MemberlistThe Library Index  FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
Mega-Talk (Megalithic)
Reply to topic Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 51, 52, 53  Next
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Wile E. Coyote


In: Arizona
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Mick Harper wrote:
It would help, Wiley, if you provided a timeline of (real) events as you envisage them.


Next up, what comes first? Sarsen or bluestones? As, if it is that the bluestones actually arrive first at stonehenge, or let's say at the samish time, I reckon it's two and half days research before the inevitable drop into the Canyon. On the other hand if it's the circular before the spina, Wiley can give it another day or so.

Provisional.

Stage 1 Ditches Bank Postholes.

Stage 2 Outer Circle Timber to Sarsens (local stone)

Arthurian mythos.

Stage 3 Tudor. Bluestones arrive via Wales, horshoes created, heel and altar stone added to give appearance of altar sarcophogi.

Does that help a bit? Probably not.
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Well, it would if we can have some dates. They often help in timelines. Not that I want to cramp your style at this exploratory stage (as per AEL regulations).
Send private message
Wile E. Coyote


In: Arizona
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Mick Harper wrote:
It would help, Wiley, if you provided a timeline of (real) events as you envisage them.


Provisional. (Not that I agree with conventional dating and it is approx)

Stage 1 Ditches Bank Postholes. (3000 BC)

Stage 2 Outer Circle Timber to Sarsens (local stone) (2500 BC)

Arthurian mythos. (1100AD )

Stage 3 Tudor. (1500AD ) Bluestones most probably from another ancient Welsh circle, arrive at stonehenge horsehoes created, heel and altar stone added to give appearance of altar sarcophogi.
Send private message
Wile E. Coyote


In: Arizona
View user's profile
Reply with quote

I just need evidence that the bluestones are at Stonehenge earlier or roughly at the same time as the sarsens round about 2400 BC to force me to dive into the canyon.

Then I can go back to studying coins.
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

If you make your case, it will be quite interesting but not that important, surely?
Send private message
Wile E. Coyote


In: Arizona
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Difficult to answer as Stonehenge is in one sense important.

The starting point for everybody, the gold standard for theorising, is always to make head or tail of Stonehenge


It also has, as you say in ME, no practical function despite being the most sophisticated of the stone cicles and discuss Mitchell's interpretation. You and Hats also speculate a bit on its relationship to Avebury and other lines. I confess for some reason it doesn't really read now today, as at the time of purchase.... I think this is because Wiley's interpreation on all megalithic matters was formed when you and Hats were writing Walking On Ancient Landscapes, and by the time of reading ME I just assumed I had underststood what you were saying.

Here is what you get from UNESCO

Stonehenge is one of the most impressive prehistoric megalithic monuments in the world on account of the sheer size of its megaliths, the sophistication of its concentric plan and architectural design, the shaping of the stones - uniquely using both Wiltshire Sarsen sandstone and Pembroke Bluestone - and the precision with which it was built.


At Avebury, the massive Henge, containing the largest prehistoric stone circle in the world, and Silbury Hill, the largest prehistoric mound in Europe, demonstrate the outstanding engineering skills which were used to create masterpieces of earthen and megalithic architecture


Stonehenge is the most architecturally sophisticated prehistoric stone circle in the world. It is unrivalled in its design and unique engineering, featuring huge horizontal stone lintels capping the outer circle and the trilithons, locked together by carefully shaped joints. It is distinguished by the unique use of two different kinds of stones (Bluestones and Sarsens), their size (the largest weighing over 40 t) and the distance they were transported (up to 240 km). The sheer scale of some of the surrounding monuments is also remarkable: the Stonehenge Cursus and the Avenue are both about 3 km long, while Durrington Walls is the largest known henge in Britain, around 500 m in diameter, demonstrating the ability of prehistoric peoples to conceive, design and construct features of great size and complexity.


Avebury prehistoric stone circle is the largest in the world. The encircling henge consists of a huge bank and ditch 1.3 km in circumference, within which 180 local, unshaped standing stones formed the large outer and two smaller inner circles. Leading from two of its four entrances, the West Kennet and Beckhampton Avenues of parallel standing stones still connect it with other monuments in the landscape. Another outstanding monument, Silbury Hill, is the largest prehistoric mound in Europe. Built around 2400 BC, it stands 39.5 m high and comprises half a million tonnes of chalk. The purpose of this imposing, skilfully engineered monument remains obscure.


The complexes of monuments at Stonehenge and Avebury provide an exceptional insight into the funerary and ceremonial practices in Britain in the Neolithic and Bronze Age. Together with their settings and associated sites, they form landscapes without parallel.

The design, position and interrelationship of the monuments and sites are evidence of a wealthy and highly organised prehistoric society able to impose its concepts on the environment. An outstanding example is the alignment of the Stonehenge Avenue (probably a processional route) and Stonehenge stone circle on the axis of the midsummer sunrise and midwinter sunset, indicating their ceremonial and astronomical character. At Avebury the length and size of some of the features such as the West Kennet Avenue, which connects the Henge to the Sanctuary over 2 km away, are further evidence of this.


So my answer to your question is something like, if you change the way you view the development of Stonehenge through linear time (no hope of getting any agreement on circular thinking), it has a knock-on effect on everyone's bigger picture, eg surely Averbury becomes more important.

I want a Stonehenge that becomes more boring, less exceptional when originally constructed, less studied as a gateway to the Neolithic. I want a Stonehenge that is more exceptional but in the Tudor era. My speculation is that as they dissolved the monasteries they re-engineered Stonehenge as a monument for visitors. I think that's quite a fun way to go, for Wiley.......until you folks refute it.
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

But that is entirely our position in Megalithic Empire. We ignore all the super-sophisticated (and mystical) stuff and concentrate only on the trilithons which, if I understand your theory correctly, are original c 3000 BC constructions, made from purely local stone. We adopt the Michel position that the cross members of the trilithons are measuring standards, up there to keep them out of harm's way. The standing stones have to be massive to bear their weight but are very rough cut and have no other purpose.

The entire Salisbury Plain site -- including we argue, Salisbury Plain itself -- is designed for the supervision of the megalithic system as a whole, along with Avebury and Tan and Milk hills. As such, it presumably acted as a college for young megalithic supervisors and, as the 'capital' of Megalithia, no doubt acquired other more celebratory functions over the years.
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote



On medium.com, John Welford wrote:
Maiden pink (Dianthus deltoides) is a plant that grows wild throughout Great Britain on banks and in hill pastures. It is also grown in gardens for its delicate pink flowers. It is related to carnations and sweet williams. Maiden pink may get its name from the flowers, which appear from June to September. They are supposed to be the colour of a maiden’s blush and to close with maidenly modesty when the weather is overcast. However, the name could be a corruption of “mead pink” from its habit of growing in meadows. Because natural meadows are encountered only rarely these days, maiden pinks are not as common as they once were.

To which Mick Harper wrote:
Just a thought but since you say maiden pink is found "throughout Great Britain on banks and in hill pastures" it may be related to 'maiden' as in Maiden Castle (or even 'madan' in India) denoting some kind of raised fortress.

But why, I couldn't say. Anyone got any theories? Makes them visible, I suppose, but that wouldn't be a very good explanation since they are anyway. To identify which ones perhaps, like our artificial circular clumps of trees.
Send private message
Wile E. Coyote


In: Arizona
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Mick Harper wrote:
But that is entirely our position in Megalithic Empire. We ignore all the super-sophisticated (and mystical) stuff and concentrate only on the trilithons which, if I understand your theory correctly, are original c 3000 BC constructions,


I don't think they did a lot of stone mortice and tenon joints in the Neolithic, they actually preferred unworked or, to be precise, stones worked by nature. There is a beautiful illustration of the type of melding of mound, sea and monument on the front of ME. No, the mortice and tenon joints are down to Merlin's "artistry," visitors admire this sort of sorcery showboating. It's arguably a bit tacky, the blue stones were added to the site, and then both some of the existing stones and the bluestones were reworked to create Merlin's vision.
Send private message
Wile E. Coyote


In: Arizona
View user's profile
Reply with quote

The first proper survey of Stone-heng (as it was known) was done by Inigo Jones (1573 – 1652), an architect and surveyor of the King's works, so Inigo, unlike Wiley and most archaeologists, had an ideal skill set to undertake this daunting task. For some reason his conclusions were only published after his death by his assistant, John Webb (1611 – 1672), in a book entitled "The Most Notable Antiquity of Great Britain, Vulgarly Called Stone-heng, on Salisbury Plain. Restored to the Danes." This was the first book on Stonehenge, and was based on Jones' notes. It is not known what is Jones' and what is Webb's interpretation of Jones.

The conclusion is that Stonehenge was similar in design to that of a Roman theatre. The book contained a plan and elevations of what Jones considered to be the original appearance of Stonehenge, according to Jones it's in fact a couple of hexagons within a circle.

Jones was right, it is clearly of a classical design, however it wasn't built by the Romans, it was built by Merlin.

https://www.bl.uk/picturing-places/articles/inigo-jones-and-the-ruins-of-stonehenge
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Posthumous claims about what was supposedly in the Great Man's notes feature quite a lot in Revisionist Historiography.

PS As does John Webb, but our one was Sir Augustus Franks' nineteenth century co-conspirator. Dora Webb of course was Theodore Besterman's twentieth century miniatures faker. It's a crime family!
Send private message
Wile E. Coyote


In: Arizona
View user's profile
Reply with quote

I really need a bit of help with some refutations of all this Wiley nonsense. Don't forget it's all got to be completed within 3 days by Wiley, it is after all Time Team rules.
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

All right then.
Wiley wrote:
I don't think they did a lot of stone mortice and tenon joints in the Neolithic

They're always going on about them. If you can discover that Stonehenge's are in fact unique among Megalithic monuments, your case will be strengthened no end.
Send private message
Wile E. Coyote


In: Arizona
View user's profile
Reply with quote

I mean proper rules, none of this sending off the landscape guy and a pretty geophysicist a couple of months beforehand to see if there is a possible programme worth making........

They didn't do that, did they?
Send private message
Wile E. Coyote


In: Arizona
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Mick Harper wrote:
All right then.
Wiley wrote:
I don't think they did a lot of stone mortice and tenon joints in the Neolithic

They're always going on about them. If you can discover that Stonehenge's are in fact unique among Megalithic monuments, your case will be strengthened no end.


Thank You.
Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 51, 52, 53  Next

Jump to:  
Page 52 of 53

MemberlistThe Library Index  FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group