tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5787185370858787658.post5140428335784786272..comments2024-01-30T06:35:10.103+00:00Comments on www.Sarsen.org: Durrington Walls "Superhenge" - Full Press ReleaseTim Dawhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10667360714222841797noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5787185370858787658.post-45983664793793460092015-09-10T08:32:07.444+01:002015-09-10T08:32:07.444+01:00IF and it's a big IF as it is a MOD tank site ...IF and it's a big IF as it is a MOD tank site in the past and these objects could be 'Dragon's Teeth' which are littered all over Salisbury plain then and. these are megaliths then the Neolithic date is clearly wrong.<br /><br />Interestingly the new map and animation by Prof Gaffney shows Durrington was originally a semi-circular site - not round as most text books, which is a much later date (like the eastern side of the Avenue from Stonehenge Bottom) as their new data shows the original site would have meet the raised Avon river - which is not shown in the animation (Durrington Walls, Environ, cleal et all, 1991) shows at the time of the Roman Invasion the Avon was 100m - 200m wider that today (an clear indication that it was wider still in Prehistoric times).<br /><br />The wibbly wobbly 'path' which shows as an indentation on the scans clearly isn't a path (unless the citizens are constantly drunk) its a watercourse (as pointed out in the report there are numerous ancient spings in this area) and that's why it goes all the way from the 'ditch' to the river as the ditch was a moat for boats. ( I think I wrote a book about that five years ago.. what a lucky guess?).<br /><br />The only mystery really is IF these are stones - why were they buried? As there is no indication of the 'spoil' from the moat visible on this site of the site - it is possible that they were buried below. This makes the Stone row really old 10K BCE- but without any obvious purpose!<br /><br />RJLBobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16886732338349957214noreply@blogger.com