Avebury forum 222 room
Image by wickerman
close
more_vert

are you sure they didn't? Not that I don't believe you ...

I mean, I've got no idea about stone-burning. If you don't actually try these things out properly, then you're riding on an assumption. You've got to use a stone from thereabouts, otherwise you'll get misleading results.

I wish I'd seen this prog years ago, when I used to work in these woods - one of the jobs was rebuilding barbed wire fences, and to firm up the stakeposts, we used to use bits of stone at the base, below the soil. Right bastard of a job is breaking stone ...

at what distance from Avebury/Delling would people say it's OK to molest the stones then?

RG

>at what distance from Avebury/Delling would people say it's OK to molest the stones then?<

point taken, but I still feel they could have done with treating this subject with a bit more respect. I think archeology and reconstruction-of-past -event type thingies should be as un-intrusive as possible. we don't know what evidence we might destroy which will be of interest to future generations. I know it's unlikely that future folks will want to study that particular stone, but it's the principle of the thing. Destructive science is not something that should be encouraged on the TV if you ask me.

Even down here in Hants there are a few outcrops of exactly the same stone type. There are also loads of stones which were removed years ago and used for all sorts of things, bits of building work,protection for the corners of houses,foundations, I could go on. The point is that these stones have no importance outside their current use/nonuse. One of these could easily have been used and the scientific results just as valid wherever it was done.

There are plenty of sarcens scattered along all the riverbeds. They could have used one of them or one from the Quarry in westwoods. To di it right on the edge of WHS is insensitive.
I'll post some pics of the stone when I get out to it over the weekend.
PeteG