Stonehenge forum 180 room
Image by pebblesfromheaven
Stonehenge

Stone shifting 4

close
more_vert
nigelswift N
nigelswift Sep 9, 2003 10:40:12
Replying to Steve Gray

It's all very thin ice. The Y and Z holes may be younger as measured by analysis of their contents, but the holes themselves are less certain I suppose, except one set of them, I forget which, is definitely younger because of what they cut into.
The thing is, the existence of a hole doesn't preclude the idea that it replaced an earlier smaller hole. All we know is that you can draw a straight line from the centre, through any sarsen and then through it's equivalent x,y and (approximately) Aubrey stone. Why? A construction-related origin seems possible or even another origin but utilized in construction.
Nice though it would be to win that particular argument would it be safer to keep clear of it, and have a "surface" anchor, if you can do it?

S Steve Gray
Steve Gray Sep 9, 2003 11:42:37
Replying to nigelswift

Another way to avoid the problem is to use a small A-frame in front of the anchor stone to change the direction of the rope so that it is pulling vertically on the stone. Since the tension in both parts of the rope are roughly the same, the A-frame needs to incline at about 45 degrees towards the anchor stone. This would require some shallow, angled holes to prevent it skidding. They don't need to be very deep, 6" or so should be OK. The A-frame also has the effect of increasing the height of the rope which gives a better range of movement to the weighting stone and might mean that we could do the whole job in a single "raise and lower" sequence.