Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 beta 3/9/83; site tellab1.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!mgnetp!ihnp4!tellab1!heahd
From: heahd@tellab1.UUCP (Dan Wood)
Newsgroups: net.nlang.celts,net.sci,net.astro,net.physics,net.origins,net.puzzle
Subject: Re: Stonehenge Explained for K. Kissel
Message-ID: <292@tellab1.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 6-Jul-84 10:13:53 EDT
Article-I.D.: tellab1.292
Posted: Fri Jul  6 10:13:53 1984
Date-Received: Sat, 7-Jul-84 02:44:14 EDT
References: <141@bonnie.UUCP>, <614@flairvax.UUCP>
Organization: Tellabs, Inc., Lisle, Ill.
Lines: 20


   I'd just like to point out to those interested that Stonehenge was old by
the time the Celts arrived in the british isles. If I remember aright, the
first stage of Stonehenge was started ~2000 B.C., the Celts as a culture
didn't even emerge on the continent until c. 800 B.C. and didn't migrate to
britain until c. 400 B.C.

   Trying to interpret Stonehenge is an exercise in futillity. We are looking
at something that was built by a neolithic culture from a postindustrial, 
christianized point of view (even if you're an athiest, western civilization 
has been inundated by the christian world view for something like 2000 years, 
so your thought patterens are steeped in christian thought). We'll never know
for sure what went on there or what the astronomical alignments ment to the
people who built it. I admit that studying Stonehenge out of a sence of
curiosity is fun, but our conclusions will never be more than speculation.
-- 


Yrs. in Fear and Loathing,        
DW @ ...!ihnp4!tellab1!heahd