|
 Log in |
Register
|
|
 Head To Head The Modern Antiquarian General Discussion Forum | Start a topic | Search |
 Re: Ritual Landscapes 133 messages | Select a forum: |
| Hi BuckyE, welcome to TMA and thanks for digging out some of these great threads and adding some fair comments to them. So often these old threads just disappear and we probably forget a lot of what i said. "When Mr. Cope and friends have done this work and demonstrated some correlations, I'll take notice. Until then, the cursuses, henges, rings, standing stones and barrows were placed where the hallucinating shamans dreamed they should be for reasons we'll probably never know and don't make any difference to our understanding of the things IN GENERAL." I suppose I fall into this group of people so I feel somewhat obliged to answer for all us <i>Significant Hill Heads</i>. This work is being done, but it's a slow process. What work has been done to investigate how "the hallucinating shamans dreamed" where sites should be? How do you statistically prove that theory? Basically you can't do it, so this makes the theory a good one to cling to as a bit of a dream. I'm not saying it couldn't have been that way, just that the other likelyhoods are worth investigating and the folks that cling to other ideas need to be open minded about any findings that come to light. I, for one, will take a lot of convincing that situations like this one: http://www.themodernantiquarian.com/post/40794 are coincidental. Reply | with quote |  8th October 2005ce 19:34 In reply to: Re: Ritual Landscapes (BuckyE) |
Messages in this topic: |
|