Re: The bluestone debate | Forum — The Modern Antiquarian

Stonehenge and its Environs 134

Image by moss

The bluestone debate

Littlestone Jun 18, 2006 12:35:04

Replying to moss

Yes, the sea bit of the journey seems to be the most problematic. CraigR's link to Burl's essay at http://www.britarch.ac.uk/ba/ba45/ba45int.html points that up.

Let's face it, given enough time and manpower practically anything can be moved anywhere overland - the same cannot be said about sea crossings (though I hasten to add that I'm not saying they didn't or couldn't do it :-)

FourWinds Jun 18, 2006 14:21:48

Replying to Littlestone

I'm going to mention Lethbridge again ...

... Lethbridge was quite an authority on ancieent boats and wrote a couple of amazing books about them. He had no problem with the thought of Neolithic sea-going boats carrying big stones.

GordonP Jun 19, 2006 08:12:50

Replying to Littlestone

Burl's main argument seems to be against the use of rafts for a sea and river journey.

I agree with this, almost impossible.

But why discount the use of a real wooden boat? the Northferribee boat has now been redated as 3000 years old.

Is it possible that such craft might have been in use at the time the Bluestones were moved?

With such a craft as few as 8 men (the Northferribee boat would have held such a crew and a stone) could travel to Wales and using stone-rowing techniques move a stone to the beach and load it into the boat.