|
 Log in |
Register
|
|
 Head To Head The Modern Antiquarian Kilmartin Area Forum | Start a topic | Search |
21 messages | Select a forum: |
| Hi tiompan, Thanks for your response. tiompan wrote: Hi Pilgrim , It is often suggested that standing stones with RA were carved in situ then moved to be erected , evidence for this is the discovery of markings below ground level and hence difficult to carve. Interesting. I asked the question because the marks seem only to go up so far on this stone, which suggest to me that it was carved after it had been erected (or am I being height-ist?). Would it not be the case that there might be an increase in ground cover (humic layer etc.) that could account for the markings below ground level? [edited: of course not; that would preclude packing stones, you numpty!] It's not something I know anything about, so forgive me if I appear thick. tiompan wrote: Personally I think a lot of the carvings would have been done at least before erection if only because it was easier but maybe that misses some important point in relation to ritual or the markings having some relevance to the erection site . Aye. Strange how one of them sits astride the the large "gouge". This would be co-opted, I take it? Peace Pilgrim X Reply | with quote |  6th July 2007ce 10:46 In reply to: Re: RA Query (tiompan) |
Messages in this topic: |
|