(Couldn't find another place to put this!) What do you all think of the new evidence regarding stonehenge. I've always marvled at the pyramids and statues of all kinds. Stonhenge always held a special place in my heart. I think it's a miraculous sight. However, I don't understand why it has taken us so long to begin exploring the site and learning about it. There are so many other well known ancient works of architecture that we know so much about; I just don't understand why this one has gotten the shaft up until now!
Before the 1960's there wasn't an accurate way to date the site. But today with the various techniques of dating, science now has a complete picture of Stonehenge from it's Neolithic origins. For many years it was believed that the Druids built Stongehenge, but now we know they merely worshipped there, and in fact there was an entire culture and a people associated with Stonehenge, who began slowly populating the area thousands of years before the Druids. Hotwater
"the new evidence" linkylinky to an article if you're referring to anything in particular. Well, if you want me to discuss at all I haven't read up on it in ages so I don't know what "new evidence" is exactly
the new evidence is the town they found about 2 miles from Stonehenge. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/01/070130-stonehenge.html?source=G1901 Love The Linkage
Actually I think despite all the waffle about stonehenge being a ceremonial site and a kind of early astronomical aid, it was just some form of defensive building they were trying to build - the rest is pure coincidence. The fact is that the new evidence ponts toward the fact they were sophisticated builders and carpenters - I believe they would have had, in those days much more pressing concerns than astrology, such as a place to store their animals and crop yields as well as a fortified place from which to defend - Britain was pretty barbaric in those days - no police or army to help defend your town and a lot of hungry people just aching to take what other people owned - as well as disputes over land etc - very tribal indeed
We might see Stonehenge as marking the beginning and the end of the darkest months of the year, while Durrington celebrates the light, the high point of summer and the turn away from midwinter. Midsummer Eve at Durrington would be followed by dawn at Stonehenge as the year turned from light toward dark, while in midwinter the procession would go the other way, from Stonehenge at sunset on the shortest day to dawn at Durrington, to see the light return.
stonehenge is crazy. i know nothing about it, but i always had the feeling it was alot more significant than most people realized.
I think you are confused. There is no way Stonehenge could have been a defensive "fort," so to speak. AND we know from many ancient cultures that astronomy was a very big deal, and was very good aid in their agricultual pursuits (that's likely why they took an interest in astronomy in the first place!)
My personal feeling is such places were essentially gathering places for focussing collective influence over nature via communal intentionality focus - no, I haven't been smoking anything! lol. I think modern religion misses the real point of meeting places like these, with it's purely ceremonial 'churches' and so on. Pagan ideas contain hints of how it might have been.
Well what is the alternative to technology building it? Cave men built it, it took them a really long time as in 100's of generations, and one generation did as little as move one stone. And somehow they did it with such precision even modern engineers could not do it as well with many centuries of technological improvement. Stone hedge is the same as the Egyptian pyramids or many temples in Central America. People just accept people built it in a ridiculous amount of time with primitive tools. Aliens may seem far fetched, but so is that current accepted theory.
