New henge found in Wales: possible Stonehenge link

The Old World is a reference to those parts of Earth known to Europeans before the voyages of Christopher Columbus; it includes Europe, Asia and Africa.

Moderators: MichelleH, Minimalist

User avatar
CShark
Posts: 93
Joined: Sun Jan 27, 2008 12:58 pm
Location: Canada

New henge found in Wales: possible Stonehenge link

Post by CShark » Tue Apr 15, 2008 6:23 am

The henge may have been carefully positioned on a route from the Blue Stone Hills at Preseli (where, apparently, there used to be another henge) and the route for transporting the bluestones to Stonehenge may have made use of inland waterways,” say the investigators. One such stream runs close by the Llanddowror site
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_a ... 738383.ece

Scroll down to the New Henge section.

More 'proof' of the bluestone source in Wales ?

User avatar
Digit
Posts: 6618
Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2006 1:22 pm
Location: Wales, UK

Post by Digit » Tue Apr 15, 2008 6:52 am

Ther's no proof required Shark. Chemical analysis of the stones sampled came from west Wales. I take it you meant the mode of transport, if so the report neither adds nor subtracts from what we aleady know. The mere existance of a supposed Henge doesn't help much. There was one near Carn Meini and there's another down the road from me, which is north of Carn Meini.

User avatar
CShark
Posts: 93
Joined: Sun Jan 27, 2008 12:58 pm
Location: Canada

Post by CShark » Wed Apr 16, 2008 8:27 am

Digit wrote:Ther's no proof required Shark. Chemical analysis of the stones sampled came from west Wales. I take it you meant the mode of transport, if so the report neither adds nor subtracts from what we aleady know. The mere existance of a supposed Henge doesn't help much. There was one near Carn Meini and there's another down the road from me, which is north of Carn Meini.

Actually, I meant both the source and mode of transport. I've been reading articles of late that support the glacial transfer threory: if the stones are chemically linked to Wales, then that makes short work of ice-age glacial source, unless of course the glaciers swung way west on the way to the Salisbury plain!


By the way, you are fortunate to live so close to some wonderful archeology!
Sorry to be vague :oops:

Minimalist
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15673
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 1:09 pm
Location: Arizona

Post by Minimalist » Wed Apr 16, 2008 9:25 am

Just once I'd like to see these guys try to move a big stone overland and cross a ridge or a stream along the way with nothing but ropes and muscle power.

For that matter, I'd like to see the Egyptology Club do the same thing.
Something is wrong here. War, disease, death, destruction, hunger, filth, poverty, torture, crime, corruption, and the Ice Capades. Something is definitely wrong. This is not good work. If this is the best God can do, I am not impressed.

-- George Carlin

User avatar
Digit
Posts: 6618
Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2006 1:22 pm
Location: Wales, UK

Post by Digit » Wed Apr 16, 2008 10:08 am

I am indeed Shark, but I feel I must correct a common error made yourself.
The original suggestion that the stones might be glacial erratics dates back, I believe, to the 1920s, and no serious investigater has suggested that the stones were dumped on SP.
If you read my earlier posts on the subject you will see that a possible source for such erratics is both north and south of the Bristol Channel.

User avatar
spacecase0
Posts: 50
Joined: Fri Sep 01, 2006 10:29 am
Location: berkeley, CA
Contact:

Post by spacecase0 » Wed Apr 16, 2008 11:13 am

some guy figured out how to move large stones fairly easy.
www.theforgottentechnology.com
I have tried it, it works really well.

are there 2 wear points on the stones slightly off center of gravity ?
if so, then they likely moved them in this method.
if not, then did they clean up the stones on location after they were moved ?

User avatar
Digit
Posts: 6618
Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2006 1:22 pm
Location: Wales, UK

Post by Digit » Wed Apr 16, 2008 11:24 am

Another method I saw demonstrated some time ago required no rollers, which wouldn't work anyway, no sled, the stones were 'rowed.

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/g.pipes/ST ... update.htm

A much more suitable transport method than the other two over uneven ground.

Minimalist
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15673
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 1:09 pm
Location: Arizona

Post by Minimalist » Wed Apr 16, 2008 11:32 am

spacecase0 wrote:some guy figured out how to move large stones fairly easy.
www.theforgottentechnology.com
I have tried it, it works really well.

are there 2 wear points on the stones slightly off center of gravity ?
if so, then they likely moved them in this method.
if not, then did they clean up the stones on location after they were moved ?

I still want to see it go uphill or across a muddy creek bank.
Something is wrong here. War, disease, death, destruction, hunger, filth, poverty, torture, crime, corruption, and the Ice Capades. Something is definitely wrong. This is not good work. If this is the best God can do, I am not impressed.

-- George Carlin

User avatar
Digit
Posts: 6618
Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2006 1:22 pm
Location: Wales, UK

Post by Digit » Wed Apr 16, 2008 11:47 am

It certainly will go up a slope Min, and as far as I can recall there are no water courses along the supposed routes. Locally there is little surface water as it vanishes into sink holes to reappear miles away.
I was Trout fishing in the area many years ago and the river bank was heavily planted with pollarded Willow trees. Being fed up with entangling my line in the trees and undergrowth I donned my waders and proceeded upstream, till I found a small sink hole.
Have you any idea how much water a wader can hold? :lol:

Rokcet Scientist

Post by Rokcet Scientist » Wed Apr 16, 2008 3:22 pm

Minimalist wrote:
spacecase0 wrote:some guy figured out how to move large stones fairly easy.
www.theforgottentechnology.com
I have tried it, it works really well.

are there 2 wear points on the stones slightly off center of gravity ?
if so, then they likely moved them in this method.
if not, then did they clean up the stones on location after they were moved ?
I still want to see it go uphill or across a muddy creek bank.
:lol:

Isn't it obvious? E.T. did it!

User avatar
CShark
Posts: 93
Joined: Sun Jan 27, 2008 12:58 pm
Location: Canada

Post by CShark » Thu Apr 17, 2008 6:07 am

Digit wrote:I am indeed Shark, but I feel I must correct a common error made yourself.
The original suggestion that the stones might be glacial erratics dates back, I believe, to the 1920s, and no serious investigater has suggested that the stones were dumped on SP.
If you read my earlier posts on the subject you will see that a possible source for such erratics is both north and south of the Bristol Channel.
Good point. To add to this thread, and I will try to find the reference, someone has suggested that the blustones were moved by a much earlier glacial epoch, something in the order of 1.5M years ago. I realize this has been beaten to death here, and I do not wish to flog the poor horse further, so perhaps we can let this one be ? Personally, I have no idea how the stones made their way from Wales, as muscle power just seems so ... impossible!

I will have to look at your thread, Dig, and 'check out' the Bristol channel theory. Thanks for clarifying that.

kbs2244
Posts: 2469
Joined: Wed Jul 12, 2006 12:47 pm

Post by kbs2244 » Thu Apr 17, 2008 10:48 am

spacecase0:

This is a you tube video I posted a while back on your guy "moving heavy objects for fun"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lRRDzFROMx0

It does make you think.
If one old guy can do this by himself. what could 10 or 20 guys do?

User avatar
spacecase0
Posts: 50
Joined: Fri Sep 01, 2006 10:29 am
Location: berkeley, CA
Contact:

Post by spacecase0 » Thu Apr 17, 2008 11:39 am

I still want to see it go uphill or across a muddy creek bank.
I was more meaning how they got them from the boat to where they are now. I see lots of modern engineers say how big a boat would have to be to move stones like that, but the modern engineers always want the block out of the water, they forget how much easier it is to have the block under the water level, all you have to do is keep your raft from hitting the bottom, and that is way easier.
It does make you think.
If one old guy can do this by himself. what could 10 or 20 guys do?
that is what I was thinking, and why I posted it, I don't think that it is that hard to move stone around, even if you have to wait for a dry season to do it.

I wonder if anyone has looked for stones that they might have lost on the way in the water channels, although they likely did not have any boats go down ?

they have to have finished the stones somewhere, that has to leave findable remains.
I wonder if you rowed up the proposed path if you would see somewhere that they would have picked to ship them from, it might be easy to spot where the stones came from, or has someone already done this ?

Minimalist
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15673
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 1:09 pm
Location: Arizona

Post by Minimalist » Thu Apr 17, 2008 11:45 am

I didn't see him moving anything on mud or sand but rather on prepared concrete slabs.

There was an interesting article on the engineering aspects of moving big stones...by a guy named Hart I believe. I'll have to see if I can find it.

Part of his point was (and he was mainly talking about Egypt) that just because you can move 70 1-ton stones does not mean the same methods will work to move 1 70-ton stone.
Something is wrong here. War, disease, death, destruction, hunger, filth, poverty, torture, crime, corruption, and the Ice Capades. Something is definitely wrong. This is not good work. If this is the best God can do, I am not impressed.

-- George Carlin

Minimalist
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15673
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 1:09 pm
Location: Arizona

Post by Minimalist » Thu Apr 17, 2008 11:48 am

Well, that didn't take long.

http://www.world-mysteries.com/mpl_wh2. ... ptologists
Egyptologists are displaying irrational and unscientific fixations by stubbornly clinging to ideas that have already been discredited. Mr. Lerhner and Mr. Hawass use every public forum to repeat their unproven speculations about how the ancient (Egyptian) builders quarried, transported, lifted, dressed and precisely positioned blocks of stone weighing from 50 to 200 tons.

The problem is that they have not proven that the primitive tools and methods that they assert the builders used are equal to the task. In fact, several well-documented attempts over the past 30 years have actually failed to replicate what the builders achieved. In the 1970s a Japanese team funded by Nissan tried to build a one-third, scale model of the Great Pyramid using the methods Egyptologists claim the ancient engineers employed. They could not duplicate a single step of the process.

This is one version of the article but good enough.
Something is wrong here. War, disease, death, destruction, hunger, filth, poverty, torture, crime, corruption, and the Ice Capades. Something is definitely wrong. This is not good work. If this is the best God can do, I am not impressed.

-- George Carlin

Post Reply