This rather exotic reconstruction of Bluehenge or Bluestonehenge comes to us courtesy of a Canadian (?) TV programme called Nova. Not having seen the programme, I'm not sure what the "exciting findings" are, but I suspect that there aren't any -- just the usual dose of fantasy. Quote:
"Archeologists have ..... hypothesized that stones may have been removed from Bluehenge around 2500 BC and used to shore up Stonehenge itself, which is known to have undergone major restoration around that time. One theory holds that Bluehenge was a place of life, where the living gathered, and Stonehenge was the “domain of the dead,” and ancient Britain’s first known cemetery".
Splendid stuff -- and all based on a few supposed sockets and two small fragments of "bluestone." In my view it's much more likely that the stone sockets held small sarsens. Have a look at my previous post:
http://brian-mountainman.blogspot.com/2009/10/bluestonehenge-some-science-much.html
3 comments:
There is no 'bluestone' from bluestonehenge.
The two fragments are unrelated to any other SH lithics or to each other.
GCU. In two minds
Thanks for that, Anon. That is very interesting indeed. So that means there is no physical evidence of any sort to link Bluehenge with Stonehenge -- the thesis that the "Bluehenge sockets are of the right dimensions to have held Stonehenge bluestones" can be dismissed out of hand, given that the latter are of so many different shapes and sizes that generalisations are impossible. Am I right in thinking that there were lots of sarsen fragments turned up in the MPP dig? If so, then maybe the "monument" (if there was one) should be renamed "Sarsenhenge"......
hi Brian, Merlin exists, i've met him, he's a time traveller, sounds crazy but i am not, have lots of information.
Post a Comment