The Modern Antiquarian. Stone Circles, Ancient Sites, Neolithic Monuments, Ancient Monuments, Prehistoric Sites, Megalithic MysteriesThe Modern Antiquarian

Head To Head   The Modern Antiquarian   General Discussion Forum Start a topic | Search
The Modern Antiquarian
Re: Stonehenge - dating the Y and Z holes
56 messages
Select a forum:
I have read through Cleal et al to gather information a couple of years ago, or is it 3 ? (obtained from my local library) How the years fly by when you haven't got many left ! : ) A re-read of page 256 plus from your link, which I'd forgotten about ( there's nothing wrong with my memory, it's just full up, as I keep telling people ) came up with a couple of things.

a) Positioning the holes was done using the Ordinance Survey grid system, and applying a graph principle (as per Cartesian co-ordinates) This can be resolved down as far as accuracy requires. The limiting factor is the hand tools used for measurement. My agricultural apprenticeship in 1965 included a surveying course with the hand tools of a chain for linear distance, magnetic compass for North, and optical theodolites. An effective practical theodolite was available in 1787 ( Jesse Ramsden's ) These hand tools are surprisingly accurate for building civil structures.

With two axis marked out and a theodolite, the position of anything on that grid can be fixed and recorded as an x and y co-ordinate. An accurate diagram can then be drawn. The diagram Fig 151 in Cleal et al appears to have been done with some care and professionalism, which of course one does expect from British academia. : )

b) The hole widths of only 1 to 1.5 metres would not be a problem to sliding the Sarsen stones over them into their ramps,

c) The edges of ‘some’ (not identified) holes are in a ‘slightly ruiness state’ which possibly indicates they once held stones. Bluestone chips have been found in ’some’ holes - markers for the midsummer and midwinter sunrises perhaps ?

I noted a very good point you made about the irregularities of the holes indicating that the stones must have been present and interfered with the positioning of the holes. I’m going to try to resolve that point tonight and hope to post it tomorrow teatime.

Dave1982


Reply | with quote
Dave1982
Posted by Dave1982
15th December 2014ce
18:07

Messages in this topic: