Stonehenge and its Environs 134
Image by Mr Hamhead

As I recall Julian's paper a consideration of the mechanics of transport was very much secondary and a bit of a "filler" as the main project was erection. I wasn't convinced by his musings about a formal track being built - it strikes me the labour cost would be massive, equivalent to building a 21 mile wooden road from Avebury all the way to Salisbury Plain and if there was any viable alternative they'd have gone for it.

Foamhenge strengthened this feeling. It revealed you just don't need a track or rollers to shift stones. I also think the "steering problem" is overplayed - and in fact it's actually created by the use of a track or rollers. In the absence of those, going off-line isn't a crucial issue and you can re-adjust the alignment periodically using levers or by the even more blindingly simple expedient of simply carrying on pulling but slightly to one side.

At the end of the day I think we will have to "beg to differ on this question".

Although you seem to ignore my reasoning that if you need 640 men to move a stone on rollers then my seemingly slower method of stone-rowing is actually far quicker because I can move 10 megaliths at the same time with such a workforce.

Anyway I am the first man in written history to suggest picking up a megalith in order to move it, that is apart from William Stuckely, but that piece of information only came to light years after I first suggested Stone-rowing in an article in the Derby Evening Telegraph December 1999.

Quite interesting though how he described the transport, stones moved using "leavers in the nature of galley oars". See Stuckely's Stonehenge An Unpublished Manusript 1721-1724 (Yale) by Aubrey Burl and Neil Mortimer.