Stonehenge tale gets ‘weirder’ as Orkney is ruled out as altar stone origin (www.theguardian.com)

submitted 2 months ago by gytrash@feddit.uk to c/britisharchaeology@feddit.uk

11 comments fedilink hide all child comments

"The plot has thickened on the mystery of the altar stone of Stonehenge, weeks after geologists sensationally revealed that the huge neolithic rock had been transported hundreds of miles to Wiltshire from the very north of Scotland.

That discovery, described as “jaw-dropping” by one of the scientists involved, established definitively that the six-tonne megalith had not been brought from Wales, as had long been believed, but came from sandstone deposits in an area encompassing the isles of Orkney and Shetland and a coastal strip on the north-east Scottish mainland.

Many experts assumed that the most likely place of origin was Orkney, based on the islands’ rich neolithic culture and tradition of monument building.

But a separate academic study has now found that Orkney is not, in fact, the source of the altar stone, meaning the tantalising hunt for its place of origin goes on..."

top 11 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] sxan@midwest.social 14 points 2 months ago

Look, when will the "scientists" admit that the Lizard People brought the stones from the far side of the moon‽ NASA is covering up the pictures from Luna 3 showing the excavation, but if we ever really land people on the moon

... I'm sorry. I just can't. The amount of crazy is simply too hard to emulate.

[-] snooggums@midwest.social 9 points 2 months ago

Honestly the best thing for people to keep in mind is that humans were really good at moving giant stones long distances at that point in time so they could come from pretty much anywhere. There is a video on Easter Island statues where they figured out a way to walk the statues down to the water's edge matching oral tradition descriptions and there is a guy who moves huge blocks multi ton around with a similar technique.

When people did it full time for generations I bet they had even better techniques!

[-] sxan@midwest.social 2 points 2 months ago

I know. When a technology is replaced by something better, we tend to lose common knowledge, and sometimes all knowledge, of how to do it most effectively.

Sometimes, it's not replaced, just lost and we can't replicate it (Roman concrete, until recently). Sometimes, it's just not relevant and the majority of people never learn or know how to do it anymore (knapping). Sometimes it's lost because nobody has done it on so long and there are few or no records - we can reverse engineer and make educated guesses, but we can't be certain about how they did it, and we probably can't do it as well without cheating with newer technology (Egyptian pyramids).

I completely agree with you, and knapping is one of my favorite examples. It's something nearly everyone could do, and do pretty darned well, at one point. And now now almost nobody can do it, or even know how to, except for some indigenous communities and a few enthusiasts. Giant public works projects, like Stonehenge, Pyramids, and Easter Island are even harder, because they did it all the time and were good at it, we have so little written record of how because nobody bothered to write a manual, and it required the combined effort of a community.

[-] snooggums@midwest.social 2 points 2 months ago

Another great example is probably starting a fire only using materials from the environment. Anyone can learn how to do so, but most people never have it come up during their lifetimes!

Someone who knows knapping and how to start a fire is 90% of the way to surviving long term in temperate wilderness. Yeah, building shelter and knowing what to eat are important too, but making sharp things and creating heat are the two things that are make or break in a survival situation.

Speaking of not leaving written records, a large number of cultures had strong oral traditions that passed information down for thousands of years. Oral traditions have the additional benefit of being taught personally, allowing for time to ensure it is actually understood! It does have the danger of being lost when the culture changes significantly.

[-] sxan@midwest.social 1 points 2 months ago

Yes! I read something recently about how, while making reading and writing ubiquitous was an unarguable net benefit for humanity, it did irreversible damage to oral traditions.

People used to tell fairy tales to their kids from memory. Now, we read them books. I was discussing this with my in-laws; the 30% of us who never had children weren't able to recite more than a few lines of more than a couple nursery rhymes. You just forget stuff over the years.

Don't get me wrong: I'm a huge fan of books. I love reading. But we've also lost something in the process.

[-] Emperor@feddit.uk 7 points 2 months ago

Curiouser and curiouser. While the Orkneys did seem the obvious first place to look the logistics of getting the altar stone from there to Stonehenge would have been quite something. Dragging it from near Inverness is challenging enough but that would have been orders of magnitude harder.

Previously:

[-] HumanPenguin@feddit.uk 3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Once you start accepting, people of the time could move such stones 100miles. (Seems undeniably atm)

Then it really is more about motive then distance. The same techniques work. It is just keeping an interested workforce that is questionable.

If you then add the things religion mangaged later in time. Its hard to argue that early beliefs would not be as motivational.

[-] Emperor@feddit.uk 1 points 2 months ago

Once you start accepting, people of the time could move such stones 100miles. (Seems undeniably atm)

Then it really is more about motive then distance. The same techniques work.

Overland. Getting a large stone from the Orkneys to the mainland would have been a considerable undertaking requiring a whole raft of new techniques (pun intended).

[-] HumanPenguin@feddit.uk 2 points 2 months ago

Not really. People travelled. So they understood the dynamics of boating. Even if simple rafts were the best the achieved (evidence indicates the latest stones were moved 5 to 2.5k BC. So well beyond rafts were likely).

Getting heavy stone onto a raft is no harder than moving over rough dry land. And pulling a loaded raft from a beach into the point it floats is just a case of person power. We know arming was widespread towards the end of that timeline. So oxen likely helped.

[-] Luvs2Spuj@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago

Stonehenge is the ultimate troll. Thousands of years ago someone convinced a workforce to move a massive rock thousands of miles to a place it didn't belong just to mess with people who later found it with no context.

I like to think if they turned it over it would just have LMAO inscribed.

[-] aaaaace@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 2 months ago

They haven't yet seen the only image of a Pict on the bottom side.

this post was submitted on 06 Sep 2024

36 points (97.4% liked)

British Archaeology

0 readers

21 users here now

For archaeological finds in Britain or by Brits.