4 ms·
Stonehenge also appears to have been part of a much larger permanent settlement. http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-wiltshire-34156673 http://www.bbc.com/news/
by neffy 10y ago
Stonehenge also appears to have been part of a much larger permanent settlement.
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-wiltshire-34156673 http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-wiltshire-34156673
And Stonehenge is far from being the only examplar of its kind. There's a big one in Scotland:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Callanish_Stones https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Callanish_Stones
And another in Brittany:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnac_stones https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnac_stones
It seems like back in the Neolithic, there must have some kind of pan-euroasian craze for menhir based construction.
- dalbasal 10y agoThis site is a lot older than stonehenge. Taking the oldest and youngest proposed dates for the two sites, and Stonehenge is still closer to the present than to Gobleki Tepeh. Ancient Britons were farmers. They lived in village communities that we can picture forming larger societies with religion, organisation and (fabulously impressive) masonry skills. Gobleki Tepeh predates known agriculture and permanent settlements. It really is a singular site, with genuine mystery.
- vanderZwan 10y agoTo further put this in perspective: estimates of Göbekli Tepe age are somewhere around 9000 years old. Wooly Mammoths went extinct 4500 years ago.