| Author | The latest Durrington discoveries |
drolaf
Joined:
12-11-2015
Messages: 893
from west yorkshire
 OFF-Line
|  Posted 28-06-2020 at 21:49
Hope you are all having a peaceful solstice tide.
Anyone want to comment on the new LIDAR results?
Here's a natty animation
https://intarch.ac.uk/journal/issue55/4/index.html
 Profile
 Reply
|
davidmorgan
Joined:
23-11-2006
Messages: 3097
from UK
OFF-Line
| Posted 29-06-2020 at 10:09
Big holes in the ground, eh? Now those ancients are just messing with our heads.
Profile
Reply
|
Andy B
Joined:
13-02-2001
Messages: 12311
from Surrey, UK
OFF-Line
| Posted 29-06-2020 at 20:43
Just to link to our Durrington page to tie in with the stuff posted on there.
https://www.megalithic.co.uk/article.php?sid=6501#comments
I'm going to defer to noted skeptic Mike Pitts on this one:
"immediate reaction to this is disbelief, yet however hard you try to take it apart it stands up. Exactly when the pits were dug is not clear and their function is a mystery. More Excavation needed, but congrats all round"
https://twitter.com/pittsmike/status/1274925877311266816
Do you go along with the measurement claims? I know Mike doesn't but if so it is potentially a 'told you so' moment.
To be fair I may have to move this into 'Mysteries' so keep a look out for that.
The whole thing is intriguing and it is at least open access for once. As Dr O says, have a look.
Profile
 Email
Reply
|
cerrig
Joined:
25-09-2009
Messages: 2823
from Brecon Beacons
OFF-Line
| Posted 29-06-2020 at 22:13
This looks quite damning.
https://brian-mountainman.blogspot.com/2020/06/sink-holes-and-solution-hollows.html
cerrig
Profile
Reply
|
drolaf
Joined:
12-11-2015
Messages: 893
from west yorkshire
OFF-Line
| Posted 30-06-2020 at 02:23
'As far as we can tell they are nearly vertical sided; that is we can't see any narrowing that might imply some sort of shaft. Some of the silts suggest relatively slow filling of the pits. In other words they were cut and left open," added Prof Gaffney.'
possibly some of the pits (the northern arc?) are natural sinkholes, and the rest are manmade. there are certainly many examples of early neolithic structures built around natural things such as trees or tree throws.
Andy, to be fair we don't know much about the purpose of any neolithic site so by that reasoning you should put them all into mysteries? or not. you could leave it where the poster put it. cheers
[ This message was edited by: drolaf on 2020-06-30 02:35 ]
Profile
Reply
|
Andy B
Joined:
13-02-2001
Messages: 12311
from Surrey, UK
OFF-Line
| Posted 30-06-2020 at 20:22
> Andy, to be fair we don't know much about the purpose of any neolithic site so by that reasoning you should put them all into mysteries? or not. you could leave it where the poster put it. cheers
Well yes quite. But moving it changes the link so I'll leave it here for now so people can find it.
Brian writes:
> So they are not arguing against a natural origin for these seven northern features. And yet suddenly, in the next part of the paper, they are treated as essential or integral parts of the "Durrington Shafts" arc or circuit, and it is assumed from this point on that the seven pits are man-made.
Or: Possibly someone in prehistory noticed the 'magical' arc like alignment of the existing pits and was inspired to continue the pattern.
Possibly that's why Durrington is placed where it is?
Profile
Email
Reply
|
drolaf
Joined:
12-11-2015
Messages: 893
from west yorkshire
OFF-Line
| Posted 01-07-2020 at 00:16
it's possible to imagine the natural landscape with natural pits and the glacial scar (later the avenue), and pine trees, then being moulded and added to by people. i'd love to see an animation of that.
Profile
Reply
|
STOCKDALE
Joined:
11-11-2015
Messages: 1028
OFF-Line
| Posted 01-07-2020 at 16:44
Andy you said that
"Do you go along with the measurement claims? I know Mike doesn't but if so it is potentially a 'told you so' moment."
What are the specific measurements? I have seen measurements re the depth of the holes etc in the report and generalised diameter measurements in the press.
Surely if measurements are a factor in this design, and I stress a factor, not the be all and end all, then there surely needs to be a centre point to the circle or points where arcs were taken from?
Similarly a diameter or measurement of radius and crucially a circumference length of the "circle" would be needed?
From what I have read, with parts of the circle under recent development areas, this find at Durrington will be very difficult to hang something with credibility on re its measurements. Hope I am wrong!
Profile
Reply
|
davidmorgan
Joined:
23-11-2006
Messages: 3097
from UK
OFF-Line
| Posted 24-11-2021 at 14:08
"New tests show neolithic pits near Stonehenge were human-made".
Article in The Guardian.
"It adds to the evidence that early inhabitants of Britain, mainly farming communities, had developed a way to count, tracking hundreds of paces to measure out the pits."
[ This message was edited by: davidmorgan on 2021-11-24 14:18 ]
Profile
Reply
|
Andy B
Joined:
13-02-2001
Messages: 12311
from Surrey, UK
OFF-Line
| Posted 24-11-2021 at 20:15
Thanks David. Does anyone know what new data has been published? I'm wondering if there is perhaps some confusion / TV hype going on here?
As far as I can tell the OSL dating was in the original paper and reported here in July 2020?
https://www.economist.com/science-and-technology/2020/07/11/measuring-luminescence-helps-to-date-a-remarkable-new-discovery-at-stonehenge
Tim Kinnaird has an undated blog post here
https://www.timkinnaird.com/astonishing-huge-circular-neolithic-monument-discovered-near-stonehenge/
and the paper from 2020 is here
https://www.intarch.ac.uk/journal/issue55/4/
So what's new? The Guardian's archaeology reporting has gone seriously downhill since Maev Kennedy was let go...
[ This message was edited by: Andy B on 2021-11-24 20:17 ]
Profile
Email
Reply
|
