Featured Title:
Bending the Boyne: a Novel of Ancient Ireland |
 |
| A Guide to Stone Circles (New Edition), Aubrey Burl |
 |
| 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, 112 guests and 2 members online.
You are a guest. To join in, please register for free by clicking here |
| |
Moderated by : Andy B , TimPrevett , coldrum , Klingon , MickM , TheCaptain , bat400 , davidmorgan , Runemage , SolarMegalith , sem
The Megalithic Portal and Megalith Map : Index >>
Stones Forum >> Another TV prog: 'Stonehenge Decoded' on National Geographic
|
 |
| Author |
Another TV prog: 'Stonehenge Decoded' on National Geographic |
Andy B
Joined:
13-02-2001
Messages: 7001
from Surrey, UK
 OFF-Line
|  Posted 30-05-2008 at 20:58
Adam Stanford writes: For those who receive the National Geographic Channel, (I don't) "Stonehenge Decoded" is to be broadcast this Sunday at 8pm. There may be a bit of Aerial-Cam stuff in it, there is in the trailer you can view online:
http://natgeochannel.co.uk/Video/Default.aspx?FeaturedVideoId=91
I may have to try and see if I can watch it at the pub or somewhere that gets NGC.
Cheers
Adam Stanford
web >> http://www.aerial-cam.co.uk
web >> http://www.archaeology-safaris.co.uk
 Profile
 Email
 Reply
|
chimera
Joined:
09-09-2006
Messages: 1508
from Australia
OFF-Line
| Posted 30-05-2008 at 21:34
Speculating.. if the 2 avenues to Avon are drawn out they will meet. Whatever the sunrays meant, their intersection would mean something. Is there evidence of a sign there, perhaps a hilltop?
Profile
Reply
|
mikecroley
Joined:
27-10-2006
Messages: 1655
OFF-Line
| Posted 01-06-2008 at 22:06
That was a giggle! Mike Pitts always cracks me up with his wacky way of looking at things, so him showing up was a bonus.
All we needed was Devereux's shamanic death roads and we'd have a full house of loonies. Britain certainly has talent LOL! The comedy club of the world, a laughing stock.
mike
mike
Profile
Reply
|
tiompan
Joined:
09-01-2005
Messages: 2651
OFF-Line
| Posted 02-06-2008 at 09:48
Quote:
|
On 2008-05-30 21:34, chimera wrote:
Speculating.. if the 2 avenues to Avon are drawn out they will meet. Whatever the sunrays meant, their intersection would mean something. Is there evidence of a sign there, perhaps a hilltop?
|
|
They would meet at SU 1367 4345 give or take 15 m , there is nothing marked on the map ,the spot is about 250 m SE of a group of tumuli and just east of a field boundary.
Profile
Reply
|
chimera
Joined:
09-09-2006
Messages: 1508
from Australia
OFF-Line
| Posted 03-06-2008 at 06:04
Oh? Their aerial-photo maps 2500 BC had defects so line-of-sight was the method. Then 250 yards off true-alignment may be as good as it gets - what distance is the point away from the 2 avenues? The tumuli. hmmm..
Profile
Reply
|
tiompan
Joined:
09-01-2005
Messages: 2651
OFF-Line
| Posted 03-06-2008 at 08:14
Quote:
|
On 2008-06-03 06:04, chimera wrote:
Oh? Their aerial-photo maps 2500 BC had defects so line-of-sight was the method. Then 250 yards off true-alignment may be as good as it gets - what distance is the point away from the 2 avenues? The tumuli. hmmm..
|
|
C , I was assuming that the two avenues were the two arms of the Stonehenge avenue but have just realised that you may have meant the The short (180 m ? )Durringtom Walls avenue as the second , if so I only have a rough alignment for it but don't know it's location in relation to the monument and therefore can't say where it would it meet the other . A map would showing the relation would be good . Hope this makes some sort of sense .
Profile
Reply
|
chimera
Joined:
09-09-2006
Messages: 1508
from Australia
OFF-Line
| Posted 03-06-2008 at 08:52
This is getting to be comical, as I thought I had misread the brief comments on Durrington and that really the avenues are parallel.
I don't even know which sides of the Avon the 2 place are.
help...
Profile
Reply
|
tiompan
Joined:
09-01-2005
Messages: 2651
OFF-Line
| Posted 03-06-2008 at 10:47
Quote:
|
On 2008-06-03 08:52, chimera wrote:
This is getting to be comical, as I thought I had misread the brief comments on Durrington and that really the avenues are parallel.
I don't even know which sides of the Avon the 2 place are.
help...
|
|
The Stonehenge avenue is aligned approx 50 degrees from monument to the NE whereas what I can work out from wee scraps of info the Durrington avenue is something like 306 degrees ,so they would both intersect at approx SU 1444 4412 which is almost on the road by the golf driving range at Larkhill .
However the other arm of the Stonehenge avenue and the Durrington avenue ,both oriented from the Avon would meet at approx SU 12639 45450 whuich is more intersting in tha tis close to the Knighton Long Barrow and the trig point on the 147 m OD contour . I don't know the horizon profile but if the hill was visible it just might provide a declination for summer solstice sunset .
Profile
Reply
|
chimera
Joined:
09-09-2006
Messages: 1508
from Australia
OFF-Line
| Posted 04-06-2008 at 08:51
Could you give the bearings in that last example?
The summer solstice sunset, approximately in line with winter solstice sunrise, may relate to this quote from Angie Lake (thank you Angie).
(quote) "Hi Andy
If you want a suggestion for something discovered at an already discovered site, how about ..the important SW-positioned
'Fertility rite stone' (stone 16 at Stonehenge)... with the 'V' mark on its inside and big belly on its outside, noticed at sunrise on 6 Dec 2006? There was also a patch of sun in the shape of a sun-dagger on Stone 57 that morning, which just about positioned itself in the carved 'rectangle', but I haven't posted those pix yet!
Two or three people had sat on the ground, leaning against the inverted 'V', all night but didn't mind me taking pics of it around sunset (when I arrived) and again in the morning. They probably wondered what the heck I was looking at, as it does need the right light to make the mark distinguishable [see pic from sunrise visit with Jack on 6.12.07].
The fact that it's behind the remaining Great Trilithon [stone 56] means it could possibly have caught a glimpse of sun between the tallest stones when stone 55 (other half of Gt Trilithon) was still upright. The light could have reached there after shining briefly between stones 30 and 1. (I took a steel rule and placed it on a plan in an old official guide to Stonehenge to check.)
Stone 16 also seems to align with the centre of the Avenue.
At the time, the peoples' heads were just underneath the 'V' as they sat on the ground. You can guess at its approx. height off the ground by looking at posted pic [also in 'latest comments' since my recent comment regarding 'V' shape also being similar to 'antler pick' symbol.]
[Incidentally: I only saw the 'V' for the first time when looking at my photos developed after 6 Dec. 06, and on subsequent viewing of my camcorder film. I'd photographed the stone because I had twice - 03 and 06 - dowsed the area between it and the Great Trilithon to be the most important area at Stonehenge. I know that seems unusual.]
What intrigues me is that the 'V' was so well highlighted on 6 Dec sunrise, so maybe it is meant to be important at Winter Solstice? (Also, it's in the SW arc of the circle.
NB!! [on 3rd January 2008]
Further to this comment (above) made in reply to Chimera on 26 Dec, I was stunned to read the following tonight in an old copy of 'Stonehenge - Archaeology and Interpretation' by R J C Atkinson, (reprint with revisions, 1979):
(Page 126)
"A careful survey of the various degrees of tooling and polishing to which the stones have been subjected shows that the main concern of the builders was to produce a presentable finish on those surfaces which would be seen from the interior* of the site.
The best finish thus occurs on the inner faces of the uprights. Their sides have often been left in the second (shallow groove) stage of dressing, while their outer faces are frequently very rough, with large irregularities only perfunctorily reduced by deliberate coarse tooling.
The chief exceptions to this rule are the sides and outer faces of the uprights of the great central trilithon (55, 56), which have been finished as carefully as the inner face. This suggests that one of the prinicipal ritual stations in the monument may have been behind* this trilithon, from which these surfaces would be visible. It is notable, too, that the finish of the lintels is in general much higher than that of the uprights."
*[those two words were printed in italics.]
Well, well...... how odd that he should have found this. And I'd dowsed the same thing about that area's importance.
Incidentally, this is the first time I'd read that, and I don't recall Burl using that info in his Stonehenge books, which I HAD read in the past year or so.
In Atkinson's book, there is even a photo [Plate 5] of the NW side of Stone 16 (which I hadn't photographed) to illustrate the neat tooling on it. There is no mention in the book of the 'V' mark. The b & w photo shows how flat the inner surface of the stone is, and how curved the outer face looks. I have also noticed before how well-finished Stone 16 looks when viewed from inside the circle, looking SW. It is almost perfectly rectangular with its straight top and sides.
Angie .(end quote).
Looking at plans, it seems as if 16 is in line with the trilithon upright, and not between . Then the missing next stone would likely also be in line with the other upright. The existant 16 and upright have the same rectangle shape, so perhaps 16 and its next stone were copies of the trilithon , with matching in-line walls. This extra precision would suggest a chamber if an official stood within it, with the sunrise striking a person and not 16. The heel stone shadow would fall on him, facing the altar. And the sunray would pass on and not be blocked by stone.
Perhaps the V marks the edge of sunlight at solstice..
? ?
Posted 03-01-2008 at 15:12
Maybe it wasn't anything to do with Summer Solstice sunrise, but more to do with Winter Solstice sunset? Arriving at a point near the so-called Altar Stone in the centre of Stonehenge, they'd see the lowering light of the sun shining between the uprights of the Great Trilithon. Maybe they stood on the Altar Stone [if it was always recumbent] to view this over the top of the bluestone at the apex of the horseshoe? Then passing between Gt. Trilithon Stones 56 and 57, and entering the area between the Gt.Trilithon and Stones 15/16, which 'captured' sunlight from the 'dying' winter sun. This would seem a 'hallowed' area, with those stones 15/16 decorated with female and male symbols, associated with their prayers to the gods for renewal at the shortest day of the year, framing the light shining between them.
Maybe even a symbolic 'coupling' of priest/priestess occured here?
Profile
Reply
|
Andy B
Joined:
13-02-2001
Messages: 7001
from Surrey, UK
OFF-Line
| Posted 04-06-2008 at 14:03
I'm going to take this thread 'down below' for continuation...
Profile
Email
Reply
|
tiompan
Joined:
09-01-2005
Messages: 2651
OFF-Line
| Posted 04-06-2008 at 22:07
Quote:
|
On 2008-06-04 08:51, chimera wrote:
Could you give the bearings in that last example?
(end quote).
339 & 307 degrees .
Looking at plans, it seems as if 16 is in line with the trilithon upright, and not between . Then the missing next stone would likely also be in line with the other upright. The existant 16 and upright have the same rectangle shape, so perhaps 16 and its next stone were copies of the trilithon , with matching in-line walls. This extra precision would suggest a chamber if an official stood within it, with the sunrise striking a person and not 16. The heel stone shadow would fall on him, facing the altar. And the sunray would pass on and not be blocked by stone.
Perhaps the V marks the edge of sunlight at solstice..
? ?
Posted 03-01-2008 at 15:12
Maybe it wasn't anything to do with Summer Solstice sunrise, but more to do with Winter Solstice sunset? Arriving at a point near the so-called Altar Stone in the centre of Stonehenge, they'd see the lowering light of the sun shining between the uprights of the Great Trilithon. Maybe they stood on the Altar Stone [if it was always recumbent] to view this over the top of the bluestone at the apex of the horseshoe? Then passing between Gt. Trilithon Stones 56 and 57, and entering the area between the Gt.Trilithon and Stones 15/16, which 'captured' sunlight from the 'dying' winter sun. This would seem a 'hallowed' area, with those stones 15/16 decorated with female and male symbols, associated with their prayers to the gods for renewal at the shortest day of the year, framing the light shining between them.
Maybe even a symbolic 'coupling' of priest/priestess occured here?
|
|
Profile
Reply
|
chimera
Joined:
09-09-2006
Messages: 1508
from Australia
OFF-Line
| Posted 05-06-2008 at 06:31
It sounds like Knighton Long Barrow is not particularly significant.
The avenues' extension, also? Is that how it is?
Profile
Reply
|
tiompan
Joined:
09-01-2005
Messages: 2651
OFF-Line
| Posted 05-06-2008 at 17:13
Quote:
|
On 2008-06-05 06:31, chimera wrote:
It sounds like Knighton Long Barrow is not particularly significant.
The avenues' extension, also? Is that how it is?
|
|
Not sure what your'e asking but the barrow seems a sufficently significant barrow , see http://history.wiltshire.gov.uk/smr/getsmr.php?id=12266 .
If ,indeed one or both of the avenues meet there it's really down to the individual if they consider the "alignment " significant , you would have a hard job convincing some and others might find it exciting .
Profile
Reply
|
chimera
Joined:
09-09-2006
Messages: 1508
from Australia
OFF-Line
| Posted 06-06-2008 at 04:14
I clicked but they don't seem very excited.
"Sorry, no keywords were found matching "knighton long barrow".
Information on searching the calalogue can be found here.
Contact Details
Archaeology Service
Wiltshire and Swindon History Centre
Cocklebury Road
Chippenham"
Profile
Reply
|
tiompan
Joined:
09-01-2005
Messages: 2651
OFF-Line
| Posted 06-06-2008 at 08:33
Quote:
|
On 2008-06-06 04:14, chimera wrote:
I clicked but they don't seem very excited.
"Sorry, no keywords were found matching "knighton long barrow".
Information on searching the calalogue can be found here.
Contact Details
Archaeology Service
Wiltshire and Swindon History Centre
Cocklebury Road
Chippenham"
|
|
Starnge , I have just retried it and it worked fine .
Profile
Reply
|
chimera
Joined:
09-09-2006
Messages: 1508
from Australia
OFF-Line
| Posted 06-06-2008 at 10:03
OK got it, but it's not much. So maybe it lines up with both Stonh. and Durring. Maybe not...
Profile
Reply
|
tiompan
Joined:
09-01-2005
Messages: 2651
OFF-Line
| Posted 06-06-2008 at 15:16
Quote:
|
On 2008-06-06 10:03, chimera wrote:
OK got it, but it's not much. So maybe it lines up with both Stonh. and Durring. Maybe not...
|
|
I have just rechecked and the site in the SMR is Knighton Down Long Barrow when the eastern arm of the avenue is aligned on Knighton Long Barrow which is not listed on the SMR . Using "Magic " the barrow appears to be on the top of a hill . The problem are , the exact location and orienation of the Durrington avenue location and orienation and whether the site was visible from the avenue .But as it stands the barrow is line with the eastern stonehenge avenue .Meaningful ? you decide .
Profile
Reply
|
chimera
Joined:
09-09-2006
Messages: 1508
from Australia
OFF-Line
| Posted 06-06-2008 at 23:34
I'm a bit wobbly on "eastern avenue" being 339, or 307 bearing.
What is the usual understanding of the reason for that avenue?
Profile
Reply
|
tiompan
Joined:
09-01-2005
Messages: 2651
OFF-Line
| Posted 07-06-2008 at 20:52
Quote:
|
On 2008-06-06 23:34, chimera wrote:
I'm a bit wobbly on "eastern avenue" being 339, or 307 bearing.
What is the usual understanding of the reason for that avenue?
|
|
The eastern arm of the stonehenge avenue is aligned 339 degrees looking from the Avon towards Knighton .The Durrington Walls avenue , as close as I can work out from a small sectiom of amp thatt may haev a dodgy northing ,is aligned 306 degrees looking from the Avon .
Profile
Reply
|
chimera
Joined:
09-09-2006
Messages: 1508
from Australia
OFF-Line
| Posted 07-06-2008 at 22:09
Ah, so! The eastern avenue bends SE to the Avon. Is there a reason such as the landscape, for bending it? Could Stonh. have been built more soutward to allow a straight run to sunrise and the Avon?
Profile
Reply
| |
| Go to Page: 1 | 2 |
|
|
|
|
|
IMPORTANT NOTES: This site uses COOKIES. Please do not use this web site if you do not agree to our Terms and Conditions of use.
If you plan to visit ancient sites in person, please make sure you follow our Charter.
Articles, photographs and comments are the property of their respective authors or contributors, please contact them for permission to reproduce. Site design ©1997-2012 Andy Burnham.
|
Main News