|
 Log in |
Register
|
|
 Head To Head The Modern Antiquarian General Discussion Forum | Start a topic | Search |
 Re: Zennor Quoit query 37 messages | Select a forum: |
Sanctuary wrote: tiompan wrote: I don't have any expectations about Trethevy or any other monument you have to take them at face value .They are not utilatarian so anything goes , there is no blue print for portal tombs you even get double capstones What is the one off possibility at Trethevy ? Maybe my terminology (one-off) is wrong but I feel some of the stones are out of position and give a false impression of what it may have been like on first-build. That's all I want to say about it at this time other than I believe that happened when the capstone partially slipped. An interesting thing about most of these monuments is that if you took them all apart and laid the pieces out on the ground I wonder how many people would reassemble them as they stood beforehand if they hadn't seen them before but were told what they were? Certainly not many, did you see what they did when the hellstone chamber, in dorset collapsed, they must have they ended up with stones all over and when it was "put back together" it's safe to say it was a little wrong, in the past they couldn't even get the ones with only 4 stones right like lanyon or the spinsters' rock, so regarding Trethevy, once things have slipped and fallen there is more often than not stones put back in the wrong places or sometimes put back in different places, sometimes just because the person doing it thought it "looked better" that way. Reply | with quote |  8th September 2012ce 11:08 In reply to: Re: Zennor Quoit query (Sanctuary) |
Messages in this topic: |
|