|
The Modern Antiquarian Forum » Stonehenge and its Environs » The Secrets of Stonehenge |
Log In to post a reply
|
|
|
|
| Topic View: Flat | Threaded | |
|
GordonP 474 posts |
Jun 03, 2009, 22:42
|
||
I did some experiments along these lines some years ago, sort of a rock on a piece of string, it worked really well.
|
|||
goffik 3926 posts |
Jun 04, 2009, 09:36
|
||
|
GordonP wrote: I did some experiments along these lines some years ago, sort of a rock on a piece of string, it worked really well. Gordon! Just the man! How the divil are ye? :) So - did your experiment use a rock being swung from an A-frame? Or was it something that I (as a non-technical lay-person) would consider to be a bit more controlled? As in a hand-held rock-on-a-rope? Im really interested to know just how precise it can be to swing a rock from a frame. I mean - won't it just knock random chunks off? G x
|
|||
|
nigelswift 8112 posts |
Jun 04, 2009, 10:39
|
||
|
Horses for courses I reckon Goff. If you wanted to roughly square up a 40 ton sarsen then swinging a Ford Escort engine block at it would be better than pratting about with a ball bearing on a string. You could keep the latter for the final finish. One thing Gordon did find - using a rope is essential as without it it plays hell with your hands.
|
|||
|
goffik 3926 posts |
Jun 04, 2009, 11:11
|
||
|
Did they have Ford Escorts back in those days/ You live and learn... ;) A very good analogy and one that helps the whole idea make more sense... I'd still like to see it in action though. From Ford Escort to ball bearing... Be interesting to see just how accurate and effective it all is. Not that I don't believe you. Or Gordon. G x
|
|||
|
nigelswift 8112 posts |
Jun 04, 2009, 11:49
|
||
|
Well they found mauls of very different sizes at Stonehenge. The thing about the Ford engine hanging from an A frame, you could make it fairly accurate by having the sarsen laid flat in front of it, and aiming it, and maybe having timber guide rails for the string, then moving the sarsen along a bit when you'd done, and repeating the process so the result was consistent. Spookily, Henry Ford re-discovered this technique and changed the world. I seem to remember we designed another version, do you remember? A maul on a rope with the sarsen directly under the A frame. Then you'd have two teams swinging the maul to each other and, depending on the exact length you made the rope it would take off an exact amount of the stone surface - and you'd know when it had done so as the maul would no longer scrape the sarsen. It would be an easy way to produce the slight bowing on some of the uprights and the curve of the lintels.
|
|||
StoneGloves 1149 posts |
Jun 05, 2009, 08:06
|
||
|
Yes, I have a hammerstone. It was ritually deposited and has never been used. Brand new! A person would need to have twice the strength of a modern person to do anything useful with it. The copper mine I talk about sometime has sections of the roof with identifiable hammered out sections. Something else I noticed about the Stonehenge special - they didn't mention Darvill and Wainwright at all. The new construction sequence fits, but. And they were too down on Atkinson - who, at least, dug in the right places.
|
|||
|
nigelswift 8112 posts |
Jun 05, 2009, 09:12
|
||
|
"And they were too down on Atkinson - who, at least, dug in the right places." Aw come on, digging in the right places and not telling anyone what you destroyed or removed is pure cultural vandalism isn't it? Who else does that? Ah, I know.... ;)
|
|||
Littlestone 5386 posts |
Jun 05, 2009, 11:42
|
||
|
And they were too down on Atkinson - who, at least, dug in the right places. You are talking about Stonehenge here Mr S aren't you (and not Silbury ;-) Actually, I was quite taken aback by TR's very strong comment about Atkinson (first time I've heard it said publicly in such a way) and wondered if it was his own idea or something he'd got from discussions with the archeos. Need to watch the prog again but was happy at the mention of pigs being fed on something sweet. Like wot some of us have been saying for a long time, the tradition of Wiltshire honey roast ham probably started way back in the Neolithic ;-)
|
|||
|
nigelswift 8112 posts |
Jun 05, 2009, 13:11
|
||
|
"Actually, I was quite taken aback by TR's very strong comment about Atkinson (first time I've heard it said publicly in such a way) and wondered if it was his own idea or something he'd got from discussions with the archeos." The dehabilitation of Atkinson has been a deliberate process, and traceable over time. Nothing was said for decades - I presume because half the blame was down to EH's predecessors who should have controlled him. Then a few years ago four people in EH let rip in an article in British Archaeology and the poor sod was finally openly demonised, not without reason but late. Did you know when he'd done at Silbury he left the blokes to fill it and didn't go back to supervise them? Apparently they didn't give a damn how they filled it, and partly didn't, and on cold days they ripped down the timber that had been put to line the walls and made bonfires in there? And no-one checked.
|
|||
|
Littlestone 5386 posts |
Jun 05, 2009, 18:24
|
||
|
Did you know when he'd done at Silbury he left the blokes to fill it and didn't go back to supervise them? Apparently they didn't give a damn how they filled it, and partly didn't, and on cold days they ripped down the timber that had been put to line the walls and made bonfires in there? And no-one checked. Yup, but what I really don't get is just how anyone can be so unprofessional - keeping his Stonehenge research under his bed and losing stuff from his shenanigans at Silbury. Have heard it suggested that he was intentionally keeping things under wraps but I just dunno. Very strange.
|
| Pages: 8 – [ Previous | 1 … 3 4 5 6 7 8 | Next ] | Add a reply to this topic |
|
|
|
| The Modern Antiquarian Forum Index | |
