Dartmoor forum 5 room
Image by GLADMAN
close
more_vert

The other bit I thought was pushing it a bit was when they found the flint on top of the mound and straight way said it was a Neolithic mound. The mound had been under flowing water for well over a hundred years. What was to have stopped it being carried there by the current?

Lubin

..and I am far from knowledgeable about bits of flint....but how can they date them just by looking?
We have no idea what happened to that little bit of landscape and the people who moved through it during the 6 to 8 thousand years up and to a group of hairy dirty TV personalities decided to dig it up...I don't even know what my back garden looked like 20 years ago...it's got a standing stone in it now...that will fox the historians in the future!

Lubin wrote:
The other bit I thought was pushing it a bit was when they found the flint on top of the mound and straight way said it was a Neolithic mound. The mound had been under flowing water for well over a hundred years. What was to have stopped it being carried there by the current?

Lubin

Phil's obsession with flint makes me smile. Crack a sherd of flint off and depending how it breaks away it can look just like a cutting tool of the Neolithic but in fact brand new. How do they tell the difference?