Remains of village found near Stonehenge

Denny · Post by **Denny** » Tue Jan 30, 2007 9:20 pm

WASHINGTON - A village of small houses that may have sheltered the builders of the mysterious Stonehenge — or people attending festivals there — has been found by archaeologists studying the stone circle in England.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16887060/from/RS.3/

Congratulations · Post by **Congratulations** » Tue Jan 30, 2007 9:22 pm

Ugh, I'm in archaeology right now, and I hate it. I mean, this stuff sounds interesting and all...

kkrell · Post by **kkrell** » Tue Jan 30, 2007 10:05 pm

Congratulations wrote:Ugh, I'm in archaeology right now, and I hate it. I mean, this stuff sounds interesting and all...

Having trouble with all the lying and making up stuff that's required? There are an awful lot of assumptions, supposition, and speculation involved. Are you sure you can handle all that uncertainty?

Which reminds me, I'm feasting right now, in here with my bed, furniture and cabinets, and just throwing all those half-eaten bones on the floor. Think I'll leave them here for thousands of years, too. Yeah right!

Kevin Krell

brianc · Post by **brianc** » Tue Jan 30, 2007 10:12 pm

Any truth to them finding one house with a large sign hanging over the door that said:

Congratulations · Post by **Congratulations** » Tue Jan 30, 2007 10:17 pm

kkrell wrote:
Congratulations wrote:Ugh, I'm in archaeology right now, and I hate it. I mean, this stuff sounds interesting and all...
Having trouble with all the lying and making up stuff that's required? There are an awful lot of assumptions, supposition, and speculation involved. Are you sure you can handle all that uncertainty?

Pretty much exactly.

Cynth · Post by **Cynth** » Tue Jan 30, 2007 10:26 pm

Well, it sounds pretty interesting and important. I'm not inclined to take a class in archaeology but just the idea of finding a bunch of really old house remains seems pretty thrilling. They are finding tools and things I guess. I don't suppose the remains themselves are fake. It doesn't seem like someone would make it up that pig bones are there, would they?

Congratulations · Post by **Congratulations** » Tue Jan 30, 2007 10:30 pm

Cynth wrote: Well, it sounds pretty interesting and important. I'm not inclined to take a class in archaeology but just the idea of finding a bunch of really old house remains seems pretty thrilling. They are finding tools and things I guess. I don't suppose the remains themselves are fake. It doesn't seem like someone would make it up that pig bones are there, would they?

No, but an archaeologist will probably have a tendency to ascribe a lot of meaning and importance to pig bones that are probably incidental to whatever they're studying. Thus the making stuff up.

But, really, that's just a hazard of the discipline. The most you can do is say, "Well, we found these pig bones in the same strata as this pottery, so maybe the people who made the pottery were also aware of the existence of pigs...?" Now, if the pig bones show signs of being worked by humans (knife marks that are consistent with butchering, what have you), then we might have something to work with. But really, archaeologists are just sort of disadvantaged from the beginning as far as data, so they tend to fudge and smudge a lot of things. In an undergraduate setting, anyway.

Anyway, I'm not a big fan of archaeology, because it doesn't suit me, personally. I'd much rather study living people.

Congratulations · Post by **Congratulations** » Tue Jan 30, 2007 10:37 pm

And while I'm on it, am I the only person who thinks it's silly that archaeology is a requirement for all anthropology majors? I mean, we have a whole separate minor for that, so if I really cared, maybe I'd do that? It should at least be optional, I say! I could be in "anthropology of gender" or "anthropology of religion" or "culture and the individual" or any number of classes that are more interesting and more useful to my area of interest. Ugh. Sorry guys, here's a cute kitty:

Innocent Bystander · Post by **Innocent Bystander** » Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:25 am

Yeah, you can generally distract us with pussy.

There's a TV program called "Time Team" where a bunch of archeologists and an ex-comedy front-man dig holes all over the UK. The impression it leaves is that it's impossible to dig a trench anywhere in the UK without finding something of archeological interest.

And I like Avebury Stone Circle better.

GaryKelly · Post by **GaryKelly** » Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:39 am

kkrell wrote:Having trouble with all the lying and making up stuff that's required? There are an awful lot of assumptions, supposition, and speculation involved. Are you sure you can handle all that uncertainty?

And *belief*, Kevin, don't forget the *belief*.

"The Sheffield University researcher thinks the settlement was probably not lived in all year round. Instead, he believes, Stonehenge and Durrington formed a religious complex used for funerary rituals.
He believes it drew Neolithic people from all over the region, who came for massive feasts in the midwinter, where prodigious quantities of food were consumed. The bones were then tossed on the floors of the houses."

kkrell · Post by **kkrell** » Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:55 am

GaryKelly wrote:"He believes it drew Neolithic people from all over the region, who came for massive feasts in the midwinter, where prodigious quantities of food were consumed. The bones were then tossed on the floors of the houses."

Bet they weren't invited back.

Kevin Krell

missy · Post by **missy** » Wed Jan 31, 2007 4:35 am

Congrats - are you interested in science? Maybe you could approach the archaeology from it's more scientific aspects - you know, the carbon dating, the looking at pollen to determine what plants were around, what minerals and metals are found in pot sherds, etc.
Those are the things that have always interested me about archaeology. The rest I've always looked at as kind of "historical fiction". It could have it's basis in fact, but there are a lot of assumptions that have to go on, too.

dwinterfield · Post by **dwinterfield** » Wed Jan 31, 2007 7:10 am

kkrell wrote:
GaryKelly wrote:"He believes it drew Neolithic people from all over the region, who came for massive feasts in the midwinter, where prodigious quantities of food were consumed. The bones were then tossed on the floors of the houses."
Bet they weren't invited back.
Kevin Krell

I'm wondering if they'll find a primitive whistle and drum in the corner.

crookedtune · Post by **crookedtune** » Wed Jan 31, 2007 10:11 am

dwinterfield wrote: I'm wondering if they'll find a primitive whistle and drum in the corner.

Not a chance. They'll all be hand-made and -voiced. Primitive is for the Generations that followed.

anniemcu · Post by **anniemcu** » Wed Jan 31, 2007 6:23 pm

shifting a mite to the left... i found this little effort remarkable...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lRRDzFROMx0&eurl=
Building Stonehenge - This Man can Move Anything