-
I wonder if Geoffrey of Monmouth's work will be reviewed in light of this?
Fascinating to think what else he might have accurately reported on...
Scilly.Suffolk-
I wonder if Geoffrey of Monmouth's work will be reviewed in light of this?
Fascinating to think what else he might have accurately reported on...
Well, it's known that the Heinrich Schliemann approach, looking at old legends and trying to gain clues from them, is important, but only if the person doing the work isn't also a charlatan. :)
I'm not familiar with Geoffrey of Monmouth's work so don't know what other stories may be useful for real-world archaeology, but I certainly don't think myth should be dismissed altogether, just treated with caution.
I mean, the Stonehenge connection does look interesting, but they'll need to do some more work yet before it's generally accepted, I would think.
Oliver Schick
This has been going on for a while, and they are now clearly confident enough to make the announcement:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/feb/12/dramatic-discovery-links-stonehenge-to-its-original-site-in-wales
It's without a doubt a very interesting find, but what would be even more interesting would be any evidence for the reason why. Perhaps the circle was taken as a kind of political trophy to shift a recognised centre of power to the area a victorious people lived in? Who knows. There will soon be further work on this, I'm sure, so that's something to look forward to.