Forums | Re: New 'low profile' Moth – The Modern Antiquarian.com

The Modern Antiquarian

Home	Latest Posts	Forums	Maps	Help

Browse Sites	News	Blog	Contributors	The Books

Head To Head

The Modern Antiquarian

Avebury Forum

Start a topic | Search

Avebury

Re: New 'low profile' Moth

103 messages

Select a forum:

You're right, of course, about putting them back up. But what about removing the later buildings that are within the henge ?

I imagine in reality that opposing arch. factions would appear "the stone goes this way up", "no, the stone goes this way up", and then there's the concrete setting of the stones for HASAW versus the original-type shims, wedges and backfill.

And then also there's the mountain of paperwork that comes from the place having so many designations. 'Application to alter World Heritage Site' and so on.

Reply | with quote

Posted by BlueGloves
4th December 2003ce
12:40

(Rhiannon, Dec 02, 2003, 17:52)

Re: new stones found (Pete G, Dec 02, 2003, 20:23)
from today's Independent (grrr, Dec 03, 2003, 11:47)
- Re: from today's Independent (pebblesfromheaven, Dec 03, 2003, 11:49)
  - Re: from today's Independent (suave harv, Dec 03, 2003, 13:54)
    - Re: from today's Independent (suave harv, Dec 03, 2003, 13:55)
      - Re: from today's Independent (Pete G, Dec 03, 2003, 13:59)
        Re: from today's Independent (suave harv, Dec 03, 2003, 15:10)
        Re: from today's Independent (Pete G, Dec 03, 2003, 15:24)
        Re: from today's Independent (suave harv, Dec 03, 2003, 15:40)
        Re: from today's Independent (nigelswift, Dec 03, 2003, 16:48)
        Re: from today's Independent (Pete G, Dec 03, 2003, 16:55)
        Re: from today's Independent [sos] (megalith6, Jun 26, 2004, 10:31)
BBC article (Killer, Dec 03, 2003, 14:07)
BBC article (Killer, Dec 03, 2003, 14:07)
Re: new stones found (Kammer, Dec 03, 2003, 14:10)
- Re: new stones found (Rhiannon, Dec 03, 2003, 17:04)
  - Re: new stones found (Pete G, Dec 03, 2003, 17:11)
    - Re: new stones found (GordonP, Dec 03, 2003, 17:22)
      - Re: new stones found (Pete G, Dec 03, 2003, 17:27)
        Re: new stones found (Vybik Jon, Dec 03, 2003, 18:03)
    - Re: new stones found (Kammer, Dec 04, 2003, 13:29)
      - Re: new stones found (Steve Gray, Dec 04, 2003, 14:39)
        Dildonics (FourWinds, Dec 04, 2003, 14:45)
      - Quake (Pete G, Dec 04, 2003, 15:33)
        Re: Quake (Kammer, Dec 05, 2003, 09:25)
        Re: Quake (Chris Collyer, Dec 05, 2003, 09:41)
        Re: Quake (Steve Gray, Dec 05, 2003, 11:56)
        Re: Quake (Pete G, Dec 05, 2003, 12:17)
Its the Pitts (Pete G, Dec 03, 2003, 18:47)
- Re: Its the Pitts (baza, Dec 03, 2003, 18:54)
  - Re: Its the Pitts (suave harv, Dec 03, 2003, 18:59)
    - Re: Its the Pitts (nigelswift, Dec 03, 2003, 19:10)
      - Re: Its the Pitts (baza, Dec 03, 2003, 19:31)
        Re: Its the Pitts (nigelswift, Dec 03, 2003, 20:29)
      - Re: Its the Pitts (Pete G, Dec 03, 2003, 23:24)
        Re: Its the Pitts (neighbourofthedrude, Dec 04, 2003, 14:41)
        Re: Its the Pitts (Pete G, Dec 04, 2003, 15:29)
Re: new stones found (gm, Dec 03, 2003, 19:47)
- Re: new stones found (Moth, Dec 03, 2003, 20:40)
  - Re: new stones found (pebblesfromheaven, Dec 03, 2003, 22:33)
    - New 'low profile' Moth (Moth, Dec 04, 2003, 01:47)
      - Re: New 'low profile' Moth (nigelswift, Dec 04, 2003, 09:09)
        Re: New 'low profile' Moth (BlueGloves, Dec 04, 2003, 09:24)
        Re: New 'low profile' Moth (FourWinds, Dec 04, 2003, 10:14)
        Re: New 'low profile' Moth (nigelswift, Dec 04, 2003, 10:31)
        Re: New 'low profile' Moth (Rhiannon, Dec 04, 2003, 10:53)
        Re: New 'low profile' Moth (FourWinds, Dec 04, 2003, 11:03)
        Re: New 'low profile' Moth (nigelswift, Dec 04, 2003, 11:25)
        why buried? (Joanna, Dec 04, 2003, 12:16)
        Re: why buried? (FourWinds, Dec 04, 2003, 12:22)
        Re: why buried? (Rhiannon, Dec 04, 2003, 12:25)
        Re: why buried? (Pete G, Dec 04, 2003, 12:24)
        Re: why buried? (Rhiannon, Dec 04, 2003, 12:29)
        Re: why buried? (Pete G, Dec 04, 2003, 12:34)
        Re: why buried? (Rhiannon, Dec 04, 2003, 12:39)
        Re: why buried? (FourWinds, Dec 04, 2003, 13:14)
        Re: why buried? (Pete G, Dec 04, 2003, 13:19)
        Re: why buried? (FourWinds, Dec 04, 2003, 13:30)
        Re: why buried? (Pete G, Dec 04, 2003, 13:40)
        Re: why buried? (Kozmik_Ken, Dec 04, 2003, 14:28)
        Re: why buried? (Pete G, Dec 04, 2003, 15:27)
        Re: why buried? (Kozmik_Ken, Dec 04, 2003, 15:45)
        Re: why buried? (Joanna, Dec 04, 2003, 15:46)
        Re: why buried? (Pete G, Dec 04, 2003, 15:50)
        Oops (Pete G, Dec 04, 2003, 15:57)
        Re: why buried? (nigelswift, Dec 04, 2003, 13:42)
        Re: why buried? (megalith6, Jun 21, 2004, 00:03)
        Re: New 'low profile' Moth (Rhiannon, Dec 04, 2003, 12:21)
        Re: New 'low profile' Moth (BlueGloves, Dec 04, 2003, 12:40)
        Re: putting them back up (Rhiannon, Dec 04, 2003, 12:50)
        Re: putting them back up (suave harv, Dec 04, 2003, 16:55)
        Re: putting them back up (GordonP, Dec 04, 2003, 17:54)
        Re: putting them back up (nigelswift, Dec 04, 2003, 18:40)
        What - like this ? (BlueGloves, Dec 05, 2003, 08:01)
        Re: putting them back up (BlueGloves, Dec 05, 2003, 07:55)
        Re: putting them back up (nigelswift, Dec 05, 2003, 08:36)
        Re: putting them back up (FourWinds, Dec 05, 2003, 08:43)
        Re: putting them back up (nigelswift, Dec 05, 2003, 08:57)
        Also... (nigelswift, Dec 05, 2003, 09:06)
        And (BlueGloves, Dec 06, 2003, 10:17)
        Re: And (nigelswift, Dec 06, 2003, 11:32)
        Re: And (BlueGloves, Dec 06, 2003, 13:33)
        Re: putting them back up (megalith6, Jun 20, 2004, 23:45)
        Re: putting them back up (FourWinds, Jun 21, 2004, 07:16)
        Re: putting them back up (FourWinds, Jun 21, 2004, 07:31)
        Re: putting them back up (megalith6, Jun 26, 2004, 00:32)
        Re: putting them back up (nigelswift, Jun 21, 2004, 08:07)
        Re: putting them back up (rocknicker, Jun 21, 2004, 09:19)
        Re: putting them back up (doktoratomik, Jun 21, 2004, 12:00)
        Re: putting them back up (nigelswift, Jun 21, 2004, 13:10)
        Re: putting them back up (VenerableBottyBurp, Jun 21, 2004, 14:11)
        Re: putting them back up (VenerableBottyBurp, Jun 21, 2004, 14:12)
        Re: putting them back up (nigelswift, Jun 21, 2004, 15:13)
        Re: putting them back up (StoneLifter, Jun 21, 2004, 21:52)
        Re: putting them back up (megalith6, Jul 01, 2004, 23:14)
        Re: putting them back up (megalith6, Jul 01, 2004, 23:13)
        Re: putting them back up (nigelswift, Jul 02, 2004, 05:35)
        Re: putting them back up (Pete G, Jul 02, 2004, 12:14)
        Re: putting them back up (megalith6, Jun 26, 2004, 00:08)
        Re: putting them back up (megalith6, Jul 04, 2004, 01:56)
        Re: putting them back up (nigelswift, Jul 04, 2004, 06:51)
        Re: putting them back up (Littlestone, Jul 04, 2004, 22:23)

Terms & Conditions | Home | Julian Cope presents Head Heritage

Top of page

The Modern Antiquarian

In reply to:

1 reply:

Messages in this topic: