|
The Modern Antiquarian Forum » Modern not antiquarian |
Log In to post a reply
|
|
|
|
| Topic View: Flat | Threaded | |
tjj 3606 posts |
Aug 05, 2012, 00:16
|
||
|
texlahoma wrote: tjj wrote: texlahoma wrote: bladup wrote: I built one once and got nicked and fined [it's in my avatar], so you've gone one better than me, we didn't use diggers though, you all should have done it properly and the satisfaction would have been even greater, well done though, and what a strange reason for it been built. We thought about that a lot, doing it the ancient way though, or at least the current interpretation of what that might have been. Our professional and expert advice swung it though... "Believe me, if the ancients had JCBs they would've used them" I have some sympathy with Bladup's point of view, especially given his own was had a destruction order place on it. Hesitated to comment as a) I like what I know about you and b) it would be easy to just sound like a killjoy. I didn't like the commercialised 'perfume' aspect of the end result and thought the people going around sniffing the stones looked a bit gullible. The question in my mind was how do you 'date' these contemporary stone circles for the future (given that one day the internet will probably disappear along with all the data held therein). I discussed it with a friend yesterday, whose views I respect, and who thinks 'new' stone circles are great. There is one at Pilton near Glastonbury and a few in the gardens of the wealthy around Wiltshire (Alton Barnes and East Kennett). On the issue of 'dating', my friend thought the builders would perhaps bury a coin near one of the stones. Was 'dating' considered in this case ... I may have missed it. That's a very good point about the dating, our approach to that was a time capsual, the solstice date and a few items from Simon including a piece done by the artist Steve Krakow (Plastic Crimewave) with the back story. It is a really special place to visit despite the fact it is so modern, I'd love to show you the circle sometime. Thanks for answering my question in a courteous and unpatronising manner - there are many modern stone circles and so long as there are clear indicators of when and why they were built I don't see a problem. It looks as though newly quarried stone was used in your circle but often circles are erected with existing 'old' stones like sarsens and it isn't always obvious that they are modern. I am thinking specifically of the stone circle in the Betjeman Millennium Park. There are plenty of notices and engraved stones around the park to indicate that this is a memorial to a 20th century poet, so no confusion. All the best tjj
|
|||
texlahoma 891 posts |
Edited Aug 05, 2012, 10:32
Aug 05, 2012, 08:47
|
||
|
tjj wrote: texlahoma wrote: tjj wrote: texlahoma wrote: bladup wrote: I built one once and got nicked and fined [it's in my avatar], so you've gone one better than me, we didn't use diggers though, you all should have done it properly and the satisfaction would have been even greater, well done though, and what a strange reason for it been built. We thought about that a lot, doing it the ancient way though, or at least the current interpretation of what that might have been. Our professional and expert advice swung it though... "Believe me, if the ancients had JCBs they would've used them" I have some sympathy with Bladup's point of view, especially given his own was had a destruction order place on it. Hesitated to comment as a) I like what I know about you and b) it would be easy to just sound like a killjoy. I didn't like the commercialised 'perfume' aspect of the end result and thought the people going around sniffing the stones looked a bit gullible. The question in my mind was how do you 'date' these contemporary stone circles for the future (given that one day the internet will probably disappear along with all the data held therein). I discussed it with a friend yesterday, whose views I respect, and who thinks 'new' stone circles are great. There is one at Pilton near Glastonbury and a few in the gardens of the wealthy around Wiltshire (Alton Barnes and East Kennett). On the issue of 'dating', my friend thought the builders would perhaps bury a coin near one of the stones. Was 'dating' considered in this case ... I may have missed it. That's a very good point about the dating, our approach to that was a time capsual, the solstice date and a few items from Simon including a piece done by the artist Steve Krakow (Plastic Crimewave) with the back story. It is a really special place to visit despite the fact it is so modern, I'd love to show you the circle sometime. Thanks for answering my question in a courteous and unpatronising manner - there are many modern stone circles and so long as there are clear indicators of when and why they were built I don't see a problem. It looks as though newly quarried stone was used in your circle but often circles are erected with existing 'old' stones like sarsens and it isn't always obvious that they are modern. I am thinking specifically of the stone circle in the Betjeman Millennium Park. There are plenty of notices and engraved stones around the park to indicate that this is a memorial to a 20th century poet, so no confusion. All the best tjj The circle Is going to be used by a registered charity & trust now along various other facilities nearby. They provide an essential and comprehensive program for a number of groups, focusing mainly on severely handicapped people but also with a focus on people socially disadvantaged in some way. The stones were from Suttles quarry but not quarried especially, they were already there waiting for us along with other off cuts. Julian Richards very kindly came along to the quarry to help chose the stones and also visit the site to suggest their positioning. All things considered it felt better to do it this way, and to leave a monument for others to enjoy than to descend on an ancient circle in Dorset with all the concerns that come with large groups in these places. I'm personally very protective of many of these sites and wouldn't want to see and damages to land or littering or whatever due to anything I'm involved with.
|
|||
Sanctuary 4670 posts |
Aug 05, 2012, 09:05
|
||
|
texlahoma wrote: tjj wrote: texlahoma wrote: tjj wrote: texlahoma wrote: bladup wrote: I built one once and got nicked and fined [it's in my avatar], so you've gone one better than me, we didn't use diggers though, you all should have done it properly and the satisfaction would have been even greater, well done though, and what a strange reason for it been built. We thought about that a lot, doing it the ancient way though, or at least the current interpretation of what that might have been. Our professional and expert advice swung it though... "Believe me, if the ancients had JCBs they would've used them" I have some sympathy with Bladup's point of view, especially given his own was had a destruction order place on it. Hesitated to comment as a) I like what I know about you and b) it would be easy to just sound like a killjoy. I didn't like the commercialised 'perfume' aspect of the end result and thought the people going around sniffing the stones looked a bit gullible. The question in my mind was how do you 'date' these contemporary stone circles for the future (given that one day the internet will probably disappear along with all the data held therein). I discussed it with a friend yesterday, whose views I respect, and who thinks 'new' stone circles are great. There is one at Pilton near Glastonbury and a few in the gardens of the wealthy around Wiltshire (Alton Barnes and East Kennett). On the issue of 'dating', my friend thought the builders would perhaps bury a coin near one of the stones. Was 'dating' considered in this case ... I may have missed it. That's a very good point about the dating, our approach to that was a time capsual, the solstice date and a few items from Simon including a piece done by the artist Steve Krakow (Plastic Crimewave) with the back story. It is a really special place to visit despite the fact it is so modern, I'd love to show you the circle sometime. Thanks for answering my question in a courteous and unpatronising manner - there are many modern stone circles and so long as there are clear indicators of when and why they were built I don't see a problem. It looks as though newly quarried stone was used in your circle but often circles are erected with existing 'old' stones like sarsens and it isn't always obvious that they are modern. I am thinking specifically of the stone circle in the Betjeman Millennium Park. There are plenty of notices and engraved stones around the park to indicate that this is a memorial to a 20th century poet, so no confusion. All the best tjj The circle Is going to be used by a registered charity, trust now along various other facilities nearby. They provide an essential and comprehensive program for a number of groups, focussing mainly on severely handicapped people but also with a focus on people socially disadvantaged in some way. The stones were from Suttles quarry but not quarried especially, they were already there waiting for us along with other off cuts. Julian Ruchards very kindly came along to the quarry to help chose the stones and also visit the site to suggest their positioning. All things considered it felt better to do it this way, and to leave a monument for others to enjoy than to defend on an ancient circle in Dorset with all the concerns that come with large groups in these places. Im personally very protective of many of these sites and wouldn't want to see and damages to land or littering or whatever due to anything I'm involved with. I think it an excellent idea and way of educating others into the stone circle phenomonom especially if it involves socially disadvantaged people. My first thoughts on reading your initial post was that is was for purely financial gain so I'm glad the thread was responded to by so many people as to its future use and has been expanded upon...with the exception of the foul-mouthed posts of course which are totally unnacceptable and totally unneccessary.
|
|||
tiompan 5758 posts |
Aug 05, 2012, 09:36
|
||
|
bladup wrote: tiompan wrote: bladup wrote: tiompan wrote: bladup wrote: tiompan wrote: bladup wrote: tiompan wrote: bladup wrote: tiompan wrote: bladup wrote: tiompan wrote: bladup wrote: tiompan wrote: nigelswift wrote: bladup wrote: I think you sound like a complete and utter knobhead Sounds like you've been ripped off with the pipe! LOL Different planets, are you christian's [i imagine maybe catholic upbringings]. Your'e imagination has already shown to be a bit untrustworthy , maybe a bit of chakra re-alignment might help with future intuitions . My imagination is pretty good [you should see my artwork] and is very trustworthy i thank you very much, and there you go with all that hippy nonsence again, it must be pretty hard to be aligned with a glass eye. It depends how you use your imagination , what might be useful in writing stories for children might not helpful in solving a political problem , understanding the behaviour of people in prehistory or the religious beliefs of your contemporaries . I can't talk for Nigel , but using my imagination I imagine you are wrong .In those other examples where you have attempted to imagine something in the real world and mentioned it here you have got it wrong . I love the way you say this as if you know it's true- anyone can look back though and my opinion is just as valid as yours. You've turned into noris cole from corrie now. Yo might like to think your opinion might be as valid as anyone else's , but if your opinion is wrong , in this case the continually unaddressed "Stone circles have nothing left in them " it is not . I have addressed it lots and who the fuck do you think you are , you are openly saying that your opinion is more valid than mine..... go fuck yourself you pompous prick. Read what was said , your comment c is demonstably wrong and was refuted a long time ago and you have failed to come up with a counter refutation . You master of repartee . By the people who built them [true stone circles, not cremation cemeteries, which are often later or circles round cairns], i really have said it again and again, people before and after did alsorts and left alsorts at a lot of sites. You failed to define what you describe as a "true " stone circle or mention any others e.g. Barnatt or Burl use of the term or definition . Stone circles , not enclosed cremation cemetries , have as has been mentioned many times previously plenty left in them from before the erection of the stones as close as we can judge , contemporaneously with the erection and after the stones were erected . Examples include ,empty pits , pits with various deposits , burials , burials in urns , charcoal , pottery , etc , stone circles have been mentioned across the country it simply wrong to suggest "Stone circles have nothing left in them " as was another statement "Archaeologists don't like excavating them [because not a lot is going to be there]" even though there was a change from "nothing " to "not a lot " it is still wrong . By the builders of the stone circles. The stuff there is left by other people. Down here in cornwall the circles have later cairns in them, i don't need an archeologist to tell me this as i can see it for myself. [but other people would find it helpful- i do myself sometimes]. A definition of a "true " circle ? If the deposits or in the case of ring cairns at Clava, monuments , are contemporaneous then of course it is the builders of the circles , regardless you never mentioned that in your all encompassing wrong statement . It doesn't really matter the statement "Stone circles have nothing left in them " is simply wrong as is the other comment "Archaeologists don't like excavating them [because not a lot is going to be there]" if you can't see that there is little hope in carrying on anything resembling a rational discussion . A true stone circle been a circle of stones with nothing in it, any previous posts gone and future cairns not built yet, maybe a few broken beakers from the builders but that's normally it. . No archaeologist or anyone who knows anything about stone circles would agree that the use of the word "true" in this context bore any relation to the dictionary definition . There was no mention of the word "true" or this Orwellian definition in the original erroneous "Stone circles have nothing left in them " which is still wrong , as is "Archaeologists don't like excavating them [because not a lot is going to be there]" . Originally it was "nothing " then it became "not a lot " now it is " a few broken beakers " at this rate another few hundred posts (non timber ) and you'll arrive at something like the real situation . There are countless genuine stone circles where this situation couldn't possibly apply , a post hole minus a post is a very telling feature ,it may be empty but is it is not "nothing" . Cremated bone found pre circle construction is not nothing . A passage grave e.g. Newgrange in the middle of your soon to be built stone circle is unlikely to have gone unnoticed even with a very active imagination .
|
|||
Littlestone 5386 posts |
Aug 05, 2012, 09:36
|
||
|
The circle Is going to be used by a registered charity, trust now along various other facilities nearby. They provide an essential and comprehensive program for a number of groups, focussing mainly on severely handicapped people but also with a focus on people socially disadvantaged in some way. The stones were from Suttles quarry but not quarried especially, they were already there waiting for us along with other off cuts. Julian Ruchards very kindly came along to the quarry to help chose the stones and also visit the site to suggest their positioning. All things considered it felt better to do it this way, and to leave a monument for others to enjoy than to defend on an ancient circle in Dorset with all the concerns that come with large groups in these places. Im personally very protective of many of these sites and wouldn't want to see and damages to land or littering or whatever due to anything I'm involved with. Well done again! Looks like you’ve done just about everything right on this one Mr t.
|
|||
|
texlahoma 891 posts |
Aug 05, 2012, 10:06
|
||
|
Littlestone wrote: The circle Is going to be used by a registered charity, trust now along various other facilities nearby. They provide an essential and comprehensive program for a number of groups, focussing mainly on severely handicapped people but also with a focus on people socially disadvantaged in some way. The stones were from Suttles quarry but not quarried especially, they were already there waiting for us along with other off cuts. Julian Ruchards very kindly came along to the quarry to help chose the stones and also visit the site to suggest their positioning. All things considered it felt better to do it this way, and to leave a monument for others to enjoy than to defend on an ancient circle in Dorset with all the concerns that come with large groups in these places. Im personally very protective of many of these sites and wouldn't want to see and damages to land or littering or whatever due to anything I'm involved with. Well done again! Looks like you’ve done just about everything right on this one Mr t. Thanks Littlestone, I and all the team involved really did try out best to do things in the correct manner, and also sought the help of an environmental officer, archaeologists, as well as a structural engineer to make sure it's safe and will last for generations.
|
|||
|
tjj 3606 posts |
Aug 05, 2012, 10:23
|
||
|
texlahoma wrote: tjj wrote: texlahoma wrote: tjj wrote: texlahoma wrote: bladup wrote: I built one once and got nicked and fined [it's in my avatar], so you've gone one better than me, we didn't use diggers though, you all should have done it properly and the satisfaction would have been even greater, well done though, and what a strange reason for it been built. We thought about that a lot, doing it the ancient way though, or at least the current interpretation of what that might have been. Our professional and expert advice swung it though... "Believe me, if the ancients had JCBs they would've used them" I have some sympathy with Bladup's point of view, especially given his own was had a destruction order place on it. Hesitated to comment as a) I like what I know about you and b) it would be easy to just sound like a killjoy. I didn't like the commercialised 'perfume' aspect of the end result and thought the people going around sniffing the stones looked a bit gullible. The question in my mind was how do you 'date' these contemporary stone circles for the future (given that one day the internet will probably disappear along with all the data held therein). I discussed it with a friend yesterday, whose views I respect, and who thinks 'new' stone circles are great. There is one at Pilton near Glastonbury and a few in the gardens of the wealthy around Wiltshire (Alton Barnes and East Kennett). On the issue of 'dating', my friend thought the builders would perhaps bury a coin near one of the stones. Was 'dating' considered in this case ... I may have missed it. That's a very good point about the dating, our approach to that was a time capsual, the solstice date and a few items from Simon including a piece done by the artist Steve Krakow (Plastic Crimewave) with the back story. It is a really special place to visit despite the fact it is so modern, I'd love to show you the circle sometime. Thanks for answering my question in a courteous and unpatronising manner - there are many modern stone circles and so long as there are clear indicators of when and why they were built I don't see a problem. It looks as though newly quarried stone was used in your circle but often circles are erected with existing 'old' stones like sarsens and it isn't always obvious that they are modern. I am thinking specifically of the stone circle in the Betjeman Millennium Park. There are plenty of notices and engraved stones around the park to indicate that this is a memorial to a 20th century poet, so no confusion. All the best tjj The circle Is going to be used by a registered charity & trust now along various other facilities nearby. They provide an essential and comprehensive program for a number of groups, focusing mainly on severely handicapped people but also with a focus on people socially disadvantaged in some way. The stones were from Suttles quarry but not quarried especially, they were already there waiting for us along with other off cuts. Julian Richards very kindly came along to the quarry to help chose the stones and also visit the site to suggest their positioning. All things considered it felt better to do it this way, and to leave a monument for others to enjoy than to defend on an ancient circle in Dorset with all the concerns that come with large groups in these places. I'm personally very protective of many of these sites and wouldn't want to see and damages to land or littering or whatever due to anything I'm involved with. You've won me over - I'd like to visit. Can you give directions of how to get there (from the Wiltshire direction). Well done for being so thorough in all considerations.
|
|||
|
texlahoma 891 posts |
Aug 05, 2012, 10:34
|
||
|
tjj wrote: texlahoma wrote: tjj wrote: texlahoma wrote: tjj wrote: texlahoma wrote: bladup wrote: I built one once and got nicked and fined [it's in my avatar], so you've gone one better than me, we didn't use diggers though, you all should have done it properly and the satisfaction would have been even greater, well done though, and what a strange reason for it been built. We thought about that a lot, doing it the ancient way though, or at least the current interpretation of what that might have been. Our professional and expert advice swung it though... "Believe me, if the ancients had JCBs they would've used them" I have some sympathy with Bladup's point of view, especially given his own was had a destruction order place on it. Hesitated to comment as a) I like what I know about you and b) it would be easy to just sound like a killjoy. I didn't like the commercialised 'perfume' aspect of the end result and thought the people going around sniffing the stones looked a bit gullible. The question in my mind was how do you 'date' these contemporary stone circles for the future (given that one day the internet will probably disappear along with all the data held therein). I discussed it with a friend yesterday, whose views I respect, and who thinks 'new' stone circles are great. There is one at Pilton near Glastonbury and a few in the gardens of the wealthy around Wiltshire (Alton Barnes and East Kennett). On the issue of 'dating', my friend thought the builders would perhaps bury a coin near one of the stones. Was 'dating' considered in this case ... I may have missed it. That's a very good point about the dating, our approach to that was a time capsual, the solstice date and a few items from Simon including a piece done by the artist Steve Krakow (Plastic Crimewave) with the back story. It is a really special place to visit despite the fact it is so modern, I'd love to show you the circle sometime. Thanks for answering my question in a courteous and unpatronising manner - there are many modern stone circles and so long as there are clear indicators of when and why they were built I don't see a problem. It looks as though newly quarried stone was used in your circle but often circles are erected with existing 'old' stones like sarsens and it isn't always obvious that they are modern. I am thinking specifically of the stone circle in the Betjeman Millennium Park. There are plenty of notices and engraved stones around the park to indicate that this is a memorial to a 20th century poet, so no confusion. All the best tjj The circle Is going to be used by a registered charity & trust now along various other facilities nearby. They provide an essential and comprehensive program for a number of groups, focusing mainly on severely handicapped people but also with a focus on people socially disadvantaged in some way. The stones were from Suttles quarry but not quarried especially, they were already there waiting for us along with other off cuts. Julian Richards very kindly came along to the quarry to help chose the stones and also visit the site to suggest their positioning. All things considered it felt better to do it this way, and to leave a monument for others to enjoy than to defend on an ancient circle in Dorset with all the concerns that come with large groups in these places. I'm personally very protective of many of these sites and wouldn't want to see and damages to land or littering or whatever due to anything I'm involved with. You've won me over - I'd like to visit. Can you give directions of how to get there (from the Wiltshire direction). Well done for being so thorough in all considerations. Could you send me a private message and I'll send you all the details you need to get there and the people to talk to about arranging a visit. I think you'll enjoy a visit there and make sure you leave some time for visiting some genuine old sites nearby too. I'd be happy to meet up and take you to some if you're not familiar with where they are.
|
|||
|
tjj 3606 posts |
Aug 05, 2012, 10:51
|
||
|
texlahoma wrote: Could you send me a private message and I'll send you all the details you need to get there and the people to talk to about arranging a visit. I think you'll enjoy a visit there and make sure you leave some time for visiting some genuine old sites nearby too. I'd be happy to meet up and take you to some if you're not familiar with where they are. Message sent ... and thanks. Hope to do that before summer flies away.
|
|||
|
texlahoma 891 posts |
Aug 05, 2012, 10:57
|
||
|
tjj wrote: texlahoma wrote: Could you send me a private message and I'll send you all the details you need to get there and the people to talk to about arranging a visit. I think you'll enjoy a visit there and make sure you leave some time for visiting some genuine old sites nearby too. I'd be happy to meet up and take you to some if you're not familiar with where they are. Message sent ... and thanks. Hope to do that before summer flies away. Excellent, I have just replied to your email.
|
| Pages: 28 – [ Previous | 1 … 9 10 11 12 13 14 | Next ] | Add a reply to this topic |
|
|
|
| The Modern Antiquarian Forum Index | |
