StonesTalk Pop-Up with Michael & Rupert. What are the Aubrey Holes for?

A few days ago, a viewer left a comment on our podcast on Archaeoastronomy asking: "Who debunked Fred's (Hoyle) theory about the Aubrey Holes?". The theory in question is the one first put forward by Gerald Hawkins that the 56 Holes were used by the builders of Stonehenge to predict the lunar eclipse. We think that Hawkins' construct has been taken down on technical grounds - but we know of no such analysis of Holyle's work. The only voice we know declaring that the whole eclipse predictor notion for the Aubrey Holes is not sound - including Hoyle's theory - is Clive Ruggles, Emeritus Professor of Archaeoastronomy at Leicester University. However Ruggles objections to Hoyle's work on Stonehenge is not (so far as we know) technical, but is of a more generalised flavour - invoking a typological comparison to other hengeiform sites with postholes around the perimeter that cannot have astronomical prediction qualities. I for one am not convinced by this argument and, despite my own scepticism in this matter, without more technical reasoning I cannot reasonably throw the eclipse predictor idea out. Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Support Standing with Stones on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/standingwithstones

WEBSITE: http://www.standingstones.net/
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/standingwithstones/
Twitter: https://twitter.com/thestonestalk
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/thestonestalk/

Видео StonesTalk Pop-Up with Michael & Rupert. What are the Aubrey Holes for? канала The Prehistory Guys