Bluestones

close
more_vert
The Eternal T
The Eternal May 24, 2013 23:52:29
Replying to tiompan

tiompan wrote:
Hi TE ,the most recent suggestion was the Craig Rhosyfelin one , but the one you mention sounds like Darvill and Wainwright and probably the Carn Menyn stone http://www.archaeology.co.uk/articles/news/the-stones-of-stonehenge.htm . It's certainly not dressed like the stones at Stonehenge and is no different from similar sized and shaped rocks found on the Preseli outcrops which have also been used for local building stone in the historoc period .

The glacial theory depends on the Irish sea glacier entraining the rocks at Preseli and and depositing them somewhere around the Somerset levels i.e. the movement need not be unidirectional and the Somerset levels is the eastern extent of the glacier . Of course just because the glacier was capable of doing so doesn't mean it did .

Hi tiompan,

Thanks for the link. The photo in your link is very similar to the one I saw. There must have been a number taken. That one certainly looks dressed, or at least semi-dressed.

I see your point about the glacial flow. Something else for us to look-up, eh?

Cheers,
TE.

T tiompan
tiompan May 26, 2013 10:36:08
Replying to The Eternal

The Eternal wrote:
tiompan wrote:
Hi TE ,the most recent suggestion was the Craig Rhosyfelin one , but the one you mention sounds like Darvill and Wainwright and probably the Carn Menyn stone http://www.archaeology.co.uk/articles/news/the-stones-of-stonehenge.htm . It's certainly not dressed like the stones at Stonehenge and is no different from similar sized and shaped rocks found on the Preseli outcrops which have also been used for local building stone in the historoc period .

The glacial theory depends on the Irish sea glacier entraining the rocks at Preseli and and depositing them somewhere around the Somerset levels i.e. the movement need not be unidirectional and the Somerset levels is the eastern extent of the glacier . Of course just because the glacier was capable of doing so doesn't mean it did .

Hi tiompan,

Thanks for the link. The photo in your link is very similar to the one I saw. There must have been a number taken. That one certainly looks dressed, or at least semi-dressed.

I see your point about the glacial flow. Something else for us to look-up, eh?

Cheers,
TE.

Hi TE , I'm not so sure that stone in question shows any signs of being dressed , it looks like a typical if narrower block of rhyolite from the Preseli tors .I don't think Darvill and Wainwright claimed it was dressed either ,their comment was "a veritable Aladdin's Cave of made-to-measure pillars for aspiring circle builders." but not only aspiring stone circle builders any local builders too .Even if it was dressed it could have been done any time in the past 6,000 years .More importantly the type of dressing found on the bluestones at Stonehenge e.g. Fine transverse tooling , Coarse tooling , Coarse pick dressing and Fine pick dressing is not found on the suggested Preseli stone(s) and there is evidence that the dressing was done close to the monument .