Stonehenge and its Environs 134
Image by moss

"Ah, now we come to another sacred cow!! That particular idea was invented by Richard Atkinson -- HH Thomas did not think the sarsens were manhandled from the Marlborough Downs. He thought they were just collected from the Stonehenge area, where they littered the landscape."

Yes I know. But all 4 theories are unproven, why should two be picked out as sacred cows and wrong?

As for evidence for human transport, the Millenium Project was a shambles but that didn't prove the bluestones couldn't have been moved by humans, just not in a ramshackle fashion. And the evidence that the sarsens could have been moved by people is very strong - ask Gordon Pipes, Julian Richard and loads of others worldwide.

Maybe the sarsens were strewn about on the Plain but that still involved shifting forty-tonners a mile or two. Why is "shifting them a mile or two" sensible whereas "shifting them 21 miles" is incredible and a sacred cow?

I just think collating evidence for a particular theory shouldn't involve slagging off the alternatives. All four are possible.

Sorry Nigel -- I thought we were supposed to be arguing out where the weight of evidence lies? All 4 theories can't be right -- at least not in their entirety. Probably what we'll end up with is a classic compromise, with ice doing some of the work and man the rest.

Would you not agree with me that the archaeology establishment has worked rather hard at making sure that their sacred cows remain sacred? Look at the way Kellaway and Williams-Thorpe were ignored and vilified by men who should have known better, just because they dared to question the established belief system of our leading archaeologists........ Richard Thorpe and his colleagues put forward meticulously researched geological evidence in 1991. They have never had the credit they deserved, for their contribution to a full understanding of Stonehenge.