Ozymandias Posted January 30, 2007 Report Share Posted January 30, 2007 Archaeologists say they have found a huge ancient settlement used by the people who built Stonehenge. Excavations at Durrington Walls, near the legendary Salisbury Plain monument, uncovered remains of ancient houses. People seem to have occupied the site seasonally, using it for ritual feasting and funeral ceremonies. More at BBC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DecimusCaesar Posted January 30, 2007 Report Share Posted January 30, 2007 An amazing discovery! Hopefully this will solve many of the mysteries surrounding the construction of Stonehenge. I imagine Horizon might do a program on this discovery in the near future, perhaps hosted by Dr. Julian Richards (seeing as he is frequently associated with this site). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DecimusCaesar Posted January 30, 2007 Report Share Posted January 30, 2007 Just seen it on BBC news right now. Oddly enough Dr. Julian Richards was interviewed and he said he was skeptical of the new theory. Even so, they said that excavations shall continue in the near future. They even suggested there might be more Neolithic villages in the surrounding countryside. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pertinax Posted February 1, 2007 Report Share Posted February 1, 2007 They would also ,apparently "get Neolithic on yo ass" http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/arti...in_page_id=1770 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DecimusCaesar Posted February 1, 2007 Report Share Posted February 1, 2007 They would also ,apparently "get Neolithic on yo ass" That one more nail in Richard Rudgley's theory that the Stone-agers were a peaceful bunch. He also said the same about Otzi the Iceman in the early days, before it was revealed that Otzi had indulged in some violence. Wasn't he actually killed by an arrow in the back? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaius Octavius Posted February 1, 2007 Report Share Posted February 1, 2007 350 skulls are enough to generalize? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pertinax Posted February 1, 2007 Report Share Posted February 1, 2007 350 skulls are enough to generalize? Quite, what if it was in effect a "war grave" and other people were cremated not inhumated? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaius Octavius Posted February 1, 2007 Report Share Posted February 1, 2007 350 skulls are enough to generalize? Quite, what if it was in effect a "war grave" and other people were cremated not inhumated? Right on! Personally, I think that it was a site for cluster fornication at the solstices and equinoxes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pertinax Posted February 4, 2007 Report Share Posted February 4, 2007 More news from the hard partying Brythonics: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/0,,...2583090,00.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skarr Posted February 6, 2007 Report Share Posted February 6, 2007 They would also ,apparently "get Neolithic on yo ass" That one more nail in Richard Rudgley's theory that the Stone-agers were a peaceful bunch. He also said the same about Otzi the Iceman in the early days, before it was revealed that Otzi had indulged in some violence. Wasn't he actually killed by an arrow in the back? Any theory that says ancient people were less violent ("peaceful" is a modern, utopian concept) needs to be taken with a pinch of salt. Human civilization and its history is mainly about survival, a little more than what Darwin envisages but no less evolutionary in that it was dictated by something far more than basic survival or adaptability to the local environment. One can just imagine the effects of a bad winter on a population that has exploded (relatively speaking) during so called "peaceful" times. More mouths, dwindling resources, hunger gnawing at the belly - it doesn't take a math genius to figure out what's going to happen. I have a hard time imagining an altruistic approach - hey, I'll starve but I'll see that you get your share of whatever wild animal they managed to capture. Violence is a key survival mechanism and the ancients used it far more often than is conceived. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.