|
The Modern Antiquarian Forum » Trethevy Quoit in danger |
Log In to post a reply
|
|
|
|
| Topic View: Flat | Threaded | |
bladup 1986 posts |
Edited Mar 03, 2013, 01:44
Mar 03, 2013, 01:27
|
||
|
Sanctuary wrote: bladup wrote: Sanctuary wrote: bladup wrote: Sanctuary wrote: bladup wrote: nigelswift wrote: OK, I get the message! But going back to the stability issue, if you're concerned that the EH engineer needs to reconsider maybe your best bet is to get a friendly structural engineer to contact him? Mulfra's also cut [lots] on the underside of the capstone and would slot onto the uprights perfectly because of it, But i'm sure you've seen that Roy. and of course Zennor as well. Yep zennor has some beauties but nobody ever considered them as being important. I'd say the mulfra one is probably the most worked, it's had a huge amount of stone broken off the underside so it fits neatly on it's uprights. Yes I've got some good pix of that Paul. I wonder where the missing side flanker ended up... any thoughts cos it's pretty barren up there isn't it? Remember the old drawing of Zennor with one end on one single stone, It may have been like that, the one stone been blasted has such an effect on the whole thing or maybe it just smashed under the weight of the capstone, there is big lumps of a broken stone on site, but that stone wouldn't have being as big as the others if you put the bits together, but if i had to put my money on it, it would have been pretty much the same as Chun, but saying that the single stone idea stands up because on site i can prove the capstone would have being tilted not flat like it at first looks like it would have been and if the single stone was smaller the remains of it are still there on site [but broken up]. I've always thought that the Borlase drawing didn't look right Paul. That rear stone propping up the capstone looks remarkably slender at the business end doesn't it and far too inferior to carry that massive weight. Unfortunately it's the only drawing so we either accept it as being correct or how he thought it should have been. Once you go to Zennor with that in mind a whole new world opens up to be honest Roy, it's a revelation, and for what i know to be true would mean that it only lacks 3 stones, the one that's missing from the drawing [we know it got blasted] and another 2, they would have been the smallest of the bigger stones and therefore the first to go [or they could even have been wood and never stone], you'll love it when you see where they went because the stones are shaped to hold them [yes, more shaped stones], it might make you see that drawing as a lot more real, give us a shout next time your down this way because i'd like to show you what i mean because it really needs to be shown in the flesh, put it like this - if the drawing is right i now know how it became 2 sealed chambers [apart from their little entrances], and it's very simple but clever [always a good sign].
|
|||
|
nigelswift 8112 posts |
Mar 03, 2013, 06:30
|
||
|
Sanctuary wrote: Re the engineer, yes a good idea, but I don't have or know any friendly ones. It was pointed out to me that EH engineers are highly skilled, far more than your bog standard engineer Well, more used to dealing with megaliths anyway. But it's all maths, innit - loadings, angles and coefficients of friction - there's a clear and certain answer as to whether it is currently dangerous I'd have thought. There are relevant academic departments in Exeter and Falmouth who might like to be asked for their opinion just as a fun exercise, not to tread on the toes of their colleague. But I'm fascinated by the idea of artificially constructed tenons and mortises. They might look like that because a nobble tends to settle into a hollow, but were they deliberately constructed? Would such a thing be necessary if the structure was intended to be buried? It's a fact that a capstone resting on three points (not 4) is extremely stable, would further engineering specifications be needed?
|
|||
Sanctuary 4670 posts |
Edited Mar 03, 2013, 07:46
Mar 03, 2013, 07:28
|
||
|
nigelswift wrote: [ But I'm fascinated by the idea of artificially constructed tenons and mortises. They might look like that because a nobble tends to settle into a hollow, but were they deliberately constructed? Would such a thing be necessary if the structure was intended to be buried? It's a fact that a capstone resting on three points (not 4) is extremely stable, would further engineering specifications be needed? Well it was you that mentioned mortise and tenons Nigel not me, I just showed you a photograph of an angled upright with 'knobbles on it! But I have got another that will interest you but you're seeing that one yet :-) With regard to it being buried, I take it you mean under a mound? If so, where is the proof for that at Trethevy? I see a banked area at the base securing the stones but that's all. It was 'open for business' for centuries (it would seem) so the structure didn't need covering to keep it structurally sound during that time. If you read all the accounts of Trethevy you will find that they all suppose that the capstone was raised much higher than it is now at the rear and the original backstone lies prostrate inside the chamber. If that's true, how would you stop the ingress of cairn material into the open chamber if it was totally covered? Maybe it wasn't a backstone at all. Again we have taken it as read because our peers say it was. We are allowed to challenge them and that's what I've done and ofered evidence for and shown the obvious alternatives.
|
|||
|
nigelswift 8112 posts |
Mar 03, 2013, 08:09
|
||
|
Sanctuary wrote: Well it was you that mentioned mortise and tenons Nigel not me True, but it was you that said "where do you think the 'lid' would be today if they weren't there"! So would it be OK if I asked your opinion on whether the "where would the lid be without 'ems" are artificial or natural? ;)
|
|||
Littlestone 5386 posts |
Edited Mar 03, 2013, 10:26
Mar 03, 2013, 08:17
|
||
|
VBB wrote: I asked at the time what evidence there was for altering anything once it was known it wasn't going anywhere... That’s a dangerous assumption and flies in the face of logic (unless you’re suggesting that the Henge builders erected the stone at an angle :-) Assuming then that the stone was originally in the vertical it ‘has gone somewhere’ since then and presumably would have continued to do so. Given the appalling wet weather last year, and the plonkers I’ve seen climbing both stones and standing on the top of them over the years, further movement was not just a possibility it was nigh on a certainty!
|
|||
|
Sanctuary 4670 posts |
Mar 03, 2013, 08:21
|
||
|
nigelswift wrote: Sanctuary wrote: Well it was you that mentioned mortise and tenons Nigel not me True, but it was you that said "where do you think the 'lid' would be today if they weren't there"! So would it be OK if I asked your opinion on whether the "where would the lid be without 'ems" are artificial or natural? ;) The knobbles, as you called them, would be artificial. They are not the only ones, but only appear in the 'right places'.
|
|||
tiompan 5758 posts |
Mar 03, 2013, 09:06
|
||
|
tiompan wrote: Sanctuary wrote: tiompan wrote: Sanctuary wrote: Pic 5 shows why it hasn't slid off and for some reason not mentioned over the years...keying points...and they called themselves researchers! Other than...Trethevy had a HUGE scare in the past and is not now as it is was then prior to that scare. The only mystery left is why all the antiqueries of the past have not sussed it out. Roy , apart from the two blokes going on about the light coming through the hole and various other points , who were these "researchers " and what was there to "suss out " ? Researchers was probably the wrong word to use George, but those that have written up on the quoit in the past, who must have researched it as well presumably before passing comment or putting stuff in print. Anyone spending time at the quoit should soon suss out that it was very unlikely to have looked like it is now on first build but they seem to have gone down the same path as others before them and just copied each others work and didn't seem to be prepared to make claims which they couldn't substantiate for fear of being made to look foolish. I on the other hand can say what I like and am prepared to be challenged once my Tome is out. But I can promise you that I believe I have made a good fist of it and won't be ridiculed through lack of careful consideration. If I'm wrong I'm wrong but people will always have a chance to come up with their own ideas which of course will also be open to question. Maybe anyone who has written about it in the past didn't believe that it has been modified since first build . If they had believed so there was nothing to stop them mentioning it either . Without excavation to show that there has been some modification to show that there may have been some modification I don't see any reason to doubt the standard model which is also the most parsomonious . The back stone slipped and the northern ante chamber stone is missing .There is even a local precedent for the uncommon ante chamber at Zennor .
|
|||
|
nigelswift 8112 posts |
Mar 03, 2013, 09:10
|
||
|
Sanctuary wrote: The knobbles, as you called them, would be artificial. if that can be established as a fact it will be interesting as the amount of effort involved in reducing the whole surface in order to leave the nobbles standing proud is pretty great. Not as great as with the Stonehenge tenons but still pretty hard.
|
|||
|
Sanctuary 4670 posts |
Mar 03, 2013, 09:21
|
||
|
nigelswift wrote: Sanctuary wrote: The knobbles, as you called them, would be artificial. if that can be established as a fact it will be interesting as the amount of effort involved in reducing the whole surface in order to leave the nobbles standing proud is pretty great. Not as great as with the Stonehenge tenons but still pretty hard. As would the slopes themselves Nigel so just leaving the knobs behind would be no big deal really and earlier than SH. Look what they left behind when they scooped Abu Simbel out of that mountain!!
|
|||
|
nigelswift 8112 posts |
Mar 03, 2013, 09:32
|
||
|
It would feel like a big deal if you were one of the pounders. I guess 3D laser scanning would show if it happened.
|
| Pages: 44 – [ Previous | 1 … 7 8 9 10 11 12 | Next ] | Add a reply to this topic |
|
|
|
| The Modern Antiquarian Forum Index | |
