The rolling stones of Newgrange.

The rolling stones of Newgrange. In his paper 'Newgrange--a view from the platform'Gabriel Cooney accepts that the quartz/ granite layer at Newgrange wasnever part of a wall; instead it constituted a structure--aplatform--placed on the ground. This new view was first put forward byFlemming Kaul in 1995 and developed in 2004, in a paper that denouncedthe hideous white wall of O'Kelly's reconstruction (Eriksen2004). But if there was no wall, one has to explain the astonishing a��ston��ish?tr.v. as��ton��ished, as��ton��ish��ing, as��ton��ish��esTo fill with sudden wonder or amazement. See Synonyms at surprise. masses of mound-fill at Newgrange. The mound-fill, mainly consisting ofhead-size stones, covered and hid the passage-grave and its kerbstonesuntil the discovery of the passage-grave in 1699. In front of thekerbstones there was--before Michael O'Kelly's excavation--alot of 'loose stones', which he explained as slip from themound. Put them back, and you have an enormous mound, the fill of which,according to according toprep.1. As stated or indicated by; on the authority of: according to historians.2. In keeping with: according to instructions.3. O'Kelly, can only be kept in place by an enormouswall. Gabriel Cooney does not follow this line. Instead he complementsand develops the idea of the platform and its continued use through theNeolithic and the Beaker beaker/beak��er/ (bek��er) a glass cup, usually with a lip for pouring, used by chemists and pharmacists. beakera round laboratory vessel of various materials, usually with parallel sides and often with a pouring spout. period. But the platform and the mound belongto the same structure: Newgrange. If there was never a retaining wallthe great mass of stones from the mound fill which covered thekerbstones and the platform of quartz/granite are an enigma. The only reasonable explanation is that Newgrange is a multi-periodmound, and the indications for this are strong (Eriksen 2004). If youstudy the long section of O'Kelly's excavation-trench 10m eastof the entrance (O'Kelly 1982: 69), you can distinguish four tofive possible phases with three corresponding vegetation layers (Eriksen2004: Fig. 11). In short, there was first a passage-tomb, which may haveexpanded once or twice, ending up with the quartz/granite layer in frontof it. Later in prehistory--perhaps in the Beaker period--the mound withthe passage tomb and the quartz/granite layer in front of it wasincorporated and hidden by a new mound. The platform dealt with byGabriel Cooney moved outwards following the new limit of the mound. Youcould no longer see the quartz-granite platform. The entrance to thepassage-grave became and remained closed and hidden until three hundredyears ago, and therefore O'Kelly to his great surprise did not findartefacts in the chamber or passage later in date than the first use ofthe passage-grave (O'Kelly 1982: 126). When reading the structure of cairns, i.e. mounds with a filling ofstones, like Newgrange, there is always a supposition of collapse and apredilection for rolling stones. In fact, if the mound is proportionate,the stones did not roll or slide under normal circumstances, becausethey locked each other so they were kept in place. This is shown by morethan 5000 years old 'experimentations' at the undisturbedLoughcrew cairn cairn,pile of stones, usually conical in shape, raised as a landmark or a memorial. In prehistoric times it was usually erected over a burial. A barrow is sometimes called a cairn. T and at the unspoiled parts of Dowth, though its sideis very steep. The cairn-stones still lie in situ In place. When something is "in situ," it is in its original location. and have not slid downand covered the kerbstones. The point is that the so-called 'slip' supposed todeposit stones in front of the kerbstones at Newgrange, is actuallymound-fill in situ from a time in prehistory prehistory,period of human evolution before writing was invented and records kept. The term was coined by Daniel Wilson in 1851. It is followed by protohistory, the period for which we have some records but must still rely largely on archaeological evidence to when Newgrange was still inuse, but its passage-tomb was no longer visible. The shape of the moundwas dramatically altered when the new monument builders provided it withat flat top--a mini Irish Silbury Hill Silbury Hill (grid reference SU100685), part of the complex of Neolithic monuments around Avebury in the English county of Wiltshire (which includes the West Kennet Long Barrow), is the tallest prehistoric man-made mound in Europe[1] and one of the world's largest. . They had, like theirpredecessors, their own Newgrange, as we have ours today--unfortunately! References ERIKSEN, P. 2004. Newgrange og den hvide mur. KUML 2004: 45-77.(With a summary in English). O'KELLY, M.J. 1982. Newgrange: Archaeology, Art and Legend.London: Thames & Hudson. Palle Eriksen, Department of Archaeology, Ringkobing Museum,Kongevejen 1, 6950 Ringkobing, Denmark (Email: pe@ringmus.dk)