Stonehenge forum 180 room
Image by juamei
Stonehenge

Stone Shifting

close
more_vert
GordonP G
GordonP Aug 16, 2003 10:44:53
Replying to FourWinds

Hi Fourwinds, Baza, Moth and Nigel
Thanks Baza and Moth for the info.
Fourwinds, I estimated 900 yards as a days work for one team. Second question, it would probably be quicker to move small stones by using a basket.
Nigel, you've set me thinking now, your idea might work but there could be unexpected problems. as with moving the stones by the old idea of timber rollers. Unless the trackway is perfectly level the stone will veer off line, then it's a right job moving it back. Also going downhill you might lose control altogether, I'll give it some more thought. By the way there are no crosswise logs only the levers are crosswise. Regarding further experiments I've become obsessed with this thing, I am now hoping to try moveing a 10 ton stone and would welcome any help I can get. I don't think we will get much help from the archaeologist though, they have been ignoring me for the last four years which is why I've dragged myself into the 21st century and bought a computor
Regards Gordon

N nigelswift
nigelswift Aug 16, 2003 11:41:38
Replying to GordonP

Maybe they “pulled” when on the level and “rowed” downhill, relying on the track-friction to act as a brake?

I can certainly see that using a combination of both methods you could get fantastic control – you could tilt the front upwards, just as you reached a small hillock, and you could steer it left and right by tilting one side but not the other, whilst pulling.

Also, when you came to a bigger hill, by tilting the front, adding a packing log, tilting the back, adding a larger packing log, then pulling, you could get up the whole hill in a series of small horizontal pulls. By the time you’d got to the top, you’d have travelled by means of a combination of 2 vectors: horizontal, entirely by bullocks pulling horizontally, and vertical, entirely by levers. Both vectors would have been achieved by the most appropriate and energy-efficient means.

I expect I mean oxen, not bullocks. But then, someone may tell me that bullocks is derived from bullox, so it might be right....