Featured Title:
Cave Of Forgotten Dreams on DVD |
 |
| 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, 86 guests and 1 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 >> Question: is there a relationship between megalithic tombs and circles?
|
 |
| Author |
Question: is there a relationship between megalithic tombs and circles? |
Elijah
Joined:
21-03-2012
Messages: 86
from Spain
 OFF-Line
|  Posted 27-03-2012 at 12:28
Hi
Before anyone gets worried my research is scientific, not esoteric or occult.
I have spent many years examining ancient ritual activity; the main focus being the practice of blood sacrifice. This work has revealed a deeply significant ritual relationship between the altars that are found in front of ancient tombs and temples.
Let me explain; the act of blood sacrifice yielded two products for ancient people, the "flesh" and the "blood" of the victims. Anthropologists readily tell us about the formers feasting consumption, but unfortunately never discuss the latter because of its spiritual connotations. In fact the victims blood was ritually employed both at the altar and in the darkness of nearby sanctuaries; be it a tomb or temple. There is more than enough evidence to show that the victims blood was invariably conveyed, by various means, from the altar into the darkness of nearby sanctuaries, be they in a tomb or a temple. Here we must assume that it had further ritual applications. A major clue to its use may be found in the many ancient accounts that allude to the appearance of illuminated spirits in temples; a phenomenon also reported on sacrificial pyres.
Given the widespread relationship seen between the altar and the temple, one has to suspect that those altars associated with tombs also fulfilled the same ritual function, and perhaps we should look more seriously at the myths that associate burial mounds with luminous spirits and fairies etc.
The evidence would suggest therefore that there is correlation between the classical altar and sanctuary and the megalithic stone circle and the passage grave. Take a step back in time and one finds the origins of this ritual activity in the practices of the Natufeans and their use of megaliths.
My question therefore is... has anyone noticed a relationship in the landscape between megalithic circles or uprights/recumbents and passage graves/burial mounds?
John
 Profile
 Reply
|
James
Joined:
13-11-2002
Messages: 80
from High Desert
OFF-Line
| Posted 27-03-2012 at 17:00
And that is "Science"? You seem to come up with the answers first, then ask for evidence to support your answers...well, good luck with that!
Profile
Reply
|
Elijah
Joined:
21-03-2012
Messages: 86
from Spain
OFF-Line
| Posted 27-03-2012 at 17:22
James
No, first you come up with evidence (which I have) that suggests a series of events once occurred in certain locations. It then seems perfectly reasonable to check to see if those same events might have occurred in other contemporary locations that look to have had the same usage 
Profile
Reply
|
frogcottage42
Joined:
14-02-2010
Messages: 235
from tuosist
OFF-Line
| Posted 27-03-2012 at 22:04
I will stay clear of the debate as to the scientific or other reason for this question and offer the following;
In the SW of Eire there is a huge concentration of both circles and megalithic tombs ( over 100 circles in Cork and Kerry and if you include all types probably 400 known tombs)
There are many tombs very close to the circles and some excavations have shown evidence of cremation under boulders or capstones within circles ( For instance Cashelkeelty, excavated in the 70's)
Other sites have wedge tombs close by but these seem to pre-date the circles by a 1000 years or so.
The choice of site seems to have more relevance to the presence of either type of monument and they seem to be placed with respect to the other rather than as part of a whole.
As far as I know no evidence of inhumations of either whole corpses or assemblages of bones is known from the SW.
Whilst neither adding to or contradicting the kind of evidence you are looking for I suspect that lack of serious excavation means you will struggle to find good documentary research for these kind of questions
Good luck anyway
Profile
Reply
|
tiompan
Joined:
09-01-2005
Messages: 2658
OFF-Line
| Posted 27-03-2012 at 22:22
John , apart from the putative Maltese examples at Hagar Qim albeit a temple and not a tomb , where is the evidence for altars associated with tombs from prehistory .
George
Quote:
|
On 2012-03-27 12:28, Elijah wrote:
Hi
Before anyone gets worried my research is scientific, not esoteric or occult.
Given the widespread relationship seen between the altar and the temple, one has to suspect that those altars associated with tombs also fulfilled the same ritual function,
The evidence would suggest therefore that there is correlation between the classical altar and sanctuary and the megalithic stone circle and the passage grave.
John
|
|
Profile
Reply
|
Elijah
Joined:
21-03-2012
Messages: 86
from Spain
OFF-Line
| Posted 28-03-2012 at 04:32
Hi frogcottage 42
Quote:
| I will stay clear of the debate as to the scientific or other reason for this question and offer the following; |
|
I understand. It's a tricky path I tread as you have realized; a good proportion of the material I research is classed as symbolic and mythic. But I do try to attain some form of balance by studying the work of archaeologists, anthropologists, and historians.
Quote:
| There are many tombs very close to the circles and some excavations have shown evidence of cremation under boulders or capstones within circles ( For instance Cashelkeelty, excavated in the 70's) |
|
It looks like you've read my article. Thanks for the information on cremations, another area of uncertainty I fear. Did you know that of the 390 stone circles detailed in Audrey Burls "A guide to the Stone Circles of Britain, Ireland and Britanny", of those that have undergone some form of archaeological excavation, 110 of them have been found to contain cremations. In Mike Pitts book “Hengeworld” P121, he informs us of the archaeological evidence being re-evaluated, that has revealed some “sixty cremation burials” within the excavated portions of Stonehenge. He mentions the work of forensic archaeologist Jackie Mckinley who has become deeply puzzled by the degree of burning to these and other cremated burials - “these features, a high degree of cremation, and a lot of bone collected – are typical of burials found in the centre of round barrows”. More information on this subject can be found at the "Ancient Cremations Workshop" to try and better understand the practice of ritual cremation.
Quote:
| The choice of site seems to have more relevance to the presence of either type of monument and they seem to be placed with respect to the other rather than as part of a whole.
As far as I know no evidence of inhumations of either whole corpses or assemblages of bones is known from the SW.
Whilst neither adding to or contradicting the kind of evidence you are looking for I suspect that lack of serious excavation means you will struggle to find good documentary research for these kind of questions |
|
I think your right, but if these questions lead to further study in this area then it may be worth asking them.
Hi George
Quote:
| John , apart from the putative Maltese examples at Hagar Qim albeit a temple and not a tomb , where is the evidence for altars associated with tombs from prehistory . |
|
The fact that you have to ask this question aptly illustrates the academic ignorance in this area. Without going through my poorly filed papers and books, let me say that it appears to have been a really ancient practice associated with royalty and the hierarchy in ancient society, those people that could afford it. I can't recall his name at this moment but one Egyptian pharaoh left behind enough money to have a team of priests man his mortuary temple, sacrificing it is said, some 900 cattle each year. The Egyptians were unique in that their whole theology pivoted about the pharaoh and the dead, which is why you'll find that all Egyptian pyramids had mortuary temples attached to them; indeed if you look at Giza plateau you'll see a huge sacrificial altar between the pyramids, and I believe there was also one between the legs of the Sphinx. It is in the New Kingdom that the pharaohs start to be buried in the Valley of the Kings, which is why their mortuary temples are found elsewhere. The Romans would sacrifice to the dead in order to provide them with blood; a practice the early Christians carried on with glass phials of blood being buried with them. Homer's work suggests that on death, the cremations of highborn individuals were accompanied by sacrifices, both animal and human. Look around at the tombs of most ancient kings and you'll find that their tombs, mostly carved into rock. are designed to look like temples. Petra is a prime example of this that springs to mind, but do check out the altars built from the living rock that litter the place.
John
Profile
Reply
|
tiompan
Joined:
09-01-2005
Messages: 2658
OFF-Line
| Posted 28-03-2012 at 10:34
John , wouldn't the source of the info in your notes be from academics ?
My question was in relation to prehistory and your examples are historic .
George
Quote:
|
On 2012-03-28 04:32, Elijah wrote:
[
Hi George
Quote:
| John , apart from the putative Maltese examples at Hagar Qim albeit a temple and not a tomb , where is the evidence for altars associated with tombs from prehistory . |
|
The fact that you have to ask this question aptly illustrates the academic ignorance in this area. Without going through my poorly filed papers and books, let me say that it appears to have been a really ancient practice associated with royalty and the hierarchy in ancient society, those people that could afford it. I can't recall his name at this moment but one Egyptian pharaoh left behind enough money to have a team of priests man his mortuary temple, sacrificing it is said, some 900 cattle each year. The Egyptians were unique in that their whole theology pivoted about the pharaoh and the dead, which is why you'll find that all Egyptian pyramids had mortuary temples attached to them; indeed if you look at Giza plateau you'll see a huge sacrificial altar between the pyramids, and I believe there was also one between the legs of the Sphinx. It is in the New Kingdom that the pharaohs start to be buried in the Valley of the Kings, which is why their mortuary temples are found elsewhere. The Romans would sacrifice to the dead in order to provide them with blood; a practice the early Christians carried on with glass phials of blood being buried with them. Homer's work suggests that on death, the cremations of highborn individuals were accompanied by sacrifices, both animal and human. Look around at the tombs of most ancient kings and you'll find that their tombs, mostly carved into rock. are designed to look like temples. Petra is a prime example of this that springs to mind, but do check out the altars built from the living rock that litter the place.
John
|
|
Profile
Reply
|
James
Joined:
13-11-2002
Messages: 80
from High Desert
OFF-Line
| Posted 28-03-2012 at 17:43
Obviously, this is a Thread which contains the Element of "Mystery", in which, there can only be Opinions, and no clear answers. The "Research" you speak of, is not Research. You, "Elijah" are merely invading this site with the intention of spreading baloney posed as a question.
The "Natufian" Burials are located in the settlements, commonly in pits in abandoned houses but also in caves in Mount Carmel and the Judean Hills. The pits were backfilled with settlement refuse, which sometimes makes the identification of grave-goods difficult. Sometimes the graves were covered with limestone slabs. The bodies are stretched on their backs or flexed, and there is no predominant orientation.
Your question does come up on search, being the only one with "Natufeans" spelled in that manner...please stop this sham, before it gets you in trouble.
Have a nice day.
Profile
Reply
|
Elijah
Joined:
21-03-2012
Messages: 86
from Spain
OFF-Line
| Posted 28-03-2012 at 19:59
Hi George
I appreciate the question, but the reference to my source being "academic" has me confused. My conclusions are based upon a number of unusual claims found throughout the ancient worlds religious and historical writings. The fact that these unusual claims appears to be supported by archaeological discoveries and the now ruined structures that ancient people abandoned, is significant in my view. Of course, I've examined the academic interpretations of this data and whilst I agree with many of their conclusions, I disagree with others.
James
I was expected quite a lot of disagreement from the historical sciences, not a pedantic Druid who is limited to cutting and pasting selective pieces from Wikipedia 
Profile
Reply
|
Elijah
Joined:
21-03-2012
Messages: 86
from Spain
OFF-Line
| Posted 28-03-2012 at 20:39
Sorry George
Forgot to ask if you would define what you see as prehistoric? History is seen as beginning with writing but this was not a universal invention, and so civilization progressed at different rates amongst different peoples. Prior to writing we are reliant on archaeology for answers as to human developments. From a ritual perspective the story must begins with Gobekli Tepe, Ain Ghazal, Catal Hoyuk, Coyuna, Nevali Cori, and Jericho, etc, although there is evidence of the odd caring burials being found during the late Paleolithic that may have led to the sacrificial activity of the Natufians.
John
Profile
Reply
|
tiompan
Joined:
09-01-2005
Messages: 2658
OFF-Line
| Posted 28-03-2012 at 22:03
John , I accept the usual definition of Prehistoric i.e. the period before recorded history . So to repeat the original question .
"apart from the putative Maltese examples at Hagar Qim albeit a temple and not a tomb , where is the evidence for altars associated with tombs from prehistory ?"
George
Quote:
|
On 2012-03-28 20:39, Elijah wrote:
Sorry George
Forgot to ask if you would define what you see as prehistoric? History is seen as beginning with writing but this was not a universal invention, and so civilization progressed at different rates amongst different peoples. Prior to writing we are reliant on archaeology for answers as to human developments. From a ritual perspective the story must begins with Gobekli Tepe, Ain Ghazal, Catal Hoyuk, Coyuna, Nevali Cori, and Jericho, etc, although there is evidence of the odd caring burials being found during the late Paleolithic that may have led to the sacrificial activity of the Natufians.
John
|
|
Profile
Reply
|
Elijah
Joined:
21-03-2012
Messages: 86
from Spain
OFF-Line
| Posted 29-03-2012 at 16:42
Hi George
I'm not trying to avoid your question, but I did misinterpret it, so lets start again. First of all lets be clear what prompted your question because you quote me - Quote:
| Given the widespread relationship seen between the altar and the temple, one has to suspect that those altars associated with tombs also fulfilled the same ritual function, - The evidence would suggest therefore that there is correlation between the classical altar and sanctuary and the megalithic stone circle and the passage grave. |
|
Quote:
| You then asked... "apart from the putative Maltese examples at Hagar Qim albeit a temple and not a tomb , where is the evidence for altars associated with tombs from prehistory ?" |
|
Your introduction of the term "prehistory" into the conversation here confused me because I don't see it as being related to my enquiry, and you think it is. So lets both be clear what we are talking about...
Quote:
| The Sumerian city states rise to power during the prehistoric Ubaid and Uruk periods (5300-2900 BC), but the historical record only begins to emerge with the Early Dynastic period from circa 2900-2334 BC, although it remains rather thin until the Lagash Dynasty period begins in circa 2550 BC. http://www.historyfiles.co.uk/KingListsMiddEast/MesopotamiaSumer.htm |
|
If this analysis hasn't been superseded, then most of the megalithic world fall into prehistory, along with the earlier temples of Malta. So I could simply have cited Newgrange as an example of the prehistoric relationship between the altar and the tomb in answer to your question. As we both know however, the advent of history is not a clear demarcation line in the past, is it a place in time and space where we note the isolated emergence, and then the spread, of a system that was initially designed to record religious events. History writing people coexisted side by side for many millennia with non historic writing people. Can you see why I found your inclusion of "prehistory" as if it were some sort of demarcation line in time, confusing in the context of this conversation. Look at my poorly framed question again... Quote:
| has anyone noticed a relationship in the landscape between megalithic circles or uprights/recumbents and passage graves/burial mounds?
|
|
Some background information before I try to answer your question again. I'm currently trying to obtain a clearer picture of our past and its developments, because the evidence I'm findings suggests that the established view of the past is wrong, hence my question above... A question that arises from the discovery of evidence that suggests a ritual-revolution occurred amongst the Natufians some 12,000 years ago. My first inkling of this ritual-revolution came when I began to uncover widespread ancient claims of (what ancient people believed were) miracles; what this surprisingly uniform body of testimony indicated, was that the practice of blood sacrifice was instrumental in manifesting several unusual phenomena. Yes, an incredible suggestion I know, but the evidence was/is compelling. The problem I face now is how to explain these incredible ancient assertions? From an anthropological perspective these claimed wonders are seen as myths, and the practice of sacrifice is labelled a symbolic act. Is it significant that in the light of this study it is now possible to see how these anthropological viewpoints may explain their failure to explain the origins and the astonishing spread of this puzzling rite? From an archaeological perspective however, the story is much different because here we are dealing with raw data untainted by anthropological interpretation. It is here in the archaeological records we begin to find evidence of these ritual phenomena; the first being a spontaneous fire said to ignite within the flesh of sacrificial offerings, the second was a mysterious spiritual radiance said to envelope the icons of deities. Suffice to mention here that there is a third ancient phenomenon that sheds light upon the biological relationship of this odd ancient trinity. As you would expect, I have thoroughly examined the universal circumstances of blood sacrifice and scoured the historical and scientific records in an attempt to understand and explain these phenomena, and now, I believe I may be able to help explain these peculiar biological events.
Let me try and answer your question. Crucial to the ritual production of these two phenomena would appear to have been the environment in which these ancient people lived 12,000 years ago. I'm not talking about the weather but the the strength of the Earth's magnetic field, which was much stronger back then, a factor that appears to explain the curious need for massive monoliths. A quick warning for those who might like to replicate this abhorrent rite; the earth's magnetic field has reduced so significantly that it would be impossible to reproduce these biological phenomena, and why would you want to anyway.
With the history of blood sacrifice unwritten, I have had to play detective and search out its practice, and it is clear from the evidence that this practice arose amongst the Natufians as part of their puzzling treatment of their ancestors remains. It is also where megaliths appear as part of the ritual scenery. It was this ritual activity that led them to adopt a sedentary lifestyle, albeit on a seasonal basis to start with. So what was so fascinating about this practice that it changed the way they lived? You can find a hugely significant reference to this development in the 1999 edition of "The Times History of the World", page 50, where a body of anthropologists and historians acknowledge archaeological evidence that shows it was this ritual activity that initially caused the Natufean's to adopt a sedentary lifestyle, not agriculture!
There is no distinction between the sacrificial veneration of a deceased persons remains versus that of a deities icon; both were designed to manifest, what was perceived to be, a spiritual presence. Once you understand the ritual process, then the inexplicable separation and treatment of individuals skulls by the Natufians can be seen as a vessel. I'll not go any further at this point, but I hope you can see where my question above comes from. The veneration of the dead and the act of sacrificial are intrinsically linked, thanks to the Natufians. Of course, the archaeological evidence remains open to interpretation.
If you still feel that I haven't answered your question I have included a few links below because they cite the discovery of altars and megaliths within places of prehistoric ritual significance.
http://www.laits.utexas.edu/ghazal/intro/int.html
http://www.basarchive.org/sample/bswbBrowse.asp?PubID=bsao&Volume=1&Issue=1&ArticleID=12
http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=BLZbLtmEJ68C&pg=PA139&lpg=PA139&dq=Ain+Ghazal+altar+stone&source=bl&ots=mGaETi_TYZ&sig=bbD5n2sVYFiCWUJkH7jCW13g9WM&hl=en&sa=X&ei=6hd0T8bEF8SHhQfhooimBQ&ved=0CEAQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=Ain%20Ghazal%20altar%20stone&f=false
http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=jEIv-GgyLn8C&pg=PA261&lpg=PA261&dq=prehistoric+stone+altar&source=bl&ots=TXIz4qIWiz&sig=HyzNlPojSbd2Y6ZTVnvfa9R1iLY&hl=en&sa=X&ei=Qh50T5u7DtOEhQeAndmlBQ&ved=0CCoQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=prehistoric%20stone%20altar&f=false
http://www.tharros.info/ViewGallery.php?cat=160&lng=en
http://www.stonepages.com/news/archives/000022.htmlnull
Profile
Reply
|
James
Joined:
13-11-2002
Messages: 80
from High Desert
OFF-Line
| Posted 29-03-2012 at 17:40
I see you changed your spelling...you are welcome...
Profile
Reply
|
tiompan
Joined:
09-01-2005
Messages: 2658
OFF-Line
| Posted 29-03-2012 at 21:30
John ,Stone circles and passage graves tend to be from the prehistoric period that is why I introduced the the term prehistoric . Newgrange is a good example ,where is the evidence for an altar at this monument ?
The ain Ghazal example is a possible “altar “ but like Hagar Qim it is associated with a “ temple “ not a stone circle or passage grave . Monte d’Accodi is a ziggurat there is no evidence that there was a structure that was an “altar “ and it is not associated with a passage grave or stone circle .Similarly there is little info about the Chinese “altar “ are there the required the megalithic monuments nearby .
George
Quote:
|
On 2012-03-29 16:42, Elijah wrote:
Hi George
I'm not trying to avoid your question, but I did misinterpret it, so lets start again. First of all lets be clear what prompted your question because you quote me - Quote:
| Given the widespread relationship seen between the altar and the temple, one has to suspect that those altars associated with tombs also fulfilled the same ritual function, - The evidence would suggest therefore that there is correlation between the classical altar and sanctuary and the megalithic stone circle and the passage grave. |
|
Quote:
| You then asked... "apart from the putative Maltese examples at Hagar Qim albeit a temple and not a tomb , where is the evidence for altars associated with tombs from prehistory ?" |
|
Your introduction of the term "prehistory" into the conversation here confused me because I don't see it as being related to my enquiry, and you think it is. So lets both be clear what we are talking about...
Quote:
| The Sumerian city states rise to power during the prehistoric Ubaid and Uruk periods (5300-2900 BC), but the historical record only begins to emerge with the Early Dynastic period from circa 2900-2334 BC, although it remains rather thin until the Lagash Dynasty period begins in circa 2550 BC. http://www.historyfiles.co.uk/KingListsMiddEast/MesopotamiaSumer.htm |
|
If this analysis hasn't been superseded, then most of the megalithic world fall into prehistory, along with the earlier temples of Malta. So I could simply have cited Newgrange as an example of the prehistoric relationship between the altar and the tomb in answer to your question. As we both know however, the advent of history is not a clear demarcation line in the past, is it a place in time and space where we note the isolated emergence, and then the spread, of a system that was initially designed to record religious events. History writing people coexisted side by side for many millennia with non historic writing people. Can you see why I found your inclusion of "prehistory" as if it were some sort of demarcation line in time, confusing in the context of this conversation. Look at my poorly framed question again... Quote:
| has anyone noticed a relationship in the landscape between megalithic circles or uprights/recumbents and passage graves/burial mounds?
|
|
If you still feel that I haven't answered your question I have included a few links below because they cite the discovery of altars and megaliths within places of prehistoric ritual significance.
http://www.laits.utexas.edu/ghazal/intro/int.html
http://www.basarchive.org/sample/bswbBrowse.asp?PubID=bsao&Volume=1&Issue=1&ArticleID=12
http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=BLZbLtmEJ68C&pg=PA139&lpg=PA139&dq=Ain+Ghazal+altar+stone&source=bl&ots=mGaETi_TYZ&sig=bbD5n2sVYFiCWUJkH7jCW13g9WM&hl=en&sa=X&ei=6hd0T8bEF8SHhQfhooimBQ&ved=0CEAQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=Ain%20Ghazal%20altar%20stone&f=false
http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=jEIv-GgyLn8C&pg=PA261&lpg=PA261&dq=prehistoric+stone+altar&source=bl&ots=TXIz4qIWiz&sig=HyzNlPojSbd2Y6ZTVnvfa9R1iLY&hl=en&sa=X&ei=Qh50T5u7DtOEhQeAndmlBQ&ved=0CCoQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=prehistoric%20stone%20altar&f=false
http://www.tharros.info/ViewGallery.php?cat=160&lng=en
http://www.stonepages.com/news/archives/000022.htmlnull
|
|
Profile
Reply
|
Elijah
Joined:
21-03-2012
Messages: 86
from Spain
OFF-Line
| Posted 29-03-2012 at 22:27
Hi again George
Lets forget the "prehistoric" issue.
You saidQuote:
| Newgrange is a good example ,where is the evidence for an altar at this monument ? |
|
It is the recumbent stone at the entrance with all the carvings on it. There are several sites in Ireland with similar altars. As for stone circles with altars, those that I can clearly identify have recumbent stones with uprights either side that make up the circle.
You saidQuote:
| The ain Ghazal example is a possible “altar “ but like Hagar Qim it is associated with a “ temple “ not a stone circle or passage grave . |
|
I agree, in some cases the evidence is ambiguous, but I wouldn't accept your inference that temples were places where only divine worship took place, or for that matter that megalithic mounds are only places for burial. I know that no burials took place in Maltese temples, but have you any idea where they took place?
I go back to my original question, which I shall try and rephrase... has anyone noted a correlation between the siting of stone altars and uprights (of whatever type), and burial mounds (of whatever type)?
Profile
Reply
|
frogcottage42
Joined:
14-02-2010
Messages: 235
from tuosist
OFF-Line
| Posted 29-03-2012 at 23:32
Hi again Elijah,
though I cannot dispute the position of certain recumbents being suitable as an alter I think the stone you refer to at Newgrange owes it's current prominence to the twentieth century reconstruction .We have no way of knowing whether it originally differed significantly from the other kerbstones which are generally typical of these monuments several of which have similar decoration.
There are many examples of stone circles here in Ireland which contain boulder burials either within the circle or nearby that are better candidate for 'alters' than the recumbents which in many instances are not actually recumbent at all and are simply at that position in the circle.
Profile
Reply
|
tiompan
Joined:
09-01-2005
Messages: 2658
OFF-Line
| Posted 29-03-2012 at 23:36
John , there is no evidence that the entrance stone at Newgrange , or the recumbent stones of RSC 's are "altars " .
I didn't infer that divine worship took place at what are termed by some as " temples" (note the previous use quotes ) .
The burials on Malta in the Zebugg phase were inhumations in small chambered tombs and at the Brochtorff circle at Xaghra .In the later Tarxien phase the burials were again inhumations .There were rock cut tombs at Xemxija Much earlier there were scattered remains found in the Ghar Dalam caves .
George
Quote:
|
On 2012-03-29 22:27, Elijah wrote:
Hi again George
Lets forget the "prehistoric" issue.
You saidQuote:
| Newgrange is a good example ,where is the evidence for an altar at this monument ? |
|
It is the recumbent stone at the entrance with all the carvings on it. There are several sites in Ireland with similar altars. As for stone circles with altars, those that I can clearly identify have recumbent stones with uprights either side that make up the circle.
You saidQuote:
| The ain Ghazal example is a possible “altar “ but like Hagar Qim it is associated with a “ temple “ not a stone circle or passage grave . |
|
I agree, in some cases the evidence is ambiguous, but I wouldn't accept your inference that temples were places where only divine worship took place, or for that matter that megalithic mounds are only places for burial. I know that no burials took place in Maltese temples, but have you any idea where they took place?
|
|
Profile
Reply
|
Runemage
Joined:
15-07-2005
Messages: 2412
from UK
OFF-Line
| Posted 30-03-2012 at 08:49
'Altar' was the terminology given to recumbent stones by people who attended church (so saw an altar as a significant object) and were told lurid stories of human sacrifice by primitive people worldwide (think Incas) - consequently they drew that parallel when they saw any ancient construction.
Newgrange entrance stone does not have a flat top.
The recumbent at East Aquhorthies is way above my eye-level.
There are no altar-type stones in front of Maeshowe or Tomb of the Eagles or Unstan Cairn - check out Cuween via our search engine, I've not been.
has anyone noticed a relationship in the landscape between megalithic circles or uprights/recumbents and passage graves/burial mounds?
The trouble with looking on Google Earth and plotting all these sites is that it doesn't show what's contemporary or continuity of use. Even when looking at a bumpy landscape, you need to know what was constructed and in use at what time before you can say any features are related.
perhaps we should look more seriously at the myths that associate burial mounds with luminous spirits and fairies etc.
Have you investigated the 'earthlights; theory? It does fit many modern witnessed accounts.
Rune
Profile
Reply
|
frogcottage42
Joined:
14-02-2010
Messages: 235
from tuosist
OFF-Line
| Posted 30-03-2012 at 20:54
Just to be awkward !
http://www.megalithic.co.uk/modules.php?op=modload&name=a312&file=index&do=showpic&pid=54838&orderby=
This circle near me has an alter built up against the stone just to the right of the axial. It is a rare example of Christian use of a pagan? site probably in penal times.
I will add another pic to the site page for a front view of this stone.
Profile
Reply
|
Runemage
Joined:
15-07-2005
Messages: 2412
from UK
OFF-Line
| Posted 30-03-2012 at 22:45
Ha! there's always one
Nice find, the Irish were always way more tolerant of ancient places and sought to incorporate a lot rather than use the English obliteration technique.
probably in penal times
Please help me out here, as one whose knowledge of history is dodgy and whose knowledge of Irish history is non-existent...
Rune
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