Dave Lightbody Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> There's no evidence of numeracy or linear
> measurement from the Neolithic or Bronze Age
> Britain whatsoever. That's the facts.
> This doesn't mean they weren't sophisticated or
> that they didn't use analogue calendars, it means
> they did not use numeracy or linear measurement
> systems.
I really wouldn’t think it was safe to make
quite such a sweeping assertion. In Intimations of Numeracy in the Neolithic and Bronze Age Societies of the British Isles (c. 3200-1200 B.C.). Archaeological journal, Volume 133 (1977) ; 9-32, for example, Aubrey Burl counts the stones in various stone circles of the British Isles, and concludes that there seemed to have been a preference for such factors as 2, 3, 5, 4 and 6 (28), although, admittedly, he doubts very much whether people were actually able to multiply (29). If they were capable of recognizing such numbers and factors, then surely – as I mentioned in my previous post - they would have been capable of some forms of linear measurement, even if only multiples (or additional lengths) of someone’s forearm, or pace.
> As for emotional nationalism impacting on the
> adoption of metric, it sure did. Piazzi Smyth and
> Thom were similar in this respect,
But the metric system didn't displace the Imperial system in the UK until well after their time. The comment in your previous post seemed to be applied to people living now (such as me) who object to the metric system ...
> and both of
> them allowed their personal biases to lead them to
> incorrect historical conclusions. For Smyth it was
> the imaginary "Pyramid Inch",
Admittedly, the Pyramid Inch was never one of the more convincing ideas to emerge from theories of ancient measurement …
> for Thom it was the
> imaginary "Megalithic Yard".
Well … he did find
other units, though, in Scandinavia, that might have fitted in geometrically with his proposed system ... if his proposed system really existed.
> I don't know of square fields in the UK,
Well … it’s possible to make out one or two that are
pretty square
here … In Fleming’s “Dartmoor Reaves”, there are comparable examples, this time in Dorset, (1988: 113, illus. 71); and also on Holne Moor (59, illus. 34). Fleming doesn't really say anything much about exactly what methods might have been used to set out the field system, though ...
(Some more mentions of Celtic square fields
here.)
> but by
> the Iron Age measurement and Numeracy were being
> introduced.
So not until the Roman invasion, you mean?
> What exactly is a coaxial landscape when it is at
> home?
There are examples of coaxial landscapes in
Cornwall;
Wharfedale;
Dartmoor; and some further discussion of ancient and mediaeval landscapes in general
here. One of the better known examples of an alleged coaxial landscape is perhaps the Scole-Dickleburgh example in East Anglia described by Tom Williamson (although there is a
more recent paper that disputes some of Williamson’s findings in this respect.)
Hermione
Director/Moderator - The Hall of Ma'at
Rules and Guidelines
hallofmaatforum@proton.me
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 09/02/2009 09:21AM by Hermione.
