Hundreds of Stonehenge-Like Monuments Found In The Amazon Rainforest (yahoo.com)
turkeydance quotes The Telegraph: Hundreds of ancient earthworks resembling those at Stonehenge were built in the Amazon rainforest, scientists have discovered after flying drones over the area. The findings prove for the first time that prehistoric settlers in Brazil cleared large wooded areas to create huge enclosures meaning that the 'pristine' rainforest celebrated by ecologists is actually relatively new.
The researchers believe the monuments appeared roughly 2,000 years ago -- so after Stonehenge (by about 2,500 years). "It is thought they were used only sporadically," reports the BBC, "possibly as ritual gathering places similar to the Maya pyramids of Central America, or Britain's own Stonehenge."
The researchers believe the monuments appeared roughly 2,000 years ago -- so after Stonehenge (by about 2,500 years). "It is thought they were used only sporadically," reports the BBC, "possibly as ritual gathering places similar to the Maya pyramids of Central America, or Britain's own Stonehenge."
Earth work and ditches would have been the earliest form of defenses. Let us not belittle the discovery. These earthworks tell us a lot about early settlers in the Amazon region. Also they discovered agriculture late. Eincorn wheat was domesticated in the Levant 11000 years ago, rice in China 9000 years ago. Corn was domesticated in South America just 3000 or 4000 years ago. Domestication of crops correlates with sedentism, and a transition from hunter/gatherer to farmer. We remember that transition in the New World as the story of Cain (farmer) and Abel (hunter). We need to learn the transition in the New World from these clues. So the findings are very very significant.
It is already a great and significant find. Comparing it to stonehenge is counterproductive. Stonehenge was 5000 years after domestication of crops in the New World. These geoglyphs seem to be concurrent with the domestication of corn. It is unfair to compare geoglyphs with stonehenge.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
These structures resemble henges, which are defined as a circular earthwork with a ditch inside the earthwork. Most defensive earthworks have the raised bit inside the ditch so the defenders have higher ground while the attackers are left to scramble through the ditch and then try to climb the earthwork.
Stonehenge is a henge with standing stones inside the ditch perimeter. It's a bad example to keep using as most people will keep thinking henges are the standing stone circle because of the name of the site.
The Brits think the henges are ceremonial partly because of finds inside the henge and partly because it makes no defensive sense. Some chaps think it might be to keep the dead enclosed, i.e. the inside ditch keeps them from escaping and haunting the living.
<fulldisclosure>I'm a Time Team fan</fulldisclosure>
Trying to become famous by taking photos. Visit my homepage please.
It's not arrogance at all to refuse to make suppositions without sufficient evidence. We find no refined aluminum or titanium when we dig, and yet we cover most of the planet. We find no evidence that fossil fuels were previously tapped, despite being obvious and cheap sources of energy. Nothing has been found orbiting the planet of artificial origin, despite mapping everything down to baseball size. There is no radiological evidence that would suggest any kind of nuclear testing prior to the 1940s. What possible reason would we have to suspect that we are not the most technologically advanced apes to ever inhabit the planet?
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.