|
 Log in |
Register
|
|
 Head To Head The Modern Antiquarian Sea Henge Forum | Start a topic | Search |
64 messages | Select a forum: |
tiompan wrote: bladup wrote: tiompan wrote: bladup wrote: bladup wrote: tiompan wrote: bladup wrote: harestonesdown wrote: Howburn Digger wrote: harestonesdown wrote: I dunno, i just think it's so sad how it's ended up, present it now to someone who never saw the original context and it'd be a very hard to make head or tail of it. not that we've "cracked" it's meaning in any way i should add. No-one saw it in its "original" context. The context and environment Seahenge was created in are gone aeons ago. What was revealed and excavated were the remnants after thousands of years of getting buried in sand and pummelled by the sea. I agree it is very hard to make head or tail of or "crack" its meaning. Even large, well-preserved stone circles, tombs and alignments are still bound in mystery and conjecture. Seahenge seems to me a piece of strange ephemera... original intent... like catching fog in a net... Well if you want to be pedantic i'm sure those who built it saw it in it's original context. :P Btw, my thoughts are (probably influenced by being a gardener) the central oak was a way of making offerings to the earth, it makes perfect sense really. (well to me) The upside down nature was so the roots "drew" offerings down into the earth. in it's natural life the roots were responsible for drawing up nutrients, turn it upside down and it could perform the same but in reverse. i've never heard another theory that makes any sense at all. Anyone else care to offer their theory. ? I agree with what you said and will just add that they could by that point have been losing trees to the sea, so inland a bit they built it to try and stop this happening, trying to tap into the power of the trees to fight back against the sea, that's certainly what i get trying to look at it though ancient eyes, without the modern googles on. Evidence from the palynology of the peat bed suggested that the site had been a salt marsh prior to being built ,with later alder and brushwood encroaching from the landward by 1300BC the area to the landward had become marsh and dune slacks . Cheers, I think the fact it's built on this changing inbetween land and sea place is important and a massive tree truck in the ground could have been a attempt to stabilize this "climate change" or on a lighter note it may have been a kind of naughty tree - "If you Don't pack it in you'll go sit on the tree til sun's gone down" It's fun to guess, I guess. I have to write this before the thread drops out because everytime i see the thread i think of this - it could be somewhere they tripped and the enclosure was meant to cut the outside world out so they could facilitate an inner trip far more easily and commune with the spirits there, you could sit or even lie on the treetruck, we know this because of seeing those great people sat and laid on it in their failed attempt to save it [from probable churchgoers and archaeologists] and i've sat in a modern version in a sculture park near aberdeen and it is strange how some of your senses are cut off almost straight away. I'm sure there were plenty of church goers and archaeologists opposed to the final outcome . The sides debating the finer points of rescue archaeology aren't usually reflected in church attendance /non attendance . With at least some supporting evidence the Victorians would probably have suggested it was a druidical sacrificial site , it suited the age just as a place for tripping suited the period nearly half a century ago , albeit with no evidence . What rarely gets mentioned is that there is the remains of another probably circular timber structure 100 m to the east with a central wicker setting thought to have lined a a shallow pit and it is worth bearing in mind that Norfolk has produced plank and dug out coffins from the same period as both circles . The churchgoer thing is just my viking sense of humour and I know loads of norfolk and lincolnshire folk and they're all off their heads all the time even in this day and age and the joke about Lincoln is even though it has a massive catherdal the people have mainly all stayed pagan, Seahenge is quite close to where i was born and i know how wild the people are now, so fuck knows how bad it was back then, i'm using the way the people are now to see how they'd use the place if it was built now because i believe we've all changed a lot less than than most people think, it's clearly all very speculative though, do you really think the people didn't use mind altering substances before alcohol George? because i know they did, whether with proof or not, it's in most people in this country even if they've never done it themselves because a lot of our ancestors were initiated into that world, and once those glands are opened it has a knock on effect from then to nowadays, we live everyday with what our ancestors have done in various ways. I think it is likely that psycho active plants were in use long before the EBA in many areas . In those areas where we have recordings and availibilty of the most common plants and fungi e.g. Egypt and fertile crescent there is not a lot of mention it . But we can only guess that the punters partook , maybe little different from their descendents in the mhagreb /Anatolia today where it is not outlawed and just tolerated , a bit like unsociable heavy drinking is here . North western Europe is different ,the availibility is very limited and there's no evidence . It may well be that if the punters had never had the experience they had nothing to miss . It is not everyone's cup of "tea" and could also have been considered ,even if available , unacceptable . Dope was freely availlable to western Europeans for centuries ,for various reasons , few were interested .The same situation could have applied in prehistory without the availability .Just because we like it doesn't mean everyone did or had the opportunity . I think that all religions are the fault of tripping [and it's like], so i'm not saying it's a good thing because i love Faith but hate organized religion in all its forms, and on a minor note The trade networks even back then were huge so it might surprise us all what the Northern europeans could get there hands on, and yes hemp imprints are on loads of beakers aren't they? Reply | with quote |  13th February 2013ce 15:10 In reply to: Re: Seahenge. Looking back. (tiompan) |
Messages in this topic: |
|