02-20-2019, 11:27 PM
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019...d-research
They are among the most famous and most enigmatic mysteries in all of archaeology: how did neolithic builders, using only stone, wooden and bone tools, carve Stonehenge’s bluestone pillars from the hilltops of western Wales – and how on earth did they transport them more than 230km (143 miles) to Salisbury plain?
Now, an excavation has found intriguing new evidence of the method by which the huge stones were chiselled out of the rock face at two craggy outcrops of the Preseli hills in Pembrokeshire.
The location of the two monolith quarries, according to the archaeologists, undermines the theory that the stones were taken to Wiltshire by sea, instead suggesting the two-ton blocks, up to 80 in number, were dragged or carried over land.
Okay - so, apparently, it's been known for several years that the inner 'bluestones' of Stonehenge were moved from Wales (the outer ones were quarried nearer to the monument). However, what is new is that they were carried over land (the other competing theory was that they were by sea). Also, it's believed that they were originally assembled as a smaller stone circle in Wales, which was later dismantled so that the stones could be used in Stonehenge.
I wonder why they went to all the trouble? Given the distance, the rough terrain, and the primitive technology available to them, it must have been quite an undertaking!
They are among the most famous and most enigmatic mysteries in all of archaeology: how did neolithic builders, using only stone, wooden and bone tools, carve Stonehenge’s bluestone pillars from the hilltops of western Wales – and how on earth did they transport them more than 230km (143 miles) to Salisbury plain?
Now, an excavation has found intriguing new evidence of the method by which the huge stones were chiselled out of the rock face at two craggy outcrops of the Preseli hills in Pembrokeshire.
The location of the two monolith quarries, according to the archaeologists, undermines the theory that the stones were taken to Wiltshire by sea, instead suggesting the two-ton blocks, up to 80 in number, were dragged or carried over land.
Okay - so, apparently, it's been known for several years that the inner 'bluestones' of Stonehenge were moved from Wales (the outer ones were quarried nearer to the monument). However, what is new is that they were carried over land (the other competing theory was that they were by sea). Also, it's believed that they were originally assembled as a smaller stone circle in Wales, which was later dismantled so that the stones could be used in Stonehenge.
I wonder why they went to all the trouble? Given the distance, the rough terrain, and the primitive technology available to them, it must have been quite an undertaking!
Board Information and Policies
Affiliation | Coffee Credits | Ranks and Awards | Name Changes
Account Deletion | BBCode Reference
Moonface (in 'Woman runs 49 red lights in ex's car')' Wrote: If only she had ran another 20 lights.
(Thanks to Nilla for the avatar, and Detective Osprey for the sig!)
My Items