I don't have a problem with it all Sanctuary and see it as big step forward in our understanding .The model is based on archaeological evidence , no amount of “thinking “ about Silbury is going to produce that kind of evidence , otherwise we would be back to King Sil and Roman Stonehenge . Do we ignore it because it doesn't fit in with our thinking ?
Many major and lesser sites when investigated started off from small beginnings Knowth , Long Barrows ,stone circles (Stonehenge took a long time to assume it's current architecture ) etc ,often a midden ,lithic scatter , a few scoops in the ground , deposits , a burial etc until the final monument we see today , appears , sometimes many generations after the initial sequence .
 Reply | with quote | Posted by tiompan
28th October 2010ce
08:00 |
|
Head To Head 
Re: The Story of Silbury Hill - Paperback (Sanctuary)