It all goes to show what a mighty fellow old King Arthur was -- for according to legend he was the one who put it there, by throwing it over the mountain from the other side, somewhere near Carn Alw. Alternatively, if you want to be prosaic, a glacier might have done it.......
10 comments:
Brian. Both of your ideas are just plain silly.
The rocks were obiously placed there by the same strong and ultimately extremely long armed folk, who carried the thousands of bucket loads of small sized erratic material to Salisbury Plain.
AmG
AmG
You have at last had the longed -for, much - prized Eureka moment! Somehow it all makes sense now, it all falls into place (rather like those bucket loads of small sized erratic material).
We may all sleep safely in our beds, folks. No more theories...
Of course. Our dear old Neolithic ancestors put the stone there, in that precarious position, just for the sheer joy of it. Chris assures us that he has it on good authority that these fellows who moved stones needed no purpose or motivation -- the very act of doing something like this was reward enough. So there we are then.
Brian,
The picture in your post is “proof beyond words”. The thousand bucket fulls of small erratics found at Salisbury Plain should be proof beyond doubt these were carried there by Nature. Were they to be found scattered over large areas, this would prove that 'natural agency' was glacier advance into Salisbury Plain. Were they to be found in more confined concentrated areas (like the Stonehenge Layer, the Avenue, the Cursus, etc.) this, in my humble opinion, would indicate that 'natural agency' to have been meltwater streams. Is this reasonable in your professional judgment?
The laser scan of Stonehenge took just 4 months to complete and released to the waiting public. The 2008 Darvil excavation of the Stonehenge Layer (which could be the key to answering many of our questions) has yet to be released to the public after four long years. While MPP confesses to the need to 'control the release of information' to the public. Am I too cynical to think something is wrong with this picture?
Kostas
Actual rocking stones and perched boulders are always fun , a bit like coming across a fox or a red kite , not uncommon in the right area but a pleasant diversion . This one is a bit diminutive and looks a bit too local to get into the “ giant erratic “ pic competition or even arguably “erratic “ comp . The locals must have been impressed if a little hard pushed to even bother naming it . In the hills a bit further north it would have gone un-noted or at best become a “Nigel's Snuff box “ .
Seems like an unnecessary dig at Chris when you consider that from the contemporary tiny;
http://www.flickr.com/photos/imagesofwales/3817702160/
To something a bit older at 17 tons and 4m high making the “mighty “ Arthur boulder look a bit puny in comparison ;
http://www.stone-circles.org.uk/stone/images/trilithon2_tm.jpg
It is obvious punters like showing off , playing about with rocks and making their mark on the landscape .
I sent you a link to Ceridwen's photo of this boulder from a different angle, one that might trigger debate with a different flavour. I hope you publish it and I hope that it gets laser scanned so we can get a better idea whether it is completely natural or modified by human hands.
Probably a glacier with a sense of humour was responsible for placing it where it is. Although in the days when people believed in Giants another explanation might have seen most plausible. I doubt it is placed where it is by ordinary people although one should allow for the possibility.
We tease people about selecting evidence to suit the story. Ceridwen's photo is interesting because were that the only one on view we could be having a completed different discussion about the Afanc.
Chris -- do you really think thqat a laser scan on this boulder would give us any clues as to whether there has been any human agency involved in shaping it? If the discussions on this blog are anything to go by, laser imaging does not solve problems -- it just gives people more cause to argue about things. In the end, you just see what you want to see...
Geo,
I loved your first link. The second was more familiar! But what is your point? People having fun with stones proves people moved stones for fun in prehistory? It's impossible to refute you, I admit! Nor do I really care to. But your reasoning can be faulty, nonetheless.
I don't believe prehistoric people engaged in arduous tasks for the fun of it. They had their hands full just surviving! Leisure time is modern decadence! It requires others to do your work!
Kostas
Brian, having read the laser scanning report I was very impressed by the new science which is revealing many things we had not seen before.
So yes, laser scanning would probably tell us whether the Carn Arthur boulder had been worked. It should also tell us more about the so-called quarry face at Rhos-y-felin and many other objects. I am looking forward to all the new puzzles on the horizon.
Be careful what you wish for.
Post a Comment