Head To Head
Log In
The Modern Antiquarian Forum »
John Michell lecture
Log In to post a reply

353 messages
Topic View: Flat | Threaded
5291 posts

Re: John Michell lecture
May 06, 2016, 16:58
Thankyou, but I just meant my last post (I know you mentioned you were having problems seeing who was answering to what) - ie "In a small area crammed with ancient sites, wouldn't you expect a lot to line up by chance though? How are you deciding if those lines are meaningful and not coincidental?"If it's about distances and sizes of things (not somehow-detectable energies), won't it still be a matter of interpretation about why those things are the size and angle they are?"

But maybe you've answered that:
Andy Norfolk wrote:
Do some sites fall on intentional straight alignments? Yes of course some do. Do they all? Probably not. Do I care? Not much, so long as the ancient sites are loved and protected from idiots and enjoyed by those who want to go there and think their own thoughts about them.
...Still I really don't care if he got a decimal place wrong in the dimensions of the Great Pyramid, or if he he got Borlase's inside leg measurement wrong by several kilometres. It's his breadth of vision and multi-disciplinary approach that always appealed to me, not his accuracy about minutiae.

So really you're saying it's more that you find Michell's >way of thinking< inspirational, and it's less important what he actually said, if it gets people including yourself, out there valuing the sites?

I don't think that's what Cerrig is saying, they sound like they have more specific concrete things that they've developed from Michell's work. But maybe Cerrig will elucidate.
Topic Outline:

The Modern Antiquarian Forum Index