Thing is, that's an accurate description that makes as much sense today as anything invoking some kind of category difference between religion and mass spectator team sports.murmur wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 10:09 amBack in the old parish, during a some discussion about an archaeological site, I did a spoof post about the un-earthing of St James Park in a few thousand years, describing a religious centre, a priestly caste, various sub-groups, ritual behaviours, hymns, the whole shebang, which seemed to me to make as much sense, based on as much actual evidence, as much archaeological interpretation.individualmember wrote: ↑Mon Jun 22, 2020 8:38 pmIsn’t the usual thing to say when the purpose isn’t obvious is it’s ceremonial?
I always think that if Wembley Stadium is uncovered in a few thousand years time it would be labelled as ceremonial. Which it kind of is, in a way.
Neolithic landscape
Re: Neolithic landscape
Re: Neolithic landscape
It's not surprising that "Stonehenge" is extensive, as such. A couple of thousand years ago it would have covered most of England. What's surprising is that such a large area has survived without being obliterated by later activity (yet).Grumble wrote: ↑Mon Jun 22, 2020 9:55 amEvery year we find out more and more about this area, it’s quite amazing how much we don’t know. But then again a lot of these developments have come hand in hand with better geo-phys and that has improved enormously in the last 10 years, never mind before that. It’s only fairly recently that the scope of “Stonehenge” has been increased to “the landscape around Stonehenge” as well, or at least that’s my impression.
Re: Neolithic landscape
What do you mean by the bit in bold? I hardly think most of England was a ritual landscape.Sciolus wrote: ↑Wed Jun 24, 2020 7:11 pmIt's not surprising that "Stonehenge" is extensive, as such. A couple of thousand years ago it would have covered most of England. What's surprising is that such a large area has survived without being obliterated by later activity (yet).Grumble wrote: ↑Mon Jun 22, 2020 9:55 amEvery year we find out more and more about this area, it’s quite amazing how much we don’t know. But then again a lot of these developments have come hand in hand with better geo-phys and that has improved enormously in the last 10 years, never mind before that. It’s only fairly recently that the scope of “Stonehenge” has been increased to “the landscape around Stonehenge” as well, or at least that’s my impression.
where once I used to scintillate
now I sin till ten past three
now I sin till ten past three
- Woodchopper
- Princess POW
- Posts: 7144
- Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2019 9:05 am
Re: Neolithic landscape
Even now all over the countryside there are 'standing stones', stone circles, rock carvings and other sites that presumably had some ritual significance, and those are presumably the few that survived for thousands of years.Grumble wrote: ↑Wed Jun 24, 2020 7:16 pmWhat do you mean by the bit in bold? I hardly think most of England was a ritual landscape.Sciolus wrote: ↑Wed Jun 24, 2020 7:11 pmIt's not surprising that "Stonehenge" is extensive, as such. A couple of thousand years ago it would have covered most of England. What's surprising is that such a large area has survived without being obliterated by later activity (yet).Grumble wrote: ↑Mon Jun 22, 2020 9:55 amEvery year we find out more and more about this area, it’s quite amazing how much we don’t know. But then again a lot of these developments have come hand in hand with better geo-phys and that has improved enormously in the last 10 years, never mind before that. It’s only fairly recently that the scope of “Stonehenge” has been increased to “the landscape around Stonehenge” as well, or at least that’s my impression.
I assume that every settlement would have had some kind of ritual site, probably several. Its also reasonable to assume that prominent features in the landscape had ritual significance, as they do in contemporary animist societies.
- Bird on a Fire
- Princess POW
- Posts: 10142
- Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:05 pm
- Location: Portugal
Re: Neolithic landscape
And then there's stuff like the Mayan ballgame https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maya_Ballgame which was a popular sport where they also did human sacrifices and other religious things. And the Roman games, which were at least ostensibly religious. At the very least modern sports are fulfilling part of a similar social function.dyqik wrote: ↑Wed Jun 24, 2020 4:12 pmThing is, that's an accurate description that makes as much sense today as anything invoking some kind of category difference between religion and mass spectator team sports.murmur wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 10:09 amBack in the old parish, during a some discussion about an archaeological site, I did a spoof post about the un-earthing of St James Park in a few thousand years, describing a religious centre, a priestly caste, various sub-groups, ritual behaviours, hymns, the whole shebang, which seemed to me to make as much sense, based on as much actual evidence, as much archaeological interpretation.individualmember wrote: ↑Mon Jun 22, 2020 8:38 pmIsn’t the usual thing to say when the purpose isn’t obvious is it’s ceremonial?
I always think that if Wembley Stadium is uncovered in a few thousand years time it would be labelled as ceremonial. Which it kind of is, in a way.
We have the right to a clean, healthy, sustainable environment.