nigelswift
|
Re: And they promised us a roof above our heads...
Dec 21, 2005, 09:00
|
Never mind the covering, from a technical point of view the timber roof construction is bonkers, and looks like it's been designed to fit the stones and holes that are known to exist, not designed to do the job.
A stone ring beam linked by shallow stone joints that will allow the lintels to rotate alarmingly... upper trusses that join the middle of each lintel and lower ones that join the joints of the lintels AND the vertical supports... c'mon! Imagine the construction process. "So which set of trusses do you want us to put in place first guv?
(Depends whether you want the whole thing to collapse and kill you inwards or outwards I suppose.)
|
Pilgrim
|
Re: And they promised us a roof above our heads...
Dec 21, 2005, 20:17
|
Hi, Nigel,
I'm not a great expert on where to put your truss to get optimum support; and even less of an expert on multiple truss configurations. I trussed your knowledge on this one.
I figure this chap plows a lonely furrow in the "understanding prehistory" stakes. I just thought I'd throw it into the mix: it's more interesting - and about as likely - as faster than light phenomena, and much more relevant.........but have you've seen his stone roller?
http://senseon.co.uk/mysharedaccounts/brucebedlam/roller.html
World Exclusive pictures, no less! I presume it takes more than one of these to move a forty-five ton sarsen? :-)
BTW, he's got an idea for The Route, but he's being cagey about it.....bet it involves "A" Roads....... :-)
Peace
Pilgrim
X
|
PeterH
|
Tri-radial windbreaks?
Dec 21, 2005, 21:51
|
|
Another non-ritual practical use? Not my comment but see http://www.megalithic.co.uk/modules.php?op=modload&name=My_eGallery&file=index&do=showpic&pid=18218
|
Hob
|
Re: Tri-radial windbreaks?
Dec 22, 2005, 00:39
|
As I remember it, the original mention of tri-radials being sheepfolds was based on the premise that they were not prehistoric, as Northumberland has a fair number of four limbed sheepfolds dating back a few hundred years, so the suggestion was made that they may be the remains of three-limbed sheepfolds.
As far as I know, the hills those cairns are one were not particularly exposed to the elements at the time the burials were placed in the cairns.
There's also the possibility that these structures represent a round cairn that has been re-arranged, but I think the excavated ones have shown that they are burial structures. I vaguely recall menton of them being aligned to stuff in the sky too. So even if they were windbreaks, it would seem they are ritual windbreaks (for sheltering from ritual wind?).
|
rocknicker
|
Re: Tri-radial windbreaks?
Dec 22, 2005, 07:13
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/science/unearthingmysteries_20030819.shtml
and
http://www.archaeology.co.uk/ca/timeline/prehistory/triradial/sunniside.htm
:)
|
PeterH
|
Re: Tri-radial windbreaks?
Dec 22, 2005, 09:06
|
|
Ritual wind? Holy burps, Batman!
|
PeterH
|
Re: Tri-radial windbreaks?
Dec 22, 2005, 09:08
|
|
Thanks rocknicker. These "Listen Again" links are brilliant.
|
PeterH
|
Bunfight at the Barbrook Corral?
Dec 27, 2005, 23:22
|
Not wishing to prolong this and not wanting to go over old ground, but I would appreciate your views on this. Is it a stone circle or a ring cairn or a fanciful reconstruction or...a corral?
This photo is perhaps one of the clearest on file...http://www.megalithic.co.uk/modules.php?op=modload&name=My_eGallery&file=index&do=showpic&pid=18321
|
FourWinds
|
Re: Henge corrals?
Dec 28, 2005, 09:22
|
>> they are built on top of previous sites for really basic reasons.
Only a few of the older churches are built on ancient sacred sites. As stated somewhere else recently the Victorians built loads and they built them where they could shoehorn them in.
|
PeterH
|
Re: Henge corrals?
Dec 28, 2005, 09:57
|
I agree. So much that Cropredy says is just not true - and I say that without "having a go" at him.
Consider how many medieval churches there are in Britain
Consider how many stone circles and other ancient sites there are in Britain
Consider how many co-incide - barely double figures!
|
