Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Stonehenge boy 'was from the Med'
BBC ^ | 28 Sep 2010 | Paul Rincon

Posted on 09/28/2010 3:45:43 PM PDT by Palter

Chemical tests on teeth from an ancient burial near Stonehenge indicate that the person in the grave grew up around the Mediterranean Sea.

The bones belong to a teenager who died 3,550 years ago and was buried with a distinctive amber necklace.

The conclusions come from analysis of different forms of the elements oxygen and strontium in his tooth enamel.

Analysis on a previous skeleton found near Stonehenge showed that that person was also a migrant to the area.

The findings will be discussed at a science symposium in London to mark the 175th anniversary of the British Geological Survey (BGS).

The "Boy with the Amber Necklace", as he is known to archaeologists, was found in 2005, about 5km south-east of Stonehenge on Boscombe Down.

The remains of the teenager were discovered next to a Bronze Age burial mound, during roadworks for military housing.

"He's around 14 or 15 years old and he's buried with this beautiful necklace," said Professor Jane Evans, head of archaeological science for the BGS.

"The position of his burial, the fact he's near Stonehenge, and the necklace all suggest he's of significant status."

Dr Andrew Fitzpatrick, of Wessex Archaeology, backed this interpretation: "Amber necklaces are not common finds," he told BBC News.

"Most archaeologists would say that when you find burials like this... people who can get these rare and exotic materials are people of some importance."

Chemical record

Professor Evans likened Stonehenge in the Bronze Age to Westminster Abbey today - a place where the "great and the good" were buried.

(Excerpt) Read more at bbc.co.uk ...


TOPICS: History
KEYWORDS: archaeoastronomy; england; godsgravesglyphs; mediterranean; megaliths; stonehenge; trade
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-75 next last
To: Tax-chick
The isotopes of various elements in his teeth demonstrate where he lived and what he ate.

Archaeologists as well as forensic scientists have been doing this stuff for many years.

21 posted on 09/28/2010 4:37:39 PM PDT by muawiyah ("GIT OUT THE WAY" The Republicans are coming)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah
I had heard that the Carthaginians bred “War Elephants” that were not your standard wild or domesticated breed, but bigger and more ornery.

Yep, a Knight would get up on his “high horse” and ride over other cavalry. Those suckers were like Clydesdale's, but mean!

22 posted on 09/28/2010 4:47:42 PM PDT by allmendream (Income is EARNED not distributed. So how could it be re-distributed?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: allmendream
Odds are the Carthaginian elephants were simply fed and exercised to have more muscles. It takes centuries to get those skeletons stretched and strengthened ~ and elephants are not all that easy to manage.

Still, the Middle Ages War Horses were definitely what folks had been after for a very long time.

BTW, this business about modern horses being large enough to ride has misled folks about how the horse was domesticated.

The earlier idea was that early man saw that horses were rideable and started out riding them bareback. Fact was they were edible, not rideable, and they were fit only for pulling light built wagons called "chariots". Good shot of King Tut's chariot at http://news.discovery.com/archaeology/king-tuts-chariot-heads-to-new-york.html

Gives a very good idea of what "light" meant in the early days. That one's for two horses BTW. Even the Pharoah couldn't get a really big horse.

23 posted on 09/28/2010 5:06:58 PM PDT by muawiyah ("GIT OUT THE WAY" The Republicans are coming)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: allmendream

For a thread that gets right to the heart of the problem of taking a moderate sized animal and breeding it up to where it’s among the other animals, try this thread: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2598013/posts


24 posted on 09/28/2010 5:45:54 PM PDT by muawiyah ("GIT OUT THE WAY" The Republicans are coming)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

There was a show, on the Smithsonian Channel I believe, that said one of the theories is that Stonehenge was a well-known place of healing to which the wealthy but sick would make a pilgrimage . A number of the skeletons that have been found nearby have come from beyond the British Isles.


25 posted on 09/28/2010 5:54:08 PM PDT by Bubba Ho-Tep ("More weight!"--Giles Corey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah
Well race horses are a special case. Wild horses seem to do fine in the wild, but specialization leads to a host of problems because in biology, much like in economics, there is no such thing as a free lunch. Race horses are faster, but at the expense of a LOT of other things.

We need to take a long hard look at a race horse before anyone starts throwing around the idea of selective breeding of humans.

Gattica hit the nail on the head with this, these supposedly superior humans were also non aggressive, and just couldn't seem to compete with normal humans - heart defects and all.

26 posted on 09/28/2010 6:00:30 PM PDT by allmendream (Income is EARNED not distributed. So how could it be re-distributed?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Frantzie

“Most likely Roman. They did not surrender to Islam like the English.”

Romans in 1,550 BC?


27 posted on 09/28/2010 7:15:41 PM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

“3,550 years ago the people who would become the Romans were still huddled in caves picking each other’s lice.
This makes the kid, as far as kids go and early patriarchs go, a near contemporary of Father Abraham, one way or the other by a couple of hundred years.”

Somebody on the thread gets it :)

I agree, the most likely solution is Phoenician. There might have been some proto-Celts living on the Iberian coast by then, but that’s a real long shot. Nobody else from that area, at that time, is really known to have travelled to England.

Of course, we’re talking a period of time that is basically pre-history as far as Europe goes, so there could have been some other people that was trading or colonizing that far, who we simply know nothing about.


28 posted on 09/28/2010 7:22:08 PM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: allmendream

“Lots of words for sheep, horses, and the parts to a chariot (axle, wheel, etc); thus they surmised that they most likely rode horses, herded sheep, and had chariots.”

That makes sense, since the Indo-Europeans spread out from the area around the Middle East, where chariots were common and very important technology. Nomadic herders would be a likely lifestyle for them, considering how far they ranged.


29 posted on 09/28/2010 7:26:41 PM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Del Rapier
People in the ancient world traveled in an age without passports or currency exchanges.

Try to do that today! That's why them smart Mexicans are building that wall on their southern border to block those illegal immigrants from Guatemala!

That's what you meant; right newbie?

30 posted on 09/28/2010 7:32:06 PM PDT by Grizzled Bear (Does not play well with others)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah
In addition, there are several British amber sites and the world's oldest spider web was found in an amber deposit located 100 miles east of Stonehenge, so it could be local. If he came from the Mediterranean, it could be from the Mediterranean (e.g., Sicily, Lebanon) or French deposits.

(I sure hope someone has analyzed it by now!)

31 posted on 09/28/2010 7:33:21 PM PDT by Gondring (Paul Revere would have been flamed as a naysayer troll and told to go back to Boston.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Gondring

You can supposedly determine the site amber comes from so I’d imagine they’ll get around to that. But looking at the time frame Scanderhoovian sources were already big time ~


32 posted on 09/28/2010 7:42:37 PM PDT by muawiyah ("GIT OUT THE WAY" The Republicans are coming)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Palter; martin_fierro; StayAt HomeMother; Ernest_at_the_Beach; 1010RD; 21twelve; 24Karet; ...

· GGG managers are SunkenCiv, StayAt HomeMother, and Ernest_at_the_Beach ·
· join list or digest · view topics · view or post blog · bookmark · post a topic · subscribe ·

 
 Antiquity Journal
 & archive
 Archaeologica
 Archaeology
 Archaeology Channel
 BAR
 Bronze Age Forum
 Discover
 Dogpile
 Eurekalert
 Google
 LiveScience
 Mirabilis.ca
 Nat Geographic
 PhysOrg
 Science Daily
 Science News
 Texas AM
 Yahoo
 Excerpt, or Link only?
 


Thanks Palter.

This may be an update, I'm not sure, but I'm pinging it regardless, very interesting. Blam may have some more related links to FR topics and outside sites. :') To all -- please ping me to other topics which are appropriate for the GGG list.
 

· History topic · history keyword · archaeology keyword · paleontology keyword ·
· Science topic · science keyword · Books/Literature topic · pages keyword ·


33 posted on 09/28/2010 7:46:52 PM PDT by SunkenCiv (Democratic Underground... matters are worse, as their latest fund drive has come up short...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman
We know a whole lot more with this discovery. He had amber. He had tooth chemistry typical of the Mediterranean. He was thus and so tall, had a head shaped this and that, and had a foot to shinbone ratio of xyz.

If we recall our Sa'ami history (prehistory) the big breakouts were about 9000 years ago ~ just long enough after the Younger Dryas for plants to get a good start throughout the formerly glaciated areas. Have to have plants to get the game animals. So this is just short of half way back. Probably not a whole lot of people around yet, and most likely virtually everybody was free of infectious disease ~ unless they brought it with them from the more heavily populated Eastern Mediterranean.

34 posted on 09/28/2010 7:47:46 PM PDT by muawiyah ("GIT OUT THE WAY" The Republicans are coming)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Grizzled Bear

How the hell people should enforce their borders these days should more then likely involve a flamethrower and some gators.

I am going to assume that unwelcome visitors weren’t too much of a problem back then.


35 posted on 09/28/2010 7:57:26 PM PDT by Del Rapier
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Palter; SunkenCiv
Analysis on a previous skeleton found near Stonehenge showed that that person was also a migrant to the area.

What this tells me is that it was very dangerous to be tourist ca 3550 years ago.

Question: did the BBC's Paul Rincon really mean '3550 years ago'; or did he hear, "3,550 years Before Present," and assume it was the same as 3550 years ago? It may sound trivial, but it's not when I'm programming a destination in my time machine.

36 posted on 09/28/2010 8:10:08 PM PDT by ApplegateRanch (Made in America, by proud American citizens, in 1946.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

I haven’t studied much of the Sa’ami history, I’m guessing it’s an oral tradition?


37 posted on 09/28/2010 8:10:55 PM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Gondring

Found a site that covers all of them. http://www.emporia.edu/earthsci/amber/geograph.htm


38 posted on 09/28/2010 8:11:26 PM PDT by muawiyah ("GIT OUT THE WAY" The Republicans are coming)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman
The really old stuff comes strictly from archaeology ~ still, throughout Scandinavia they find quite a few intact skeletons so they can check the tooth chemistry and so forth. They date this stuff.

Now, about 7500 years back people began putting together pictoglyphs in the Kola Peninsula ~ so let me suggest Sa'ami "history" begins about 2500 years before any other "history" ~

Remember, if you have no written record of any kind you have no "history", but if you have a written record of some kind, however primitive, you do have a "history". It's up to us to learn how to read that "history".

The next oldest records consist of the deer stones in Mongolia although some claim a few of them date back to 7500 years ago, but there's no clear cut story lines with any of them. Then we get to some old Chinese stuff, but it's pre-Shang. And finally, there's the good stuff in Mesopotamia ~ then China, then Egypt (or vice versa since Egypt and China seem to have had early systems based on the early Sumerian stuff).

The difference between archaeology and history is very simple ~ written records give you "history"; archaeology gives you "evidence".

Indo European tribes have NO HISTORY of any kind until they got writing.

39 posted on 09/28/2010 8:19:57 PM PDT by muawiyah ("GIT OUT THE WAY" The Republicans are coming)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: ApplegateRanch

:’) Whoever came up with the idea for building the complex must have had quite a set of stones.


40 posted on 09/28/2010 8:34:38 PM PDT by SunkenCiv (Democratic Underground... matters are worse, as their latest fund drive has come up short...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-75 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson