Wow, some varied opinions here!
i have read your messages and comments closely and i have thought about the very intelligent points that have been made. i have learnt loads from them, and am glad to find that people with different beliefs have been included in the attemp to protect the sites.

I hope that no-one got the wrong idea, I am not saying that theses sites should not be protected and kept in good condition. i am all in favour for this as i hope that they will be there for many more generations to enjoy and to feel a conection with the past.
As to keeping sites tidy for visitors this is also fair enough. i wouldnt want to visit if they were messy as this would destroy the atmosphere.

As to My point as to "What they were used for" that was meant in a more symbolic way.
As far as Archeaological survey and excavation can conclude many sites were not defensive, settlement nor agricultural. All through history there has been a respect for the dead and in many of the sites in question have relationship to burial, this helps to explain the belief systems of the past.
The sites not directly related to Death and Burial are harder to interpret, but evidence shows that they were used in other ways.
The relevence of this is that these places are still used in a respectful way in the practice of a belief system.

thanks for you're views, they are very helpful to me in the development of my understanding a more personal view on Archeaeology!
Cheers
Mirla!

I, personally, quite like the stone signs, and think it's nice that someone is so openly looking out for these places. It's quite reassuring. Our last visit to Men-An-Tol and the Nine Maidens was an absolute treat - I've never seen those places in such good nick! I keep meaning to write a fieldnote about it (and possibly still will). They are a credit to heritage protection, and the message should be spread far and wide...

With regards offerings... Well, we've been here before, quite a few times on this forum, and my personal belief is that people should leave the site, as the aforementioned signs state, as we found them. No offerings. Although I'm never offended by the odd flower or 2 (as long as they've not been picked from the site in the first place! Which I've seen before. Kind of defeats the object of an offering if you ask me!) And - now I know some people disagree, while others will agree - I will always, whenever possible, remove offending articles from a site and dispose of them in the appropriate manner so the next person can enjoy it.

I think that's me! :o)

G x

Hi Mirla -

But these 'old folk' who'd been coming to their local sites for a long time slowly stopped coming: the newcomers approaching these old places with differing psychologies pushed the old folk away, so to speak. I've come across this at various megalithic sites from Yorkshire northwards. And now, with the huge increase of tourists who visit these sites, we're told by the newcomers that we can't have fires, we can't leave offerings (never left any misself), cos others know better and wanna make it nice n' clean for everyone else. Odd thing is, these places were actually quiet and undisturbed until folk started making 'em "more accessible", etc. Seems like some people don't seem to be able to make the link between 'more people = more mess.' The simple issue of biodegrable offerings is, simply, yet another part of modern cultural psychology wanting Nature to be as clean and sterile as the houses people live in. (y' know the sorts: they have weird judgements on 'good' weather, 'bad' weather - instead of simply seeing all types as various cloaks of the same thing)

The issue of offerings itself relates simply to the animistic principle of 'spirit of place'; which is thankfully still very much alive in a number of countries where we find similar things left for trees, wells, rocks, etc (India's crawling with such examples, way-away from the tourist spots).

One final comment (to those who might not like my attitude on this issue): on various occasions when I've encountered people leaving crap at sites (always the tourist-types), they receive a very loud and direct order to pick up their shit before I stick it somewhere quite personal. It never fails to work!

Cheers - Paul

PS - I'm knackered & drunk so this probably doesn't make much sense. Sorry...

It strikes me that the vast majority visiting ancient monuments don't know how to connect to the past, (myself included). As there is no record of the right way to honour the stones, maybe we should invent one.

IE:

The only way to show respect to our forebears who built the stones is to sprinkle the stones and ground with water from the nearest stream.

Or summat like that.

This is a massive thread and I haven't got time to read it all right now, so I'm probably asking something that somebody as already asked ...

What are these great big lump of rock with the writing on like? And where abouts have they been placed at each site?

I find placing a stone sign at, say, a stone circle a bit silly. I know it probably blends in better, but if it's too close and too obvious then people will start to think that it's part of the monument. The next step from that is people thinking it's ok to write on part of the monument.

Furthermore, a large foreign piece of stone is going to alter photographsom this point on and could be confusing. Does anyone have a picture of one of these 'signs'?

As to the offerings issue, everyone knows my view. I don't like finding them when I visit sites. In my mind they should be classed as litter. The odd daisy chain is fine - unless daisies are foreign to the area - it shows that people have spent time there. What I do object to is bouquets of flowers in plastic wrappings and ribbons. I don't like tealights being left for animals to hurt themselves on. I don't like finding wax dripping down the stones.

Since the only bit of agreement in this highly peculiar thread seems to be that everyone thinks non biological offerings are a Bad Thing, perhaps I could offer this, not as a full solution but at least one that everyone would think would do a bit of good:

_________________________

Code for Responsible Subsequent Visitors to Megalithic Sites

CLAUSE 1: Remove all non biological offerings from the site.
CLAUSE 2: Thank you.
_________________________

Jeez! i didnt mean to start a chaos battle here!
everyone should argue their points nicely please.
anyway...thanks for your contributions and ideas, it will take me about 4 days to read them all though!!
some great arguments for or against.
just to clarify.....i have no problem with groups such as CASPN who look after and keep sites nice...they do a wicked job!! Just stupid petty rules!!
Cheers..... keep those...[nice] comments, suggestions and arguments comming!!
Mirla!

It's people going into tombs and making strange noises that gets me.

What's that all about?