Re: The Secrets of Stonehenge | Forum — The Modern Antiquarian

T

tjj Jun 2, 2009 07:54:21

Replying to megadread

megadread wrote:

Well what a waste of an hour and half i'll never get back.
They solved nothing and proved nothing.
I think MPP has invested that much time in his particular theory he's now looking for evidence that fits it rather than taking the evidence he finds and looking at the bigger picture with an open mind.
There's not a shred of evidence that Durrington and stonehenge were linked, that's just his opinion, me, i don't buy it for a second.
The only good that came out of this programme was finding the new feature at the end of the avenue.
I've nothing personal against MPP but i can't wait for the next generation of archaeologists to get their hands on the site, if they ever do that is now it's been "solved."

I only visited Stonehenge for the first time just a couple of months ago; it was Good Friday and there were hundreds of tourists there (myself included). Walked up to the Heel Stone and just stood for a bit, the other visitors all blurred into the background and I experienced this wonderful monument for a few minutes.

I'm no archaeologist and found the programme completely interesting although didn't like the 'neolithic acting' bit. The point made in the programme that the main feature in landscape was the river Avon struck a cord, as on my recent visit I also got to experience following the river for a bit via the road. It awakens the landscape in a way that looking at aerial photographs never could.

K

Kozmik_Ken Jun 2, 2009 08:54:34

Replying to megadread

I don't think it was a waste of an hour. Yes, a peak time viewing TV slot is always going to demand a bit of sensationalism and big projects with big funding need to be seen to produce big results. And yes, there was an awful lot that was missed out regarding Stonehenge - but I found it interesting non-the-less and I thought that the discoveries relating to Durrington Walls, the Avenue and the Cursus were fascinating.

As you say, there is no concrete proof that Durrington Walls and Stonehenge were linked, but the circumstantial evidence looks quite compelling. Although to declare that Stonehenge has been 'solved' is a bit of a tabloid approach! I'm sure that the surface is only beginning to be scratched.

G

Gwass Jun 2, 2009 13:32:32

Replying to megadread

megadread wrote:

Well what a waste of an hour and half i'll never get back.
They solved nothing and proved nothing.
I think MPP has invested that much time in his particular theory he's now looking for evidence that fits it rather than taking the evidence he finds and looking at the bigger picture with an open mind.
There's not a shred of evidence that Durrington and stonehenge were linked, that's just his opinion, me, i don't buy it for a second.
The only good that came out of this programme was finding the new feature at the end of the avenue.
I've nothing personal against MPP but i can't wait for the next generation of archaeologists to get their hands on the site, if they ever do that is now it's been "solved."

Like others I thoroughly enjoyed the programme. I thought MPP's theory made a lot of sense particularly when you consider the lack of any credible alternatives. (Including the centre of healing theory recently proposed by Darvill and Wainwright in my opinion).

The fact that 2 of the grandest sites in the country, built at the same time and 2 miles apart weren't linked seems inconceivable especially with the discovery of the durrington avenue.

Being someone who tries to get all the books and info I can on the site from what I can make out the likes of MPP, Mike Pitts, Julian Thomas, Colin Richards and Joshua Pollard seem to be the leading authorities on the subject.

I would be generally interested to find out who these next generation archaeoloists are and what their theories are as I'm surprised I've not heard of them.

S

StoneGloves Jun 3, 2009 10:06:27

Replying to megadread

I've written to Dr Pearson twice, at his college, and he hasn't replied. I've spoken to him once and he looked at me as though I were a limpet on a rock. So I'm bound to believe his theories are belligerent bullshit. His accomplices from Manchester U. I also believe to be half-wits. But that four-poster was a great find. They say that stone rows are the most neglected prehistoric monuments but four posters can't be far behind.

If you never watch TV and that was all a person had seen in two months then the hour wasn't wasted. It was the adverts that were painful, with the subtlety of a mell. Pearson can't be entirely wrong, it's just his importation of African belief that is incongruous (IMO).