Sanctuary, or someone more au fait with jointing techniques, can probably clarify what’s going on at Stonehenge, but my understanding is that, “...mortise-and-tenon joints secure lintels to supporting sarsens, while tongues similar to toggle joints link each lintel in the outer circle to its neighbor." (Elizabeth L. Newhouse, ed. The Builders, Marvels of Engineering. Washington, D.C.: The National Geographic Society, 1992. p205).
The point I was trying to make (not very clearly I’m afraid) was that the mortise-and-tenon joints are (as would be expected) more rounded, less angular, as they are in woodworking. Apart from the extra effort involved in producing angular wood-type joints in stone there would just be little to be gained in doing so. The converse is true – wood lends itself more easily to angular working.
I think it’s always been assumed that the mortise-and-tenon joints at Stonehenge were imitating a woodworking tradition. What I’m suggesting is that it may have been the other way round – ie that the mortise-and-tenon joints that we are now so familiar with in woodworking may have followed on, not preceded, a much older stone-based technique.
You may have seen, like I did in Egypt LS, the amazing roof slabs on the temples that were locked together by the use of a double-dovetailed separate stone block. That took my breath away and still does!
