tonyh
|
Re: Bluestains debated
Nov 18, 2008, 20:15
|
|
Stoneshifter wrote: I can answer this - Sir, me Sir, please Sir!
Durrington Walls
According to how the labour was delegated between the sexes it is most likely, I would think, for stones to be moved between Mayday, when the ground had been ploughed (arded) and sown, and Lammas, before the crops were harvested.
|
tonyh
|
Re: Bluestains debated
Nov 18, 2008, 20:25
|
|
tonyh wrote: Stoneshifter wrote: I can answer this - Sir, me Sir, please Sir!
Durrington Walls
According to how the labour was delegated between the sexes it is most likely, I would think, for stones to be moved between Mayday, when the ground had been ploughed (arded) and sown, and Lammas, before the crops were harvested.
Absolutely no idea..
My point is that winter is a bad idea.. It's wet and soft... That's if you are going over land..
My understanding is that Agriculture is very small time and soon turns to pasteurisation. So folk would be far to busy raising sheep, pigs and cattle. Then there is flint knapping, charcoal production, pottery, home building, hunting, bow and arrow production, Child rearing.. Blimey, it just goes on and on... Not a lot of time to drift off to wales..
Tony
|
Steve Gray
|
Re: The bluestone debate
Nov 18, 2008, 20:33
|
|
tonyh wrote: Sorry to correct you but a sledge does not spread the weight. It concentrates it on a smaller area. IE.. The runners..
Tony
Not necessarily. Something similar to a log raft with a flattened underside might be two or three times wider than the stone and would reduce the ground pressure by a proportional amount.
I'm not saying that's how they did it, only that there are ways to solve problems that should not be dismissed out of hand.
|
tonyh
|
Re: The bluestone debate
Nov 18, 2008, 20:39
|
|
Steve Gray wrote: tonyh wrote: Sorry to correct you but a sledge does not spread the weight. It concentrates it on a smaller area. IE.. The runners..
Tony
Not necessarily. Something similar to a log raft with a flattened underside might be two or three times wider than the stone and would reduce the ground pressure by a proportional amount.
I'm not saying that's how they did it, only that there are ways to solve problems that should not be dismissed out of hand.
But also increase the friction..
Wouldn't dream of dismissing anything out of hand...
Not my style.
Tony
|
tonyh
|
Re: The bluestone debate
Nov 18, 2008, 20:40
|
I would like to see that proved..
Tony
|
tonyh
|
Re: Draughty Animals
Nov 18, 2008, 20:42
|
|
Stoneshifter wrote: On the subject of draught animals - please take a look at my second to last picture listed under Winter Hill. It shows a round barrow, I guess, on the flanks of Winter Hill, which I've named Horrocks Moor barrow - for obvious reasons ... The longhorn cattle in that picture are notoriously docile. It was surprising just how placid they were - there'd be no difficulty harnessing one of those. Probably the ancient cattle were larger than these specimens as they were closer to the ancestral Auroch. And they eat almost anything - unlike Friesians, for instance, which have a great - and totally out of the blue - front kick.
It's not how docile they are that's important..
It's about the terrain they would need to cross..
Tony
|
Steve Gray
|
Re: The bluestone debate
Nov 18, 2008, 20:57
|
|
GordonP wrote: Until they became tired, perhaps 30 minutes at most.
And were did these 640 men (and there women and children live) and who supported them for at least 20 years?
Why would intelligent Homo sapian sapiens (modern man) use 640 men to do a job that could have been done by just 60?
Exactly because it was the most intelligent thing to do since 60 men could NOT do it in the same timescale.
True, they would need to take rests. But even 10 minutes on, 20 minutes off would still produce vastly better progress than stone-rowing.
And where did this 20 year figure come from? Maybe that's the time it would take to do it by stone-rowing, but dragging is much faster.
Simon got hurt because the stone was going faster than he could safely feed in new rollers. I reckon it was doing about 4 miles an hour uphill when the accident happened. Even if they could ONLY last half as long as you suggest they'd still have covered a mile.
Neglecting obstacles and only counting 3 hours of actual motion per day, they'd still cover the distance from the Marlborough Downs to Stonehenge in a small number of days. Taking a large contingency figure for the difficulties of the terrain into account and they might have achieved about two stones per month.
I can't remember the exact distance, but stone-rowing only got us a few tens of yards after around half an hour's effort and the stone was veering off-course because of the slope.
I'd say "no contest". Dragging wins hands down.
|
Steve Gray
|
Re: The bluestone debate
Nov 18, 2008, 21:10
|
|
tonyh wrote: But also increase the friction..
Not true. It's a popular misconception. Friction depends only on the characteristics of the two surfaces (coefficient of friction) multiplied by the weight. The area of contact does not enter into the equation, except if it changes the characteristics of the surfaces (for example by deformation) and thus alters the coefficient of friction.
Since an increased area actually reduces deformation it also reduces the friction.
There would, of course, be an small increase due to the additional weight of the sledge, but that would be relatively minor in comparison to the weight of the stone and it would be compensated for by the fact that the coefficient of friction of wood is generally less than that of stone.
|
Steve Gray
|
Re: Draught Animals
Nov 18, 2008, 21:20
|
|
fitzcoraldo wrote: So what about using draught animals?
Why do they never figure in the equation? Is there any evidence for or against the existance and use of draught animals in the late Neolithic /EBA?
They've generally been discounted on the basis that someone said large teams of oxen are notoriously difficult to control. However, pairs of oxen were often used for ploughing.
So what if 50 farmers turned up each with his own pair of oxen and a long rope? Each pair would be supervised by their owner and separated by enough space to avoid problems.
|
sleeptowin
|
Re: The bluestone debate
Nov 18, 2008, 21:37
|
how would you tie a massive rock for dragging?
wouldnt the rope being dragged wear out under the weight and pressure of the stone?
i dont have any ideas at all.
it just seems that dragging a rope under stone would wear it out really quick
|
