nigelswift wrote:
VBB, if I can mention size without setting you off on your obsession, are you saying Silbury shouldn't really be included since although it conforms size-wise its construction makes it something else? (I know there's no real answer, which is why I'm asking you)
Whilst Silbury is a mound, it is unique because of the degree of size and sophistication that was not only required in terms of design and construction, but in organisation. Marlborough could have been thown up in a matter of days - as I think a load of slaves proved to the designers of the Norman newtown that overlooked what a bind it would be when trying to park the oxen&cart outside Waitrose. Similarly Marden, not as big as Aubrey said, but sophisticated in terms of its waterproofing, could have been constructed even by one person with an antler in a relatively short period as it was pure greensand. It is not in the same league at all as Silbury, nothing is!
However, as you say there is no real answer because we don't know what it is, we don't know if Marlborough is prehistoric or Norman, or a mixture, and we don't know squat about Marden in reality because just like 1970 and 1777 the supposed fathers of archaeology weren't supervising the closure.
As EH have said to give then their due, that won't happen this time.
I for one won't be bothering to watch they do it properly and not let their possett of milk boil over - COZ ...
THERE'S NO POINT PRYING OVER SPOILT MILK!
VBB :o)
