Head To Head
Log In
Register
The Modern Antiquarian Forum »
Stonehenge and its Environs »
The bluestone debate
Log In to post a reply

390 messages
Topic View: Flat | Threaded
nigelswift
8112 posts

Re: The bluestone debate
Nov 15, 2008, 10:32
"Ah, now we come to another sacred cow!! That particular idea was invented by Richard Atkinson -- HH Thomas did not think the sarsens were manhandled from the Marlborough Downs. He thought they were just collected from the Stonehenge area, where they littered the landscape."

Yes I know. But all 4 theories are unproven, why should two be picked out as sacred cows and wrong?

As for evidence for human transport, the Millenium Project was a shambles but that didn't prove the bluestones couldn't have been moved by humans, just not in a ramshackle fashion. And the evidence that the sarsens could have been moved by people is very strong - ask Gordon Pipes, Julian Richard and loads of others worldwide.

Maybe the sarsens were strewn about on the Plain but that still involved shifting forty-tonners a mile or two. Why is "shifting them a mile or two" sensible whereas "shifting them 21 miles" is incredible and a sacred cow?

I just think collating evidence for a particular theory shouldn't involve slagging off the alternatives. All four are possible.
Topic Outline:

The Modern Antiquarian Forum Index