=
×

Julian Cope presents Head Heritage

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
mountainman
90 posts

Re: The bluestone debate
Dec 16, 2008, 15:47
nigelswift wrote:
mountainman wrote:
Since when did the sarsens at Stonehenge come from a long way off? HH Thomas (among many others) thought they had come from the neighbourhood, and I can't see any evidence to suggest that he was wrong on this one.


I think there IS some evidence he was wrong. If you look at the sarsen drifts back towards Avebury you'll see they are all shapes and sizes and ones that are approximately the right size or shape for Stonehenge uprights (or lintels) are mighty rare. It seems a bit of a rum idea that only the right shaped and right sized sarsens existed near Stonehenge. There would be a vastly larger number of unsuitable ones as well wouldn't there? Statistically (and by reference to other drifts) the vast majority would be of no use - too rounded or hopelessly wrong-sized to be used as either uprights or lintels. Where are those rejects?


Since when were all the sarsens at Stonehenge "the right shape and size? They are all sorts of shapes and sizes -- look at stones 11, 3. 27, Heelstone, Slaughter Stone etc etc. Some had to be bedded in deep, oityhers very shallow. A proper grotty collection, if you ask me....... and a lot of the smaller ones were used, in my opinion, as standing "bluestones" before being used again as lintels. Masses of smaller sarsens were used as mauls and packing stones -- they would have been easy to collect around the site and on adjacent areas of the Plain. They probably sent the kids off to collect them while their dads were grunting away, shifting the seriously big stones.
In reply to:
Re: The bluestone debate (nigelswift)		 Replies:
Re: The bluestone debate (nigelswift)
Topic Outline:
The Modern Antiquarian Forum Index