Thanks for the article regarding the remains of the fence recently found around stonehenge. I found it very interesting reading.

However, as ever, I do wonder at the mentality of some of the archaeologist's conclusions regarding the purpose for some of these ancient constructions.

One thing I have learned over the years is that the people of the time were very practical in their thinking, and actions. I also find that too many modern scientists have a limited view as to how they perceive the uses of ancient artifacts.

I remember once there was a tv quiz which had a panel of celebrities try to identify the purpose of an object. Invariably they failed to recognise any implement or how it could be used. Nearly all of the ideas put forward were based on modern societal attitudes and activities. It was rare indeed for anyone to come even close to guessing how an implemtn may be used.

I think the same applies within archaeology. Whilst the discovery and recovery of the artifacts/site constructions are excellent the purpose behind these finds have no real understanding of the people of the time who built them.

I believe the archaeologist think that this fence was huge, but would it have been a fence to keep people out? This is what we do today, create fences for security, but did they do that then? We know so little about the people of that time that it is all pure guess work.

I suggest that instead of it being a fence to keep people out, it may have actually been the solid base for a tiered wooden arena/amphitheatre where people would have been encouraged to sit and watch whatever was taking place within the stonehenge circle.

Everyone states that it was a temple of some kind, for spiritual worship or sacrificial rituals. It may have been used for this, but equally it may have been linked to a form of legal ceremony such as a courthouse, where the old adage, the Law must not only be don but SEEN to be done, would come into full use. I have noticed that in the North East of England/South East Scotland (the land that once was owned by the ancient kingdom of Northumbria) has many hills known as Law(e)s. In this area at that time there was a lot of forested land and therefore it would have been important to have any official legal ceremonies carried out on top of hills so that people from all around would be able to see what was taking place, and know that it was official/legal, not rely purely on hearsay.

I have always wondered if this idea was a lot older concept which required public acknowledgement of what had taken place to ensure stability within the societies/groups/tribes in any given area.

I certainly think that the archaeologists/scientists have completely misunderstood the real purpose behind Stonehenge, but then it has now become such an accepted "norm" that this ancient landmark is a purely religious site no-one is prepared to come up and contest the idea.

What do others think?