Stonehenge forum 180 room
Image by jimit
close
more_vert

Rupert Soskin wrote:
Ahem indeed!
The thing for me is, if the Presellis were a sacred or important site, there is a kind of rationale for building them into Stonehenge. If on the other hand, they were simply glacial 'erratics', I don't see why they would have been any more important than any other kind of stone.
Yes, yes it is a sacred site, thats what Wainwright and Darvill feel....you have to go there and see for yourself. Its the highest land mass seen from Ireland, I think it's strange shape within the landscape would have made it important and it was probably a trade route for all that gold we have down here in the west.
http://www.themodernantiquarian.com/post/54328/images/carn_meini.html
It is stunning on a sunny day, with the stone river at the bottom and the natural 'longbarrows' or outcrops facing it.

Moel Drygarn with its three massive stone cairns is also part of the (sacred?) landscape there as well.....

http://www.themodernantiquarian.com/post/63443

Im definetly both feet in the burl camp.

Are the dolmen in the national geographic article and the trilithon of Stonehenge related? Theres an obvious similarity in design. Geoffrey suggested that the stones for stonehenge were stolen from Ireland where they had existed as a healing shrine- they had opriginally been in Africa (apparently) an alusion to existing Dolmens? Its an idea.

When histories of Britain were first being written by the British would there be a tendency to cram as much oral history into the text as possible- or perhaps he just made it all up?