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 18, 2008, 05:22
"anyone who thinks that simply throwing more labour at the problem is the answer is simply wrong. As the labour force grows the efficiency of each man will decrease. (That is a fact and by as much as 50%) As will the efficiency of each man after just 5 mins of effort. (Another fact and if the effort is continued by as much as 100%). "

This is the crux. As you know, some of us concluded something quite different that day. In particular, that the exercise was hopelessly undermanned, hence any loss in individual efficiency as numbers were increased had a significant observable effect. Truth is though, individual declines in efficiency become irrelevant if there are enough people. 50-100% decreases in efficiency don't matter if you have 1000-2000% more people. If this was not true then a team of 50 in a tug 'o war wouldn't be always beaten by a team of 1000 without even raising a sweat.

For this reason some of us concluded that the lesson of the day wasn't that scaling up was impossible but that it was the only viable option. I know you postulate that a small team was used (and hence stonerowing had to be used) and quote Burl in support of the idea they wouldn't have many people available, but that was before the Durrington dig.

So I don't agree "Stone-rowing to date remains the only credible solution". "Lots of folks" seems much simpler and more certain.
Topic Outline:

The Modern Antiquarian Forum Index