<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Las Piedras &#8211; Decorated Stones or Mineralised Rocks?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://anthropology.net/2009/07/09/las-piedras-decorated-stones-or-mineralised-rocks/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://anthropology.net/2009/07/09/las-piedras-decorated-stones-or-mineralised-rocks/</link>
	<description>Beyond bones &#38; stones</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2012 20:33:10 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Luis</title>
		<link>http://anthropology.net/2009/07/09/las-piedras-decorated-stones-or-mineralised-rocks/#comment-14514</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Luis]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 27 Jul 2009 03:00:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://anthropology.net/?p=2205#comment-14514</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[They are not incisions (as would be the case of plough marks) but something on top of the stone, intentional or whatever. If you browse the site, you&#039;ll eventually notice it. An agronomist has apparently stated they can&#039;t be plough marks. 

That was also my first impression but soon Tim and I decided that, even most of the drawings are very abstract and ambiguous, they seem painted or something of the like. Plough would scarify the stones, not paint over them.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>They are not incisions (as would be the case of plough marks) but something on top of the stone, intentional or whatever. If you browse the site, you&#8217;ll eventually notice it. An agronomist has apparently stated they can&#8217;t be plough marks. </p>
<p>That was also my first impression but soon Tim and I decided that, even most of the drawings are very abstract and ambiguous, they seem painted or something of the like. Plough would scarify the stones, not paint over them.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jørgen Holm</title>
		<link>http://anthropology.net/2009/07/09/las-piedras-decorated-stones-or-mineralised-rocks/#comment-14427</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jørgen Holm]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Jul 2009 14:02:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://anthropology.net/?p=2205#comment-14427</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Looks definitely like plough marks - which explains the iron.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Looks definitely like plough marks &#8211; which explains the iron.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Luis</title>
		<link>http://anthropology.net/2009/07/09/las-piedras-decorated-stones-or-mineralised-rocks/#comment-14425</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Luis]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Jul 2009 10:04:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://anthropology.net/?p=2205#comment-14425</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Notice also Blanca&#039;s blog: http://laspiedrasprehistoricas.blogspot.com/, where she has been posting random or not so random thoughts on the mysterious pebbles. It&#039;s all in Spanish. 

If you browse back, you can notice that she has already consulted with some prehistorian, who dismissed her saying they were plough marks, with an agronomist who declared &lt;a href=&quot;http://laspiedrasprehistoricas.blogspot.com/2009/05/marcas-de-arado.html&quot; / rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;they could not be plough marks&lt;/a&gt; and that she has made a home chemical experiment that &lt;a href=&quot;http://laspiedrasprehistoricas.blogspot.com/2009/05/ferricianuro-potasico.html&quot; / rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;revealed that the pigment has iron&lt;/a&gt; (something that looked quite apparent to me on first sight). 

I think that some resemble the Iberian rock art style, while others could be Tartessian or Iberian script characters (in one case I think the expression BABAAL can be read, though it depends what script interpretation you follow). Nevertheless many are too loose, abstract or merely imprecise to say what did the author wanted to express.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Notice also Blanca&#8217;s blog: <a href="http://laspiedrasprehistoricas.blogspot.com/" rel="nofollow">http://laspiedrasprehistoricas.blogspot.com/</a>, where she has been posting random or not so random thoughts on the mysterious pebbles. It&#8217;s all in Spanish. </p>
<p>If you browse back, you can notice that she has already consulted with some prehistorian, who dismissed her saying they were plough marks, with an agronomist who declared <a href="http://laspiedrasprehistoricas.blogspot.com/2009/05/marcas-de-arado.html" / rel="nofollow">they could not be plough marks</a> and that she has made a home chemical experiment that <a href="http://laspiedrasprehistoricas.blogspot.com/2009/05/ferricianuro-potasico.html" / rel="nofollow">revealed that the pigment has iron</a> (something that looked quite apparent to me on first sight). </p>
<p>I think that some resemble the Iberian rock art style, while others could be Tartessian or Iberian script characters (in one case I think the expression BABAAL can be read, though it depends what script interpretation you follow). Nevertheless many are too loose, abstract or merely imprecise to say what did the author wanted to express.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

