close
more_vert

'They' said it was natural, and the result of geological processes. It was just a he but then he is the accepted face of academia. A decent person, just a few years younger than myself. He was genuine - there was no artifice at all - but he did think it was a natural stone. I was so sure that he would recognise the tool marks that I didn't rehearse the geological rebuttal - Millstone Grit doesn't have fossils, no geological process could cause those shapes etc. I just became quite sad. He just didn't recognise it.

I didn't say that rock art was figurative just that my piece had a figurative element upon it. 'Natural erosion'. The other figurative rock art that I can recall is the foot on the stone in the Liverpool park. I think there are other examples too. Under the Passage Grave Art heading.

StoneGloves wrote:
I didn't say that rock art was figurative just that my piece had a figurative element upon it. 'Natural erosion'. The other figurative rock art that I can recall is the foot on the stone in the Liverpool park. I think there are other examples too. Under the Passage Grave Art heading.
Sorry, misunderstood you in the context. Shame about the stone (or rather, shame about the opinion.)

StoneGloves wrote:
'

I didn't say that rock art was figurative just that my piece had a figurative element upon it. 'Natural erosion'. The other figurative rock art that I can recall is the foot on the stone in the Liverpool park. I think there are other examples too. Under the Passage Grave Art heading.

Poof Farm cist cover and the Cochno Stone , now under a metre of earth , also have footprints . More common in Scandnavia . In some cultures the foot represents the sun .And there are also the various mace heads , daggers found in , usually , funerary contexts .