Clickimin Broch forum 1 room
Image by notjamesbond
Clickimin Broch

500BC too young for TMA? and McGrail

close
BrigantesNation B
BrigantesNation Feb 5, 2003 18:26:13

Shall I remove clickhimin? it dates to 500BC and has attracted the following comment:

"note that (as the reporter points out in 'fieldnotes') the site at Clickimin doesn't relate to the pre-historic / neolithic period this web site really concerns itself with. nevertheless it is worth seeing if yr there"

May I ask for clarification as to the timescales that TMA concerns itself with? Are we saying no Iron Age at all?

McGrail - could you change brock to broch?

G Grendel
Grendel Feb 5, 2003 18:33:58
Replying to BrigantesNation

Your field note clearly mentions the Bronze Age and I always considered BC to be prehistoric (with the exception of the Romans).

My view is FlopsyPete is confused or a Neolithic purest ;)

G

C Chris Collyer
Chris Collyer Feb 5, 2003 22:30:38
Replying to BrigantesNation

Well nobody has complained, so... ;-)

The site guide only states–
‘The Modern Antiquarian is primarily concerned with megalithic sites and the ancient i.e. prehistoric landscape.’

I can’t speak for Holy or anybody else, but my reading of 'prehistoric' is generally pre-Roman, so Iron Age seems fine to me. The bottom line would seem to be that if it's of interest to you, then it will probably be of interest to someone else.

I say keep it in. :-)

-Chris

E elderford
elderford Feb 7, 2003 03:00:30
Replying to BrigantesNation

...first came over in around 43BC, so i would imagine anything before that date is pre-history, so your iron age would qualify.