Head To Head
Log In
Register
The Modern Antiquarian Forum »
Myths, truths and theories - Stonehenge
Log In to post a reply

Pages: 11 – [ Previous | 1 2 3 4 5 6 | Next ]
Topic View: Flat | Threaded
Littlestone
Littlestone
5386 posts

Re: Myths, truths and theories - Stonehenge
Sep 02, 2010, 17:41
mountainman wrote:
I agree. The surface stones will be like the tip of the iceberg -- I wouldn't mind betting that there are hundreds if not thousands more "bluestones" lurking in ancient deposits in valleys all over Wilts and Somerset. The surface ones around Stonehenge were collected up, because the builders had a job to do.


mountainman wrote:
The surface ones around Stonehenge were collected up, because the builders had a job to do.


But why eighty (just for the job) and no more?
mountainman
90 posts

Re: Myths, truths and theories - Stonehenge
Sep 02, 2010, 18:13
I agree. The surface stones will be like the tip of the iceberg -- I wouldn't mind betting that there are hundreds if not thousands more "bluestones" lurking in ancient deposits in valleys all over Wilts and Somerset. The surface ones around Stonehenge were collected up, because the builders had a job to do.
Sanctuary
Sanctuary
4741 posts

Re: Myths, truths and theories - Stonehenge
Sep 02, 2010, 18:15
Littlestone wrote:
mountainman wrote:
I agree. The surface stones will be like the tip of the iceberg -- I wouldn't mind betting that there are hundreds if not thousands more "bluestones" lurking in ancient deposits in valleys all over Wilts and Somerset. The surface ones around Stonehenge were collected up, because the builders had a job to do.


mountainman wrote:
The surface ones around Stonehenge were collected up, because the builders had a job to do.


But why eighty (just for the job) and no more?


I feel like piggy in the middle here but if they do/did exist in the area and they were dug out of the ground because they were not on the surface then once the 80 odd were collected and no more were required why take more? Once the ground was levelled over that would be the end of it and the bluestones hidden.
nigelswift
8050 posts

Re: Myths, truths and theories - Stonehenge
Sep 02, 2010, 18:31
I feel like piggy in the middle here but if they do/did exist in the area and they were dug out of the ground because they were not on the surface.....

Doesn't sound right to me, mining subterranean bluestones. How did they find them?
Sanctuary
Sanctuary
4741 posts

Re: Myths, truths and theories - Stonehenge
Sep 02, 2010, 20:20
nigelswift wrote:
I feel like piggy in the middle here but if they do/did exist in the area and they were dug out of the ground because they were not on the surface.....

Doesn't sound right to me, mining subterranean bluestones. How did they find them?


Well to clarify my earlier post Nigel, what I was really trying to say (without any great knowledge about the subject I have to admit) was that not all bluestones had to be on the surface surely as there would have been some underground but still part of the same collection. If those above ground were taken first and it could be seen that there were more underneath and they needed a few more, then they would have dug them out wouldn't they? After that the quarried section could have just been left, silted up or purposely filled and lost to us.
mountainman
90 posts

Re: Myths, truths and theories - Stonehenge
Sep 02, 2010, 21:21
nigelswift wrote:
mountainman wrote:
The surface stones will be like the tip of the iceberg -- I wouldn't mind betting that there are hundreds if not thousands more "bluestones" lurking in ancient deposits in valleys all over Wilts and Somerset.


Well of course, finding some would be a huge boost to your theory. But for now, the fact that lots of stray sarsens have been found but no bluestones doesn't do much for it.


You have every right to be sceptical, Nigel, until something spectacular is found on Salisbury Plain which demonstrably escaped the attention of the Stonehenge builders. But there are bits and pieces of "bluestone" all over the place, as I keep on saying...... and yes, there are erratics from South Wales in many places in the SW Peninsula, as described on p 118 - 122 of my book. Support your local author and go out and buy it!
mountainman
90 posts

Re: Myths, truths and theories - Stonehenge
Sep 02, 2010, 21:29
Littlestone wrote:
mountainman wrote:
I agree. The surface stones will be like the tip of the iceberg -- I wouldn't mind betting that there are hundreds if not thousands more "bluestones" lurking in ancient deposits in valleys all over Wilts and Somerset. The surface ones around Stonehenge were collected up, because the builders had a job to do.


mountainman wrote:
The surface ones around Stonehenge were collected up, because the builders had a job to do.


But why eighty (just for the job) and no more?


Who says that 80 bluestones were collected up? Not me. Having scoured all the tomes and research papers, I can find evidence for 43 bluestones and no more. The builders collected up all they could find, messed about for a few generations, moving the bluestones back and forth, and then simply gave up, with the monument only half finished. That's my scenario, and I'll stick to it until somebody proves me wrong. It's summarised on my YouTube video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wEvLWkTBEc&feature=channel

What the hell. None of this is actually that important compared with poverty and hunger, but it would be nice to get the truth of this matter sorted out, wouldn't it?
Pilgrim
Pilgrim
597 posts

Re: Myths, truths and theories - Stonehenge
Sep 02, 2010, 22:50
These things are good because they help define us as individuals.

Peace

Pilgrim

X
moss
moss
2901 posts

Re: Myths, truths and theories - Stonehenge
Sep 03, 2010, 06:20
mountainman wrote:
Littlestone wrote:
mountainman wrote:
I agree. The surface stones will be like the tip of the iceberg -- I wouldn't mind betting that there are hundreds if not thousands more "bluestones" lurking in ancient deposits in valleys all over Wilts and Somerset. The surface ones around Stonehenge were collected up, because the builders had a job to do.


mountainman wrote:
The surface ones around Stonehenge were collected up, because the builders had a job to do.


But why eighty (just for the job) and no more?



Who says that 80 bluestones were collected up? Not me. Having scoured all the tomes and research papers, I can find evidence for 43 bluestones and no more. The builders collected up all they could find, messed about for a few generations, moving the bluestones back and forth, and then simply gave up, with the monument only half finished. That's my scenario, and I'll stick to it until somebody proves me wrong. It's summarised on my YouTube video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wEvLWkTBEc&feature=channel

What the hell. None of this is actually that important compared with poverty and hunger, but it would be nice to get the truth of this matter sorted out, wouldn't it?


Hi MM, actually it was me who gave the 80ish bluestone number off the top of my head to LS, but checking Mike Pitt's Hengeworld he says that there were perhaps "sixty or seventy in the bluestone circle and nineteen in the horseshoe. Around 300 tons." so I was fairly near the mark....
Sorting the 'truth of the matter', maybe we were'nt meant to know ;)
Littlestone
Littlestone
5386 posts

Re: Myths, truths and theories - Stonehenge
Sep 03, 2010, 07:08
What the hell. None of this is actually that important compared with poverty and hunger, but it would be nice to get the truth of this matter sorted out, wouldn't it?


Yes, though speculation is half the fun :-)

The portico of the Pantheon consists of three rows of eight columns (each 46 ft high) of Egyptian granite. The task of hewing, dressing and transporting the stones from Egypt to Rome, without (modern) machinery, is mind boggling but it was done. I can't see any real (practical) difference between transporting the Bluestones from Wales to Wiltshire or transporting the Pantheon columns from Egypt to Rome. That's not to say that the Bluestones didn't get to Wiltshire through glaciation(s) but is it not also reasonable to speculate that they could have been transported there by the Stonehenge builders?

Seem to remember that the Pantheon columns were found to be a couple of foot too short when they got to Rome, and that some of the mortise and tenon joints at Stonehenge are in the wrong place. Same thing with the Hubble telescope and flat pack furniture. Transport the things thousands of miles only to find they don't fit ; -)
Pages: 11 – [ Previous | 1 2 3 4 5 6 | Next ] Add a reply to this topic

The Modern Antiquarian Forum Index