| Author |
Dating of ancient sites |
Andy B
Joined:
13-02-2001
Messages: 7050
from Surrey, UK
 OFF-Line
|  Posted 14-02-2013 at 09:43
Old Sarum
by johnhext-fremlin on Monday, 11 February 2013
Old Sarum Neolithic Site:-
This Site ties in well with Stewart Piggotts "Neolithic Cultures of the British Isles'
However if dated to 3000 BC then the site would be Early Neolithic in date and contemporary with Stone Henge.
Thus it should be bourne in mind however that 3000 BC in the conventional chronology is 2038/35 BC on the lower calibration which is good for rough estimates.
What is not so clear is that Piggott gives a date for Stone Henge at 1848 BC plus or minus 175 yrs. In his chart Piggott begins his Neolithic period about 2000 BC
My other point here is Collins "Consise Encyclopedia from the Bronze Age places it at Late Neolithic period 2000 to 1848 BC so in conclusion here is Piggott talking about early neolithic or late neolithic period?
 Profile
 Email
 Reply
|
Andy B
Joined:
13-02-2001
Messages: 7050
from Surrey, UK
OFF-Line
| Posted 14-02-2013 at 09:44
by davidmorgan on Monday, 11 February 2013
Both books you refer to are very out of date now (1954 and 1971), especially Piggott's regarding dating of Neolithic sites.
Profile
Email
Reply
|
Andy B
Joined:
13-02-2001
Messages: 7050
from Surrey, UK
OFF-Line
| Posted 14-02-2013 at 09:44
by johnhext-fremlin on Tuesday, 12 February 2013
In anwer to my question is Piggott talking about early or late neolithic ca 2000/1848 BC?
Profile
Email
Reply
|
Andy B
Joined:
13-02-2001
Messages: 7050
from Surrey, UK
OFF-Line
| Posted 14-02-2013 at 09:44
by davidmorgan on Tuesday, 12 February 2013
2000 BC would be the Early Bronze Age in Britain.
Profile
Email
Reply
|
Andy B
Joined:
13-02-2001
Messages: 7050
from Surrey, UK
OFF-Line
| Posted 14-02-2013 at 09:45
by johnhext-fremlin on Wednesday, 13 February 2013
I cannot aggree with you that just because a book is out of date that it follows that the dates are wrong.
I respectfully saugest that this is nonsense and the figment of the immagination of some archaeologists. How ever I an assuming that if 2000 BC for the sake of argument is the begginning of the early Bronze Age or perhaps more propperly speaking"
chalcolithic/neolithic as I would sugest then we might have a lower calibration for the BronzeAge in my oppinion about 1500 BC.
Another point I would make is that anything labled "Bronze Age" where no itens of bronze have been found and all are toanols of flint then that site is grossly misrepresented as "Early Bronze Age" and indeed mislabeled then that site in my view is in need of an honest Re-evaluation in terms of conventional chronology back to 3000 BC,thus I accept that Skara Brae that is dated by this chronology to 3215 BC contemporary with Ancient Egypt and early neolithic in date but I accept no dates earier than this
In conclusion why do ardhaeologists need to keep pushing the date of the neolithic in Britain to 4000 BC and beyond to match their own preconceived ideas. Clearly the Historical records in Ireland clearly show thatPartholan was the first to colonise Ireland ca 2035 BC and in conventional terms 3000 BC and early neolithic in date evidenced by Neolithic Dry Stone Walling.
Profile
Email
Reply
|
Andy B
Joined:
13-02-2001
Messages: 7050
from Surrey, UK
OFF-Line
| Posted 14-02-2013 at 09:49
For those wanting more information, John's web site is here http://www.johnhextfremlin.com/
John would you like us to re-post here what you wrote to Channel 4 (Time Team)?
[ This message was edited by: Andy B on 2013-02-17 22:03 ]
Profile
Email
Reply
|
davidmorgan
Joined:
23-11-2006
Messages: 1620
from The New Forest
OFF-Line
| Posted 14-02-2013 at 13:22
It's worth looking at this video where Colin Renfrew talks about radiocarbon dating and how it changed the previously perceived chronology of European sites:
http://www.webofstories.com/play/18188
Profile
Reply
|
davep
Joined:
05-07-2009
Messages: 28
from Exeter
OFF-Line
| Posted 14-02-2013 at 18:50
I was grappling with different dates and definitions of the Neolithic period on my website in relation to Dartmoor*. In a footnote I wrote this:
Quote:
| The precise date range for the Neolithic period varies according to different authors. Gerrrad p. 24 uses c 4500-2300 BC. Newman p. 26 refers to c 4000 BC - 2000 BC. Newman points out that specifying a precise time period is misleading since the practices that define the Neolithic period varies in "their occurence, intensity and chronology depending on what region of Britain, or indeed of europe, one examines". |
|
The references here being to Sandy Gerrard writing in 1997 and Phil Newman writing in 2011.
I would add that giving a precise date to the start of the Bronze Age is fairly meaningless. It would be like giving a precise date to the computer age. If we are defining a time when typically households would have personal computers and mobile phones in Britain it will be different to when they first existed - also it would be different for poorer countries when the "computer age" could be defined as starting later.
* see: A Brief History of Prehistory - section An Age of Ages
[ This message was edited by: davep on 2013-02-14 18:52 ]
Profile
Reply
|
johnhext-fremlin
Joined:
23-12-2012
Messages: 48
OFF-Line
| Posted 17-02-2013 at 15:36
Yes Andy Please do post my comments to the Time Team as I feel that they might respond to me favourably and thus carry a bit of weight behind it especially as you have very kindly offered to send my message to them for which I would be eternally greatfull.
Thus I am of oppinion that both of us together can enter into descussion on these and other concepts on the Neolithic Industries and would like to do what you sugested about Collin Renfrew' concepts on Radio Carbon/14 Dating Techniques.
I am much in aggreement with you that the Neolithic started in Europe at diffrent times and places &c so perhaps in some areas it would be perhaps earlier than in others and in all proberbility the huntergatherer cultures of the Palaeolithic were contemporary and overlapping with the Neolithic as in the case of Skara Brae conventionally dated to 3215 BC John
Profile
Reply
|
Andy B
Joined:
13-02-2001
Messages: 7050
from Surrey, UK
OFF-Line
| Posted 17-02-2013 at 19:55
I didn't say that, I said I'd post them here so people can see what you are on about. Personally I think it's rediculous:
Your message :
Dear Mr Tony Robinson Phil Harding Time Team&c I would most respectfully submit that your archaeologicical dig has been misdated and grosly mislabled as Bronze Age, when infact there is a total absence of Bronze Tools at County Antrim and are all scrapers and implements of stone and Flint. so is therefore in my view Early Neolithic Industry and also in the view of some creation Historians I could mention.For more information on this please visit my website at http://www.johnhextfremlin.com I would like to sugest that what has actually been found should therefore I recomend be redated to ca 3000 BC. It is known that from creation historians that Partholan colonised Ireland and possibly landed near the New Grange site. My Creationist friend and historian has sugested to me that the Hill Fort site and Neolithic Round Houses at Knock Fu County Antrim belonged to those of Partholans opponents the Formorei or picts since they were fighting Partholan for fishing grounds in Ireland and were fighting for this piece of land at the Battle of Magithe in 2025 BC I thus sugest that this site be reinvestigated in view of the absense of Bronze Tools and be redated to about 3000 BC for the archaeological date for the begginning of the Neolithic period in Ireland. I further would like to submit that the Formorei or Picts built their village at Skara Brae for which there is creationist historical evidense ca 2189/2188 BC=Archaological cecular date of 3215 BC contemporary with the founding of Ancient Egypt by Misraem (Menes). Another thing I would sugest is that the Palaeolithic and Neolithic were contemporay and overlapped each other during the post flood rappid Ice age after the despersion at Babel. I sugest that these annomalies be thouroughly investigated with speciall reffrence to my website at http://www.johnhextfremlin.com
According to the historical evidence I have for this site and I say again with the absence of Bronze tools and weopens that this site has been grossly misdated even by your website and indeed mislabled as Bronze age when quite clearly it is early Neolithic and should be cecularly dated in conventional chronology to 3000 BC and Skara Brae to 3215 BC
I would like to see an honest re-evaluation done by you and your tean in light of the above evidence. Can you please respond to this
John
On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 2:30 PM, Channel 4 Viewer Enquiries wrote:
r
Dear Mr Hext-Fremlin,
Thank you for contacting Channel 4 Viewer Enquiries regarding TIME TEAM.
We are sorry to hear that you feel this programme has been mis-dated and inaccurate, we have passed your comments onto the team and the production company responsible for making the series.
Please be assured your comments have been logged and noted for the information of those responsible for our programming.
Thank you again for taking the time to contact us. We appreciate all feedback from our viewers; complimentary or otherwise.
Regards,
Steve Reynolds
Channel 4 Viewer Enquiries
For information about Channel 4 have a look at our FAQ section
On Mon, Dec 31, 2012 at 2:55 PM, john hext-fremlin wrote:
Dear Mr Reynolds thank you so much for your feedback into my enquirey and indeed for forwarding my message to time team this is most gratifying to know in light of a re-evaluation of the site at County Antrim. Indeed you have made my message most interesting for which I am eternally greatfull and indeed endebted to you.
Thus if I can be of any further assistance into any further enquiries by Mr Tony Robinson and the Time Team of this nature please dont hesitate to let me know
I remain yours faithdully
Best Regards John Hext-Fremlin
Profile
Email
Reply
|
sem
Joined:
12-11-2003
Messages: 1722
from Bridgend,S.Wales
OFF-Line
| Posted 18-02-2013 at 12:37
It seems Mount Sandel has evidence in both tool-types and radio-carbon dating for an occupation of Ireland by about 7000BC (give or take a few years).
http://archaeology.about.com/od/mesolithicarchaic/a/mount_sandel.htm
Profile
Reply
|
johnhext-fremlin
Joined:
23-12-2012
Messages: 48
OFF-Line
| Posted 18-02-2013 at 14:05
Yes I aggree and in a later descussion I will try and show how this fits in with or correrlates with biblical chronology on the creationist timeline.
However for now I will stick with my re-evaluated conventional chrobology which as you quite correctly say is in line with Collins Consise Encyclopedia from the Bronze Age which is a most interesting concept although the book is out of date.
One cannot I would sugest change the chronology simply because a book is out of date
Profile
Reply
|
sem
Joined:
12-11-2003
Messages: 1722
from Bridgend,S.Wales
OFF-Line
| Posted 18-02-2013 at 23:56
Hi John
Luckily you have landed on your feet with the MegP Mysteries Forum - we're always interested in new ideas.
When you talk about "creationist", are you referring to James Ussher's assertion that the world was created in 4004BC? If so it seems a good place to start a science versus legend discussion.
Best wishes
Sem
Profile
Reply
|
davidmorgan
Joined:
23-11-2006
Messages: 1620
from The New Forest
OFF-Line
| Posted 19-02-2013 at 09:59
One cannot I would sugest change the chronology simply because a book is out of date
The book I'm guessing you're basing a chronology on is over two thousand years out of date.
Profile
Reply
|
johnhext-fremlin
Joined:
23-12-2012
Messages: 48
OFF-Line
| Posted 19-02-2013 at 14:18
Hi Sem thanks for your feedbackon this discussion. Yes indeed I am reffuring to Archbishop James Ussher and his chronology for a toung age of the earth about 4004 BC.
t
However I believe that as some people at this forum have already sugested you can't put an exact date on what is defined as the "Neolithic age" as it started at diffrent times and in diffrent places world wide.
I would like to sugest that where local traditions ledgends; folklore &c are concerned I believe that there is no "smoke without fire" also regarding a rappid Post flood Ice Age and Ice plannet strikes.
Of course I realize that allot of this is perhaps wild speculation but it would I aggree nake a most interesting thread for discussion and would like to dugest that some of these annomalies be investigated and evaluated. Please do visit my website at http://www.johnhextfremlin.com
All the Best and Good Hunting John
Profile
Reply
|
johnhext-fremlin
Joined:
23-12-2012
Messages: 48
OFF-Line
| Posted 21-02-2013 at 04:05
What about Velekovskey and "Worlds in Collision" as an example ok it is out of date but certainly not 200 years, John
Profile
Reply
|
davidmorgan
Joined:
23-11-2006
Messages: 1620
from The New Forest
OFF-Line
| Posted 21-02-2013 at 08:19
Maybe you should read this book as well - Scientists Confront Velikovsky
Basically, the premise behind Worlds in Collision is garbage, and has been shown to be so.
Profile
Reply
|
johnhext-fremlin
Joined:
23-12-2012
Messages: 48
OFF-Line
| Posted 22-02-2013 at 13:43
Maybe so but conventionalscientists of the "uniformitarian view" (or at least some of them) insist there was an astroid strike supposedly 65'000000 yrs ago in which dinosaurs became alledgidly extinct so at least some "catastrophism concepts" here.
I think one has toask one;s self "Where does folk lore; ledgends mythology &c meet the facts?"
There is a new interesting book out on Atlantis and they back Velekovskey's consepts.
Unfortunately hard line evolutionists of the persuasion of Richard Dawkins would try to supress these ideas and most probably try to stop books ofthis type from being published.
Profile
Reply
|
johnhext-fremlin
Joined:
23-12-2012
Messages: 48
OFF-Line
| Posted 22-02-2013 at 13:59
In comclusion I've learned some interesting ideas from you guys depending on what ideas some diffrent authors gave on dating the stone age cultures of Britain &c compared say with my concepts and would respect their views.
Thus you cannot have everyone of the same persuasion and views so it is better to work together at it and try and evaluate some of the mysteries of the Prehistoric period, John
Profile
Reply
|
davidmorgan
Joined:
23-11-2006
Messages: 1620
from The New Forest
OFF-Line
| Posted 22-02-2013 at 19:52
Maybe so but conventionalscientists of the "uniformitarian view" (or at least some of them) insist there was an astroid strike supposedly 65'000000 yrs ago in which dinosaurs became alledgidly extinct so at least some "catastrophism concepts" here. [sic] - get a spell checker, John.
Re: "asteroid" strike - haven't you heard of Chicxulub?
However, Velikovsky claimed that Venus arrived in its orbit in the 2nd millennium BCE. Only someone totally ignorant of basic physics would believe that.
Profile
Reply
|
Main News