Boscawen-Ûn forum 6 room
Image by David Milner
Boscawen-Ûn

axe carvings

close
more_vert
Sanctuary S
Sanctuary Sep 8, 2014 12:18:32
Replying to Evergreen Dazed

Evergreen Dazed wrote:
I'm in no position to defend Barnatts or Herrings writing on Boscawen Un, but something to note within the passage I posted is the sentence beginning "When the circle itself was erected.."

If no further information were available about this site, the assertion that follows it would be impossible for either writer to prove or indeed for you to disprove and would be essentially meaningless.

However - The circle is reconstructed, which is why I was keen to know you which plan you were looking at. I wasn't quite prepared for the answer 'Google Earth". I personally don't know, but if Barnatt or Herring were writing on the basis of information gleaned from the 19th century excavations or plans/illustrations created on or before that date, they may well have a reasonable basis for that assertion.

I understand your point but I would have thought it unlikely that 'qualified' people would have re-erected any of the stones back out of position. How many of the stones does your research show were re-erected when this reconstruction took place only Borlase says in 1754 18 of the 19 were still standing. There was a wall once running through it but it's not clear if any damage was done to the circle when erected or removed.
If the circle is 'as was', then google earth was the perfect way to view it as many of the hand drawings by various archaeos are unlikely to be as accurate I wouldn't have thought.

E Evergreen Dazed
Evergreen Dazed Sep 8, 2014 12:57:49
Replying to Sanctuary

Sanctuary wrote:
I understand your point but I would have thought it unlikely that 'qualified' people would have re-erected any of the stones back out of position.
I suppose the point to make here is that regardless of how likely or unlikely you happen to think something may or may not be, are you able to show that this is/is not the case?

Sanctuary wrote:
How many of the stones does your research show were re-erected when this reconstruction took place
I'm not doing any 'research' Sanctuary! But if I were, I imagine I would begin by collating all previously recorded information about the site.

Sanctuary wrote:
If the circle is 'as was', then google earth was the perfect way to view it
I agree, of course, but there is that annoying 'if' to deal with

If we knew the results of the 19th century excavations, the details of any plans/illustrations before or at that date then we might be able to talk with more certainty. As I said, i'm not doing any 'research' but as you are it would be great if you could supply some solid info to show on what basis you are refuting the claims in the paragraph of Barnatt/Herring I copied in.