Featured Title:
Pictures from the Past: Art and Symbols of the Neolithic and Bronze Age |
 |
| Stone Worlds: Narrative and Reflexivity in Landscape Archaeology |
 |
| Login |
|
Don't have an account yet? You can create one. As a registered user you have some advantages like your own home page, fewer ads, and your contributions link to your page. |
| Who's Online |
There are currently, 130 guests and 4 members online.
You are a guest. To join in, please register for free by clicking here |
| |
Forum: Stones Forum
Moderated by : Andy B , TimPrevett , coldrum , Klingon , MickM , TheCaptain , bat400 , davidmorgan , Runemage , SolarMegalith , sem
Respond to: theory
|
| Review your Reply |
Runemage
Joined:
15-07-2005
Messages: 2412
from UK
 OFF-Line
|  New Message Posted!2011-06-03 14:36
Hi Emmski,
I'm pleased you enjoyed your Newgrange visit. Well done for getting up and going to see how your theory fits in a real place.
Yes, our knowledge of what the ancients did and why they did it, and then why they did it exactly where they did it, is pretty much not much.
Some of their constructions took so long to build and were done in so many stages that it's not certain the people who did the original work envisaged the outcome we see today.
Also, once you think you've found a theory that fits at least one part of the different constructions, you find lots more that don't conform. For me, that's the interest, the never-ending wonderment at what they achieved and how it's stood there for so many thousands of years.
Very interesting to hear those comments about the quartz façade. Little has attracted more criticism of the reconstruction than that, it just looks *so* wrong. When I was there, the guide said they had found those quartz blocks and river pebbles scattered outside the mound and three times O'Kelly built a section of wall that we see today, three times he simulated its collapse over time and all three times, the scatter pattern was identical which is why he decided that's what the outside walls were clad in.
Also, if it was used as flooring in - was it Knowth? - I wonder why it's not mentioned more prominently, it was such an important material to the mound and circle-builders.
I hope your trip has served to pique your interest further, we're always interested to hear about new theories or site-visits and discoveries.
Rune
|
emmski
Joined:
27-04-2011
Messages: 8
OFF-Line
| New Message Posted!2011-06-03 13:58
Rune: Well, I just got back from Newgrange. Interesting stuff, but you're right: it's such a narrow passage that it makes my "artificial cave" theory pretty unlikely. It's a lot of work to protect only a small group of people. I was more surprised, though, at how little we affirmatively know about these sites. For example, the guide explained that they're not even sure if the crystal stones (which now impressively circle and frame the front half of the structure) were originally part of the front wall or were part of the floor. Apparently the Lowth passage has such stones on the floor, not on the wall. Still, it's pretty impressive and interesting.
|
Runemage
Joined:
15-07-2005
Messages: 2412
from UK
OFF-Line
| New Message Posted!2011-05-16 00:25
Hello Getnby and welcome to the Megalithic Portal.
You have some interesting thoughts on the uses for mounds. This forum is for more factual archaeological and evidence-based discussions, but if you'd like to discuss your Goddess/feminine principle ideas, please pop along to our Sacred Sites and Megalithic Mysteries forum where we'd be more than happy to have this as a new topic.
http://www.megalithic.co.uk/modules.php?op=modload&name=Forum&file=viewforum&forum=4
Rune
|
getnby
Joined:
15-05-2011
Messages: 1
from California
OFF-Line
| New Message Posted!2011-05-15 23:08
At the time the passage mounds were built (the common wisdom amoung archeologists is their construction took two or three generations), the social order was matriarchal and matrilineal. To keep it simple, I will describe the operational principles governing its meaning to the groups that built them.
The lead female of the tribe spent the night in them several times a year. She would "pray" and seek for guidance. The next morning, she would leave the Mother's womb and walk to the back of the mound (the Mother's belly) where she would address the Tribe with what she hoped would be solutions to existing problems and promising plans for what they would do with the coming seasons. The experience would not always lead to certainty. Most often it provided no more than a sense of balance. But it was cherished.
She was not always alone. It was said that should she become pregnant or give birth at the time when the sun was known to visit the womb, the child would be blessed. Though there is no way to know, but one would assume there were rules about arranging things. Though it is doubtfull they understood all that much about timing back then.
So, basically, the mound's function was to serve as bed chamber for what we might call a Queen. However, they would have had no such concept. She was more like the Wizened One.
The chamber was probably as ceremonial as it was functional (it was also most likely the birthing room); used only at certain times of the year and under certain precipitating circumstances.
Any. Sorry I didn't keep that all "operational" but I am too tired to go back and correct it.
|
emmski
Joined:
27-04-2011
Messages: 8
OFF-Line
| New Message Posted!2011-04-30 04:09
You are right about Uriel's Machine. I haven't read the book, but I've read about it.
I think even before that book, another a book was written --the Cosmic Serpent -- by scientists names Clube and Napier, and later books and articles were written by guy named Mike Baillie, who reviewed tree ring anomalies and compared them to comet strike data.
The themes of those books and articles are pretty much the same: periodically, lots of comet parts (and occasional the comets themselves) hit the earth, killed a lot lot people, and caused profound global climate change and consequences on ancient civilizations. They're interesting theories. Some of them seem overblown and underresearched, but they're plausible.
My mini-twist is simply an effort to connect the comet theories with the megalith observations, and to suggest that one (the comet strikes) may have somehow caused or contributed to the other (the construction of megaliths).
My premise -- people will do almost anything to keep from being obliterated by a comet from outer space -- may be right, but I'm not sure if I'm riding it too far. Will they really drag 10-ton rocks from miles away just to hide in event of an impending apocalypse? I don't know, but that's the hypothesis.
|
sem
Joined:
12-11-2003
Messages: 1710
from Bridgend,S.Wales
OFF-Line
| New Message Posted!2011-04-30 01:58
Didn't "Uriel's Machine" suggest something similar - regarding comet strikes?
The best I've got is Mt Heckla in Iceland from c2300BC exploding with even better/bigger explosions 1200-1000Bc.
|
emmski
Joined:
27-04-2011
Messages: 8
OFF-Line
| New Message Posted!2011-04-29 16:54
You know your stuff, Rune. Thanks.
|
Runemage
Joined:
15-07-2005
Messages: 2412
from UK
OFF-Line
| New Message Posted!2011-04-29 13:17
Hi Emmski, I'm not sure if you already know, so if not, this may be useful for your Newgrange visit.
Because of its popularity, you can only see the site via a guided tour from the visitor centre. When you arrive, you have to book. Please also allow enough time to include Knowth on your itinerary. It doesn't cost a lot more but visiting the two sites will show you the largest concentration of megalithic art in europe, for me that would be a shame to miss when I was literally on the doorstep. Plus it will let you see several passage-mounds so you can see how your theory would work in practise.
There's not a lot of free time to look around at your leisure, so do go prepared with an itinerary of things you want to look at.
If you have time you could also pull in Dowth and Fourknocks. Here are the links for Knowth Dowth and Fourknocks.
|
emmski
Joined:
27-04-2011
Messages: 8
OFF-Line
| New Message Posted!2011-04-29 07:52
Nice questions. I wish I had more certain answers. Here's my best shot from the hip for now.
As I read the comet timing sites, there were comet strikes in roughly the following time periods (BC): 12500, 10900 (the one that supposedly fried North America and killed the Clovis people), 9500 (thought by some to be the source of the Great Flood legends), 7640 (in 7 places around the world, including south of the coast of England; possibly from Taurid), 3150 (also suspected to be the source of the flood legend), 2345 (also, maybe flood legend, maybe Taurid), 2213 (Hale Bopp), 2193, 1628, and 1198. I'll try to check the dates again.
My impression is that megaliths started to be built around 3100 or so. (Gobekli Tepe is an outlier both in time and geography).
A very close alignment of the dates seems unlikely, as comet impact dates and megalith dates are uncertain.
My guess (hypothesis?) is that people would build these shelters shortly after a comet storm kicked their collective behinds, but the structures would fall into disuse after a period of time. Then people would come to use the shelters for other purposes, such as cemetaries or religion or as a more stable foundation for astronomical observations. Then if another comet storm occurred, more people would see the value of building more shelters, which would then fall into disuse, etc.
Most of why I think it's possible, though, is that (1) I can't imagine why anybody would go to the trouble of building/cutting/hauling these structures unless they thought that some monstrous calamity was about the befall them, (2) I can't imagine what other calamities would qualify, and (3) a lot of the megalithic structures do look [roughly] like they could have been the framework for "bomb shelters" in the past. For example, Newgrange looks like someone tried to build a cave.
Now, all we have is the "chimneys after a housefire," so to speak.
Anyway, hopefully it's worth considering.
|
bat400
Joined:
10-04-2006
Messages: 1334
from South Central Indiana, US
OFF-Line
| New Message Posted!2011-04-29 04:40
Quote:
|
On 2011-04-27 09:24, emmski wrote:
....The start of the megalith period coincides with the major comet strikes described in comet catastrophe theories, .... |
|
But, does it? Strikes me [no pun intended] you try to confirm whether or not this is true as Step 1. (And how valid do the "comet catastrophe theories" appear to be in the first place?)
And if it were true, how long does each period (megalithic building; comet catastrophe) last? Is there a match? If a comet strike didn't occur in an area for a number of generations, would they continue to build the structures? for the same reason?
| |
|
Main News