Stonehenge forum 180 room
Image by Moth
Stonehenge

Ball bearings used to build Stonehenge

close
more_vert
tjj T
tjj Nov 18, 2010 23:12:57
Replying to The Eternal

The Eternal wrote:
goffik wrote:
Ah! I obviously skim-read it more than I thought! :D

Yeah, I think the balls they're referring to are too ornate to be functional - too precious...

I wonder if - assuming there IS any weight to the theory, the "balls" would need to be so perfectly circular or if something imperfect - like a fairly round pebble - might work on something so heavy? Come on, boffins! ;)
G x

Goffik,
I think for stone read chalk, eh? A few of those have been found, mostly buried in a context, simple ones and decorated ones, but not nearly as many as are claimed by the OP, plus chalk wouldn't last too long under that kind of stress.
Regards,
TE.
Very good point TE.

For anyone who lives in the south within travelling distance of Oxford; in the European Pre-history Room there is an interactive display whereby you can test lifting a stone with a lever. In one position it won't budge at all, in another it lifts easily.
I haven't really entered into discussions on how the massive stones at Stonehenge may have been moved - would have thought a combination of levers, ropes, rolling-logs, sledges and sheer man power. Is there any evidence of Neolithic people using wheels (they existed in the Middle East from around that time).

tjj

T The Eternal
The Eternal Nov 19, 2010 00:00:21
Replying to tjj

tjj wrote:
For anyone who lives in the south within travelling distance of Oxford; in the European Pre-history Room there is an interactive display whereby you can test lifting a stone with a lever. In one position it won't budge at all, in another it lifts easily.
I haven't really entered into discussions on how the massive stones at Stonehenge may have been moved - would have thought a combination of levers, ropes, rolling-logs, sledges and sheer man power. Is there any evidence of Neolithic people using wheels (they existed in the Middle East from around that time).

tjj

Is that the Ashmolean, tjj?
Also, I agree with your levers, ropes, rolling-logs, sledges, and sheer man-power.
But, the balls theory is a very good one in principle. Nowt has been found, basically meaning it is a non-starter, but a good theory in terms of the coeficient of friction, which can be applied to any condition.
However, to be realistic, the balls would have to vary in size, or be of maximum size, depending on the hardness of the ground. Smaller diameter balls will sink in soft ground. Maybe an optimum size could be produced, which would work well on all ground.
Nevertheless, some of these theoretical balls would have been found, especially in the numbers required. And in rock, not chalk, unless a chalk ball production team was constantly working round the clock.
TE.

S Sanctuary
Sanctuary Nov 19, 2010 08:41:53
Replying to tjj

[quote="tjj"
I haven't really entered into discussions on how the massive stones at Stonehenge may have been moved - would have thought a combination of levers, ropes, rolling-logs, sledges and sheer man power. Is there any evidence of Neolithic people using wheels (they existed in the Middle East from around that time).

tjj[/quote]

I've never seen or heard of any evidence of it June, but an idea I did like was the 'cotton reel' theory which was 'wheelie'. It would take some setting up but would certainly move a stone quickly. Basically they wrapped wood of various thicknesses around a stone so that it was rounded on its length then put a turn of rope around it so that when pulled it rolled along like a cotton reel. It would have been very effective and could probabley have dealth with roughter terrain quire well in comparison to other methods. It's a fascinating subject that no doubt will 'roll' on for years to come yet, but won't we all look stupid if at the end of the day we are all missing something so blindingly obvious!!