Featured Title:
Redhead, the new thriller by Ian Cook 'a compulsive read' |
 |
| MeZolith Graphic Novel |
 |
| 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 6 members online.
You are a guest. To join in, please register for free by clicking here |
| |
Moderated by : davidmorgan , TimPrevett , Andy B , Klingon , MickM , bat400 , sem , Runemage , TheCaptain
The Megalithic Portal and Megalith Map : Index >>
Sacred Sites and Megalithic Mysteries >> STONE-AGE SENSITIVITY
|
 |
| Page 10 of 11 ( 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 ) |
| Author |
STONE-AGE SENSITIVITY |
tiompan
Joined:
09-01-2005
Messages: 2638
 OFF-Line
|  Posted 30-07-2010 at 17:11
Quote:
|
On 2010-07-30 13:15, karloff wrote:
|
|
Hi
I was responding to your Stonehenge question so my monument choice was based on that, but I'm happy to keep going with this so what monuments are particularly puzzling?
[/quote]
I realise that the comment was intended for Cerrig but if I may include a small sample to begin with ;cursus , ,henge , Long Barrrow , rock art site , timber circle , stone circle , ring cairn ,stone row , all of which I find totally puzzling .The land rights , social reproduction , ritual centre , funereal are more reasonable than the irrefutable "is it really worth considering ? energy " approach , bit they are still still glib and superficial .
George
 Profile
 Reply
|
tiompan
Joined:
09-01-2005
Messages: 2638
OFF-Line
| Posted 30-07-2010 at 18:33
Quote:
|
On 2010-07-28 10:09, vlad wrote:
"Go and learn dowsing yourself. It`s about a personal development or adventure, not necessarily about finding some stones."
|
|
That's not the usual response from dowsers but is similar to what I suggested was the case , to you , many months ago .
George
Profile
Reply
|
chimera
Joined:
09-09-2006
Messages: 1508
from Australia
OFF-Line
| Posted 30-07-2010 at 21:35
"It seems everyone marks his territory with what one has in one`s head. My provocation succeeded. Good bye"
Hullo Vlad,
Questions should provoke thought, and I agree that farmers marked their territory, and probably priests also were masters of creation with their megalith territory. Probably farm, megalith and universe were the same concept in 3 sizes. Or the universe saw men in 2 sizes, as individual farmer and tribal priest. Perhaps the megaliths only made sense to individuals if they personally connected with landscape.
Profile
Reply
|
cerrig
Joined:
25-09-2009
Messages: 907
from Brecon Beacons
OFF-Line
| Posted 30-07-2010 at 23:46
[/quote]
Hi
I was responding to your Stonehenge question so my monument choice was based on that, but I'm happy to keep going with this so what monuments are particularly puzzling?
[/quote]
Hi Karlof,
Stonehenge!!! I'm still puzzled. Maybe you could follow Georges suggestion and explain what a henge is all about first. Where the inspiration for the stone arrangements came from should wait i think. There are other things to explore before those, with your indulgence of course.
[ This message was edited by: cerrig on 2010-08-04 03:06 ]
Profile
Reply
|
cerrig
Joined:
25-09-2009
Messages: 907
from Brecon Beacons
OFF-Line
| Posted 30-07-2010 at 23:52
Quote:
|
On 2010-07-30 17:11, tiompan wrote:
[quote]
On 2010-07-30 13:15, karloff wrote:
|
|
Hi
I was responding to your Stonehenge question so my monument choice was based on that, but I'm happy to keep going with this so what monuments are particularly puzzling?
[/quote]
I realise that the comment was intended for Cerrig but if I may include a small sample to begin with ;cursus , ,henge , Long Barrrow , rock art site , timber circle , stone circle , ring cairn ,stone row , all of which I find totally puzzling .The land rights , social reproduction , ritual centre , funereal are more reasonable than the irrefutable "is it really worth considering ? energy " approach , bit they are still still glib and superficial .
George
[/quote]
I agree with you George, none of these explanations really ticks all the boxes for me. Too many assumptions in support of theories.
Profile
Reply
|
cropredy
Joined:
01-01-2006
Messages: 5525
from Oxon
OFF-Line
| Posted 31-07-2010 at 16:55
Just returned from a bit of a do, family wedding in Sheffield.
I was strangely drawn to an exhibition in the museum there of water colours.
I walked smack bang upto this one,
http://www.tate.org.uk/servlet/ViewWork?cgroupid=999999961&workid=1141
Click on picture to enlarge.
it is said to be about revelations and the flow of clear as crystal life from the godhead to the tree of life.
I was litterally moved at been stood inchs from this picture, a very moving feeling of connection .
I can only convey as I find, and that is all things have a central point where their field emitts and returns to in a figure of eight pathway.
The flow is as clear as crystal, in fact it is not visable( except if in certain resonance areas and if that area is flooded with incense, which I have viewed)
From godhead to the tree of life is imho about this cyclic route, the sun is merely in the path of this flow , and thus acts to create the consequence We wrongly attribute to it generating.
The connection ability to this life force flow is what the megaliths were constructed for, imho.
The henges and cursus been the bulk manipulators of two opposite flows that travel one on top of the other .
The wood and later stones to locally precisely manouver them, the barrows to finely interact with the flows passage in/out of this planet.
We are these flows, the biological body been a vessel that contains them both internally and externally to the body.
cropredy
Profile
Reply
|
Runemage
Joined:
15-07-2005
Messages: 2412
from UK
OFF-Line
| Posted 31-07-2010 at 19:43
Blake's amazing, a poet and visionary. Sometimes, looking at his paintings or reading his poetry, it's so difficult to comprehend how long ago they were created.
Timeless...
Rune
Profile
Reply
|
cropredy
Joined:
01-01-2006
Messages: 5525
from Oxon
OFF-Line
| Posted 31-07-2010 at 20:27
runemage,
I felt connected, maybe to Him???
http://www.museums-sheffield.org.uk/coresite/html/
It's the watercolour in britain one, there are lots of Blakes and Turners, Rossetti etc etc.
I went straight at that one though, like a giant magnet had hold of me.
How is one supposed to describe what is invisable?
He captured it in a way that makes it visable, in words and paintings, but the subject is still invisable.
The stones are visable, but the life flows that the stones are positioned to interact with are invisable, hence most people can only see the visable, hence when somewhere appears to interact with the visable light they connect the two together(newgrange)
cropredy
Profile
Reply
|
Runemage
Joined:
15-07-2005
Messages: 2412
from UK
OFF-Line
| Posted 31-07-2010 at 22:33
All art is like that, it speaks to the beholder. Not everyone seeing the painting will see what you (and I) see there.
This has been one of my favourite of Blake's for many decades.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ae/Blake_ancient_of_days.jpg
Rune
Profile
Reply
|
chimera
Joined:
09-09-2006
Messages: 1508
from Australia
OFF-Line
| Posted 01-08-2010 at 06:54
This man goes with the flow:
El Greco
Collection of images and bibliography.
http://www.artchive.com/artchive/E/el_greco.html · Cached page
---
click on_ c 1597 view of Toledo
Profile
Reply
|
sem
Joined:
12-11-2003
Messages: 1704
from Bridgend,S.Wales
OFF-Line
| Posted 03-08-2010 at 21:25
Hi Tiompan and Karloff
At the Brecon Beacon MP Meet, I was giving an amateur's description of Moon Standstills. When I said stones may have been positioned to mark this 18.6yr cycle someone replied it was an unusual period of time, not in keeping with years etc.
A lady (Roz?) then simply said "It's a generation."
Stoneage Sensitivity or just female intuition?
[ This message was edited by: sem on 2010-08-03 21:27 ]
Profile
Reply
|
megalith6
Joined:
28-10-2001
Messages: 128
from London UK
OFF-Line
|  Posted 03-08-2010 at 21:32
Thanks Vlad / have written to Muzeum Archeologiczne in Wroclaw 
Profile
 Email
Reply
|
megalith6
Joined:
28-10-2001
Messages: 128
from London UK
OFF-Line
| Posted 03-08-2010 at 21:36
no worries
Quote:
|
On 2010-07-26 23:16, cerrig wrote:
Hi Megalith 6, thanks for taking the trouble to reply, most appreciated.
|
|
Profile
Email
Reply
|
megalith6
Joined:
28-10-2001
Messages: 128
from London UK
OFF-Line
| Posted 03-08-2010 at 22:00
Hi,
sadly Silbury has been so ferked about by 'gentlemen of leisure' of past centuries its external archaeology is moot. but we do know Silbury was built at roughly the same time as the megalithic avenues at Avebury, so the whole thing is a joined-up ritual complex. There were very close links between Avebury and SH because the mega megaliths at SH were transported from the Marlborough Downs around Avebury. No-one knows quite how and the precise route taken now probably wanders off into MOD land on Salisbury Plain, so the answer to that riddle is behind wire fences and 'keep out' notices. Let's hope one day the MOD can do virtual training exercises and the public be once more allowed to roam over Salisbury Plain - and hopefully the 'sarsen route' from Avebury to Stonehenge could be defined by archaeology.
Quote:
|
On 2010-07-29 00:48, chimera wrote:
It's a bit late to see if Silbury had a woodhenge/ stonehenge on top, the origin of birthday cakes. As it's a hill within a moat is it a separate tradition from Salisbury circles? Being off the Thames, possibly there was a different ethnic population at Silbury which had moved up-river, compared with S Britain, and compared with the sun-chamber hills of Newgrange and Maes Howe. Sun-chambers resemble the star-passages of Egyptian pharaoh-hills ...
|
|
Profile
Email
Reply
|
tiompan
Joined:
09-01-2005
Messages: 2638
OFF-Line
| Posted 03-08-2010 at 22:12
Quote:
|
On 2010-08-03 21:25, sem wrote:
Hi Tiompan and Karloff
At the Brecon Beacon MP Meet, I was giving an amateur's description of Moon Standstills. When I said stones may have been positioned to mark this 18.6yr cycle someone replied it was an unusual period of time, not in keeping with years etc.
A lady (Roz?) then simply said "It's a generation."
Stoneage Sensitivity or just female intuition?
[ This message was edited by: sem on 2010-08-03 21:27 ]
|
|
Hi Sem , I think a generation is quite a loose term with no certain time limit anything between 16-25 years depending on who you ask .
George
Profile
Reply
|
chimera
Joined:
09-09-2006
Messages: 1508
from Australia
OFF-Line
| Posted 10-08-2010 at 23:21
Hi m6,
"There were very close links between Avebury and SH because the mega megaliths at SH were transported from the Marlborough Downs around Avebury. No-one knows quite how.."
-----------
That makes a close link for the source of some stones of SH. But Sil. seems the opposite idea of SH, a mountain in a moat, when the number of circles at SH keeps on growing but no Sil.-type high place. As Sil. is in a valley, the height does not seem to be the purpose, but the water circle does.
The difference is greater than the difference between Catholic and Presbyterian churches. And Newgrange/ Maes Howe are different again.
Profile
Reply
|
tiompan
Joined:
09-01-2005
Messages: 2638
OFF-Line
| Posted 14-08-2010 at 19:16
Quote:
|
On 2010-07-30 17:11, tiompan wrote:
[quote]
On 2010-07-30 13:15, karloff wrote:
|
|
Hi
I was responding to your Stonehenge question so my monument choice was based on that, but I'm happy to keep going with this so what monuments are particularly puzzling?
[/quote]
I realise that the comment was intended for Cerrig but if I may include a small sample to begin with ;cursus , ,henge , Long Barrrow , rock art site , timber circle , stone circle , ring cairn ,stone row , all of which I find totally puzzling .The land rights , social reproduction , ritual centre , funereal are more reasonable than the irrefutable "is it really worth considering ? energy " approach , bit they are still still glib and superficial .
George
[/quote]
Maybe I should clarify and expand on what I was getting at in the previous post plus a few comments too . I believe that what is most puzzling about many monuments ,for many , is function , particularly when a utilitarian motive is not obvious .The explanation for Causewayed Enclosures is reasonable but they tend not be among the most problematic and source of puzzlement . They are not “the earliest monuments in the early neolithic “ according to relatively recent dating .Hambledon Hill has been dated 3650 BC and Windmill Hill 3600-3300 BC whilst dates from Long Barrows e.g. Ascott 3760 -3695 BC, Hazleton (late 37 th C), Fussels Lodge ,West Kennet 3670-3635 BC
The ancestral bones as justification for territorial rights has been around since Meillassoux pointed out the different types of time experienced byf oragers compared with that experienced by farmers some ethnography from Bloch and Ramilsonina gave it legs , it is feasible but the monuments that provide the best dating sequences show that the bones were deposited within a very short time of build date and closure e.g. West Kennet where there is an 81% probability that primary deposits occurred 3670 BC - 3635 BC , that is not what was expected for the “ancestral “ model .Further problem are , ethnography suggests that ancestors are “worshipped “ /remembered at sites that are distinct from where they were buried and some barrows do not have any human remains deposited .There was a functional explanation for Cursuses but I would disagree with the reasoning ,see below .Cursuses , particularly in Scotland also predate causewayed enclosures . Nether Largie cursus may have been built 3800-3650 and Holywood North 3890 -3650 cal bc . As there are no earlier European counterparts they can be viewed as a British invention . We have relatively accurate azimuths for many , those not provided by Roy Loveday can be calculated and the resulting declinations show no sign of any preference for the usually accepted archaeoastronomical orienations i.e solstices and standstills . The orientations cover the whole spectrum and a significant 26 % (of a sample of 76 ) point to the northern part of the horizon where the sun or moon are not seen . Considering that there are two possible orientations for every monument and they often change course it would be expected that some might fit into the “aligned “category , but as this number is so small it doesn't appear it is a characetristic . They often connect earlier monuments which would suggest that if there was an intentional alignment it would have been the property of the earlier monuments .Farmers of any period know when is the best time to sow and a huge investment like a cursus is unlikely to have been built for that purpose when much simpler means could have been used if they really needed the astronomical info . Suggesting that Stonehenge was a focus may be true and is better than getting clever with fancy irrefutable ideas but it will not satisfy the curious and that is why I'm still puzzled by it and the rest of them .
George
Profile
Reply
|
cerrig
Joined:
25-09-2009
Messages: 907
from Brecon Beacons
OFF-Line
| Posted 14-08-2010 at 21:23
Thanks for that George. As ever you are a gentleman and a scholar. I can see that trying to make sense of intentions is very problematic, especially when reuse over a long period is involved.
I'm mostly interested in the original uses for the places that these monuments were sited at, more than the monuments themselves, as such.
My take on it is that underlying most, if not all, of the ancient monuments, is a geometric pattern of an as yet ( scientifically ) unidentified nature. This pattern/matrix was somehow known to the ancients, and they sited their monuments on it, in a quite precise way.
If this is correct then it would be the pattern that would initially have been the focus for the builders, and not the astronomy, which would bear out your info. This may have changed over time, or even as the monuments developed and became more sophisticated, they could even have become multifunctional.
This, generally, would seem to me to make more sense than some means of worshipping or burying bodies.
The individual monument types, now that's a challenge. How much is function and how much is fashion?
Profile
Reply
|
megalith6
Joined:
28-10-2001
Messages: 128
from London UK
OFF-Line
| Posted 07-09-2010 at 04:30
Quote:
|
On 2010-08-10 23:21, chimera wrote:
Hi m6,
"There were very close links between Avebury and SH because the mega megaliths at SH were transported from the Marlborough Downs around Avebury. No-one knows quite how.."
-----------
That makes a close link for the source of some stones of SH. But Sil. seems the opposite idea of SH, a mountain in a moat, when the number of circles at SH keeps on growing but no Sil.-type high place. As Sil. is in a valley, the height does not seem to be the purpose, but the water circle does.
The difference is greater than the difference between Catholic and Presbyterian churches. And Newgrange/ Maes Howe are different again.
|
|
hi
yes
there's something else going on - but i don't think Silbury is an isolate, there was also a ritual hill at Marlborough. Silbury is probably a 'new take' on the theme of the circle, a circle in 3D, i think the level top is of a similar dimension to the Sanctuary
Profile
Email
Reply
|
megalith6
Joined:
28-10-2001
Messages: 128
from London UK
OFF-Line
| Posted 07-09-2010 at 04:44
Quote:
|
Farmers of any period know when is the best time to sow and a huge investment like a cursus is unlikely to have been built for that purpose when much simpler means could have been used if they really needed the astronomical info . Suggesting that Stonehenge was a focus may be true and is better than getting clever with fancy irrefutable ideas but it will not satisfy the curious and that is why I'm still puzzled by it and the rest of them .
George
|
|
think belief was very important to these people so while there are utilitarian aspects to monuments the ritual side to them is pretty profound. Those long barrows ... they are memories in earth and stone of the 'long houses' these peoples' ancestors lived in, moving up from southern Europe, set in motion by the neolithic explosion of agriculture which changed everything; so i guess some of these barrows were just cenotaphs, points in the landscape to dwell upon and reflect on the deep time dimension that was part of these peoples' culture ~ they had no books or writing but long, long memories: i am sure the megalithic monuments were also part of the cultural mnemonic, so important to them; poetry and song probably also backed up lengthy genealogies going back centuries if not millennia ...
[ This message was edited by: megalith6 on 2010-09-07 04:45 ]
Profile
Email
Reply
| |
| Go to Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 |
|
|
|
|
|
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