Vietnam or Thailand ? Vote for the TOP Country of the Week !
Updated: May 21, 2025
I shall return to the theory that the stones were "ornaments"; meanwhile I proceed to the consideration of "cup-marks" on stones, large or small. These cups, or cupules, or ecuelles occur, not only at Dumbuck, but in association with a Scottish crannog of the Iron age, admirably described by Dr. The remainder of the stone, with the smaller part of the design, was not found.
Whether they were done by early wags, or by a modern and rather erudite forger, I know not, of course; I only think that the question is open; is not settled by Dr. Munro. Figurines are common enough things in ancient sites; by no means so common are the grotesque heads found at Dumbuck and Langbank. They have recently been found in Portugal. Did the forger know that?
Abercromby's as "the most rational explanation of their meaning and purpose." Mr. Thus rude figurines in sites of many stages are very familiar objects. The forger knew it, and dumped down a few at Dumbuck. It does not appear to me "unlike anything in any collection in the British Isles, or elsewhere" I mean elsewhere. Dr.
We have seen what slovenly designs in the archaic cup and ring and incomplete circle style he dumped down at Dumbuck. I quote Dr. Munro on his doings at Dunbuie, where the faker occasionally drops a pear-shaped slate perforated stone, with a design in cupules. Dr.
A few larger stones with cup-marks and some portions of partially worked pieces of shale complete the art gallery of Dumbuck." It seemed as if some curse were on Mr. Donnelly! Whether he discovered an unique old site of human existence in the water or on the land, some viewless fiend kept sowing the soil with bizarre objects unfamiliar to Dr.
One or other alternative must be correct, and either hypothesis has its difficulties. Of another object found by a workman at Dumbuck Dr. Munro writes "is it not very remarkable that a workman, groping with his hand in the mud, should accidentally stumble on this relic the only one found in this part of the site? This passage is "rote sarcustic." But surely Dr.
At every tide its site is covered with water to a depth of three to eight feet, but at low tide it is left high and dry for a few hours, so that it was only during these tidal intervals that the excavations could be conducted. On the occasion of my first visit to Dumbuck, before excavations were begun, Mr.
Munro, impugning the authenticity of one set of finds by Mr. Donnelly, in a pile-structure at Dumbuck, on the Clyde, near Dumbarton. I wrote to the Glasgow Herald, adducing the Australian churinga nanja as parallel to Mr. Donnelly's inscribed stones, and thus my share in the controversy began. What Dr. Munro and I then wrote may be passed over in this place. It was in July 1898, that Mr.
The tears come to my eyes, as I think of the Last Day of Old Dumbuck, for, take it as you will, there was a last day of Dumbuck, as of windy Ilios, and of "Carthage left deserted of the sea." So ends my little idyllic interlude, and, if I am wrong, blame Venerable Bede!
Donnelly found a submarine structure at Dumbuck in the estuary of the Clyde, Dr. Munro writes: "I sent Mr. Donnelly, it appears, had little book lore as to crannogs. He is, in fact, a field worker in archaeology, rather than an archaeologist of the study and of books. Mr. Donnelly's position, then, as regards archaeological research, was, in 1896-1898, very like that of Dr.
Word Of The Day
Others Looking