| Author |
Henges |
stu_tyrer
Joined:
20-09-2006
Messages: 1
from Stockport, Cheshire
 OFF-Line
|  Posted 28-09-2006 at 15:14
Hi,
I'm currently studying Archaeology at A level and for my coursework I am studying Arbor Low henge. I was wondering if anybody had any information on Arbor Low or indeed henges in general that they think may be of use to me.
thanks,
stu
 Profile
 Reply
|
ocifant
Joined:
13-10-2002
Messages: 186
from London
OFF-Line
|  Posted 28-09-2006 at 15:21
Unfortunately, studying consists of more than just posting a question to a forum (or it did in my day, maybe things have changed?)
If you were to expend a little energy on researching the subject properly, you'd find a wealth of information about extant henges on this site. Also on the Modern Antiquarian web site. Wikipedia I believe has a reasonable article on Arbor Low and on henges in general.
If all else fails, Google is your friend... good luck with the studying!
[ This message was edited by: ocifant on 2006-09-28 15:22 ]
Profile
Reply
|
cropredy
Joined:
01-01-2006
Messages: 5539
from Oxon
OFF-Line
| Posted 21-10-2006 at 21:02
Hello,
Having visited Arbor low, in sunny Derby's.
I would confirm that it is similer in all respects to all other henges.
The stones have been pushed over, so what?
The henge design is still operating, the path of the aether is still directed to where it was desired to go and be confined.
Met a very learned gentleman, who knew every detail of the regions megalithic matter, but could not comprehend of the metaphysical aspect of the matter.
On informing him that I had been banned from TMA, he laughed and expressed how wonderfull , to be banned from the fringe, what an achiement.
I explained to him that the aether was constantly striving to become matter, and that the fringe would constantly strive to become the matter fact of megaliths, that the megalithic forums would always strive to become the establishment, but there are a few who are beyond the state of matter and wish to remain as such, he looked a little perplexed.
The aether ( non matter) is influenced by the matter to become matter, no matter if you dont understand this.
I DO.
Kevin
Profile
Reply
|
rbatham
Joined:
04-04-2006
Messages: 679
from Western Australia
OFF-Line
| Posted 22-10-2006 at 13:16
Quote:
|
On 2006-09-28 15:14, stu_tyrer wrote:
Hi,
I'm currently studying Archaeology at A level and for my coursework I am studying Arbor Low henge. I was wondering if anybody had any information on Arbor Low or indeed henges in general that they think may be of use to me.
thanks,
stu
|
|
To pass your GCE you must stick to convention. Give answers that the examiners want.I suggest you visit the site and do your own survey, measurements, alignments etc. thats if your allowed to.
take no notice of Kevin. he's unconventional. But we love him really. Roy
Profile
 Email
Reply
|
cropredy
Joined:
01-01-2006
Messages: 5539
from Oxon
OFF-Line
| Posted 22-10-2006 at 17:07
Stu_tyrer,
One thing I noted at arbor low, was the different types of limestone used .
If you sourced the local quarries , matched which stone came from which quarry, I sense you would more than impress your A-level people.
Once you study the rocks , you can begin to notice the diffeences.
I believe the differences will have been purposefull, for a specific reason, to begin to contemplate this learn about chirality.
Kevin
Profile
Reply
|
Andy B
Joined:
13-02-2001
Messages: 7001
from Surrey, UK
OFF-Line
| Posted 23-10-2006 at 13:34
Discussion of whether the stones fell down over time or were deliberately laid flat (as I think Burl suggests) would be interesting too. Both ideas have things going for them so it's not all cut and dried.
Profile
Email
Reply
|
Tyrebagger
Joined:
18-09-2006
Messages: 7
from Aberdeenshire
OFF-Line
| Posted 23-10-2006 at 14:54
Quote:
|
On 2006-10-23 13:34, Andy B wrote:
Discussion of whether the stones fell down over time or were deliberately laid flat (as I think Burl suggests) would be interesting too. Both ideas have things going for them so it's not all cut and dried.
|
|
Did they fall or were they pushed? Brandsbutt & Berrybrae are examples of sites 'vandalised' in antiquity, so its quite possible.
Profile
Reply
|
TimPrevett
Joined:
02-10-2012
Messages: 1193
from Cheshire / Manchester
OFF-Line
| Posted 23-10-2006 at 20:27
Brandsbutt & Berrybrae are examples of sites 'vandalised' in antiquity, so its quite possible.
Not forgetting Bryn Celli Ddu - Circle / Henge smashed up to make way for a passage grave with a different alignment.
Cheers
Tim
Profile
Reply
|
Andy B
Joined:
13-02-2001
Messages: 7001
from Surrey, UK
OFF-Line
| Posted 23-10-2006 at 21:32
I think Burl suggests they were deliberately laid flat at the time of construction.
Profile
Email
Reply
|
Tyrebagger
Joined:
18-09-2006
Messages: 7
from Aberdeenshire
OFF-Line
| Posted 23-10-2006 at 23:03
Quote:
|
On 2006-10-23 21:32, Andy B wrote:
I think Burl suggests they were deliberately laid flat at the time of construction.
|
|
In my copy of A guide to the Stone Circles...(1995) AB is of the opinion that they once stood. Has his opinion subsequently changed?
Profile
Reply
|
cropredy
Joined:
01-01-2006
Messages: 5539
from Oxon
OFF-Line
| Posted 23-10-2006 at 23:41
As I was due to meet someone when I went to arbor low, I tended to stay inside the circle, this allowed me to check out what I can detect in detail.
There are two crossing points inside the circle that the henge is built around.
The stones were positioned on specific points or nodules created by the geometric patterns created by the two crossing points.
These points were fundementaly near what would have been the base of the stones when they were stood up.
As this dowsing ability is limited to only a few people, you will just have to consider what i detect, but if you asked me to say where the stones should be placed in the detectable patterns available at arbor low, it would take me less than an hour to pinpoint all the spots, and at the moment most of those spots coincide with the outer ends of most of the flat stones.
IMHO, they have been pushed over, but this is just my opinion .
The round barrow that is sort of built into the henge embankment, is precisely positioned over a detectable series of spirals, another set of these spirals occur outside the henge just, in a line running to the south, I would suspect this was a long barrow.
It is one heck of a mighty powerfull place, the resultant flows of the available aether flows would perhaps be too much for most people to cope with, so if you pushed the stones over, you would decrease the potential of the site.
I honestly consider these sites were a part of a complex system, unless all the parts of this system are connected, you will perhaps cause harm to people by exposing them to the wrong part of the dual flows, the flows can be earthed, by copper rods, or more drastically by steel rods, these rods need to be positioned precisely, the result is only temporary, and distance related, the flows will resume normal pathways etc not too far away from where they are earthed.
The most common symbol to depict this is St George slaying the dragon, OH NO HE HAS NOT, THANK FULLY.
Kevin
Profile
Reply
|
Andy B
Joined:
13-02-2001
Messages: 7001
from Surrey, UK
OFF-Line
| Posted 24-10-2006 at 15:08
OK, thanks, it's not Burl then, memory fails, one of the other writers in the field definitely claimed that - Barnatt?
I don't know
Profile
Email
Reply
|
baz
Joined:
16-06-2001
Messages: 67
from West Midlands, UK
OFF-Line
| Posted 24-10-2006 at 18:12
John Barnatt is adamant that the stones at Arbor Low originally stood. If you visit the site with him he shows where some of the stones have been broken off at ground level and one edge of the fallen part matches up with the piece which is left in the ground.
Profile
Email
Reply
|
Tyrebagger
Joined:
18-09-2006
Messages: 7
from Aberdeenshire
OFF-Line
|  Posted 24-10-2006 at 20:47
Quote:
|
On 2006-10-24 15:08, Andy B wrote:
OK, thanks, it's not Burl then, memory fails, one of the other writers in the field definitely claimed that - Barnatt?
I don't know
|
|
Julian Cope? 
Profile
Reply
|
rbatham
Joined:
04-04-2006
Messages: 679
from Western Australia
OFF-Line
| Posted 25-10-2006 at 02:38
Quote:
|
On 2006-10-23 13:34, Andy B wrote:
Discussion of whether the stones fell down over time or were deliberately laid flat (as I think Burl suggests) would be interesting too. Both ideas have things going for them so it's not all cut and dried.
|
|
 Andy, read somewhere that at SH the stones were buried at least 2 mtrs. there is an engineereing principle about the critical 1/3. if stones are buried 1/3 their hieght it makes them very stable, hurricanes and wild horses wouldn't push them over. so is there anything at arbor low to show that the stones were never buried.? Roy
[ This message was edited by: rbatham on 2006-10-25 12:44 ]
Profile
Email
Reply
|
hamish
Joined:
20-06-2001
Messages: 156
from Bristol
OFF-Line
| Posted 25-10-2006 at 09:40
You're at it again Kevin, anybody can dowse,it is not limited to a few people.I dowse at stone circles,maybe I look for different things than you but I am definately dowsing. I have never been to Arbor Low hope to one day. Will definately look at the layed down stones and try to ascertain why they are as they are.
H
[quote]
On 2006-10-23 23:41, cropredy wrote:
.
As this dowsing ability is limited to only a few people, you will just have to consider what i detect, but if you asked me to say where the stones should be placed in the detectable patterns available at arbor low, it would take me less than an hour to pinpoint all the spots, and at the moment most of those spots coincide with the outer ends of most of the flat stones.
Profile
Email
Reply
|
rbatham
Joined:
04-04-2006
Messages: 679
from Western Australia
OFF-Line
| Posted 25-10-2006 at 12:50
Hey! Get below decks you scurvy knaves. dowsing is not allowed up here.
Profile
Email
Reply
|
cropredy
Joined:
01-01-2006
Messages: 5539
from Oxon
OFF-Line
| Posted 25-10-2006 at 14:31
Rbatham,
that should have been the Captain saying that, then i could have replied ,
I, I, captain, thee be reet, back into the lower regions for me.
Hamish,
You are quite correct about many people been able to D*wse, I just feel like I'M all on my own sometimes, but enough of this talk, this is the serious part, and I must return into the aether ( trouble is, it's everywhere)
Kevin
Profile
Reply
|
mithra
Joined:
27-06-2006
Messages: 562
OFF-Line
| Posted 25-10-2006 at 16:17
Think it might've been me that gave information on the stones originally standing upright at Arbor Low - on previous forum on this site.
It's mentioned in a book by the archaeologist Peter Clayton, quote:
''......a local man, William Normanshaw, who told the antiquary the Revd Samuel Pegge that he remembered some of them standing in the early 18th century.''
Excavations have not found any sockets into which stones were slotted. This could be because the sockets have long filled with earth or blocking stones were used (or perhaps a combination of the two, using only shallow sockets.)
Someone mentioned 'different types of limestone used for stones' - this is not strictly true. The limestone used for the stones all came from a nearby source - which is different from that found on site in the rubble of the banks. Mithra.
Profile
Reply
|
rbatham
Joined:
04-04-2006
Messages: 679
from Western Australia
OFF-Line
| Posted 27-10-2006 at 03:17
Quote:
|
On 2006-10-25 16:17, mithra wrote:
Excavations have not found any sockets into which stones were slotted. This could be because the sockets have long filled with earth or blocking stones were used (or perhaps a combination of the two, using only shallow sockets.)
|
|
Archaeologists can tell if an excavation has been made by the distubance of the different strata of the soil. I remember an episode of 'Meet the Ancestors' where ancient graves 6ft deep were found simply by wetting the surface. the water soaks in more easily where the excavation was made and the outline shows clearly. Roy
Profile
Email
Reply
|
Main News