cerrig
|
Re: Stonehenge
Feb 13, 2021, 13:57
|
|
Here's another take on it. Some interesting points made. It does look a little flimsy when it's examined.
|
Kammer
|
Re: Stonehenge
Feb 13, 2021, 15:13
|
|
I think he did visit it, many moons ago ;-) K x
|
GLADMAN
|
Re: Stonehenge
Feb 13, 2021, 16:06
|
|
tomatoman wrote: The subject of Stonehenge always elicits controversy and I can understand why, but I've never understood the antipathy towards MPP. Is it "science-led"?
I saw him at a lecture at Leicester University 5 or 6 years ago, arranged by the Leicestershire Field-walkers Group and the first thing he acknowledged when he got on his feet was that the audience was peppered with sceptics, not of his subject, but HIM.
In my experience, that's in the nature of archaeological endeavour. I just don't understand why it's gets so personal.
Maybe his sceptics believe he looks for evidence to fit his theories... rather than recording what's there and hypothesising solely upon that? I guess it would be very un-human to be completely unbiased when it comes to interpretation when you are so passionate about something. And he does seem a decent enough chap, to be fair. However all roads once again lead - and all resources seem to be devoted - to Stonehenge. I'm more excited about confirming a new 'circle in Pembrokeshire, myself....
|
tjj
|
Re: Stonehenge
Feb 13, 2021, 18:32
|
Sometimes the subject of Stonehenge makes me feel a little weary but maybe weariness is a sign of the times ... so I put the programme on record and am watching right now. Far from wearying am finding it quite exciting, a bit of a roller coaster. Full credit to Mike Parker Pearson for keeping going over a decade in the face of some disappointments. And at the last site ... those archaeology students were amazing - they keep digging in wind and rain.
The other thing that came up that appealed to me was the idea that the route taken to transport those bluestones was perhaps an ancient trackway now the route of the modern A40.
https://www.sabre-roads.org.uk/wiki/index.php?title=A40/Route
A great account of a mammoth act of faith. Bravo to MPP and his intrepid team.
|
thesweetcheat
|
Re: Stonehenge
Feb 14, 2021, 09:06
|
*waves*
I thought Toby might nudge you!
|
thesweetcheat
|
Re: Stonehenge
Feb 14, 2021, 09:10
|
|
GLADMAN wrote: I'm more excited about confirming a new 'circle in Pembrokeshire, myself....
Yes! I've still never been to Gors Fawr or Bedd Yr Afanc. A Pembrokeshire revisit has been on my to-do list for some years now. Oh, to be able to travel to Wales again!
|
nigelswift
|
Re: Stonehenge
Feb 14, 2021, 09:21
|
Brian John's latest review is extraordinarily angry.
Glacial, you might say.
Right or wrong the latest news tips the balance in favour of human transport closer to certainty.
Is it bad to hope MPP is right?
|
drewbhoy
|
Re: Stonehenge
Feb 14, 2021, 10:43
|
|
Wished they'd put up the other stones at the site :-)
|
drewbhoy
|
Re: Stonehenge
Feb 14, 2021, 10:46
|
|
I agree with the human transport thing, look at Orkney they probably used seaweed to move stones, so why not make sledges down there. Would have aurochs possibly been used to help pull these things?
|
nigelswift
|
Re: Stonehenge
Feb 14, 2021, 11:01
|
I've always maintained that 50, better still 100 fit blokes could CARRY the largest of bluestones indefinitely using an arrangement of ropes to share the weight.
There's a reconstruction, a film, a book and a lecture circuit in it if you want. Wish I was younger.
|
