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
Dec 18, 2008, 07:42
mountainman wrote:
we have no way of knowing how dense this scatter might have been, or what components it might have had.


That's quite true (well partly). But since you are the one that thinks it probably existed and I'm the one that's less sure, it falls to you to be chief speculator doesn't it?

Anyhow, here are my guesses:

1. It may have looked like the nearest known ones, in the Avebury area http://www.english-nature.org.uk/ImageLibrary/web/11/11622.jpg
http://www.walkweb.org.uk/Stone_209.jpg
If so, it contained an awful lot of stones for them to have found enough suitable ones since, as you see, they are in a tiny minority at Avebury.
And if that's the case we need to know why that huge number of rejects aren't there now.

2. Alternatively it might have been only a small scatter. But that would mean there was a high instance of usable stones, else they wouldn't have enough. By usable, I mean about the right size and shape. I guess that's possible (but needs checking with a geologist) but there's a further factor - this tendency to homogeneity would have to be in two forms - suitable upright shape and size AND suitable lintel shape and size. That would be a very strange happenstance, and rather a speculative stretch in the absence of other examples or geologists' confirmation that such things happen.

3. My favourite guess - there warn't no scatter at Stonehenge and they lugged them there.

Incidentally, just for fun, on the subject of pulling big loads and whether it's conceivable, take a look at this, it's amazing what CAN be done that one would probably assume couldn't.... http://www.lakesideinn.net/lakesideinnstory/media/image005.jpg
Topic Outline:

The Modern Antiquarian Forum Index