Julian Cope presents Head Heritage

Head To Head
Log In
The Modern Antiquarian Forum »
How is Rock Art aged?
Log In to post a reply

412 messages
Topic View: Flat | Threaded
4828 posts

Re: How is Rock Art aged?
Dec 19, 2012, 12:06
tiompan wrote:
Sanctuary wrote:
tiompan wrote:
Sanctuary wrote:
tiompan wrote:
Harryshill wrote:
bladup wrote:
Harryshill wrote:
No I wouldn't. I also think its unlikely that a map would be required in the first place

It might if some places were out of bounds, and if not there were more trees back then and we all know how easy it is to get lost in big woods.

Difficult to find a small stone map in the woods.

If the woods are troublesome for finding anything then you might need a map to find the original "map " . Then what do you do ?. If what it is supposed to be indicating is nearby you may have come across "them " earlier in which case no need for the map. If they are more distant do you then remember the info but if so pretty soon your'e back to the original problem ,in the woods not knowing where to go and in need of a map . Where you find one marked rock often enough there will be others , so you miight find another "map" which will have entirely different info from the first , i..e. a different number of markings and in a different configuration , do you then accept this one as the real " map" ? Then there is the problem of the map maker how did they know how to replicate the configuration accurately when they also had the problem of being in the woods which caused the problem in the first place ? More likely punters did know their way around to important spots in the landscape whether in trees or otherwise and had no need for maps particularly "Flintstone " style ones .

It's interesting that the 'map' in question was built into a passage grave nearly 6,000 years ago with only a small amount of cups showing. This suggests that whatever its 'use' was originally it was no longer of any further use by then. Would that be a fair assessment?

Re-use is quite common in passage graves sometimes the markings are turned the other way i.e. out of sight , buried , defaced or more recent engravings superimposed upon them .

But do you agree with the second part of my post George?

As we don't know what it's "use " was , it would be difficult to say .
Usually in cases of re-use the markings are seen , ( but see above ) and it's unlikely that they don't retain some of their original impact i.e. the stone is not just being used for convenience and could be being accepted as having some power just as non -believers might wear a religious symbol or accept the power invested in icons i.e. If it was originally apotropiaic then it might still be doing it's job just as non believers wear crosses or ankhs .

My reason for asking my previous question was that IF the marked stone was seen as being redundant by then (nearly 6,000 years ago) then it may be that the cupmark era had also past its sell-by date by then. We don't know that it was 'unlikely that they don't retain some of their original impact' (that's what you'd normally tell me anyway LOL) but understand your point of view. What other build dates come to mind of cupmarked stones being re-used and included in other structures? Anything around that 3,500+BC date? Just trying to see if there was a cut-off point.
Topic Outline:

The Modern Antiquarian Forum Index