Making it genuine then?
I'd agree 100% that some, if not all the holes are natural, and cosmetically enhanced with a ring around some of them. The tearshaped one in particular is natural, but I'll wait for the report from the archaeologists before drinking my disappointment away.
PS, I have another in the area to look at too, thanks to a new plan I just found ;)
PPS What's the closest recorded cup-and-ring/rockart to these?
Reply | with quote | Posted by slumpystones 3rd July 2007ce 21:20 |
F.A.O. Slumpy . (tiompan, Jul 02, 2007, 08:01)- Re: F.A.O. Slumpy . (Paulus, Jul 02, 2007, 09:07)
- Re: F.A.O. Slumpy . (rocknicker, Jul 02, 2007, 09:20)
- Re: F.A.O. Slumpy . (wideford, Jul 02, 2007, 09:39)
- Re:Co-opted? (Pilgrim, Jul 02, 2007, 10:14)
- Re:Co-opted? (wideford, Jul 02, 2007, 14:11)
- Re:Co-opted? (Pilgrim, Jul 02, 2007, 21:19)
- Re:Co-opted? (slumpystones, Jul 02, 2007, 22:08)
- Re:Co-opted? (Pilgrim, Jul 03, 2007, 01:13)
- Re:Co-opted? (slumpystones, Jul 03, 2007, 08:08)
- Re:Co-opted? (goffik, Jul 03, 2007, 13:27)
- Re:Co-opted? (CianMcLiam, Jul 03, 2007, 13:44)
- Re:Co-opted? (slumpystones, Jul 03, 2007, 14:39)
- Re:Co-opted? (slumpystones, Jul 03, 2007, 21:20)
- Re: F.A.O. Slumpy . (slumpystones, Jul 02, 2007, 10:24)
- Re: F.A.O. Slumpy . (slumpystones, Jul 18, 2007, 13:22)
|
|