HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Science » Science (Group) » Four-thousand year old go...

Mon Apr 22, 2013, 03:11 AM

Four-thousand year old gold-adorned skeleton found near Windsor

Last edited Mon Apr 22, 2013, 05:08 AM - Edit history (1)

Archaeologists, excavating near the Royal Borough, have discovered the 4400 year old gold-adorned skeleton of an upper class woman who was almost certainly a member of the local ruling elite.

She is the earliest known woman adorned with such treasures ever found in Britain.

The individual, aged around 40, was buried, wearing a necklace of folded sheet gold, amber and lignite beads, just a century or two after the construction of Stonehenge some 60 miles to the south-west. Even the buttons, thought to have been used to secure the upper part of her now long-vanished burial garment, were made of amber. She also appears to have worn a bracelet of lignite beads.

The archaeologist in charge of the excavation, Gareth Chaffey of Wessex Archaeology, believes that she may have been a person of power – perhaps even the prehistoric equivalent of a princess or queen.

It’s known that in southern Britain, some high status men of that era – the Copper Age – had gold possessions, but this is the first time archaeologists have found a woman of that period being accorded the same sort of material status.



http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/archaeology/fourthousand-year-old-goldadorned-skeleton-found-near-windsor-8581819.html














18 replies, 6146 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 18 replies Author Time Post
Reply Four-thousand year old gold-adorned skeleton found near Windsor (Original post)
Ichingcarpenter Apr 2013 OP
eppur_se_muova Apr 2013 #1
Ichingcarpenter Apr 2013 #5
Ash_F Apr 2013 #2
DRoseDARs Apr 2013 #3
Ichingcarpenter Apr 2013 #4
muriel_volestrangler Apr 2013 #6
DRoseDARs Apr 2013 #9
FiveGoodMen Apr 2013 #10
dipsydoodle Apr 2013 #7
muriel_volestrangler Apr 2013 #8
eppur_se_muova Apr 2013 #11
dipsydoodle Apr 2013 #12
eppur_se_muova Apr 2013 #13
dipsydoodle Apr 2013 #14
eppur_se_muova Apr 2013 #15
dipsydoodle Apr 2013 #16
Boudica the Lyoness Apr 2013 #17
HooptieWagon Apr 2013 #18


Response to eppur_se_muova (Reply #1)

Mon Apr 22, 2013, 05:09 AM

5. added the photos in the link thanks N/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ichingcarpenter (Original post)

Mon Apr 22, 2013, 04:05 AM

2. Interesting. I wonder what that society was like. /nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ichingcarpenter (Original post)

Mon Apr 22, 2013, 04:24 AM

3. This article is slightly out of archaeological date. Stonehenge has been pushed back 5k yrs earlier.

 

Announced just yesterday.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DRoseDARs (Reply #3)

Mon Apr 22, 2013, 04:45 AM

4. I think they are referring to

the last and final building stage of Stonehenge

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DRoseDARs (Reply #3)

Mon Apr 22, 2013, 05:13 AM

6. No; they just found a settlement 2km from Stonehenge that was 5000 years older than it

Here's the website for the excavation: http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/classical-studies/amesbury/index.shtml

The dating of Stonehenge has not changed. Discovery just wrote a misleading title for their web page.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muriel_volestrangler (Reply #6)

Mon Apr 22, 2013, 09:01 AM

9. Why do non-Scientists insist on writing science articles? Goddamn it that's obnoxious. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DRoseDARs (Reply #9)

Mon Apr 22, 2013, 01:52 PM

10. Maybe there aren't enough scientists writing for the average reader

In pursuit of new knowledge, they might forget the value in talking "down" to the average citizen and explaining what they're learned.

But science needs the support of the whole community. Needs the money to test the latest theories; needs the good will of the community to teach the real stuff in schools and not someone's fairy tale.

That requires that we all understand and appreciate as much of this vast, ongoing accumulation of knowledge as possible.

All of us; including those who haven't spent the years of advanced study necessary to understand all the details.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ichingcarpenter (Original post)

Mon Apr 22, 2013, 06:17 AM

7. For those who can't easily relate to that area

its the end of the southern Colne Valley which runs down from St Albans. That's a huge gravel strip from the end of the last ice age here. Most of the pits in that area have been using for angling for donkeys years now - I use some myself. The one referred to here must be one which is still being worked and its good to know that Cemex are working closely with the archeologists.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to dipsydoodle (Reply #7)

Mon Apr 22, 2013, 03:38 PM

11. Angling for donkeys ? Peculiar behavior for a Democrat. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to eppur_se_muova (Reply #11)

Mon Apr 22, 2013, 04:16 PM

12. Its what we call

coarse fishing.

Like this one

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dipsydoodle (Reply #12)

Mon Apr 22, 2013, 04:20 PM

13. Thanks for the explanation ...

I figured there was some kind of "sea donkey" or something, but couldn't imagine what it was.

(I don't know what a "coarse" is either, BTW .. )

There's a reason it's known as Angle-land.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to eppur_se_muova (Reply #13)

Mon Apr 22, 2013, 04:34 PM

14. Coarse fishing

is everyday freshwater fish in lake and rivers. That excludes some trout and salmon which are game fish. What are in the sea are classed as sea fishing. Coarse and game require licenses to fish.

btw - the guy in the picture and I have been friends since we were 5 years old.

In passing - the Angles were those from what is now southern Denmark who settled here long ways back.

See :

Settlers in Britain

The Romans invaded Britain in AD43. After that, for 400 years southern Britain was part of the Roman world. The last Roman soldiers left Britain in AD 410, and then new people came in ships across the North Sea. Historians call them Anglo-Saxons. The new settlers were a mixture of people from north Germany, Denmark and northern Holland. Most were Saxons, Angles and Jutes. There were some Franks and Frisians too. If we use the modern names for the countries they came from, the Saxons, Franks and Frisians were German-Dutch, the Angles were southern Danish, and Jutes were northern Danish.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/schools/primaryhistory/anglo_saxons/who_were_the_anglo-saxons/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dipsydoodle (Reply #14)

Mon Apr 22, 2013, 04:41 PM

15. The origin of the name is not as clear-cut as I thought ...

The name of the Angles is thought to derive from the name of the area they inhabited, Angeln. The latter has been hypothesized to originate from the Germanic root for "narrow" (compare German eng = "narrow", meaning "the Narrow [Water]", i.e. the Schlei estuary; the root would be angh, "tight". Another theory is that the name meant "hook", as in angling for fish; Julius Pokorny, a major Indo-European linguist, derives it from *ang-, "bend" (see ankle).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angeln#Name

I thought the Angles were so named for their habit of fishing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to eppur_se_muova (Reply #15)

Mon Apr 22, 2013, 04:48 PM

16. Interesting

Thanks for that.

Had never considered that may be the origin of angling.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to eppur_se_muova (Reply #11)

Tue Apr 23, 2013, 12:33 AM

17. Donkeys years

 

= A very long time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ichingcarpenter (Original post)

Tue Apr 23, 2013, 01:35 AM

18. Way cool. I love British history.

 

My earliest known ancestors (mothers side) were from Saxony. Emmigrated to Brittany, then a short time in Normandy (couple hundred years), then to England at or about the time of the Norman invasion. I like learning what they were about...how they lived, might have dressed, etc.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread