=
×

Julian Cope presents Head Heritage

Head To Head
Log In
Register
The Modern Antiquarian Forum »
Stone shifting - was it just about effort?
Log In to post a reply
92 messages
Topic View: Flat | Threaded
BrigantesNation
1733 posts

Re: Stone shifting - was it just about effort?
Jan 18, 2004, 21:14
Colin Richards was the chap.

I found his premise appealing and I think what is most likely is something between the two.

I'm not argueing that dragging was the way stones were moved. I think the exact method is very much open to question and that this alone validates research such as stone rowing.

However, the bit I found appealing was his argument that the Neolithic people may not have been on a "technical efficiency kick", driven purely by the need to to move the largest stone possible with as few people as possible.

I would say that the erection of each stone probably was an event in itself, and the erection of a single stone was potentially more important than the completion of the monument itself.

The nature of a stone erection must be by was of a statement, as much to peer tribal groups as to the gods or ancestors that stimulated the erection (love these inuedo laden discussions) in the first place.

There is a chap who says he has a technique that allows a person to raise one single handed. To me there would be little point in raising a stone without an audience and a ceremony. The best ceremonies are those where as many people as possible feel they have taken part.

So, I am happy to accept, whatever method was used, it may not have been the most efficient, and this may well have been a deliberate decision.
In reply to:
Re: Stone shifting - was it just about effort? (fitzcoraldo)		 Replies:
Re: Stone shifting - was it just about effort? (Shestu)
Topic Outline:
The Modern Antiquarian Forum Index