Our civilisation is ancient and its roots run deep – far more ancient and far deeper than anything that Islam can posit as civilised societies. Some time ago
I posted about how ancient London is as a place of human habitation so it comes as no surprise to me to learn that Oxford – one of the great university towns of England – is also a very ancient foundation. Over at
Science Daily is this interesting little piece from last November (I get there in the end!) which seems to indicate that there was settlement on the site of Oxford at least two thousand years before Christ:
Archaeologists excavating the former Radcliffe Infirmary site in Oxford have uncovered evidence of a prehistoric monumental landscape stretching across the gravel terrace between the Thames and Cherwell rivers.
[...]
In addition to these findings, the work has also uncovered evidence of a 6th century Saxon settlement, including a sunken featured craft hut known as a Grübenhauser and a pit containing unfired clay loom weights.
A team from Museum of London Archaeology (MOLA) has been excavating parts of the 3.7 hectare site. The excavation has revealed evidence of three large prehistoric 'ring ditches' along with some evidence of possible associated cremation burials and an enigmatic rectangular enclosure, finds from which are currently being subjected to radio carbon dating.
[...]
The River Thames was an important focus for monument building in the Neolithic and Bronze Age periods when monuments used for burial, ritual and social purposes were constructed along the gravel terraces of the river.
A spokesperson from MOLA explained: 'Ring ditches are, as the name suggests, circular ditches, which are often the remains of ploughed out barrows, that may be associated with burials of high status individuals in the later Neolithic or Bronze Age, about 4000 years ago.'
The archaeologists had suspected the presence of prehistoric remains because a 12th century documentary source records 'the croft of the three barrows' in this area. Parch marks of a possible sequence of ring ditches in University Parks had indicated that similar remains might be present on the Radcliffe site.
The Saxon activity around the much earlier barrow cemetery is not uncommon and is recorded at other similar sites along the Thames. However, this is the first evidence for such a relationship in Oxford. The archaeologists are now working on the post-excavation phase of the project.
Naturally, I am forced to wonder if some Neolithic or Bronze Age inhabitant of that small settlement was a respected teacher; maybe people travelled from all over to hear such a one lecture; maybe erudition and learning are anciently part of the soil of Oxford. Just my fancy, but wouldn’t it be nice if it were true!
Moving on, and to the other side of the world at that, there is this fascinating article, also at
Science Daily, which will rattle a few cages in the Archaeological establishment:
Archaeologists have disproved the fifty-year-old theory underpinning our understanding of how the famous stone statues were moved around Easter Island.
[...]
A complex network of roads up to 800-years-old crisscross the Island between the hat and statue quarries and the coastal areas.
Laying alongside the roads are dozens of the statues, or moai.
[...]
Heyerdahl and subsequent researchers believed that statues he found lying on their backs and faces near the roads were abandoned during transportation by the ancient Polynesians.
But his theory has been completely rejected by the team led by Manchester's Dr Colin Richards and UCL's Dr Sue Hamilton.
Instead, their discovery of stone platforms associated with each fallen moai -- using specialist 'geophysical survey' equipment -- finally confirms a little known 1914 theory of British archaeologist Katherine Routledge that the routes were primarily ceremonial avenues.
The statues, say the Manchester and UCL team just back from the island, merely toppled from the platforms with the passage of time.
"The truth of the matter is, we will never know how the statues were moved," said Dr Richards.
"Ever since Heyerdahl, archeologists have come up with all manner of theories -- based on an underlying assumption that the roads were used for transportation of the moai, from the quarry at the volcanic cone Rano Raraku.
"What we do now know is that the roads had a ceremonial function to underline their religious and cultural importance.
"They lead -- from different parts of the island -- to the Rano Raraku volcano where the Moai were quarried.
"Volcano cones were considered as points of entry to the underworld and mythical origin land Hawaiki.
"Hence, Rano Ranaku was not just a quarry but a sacred centre of the island."
The previous excavation found that the roads are concave in shape -making it difficult to move heavy objects along them
And as the roads approach Rano Raraku, the statues become more frequent -- which the team say, indicated an increasing grades of holiness.
"All the evidence strongly shows that these roads were ceremonial -- which backs the work of Katherine Routledge from almost 100 years ago, " said Dr Sue Hamilton.
[...]
She added: "What is shocking is that Heyerdahl actually found some evidence to suggest there were indeed platforms.”
[...]
Well, whatever one makes of this it is going to set the cat amongst the pigeons. Of course any follower of Islam would just destroy the statues and write off the Easter Island folk as beyond the pale – they would probably change the name of the Island, too.
Posted on 06/21/2010 6:16 AM by John M. Joyce
.jpg)
%20(2).jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
