13,000 Year old temple,

[HillBill]

Didn't the stones from Stonehenge have to be moved 200 miles to the place they are now?

There is a book called Stonehenge by Bernard Cornwell (of sharpe fame). That is all about the building of it. It is historical fiction but all his books are good.

One question about the vid. How did he get the first plank under the huge block he stood up?

 

[BigShot]

Bill, from Wikipedia...
The bluestones (some of which are made of dolerite, an igneous rock), were thought for much of the 20th century to have been transported by humans from the Preseli Hills, 250 kilometres (160 mi) away in modern day Pembrokeshire in Wales. A newer theory is that they were brought from glacial deposits much nearer the site, which had been carried down from the northern side of the Preselis to southern England by the Irish Sea Glacier.

The same documentary I saw a while back tested various means of moving them, some of them were incredibly efficient - took a bit of effort to get the things moving and then the movement could be maintained fairly easilly as long as they didn't stop.

Can't remember if they decided on log rollers or some sort of skids with water or some such as a lube though.

 

[HillBill]

Bill, from Wikipedia...
The bluestones (some of which are made of dolerite, an igneous rock), were thought for much of the 20th century to have been transported by humans from the Preseli Hills, 250 kilometres (160 mi) away in modern day Pembrokeshire in Wales. A newer theory is that they were brought from glacial deposits much nearer the site, which had been carried down from the northern side of the Preselis to southern England by the Irish Sea Glacier.

The same documentary I saw a while back tested various means of moving them, some of them were incredibly efficient - took a bit of effort to get the things moving and then the movement could be maintained fairly easilly as long as they didn't stop.

Can't remember if they decided on log rollers or some sort of skids with water or some such as a lube though.

Ah, it would have made it easier Without going back to the earlier debate, is it just theory or do they know? If those rocks were closer then i have no reason to doubt it because they did have to get them from somewhere.

In the book Stonehenge, they make hugh boats/rafts and lash 3 together to transport the stones down the coast and up the nearest river, they then do the rollers. To stand the stones up they dig a hole under one half of the stones and line it with wood so the corners dont stick in the ground and make it impossible to get out. They then rig a big frame like a catapult without the throwing arm, throw ropes over the top and tie them around the end of the stone away from the hole. Man and donkey power then pull which tips the stone into the hole. The tops were done the same way the guy in the video does it iirc. In the book it takes a lifetime to complete it. The same people from being young to old.

 

[Tadpole]

Stonehenge was, until the mid 1700's just a pile of rocks, admittedly a pile of big rock, but it looked nothing like it does today. Over the past couple of hundred years it has been reassembled. Half of the Henge was missing or had been moved. The maps and line drawing of that period show the ‘circle’ as a rude semi circle, with stones piled at random front and to the rear. (See John Constable's 1835 painting of Stonehenge)
The Victorians stood up five of the biggest stones, it’s a sad fact that few people know, or care that from 1900 to present day nearly all the stones have be moved, tidied up, reassembled and concreted in. 1958, ARC Roadstone/Hansons supplied the majority of the concrete used to prop up/re-stand the stones

 

[John Fenna]

I would be interested to know what glacier moved the Bluestones - I thought that our local glaciers (Preceli Pembrokeshire) flowed to the West not the East....thats what the geomorphy says anyway....
As to moving the stones everyone knows that Merlin (from Carmarthen) moved them in one night (from Ireland - but in those days the Irish ruled West Wales...) or are Celtic traditions as outmoded as Bilble stories....

 

[HillBill]

Stonehenge was, until the mid 1700's just a pile of rocks, admittedly a pile of big rock, but it looked nothing like it does today. Over the past couple of hundred years it has been reassembled. Half of the Henge was missing or had been moved. The maps and line drawing of that period show the ‘circle’ as a rude semi circle, with stones piled at random front and to the rear. (See John Constable's 1835 painting of Stonehenge)
The Victorians stood up five of the biggest stones, it’s a sad fact that few people know, or care that from 1900 to present day nearly all the stones have be moved, tidied up, reassembled and concreted in. 1958, ARC Roadstone/Hansons supplied the majority of the concrete used to prop up/re-stand the stones

Theres my daily dose of education. Cheers Tadpole.

This thread aint half took a few detours, 200+ posts in no time.

 

[BigShot]

HillBill - I don't think it makes any real difference where the stones came from. It's entirely possible for it to have been done either way. One's only marginally more impressive than the other to me, the same technologies and same "smart people" figuring out how to do things never done before are what make it happen.


Tadpole - I didn't know that at all.
Do we have any evidence that it was once "complete", that it was like it is now, or indeed, that the whole things isn't a great big folly? There are a few follies around, I wonder, could stonehenge actually be one too?
I admit to having precious little knowledge about the whole thing so forgive me if there's anything glaringly obvious that I'm missing which would answer those questions for me.

 

[Tadpole]

but in those days the Irish ruled West Wales...)

now it's the French who own Wales,

 

[HillBill]

HillBill - I don't think it makes any real difference where the stones came from. It's entirely possible for it to have been done either way. One's only marginally more impressive than the other to me, the same technologies and same "smart people" figuring out how to do things never done before are what make it happen.


Tadpole - I didn't know that at all.
Do we have any evidence that it was once "complete", that it was like it is now, or indeed, that the whole things isn't a great big folly? There are a few follies around, I wonder, could stonehenge actually be one too?
I admit to having precious little knowledge about the whole thing so forgive me if there's anything glaringly obvious that I'm missing which would answer those questions for me.

I expect there will be local knowledge and maybe paintings or drawings/descriptions from years past somewhere or other.