Re: Browne's Hill dolmen capstone not raised? | Forum

Sanctuary Feb 8, 2011 20:47:57

Replying to GLADMAN

GLADMAN wrote:

Just wondering what people think about the suggestion that truly massive capstones - such as that at Browne's Hill - may have been 'dug out' of the earth in situ instead of being raised upon orthostats by our crafty ancient friends...

Could a wooden 'A' frame, for arguments sake - have been able to lift such a weight? Would it have been possible from an engineering point of view?

Do you mean the support stones being placed under them first Gladman then the earth from all around then moved? That's quite a common belief I think isn't it for other such monuments.

tiompan Feb 8, 2011 20:51:13

Replying to Sanctuary

Sanctuary wrote:

GLADMAN wrote:

Could a wooden 'A' frame, for arguments sake - have been able to lift such a weight? Would it have been possible from an engineering point of view?

Do you mean the support stones being placed under them first Gladman then the earth from all around then moved? That's quite a common belief I think isn't it for other such monuments.

Colin Richards thought so at Carreg Samson and it has been suggested that pits below capstones were the actual quarrying site .

GLADMAN Feb 8, 2011 21:03:19

Replying to Sanctuary

Sanctuary wrote:

Do you mean the support stones being placed under them first Gladman then the earth from all around then moved? That's quite a common belief I think isn't it for other such monuments.

That's right. Are we talking glacial erratics upon deposits rather than the digging away of hill sides - can't recall any dolmens sited in hollows on my travels?