The Modern Antiquarian. Stone Circles, Ancient Sites, Neolithic Monuments, Ancient Monuments, Prehistoric Sites, Megalithic MysteriesThe Modern Antiquarian

Head To Head   The Modern Antiquarian   Trethevy Quoit Forum Start a topic | Search
Trethevy Quoit
Re: Similarities elsewhere?
391 messages
Select a forum:
thesweetcheat wrote:
Roy said yesterday that no stones had been removed from site, particularly not the backstone. He also said that the fallen/leaning stone in the chamber is not the backstone. So where's the backstone been moved to?

Sorry, I assumed the suggestion was that it was the stone moved to form the "buttress" - if it isn't that means the backstone is now somewhere else in the structure and also that another stone has been moved to form the "buttress".

There's too many stones being moved about for no good reason here, and all between 1824 and 1850. Surely some of the writers in the mid-19 century would have known/been told about a substantial remodelling of the structure in the previous 20 years?!



It's difficult for me to elaborate, having seen Roys model but not read the whole thread, as i don't want to give anything away that's not already public.


Reply | with quote
harestonesdown
Posted by harestonesdown
2nd April 2013ce
18:44

In reply to:

Re: Similarities elsewhere? (thesweetcheat)

1 reply:

Re: Similarities elsewhere? (thesweetcheat)

Messages in this topic: