Researching Stonehenge: Theories Past and Present

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Researching Stonehenge: Theories Past and Present Parker Pearson, M 2013 Researching Stonehenge: Theories Past and Present. Archaeology International, No. 16 (2012-2013): 72-83, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5334/ai.1601 ARTICLE Researching Stonehenge: Theories Past and Present Mike Parker Pearson* Over the years archaeologists connected with the Institute of Archaeology and UCL have made substantial contributions to the study of Stonehenge, the most enigmatic of all the prehistoric stone circles in Britain. Two of the early researchers were Petrie and Childe. More recently, colleagues in UCL’s Anthropology department – Barbara Bender and Chris Tilley – have also studied and written about the monument in its landscape. Mike Parker Pearson, who joined the Institute in 2012, has been leading a 10-year-long research programme on Stonehenge and, in this paper, he outlines the history and cur- rent state of research. Petrie and Childe on Stonehenge William Flinders Petrie (Fig. 1) worked on Stonehenge between 1874 and 1880, publishing the first accurate plan of the famous stones as a young man yet to start his career in Egypt. His numbering system of the monument’s many sarsens and blue- stones is still used to this day, and his slim book, Stonehenge: Plans, Descriptions, and Theories, sets out theories and observations that were innovative and insightful. Denied the opportunity of excavating Stonehenge, Petrie had relatively little to go on in terms of excavated evidence – the previous dig- gings had yielded few prehistoric finds other than antler picks – but he suggested that four theories could be considered indi- vidually or in combination for explaining Stonehenge’s purpose: sepulchral, religious, astronomical and monumental. Although he could not know that Stonehenge contained a large cremation cemetery, he guessed that its purposes were more sepulchral and monu- Fig. 1: William Flinders Petrie (c.1886). mental than religious or astronomical (1880: * UCL Institute of Archaeology, London WC1H 0PY, United Kingdom 31). Of the latter notion, he remarked: ‘The [email protected] astronomical theory has the strong evidence Parker Pearson: Researching Stonehenge 73 Fig. 2: Gordon Childe and a Russian archaeologist at Stonehenge. of the very close pointing to the midsummer Stonehenge. By this time, a string of archae- sunrise, but apparently none other that will ologists had dug there: William Gowland in bear scientific scrutiny’ (ibid.). A few years 1901 (1902), William Hawley in 1919–1926 later, another archaeologist, Sir Arthur Evans and, from 1950 onwards, Richard Atkin- – later the excavator of Minoan Knossos – son together with Stuart Piggott and J.F.S. proposed that Stonehenge was a monument Stone. Atkinson’s book on Stonehenge was to the dead, built to honour the ancestors of published in 1956 and, in the heyday of the a whole prehistoric tribe (1885). ‘culture history’ paradigm, he concluded that Many years later, Gordon Childe (Fig. 2) it was built to the specification of a Bronze included Stonehenge in his magisterial Age Mycenaean architect (1956: 163–64). overview The Dawn of European Civilization. In Atkinson’s view, Stonehenge (Fig. 3) was Although the book was first published in a true example of architecture in contrast to 1925, it was only in the sixth and final edi- mere construction, unparalleled in Britain’s tion, published in 1957 – the year of his death barbarian Bronze Age (ibid.). He considered – that Childe speculated on the purpose of it to be entirely out of character with other 74 Parker Pearson: Researching Stonehenge Fig. 3: Stonehenge from the air (photo: Adam Stanford). British monuments and thus had to be an broadly that of the antiquarians Aubrey, alien intervention. Conversely, Childe was Stukeley and others, followed by the 20th- in no doubt that it was an indigenous crea- century excavators at Stonehenge, followed tion. He had observed that stone circles were by the astronomers (Chippindale, 1994; Pitts, a peculiarly British phenomenon (1936) and 2001; Richards, 2007). he considered that Stonehenge was built by and for ancient Britons. From ancient druids to astronomers It had long been known that Stonehenge’s Putting aside for the moment the 12th- smaller monoliths – the bluestones – origi- century pseudo-history of Geoffrey of Mon- nated in the Preseli hills of west Wales and mouth, the first theory about Stonehenge Childe theorized that their long-distance in modern times was that it was a temple movement must have been the result of a for ancient druids, an idea first proposed by cooperative effort that could only have taken John Aubrey in the mid-17th century and place under special conditions: ‘This fantas- later elaborated by William Stukeley almost tic feat ... must illustrate a degree of politi- a century later (1740). Both of these remark- cal unification or a sacred peace ...’ (Childe, able antiquarians realized that Stonehenge 1957: 331). This insightful observation, just had been built before the Romans. Stukeley like those of Petrie and Evans, was then for- in particular drew on Classical Greek and gotten by both archaeologists and the public Roman comparisons to argue that the plan at large. and elevations of Stonehenge could be inter- The conventional narratives on theories preted as a roofless temple. Neither scholar about Stonehenge surprisingly ignore these could have any idea of the true antiquity of ideas proposed by three of the greatest Stonehenge, 3,000–2,500 years before the archaeologists of the late 19th-early 20th Romans came to Britain, so they could only century and focus on a different history, extrapolate that it had been used by the peo- Parker Pearson: Researching Stonehenge 75 ple that Caesar and other Classical authors cal investigations (1967; 1971; Thom and named as the resident religious elite – the Thom, 1974) to Gerald Hawkins’ proposi- druids. Stukeley was so taken by this theory tion amongst other things that the circle that he even took up druidry. More recently, of 56 Aubrey Holes within the circuit of this reinvention has led to a small but thriv- Stonehenge’s bank and ditch could be used ing ‘new age’ religion; some 4,189 people to predict lunar and solar eclipses (1965), described their religion as ‘druid’ in the UK’s Stonehenge gained a new and sensational 2011 census. Although Classical authors reputation as a repository of the ancients’ referred to ancient druids worshipping only lost knowledge. As the counter-culture of in wooded groves – there is no mention of the 1970s and early 1980s claimed Stone- any link between druids and stone monu- henge as spiritual inspiration for a lost world ment, let alone Stonehenge – the association of mysticism, so the archaeological ‘fringe’ of druids with Stonehenge has become fixed imputed a new range of earth mysteries, in the public consciousness. ley lines and hidden forces responsible for Whereas Hawley (1921) followed Stuke- Stonehenge’s location and raised stones. ley’s theory, proposing that Stonehenge Following on from Hawkins, the astrono- was a temple for priests and nobles, Richard mer Fred Hoyle developed his own expla- Atkinson (1956) saw Stonehenge as resulting nation of astronomical prediction at from the concentration of political power in Stonehenge (1977), although his book was the hands of a single individual who could nowhere near as successful as Hawkins’ draw on the architectural tradition of the Stonehenge Decoded. John North, a respected Bronze Age Aegean. This classic notion of historian of science, also developed some diffusion from an advanced civilization is unusually elaborate astronomical theo- one of many perceptions of Stonehenge as ries about Stonehenge and its surrounding being constructed by the non-indigenous monuments (1996). For many who were ‘other’, whether from Neolithic Brittany, impressed by the astronomical possibilities ancient Egypt or even outer space. Certainly of Stonehenge, the notion that it was oper- until a few decades ago, it was easy to per- ated by a ruling class of astronomer priests ceive Stonehenge as a mysterious intrusion became the theory of the day (e.g. Mackie, into an under-populated land where the few 1977). However, the astronomers’ bubble inhabitants eked out a miserable subsistence was burst by the arrival of archaeo-astrono- using only the most primitive technology for mers such as Clive Ruggles who could bring farming. As archaeologists have learned oth- expertise in both archaeology and astronomy erwise about population densities and early to bear on the problem. farming efficiency (e.g. Pryor, 2003), they Working from ethnographic analogies of have also discovered antecedents and precur- the integrated use of astronomy within the sors to the architecture of Stonehenge else- religions and cultures of traditional socie- where in Britain, notably in timber. In fact, ties, Ruggles and others not only argued for many of these innovations and architectures understanding the role of simple astronomy now appear to have originated on the mar- within its cultural context but also developed gins of Britain, notably in Wales and Orkney a critical methodology for assessing and eval- (Burrow, 2010; Gibson, 1998; 2010). uating competing astronomical claims. For Although the solstitial alignment of Stone- Ruggles, Stonehenge was not a computer henge and its avenue has been long known, or an observatory for prediction and obser- it was only in the 1960s that claims were vation, but a monument for memorializing widely accepted for Stonehenge’s role as an certain key heavenly events, notably
Recommended publications
  • AVAS Newsletter 2016
    AVON VALLEY ARCHAEOLOGICAL SOCIETY NEWSLETTER December 2016 Editorial This year is a swan song for me as this twelfth edition of the Newsletter will be my last one. I feel that I have had a good innings and that it is time to pass baton on to someone who will bring a fresh vision to the task. As I stated last year there is a distinct move away from excavation work in archaeology and this trend is continuing, but our work with resistivity techniques to do non-invasive searches, supplemented by the use of Magnetometry, using some equipment borrowed from Bournemouth University has proved a revelation. For those who wish to know more and see some of the results, then attendance at our Members Evening in January is a must! We really are discovering more and disturb less! My last edition of our newsletter, like a number of previous copies is taking in some practical archaeological topics and attempting to stimulate members to seek out even more interesting places based upon the travels of a number of our members. Our blog site continues to flourishing. So once again, our thanks go to Mike Gill for his continuing work in keeping the news of activities and plans of AVAS available to our members and the general public at large. So let us all support them with any useful news or other input that we, as members, might come up with. N.B. The address on the web for our blogsite is at the bottom of this page. I hope that this edition of the Newsletter will be both stimulating and entertaining and wish you all great year of archaeology in 2017.
    [Show full text]
  • Archaeology Book Collection 2013
    Archaeology Book Collection 2013 The archaeology book collection is held on the upper floor of the Student Research Room (2M.25) and is arranged in alphabetical order. The journals in this collection are at the end of the document identified with the ‘author’ as ‘ZJ’. Use computer keys CTRL + F to search for a title/author. Abulafia, D. (2003). The Mediterranean in history. London, Thames & Hudson. Adkins, L. and R. Adkins (1989). Archaeological illustration. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. Adkins, L. and R. A. Adkins (1982). A thesaurus of British archaeology. Newton Abbot, David & Charles. Adkins, R., et al. (2008). The handbook of British archaeology. London, Constable. Alcock, L. (1963). Celtic Archaeology and Art, University of Wales Press. Alcock, L. (1971). Arthur's Britain : history and archaeology, AD 367-634. London, Allen Lane. Alcock, L. (1973). Arthur's Britain: History and Archaeology AD 367-634. Harmondsworth, Penguin. Aldred, C. (1972). Akhenaten: Pharaoh of Egypt. London, Abacus; Sphere Books. Alimen, H. and A. H. Brodrick (1957). The prehistory of Africa. London, Hutchinson. Allan, J. P. (1984). Medieval and Post-Medieval Finds from Exeter 1971-1980. Exeter, Exeter City Council and the University of Exeter. Allen, D. F. (1980). The Coins of the Ancient Celts. Edinburgh, Edinburgh University Press. Allibone, T. E. and S. Royal (1970). The impact of the natural sciences on archaeology. A joint symposium of the Royal Society and the British Academy. Organized by a committee under the chairmanship of T. E. Allibone, F.R.S, London: published for the British Academy by Oxford University Press. Alves, F. and E.
    [Show full text]
  • Concrete Prehistories: the Making of Megalithic Modernism 1901-1939
    Concrete Prehistories: The Making of Megalithic Modernism Abstract After water, concrete is the most consumed substance on earth. Every year enough cement is produced to manufacture around six billion cubic metres of concrete1. This paper investigates how concrete has been built into the construction of modern prehistories. We present an archaeology of concrete in the prehistoric landscapes of Stonehenge and Avebury, where concrete is a major component of megalithic sites restored between 1901 and 1964. We explore how concreting changed between 1901 and the Second World War, and the implications of this for constructions of prehistory. We discuss the role of concrete in debates surrounding restoration, analyze the semiotics of concrete equivalents for the megaliths, and investigate the significance of concreting to interpretations of prehistoric building. A technology that mixes ancient and modern, concrete helped build the modern archaeological imagination. Concrete is the substance of the modern –”Talking about concrete means talking about modernity” (Forty 2012:14). It is the material most closely associated with the origins and development of modern architecture, but in the modern era, concrete has also been widely deployed in the preservation and display of heritage. In fact its ubiquity means that concrete can justifiably claim to be the single most dominant substance of heritage conservation practice between 1900 and 1945. This paper investigates how concrete has been built into the construction of modern pasts, and in particular, modern prehistories. As the pre-eminent marker of modernity, concrete was used to separate ancient from modern, but efforts to preserve and display prehistoric megaliths saw concrete and megaliths become entangled.
    [Show full text]
  • 2013 CAG Library Index
    Ref Book Name Author B020 (Shire) ANCIENT AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENTS Sian Rees B015 (Shire) ANCIENT BOATS Sean McGrail B017 (Shire) ANCIENT FARMING Peter J.Reynolds B009 (Shire) ANGLO-SAXON POTTERY D.H.Kenneth B198 (Shire) ANGLO-SAXON SCULPTURE James Lang B011 (Shire) ANIMAL REMAINS IN ARCHAEOLOGY Rosemary Margaret Luff B010 (Shire) ARCHAEOLOGY OF GARDENS Christopher Taylor B268 (Shire) ARCHAEOLOGY OF GARDENS Christopher Taylor B039 (Shire) ARCHAEOLOGY OF THE ENGLISH CIVIL WAR Peter Harrington B276 (Shire) ARCHAEOLOGY OF THE ENGLISH CIVIL WAR Peter Harrington B240 (Shire) AVIATION ARCHAEOLOGY IN BRITAIN Guy de la Bedoyere B014 (Shire) BARROWS IN ENGLAND AND WALES L.V.Grinsell B250 (Shire) BELLFOUNDING Trevor S Jennings B030 (Shire) BOUDICAN REVOLT AGAINST ROME Paul R. Sealey B214 (Shire) BREWING AND BREWERIES Maurice Lovett B003 (Shire) BRICKS & BRICKMAKING M.Hammond B241 (Shire) BROCHS OF SCOTLAND J.N.G. Ritchie B026 (Shire) BRONZE AGE COPPER MINING William O'Brian B245 (Shire) BRONZE AGE COPPER MINING IN BRITAIN AND William O'Brien B230 (Shire) CAVE ART Andrew J. Lawson B035 (Shire) CELTIC COINAGE Philip de Jersey B032 (Shire) CELTIC CROSSES OF BRITAIN AND IRELAND Malcolm Seaborne B205 (Shire) CELTIC WARRIORS W.F. & J.N.G.Ritchie B006 (Shire) CHURCH FONTS Norman Pounds B243 (Shire) CHURCH MEMORIAL BRASSES AND BRASS Leigh Chapman B024 (Shire) CLAY AND COB BUILDINGS John McCann B002 (Shire) CLAY TOBACCO PIPES E.G.Agto B257 (Shire) COMPUTER ARCHAEOLOGY Gary Lock and John Wilcock B007 (Shire) DECORATIVE LEADWORK P.M.Sutton-Goold B029 (Shire) DESERTED VILLAGES Trevor Rowley and John Wood B238 (Shire) DESERTED VILLAGES Trevor Rowley and John Wood B270 (Shire) DRY STONE WALLS Lawrence Garner B018 (Shire) EARLY MEDIEVAL TOWNS IN BRITAIN Jeremy Haslam B244 (Shire) EGYPTIAN PYRAMIDS AND MASTABA TOMBS Philip Watson B027 (Shire) FENGATE Francis Pryor B204 (Shire) GODS OF ROMAN BRITAIN Miranda J.
    [Show full text]
  • Stonehenge Bibliography
    Bibliography Abbot, M. and Anderson-Whymark, H., 2012. Anon., 2011a, Discoveries provide evidence of Stonehenge Laser Scan: archaeological celestial procession at Stonehenge. On-line analysis report. English Heritage project source available at: 6457. English Heritage Research Report http://www.birmingham.ac.uk/news/latest/ Series no. 32-2012, available at: 2011/11/25Nov-Discoveries-provide- http://services.english- evidence-of-a-celestial-procession-at- herita ge.org.uk/Resea rch Repo rtsPdf s/032_ Stonehenge.aspx (accessed 2 April 2012). 2012WEB.pdf Anon., 2011b, Stonehenge’s sister? Current Alexander, C., 2009, If the stones could speak: Archaeology, 260, 6–7. Searching for the meaning of Stonehenge. Anon., 2011c, Home is where the heath is. National Geographic, 213.6 (June 2008), Late Neolithic house, Durrington Walls. 34–59. Current Archaeology, 256, 42–3. Allen, S., 2008, The quest for the earliest Anon., 2011d, Stonehenge rocks. Current published image of Stonehinge (sic). Archaeology, 254, 6–7. Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural Anon., 2012a, Origin of some of the Bluestone History Magazine, 101, 257–9. debris at Stonehenge. British Archaeology, Anon., 2006, Excavation and Fieldwork in 123, 9. Wiltshire 2004. Wiltshire Archaeological Anon., 2012b, Stonehenge: sourcing the and Natural History Magazine, 99, 264–70. Bluestones. Current Archaeology, 263, 6– Anon., 2007a, Excavation and Fieldwork in 7. Wiltshire 2005. Wiltshire Archaeological Aronson, M., 2010, If stones could speak. and Natural History Magazine, 100, 232– Unlocking the secrets of Stonehenge. 39. Washington DC: National Geographic. Anon., 2007b, Before Stonehenge: village of Avebury Archaeological and Historical wild parties. Current Archaeology, 208, Research Group (AAHRG) 2001 17–21.
    [Show full text]
  • Stonehenge and Avebury WHS Management Plan 2015 Summary
    Stonehenge, Avebury and Associated Sites World Heritage Site Management Plan Summary 2015 Stonehenge, Avebury and Associated Sites World Heritage Site Management Plan Summary 2015 1 Stonehenge and Avebury World Heritage Site Vision The Stonehenge and Avebury World Heritage Site is universally important for its unique and dense concentration of outstanding prehistoric monuments and sites which together form a landscape without parallel. We will work together to care for and safeguard this special area and provide a tranquil, rural and ecologically diverse setting for it and its archaeology. This will allow present and future generations to explore and enjoy the monuments and their landscape setting more fully. We will also ensure that the special qualities of the World Heritage Site are presented, interpreted and enhanced where appropriate, so that visitors, the local community and the whole world can better understand and value the extraordinary achievements © K020791 Historic England © K020791 Historic of the prehistoric people who left us this rich legacy. Avebury Stone Circle We will realise the cultural, scientific and educational potential of the World Heritage Site as well as its social and economic benefits for the community. © N060499 Historic England © N060499 Historic Stonehenge in summer 2 Stonehenge, Avebury and Associated Sites World Heritage Site Management Plan Summary 2015 Stonehenge, Avebury and Associated Sites World Heritage Site Management Plan Summary 2015 1 World Heritage Sites © K930754 Historic England © K930754 Historic Arable farming in the WHS below the Ridgeway, Avebury The Stonehenge, Avebury and Associated Sites World Heritage Site is internationally important for its complexes of outstanding prehistoric monuments. Stonehenge is the most architecturally sophisticated prehistoric stone circle in the world, while Avebury is Stonehenge and Avebury were inscribed as a single World Heritage Site in 1986 for their outstanding prehistoric monuments the largest.
    [Show full text]
  • Stonehenge OCR Spec B: History Around Us
    OCR HISTORY AROUND US Site Proposal Form Example from English Heritage The Criteria The study of the selected site must focus on the relationship between the site, other historical sources and the aspects listed in a) to n) below. It is therefore essential that centres choose a site that allows learners to use its physical features, together with other historical sources as appropriate, to understand all of the following: a) The reasons for the location of the site within its surroundings b) When and why people first created the site c) The ways in which the site has changed over time d) How the site has been used throughout its history e) The diversity of activities and people associated with the site f) The reasons for changes to the site and to the way it was used g) Significant times in the site’s past: peak activity, major developments, turning points h) The significance of specific features in the physical remains at the site i) The importance of the whole site either locally or nationally, as appropriate j) The typicality of the site based on a comparison with other similar sites k) What the site reveals about everyday life, attitudes and values in particular periods of history l) How the physical remains may prompt questions about the past and how historians frame these as valid historical enquiries m) How the physical remains can inform artistic reconstructions and other interpretations of the site n) The challenges and benefits of studying the historic environment 1 Copyright © OCR 2018 Site name: STONEHENGE Created by: ENGLISH HERITAGE LEARNING TEAM Please provide an explanation of how your site meets each of the following points and include the most appropriate visual images of your site.
    [Show full text]
  • Stonefloors & Stonewalls Online Catalogue
    Pty Ltd 32 Bryant Street, Padstow NSW 2211 ABN 86 089 623 487 Tel: (02) 9773 5677 Fax: (02) 9773 5644 Email: [email protected] StoneFloors & StoneWalls Online catalogue: www.cinajus.com Which Stone Where – an introductory guide to material selection We have all been bamboozled by salespeople trying to explain the virtues of the latest product – whether it be a computer or a car. Choosing stone need not be the same experience. By understanding stone’s basic properties you can make an educated decision when you are selecting stone for your next project. The ‘right stone’ for your project needs to meet requirements based on appearance and performance. Selecting suitable flooring, for example, is firstly a matter of personal taste. One of the appealing aspects of using stone is how its unique character can be used to display your own distinctive personality. The range of colours, textures and finishes available in stone now rivals the range available in more ‘traditional’ floor coverings. Like these coverings, choosing a stone that is durable and resistant to staining and wear is important. The first step is to understand the strengths and challenges of the various types of stone available. Below is a brief beginner’s guide to the seven main stone types commercially available. Stone Type: Sandstone Formation and composition: A sedimentary rock composed predominantly of quartz usually cemented together with clay and/or fused with secondary silica which has been chemically deposited. Minor minerals containing iron and manganese (among others) give the stone its unique characteristics. The movement of these soluble minerals throughout the stone can produce banding or develop as a uniform colour.
    [Show full text]
  • OUGS Journal 32
    Open University Geological Society Journal Volume 32 (1–2) 2011 Editor: Dr David M. Jones e-mail: [email protected] The Open University Geological Society (OUGS) and its Journal Editor accept no responsibility for breach of copyright. Copyright for the work remains with the authors, but copyright for the published articles is that of the OUGS. ISSN 0143-9472 © Copyright reserved OUGS Journal 32 (1–2) Edition 2011, printed by Hobbs the Printers Ltd, Totton, Hampshire Committee of the Open University Geological Society 2011 Society Website: ougs.org Executive Committee President: Dr Dave McGarvie, Department of Earth Sciences, The Open University, Milton Keynes MK7 6AA Chairman: Linda Fowler Secretary: Sue Vernon, Treasurer: John Gooch Membership Secretary: Phyllis Turkington Newsletter Editor: Karen Scott Events Officer: Chris Arkwright Information Officer: vacant at time of going to press Branch Organisers East Anglia (EAn): Wendy Hamilton East Midlands (EMi): Don Cameron East Scotland (ESc): Stuart Swales Ireland (Ire): John Leahy London (Lon): Jenny Parry Mainland Europe (Eur): Elisabeth d'Eyrames Northumbria (Nor): Paul Williams North West (NWe): Mrs Jane Schollick Oxford (Oxf): Sally Munnings Severnside (Ssi): Janet Hiscott South East (SEa): Elizabeth Boucher South West (SWe): Chris Popham Walton Hall (WHa): Tom Miller Wessex (Wsx): Sheila Alderman West Midlands (WMi): Linda Tonkin West Scotland (WSc): Jacqueline Wiles Yorkshire (Yor): Geoff Hopkins Other officers (non-OUGSC voting unless otherwise indicated) Sales Administrator (voting OUGSC member ): vacant at time of going to press Administrator: Don Cameron Minutes Secretary: Pauline Kirtley Journal Editor: Dr David M. Jones Archivist/Reviews: Jane Michael Webmaster: Stuart Swales Deputy Webmaster: Martin Bryan Gift Aid Officer: Ann Goundry OUSA Representative: Capt.
    [Show full text]
  • 2713^7 Contents
    MINERALS OF WASHINGTON, D.C. AND VICINITY by Lawrence R. Bernstein U. S. Geo^r^'ce.l Survey OPEN F-'::. r;.".r'0.?;r cer.-..: 2713^7 CONTENTS Introduction 1 Scope of report 4 Mineral collecting 5 Acknowledgments 6 Introduction 6a ITT3 Aclj.il1 -> ! T^______.___~^. -"» _«_____«..«_»«__.. " " .._.«__._.._*_.__._.,_.._.-. _>-.-- -_>-->.-..-. Q Triassic deposits 31 Mineral localities 38 District of Columbia : 38 IMavtrlWlCfci JT XClilUl a Tirl ~ __ ___« - - -_ -»-i-___ .__- _ __- - ________________ m~m~m~ m~ m~ «M » M* **A^J ^ Anne Arundel County 43 Baltimore County 45 Howard County - 74 Montgomery County 88 Prince Georges County 120 Virginia . 129 Arlington County 129 Fairfax County 131 Fauquier County 139 Loudoun County 143 Prince William County 149 Diabase quarries of northern Virginia 155 CAPTIONS Illustrations Plate 1. Mineral localities of Washington, B.C., and vicinity. Plate 2. Generalized geologic map of Washington. D.C. and vicinity, Plate 3. Mineral deposits and generalized geology of the Triassic rocks near Washington, D.C. List of Figures Figure 1. Index map showing region covered in this report. Stfaded area is covered in most detail. Figure 2. Block diagram of the Washington, D.C. region showing physiographic provinces and major geographic and geologic features. ITfgure -3. Coastal Plain deposits of Washington, D.C. and vicinity. Figure 4. Generalized cross section of a typical complex pegmatite of the Washington, D.C. area. Figure 5. Rhythmically.layered gabbro of the Baltimore Gabbro Com­ plex at Ilchester, Maryland. Figure 6. Triassic diabase dike forming a ridge north of Route 7 near Dranesville, Virginia.
    [Show full text]
  • Stonehenge and Ancient Astronomy Tonehenge Is One of the Most Impressive and Best Known Prehistoric Stone Monuments in the World
    Stonehenge and Ancient Astronomy tonehenge is one of the most impressive and best known prehistoric stone monuments in the world. Ever since antiquarians’ accounts began to bring the site to wider attention inS the 17th century, there has been endless speculation about its likely purpose and meaning, and a recurring theme has been its possible connections with astronomy and the skies. was it a Neolithic calendar? A solar temple? A lunar observatory? A calculating device for predicting eclipses? Or perhaps a combination of more than one of these? In recent years Stonehenge has become the very icon of ancient astronomy, featuring in nearly every discussion on the subject. And yet there are those who persist in believing that it actually had little or no connection with astronomy at all. A more informed picture has been obtained in recent years by combining evidence from archaeology and astronomy within the new interdiscipline of archaeoastronomy – the study of beliefs and practices concerning the sky in the past and the uses to which people’s knowledge of the skies were put. This leaflet attempts to summarize the evidence that the Stonehenge monument was constructed by communities with a clear interest in the sky above them. Photograph: Stonehenge in the snow. (Skyscan/english heritagE) This leaflet is one of a series produced by the Royal Astronomical Society (RAS). An electronic version is available for download at www.ras.org.uk. It has been written by the following members of the RAS Astronomical Heritage Committee: Clive Ruggles, Bill Burton, David Hughes, Andrew lawson and Derek McNally.
    [Show full text]
  • THE SINCEREST FORM of FLATTERY: an ANALYSIS of FULL-SCALE, EX SITU REPLICAS of WORLD HERITAGE SITES by REBECCA LEIGH MCMANUS
    THE SINCEREST FORM OF FLATTERY: AN ANALYSIS OF FULL-SCALE, EX SITU REPLICAS OF WORLD HERITAGE SITES by REBECCA LEIGH MCMANUS (Under the Direction of WAYDE BROWN) ABSTRACT Full-scale, ex situ replicas of UNESCO World Heritage Sites can be found in five countries and their constructions predate even the World Heritage Convention itself. Clearly, the desire of humans to copy the architectural wonders of the world has a long and enduring history. This thesis will attempt to answer three related questions. First, what is the intent behind constructing these replicas? Second, how do the public and cultural heritage professionals receive these replicas? And third, how do these replicas fit into the ongoing discussions on authenticity and interpretation in historic preservation? INDEX WORDS: Replica, Full-Scale, Ex Situ, World Heritage Convention, World Heritage Sites, Stonehenge, Maryhill Stonehenge, Foamhenge, Parthenon, Nashville Parthenon, Hallstatt Village, Luoyang Hallstatt, Great Sphinx at Giza, Chuzhou Sphinx, Duplitecture, Nara Document, Venice Charter, Postmodernism, Forgeries, Umberto Eco, Jean Baudrillard, Richard Handler, Albert Lessing, Biana Bosker. THE SINCEREST FORM OF FLATTERY: AN ANALYSIS OF FULL-SCALE, EX SITU REPLICAS OF WORLD HERITAGE SITES by REBECCA LEIGH MCMANUS BA, Emory University, 2013 A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of The University of Georgia in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree MASTER OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION ATHENS, GEORGIA 2016 © 2016 Rebecca Leigh McManus All Rights Reserved THE SINCEREST FORM OF FLATTERY: AN ANALYSIS OF FULL-SCALE, EX SITU REPLICAS OF WORLD HERITAGE SITES by REBECCA LEIGH MCMANUS Major Professor: Wayde Brown Committee: Scott Nesbit Akela Reason Taylor Davis Electronic Version Approved: Suzanne Barbour Dean of the Graduate School The University of Georgia May 2016 iv DEDICATION I dedicate this work to my parents, who encouraged me to keep pursuing knowledge, and to Alex Green, Sophia Latz, and Lesa Miller for their support and editorial advice.
    [Show full text]