brownieathome
|
'Sat-nav' 5,000 BC
Sep 15, 2009, 22:34
|
I feel sure this has been discussed before however following article
appeared in todays SUN newspaper.
"Stone Age man used a crude version of sat nav to point the way to their
settlements a historian claimed yesterday.
More than 1,500 stone circle hilltop sites in England and Wales formed part
of a giant network.
A series of triangles - some 100 miles long - pointed to the next settlement in the grid. British expert Tom Brooks said our ancestors in 5000 BC had 'a complex understanding of geometry '.
I'm not personally sure I agree with this particular viewpoint however it
could be possible in some cases and wondered what peoples thoughts were ?
|
tjj
|
Re: 'Sat-nav' 5,000 BC
Sep 15, 2009, 22:37
|
|
brownieathome wrote: I feel sure this has been discussed before however following article
appeared in todays SUN newspaper.
"Stone Age man used a crude version of sat nav to point the way to their
settlements a historian claimed yesterday.
More than 1,500 stone circle hilltop sites in England and Wales formed part
of a giant network.
A series of triangles - some 100 miles long - pointed to the next settlement in the grid. British expert Tom Brooks said our ancestors in 5000 BC had 'a complex understanding of geometry '.
I'm not personally sure I agree with this particular viewpoint however it
could be possible in some cases and wondered what peoples thoughts were ?
http://www.themodernantiquarian.com/forum/?thread=40183&message=679463
Discussed under Books of Possible Interest
|
brownieathome
|
Re: 'Sat-nav' 5,000 BC
Sep 15, 2009, 22:41
|
|
thanks TJJ , I had a feeling it would be lurking somewhere
|
Amberlady
|
Re: 'Sat-nav' 5,000 BC
Sep 18, 2009, 09:08
|
|
This is nothing new. Alfred Watkins postulated much the same thing in his book "The Old Straight Track" back in the 1930s. It was only much later that his "Ley Lines" became the mystical lines of Earth energy that we know and love today
|
nigelswift
|
Is the M5 a ley line?
Sep 18, 2009, 09:56
|
"This is nothing new."
Quite.
If you keep the Malverns on your right and the Cotswolds on your left you get to Bristol. Not a lot of maths needed.
|
baza
|
Re: 'Sat-nav' 5,000 BC
Sep 18, 2009, 20:39
|
|
Amberlady wrote: This is nothing new. Alfred Watkins postulated much the same thing in his book "The Old Straight Track" back in the 1930s....
No he didn't.
:o)
Tom Brooks has mapped out sites which he reckons to be opposite and equidistant from a central point, and that point in itself is very significant, e.g. Silbury Hill. I name Silbury Hill because he does, very often.
I saw Tom speak in Cumbria earlier in the year. He came across as a bitter man, railing against the many archaeologists who had no interest in his theories. He seemed to be unaware that there are others who have, and are still, researching along the same lines.
Later on, at Megalithomania, his DVD was showcased. I skipped it because I'd already heard what he had to say and was not impressed enough to bother.
http://www.mysteriousplanet.net/earth-mysteries.php
|
tiompan
|
Re: 'Sat-nav' 5,000 BC
Sep 18, 2009, 20:43
|
|
baza wrote: Amberlady wrote: This is nothing new. Alfred Watkins postulated much the same thing in his book "The Old Straight Track" back in the 1930s....
No he didn't.
:o)
Tom Brooks has mapped out sites which he reckons to be opposite and equidistant from a central point, and that point in itself is very significant, e.g. Silbury Hill. I name Silbury Hill because he does, very often.
I saw Tom speak in Cumbria earlier in the year. He came across as a bitter man, railing against the many archaeologists who had no interest in his theories. He seemed to be unaware that there are others who have, and are still, researching along the same lines.
Later on, at Megalithomania, his DVD was showcased. I skipped it because I'd already heard what he had to say and was not impressed enough to bother.
http://www.mysteriousplanet.net/earth-mysteries.php
Pity there is no discussuion doodah on his web site .
|
