close

hello again wonderful people,
what do you know, a piece of grain was found at the new sh dig. and the video from day 12 talks about the area having been open grassland at the time of stonehenge .

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/programmes/stonehenge/day11.shtml

this by no means proves my theory, but it should give us pause. i know there are no converts to my theory among you, but it was very kind of british archaeology to undertake this first dig in 50 years and find a bit of grain for me. perhaps further lab tests on the soil will reveal even more grain residue.

http://www.granaryatstonehenge.org

i do not know why you are not replying to this post considering your previous replies the the granary at stonehenge idea. surely some of you have a response to this new information out of the stonehenge dig. let's hear it whether pro or con.
clyde

Personally.

I would be amazed if grain had not been found... Plants (of all types) use many different mechanisms to 'spread' their seeds. Wind and water and Animal life of all types and sorts.
Cereals can be spread by Ingestion accidentally or purposefully (Not all that is eaten is digested) Dung or dropping make a nice little 'Grow bags'

Seed heads are spiky and cling to Animal coats and can be born long distances..

I'm not sure about wheat, but other members of the grass family can have a none germination rate as high as 15%...

Even had they found hundreds of grains it still would not mean that much _
After Man felled the pine trees, He may very well have grown cerial crops before it was turned to pasture.

The following link should take you hopefully to Barry Cunliffe and the Iron Age, he gives an account of the economy of the chalkland settlements, he does stress use of querns right from Neolithic times. and of course there is always the pits that grain was stored in so that it did'nt sprout, presumably stored for small scale grinding with querns over the winter;)

http://tinyurl.com/4e824w