Somebody complained to me the other day (why me, for goodness sake?) about the Stonehenge quiz published in the EH members magazine in October last. They said, quite rightly, that the "correct" answer to the question about the bluestones was misleading, to say the least.
https://www.english-heritage.org.uk/members-area/members-magazine/october-2018-20-questions-quiz/
What do you think?
Neither the answer nor the added explanation should go unchallenged.
Not all of the bluestones are from the Preseli Hills -- but most of them almost certainly are.
The supporting wording is carefully chosen, but it is far from adequate. It is thought by whom? And ".... to bring the bluestones to Stonehenge"?? That assumes the correctness of the human transport theory. EH should be honest enough to accept that there is a dispute going on. The explanation should be this:
The mode of transport is disputed. Some archaeologists believe that the stones were carried across land and sea by Neolithic tribes, but some earth scientists are convinced that the stones were moved to Salisbury Plain by glacier ice.
To repeat -- it's really rather weird that EH seems to be incapable of using the word "dispute" -- maybe in the belief that an academic dispute would cause the public to become confused, or dilute the romance of the ancient stones. Less emphasis on narrative and storytelling, and more on scientific accuracy, if you please......
Not all of the bluestones are from the Preseli Hills -- but most of them almost certainly are.
The supporting wording is carefully chosen, but it is far from adequate. It is thought by whom? And ".... to bring the bluestones to Stonehenge"?? That assumes the correctness of the human transport theory. EH should be honest enough to accept that there is a dispute going on. The explanation should be this:
The mode of transport is disputed. Some archaeologists believe that the stones were carried across land and sea by Neolithic tribes, but some earth scientists are convinced that the stones were moved to Salisbury Plain by glacier ice.
To repeat -- it's really rather weird that EH seems to be incapable of using the word "dispute" -- maybe in the belief that an academic dispute would cause the public to become confused, or dilute the romance of the ancient stones. Less emphasis on narrative and storytelling, and more on scientific accuracy, if you please......
3 comments:
'Combination of water...'
What if the water was solid?
Quite so. And then we must consider the role of water vapour too....... the westerly winds are very powerful at times......
You say, with some justification I reckon, "Less emphasis on narrative and storytelling and narrative, and more on scientific accuracy, if you please".
Narrative and storytelling.......hmmm,...... sometimes these MAY provide the 'X Factor'. David Attenborough and historian Michael Wood readily spring to mind.....
........trouble is, with MPP and his convinced or conned cohorts, it's not so much the 'X Factor......
............. more the"Max Factor". Max being our old cockney sparrow, Max Bygraves, he of "I wanna tell you a story" catchphrase.
Post a Comment