'Stonehenge Decoded' aired last Sunday night on the History Channel and the British archaeologist seems to think he has figured out why Stonehenge was built. It was built as an ancient cemetery where twice a year the ancient people gathered to proceed in rituals of ancestry worship. Whatever you call it, it appears to be ancient re-incarnation in its finest form, yet it's constantly referred to as ancestry worship in the academic community.
To give a bit of a critique to this documentary, let's begin at the sole purpose of the proposed documentary, to decode Stonehenge, yet many of us are still asking the question, just who built Stonehenge and why didn't this documentary focus more on how the stones came there to begin with? Archaeology is nothing more than theories based on evidence found in the field, so we find the evidence we are looking for and we interpret it the way we see it. There will always be the human factor and the human element to our view of archaeology or of the possibility of life on other planets. Carl Sagan was very aware of the human factor or bias when viewing our past or the potential of life elsewhere in the universe. No matter how scientific, we always interpret the way we see, from our human view point and our personal biases and conditioning we have received during the course of our lifetimes.
Haven't we heard all this before? As a matter of fact...
So why all the hubbub by "The History Channel" to create a documentary titled 'Stonehenge Decoded"? We'd much rather see a documentary concerning the work by noted archaeologist Dennis Price who believes the lost city of Apollo is located at King's Barrow Ridge overlooking Stonehenge. What happened to that story?