|
 Log in |
Register
|
|
 Head To Head The Modern Antiquarian Stonehenge Forum | Start a topic | Search |
51 messages | Select a forum: |
tiompan wrote: Annexus Quam wrote: They've been toying with this idea that the early monument was built around the Heel Stone for a couple of years, suggesting that it was there from some time after the mesolithic posts. It certainly is an attractive idea as more and more menhirs (e.g.the ones in the Algarve) are giving very ancient dates and as more and more new research outside the UK is revealing equinox/solstice allignments with a low probability of it all being pure coincidence. Hasn't the Heel Stone's pit been dug for organic material (with modern methods, not 100 years ago)? The problem is that apart from the extreme conjecture about processions at the speed of sarsen movers their alignments are inaccurate i.e. the pit does not align with the solstice sun set being about five weeks out . Even if it was spot on , (which it clearly isn't ) it is simply a pit that we know nothing about , it could be from any date and certainly wouldn't indicate any intention on behalf of the builders . Looks like the Cursus pits and putative alignments and procession have quietly been forgotten about . Not a mention in this more recent survey also involving the Gaffneys . https://www.academia.edu/75937[...]nge_through_multi-receiver_EMI Reply | with quote |  19th August 2014ce 21:57 In reply to: Re: More evidence on Stonehenge/Solar connections (tiompan) |
Messages in this topic: |