attempts to make history perceptible for non archaeologists by recreating historic buildings are basically a nice idea. but they are also nearly always wrong. recreations like the palaces in crete, the sea dwellings in unteruhldingen at the lake constance, the reconstruction of a bronze age fort in biskupin (
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biskupin) aso are to the lagest part creations of the fantasy of the modern builders. you need findings like must farm (
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Must_Farm) to be able to make realistic assumptions about the buildings' structures above earth.
this one here near stonehenge is all ficticious, with the exception of the position of the posts in the ground. could be plausible, but probably is all wrong. i personally don't mind if you try to illustrate history by making up something that seems plausible to you. but it is wrong to claim these made up constructions are just like the real things have been.
nitpiking, might be ...
#
geschichte #
archäologie #
archaeology #
archéologie #
reconstruction English Heritage unveils recreation of 4,500-year-old Neolithic hall near Stonehenge
The Kusuma Neolithic Hall, based on Durrington 68 site, will allow visitors to ‘step back in time’ into the lives of those who built the stone circle
