lmc@denelcor.UUCP (Lyle McElhaney) (07/21/84)
When Gerald Hawkins propounded his theories concerning the
astronomical use of Stonehenge, the assumptions upon which it was based
were (are?) considered controversial; flow-of-culture theories, which
Hawkins thesis made a moot point, and on top of that he was an astronomer,
not an *archaeologist*.
Like most new science, it took a while for his views to be absorbed,
and some of the implications to be checked out. Today his theories seem to
have been accepted because they answered more questions than they asked in
the long run. This is the way science works. Hawkins was on the receiving
end of a lot of controversy, yes, and probably some abuse, too, but that's
part of the game.
Now here comes Jim McGhee, with a new theory concerning the trench
around the Stonehenge site. Interesting. Perhaps plausible, inasmuch as
no one else has been able to give a compelling reason for the ditch.
There seems to be some question as to why the tops of the lintel pieces
need to be levelled in the first place, and some hand-waving about an
artificial horizon, and so on..... but a good idea, nonetheless.
But unfortunately he also seems to have a "thing" about bringing
the Celts and their subclass the Druids into the argument as the builders
of Stonehenge. I cannot speculate why this is, but from the net articles
that I've read this is the part that most of the objections (including
my own) have centered on.
I remember reading in one of his books that when he first proposed his
[Hawkins'] theories on Stonehenge he received a lot of acrid abuse from
various people. I guess these things just run in cycles.
No, he got some acrid abuse (perhaps), and a lot of criticism, perhaps
some constructive and some not, depending on the author. That is the way
science is done. Jim posted his ideas to the net, where a lot of amateur
readers could poke at him, and is surprised at the response. I'm not.
Einstein himself was flamed at by respected physicists long after he made
his name, so why should Jim be different (particularly for ideas (the Celtic
origin) that are a lot less defensible)?
--
Lyle McElhaney
(hao,brl-bmd,nbires,csu-cs,scgvaxd)!denelcor!lmc