Talk:Henge

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A Henge is a circular or sub-circular prehistoric enclosure unique to the British Isles defined by a raised circular bank, and a circular ditch which normally runs inside the bank. Without incurring nationalistic rage, how is one to define Goseck circle, since it is so clearly outside this definition of a "henge?" I selected "circle" when I wrote that entry, not to get embroiled. Any Florence Chadwicks here to swim La Manche and make a link to Goseck circle? Not me, for one. Wetman 22:10, 6 May 2004 (UTC)

I still find it odd that "unique to the British Isles" is part of the archaeological definition of "henge," rather than being a matter of discussing where "henges"— in the most accepted archaeologists' sense— are actually located. A discussion of some specific examples that an educated but neutral observer might naturally take for henges, and why they are not henges in adamsan's unique definition, might help the Wikipedia reader. It appears that if an earthen ring around stones is for defense the structure is not a "henge"; but whether the ring is located inside or outside the ditch is not diagnostic among professionals.Wetman 19:46, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Hi Wetman. Here is the definition of a henge. This is what all archaeologists accept it to be, including myself; try typing henge definition into Google. If you have substantiated examples of a wider geographical distribution of henges then please include them. Regarding your second point, surely our time is better spent describing what a henge is rather than what it isn't, the former seems to me to render the latter unnecessary. Stone circles exist, henges exist, sometimes they are present at the same site. Nobody has said that an earth ring surrounding a stone circle is for defence, merely that a ditch within a bank would be an illogical defensive configuration which leads archaeologists to discount that interpretation. There are plenty of Neolithic monuments with external ditches, see causewayed enclosure. adamsan 20:18, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I'm afraid the British and Irish have fist dibs on 'henge' Wetman. Earthworks come in many, many different morphologiocal classifications some with names and some with just Type numbers. As I understand it, the important thing about a henge is the internal ditch which is not employed elsewhere as it obviously serves little *functional* purpose as a barrier. Whatever word the Germans call their monuments would be the natural home for Gosek. With great affection --adamsan 08:57, 7 May 2004 (UTC)

There's still no link to any Wikipedia sites beyond the ditch to compare to, or any distinctions given between a British henge and a continental "ring" or "circle." They would illuminate the reader. Without affectation. Wetman 15:15, 8 May 2004 (UTC)

Hello Wetman. How are you? I am very well! I suppose an amended enclosure entry would be starting points for that whole prehistoric circle making craze. Henge and stone circle and whatever the Germans call Gosek could all be linked neatly from there along with other worldwide examples. I fear we'd need a polyglot archaeologist to get the terminology right for all these types though. Perhaps we could ask the international Wiki archaeology writers to pitch in? It would also be necessarily vague due to all the regional and chronological differences so we'd have to sure we weren't exposing ourselves to accusations of DicDef-ing.

I'm sorry to hear your affectations are missing, I'm sure I saw some on your User page, why don't you check there? Tee hee! adamsan 15:58, 8 May 2004 (UTC)

Some of the finest and best-known henges include Avebury Henge, about 20 miles N. of Stonehenge on, The Ring O'Bookan in Orkney, Thornborough Henge complex in Yorkshire and the Great Circle at Stanton Drew in Wiltshire. It sure sounds as if some British henges are locally called "Ring" or "Great Circle." Wetman 22:23, 12 May 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Ring of Bookan vs. Ring of Brodgar

The most famous stone circle in Orkney is the Ring of Brodgar, not the Ring of Bookan (which as of this writing doesn't even have its own page yet). The latter is nothing but a mound - a very interesting mound that was likely a magnificent stone circle, but a mound nonetheless. The Ring of Brodgar on the other hand is largely intact, with 27 of the 60 original stones still in place. It surprises me that anyone could make this error, given the obscurity of Bookan compared to Brodgar. Thorf 06:32, 1 November 2006 (UTC)