. Page 71.
|
|||
|
The Eternal 924 posts |
May 29, 2009, 22:26
|
||
|
Littlestone, At last, a programme worth watching on a Monday night. Makes a great change from the usual dearth, such as endless shite soap operas, so-called celebrity crap-horror, and other media-hype bollocks. Sorry for the rant, but the latest telly offerings turn me into grumpy old man mould, and rightly so. Three cheers for Time Team. Thanks, T.E.
|
|||
|
wideford 1086 posts |
Jun 01, 2009, 22:46
|
||
Rather parochial of me, but when I saw the depiction of standing stones on the burial mound by the cursus sealed end I couldn't help thinking of the Comet Stone[s] mound near the Ring of Brodgar. Only three and some difference on scale though ;-)
|
|||
|
megadread 1202 posts |
Jun 02, 2009, 02:52
|
||
|
Well what a waste of an hour and half i'll never get back. They solved nothing and proved nothing. I think MPP has invested that much time in his particular theory he's now looking for evidence that fits it rather than taking the evidence he finds and looking at the bigger picture with an open mind. There's not a shred of evidence that Durrington and stonehenge were linked, that's just his opinion, me, i don't buy it for a second. The only good that came out of this programme was finding the new feature at the end of the avenue. I've nothing personal against MPP but i can't wait for the next generation of archaeologists to get their hands on the site, if they ever do that is now it's been "solved."
|
|||
FourWinds 10943 posts |
Jun 02, 2009, 07:15
|
||
|
Apparently, Mike Pitts thinks that if you had people with large poles you could propel large stones along. If you had enough of them you could "practically row it along". Hhhmmmm .... that sounds familiar! I enjoyed the program and only screamed a couple of times at the gogglebox. I actually think the link is there between Durrington and Stonehenge - the similar radiocarbon dates say that much. However, I don't agree with the conclusions. If you excavate a church and its graveyard you find a place for the dead and a temple for use by the living that celebrates life. Why should this be different? Probably only to fit in with your theory, that's why. The erosion marks in the top of the avenue were interesting. I know they are natural, but surely the got their sequence wrong. They reckon they were caused by water running between two natural banks. Well, why couldn't they have been formed by water running down between two manmade banks? There's no evidence of two natural banks, but we know there were two manmade ones! I was at an ancient roadway on a steep hillside this weekend in Mayo and the ground was scarred with similar grooves down its length. Granted, these grooves were in the soil that had accumulated since the road went out of use (about 150 years ago), but the effect was the same. What is great is that a project of this scale found funding. The new finds are amazing: stones at the end of the avenue, possible mortuary structures, the huge road from Durrington to the river & the sheer scale of the housing around Durrington.
|
|||
tjj 3606 posts |
Jun 02, 2009, 07:54
|
||
|
megadread wrote: Well what a waste of an hour and half i'll never get back. They solved nothing and proved nothing. I think MPP has invested that much time in his particular theory he's now looking for evidence that fits it rather than taking the evidence he finds and looking at the bigger picture with an open mind. There's not a shred of evidence that Durrington and stonehenge were linked, that's just his opinion, me, i don't buy it for a second. The only good that came out of this programme was finding the new feature at the end of the avenue. I've nothing personal against MPP but i can't wait for the next generation of archaeologists to get their hands on the site, if they ever do that is now it's been "solved." I only visited Stonehenge for the first time just a couple of months ago; it was Good Friday and there were hundreds of tourists there (myself included). Walked up to the Heel Stone and just stood for a bit, the other visitors all blurred into the background and I experienced this wonderful monument for a few minutes. I'm no archaeologist and found the programme completely interesting although didn't like the 'neolithic acting' bit. The point made in the programme that the main feature in landscape was the river Avon struck a cord, as on my recent visit I also got to experience following the river for a bit via the road. It awakens the landscape in a way that looking at aerial photographs never could.
|
|||
|
nigelswift 8112 posts |
Edited Jun 02, 2009, 07:59
Jun 02, 2009, 07:56
|
||
|
"If you had enough of them you could "practically row it along". Hhhmmmm .... that sounds familiar!" I nearly fell off my chair when he said that! Bet Gordon Pipes did too. It was Gordon's idea but discussed, refined and (I think) NAMED here. Ideas from Derbyshire carpenters, further developed and named on amateur websites don't usually get taken seriously but it looks like it has happened. To be fair to Mike Pitts he has always been sympathetic to the idea. I hope when he writes it up he acknowledges the sources. He might mention that Stukeley proposed moving the stones using "leavers in the nature of a galley oars" but he was unaware of that until June 2005 by which time the whole method had already been exhaustively discussed here.
|
|||
Kozmik_Ken 829 posts |
Jun 02, 2009, 08:54
|
||
|
I don't think it was a waste of an hour. Yes, a peak time viewing TV slot is always going to demand a bit of sensationalism and big projects with big funding need to be seen to produce big results. And yes, there was an awful lot that was missed out regarding Stonehenge - but I found it interesting non-the-less and I thought that the discoveries relating to Durrington Walls, the Avenue and the Cursus were fascinating. As you say, there is no concrete proof that Durrington Walls and Stonehenge were linked, but the circumstantial evidence looks quite compelling. Although to declare that Stonehenge has been 'solved' is a bit of a tabloid approach! I'm sure that the surface is only beginning to be scratched.
|
|||
|
Gwass 193 posts |
Jun 02, 2009, 13:32
|
||
|
megadread wrote: Well what a waste of an hour and half i'll never get back. They solved nothing and proved nothing. I think MPP has invested that much time in his particular theory he's now looking for evidence that fits it rather than taking the evidence he finds and looking at the bigger picture with an open mind. There's not a shred of evidence that Durrington and stonehenge were linked, that's just his opinion, me, i don't buy it for a second. The only good that came out of this programme was finding the new feature at the end of the avenue. I've nothing personal against MPP but i can't wait for the next generation of archaeologists to get their hands on the site, if they ever do that is now it's been "solved." Like others I thoroughly enjoyed the programme. I thought MPP's theory made a lot of sense particularly when you consider the lack of any credible alternatives. (Including the centre of healing theory recently proposed by Darvill and Wainwright in my opinion). The fact that 2 of the grandest sites in the country, built at the same time and 2 miles apart weren't linked seems inconceivable especially with the discovery of the durrington avenue. Being someone who tries to get all the books and info I can on the site from what I can make out the likes of MPP, Mike Pitts, Julian Thomas, Colin Richards and Joshua Pollard seem to be the leading authorities on the subject. I would be generally interested to find out who these next generation archaeoloists are and what their theories are as I'm surprised I've not heard of them.
|
|||
moss 2897 posts |
Jun 02, 2009, 13:54
|
||
Well perhaps one word will give a clue to exploration..'phenomenological', this perhaps is where some of the new archaeologists are coming from, experiencing the landscape through a 'thought' process of what it might have been like at that particular time of history.. It is a subjective approach, the old objective 'interpretation' of earlier archaeology has been dissed for a new modern approach;).. Julian Thomas is a phenomenologist I believe, cant say about the others, and I think MPP has been criticised to some extent for a reliance on other cultures to interpret Stonehenge... in the game of theories you can never arrive at an ultimate truth, unless of course you're Dr.Who...
|
| Pages: 8 – [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 | Next ] | Add a reply to this topic |
|
|
|
| The Modern Antiquarian Forum Index | |
