Julian Cope presents Head Heritage

Head To Head
Log In
Register
The Modern Antiquarian Forum »
Modern not antiquarian
Log In to post a reply

Pages: 28 – [ Previous | 1 2 3 4 5 6 | Next ]
Topic View: Flat | Threaded
goffik
goffik
3909 posts

Re: The finished circle
Aug 02, 2012, 11:56
Looks like great fun! What a superb, once-in-a-lifetime thing to do!

G x
Littlestone
Littlestone
5386 posts

Re: The finished circle
Aug 02, 2012, 12:05
texlahoma wrote:


Ha! Love it!

First B&W pic down is a stunner, and the video is great, showing peeps really enjoying themselves and being enthused by the whole idea/experience. Think what’s really impressive is that this is something that a whole lot of time and effort has been spent on – not just some company going in and commandeering an existing circle or heritage feature for their own interests.

Well done again :-)
texlahoma
texlahoma
882 posts

Re: The finished circle
Aug 02, 2012, 20:53
Littlestone wrote:
texlahoma wrote:


Ha! Love it!

First B&W pic down is a stunner, and the video is great, showing peeps really enjoying themselves and being enthused by the whole idea/experience. Think what’s really impressive is that this is something that a whole lot of time and effort has been spent on – not just some company going in and commandeering an existing circle or heritage feature for their own interests.

Well done again :-)



There was a really nice vibe on the evening, the closes to being at a Solstice morning or equinox morning I've found outside of an ancient site. There we're people there from 48 counties so it felt good to be able to talk to them about ancient British heritage and for someone I respect as much as Paul Devereux to talk and for Julian Richards to help out in the consultancy stages too.

It really was a long and well thought out process, I know there will be those that will believe that using probable ancient techniques might have been more genuine in some way, in fact we even discussed that a whole lot. Still, there was very real planning, passion and belief in doing it and I think it shows.

Visiting there now it's just a wonderful place. I hope it's there for generations to come.
bladup
bladup
1986 posts

Re: The finished circle
Aug 03, 2012, 15:26
I can't really see beyond it been a money making exercise, i think the people who built stone circles would have hated money, i'm sorry but this whole thing gives me an uneasy feeling, but i suppose in this day and age nothing is sacred anymore.
texlahoma
texlahoma
882 posts

Re: The finished circle
Aug 03, 2012, 15:42
bladup wrote:
I can't really see beyond it been a money making exercise, i think the people who built stone circles would have hated money, i'm sorry but this whole thing gives me an uneasy feeling, but i suppose in this day and age nothing is sacred anymore.


Well there was no commerce involved, no products to buy at the site, it was built for the event to happen with a completely different event and space for the commerce which would be much more suitable to discuss on the village pump or unsung given it's nature.

There are plenty of evidence for goods and tokens, and later money at sacred sites though, all the way though from precious stones, grave goods and later coins right through to the roman era. Depends on which site your thinking of specifically or your theory on who was doing the building at which time in pre-history.
bladup
bladup
1986 posts

Edited Aug 04, 2012, 15:51
Re: The finished circle
Aug 03, 2012, 15:55
Stone circles have nothing left in them [thats why archeologists don't like them] and when they do find stuff it's from a different age [romans liked leaving coins, and other people putting cairns or cremations in them] to when the circle was built, and their not going to be giving all there perfume away are they?? It doesn't give you an uneasy feeling but it does me, it's just my opinion. The video made me cringe [because of the commercialism, some guy gets taken to stonehenge and while there was thinking how he could use daddys money to make money out of the experience] to me it is quite clearly a money making exercise. The only diggers used on our one were to pull it down. The building side for the makers was probably a very underestimated part of the exercise.
tiompan
tiompan
5758 posts

Re: The finished circle
Aug 03, 2012, 17:36
bladup wrote:
Stone circles have nothing left in them
[thats why archeologists don't like them]
and when they do find stuff it's from a different age [romans liked leaving coins] to when the circle was built,


Stone circles have been show to have plenty "left in them " . Often the cirle is the last architectural event after depositions of human/animal remains .An obviious example is Stonehenge where the erection of the stones came long after the creation of a ditch and banked enclosed cremation cemetery .
It's pretty obvious many archaeologists actually do like them .Any quotes from any saying they don't ?
Stuff from all periods pre and post circle erection are routinely found .
bladup
bladup
1986 posts

Edited Aug 03, 2012, 18:03
Re: The finished circle
Aug 03, 2012, 17:55
tiompan wrote:
bladup wrote:
Stone circles have nothing left in them
[thats why archeologists don't like them]
and when they do find stuff it's from a different age [romans liked leaving coins] to when the circle was built,


Stone circles have been show to have plenty "left in them " . Often the circle is the last architectural event after depositions of human/animal remains .An obviious example is Stonehenge where the erection of the stones came long after the creation of a ditch and banked enclosed cremation cemetery .
It's pretty obvious many archaeologists actually do like them .Any quotes from any saying they don't ?
Stuff from all periods pre and post circle erection are routinely found .


Stonehenge is a shit example to use for so many reasons, in it's first phases it was more of a causewayed enclosure [they have lots of things left in them- beakers , animal bones], then like YOU said a cremation cemetery- so was probably never a normal stone circle, which have fuck all left in them from the original builders, people who have excavated them describe them as been almost routinely swept clean- maybe for dancing feet [of which there is some folklore]. I said Archaeologists don't like excavating them [because not a lot is going to be there] not that they don't like them in general.
moss
moss
2877 posts

Re: The finished circle
Aug 03, 2012, 18:09
texlahoma wrote:


Well I have just viewed and it looked a very happy event. Music, perfume and stones and people gathering round enjoying themselves. Loved the dead tree in the background, very shapely ''yggdrasil tree' to add to the atmosphere of the circle......
Sanctuary
Sanctuary
4786 posts

Re: The finished circle
Aug 03, 2012, 18:21
bladup wrote:
tiompan wrote:
bladup wrote:
Stone circles have nothing left in them
[thats why archeologists don't like them]
and when they do find stuff it's from a different age [romans liked leaving coins] to when the circle was built,


Stone circles have been show to have plenty "left in them " . Often the cirle is the last architectural event after depositions of human/animal remains .An obviious example is Stonehenge where the erection of the stones came long after the creation of a ditch and banked enclosed cremation cemetery .
It's pretty obvious many archaeologists actually do like them .Any quotes from any saying they don't ?
Stuff from all periods pre and post circle erection are routinely found .


Stonehenge is a shit example to use for so many reasons, in it's first phases it was more of a causewayed enclosure [they have lots of things left in them- beakers , animal bones], then like YOU said a cremation cemetery- so was probably never a normal stone circle, which have fuck all left in them from the original builders, people who have excavated them describe them as been almost routinely swept clean- maybe for dancing feet [of which there is some folklore]. I said Archaeologists don't like excavating them [because not a lot is going to be there] not that they don't like them in general.


Your bog standard stone circle is practically devoid of anything to make one believe that they were built for any particular reason, be it religious, ceremonial, funery, ritual, feasting or whatever, that is the mystery of them because there is no consistency. I suspect I'm no different to any of you guys but when I visit a circle for the first time I'm stoked up and thinking...'Maybe this will be the one that gives me the answer'...but it never is of course and you leave feeling just as confused as ever, so I can well imagine some archaeo's privately also feeling rather negative about them!
Pages: 28 – [ Previous | 1 2 3 4 5 6 | Next ] Add a reply to this topic

The Modern Antiquarian Forum Index