Stonehenge forum 180 room
Image by GLADMAN
Stonehenge

Stonehenge is second hand

close
more_vert
tiompan T
tiompan Dec 9, 2015 10:27:32
Replying to tjj

From that article in answer to the question “Have archaeologists found Stonehenge quarries? “ he answers “they certainly thinks so “
Not a resounding yes from a source we might expect to be supportive of the team

The archaeos seem little better than the glacial proponents when it comes to hubris and narrative creation , although they do have much more going for them and ultimately are more likely to be seen to be correct or at least the glacial proponents will have never provide the evidence to support their moribund theory whilst the petrographers will slowly make the human transport one more likely to all but the most obsessive .

There are a quite a few problems though June .
One is the 500 years , where does that fit in ?
There are various dates from the site from Mesolithic to 780 AD (no doubt beyond too but they are not relevant ) and none can provide dates from the removal of the rocks , if they were indeed removed . There is no certain date for their arrival or erection at Stonehenge either , so the 500 years is completely manufactured to fit in with one particular narrative .

N nigelswift
nigelswift Dec 9, 2015 11:34:05
Replying to tiompan

Unjust speculation 1: “the ruins of any dismantled monument are likely to lie somewhere between the two megalith quarries”. Not really, there are lots of other motivations for where you build a circle, why assume the positions of the two quarries were the likely determining factor? What about views, water, unknown commemoration etc etc like other monuments?

Unjust speculation 2: there was a proto Stonehenge in Wales for 500 years. But isn't it equally likely there was a proto-Stonehenge (if there was one at all) somewhere else, including, equally probably, near Stonehenge?

Isn't there a stronger argument for spending their funding looking in Wilts rather than Wales? What a hoot if it was found on the route of the road leading to the tunnel!

T tjj
tjj Dec 10, 2015 08:41:29
Replying to tiompan

tiompan wrote:
From that article in answer to the question “Have archaeologists found Stonehenge quarries? “ he answers “they certainly thinks so “
Not a resounding yes from a source we might expect to be supportive of the team

The archaeos seem little better than the glacial proponents when it comes to hubris and narrative creation , although they do have much more going for them and ultimately are more likely to be seen to be correct or at least the glacial proponents will have never provide the evidence to support their moribund theory whilst the petrographers will slowly make the human transport one more likely to all but the most obsessive .

There are a quite a few problems though June .
One is the 500 years , where does that fit in ?
There are various dates from the site from Mesolithic to 780 AD (no doubt beyond too but they are not relevant ) and none can provide dates from the removal of the rocks , if they were indeed removed . There is no certain date for their arrival or erection at Stonehenge either , so the 500 years is completely manufactured to fit in with one particular narrative .

Thanks for your always measured comments Tiompan, especially the one about the 500 years. Have to admit when archaeologists talk about such precise timescales in the context of millennia I start to feel a little bemused. Stonehenge is, and probably always will be, an enigma.