The Modern Antiquarian. Stone Circles, Ancient Sites, Neolithic Monuments, Ancient Monuments, Prehistoric Sites, Megalithic MysteriesThe Modern Antiquarian
Home Latest Posts Forums Maps Help
Browse Sites News Blog Contributors The Books
Head To Head   The Modern Antiquarian   Stonehenge and its Environs Forum Start a topic | Search
Stonehenge and its Environs
Re: The bluestone debate
390 messages
Select a forum:
"Ah, now we come to another sacred cow!! That particular idea was invented by Richard Atkinson -- HH Thomas did not think the sarsens were manhandled from the Marlborough Downs. He thought they were just collected from the Stonehenge area, where they littered the landscape."

Yes I know. But all 4 theories are unproven, why should two be picked out as sacred cows and wrong?

As for evidence for human transport, the Millenium Project was a shambles but that didn't prove the bluestones couldn't have been moved by humans, just not in a ramshackle fashion. And the evidence that the sarsens could have been moved by people is very strong - ask Gordon Pipes, Julian Richard and loads of others worldwide.

Maybe the sarsens were strewn about on the Plain but that still involved shifting forty-tonners a mile or two. Why is "shifting them a mile or two" sensible whereas "shifting them 21 miles" is incredible and a sacred cow?

I just think collating evidence for a particular theory shouldn't involve slagging off the alternatives. All four are possible.


Reply | with quote
nigelswift
Posted by nigelswift
15th November 2008ce
10:32

In reply to:

Re: The bluestone debate (mountainman)

1 reply:

Re: The bluestone debate (mountainman)

Messages in this topic:

Terms & Conditions  |  Home  |  Julian Cope presents Head Heritage Top of page