Modern not antiquarian

close
more_vert
bladup B
bladup Aug 3, 2012 17:55:36
Replying to tiompan

tiompan wrote:
bladup wrote:
Stone circles have nothing left in them
[thats why archeologists don't like them]
and when they do find stuff it's from a different age [romans liked leaving coins] to when the circle was built,
Stone circles have been show to have plenty "left in them " . Often the circle is the last architectural event after depositions of human/animal remains .An obviious example is Stonehenge where the erection of the stones came long after the creation of a ditch and banked enclosed cremation cemetery .
It's pretty obvious many archaeologists actually do like them .Any quotes from any saying they don't ?
Stuff from all periods pre and post circle erection are routinely found .
Stonehenge is a shit example to use for so many reasons, in it's first phases it was more of a causewayed enclosure [they have lots of things left in them- beakers , animal bones], then like YOU said a cremation cemetery- so was probably never a normal stone circle, which have fuck all left in them from the original builders, people who have excavated them describe them as been almost routinely swept clean- maybe for dancing feet [of which there is some folklore]. I said Archaeologists don't like excavating them [because not a lot is going to be there] not that they don't like them in general.

S Sanctuary
Sanctuary Aug 3, 2012 18:21:51
Replying to bladup

bladup wrote:
tiompan wrote:
bladup wrote:
Stone circles have nothing left in them
[thats why archeologists don't like them]
and when they do find stuff it's from a different age [romans liked leaving coins] to when the circle was built,
Stone circles have been show to have plenty "left in them " . Often the cirle is the last architectural event after depositions of human/animal remains .An obviious example is Stonehenge where the erection of the stones came long after the creation of a ditch and banked enclosed cremation cemetery .
It's pretty obvious many archaeologists actually do like them .Any quotes from any saying they don't ?
Stuff from all periods pre and post circle erection are routinely found .
Stonehenge is a shit example to use for so many reasons, in it's first phases it was more of a causewayed enclosure [they have lots of things left in them- beakers , animal bones], then like YOU said a cremation cemetery- so was probably never a normal stone circle, which have fuck all left in them from the original builders, people who have excavated them describe them as been almost routinely swept clean- maybe for dancing feet [of which there is some folklore]. I said Archaeologists don't like excavating them [because not a lot is going to be there] not that they don't like them in general.
Your bog standard stone circle is practically devoid of anything to make one believe that they were built for any particular reason, be it religious, ceremonial, funery, ritual, feasting or whatever, that is the mystery of them because there is no consistency. I suspect I'm no different to any of you guys but when I visit a circle for the first time I'm stoked up and thinking...'Maybe this will be the one that gives me the answer'...but it never is of course and you leave feeling just as confused as ever, so I can well imagine some archaeo's privately also feeling rather negative about them!

T tiompan
tiompan Aug 3, 2012 19:03:26
Replying to bladup

bladup wrote:
tiompan wrote:
bladup wrote:
Stone circles have nothing left in them
[thats why archeologists don't like them]
and when they do find stuff it's from a different age [romans liked leaving coins] to when the circle was built,
Stone circles have been show to have plenty "left in them " . Often the circle is the last architectural event after depositions of human/animal remains .An obviious example is Stonehenge where the erection of the stones came long after the creation of a ditch and banked enclosed cremation cemetery .
It's pretty obvious many archaeologists actually do like them .Any quotes from any saying they don't ?
Stuff from all periods pre and post circle erection are routinely found .
Stonehenge is a shit example to use for so many reasons, in it's first phases it was more of a causewayed enclosure [they have lots of things left in them- beakers , animal bones], then like YOU said a cremation cemetery- so was probably never a normal stone circle, which have fuck all left in them from the original builders, people who have excavated them describe them as been almost routinely swept clean- maybe for dancing feet [of which there is some folklore]. I said Archaeologists don't like excavating them [because not a lot is going to be there] not that they don't like them in general.
Stonehenge is a good example because it has been excavated , studied , commented upon and we all know it . It clearly has two stone circles a sarsen and a bluestone , the former possibly never actually a completed circle but the latter certainly was , and like many other stone circles post dated previous activity . The early monument has similarities to causewayed enclosures nobody said it didn't but it was an enclosed cremation cemetery prior to the erection of the stones . Other examples of stone circles that have had earlier activity at the site , usually fires or deposits are the recumbent stone circles ,those that have been excavated also show that the stone circle was probably the last activity at the site .
Any quotes from archaeologists saying they don't like excavating them , because “ there is not a lot going there “ or were “ they have been routinely swept clean “ ?