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:
Littlestone says: "They must have missed some of the sarsens at Stonehenge then - the ones that were hauled there from some 30km away." That's your opinion -- but I still haven't seen any evidence to support it. I'll stick to the HHT theory on this one until somebody comes up with a killer fact.

With regard to Old Keig, tell me why it isn't a glacial erratic. The ice crossed this part of Aberdeenshire on several occasions in the Ice Age. Ice has no problems either in quarrying large rocks or moving them uphill. It's entirely logical to assume a natural explanation for most phenomena (eg large stones in "strange" places) and if that doesn't work, look for another (human-based) explanation instead. In exactly the same way I would assume that a cliff at the coast is created by the sea, and a large hole in a limestone area is caused by the solution of limestone. Because a large stone is incorporated into a dolmen, it doesn't mean it was dragged to it from somewhere else. There's a 60-tonner at Garn Turne. Ther stone was there before the tomb.


Reply | with quote		Posted by mountainman
17th December 2008ce
11:42

In reply to:

Re: The bluestone debate (nigelswift)

2 replies:

Re: The bluestone debate (nigelswift)
Re: The bluestone debate (Littlestone)

Messages in this topic:

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