Nant Tarw forum 4 room
Image by GLADMAN
Nant Tarw

Solstice spotting

close
more_vert
tiompan T
tiompan Mar 9, 2016 09:23:28
Replying to nigelswift

nigelswift wrote:
"there is no shortage of " very small surface marker boulders " on the side of most featureless hillsides ,that will be pronounced as being different enough to be a genuine prehistoric marker or "observation point "

That touches on an interesting point. Even if the boulders were identical if one was "aligned" it would be taken by some as "an alignment". Alignments are evidence of intentionality. ;)

And that’s the next problem , it’s one thing to point that the sun or moon doesn’t set or rise over a peak or in gap ,but the “aligners “ could never be convinced that their boulder , among countless others , isn’t somehow special because it is on the same bearing as the “alignment “ . That there is little reason ,or precedent for setting an unsighted “marker” at the spot , and in many upland areas it would be more difficult to find boulders that are not on the alignment , won’t deter either .
When you consider how the “it must be aligned to that hill top/ col “ thinking still persists despite the simple numerous obvious refutations over the years , the “boulder marker “ will take for ever to be rid of .

T tiompan
tiompan Mar 9, 2016 11:17:04
Replying to tiompan

tiompan wrote:
nigelswift wrote:
"there is no shortage of " very small surface marker boulders " on the side of most featureless hillsides ,that will be pronounced as being different enough to be a genuine prehistoric marker or "observation point "

That touches on an interesting point. Even if the boulders were identical if one was "aligned" it would be taken by some as "an alignment". Alignments are evidence of intentionality. ;)

And that’s the next problem , it’s one thing to point that the sun or moon doesn’t set or rise over a peak or in gap ,but the “aligners “ could never be convinced that their boulder , among countless others , isn’t somehow special because it is on the same bearing as the “alignment “ . That there is little reason ,or precedent for setting an unsighted “marker” at the spot , and in many upland areas it would be more difficult to find boulders that are not on the alignment , won’t deter either .
When you consider how the “it must be aligned to that hill top/ col “ thinking still persists despite the simple numerous obvious refutations over the years , the “boulder marker “ will take for ever to be rid of .
Sorry , didn't respond to your intentionality comment .
Yes ,with nothing to show that there was some form of intentional indication , it's meaningless .
In some repects much the same applies to Nant Tarw , although it has been demonstrated that no landscape features are aligned on astro events as seen from from the monuments , even if one did happen to coincide with a col or a peak , without some form of indication i.e. . a genuine marker like an outlier ,the axis of the monument , a row , an entrance etc it would be difficult to argue for intentionality .
If you only look at monumnets you will find something that might appear salient but unless there are controls , sheep pens , pylons , erratics trees , which the aligners never consider ,it is never appreciated that there are "alignments " all over the place , but they are obviously not intentional .