Re: Study: For centuries Stonehenge was a burial site


"Eric Stevens" <eric.stevens@xxxxxxxxx> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:gsjv34lb020kcstqfj53f7n9e7h9oblkh0@xxxxxxxxxx
On Fri, 30 May 2008 08:10:28 +0200, "Uwe Müller"
<uwemueller@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


"Eric Stevens" <eric.stevens@xxxxxxxxx> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:eb8u34dqsd2r80kg002tsr2tnibrj1c5au@xxxxxxxxxx
On Thu, 29 May 2008 11:37:32 -0700 (PDT), Jack Linthicum
<jacklinthicum@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

"The researchers said the earliest cremation burial was a small group
of bones and teeth found in pits called the Aubrey Holes and dated to
3030-2880 B.C., about the time with the first ditch-and-bank monument
was being built.

Is it being suggested that the Aubrey holes were dug for the
cremation, or were they used because they were already there?

-------- snip ----------

Cremated bones were found in the filling of some of the Aubrey holes. It
would depend on the definition of the term cremation burial, if these
could
be called burials or not. Once refilled they stopped being holes of
course.

The issue in question is wether the Aubrey holes were all in use (open?)
at
one point in time, or wether they were dug and refilled succesively.
Carefull excavations have shown, that at some continental 'henges', the
'ditch' consisted of a number of pits, which were dug and refilled
separately, so there was in fact no ditch while the monument was in use.


What I had in mind was the possibility that as suggested by Hoyle &
Wickramasinghe that the Aubrey holes were part of a calculating
engine. If that was the case the entire set of holes would be dug
first (at much the same time) and only later used for inhumation. If
it can be shown that the date of the holes does not necessarily
parallel the date of the burials it may go to support Hoyle &
Wickramasinghe. On the other hand, if the burials were spread over
many years and the date of the holes closely parallels that of the
burials then this would seem to argue against Hoyle & Wickramasinghe.

Theoretically it is possible to date the holes by stratigraphy. In reality
they were dated by the refill, but of course with a terminus ante quem.
AFAIK no sharp dating is available for or against such notions.

have fun

Uwe Mueller


.