Haven't posted for a while but thought this thread looked quite interesting. I must admit I don't know much about the technical points of moving tons of rock but I do know the landscape in question quite well having grown up in the centre of Salisbury plain and now living 2 miles away from Marden.
Those of you who also know SP well will know that its not just a matter of getting over that "first hill" near Marden Cowbag, SP is full of hills! If the theory is the builders/draggers chose the shortest route then that would also entail tackling the various monsterous hills within SP. I find it quite hard to believe that they would do this, as lets face it, they were pretty clever to construct Stonehenge and the other fantastic monuments of that time, surely they would have used a more "intelligent" route making full use of what the land could offer them? Without sounding dumb, but why are we disfavouring the theory of transportation via river? Again, as I said above I'm not too clued up with the technical points but this would seem the easiest and most energy efficient way of transporting things. Perhaps someone would answer this question as I have often thought about this theory.
Just a couple of ideas and questions.
Dee
 Reply | with quote | Posted by lilydee05
14th February 2008ce
13:04 |
Route of the Sarsens. (jimit, Feb 11, 2008, 18:02)- Re: Route of the Sarsens. (nigelswift, Feb 11, 2008, 18:47)
- Route of the Sarsens. (Vybik Jon, Feb 11, 2008, 19:16)
- Re: Route of the Sarsens. (GordonP, Feb 12, 2008, 18:16)
- Re: Route of the Sarsens. (lilydee05, Feb 14, 2008, 13:04)
- Re: Route of the Sarsens. (brucebedlam, Apr 21, 2008, 17:11)
|
|
Head To Head 
Route of the Sarsens. (jimit)