Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

operation stonehenge: what lies beneath

wayward bob

wayward bob

i ate all your bees
I enjoyed this, too. Particularly interesting how the whole theory of Stonehenge sitting in isolation has now been rewritten.
 
wayward bob said:
wasn't expecting much from this doc but was really impressed. it covers the results of a wide scale geophysical survey of the area with all kinds of fascinating findings about the history and extent of the ritual landscape. the link between the cursus and stonehenge was pretty cool and unexpected. looking forward to the next one :cool:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b04hc5v7/operation-stonehenge-what-lies-beneath-episode-1
Click to expand...
I got a copy of Francis Pryor's Britain BC on a visit to Skara Brae ealier in the year and he has some really interesting things about ritual landscapes in there; apparently there's some theory one archaeologist developed in partnership with someone from Madagascar who used knowledge of surviving ideas there to posit these "liminal" zones where you move between the lands of the living and dead and the cursus is a conduit for that IIRC.
 
wayward bob said:
i was very nearly put off at the beginning with the bloody recreations, can't stand them, but it's well worth persevering with :)
Click to expand...
Yeah it seems de rigeur these days to have a jittery computer graphic just to show how high tech they are. It's a documentary about Stonehenge not The Fucking Bourne Identity ffs. :mad:

Anyhow, the barrow bit that showed how the mass tomb would've looked was good.
 
JimW said:
I got a copy of Francis Pryor's Britain BC on a visit to Skara Brae ealier in the year and he has some really interesting things about ritual landscapes in there; apparently there's some theory one archaeologist developed in partnership with someone from Madagascar who used knowledge of surviving ideas there to posit these "liminal" zones where you move between the lands of the living and dead and the cursus is a conduit for that IIRC.
Click to expand...

I'm reading that, too. Interesting stuff about how the stone circles came into being. The families remember the dead ancestors in the eastern part of the enclosure and then gather in the west with the setting sun to celebrate the milestones of the passing year.
 
Last edited:
wayward bob said:
oh it's not so much the cgi as the bloody beardy dudes chucking spears at aurochs that get my goat, so to speak, :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Yeah they bug me too. I think there's a tendency with documentaries now to jazz them up more than necessary. The actual story of this is interesting enough, really. Anyhow, it's a minor gripe. I'm looking forward to the next one.

The enclosure place that was possibly the scene of Englands first battle interested me as the layout of the site looked very similar to Caer Bran Hill Fort near where I live. Bronze/Iron Age so similar era, I think.
 
Voley said:
The enclosure place that was possibly the scene of Englands first battle interested me as the layout of the site looked very similar to Caer Bran Hill Fort near where I live. Bronze/Iron Age so similar era, I think.
Click to expand...

they might be structurally similar but causewayed enclosures are a feature of the neolithic (pre-2000bc), hill forts are iron age (500bc+) so a fair divide (caveat dates are -ish it's a while since i properly knew my stuff :D)

eta: afair hill forts were occupied, defended habitations, whereas causewayed enclosures were used for ritual and "festival" type activities - temporary meeting places, not inhabited. i have to admit to being half asleep when they were discussing the "first battle" so there may be new stuff there that i missed.
 
wayward bob said:
i was very nearly put off at the beginning with the bloody recreations, can't stand them, but it's well worth persevering with :)
Click to expand...
Right I'll go by your say so and check it out on iPlayer.
I find that recently I scan the listings and make assumptions from past Time Team or reality type shows.
I nearly missed 'Our Zoo' for that reason.
 
wayward bob said:
they might be structurally similar but causewayed enclosures are a feature of the neolithic (pre-2000bc), hill forts are iron age (500bc+) so a fair divide (caveat dates are -ish it's a while since i properly knew my stuff :D)

eta: afair hill forts were occupied, defended habitations, whereas causewayed enclosures were used for ritual and "festival" type activities - temporary meeting places, not inhabited. i have to admit to being half asleep when they were discussing the "first battle" so there may be new stuff there that I missed.
Click to expand...
Ah right there will be a bit of difference then, you're right. Caer Bran has (very minimal) remains of a few buildings within the ramparts so it'll fall into that category. General consensus of opinion is that it was a defended structure possibly used to store tin/other metal safely while it was being transported. Whatever was in there was very precious as it has a 7 foot ditch and a 15 foot wall around it. The next two hills along have remains of buildings / forts on them, too. There was a road linking them all between Penzance and Lands End once. It's a cracking day's walk between the three hills. I usually go back via Carn Euny which has a fougou amongst other things.
 
I saw this program and it didn't take my fancy so much, some interesting stuff but they had been busy with the new technology for sure, Stonehenge itself looked very special complete, as it was, and overall I left it feeling less than satisfied.
 
Far too scanty for me, and the recreations just make me roll my eyes and sigh.

The whole thing about the ritual landscape is very interesting. I have to say that once I started looking at Avebury it seemed increasingly implausible to me that Stonehenge existed in glorious isolation. And then when the Woodenge connection was posited, I was just kinda waiting until further sites were located in the surrounding landscape. The palisade enclosures identified in the vicinity of Silbury Hill strengthened my belief that there had to be other earthworks and structures to be found around Stonehenge.

The graphics were helpful to some extent, but there was a lot of speculation about the details. And the stuff that was illustrated by the recreations was pure fantasy.

The stuff about the Cursus was very interesting, because it seems to hint at the possibility of understanding the coherence of the larger site.

That stuff about the pink flint was romantic and lovely, but raised far too many questions. Where is that spot in the landscape and now does it relate to the various henges? Are we sure the algae responsible for the colour change were there in the Mesolithic and/or Neolithic? Why is there no marker stone or shrine to denote the place? Where are the pink flint artefacts? Etc.

No mention of the lunar proto-temple that lies under the carpark and how that might be tied into the picture, which seemed like an oversight to me.

And I think we're overdue for a reassessment of the astroarcheology at Stonehenge.

Maybe some of these points will be covered in the other episodes.
 
Always interesting to see the latest research.

Funny that discoveries are always "ritual sites" and not a hut that the workmen lived in.

That Cursus, well thats obviously a race track to gallop yer ponies along.
 
I've not watched it yet, but as an archaeologist it's not like some huge surprise that Stonehenge didn't stand alone as the only site in the area. There are a plethora of sites nearby that have been known about for years, so it's not like 'shock horror, Stonehenge was not only site'.
However recent surveys have discovered more detail about stuff around Stonehenge and its environs which was previously unknown, and I am excited to hear more about the details (hopefully the TV show won't be constant dramatic recaps and will actually contain some info, if not I'll have to check out the journals for the actual reports)
 
Chilli.s said:
Always interesting to see the latest research.

Funny that discoveries are always "ritual sites" and not a hut that the workmen lived in.

That Cursus, well thats obviously a race track to gallop yer ponies along.
Click to expand...

It's just a convention in archaeology, anything you can't immediately explain as having a recognisable domestic or industrial function is put down as "ritual use". Don't pay too much heed to that.

Edit: another thing that can be a bit confusing is why archaeologists only ever find broken stuff. It's because with the small exception of deliberately buried grave goods, most objects get used until they break, hence the only stuff you find is either broken due to repeated use, or it's ritual. Eg. if I break a plate and throw it out, that is normal, in 1000 years or more archaeologists will find bits of a plate that broke long ago and take it to be an implement involved in the eating of a meal, which broke and was discarded. If I bury a whole plate though, it raises questions about the reasons why I might discard/bury that plate when it was still usable. Most stuff you find as an archaeologist is broken shit that has been thrown away, if you find something whole, that raises questions about why.
 
Last edited:
emanymton said:
Superglue is going to blow the minds of future archaeologists.
Click to expand...

No it won't, you can tell if something has been fixed with superglue.
If you really want to confound archaeologists of the future, dig down 2 metres into your garden and bury something that seems to have no rational purpose, and that won't degrade/decompse easily once buried. A ceramic figure speared through the heart with a miniature flint spearpoint or something. Now that could really fuck with peoples heads.
 
From that article:

Mr. Carr-Gomm...rents all of Stonehenge a few weeks before the solstice for a private gathering
Click to expand...

I had no idea you could do that.
 
Voley said:
I enjoyed this, too. Particularly interesting how the whole theory of Stonehenge sitting in isolation has now been rewritten.
Click to expand...
When was this theory of splendid isolation current? As long as I've known the landscape around stonehenge has been recognised as important - the cursus, avenue and other features. This programme was right up its own arse. Did it discuss what techniques were being used and how? Lots of film of helicopters and trailers being pulled round fields with no explanation of what they were actually doing. And speculation presented as fact.
 
Sirena said:
The redoubtable Arthur Pendragon
Click to expand...
Mr. Pendragon is a former British army soldier and biker gang leader, who used to be called John Rothwell and later went by several names including "Mad Dog." In 1986,
Click to expand...
"Mad Dog Pendragon" :D

I watched these at the weekend. Interesting stuff, but they could have probably gone into a bit more detail.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

DaveCinzano
What films are currently on your TO WATCH list?
2 3
Replies
63
Views
3K
krtek a houby
krtek a houby
trashpony
What should I download to watch on a loooooong train journey?
2 3
Replies
69
Views
2K
trashpony
trashpony
D'wards
What are the essential 21st century sci fi novels?
2
Replies
48
Views
2K
D'wards
D'wards
danny la rouge
What’s good to stream? Any platform. Newer programmes.
3 4 5 6 7
Replies
208
Views
7K
nagapie
N
Orang Utan
What’s the grimmest, bleakest or most pessimistic film or tv show you’ve ever seen?
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
174
Views
6K
Plumdaff
Plumdaff
Back
Top Bottom