moss
|
Re: The Blue Stone Enigma
Jun 24, 2009, 10:37
|
|
Pete G wrote: I've read Castleden's book.
Wainwright & Darvil are not archaeologists so in my opinion are not qualified to comment on glaciation. They can provide no evidence for the stones being moved manualy.
I suggest you read the book so you can get up to date on Brians latest findings.
PeteG
Think you got your professions mixed up there Pete, Professors Wainwright and Darvill were into archaeology the last time I looked....
And the argument could of course be turned round that Johns as a geologist is not qualifed to judge archaeology - but that would of course be quibbling - don't you think.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/programmes/stonehenge/biographies.shtml
|
nigelswift
|
Re: The Blue Stone Enigma
Jun 24, 2009, 10:50
|
|
Forgot to add Goff, I haven't read any books and wasn't a witness to what happened originally so I know naaaathing but I was at Foamhenge and from what I saw there I reckon that had the pulling team been 20x larger (1000 people) then they could have moved 60 Bluestones uphill in one go so moving ONE wouldn't have been terribly hard. But that's just my findings as an eye witness without the benefit of any book larnin'.... ;)
|
tonyh
|
Edited Jun 24, 2009, 10:58
Re: The Blue Stone Enigma
Jun 24, 2009, 10:50
|
Personaly, I don't think that the glaciation theory should be judged on whether large stone can be or have been moved by Human effect.
The question is, could they have been moved by glaciation? I haven't read anything that shows not so far. Probability? difficult to say really, but can't see any reason to dismiss the idea..
Tony
|
tiompan
|
Re: The Blue Stone Enigma
Jun 24, 2009, 11:41
|
|
tonyh wrote: Personaly, I don't think that the glaciation theory should be judged on whether large stone can be or have been moved by Human effect.
The question is, could they have been moved by glaciation? I haven't read anything that shows not so far. Probability? difficult to say really, but can't see any reason to dismiss the idea.
Tony
To ignore the possibility of glaciation is as daft as to ignoring human effort /ingenuity . Unfortunately the Williams etc paper showed that the proponents of glaciation have ignored or were unaware of the examples of effort /ingenuity in Britain .
|
nigelswift
|
Re: The Blue Stone Enigma
Jun 24, 2009, 12:01
|
Unfortunately the Williams etc paper showed that the proponents of glaciation have ignored or were unaware of the examples of effort /ingenuity in Britain
Indeed. Of which there have been a whole series stretching over many decades. I wonder if the fact many of them were amateur efforts and therefore didn't make it into "the literature" has something to do with it?
On the other hand quite a gaggle of well known archaeologists were at Foamhenge and some even had a go with both the oars and ropes so maybe the climate will change as a result. Mike Pitts has already mentioned rowing as a possibility.
Like you say, the jury's quite rightly out on the issue and saying one explanation is more likely by default because the other is unlikely isn't on. It's got to be 50-50 I'd have thought.
|
Pete G
|
Re: The Blue Stone Enigma
Jun 24, 2009, 12:10
|
Ooops.
I meant Geologists.
Still, you don't have to read the book if you think it might topple some of the well established myths in archaeology.
|
tonyh
|
Re: The Blue Stone Enigma
Jun 24, 2009, 14:29
|
|
tiompan wrote: tonyh wrote: Personaly, I don't think that the glaciation theory should be judged on whether large stone can be or have been moved by Human effect.
The question is, could they have been moved by glaciation? I haven't read anything that shows not so far. Probability? difficult to say really, but can't see any reason to dismiss the idea.
Tony
To ignore the possibility of glaciation is as daft as to ignoring human effort /ingenuity . Unfortunately the Williams etc paper showed that the proponents of glaciation have ignored or were unaware of the examples of effort /ingenuity in Britain .
I must admit to being open minded about the transportation of the Blue Stones In the fact that I'm not really completely 'sold' on any of the theories.
Tony
|
Rupert Soskin
|
Re: The Blue Stone Enigma
Jun 24, 2009, 14:50
|
|
Something that gets missed in all this sort of debate is comparable feats elsewhere. For example, the Inca citadel of Sacsayhuaman has stone blocks weighing over 300 tons. Early accounts of Spanish missionaries recall the huge teams of men hauling blocks up hill with ropes.
|
tiompan
|
Re: The Blue Stone Enigma
Jun 24, 2009, 15:13
|
|
Rupert Soskin wrote: Something that gets missed in all this sort of debate is comparable feats elsewhere. For example, the Inca citadel of Sacsayhuaman has stone blocks weighing over 300 tons. Early accounts of Spanish missionaries recall the huge teams of men hauling blocks up hill with ropes.
That is due to Thorpe etc. restricted the debate to Britain.
|
sleeptowin
|
Re: The Blue Stone Enigma
Jun 24, 2009, 15:57
|
i thought Merlin moved them, or was that the bigger stones?
no one is ever going to know really, theres some stones there, and they look good, and to be honest it cant be proved either way how they got there.
at this point im going to point out that they obviously got there by camel.
|
