The Modern Antiquarian. Stone Circles, Ancient Sites, Neolithic Monuments, Ancient Monuments, Prehistoric Sites, Megalithic MysteriesThe Modern Antiquarian
Home Latest Posts Forums Maps Help
Browse Sites News Blog Contributors The Books
Head To Head   The Modern Antiquarian   General Discussion Forum Start a topic | Search
The Modern Antiquarian
Re: Conclusions...Stone circles, are we learning much?
253 messages
Select a forum:
"Phew , back to the decryption , sounds more like "Northand " or "handto " in Neolithic rhyming slang ?"

Haha. You must have seen the intro to the latest version of the book (or I missed the reference entirely): A bit different from Stonehenge this one. It is not even vaguely complex. To me it seems very obvious, especially with all the detailed drawings around the perimeter showing what to do. So I find myself wondering if I am imposing some of these development systems (which would lead directly to a "Stonehenge" being built) onto those monuments: It's a bit weird putting these ideas together and then finding that all of them seem to have been constructed.

If Stonehenge is engineering brilliance, then that other set is intellectual genius. If they're what I think they might be, then the whole set-up is so profound, simple, logical and obvious that future generations will look back with amazement; not at the interpretation, but at how long we took to work it out. But can it really be that obvious? I'm struggling with this so think I need the people who really know the place to take a look.


 This topic is locked
jonmor
Posted by jonmor
5th November 2013ce
19:31

In reply to:

Re: Conclusions...Stone circles, are we learning much? (tiompan)

1 reply:

Re: Conclusions...Stone circles, are we learning much? (tiompan)

Messages in this topic:

Terms & Conditions  |  Home  |  Julian Cope presents Head Heritage Top of page