 |
 carl munck and others
Raadsel
|
02 Januari 2012 | 20:49:25
 |
ENGLISH:
''This video is about how the Great Pyramid and Newark Earthworks in Ohio are oriented such that they point to each other. The Earthworks are oriented to create an azimuth to Giza. This same line matches the orientation of the Great Pyramid...''
-------------------------
DUTCH:
''Jeroen Barhorst schreef voor de website van Dossier X een aantal artikelen over de code van Carl Munck. Klik op onderstaande links voor meer informatie (bron:dcca.nl) :''
--------------------
picture source: hotfileserveforum.com
ENGLISH
The Code: By Carl Munck intro
''All research credit on The Code goes to Carl P. Munck. The following video was adapted from his original video series and was uploaded ONLY for review and educational purposes.
You can learn more about The Code by going to http://www.pyramidmatrix.com/''
Carl Munck - The Code part 1
The Code by Carl Munck Part2
The Code 2000 by Carl Munck Part 3
------------
|
|
|
 |
 |
 The Horizon Project video
Raadsel
|
18 December 2011 | 12:18:13
 |
|
The Horizon Project - Episode 1 - (1 of 8).
----------------------
----------------------
I am watching it now..
--
''The Horizon Project:
Episode 01: Bracing for Tomorrow
Release: August 2006
Runtime: 1 hr, 15 minutes
Episode 01 of The Horizon Project begins with a frightening bang. Newly discovered scientific evidence shows that the world as we know it is about to come to an unexpected end; however, knowing what's coming over the horizon is only the tip of the iceberg; understanding WHY presents a picture far greater than you could have imagined.
Global catastrophic events throughout our past have severed the flow of information from one generation to the next, creating permanent gaps in history and knowledge. Civilizations that came before us knew of the upcoming inevitable catastrophe, leaving behind major clues that have just been recently discovered. The knowledge that was once lost is the missing link that provides a clear understand of how our world truly operates. Ironically, these clues also inform us that time is running out; sooner than you may believe.
Understand what is about to happen but more importantly HOW and WHY. In Episode 01, The Horizon Project Research Team will identify some of the signs that are scattered all over our planet and reveal a shocking truth! '' |
|
|
 |
 77,000-Year-Old Evidence Medicinal Plants
Raadsel
|
10 December 2011 | 10:58:19
 |
source:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/12/111208151220.htm
''77,000-Year-Old Evidence for 'Bedding' and Use of Medicinal Plants Uncovered at South African Rock Shelter
ScienceDaily (Dec. 8, 2011) — Researchers have discovered the earliest evidence for the intentional construction of plant "bedding."
An international team of archaeologists, with the participation of Christopher Miller, junior professor at the University of Tübingen, is reporting 77,000-year-old evidence for preserved plant bedding and the use of insect-repelling plants in a rock shelter in South Africa. This discovery is 50,000 years older than earlier reports of preserved bedding and provides a fascinating insight into the behavioural practices of early modern humans in southern Africa.
The team, led by Lyn Wadley of the University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, in collaboration with Christopher Miller (University of Tübingen, Germany), Christine Sievers and Marion Bamford (University of the Witwatersrand), and Paul Goldberg and Francesco Berna (Boston University, USA), is reporting the discovery in the journal Science, available online this week.
The ancient bedding was uncovered during excavations at Sibudu rock shelter (KwaZulu-Natal province, South Africa), where Prof. Wadley has been digging since 1998. At least 15 different layers at the site contain plant bedding, dated between 77,000 and 38,000 years ago. The bedding consists of centimetre-thick layers of compacted stems and leaves of sedges and rushes, extending over at least one square meter and up to three square meters of the excavated area. Christine Sievers, of the University of the Witwatersrand, was able to identify several types of sedges and rushes used in the construction of the bedding.
The oldest evidence for bedding at the site is particularly well-preserved, and consists of a layer of fossilized sedge stems and leaves, overlain by a tissue-paper-thin layer of leaves, identified by botanist Marion Bamford as belonging to Cryptocarya woodii, or River Wild-quince. The leaves of this tree contain chemicals that are insecticidal, and would be suitable for repelling mosquitoes. "The selection of these leaves for the construction of bedding suggests that the inhabitants of Sibudu had an intimate knowledge of the plants surrounding the shelter, and were aware of their medicinal uses. Herbal medicines would have provided advantages for early human health, and the use of insect-repelling plants adds a new dimension to our understanding of human behaviour 77,000 years ago" said Lyn Wadley, honorary professor at the University of the Witwatersrand.
"The inhabitants would have collected the sedges and rushes from along the uThongathi River, located directly below the site, and laid the plants on the floor of the shelter. The bedding was not just used for sleeping, but would have provided a comfortable surface for living and working," said Wadley. Microscopic analysis of the bedding, conducted by Christopher Miller, junior-professor for geoarchaeology at the University of Tübingen, suggests that the inhabitants repeatedly refurbished the bedding during the course of occupation.
The microscopic analysis also demonstrated that after 73,000 years ago, the inhabitants of Sibudu regularly burned the bedding after use. "They lit the used bedding on fire, possibly as a way to remove pests. This would have prepared the site for future occupation and represents a novel use of fire for the maintenance of an occupation site," said Miller.
The preserved bedding is also associated with the remains of numerous fireplaces and ash dumps. Beginning at 58,000 years ago, the number of hearths, bedding and ash dumps increases dramatically. The archaeologists believe that this is a result of increased occupation of the site. In the article, the archaeologists argue that the increased occupation may correspond with changing demographics within Africa at the time. By around 50,000 years ago, modern humans began expanding out of Africa, eventually replacing archaic forms of humans in Eurasia, including the Neanderthals.
This discovery adds to a long list of important finds at Sibudu over the past decade, including perforated seashells, believed to have been used as beads, and sharpened bone points, likely used for hunting. Wadley and others have also presented early evidence from the site for the development of bow and arrow technology, the use of snares and traps for hunting and the production of glue for hafting stone tools.
The discovery is particularly well timed, since future work at the site may be in jeopardy. Local officials are planning the construction of large housing tracts near Sibudu that would irreparably damage the site and prevent future excavation. Wadley and her colleagues hope that this discovery will emphasize the importance of Sibudu as an irreplaceable cultural resource for South Africa and the rest of the world.'' |
|
|
 |
 The Atlantis / Google article on www.argusoog.nl
Raadsel
|
04 December 2011 | 22:29:01
 |
|
|
 |
 The Atlantis / Google article on www.wanttoknow.nl
Raadsel
|
04 December 2011 | 19:36:59
 |
|
|
 |
 more in depth debunking info, ocean site
Raadsel
|
02 December 2011 | 23:18:12
 |
I have to stay as sceptical as I can, so here's:
Two connected articles with extra 'in depth' info, from the debunking side of the story.
Actually I must say they used a pretty good picture to counter it, by showing the picture near Hawai, the biggest problem with that picture is> it's zoomed in too much.
It's like comparing a picture of a car with a picture that might show a part of a tire.
Sorry for the silly example or comparison, but I think if you would zoom out anywhere, you don't find a rectangle and within that a grid pattern with these straight lines, otherwise the millions of Google Earth fans would have already shouted: "Look we found another one just like it!"
I have no clue what it is, but at the moment I am open to all possibilities, that includes that it might be really physically there, whatever it might be (a historical site would bring new learning opportunities).
Here are the two connected articles with extra 'in depth' info, from the debunking side of the story:
''...Google was quick to discredit the rumor, saying that these lines couldn't have been from the lost city and were created by "ship tracks."
Google was swamped by even more conspiracy-theory feedback, and ultimately it pulled in Walter Smith of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and David Sandwell of UC San Diego's Scripps Institution of Oceanography, two scientists who helped gather some of the ocean-floor data in Google Earth, to clear it all up in a post on the company's official blog. ..
LINK 1
----------------------
''...So what is it? The scientific explanation is a bit less exotic, but we think it's still pretty interesting: these marks are what we call "ship tracks." You see, it's actually quite hard to measure the depth of the ocean. Sunlight, lasers, and other electromagnetic radiation can travel less than 100 feet below the surface, yet the typical depth in the ocean is more than two and a half miles. Sound waves are more effective. By measuring the time it takes for sound to travel from a ship to the sea floor and back, you can get an idea of how far away the sea floor is. Since this process — known as echosounding — only maps a strip of the sea floor under the ship, the maps it produces often show the path the ship took, hence the "ship tracks." In this case, the soundings produced by a ship are also about 1% deeper than the data we have in surrounding areas — likely an error — making the tracks stand out more. You can see all of the soundings that produced this particular pattern with this KMZ file .
Echosounding with sonar is currently the best method for collecting this kind of data, but it's not perfect. One challenge is that it's quite slow. It has to be done from ships or underwater vehicles, and they can't go very fast or they'll spoil the measurement. As a result, not much of the ocean has been mapped this way, and huge gaps remain all over the ocean. In fact, the typical hole between tracks is about 20,000 square kilometers, or about the size of the state of New Jersey.
Now you're probably wondering where the rest of the depth data comes from if there are such big gaps from echosounding. We do our best to predict what the sea floor looks like based on what we can measure much more easily: the water surface. Above large underwater mountains (seamounts), the surface of the ocean is actually higher than in surrounding areas. These seamounts actually increase gravity in the area, which attracts more water and causes sea level to be slightly higher. The changes in water height are measurable using radar on satellites. This allows us to make a best guess as to what the rest of the sea floor looks like, but still at relatively low resolutions (the model predicts the ocean depth about once every 4000 meters). What you see in Google Earth is a combination of both this satellite-based model and real ship tracks from many research cruises (we first published this technique back in 1997). If you zoom in and take a look around the ocean for yourself, you can see higher resolution patches where ships have studied the sea floor and all the places we've still yet to explore. Here's a good example just north of Hawaii:
So, what if we really wanted to find Atlantis? We probably couldn't do it with satellites — man-made structures simply aren't big enough to be measured that way. But we could map the whole ocean using ships. A published U.S. Navy study found that it would take about 200 ship-years, meaning we'd need one ship for 200 years, or 10 ships for 20 years, or 100 ships for two years. It costs about $25,000 per day to operate a ship with the right mapping capability, so 200 ship-years would cost nearly two billion dollars. That may seem like a lot of money, but it's not that far off from the price tag of, say, a new sports stadium.
For now, keep exploring the ocean in Google Earth, and continue to share what you discover. It's great to have so many sets of eyes looking at the data currently in Google Earth and asking questions about what it represents. We and our fellow oceanographers are constantly improving the resolution of our seafloor maps, so we promise to work with Google to keep the virtual explorers out there busy.
Posted by Walter Smith, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and David Sandwell, Scripps Institution of Oceanography at UC San Diego
...''
LINK 2
|
|
|
 |
 Heeft Google Atlantis gevonden? Zoektocht 2.0, zaak 'heropend'
Raadsel
|
01 December 2011 | 17:08:38
 |
Dutch text, translation in English below:
Heeft Google Atlantis gevonden? Zoektocht 2.0, zaak 'heropend'
Op de bodem van de Atlantische oceaan, op zo'n 1000 kilometer ten westen van de Afrikaanse kust, bij de Kanarische eilanden heeft een Engelse technische luchtvaartdeskundige iets meer dan 2 jaar geleden een mogelijk zeer belangrijke historische locatie ontdekt met behulp van Google Earth 5.0, toen dit in 2009 uitkwam.
Deze Engelsman, Bernie Bamford heeft in een artikel voor de Engelse krant Daily Telegraph aangegeven dat deze locatie wel zeker door mensen moet zijn gemaakt.
31 15’15.53N, 24 15’30.53W
31 15’15.53N, 24 15’30.53W , uitgezoomed.
Het gaat om een enorme onnatuurlijk ogende rechthoekige formatie (zie afb 1), met scherpe lijnen als buiten lijnen, aan de binnenzijde een soort netwerk van scherpe, rechte lijnen en rechthoeken, afgewisseld met een paar schuine rechte lijnen. Het lijken op het eerste gezicht een soort wegen, kanalen of muren van boven af bekeken. Met betrekking tot de schaal zou dat van ons moderne perspectief in 21e eeuw wel vreemd zijn, want dan zouden het reusachtige wegen, kanalen of gebouwen moeten zijn.
Dit onderwater netwerk in de vorm van een rechthoek is zo'n 100 mijl bij 70 mijl (+_17.000km2) oftewel de helft van het landoppervlak van Nederland welke ongeveer 33.883 km2 bedraagt. De locatie ligt op een diepte van ongeveer 3,5 mijl, oftewel ongeveer 4,5 kilometer diep.
De formatie is zowel op Google Earth als op Google Maps te vinden door de volgende coordinaten te knippen en te plakken: 31 15’15.53N, 24 15’30.53W
Momenteel als je het bovenstaande op Google plakt en op zoeken drukt, vindt Google meer dan 90.000 resultaten en als je de resultaten filtert op afbeeldingen, dan vind je meer dan 6.000 resultaten. In talloze kranten, tijdschriften en vooral op alternatieve media en alternatieve blogs is dit onderwerp besproken. Sinds 2009 zijn er miljoenen mensen die zich deze puzzelvraag afvroegen: is dit netwerk van kunstmatig ogende rechthoeken en strepen een archeologische, door mensen gemaakte locatie en zo ja, is dit dan ook (een deel van) het mythische Atlantis?
Waarschijnlijkheid
Dit is misschien een minder raar vraagstuk dan je zou denken, Troje was bijvoorbeeld tot de opgravingen door: Frank Calvert en Heinrich Schliemann ook slechts een mythe. Toen Troje eenmaal ontdekt en opgegraven was, kon dit moeilijk meer ontkend worden!
Toen locaties op het landoppervlak van Zuid Amerika in de moderne tijd voor het eerst van bovenaf bekeken werden met vliegtuigen, werden bijvoorbeeld de Nasca Lines (geoglyfen/aardtekeningen) in Peru ontdekt. Op dezelfde manier worden sinds het gebruik van Google Earth steeds meer nieuwe archeologische locaties gevonden met behulp van satelliet beelden en vliegtuig opnames. David Kennedy heeft hier veel ervaring mee, zie zijn websites met prachtige foto's:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/APAAME/collections/
http://www.apaame.org/
Plato
Dr. Charles Orser, curator van de historische archeologie afdeling van New York State University heeft aan het tijdschrift The Sun in 2009 aangegeven dat '' het overblijfselen kunnen zijn van de verloren eiland stad Atlantis, eerst genoemd in de dialogen van de Griekse filosoof Plato.'' ''De locatie is een van de meest waarschijnlijke plekken die overeenkomt met de voorgestelde locatie van Atlantis, als omschreven door Plato.'' Vertelde Orser aan The Sun. "Zelfs als het een natuurlijke gevormde geografische/geologische structuur blijkt te zijn, is het de moeite waard om verder te onderzoeken.''
Google zelf heeft de vondst en de formatie als niet bestaand verklaard
Google legt uit dat de schepen die de bodem meten en in kaart brengen, het gebied opmeten in stroken met echo geluidsgolven; dit verklaart waarom er soms strepen voorkomen op de zeekaarten in Google Earth, zo ook bij de coordinaten:
31 15’15.53N, 24 15’30.53W
Dit zijn volgens Google niet meer dan: 'scheep strepen' die de route van de schepen weergeven.
Google concludeert met deze uitleg dat deze rechthoekige formatie, ter grootte van de helft van het landoppervlak van Nederland, dus niet echt fysiek op die plek te vinden is, maar slechts als een imperfectie in de kaart op Google Earth te zien is.
Mijn huidige visie op Google's uitleg
Ik begrijp dat de kaart in stroken wordt opgemeten. Volgens mij worden bijna alle kaarten of het nu op de grond, in de lucht, vanuit de ruimte of op zee allemaal eerst in delen opgemeten en later samengevoegd tot een geheel.
Het is begrijpelijk dat hoe ruwer (met meer variaties per strook) de techniek is die je gebruikt om te meten, hoe ruwer je kaart evt wordt.
Google Earth ligt voor zover ik kan waarnemen volledig bezaaid met duidelijk zichtbare stroken kaart die aan elkaar geplakt zijn, met oneffenheden, kleurverschillen, verschillen in aantal pixels. Zie afb2 voor voorbeelden van deze standaard willekeurig gevormde 'scheep strepen' / meet stroken op een willekeurige locatie:
33°51'28.64"N 37°37'56.03"W. Een willekeurige locatie met scherpte verschillen en strepen.
Deze soort strepen zijn dus overal te vinden op de zeekaart van Google Earth (Google Ocean) en lijkt overeen te komen met wat Google zelf omschreef als 'scheep strepen', echter dit verklaart totaal niet een perfect ogende rechthoekige formatie met een netwerk van rechthoeken en strepen aan de binnenzijde van de grote rechthoek, die van een compleet andere aard is dan de structureel voorkomende imperfecties waar Google het eigenlijk over heeft.
Voorlopige conclusie:
Wat mij betreft is de vondst van Bernie Bamford, de Engels technische luchtvaartdeskundige, nu 2 jaar na ontdekking nog meer de moeite waard om te onderzoeken dan 2 jaar geleden; simpelweg omdat het momenteel toch niet echt rationeel te verklaren is en wellicht ons dichterbij het vinden van overblijfselen van een oude beschaving brengt. Atlantis?
Berend Watchus
december 2011
--
TRANSLATION:
Did Google find Atlantis? Search 2.0, case reopened
At the bottom of the ocean, about a 1000 kilometers west off the coast of th African continent, near the Canary Islands, an English aeronautical engineer may have made an essential historical discovery with the use of Google Eaarth 5.0 when it came out in 2009.
This Englishman, Bernie Bamford has told the Daily telegraph in an article that the network, or grid of lines must be man-made.
It's an enormous site with an unnatural/artificial looking rectangular structure (see pictures 1a and 1b), with sharp lines as outer lines, and on the inside a sort of network or grid of sharp, straight lines and rectangles and a few diagonal straight lines. At first site, it looks like a network of roads, canals or walls viewed from above. If you look at scale this would make no sense to our modern 21 st century perspective, because the roads, canals or buildings would have be gigantic.
This under water network in the shape of a rectangle is approximately 100 miles by 70 miles (about 17.000 square kilometers), which is about half of the land surface of The Netherlands (33.883 square kilometers) or the equivalent of the surface of Wales. The site is at a depth of about 3,5 miles, which is roughly 4,5 kilometers deep.
You can find the site on Google Earth and on Google Maps by copy pasting the following coordinates: 31 15’15.53N, 24 15’30.53W
At the moment, if you paste the coordinates mentioned above in the standard Google searchbar, Google shows more than 90.000 results and when you filter just to look at images, there are over 6.000 results. The subject has been discussed in many newspapers, magazines and mostly in alternative media and personal blogs o people interested in alternative knowledge. Since 2009 millions of people have asked themselves the same questions: is this network artificial looking rectangles and lines an archeological, man-made site? And if the answer is YES, would this then also be (a port of) the mythical Atlantis?
Probability
You might think it's a bit far fetched. As an example: Troy was before the discovery by Frank Calvert and Heinrich Schliemann also considered to be just a myth. After Troy had been discovered and dug up, the fact of Troy not only being a myth but a real physical place, could no longer be denied!
When locations of the South American continent had been viewed for the first time from high up in the air, in airplanes, the Nasca Lines (geoglyphs/earth drawinngs) were discovered in Peru. In a similar way, since the use of Google earth, more and more archeological sites are being spotted with the help of satellite images (and sometimes air photography from airplanes). David Kennedy is very experienced in this field. I Recommend his websites with beautiful pictues:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/APAAME/collections/
http://www.apaame.org/
Plato
Dr. Charles Orser, curator of historical archeology at New York State University told the magazine The Sun in 2009 that the mysterious markings could be the remains of the lost island city of Atlantis, mentioned in the dialogues of the Greek philosopher Plato. "the site is one of the most prominent places for the proposed location of Atlantis, as described by Plato. Even if it turns ou to be geographical, it definitely deserves a closer look.
Google has declared the rectangular formation to be non existing, not real
Google explains that the ships that measure and create maps of the bottom of the ocean, measure the surface with echo soundwaves, this can only be done in a limited strip of surface underneath and around the ship. Depending on where the ship 'sails', this results in a certain mapped area, in the form of a strip, resembling the route of the ship. That's why they call it 'ship tracks' on a map.
Google says that this is the reason that there are different looking strips in the ocean maps.
Google then explains that the myterious location 31 15’15.53N, 24 15’30.53W in google Earth (Google Ocean) is caused by the ship tracks / the way of mapping the surface.
Google then concludes that this perfectly sharp looking retangular site, with a grid on the inside which contains visual details and with the size of Wales, is physically not there on that location, it's just an imperfection on the map.
My own current opinion concerning Google's explanation
I understand that the map is measured in separate strips. I think almost all maps, wether it be on the ground, in the air, from space or at sea, all of them are first measured and recorded in separateparts and then later put together in one map, as a whole.
It's understandable that the rougher the technique is (more variations per strip), the rougher the map might be as an end result.
Google Earth's bottom of the ocean is as far as I can tell completely covered in clearly visible separate strips of map that have been put together, the contain: imperfections, colour differences, differences in sharpness/pixels. See picture 2 for a random location that contains these standard randomly (it looks random) shaped ship tracks / mapping strips.
You can find these strips everywhere on the sea maps of Google Earth (Google Ocean) and it seems to ressemble what Google calls: 'Ship tracks', however this does not all explain a perfect looking rectangular formation, with a network or a grid of rectangles and stripes on the inside of the bigger rectangle, which is completely different in it's nature from the structural present imperfections which Google was talking about.
My current conclusion:
I think that the discovery by the English aeronautical engineer, Bernie Bamford, now 2 years after the discovery is more worth researching and 'diving into' than 2 years ago, since there is at the moment not yet a convincing rational explanation for this site.
A motivation to do more research is that it might bring us closer to finding remains of an ancient civilisation. Atlantis?
Berend Watchus
december 2011 |
|
|
 |
 Google found Atlantis? part 3
Raadsel
|
01 December 2011 | 10:50:15
 |
If you copy paste: 31 15’15.53N, 24 15’30.53W
in google, at the moment it gets over 90.000 results in total
and if you filter for images, it's gets over 6.000 results.
31 15’15.53N, 24 15’30.53W
See also part 1 & part 2 earlier on this blog.
''......
The blog post expanded on Google's original explanation of the odd formation: "These marks are what we call 'ship tracks,'" it explained. "You see, it's actually quite hard to measure the depth of the ocean. Sunlight, lasers, and other electromagnetic radiation can travel less than 100 feet below the surface, yet the typical depth in the ocean is more than two and a half miles. Sound waves are more effective. By measuring the time it takes for sound to travel from a ship to the sea floor and back, you can get an idea of how far away the sea floor is. Since this process--known as echosounding--only maps a strip of the sea floor under the ship, the maps it produces often show the path the ship took, hence the 'ship tracks.'"
There are other "ship track" patterns visible on Google Earth ocean maps, Smith and Sandwell added, like one off the coast of Hawaii.
But the post refused to outright deny that Atlantis might yet be found through the use of Google Earth. Google is hoping that the resolution of undersea footage will continue to improve, which will take both money and time. "It's great to have so many sets of eyes looking at the data currently in Google Earth and asking questions about what it represents," the blog post concluded. "We and our fellow oceanographers are constantly improving the resolution of our seafloor maps, so we promise to work with Google to keep the virtual explorers out there busy." In other words: never stop searching.
In bygone centuries there were the likes of Magellan and Columbus and Marco Polo. These days, I suppose, we have Google. .."
Other info about this:
|
|
|
 |
 Secret history of Stonehenge revealed
Raadsel
|
29 November 2011 | 14:58:13
 |
|
''Secret history of Stonehenge revealed
Ancient site may have been place of worship 500 years before the first stone was erected
Extraordinary new discoveries are shedding new light on why Britain’s most famous ancient site, Stonehenge, was built – and when.
Current research is now suggesting that Stonehenge may already have been an important sacred site at least 500 years before the first Stone circle was erected – and that the sanctity of its location may have determined the layout of key aspects of the surrounding sacred landscape.
What’s more, the new investigation – being carried out by archaeologists from the universities’ of Birmingham, Bradford and Vienna – massively increases the evidence linking Stonehenge to pre-historic solar religious beliefs. It increases the likelihood that the site was originally and primarily associated with sun worship
The investigations have also enabled archaeologists to putatively reconstruct the detailed route of a possible religious procession or other ritual event which they suspect may have taken place annually to the north of Stonehenge.
That putative pre-historic religious ‘procession’ (or, more specifically, the evidence suggesting its route) has implications for understanding Stonehenge’s prehistoric religious function – and suggests that the significance of the site Stonehenge now occupies emerged earlier than has previously been appreciated.
The crucial new archaeological evidence was discovered during on-going survey work around Stonehenge in which archaeologists have been ‘x-raying’ the ground, using ground-penetrating radar and other geophysical investigative techniques. As the archaeological team from Birmingham and Vienna were using these high-tech systems to map the interior of a major prehistoric enclosure (the so-called ‘Cursus’) near Stonehenge, they discovered two great pits, one towards the enclosure’s eastern end, the other nearer its western end.
When they modelled the relationship between these newly-discovered Cursus pits and Stonehenge on their computer system, they realised that, viewed from the so-called ‘Heel Stone’ at Stonehenge, the pits were aligned with sunrise and sunset on the longest day of the year – the summer solstice (midsummer’s day). The chances of those two alignments being purely coincidental are extremely low.
The archaeologists then began to speculate as to what sort of ritual or ceremonial activity might have been carried out at and between the two pits. In many areas of the world, ancient religious and other ceremonies sometimes involved ceremonially processing round the perimeters of monuments. The archaeologists therefore thought it possible that the prehistoric celebrants at the Cursus might have perambulated between the two pits by processing around the perimeter of the Cursus.
Initially this was pure speculation – but then it was realized that there was, potentially a way of trying to test the idea. On midsummer’s day there are in fact three key alignments – not just sunrise and sunset, but also midday (the highest point the sun reaches in its annual cycle). For at noon the key alignment should be due south.
One way to test the ‘procession’ theory (or at least its route) was for the archaeologists to demonstrate that the midway point on that route had indeed a special relationship with Stonehenge (just as the two pits – the start and end point of the route – had). The ‘eureka moment’ came when the computer calculations revealed that the midway point (the noon point) on the route aligned directly with the centre of Stonehenge, which was precisely due south.
This realization that the sun hovering over the site of Stonehenge at its highest point in the year appears to have been of great importance to prehistoric people, is itself of potential significance. For it suggests that the site’s association with the veneration of the sun was perhaps even greater than previously realized.
But the discovery of the Cursus pits, the discovery of the solar alignments and of the putative ‘processional’ route, reveals something else as well – something that could potentially turn the accepted chronology of the Stonehenge landscape on its head.
For decades, modern archaeology has held that Stonehenge was a relative latecomer to the area – and that the other large monument in that landscape – the Cursus – pre-dated it by up to 500 years.
However, the implication of the new evidence is that, in a sense, the story may have been the other way round, i.e. that the site of Stonehenge was sacred before the Cursus was built, says Birmingham archaeologist, Dr. Henry Chapman, who has been modelling the alignments on the computerized reconstructions of the Stonehenge landscape
The argument for this is simple, yet persuasive. Because the ‘due south’ noon alignment of the ‘procession’ route’s mid-point could not occur if the Cursus itself had different dimensions, the design of that monument has to have been conceived specifically to attain that mid-point alignment with the centre of Stonehenge.
What’s more, if that is so, the Stonehenge Heel Stone location had to have been of ritual significance before the Cursus pits were dug (because their alignments are as perceived specifically from the Heel Stone).
Those two facts, when taken together, therefore imply that the site, later occupied by the stones of Stonehenge, was already sacred before construction work began on the Cursus. Unless the midday alignment is a pure coincidence (which is unlikely), it would imply that the Stonehenge site’s sacred status is at least 500 years older than previously thought – a fact which raises an intriguing possibility.
For 45 years ago, archaeologists found an 8000 BC Mesolithic (‘Middle’ Stone Age) ritual site in what is now Stonehenge’s car park. The five thousand year gap between that Mesolithic sacred site and Stonehenge itself meant that most archaeologists thought that ‘sacred’ continuity between the two was inherently unlikely. But, with the new discoveries, the time gap has potentially narrowed. Indeed, it’s not known for how long the site of Stonehenge was sacred prior to the construction of the Cursus. So, very long term traditions of geographical sanctity in relation to Britain’s and the world’s best known ancient monument, may now need to be considered.
The University of Birmingham Stonehenge area survey - the largest of its type ever carried out anywhere in the world – will take a further two years to complete, says Professor Vince Gaffney, the director the project.
Virtually every square meter in a five square mile area surrounding the world most famous pre-historic monument will be examined geophysically to a depth of up to two metres, he says.
It’s anticipated that dozens, potentially hundreds of previously unknown sites will be discovered as a result of the operation.
The ongoing discoveries in Stonehenge’s sacred prehistoric landscape – being made by Birmingham’s archaeologists and colleagues from the University of Vienna’s Ludwig Boltzmann Institute – are expected to transform scholars’ understanding of the famous monument’s origins, history and meaning." |
|
|
 |
 over 1000 Sacred Sites in Over 100 countries
Raadsel
|
28 November 2011 | 11:11:05
 |
|
''Martin Gray has traveled the world like no other, visting and photographing over 1000 Sacred Sites in Over 100 countires. Martin's book, "Sacred Earth" is out from Barnes and Noble and contains the most beautiful photographs and writings about Sacred Sites ever presented in a single format.
Visit Martin and find out more at www.SacredSites.com ''
|
|
|
|
|
|