For what it's worth... | Forum — The Modern Antiquarian

Stonehenge and its Environs 134

Image by Chance

The bluestone debate

Moth Nov 21, 2008 02:33:09

Replying to tonyh

What a shame this discussion has become somewhat acrimonious. Just in the vague hope it can resume, I thought I'd put in me tuppenceworth....

I was involved in the Stonehengineers project with Gordon and Steve.

I'm convinced that Steve wouldn't try to take credit for anything he didn't say/draw/tell people about.

I also find it hard to believe that Gordon would knowingly take an idea and claim credit for himself. I do think it's possible that Gordon may have forgotten Steve telling him about it, or believe it to be a different idea.

A little 'background' is that Gordon and Steve (and others) worked together on the Stonehengineers project really well, with as far as I know little (pardon the pun) 'friction' until the 'big weekend' of the experiment at Foamhenge for the TV. Then it became apparent that Gordon seemed to think that Steve was trying to take over (or something).

Nobody else in the group could see what made Gordon feel that way. But, basically Gordon wouldn't work with Steve after that weekend and Steve was very hurt by Gordon's mistrust. It was the end of the Stonehengineers project.

That weekend, I was pulling one of the levers for the 'stonerowing' developed by Gordon and we proved clearly that it worked.

The next day there was a 'pulling' experiment, which unfortunately I couldn't stay for. But everyone I've spoken to about it who was there (except Gordon) agreed that it seemed from the experiment that on pretty even ground, pulling was far more efficient, and that it would certainly be interesting to develop it alongside stonerowing.

They were all of the view that stonerowing could be very useful on rough terrain or uphill.

Of course Gordon's entitled to stick to his theory that stonerowing would be the major method to use, but in my view, those are the reasons that Gordon and Steve 'rub each other up the wrong way'.

What I don't quite understand is why you, Tony, have become quite so antagonistic towards Steve, yet believe everything Gordon says.

I'm not physics or mechanically-minded enough to be able to make any judgements on a lot of the discussion, but I was enjoying it up until the point when you said:

tonyh wrote:

Steve Gray wrote:

tonyh wrote:

But you had 50 teams of two oxen..

Do they stretch out in a straight line and have 50 different lengths of rope
runing back to the sledge? or are the kind of fanned out so that the are not in each others way?

Tony

It doesn't matter, the principle is the same. I would imagine practicalities might dictate a mixture of the two.

Bear in mind that I only posed this as a question, not as a fully-fledged theory.

You mean it would not work..

That's OK..

So do I..

Tony

...which understandably (in my opinion) riled Steve, whether it was meant to or not.

Up until then (and on other parts of the thread) the discussion had been very interesting.

It'd be nice if all the protagonists in this discussion could find a way to 'get on' well enough to continue....

love

Moth

goffik Nov 21, 2008 12:14:21

Replying to Moth

Check yer email, matey... :)

G x

tonyh Nov 21, 2008 18:54:15

Replying to Moth

I'm sorry that you see it that way.

I do not back Gordon. I only accept that His methods work and suggest speed may not be a priority. Terrain may be everything.

I find Steve aloof and condescending. Observations contrary to His beliefs are dismissed as unimportant and irrelevant.
With 35 years of exspereance of towing. pushing and pulling things that are of considerable weight both wheeled and non wheeled I do know a little on the subject. But hey, that has no important to Him..

My question of rope and where did they get it from and for that mater why would they have it is very relevant. After all you cant use what you don't own and given the time and effect to make rope it would have a great value and you would only own what you needed... But all I got was sarcasm.

As far as I'm concerned This subject is closed I have no time for it..

Tony

tonyh Nov 21, 2008 21:04:56

Replying to Moth

While on the subject of ropes..

You may wish to consider.

Does a rope produced in a modern Norwegian factory represent The type of rope available to late neolithic/bronze age Man..

Personaly..

I would not think so..

They may be using Neolithic material - Lime Tree Bast, but they are using later technology.

Wheels and gears

Tony

GordonP Nov 21, 2008 21:42:51

Replying to Moth

[quote="Moth"]What a shame this discussion has become somewhat acrimonious. Just in the vague hope it can resume, I thought I'd put in me tuppenceworth....

Dear Moth

Ever the peacemaker, if you were enjoying the debate then what can I do but continue.

I have spent a great deal of my life pondering on the mystery of how stone-age man achieved the wonders of Stonehenge, Easter Island, etc etc.

I have formed certain opinions as to how they may managed to perform the seemingly impossible, these opinions are genuine and I post, not to score points in some pointless game, but for genuine responses in the hope that some one may see something I have overlooked.

None of my opinions were formed in a classroom but are drawn from my own experience of hard labour during my youth, something I enjoyed and was well paid for. I have at times spent 12 hour shifts swinging a 14lb sledgehammer in order to shore up timber formwork to hold in place 100s of tons of wet concrete so I know the meaning of hard work and a little of engineering.

One opinion I have formed is that Neolithic man was as intelligent on average as the average man alive today. That is, in my opinion, far to intelligent to even comtemplate dragging dragging massive megaliths about the countryside.

That thought has been the bedrock of all the possible solutions I have offered.

I have little time for argument for the sake of argument.